Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPACKET Town Board 2015-08-11The 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, August 11, 2015 7:00 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. (Any person desiring to participate, please join the Board in the Pledge of Allegiance). PUBLIC COMMENT. (Please state your name and address). TOWN BOARD COMMENTS / LIAISON REPORTS. TOWN ADMINISTRATOR REPORT. 1. CONSENT AGENDA: 1. Town Board Minutes dated July 28, 2015, Town Board Study Session Minutes dated July 28, 2015, and Town Board Budget Study Session Minutes dated July 28, 2015. 2. Bills. 3. Committee Minutes: A. Community Development & Community Services Committee, July 23, 2015. 4. Estes Park Board of Appeals Minutes dated July 2, 2015 (acknowledgement only). 2. ACTION ITEMS: 1. RESOLUTION #13-15 SETTING ELECTION FOR REFERRED MEASURE – THE DOWNTOWN ESTES LOOP. Town Clerk Williamson. 2. INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT (IGA) BETWEEN THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK AND LARIMER COUNTY ELECTIONS OFFICE FOR THE 2015 COORDINATED ELECTION – DOWNTOWN ESTES LOOP. Town Clerk Williamson. 3. REPORT AND DISCUSSION ITEMS: Prepared 8/3/15 * NOTE: The Town Board reserves the right to consider other appropriate items not available at the time the agenda was prepared. 1. REVIEW DRAFT ORDINANCE TO ADD MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 7.20 WILDLIFE PROTECTION. Chief Kufeld. 4. ADJOURN. Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, July 28, 2015 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 28th day of July 2015. Present: William C. Pinkham, Mayor Wendy Koenig, Mayor Pro Tem Trustees John Ericson Bob Holcomb Ward Nelson Ron Norris John Phipps Also Present: Frank Lancaster, Town Administrator Travis Machalek, Assistant Town Administrator Greg White, Town Attorney Town Clerk Williamson Finance Officer McFarland Barbara Jo Limmiatis, Recording Secretary Absent: None Mayor Pinkham called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. and all desiring to do so, recited the Pledge of Allegiance. PROCLAMATION. Mayor Pinkham proclaimed July – September 2015 as the “Estes Park United Campaign” in the Estes Valley. RODEO PARADE AWARD PRESENTATION. Representatives from Western Heritage presented the Rodeo Parade Awards of Best Marching Entry, Best Float and Best Overall Entry to Rocky Mountain National Park. BEST SENIOR RODEO PRESENTATION. Representatives from the Senior Pro Rodeo presented the Best Senior Rodeo Award to Mayor Pinkham on behalf of the Town. PUBLIC COMMENTS. None. TRUSTEE COMMENTS. Trustee Norris informed the Board Rocky Mountain National Park was recently voted the #1 Most Hikeable Park in the United States. Mayor Pro Tem Koenig stated the next Sister City meeting would be on July 29, 2015 at the Museum and she attended the Joint Regional Meeting of Larimer County. House Bill 15-1348 which addresses public bodies in connection to urban redevelopment was a major topic of discussion. Trustee Phipps updated the Board on the activities of the Planning Commission including vacation rentals, the Modernization of the Comprehensive Plan and the Downtown Visioning Request for Proposal process. Trustee Nelson reported the Open Lands Advisory Board was grateful to the Town Board for supplying matching funds for the purchase of Cascade Cottages and they are in an excellent financial situation, acquiring more properties and maintaining existing lands for the County. Board of Trustees – July 28, 2015 – Page 2 Trustee Ericson congratulated the Town on receiving the Voice of the People Award for Transformation in Economy and informed the Board of the activities of the Transportation Advisory Board and the Community Development Community Services Committee meetings including the parking study completed by the Rocky Mountain Performing Arts Center, paid parking alternatives, the Loop, the parking structure near the Visitor Center, the Barnes Dance Study, vacation rental policy, the Downtown Plan process and major construction projects underway. TOWN ADMINISTRATOR REPORT. Administrator Lancaster informed the Board formal action should be taken to appoint a representative to the Colorado Municipal League (CML) Policy Committee. It was moved and seconded (Koenig/Norris) to appoint Administrator Lancaster to the CML Policy Committee, and it passed unanimously. Trustee Ericson requested clarification on the Audit Committee. He stated the administrative members would be removing themselves and suggested a minimum of three Board members participate. Administrator Lancaster stated direction was needed from the Board in regards to how the Audit Committee should move forward. Mayor Pinkham stated further discussion is needed and should take place during a Study Session. 1. CONSENT AGENDA: 1. Town Board Minutes dated July 14, 2015 and Town Board Study Session Minutes dated July 14, 2015. 2. Bills. 3. Committee Minutes: A. Public Safety, Utilities & Public Works Committee, July 9, 2015. 4. Estes Valley Planning Commission Minutes dated April 21, 2015 (acknowledgement only). 5. Transportation Advisory Board Minutes dated June 17, 2015 (acknowledgement only). Trustee Norris requested the removal of Item 1 for discussion. It was moved and seconded (Koenig/Holcomb) to accept Consent Agenda Items 2, 3, 4 and 5, and it passed unanimously. Item 1 – Town Board Minutes dated July 14, 2015 and Town Board Study Session Minutes dated July 14, 2015: Trustee Norris stated the last sentence of the first paragraph of the Town Board Study Session minutes should state the Committee advised staff to look for solutions that do not involve removal of parking spaces. It was moved and seconded (Norris/ Holcomb) to approve Town Board Minutes and Town Board Study Session Minutes as corrected, and it passed unanimously. 2. LIQUOR ITEMS: 1. NEW BEER & WINE LIQUOR LICENSE FOR HIMILAYAN CURRY & KEBOB, INC., DBA HIMALAYAN CURRY & KEBOB, 101 B W. ELKHORN AVENUE, ESTES PARK, CO 80517. Town Clerk Williamson presented the application for a new liquor license for Himalayan Curry & Kebob, stating all applicable fees and paperwork were submitted. The applicant filed a concurrent review with the state. TIPS training has been completed. It was moved and seconded (Koenig/Phipps) to approve the new Beer & Wine Liquor License Board of Trustees – July 28, 2015 – Page 3 for Himalayan Curry & Kebob, Inc., dba Himalayan Curry & Kebob, and it passed unanimously. 2. TRANSFER OF OWNERSHIP – FROM GAST HAUS ESTES PARK, INC., DBA MOLLY B RESTAURANT TO LEE ENTERPRIESES, INC., DBA MOLLY-B, 200 MORAINE AVENUE, TAVERN LIQUOR LICENSE. Town Clerk Williamson presented the application to transfer the current Tavern liquor license. All required paperwork and fees were submitted and a temporary permit was issued on June 18, 2015. The applicant is aware of the TIPS training requirement and plans to attend the next available class. It was moved and seconded (Koenig/Phipps) to approve the transfer from Gast Haus Estes Park, Inc., dba Molly B Restaurant to Lee Enterprises, Inc., dba Molly-B, Tavern Liquor License, and it passed unanimously. 3. REPORT AND DISCUSSION ITEMS: 1. SECOND QUARTER FINANCIAL REPORT. Finance Officer McFarland reviewed the 2nd quarter sales tax and financial report stating sales tax is up 8% and 14% ahead for the 2015 budget. Expenditures are on target at 50%. The Utilities expenditures are slightly under budget due to capital projects which have not yet started and non-restricted investments have been expanded in accordance with the adoption of the new investment policy. The Community Reinvestment Fund should be near $50,000 at the end of the year with the completion of the Events Center and Pavilion. A grant funded flood accountant was recently hired and continues to make progress on obtaining reimbursement from various agencies on 2013 Flood expenses. 4. REQUEST TO ENTER EXECUTIVE SESSION: It was moved and seconded (Koenig/ Phipps) to enter executive session for a conference with Town Attorney for the purpose of receiving legal advice on specific legal questions on the Loop under 24-6-402(4)(b) C.R.S, and it passed unanimously. The Board entered executive session at 8:01 p.m. and adjourned back to regular session at 9:01 p.m.; whereupon Mayor Pinkham directed staff to draft a Resolution and ballot language regarding the Loop project for consideration at the August 11, 2015 Town Board meeting. There being no further business, Mayor Pinkham adjourned the meeting at 9:06 p.m. William C. Pinkham, Mayor Barbara Jo Limmiatis, Recording Secretary Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, July 28, 2015 Minutes of a Regular meeting of the TOWN BOARD STUDY SESSION of the Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held at Town Hall in Rooms 202/203 in said Town of Estes Park on the 28th day of July, 2015. Board: Mayor Pinkham, Mayor Pro Tem Koenig, Trustees Ericson, Holcomb, Nelson, Norris and Phipps Attending: Mayor Pinkham, Mayor Pro Tem Koenig, Trustees Ericson, Holcomb, Nelson, Norris and Phipps Also Attending: Town Administrator Lancaster, Assistant Town Administrator Machalek, Attorney White, Deputy Town Clerk Deats Absent: None Mayor Pinkham called the meeting to order at 5:10 p.m. TRUSTEE & ADMINISTRATOR COMMENTS & QUESTIONS. In regard to the sale of a Town-owned property (vacant lot located on Old Ranger Road adjacent to Elkhorn Lodge) with an assessed value of $133,000, Town Administrator Lancaster suggested, and the Board concurred, that Administrative staff will proceed with offering the property for sale without the aid of a realtor. The adjacent property owners will be notified of the Town’s intention to sell and Attorney White will prepare a contract for sale if and when necessary. Mayor Pro Tem Koenig requested the standing agenda items “Trustee & Administrator Comments & Questions” and “Future Study Session Agenda Items” be moved to the end of the study session agenda. Presentations and reports would be addressed at the beginning of the meeting eliminating the need for community members to sit through discussions of these topics. The Board requested staff make this change to the permanent agenda format. FUTURE STUDY SESSION AGENDA ITEMS.  Trustee Phipps suggested that the “Study Session Items for Board Consideration” be moved to the category “Items Approved – Unscheduled”.  Dates for the October budget study sessions will be finalized and sent to the Board. The meetings will likely be held on the first two or three Fridays in October. FINAL DRAFT OF NEO FIBER BROADBAND STRATEGY REPORT. Diane Kruse, CEO of NEO Fiber, provided the Town Board with a draft report related to broadband expansion. She stated that current broadband service in the Estes Valley is inadequate, slow and expensive; and said that based on the support of the electorate shown during the February 2015 election, broadband survey results and public engagement discussions, the community is interested in accessing a faster, more reliable broadband network. She said the demand for broadband and additional speed is doubling every year, and noted that the Town of Estes Park has an opportunity to build a state of the art, best in class, gigabit-enabled fiber network funded by user fees. She said that five financial models for various service delivery options were explored and reported that only two of the five models were considered feasible due to Estes Park’s rural, remote location, and the higher costs of building in the rocky conditions that exist in this mountainous area. The two feasible models discussed hypothesized the Town providing retail services directly to anchor institutions and businesses; and to the business community, residents and homes of the community. Topics discussed included: Town Board Study Session – July 28, 2015 – Page 2  the feasible models for the Town of Estes Park resemble the model the City of Longmont is currently investing in;  offering cable television and telephone service is not recommended;  recommend offering a two-tier network ranging from 100 megabits to one gigabit; this capacity may not be used initially, but will become the norm;  infrastructure build-out costs are estimated at $27 million to $30 million; with an approximate 10-12 year debt retirement;  after build-out debt retirement, the revenue source from user fees would be similar to that of the Town’s Light and Power Division;  goal is to supply affordable, abundant broadband at approximately $70 to $95/month for residential customers;  estimate a 40% take rate; but debt coverage works at a 30% take rate;  provides for possible private-public partnership roles related to design, engineering and construction;  operational partnerships such as outsourcing billing, customer service, trouble resolution, service calls, installation and repair, etc., may also be possible;  economic development is targeting professionals who would require high-speed broadband; and  municipalities have access to low interest rate grant and loan programs that are unavailable to the private sector. Ms. Kruse stated that fiber is a good investment with a long shelf-life and is now being considered a utility rather than a luxury. The Board expressed interest in the project and requested that staff meet with Ms. Kruse and Jon Nicholas of the Economic Development Corporation (EDC) to discuss what it would take to move ahead on the project and report back to the Board. There being no further business, Mayor Pinkham adjourned the meeting at 6:25 p.m. Cynthia Deats, Deputy Town Clerk Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, July 28, 2015 Minutes of a Budget Study Session meeting of the TOWN BOARD of the Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held at Town Hall in Rooms 202/203 in said Town of Estes Park on the 28th day of July, 2015. Board: Mayor Pinkham, Mayor Pro Tem Koenig, Trustees Ericson, Holcomb, Nelson, Norris and Phipps Attending: All Also Attending: Town Administrator Lancaster, Assistant Town Administrator Machalek, Finance Officer McFarland, Directors Bergsten, Chilcott, Kufeld, and Winslow, Manager McEachern, Town Clerk Williamson, Public Information Officer Rusch and Grant Specialist Crosser Absent: Director Muhonen Mayor Pinkham called the meeting to order at 2:55 p.m. REVIEW OF BOARD RETREAT HELD JUNE 25, 2015. Town Administrator Lancaster reviewed the 2015 Strategic Plan draft developed at the Town Board retreat that included a list of objectives. REVIEW OF FLOOD RECOVERY EXPENSES AND FUNDING. Finance Officer McFarland reviewed the finances for flood recovery stating reimbursements have taken longer to receive from the State than anticipated. The State continues to review each submittal thoroughly to ensure municipalities are not receiving funds erroneously that would have to be paid back in the future. Reimbursements for CDBG-DR grant funds are slow for the Fish Creek utility repairs. FHWA funds are being administrated by Larimer County; therefore, the reimbursement timeframe is dependent on submittals by the County. The Town received DOLA funds for three flood recovery position and reimbursements for pay and benefits are being submitted monthly. With the unknown timeframe for the reimbursements staff continues to be cautious with regard to cash flow to ensure the Town does not expend funds beyond those available. FORECAST OF FUND BALANCES. General fund has a fund balance of 13% due in large part to a lag in reimbursements and a significant shortfall of approximately $715,000 in budgeted revenues for the Event Center. Staff would propose a balanced budget for 2016 to address the declining fund balance. Community Reinvestment fund has an anticipated fund balance of $49,000 at the end of 2015; therefore, there are no funds available for projects in 2016. The General fund would transfer $500,000 to the fund to cover the Certificate of Participation payment for the Event Center. The Open Space fund could be used to fund appropriate flood recovery efforts such as the Scott Ponds reconstruction. The remaining Special Revenue funds include the 1A sales tax funds: Emergency Response, Community Center, Trails and Streets. The Street fund includes the RAMP funds of $4.2 million received for the devolution of Elkhorn from Moraine to the Wonderview bypass. Enterprise funds include the Light and Power fund and Water fund which require appropriate fund balance ratios to meet bond ratings. The Water department would reduce expenses to improve the fund balance and associated bond rating. Town Board Study Session – July 28, 2015 – Page 2 Internal Service funds are funded by General and Enterprise funds and include the Medical, Fleet, IT and Vehicle Replacement funds. The Fleet fund has a declining fund balance, IT fund remains healthy and can complete projects, and the Vehicle Replacement fund has not been funded fully in the past couple of year and needs to be fully funded in the future. The Theater fund continues to hold funds for the performing art center. GENERAL THOUGHTS ON REMAINDER OF 2015 AND 2016 Administrator Lancaster stated out of budget requests are impacting the overall budget. The Town’s expenditures have been exceeding revenues for several years, which was intentional to spend down a large fund balance. The spending would be cut in 2016 to attempt to balance the budget. Multiple constraints for staffing and expenditure exist. Requests for new projects have an effect on staff workload and staff has been and continues to be over taxed. The Town has an opportunity to replace the Moraine Bridge; however, if awarded engineering staff would have to manage the project or hire a project engineer. Other possible projects discussed during the Strategic Planning meeting include: 1) Fall River Trail – the project design should be completed and shovel ready for grant opportunities such as COGO funds. There would likely be a match required and could be funded by the Open Space fund; 2) Additional Parking Structures – would require matching funds and continues to be a very high priority for the Town; 3) Storm Water Master Plan – a consultant would be needed to review and develop a master plan. Grant opportunists may be available to develop a plan; 4) Special Event Signage – staff has discussed the need to update the banner location with a variable sign; 5) Conference Center Improvements – would require a consultant to review the property and provide recommendations; 6) 100th Anniversary in 2017 – cost unknown at this time and would largely be expended in 2017; 7) Document Management System – consulting fees; and 8) Biennial Survey – cost estimated at $15,000. The survey could be moved to 2017. Personnel costs Personnel costs are estimated to increase by 2 – 3% based on the market study adjustments. No merit adjustments are being recommended for 2016. Increases to benefits are unknown as the Town has hired a new benefit consultant in June. Staff has placed a 10% increase in the preliminary budget for medical. The medical insurance would continue to have no spousal coverage in 2016, which has had an effect on recruiting. Staffing A number of staffing needs have been identified and include a Payroll Clerk, Street staff, Special Event staff, Administrative Services staff, Police Records Tech, additional CSOs, Community Development staff, and Utilities staff. Other Department Needs Community Services continues to review funding for the Museum storage facility. Community Development would implement the Downtown Neighborhood plan, develop wayfinding plan for downtown neighborhood, code changes to address business concerns, and update fees to aid in cost recovery. Public Works would eliminate the ice rink in 2016; update GIS management, expand Lucity software to include Streets and Facilities modules; a need for heated storage for the spray patcher and aggregate; and Master Plan for the Elm Road campus. Finance would request an upgrade to the HTE financial software that may be funded by the IT fund. Town Board Study Session – July 28, 2015 – Page 3 Utilities continues to evaluate a redundant source for the Mary’s Lake Water Treatment Plant, and the need to extend the fiber associated with the electric system management. Board discussion followed and has been summarized: Trustee Holcomb listed top priorities: parking structure, personnel, Event staff, Police staff, storage, and cost recovery on fee. Trustee Norris stated personnel would be at the top of the list. Capital projects should be evaluated and a cost benefit analysis conducted. Trustee Ericson agreed employee compensation should be adjusted to market, would recommend pushing projects out to maintain financial strength, review revenues and fees charged, eliminate or cut back special programs, invest in Community Development, and eliminate the Street Improvement (STIP) funding of $435,000 from the General fund because of the increase in 1A sales tax revenues. Trustee Nelson concurred that personnel compensation and staffing issues are important, especially an adequately staffed Community Development and Special Event departments. Mayor Pro Tem Koenig stated personnel would be at the top of her list. Trustee Phipps agreed the Community Development and Special Event staffing needs should be addressed. There being no further business, Mayor Pinkham adjourned the meeting at 5:00 p.m. Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, July 23, 2015 Minutes of a Regular meeting of the COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT / COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMITTEE of the Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held in Town Hall in said Town of Estes Park on the 23rd day of July, 2015. Committee: Chair Ericson, Trustees Holcomb and Phipps Absent: Trustee Phipps Also Attending: Town Administrator Lancaster, Directors Chilcott, Winslow and Fortini, Manager Salerno, Coordinators Jacobson and Wells, and Recording Secretary Limmiatis Trustee Ericson called the meeting to order at 8:00 a.m. PUBLIC COMMENT. Bob Beers of the Model A Ford Club of Colorado informed the Committee the National Convention of Model A Fords would be traveling through Estes Park on June 23, 2016. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. REPORTS. Reports provided for informational purposes and made a part of the proceedings.  Community Development Quarterly Report – Director Chilcott updated the Committee on building activity, the progress on the adoption of the International Building Codes, flood plain management, the Moraine Avenue bridge grant application status, the Downtown Neighborhood Plan consultant selection process, the sign code, fee schedules, and vacation rental activity. COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT. REPORTS. Reports provided for informational purposes and made a part of the proceedings.  Museum Quarterly Report – Director Fortini informed the Committee of the success of the Pioneer of the Peaks program, the completion of the 2013 Flood oral history collection and the status of the Museum Master Plan.  Visitor Services Quarterly Report – Manager Salerno described the increases seen in attendance through the second quarter, the need for more information about the National Forests that surround Estes Park and the increase in ambassadors on staff through the summer.  Shuttle Update – Shuttle Coordinator Wells stated record ridership was achieved on the Fourth of July holiday. Concerns have been received regarding the #10 stop of the Brown route and would be monitored closely to determine if changes need to be made. The trolleys have experienced major mechanical issues. Replacement buses are running in their place until a solution can be identified.  Event Report – Coordinator Jacobson informed the Committee of the sold out performances at the Rooftop Rodeo, the upcoming Wine Festival and the increase in participants at the Hunter Jumper Horse Shows.  Verbal Updates and Committee Questions – Manager Lynch updated the Committee on the Events Center bookings. Administrator Lancaster stated staff continues to investigate solutions for the placement of multiple banners, examine the best location for a second sign and the need for an electronic variable message sign. There being no further business, Trustee Ericson adjourned the meeting at 9:55 a.m. Barbara Jo Limmiatis, Recording Secretary RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Park Board of Appeals 1 July 2, 2015 Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall Commission:  Brad Klein, John Spooner, Joe Calvin, Don Darling, Tony Schiaffo       Attending:    Chair Spooner, Members Klein, Calvin, Darling and Schiaffo    Also Attending: Chief Building Official Will Birchfield, Building Inspector Claude Traufield,  Recording Secretary Karen Thompson    Absent:  None      The following minutes reflect the order of the agenda and not necessarily the chronological sequence.  There were four people in the audience.    Chair Spooner opened the meeting, stating this meeting would be a review of the International  Plumbing Code (IPC) Significant Changes for 2012 and 2015.  He explained the reasoning behind  reviewing two years: the Town adopted the 2009 codes, and is planning to skip the 2012 and adopt  the 2015 codes. However, in order to do this, the 2012 changes still apply.     CONSENT AGENDA  Minutes from June 4, 2015 Board of Appeals meeting.    It was moved and seconded (Schiaffo/Calvin) to approve the minutes as presented and the motion  passed unanimously.    REPORTS  CBO Birchfield stated the August meeting will be a review of the International Property Maintenance  Code (IPMC).  He encouraged members of the public to attend and participate in the discussion.   Next month’s meeting will be the Property Maintenance Code.    CBO Birchfield stated portions of the IPC are also in the International Residential Code (IRC). He  reminded the Board that all the ICC codes are written as minimum standards. These regulations are a  target to aim past, not a target to shoot for. The significant changes being discussed today are part of  the publications from the ICC. CBO Birchfield reviewed the changes and will focus on the changes  significant to the Estes Park community. The ICC publications are available for check out through the  Division of Building Safety.    CURRENT LOCAL AMENDMENTS TO THE INTERNATIONAL MECHANICAL CODE (2009)  CBO reviewed the current local amendments, and stated the public would be given the opportunity to  ask questions during the review.    CBO Birchfield stated almost all of the local amendments to the IPC are to provide consistency with  the Larimer County Health Department, the Town Water Department, or one of the Sanitation  Districts. Most of the amendments make the International Plumbing Code line up with their  regulations, to avoid conflict in the field.  RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Park Board of Appeals 2 July 2, 2015 Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall    Chapter 1 contains administrative provisions for fees, daily operating procedures, etc. These items are  moved from the International Building Code (IBC) to the International Plumbing Code (IPC).    Connection of service utilities.  The pressure release valve (PRV) must be placed ahead of the meter.  Cut offs shall be located in appropriate places in order to replace the entire assembly of meter and  PRV without cutting into the water service line. CBO Birchfield stated inspections for these  connections are done by the Town, which means the regulations have to be in the IPC.     Contractor’s affidavit of compliance. CBO Birchfield stated the current amendment allows pre‐ approved contractors to submit an affidavit of compliance for the following work: (1) Water service  line, new and replacement; (2) Sewer service line, new and replacement, or (3) Pressure test for  underground plumbing connected to an existing system, only the test is exempt, inspection is still  required. He stated the sewer service line item will be deleted from the proposed amendments  because the sanitation districts are doing their own inspections. Concerning the pressure test, CBO  Birchfield stated if there is a state certified plumber doing the work, they can do a hose test to make  sure it doesn’t leak. The goal is to keep jobs moving forward.     Means of Appeal. This section of the IPC will be deleted, and reference made to the appeals section of  the IBC. Each code has its own appeals section, and it is more appropriate for the Town to have only  one appeals process for all construction appeals. That also applies to the floodplain regulations. The  Board of Appeals serves as the appeal body for floodplain regulations.     Building drain. CBO Birchfield stated the IPC says the building drain is the lowest piping of a drainage  system that receives the discharge from soil, waste and other drainage pipes inside and that extends  30 inches beyond the exterior walls of the building. Everything past the 30 inches is considered the  building sewer. The differences in the definitions between building drain and sewer is important to  know because the sewer districts do their own inspections.  CBO Birchfield stated a proposed  amendment to the code would remove the 30 inches and add “to the cleanouts.” There are some  construction situations when the cleanouts are not installed within that 30 inches from the building.   The Sanitation District would take over past the cleanout.      Pipes through or under footings or foundation walls. CBO Birchfield stated the IPC requires pipes  going through a foundation to be in a sleeve two pipe sizes larger than the pipe going through. The  current local amendment requires a sleeve one pipe size larger, because the soils in Estes Park are not  expansive like in other parts of the country. He emphasized that pipes cannot be buried inside the  footing.     Freezing. The exterior water supply shall be installed not less than 60 inches below grade. This is a  water department standard for Estes Park.    Sewer depth. The IPC requires municipalities to adopt a minimum depth. The current amendment  states private sewage disposal systems shall comply with the most recent edition of the Larimer  RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Park Board of Appeals 3 July 2, 2015 Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall County Individual Sewer System Regulation enforced by the Larimer County Health Department. The  local sanitation districts require a minimum depth of four feet for a sewer main and 36 inches for  service lines.     Water supply system test. The current local amendment states the required minimum air pressure  test shall be at 80 psi (up from 50 psi in the IPC). .     Gravity sewer test. This current amendment concerns the line from the building to the tap. If  connected to public sewer, the building sewer downstream of the double cleanouts required by  708.3.5 shall be regulated by the requirements of the appropriate sanitation district.  The sanitation  district or health department will perform the inspections, depending on the type of system.     Forced sewer test. The current local amendment states if connected to public sewer, the building  sewer downstream of the double cleanouts required by 708.3.5 shall be regulated by the  requirements of the appropriate sanitation district.  The sanitation district or health department will  perform the inspections, depending on the type of system.     Inspection and testing of backflow prevention assemblies. The current local amendment states all  backflow prevention assemblies shall be in compliance with the requirements of and be approved by  the Town of Estes Park Water Department.     Inspections. The current local amendment states backflow prevention assemblies and air gaps shall  comply with requirements of the Town of Estes park Water Department.  CBO Birchfield stated the  Water Department and/or Sanitation Districts are required to sign off on the inspection record cards.    Fuel burning applicances. The current local amendment states condensate shall not discharge into a  street, alley, or other areas so as to cause a nuisance.     Size of water service pipe. CBO Birchfield stated because of the town’s high water pressure, the  Water Department has a different system than what is written in the IPC. The current local  amendment accounts for this in a table of Maximum Units per Meter Size.      Separation of water service and building sewer. CBO Birchfield stated the current local amendment  requires separation of water and sewer lines by at least ten feet unless one is sleeved.      Water service pipe. Exceptions were added to the IPC to require ductile iron pipe or another material  pre‐approved for service lines for fire suppression systems and services lines larger than two inches.    Prohibited joints and connections. The current local amendment states service taps shall be made or  approved by the Town of Estes Park Water Department.     Location of full‐open valves. The current local amendment states full‐open valves must be at certain  locations near property lines. This is because there are few curbs in town.   RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Park Board of Appeals 4 July 2, 2015 Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall   General. The current local amendment added  a statement that all backflow assemblies shall be in  compliance with the requirements of and be approved by the Town of Estes Park  Water Department.      Sewer required. This current local amendment replaces the reference to the International private  Sewage Disposal Code with the Larimer County Individual Sewer System Regulation enforced by the  Larimer County Health Department.         Building sewer pipe near the water service. The current local amendment states building sewers shall  not be installed within ten feet of the water service pipe, unless one of them is sleeved.     Prohibited joints. The current local amendment prohibits saddle‐type fittings unless these service taps  are installed by the appropriate sanitation district and comply with their regulations..     Building sewers. The current local amendment states cleanouts shall be provided by the appropriate  sanitation district.    Building drain and building sewer junction. This current local amendment reworded the text to clarify  where town jurisdiction stops and health department or sanitation district jurisdiction starts.  Text was  also added to allow the cleanout closest to the building to be used as the required cleanout for  building drain and building sewer. This complies with the sanitation district’s and the Town’s  inspections.     Roof extensions. The current local amendment states all open vent pipes that extend through a roof  shall be terminated at least six inches above the roof, except that where a roof is to be used for any  purpose other than weather protection, the vent extensions shall be at least seven feet above the  roof.      Approval. CBO Birchfield states this current local amendment concerns traps and interceptors. He  suggested amending this code to put everything in the hands of the sanitation districts (grease  interceptors, sand interceptors outside garages, etc.) The goal of this section of the IPC is to protect  sewer lines.       Grease interceptors. CBO Birchfield would suggest amending this code the same way as the previous  amendment, with an exception stating new and replacement grease interceptors shall not be located  inside buildings.    Grease interceptors and automatic grease removal devices required. CBO Birchfield asked for  comments from the local sanitation districts concerning this current local amendment. Jim Duell/Estes  Park Sanitation District stated when the process starts it will be defined from the beginning and actual  connections would be verified before the final is approved.  Todd Krula/Upper Thompson Sanitation  District stated they are OK with the way the current local amendment is written. Mr. Duell stated a  minor change to the code would allow a developer to upsize an interceptor if needed. CBO Birchfield  RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Park Board of Appeals 5 July 2, 2015 Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall stated the Town would perform an inspection in the field, and the appropriate sanitation district  would also sign off on the device, meaning there would be two people performing the inspection to  ensure it was properly installed.     Grease intercept capacity.  The current local amendment states the appropriate sanitation district  shall determine the size required.     Separate systems required. This current local amendment states stormwater cannot be discharged  into sewer systems.     Appendix D – Degree day and design temperatures. CBO Birchfield stated if we want to use these  appendices, they must be officially adopted. Appendix D is currently adopted.    Appendix E – Sizing of water piping system. The same statement as Appendix D applies to this  appendix.     End of proposed local amendments.    2012 SIGNIFICANT CHANGES TO THE INTERNATIONAL PLUMBING CODE  Hot or Tempered Water Supply to Fixtures. CBO Birchfield stated this change states the maximum  distance between a hot water supply source and all fixtures served by the supply source has been  reduced from 100 feet to 50 feet.     Fixture Protection from Sewage Backflow. CBO Birchfield stated if you have plumbing fixtures are  installed on a floor with a finished floor elevation below the elevation of the manhole cover of the  next upstream manhole in the public sewer, fixtures shall be protected by a backwater valve installed  in the building drain or horizontal branch serving such fixtures. The measurement currently used is the  top of the bowl or lavoratory. This has now changed to measure from the floor. There was brief  discussion about how backwater valves work and where they should be located. CBO Birchfield stated  discussion with other changes later in the meeting would add useful information to this change.     Prohibited Locations for Waste Receptors. This changes states you cannot install p‐traps in building  spaces that are uninhabitable. This item was tabled for further discussion at the request of Member  Klein.     NOTE: CBO Birchfield stated the Board needs to have additional discussion about condensation.  The  August meeting will be a review of the International Property Maintenance Code, which has not been  previously adopted by the Town. The Board will review this code and make recommendations to the  elected officials as to whether or not to adopt this code.  CBO Birchfield stated the current adopted  codes state issues in existing buildings must be deemed imminently dangerous before he can issue a  building code violation. The IPMC would allow violations to be issued and addressed before a situation  becomes imminently dangerous.  CBO Birchfield stated there should be some time at the August  meeting for additional discussion on all the items that have been tabled thus far.   RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Park Board of Appeals 6 July 2, 2015 Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall   Combination Waste and Vent System Sizing.  CBO Birchfield stated the length of a combination waste  and vent system is unlimited, and every system has a trap and a vent or it will not work. The change  states this type of system must now be sized.       Gray Water Recycling Systems. CBO Birchfield stated provisions addressing gray water recycling  systems have been relocated from Appendix C to a new Chapter 13 in the IPC.      2015 SIGNIFICANT CHANGES TO THE INTERNATIONAL PLUMBING CODE   Determining Minimum Number of Plumbing Fixtures. CBO Birchfield stated plumbing fixtures are  based on the occupancy classification.  The IBC occupancy classifications are no longer used to  determine which row in Table 403.1 Minimum Number of Required Plumbing Fixtures, to use for  fixture quantities. This is a philosophical change in the code.  The ICC is moving into a performance  arena and looking at actual use instead of strictly using occupancy classifications.  The 2015  International Existing Building Code also takes this approach, based on use.     Directional Signage for Location of Public Toilet Facilities. CBO Birchfield stated this change states  directional signage indicating the route to the required public toilet facilities shall be posted in a lobby,  corridor, aisle or similar space so it can be readily seen from the main entrance.     Water Heater Pan Drain Line. CBO Birchfield stated this change allows where a pan drain was not  previously installed, a pan drain shall not be required for a replacement water heater installation.  He  stated this issue is regularly discussed among staff and contractors. There was brief discussion  concerning this regulation and how it might apply to both electric and gas water heaters. CBO  Birchfield stated permits are currently not required by the Division of Building Safety for electric water  heaters. Additional discussion needs to occur concerning this change.       Hot Water Thermal Expansion Pressure Control. CBO Birchfield stated this change has to do with the  available method to control closed‐system pressure increases caused by the heating of water. It has  been limited to the use of thermal expansion tanks only.  In this case, the code is catching up with the  manufacturers, and is mostly a warranty issue.      Identification of Nonpotable Water. CBO Birchfield stated fixtures with nonpotable water must now  be identified with words and a symbol indicating nonpotable water is being used. The color purple has  been established for identifying distribution piping conveying nonpotable water.  Local designer Paul  Brown inquired about gray water and the effects on the sanitation districts. CBO Birchfield stated the  state of Colorado does not currently allow use of nonpotable water. If it is ever approved, there will  need to be discussions with the Water Department and Sanitation Districts.      Exception for Solvent Cementing PVC Piping 4 Inches and Smaller.  CBO Birchfield stated this is for  non‐pressurized systems only. The application of a primer to drain, waste and vent PVC pipe and  fittings prior to solvent cementing is not required for 4‐inch pipe size and smaller. He stated the  RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Park Board of Appeals 7 July 2, 2015 Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall systems will still require testing and have to pass inspection.  Pressurized systems are still glued  according to the manufacturer’s specifications.        Exception for Backwater Valve Installations. In existing buildings, fixtures above the elevation of the  manhole cover of the next upstream manhole in the public sewer shall not be prohibited from  discharging through a backwater valve. CBO Birchfield stated an amendment could be recommended  to require the valve to be located outside the building.      Vent Terminations to Outdoors. Where a roof is to be used for assembly or as a promenade,  observation deck, sunbathing deck or similar purposes, open vent pipes shall terminate not less than 7  feet above the roof. Additionally, any increase in the size of the vent shall be made not less than one  foot inside the building’s thermal envelope.   In public access areas, they terminations need to be  more than 7 feet.     End of 2015 Significant Changes    Staff and Board Discussion  CBO Birchfield suggested requiring building permits for electric water heaters. Comments concerning  drains and drain pans included, but were not limited to: many electric water heaters would require  custom‐made drain pans; should we consider a local amendment to require floor drains in any room  where there may be condensate; floor drains can freeze in homes that do not have ful‐time  occupants; if you dump condensate into the sewer drain of an unoccupied home it could freeze; there  are many variables as to how much condensate occurs; a condensate pump would allow it to build up  and occasionally discharge all at once; a trap primer cannot be used if the property owner turns off  the water to the house.  The general consensus on eliminating condensate was to table the item.  Inspector Traufield will take this item to the next Colorado Association of Plumbing and Mechanical  Operators meeting to learn what other similar jurisdictions are doing.  CBO Birchfield stated this is not  an easy fix. One solution would be to prohibit equipment in crawl spaces, which would bring concerns  about the loss of square footage in existing homes for mechanical rooms.     CBO Birchfield stated he and Fire Marshall Marc Robinson discussed sprinkler systems in residential  dwellings. Part of the issue is the development code allows any residential dwelling in the single‐ family residential zone district can rent the home long‐term (more than 30 days) or short‐term (30 ays  or less). This brings up the question as to whether or not the building would be considered a business  or a hotel, where the building codes are concerned. CBO Birchfield states his position is if the building  was built as a single‐family dwelling under the IRC, he does not want to get into land use issues. His  bigger concern is wildfire. A major wildfire in the Estes Valley could be much more devastating than a  flood. During the Woodland Heights fire, over twenty homes were destroyed in a few hours. If a house  is in a wildfire area and it trips another trigger (lack of adequate access for fire trucks, lack of adequate  water supply for the fire departmentor, or if it is over a certain size) the property owner is putting the  entire community at risk if the house catches fire and creates a wildfire.  We regulate snow, wind,  geohazards, etc., but wildfire is exponentially more dangerous than all of those.   He asked the Board  to consider those concerns when recommending exemption of sprinkler systems in one‐ or two‐family  RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Park Board of Appeals 8 July 2, 2015 Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall homes. Currently, dwellings for more than two families and mixed‐use buildings must be sprinkled.  Comments included but were not limited to: the cost for sprinklers is between $8 and $10 per square  foot; Vail has buildings that are sprinkled on the outside for wildfire protection; Boulder County  requires sprinkler systems inside as well as outside wildfire mitigation (vegetation mitigation, gravel  landscaping three feet around homes, under decks, etc.), if there would have been sprinklers in the  High Drive area, some of those homes may have been saved; it would be beneficial for new homes;  most of the easy lots are built out; wildfire has the most potential for devastation; building materials  have an impact on fire safety; some jurisdictions require a factory‐applied fire resistive material on  exterior siding; the issue is a house fire causing a wildfire; sprinkler systems are designed to contain  the fire by taking heat away and keeping the fire from spreading; a current issue is once a certificate  of occupancy is issued, the property owner is not required to maintain the mitigation measures; every  second counts in a fire; community opinion about wildfire may be change, and property owners may  be more willing to consider sprinkling their homes; CBO Birchfield will research the costs of systems;  sprinklers buy time for firefighters to get on site to fight the fire; sprinklers keep the combustible  vapors from igniting; it is very important to maintain the systems once they are installed.     CBO Birchfield stated the Board would receive the IPMC book to review for the August meeting. It is a  small code, with only 26 pages.     There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 6:04 p.m.            ___________________________________        John Spooner, Chair                    ___________________________________        Karen Thompson, Recording Secretary  Town Clerk Memo To: Honorable Mayor Pinkham Board of Trustees Town Administrator Lancaster From: Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk Date: August 7, 2015 RE: Resolution #13-15 Setting Election for Referred Measure – The Downtown Estes Loop & Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) Between The Town of Estes Park and Larimer County Elections Office for the 2015 Coordinated Election – Downtown Estes Loop Objective: Board to consider setting an election for a referred measure to be included on the Coordinated Election November 3, 2015 for the Downtown Estes Loop project. Present Situation: At the July 28, 2015 meeting, the Town Board directed staff to prepare a Resolution to consider referring a measure to the electorate of the Town of Estes Park and ballot language on the continuation of the Downtown Estes Loop project. Proposal: The proposed Resolution #13-15 would refer a measure to the electorate of the Town of Estes Park on whether or not the Town should continue to pursue the Downtown Estes Loop project. If approved the ballot language would be forward to the County Clerk and Recorder for inclusion on the Coordinated Election ballot. The County Clerk would be designated as the Coordinated Election Official and would conduct the election for the Town. The Resolution would also set the ballot language. In order to formally be included on the Coordinated Election ballot through Larimer County, an Intergovernmental Agreement is required and would need to be approved if the Board approves Resolution #13-15. Advantages:  The Town electorate would be given the ability to vote on the continuance of the project. Disadvantages:  Not allowing the public a vote on the issue. Action Recommended: As this item is a policy decision, staff does not have a recommendation for this action item. Budget: Election costs are estimated at $10,000 - $15,000. Sample Motion: I move to approve/deny Resolution 13-15 referring a measure to the Coordinated Election November 3, 2015 for the Downtown Estes Loop project. I move to approve/deny the Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) between the Town of Estes Park and Larimer County Elections Office for the 2015 Coordinated Election – Downtown Estes Loop project. Attachments Resolution #13-15 RESOLUTION NO. 13-15 SETTING ELECTION FOR REFERRED MEASURE THE DOWNTOWN ESTES LOOP WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees has determined, through the adoption of this Resolution, to refer a measure to the Coordinated Election on November 3, 2015, for the purpose of submitting to the electors of the Town of Estes Park a ballot question on whether or not the Town shall continue to pursue the Downtown Estes Loop Project; and WHEREAS, Section 31-11-111 (2) C.R.S. allows the Board of Trustees to fix a ballot title for this ballot question. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO: 1. That the Town of Estes Park will participate in the Coordinated Election on Tuesday, November 3, 2015 to refer a question to the Town of Estes Park electorate. 2. That the County Clerk shall act as the “Coordinated Election Official” (CEO) in accordance with C.R.S. Title 1 and Secretary of State Rules and shall conduct the Election for the Town of Estes Park. 3. The following ballot question shall be placed on the ballot: In accordance with decisions of the Town Board of Trustees in March, 2013 and April, 2015, shall the Town of Estes Park continue to support the Downtown Estes Loop Project subject to the continued participation of the Central Federal Lands Highway Division and Colorado Department of Transportation, the outcome of the NEPA Environmental Assessment and the availability of adequate funding? DATED this day of 2015. TOWN OF ESTES PARK Mayor ATTEST: Town Clerk Police Memo To: Honorable Mayor Pinkham Board of Trustees Town Administrator Lancaster From: Wes Kufeld, Chief of Police Date: August 11th, 2015 RE: Review Draft Ordinance to Add Municipal Code Chapter 7.20. WILDLIFE PROTECTION Objective: To present in draft format of the proposed Wildlife Protection Ordinance, Chapter 7.20 to Town Board and Citizens of Estes Park in an effort to receive board and public comments and/or recommendations. Staff is requesting feedback with a goal of presenting a final draft for possible adoption in September, with education occurring until enforcement begins in 2016. Present Situation: As requested by Town Board, staff is presenting a draft Wildlife Protection Ordinance based on the recommendations presented to the board and the public June 23. Staff has educated the public and requested public feedback throughout the process, and this will continue through the adoption process. Advantages:  As the Estes Park Police Department continues to see increasing numbers of wildlife calls, particularly those related to bears drawn to trash, the need for stronger trash management regulations is also increasing.  Gathering further public and board input on the draft ordinance will allow staff to continue progressing toward a final ordinance for the board to consider. Disadvantages:  None Action Recommended: Consider the language of the ordinance, include recommendations from the Board and citizens in order to move towards the final draft and adoption of a Wildlife Protection Ordinance. Budget: None Level of Public Interest High public interest Sample Motion: None at this time – Consensus to move the draft forward to a September board meeting. Attachments: Wildlife Protection – Chapter 7.20 DRAFT 1 WILDLIFE PROTECTION CHAPTER 7.20 7.20.010 In this Chapter, the following words and phrases have the following meanings: (a) Wildlife means any undomesticated animal, including, but not limited to, birds, elk, deer, sheep, lynx, skunks, magpies, crows, bears, raccoons, coyotes, beavers, porcupines, mountain lions, bobcats and foxes. (b) Refuse means any waste that could reasonably attract wildlife including, but not limited to, kitchen organic waste, food, food packaging, toothpaste, deodorant, cosmetics, spices, seasonings, oil and grease. Refuse shall not include glass, paper, cardboard, metal, plastic, aluminum, textiles, electronics, non-edible yard maintenance waste, construction materials and household items when not commingled with food waste attractants. (c) Wildlife Resistant Container means a fully enclosed container constructed of pliable materials and reinforced to deter access by wildlife. (d) Wildlife Resistant Enclosure means an enclosed structure consisting of four (4) sides and a secure door or cover, which shall have a latching device of sufficient design and strength to prevent access by wildlife. (e) Hard-sided Container means a container constructed using materials such as polycarbonate, ABS plastic, carbon fiber, wood or aluminum with a lid preventing wildlife from accessing the interior of the container. (f) Enclosed Structure means a residential building, commercial building, accessory dwelling unit, garage or shed. Enclosed Structure shall not include a patio, deck, driveway, or other area located outside of the walls of a residential building, commercial building, shed, garage or accessory dwelling unit. 7.20.020 Standards for Wildlife Resistant Containers & Hard-Sided Containers (a) Wildlife Resistant Containers shall meet the following standards: (1) Containers shall be of a design that is impervious to wildlife, with drain holes no greater than one (1) inch in diameter. DRAFT 2 (2) Container lids shall have a closure mechanism and/or a latching device such as cables, bars, and/or pull handles that prevents opening by wildlife. All lids shall also: (i) fully enclose (cover) the container opening. (ii) have edges that fit flush. (iii) shall not be turned up or bent. (iv) shall remain closed when on their side or upside down. (v) latching devices shall lock into place with a pin or other mechanism. (3) Wildlife Resistant Containers shall meet the standards of testing by the Living with Wildlife Foundation and a “passing” rating by the Interagency Grizzly Bear Committee (IGBC) as bear resistant for 60 minutes. (b) Hard-Sided Containers shall meet the following standards: (1) Container lids shall have latching devices to prevent access by wildlife. 7.20.030 Maintenance and operation of Wildlife Resistant Containers, Wildlife Resistant Enclosures, and Hard-Sided Containers. (a) Wildlife Resistant Containers, Wildlife Resistant Enclosures, and Hard-Sided Containers shall be kept closed and secure when refuse is deposited. (b) If a Wildlife Resistant Container, Wildlife Resistant Enclosure or Hard-Sided Container is damaged and allows access by wildlife, repairs shall be made within seventy-two (72) hours after the damage. 7.20.040 Residential refuse disposal. (a) With the exception of designated times listed in Section 7.02.040 (b), all refuse located outside an Enclosed Structure shall be contained in a Wildlife Resistant Container, a Wildlife Resistant Enclosure, or a Hard-Sided Container. (b) Residents with curbside pick-up shall place waste in a Wildlife Resistant Container or a Hard-Sided Container at the curb, alley, or public right of way at or after six o'clock (6:00) A.M. on the morning of scheduled pick up. After pick up, all containers must be removed from the curb, alley or public right of way by seven o'clock (7:00) P.M. on the same day. Any containers placed earlier than 6 a.m. or left overnight after 7 p.m. shall be in Wildlife Resistant Containers or Wildlife Resistant Enclosure. DRAFT 3 (c) Multi-family housing developments and other types of clustered residential housing utilizing centralized refuse containers shall use either a Wildlife Resistant Container or a Wildlife Resistant Enclosure for all refuse. 7.20.050 Construction site refuse disposal. All food packaging refuge shall be deposited in a Wildlife Resistant Container. Construction materials are not required to deposit in a Wildlife Resistant Container or Enclosure. 7.20.060 Commercial Refuse Disposal. (a) All refuse located outside an Enclosed Structure from commercial establishments and vacation rentals shall be deposited in Wildlife Resistant Containers or Wildlife Resistant Enclosures. This requirement shall not apply to containers 95-gallons or less which are emptied by 10 p.m. each day or are under contract for removal overnight. (b) Food service establishments shall deposit all oil and grease from their operations within Wildlife Resistant Containers or Wildlife Resistant Enclosures. 7.20.070 Trash Compactors. Trash compactors are compliant with this Chapter when no refuse is exposed. Compactor doors must be kept closed at all times, except when loading or removing refuse and the area around the compactor must be kept clean of refuse and debris. 7.20.080 Bird feeders. Bird feeders are allowed, except between April 1 and November 1 of each year, all bird feeders must be suspended on a cable or other device so that they are inaccessible to bears. 7.20.090 Barbeque grills. Barbeque grills located outside of an Enclosed Structure shall be cleaned by burning and scraping off debris after each use. 7.20.100 DRAFT 4 Inspections. The Town shall have the right to inspect all premises within the Town for the purpose of ascertaining compliance with the terms and conditions of this Chapter. 7.20.110 Violation. (a) Violation of any provision of this Chapter shall be unlawful and subject to the General Penalty provision of the Estes Park Town Municipal Code. The owner and/or the occupant of a residence or commercial establishment may be held responsible for a violation of any provision of this Chapter. Each day that any violation continues after service of a Notice of Violation shall be deemed a separate offense. (b) An owner and/or occupant shall be deemed to have been issued a Notice of Violation if it is personally served upon the owner and/or occupant, placed in the U.S. mail, postage prepaid and addressed to the owner and/or occupant according to the last known address given by the owner and/or occupant. If the identity of the owner and/or occupant is not known, the person responsible for payment of the garbage removal services for the subject location shall be used for the mailing address. 7.20.120 Compliance Required and Time Period. Any container or enclosure containing refuse shall be brought into conformity with the provision of this Chapter by April 1st, 2016. Upon application to the Town Administrator, and a showing of hardship by an owner and/or occupant of an enclosure or container required hereunder, the Town Administrator may grant an extension, for a reasonable period of time, with which to comply with the provision of this Chapter.