Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPACKET Town Board 2013-11-12 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. REGULAR MEETING BOARD OF TRUSTEES - TOWN OF ESTES PARK Tuesday, November 12, 2013 7:00 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. (Any person desiring to participate, please join the Board in the Pledge of Allegiance). SWEARING IN CEREMONY. Sergeant Polucha. PUBLIC COMMENT. (Please state your name and address). NATIONAL PARK ANNIVERSARY UPDATE. Chuck Levine, Fran Grooters, Barbara Hoppe Scott TOWN BOARD COMMENTS / LIAISON REPORTS. TOWN ADMINISTRATOR REPORT. 1. CONSENT AGENDA: 1. Town Board Minutes dated October 22, 2013. Town Board Study Session Minutes October 15 and October 22, 2013. 2. Bills. 3. Committee Minutes: A. Community Development/Community Services Committee, October 24, 2013. 4. Estes Valley Board of Adjustment Minutes dated September 10, 2013. (acknowledgement only). 5. Tree Board Minutes dated October 24, 2013. (acknowledgement only). 2. ACTION ITEMS: Prepared 10/30/13 *Revised NOTE: The Town Board reserves the right to consider other appropriate items not available at the time the agenda was prepared. 1. ORDINANCE #15-13 APPROVING THE CONTRACT FOR THE SALE OF LOT 4, STANLEY HISTORIC DISTRICT FOR THE ANSCHUTZ WELLNESS CENTER. Attorney White. 2. RESOLUTION #34-13 SETTING A SPECIAL ELECTION FOR DECEMBER 17, 2013 FOR THE SALE OF LOT 4, STANLEY HISTORIC DISTRICT AND SETTING THE BALLOT LANGUAGE. Town Clerk Williamson. 3. ADDITIONAL ACTION ITEM. Items carried over from the Special Meeting, November 12, 2013 6:00 p.m. 4. ADJOURN. Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, October 22, 2013 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 22nd day of October, 2013. Present: William C. Pinkham, Mayor Eric Blackhurst, Mayor Pro Tem Trustees Mark Elrod John Ericson Wendy Koenig Ron Norris John Phipps Also Present: Frank Lancaster, 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. SWEARING IN CEREMONY. Town Clerk Williamson performed a swearing in ceremony for Police Commander Corey Pass and Police Officer Jared Paul. PROCLAMATION. Mayor Pinkham presented a proclamation for National Philanthropy Day to be held on November 14, 2013. PUBLIC COMMENTS. Jon Nicholas/Executive Director Estes Park Economic Development Council provided a review of the organizations activities, including providing assistance to local businesses with disaster recovery, businesses recovery, tourism recovery, business retention, and attracting new business. He and Bill Almond/Visit Estes Park (VEP) attended the EDCC conference and meet with Al White/Director State Tourism office to discuss the importance of funding VEP for business recovery and discussed how to access State funds to support the organization. Staff continues to review other funding resources for business, including the EDA for economic recovery and access to federal money aimed at business recovery and marketing. Charlie Dickey/Town citizen provided the Board with results of a survey conducted on the recent Pro Cycle Challenge event and its effects on local businesses. He also commented on the actions taken by the Town, businesses and citizen to come together and support one another after the flood. He stated a number of businesses paid their employees to clean up after the flood instead of laying them off. He has worked with Rob Pieper/Poppy’s and Poppy’s wholesaler to provided candy for the businesses downtown to handout this Halloween. McLane Company, one of the largest candy distributors in the world and several candy manufacturers: Mars Chocolate North America, The Hershey Company, Ferrara Candy, Nestle USA, and Tootsie Charms have donated all the candy for this year’s Halloween event. Johanna Darden/Town citizen stated the proposed pavilion and amphitheater has been reviewed by the Technical Review Committee. The Committee heard concerns from the neighboring property owners related to the noise generated by the new facilities. She questioned why the Estes Valley Planning Commission was provided an update on the status of this review. Board of Trustees – October 22, 2013 – Page 2 1. CONSENT AGENDA: 1. Town Board Minutes dated October 8, 2013. 2. Bills. 3. Committee Minutes: a. Public Safety, Utilities, Public Works Committee – October meeting cancelled. 4. Estes Valley Planning Commission Minutes dated October 1, 2013. (acknowledgement only). It was moved and seconded (Blackhurst/Koenig) to approve the Consent Agenda, and it passed unanimously. 4. ACTIONS ITEMS: 1. CONSIDERATION OF THE SALE OF LOT, 4 STANLEY HISTORIC DISTRICT FOR THE ANSCHUTZ WELLNESS CENTER. Administrator Lancaster stated the Board requested staff determine if it was possible to complete an accelerated review of the Anschutz Wellness Center proposal and hold an election for the sale of Lot 4 by the end of the year, per Municipal Code 17.44.090 Vote Prior to Sale. The Stanley Hotel has Credit Enhancement grants that expire at the end of the year; therefore, they need approval for the sale of the property before the end of the year. This would require the completion of an appraisal of the property, development of a sales contract and the preparation of the ballot language for the Board’s consideration at the November 12, 2013 meeting. The contract would include purchase price, description of the property, and the sale would be specific to the Wellness Center use and would not allow any other use of the property. The Stanley would work through any concerns related to the relationship of the proposed destination wellness center and the proposed community wellness and recreation center, to the satisfaction of the Board prior to November 12th. The Stanley would submit a development application for review by the Planning Commission prior to December 17th, with all costs of an outside consultant to review said proposal paid for by the Stanley. If a sales contract is approved on November 12th, the Board would take action to set a special election on December 17th as a poll election, with the Stanley paying for the full cost of the election. The Special Review would come before the Town Board for final approve at the January 14, 2104 meeting. Skylar Rorabaugh/Executive Director Estes Valley Recreation and Park District stated the Board of Directors conducted a special work session to discuss the Anschutz Wellness Center and how it may affect a community center with John Cullen/Stanley Hotel and Greg Rosener attending the meeting. The EVRPD Board agreed to work on an MOU to outline the synergy between the two projects. Public Comment. Those speaking in favor of the sale of Lot 4, Stanley Historic District with an expedited review process and vote by the end of the year included Cydney Springer/Town citizen, Bobbi Swenson/EMPC Interim CEO, Dr. Frank Dumont/EMPC, Kent Smith & Diane Muno/Estes Partners for Commerce, Bill Van Horn/Stanley Village & EDC member, Jim Pickering/EDC Board of Director Chair, Rainer Schelp/EDC Executive Chair, Melinda Merrill/Town citizen, and John Nicholas/Economic Development Council Executive Director. Comments have been summarized: the wellness center would benefit the community through the creation of year around revenue generation, increased lodging tax, increased utilization of the hospital, benefit the lodging association members, Board of Trustees – October 22, 2013 – Page 3 and bring awareness of better health to the community; the project would bring a new non-tourism business to Estes Park, diversifying the economy; new jobs would be created and bring additional families to the community; the hospital continues to look for new revenue sources to close the gap on the reimbursement of services; recruitment of medical professionals would be easier; the wellness center would focus on a new model of health care; Lot 4 was not purchased by the Town as open space and should be used to improve the economy of the town; the wellness center would be built with private funds and no public assistance has been requested; and the EDC has completed a full analysis of the project and has stated the project has merit. Those speaking against the sale of Lot 4, Stanley Historic District with an expedited review process and vote by the end of the year included Jim Cope/Town citizen & President Stanley Views HOA, Janet Jones/Town citizen, Don Seller/Town citizen, Ed Hayek/Town citizen, Pat Newsom/Town citizen, Johanna Darden/Town citizen, and Matthew Heiser/Town citizen. Comments have been summarized: Lot 4 should be left in its natural state and it serves as a buffer between the Stanley and Stanley Village commercial area; the fate of the property should not be decided in a rushed review process; the land belongs to the citizens of Estes Park and a decision on the ultimate use of Lot 4 should not be made hastily; the town continues to deal with the flood and Town staff is already overtaxed; an outside contractor should not be used to review the project as they are not familiar with our codes, the town and specific local issues; the Town should have a discussion on the best and highest use for Lot 4 before selling it; the project would negatively impact the local neighborhood, who wish for the property to remain as open space; the view and wildlife corridors would be impacted; Estes Park attracts middle class families that would not utilize the wellness facility; the proposed election in December would be during the holiday season when voters would be out of town and unable to vote; if the project is a good idea today, it will be good idea in the future when a proper review can be conducted; further review of the project, a business plan and the activities to take place at the center are needed before a decision can be made on the sale of the property; questioned why the Town would expedite a process that other developers with time and financial constraints are required to follow; and the accelerated process would require significant staff time to process. Dr. Paul Fonken/Timberline Medical facility Director stated he was undecided on the wellness center; however, he would not support the accelerated review process. The Anschutz Wellness Center would have a limited market, but it could dovetail nicely with the Community campus. Timberline Medical has not been involved in any discussions on providing services to the proposed facility. He questioned the viability of the project and the fate of the property if it does not succeed. Lucia Lily/Stanley Hotel representative provided an overview of the project stating the center would not be a spa but a wellness center incorporating the outdoor activities such as hiking, biking, walking trails, etc. The Stanley Hotel requested the sale of Lot 4 be presented to the voters to decide if this is the right project for the property. The planning process would proceed in a parallel path to determine if the project meets the code requirements. The expedited process would require additional efforts, including the use of consultants to complete the work, and the Stanley Hotel would pay for the costs incurred by the Town. Without the expedited process the credit enhancement financing would not be available to complete the privately financed project. She emphasized the commitment of the Stanley Hotel to ensure the voters have the information needed to make an informed decision on the sale and the project. The project would created 100 construction jobs, 60 new primary jobs, a new revenue source, a year around facility, new property, sales and lodging tax funding, a partnership with EMPC and help brand Estes Park. The loss of this unique project would have immediate and long term consequences. Board of Trustees – October 22, 2013 – Page 4 Town Board Comments. Mayor Pro Tem Blackhurst stated that until the Board is presented with a contract and an appraisal there can be no act. He supports the project but the timeframe for the voters is too quick. Trustee Elrod commented the contract and appraisal would be presented at the November 12, 2013 meeting, and if approved the Board would set a special election date. The unique project at no cost to the community should be presented to the votes for a decision. Trustee Norris agreed the community should weigh in on the project at the polls. He stated concern that the complex project be given careful consideration without skipping steps in the review process and allow for public input. The use classification for the project and the expedited review schedule may be the limiting factors for whether or not the project can be completed before the end of the year. An April election would allow for an adequate review; however, he could support taking the next steps, including an appraisal and contract. Trustee Koenig voiced support in taking the next steps to determine if a viable contract can be completed. Trustee Ericson commented the project could be beneficial to the community; however, he has concerns with the content of the project, the timing, and the need to expedite. Trustee Phipps agreed the project presented has inconsistencies and changes with each review. He stated the Board has a duty to ensure the project details are clear before moving it forward to a vote. The development plan needs to be detailed and should go through the regular review process. After further discussion, it was moved and seconded (Elrod/Norris) to direct staff to proceed with the outlined process for the sale of Lot 4, Stanley Historic District and the development review for the Anschutz/Stanley Wellness Center as outlined with an additional check point at the November 12, 2013 Town Board Meeting, and the motion was a tie vote Trustees Elrod, Koenig and Norris voting “Yes” and Mayor Pro Tem Blackhurst, Trustees Phipps and Ericson voting “No”. Mayor Pinkham voted “Yes” to break the tie and the motion passed. It was moved and seconded (Blackhurst/Phipps) to extend the meeting until the 10:30 p.m., and it passed with Trustee Ericson voting “No”. Mayor Pinkham called for a recess at 10:00 p.m. and resumed the meeting at 10:10 p.m. 2. RESOLUTION #31-13 ESTES PARK LOCAL MARKETING DISTRICT BUSINESS AND OPERATING PLAN FOR 2014. Visit Estes Park Executive Director & CEO Campbell presented the Local Marketing District (LMD) 2014 Operating Plan, including the budget. She stated the budget presented would be updated in light of the flood and its affect on local tourism. The LMD receives its funding from the 2% lodging tax collected and remitted quarterly by lodging establishments. The announcement by the Department of Revenue to allow a delay in payment until the end of the year could negatively affect the viability of the organization. To date the LMD has laid off 2 employees and all vendors continue to work without payment. Staff continues to investigate other funding sources such as grants to close the gap on the delayed revenues from the State. As the organization has completed major projects such as a new website, economic studies, branding, and DMO accreditation from the Destination Marketing Association International, the 2014 budget would focus on marketing the community and increasing revenues in the future. Board of Trustees – October 22, 2013 – Page 5 Charley Dickey/Town citizen and business owner stated appreciation for the common message delivered from all the business sectors in the aftermath of the flood. He stated there should be a funding mechanism for situations such as these. It was moved and seconded (Norris/Ericson) to approve Resolution #31-13, and it passed with Mayor Pro Tem Blackhurst recusing himself. It was moved and seconded (Koenig/Norris) to extend the meeting until the completion of the agenda, and it passed with Mayor Pro Tem Blackhurst abstaining. 3. TREE TRIMMING CONTRACT FOR 2014-2018. Director Bergsten stated an RFP was completed for a five year tree trimming contract starting January 2014 through 2018. Quotes were received from three vendors including Asplundh Tree Expert Co., Adam’s Tree Service and Wright Tree Service. Although the Town currently contracts with Wright Tree Service, the low bidder, staff recommends contracting with Adam’s Tree Service, a local company. Wright Tree Service has not been available since the flood, therefore, staff contracted with Adam’s Tree Service to perform necessary tree removal during the flood recovery. The work performance, cooperation, quality work and reliability have been recognized during the past four weeks. Mayor Pro Tem Blackhurst requested the item be delayed until the Board has been presented the proposed budget during the budget study sessions. It was moved and seconded (Ericson/Blackhurst) to table the issue until the November 12, 2013 meeting. The motion did not carry as a substitute motion was presented. Johanna Darden/Town citizen commented that Adam’s Tree Service provides excellent service. It was moved and seconded (Koenig/Elrod) to award the 2014 – 2018 Tree Trimming Contract to Adam’s Tree Service for a five-year term with each of the last four years being contingent upon work performance of contract obligations of the previous year and budget appropriations, and it passed unanimously. 4. ENGINEERING CONTRACT FOR ELM ROAD ENVIRONMENTAL IMPROVEMENT/MITIGATION MASTER PLAN. Mayor Pro Tem Blackhurst and Trustee Phipps requested the item be delayed to the November 12, 2013 because of missing attachments to the contract. It was moved and seconded (Norris/Blackhurst) to table the item to the November 12, 2013 meeting, and it passed unanimously. 3. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS. Items reviewed by Planning Commission or staff for Town Board Final Action. 1. CONSENT ITEMS: A. PRELIMINARY PLAT, Mountain River Townhomes, Metes & Bounds parcel, 650 Moraine Avenue; Item Tabled until the Estes Valley Planning Commission provides a recommendation to the Town Board. B. AMENDED PLAT, Estes Park Medical Center, Rezoning Request, and Special Review 2013-03, All Hospital Addition, Lot 18 and a portion of Lot 17, Little Prospect Mountain Addition, 555 Prospect Avenue, 161 1/2, 163, & 165 Stanley Circle Drive; Item Tabled until the Estes Valley Planning Commission provides a recommendation to the Town Board. Board of Trustees – October 22, 2013 – Page 6 C. PRELIMINARY PLAT, The Sanctuary on Fall River Townhomes, Tract 59A, Amended Plat of Tracts 59, 61, 62, & 63, Fall River Addition, Item Tabled until the Estes Valley Planning Commission provides a recommendation to the Town Board. It was moved and seconded (Norris/Blackhurst) to approve the Planning Commission consent agenda as presented, and it passed unanimously. 3. REPORTS AND DISCUSSION ITEMS: 1. MULTI-PURPOSE EVENT CENTER & STALL BARN CONSTRUCTION UPDATE. Director Zurn updated the Board on the construction activities for the stall barn stating completion of perimeter metal siding and roof panels, exterior door frames and exterior stone work has begun, and interior painting of structural members to begin. MPEC structural steel frame is 50% complete and the underground exterior civil site work has begun. Staff continues negotiations with Dohn Construction for a revised schedule due to the flood. The project remains within budget if the highways open by December 1, 2013 as projected by the State. 2. PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICE QUARTERLY REPORT. Public Information Officer Rusch provided a review of the past quarter activities, including flood response and recovery efforts, public information and involvement planning, and social media. Most notably, staff was involved in the operations of the joint information center during the flood; facilitation of communication related to Park closure, MPEC and stall barn construction, Visitor Center parking structure design, and bear education task force; and use of social media as of August 13, 2013. 3. TOWN BOARD COMMENTS / LIAISON REPORTS. Trustee Elrod stated the Estes Valley Planning Commission received an update from staff on the modernization of the Comprehensive Plan. The update has been extended by three to four months due to staff efforts addressing issues related to the flood. Trustee Ericson reminded citizens the Community Development / Community Services meeting would be held on Thursday, October 24, 2013 at 8:00 a.m. in the Board Room. He stated the Board would hold budget study session meetings on October 25 and November 1, 2013. Mayor Pinkham attended a meeting with Governor Hickenlooper and other Colorado Representative where it was announced $425 million has been dedicated to road repairs. 4. TOWN ADMINISTRATOR REPORT. None. Whereupon Mayor Pinkham adjourned the meeting at 11:03 p.m. William C. Pinkham, Mayor Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado October 15, 2013 Minutes of a Study Session meeting of the TOWN BOARD of the Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held at Town Hall in the Board Room in said Town of Estes Park on the 15th day of October, 2013. Board: Mayor Pinkham, Mayor Pro Tem Blackhurst, Trustees Elrod, Ericson, Koenig, Norris and Phipps Attending: All Also Attending: Town Administrator Lancaster, Town Attorney White and Town Clerk Williamson Absent: None Mayor Pinkham called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m. STANLEY WELLNESS CENTER PRESENTATION John Cullen/Stanley Hotel owner presented the Town Board with a proposal to develop a wellness center on Lot 4, Stanley Historic District, currently owned by the Town of Estes Park. The center would be a fitness and dietary learning center with long term stay facilities for its guests. The Stanley Hotel has partnered with the Anschutz Medical Center to create a collaborative relationship with the Estes Park Medical Center to provide medical support to the center. The center would be the first of 6 wellness centers across Colorado in an effort to begin marketing Colorado for medical tourism, an effort backed by Governor Hickenlooper. The first center was to be in Telluride because a building already exists; however, the focus turned to Estes Park as it is easier to get to. The center would bring new clientele to Estes Park and provide a year around revenue source. The Stanley Hotel lost funding from Morgan Stanley for the project after the flood due to access issues; however, new private funding has been secured with the backing of credit enhancement grants good through December 31, 2013. Mr. Cullen commented he is prepared to spend the necessary time and money needed to have the project proceed through an expedited development process, and requested the sale of Lot 4 be presented to the voters during a special election before the end of the year. The cost of consultants to review the development plan for the Town and to hold an election would be funded by the Stanley Hotel. The Anschutz Wellness Center would not compete with the proposed Community Wellness Center being considered by the Estes Valley Recreation and Park District. The Wellness Center would be for patrons only and would not have many of the facilities being proposed by the Community Center such as a large competition pool, indoor walking track, meeting rooms, etc. Trustee Phipps stated concern the Stanley Wellness Center and the Community Center may conflict with each other. He sees the wellness center as an extension of the Stanley Hotel campus, and would not service the community. Attorney White commented the development plan agreement for Lot 4 expired in 2009 as well as the requirements of the Stanley Master Plan for the property. The Estes Valley Planning Commission would review the development plan, not a Technical Review Committee. Lucia Liley/Stanley Hotel Land Use Attorney stated the Stanley would propose a development agreement for the property in order to protect it and the use of the Stanley Master Plan guidelines. Trustee Norris commented the Town has an obligation to the citizens to determine the highest use for the property before any sale to a private land owner. He commented the Town Board Study Session – October 15, 2013 – Page 2 project could be beneficial to the community and could fit with the new branding strategy of family health. He questioned who the facility would attract, how the programming would be different than the Community Center, the timeline of the expedited process, and if other locations have been considered. The project has merit and he questioned if the Stanley could get an extension on the funds. Mr. Cullins stated the Wellness Center would attract families with disposable income that do not come to Estes Park currently. The Wellness Center would be a high-end medically oriented facility with new talent brought in to present rotating series of lectures and research. Ms. Liley stated the Stanley would need to complete the planning process by the end of December in conjunction with a special election in December for the sale of the property. Mr. Cullins stated he has pledged the Stanley Hotel as collateral, and therefore, it is necessary that the new facility be near the Stanley Hotel. Trustee Ericson stated there could be alternative uses for the property or other development proposals that may be presented, if it was known the Town was selling the property. He raised the fact that the Stanley Hotel was involved with the Issue Committee Friends of Stanley Lot 4 and provided financing for the group which brought forward the current ordinance requiring a vote prior to the sale of Lot 4. Mayor Pro Tem Blackhurst recommended a contract be developed for the Board to review, which would require the completion of an appraisal. He commented on the need to further discuss the sale of Lot 4 and the uses of the property. Town Administrator Lancaster stated staff’s first priority to the community would be rebuilding the community; therefore, the development review would be conducted by a consultant at the expense of the applicant. The Town would bring in the necessary resources to complete the review. The Board discussed the next steps and whether or not to move forward with determining if the project review and election could be conducted before the end of the year. Comments have been summarized: would support bringing the project forward for the citizens to vote on the sale; the Board needs to hear from the groups and individuals that would be impacted or have expressed concerns such as the Senior Center, Museum and the EVRPD; need to see a development plan; the Board needs to have a discussion on what the Town would like to do with the property; would only be comfortable moving forward with obtaining an appraisal and review a sales contract; the expedited timeline appears to be extremely aggressive; and the Town has an obligation to take a detailed package forward for the voters in order for them to make a reasonable decision. Attorney White stated staff would meet with the Stanley Hotel representatives to develop milestones; however, the development and the election would have to move down parallel paths in order to complete the development review by the end of the year. After further discussion, it was the general consensus of the Board to bring the item forward to the November 12, 2013 meeting to review and determine if a timeline can be established to complete the development review and hold an election in December, with the understanding that an outside consultant would be hired for the development review. It was further agreed that staff and the Stanley Hotel representatives would begin the appraisal process and the development of a sales contract with contingencies, such as the property would be limited to the use as a Wellness Center, must meet all code requirements, etc. There being no further business, Mayor Pinkham adjourned the meeting at 5:35 p.m. Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, October 22, 2013 Minutes of a Regular meeting of the TOWN BOARD STUDY SESSION of the Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held in Town Hall in said Town of Estes Park on the 22nd day of October, 2013. Board: Mayor Pinkham, Mayor Pro Tem Blackhurst, Trustees Elrod, Ericson, Koenig, Norris, and Phipps Attending: All. Also Attending: Town Administrator Lancaster, Town Attorney White, Town Clerk Williamson, Police Chief Kufeld, Police Commander Pass and Recording Secretary Limmiatis Absent: None Mayor Pinkham called the meeting to order at 4:30 p.m. TRUSTEE COMMENTS. None FUTURE STUDY SESSION AGENDA ITEMS. Trustee Phipps requested clarification with the difference between the Parking Structure Design Review and the Review of the Accelerated Development and Design Process Used for Parking Structure. Town Administrator Lancaster stated one is for reviewing the design; the other is for reviewing the process used to achieve the design. Trustee Ericson requested staff schedule and prioritize items not currently scheduled. He expressed concern the review of Town property has not been made top priority since the flood. Town Administrator Lancaster stated that staff would attempt to schedule the items but may need further direction from the Board. SALES TAX INITIATIVE. Town Administrator Lancaster questioned if the Board would like to continue discussions on a sales tax initiative for the April 1, 2014 municipal election in light of the recent flooding event. Board discussion followed: Trustee Norris stated support for moving the sales tax question forward to the voters in April; Mayor Pro Tem Blackhurst questioned increasing the sales tax on the few visitors that are coming, and the public opinion on the proposed initiative, and Mayor Pinkham suggested the Board receive input from the local businesses. The Board consensus was to move forward with the initiative; however, they requested the one percent increase sunset in 10 years rather than the 15 years originally discussed. TOWN BOARD COMPENSATION. Staff reviewed the compensation data provided to the Board in 2012 and found that only two communities have changed their compensation packages – Steamboat Springs and Blackhawk. Several factors were identified to guide future discussion, such as review of the budget in March to make recommendations prior to the April election, public impression of increasing Board compensation, fairness of compensation, and ability of compensation to cover health insurance premiums. Trustee Elrod suggested creating an incremental increase schedule that would avoid a situation in which a high increase would be needed in the future. The Board requested staff investigate the possibility of a multi-year increase schedule that could be enacted, and to make sure insurance premiums are covered. Staff would bring several scenarios to the Board for their review prior to March. Town Board Study Session – October 22, 2013 – Page 2 REVIEW OF LIQUOR VIOLATION GUIDELINES & PROCESS. The Board reviewed public comment received since the October 8, 2013 Town Board meeting on liquor violation guidelines. Staff requested direction from the Board on how to proceed with developing revised guidelines. Commander Pass presented the possibility of using the Restorative Justice Program as an innovative tool to address the concerns of accountability, consistency, and fairness of the consequences when a liquor licensee violates the liquor code. The Board discussed and recommended staff move forward with revising the guidelines to align the with State guidelines, best practices and procedures, provide additional training opportunities, and review the possibility of utilizing Restorative Justice as allowed by the liquor code. The Board directed staff to review the four outstanding violations utilizing the current guidelines. There being no further business, Mayor Pinkham adjourned the meeting at 6:11 p.m. Barbara Jo Limmiatis, Recording Secretary Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, October 24, 2013 Minutes of a Regular meeting of the COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT / COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMITTEE of the Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held in Town Hall in said Town of Estes Park on the 24nd day of October, 2013. Committee: Chair Ericson, Trustees Elrod and Norris Attending: All Also Attending: Town Administrator Lancaster, Directors Chilcott & Zurn, Museum Director Fortini, Shuttle Coordinator Wells, Chief Building Official/Floodplain Manager Birchfield, and Recording Secretary Limmiatis Absent: None Chair Ericson called the meeting to order at 8:00 a.m. PUBLIC COMMENT. Outgoing Ambassador President Sandy Osterman introduced Mare Bradley, the newly appointed Ambassador President. Ms. Bradley expressed her excitement over her new position and looks forward to getting to know the Town Board and community. COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT. REPORTS. Reports provided for informational purposes and made a part of the proceedings.  Museum Quarterly Report – Director Fortini informed the committee the Museum did not suffer any damage to the facilities due to the recent flooding, although approximately one hundred feet of pipe (penstock) is now exposed at the hydroplant. With extra hours put in by staff, the Museum was able to complete the opening of the Sandzén exhibit on time. This was the first community event to happen after the flood and the reception was well received. Trustee Elrod asked for a clarification of the de-accession process. Director Fortini explained when artifacts no longer fit within the mission or scope of the collection, either due to deterioration or are no longer of historical value, staff attempts to find other institutions that will benefit from these items. If no institution can be found that is willing to accept these artifacts, staff will reach out to individuals. Not much monetary value is generated during the de-accession process, but a high value is placed on the rapport that is created with other institutions. Director Fortini informed the Committee they are attempting to train the docents to lead the Downtown Walking tours on a consistent basis so people know to go downtown at a specific time and place to be able to go on a tour. Administrator Lancaster pointed out we have all recently lived through a historical moment and asked if the museum staff has considered taking in items to remember the flood of September 2013. Director Fortini stated staff is crafting a policy on accepting digital photos that relate to the flood. Staff anticipates to start building the history in January 2014.  Year End Shuttle Report – Shuttle Coordinator Wells reported a 52.3% increase in ridership in 2013. The trolley was one of the main contributing factors for the increase. It is assumed a large portion of the riders were locals and summer workers. The daily average increased by approximately 55%. Staff received a number of requests to start the buses earlier in the day. Trustee Norris remarked how the intention of the shuttles was to reduce traffic, but an unexpected benefit of community bonding has also occurred. Elderly members of the population are riding to get out of the house and socialize. Coordinator Wells stated there has been an increase in the use of mobile devices to retrieve shuttle information Community Development / Community Services – October 24, 2013 – Page 2 corresponding to a reduction in calls to the Visitor Center for information. Additional discussion with local businesses would take place prior to the 2014 season to address shuttle stop locations. The Committee was very impressed with the increase in ridership and commended Coordinator Wells for his work.  Verbal Updates: o Ambassadors – Director Winslow stated staff has completed a Memorandum of Understanding with the Ambassadors. o Visitor Center – Several new computers were installed in the lobby for visitors. o Rodeo – The Town was again in the top 5 of the medium size Rodeo and asked to give several presentations at PRCA. o Scandinavian Festival – This event would return in the summer of 2014 as a Town sponsored event. o Fall Back Beer Festival – This new event would be held Saturday, November 2, 2013 at Riverside Plaza and include beer brewing demonstrations, tastings and pairings with local restaurants. o Tree Lighting Ceremony – This year’s event would include honoring local heroes from the flood event. o Staff Update – Director Winslow informed the Committee on the various activities the Community Services staff was involved in during the flood such as coordinating food, fuel, and equipment deliveries, finding housing and helping with the Disaster Assistance Center. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. REPORTS. Reports provided for informational purposes and made a part of the proceedings.  Floodplain Management Report Post Flood – Chief Building Official Birchfield, acting as the Town’s Floodplain Manager, described the four floodplains in Town – Black Canyon, Fish Creek, Fall River and the Big Thompson. He stated since the Town of Estes Park participates in the National Flood Insurance Program any property owner, including renters, can purchase flood insurance. The Development Code has regulations that exceed the national guidelines, which help staff manage the local floodplains properly. The Fish Creek and Fall River floodplains incurred substantial damage in the recent flood, including the rivers moving up to 50 feet in some places, the tremendous amount of deposited material, stream beds have risen and been lowered, mud slides, rock slides, major erosion in minor drainage channels, and damage to infrastructure along the rivers. Some lots are no longer developable. Lots that used to be conforming are no longer due to the movement of the water channel. He stated about half of the 7,500 buildings in the Estes Valley have been effected by this event, with one home considered substantially damaged, only the garage remains. Fourteen additional buildings have received some structural damage, but are repairable. All of the damaged structures are outside of the one percent chance floodplain. The maps that were being used to manage the floodplain are no longer accurate. Birchfield informed the Committee that the Community Development Department has stopped issuing permits for permanent construction and enacted a temporary suspension on issuing permits for existing and new building permits along waterways. Individuals are not allowed to reclaim their land or reconfigure the waterways to pre-flood conditions; however, temporary work to stabilize banks, shore up buildings, repair bridges and protect investments continues to be allowed. The suspension ends on November 12, 2013. As the Floodplain Manager, Birchfield relies on the high water mark to manage the floodplains. He stated staff has three to four people in the field collecting data to aid in future decisions about the floodplains in the valley. In the short term, staff continues to focus on the major concerns of bank stabilization prior to the ground freezing and spring runoff, the remobilization of fine materials, and the shortage of available construction materials. Fish Creek and Fall River floodplains have been made Community Development / Community Services – October 24, 2013 – Page 3 the highest priority. Director Chilcott has identified public and private financial resources available to restore the waterways. Private property owners are responsible for their bank stabilization. REVISION TO TOWN FLOODPLAIN REGULATIONS. The State of Colorado has updated floodplain regulations, therefore, the Town has until January 14, 2014 to get updated regulations in place to be in compliance. In reviewing the Municipal Code, it was noticed there was a typo in the Appeals Board in the Floodplain Ordinance, which should be the Board of Appeals rather than the Board of Adjustment. The revised regulations come from the Colorado Water Conservation Board and are higher than the National Flood Insurance Program. There were three major changes: redefine the floodway from a 12 inch rise to a 6 inch rise, free board standards will increase to one foot or more, and one may elevate a building out of the floodplain, but may not in turn install a basement. Additional changes include items which are already taking place administratively. Section 17.28.090 of the Municipal Code would require an engineer to apply for a floodplain development permit and upon completion of the work a Floodway No Rise Certificate shall be submitted by the engineer of record. PUBLIC COMMENT. Cory LaBianca/town resident, questioned if floodplains are associated with natural waterways not associated with the rivers. CBO Birchfield reported that the floodplain ordinance does not regulate natural waterways, but it is addressed in the Development Code. Chuck Bonds/town resident questioned how the National Flood Insurance Program arrives at their reimbursement numbers. He thanked Town staff in helping him address building and flooding issues, and requested additional staff for the building division to address the ongoing issues. Director Chilcott stated the Natural Resource Conservation Service has a program that addresses restoration of streams and rivers and would be providing support for rehabilitation in the valley. REPORTS. Reports provided for informational purposes and made a part of the proceedings.  Community Development Monthly Report –Director Chilcott, stated all activities outside of flood related issues are being postponed. The Community Development Department is attempting to keep up with the basic activities that must be completed, but most staff activity has been focused on flood recovery. Staff would resume the Comprehensive Plan update as soon as possible. TEMPORARY SIGN POLICY. This topic was not discussed at the meeting. There being no further business, Chair Ericson adjourned the meeting at 10:02 a.m. Barbara Jo Limmiatis, Recording Secretary   Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, October 24th, 2013  Minutes of a Regular meeting of the Tree Board of the Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado.  Meeting held in the Administration Conference Room of Town Hall Room 150 in said Town of Estes  Park on the 24th day of October, 2013.   Present:  Celine Lebeau    Barbara Williams    Chris Reed    Dewain Lockwood  Also Present: Scott Zurn, Director of Public Works     Kevin McEachern, Public Works Operations Manager     Jen Imber, Public Works Secretary      Brian Berg, Municipal Service Worker‐Parks Division    Rex Poggenpohl, Resident  Absent:  Apryle Craig  Scott Zurn called the meeting to order at 4:10 p.m.    GENERAL BUSINESS  Minutes from the July 18, 2013, Tree Board meeting were reviewed by members. It was moved and  seconded (Williams/Lebeau) to approve the minutes and it passed unanimously.  The board discussed setting a schedule to hold future monthly meetings. Beginning in November, Tree  Board meetings will be held on the third Thursday of each month for the duration of one hour, with a  starting time of 4:00 pm.  EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS  Jen Imber and Brian Berg updated the board on the success of recently held educational programs.  Merle Moore’s “Native Plant Walk”, first held on August 14th, received such a positive response from  the community and registration for the 20‐person capacity filled so quickly that an encore of the  program was held on August 27th. Due to a scheduling conflict, Scott Roederer’s RMNP Tree  Identification workshop, originally scheduled for September 13th, was cancelled. Mr. Roederer is willing  to reschedule this workshop in the spring of 2014. Dave Leatherman’s Tree Ecology program,  scheduled for October 3rd, was cancelled due to the flooding event and loss of roads into Town. Mr.  Leatherman would like to keep open the option of rescheduling the program sometime in 2014.  The Estes Park Garden Club expressed interest in collaborating with the Tree Board on a Tree Disease  seminar, to be held in March of 2014, and asked the Tree Board to recommend an expert in the area to  speak at the seminar. Board members suggested Boyd Lebeda of the Colorado State Forest Service. Mr.  Lebeda has worked with the Tree Board on activities in the past, including Arbor Day events.    AMERICA IN BLOOM AWARDS  Brian Berg updated the board on the awards Estes Park received from the America In Bloom program.  Keri Kelly attended the AIB Symposium and Awards Ceremony in September, and brought home three  awards for Estes Park’s first entry. Awards received include the Outstanding Achievement Award for  Landscape Areas, Most Effective Use of Bold Foliage and the nationwide winner in the population  category of 4,001‐7,000 residents.  Scott Zurn adjourned the meeting at 4:35 pm.  Town Attorney Memo To: Honorable Mayor Pinkham Board of Trustees Town Administrator Lancaster From: Gregory A. White, Town Attorney Date: November 7, 2013 RE: Ordinance No. 15-13 Approving Contract to Buy and Sell Real Estate - Lot 4 of the Stanley Historic District Objective: Review and consider approving a Contract to Buy and Sell Lot 4 of the Stanley Historic District to Grand Heritage Hotel Group, LLC (the “Buyer”). Present Situation: On October 22, 2013, the Town Board approved the request by the Buyer for the Town Board to consider the sale of Lot 4 of the Stanley Historic District to the Buyer for the Buyer’s proposed Wellness Center Project. The Buyer’s request included development of an expedited review process for the Project, review and preparation of a contract for purchase of Lot 4, an ordinance approving the contract, a resolution setting a special election which is necessary to meet the requirements of Section 17.44.090 of the Municipal Code which requires voter approval of the terms and consideration of any sale of Town owned property within the Stanley Historic District. The Town Board also requested an appraisal of the property. All of the documents were to be presented to the Town Board for consideration at its November 12, 2013 regular meeting. The Board packet contains the following documents: 1. Appraisal effective November 2, 2013 for Lot 4 2. Proposed Contract to Buy and Sell Real Estate for Lot 4 3. Ordinance approving the Contract 4. Resolution setting a special election on December 17, 2013 including the form of the ballot question 5. Copy of relevant portions of the land use application filing for the Stanley Wellness Project Proposal: The Buyer has proposed to purchase Lot 4 from the Town pursuant to the terms and conditions of the Contract. The Contract is specifically contingent upon all necessary land use approvals for the project being completed by January 30, 2014, and approval of the sale of Lot 4 pursuant to the terms of the Contract at a special election to be held on December 17, 2013. Advantages:  If the Contract is approved by the Town Board, the sale is approved by the voters at the special election of December 17, 2013, and all land use approvals for the project are accomplished by January 30, 2014, Lot 4 will be sold to the Buyer for the purchase price.  Operation of the project on Lot 4 would provide revenue to the Town from sales tax revenues and lodging tax revenues to the LMD. Construction of the project would provide construction related revenues to those participating in construction of the project.  Operation of the project would provide employment opportunities and increase visitation to the Estes Valley. Disadvantages:  The review process is expedited and compressed to meet the January 30, 2014 land use approval contingency in the Contract. .  The special election on December 17, 2013, will be a poll ballot election and not a mail ballot election. Action Recommended: The consideration of Ordinance No. 15-13 is a policy decision by the Town Board and Staff has no recommendation. Budget: Closing of the property will result in revenue to the Town of the purchase price of the property. The Buyer has entered into a Reimbursement Agreement with the Town agreeing to reimburse the Town for costs incurred by the Town for the appraisal, an outside consultant to provide planning assistance to the Community Development Department for review of the project, and costs of the special election. Level of Public Interest Extremely high. Sample Motion: I move to adopt/not adopt Ordinance No. 15-13 approving the Contract to Buy and Sell Real Estate for the purchase of Lot 4 of the Stanley Historic District by the Buyer. 1 ORDINANCE NO. 15-13 AN ORDINANCE APPROVING THE CONTRACT TO BUY AND SELL REAL ESTATE FOR THE SALE OF LOT 4, STANLEY HISTORIC DISTRICT SUBDIVISION TO GRAND HERITAGE HOTEL GROUP, LLC WHEREAS, Section 31-15-713 (1)(b) C.R.S. provides that the Town of Estes Park, Colorado (“Town”), by ordinance, may dispose of any property not held or used for park purposes or any governmental purpose upon terms and conditions the Board of Trustees of the Town (“Board of Trustees”) may determine; and WHEREAS, an Initiated Ordinance Petition was filed with the Town Clerk on November 20, 2007, and referred to the electors of the Town by the Board of Trustees on December 11, 2007; and WHEREAS, Initiated Ordinance No. 29-07 provided that the Estes Park Municipal Code be amended by the addition of Section 17.44.090 to read: “Before any sale of any property owned by the Town of Estes Park within the Stanley Historic District, the question of such sale and the terms and consideration thereof shall be submitted and approved at a regular or special election” ; and WHEREAS, Initiated Ordinance No. 29-07 was adopted by the electors of the Town at the Municipal Election on April 1, 2008; and WHEREAS, Grand Heritage Hotel Group, LLC (the “Buyer”) has presented the Board of Trustees with a Contract to Buy and Sell Real Estate (the “Contract”). The form of the Contract is set forth on Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference; and WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees has reviewed the Contract, taken public comment, and determined that Lot 4, Plat of Lots 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8,and 9 of the Stanley Historic District Subdivision, Town of Estes Park (“Lot 4”), shall be sold according to the terms and conditions of the Contract. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO AS FOLLOWS: 2 1. The Contract to Buy and Sell Real Estate, in substantially the form as set forth on Exhibit A, is approved, and the Mayor or, in the absence thereof, the Mayor Pro Tem is authorized and directed to execute the Contract for and on behalf of the Town, but with such minor changes therein as shall be consistent with Exhibit A and as the Town Attorney and the Mayor or Mayor Pro Tem shall approve, the execution thereof being deemed conclusive of the approval of any such changes. 2. Pursuant to the terms and conditions of Section 17.44.090 of the Municipal Code, the question of the sale of Lot 4 pursuant to the terms and conditions of the Contract shall be submitted to the electors of the Town at a Special Election on December 17, 2013. 3. If the sale of Lot 4 pursuant to the Contract is approved at the Special Election of December 17, 2013, the appropriate elected officials and administrative staff of the Town are hereby authorized to close the sale of Lot 4 according to the terms and conditions of the Contract without further action and approval of the Board of Trustees. 4. All land use applications in connection with the project described in the Contract which have been executed by the Town Administrator on behalf of the Town as owner of Lot 4, are hereby ratified; and the Town Administrator is authorized to execute any other land use applications and/or any other documents to process the approval of the project described in the Contract through the Town’s land use application process including, but not limited to, special review applications and an amended subdivision plat. 5. 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 _______________, 2013. 3 TOWN OF ESTES PARK Mayor ATTEST: Town Clerk I hereby certify that the above ordinance was introduced and read at a meeting of the Board of Trustees on the ________day of _____________, 2013 and published in a newspaper of general publication in the Town of Estes Park, Colorado, on the day of __________________, 2013. Town Clerk 11-8-13 CONTRACT TO BUY AND SELL REAL ESTATE 1. Contract. Buyer agrees to buy and Seller agrees to sell the Property on the terms and conditions set forth in this Contract. 2. Defined Terms. (a) Buyer. Buyer is GRAND HERITAGE HOTEL GROUP, LLC, a Maryland limited liability company. (b) Seller. Seller is THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO, a municipal corporation. (c) Property. The Property is the following-described real estate together with the interests, easements, rights, and benefits appurtenant thereto, and all interests of Seller in strips and gores of land, vacated streets and alleys adjacent thereto: Lot 4, Plat of Lots 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9 of the Stanley Historic District Subdivision of a portion of Tracts 4 and 5, Stanley Addition to Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado. (d) Project. The Project shall mean a Wellness Training Center primarily focused on lifestyle changes, physical fitness and training, nutrition and medical/personal care treatment, with associated facilities and lodging. (e) MEC (mutual execution of the Contract). MEC shall mean the date upon which both parties have signed this Contract as indicated next to their signatures on this Contract. (f) Due Diligence Deadline. The Due Diligence Deadline shall be the date that is ninety (90) days after MEC. (g) Final Approval. Final Approval shall mean final approval by the Town Board of the Seller (“Town Board”) no later than January 31, 2014 (or, at Buyer’s option, extension to a date beyond January 31, 2014 but no later than March 17, 2014) of all land use applications filed by Buyer in connection with the Project (“Land Use Applications”) and of any action necessary to permit the design of the buildings within the Project to be compatible with the colors and architecture of the Stanley Hotel Complex, including but not limited to, the use of red roofs and white walls (“Building Design Action”), and thereafter expiration of all rights of any person or entity to challenge the Town Board’s approval of the Land Use Application and the Building Design Action by referendum or litigation. Nothing in this Paragraph 2(g) shall be construed as requiring the Town Board to approve the Land Use Applications or the Building Design Action, and any such approvals shall be made in accordance with applicable provisions of Town ordinances and regulations governing the Project. 11-8-13 2 (h) Buyer's Activities. Buyer’s Activities shall mean surveys, soil tests, engineering tests, environmental audits and tests, feasibility studies, appraisals and any other studies, inspections or investigations Buyer deems reasonably necessary or appropriate in evaluating the Property for the Project. (i) Studies and Reports. Studies and Reports shall mean all plans, plats, studies, surveys, soils reports, geotechnical reports, environmental audits, drainage studies and reports, utility plans, street designs, landscape plans, traffic studies and reports, appraisals, and all other documents, studies, and reports relating to the Property. “Studies and Reports” shall not include any information of a confidential or privileged nature. 3. Purchase Price and Terms. The purchase price of the Property is ONE MILLION SIX HUNDRED FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS ($1,650,000 ) which shall be paid by Buyer as follows: (a) Earnest Money. An amount equal to ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($100,000.00) shall be paid by Buyer to Stewart Title Company (the “Title Company”) within three (3) business days after approval by the Town Board of the Seller of all Land Use Applications in connection with the Project as specified in Paragraph 2(f) above. The Earnest Money shall be deposited in an interest bearing account. The Earnest Money and all interest earned thereon, shall be referred to as the “Earnest Money.” If this Contract is terminated by the Buyer prior to the Due Diligence Deadline, all Earnest Money shall be promptly returned to the Buyer and, except as provided in Section 6(a) of this Contract, upon return of the Earnest Money all parties shall be released from all obligations hereunder. If Buyer does not terminate this Contract prior to the Due Diligence Deadline, the Earnest Money shall be non- refundable for any reason other than a default by the Seller in the performance of Seller’s obligations under this Contract or a new title Exception disclosed to Buyer after the Due Diligence Deadline that is not acceptable to Buyer as provided in Section 5(a) of this Contract. The Earnest Money shall be applied to the Purchase Price at Closing. (b) Cash at Closing. The balance of the purchase price subject to closing costs and customary prorations, shall be payable by Buyer to Seller at Closing in funds which comply with all applicable Colorado laws, which include cash, electronic transfer funds, certified check, or savings and loan teller check (“Good Funds”). 4. Evidence of Title. (a) Commitment. Within ten (10) days after MEC (“Title Deadline”), Seller, at Seller’s expense, shall cause to be furnished to Buyer a current commitment for an owner’s title insurance policy in an amount equal to the purchase price (“the Commitment”) from the Title Company . The Commitment shall commit to delete or insure over the standard exceptions which relate to: (1) parties in possession; (2) unrecorded easements; (3) survey matters; (4) unrecorded mechanic’s liens; (5) gap 11-8-13 3 period (effective date of the Commitment to date the deed is recorded); and (6) unpaid taxes, assessments, and unredeemed tax sales prior to the closing. (b) Copies of Exceptions. On or before the Title Deadline, Seller, at Seller’s expense, shall furnish to Buyer (1) a copy of any plats, declaration, covenants, conditions, and restrictions burdening the Property; and (2) copies of any other documents (or, if illegible, summaries of such documents) listed in the schedule of exceptions in the Commitment (“the Exceptions”). This requirement shall pertain only to documents as shown of record in the office of the Clerk and Recorder of Larimer County, Colorado. The Commitment, Survey, and copies or summaries of the Exceptions constitute the title documents (“the Title Documents”). 5. Title. (a) Title Review. Buyer shall have the right to inspect the Title Documents. Written notice by Buyer of unmerchantability of title or of any other unsatisfactory title condition shown by the Title Documents shall be signed by or on behalf of Buyer and given to Seller on or before the Due Diligence Deadline, or within fifteen (15) calendar days after receipt by Buyer of any Title Document(s) or endorsement(s) adding new Exception(s) to the Commitment, together with a copy of the Title Document adding the new Exception(s) to title. If Seller does not receive Buyer’s notice by the date(s) specified above, Buyer accepts the condition of title as disclosed by the Title Documents as satisfactory. (b) Matters Not Shown by the Public Records. Seller shall disclose to Buyer, on or before the Title Deadline all easements, liens, leases, or other title matters not shown by the public records of which Seller has actual knowledge. Buyer shall have the right to inspect the Property to determine whether any third party or parties has any right in the Property not shown by the public records (such as an unrecorded easement, unrecorded lease, or boundary line discrepancy). Written notice of any unsatisfactory condition(s) disclosed by Seller or revealed by such inspection shall be signed by or on behalf of Buyer and given to Seller on or before the Due Diligence Deadline. If Seller does not receive Buyer’s notice by said date, Buyer accepts title subject to such rights, if any, of third parties of which Buyer has actual knowledge. (c) Right to Cure. If Seller receives notice of unmerchantability of title or any other unsatisfactory title condition(s) or Commitment terms as provided in Section 4(a) or (b) of this Contract, Seller shall use reasonable effort to correct said items and bear any nominal expense not to exceed One Thousand and 00/100 Dollars ($1,000.00) to correct the same prior to Closing. If such unsatisfactory title condition(s) are not corrected on or before the date of Closing, this Contact shall then terminate; provided, however, Buyer may, by written notice given to Seller at the time of or prior to Closing, waive objection to such items. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Seller shall obtain the release of all monetary liens regardless of the cost or expense of obtaining such release(s). 6. Contingencies. 11-8-13 4 (a) Due Diligence. Within ten (10) business days after MEC, Seller shall deliver to Buyer true and correct copies of all Studies and Reports Seller may have in its possession or control pertaining to the Property. Prior to the Due Diligence Deadline, Buyer, its authorized agents and representatives, shall be entitled to enter upon the Property at all reasonable times for Buyer’s Activities. Buyer shall promptly pay when due all costs of Buyer’s Activities, shall not permit any lien to attach to the Property by reason of Buyer’s Activities, and shall promptly repair any damage to the Property caused by Buyer’s Activities. Buyer shall defend, indemnify and hold Seller, its agents and employees, harmless from and against any and all liability, loss, damage, cost, and expense including reasonable attorney’s fees, which Seller may suffer as a result of claims, demands, costs, liens, and/or judgments against Seller arising out of Buyer’s Activities. If Buyer shall for any reason, in Buyer’s sole discretion, disapprove of, or be dissatisfied with, any aspect of the Property or any investigation, test, or study, Buyer shall be entitled to terminate this Contract by written notice to Seller given on or before the Due Diligence Deadline. The obligation to indemnify Seller pursuant to the terms of this section 6(a) shall survive the termination of this Contract. (b) Final Approval. This Contract is expressly conditional and contingent upon Final Approval of the Project. Buyer shall diligently and timely pursue Final Approval in good faith, execute all documents and furnish all information reasonably required by the Seller. Buyer agrees to satisfy the reasonable requirements of the Seller, but Buyer shall have the right, at Buyer's sole and absolute discretion, to reject any condition of Final Approval and/or withdraw its application for Final Approval at any time. If Buyer is unable to obtain Final Approval within five hundred forty-five (545) days after MEC, this Contract shall terminate. The Contingency set forth in this Section 6(b) is for the benefit of both parties and may not be waived by either party without the written consent of the other party. (c) Elector Approval of Sale of Property. This Contract is also expressly conditional and contingent upon authorization by the electors at a special Town of Estes Park, Colorado election on December 17, 2013, of the sale of the Property by Seller to Buyer pursuant to the consideration and terms of this Contract. If the electors do not authorize such sale on December 17, 2013, this Contract shall thereupon terminate. 7. Closing. The Closing shall be held on the date that is ten (10) business days after satisfaction of all Contingencies described in Paragraph 6 above. . Delivery of deed(s) from Seller to Buyer shall be at closing. The Closing shall be held at 10:00 a.m. at the office of the Seller in Estes Park, Colorado or at such other reasonable time and location as the parties may mutually agree. The Closing shall be held not less than ninety (90) nor more than five hundred fifty-five (555) days after MEC. The date of Closing may be extended by mutual agreement of the parties. 8. Transfer/Use Covenant. Subject to tender or payment at Closing as required herein and compliance by Buyer with the other terms and provisions hereof, Seller shall execute and deliver a good and sufficient special warranty deed to Buyer at Closing conveying the Property free and clear of all liens and encumbrances subject 11-8-13 5 only to those specific Exceptions described by reference to recorded documents as reflected in the Title Documents accepted by Buyer in accordance with Section 5 of this Contract and a Covenant to be recorded prior to the recording of the deed restricting the use of the Property to the Project for a period of twenty (20) years. 9. Closing Costs; Documents and Services. Buyer and Seller shall pay, in Good Funds, their respective Closing costs and all other items required to be paid at Closing. Buyer and Seller shall sign and complete all customary or reasonably required documents at or before Closing. Fees for real estate closing services shall be paid at Closing one-half by Buyer and one-half by Seller. The documentary fee of .01 percent of the purchase price shall be paid at Closing by Buyer. Seller shall pay the premium for the owner’s title insurance policy. Prorations shall be made between the Buyer and Seller in accordance with customary local practices. 10. Possession. Possession of the Property shall be delivered to Buyer at Closing free and clear of any leases, subject to Buyer’s right to enter the Property prior to Closing to perform Buyer’s Activities. 11. Assignability and Binding Effect. This Contract may not be assigned by Buyer without Seller’s consent except to an affiliate of Buyer. This Contract shall inure to the benefit of and be binding upon the successors and, to the extent permitted, assigns of the parties. 12. Condition of Property . The Property shall be delivered to Buyer at Closing in substantially the same condition existing as of MEC. 13. Time of Essence and Remedies. Time is of the essence hereof. If any obligation hereunder is not performed or waived as herein provided, there shall be the following remedies: (a) Buyer’s Default. If Buyer is in default, all Earnest Money shall be forfeited by Buyer, released and paid to Seller and, except as provided in section 6(a) of this Contract, both parties shall thereafter be released from all obligations hereunder. It is agreed that the Earnest Money is liquidated damages, and not a penalty, which amount the parties agree is fair and reasonable and said forfeiture shall be Seller’s sole and only remedy for Buyer’s failure to perform the obligation of this Contract. Seller expressly waives the remedies of specific performance and additional damages. (b) Seller’s Default. If Seller is in default, Buyer may elect to treat this Contract as canceled, in which case all Earnest Money shall be returned to Buyer, or Buyer may elect to treat this Contract as being in full force and effect and Buyer shall have the right to an action for specific performance. (c) Attorneys’ Fees. In the event of any litigation arising out of or in any way relating to this Contract, the court shall award to the party that substantially prevails in such litigation all reasonable costs and expenses, including attorneys’ fees. 11-8-13 6 14. Entire Agreement; Subsequent Modification; Survival. This Contract constitutes the entire agreement between the parties relating to the subject hereof, and any prior letters of intent or agreements pertaining thereto, whether oral or written, have been merged and integrated into this Contract. No subsequent modification of any of the terms of this Contract shall be valid, binding upon the parties, or enforceable unless made in writing and signed by both parties. Any obligation in this Contract which, by its terms, is intended to be performed after termination or Closing shall survive the same. 15. Counterpart Copies. This Contract may be executed in counterpart copies. Signatures may be evidenced by facsimile or electronic mail. Documents with original signatures shall be provided to the other party at Closing, or earlier upon request of either party. 16. Notice. Any notice required or desired to be given by the parties hereto shall be in writing and may be personally delivered; mailed, certified mail, return receipt requested; sent by telephone facsimile with a hard copy sent by regular mail; sent by a nationally recognized receipted overnight delivery service for earliest delivery the next business day; or sent by electronic mail with a hard copy sent by regular mail. Any such notice shall be deemed given when personally delivered; if mailed, three (3) delivery days after deposit in the United States mail, postage prepaid; if sent by telephone facsimile or electronic mail, on the day sent if sent on a business day during regular business hours (9 a.m. to 5 p.m.) of the recipient, otherwise on the next business day; or if sent by overnight delivery service, one (1) business day after deposit in the custody of the delivery service. The addresses, telephone numbers, and electronic mail addresses for the mailing, transmitting, or delivering of notices shall be as set forth below each parties signature on this Contract. Notice of a change of address of either party shall be given in the same manner as all other notices as hereinabove provided. 17. Acceptance. This proposal shall expire unless accepted in writing by Buyer and Seller, as evidenced by their signatures on this Contract, and the offering party receives notice of acceptance, on or before 5:00 p.m. on November 14, 2013. 11-8-13 7 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Contract the day and year set forth opposite their signatures. BUYER: GRAND HERITAGE HOTEL GROUP, LLC, a foreign limited liability company By: DELAWARE, LLC, a foreign limited liability company, Member Date: __________ By: ___________________________ John Cullen, Member ADDRESS OF BUYER: SELLER: THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO, a municipal corporation Date: __________ By: William C. Pinkham, Mayor Attest: Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk ADDRESS OF SELLER: Town of Estes Park P.O. Box 1200 Estes Park, CO 80517 November 8, 2013 The Estes Valley Recreation and Park District (EVRPD) Board of Directors met last night, Thursday, November 7, 2013, to discuss a memorandum of understanding with a representative (Greg Rosener) from the Anschutz Wellness Center at the Stanley (AWCS) regarding the project’s relationship with the proposed Community Wellness Recreation Center (CWRC) project. Three specific points were made during this discussion and the EVRPD Board of Directors would like to share this information with the Town Board of Trustees as an information piece of the AWCS item on the Town’s November 12, 2013, meeting agenda. Point #1: No Perceived Competition Based on the information that our Board of Directors and administration have received thus far from representatives from the AWCS, EVRPD does not perceive the AWCS project to be in direct competition with the proposed CWRC project. We understand that Mr. John Cullen’s AWCS project will serve a high-end demographic target market to generate revenue for the AWCS and that it will not focus on the local community from a programming or target market standpoint. The CWRC project, on the other hand, focuses on a cost recovery model that specifically targets the Estes Valley Community. Point #2: Position of Neutrality However, until we have an opportunity to discuss the AWCS project with our entire project team, consisting of EVRPD, the Estes Park Medical Center (publically supports AWCS), the Estes Valley Public Library District, and the Estes Park School District R-3, we believe it would be inappropriate to enter into an agreement without engaging our entire project team in any proposed MOU. We also believe it would be a disservice to our community to do so, since community input is a critical component of our feasibility study for the proposed CWRC facility. Point #3: Positive Synergies towards a Partnership Future with AWCS EVRPD appreciates any support Mr. John Cullen of AWCS can provide to CWRC project efforts. EVRPD and John Cullen of AWCS have been working on a draft MOU that can be considered a “working document” as both projects progress. We look forward to working with Mr. Cullen and AWCS in the future – after the completion of our feasibility study and the election process for the AWCS project. We foresee a significant amount of synergy between the two projects that will allow both projects to be more successful through collaboration. We look forward to helping transform the Estes Valley into a wellness destination in the state of Colorado. We appreciate the Town of Estes Park’s support of the CWRC project and we look forward to completing our feasibility study in February 2014. Sincerely, Skyler Rorabaugh Executive Director __________________________________________________________________ P.O. Box 1379, 690 Big Thompson Avenue info@evrpd.com 970-586-8191 Phone Estes Park, CO 80517 www.evrpd.com 970-586-8193 Fax COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Memo To: Honorable Mayor Pinkham Board of Trustees Town Administrator Lancaster From: David Shirk, Senior Planner Bob Blanchard, Orion Planning Group Date: November 12, 2013 RE: Lot 4 – Application status Objective: Provide application status to Town Board. Present Situation: Lot 4 is currently undeveloped and owned by the Town of Estes Park. Lot 4 is zoned CO-Commercial Outlying, and has a platted no-development area in the western portion. Orion Planning Group use classification analysis finds the proposed use is compatible with CO zoning. Application has been submitted and found complete for review. Project website has been established: www.stanleyanschutzproject.org. This includes complete application, and will be updated throughout the review process. Proposal: Sale of Lot 4 for development of a wellness center of approximately 73,000 square feet. Advantages: Influx of cash revenue to Town with sale of Lot 4; additional employment opportunities in the community. Disadvantages: Initial review indicates the application does not appear to comply with the following development requirements: 1. Development in platted non-development area. 2. Architectural design does not appear to comply with standards for the Stanley Historic District, specifically white walls and red roofs. Review by the State Historical Preservation Officer is pending. Action Recommended: None. Informational only. Budget: Impact of sale of Lot 4 Level of Public Interest: Very high Sample Motion: None. November 8, 2013 Memo To: Town of Estes Park Trustees From: Greg Rosener, on behalf of the Anschutz Wellness Center at the Stanley RE: Requested agreement between the Estes Valley Park and Recreation District and the Anschutz Wellness Center at the Stanley Dear Trustees: After numerous discussions around the issue of a written MOU with Skyler Rorabaugh, three EVRPD Board Meetings, and one-on-one discussions with EVRPD Board Members concerning the Anschutz Wellness Center at the Stanley, I am pleased to inform you that the EVRPD and Grand Heritage Hotel Group have the clear understanding that both parties will continue to work together in the coming months to coordinate ‘Wellness’ programing efforts between the two entities. Although both sides worked diligently to come to a written agreement, in the end it became unmistakable to both parties such an agreement is premature. In the case of the Anschutz Wellness Center at the Stanley, the decision as to whether this project will become a reality is still unclear because of the development and political issues that are yet to be resolved. In the case of the Community Wellness Center, it is so early in the planning stages the EVRPD Board felt it premature to try to ‘lock’ either side into any kind of a written agreement that would have the appearance of a contractual relationship with so many unknowns. But after the EVRPD Board meeting on November 6, it is obvious there is the tremendous potential for a synergistic relationship between the two ‘Wellness’ entities. And this synergy is exemplified by the partner relationship between the Estes Park Medical Center and the Anschutz Wellness Center at the Stanley and the Estes Park Medical Center’s guiding role in the proposed Community Wellness Center. I feel it inappropriate to speak for the Estes Park Medical Center, but it is clear to all involved with the Anschutz Wellness Center at the Stanley that the Estes Park Medical Center is what I would call the ‘bridge’ that gives all parties the avenue to work together to make the whole concept of ‘family wellness’ an integral part of Estes Park. In closing, I want to acknowledge the efforts of the EVRPD Board Directors for all the time spent to get us to this point. In addition it needs to be noted that it is the assistance of the Estes Park Medical Center that helped highlight how both projects have benefits to the Estes community. The leadership of the Estes Park Medical Center has assisted greatly in creating this synergistic opportunity that bridges the Anschutz Wellness Center at the Stanley and the Community Wellness Center projects which results with the highest benefits to the Estes Park community. EdwaniHayek611FindleyCLEstesPa,k,CO80517October31,2013DearDirectorChilcott:IhadtheopportunitytoobservethePre-ApplicationmeetingheldonWednesday,October30,2013.IwasdisturbedbymuchofwhatIheardatthatmeeting.Ithinkmostofthepublicwouldbealso.Itstrikesmethattoomuchaccommodationisbeingmadeforthedeveloper,withoutreciprocalcooperationbythedeveloper.Thecityemployeesarebreakingtheirbackstobehelpfultothedeveloper.Overandover,Iheardcityplanningortheconsultantsstipulatewhatcoderequirementsare.Overandover,Iheardthedeveloperobjectandresist,theycouldn’tdothat,itwasn’tnecessaryetc.Somespecifics:1.TheWestendofLot4iscurrentlyplattedasanon-developmentarea.Asignificantportionoftheproposedfacilityisonthatarea.Thiswasestablishedasanopencorridorforviewsandwildlife.WhywouldtheCitychangethatnowtoaccommodatedevelopment?AsaresidentofFindleyCourtitistomyadvantageiftheydobuildonthatportionofLot4,itisfartherawayandslopesdownward.Butthatisnotthepoint;thisspacewastobekeptundevelopedonthePlat.Mustwedevelopallouropenland?PeoplevisitorsettleinEstesforviewsandwildlife,notbuildingsandparkinglots.Someinourbusinesscommunityappeartohavethisbackwards.Oncewepaveeverythingover,peoplewillnotcome,we’renothingspecial.Achangeindesignationshouldnotbeyetanotheraccommodationtothedeveloper2.Thedevelopercontinuedtoobjecttodetailrequestsfromvariouscitydepartmentstounderstandthetotalmasterplan.TheCityrepresentativeshadvalidreasons.Howdoyoudetermineadequacyofstormwater,sewage,andtrafficpatterns,etc.unlessyouknowwhatthetotalplanis?Ialsobelievethepublichasarighttoknowthetotalpicture.Developerhasn’tsubmitteddetailelevationmaterialbeingrequested.Thisfarintothegame,wedon’tevenknowhowtallthebuildingswiltbe.Sofarallthepublichasseenareproponent’sargumentsinthepaper,andbeengivenlittlerealdetailofthisproject.Everyonehasarighttoknow.Howwillanyvoterknowwhattheissuesare?Thereisnoopportunityforthemtobeeducated.Thisisarealissuewiththisfast-trackprocess.3.EmployeeHousingisapartofthisplan.FindleyCourtresidentshavebeenveryconcernedabouta26,000squarefootemployeehousingpod,immediatelyadjacenttotheirproperty.Pertheplanningdepartmentsuchfacilitiesareaccessorybuildingslimitedto1000squarefeet.Howcanwepossiblybeokwiththis?4.ThisplancontinuestobespunasaWellnessCenter.Onthecurrentplan(oneofmanyI’veseen),theFitnessCenterisonly11,600squarefeetandtheTreatmentandNutritionCenterare15,000squarefeet.Onlyabout1hoftheproposedbuildingsactuallyservesthestatedpurpose,therestishousing.Isn’tanyonequestioningthat?Itlookslikeadditionalhotelspacetome.Howcanthatcanfitusedesignations?5.Time,Time,Time.IfIunderstandcorrectly,thenexttimethepublicwillbeabletocommentisatthePlanningCommissionReviewofDevelopmentApplicationsonDecember9th.Thatisabout1%monthsfromnow,yettheelectionwouldbealittleoveraweekafterthatmeeting.Doesthatmakeanysense?Alltheaccommodationisbeingmadeforthetimeframeofthe •Page2October3l,2013developer.Thisispubliclandownedbythepublic.Theirconcernsshouldbeparamount,thatiswhoyourepresent,andthisfeelsverybackward.Underthisprocesshowdocitizensthatdonotthinkthisprojectisinthebestinterestofthecommunity,havetimetoeducatetheirfellowcitizensonalltheissues?Thisram-rodapproachtakesawaythatpublicright,andasacitizenIfinditveryobjectionable.PleasedonotgettheimpressionthatIamtotallyagainstanydevelopmentonLot4.Itispublicproperty.Whateverdevelopmentoccurs,shouldserveallcitizens,shouldconsiderthenaturalbeautyofthesite,andpreserveit.In2007thecitizensvoteddownaproposeddevelopmentofapproximately60,000squarefeet.Commentsatthattimewerethatitwasoverbuiltandgrotesque.Sowhatdoesthatmakethe100,000squarefeetyouarenowentertaining?Pleasekeepallcitizensinmindasyouconsiderthevariousissuesassociatedwiththisproject,notjusttheviewsofthedeveloperandasmallcontingentofthebusinesscommunity.Sincerely,EdwardA.Hayek’ Town Clerk Memo To: Honorable Mayor Pinkham Board of Trustees Town Administrator Lancaster From: Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk Date: November 8, 2013 RE: Resolution #34-13 Setting A Special Election for December 17, 2013 for the Sale of Lot 4, Stanley Historic District and Setting the Ballot Language Objective: To set a special election for the sale of Lot 4, Stanley Historic District per Municipal Code Section 17.44.090 Vote Prior to Sale. Present Situation: At the November 12, 2013 meeting, the Town Board will consider a sales contract for Lot 4, Stanley Historic District to the Stanley Hotel for the Anschutz Wellness Center. If the Board approves the contract, Resolution #34-13 will be considered by the Board to set a special election for Tuesday, December 17, 2013 as a poll election and to approve the ballot language. Proposal: As per State Statute 31-10-108 a special election shall be held on a Tuesday designated by resolution by the Town Board; no special election shall be held within ninety days preceding a regular election (April 1, 2014); and no special election shall be called within thirty days before the date selected for the election. Therefore, the only day available to complete a special election would be Tuesday, December 17, 2013. The election would be held as a poll ballot election because there is not enough time to conduct a mail ballot election. The Resolution would designate the Town Clerk as the Designated Election Official for the Town of Estes Park, thereby giving authority to complete all aspects of the Municipal election. Electronic equipment, Accuvote machines, would be rented from Dominion Voting to count the ballots. Dominion would also be used to set up the ballot layout for the printer. Additional equipment would be rented from Larimer County, ballot boxes and voting booths, to complete the election. In order to formally obtain the assistance of Larimer County, an Intergovernmental Agreement is required and would be developed for the Board’s approval at the next Town Board meeting should Resolution #34-13 be approved to set the election. Advantages: Provides the Town Clerk the authority to perform a special municipal election. Disadvantages: None. Action Recommended: Approval of Resolution #34-13 if the Board approves the sales contract for Lot 4, Stanley Historic District. Budget: All costs associated with the special election would be reimbursed by the Stanley Hotel. The cost is estimated at $8,000 in fixed costs. This does not include staff time. Sample Motion: I moved to approve/deny Resolution 34-13 setting a Special Municipal Election for Tuesday, December 17, 2013. RESOLUTION NO. 34-13 WHEREAS, on November 12, 2013, the Town Board of Trustees approved a Contract to Buy and Sell Real Estate for the sale of Lot 4, Plat of Lots 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9, Stanley Historic District Subdivision, Town of Estes Park, State of Colorado; and WHEREAS, Section 17.44.090 of the Municipal Code requires as follows: “Before any sale of any property owned by the Town of Estes Park within the Stanley Historic District, the question of such sale and the terms and consideration thereof shall be submitted and approved at a regular or special election” ; and WHEREAS, Colorado Revised Statutes 31-10-108 requires a special municipal election to be held on any Tuesday; and WHEREAS, it is the decision of the Town Board by the adoption of this Resolution to hold a Special Municipal Election on December 17, 2013, pursuant to the provisions of Section 31-10-108 C.R.S.; and WHEREAS, Section 31-10-401, C.R.S., 1973, allows the Board of Trustees to delegate to the Town Clerk, by Resolution, the authority and responsibility to appoint the Judges of Election. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO: 1. That a Special Municipal Election shall be held on Tuesday, December 17, 2013. 2. That the only polling place shall be in the Municipal Building: Rooms 202-203, Municipal Building for polling place voting, December 17, 2013 (Election Day), 170 MacGregor Ave., Estes Park, Colorado. 3. That early voting will be conducted through Absentee Ballot voting with applications available November 13 through December 13, 2013 and shall be available from 8:00 a.m. – 5:00 p.m. in the Town Clerk’s Office. 4. That the polls on Election Day shall be open from 7:00 a.m. - 7:00 p.m. 5. That the Global Electronic Voting System “ACCUVOTE” shall be used in the Special Municipal Election and that the Town Clerk be and is hereby authorized and directed to perform all acts and functions necessary for the use of such voting equipment as required by the laws of the State of Colorado pertaining thereto. 6. That pursuant to Section 31-10-401, C.R.S., 1973, the Board of Trustees delegates to the Town Clerk, by Resolution, the authority and responsibility to appoint the Judges of Election. 7. That the Judges of Election shall receive for their services the sum of $150.00/ea. on Election Day, and $20.00/ea. for Judges Training School. 8. That the Town Clerk shall arrange for such materials and supplies for such election as may be necessary. 9. That the Ballot Question shall be substantially in the form as set forth on Exhibit A attached hereto. DATED this day of 2013. TOWN OF ESTES PARK Mayor ATTEST: Town Clerk EXHIBIT A – RESOLUTION #34-13 Draft of Ballot Question Shall the Town of Estes Park (“Town”) sell Lot 4, Plat of Lots 3 through 9, Stanley Historic District Subdivision, Town of Estes Park, Colorado (“Lot 4”), pursuant to the following key terms and consideration of the “Contract to Buy and Sell Real Estate,” a complete copy of which is on file with the Town Clerk (“Contract”): Buyer: Grand Heritage Hotel Group, LLC Purchase Price: $1,650,000, payable at Closing. Earnest Money: (1) $100,000 paid by Buyer to Town within 3 business days after Town Board approval of all land use applications earlier filed in connection with the Anschutz Wellness Center at The Stanley Hotel project (“Land Use Applications”) and Town Board approval of any action required to permit the buildings within the Project to be consistent with the colors and architecture of the Stanley Hotel Complex (“Building Design Action”). (2) If Buyer terminates the Contract prior to the Due Diligence Deadline which is 90 days after execution of Contract, earnest money is refunded to Buyer. (3) Thereafter, earnest money is nonrefundable unless the Town is in default under the Contract. (4) Earnest money applied to purchase price at Closing. Contingencies: (1) Buyer’s right to receive studies and reports and inspect Lot 4 and terminate the Contract prior to the Due Diligence Deadline, if not satisfied with condition of Lot 4. (2) Approval by Town Board of the Land Use Applications and Building Design Action no later than January 31, 2014 (or no later than March 17, 2014 if extended by Buyer), and thereafter expiration of all referendum and litigation periods related to such approvals (“Final Approval”), with a Final Approval deadline of 545 days after execution of the Contract. (3) Authorization by the electors at a special Town election on December 17, 2013, for the sale of Lot 4 to Buyer pursuant to the terms and consideration of the Contract. Closing: Within 10 business days after satisfaction of all Contingencies, with a Closing deadline of 555 days after execution of the Contract. Use Covenant: Covenant will be recorded prior to recording of the deed to Buyer, restricting use of Lot 4 for a 20-year period to a wellness training center primarily focused on lifestyle changes, physical fitness and training, nutrition and medical/personal care treatment, with associated facilities and lodging. Assignment: Buyer may not assign Contract except to an affiliate of Buyer. Default: If Town defaults, Buyer may cancel Contract or seek specific performance; if Buyer defaults, earnest money is forfeited, with prevailing party subject to payment of costs and attorneys’ fees. Miscellaneous Terms: There are additional miscellaneous terms in the Contract including those related to title matters, closing details and notice. YES NO