Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES Town Board 2000-12-12Town of Estes Park,Larimer County,Colorado,December 1 2,2000 Minutes of a Regular meeting of the Board of Trustees of the Town of Estes Park,Larimer County,Colorado.Meeting held in the Municipal Building in said Town of Estes Park on the 1 2th day of December, 2000.Meeting called to order by Mayor John Baudek. Present:John Baudek,Mayor Susan L.Doylen,Mayor ProTem Trustees Jeff Barker Stephen W.Gillette David Habecker Lori Jeffrey G.Wayne Newsom Also Present:Rich Widmer,Town Administrator Vickie O’Connor,Town Clerk Gregory A.White,Town Attorney Absent:None Mayor Baudek called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Jo Adams,President/Rooftop Rodeo Committee,announced that the Professional Rodeo Cowboys Association has honored the Rooftop Rodeo Committee with a plaque in recognition of being selected as one of the top five finalists for the 2000 Small Outdoor Rodeo Committees of the year.This was the first time the Rooftop Rodeo Committee has been nominated for this prestigious award. Mayor Baudek introduced Representative-Elect Timothy Fritz as the new District 51 State Representative for the Estes Park area. PUBLIC COMMENT None. TOWN BOARD COMMENTS Trustee Jeffrey reported on her recent NLC Congress of Cities conference recently held in Boston. 1.CONSENT AGENDA (Approval of): 1.Town Board Minutes dated November 28,2000. 2.Bills. 3.Committee Minutes: A.Public Safety,December 7,2000. 4.Estes Park Housing Authority,October 11,2000 (acknowledgment only). 5.Estes Valley Planning Commission,November 21,2000 (acknowledgement only). 6.Estes Valley Board of Adjustment,December 5,2000 (acknowledgement only). 7.Special Events:Lease of Barn W with EVRPD for In-line Skating Program and Dog Obedience Classes. 8.T.A.B.O.R.Agreements (Standard Renewals). Board of Trustees December 12,2000 -Page 2 It was moved and seconded (Gillette/Doylen)the consent agenda be approved,and it passed unanimously. I A.PLANNING COMMISSION CONSENT AGENDA (Approval of): Trustee Barker requested Item #3-Sleepy Hollow be removed from the Consent Agenda and voted upon separately.Mayor Baudek announced the following planning items and opened the public hearing: 1.SUBDIVISION.Amended Plat of the Amended Plat of Lot 20, Amended Plat of Peak View Subdivision,and Lot 16,5.St.Vram Addition,Harold B.Miller EstatelApplicant;subdivide one lot into two lots —WITHDRAWN AT APPLICANT’S REQUEST. 2.MINOR SUBDIVISION.Lot 2,Mountain Technology Center Subdivision,H.D.Dannels &Sons!Applicant.Sr.Planner Joseph noted that this minor subdivision divides one lot in the heavy commercial zoning district into four lots.The property contains one building,a construction shop located on the proposed Lot 3.The property is served by Town utilities and will have sanitary sewer provided by UTSD.The subdivision is being proposed to help meet the demand for heavy commercial lots I the Estes Valley.The Estes Valley Planning Commission has recommended approval,and all conditions of approval have been met. 4.AMENDED PLAT.Lumber Yard Subdivision of Lots 5 &6,DeVille Subdivision &a portion of Lot 36,White Meadow View Place Addn.,and a Portion of Lot 5,Manford Addn.,Estes Park Lumber Co.!Applicant —WITHDRAWN AT APPLICANT’S REQUEST. As there were no audience comments,Mayor Baudek closed the public hearing.It was moved and seconded (Newsom/Gillette)Items 1,2 and 4 above be approved,and it passed unanimously. 3.AMENDED PLAT.Sleepy Hollow Subdivision,Gary ConnelylApplicant.The purpose of this amendment is to relocate the shared private drive access to Lots 1 and 2 and 9 and 10.These easements are part of the plat,and therefore,require an amended plat to revise them;the relocation will help preserve existing trees and reduce grading-related site impacts.The Estes Valley Planning Commission has recommended approval.There were no audience comments,thus it was moved and seconded (Gillette/Doylen)the Amended Plat of Sleepy Hollow Subdivision be approved,and it passed with Trustee Barker Abstaining. 2.ACTION ITEMS: ORDINANCE #15-00 —AMENDING SECTION 7.12.11 OIDOG WASTE REMOVAL,AND NEW SECTION 7.06M40/DOMESTIC ANIMAL WASTE REMOVAL.Assistant Town Administrator Repola reported that the Public Safety Committee recommended approval of this Ordinance that would hold pet owners (dogs and cats)responsible for the removal of waste left behind by their pets.Town Attorney White read the Ordinance.Discussion followed concerning enforcement issues,and audience comments were heard from Alan Aulabaugh on penalties.Town Attorney White confirmed that penalties would be assessed by the Municipal Court,and that the Ordinance is in response to resident complaints.It was moved and seconded (Gillette/Newsom)Ordinance #15-00 be adopted,and it passed unanimously. Board of Trustees December 12,2000 -Page 3 2.ANNEXATION,SUBDIVISION &ZONING DESIGNATION OF E-1 ESTATE FOR WALDO ADDITION,LOT 4 LOCATED IN THE NW 1/4 OF THE NW 1/4 OF SECTION 31,WILLIAM &EVELYN WALDOIAPPLICANTS.Mayor Baudek opened the Public Hearing,and St.Planner Joseph presented the Staff Report:the request is to annex and subdivide an existing 2.6-acre tract into 2 lots of 1.35 ac.and 1.25 ac.The proposed lots meet the minimum lot area requirements,and the property is to be served with Town utilities and EPSD sanitary sewer.A half public street dedication,30’wide,is being provided along the north property line;this will allow for a future street connection between Prospect Mountain Tunnel Rd.and Lexington Ln.An Improvement Guarantee for the sewer extension has been provided.The zoning is to remain E-1,Estate.The Estes Valley Planning Commission has recommended annexation with E-1,Estate zoning,and the proposed subdivision of the property into two lots.All conditions of approval have been met.The Plat will be held pending finalization of an Improvement Guarantee. Town Attorney White read Resolution #27-00 and Ordinance #16-00. Applicant Representative Lonnie SheldonNan Horn Engineering,confirmed that all issues have been addressed.Trustee Habecker questioned whether the roadway would be paved,and if not,where would the responsibility lie? Mr.Sheldon noted that Concord Ln.is paved up to the east line of Connolly Addn.,which was annexed in the mid-90’s.The roadway was not paved with that annexation and the Applicant does not intend to pave the road with this annexation.The Applicant has,however,dedicated right-of-way and easements as requested.There was no public testimony,thus Mayor Baudek closed the public heating. It was moved and seconded (Newsom/Jeifrey)Waldo Addition,as contained in Resolution #27-00 and Ordinance #16-00 be approved. Trustee Habecker stated that for the record,the Town is also not agreeing to pave the road.The Motion passed unanimously. 2.RIVER ROCK TOWNHOMES -REQUEST FOR TIME EXTENSION FOR REVISED DEVELOPMENT PLAN OF AMENDED DEVELOPMENT PLAN #95-02,RIVER ROCK TOWNHOMES,LLC!APPLICANT.Sr.Planner Joseph reported that the original approval for this development was in February,1995.On February 17,1998,the Planning Commission granted a two-year vested tights time extension.This vested rights time extension expired February 17,2000,and the owners are now requesting a further time extension until February 17,2004.By state statute,development plan approvals expire after 3 years,unless extended.This request would extend the standard vested rights period from 3 years to 9 years. The site was approved for a total of 25 dwelling units.Nine of these units that were to be constructed in a single multiplex building with underground parking have not yet been constructed. The development plan that is the subject of this time extension request does not conform to two current Estes Valley Development code standards.The 9- plex building as designed,would likely require a height variance due to a change in the height measurement method.Also,the plan exceeds the current allowable floor area ratio by 5,560 s.f. Responding to the legality of a time extension when the time has expired, Town Attorney stated that pursuant to State Statute,the Town Board may grant a new vested tight time extension.Staff was unable to confirm whether a precedent on this issue had previously been established. Board of Trustees December 12,2000 -Page 4 Staff confirmed that the development plan has been revised several times and that the developer has opted to request an additional unit for a total of 25. Parking is posing some difficulty in this development,and this issue may be the reason for proposed underground parking.Staff added that when the developer received approval of the amended development plan,the developer had two years in which to complete development.At that time,the developer did request 3 years,however,the Planning Commission granted 2 years. The staff report contained a list of three options for the Board to consider. Letters in opposition to the time extension were submitted by River Rock Townhome Property Owners:Terry &Ellie Chambers (2),Dorothy C. Joseph,Donald &Laura Orris,Kathryn Reed,and Wendell Walker. Applicant representative Bill Van Horn commented that the remaining building had not been constructed due to changes in ownership of the organization (developer),however,a building permit had issued.He also agreed that the Planning Commission may have granted a 2-yr.extension in lieu of 3-yr.due to the impending adoption of the Estes Valley Development Code.In addition,the total of 25 units was previously approved and is not an issue at this time;the height limitation is not an issue with the developer;and the 30% floor area ratio is an issue as this calculation was not anticipated in planning the development.Meeting the floor area ratio will create a significant hardship.Should the time extension request be denied,the developer intends to re-submit their plans. The last 9 units will be significantly diminished from the original development, otherwise,the development is basically in conformance with Code.To apply new standards to previously developed situations may create hardships,and the new units could have a significantly different appearance than the original units.As the project progressed,the river side was sold first.There are a number of factors in requesting the extension,that include:concern with the highway units,recognition of the parking situation,etc.Discussion followed on the homeowners association and associated declarant rights,with Town Attorney White stating he had read all correspondence and his advice to the Town Board is that the condominium rights issue is a matter between the homeowners association,the developers,and the court;the Town has no involvement. Audience comments were heard from David Crockett,513 River Rock Cir./President,River Rock Homeowners Association.Mr.Crockett urged the Board to deny the request as the developer has lost their vesting,the rights need to be turned over to the homeowners association,roadway issues,the last 9 units have not been approved by the homeowners association,the developer previously assured the association that they would not build 9 more units,adequate notice was not provided to affected property owners by staff,and parking concerns particularly relative to the developer’s use of their property for weekly rentals.The association is not opposed to development, but they are concerned with the developer’s lack of effort/response on maintenance issues.In conclusion,Mr.Crockett urged denial of the request, suggesting the developer return with a plan that meets the current Code before the Trustees grant an extension. Mr.Van Horn rebutted that whatever rights the homeowners association may have is separate from this land use issue;the roadway is intended for use by the entire project. Board of Trustees December 12,2000 -Page 5 Trustees Habecker and Doylen stated they were not in favor of approving the time extension,and that it is appropriate to re-submit and allow time for input from the homeowners association.Mayor Baudek added that the Town must be cautious in granting extension. It was moved and seconded (Habecker/Doylen)the time extension as requested by RiverRock Townhomes,LLC be denied,and it passed unanimously. 3.2000 BUDGET SUPPLEMENT RESOLUTION #28-00.Assistant Town Administrator Repola presented Resolution #28-00 that supplements the 2000 Budget for the Park Entrance Estates SID Fund and Larimer County Open Space Fund.There were no audience comments,thus it was moved and seconded (Barker/Newsom)Resolution #28-00 be adopted,and it passed unanimously.Town Administrator Widmer commended Assistant Repola for his efforts on the Budget. 4.APPOINTMENTS/RE-APPOINTMENTS (Miscellaneous).Town Administrator Widmer submitted the following appointments/re-appointments for consideration: A.Peggy Lynch,BUILDING AUTHORITY,3-yr.term,expiring 12/31/03 (re-appointment). B.Ed PohI &Ed McKinney,ESTES VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION,3-yr.terms,expiring 12/31/03 (both re appointments). C.Bill Almond,Cory Blackman,David Thomas,Monte House,Larry Wexier,Peter Marsh,Tom Pickering,Rich Widmer &Trustee Barker/Liaison,MARKETING ADVERTISING COUNCIL,3-yr.terms, expiring 10/01/03 (re-appointments). D.Marshall Hesler,Barbara Lister &Helen Platt,ESTES VALLEY PUBLIC LIBRARY DISTRICT,4-yr.terms,expiring 12/31/04.These appointments also requires approval by the Larimer County Corn miss loners. It was moved and seconded (Habecker/Gillette)all appointments listed in Items A-D be approved,and it passed unanimously.Trustee Habecker suggested letters of appreciation be issued to all appointees. 5.STANLEY HALL RESTORATION PROJECT —BUILDING IMPROVEMENTS.Town Administrator Widmer reported that the total anticipated expenditure on the State Historical Fund-approved project (Phases I-Ill)is $360,505.The Town submits funding requests to the State Historical Society;and their funding share for Phases I-Ill is $220,505.Not all funding requests have been approved by the Town,and have been funded by New Stanley Associates.Based on mechanical drawings by Building Systems Engineering,the price for the lower level heating and exhaust system is $18,600.The price for the main floor heating system is $79,925; thus the total is $98,525.A recap of Stanley Hall Building Improvements was presented.The goal is not to exceed any authorized funding by the Town, Historical Society and New Stanley Associates.New Stanley Associates believes Stanley Hall will be completed by Christmas Eve.It was moved and seconded (Habecker/Newsom)the funding level of $67,500 up to a maximum of $98,525 be approved if historic funds are available up to the maximum amount,and it passed unanimously.