HomeMy WebLinkAboutPACKET Town Board Study Session 2015-05-26
Tuesday, May 26, 2015
TOWN BOARD 5:00 p.m. – 6:30 p.m.
STUDY SESSION Rooms 202/203
5:00 p.m. Trustee Comments & Questions.
5:10 p.m. Future Study Session Agenda Items.
(Board Discussion)
5:20 p.m. Dinner Served.
5:30 p.m. Vacation Rental Home Project and Objectives.
(Planner Kleisler)
6:00 p.m. FEMA Community Rating System.
(Planner Kurtz)
6:30 p.m. Adjourn for Town Board Meeting.
“Informal discussion among Trustees concerning agenda items or other Town matters may occur before this
meeting at approximately 4:45 p.m.”
AGENDA
June 9, 2015
Update on Economic Development
Strategic Planning Project from
Avalanche Consulting
Discussion of April Financial
Statements
July 28, 2015
Update on Town of Estes Park
Financial Policies
August 11, 2015
Session on Zoning Basics
Items Approved – Unscheduled:
(Items are not in order of priority)
International Property Maintenance
Code (Dangerous Buildings Code) and
Adoption of New International Building
Code Draft Reviews
Discussion of Noise Ordinance
Truancy Ordinance (Requested by
School District & Chief Kufeld)
Wildlife Ordinance – Follow Up
Local Preference Purchasing Policy
Briefing on Storm Drainage and Flood
Management Issues and Management
Options
Discussion of How to Better Involve
and Reach Out to the Hispanic
Members of the Community
Study Session Items for Board
Consideration:
Update from CDOT on Major Road
Repair Projects on US 34 and CO 7
Future Town Board Study Session Agenda Items
May 26, 2015
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Report
To: Honorable Mayor Pinkham
Board of Trustees
Town Administrator Lancaster
From: Philip Kleisler, Planner II
Date: May 26, 2015
RE: Vacation Rental Home Project and Objectives
Objective:
The purpose of this agenda item is to provide an update to the Board on staff’s ongoing
efforts to evaluate options for regulation of vacation rentals by owner.
Present Situation:
The Town Board held a joint meeting with the Board of County Commissioners and
Estes Valley Planning Commission on October 15, 2014. During that meeting the topic
of vacation home regulations were discussed, including potential code revisions and
adjustments to the existing fee structure. As a result of this meeting staff prepared a
white paper in an effort to provide a concise history of vacation home regulations and
initial recommendations.
At a work session earlier this year the Trustees directed staff to hold a public forum to
hear ideas from the public on how to address various land use concerns. Since this
time staff presented the white paper to the Board of County Commissions for comment
and held a community meeting on May 14, 2015. The community meeting was well
attended, with a total of 86 participants. Of the 86 attendees, 35 (or 41%) owned
vacation homes in the Estes Valley. The meeting summary provided by the 3rd party
consultant is attached to this report.
Proposal:
Town staff have continued to work on the concepts presented in the white paper.
Current topics include:
1. Occupancy Limits: If larger rentals be allowed to host parties greater than eight.
2. Vehicles and Parking: How to effectively manage guest parking at rentals.
3. Fire Prevention: Specific operational requirements to address potential fire risks.
4. The number of parties: If more than one party should be allowed on a site and if
a property owner should be permitted to rent a single room of their home while
remaining on site.
5. Workforce Housing: The relationship between short-term rentals and workforce
housing.
6. Highway Development: If traditional development patterns in the A
Accommodations zone district is changing from traditional hotels to less dense
accommodation “homes”. If so, is the Code setup to effectively accommodate
these changes.
7. Fees: Increasing Town fees and establishing County fees.
8. Licensing: Creating a clear and more streamlined license management process.
9. Property Management: Enhancing the role of the “property manager” (i.e. local
contact).
Public Engagement
Community involvement will be coordinated by the Community Development
Department, in coordination with the Administration and Administrative Services
Departments. There will be at least one additional public input session prior to bringing
the final ordinances for the Board’s consideration.
Cross-functional Teams
Internal staff workgroups will be formed to coordinate the various components of this
project. Internal workgroups include:
1. Executive Oversight/Project Sponsor: Provides overarching vision and
direction to internal work groups.
2. Process Analysis: Coordinate and recommend the necessary revisions to
administrative changes, generally managed through the Administrative Services
Department.
3. Regulatory Analysis: Coordinate and recommend the necessary revisions to
the Estes Valley Development Code and Estes Park Municipal Code,
enhancement of enforcement processes and hiring of a staff member to work on
vacation home enforcement.
4. Communications: Ensure transparency and public availability of information
relating to the project. The team will direct the overall communications strategy,
including public meetings, press releases, website management (project
webpage) and engagement with community groups.
5. Code Enforcement: Coordinate process changes for greater communication
and coordination among Town departments.
Timeline
The table below outlines the mayor tasks and milestones associated with this project.
Phase Date Description
Initial Project Engagement April Project webpage published.
May 14 Public meeting #1 to present project plan and receive initial
feedback.
May 26 Town Board Work Session update on final project scope and
timeline.
June 16 Planning Commission update on final project scope and timeline.
June 15
(tentative)
County Commissioner Work Session update on project scope and
timeline. Refining the Product July 1 – 31 Community survey published on the project webpage
July/Aug Public meetings, Round 2 to present draft of changes.
Sept Town Board, County Commission and Planning Commission
updates on preliminary ordinance, public input and best practices.
Oct 20 Planning Commission recommendation of Development Code
amendments.
Nov 10 Town Board adopts ordinance package
Nov 16 County Commissioners adopts ordinance package
Advantages:
A proactive approach to managing the growth of vacation home rentals is a
necessary step in sustaining a balance between private property rights and
residential neighborhood character.
Disadvantages:
A proactive approach will require staff resources and may lead to a degree of
division among community members. However, any changes will be made with
any eye toward enforceability, each with substantial opportunities for public
comment and collaboration.
Action Recommended:
Staff are reporting back to the Board following the community meeting and requests
guidance about the following questions:
1. Are there any topics not covered above that the Board would like considered
during this process?
2. Are there any topics covered above that the Board is uninterested in pursuing?
Budget:
The direct costs will likely be fairly limited with this project, but will likely include, legal
notices, codification fees, meeting supplies and facilitator costs.
Level of Public Interest
High. The public meeting on May 14 attracted many more people than anticipated.
Staff is also receiving consistent written public comments on the topic.
Attachments:
1. Public Meeting Summary
Vacation Rentals
Meeting: May 14th, Town of Estes Park Board Room
Agenda: Presentation Community Input Wrap-up of process
Presentation Review:
Community Input: (all questions answered in brainstorm) Overall input from the community focused on regulations being understood by all and having a process for making certain owners/property managers and renters understand them – this including potential clarification when regulation seemed too vague; making the regulations enforceable; having clear lines of accountability for reporting. Participants also were interested in knowing “what problem you were trying to solve” and they expressed concern about maintaining the neighborhood character and public safety. Though some participants knew a great deal about the “why” and “what” of regulations, many participants expressed interest in learning more about the “whys, whats and how?” and were relatively uninformed on how the process works – for example why sometimes a regulation is enforced and sometimes it is not. They also were willing to pay more fees if they understood more clearer what services would be different or added as a result of those increases. Below are the specific questions used in this process, with highlights of the answers given.
Question 1: What does a balanced approach to vacation home rentals look like
from your point of view? Clarity of what the regulations Enforceability Includes: Fair fees and applications (consistency between long-term and short-term rentals) Clearly defined expectations, signed by owners, posted for renters Property managers, or equivalent, held responsible to “act” Flexibility in the regulations, recognizing differences of needs based on (location, lot size, proximity, number of legitimate bedrooms and bathrooms)
Attachment: Public Meeting Summary Compliments of Pollard Consulting
Question 2: Thinking about the following…..
Occupancy: Easily followed regulations with options for flexibility depending upon size (lot, bedrooms, bathrooms), location Clarity on “person” (child vs. adult)
Property manager: Property manager need not be a FT resident of EP BUT must be easily reachable Residents in neighborhood and visitors to rental have clear knowledge of who to contact for what Does not have to be property manager BUT has to have clear access and accountability in the process
Town and County fees: Enforce fees and fine violations Fees commiserate with occupancy limits Clarity around fees, known by all
Location: Enforce regulations Preserve character of long-term neighborhoods No locations identified for vacation rentals or not
Vehicles: Limiting the number of vehicles and length of time
Question 3: When thinking about vacation rentals what would you like to see
……more of?
Compliance Enforcement Clarity Encouraging long-term rentals Riders signed by owners stating they understand the regulations
……less of?
Overlapping regulations between residents and rentals Unenforced regulations
Attachment: Public Meeting Summary Compliments of Pollard Consulting
Question 4: Brainstorm of most important consideration Enforce, Define and Clarify Flexibility Clear lines of accountability for owner/PM Preserve neighborhood character Expand occupancy limits based on size, number of bedrooms and bathrooms, lot location and size
Attachment: Public Meeting Summary Compliments of Pollard Consulting
Community Development
Department Memo
To: Honorable Mayor Pinkham
Board of Trustees
Town Administrator Lancaster
From: Tina Kurtz, Environmental Planner
Date: May 26, 2015
RE: FEMA Community Rating System
Objective:
Provide a brief overview of the FEMA Community Rating System (CRS) Program and
request approval to begin public discussions this fall regarding Town participation in the
CRS Program.
Present Situation:
The Town staff is working very diligently to explore every avenue available for flood
recovery and mitigation projects/programs with the purpose of reducing or, if possible,
eliminating negative economic and social impacts to businesses, property owners and
homeowners within Estes Park, due to future flood events. These impacts include not
only loss of business trade and structural damage to properties, but potential costly
flood insurance premiums. One such program that Community Development staff has
been exploring is the CRS Program.
Ultimately, the Town Board will have to make the decision whether to participate in the
CRS Program, but in order to provide the Board with additional information before
making that decision, Community Development staff would like to engage the public, in
particular the downtown business and property owners, in a discussion about the CRS
Program. We would like to begin the discussions this fall in order to avoid interrupting
business owners during their busiest time of year. However, our ongoing education and
information efforts on flood-related topics, including CRS, will continue throughout the
summer.
The following is a brief overview of the CRS Program taken from
https://www.floodsmart.gov/floodsmart/pages/crs/community_rating_system.jsp:
The Community Rating System (CRS) is a voluntary incentive program that recognizes
communities for implementing floodplain management practices that exceed the
Federal minimum requirements of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) to
provide protection from flooding.
In exchange for a community's proactive efforts to reduce flood risk, policyholders can
receive reduced flood insurance premiums for buildings in the community. These
reduced premiums reflect the reduced flood risk resulting from community efforts toward
achieving the three CRS goals:
1. Reduce flood damage to insurable property
2. Strengthen and support the insurance aspects of the NFIP
3. Encourage a comprehensive approach to floodplain management
Participation in the Community Rating System (CRS) is voluntary. By participating,
communities earn credit points that determine classifications. There are 10 CRS
Classes: Class 1 requires the most credit points and provides the largest flood
insurance premium reduction (45 percent), while Class 10 means the community does
not participate in the CRS or has not earned the minimum required credit points, and
residents receive no premium reduction. The CRS Classes are based on completion of
19 creditable activities organized into 4 categories:
1. Public Information
2. Mapping and Regulations
3. Flood Damage Reduction
4. Warning and Response
Proposal:
Community Development staff recommend engaging the public, particularly the
downtown business and property owners, in discussions about the CRS Program to
provide further education and information about the program and to solicit feedback.
Advantages:
Engagement with the public will provide a forum for Town staff to provide
information and have a dialog with the public, in particular the downtown
business and property owners, about the CRS Program.
Participation in the CRS Program would reduce flood insurance premiums. The
activities the Town is currently implementing for floodplain management would
place the Town into a Class 8 or 9, meaning a 5-10% reduction in flood
insurance premiums.
Additional grant funding opportunities for flood mitigation activities would be
available to the Town with participation in the CRS Program.
There are 46 towns and counties in Colorado participating in the CRS Program,
as of May 2014, thereby providing a large network of CRS expertise for Town
staff to utilize.
CRS Program participation would provide an incentive for further flood mitigation
activities/programs and floodplain management within the Town.
o All additional flood mitigation activities and floodplain management
employed by the Town will help ensure the economic vitality and resiliency
of the downtown area for future flood events by reducing flood risks.
Disadvantages:
Significant staff time is needed to administer the CRS Program. There is
extensive monitoring by the state and federal government of the
activities/programs the Town has implemented to use for CRS Program credit.
The Town would be in danger of being downgraded in CRS Program Class
(meaning loss of flood insurance premium discounts), or even having CRS
Program membership rescinded if the Town does not continue with the
activities/programs being used for CRS Program credit.
Action Recommended:
Town staff recommends Town Board approval to engage the public, in particular the
downtown business and property owners, in discussions about the Community Rating
System Program this fall.
Budget:
N/A
Level of Public Interest
High
Sample Motion
N/A
Attachments:
N/A