HomeMy WebLinkAboutPACKET Town Board Estes Valley Planning Commission & County Commissioners Study Session 2016-02-02 Tuesday, February 2, 2016
TOWN BOARD /
PLANNING COMMISSION /
COUNTY COMMISSIONER
STUDY SESSION 3:00 p.m.
Board Room
3:00 p.m. Vacation Home Policy Discussion.
“Informal discussion among Trustees concerning agenda items or other Town matters
may occur before this meeting at approximately 2:45 p.m.”
AGENDA
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Report
To: Honorable Mayor Pinkham
Estes Park Board of Trustees
Honorable Commissioner Chair Donnelly
Larimer County Board of County Commissioners
Planning Commission Chair Hull
Estes Valley Planning Commission
Town Administrator Lancaster
County Manager Hoffmann
From: Philip Kleisler, Planner II
Date: February 2, 2016
RE: Vacation Home Policy Discussion
Objective:
Review and obtain guidance on key issues.
Present Situation:
The Town of Estes Park and Larimer County have engaged in a long and public
conversation over the proliferation of vacation home rentals in the Estes Valley Planning
Area. Most recently, the Town Board and County Commissioners reviewed various
policy questions during your November 9, 2015 joint work session. A summary of those
questions, along with the feedback staff received from some board members, is
attached to this report (“Key Issues”).
Proposal:
This is a meeting between Town Board, County Commissioners and Planning
Commission to discuss next steps in the project. Given our limited time, staff has hired
a professional facilitator who has assisted us throughout the project. Staff recommends
the following topics be considered for discussion:
1. Common Ground. The Town Board and County Commissioners have
independently advised staff of separate schedules for implementation of a land
use ordinance. The Town Board desires to complete this project by April prior to
the town election and subsequent turnover in board membership. The County
Commissioners have shown interest in studying this item further through a citizen
task force.
Staff recommends discussing any common ground that we may move forward
with jointly prior to April. For example, there appears to be a general consensus
about more effective code enforcement. The Town Board voted to increase
vacation home license fees on January 26 for rentals within the Town of Estes
Park. A contract enforcement officer is beginning work with the Town on
February 1 to assist with more proactive enforcement. There are also staff
discussions about amending enforcement provisions in Chapter 12 of the Estes
Valley Development Code, Enforcement and Penalties, specific to vacation
homes. To an extent, these enforcement changes may be dependent on the
land use policy direction received from the boards. However, staff could bring
some changes to the boards in early March for consideration, if that is the will of
the boards.
2. Draft Ordinance. The attached draft ordinance was originally shared with the
boards at your November 9 work session and has been updated to reflect
comments received at that time (i.e. “key issues” attachment). The ordinance
contemplates the following:
a. Separating the small and larger rentals through new uses. The larger
rentals are classified as Vacation Home- High Intensity;
b. The Vacation Home-High Intensity use would be reviewed through a
Conditional Use Permit or Special Review. The boards can decide if you
would like the staff, Planning Commission or Town Board to review the
Conditional Use Permits. The draft ordinance allows staff to review most
of these. The review criteria for the Conditional Use Permits are also
included in the draft ordinance.
c. Postings: (i) Require internal postings to educate renters, (ii) a reference
to the license number with online listings, and (iii) a neighbor notification
containing the local contact information.
d. Parking: With the exception of on-street parking, amends parking
requirement to be consistent with residential properties.
Advantages/Disadvantages:
See attachment #1, “Key Issues”
Action Recommended:
Staff requests direction on next steps for any amendments for the Estes Valley
Development Code.
Level of Public Interest
High. Both public meetings held for this project were well attended and staff has
received consistent written and verbal comments on the topic.
Attachments:
1. Key Issues Summary
2. Draft Ordinance, Development Code
Attachment #1: Key Issues Summary
Key Issue #1: Should vacation homes with a higher occupancy be permitted in residential zone
districts?
Initial Feedback from some Elected Officials
The majority of Town Board members appeared supportive of allowing these larger
vacations homes in residential zone districts. County Commissioners requested additional
public input prior to directing staff.
Pros (public comments):
Accommodates the growing market demand for larger groups, such as family reunions.
Allows property owners more flexibility by hosting larger parties.
Cons (public comments):
Expands a non‐residential use within residential zone districts.
Potential land use conflicts and loss of residential character.
Potential loss of long‐term residential units.
General Comments (public comments):
Ensure that regulations are clear and easily followed.
Must protect and respect long‐term residential character.
Key Issue #2: Should a limit be set on the number of vacation homes within the town and
unincorporated valley?
Initial Feedback from Elected Officials
Town Board members showed a preference to continue to track and report on licenses
without a cap. County Commissioners requested additional public input prior to directing
staff.
Pros (public comments):
A short‐term rental market is a fast growing industry. Future boards may reassess the
community's direction if the cap is ever reached, allowing for a “pause” if needed.
Incentivizes short‐term license compliance.
Cons (public comments):
This action would destroy home values.
“A more effective method may be to deny a license renewal for homes that receive
violations”.
It is an extra regulation when a moratorium could achieve the same end.
Attachment #1: Key Issues Summary
General Comments (public comments):
Strictly enforced regulations should achieve the same end.
Key Issue #3: Should there be a limit to the size or maximum occupancy of larger vacation homes?
Initial Feedback from Elected Officials
Town Board members showed a preference allowing larger vacation homes without a maximum
size limit, but with a maximum occupancy cap of 20 people. County Commissioners requested
additional public input prior to directing staff.
Pros (public comments):
No public comments to this specific question.
Cons (public comments):
No public comments to this specific question.
General Comments (public comments):
No public comments to this specific question.
Key Issue #4: Should vacation homes with a higher occupancy be treated as a commercial use in terms
of building code and public facilities (fire, water and sewer) requirements?
Initial Feedback from Elected Officials
The majority of Town Board members appeared supportive of applying commercial zoning
standards, such as adequate public facilities (e.g. fire protection, utilities) to larger vacation
homes. County Commissioners requested additional public input prior to directing staff.
Pros (public comments):
Increases guest safety.
Provides a more level playing field with other commercial accommodations such as small hotels.
Cons (public comments):
Potential cost to property owner if building upgrades are required (e.g. sprinkler system).
General Comments (public comments):
No public comments to this specific question.
Attachment #1: Key Issues Summary
Key Issue #5: Where should vacation homes with a larger occupancy be permitted and what should
the review process be?
Initial Feedback from Elected Officials:
The majority of Town Board members appeared supportive of allowing larger homes in the RE‐1
and RE districts through a Conditional Use Permit (staff‐level), and in the E‐1 and E districts
through Special Review (board‐level). County Commissioners requested additional public input
prior to directing staff.
Pros (public comments):
Increases options for guest accommodations, specifically for large groups.
A staff‐level review allows for a faster review process and consideration of neighbor input.
Cons (public comments):
Increases the potential for land use conflicts.
Establishing a review process doesn’t provide complete certainty that a home can be used as a
Vacation Home, High‐Intensity use.
General Guidance (public comments):
Avoid areas with close homes, high density, private streets and small streets that cannot handle
the traffic.
These larger vacation homes shouldn’t be permitted on lots less than one acre or in attached
homes.
Key Issue #6: What should the review criteria be for vacation homes with a larger occupancy?
Initial Feedback from Elected Officials:
The majority of Town Board members appeared supportive of a review criteria that generally
includes the following:
All CUP applications must satisfy this general requirement:
The proposed application shall mitigate, to the maximum extent feasible, potential
adverse impacts on nearby land uses, public facilities and services and the
environment.
Examples of potential adverse impacts are provided in the draft ordinance and include
outdoor activities, trespassing onto neighboring properties and public utility capacity.
A parking plan would be required to ensure adequate parking exists, which in most cases
would trigger one (1) paved accessible space.
Operational Performance Standards (§7.10) is also referenced to allow the applicant to
address items such as the placement of trash receptacles, lighting and noise.
County Commissioners requested additional public input prior to directing staff.
Attachment #1: Key Issues Summary
Pros (public comments):
The process allows for consideration of neighborhood impacts.
Cons (public comments):
There is less certainty for the property owner because the review is discretionary and not
prescriptive.
General Comments (public comments):
Applications should address neighborhood conflicts such as noise, traffic, trash, parking and the
proximity to other homes.
Attachment 2: Draft Ordinance, Development Code
Additions are shown in blue.
Deletions are shown in
Deleted: red.
§ 2.1 CODE ADMINISTRATION AND REVIEW ROLES
A. Relevant Administrating Bodies.
The following entities shall have roles in administrating the provisions of this Code:
1. The Town of Estes Park Board of Trustees and Larimer County Board of County
Commissioners (collectively referred to as "the Boards");
2. The Estes Valley Planning Commission ("EVPC");
3. The Estes Valley Board of Adjustment (BOA); and (Ord. 18-01 #3)
4. Staff of the Community Development Department of the Town of Estes Park and the
Planning Department of Larimer County (collectively referred to as "Staff").
B. Table 2-1: Code Administration and Review Roles.
PROCEDURE
REVIEW AND DECISION-MAKING AUTHORITY
Staff EVPC Boards [1] BOA [1]
Code Text Amendments R R DM ‐‐‐
Zoning Map Amendments R R DM ‐‐‐
Comprehensive Plan
Adoption/Amendment
R DM R ‐‐‐
Subdivisions
Preliminary Plat R R DM ‐‐‐
Final Plat R ‐‐‐ DM ‐‐‐
Minor Subdivisions [5] (Ord. 8‐05 #1) R R DM ‐‐‐
Planned Unit Developments
Preliminary Plan R R DM ‐‐‐
Final Plan R ‐‐‐ DM ‐‐‐
Special Review Uses R R DM ‐‐‐
Development Plans R DM [3] DM A [3] A ‐‐‐
Minor Modifications DM [4] DM A [4] A [2] ‐‐‐
Use Classification (Ord. 18‐01 #4) DM ‐‐‐ A ‐‐‐
Separate Lot Determinations (Ord. 18‐02
#1)
DM ‐‐‐ A ‐‐‐
Variances R ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ DM
Administrative Appeals R ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ DM
Temporary Use and Sign Permits DM ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐
Code Interpretation DM ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ A
Fees and Charges ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ DM ‐‐‐
Location and Extent Require (Ord. 21‐10 §
1)
R DM [3] DM A [3] A ‐‐‐
Conditional Use Permit (Ord. 21‐10 § 1) R DM [6] DM [6] A ‐‐‐
R = Review Body (Responsible for Review and Recommendation)
DM = Decision‐Making Body (Responsible for Final Decision to Approve or Deny)
A = Authority to Hear and Decide Appeals of Decision‐Making Body's Action‐‐See also §12.1, "Appeals."
Commented [PK1]: This row allows staff to review these
permits, which can then be appealed to the Planning Commission,
then the Town Board or County Commissioners (see Note #6 on
following page).
Attachment 2: Draft Ordinance, Development Code
Additions are shown in blue.
Deletions are shown in
Deleted: red.
NOTES TO TABLE 2‐1:
[1] The Boards and the BOAs shall have decision‐making authority on the applications shown in Table
2‐1 only as applied to properties located within their respective Town or County jurisdictions. (Ord.
18‐01 #4)
[2] The Boards shall have authority only for appeals taken from the EVPC (not Staff) action on
applications for minor modifications.
[3] The Staff shall have decision‐making authority on development plan applications specified for "Staff
Review" in Table 3‐3 of this Code. See §3.8, "Development Plan Review." The EVPC shall have
decision‐making authority on those development plans specified for "EVPC Review" in Table 3‐3 of
this Code. Appeals from Staff decisions on a development plan shall be to the EVPC. Appeals from
EVPC decisions on a development plan shall be to the respective Board.
[4] The Staff shall have decision‐making authority on applications seeking minor modifications of Code
standards by no more than 10%; whereas, the EVPC shall have decision‐making authority on all
applications seeking minor modifications of Code standards by 10% or more, but in no case greater
than 25%. See §3.7, "Minor Modifications." Appeals from Staff decisions on applications for minor
modifications shall be to the EVPC.
[5] Land Consolidation Plats shall not be subject to review by the Planning Commission. (Ord. 8‐05 #1)
[6] Vacation Home, High‐Intensity may be reviewed by staff in accordance with §___ . Appeals from
staff decisions on a CUP shall be to the EVPC. Appeals from EVPC decisions on a CUP shall be to the
respective Board (Org. __‐__)
(Ord. 18-01 #3, 4, 10/23/01; Ord. 18-02 #1, 12/10/02; Ord. 8-05 #1, 6/14/05; Ord. __-__, _/_/_)
Attachment 2: Draft Ordinance, Development Code
Additions are shown in blue.
Deletions are shown in
Deleted: red.
§ 3.2 STANDARD DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCEDURE
A. Step 1: Pre-Application Conference.
1. Purpose. The purposes of the pre-application conference are to provide an opportunity
for the Applicant and the Staff to discuss the review process schedule and submittal
requirements, the scope of the project and compliance with this Code.
2. Applicability. A pre-application conference is mandatory for the following applications:
a. Special review uses;
b. Development plans;
c. Rezoning applications;
d. Preliminary subdivision plat;
e. Preliminary PUD plans;
f. Variances;
g. Minor subdivisions;
h. Annexations; and
h. Conditional Use Permits;
Staff may waive the pre-application conference on the ground that the proposed
development is not complex and will not have any significant impacts on services, roads,
natural resources or adjacent property. (Ord. 18-02 #2; Ord. __-__)
Deleted: and
Commented [PK2]: Housecleaning item.
Attachment 2: Draft Ordinance, Development Code
Additions are shown in blue.
Deletions are shown in
Deleted: red.
§5.1 SPECIFIC USE STANDARDS
B. Bed and Breakfast Inn and Vacation Home. (Ord. 02-10 §1)
1. General Applicable Standards. All bed and breakfast inns and vacation homes shall
be subject to the following (see §5.1.B.2 and §5.1.B.3 for additional regulations):
a. Annual Operating Permit.
(1) Permit Required. All bed and breakfast inns and vacation homes shall
obtain an operating permit on an annual basis. If the property is located
within Town limits, the business license shall be considered the permit. If
the property is within the unincorporated Estes Valley, a permit shall be
obtained from the Town of Estes Park Town Clerk's Office.
(2) Local Contact. The permit shall designate a local resident or property
manager who can be contacted and is available twenty-four (24) hours per
day, with regard to any violation of the provisions of this Section. If
necessary, the local resident or property manager shall respond to
complaints on site within thirty (30) minutes. The person set forth on the
application shall be the representative of the owner for all purposes with
regard to the operation of the bed and breakfast inn or vacation home.
(3) State Sales Tax License. A condition of issuance of the annual operating
permit shall be proof of a current sales tax license.
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.
c. Residential Character. Bed and breakfast inns and vacation homes 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) Except in the CD district, design shall be compatible, in terms of
building scale, mass and character, with low-intensity, low-scale residential
use.
(2) Guest rooms shall be integrated within the bed and breakfast inn or vacation
home.
(3) Kitchen facilities shall be limited to be consistent with single-family residential
use. No kitchen facilities or cooking shall be allowed in the guest rooms.
(4) Accessory buildings shall not be used for amenities beyond a gazebo or
similar outdoor room.
(5) No changes in the exterior appearance shall be allowed to accommodate
each bed and breakfast inn or vacation home, except that one (1) wall-
mounted identification sign no larger than four (4) square feet in area shall be
permitted.
(6) Vehicular traffic and noise levels shall not be out of character with residential
use.
(7) Quiet hours. No use of outdoor hot tubs or pools shall be allowed after 10:00
p.m.
d. Postings.
(1) Bed and breakfast inns and vacation homes shall have a clearly legible notice
posted within the unit on or adjacent to the front door, containing at a
Deleted: of the Estes Valley
Commented [PK3]: We have received public comments that
local managers should be able to reside outside (yet close to) the
Estes Valley. This replaces the requirement that local contacts live
within the Estes Valley to a 30‐minute response standard.
Commented [PK4]: Is 10:00pm acceptable?
Commented [PK5]: Many owners or managers of rentals post
detailed signage inside the rental to educate guests. This section
would require this of all rentals. If approved, staff would draft a
fillable flyer as a service to rental owners and managers.
Attachment 2: Draft Ordinance, Development Code
Additions are shown in blue.
Deletions are shown in
Deleted: red.
minimum the following information:
(a) Name and telephone number of the local contact and property owner;
(b) Maximum number of occupants and vehicles allowed;
(c) Water and gas shut off locations;
(d) Quiet hours; and
(e) Refuse disposal and curbside pick-up information.
(2) Owner or local contact of any bed and breakfast inn and vacation home shall
include in all advertising a reference to the owner’s vacation home rental
license or permit number.
(3) Neighbor Notification. Within ten 10 days of the issuance of initial Annual
Operating Permit, the owner or local contact shall mail a notice.
(a) Notice shall be by first class mail, with certificate of mailing, to the owners
of properties within one hundred (100) feet of the subject property.
(b) Notices shall provide a name and telephone number of the local contact
and property owner.
(c) Copies of all required mailing lists and mailing certificates shall be provided
to the Community Development Director within fifteen (15) days of the
mailing.
e. Parking.
(1) Minimum Required Parking. Except in the CD Downtown Commercial zoning
district, the number of parking spaces available to a dwelling unit housing a
bed and breakfast inn or a vacation home shall not be reduced to less than
two (2).
f. Maximum Allowed Parking. Unless otherwise permitted by this Chapter, parking shall
comply with §5.2.B.2.e no more than three (3) vehicles shall be parked outside at any
one (1) time. Vehicles enclosed within a garage do not count towards this maximum.
On-street parking shall be prohibited. Employee Housing Units. Employee
housing units shall not be rented, leased or furnished for tenancies of less than
thirty (30) days. (See §5.2.C.2.a).
g. Attainable Housing Units. Attainable housing units shall not be rented, leased or
furnished for tenancies of less than thirty (30) days. (See §11.4.E).
h. Accessory Dwelling Units. Bed and breakfast inns and vacation homes shall not
be permitted on residential lots containing an accessory dwelling. (See also
§5.2.B.2.a, which prohibits rental of accessory dwelling units regardless of the
length of tenancy).
i. CD District. In the CD Downtown Commercial zoning district, such use shall not
be located on the ground floor of a building fronting on Elkhorn Avenue.
j. Density. Only one (1) vacation home or bed and breakfast inn shall be permitted
per residential dwelling unit.
2. All bed and breakfast inns shall also be subject to the following:
a. Occupancy.
(1) Maximum Occupancy. No more than eight (8) guests shall occupy a bed and
Commented [PK6]: This will aide in code compliance.
Commented [PK7]: There appears to be consensus about the
need for better communication. This would require proof that
properties within 100’ have been given contact information for the
rental operation.
Commented [PK8]: With the exception of on‐street parking,
this aligns parking requirements with residential parking
restrictions. This would allow slightly more cars on larger lots and
address any recreational equipment on site.
Deleted: Refer to
Deleted: §5.2.B.2.f, which may further limit the
number of vehicles permitted on site.¶
Attachment 2: Draft Ordinance, Development Code
Additions are shown in blue.
Deletions are shown in
Deleted: red.
breakfast inn at any one time. This maximum allowable occupancy shall be
further limited by a maximum of two (2) guests per bedroom plus two guests.
(2) Number of Parties, Bed and Breakfast Inns. Bed and breakfast inns may be
rented, leased or furnished to one (1) or more parties.
b. Home Occupations. Home occupations may be operated on the site of a bed and
breakfast inn. Bed and breakfast inns may also offer limited ancillary services to
guests, such as performing small weddings or offering classes/workshops to
guests, provided they are in character with residential use.
c. Meal Service. Bed and breakfast inns may provide meals service to
registered guests; however, meals shall not be provided to the general public.
3. All Vacation Homes, Low-Intensity shall also be subject to the following:
a. Occupancy.
(1) Maximum Occupancy. No more than eight (8) individuals shall occupy a
vacation home at any one time. This maximum allowable occupancy shall be
further limited by a maximum of two (2) individuals per bedroom plus two
(2) individuals.
(2) Number of Parties. Vacation homes 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 permitted to occupy the
vacation home while a party is present.
b. Home Occupations. Home occupations shall not be operated on the site of
a vacation home, nor shall vacation homes offer ancillary services to guests.
(See §5.2.B.2.d). (Ord. 02-10 §1)
4. All Vacation Home, High-Intensity shall also be subject to the following:
a. Review Criteria
(1) The proposed application shall mitigate, to the maximum extent feasible,
potential adverse impacts on nearby land uses, public facilities and services
and the environment. Impacts include but are not limited to:
(a) Outdoor activities.
(b) Trespassing onto neighboring properties.
(c) Public utility, septic system and water well capacity.
(2) All Vacation Home, High Intensity uses shall comply with the performance
standards prescribed by §7.10 of this Code.
(3) Parking Plan in accordance with §7.11 of this Code.
(4) Provision of adequate public facilities and services to serve the development
in accordance with §7.12 of this Code.
b. Decision-Making Body
(1) Staff shall be the Decision-making Body when such uses contain eight (8) or
fewer bedrooms. Staff may, at their discretion, refer any application to the
EVPC for review. Factors influencing such a referral to the EVPC include but
are not limited to unresolved concerns expressed by staff, affected agency, or
Deleted: h
Commented [PK9]: The Board should weigh in on the review
criteria for larger rentals.
Commented [PK10]: A benefit of a Conditional Use Permit is
that the Boards may determine specific review standards.
Commented [PK11]: This would trigger one (1) paved
accessible space.
Commented [PK12]: This ensures that adequate utilities (or
septic/well) are in place to serve the use.
Commented [PK13]: Three options for the review of
Conditional Use Permits include:
1.Staff reviews those up to 8 bedrooms. The Planning
Commission reviews those more 9 or more bedrooms;
2.The Planning Commission reviews all applications; or
3.The Boards review all applications.
Currently, the Planning Commission reviews Conditional Use
Permits. This draft ordinance allows staff to review most
Conditional Use Permits.
Attachment 2: Draft Ordinance, Development Code
Additions are shown in blue.
Deletions are shown in
Deleted: red.
Party-in-Interest.
(2) EVPC shall be the Decision-making Body when such uses contain nine (9) or
more bedrooms.
c. Occupancy.
(1) Maximum Occupancy. No more than twenty (20) individuals shall occupy a
Vacation Home, High-Intensity at any one time. The maximum allowable
occupancy shall be limited to a maximum of two (2) individuals per bedroom
plus two (2) individuals.
(2) Number of Parties. Vacation Home, High-Intensity 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 permitted to
occupy the vacation home while a party is present.
d. Parking
(1) Minimum Required Parking. Except in the CD Downtown Commercial zoning
district, the number of parking spaces available to a dwelling unit housing a
bed and breakfast inn or a vacation home shall not be reduced to less than
two (2).
(2) Maximum Allowed Parking. The Decision-making body shall establish a
maximum number of vehicles permitted at any one (1) time. Vehicles enclosed
within a garage do not count towards this maximum. On-street parking shall
be prohibited.
e. Lapse
(1) Failure of an Applicant to apply for an Annual Operating Permit and
commence operations within one (1) year of receiving approval of the
conditional use permit, or as otherwise explicitly set forth in the original
approval, shall automatically terminate the conditional use permit.
(2) Abandoning or discontinuing a legally established conditional use permit for a
period of one (1) year or more, or failing to renew an Annual Operating Permit,
shall automatically terminate the conditional use permit.
(Ord. 8-05 §1, 6/14/05; Ord. 6-06 §1, 9/26/06; Ord. 02-10 §1, 1/26/10; Ord. 19-11 §1, 9/27/11)
§ 5.2 ACCESSORY USES (INCLUDING HOME OCCUPATIONS) AND
Commented [PK14]: There was agreement among some board
members about increasing the occupancy to 20. This should be
discussed.
Attachment 2: Draft Ordinance, Development Code
Additions are shown in blue.
Deletions are shown in
Deleted: red.
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
(Ord. 18-01 §18; Ord. 15-03 §1; Ord 6-06 §1; Ord. 03-10 §1; Ord. 05-10 §1; Ord. 21-10 §1; Ord. 19-
11 §1
Table 4-1: Permitted Uses: Residential Zone Districts
USE
CLASSIFICATION Specific Use
Zoning Districts Additional
Regulations
(Apply in All
Districts
Unless
Otherwise
Stated)
“P” = Permitted by Right
“S” = Permitted by Special Review
“-“ = Prohibited
RE-
1
RE E-
1
E R R-
1
R-
2
RM
ACCOMMODATIONS USES
Low-Intensity
Accommodations
Bed and Breakfast
Inn
- - - - - - S P §5.1.B
(Ord. 02‐10
§1)
Vacation Home,
Low-Intensity
P P P P P - P P §5.1.B
(Ord. 02‐10
§1)
Vacation Home,
High-Intensity
CUP CUP S S - - - - §5.1.B
Table 4-4: Permitted Uses: Nonresidential Zone Districts
USE
CLASSIFICATION Specific Use
Zoning Districts Additional
Regulations
(Apply in All
Districts Unless
Otherwise
Stated)
“P” = Permitted by Right
“S” = Permitted by Special Review
“-“ = Prohibited
A A-1 CD CO O CH I-1
Low-Intensity
Accommodations Bed and breakfast inns P P P - - - - §5.1.B. In CD,
such use shall
Deleted: ¶
Vacation Home¶
Deleted: No
Deleted: Yes
Deleted: Yes
Deleted: No
Deleted: No
Deleted: No
Deleted: No
Deleted: §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)
Deleted: P
Commented [PK15]: This was discussed at your November
joint meeting.
Attachment 2: Draft Ordinance, Development Code
Additions are shown in blue.
Deletions are shown in
Deleted: red.
not be located
on the ground
floor of a
building
fronting on
Elkhorn
Avenue.
Hotel, Small - P P - - - - In CD, such use
shall not be
located on the
ground floor of
a building
fronting on
Elkhorn
Avenue.
Vacation Home, Low-
Intensity
- P P - - - - §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)
Vacation Home, High-
Intensity
P P P In CD, such use
shall not be
located on the
ground floor of
a building
fronting on
Elkhorn
Avenue.
Resort lodge/cabins,
low-intensity
- P - - - - - (Ord. 19‐10 §1)
§ 13.2 USE CLASSIFICATIONS/SPECIFIC USE DEFINITIONS AND EXAMPLES
2. Accommodations, Low-Intensity.
a. General Definition: Visitor-serving facilities that provide temporary lodging for
compensation, and with an average length of stay of less than thirty (30) days
(except for permitted long-term nightly rentals--see 2.b(3) below). Such facility shall
be designed to be compatible, in terms of building scale, mass and character, with a
predominantly low-intensity and low-scale residential and/or rural setting.
b. Examples: This classification includes the following types of specific uses:
Attachment 2: Draft Ordinance, Development Code
Additions are shown in blue.
Deletions are shown in
Deleted: red.
(1) Bed and Breakfast Inn: A detached single-family residential dwelling unit that is
rented, leased or occupied as a single accommodations unit for
accommodations purposes for terms of less than thirty (30) days and is
operator-occupied on a full-time basis. (Ord. 2-02 §10; Ord. 11-02 §1)
(2) Hotel, Small: An establishment containing no more than eight (8) guest rooms
that provides temporary lodging with eating and drinking service and a dining
room where meals are served.
(3) Resort Lodges/Cabins, Low-Intensity: A tract of land under single ownership
and management with no more than a total of twenty (20) guest rooms or
guest units available for temporary rental. The guest rooms may be contained
in a main “lodge” building and/or contained in detached, freestanding “cabin”
structures (the latter freestanding structures shall not include recreational
vehicles or mobile homes). A single structure shall contain no more than four
(4) guest rooms or units. Guest rooms/units in a resort lodge/cabin use may
contain full kitchen facilities in lieu of “limited kitchen facilities,” but only if such
guest rooms comply with all conditions set forth in §5.1.P of this Code.
(4) Vacation Home, Low-Intensity. A residential dwelling unit that is rented, leased
or occupied for accommodations purposes for compensation for terms of less
than thirty (30) days and permitted to host parties of eight (8) or less. (Ord. __ -
__)
(5) Vacation Home, High-Intensity. An accommodations establishment that is
rented, leased or occupied for accommodations purposes for compensation for
terms of less than thirty (30) days, permitted to host parties between nine (9)
and twenty (20). (Ord. __-__)
APPENDIX B. SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. PRE-APPLICATION “SKETCH PLAN” SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS ........................... B-1
A. Sketch Plan Submittal Requirements for Pre-Application Review of
Subdivision and Development Plan Applications ...................................................... B-1
B. Submittal Requirements for All Other Pre-Application Sketch Plan Review ............. B-1
II. SUBDIVISION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS ................................................................ B-1
A. General Submittal Requirements .............................................................................. B-1
Attachment 2: Draft Ordinance, Development Code
Additions are shown in blue.
Deletions are shown in
Deleted: red.
B. Sketch Plans ............................................................................................................. B-2
C. Preliminary Subdivision Plans ................................................................................... B-2
D. Final Subdivision Plats .............................................................................................. B-5
E. Condominium Projects .............................................................................................. B-9
III. DEVELOPMENT PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS .................................................. B-9
A. General Submittal Requirements .............................................................................. B-9
B. Sketch Plan Submittal Requirements ....................................................................... B-9
C. Development Plan Submittal Requirements ............................................................. B-11
IV. SPECIAL REVIEW USES--SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS ............................................. B-15
A. Submittal Requirements ............................................................................................ B-15
V. CODE AMENDMENTS (REZONINGS)--SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS ........................ B-15
A. Submittal Requirements ............................................................................................ B-15
VI. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS--SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS ............................. B-16
A. Preliminary PUD Applications--Submittal Requirements .......................................... B-16
B. Final PUD Applications--Submittal Requirements .................................................... B-16
VII. VARIANCES AND ADMINISTRATIVE (MINOR) MODIFICATIONS--
SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS ......................................................................................... B-17
A. Submittal Requirements ............................................................................................ B-17
VIII. USE CLASSIFICATION--SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS ................................................ B-17
A. Submittal Requirements ............................................................................................ B-17
IX. ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS ........................................................................................... B-18
A. Submittal Requirements ............................................................................................ B-18
X. SEPARATE LOT DETERMINATION - SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS ........................... B-18
A. Submittal Requirements ............................................................................................ B-18
XI. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT ........................................................................................... B-18
A. Vacation Home, High Intensity Submittal Requirements .......................................... B-18
ATTACHMENTS:
A. Form and Acknowledgment for Dedications ............................................................. B-41
B. Forms for All Plan Certifications ................................................................................ B-51
C. Compatible Digital Formats and Media Types .......................................................... B-61
APPENDIX D. SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS
X. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
A. Vacation Home, High Intensity Submittal Requirements.
1. A complete application form provided by the Staff.
2. All applicable fees as set forth in the adopted Schedule of Fees.
3. Statement of Intent identifying how the application complies with §3.16.
Attachment 2: Draft Ordinance, Development Code
Additions are shown in blue.
Deletions are shown in
Deleted: red.
4. A vicinity map locating the subject property and showing streets and other general
development of the surrounding area.
5. Site Plan, in a format approved by the Staff, contain at a minimum the following:
i. The location and use of all existing buildings, structures, parking areas and
signs on the property.
ii. Location of property lines; and
iii. Existing zone district;
Staff shall have the discretion to request a more detailed site plan..
6. Floor Plan showing the location of all bedrooms.
7. Written acknowledgement that the all bedrooms are equipped with proper means of
egress, in accordance with the International Building Code, as amended.
8. Written evidence of recorded, legal access to the site.
9. Completed Annual Operating Permit application (see §5.1.B.1.a).
10. Any other information deemed necessary by the Staff to make a fully informed and
deliberate review of the Conditional Use Permit.
January 31, 2016
Estes Park Town Board of Trustees:
Back in November, after viewing the Joint Town Board Study Session with the County Commissioners
that was held on November 9, 2015, we were extremely disappointed in the apparent lack of concern
for Estes Park neighborhoods and their residents that was shown by our Town of Estes Park elected
officials. It was disappointing to see the Town Board focus on the rights of vacation home owners and
operators, with very little regard for the rights of the local inhabitants of our neighborhoods and
residential areas.
It is time for the Town to enforce the current regulations that pertain to vacation homes, not to loosen
the regulations and allow for even greater occupancy and a greater number of vacation homes in Estes
Park and the surrounding Estes Valley.
I am certain you all know the feeling, you spend the day in the hustle bustle traffic and congestion of
Denver, Boulder or Fort Collins and look forward to driving home, into the Estes Valley, to enjoy the
peace, quiet, and solitude it offers. But instead, as you attempt to drive into your driveway, you find
your road is blocked with cars at the neighboring vacation home, and the peace, quiet and solitude is
disrupted by its occupants enjoying their vacation, partying loudly, with no regard for the residents of
the neighborhood they have invaded. We are all aware that Estes Park is a tourist destination and we
are grateful for that, however, to allow vacation homes, which are essentially commercial ventures, to
exist in residential areas is negatively affecting our neighborhoods and our sense of community.
Operating vacation homes in residential areas truly changes the personality of the neighborhood with
increased automobile traffic, increased noise levels, people coming and going at all hours of the day and
night, never knowing who your “neighbor” is at any given time and altercations between property
owners within neighborhoods…just to name a few of the issues involved. This is not just speculation on
our part…we can see no fewer than six vacation homes just by looking out the windows of our home.
Vacation homes are intrusions of commercial businesses into residential neighborhoods. In addition,
the inordinate number of vacation homes in the Town limits and the surrounding Estes Valley may be
limiting the number of long term rentals available for people who want to live in, and contribute to, our
community on a year ‘round basis.
My family chose to live in a residential area and purchased property in a residential zoning district. Our
property is zoned E‐1. We have a significant investment in our land and our home and are adamantly
opposed to the proposal of allowing vacation homes in E‐1, or any zoning district, to be allowed to rent
to parties larger than eight in number. We invested in our property to have some space between our
home and our neighbors’ homes, to provide room for the wildlife to wander, and to enjoy the solitude
and beauty of Estes Park, not to allow for what constitutes as a small hotel in our neighborhood. If we
had wanted to be surrounded by hotels and motels we would have purchased property in a Commercial
or Accommodations zoning district where this type of activity is allowed and expected.
The accommodations zoning districts were created for just that, accommodations and lodging. The
current vacation home regulations related to numbers of occupants and cars, etc., are already difficult
to enforce. Please do not consider making these regulations any more lenient than they already are.
Rather, consider changes to vacation home rental regulations that will eliminate the encroachment of
commercial business activities into our residential neighborhoods, thereby preserving the
neighborhoods of Estes Park and the right to quiet enjoyment by the residents of Estes Park residential
neighborhoods.
Please retain the occupancy criteria currently in place (two people per bedroom plus two with a
maximum of eight); enforce the regulations currently in place; honor and uphold the covenants of our
neighborhoods and subdivisions; and keep lodging on properties that are zoned for accommodations.
Thank you,
Cyd and Steve Deats
Town of Estes Park residents