HomeMy WebLinkAboutPACKET Town Board 2015-05-26
The 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.
BOARD OF TRUSTEES - TOWN OF ESTES PARK
Tuesday, May 26, 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 May 12, 2015 and Town Board Study Session Minutes
dated May 12, 2015.
2. Bills.
3. Committee Minutes:
A. Public Safety, Utilities & Public Works Committee, May 14, 2015 - Cancelled.
4. Transportation Advisory Board Minutes dated April 15, 2015 (acknowledgement
only).
5. Parks Advisory Board Minutes dated April 16, 2015 (acknowledgement only).
6. Estes Valley Planning Commission Minutes dated April 21, 2015
(acknowledgement only). Item continued by staff to the June 23, 2015 Town
Board meeting.
2. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS. Items reviewed by Planning Commission or staff
for Town Board Final Action.
1. ACTION ITEM:
A. AMENDED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT – Lot 7, Marys Lake Subdivision
Replat, TBD Kiowa Court; Greg Coffman/Applicant. Planner Kleisler. Item
continued by staff to the June 23, 2015 Town Board meeting.
Prepared 5/18/15
* Revised 05/22/15
*
NOTE: The Town Board reserves the right to consider other appropriate items not available at the time the agenda was
prepared.
B. AMENDED PLAT, DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT & REZONING REQUEST
AMENDED PLAT & DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT Portion of Lot 25,
Block 10, Town of Estes Park, & portion of Lot 8A of the Amended Plat of a
portion of Lots 7, 8, 24, & 25, Block 10, 2nd Amended Plat, Town of Estes
Park; 175 Spruce Drive and the adjacent undeveloped land; Silver Moon,
LLC/Owner. Planner Kleisler.
ORDINANCE #03-15 Rezone from RM-Multi-Family Residential to CD-
Commercial Downtown, Silver Moon, LLC/Owner. Planner Kleisler.
3. ACTION ITEMS:
1. ORDINANCE #09-15 FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE LEASE FOR PROSPECT
MOUNTAIN RADIO SITE. Attorney White
2. TOWN ADMINISTRATOR EMPLOYMENT CONTRACT. Director Williamson.
4. REQUEST TO ENTER EXECUTIVE SESSION:
24-6-402(4)(b). C.R.S. – For a conference with the Town Attorney for the purpose of
receiving legal advice on specific legal questions on the Loop.
5. ADJOURN.
Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, May 12, 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 12th day of May 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
Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk
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.
PUBLIC COMMENTS.
None.
TRUSTEE COMMENTS.
Trustee Norris commented the Public Safety, Utilities and Public Works Committee
meeting has been cancelled for May 14th and the next meeting would be held on June
11th. The local hand radio club has been granted non-profit status. Visit Estes Park
(VEP) has an opening on its board and applications are being accepted. VEP has
been in discussions with the State as it relates to vacation homes not remitting taxes.
The Town would hold a public meeting on May 14th to discuss changes to the vacation
home regulations. Community Development and the Bear Education Task Force are
working to coordinate efforts related to a new wildlife code and vacation rentals.
Trustee Holcomb recognized the Community Services staff for the gymnastics meet.
The organizers of the event were pleased with the facility and the staff cooperation. He
would encourage staff to book more events of this type which provide a number of
lodging guests and guests at other facilities such as restaurants.
Trustee Nelson commented sales tax throughout Larimer County has been up for 2015.
The Open Lands Advisory Board has benefited and has a healthy fund balance. The
Board continues to work on the Big Thompson Master Plan which should be complete
by the end of the summer. The Estes Park Community Gardens was awarded an Open
Lands community grant.
Trustee Ericson restated the May 14th public forum on vacation home regulations. The
Transportation Advisory Board would meet on May 20th at noon in Town Hall. Their
discussions have been focused on the development of a master parking plan. The
Town Board would begin the strategic planning process in June.
Mayor Pinkham thanked the Special Event staff for a wonderful open house for the
Event Center on May 8th.
TOWN ADMINISTRATOR REPORT.
The Regional Transportation District (RTD) was organized in 1969 and is a regional
authority operating public transit services in eight of twelve counties in the Denver-
Board of Trustees – May 12, 2015 – Page 2
Aurora-Boulder Combined Statistical Area in Colorado. RTD currently services areas in
Longmont, Lyons and Nederland in Boulder County. In order for the Town to be served
by RTD the Town must be annexed into the district. Three essential criteria for any
annexation are (1) the land must be contiguous to the district; (2) a petition submitted
with 100% of the landowners of the area, or there is a successful annexation election
following the petition or county commissioner election process set forth in the statute;
and (3) the RTD Board of Directors agrees to the annexation. The county would be a
party involved in the petition and would have to be willing to address the issue. The
area annexed would be subject to a sales tax and would not be guaranteed bus
services. After further discussion the Board consensus was not to move forward with
discussions at this time.
1. CONSENT AGENDA:
1. Town Board Minutes dated April 28, 2015 and Town Board Study Session
Minutes dated April 28, 2015.
2. Bills.
3. Committee Minutes:
a. Community Development & Community Services Committee, April 23,
2015.
1. 2015 Shuttle Services Contract with Rocky Mountain Transit
Management (McDonald Transit).
4. Estes Park Board of Appeals Minutes dated January 8, 2015, February 5,
2015, March 12, 2015, March 26, 2015 and April 2, 2015.
It was moved and seconded (Koenig/Norris) to approve the Consent Agenda
Items 2, 3, and 4, and it passed unanimously.
Consent Agenda Item 1.1 Town Board Minutes dated April 28, 2015 and Town
Board Study Session Minutes dated April 28, 2015: Trustee Holcomb requested the
following be added to the Town Board minutes under Action Item 3.1 - Trustee Norris
and Holcomb expressed the opinion the approved rate increases are a step in the right
direction in order to achieve and maintain reliable supply of safe drinking water for
residents. The pipe replacement schedule needs to be accelerated and perhaps
additional treatment facilities may need to be constructed. To achieve these strategic
infrastructure goals additional rate increases are likely to be required in the future. It
was moved and seconded (Holcomb/Norris) to approve the Consent Agenda Item
1.1 with the amendments to the Town Board meeting minutes as identified, and it
passed unanimously.
2. LIQUOR ITEMS:
1. TRANSFER OF OWNERSHIP – FROM HESS ENTERPRISES, INC., DBA
HUNTERS CHOPHOUSE, TO LOTUS GLOBAL, INC., DBA HUNTERS
CHOPHOUSE, 1690 BIG THOMPSON AVENUE, HOTEL & RESTAURANT
LIQUOR LICENSE. Town Clerk Williamson presented the application to
transfer the current Hotel and Restaurant liquor license. All required paperwork
and fees were submitted and a temporary was issued on April 3, 2015. TIPS
training to be completed in June once all the staff has been hired. It was
moved and seconded (Koenig/Phipps) to approve Hess Enterprises, Inc.,
dba Hunters Chophouse, to Lotus Global, Inc., dba Hunters Chophouse,
1690 Big Thompson Avenue, Hotel & Restaurant Liquor License, and it
passed unanimously.
3. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS. Items reviewed by Planning Commission or
staff for Town Board Final Action.
Board of Trustees – May 12, 2015 – Page 3
1. ACTION ITEM:
A. ORDINANCE #04-15, Rezoning from E Estate to R-2 Two-Family
Residential, Lot 4, Twin View Resubdivision, 1650 Avalon Drive, Cindy
Younglund-Liddell & Robert Liddell/Applicant. Mayor Pro Tem Koenig
recused herself from the item. Planner Kleisler stated the property was
rezoned during the valley wide rezoning from R-1 One and Two Family
Residential to E Estate Single Family zoning. During the rezoning the R-1
zoning district was eliminated. The property has historically been used as
a seasonal B&B. The B&B use was prohibited in the E zoning district in
2010, rendering the use of the property non-conforming. The applicant
has not had a business license to operate an accommodation on the
property; however, they have collected and remitted all taxes. The
applicant has requested the property be rezoned from E Estate to R-2
Two-Family Residential. Approval would grant the property owner
additional land use rights to covert the single family dwelling into a duplex.
The rezoning would contradict the Estes Valley Comprehensive Plan and
may negatively impact the neighborhood. The Estes Valley Planning
Commission unanimously recommended conditional approval of the
rezoning at their March 17, 2015 meeting. The B&B use would continue
to be non-conforming and would require a Special Review be approved to
grant a use by right.
Cindy Younglund-Liddell stated they recently discovered their property
was rezoned in 1999 and were unaware the use as a B&B was no longer
allowed as a use by right.
Attorney White read the Ordinance. It was moved and seconded
(Norris/Phipps) to approve Ordinance #04-15 rezoning Lot 4, Twin
View Resubdivision, 1650 Avalon Drive from E Estate to R-2 Two-
Family Residential zoning with staff findings, and it passed with Mayor
Pro Tem Koenig recusing herself.
B. ORDINANCE #06-15, Estes Valley Development Code Amendment,
Section 4.4.B, Table 4-4: Permitted Uses, Non-Residential Zoning District.
Amendment to allow small-scale pet grooming in the CD-Commercial
Downtown zone district as an accessory use to pet-related retail
establishments. Planner Kleisler reviewed the code amendments
proposed at the Town Board meeting on April 28, 2015. Staff contacted
the businesses downtown that would be adjacent to the business
requesting the change and none had an issue with the addition of animal
grooming downtown. A discussion followed on what short term boarding
would include and the 48-hour limit in the definition of Animal
Sales/Services would not apply to the CD Commercial Downtown zoning
district. After further discussion Attorney White read the Ordinance. It
was moved and seconded (Koenig/Holcomb) to approve Ordinance
#06-15, and it passed unanimously.
3. ACTION ITEMS:
1. SCOTT PONDS NATURAL AREA DAM MODIFICATIONS – APPROVAL OF
DESIGN CONSULTANT CONTRACT. The east dam in the Scott Ponds
system was breached and the west dam was damaged during the 2013 flood.
The State Dam Inspection Office visited the site multiple times and provided the
Town with a written mandate to perform maintenance work on the west dam
and have a State-compliant dam in place by November 2015. This work would
be above and beyond the FEMA reimbursable expenses to replace the fill
material and pipework that was removed by the breach. The cost to bring the
west dam up to current standards and mitigate the site damage has been
estimated at $1 million. The State Office of Emergency Management has
Board of Trustees – May 12, 2015 – Page 4
retained a private consultant to perform an Environmental Impact Assessment
of the anticipated repair work on the two dams with completion of the
assessment by the end of July 2015. The Town has applied for a CDBG-DR
grant to fund the repairs; however, the funds are not guaranteed and would not
be awarded until the EIA has been successfully completed.
The Public Works department completed an RFP for design services to
complete the Scott Ponds Natural Area Dam Modification Project, including a
Hazard Classification Study; develop conceptual designs for modification to the
dams to reduce the hazard classification of the dams and to reduce the risk of
damage to downstream properties; obtain and respond to stakeholder review
and comments, finalize design concepts, develop construction drawings and
construction specifications; and oversee and manage the construction of the
proposed dam modification work. A review team rated the four responses on
ten categories to determine the most qualified and selected Cornerstone/Deere
Ault at a cost of $204,494. The design cost would be funded through the
Larimer County Open Space funds, would not be reimbursable through the
CDBG-DR grant funds and has not been budgeted. The project would be
completed by March 2016. Mike Todd/Cornerstone Engineering stated the
work to be completed by Deere Ault would be approximately $85,000 of the
$204,494.
Joe Holtzman/Town citizen stated the judicial decision stated the Town owns
junior water rights within the Scott Pond area. He stated the ponds are a
wonderful asset and resource for the community. He would recommend
approval of the contract.
Rebecca Power/Town citizen appreciated the process and Town staff listening
to the public comment. The area is a valuable asset to the community.
It was moved and seconded (Norris/Koenig) to approve a professional
contract with Cornerstone Engineering & Surveying/Deere Ault for the
Scott Ponds Natural Area Dam Modification: Hazard Classification and
Consulting Engineering Service for a cost not to exceed $204,494, and it
passed unanimously.
2. ORDINANCE #07-15 LEASE OF THE HYDRO PLANT PICNIC GROUNDS
(VICKIE O’CONNOR PAVILLION). Director Winslow presented the Board with
a lease agreement between the Town and Mike and Kathy Miller to operate the
Hydro Plant Picnic Ground and Vickie O’Connor Pavilion. The lease provides
the Town with 15% of the gross proceeds for the lease of the property. The
advantages to leasing the property also include better customer service, a new
business opportunity and frees up staff time to complete other duties. The
Millers have presented in their response a number on new ideas they would like
to discuss with the Board as they move forward to enhance the services and
utilization of the property. There would be further discussion of the proposed
ideas at an upcoming Community Development/Community Services
Committee meeting. The current contract would not be contingent on approval
of future uses.
Kathy Miller managed the View Restaurant for over 20 years and was a founder
and president of the wedding association. Mrs. Miller has been looking for a
wedding venue and would focus the business on conducting weddings on site,
not receptions. The area would still be available for Town functions, reunions,
picnic events, etc.
Attorney White read the Ordinance. It was moved and seconded
(Koenig/Holcomb) to approve Ordinance #07-15, and it passed unanimously.
3. ORDINANCE #08-15 ART IN PUBLIC PLACES. Director Muhonen stated the
proposed ordinance would establish the authority for a new Art in the Public
Board of Trustees – May 12, 2015 – Page 5
Places and the policy would provide the structure. Parks Supervisor Berg
stated one of the 2015 Board Objectives was to develop a method for accepting
public art, memorials and donations. The Parks Advisory Board (PAB)
reviewed policies from a number of other local communities and utilized the
best practices. The proposed ordinance and policy would guide decision-
making associated with the selection, acquisition, purchase, commissioning,
placement, installation and maintenance of public works of art. The PAB has
established the proposal for the Board’s review and consideration. Merle
Moore/PAB member presented the ordinance and policy. The PAB would
prepare a budget during the annual budget process for the Town Board to
review and approve for the purchase, installation and maintenance of artwork
throughout town.
Mayor Pro Tem Koenig stated concern with the submission requirements within
the policy as it appears to limit new artists from submitting a piece of art. She
would request the language be updated to allow new artists. The policy states
the Town would carry $3,000 in liability insurance and the artist would have to
agree to the limit for temporary art exhibits. She stated concern this policy
would limit the quality of work that would be shown. She would recommend the
insurance limit be increased. She suggested a summary page be produced to
provide an easy to follow document as the policy is rather complex and
cumbersome to read.
Mr. Moore stated the policy is complex as it includes information to address
issues related to litigation. Supervisor Berg stated the PAB would review if a
piece of artwork fits the policy and then bring it forward to the Town Board for
final approval. A donated piece would not be guaranteed to be displayed. The
PAB would recommend a map be created in the future for residents and guests
to complete an artwork through town.
Administrator Lancaster stated the policy would be administrative and approved
by staff. The changes requested would be included in the final document and
staff would review the policy before its final adoption.
Attorney White read the Ordinance. It was moved and seconded
(Ericson/Holcomb) to approve Ordinance #08-15, and it passed unanimously.
4. LOCAL MARKETING DISTRICT INTERVIEW TEAM APPOINTMENTS.
It was moved and seconded (Koenig/Holcomb) to appointment Trustees
Norris and Holcomb to the Local Marketing District Board Interview Panel,
and it passed unanimously.
5. REQUEST TO ENTER EXECUTIVE SESSION:
It was moved and seconded (Koenig/Norris) to enter into executive session
for the purpose of determining positions relative to matters that may be
subject to negotiations, developing strategy for negotiations, and/or
instructing negotiators, Town Administrator contract, and it passed
unanimously.
Whereupon Mayor Pinkham adjourned the meeting to Executive Session at 9:06 p.m.
Mayor Pinkham reconvened the meeting to open session at 9:51 p.m.
Whereupon Mayor Pinkham adjourned the meeting at 9:51 p.m.
William C. Pinkham, Mayor
Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk
Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado May 12, 2015
Minutes of a Study Session meeting of the TOWN BOARD of the Town of
Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held at Town Hall in
Rooms 202/203 in said Town of Estes Park on the 12th day of May, 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, Town Attorney White and Town Clerk Williamson
Absent: None
Mayor Pinkham called the meeting to order at 4:30 p.m.
TRUSTEE COMMENTS & QUESTIONS.
Trustee Phipps requested an executive session at the next Board meeting to discuss
the legal issues related to the Loop project.
Trustee Koenig commented the packet material presented to the Board should be
higher level and not so detailed in an effort to maintain focus on the main issue and not
the minor details of a project. Additional details such as drawings could be provided as
a link for those who need further details.
Trustee Norris thanked staff for the grand opening of the Event Center. The Visit Estes
Park Board has conducted a self evaluation and would be adopting policies such as the
Town Board’s governing policy and code of conduct.
Trustee Holcomb stated concern with the sound system at the Event Center. Mayor Pro
Tem Koenig informed the Board not all the equipment was in use during the grand
opening and there were issues with the fish tank interfering with the sound system.
Administrator Lancaster stated sound baffles were not installed and staff would continue
to review the sound in the building.
FUTURE STUDY SESSION AGENDA ITEMS.
Board agreed to the following changes to future study sessions:
- Basic Zoning Law and Development Code – August 11, 2015
- April Financial Statement – June 9, 2015
- Draft Financial Policy Review – July 28, 2015
- Noise ordinance was approved and moved to the unscheduled list.
Trustee Norris requested the proposed wildlife ordinance be discussed in conjunction
with the vacation homes.
Trustee Ericson stated the conference center remodel should be removed from the
study session list and added to the projects list.
DRY GULCH ROAD CONSTRUCTION ISSUES.
The Dry Gulch roadway was identified in 2012 as the first capital roadway project to be
completed once a revenue source was identified. Since the passage of the 1A sales tax
increase in April of 2014 staff has been working on the design of the roadway with
Farnsworth. The Board requested the repairs include the roadway surface,
Town Board Study Session – May 12, 2015 – Page 2
improvements to the impeded drainage, and creation of a pedestrian walkway on one
side of the roadway with curb, gutter, drainage culverts/inlets and a sidewalk consistent
with Town codes. In the past 2 years there has been a community wide movement to
include bike lanes and multi-modal forms of transportation to the roadway system. Bike
lanes of 5 feet in each direction require the roadway to have an additional 10 feet of
right-of-way, which would increase the cost, require additional road base, asphalt, utility
relocations, and the need to acquire additional right-of-way were necessary. The
original 2011 road design included curb and gutter, 8 foot sidewalk to the east, drainage
improvement and utility relocation at a cost of $1.67 million. The addition of bike lanes,
right-of-way acquisition, retaining walls, realignment of the road, recreational trail
crossing US Hwy 34 and an attached 5 foot pedestrian walk has increased the
estimated cost to $3.73 million. A roadway and pedestrian walk only would be $3.03
million and a roadway and bike lanes would cost $3.08 million. The 2015 estimate to
complete the roadway only has been estimated at $1.76 million. The significant cost
increase for the walk or the bike lane was largely due to the inability to successfully
negotiate additional right-of-way from the property to the east requiring large retaining
walls along the west edge of the roadway.
The Board discussed the options with comments summarized: some concern other
projects would be delayed by spending all available funds on one project; the top priority
would be fixing the roadway; multi-modal projects should connect to existing areas to
create connectivity; the Falcon Ridge project would bring an additional 40 plus homes to
the area making this a prime area to connect to the trail system; and public safety
should be considered and a trail would provide a walk way and a biking path.
Staff comments are summarized: moving the pedestrian walk to the west side would
eliminate approximately $500,000 in handrail costs; the walk could be widened from 5
feet to 8 feet to create a multi-use trail for an additional $90,000 in cement and retaining
wall costs; and a detached walk would require right-of-way acquisition along the entire
length of the roadway.
Board consensus was to move forward with the roadway and 8 foot wide trail on the
west side with no handrail. Trustee Phipps stated concern the Town should address the
status of the roadways throughout town. Mayor Pro Tem Koenig suggested the Town
should coordinate with the school to accommodate bus stops and perhaps bus shelters
along the roadway. Staff would move forward with final design, conduct bidding
process and bring forward the final bids for the Board’s consideration.
UPDATE ON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL (EDC) BROADBAND
PROJECT. The Estes Park Economic Development Corporation and the Town
contracted with NEO Fiber to complete a Broadband Expansion Technical Assistance
Strategy Project funded by the U.S. Economic Development Administration grant
awarded in 2014. The project began in February 2015 and would be completed in 5 to
6 months. There are 5 phases to the project including Phase 1 – Needs Assessment,
Market Analysis and Business Plan; Phase 2 – Stakeholder Support; Phase 3 – Design
and Engineering; Phase 4 – Development of Business Model; and Phase 5 – Financial
Planning and Funds Sourcing.
Diane Kruse/NEO Fiber CEO provided the Board with an update on the project and an
overview of the discussion on organizational structure and service models. Broadband
infrastructure is a critical infrastructure need and necessary to support economic
development, local tourism, industry, schools and students, and healthcare. The needs
for broadband double every two years. She stated an assessment was conducted to
determine gaps of services and coverage, how to expand service, regulatory issues,
Platte River Power Authorities infrastructure to serve future business and residential
needs, and the communities interest and involvement. The design and build out to the
anchor institutions such as schools, hospital, government and key businesses would be
completed in the next couple of months. Over 60% of the infrastructure costs are
Town Board Study Session – May 12, 2015 – Page 3
related to placement of the fiber; therefore, placing conduit in the right-of-ways during
major projects would save money in future infrastructure upgrades.
The Town’s level of involvement in providing services could be one of the following:
Infrastructure Owner: Dark fiber, land, towers, and conduit.
Government Services Provider: Anchors, stakeholders, and larger businesses.
Open Access Provider: Build out infrastructure and a service provider uses the
network to provide service to the end user.
Retail Services Businesses: Internet service provider.
Retail Services Business and Residential: Town becomes internet provider.
The Town may choose one of the above service models and does not have to become
an internet provider; however, the Town could be the provider and would not be limited
by regulatory limitations. The Town may have access to grant and funding opportunities
that providers would not have access to. In considering this option the Town would
need to consider the financial and political risks against the community reward
(financial, economic development, affordability, redundancy and abundant broadband).
Take rates are higher when a government services provider is involved.
The organizational structure would include a public utility, a Town department,
consortium, non-profit or a public/private partnership. The Town already has the staff
and equipment to provide the infrastructure to create a public utility. As a Town
department there could be the development of policies such as the dig once policy,
broadband friendly practices, and any abandoned fiber would revert to Town ownership.
A consortium would not be recommended due to decision making process. A non-profit
would mitigate any transparency issues. A public/private partnership would allow the
Town to provide the infrastructure and the service provider to build out and provide the
service.
Mayor Pro Tem Koenig stated the Board informed the voters during the Broadband
election that the government would not compete with the local providers; therefore, the
Town would not become a service provider.
The next steps would include design and engineering, financial modeling and
recommendations and a go forward business plan.
DISCUSS THE PROCESS OF JOINING THE REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION
DISTRICT (RTD). Item to be discussed at the Town Board meeting.
There being no further business, Mayor Pinkham adjourned the meeting at 6:50 p.m.
Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk
Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, April 15th, 2015
Minutes of a Regular meeting of the Transportation Advisory Committee of the Town of
Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held in the Rooms 202 & 203 of Town
Hall, in said Town of Estes Park on the 15th day of April, 2015.
Present: Kimberly Campbell
Ann Finley
Bryon Holmes
Amy Hamrick
Belle Morris
Also Present: Greg Muhonen, Director of Public Works
Kevin Ash, Public Works Civil Engineer
Jen Imber, Public Works Administrative Assistant
Brian Wells, Shuttle Coordinator
Teri Salerno, Visitor Services Manager
Sandy Osterman, Shuttle Committee Representative
John Ericson, Town Board Liaison
Abscent: Stan Black
Cory LaBianca
Gregg Rounds
Thom Widawski
Chair Campbell called the meeting to order at 12:05 p.m.
GENERAL DISCUSSION
Public comment was heard from Pat Newsom regarding paid parking meters downtown.
Since a quorum was not present, the approval of meeting minutes was postponed until
the May meeting.
Sandy Osterman gave a brief update on Shuttle Committee items. The Estes Park
Visitor Center will be hosting an open house on April 30th and everyone is invited to
attend. As part of the event, the Gold Shuttle route will be running. Additional weekend
dates have been added to the shuttle schedule for 2015, with full-time shuttles starting
June 27th. Sandy also presented the new shuttle-stop signs.
Director Muhonen reported that the local BOR office has been given the go-ahead to
begin our NEPA study on the Transit Facility Parking Structure on the South Site of the
Visitor Center. A local firm will likely engineer the civil site work for the project.
A public hearing on the Loop project will take place at 6 pm on April 15th at a Special
Town Board meeting. TAB members were encouraged to attend.
DRY GULCH IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT
Kevin Ash presented an updated plan set for the Dry Gulch project. Plans were
displayed for the board to examine and various design elements were discussed,
including parking, sidewalks, pedestrian crossings, turn lanes and intersections. The
Town would like to hold a public meeting in May to talk with parties impacted by the
project. The current design requires a significant amount of retaining wall to widen the
road for sidewalk and bike lanes, driving the cost of the project up considerably.
Alternative design options, such as sharrow bike lanes, were discussed for reducing
construction costs. Placement of the sidewalk on the west side versus the east side of
the road was also examined. Eliminating the pedestrian component of an attached
sidewalk to the project would bring it much closer to budget, with the option of easement
Transportation Advisory Committee – April 15th, 2015 – Page 2
acquisition to be completed at a later date to add a multi-use trail. Two on-road bike
lanes could be added to the road for cyclists. Staff will move forward based on the
comments received by the board.
DOWNTOWN PARKING STRATEGY
Chair Campbell discussed several options for developing a parking plan, including hiring
a consultant versus TAB members actively developing the plan. It was discussed
whether the board should be involved in plan implementation or just the creation of a
tactical and strategic plan. With not enough board members present to make a decision
on how to move forward, the topic will be revisited at the next meeting.
The board brainstormed on downtown parking demands and potential solutions. The
highest demand happens seven days per week during summer months. Piccadilly
Square was identified as an ideal location to place a parking structure to capture
eastbound traffic re-entering the downtown district. RV spaces, handicap parking and
intercept parking structures were all topics of discussion. Director Muhonen suggested
the board make a recommendation regarding tour buses and RVs in the downtown
district. The board debated if such large passenger vehicles should they be allowed to
drive through the downtown district and if parking for such vehicles should be made
available downtown. The general consensus of the board was no RV or tour bus
parking downtown, but drop-off location would be suitable. Information and a brochure
could be made available online to direct guests to various parking locations and
recommended transportation and routes around town. Chair Campbell requested staff
provide an accurate count of current RV and bus parking spots available.
With no other business to discuss, Chair Campbell adjourned the meeting at 1:54 p.m.
Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, April 24th, 2015
Minutes of a Regular meeting of the Parks Advisory Board of the Town of Estes Park,
Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held in the Town Hall Rooms 202 & 203, in said
Town of Estes Park on the 24th day of April, 2015.
Present: Merle Moore
Ronna Boles
Celine Lebeau
Dewain Lockwood
Also Present: Greg Muhonen, Public Works Director
Kevin McEachern, Public Works Operations Manager
Brian Berg, Parks Division Supervisor
Jen Imber, Public Works Administrative Assistant
Bob Holcomb, Town Board Trustee
Absent: Chris Reed
Terry Rustin
Chair Lebeau called the meeting to order at 11:04 a.m.
GENERAL BUSINESS
It was moved and seconded (Lockwood/Moore) to approve the March 20th meeting
minutes and the motion passed unanimously.
Since the normal PAB meeting time in May falls on the date of the Arbor Day
Celebration at the elementary school, members decided to move the May meeting
forward to the 8th instead of the 15th. The meeting will take place on that date from 11am
in the Engineering Conference Room.
Ronna Boles suggested a “Life Tree” or something along those lines at the school in
memory of the students who have passed away recently. Brian Berg indicated the Town
would donate a tree if the school was supportive, with the school responsible for
obtaining a plaque. Ronna will talk to the school superintendent about the tree donation.
ARBOR DAY 2015
Chair Lebeau and Ronna Boles have been working on Arbor Day materials. Water
bottles have been ordered and a portion of the books have been delivered, with plaques
installed on the covers. Art contest entries have been received but have not been
narrowed down, so an email vote will be taken to determine winners. Pencils and
temporary tattoos will be ordered in addition to the water bottles for prizes. Ronna
worked to develop artwork to be placed on the water bottles with the slogan of “plant,
grow, breathe” printed on them. The event schedule will be finalized and invitations and
Parks Advisory Board – April 24th, 2015 – Page 2
a news release sent out in the next week. The Mayor will proclaim May the “Month of
the Tree” at the April 28th Town Board meeting.
PUBLIC ART POLICY AND ORDINANCE
Merle Moore addressed the attorney comments to the public art policy. Brian Berg
explained that issues came to light when the policy was reviewed by the Town attorney
and Administration had concerns about the policy becoming an ordinance versus a
policy, especially the funding portion of the program. The issues are administrative and
program format more so than substance. Administration is not keen to revise municipal
code and make the program an ordinance and would prefer to see it adopted as a Town
policy. Director Muhonen suggested some quick changes to bring the current document
in line with what Administration is looking for in the “funds for works of art” section, with
maintenance and capital being addressed through line items in the Parks budget. The
concern is obligating the Town Board to fund money each year for art work. PAB
members argued that the ordinance did not obligate the Board to a certain dollar
amount, only that a budget proposal would be brought forward by PAB and requested of
the Town Board.
Merle feels an ordinance is more concrete and a policy is not as solid. Ronna
questioned whether an ordinance or a policy gives PAB more authority in case of
backlash or public criticism. Celine expressed concern that Town was committing to an
art program and art in town, but the policy doesn’t ensure maintenance funds even for
existing art. Merle countered that the Town has demonstrated commitment to
maintenance by funding it each year so far. Merle held that every other town’s program
that was referred to as an example in creating Estes Park’s program is tied to an
ordinance, so Estes Park would be taking a very different approach. PAB would like
Merle to sit down with Administrator Lancaster and Director Muhonen to further discuss
the program. The timeframe on getting the final draft to the Town Board would be need
to be pushed back a bit, with PAB continuing discussion and voting on the final draft at
the May 8th meeting and taking it to the Town Board in May.
With no other business to discuss, a motion was made and seconded (Lockwood/Boles)
to adjourn the meeting at 12:05 pm, with all voting in favor.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Report
To: Honorable Mayor Pinkham
Board of Trustees
Town Administrator Lancaster
From: Philip Kleisler, Planner II
Date: May 26, 2015
RE: Amended Plat, Development Agreement and Rezoning Request; Silver
Moon, LLC/Owner
Objective:
Consideration of (i) a request to adjust an internal property line between two parcels
(“southern” and “northern”), (ii) an ordinance rezoning the northern parcel from RM
Multi-family to CD Commercial Downtown, and (iii) a development agreement as a
substitute for a traditional development plan.
Present Situation:
The two subject parcels are owned by the applicant, Silver Moon, LLC. The northern
parcel is zoned RM Multi-family and is currently vacant. The southern parcel is zoned
CD Commercial Outlying, and is developed with a 44-unit hotel named the Silver Moon
Inn. The hotel and associated facilities (e.g. parking, pool) are entirely contained within
the southern lot. The applicant recently purchased the northern parcel to perform rock
fall mitigation work along the internal property line.
The northern parcel was initially a part of the Mountain Gate development. Throughout
the development of Mountain Gate the northern parcel was illegally subdivided.
Proposal:
The applicant proposes the following:
1. Lot Consolidation Plat to consolidate both parcels into one (1) lot by removing the
interior lot line. The proposed plat will correct the illegal subdivision noted above.
2. Rezone the area that is currently the northern parcel to CD Commercial Outlying.
Once the parcels are combined, the best practice is to rezone to have a single
zone district.
3. Development Agreement restricting the use of the area currently comprised of
the northern parcel. Development plans are generally reviewed with any
rezoning of land. The Development Agreement will substitute a development
plan by requiring any future development in that area to go through a Special
Review. As written no development will be permitted, including accessory uses
such as a small gazebo, without first gaining Special Review approval.
As outlined below (“Action Recommended”), the Planning Commission
recommends that restrictions for the area of the northern parcel be further
restricted to residential use only. This restriction would prohibit accessory uses
for the hotel (e.g. gazebo, picnic areas) and vacation home rentals.
Advantages:
The application is consistent with the policies and goals of the Estes Valley
Comprehensive Plan.
The proposed Development Agreement seeks to mitigate potential adverse
impacts from future development to the neighboring residential properties.
Disadvantages:
Future development not determined at the time of rezoning.
Action Recommended:
The Estes Valley Planning Commission reviewed this request at their March 16, 2015
hearing. At that time the Commission made the following findings:
1. The Planning Commission is the Recommending Body to the Town Board.
2. The requested rezoning is generally consistent with the land use plan described
in Chapter 4 of the Estes Valley Comprehensive Plan.
3. If revised to comply with recommended conditions of approval, the application
will comply with applicable sections of the Estes Valley Development Code.
4. Approval of the amended plat and rezoning will not be materially detrimental to
the public welfare, injurious to other property in the neighborhood, or in conflict
with the purposes and objectives of this Code.
5. The amendment is necessary to address changes in conditions in the areas
affected.
6. The Town and other relevant service providers have the ability to provide
adequate services and facilities that might be required if the application is
approved.
The Commission then voted unanimously (5-0, two absent) to recommend approval of
the application package, conditional to:
1. Development on the former Mountain Gate [northern parcel] parcel shall be
limited to residential use only.
2. The following notes shall be included on the plat:
a. Boundary lines indicated on this map are adjustments of former boundary
lines of the property depicted hereon. Such adjustment do not create
additional lots or building site for any purposes. The area added to each
lot shown hereon by such adjustment is to be considered an addition to,
shall become part of, and shall be conveyed together with, each lot as
shown.
b. Approval of this plat does not affect the nonconformity of any structures.
3. Compliance with memos from:
a. Estes Park Community Development memo dated March 5, 2015.
b. Estes Park Utilities Department memo dated February 16, 2015.
c. Estes Valley Fire Protection District memo dated February 10, 2015.
d. Estes Park Sanitation District memo dated January 29, 2015.
Note on Condition #1
The Planning Commission moved to further limit all development in the area of what is
currently the northern parcel. The applicant submitted a letter dated April 6, 2015
objecting to this condition. Should the Board move to approve the application pursuant
to the Planning Commission’s recommendation, staff recommends including the
following condition of approval:
1a. The proposed Development Agreement shall be amended to reflect the Town
Board conditions of approval.
Budget:
N/A
Level of Public Interest
Low-to-Moderate
Staff has received two letters from residents to the north. In a letter dated February 18,
2015, the President of the Mountain Gate Condominium Association requests that a
“restriction be placed on the plat restricting all non-residential (commercial) use from
being developed” in the area of the northern parcel. The letter further asserts that
absent of such a restriction, the Association opposes the rezoning application. A
nearby homeowner made a similar request in a letter dated March 16, 2015.
Sample Motion:
1. I move to approve (or deny) the proposed Amended Plat and Development
Agreement, with the findings and conditions recommended by the Planning
Commission and staff.
2. A move to approve (or deny) Ordinance #03-15.
Attachments:
1. Ordinance 03-15
2. Statement of Intent
3. Site Plan
4. Development Agreement
5. Planning Commission Report and Minutes Excerpt
6. Letter Challenging Planning Commission Recommendation
7. Public Comments
ORDINANCE NO. 03-15
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING
THE ESTES VALLEY DEVELOPMENT CODE
TO REZONE A PORTION OF LOT 8A OF THE AMENDED PLAT OF A PORTION OF
LOTS 7, 8, 24, & 25, BLOCK 10, 2ND AMENDED PLAT, TOWN OF ESTES PARK
LOCATED AT 315 BIG HORN DRIVE
WHEREAS, the Estes Valley Planning Commission has recommended rezoning
a portion of Lot 8A of the Amended Plat of a portion of Lots 7, 8, 24, & 25, Block 10, 2nd
Amended Plat, Town of Estes Park; Located at 315 Big Horn Drive as the northern
portion of Lot 25A of the Silver Moon Amended Plat, from RM Multi-family to CD
Commercial Outlying; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees of the Town of Estes Park has determined
that it is in the best interest of the Town that the recommended zoning change be
granted.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF
THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO:
Section 1: The zoning of a portion of Lot 8A of the Amended Plat of a portion of
Lots 7, 8, 24, & 25, Block 10, 2nd Amended Plat, Town of Estes Park; Located at 315
Big Horn Drive, shall be changed from RM Multi-family to CD Commercial Outlying.
Section 2: This Ordinance shall take effect and be enforced thirty (30) days after
its adoption and publication.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF
ESTES PARK, COLORADO, THIS 26th DAY OF MAY, 2015.
TOWN OF ESTES PARK
_____________________________________
William Pinkham, Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk
I hereby certify that the above Ordinance was introduced and read at a regular
meeting of the Board of Trustees on the 26th day of May, 2015 and published in a
newspaper of general circulation in the Town of Estes Park, Colorado, on the
day of , 2015, all as required by the Statutes of the State of
Colorado.
Town Clerk
Silver Moon Amended Plat, Development Agreement, Rezoning; Estes Park Town Board, May 26, 2015Silver Moon Amended Plat, Development Agreement, RezoningI. Summary of ProjectII. Process and Review CriteriaIII. Key IssuesIV. Staff FindingsV. Planning Commission Recommendation
Silver Moon Amended Plat, Development Agreement, Rezoning; Estes Park Town Board, May 26, 2015Summary of Project
Silver Moon Amended Plat, Development Agreement, Rezoning; Estes Park Town Board, May 26, 2015Summary of Project
Silver Moon Amended Plat, Development Agreement, Rezoning; Estes Park Town Board, May 26, 2015Process and Review CriteriaI. Estes Valley Comprehensive PlanII. Estes Valley Development CodeIII. Planning Commission RecommendationIV. Motion by Town Board
Silver Moon Amended Plat, Development Agreement, Rezoning; Estes Park Town Board, May 26, 2015Key Issue #1: Development AgreementI. Development Agreement
Silver Moon Amended Plat, Development Agreement, Rezoning; Estes Park Town Board, May 26, 2015Key Issue #2: RezoningSpecial Review for any Development (applicant proposal)• Potential mitigating conditions need a rational nexus with the desired outcome of mitigating potential impacts to the nearby land uses, public facilities and services, and the environment. • Examples: • Limiting noise and outdoor activities• Building placement, bulk and height• Lighting • Would apply to any use, even a single family home or duplexOnly residential permitted through Special Review (Planning Commission recommendation)• Would limit use of “northern parcel” to Household Living and Small Group Living Facilities.
Silver Moon Amended Plat, Development Agreement, Rezoning; Estes Park Town Board, May 26, 2015Key Issue #2: Rezoning, cont.1. Commercial Downtown District (CD)2. CD with Special Review3. CD with development limited to residential4. Null alternative – split zoning
Silver Moon Amended Plat, Development Agreement, Rezoning; Estes Park Town Board, May 26, 2015Key Issue #3: Public CommentsTwo Comments Received• Both from immediate area• Both support Planning Commission restriction
Silver Moon Amended Plat, Development Agreement, Rezoning; Estes Park Town Board, May 26, 2015Planning Commission RecommendationApprovalof the application package, conditional to: 1. Development on the former Mountain Gate [northern parcel] parcel shall be limited to residential use only. 1. 1a. The proposed Development Agreement shall be amended to reflect the Town Board conditions of approval. 2. The following notes shall be included on the plat: 1. Boundary lines indicated on this map are adjustments of former boundary lines of the property depicted hereon. Such adjustment do not create additional lots or building site for any purposes. The area added to each lot shown hereon by such adjustment is to be considered an addition to, shall become part of, and shall be conveyed together with, each lot as shown.2. Approval of this plat does not affect the nonconformity of any structures. 3. Compliance with memos from: Estes Park Community Development memo dated March 5, 2015.Estes Park Utilities Department memo dated February 16, 2015.Estes Valley Fire Protection District memo dated February 10, 2015.Estes Park Sanitation District memo dated January 29, 2015.
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, made this _____ day of April, 2015, by and between the Town of Estes
Park, a Municipal Corporation (the “Town”), and Silver Moon, LLC, a Colorado Limited
Liability Company ( hereinafter referred to as the “Owner”).
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the Owner owns the real property (Parcel 1) located within the Town of Estes Park,
described as follows:
SEE EXHIBIT A
WHEREAS, the Owner has acquired the real property (Parcel 2) located within the Town of
Estes Park, described as follows:
That portion of Lot 8A of the Amended Plat of a portion of Lots 7, 8, 24 and 25, Block
10, Second Amended Plat of the Town of Estes Park, described as follows:
Beginning at the Southwest Corner of said Lot 8A; thence North 4808'38" East 226.45
feet; thence South 3257'04" East 45.06 feet; thence North 4441'06" East 75 feet; thence
North 0748'14" East 30.0 feet; thence North 3816'36" East 119.81 feet; thence along the
Easterly boundary of said Lot 8A South 0033'43" West 169.89 feet; thence South
8936'16" East 50.04 feet; thence South 2135'14" East 125.24 feet; thence South 8709'00"
East 19.28 feet; thence along the arc of a curve to the left (said curve having a radius of
255.00 feet, a central angle of 0713'10", chord of said arc bears South 4305'00" West
32.11 feet) a distance of 32.13 feet; thence along the South Line of said Lot 8A North
8709'00" West 416.48 feet to the point of beginning, containing 1.27 acres, more or less,
Larimer County, Colorado
WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees of the Town of Estes Park approved the Silver Moon replat
on April ___, 2015.
WHEREAS a condition of approval of said plat requires a Development Agreement between the
Town of Estes Park and Silver Moon, LLC, addressing future development of the resultant parcel
depicted on the plat, described as Lot 25A of the Silver Moon Amended Plat.
WHEREAS the parties wish to define the requirements for any future development of this parcel.
NOW THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THE ABOVE RECITATIONS AND THE
COVENANTS AND CONDITIONS CONTAINED HEREIN, THE PARTIES AGREE AS
FOLLOWS:
1.Prior to approval of the Silver Moon Amended Plat, Parcel 1 was zoned
Downtown Commercial.
2.Prior to approval of the Silver Moon Amended Plat, Parcel 2 was zoned Multi
Family Residential.
3.The owner applied to replat Parcels 1 and 2 into a single parcel, for convenience
of ownership and related purposes. In order to combine Parcels 1 and 2, Parcel 2
is to be re-zoned to Downtown Commercial, so that the entire resultant Parcel
shall be zoned Downtown Commercial.
4.Downtown Commercial zoning on Parcel 2 would result in certain uses by right,
which would not be permitted in Multi Family Residential zoning. The owner
states that combining Parcels 1 and 2 is for convenience in ownership only, and no
development of Parcel 2 is contemplated at this time.
5.The parties agree that any future development or redevelopment of the resultant
parcel shall be required to go through Special Review, and owner hereby waives
any “use by right” as to Parcel 2, which use is permitted in Downtown
Commercial zoning, but not permitted in Multi Family Residential zoning.
6.This Agreement shall run with the land and shall be binding on the personal
representatives, heirs, transferees, successors and assigns of the parties.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have set their hands the day and year first written
above.
TOWN OF ESTES PARK
___________________________________
William C. Pinkham, Mayor
ATTEST:
__________________
Town Clerk
Subscribed and sworn to before me this ____day of February, 2015 by William C. Pinkham.
Witness my hand and official seal.__________________________________
Notary Public
____________________________________
Thomas E. Hochstetler, Manager
Silver Moon, LLC
Subscribed and sworn to before me this ____day of February, 2015 by Thomas E. Hochstetler.
Witness my hand and official seal.
____________________________________
Notary Public
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Planning Commission 4
March 17, 2015
Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall
had the opportunity to voice their opinion at that time. The Town of Estes Park and Larimer
County adopted the Comprehensive Plan in 1996, which detailed the land‐use planning process
used to rezone properties. In late 1999, the Estes Valley Development Code was adopted. Prior to
the zoning changes, there were opportunities for property owners of proposed rezonings to meet
with Town staff and/or the Mayor to request the zoning not be changed. Additionally, property
owners had one year following the zoning changes to challenge the decision. In this case, the
Liddells did not come forward to request the zoning remain two‐family residential. Staff
commented many properties in the immediate area were down‐zoned from two family to single‐
family, and the Liddell property was not singled out.
Conditions of Approval
1. Compliance with memos from:
a. Estes Park Community Development memo dated March 5, 2015
b. Upper Thompson Sanitation District email dated February 20, 2015
c. Estes Valley Fire Protection District memo dated January 27, 2015.
It was moved and seconded (Murphree/Schneider) to recommend approval to the Town Board
of the Rezoning request of Lot 4, Twin View Subdivision with the findings and conditions
recommended by staff and the motion passed unanimously with two absent.
4. LOT CONSOLIDATION PLAT AND REZONING REQUEST, Portions of Lots 7, 8, 24, and 25, Block 10,
Town of Estes Park, 175 Spruce Drive and an adjacent undeveloped property, Silver Moon Inn
Planner Shirk reviewed the staff report. The applicant proposed to adjust the property line
between Mountain Gate Condominiums and the Silver Moon Inn. Both parcels are owned by the
applicant, Silver Moon LLC, and have different zoning designations; the Silver Moon property is
zoned CD–Commercial Downtown, and the adjacent undeveloped property is zoned RM‐Multi‐
Family Residential. Planner Shirk stated no development is proposed at this time. In order to
mitigate potential impact of the rezoning on adjacent properties, the owner has submitted a
development agreement that would require Special Review for any development on the portion
of Mountain Gate being incorporated in the Silver Moon property. This Special Review would be
heard by the Planning Commission, who would make a recommendation to the Town Board for
the final decision.
Planner Shirk stated the request is to rezone the undeveloped property from RM to CD, then
consolidate the Silver Moon Inn property with the undeveloped property, with a CD zone district.
Planner Shirk stated the applicant has mitigated some rockfall to protect the Silver Moon Inn. In
the past, rocks have fallen and caused damage and a safety hazard. The undeveloped lot is fairly
steep, with quite limited access. Any additional access would require abandonment of one of the
entryways into the Silver Moon Inn, and a variance to the EVDC to allow driveway access. Planner
Shirk stated the application was routed to affected agencies and adjacent property owners. Staff
received one letter from the Mountain Gate Condominiums Homeowner Association opposing
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Planning Commission 5
March 17, 2015
Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall
the rezoning. They had concerns about potential uses. Planner Shirk reminded the Commission of
the requirement to go before the Planning Commission for any development proposals. The
undeveloped property was previously part of the Mountain Gate Condominiums. Removal of this
property still allows Mountain Gate Condominiums to meet the density requirement in the EVDC.
Planner Shirk stated the Standards for Review were as follows:
1. The amendment is necessary to address changes in conditions in the areas affected;
Staff Finding: In the past, rocks from the cliff behind the Silver Moon Inn have fallen onto
the Silver Moon Inn causing damage and a safety hazard. In November 2014, the owner of
the Silver Moon Inn purchased the undeveloped portion of the Mountain Gate Condos to
facilitate rockfall mitigation. The property owner desires to combine his property into a
single parcel. Section 1.7.C specified that zoning district boundaries should be lot lines,
and makes no provision for mixed‐zoning districts on a lot.
2. The development plan, which the proposed amendment to the EVDC would allow, is
compatible and consistent with the policies and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and
with existing growth and development patterns in the Estes Valley;
Staff Finding: Because no development is proposed at this time, staff has waived the
requirement for a development plan. The proposed development agreement requiring
Special Review will require a development plan for review and approval.
3. The Town, County or other relevant service providers shall have the ability to provide
adequate services and facilities that might be required if the application were approved.
Staff Finding: Utility providers have not expressed any significant concerns about the
requested rezoning. Any future development will need to demonstrate compliance with
EVDC Section 7.12 Adequate Public Facilities.
Staff Findings
1. The Planning Commission is the Recommending Body to the Town Board.
2. The requested rezoning is generally consistent with the land use plan described in Chapter
4 of the Estes Valley Comprehensive Plan.
3. If revised to comply with recommended conditions of approval, the application will comply
with applicable sections of the Estes Valley Development Code.
4. Approval of the amended plat and rezoning will not be materially detrimental to the public
welfare, injurious to other property in the neighborhood, or in conflict with the purposes
and objectives of this Code.
5. The amendment is necessary to address changes in conditions in the areas affected.
6. The Town and other relevant service providers have the ability to provide adequate
services and facilities that might be required if the application is approved.
Planner Shirk stated staff recommended approval of the Lot Consolidation Plat and Rezoning,
with conditions listed below. He noted approval will not affect non‐conforming uses.
Public Comment
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Planning Commission 6
March 17, 2015
Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall
Lonnie Sheldon/applicant representative stated he had no comments at this time, but would like
the opportunity to reply to other public comments.
Dan Herlihey/Mountain Gate Condominiums HOA President stated six of the fifteen buildings
directly abut and overlook the subject property. There were originally 19 units planned, but the
final phase was never developed and the development rights expired. He stated commercial
zoning was not appropriate for that parcel, based upon the slope, natural undisturbed nature of
the hillside, lack of access, and adjacency of that property to the Mountain Gate residential units
and other adjacent residential parcels. If the rezoning request was approved, the HOA requested
a restriction to the undeveloped parcel to residential use. This would ease their concerns about
the potential for commercial development on that parcel.
Rene Krahn/Town resident was concerned about future development on such a steep lot. He
agreed with Mr. Herlihey’s comments.
Staff and Commission Discussion
None.
Conditions of Approval
1. The following notes shall be included on the plat:
a. Boundary lines indicated on this map are adjustments of former boundary lines of the
property depicted hereon. Such adjustments do not create additional lots or building
sites for any purposes. The area added to each lot shown hereon by such adjustment is
to be considered an addition to, shall become part of, and shall be conveyed together
with, each lot as shown.
b. Approval of this plat does not affect the nonconformity of any structures.
2. Compliance with memos from:
a. Estes Park Community Development memo dated March 5, 2015
b. Estes Park Utilities Department memo dated February 16, 2015
c. Estes Valley Fire Protection District memo dated February 20, 2015
d. Estes Park Sanitation District memo dated January 29, 2015
It was moved and seconded (Hills/Murphree) to recommend approval of the Lot Consolidation
Plat with the findings and conditions recommended by staff and the motion passed
unanimously with two absent.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Planning Commission 7
March 17, 2015
Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall
It was moved and seconded (Schneider/Hills) to recommend approval of Rezoning from RM‐
Multi‐Family Residential to CD–Commercial Downtown with the findings and conditions
recommended by staff, while limiting development on the currently undeveloped property to
only residential use, and the motion passed unanimously with two absent.
5. ASPIRE WELLNESS COMPLEX AT THE STANLEY; AMENDED SPECIAL REVIEW 2014‐01; TBD
Steamer Drive
Planner Kleisler reviewed the staff report. He stated the applicant received approval by Town
Board of Special Review 2014‐01 in February, 2014. The site is Lot 4 of the Stanley Historic
District, and is zoned A–Accommodations. Stanley Village Shopping Center is located to the south,
and public open space is on the west, Stanley Hotel complex to the northwest, and a mix of
single‐family residential and outlots to the northeast. The original approval included an
Accommodations‐1 building, a Wellness Center, and the Accommodations‐2 building. The original
development plan proposed building the Wellness Center and the Accommodations‐1 buildings as
separate buildings, along with the infrastructure that included the parking lots. The
Accommodations‐2 building was only a conceptual footprint, with an undetermined construction
date (part of a future phase). The applicant is now requesting approval to construct the
Accommodations‐2 building first, with the Wellness Center and Accommodations‐1 building to
follow once the Estes Park Medical Center (EPMC) obtains necessary funding. When EPMC
realized the original separate buildings were not the ideal layout for day‐to‐day operations, they
approached the applicant about “fusing” the Wellness Center and the Accommodations‐1
building together, allowing clients easier accessibility to both buildings. Planner Kleisler displayed
a diagram of the approved plan, and overlayed the proposed changes to allow a better visual for
the Commissioners and public in attendance. He stated because the Accommodations‐2 building
was only a concept with the first approval, the application being reviewed today includes an
architectural review and analysis. The changes include a slightly larger footprint for the fused
buildings, and a shift of the Accommodations‐2 building approximately five (5) feet to the
northwest. The original construction phases would be reversed.
Planner Kleisler stated the process and review criteria included the following: consistency with
the goals and objectives of the Estes Valley Comprehensive Plan (this parcel is part of the
Downtown Neighborhood); compliance with the Estes Valley Development Code (EVDC); and
compliance with the Stanley Historic District guidelines, which are located in the Estes Park
Municipal Code. The Stanley Historic District Master Plan does not apply to this specific lot. The
Planning Commission is the recommending body, with the Town Board hearing the item on
Tuesday, March 24, 2015 for a final decision. Planner Kleisler stated the Special Review criteria
requires applications mitigate, to the maximum extent feasible, potential adverse impacts on
nearby land uses, public facilities and services, and the environment. The application should
accomplish these in order to receive a positive recommendation by the Planning Commission.
Planner Kleisler stated the Stanley Historic District guidelines include view corridors from the
Stanley Hotel. The Accommodations‐2 building is proposed to lie just outside a view corridor, and
March 16, 2015
Estes Valley Planning Commission
PO Box 1200
Estes Park CO 80517
Re: Silver Moon Inn Lot Consolidation Plat and Rezoning
Dear Planning Commission Members:
As the owners of Mountain Gate Condo Unit H, which is located on the southeast corner of the
Mountain Gate Condominium Development at the edge of the wall associated with the former
Lewiston Hotel, we have enjoyed looking out over that beautiful property toward town and the
mountains every day of the four or five months a year that we have been spending there for the
last 10 years. We have also appreciated viewing the wildlife that often makes its way on a “trail”
through the ravine, below our property and on around the bottom of the wall to the west.
Though we are very pleased that the Silver Moon, LLC has purchased the property with no plans to
develop it and that they have submitted a development agreement that would require Special
Review on the portion of the Mountain Gate property being incorporated into their property, we
are writing today to share our concerns and discomfort about the possible negative effects of the
“commercial zoning” designation on our property and others in our Association and their potential
real estate values in the future. Ironically when we bought our condo we were concerned about
the potential development of that property by the owners at that time, but were relieved to learn
that their original permit had expired and that the residential zoning codes in Estes Park had since
been tightened up a little making the development of that property less dense than it might have
been before. Therefore we would really like to see a restriction placed on the rezoned area
restricting all non-residential development from the parcel, particularly since we are planning to
move to Estes Park full time this summer!
We are sorry that we are not able to be at the hearing in person. My husband, Gordon Dyck, was
diagnosed with ALS last fall at the Cleveland Clinic. On Wednesday morning, the 18th, we will be in
Cleveland spending the entire morning at our first ALS Clinic meeting with several doctors, physical
therapists and other health professionals. Gordon’s diagnosis is another reason that I decided to
write this letter, since he has so appreciated being in Estes Park as he learns to live with ALS where
he gains strength from the beauty of the morning sunrise from our condo windows, the great
views from our patio and the support of the wonderful friends and neighbors around him!
Thanks for giving this letter and the Mountain Gate Condo Association ’s memo your consideration.
Judith A Beechy
315 Big Horn Drive, Unit H
Estes Park CO 80517
Town Attorney Memo
To: Honorable Mayor Pinkham
Board of Trustees
Town Administrator Lancaster
From: Gregory A. White, Town Attorney
Date: May 22, 2015
RE: Ordinance No. 09-15 Approving the First Amendment to Lease Agreement with
Heron LLC for a Communication Site
Objective:
Review and, if appropriate, approve the First Amendment to Lease Agreement between
the Town and Heron LLC for the purpose of amending the current Lease Agreement
dated January 12, 2010 to add property on Prospect Mountain to the Lease for the
Town to install and operate radio transmission and reception systems.
Present Situation:
The Town entered into a Lease Agreement dated January 12, 2010 with Heron LLC to
lease property on Prospect Mountain to install and operate communication transmission
and reception systems. In 2014, the Town installed its Highway Advisory Radio System
and Antenna (HAR Facilities) on Prospect Mountain. It was later determined that the
HAR Facilities were not on the Prospect Mountain property subject to the Lease
Agreement and that certain provisions of the Lease Agreement had not been performed
by the Town. The First Amendment to Lease Agreement addresses the lease of
additional property for the Town’s HAR Facilities, updates the listing of communication
systems, provides for the payment of past due rentals, and substitutes an annual rental
increase in the amount of 3% to replace the CPI increase.
Proposal:
The First Amendment to Lease Agreement must be approved by the adoption of
Ordinance No. 09-15 by the Board of Trustees as the lease period is greater than one
year.
Advantages:
The approval of the First Amendment to Lease Agreement allows the Town to
continue to maintain its communication facilities on Prospect Mountain, addresses
payment of back rent, and adopts a new formula for future increases in rent
payments.
Disadvantages:
None.
Action Recommended:
Adopt Ordinance No. 09-15 approving the First Amendment to Lease Agreement.
Budget:
The rental payments shall be divided among the Town Departments using the
communication facilities based on radios per department.
Level of Public Interest
Low.
Sample Motion:
I move to approve/deny Ordinance No. 09-15 approving the First Amendment to Lease
Agreement between the Town of Estes Park and Heron LLC.
ORDINANCE NO. 09-15
AN ORDINANCE APPROVING THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO LEASE AGREEMENT
WITH HERON LLC FOR A COMMUNICATION SITE
WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees of the Town of Estes Park has determined
that it is in the best interest of the Town to approve the First Amendment to Lease
Agreement for a communication site on Prospect Mountain.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF
THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The First Amendment to Lease Agreement, a copy of which is attached
hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference, is hereby approved and
the appropriate officials of the Town of Estes Park are hereby authorized to execute the
First Amendment to Lease Agreement.
Section 2: This Ordinance shall take effect and be enforced thirty (30) days after its
adoption and publication.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF
ESTES PARK, COLORADO, THIS __DAY OF __________ , 2015.
TOWN OF ESTES PARK
By:
Mayor
ATTEST:
Town Clerk
I hereby certify that the above Ordinance was introduced and read at the meeting of
the Board of Trustees on the _______ day of _______________, 2015, and
published in a newspaper of general circulation in the Town of Estes Park, Colorado,
on the _______ day of __________________, 2015.
_____________________________
Town Clerk
Town Administrator Contract
Administrative Services Memo
1
To: Honorable Mayor Pinkham
Board of Trustees
Town Administrator Lancaster
From: Jackie Williamson, Administrative Services Director
Date: May 22, 2015
RE: Town Administrator Contract
Objective:
To approve a new four-year contract and job description for the Town Administrator
Frank Lancaster.
Present Situation:
The Board approved a three-year contract with Town Administrator Lancaster in April of
2012 after an extensive nationwide search for a new Town Administrator. The contract
expired in April 2015 and was extend through June 30, 2015 to provide the Board time
to complete his annual evaluation and discuss new contract terms. During the month of
February and March the Board completed a review of Administrator Lancaster’s
performance and found his performance to be well above average. He has shown great
leadership during a number of emergency situations, staff development and
communication and strategic planning.
Proposal:
Attached for the Board’s approval is an updated Town Administrator job description.
The description was drafted by the Town’s compensation consultant Eric Marburger and
reviewed by Administrative Services and Town Administrator Lancaster.
Also attached is a updated contract with the following changes from the previous
contract:
Four-year contract with a term expiring May or June of 2019 depending on when
the contract is official executed. The Town Administrator’s term would end on an
off election year, therefore, the Board would not be addressing new Board
members and a new Administrator in the same month and year.
Sick and vacation time balances would roll over to the new contract and be
maintained from year-to-year as is the case with all Town employees.
Deferred compensation (retirement) would be contributed at the same
contribution level as PERA employees, i.e. 13.7% in 2015 and be made to the
Town’s ICMA fund.
The Administrator would receive a cell phone allowance per the cell phone policy
rather than reimbursing the employee for the monthly operating costs.
Town Administrator Contract
2
The Board has recommended a salary increase of $155,000, just above the
market average for similar positions along the Front Range. The Town’s
compensation consultant completed a market study in March 2015 utilizing the
same market analysis used for all other Town employee positions. The original
contract did not include annual increases; therefore, Administrator Lancaster has
not realized an increase in over 3 years.
Salary would be reviewed annually and increased based on the market rate
study completed for the management pay family.
Advantages:
Provide an updated contract that outlines compensation and benefits for the Town
Administrator position.
Provide an updated job description.
Continue employment of Town Administrator Lancaster at just above the market rate
midpoint for Administrator/Manager in the Front Range based on the Town’s current
compensation plan.
Disadvantages:
The Town Administrator would operate without an updated contract or job
description through June 30, 2015.
Action Recommended:
To approve the new job description and four-year contract with Town Administrator
Frank Lancaster.
Budget:
Increase to compensation and retirement.
Level of Public Interest
Moderate.
Sample Motion:
I move to approve/deny the updated Town Administrator job description and new four-
year employment contract with Town Administrator Frank Lancaster.
Attachments
Town Administrator Job Description
Employment Contract
Town Administrator
Job Description
May 2015 Page 1
TOWN OF ESTES PARK
TOWN ADMINISTRATOR
EXEMPT: Yes GRADE: N/A - Contract with Board
DEPARTMENT: Administration REPORTS TO: Board of Trustees
SUMMARY
Responsible to the Board of Trustees for the efficient administration of all departments of the
Town government. Exercises supervision over all departmental supervisory personnel. Must
reside within the Town of Estes Park within six months of employment.
EXAMPLES OF ESSENTIAL DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
The below list is intended to be illustrative of the responsibilities of the position and not all
encompassing. The Town may change these duties at any time.
Efficient and effective administration of all departments.
Supervises the enforcement of all Town laws, ordinances and regulations.
Prepare, recommend and administer the Town budget consisting of multiple funds, and
Enterprise Funds.
Anticipate and advise the Board of future municipal and community needs.
Maintain relations with the Board, Community Leaders, outside agencies and constituents
Carries out instruction and guidance from the Board as directed during official Board
meetings and work sessions.
Perform duties prescribed by ordinance or by direction of the Board as specifically outlined
under Policy Governance Category 2, Board/Staff Linkages and Category 3, Staff
Limitations.
Develops and recommends policies and actions to the Board and ensures that all policies are
effective and enforced by all departments
Performs other duties as assigned.
KNOWLEDGE, SKILLS & ABILITIES
To perform this job successfully, an individual must be able to perform each essential duty
satisfactorily. Reasonable accommodations may be made to enable qualified individuals with
disabilities to perform the essential functions. The requirements listed below are representative
of the knowledge, skill, and/or ability required:
Thorough knowledge of municipal and public administration principles, practices, and
procedures.
Considerable knowledge of municipal organization, including applicable budgetary
ordinances and regulations.
Ability to analyze a variety of public policy issues and make recommendations.
Ability to communicate effectively verbally and in writing.
Town Administrator
Job Description
May 2015 Page 2
Ability to plan, direct and supervise the work of others.
Ability to establish and maintain effective working relationships with employees, other
departments, other governmental agencies, businesses and the general public.
EDUCATION & EXPERIENCE
College Graduate with a Bachelor's Degree in Business, Public Administration, or related
field. Master’s Degree highly preferred.
Five years professional managerial experience in a public agency with significant oversight
of standard municipal department and operations to include responsibility for budgetary and
financial management.
Any equivalent combination of education and experience.
CERTIFICATES, LICENSES, REGISTRATIONS
Valid Colorado Driver’s License and satisfactory driving record.
Town Administrator
Job Description
May 2015 Page 3
Town Administrator
Physical Requirements and Work Environment
Frequency Guide
Rarely (R) Occasionally (O) Frequently (F) Constantly (C)
Less than - 5% 6 – 30% 31% - 70% Over 70%
Physical Task Frequency Physical Surroundings Frequency
Sitting F Extreme Temperatures R
Standing F Inside Work C
Walking O Outside Work O
Running R Walking on uneven surfaces R
Stooping R Working at height R
Kneeling R Other:
Squatting R
Climbing R Environmental Conditions
Balancing R Exposure to Chemicals R
Reaching O Exposure to Gases/Fumes/Dust R
Grasping F High Noise Levels R
Fingering F Moderate Noise Levels R
Handling F Vibrations R
Visual Acuity: Near C Light/Power Equipment Ops R
Visual Acuity Far O Heavy Equipment Operation R
Depth Perception F Work in Traffic R
Color Discrimination O Local Travel F
Peripheral Vision F Out of Town Travel O
Talking C Other:
Hearing C
Other: Weight of Objects Moved
Over 100 pounds R
Over 50 Pounds R
Over 10 pounds O
I understand the description of this job and the essential functions, as given above. I also
understand that all of the duties are not described above and that I will perform those above and
all other assigned duties as directed by my supervisor and management.
Signature: Printed Name:
Date:
1
EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT (hereinafter called the “Agreement”) effective June 1, 2015,
by and between the Town of Estes Park, Colorado, a municipal corporation (hereinafter
called “TOWN”) and Frank T. Lancaster (hereinafter called “Employee”), both parties
agreeing as follows:
WHEREAS, the TOWN desires to continue the employment of the Employee as
Town Administrator as provided in the Municipal Code, as amended from time to time;
and
WHEREAS, the Employee desires to accept continued employment as Town
Administrator of the TOWN; and
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants herein contained,
the parties agree as follows:
Section 1. Duties
The TOWN employs Employee as Town Administrator of the TOWN to perform
the functions and duties of the position in accordance with all the applicable provisions
of the Municipal Code as they may be amended from time to time, and to perform other
duties and functions as the Town Board shall periodically assign.
Section 2. Term
The term of this Agreement shall be for four (4) years beginning on the effective
date of this Agreement, subject to Sections 8, 9 and 10.
Section 3. Compensation
The TOWN agrees to pay Employee for his services an annual base salary of
$155,000 payable in installments as other employees of the TOWN are paid.
Employee’s total compensation consists of base salary and other benefits described in
this Agreement. Employee’s annual base salary shall be increased in each calendar
year based on the annual market study by the percentage of increase by which the
management job family is increased.
Section 4. Vacation
Employee shall be entitled to sixteen (16) hours per month of annual paid
vacation subject to the Annual Leave provisions of the Personnel Policy Manual,
including a maximum allowable carryover of 312 hours.
Employee shall be entitled to all of the days off for holidays enjoyed by all Town
2
employees as set forth in the Personnel Policy Manual.
Section 5. Benefits
The TOWN shall provide for Employee the benefits as set forth on Exhibit A, as
amended from time to time for all employees.
Section 6. Other Benefits
a. In addition to the benefits stated in this Agreement, Employee shall also be
allowed other fringe benefits as may be adopted or have been adopted by the
TOWN as part of the fringe benefit package given to all other management
employees of the TOWN. Employee shall not receive an automobile
allowance.
b. Employee shall maintain the current sick and vacation balances accrued
during his previous employment contract.
Section 7. Deferred Compensation
The TOWN agrees to contribute an amount equal to the contribution level
determined by PERA annually and currently at 13.7% of Employee’s base salary to the
Town’s ICMA account if the employee waives their right to PERA.
Section 8. Termination and Severance Pay
a. In the event this Agreement is not renewed due to non-appropriation of funds,
in the event Employee is not re-appointed as Town Administrator in April of each even
numbered year, pursuant to C.R.S. § 31-4-304 and the Municipal Code, or in the event
the employment of Employee is terminated by the TOWN, except for cause, the TOWN
agrees to pay Employee a lump sum severance payment equal to six (6) month’s base
salary, plus cash compensation for any annual leave, sick leave, and other benefits that
have been accrued through the date of termination, but have not been used by
Employee, as well as any other pro-rated benefits, and reimbursements. If Employee
receives severance, the TOWN shall keep in force and pay the full required premiums
for health, vision and dental benefits as provided for in Section 5 for the same length of
time. In consideration for, and as a condition precedent to, provision of all benefits
payable under this Section 8, Employee shall be required to execute a general release
form releasing the TOWN from any and all causes of action, claims and demands which
the Employee may have against the TOWN.
b. The TOWN agrees to provide Employee at least sixty (60) days’ notice
prior to the end of the term of this Agreement that it does not intend or desire to extend
or offer a new agreement to Employee. In this event, failure to extend or offer to renew
Agreement to Employee shall be deemed a termination without cause and subject to the
severance provisions of sub-paragraph a. above.
3
c. In the event that the TOWN decides to terminate the services of Employee
during the term of this Agreement, except for cause, the effective date of such
termination shall be at least 30 days following notification by the TOWN in writing to
Employee of such termination.
d. In the event the TOWN at any time during the term of this Agreement
reduces the financial benefits of Employee in a greater percentage than an applicable
across-the-board reduction for all employees of the TOWN as set forth in Section 22, or
Employee resigns following an offer by the TOWN to accept resignation, whether formal
or informal, the Employee may, at his option, be deemed to be “terminated” at the date
of such reduction or the offer to accept resignation. In either case the termination shall
be subject to the severance provisions in sub-paragraph a. above.
e. Termination for cause shall mean:
a) Conduct by Employee that is fraudulent or dishonest,
b) Employee’s conviction of a felony or crime involving moral turpitude under
federal or state law, or
c) Failure by Employee in a material way to fulfill or comply with his obligations
under this Agreement. By way of example and not by limitation, should Employee not
comply with the residency requirement set forth in Section 19, and
d) Gross neglect of his duties.
Termination for cause shall not entitle Employee to any severance pay or benefits set
forth in sub-paragraph (a) above.
Section 9. Disability.
Should Employee be permanently disabled and unable to fulfill his duties
because of sickness, accident, injury, health, or mental incapacity beyond what is
lawfully required by Family Medical Leave or granted to Employee by the TOWN, then
the TOWN shall have the right to terminate this Agreement subject to the payment of
the severance provisions provided for in Section 8 (a).
Section 10. Resignation
Employee may resign by giving a minimum of 30 days’ written notice to the
TOWN. Employee shall be entitled to all salary and fringe benefits that accrue to
Employee to the effective date of his resignation, including annual leave and sick leave
to which he is entitled. Employee is not entitled to severance pay and benefits set forth
in Section 8 (a) above.
4
Section 11. Dues and Subscriptions
TOWN agrees to budget for and pay the reasonable professional dues and
subscriptions of Employee necessary for his continuation and full participation in
national, regional, state, and local associations and organizations necessary or
desirable for his continued professional participation, growth, and advancement, and for
the good of the TOWN.
Section 12. Professional Development
TOWN agrees to budget for and pay reasonable travel and subsistence
expenses of Employee for professional and official travel, meetings and occasions
adequate to continue the professional development of Employee and to adequately
pursue necessary official functions for TOWN, including, but not limited to, the ICMA
Annual Conference, Colorado Municipal League seminars, programs and annual
meetings and attendance by Employee at courses, classes, seminars, meetings, and
professional conferences that will mutually benefit the TOWN and Employee.
Section 13. Civic Involvement/Official Functions
The TOWN recognizes the desirability of representation in or before certain civic
organizations as part of the public relations obligations of the TOWN, or for Employee to
pursue necessary official functions as a representative of the TOWN. Subject to the
prior approval of the TOWN, the TOWN agrees to pay for the reasonable costs of dues,
memberships, or attendance by Employee at official functions and of certain civic
organizations.
Section 14. General Expenses
The TOWN recognizes that certain expenses of a non-personal, job-affiliated
nature are incurred by Employee in the course of conducting business on behalf of the
TOWN. The TOWN hereby agrees to reimburse or to pay said general expenses of
Employee in accordance with TOWN reimbursement procedures.
Section 15. Wireless Electronic Communication Equipment
Employee’s duties require that he be reasonably accessible in order to properly
conduct TOWN business during his employment with the TOWN. Accordingly,
Employee shall maintain a wireless electronic communication device and receive a cell
phone allowance per the Town’s cell phone policy.
Section 16. Performance Evaluations
The TOWN shall annually review the performance of the Employee subject to a
process, form, criteria, and format for the evaluation which shall be mutually agreed
upon by the TOWN and Employee. The process, at a minimum, shall include the
5
opportunity for both parties to: (1) prepare a written evaluation, (2) meet and discuss
the evaluation, and (3) present a written summary of the evaluation results. The final
written evaluation should be completed and delivered to Employee within thirty (30)
days of the evaluation meeting.
Section 17. Hours of Work
It is recognized Employee must devote a certain amount of time outside of
normal office hours to business of the TOWN, and to that end Employee will be allowed
to take compensatory time off as he deems appropriate during normal business hours.
Section 18. Outside Employment
The primary obligation of Employee is to the TOWN, and Employee agrees not to
become employed by any other employer during the term of this Agreement that would
interfere with the proper execution of his duties. The term “employed” shall not be
construed to include occasional teaching, writing, speaking, consulting, or similar work
performed by Employee on his own time that does not create a conflict of interest with
the TOWN, even if outside compensation is provided for such services. Employee
agrees not to perform work for any other governmental body without prior approval of
the TOWN.
Section 19. Residency
It is mutually agreed that Employee shall reside within the 80517 zip code with
the preference within the TOWN’s corporate limits.
Section 20. Personnel Policies
Unless otherwise provided for herein, the personnel policies and rules of the
TOWN, as stated in the Personnel Policy Manual and as in effect from time to time,
shall apply to the employment of Employee.
Section 21. Other Terms and Conditions of Employment
The TOWN, in consultation with Employee, shall fix any such other terms and
conditions of employment, as it may determine from time to time, relating to the
performance of the Employee, provided such terms and conditions are not inconsistent
with or in conflict with the provisions of this Agreement, the Municipal Code, or any
other law.
Section 22. No Reduction of Benefits
The TOWN shall not at any time during the term of this Agreement reduce the
salary, compensation, or financial benefits of the Employee, except to the degree of
such a reduction across-the-board for all employees of the TOWN.
6
Section 23. Notices
Notices pursuant to this Agreement shall be given by deposit in the custody of
the United States Postal Service, postage prepaid, addressed as follows:
TOWN: Town of Estes Park
Attn: Mayor
P O Box 1200
Estes Park, CO 80517
EMPLOYEE: Frank T. Lancaster
751 Black Canyon Drive
Estes Park, CO 80517
Alternately, notices required pursuant to this Agreement may be personally
served in the same manner as is applicable to civil judicial practice. Notice shall be
deemed given as of the date of personal service or as of the date of deposit of such
written notice in the course of transmission in the United States Postal Service.
Employee shall notify the TOWN in writing of any change in address.
Section 24. General Provisions
a. This Agreement constitutes the entire Agreement between the parties,
and it shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the heirs, executors, successors,
and assigns of the parties. This Agreement may only be amended by written instrument
executed by both parties, and each provision hereof shall be construed under the laws
of the State of Colorado.
b. In the event of conflict between the terms of policy provisions, regulations,
codes and ordinances of the TOWN and terms of this Agreement, this Agreement shall
take precedence and govern.
Section 25. Severability
To the extent any provision herein is prohibited by applicable Federal, State, or
local law, or is impossible to perform, such provision will be deemed deleted from this
Agreement and the remainder of the Agreement will survive.
7
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement is executed on this ____ day of
______, 2015.
TOWN OF ESTES PARK
By___________________________
William C. Pinkham, Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
Town Clerk
EMPLOYEE
_________________________
Frank T. Lancaster
Exhibit A
8
9
1
TOWN OF ESTES PARK
EXECUTIVE SESSION PROCEDURE
May 26, 2015
Executive Sessions may only occur during a regular or special meeting of the Town
Board.
Limited Purposes.
Adoption of any proposed policy, position, resolution, or formal action shall not occur at
any executive session.
Procedure.
Prior to the time the Board convenes in executive session, the Mayor shall announce
the topic of discussion in the executive session and identify the particular matter to be
discussed in as much detail as possible without compromising the purpose for which the
executive session is authorized, including the specific statutory citation as enumerated
below. Prior to entering into an executive session, the Mayor shall state whether or not
any formal action and/or discussion shall be taken by the Town Board following the
executive session.
1. To discuss purchase, acquisition, lease, transfer or sale of any real, personal,
or other property interest - Section 24-6-402(4}(a}, C.RS.
2. For a conference with an attorney for the Board for the purposes of receiving
legal advice on specific legal questions - Section 24-6-402(4}(b}, C.RS.
3. For discussion of a matter required to be kept confidential by federal or state
law, rule, or regulation - Section 24-6-402(4}(c}, C.RS.
4. For discussion of specialized details of security arrangements or investigations
Section 24-6-402(4}(d}, C.RS.
5. For the purpose of determining positions relative to matters that may be
subject to negotiations, developing strategy for negotiations, and/or instructing
negotiators - Section 24-6-402(4}(e}, C.RS.
6. For discussion of a personnel matter - Section 24-6-402(4}(f}, C.RS. and not
involving: any specific employees who have requested discussion of the matter
in open session; any member of the Town Board; the appointment of any person
to fill an office of the Town Board; or personnel policies that do not require
discussion of matters personal to particular employees.
7. For consideration of any documents protected by the mandatory non-
disclosure provision of the Colorado Open Records Act - Section 24-6-402(4}(g},
C.RS.
2
Electronic Recording.
A record of the actual contents of the discussion during an executive session shall be
made by electronic recording. If electronic recording equipment is not available or
malfunctions, written minutes of the executive session shall be taken and kept by the
Town Clerk, if present, or if not present, by the Mayor.
The electronic recording or minutes, if any, of the executive session must state the
specific statutory provision authorizing the executive session. The electronic recording
or minutes, if any, of the executive session shall be kept by the Town Clerk unless the
Town Clerk was the subject of the executive session or did not participate in the
executive session, in which event, the record of the executive session shall be
maintained by the Mayor. If written minutes of the executive session are kept, the
Mayor shall attest in writing that the written minutes substantially reflect the substance
of the discussion during the executive session and such minutes shall be approved by
the Board at a subsequent executive session.
If, in the opinion of the attorney who is representing the Board, and who is
present at the executive session, "all or a portion" of the discussion constitutes
attorney-client privileged communications:
1. No record shall be kept of this part of the discussion.
2. If written minutes are taken, the minutes shall contain a signed statement from
the attorney attesting that the unrecorded portion of the executive session
constituted, in the attorney's opinion, privileged attorney-client communications.
The minutes must also include a signed statement from the Mayor attesting that
the discussion in the unrecorded portion of the session was confined to the topic
or topics for which the executive session is authorized pursuant to the Open
Meetings Law.
Executive Session Motion Format.
Section 24-6-402(4) of the Colorado Revised Statutes requires the specific citation of
the statutory provision authorizing the executive session.
THEREFORE, I MOVE TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION:
X For a conference with the Town Attorney for the purpose of receiving legal
advice on specific legal questions under C.RS. Section 24-6-402(4)(b) –
Litigation.
For the purpose of determining positions relative to matters that may be subject
to negotiations, developing strategy for negotiations, and/or instructing
negotiators under C.RS. Section 24-6-402(4)(e) - Cornerstone Engineering.
3
To discuss the purchase, acquisition, lease, transfer, or sale of real, personal, or
other property interest under C.RS. Section 24-6-402(4)(a).
For discussion of a personnel matter - Section 24-6-402(4)(f), C.RS. and not
involving: any specific employees who have requested discussion of the matter
in open session; any member of the Town Board (or body); the appointment of
any person to fill an office of the Town Board (or body); or personnel policies
that do not require discussion of matters personal to particular employees.
For discussion of a matter required to be kept confidential by the following
federal or state law, rule or regulation: under C.RS. Section 246-402(4)(c).
For discussion of specialized details of security arrangements or investigations
under C.RS. Section 24-6-402(4)(d).
For consideration of documents protected by the mandatory nondisclosure
provisions of the Open Records Act under C.RS. Section 24-6-402(4)(g).
AND THE FOLLOWING ADDITIONAL DETAILS ARE PROVIDED FOR
IDENTIFICATION PURPOSES (The Mayor may ask the Town Attorney to provide the
details): .
The Motion must be adopted by the affirmative vote of two-thirds (2/3) of the quorum
present.
Retention of Electronic Recording or Minutes.
Pursuant to Section 24-6-402(2)(d.5)(II)(E) C.RS., the Town Clerk shall retain the
electronic recording or minutes for ninety (90) days. Following the ninety (90) day
period, the recording or the minutes shall be destroyed unless during the ninety (90) day
period a request for inspection of the record has been made pursuant to Section 24-
72204(5.5) C.RS.
If written minutes are taken for an executive session, the minutes shall be approved
and/or amended at the next executive session of the Town Board. In the event that the
next executive session occurs more than ninety (90) days after the executive session,
the minutes shall be maintained until they are approved and/or amended at the next
executive session and then immediately destroyed.
4
ANNOUNCEMENT
ANNOUNCEMENT SHALL BE MADE BY THE MAYOR AT THE BEGINNING OF THE
EXECUTIVE SESSION. MAKE SURE THE ELECTRONIC RECORDER IS TURNED
ON; DO NOT TURN IT OFF DURING THE EXECUTIVE SESSION UNLESS SO
ADVISED BY THE TOWN ATTORNEY.
It is Tuesday, May 26, 2015 , and the time is (state the time) p.m.
For the Record, I am Bill Pinkham , the Mayor (or Mayor ProTern) of the
Board of Trustees. As required by the Open Meetings Law, this executive
session is being electronically recorded.
Also present at this executive session are the following person(s): Mayor Pro Tern
Koenig. Trustees Ward Nelson. John Ericson, Bob Holcomb. Ron Norris. and John
Phipps; and Town Administrator Lancaster, Town Attorney White, and Town Clerk
Williamson.
This is an executive session for the following purpose of:
For a conference with the Town Attorney for the purpose of receiving legal advice
on specific legal questions on the Loop under under C.RS. Section 24-6-402(4)(b)
–Litigation.
I caution each participant to confine all discussion to the stated purpose of the executive
session, and that no formal action may occur in the executive session.
If at any point in the executive session any participant believes that the discussion is
outside of the proper scope of the executive session, please interrupt the discussion
and make an objection.
The close of the executive session is in the Mayor's discretion and does not require a
motion for adjournment of the executive session.
The Mayor shall close the executive session by stating the time and return to the open
meeting.
After the return to the open session, the Mayor shall state that the Town Board is in
open session and whether or not any formal action and/or discussion shall be taken by
the Town Board.