HomeMy WebLinkAboutPACKET Town Board 2023-11-28NOTE: The Town Board reserves the right to consider other appropriate items not available at the time the agenda was
prepared.
The Mission of the Town of Estes Park is to provide high-quality, reliable services
for the benefit of our citizens, guests, and employees, while being good stewards
of public resources and our natural setting.
BOARD OF TRUSTEES - TOWN OF ESTES PARK
Tuesday, November 28, 2023
7:00 p.m.
ACCESSING MEETING TRANSLATIONS
(Accediendo a las Traducciones de la Reunión)
To access written translation during the meeting, please scan the QR Code
or click this link for up to 48 other languages (Para acceder a la traducción
durante la reunión, par favor escanee el código QR o haga clic en el enlace
para hasta 48 idiomas más):
https://attend.wordly.ai/join/UOFH-5928
Choose Language and Click Attend (Seleccione su lenguaje y haga clic en
asistir)
Use a headset on your phone for audio or read the transcript can assist
those having difficulty hearing (Use un auricular en su teléfono para audio o
lea la transcripción puede ayudar a aquellos que tienen dificultades para
escuchar).
The Town of Estes Park will make reasonable accommodations for access to Town services, programs, and
activities and special communication arrangements for persons with disabilities. Please call (970) 577-4777.
TDD available or use the link above to access audio or read the transcript.
ADVANCED PUBLIC COMMENT
By Public Comment Form: Members of the public may provide written public comment on a specific
agenda item by completing the form found at https://dms.estes.org/forms/TownBoardPublicComment.
The form must be submitted by 12:00 p.m. the day of the meeting in order to be provided to the Town
Board prior to the meeting. All comments will be provided to the Board for consideration during the
agenda item and added to the final packet.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
(Any person desiring to participate, please join the Board in the Pledge of Allegiance).
UNITED STATES PERMANENT RESIDENT STATUS RECOGNITION.
AGENDA APPROVAL.
PUBLIC COMMENT. (Please state your name and address).
TOWN BOARD COMMENTS / LIAISON REPORTS.
TOWN ADMINISTRATOR REPORT.
CONSENT AGENDA:
1.Bills.
2. Town Board Minutes dated November 14, 2023 and Town Board Study Session
Minutes dated November 14, 2023.
Prepared 11-17-2023
*Revised
NOTE: The Town Board reserves the right to consider other appropriate items not available at the time the agenda was
prepared.
3.Estes Park Planning Commission Minutes dated October 17, 2023 (acknowledgment
only).
4.Consider the Acceptance of Art in Public Places Sculpture Donation – Book Loving
Betty.
REPORTS AND DISCUSSION ITEMS: (Outside Entities).
1. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR RMNP’S DAY USE VISITOR ACCESS
PLAN. Superintendent Ingram, Management Specialist Hannon, and Management
Specialist Patterson.
ACTION ITEMS:
1.ORDINANCE 12-23 TEMPORARY 6-MONTH MORATORIUM ON NEW BED AND
BREAKFAST INN BUSINESS LICENSES. Town Clerk Williamson.
To consider a second temporary 6-month moratorium for bed & breakfast licenses.
2. POLICY 603 – UTILITY FEE AMORTIZATION. Director Creamean.
To amortize water system development and water rights fees over time.
REPORTS AND DISCUSSION ITEMS:
1. PROPERTY TAX UPDATE. Director Creamean.
Review updated information on property tax discussions from special legislative
session and further discuss the Town's mill levy.
2. BOARD COMPENSATION FOR 2024. Town Clerk Williamson.
To review market communities board/council compensation in advance of preparing an
ordinance with Consumer Price Index (CPI) adjusted compensation for the incoming
2024 Board.
ADJOURN.
Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, November 14, 2023
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 14th day of November, 2023.
Present: Wendy Koenig, Mayor
Marie Cenac, Mayor Pro Tem
Trustees Kirby Hazelton
Frank Lancaster
Barbara MacAlpine
Patrick Martchink
Cindy Younglund
Also Present: Travis Machalek, Town Administrator
Jason Damweber, Deputy Town Administrator
Dan Kramer, Town Attorney
Kimberly Disney, Recording Secretary
Absent: None
Mayor Koenig called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. and all desiring to do so, recited
the Pledge of Allegiance.
AGENDA APPROVAL.
It was moved and seconded (Cenac/MacAlpine) to approve the Agenda, and it passed
unanimously.
PUBLIC COMMENTS.
None.
TRUSTEE COMMENTS.
Board comments were heard and have been summarized: The Estes Valley Watershed
Coalition hosted a public meeting on slash burning. The Visit Estes Park met and
discussed the upcoming tree lighting ceremony, fall visitor survey, and the 4.1% decrease
in lodging tax The Veteran’s Day Ceremony was held with recognition of veterans in the
community. The Board discussed options of a temporary Property Tax Credit to mitigate
potential increases in property tax due to the failure of Proposition HH. Sister Cities Board
met and elected new officers. The Annual Dia de Los Muertos celebration was held with
large community participation. The National Philanthropy Day celebration recognized 33
individuals and non-profit organizations in the community. The Estes Park Board of
Adjustment approved an occupancy waiver. The Police Auxiliary would hold an
ambulance training. The Restorative Justice Annual Fundraising Dinner would be held
with meals provided by Mama Rose’s. The Estes Park Economic Development
Corporation would meet to discuss the corporation’s future. The October Trustee Talk
focused discuss on workforce housing, land use, Sanitation District, and Bond Park. The
November Trustee Talk would focus on the budget process and Downtown Estes Loop
construction. Mayor Koenig announced she would not run for reelection in April 2024.
TOWN ADMINISTRATOR REPORT.
Town Administrator Machalek thanked staff for their response to the power outage on
October 29, 2023. Staff would continue to work on improvements with the Western Area
Power Administration to maintain reliable power to the Estes Valley.
CONSENT AGENDA:
1.Bills.
2.Town Board Minutes dated October 24, 2023 and Town Board Study Session
Minutes dated October 24, 2023.
3.Estes Park Board of Adjustment Minutes dated October 3, 2023 (acknowledgment
only).
DR
A
F
T
Board of Trustees – November 14, 2023 – Page 2
4. Transportation Advisory Board Minutes dated September 20, 2023
(acknowledgment only).
5. Resolution 97-23 Intergovernmental Agreement with the Colorado Department of
Transportation for Fiscal Year 2024 Federal Transit Administration 5311 Rural
Area Formula Funds to Support Estes Transit - CDOT PO 491003380.
6. Reappointment of Rich Chiappe to the Local Marketing District Board of Directors
for a term expiring December 31, 2027.
It was moved and seconded (Hazelton/Younglund) to approve the Consent Agenda,
and it passed unanimously.
LIQUOR ITEMS:
1. RESOLUTION 98-23 TRANSFER OF A LODGING & ENTERTAINMENT LIQUOR
LICENSE FROM ESTES PARK CATERING LLC DBA JUBILATIONS CATERING
TO JOGAN INC, LLC DBA JUBILATIONS CATERING, 215 VIRGINIA DRIVE,
ESTES PARK, CO 80517. Mayor Koenig opened the public hearing and Town Clerk
Williamson presented Resolution 98-23. She reviewed the application for the
transfer of ownership, stating all paperwork and fees had been submitted and a
temporary permit was issued October 13, 2023, which authorizes the Transferee to
continue the sale of alcohol while the transfer application was pending. The applicant
was aware of the Training for Intervention Procedures (TIPS) requirement. Mayor
Koenig closed the public hearing and it was moved and seconded
(MacAlpine/Younglund) to approve Resolution 98-23, and it passed unanimously.
PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS: Items reviewed by Planning Commission or staff for
Town Board Final Action.
1. ACTION ITEMS:
A. ORDINANCE 09-23 REZONING, RAVEN SUBDIVISION ZONING MAP
AMENDMENT, RAVEN AVENUE TBD, HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF THE
ST. VRAIN VALLEY, INC., OWNER/APPLICANT. Mayor Koenig opened the
public hearing and Planner Washam presented Ordinance 09-23 to rezone 0.82
undeveloped acres of Lot 2A Ward Minor Subdivision from RM - Multi-Family
Residential to R-1 - Single-Family Residential. A minor subdivision of the
property was approved in January 2021 in anticipation of further subdivisions and
to enable Habitat for Humanity to develop single-family residences on five
proposed lots with a minimum lot size of 5,000 feet. She highlighted the Estes
Park Planning Commission’s review and recommendation of the rezoning
application, criteria for rezoning, characteristics of the subdivision and lots, and
staff findings. Dave Emerson, Executive Director of St Vrain Habitat for
Humanity, provided background on the organization, their elgibility requirements
for housing, and the property. The Board discussed the difference between
detatched and attached single-family homes, the minimum lot size for attached
single-family homes, variance options and limitations, and maintaining natural
landscaping of the area.
John Guffey/Town citizen spoke regarding the natural grass and maintenace of
the open space area included in the rezoning. Scott Moulton/Estes Park Housing
Authority Director spoke in support of the rezoning citing the Housing Needs
Assessment.
Mayor Koenig closed the public hearing and it was moved and seconded
(Younglund/MacAlpine) to approve Ordinance 09-23, and it passed
unanimously.
ACTION ITEMS:
1. PUBLIC HEARING – 2024 BUDGET. Mayor Koenig reopened the public hearing
from October 24, 2023. Manager Hudson presented the 2024 budget of $87.9
million. The budget outlines the Highway User Trust Fund revenues received from
DR
A
F
T
Board of Trustees – November 14, 2023 – Page 3
the State of Colorado estimated at $285,504 would offset the operational costs of
the Streets division of Public Works. Resolution 99-23 would set the mill levy for
2024 at 1.822 mills for a total of approximately $445,000 in property tax revenues.
Resolution 100-23 would adopt the 2024 budget as presented. Resolution 101-23
would appropriate sums of money to be expended as outlined in the proposed
budget. The 2024-2028 Capital Improvement Plan would provide guidance to the
Board, staff, and citizens on upcoming projects and funding needs.
Bill Brown/Town citizen spoke regarding Resolution 99-23 and the components of
property tax. He requested a reduction to the mill levy to support the needed
funding from property tax of approximately $445,000.
The Board discussed reassessing the $65,000 earmarked for economic
development funding following discussions on base funding entities. They directed
staff to provide more information on the mill levy adjustment depending the results
of the State Legislature review of property tax. Mayor Koenig closed the public
hearing and it was moved and seconded (Hazelton/Younglund) to approve the
Highway User’s Trust Fund for expenditures for striping, snow plowing,
traffic signs, street lights, and other related road and street costs as
proposed for 2024, and it passed unanimously.
It was moved and seconded (Lancaster/MacAlpine) to table Resolution 99-23
to December 12, 2023, and it passed unanimously.
It was moved and seconded (Lancaster/Cenac) to approve Resolutions 100-
23 and 101-23, and it passed unanimously.
It was moved and seconded (Cenac/Younglund) to approve the Capital
Improvements Plan for 2024-2028, and it passed unanimously.
2. 2024 STRATEGIC PLAN ADOPTION. Town Administrator Machalek presented
the 2024 Strategic Plan and highlighted the Strategic Planning Sessions held
March 8, 2023 and April 5, 2023, adoption of the 2024 Provisional Strategic Plan
on May 23, 2023, and suggested edits since the provisional plan was adopted.
Edits included: Amending Infrastructure Objective 4.D.1, Public Safety, Health,
and Environment Goal 2.D and Objectives 1.A.1, and 7.A.1. Adding Outstanding
Community Services Objective 2.A.1, Public Safety, Health, and Environment
Objectives 1.F.1, and 6.A.1., and eliminating Transportation Objective 4.A.1 and
7.A.1. The Board discussed the removal of an Environmental Sustainability
Manager position as a part of Public Safety, Health, and Environment Objective
1.A.1, budgetary needs or amendments to support the position, collaboration with
other entities including Visit Estes Park’s Sustainability Manager, the
Environmental Sustainability Task Force recommendations, staff’s current efforts
to implement the recommendations, and maintaining the current trajectory.
John Guffey/Town citizen spoke regarding the importance of environmental
restoration stating sustainability was no longer sufficient. He elaborated that Estes
Park should be a leader in the restoration of the environment considering the
proximity of Rocky Mountain National Park. Nick Thomas/County citizen stated
the League of Women Voter’s would be hosting a meeting on Estes Sustainability
at the Legion.
It was moved and seconded (Cenac/Younglund) to approve the 2024 Strategic
Plan with the addition of an objective to explore collaboration on
sustainability management with partner entities and evaluate sustainability
actions the Town Board wants to accomplish, and it passed with Trustee
MacAlpine voting “No”.
3. ORDINANCE 10-23 TEMPORARILY SUSPENDING TIME LIMITATIONS AND
WAIVING APPLICATION FEES FOR SUPPLEMENTAL TEMPORARY SIGNS
FOR PROPERTIES DIRECTLY IMPACTED BY CONSTRUCTION OF THE
DOWNTOWN ESTES LOOP. Mayor Koenig opened the public hearing and
Planner Hornbeck presented Ordinance 10-23 to waive application fees for
DR
A
F
T
Board of Trustees – November 14, 2023 – Page 4
temporary signs for businesses impacted by the construction. He provided
background on the Downtown Estes Loop, supplemental temporary signs, limits
on these types of signs as noted in the Estes Park Development Code, and the
affected businesses.
John Guffey/Town citizen requested clarification on the temporary suspension
timeframe.
The Board discussed the number of temporary signs a business can have during
the temporary suspension and supporting businesses affected by the construction.
Mayor Koenig closed the public hearing and it was moved and seconded
(Martchink/Cenac) to approve Ordinance 10-23, and it passed unanimously.
4. RESOLUTION 102-23 6E FUNDING EXPENDITURE FOR A CHILDCARE
FUNDING AGREEMENT WITH THE BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF LARIMER
COUNTY. Manager Bangs presented Resolution 102-23 for a 6E Funding
expenditure and agreement with the Boys and Girls Club of Larimer County to
support out-of-school programming as outlined in the 2023 Childcare Funding
Plan. She highlighted the club’s current operations, strategic plan, intended uses
of the funds, and the expenditure’s financial impacts. The Board discussed the
Behavioral Health position with the Boys and Girls Club, increased participants and
staffing during the summer, collaboration with the School District, funding Estes
Park specific staff, eligibility for future funds, increased capacity, demographics of
participants, and expansion of the program. It was moved and seconded
(Younglund/MacAlpine) to approve Resolution 102-23, and it passed
unanimously.
5. ORDINANCE 11-23 AMENDING CHAPTER 5.20 OF THE ESTES PARK
MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING BED AND BREAKFAST INN PROPERTIES.
Mayor Koenig opened the public hearing and Town Clerk Williamson presented
Ordinance 11-23 to amend the Municipal Code regarding Bed and Breakfast (B&B)
Inns. She highlighted the previous study session discussions and the Board’s
direction on the need to clarify the use for staff, owners, and neighbors on key
components including meal service, kitchen facilities, and innkeeper residency,
and clearly outlining the operation to differentiate the use from vacation homes.
The proposed amendments would provide current operations a year to come into
compliance. She noted public comment was received related to the incorporation
of the innkeeper within the dwelling, the requirement of a meal, and grandfathering.
Jim Docter/Town citizen, South Cox/Town citizen, Jeff Robbins/Town citizen,
Nathan Welton/County citizen, Dan Ludlum/County citizen, Matt Lovas/Town
citizen, Mike Kingswood/Town citizen, Nick Thomas/County citizen, Elizabeth
Coffin/Town citizen spoke against the Ordinance citing oversight of local
government, the need to reduce regulations, the financial impacts of operating a
B&B, amenities provided by B&Bs, the requirement to provide a meal, need for a
third short-term rental classification, alignment with Larimer County’s
requirements, the proposed regulation to allow guest access to the kitchen,
circumvention of the vacation home cap, home values in Estes Park, providing a
mechanism for working families to afford to live in Estes Park, transferability of
short-term rental licenses, and the inability to continue operation should the
regulations change.
It was moved and seconded (MacAlpine/Hazelton) to extend the meeting past 10:00
p.m., and it passed unanimously.
The Board discussion was heard and summarized: questioned if Larimer County
health and safety requirements would be required for food storage and
preparation; clarification on the requirement to have an innkeeper on premises at
all times; commented on the operation of a commercial business in a residential
zoning district and expanding that use; questioned the need for the proposed
regulation to require guest access to the kitchen facilities within the B&B; stated
current licensees could provide long-term rentals to the community; the need to
DR
A
F
T
Board of Trustees – November 14, 2023 – Page 5
discuss the creation of a third short-term rental classification; circumvention of the
vacation home cap, the need to amend the meal requirement for properties
operating as a B&B; the possibility of grandfathering current operations; and the
need to bring forward a second moratorium on new B&B applications to allow for
further discussion on B&B regulations. Mayor Koenig closed the public hearing and
it was moved and seconded (Younglund/Cenac) to table Ordinance 11-23 and
extend the current moratorium. No vote occurred on the motion as a substitute
motion was passed.
A substitute motion was moved and seconded (Cenac/Koenig) to table
Ordinance 11-23 to allow further conversation at a future Study Session
pending the ordinance and thereby suspending the submittal of new Bed &
Breakfast applications, and bring forward an Ordinance for a 6-month
temporary moratorium to the November 28, 2023 Town Board Meeting, and it
passed unanimously.
Mayor Koenig called a 10-minute break at 10:45 p.m. and reconvened at 10:53 p.m.
6. RESOLUTION 103-23 LEASE AGREEMENT WITH LTD PROPERTIES LLC
FOR TRANSITIONAL EMPLOYEE HOUSING Town Administrator Machalek and
Director Williamson presented Resolution 103-23 for a lease agreement with LTD
Properties LLC to lease a two-bedroom apartment for two years for housing new
employees on a transitional basis. It was moved and seconded
(Cenac/MacAlpine) to approve Resolution 103-23, and it passed unanimously.
7. RESOLUTION 104-23 AMENDED INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT
(IGA) FOR SOLID WASTE PROGRAMMING AND INFRASTRUCTURE
IMPROVEMENTS. Town Administrator Machalek presented Resolution 104-23 to
amend the IGA for Solid Waste Programming and Infrastructure Improvements.
The amendment would put the IGA into abeyance. He highlighted issues the
County has faced with the program and the potential of a future IGA for Solid
Waste. It was moved and seconded (Martchink/Younglund) to approve
Resolution 104-23, and it passed unanimously.
REPORTS AND DISCUSSION ITEMS:
1. 1% SALES TAX RENEWAL PACKAGE. Town Administrator Machalek provided
a review of the updated 1% Sales Tax Renewal package consisting of 46% toward
Steet Maintenance, 28% for Stormwater Infrastructure Expansion, 12.5% Trail
Expansion and Reconstruction, 9% Wildfire Mitigation, and 4.5% Powerline
Wildfire Mitigation. At the request of the Board, staff met with the Estes Valley Fire
Protection District (EVFPD) and the Executive Leadership Team to evaluate
needs. Staff requested Board direction on the proposed package and allowing the
9% Wildfire Mitigation allocation to be a pass-through to the EVFPD. EVFPD
Division Chief Landkamer provided further information on the District’s intended
use of Sales Tax Renewal funds including staffing, equipment, and projects. The
Board discussed the main locations the EVFPD intends to focus on and their
funding plans after the 10-year Sales Tax Renewal period. The Board directed staff
to continue work on the proposed 1% Sales Tax Renewal package and for the
Wildfire Mitigation allocation to be a pass-through.
Whereupon Mayor Koenig adjourned the meeting at 11:15 p.m.
Wendy Koenig, Mayor
Kimberly Disney, Recording Secretary
DR
A
F
T
Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado November 14, 2023
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 10th day of October, 2023.
Board: Mayor Koenig, Mayor Pro Tem Cenac, Trustees Hazelton,
Lancaster, MacAlpine, Martchink, and Younglund
Attending: All
Also Attending: Town Administrator Machalek, Deputy Town Administrator
Damweber, Town Attorney Kramer, Town Clerk Williamson,
Manager Bangs and Deputy Town Clerk Beers
Estes Park School Board District President Stacy Ferree,
Vice President Ava Kendall, Director Jason Cushner and
Superintendent Bode.
Absent: None
Mayor Koenig called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m.
Town Clerk Williamson introduced Rachel Richards, Administrative Assistant in the
Town Clerk’s office.
OVERVIEW OF MEETING TRANSLATIONS USING WORDLY.
Town Clerk Williamson provided a demonstration of Wordly, a live two-way translation
of audio and captions for Town Board meetings. She stated the two-way translation of
audio would allow members of the public to listen and/or read a translation of the
meeting in one of 53 languages currently, and to speak in their native language which
would be translated to the Board in English allowing a dialogue to occur. Trustee
Younglund questioned whether staff have discussed sharing the services with other
local entities and the benefits in utilizing the program during Trustee Talk sessions.
Trustee MacAlpine questioned whether un-used hours would roll over to which the
Town Clerk Williamson responded they would not. Staff would review the use to
determine the most cost-effective number of hours for each upcoming year.
AUDIT COMMITTEE SUNSET REVIEW.
Town Board Governing Policy 1.6.1.88 states committees would undergo a regular
sunset review at least once every five years. The Audit Committee was last reviewed in
October 2018. There were no Board comments and it was determined the Audit
Committee would undergo the next sunset review according to policy.
BOARD MEMBER “COOLING OFF” PERIOD.
At the October 10, 2023 Study Session, the Board requested staff research cooling-off
periods for elected board members ending their term and possibly becoming an
employee of the Town. Staff collected data from 30 of the 31 market communities to
determine whether or not these communities had a cooling-off period for former board
members and found of those communities, 33% (10) had a cooling-off period for any
employee position, 57% (17) had no cooling-off period, and 10% (3) had a cooling-off
period only for the City/Town Manager position. The communities with a cooling-off
period of any kind (12), two had a six-month period, five had a one-year period, four had
a two-year period, and one prohibited employment for an office created or the salary
increased during the time the board member served their term. Staff requested Board
direction on interest in modifying the Estes Park Municipal Code with a cooling-off
period. The Board consensus preferred instituting a cooling-off period for an office
which was created or the salary was increased during the time the board member was
DR
A
F
T
Town Board Study Session – November 14, 2023 – Page 2
serving, or more specifically for a leadership role similar to the Town Administrator.
Town Administrator Machalek confirmed former board members had been hired as
employees, however, none were hired under one-year from the end of their term. He
further stated a cooling-off period would clearly outline positions advocated by a former
board member would not allow a termed member to apply for said position during this
timeframe. Staff was directed to bring forward a draft ordinance for a future Town
Board meeting with a one-year cooling-off period.
179 STANLEY CIRCLE DRIVE CHECK-IN AND NEXT STEPS.
At the July 25, 2023 Study Session, the Board directed staff to identify development
potential for Town-owned property at 179 Stanley Circle Drive. Staff determined the
property may accommodate a range of 10-12 housing units if rezoned to allow for
greater density, acknowledging further research would be necessary to review area
access improvement or needs. The site, just under 1-acre, zoned E - Estate contains a
single-family home used as a duty house for Town employees living outside of the
Estes Valley who are on-call or otherwise need to be in Town for work related reasons.
Staff requested Board direction on the proposed next steps to rezone and conduct
preliminary planning of the site for Town-employee housing, and the use of the Housing
Reserve Fund and grant funding. Staff stated initiating the predevelopment process,
beginning with rezoning the property to RM - Multi-family Residential, would assist the
Town in submitting competitive applications for future grants. Town Attorney Kramer
clarified the rezoning would be a quasi-judicial matter and the Board would only be
directing staff to initiate the predevelopment process. Town Administrator Machalek
stated as the housing would be for Town employees only, 6E funds could not be used.
Board consensus was to direct staff to begin the predevelopment process.
TRUSTEE & ADMINISTRATOR COMMENTS & QUESTIONS.
Trustee Younglund requested Board interest in a study session related to pension pay
tax and how staff can coordinate with other entities to reduce taxes. Mayor Pro Tem
Cenac requested staff research year-round computer operated lights similar to the
Town of Lyons and whether this would be cost effective for the Town. Town
Administrator Machalek stated staff have researched long term lighting solutions on
West Elkhorn and would discuss holiday and year-round lighting opportunities with Visit
Estes Park.
FUTURE STUDY SESSION AGENDA ITEMS.
Town Administrator Machalek requested, and it was determined, to schedule the Estes
Arts District Arts Master Plan Draft, Encore Arts Update, and Racial Covenants
Research and ordinance at the December 12, 2023 meeting. The HR Strategic Plan
and Organizational Culture Update would be scheduled for January 9, 2024 and
Substandard Rental Housing would be added to approved unscheduled.
Mayor Koenig called a 15-minute break and the meeting resumed at 6:10 p.m.
JOINT DISCUSSION WITH ESTES PARK BOARD OF EDUCATION ON
CHILDCARE. Estes Park School District Board representatives and Superintendent
Bode held a joint discussion with the Board regarding childcare. Mayor Pro Tem Cenac
opened the discussion by requesting the School Board provide details on the School
District’s childcare efforts, workforce housing plans, and potential collaboration with the
Town to address community needs. Superintended Bode stated any K-12 programing
offered by the School District would be directly tied to Colorado State Standards for
education beginning with preschool. She stated the preschool program was extended in
2023 to include two full-day and one half-day classrooms. The School District partners
with the Boys and Girls Club of Larimer County to provide after school education and
enrichment care at the school facilities. The Boys and Girls Club expands into the
summer offering all day programming for families. She stated the Boys and Girls Club
has the capacity to serve approximately 40 families; however, they don’t always meet
capacity due to alternate clubs offered by the school or the Estes Valley Recreation and
Park District (EVRPD). Board questions have been summarized: questioned if the
DR
A
F
T
Town Board Study Session – November 14, 2023 – Page 3
School District would have facility space which could be utilized for childcare potentially
using 6E funds; if the School District and EVRPD coordinate afterschool care and
programs; noted the lease between the School District and the EVRPD for the land the
Community Center sits on included provisions allowing use of the Center by the School
District for programs; and the impact of seasonal families on the School District’s
funding. Superintendent Bode stated if the School District partnered with the Town to
offer or share facilities it would be important to clarify where the District’s and Town’s
responsibilities begin and end. She added the School District would not be able to
expand programs with current staffing and without additional funding. School Board
President Ferree stated her support for more coordination to ensure children do not go
home to an empty house and welcomed future conversations on how both Boards could
meet community needs. Deputy Town Administrator Damweber stated Town staff have
been in discussions on opportunities to meet childcare needs with local partners and the
School District.
There being no further business, Mayor Koenig adjourned the meeting at 6:34 p.m.
Bunny Victoria Beers, Deputy Town Clerk
DR
A
F
T
Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, October 17, 2023
Minutes of a Regular meeting of the ESTES PARK PLANNING COMMISSION of the
Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held in said Town of Estes Park
on the 17 day of October 2023.
Commission: Chair Matt Comstock, Vice-Chair Matthew Heiser, Charles
Cooper, Chris Pawson, David Shirk
Attending: Chair Comstock, Vice-Chair Heiser, Commissioner Hanson,
Commissioner Shirk, Interim Community Development
Director Jason Damweber, Planner I Kara Washam, Senior
Planner Paul Hornbeck, Recording Secretary Karin
Swanlund, Town Attorney Dan Kramer, Town Board Liaison
Barbara MacAlpine
Absent: none (Shirk arrived at 1:35 p.m.)
Chair Comstock called the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m. There were 14 people in
attendance.
AGENDA APPROVAL
It was moved and seconded (Heiser/Cooper) to approve the agenda. The motion
passed 3-0-1, with Pawson abstaining and Shirk not yet in attendance.
PUBLIC COMMENT:
Kristine Poppitz, 650 Devon Drive, thanked Staff for the meet and greet held at the
Community Center on the 16th.
INTRODUCTIONS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
New Commissioner Charles Cooper and new Senior Planner Paul Hornbeck were
introduced.
CONSENT AGENDA APPROVAL
It was moved and seconded (Heiser/Shirk) to approve the consent agenda. The
motion passed 3-0, with Cooper and Pawson abstaining.
ACTION ITEMS
1.Amended Development Plan Max Storage Planner Washam
DJMC LLC, Owner/Applicant
The Applicant has requested a minor modification to the landscape plan of the approved
development plan. The plan proposed planting eight (8) trees along Acacia Drive. With
the proximity of an existing sewer easement and insurance requirements for trees to be
a minimum of ten (10) feet from the structure, the Applicant cannot install trees in this
location. The Applicant proposes shrubs in place of trees in this location, at a ratio of
three (3) shrubs to one (1) tree for a total of twenty-four (24) additional shrubs along
Acacia Drive.
DISCUSSION:
Jes Reetz, Cornerstone Engineering, stated that insurance requirements brought on this
amendment. The shrubs from the original plan are in place, but he can't install the trees
in this location due to sewer easement requirements (10 feet required vs 5 feet available
space). Trees were not a requirement for street buffering in the original Development
Plan. The number of trees was required, but their specific placement was not. The overall
intent should be met.
Discussion on obtaining a Certificate of Occupancy (CO) was had. It was understood that
once this amendment was submitted, the owner could receive the CO and start doing
business. The Improvement guarantee for public improvements has been met. Leftover
funds from that will be rolled into a Landscape Guarantee.
Planning Commission – October 17, 2023 – Page 2
PUBLIC COMMENT:
Mike Copp, 1940 Baldpate Court, stated that wildlife no longer migrates through this
property. The structure has eight large street lights and suggested cutting that number
in half and installing motion sensors. Other storage facilities use LED lights, and the
Water Department uses only three lights. The lighting is affecting property owners two
blocks away on Scott Avenue. He handed out photos of the property at night.
Vice Chair Heiser confirmed that lighting was a part of the landscape plan requirements.
Planner Washam stated that if there is a problem with lighting, it would be a Code
Enforcement issue.
Commissioner Shirk noted that, per code, "if installed, all exterior lighting shall meet the
functional security needs of the proposed land use without affecting adjacent properties
or the community." He requested the Applicant return with a specific landscape plan and
lighting standards, suggesting finding a new location for trees.
It was moved and seconded (Pawson/Shirk) to continue the amended MAX Storage
Development Plan to the next regularly scheduled meeting, finding that a revised
landscaping plan describing the replacement shrub type and location, and more
information on how the landscaping will provide adequate screening of lighting be
submitted. The motion passed 5-0.
2.Location and Extent Review 360 Community Drive Planner Washam
Estes Valley Recreation and Park Department (EVRPD), Applicant.
Planner Washam reviewed the staff report. The EVRPD proposes a new "all wheels"
concrete/shotcrete skate park at Stanley Park. The skate park will be approximately
10,500 square feet in size. Public facilities and utilities will not be impacted. Lighting or
power to the skate park is not being proposed, as the intention is a dawn-to-dusk
operation.
PUBLIC COMMENT: none
DISCUSSION:
Vice Chair Heiser suggested the Planning Commission could approve a Master Plan for
Stanley Park to alleviate future individual Location & Extent hearings for the Park.
It was moved and seconded (Shirk/Pawson) to approve the Location and Extent
Review application, according to findings recommended by Staff. The motion
passed 5-0.
3. Rezone TBD Raven Avenue Planner Washam
Habitat for Humanity of the St. Vrain Valley, Inc., Owner/Applicant
The Applicant proposes rezoning the 0.82-acre parcel from RM (Multi-family
Residential) to R-1 (Single-Family Residential), with a minimum lot size of 5,000 square
feet, to create five (5) lots. The two western lots, Lots 1 and 2, will have access by a
single point from Raven Avenue, with Lots 3, 4 and 5 having individual access directly
from Raven Avenue.
Heiser disclosed that between 1999-2015 he was on the Board of the local Habitat for
Humanity but had no financial or prior interest in this.
PUBLIC COMMENT:
Scott Moulton, Executive Director of the Housing Authority, expressed support and the
need for the project.
Planning Commission – October 17, 2023 – Page 3
DISCUSSION:
David Emerson, Habitat for Humanity Director, stated that he has worked on this since
2019. Habitat does not want condo/stacked uses, hence the reason for the rezoning
request. Medical and Education are the primary industries served by Habitat. He
explained that Habitat clearly intended to develop this lot and that the landowners had
been purposely working with them since the start in 2011.
The Deed Restriction review is unnecessary during this hearing, per Town Attorney
Kramer.
There is no requirement for a Development Plan in single-family developments; the
Preliminary Subdivision Plat provides the documentation needed.
Chair Comstock suggested expediting a Code Amendment that addresses "changes in
conditions in the areas affected" as this wording is too vague.
Shirk noted that his subdivision was created in 2020, thus creating a change in conditions.
Considerable conversation on interpreting the Development Code and Comprehensive
Plan, where mistakes were made, and the history of the lot was had.
Shirk recommended denying the zoning request because the town board approved a
multi-family zoned lot on this location three years ago. He later withdrew the motion.
Shirk questioned why townhouses weren't considered. That would maintain the multi-
family zoning, allow the Applicant to use the property as they want and is in alignment
with the Comprehensive Plan, giving a different product without rezoning. Pawson
concurred. Emerson explained that they were told the minimum lot size would still be an
issue, or they would have pursued that path.
It was moved and seconded (Heiser/Cooper) to forward a recommendation of
approval to the Town Board of Trustees of the Zoning Map Amendment application
to rezone the 0.82-acre parcel from RM to R-1, according to findings of fact
recommended by Staff. We find that the conditions of 3.3.d have been met and are
compatible with the Comprehensive Plan and existing growth patterns in the Estes
Valley. The motion passed 3-2, with Shirk and Pawson voting against.
A five-minute break was taken at 3:20 p.m. Commissioner Pawson had prior
commitments and excused himself from the meeting.
4.Preliminary Plat TBD Raven Avenue Planner Washam
Habitat for Humanity of the St. Vrain Valley, Inc., Owner/Applicant
Habitat for Humanity plans to develop the five proposed lots with single-family residences
in the R-1 zone, a use-by-right. The subdivision application is contingent on approval of
the proposed rezoning application, known as Raven Subdivision Rezoning. Habitat for
Humanity will construct the dwellings and sell the homes to individual, qualified buyers.
§4.3.D.4 of the Estes Park Development Code (EPDC) states, "All developments in the
R-1 District shall be subject to the attainable housing limitations for rental and owner
occupancy outlined in §11.4.C." A Deed Restriction or Restrictive Covenant and
Agreement is required per §11.4.E.4.
PUBLIC COMMENT:
Ken Davis, 1776 Olympian Lane Unit B, supports the project. It provides needed
workforce housing and is compatible with the other houses across the street.
Planning Commission – October 17, 2023 – Page 4
John Fridrich, 1776 Olympian Lane Unit D, commented that, concerning the willow
removal, there are drawbacks to any development. He supports the project and won't
miss the willows if they must be removed.
DISCUSSION:
The willows are not in a wetlands area. Shirk recommended preserving the willows by
incorporating them into the open space and would like to see what vegetation is being
removed. Per Daniel Barrett, Van Horn Engineering, regrading will occur for drainage to
flow into the detention pond, which may affect the willows. Shirk requested more
consideration for conservation and possible movement of the swale, so it isn't impacting
the willows, starting with the stormwater design. Emerson stated that there aren't many
options due to drainage, existing conditions and landscaping near a house.
The plan is for the Housing Authority to take responsibility for the open space on Lot 5.
This is simpler than having five owners governing an out-lot. There is still more to be
worked through with the Conservation Easement before this goes before the Town Board,
per Attorney Kramer.
Heiser stated that the findings for a continuance would not change the conditions or what
this plan is trying to accomplish.
It was moved and seconded (Shirk/Comstock) to continue the recommendation of
the Raven Subdivision Preliminary Plat to the next regular meeting. We request
more information on 7.2.d, limits of disturbance, Subsection 2, criteria for
establishing limits of disturbance, information about the maintenance of a
stormwater pond, requirements of appendix B.2.c, submittal requirements for
Preliminary Subdivision Plans showing the vegetation on site. The Applicant
consented to the continuation. The motion passed 4-0.
REPORTS:
Interim Director Damweber spoke on where the Town stands with hiring a new
Community Development Director. Interviews of four candidates took place on October
16. Town Administrator Machalek will be the final decision maker.
There being no further business, Chair Comstock adjourned the meeting at 4:05 p.m.
_______________________________
Chair Comstock
Karin Swanlund, Recording Secretary
PUBLIC WORKS Memo
To: Honorable Mayor Koenig
Board of Trustees
Through: Town Administrator Machalek
From: Brian Berg, Parks Supervisor
Greg Muhonen, PE, Public Works Director
Date: November 28, 2023
RE: Consider the Acceptance of Art in Public Places Sculpture Donation –
Book Loving Betty
(Mark all that apply)
PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE LAND USE
CONTRACT/AGREEMENT RESOLUTION OTHER______________
QUASI-JUDICIAL YES NO
Objective:
Public Works staff request Town Board consider accepting the private Art in Public
Places (AIPP) donation of a sculpture titled “Book Loving Betty Reading Girl Bronze
Garden Statue” for placement near the Estes Valley Library (ELV) entrance.
Present Situation:
A private donor has submitted an AIPP Artwork Donation Form for this bronze statue of
a young girl reading on a stack of books. The placement sites suggested by the donor
are three landscape beds with center voids that would accommodate a statue of this
particular size. Currently, there is another bronze statue on the sidewalk leading into the
EVL from East Elkhorn Avenue.
Proposal:
The AIPP Donation Form provides a full description of this Design Toscano artwork and
indicates the donor’s willingness to pay for all creation, delivery, and installation costs.
The donor also requests affixing on the sculpture a small bronze memorial plaque
honoring Ellen Reininga Mazurana.
Advantages:
•Enhance the Town’s art inventory with a beautiful sculpture that also draws
attention to the EVL.
•Installation costs and base rock are included with the donation.
Disadvantages:
• The Town’s Parks Division would need to add this artwork to their annual
maintenance program.
• This sculpture is mass-produced and is not an original work of art. Policy 880
Public Art broadly limits Town purchases of public art to “original creations of
visual art”; however, the policy does not prohibit acceptance of donated mass-
produced sculpture.
Action Recommended
Public Works staff request that the Town Board consider acceptance of this AIPP
donation.
Finance/Resource Impact:
A bronze statue requires annual maintenance work estimated to cost about $200. The
funds would come from General Fund account #101-5200-452-25-01.
Level of Public Interest
There is a low level of public interest in this proposal.
Sample Motion:
I move for the approval/denial of the “Book Loving Betty” AIPP donation.
Attachments:
1. AIPP Artwork Donation Form – Book Loving Betty
ATTACHMENT 1
TOWN BOARD MEETING
November 28, 2023
Report & Discussion Item #1 – Environmental
Assessment for RMNP’s Day Use Visitor Access
Plan.
No packet material was provided for this
item.
11/29/2023
1
NPS ●2023
Day Use Visitor Access Plan and Environmental Assessment
Grand Lake Board of Trustees –November 2023
Rocky Mountain National Park
WelcomeWelcome
N
P
S
●
2
0
2
3
Welcome!
The National Park Service is seeking your
input on the Day Use Visitor Access Plan
and Environmental Assessment at Rocky
Mountain National Park.
https://parkplanning.nps.gov/ROMO_DUVAS
2
1
2
11/29/2023
2
N
P
S
●
2
0
2
3
Meeting Purpose
The goal of this meeting is to:
•orient you to the plan and EA components
•answer any questions you have that will help inform your public comments
•share how to participate in this process.
N
P
S
●
2
0
2
3
2
3
4
Overview of Presentation
Introduction
Plan Background
The Alternatives
What do YOU think?
4
1 Introduction
3
4
11/29/2023
3
N
P
S
●
2
0
2
3
Introduction1Introduction
N
P
S
●
2
0
2
3
National Park Service
Mission
Organic Act
..to conserve park resources and to provide for their use
and enjoyment “in such a manner and by such means as
will leave them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future
generations.”
In 2009, 95 percent of Rocky
Mountain National Park was designated as
wilderness
“an area where the earth and its community of life are
untrammeled by man, where man himself is a visitor who
does not remain.”
6
5
6
11/29/2023
4
NPS ●2023
Rocky
Mountain
National Park
7
N
P
S
●
2
0
2
3
Introduction2Plan Background
7
8
11/29/2023
5
N
P
S
●
2
0
2
3
Purpose and Need for the Plan
•Protect and enhance the park's fundamental resources and values and
achieve and maintain desired conditions
•Rapid growth in day use visitation starting in 2012
•2019 was record visitation with 4.6 million visitors, a 44% increase since
2012
9
N
P
S
●
2
0
2
3
Primary Issues This Plan
Addresses
10
•Natural and Cultural Resource Issues
•Visitor Experience Issues
•Staff and Visitor Safety Issues
•Facilities and Operations Issues
9
10
11/29/2023
6
NPS ●2023
1978 ‐Shuttle buses in the Bear Lake Road Corridor
2000 –Major improvements to shuttle system
including expansion of the park and ride
2006‐Hiker shuttle added to connect Estes Park to
Rocky Mountain National Park.
2015‐Real time traffic data with webcams at east‐
side entrance station
2016‐2019 –Bear Lake Road Restrictions and active
parking management at Alpine Visitor Center
2017‐Rocky Pledge started
2017‐2019 –Wild Basin Road Restrictions
2020‐2023 –Timed entry permit system (TEPS)
pilots
History Of Day‐Use Visitor Access Strategies At Rocky
Mountain National Park
N
P
S
●
2
0
2
3
2016‐2020: Bear Lake Road Restrictions
2016‐2019: Managed Parking at Alpine
Visitor Center
2017‐2019: Wild Basin Road Restrictions
2020‐2023: Timed Entry Permit System Pilots
Ongoing:
•Parking Management with deterrence
and signage
•Education and Enforcement
12
Access Strategy Pilots
11
12
11/29/2023
7
N
P
S
●
2
0
2
3
Visitor Use Management Framework
13
National Park Service VUM Objectives:
Enhance opportunities to connect visitors to
the park’s fundamental resources and values
Implement effective visitor use management
to improve experiences and protect resources
Connect the evaluation of issues,
opportunities, and implementation strategies
Want to learn more?
Visitorusemanagement.nps.gov
N
P
S
●
2
0
2
3
Summary of Civic Engagement
Round 1: Issues and Values – Summer 2021
•What issues most interfere with your desired park experiences? How can the park better protect resources for
future generations?"
•60‐day public comment period with virtual public meetings
•Comments were used to inform desired conditions, issues analysis, and strategy identification
Round 2: Strategies –Winter 2022/2023
•Based on your desired experiences and protection of natural and cultural resources at Rocky Mountain National
Park, which of the (or combination of ideas) do you think best achieve the purpose of the plan?
•51‐day public comment period with a virtual public meeting and an open house in Estes Park, CO.
•Comments were used to inform alternatives in the Day Use Visitor Access Plan
Round 3: Day Use Visitor Access Plan and Environmental Assessment –Winter 2023/2024
•We value your feedback on the proposed alternatives to ensure quality visitor experience in a way that preserves
the natural, cultural, wilderness, and recreational resources and the environmental analysis of these alternatives.
•45‐day public comment period with a virtual public meeting and open houses in Estes Park and Grand Lake.
•Comments will be used to finalize the Rocky Mountain Day Use Visitor Access Plan.
13
14
11/29/2023
8
N
P
S
●
2
0
2
3
Introduction3The Alternatives
N
P
S
●
2
0
2
3
What is an Alternative?
•Alternatives explore
different ways to meet the
Purpose and Need of the
plan
•Must be technically and
economically feasible
•Need to be consistent
with the basic policy
objectives for
management of the area
15
16
11/29/2023
9
N
P
S
●
2
0
2
3
Strategies Common To All Alternatives
•Visitor Information, Orientation, and
Enforcement
•Technology Improvements
•Shuttles
•Transit Partnerships
•Tribal Nation Access
•Private Landowner Access
•Commercial Visitor Services
•Temporary Area Closures for High‐
Demand Areas
N
P
S
●
2
0
2
3
Alternative A: No Action, Return to Pre-2020 Pilot Management
Park is managed under the Pre‐TEPS management portfolio
•This reflects the tools and strategies used in 2016‐2019
•Access for vehicles to all areas of the park would be on a first
come first served basis
•Experience from previous summers shows that the closures:
•Occur daily especially the Bear Lake Road Corridor, Wild Basin,
and Alpine Visitor Center
•Vary in length, and could last several hours
•Are not always predictable
•Displaces visitors from their primary destinations and nearby
resources would be impacted
•Needs to be triaged as visitor use spreads to new areas and
resources are impacted
E X P E R I E N C E Y O U R A M E R I C A
17
18
11/29/2023
10
N
P
S
●
2
0
2
3
Strategies Common to Alternatives B, C, AND D
•Adopt Zoning and Desired Conditions
•Adopt Indicators and Thresholds
•Timed Entry Reservations for the
Bear Lake Road Corridor
•Reservation Systems
•Fees
•Commercial Visitor Services
•Identify Visitor Capacities
N
P
S
●
2
0
2
3
Timed Entry Reservations for Bear Lake Road Corridor
•Require visitors in private vehicles and on the Hiker Shuttle to obtain a timed entry reservation to
access the Bear Lake Road Corridor
•Reservation system would allow for visitor arrivals within a distinct block of time (e.g., from 12:00
p.m. to 2:00 p.m.) on the day of the reservation
•Upon initial implementation of this plan, this system would be in place from May through October
from 5:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. each day
Reservation systems
•Park staff would adaptively manage both the timed entry reservation for the Bear Lake Road Corridor
and any reservation system described in the subsequent alternative
•The following components of a reservation or timed entry system may shift annually, depending on
factors including, but not limited to, visitor use patterns, staff availability, and shuttle operations
•Any changes to the reservation system would be within the range of adaptive management
strategies listed below and would be communicated with the public before implementation
E X P E R I E N C E Y O U R A M E R I C A
Strategies Common to Alternatives B,C, AND D
19
20
11/29/2023
11
N
P
S
●
2
0
2
3
Strategies Common to Alternatives B, C, AND D
Desired Conditions
•Desired conditions are statements of aspiration that
describe resource conditions, visitor experiences and
opportuniƟes, and faciliƟes and services for an area
•Wilderness Designation (95% of the park) provides the first
set of desired conditions – characteristics such as pristine,
natural conditions, opportunity for solitude, unconfined
recreation, and untrammeled
Indicators and Thresholds
•Articulates minimally acceptable conditions for key
resources and, if needed, when the park will take corrective
action
Visitor Capacities
•Identifies visitor capacities and actions to manage to those
capacities ‐consistent with 1978 Parks and Recreation Act
E X P E R I E N C E Y O U R A M E R I C A
N
P
S
●
2
0
2
3
Alternative B: Timed Entry Reservations for Rest of Park and Timed Entry for Bear Lake Road Corridor (Proposed Action and NPS Preferred Alternative)
Similar to management under TEPS pilot (2021‐present)
Timed entry reservation for Bear Lake Road Corridor
•Visitors would need to arrive during their reservation window
Timed entry reservation for the rest of the park
•Visitors would need to arrive during their reservation window
•Maximizes visitor access by dispersing use spatially and
temporally
Expected decrease of approximately 8% in daily visitation
when reservations are in effect compared to alternative A
E X P E R I E N C E Y O U R A M E R I C A
21
22
11/29/2023
12
N
P
S
●
2
0
2
3
Timed entry reservations for the Bear Lake Road Corridor
•Visitors would need to arrive during their reservation window
Rest of park reservations would be daily
•Would allow for arrival anytime on the day of reservation
•Reservations would be managed to maintain desired conditions during
high visitor use times of day, limiting total number of reservations
available
Expected decrease of approximately 21% in daily visitation
when reservations are in effect compared to alternative A
Longs Peak Trailhead
•Could implement a limited use or educational permit
E X P E R I E N C E Y O U R A M E R I C A
Alternative C: Daily Reservations for Rest of Park and Timed Entry for Bear Lake Road Corridor
N
P
S
●
2
0
2
3
Alternative D: Temporary Entrance Station Closures for Rest of the Park and Timed Entry for Bear Lake Road Corridor
Timed entry reservations for the Bear Lake Road Corridor
•Visitors would need to arrive during their reservation window
Entrance station closures in the rest of the park
•Access for private vehicles on first come first served basis
•After a set number of vehicles enters, connected entrance stations
would close
•Entrance stations would remain closed until desired conditions could be
maintained with additional visitation
•Entrance stations could remain closed for several hours and visitors
would be asked to return at a later time. Queuing would not be
permitted
•BLRC reservation holders could still enter the park during reservation
time
Expected decrease of approximately 25% in daily visitation when reservations
are in effect compared to alternative A E X P E R I E N C E Y O U R A M E R I C A
23
24
11/29/2023
13
N
P
S
●
2
0
2
3
Summary of Action Alternatives
Alternative DAlternative CAlternative B
Timed‐Entry for Bear Lake Road CorridorBear Lake Road Corridor
Temporary closures would
be triggered based on the
number of vehicles that
had entered the park for
that day.
Daily Entry for Rest of ParkTimed‐Entry for Rest of
Park
Rest of Park
Likely less than 6,600
vehicles7,000 vehicles7,300 vehiclesExpected Daily Volume
Spontaneous arrivals, but a
reactive system that
is highly unpredictable.
Higher quality visitor
experience, but fewer
visitors have access during
managed periods.
Best at balancing quality of
visitor experience
with quantity of access.
Purpose and Need
Visitor Experience
Estimated Vehicle Entries
Across the Day
N
P
S
●
2
0
2
3
Alternatives And Actions Considered But Dismissed
•Stand‐alone Intelligent Transportation System
•Expanded infrastructure
Parking garage or other lot expansions
•Expanded Shuttle Services
•Multi‐day reservations
•Daily reservations to the Bear Lake Road Corridor
E X P E R I E N C E Y O U R A M E R I C A
The following alternatives were dismissed from further
analysis because they do not meet the purpose and
need
25
26
11/29/2023
14
N
P
S
●
2
0
2
3
Affected Environmental Consequences
This chapter describes the current and expected future condition of:
•visitor use, access, and experience;
•socioeconomics;
•alpine tundra;
•lakeshore and streamside vegetation;
•opportunities for solitude in wilderness;
•and the natural quality of wilderness character.
These resources relate to the key issues, and this impact analysis will inform the NPS decision on how to
provide day use visitor access in a way that protects and enhances the park’s fundamental resources and
allows visitors to have high‐quality experiences.
N
P
S
●
2
0
2
3
Impact Topics Considered But Dismissed From
Detailed Analysis
•Air Quality
•Soundscapes
•Historic Resources
•Archeological Resources
•Ethnographic Resources
•Wilderness Qualities: Untrammeled,
Undeveloped, Other Features of
Value
•Wildlife
E X P E R I E N C E Y O U R A M E R I C A
27
28
11/29/2023
15
N
P
S
●
2
0
2
3
Introduction4What do YOU Think?
NPS ●2023
29
30
11/29/2023
16
N
P
S
●
2
0
2
3
We want to hear from you!
Comments on the plan are due December 14, 2023.
To be most helpful, your comments should address:
1. The purpose and need for action
2. The environmental issues and/or impact topics analyzed
3. Your feedback on the alternatives, including mitigation measures which could reduce
potentially harmful effects; and
4. The information used to describe the affected environment and environmental consequences
The NPS specifically asks for your response to the following:
Do you have feedback on the accuracy or adequacy of our environmental analysis?
Are there opportuniƟes to beƩer explain the alternaƟves and analysis?
See details at:
https://parkplanning.nps.gov/ROMO_DUVAS
NPS ●202332
Questions?
Thank you!
31
32
11/29/2023
17
NPS ●2023
BACK UPS
33
N
P
S
●
2
0
2
3
Consultation
The National Park Service consulted with and
received comments from various agencies,
Traditionally Associated Tribal Nations,
organizations, and interested persons in
preparing this document. The process of
consultation and coordination is an important
part of this project.
33
34
11/29/2023
18
N
P
S
●
2
0
2
3
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
12.0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 101112131415161718192021222324
Pe
r
c
e
n
t
a
g
e
of
Da
i
l
y
Ve
h
i
c
l
e
Vi
s
i
t
a
t
i
o
n
Hour of the Day
Alt A
Alt B
Alt C
Alt D
N
P
S
●
2
0
2
3
35
36
11/29/2023
19
N
P
S
●
2
0
2
3
Screen shot for where the EA is
NPS ●202338
37
38
11/29/2023
20
N
P
S
●
2
0
2
3
Strategies should consider:
39
Effective
DesirableFeasible
N
P
S
●
2
0
2
3
39
40
11/29/2023
21
N
P
S
●
2
0
2
3
Instructions for this virtual meeting
Key Controls
Raise hand and other
options
N
P
S
●
2
0
2
3
What we heard from you
42
Noise
Crowds/Traffic
Congestion/Full Parking
Human Behavior
Poorly Maintained
Facilities / Inadequate
points of entry
Timed Entry
Reservations
Accessibility
"What issues most interfere with your desired park experiences"
Photo/Jacob Job
41
42
11/29/2023
22
N
P
S
●
2
0
2
3
What we heard from you
Education &
Enforcement
More Staffing
and Volunteers
Infrastructure
Improvement
Timed Entry /
Reservations
Parking‐related
options
"How can the park better protect resources for future generations?"
Shuttles
Park/Area Closures
Temporary Vehicle
Restrictions
Area Specific
Strategies
Increased Fees
NPS/Grossman
N
P
S
●
2
0
2
3
What we heard from you
Timed Entry /
Reservations
Park Staff
Volunteers
"What is the park doing well to manage these issues that you would like to see continue"
Shuttles
43
44
11/29/2023
23
N
P
S
●
2
0
2
3
45
PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED ON 11/27/2023
Board of Trustees Public Comment
Name: Brian Denning
Stance on Item: Against
Agenda Item Title: Environmental Assessment for RMNP's Day Use Visitor Access Plan.
Public Comment:
Pleased see attached documents. Thanks you
File Upload
Please note, all information provided in this form is considered public record and will be included as permanent record for
the item which it references.
Files are limited to PDF or JPG.
Questions for Town Board, Mayor, and RMNP.pdf 63.06KB
25 MB limit. Video files cannot be saved to the final packet and must be transcribed before submitting.
Hello Mayor and Town Trustees,
I am a long time resident and a business owner in Estes Park.
Submitted below are my comments on Rocky Mountain National Park’s Environmental
Assessment and their plans to use the preferred alternative to permanently implement
reservations and restrict access to RMNP. Some questions for the Mayor and Town Board and
also I hope you can bring up and ask RMNP the questions below on behalf of the public,
regardless of what your own personal views and opinions may be. Thank you.
For the Mayor and Town Board:
Do you agree with the National Park Service's characterization of the socioeconomic
impact on the town of Estes Park from a permanent reservation system, as outlined in
section three of the Environmental Assessment?
RMNP has conceded that there is no scenario where Estes Park residents or retirees
can get any preferred or discounted access to the Park during reservations, even
though they acknowledge this is why many people have moved to the area.
What would you say to locals and residents, especially the elderly, who can no longer
easily get into the Park when it's convenient for them because of reservations?
Does the Town have an official stance/position on permanent timed entry and
restrictions?
Questions for RMNP:
1. Will visitor capacity under a permanent system be determined by subjective
factors as defined by the Interagency Visitor Use Management Council?
(IVUM) The attached table from the EA shows specific capacity figures for popular
areas of the Park like Wild Basin and Longs Peak that I think would surprise a lot of
people. My understanding is that these are based on factors from the IVUM that include
things like 'encounter rates in wilderness zones' and 'people per viewshed.' The
guidance also suggests capacity is determined by 'desired conditions' which in turn are
derived from internally generated 'thresholds' and 'indicators.' In all of the previous
pilots, visitor capacity (and the number of reservations) has supposedly been a function
of parking places. The EA suggests a massive shift from that to factors opaquely
defined by the Park. This could result in even greater restrictions to the Park than any of
the pilots so far. If true, people should know that when commenting. If the new
Superintendent gets to decide what areas of the Park are open or closed on a daily
basis, no matter how well-intentioned his actions, that is a huge departure from the
principle that public lands belong to the people.
2. Year round and all day reservations. In three of the four alternatives presented by
the Park, the new system, if adopted, would allow reservations to be required ANY day
of the year for any time whatsoever (earlier in the day, or later in the day, or earlier in the
spring and later in the Fall). In the web Q&A, the Park said it didn't foresee a
requirement for reservations year round. However the preferred alternatives would
allow it to require a reservation on ANY day of the year, at any time. In practice, that
means on weekends like the one upcoming, reservations could be required with little or
no notice. The Park described this as a 'flexible' and 'adaptive' management strategy.
But I can also see a lot of bewildered and frustrated visitors who come up to Estes Park
this weekend, or in mid-February, or any-time really, and find that the rules have
changed with no notice. What's the point of planning your visit if the rules governing it
can change on a subjective dime?
3. Temporary closures and speci fic area reservations. Does the preferred
alternative give Park management the authority to require a reservation for a specific
trail, area, or destination, at any time and for any reason? Similarly, does the preferred
alternative allow for the 'temporary' closure of any trail, area, or destination for any
reason? If so, this too is a vast expansion of the authority to restrict access in any of the
previous pilots. And now this authority would be permanent.
4. Special Access and exemption from reservations and timed entry, granted to
RMNP authorized guests, and other members of the community and outlying
communities. RMNP has has stated there is no preferential treatment for locals or any
other visitors. Can RMNP provide an explanation to the Public how this special access
without making reservations, is not preferential treatment or discriminatory?
Those are the main concerns I had. I should note that the Park has decided that in all
cases--of the four alternatives it proposed--restrictions on the Bear Lake corridor are
staying. It is misleading to say one of the alternatives is to return to pre-Covid
management (first come, first serve).
But I think Estes Park residents and those on the Front Range who've moved here to
have year-round access to the national park should be fully informed about the scope of
the authority to restrict access at any time of year, and for any reason, the Park is
asking for.
It's a vast expansion of their power that goes beyond what even reasonable people
went along with in the pilots. It will have long-term socioeconomic consequences for
both RMNP and Estes Park. I hope the Trustees have taken the time to read the EA,
especially those sections dedicated to looking at the impact of permanent reservations
on gateway communities; their citizens, visitors, and businesses.
Thanks in advance for the attention you can bring to these issues, in your capacity as
Mayor, and Trustees, on behalf of the public.
Either way, NPS has managed to avoid any in-person, on-the-record Q&A that allows
the public to get specific answers to specific questions. Regardless of your personal (or
public) views on the necessity and utility of reservations, they should have to answer
clear questions about what these changes mean for public access to public lands.
Accountability for proposed policy is for everyone.
Respectfully,
Brian Denning
PROCEDURE FOR PUBLIC HEARING
Applicable items include: Rate Hearings, Code Adoption, Budget Adoption
1.MAYOR.
The next order of business will be the public hearing on ACTION ITEM 1.
Ordinance 12-23 Temporary 6-Month Moratorium on New Bed & Breakfast
Inn Business Licenses.
At this hearing, the Board of Trustees shall consider the information
presented during the public hearing, from the Town staff, public comment,
and written comments received on the item.
Any member of the Board may ask questions at any stage of the public
hearing which may be responded to at that time.
Mayor declares the Public Hearing open.
2.STAFF REPORT.
Review the staff report.
3.PUBLIC COMMENT.
Any person will be given an opportunity to address the Board concerning the
item. All individuals must state their name and address for the record.
Comments from the public are requested to be limited to three minutes per
person.
4.MAYOR.
Ask the Town Clerk whether any communications have been received in regard
to the item which are not in the Board packet.
Ask the Board of Trustees if there are any further questions concerning the item.
Indicate that all reports, statements, exhibits, and written communications
presented will be accepted as part of the record.
Declare the public hearing closed.
Request Board consider a motion.
7.SUGGESTED MOTION.
Suggested motion(s) are set forth in the staff report.
8.DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION.
Discussion by the Board on the motion.
9.VOTE ON THE MOTION.
Vote on the motion or consideration of another action.
*NOTE: Ordinances are read into record at the discretion of the Mayor as it is not required
to do so by State Statute.
TOWN CLERK Memo
To: Honorable Mayor Koenig
Board of Trustees
Through Town Administrator Machalek
From: Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk
Date: November 28, 2023
RE: Ordinance 12-23 Temporary Moratorium on New Bed and Breakfast Inn
Business Licenses
Objective:
To consider a second temporary 6-month moratorium for bed & breakfast licenses to
allow the Town Board to review options to update the definition and regulations in the
Estes Park Municipal Code.
Present Situation:
Staff presented updated regulations and an ordinance to the Town Board at the
November 14, 2023 meeting. The Board tabled the item at the meeting and requested
an additional study session to review the matter further. The Board further requested an
extension of a previous 6-month moratorium approved May 23, 2023 and expired on
November 23, 2023.
Proposal:
The attached ordinance would establish a second 6-month temporary moratorium on the
issuance of bed & breakfast licenses. The moratorium will allow the Board and staff time
to prepare revisions to the current language. The moratorium could end prior to the 6
months if the Board takes action on revisions to the code sooner.
Advantages:
•The moratorium provides time to hold an additional study session and bring
forward revised code regulations.
Disadvantages:
•Current and future applications for bed & breakfasts would not be able to be
processed or issued for the next 6 months.
Action Recommended:
To approve Ordinance 12-23 to establish the moratorium.
Budget:
None.
Level of Public Interest.
Low.
Sample Motion:
I move to approve/deny the Ordinance 12-23
Attachments
1. Ordinance 12-23
ORDINANCE NO. 12-23
AN ORDINANCE FOR A SIX-MONTH MORATORIUM ON NEW BED AND
BREAKFAST INN BUSINESS LICENSES
WHEREAS, bed and breakfast inns are a distinct category of business license
under the Estes Park Municipal Code, similar to a vacation home but requiring an on-site
manager to reside on the premises; and
WHEREAS, the Town has extensive regulations for vacation homes and less
extensive regulations for bed and breakfast inns; and
WHEREAS, the Town is concerned that property owners will begin imminently to
attempt to use bed and breakfast inn business licenses for businesses that more closely
resemble vacation homes, in order to avoid vacation home regulations; and
WHEREAS, the Town therefore faces an urgent need to update its bed and
breakfast inn business license regulations to ensure they are applied in a way that
matches the Town’s intent for the category; and
WHEREAS, the Town previously enacted a temporary moratorium, effective May
23, 2023, to give it the opportunity to update its bed and breakfast inn regulations, and
the update is not yet complete; and
WHEREAS, the Town desires to enact a second temporary moratorium, effective
November 23, 2023, to give it the opportunity to update its bed and breakfast inn
regulations.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF
THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1: Effective beginning November 23, 2023, and continuing until May 23,
2024 or until earlier terminated by the Board of Trustees, the Town shall neither accept
nor process applications for new bed and breakfast inn business licenses as described in
chapter 5.20 of the Municipal Code, nor issue new such licenses. Any required renewals
of existing licenses may occur as provided in the Code. The purpose of this moratorium
is to allow the Town time to develop new regulations for bed and breakfast inns. Any
application for a bed and breakfast inn business license pending as of November 23,
2023 or at any time during this moratorium carries with it no right to approval under
preexisting regulations. If ordinances change while such an application is pending, the
application would be evaluated under the terms of the new ordinances.
Section 2: This Ordinance shall take effect and be enforced thirty (30) days after
its adoption and publication.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Trustees of the Town of Estes Park,
Colorado this ____ day of _______________, 2023.
TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO
By:
Mayor
ATTEST:
Town Clerk
ATTACHMENT 1
I hereby certify that the above Ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the Board
of Trustees on the day of , 2023 and published by title in a
newspaper of general circulation in the Town of Estes Park, Colorado, on the day of
, 2023, all as required by the Statutes of the State of Colorado.
Town Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Town Attorney
FINANCE Memo
To: Honorable Mayor Koenig
Board of Trustees
Through: Town Administrator Machalek
From: Jeremy Creamean, Finance Director
Date: 11-28-2023
RE: Policy 603 - Utility Fee Amortization
(Mark all that apply)
PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE LAND USE
CONTRACT/AGREEMENT RESOLUTION OTHER Policy
QUASI-JUDICIAL YES NO
Objective:
To facilitate the support of essential community needs, staff proposes a policy that
permits the amortization of utility fees.
Present Situation:
The Town Board of Trustees is committed to supporting essential community needs
such as attainable and workforce housing, assisted living, public-sector projects, and
health care services. In certain situations, the Town can support these essential
community needs with an option to amortize water system development and water
rights fees over time.
Proposal:
Staff proposes the policy to limit the eligible entities and developments, limit the eligible
projects and limit minimum project/fee amount to be amortized.
Advantages:
• Incentivizes startup or expansion of essential community needs.
• Supports community members who benefit from these essential community goods and
services.
Disadvantages:
• Additional workload of tracking payments; however, finance has existing payment
processes and procedures which can be expanded to accommodate the amortization of
utility fees.
• Delayed funding of water system capital improvement projects; however, we anticipate
the eligibility requirements will be limited and have no measurable impact on Capital
Improvement Plans.
Action Recommended:
The staff recommends the adoption of the attached policy, which outlines the criteria,
procedure, and terms and conditions for the eligible amortization of utility fees.
Finance/Resource Impact:
503-0000-349.60-01, Plant Development Fees
503-0000-349.60-05, Water Rights Fee
Spreads out revenues in the above accounts from certain connections over a number of
years (5 or 10, depending on the project), reducing revenue in the first year applicable
to the connection, and increasing in future periods for that specific connection. Interest
will be charged to the developer.
Level of Public Interest
Low
Sample Motion:
I move for the approval/denial of proposed policy 603 – Utility Fee Amortization.
Attachments:
1. Finance Department Policy 603, Utility Fee Amortization
Policy 603 - Fee Amortization 11/28/2023
Town of Estes Park, Finance Dept. Page 1 of 3
Document Title
Revisions: 0
Effective Period: Until Superseded
Review Schedule: Biennially- Summer
Effective Date: 01/01/2023
References: N/A
FINANCE DEPARTMENT
603
Utility Fee Amortization
1.PURPOSE
To establish a policy for amortization of Utilities fees in support of essential community
needs.
2.POLICY
a.It is the policy of the Town Board of Trustees to support essential community needs
including attainable and workforce housing, assisted living, public-sector projects, and
health care services by amortizing certain fees assessed by the Utilities Department.
The Comprehensive Plan may be consulted as a guide in more specifically identifying
these community needs.
b.Only Water System Development and Water Rights fees (i.e., tap fees) shall be
eligible for amortization.
c.Fee amortization is a privilege granted at the discretion of the Town, not a right or
entitlement, in connection with any given development project or proposal.
3.CRITERIA
a.The following entities and developments may be eligible for amortization:
i.Governmental unit construction (federal, state, county, local); including tax
districts/special districts (e.g., hospital, library, parks and recreation);
ii.Organizations providing low-income health and human services;
iii.Attainable or workforce housing secured by a deed restriction or restrictive
covenant, as defined in section 11.4(C) of the Estes Park Development Code,
or Policy 227; and
iv.Developments transitioning to Town water service from other sources of water
supply.
b.The following criteria will be used to qualify low-income health and human services,
and attainable or workforce housing projects:
i.A critical service is being provided;
ii.The permitted project or building will serve or support a currently underserved
or disadvantaged segment of the community; and
iii.The population being served is the general public and is not subject to any
pre-qualification other than a needs-based (attainability) qualification, or (in the
case of housing) a local employment (workforce) qualification;
c.Amortization requests shall not be considered or approved where any total tap fees
are less than fifty thousand dollars ($50,000), due to the administrative cost of
carrying the obligation instrument for small amounts.
ATTACHMENT 1
Policy 603 - Fee Amortization 11/28/2023
Town of Estes Park, Finance Dept. Page 2 of 3
Document Title
Revisions: 0
d. It is not the policy of the Town of Estes Park to routinely amortize fees for projects
meeting the above criteria. These projects may request amortization by submittal of a
written request to the Utilities Department per section 4. The Board of Trustees will
hear the request and may choose to amortize some or all fees based on the merits of
the request and budget feasibility.
4. PROCEDURE
a. Potential applicants are highly encouraged to discuss their requests, including
anticipated fee amounts and due dates, with the Utilities Department before
submitting requests. Requests shall be filed as follows:
i. The requestor will submit their request to the Utilities Department via email in
the form of a letter, preferably on letterhead stationery, to the Utilities
Department, attention: Director.
ii. Letters should state specifically the amount of the fees requested for
amortization and the time period over which the requestor wishes the fees
amortized (5 or 10 years). Applicants should not expect the amortization
amount based on the design drawing to increase when a project’s as-built
construction results in a larger final tap fee calculation. Once approved by the
Town Board, the amount financed and amortized is set and cannot be changed
without subsequent Town Board action, regardless of the subsequent changes
in the final tap fee paid. The letter should also explain the public purpose
behind the amortization request, with reference to the criteria in this Policy
(Sec. 3.).
b. An amortization agreement shall be reviewed by the Finance Director for each
amortization request or requested amendment thereof prior to the request’s
scheduling for consideration by the Board of Trustees.
c. Town staff will schedule the request for consideration by the Board of Trustees, and
notify applicants of the scheduling.
d. Any amortization agreement must be in final form (ready for execution) and provided
to the Board of Trustees prior to the amortization decision, along with the
recommendations of relevant departments.
e. It is the responsibility of the requestor to demonstrate that the request meets the
criteria of section 3 of this policy.
f. All fee amortization requests, and associated amortization agreements, shall be
submitted to and acted upon by the Board of Trustees prior to payment of the fee(s) to
which the amortization request pertains. No fee amortization or subsidy shall be
approved if such amortization or subsidy would require a refund, reimbursement, or
credit of a fee already paid and deposited.
g. Disposition (approval, denial, approval for partial funding, etc.) of the request shall be
communicated to the applicant via letter from the Finance Department, along with
executed note(s) or other financing instrument(s) as applicable.
5. TERMS AND CONDITIONS:
a. The following general requirements shall be applicable to each amortization request:
i. The amortization period shall be either five (5) or ten (10) years for any given
project, as requested by the applicant and approved by the Town in its sole
discretion.
ii. Annual amortization principal and interest payment terms shall be determined
by the Town and detailed in the agreement. Interest rates shall be informed by
Policy 603 - Fee Amortization 11/28/2023
Town of Estes Park, Finance Dept. Page 3 of 3
Document Title
Revisions: 0
market conditions.
iii. Amortization shall be straight-line, and shall not balloon.
iv. In the event any annual payment of principal and/or interest is not made in full
on or before its due date, the remaining balance of delinquent principal and
accrued interest shall bear defaulting interest at a charge of one and one-half
percent (1.5%) per month on the amount due until the annual payment,
accrued interest, and defaulting interest is paid in full. This shall be reflected in
the amortization agreement.
v. All fee charges under the amortization agreement shall be charged against the
Owner, shall be a lien upon the Property to the extent permitted by law, and
shall be a perpetual charge against the Property until paid in full. This shall be
reflected in the amortization agreement.
vi. The amortization agreement shall not impair any other liens for any unpaid
water service charges for water service to the Property, or the Town’s right to
terminate water service to the Property for non-payment of utility charges on
the monthly utility bills.
vii. An amortization agreement shall run with the property. Failure of an applicant
or applicant’s successor in interest to complete a project or to receive a
Certificate of Occupancy shall not relieve the applicant or successor of the
obligations in the agreement.
Approved: _____________________________________
Mayor ____________________________________
Date
Document Title Policy 603 – Utility Fee Amortization 11/28/2023
Revisions: 0 Finance Page 1 of 3
Effective Period: Until Superseded
Review Schedule: Biennially- Summer
Effective Date: 11/28/2023
References: Governing Policies Manual 2.1.8, 3.3, 3.4
FINANCE DEPARTMENT
603
Utility Fee Amortization
1.PURPOSE
To establish a policy for amortization of Utilities fees in support of essential community
needs.
2.POLICY
a.It is the policy of the Town Board of Trustees to support essential community needs
including attainable and workforce housing, assisted living, public-sector projects, and
health care services by amortizing certain fees assessed by the Utilities Department.
The Comprehensive Plan may be consulted as a guide in more specifically identifying
these community needs.
b. Only Water System Development and Water Rights fees (i.e., tap fees) shall be
eligible for amortization.
c.Fee amortization is a privilege granted at the discretion of the Town, not a right or
entitlement, in connection with any given development project or proposal.
3.CRITERIA
a.The following entities and developments may be eligible for amortization:
i.Governmental unit construction (federal, state, county, local); including tax
districts/special districts (e.g., hospital, library, parks and recreation);
ii.Organizations providing low-income health and human services;
iii.Attainable or workforce housing secured by a deed restriction or restrictive
covenant, as defined in section 11.4(C) of the Estes Park Development Code,
or Policy 227; and
iv.Developments transitioning to Town water service from other sources of water
supply.
b.The following criteria will be used to qualify low-income health and human services,
and attainable or workforce housing projects:
i.A critical service is being provided;
ii.The permitted project or building will serve or support a currently underserved
or disadvantaged segment of the community; and
iii.The population being served is the general public and is not subject to any
pre-qualification other than a needs-based (attainability) qualification, or (in the
case of housing) a local employment (workforce) qualification;
c.Amortization requests shall not be considered or approved where any total tap fees
are less than fifty thousand dollars ($50,000), due to the administrative cost of
carrying the obligation instrument for small amounts.
UPDATED WITH BOARD CHANGES 2023-11-28
Document Title Policy 603 – Utility Fee Amortization 11/28/2023
Revisions: 0 Finance Page 2 of 3
d. It is not the policy of the Town of Estes Park to routinely amortize fees for projects
meeting the above criteria. These projects may request amortization by submittal of a
written request to the Utilities Department per section 4. The Board of Trustees will
hear the request and may choose to amortize some or all fees based on the merits of
the request and budget feasibility.
4. PROCEDURE
a. Potential applicants are highly encouraged to discuss their requests, including
anticipated fee amounts and due dates, with the Utilities Department before
submitting requests. Requests shall be filed as follows:
i. The requestor will submit their request to the Utilities Department via email in
the form of a letter, preferably on letterhead stationery, to the Utilities
Department, attention: Director.
ii. Letters should state specifically the amount of the fees requested for
amortization and the time period over which the requestor wishes the fees
amortized (5 or 10 years). Applicants should not expect the amortization
amount based on the design drawing to increase when a project’s as-built
construction results in a larger final tap fee calculation. Once approved by the
Town Board, the amount financed and amortized is set and cannot be changed
without subsequent Town Board action, regardless of the subsequent changes
in the final tap fee paid. The letter should also explain the public purpose
behind the amortization request, with reference to the criteria in this Policy
(Sec. 3.).
b. An amortization agreement shall be reviewed by the Finance Director for each
amortization request or requested amendment thereof prior to the request’s
scheduling for consideration by the Board of Trustees.
c. Town staff will schedule the request for consideration by the Board of Trustees, and
notify applicants of the scheduling.
d. Any amortization agreement must be in final form (ready for execution) and provided
to the Board of Trustees prior to the amortization decision, along with the
recommendations of relevant departments.
e. It is the responsibility of the requestor to demonstrate that the request meets the
criteria of section 3 of this policy.
f. All fee amortization requests, and associated amortization agreements, shall be
submitted to and acted upon by the Board of Trustees prior to payment of the fee(s) to
which the amortization request pertains. No fee amortization or subsidy shall be
approved if such amortization or subsidy would require a refund, reimbursement, or
credit of a fee already paid and deposited.
g. Disposition (approval, denial, approval for partial funding, etc.) of the request shall be
communicated to the applicant via letter from the Finance Department, along with
executed note(s) or other financing instrument(s) as applicable.
5. TERMS AND CONDITIONS:
a. The following general requirements shall be applicable to each amortization request:
i. The amortization period shall be either five (5) or ten (10) years for any given
project, as requested by the applicant and approved by the Town in its sole
discretion.
ii. Annual amortization principal and interest payment terms shall be determined
by the Town and detailed in the agreement. Interest rates shall be informed by
Document Title Policy 603 – Utility Fee Amortization 11/28/2023
Revisions: 0 Finance Page 3 of 3
market conditions.
iii. Amortization shall be straight-line, and shall not balloon.
iv. In the event any annual payment of principal and/or interest is not made in full
on or before its due date, the remaining balance of delinquent principal and
accrued interest shall bear defaulting interest at a charge of one and one-half
percent (1.5%) per month on the amount due until the annual payment,
accrued interest, and defaulting interest is paid in full. This shall be reflected in
the amortization agreement.
v. All fee charges under the amortization agreement shall be charged against the
Owner, shall be a lien upon the Property to the extent permitted by law, and
shall be a perpetual charge against the Property until paid in full. This shall be
reflected in the amortization agreement.
vi. The amortization agreement shall not impair any other liens for any unpaid
water service charges for water service to the Property, or the Town’s right to
terminate water service to the Property for non-payment of utility charges on
the monthly utility bills.
vii. An amortization agreement shall run with the property. Failure of an applicant
or applicant’s successor in interest to complete a project or to receive a
Certificate of Occupancy shall not relieve the applicant or successor of the
obligations in the agreement.
Approved: _____________________________________
Mayor NOVEMBER 28, 2023
Date
Property Tax Options
SENATE BILL 23B-1
•For residential property owners, SB23B-1 exempts
$55,000 from taxation and lowers the residential
assessment rate from 6.765 to 6.7%
•Similar to Prop HH
•No changes to commercial assessments
PRESENTATION TITLE 2
SB 23B-1 TIMELINE
January 3, 2024
January 10, 2024
January 17, 2024
January 24, 2024
Assessor’s office to provide updated certification of values
Mill levy due to the Board of County Commissioners
Board of County Commissioners required to approve mill
levies
Assessor’s office to deliver tax warrant to the Treasurer’s
office
3
ESTIMATED IMPACT OF SB 23B-1 ON TOWN OF ESTES PARK
TAX REVENUE
Without SB 23B-1 With SB 23B -1
2023 Actual Value $3,418,970,400 $3,418,970,400
2023 Estimated Assessed Valuation $346,492,243 $334,950,164
Town of Estes Park Tax Rate (mills) 1.822 1.822
Estimated Property Tax Revenue $631,309 $610,279
Note: Assessed Valuation uses the $50,000 exemption from Prop HH.
Updated AV for the SB 23B-1 $55,000 exemption is not available until
January 3, 2024.4
ESTIMATED IMPACT OF SB 23B-1 ON TOWN OF ESTES PARK
RESIDENTIAL TAXPAYER
Without SB 23B-1 With SB 23B -1
2023 Actual Value $800,900
$745,900
2023 Estimated Assessed Valuation $54,181 49,975
Residential Property owner total tax rate
(mills)76.365 76.365
Estimated Property Tax Bill $4,138 $3,816
Note: Certain taxing districts may have to reduce mills by state law.
This estimate assumes the same mill rate as prior year.
5
SCENARIOS FOR ADDITIONAL TAX
RELIEF
PRESENTATION TITLE 6
2022 Assessment, plus new
construction
2022 Assessment, plus new
construction and inflation
2022 Assessed Valuation $249,402,084 $249,402,084
2023 New Construction $2,399,431 $2,399,431
Total 2022 AV Plus 2023 New Construction $251,801,515 $251,801,515
Inflation adjustment 0 12.9%
Adjusted AV $251,801,515 $284,283,910
Current Town of Estes Park Tax Rate (mills) 1.822 1.822
Targeted Property tax revenue $458,782 $517,965
2023 Estimated Assessed Valuation (see note)$334,950,164 $334,950,164
Effective Mill Rate of Targeted Property Tax
Revenue 1.370 1.546
Temporary Credit Needed 0.452 0.276
Estimated Property Tax Revenue After
Temporary Credit $458,882 $517,833
Note: Because the 2023 Estimate is based on the $50,000 Prop HH actual value exemption instead of the
$55,000 SB 23B-1 exemption, the AV estimate is higher than it will likely be when the final AV is published
by the Assessor’s Office in January 7
FUTURE CONSIDERATIONS
•During the special session, House Bill 23B-1003 also
passed. The purpose of this bill is to form a task force at
the state level to look at “permanent and sustainable”
changes to property taxation throughout the State.
•This task force is to come up with legislation for the General
Assembly to consider next year or a 2024 ballot measure.
8
QUESTIONS?
PRESENTATION TITLE 9
THANK YOU
10
TOWN CLERK Report
To: Honorable Mayor Koenig
Board of Trustees
Through: Town Administrator Machalek
From: Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk
Date: November 28, 2023
RE: Town Board Compensation
Present Situation:
At the October 24, 2023 study session, staff presented an option to codify Town Board
compensation adjustments utilizing the Consumer Price Index (CPI) for Denver-
Boulder-Greeley for the previous two years using October figures. During this
discussion the Board requested a review of the compensation for market communities.
Proposal:
Staff has compiled the most recent CML data for the market communities. This
information will be reviewed during the meeting in more detail; however, upon first
glance it appears the Town is in alignment with other market communities of similar size
and even in alignment with larger communities along the front range such as Erie,
Lafayette, Loveland, and Superior.
Staff would recommend bringing forward a proposed ordinance at the December 12,
2023 meeting to consider codifying the adjustment to Board compensation using CPI.
Advantages:
• The Board salaries for the newly elected Board members would be set for the
upcoming election.
• The proposed ordinance would provide a mechanism for increasing compensation.
Disadvantages:
• CPI may not adequately address increases in benefit cost and will need to be
reviewed prior to each adjustment and Board election.
Finance/Resource Impact:
Any change to the Board’s salaries would increase the overall Legislative budget and
corresponding taxes and retirement costs.
Level of Public Interest:
Low.
Attachment:
1. Compensation Comparison Charts
Board Compensation Using Market Communities
(Estimated)
Municipality Mayor Mayor ProTem Trustee Annual Budget Population
Arvada $18,000/year $15,000/year $13,800/year 319,493,084 124,402
Aspen $39,900/year $20,000/year 222,931,571 6,871
Avon $12,000/year $9,000/year $6,000/year 59,039,180 6,072
Black Hawk $11,200.44/year $11,200.44/year 29,017,732 128
Boulder $239.40/per meeting $239.40/per meeting $239.40/per meeting 513,500,000 104,175
Breckenridge $18,000/year $14,400/year 132,000,000 5,024
Broomfield $21,000/year $13,200/year $14,400/year 457,500,000 75,325
Durango $13,404/year $10,404/year 74,000,000 19,223
Erie $12,000/year $10,000/year $10,000/year 48,600,000 31,686
Estes Park $13,500/year $11,500/year $10,000/year 87,900,000 6,362
Firestone $4,200/year $3,600/year $3,600/year 18,764,099 17,299
Fort Collins $15,168/year $10,104/year 827,000,000 168,538
Greeley $14,393/year $9,600/year 367,000,000 109,323
Lafayette $13,120/year $10,138/year $9,542/year 81,000,000 31,002
Longmont $18,000/year $12,000/year 444,500,000 100,758
Louisville $13,968/year $11,664/year $11,664/year 87,600,000 20,975
Loveland $12,000/year $9,600/year $7,200/year 442,100,000 77,194
Mead $4,992/year $3,600/year $3,600/year 44,000,000 5,336
Northglenn $14,144/year $11,627/year $10,109/year 70,000,000 37,333
Snowmass Village $26,400/year $20,400/year 720,000,000 3,093
Steamboat Springs $15,807/year $13,852/year $11,869/year 56,000,000 13,390
Superior $13,200/year $10,800/year $10,800/year 43,600,000 13,271
Telluride $23,316/year $14,916/year 41,600,000 2,595
Thornton $24,000/year $21,000/year $18,000/year 554,857,276 142,610
Vail $12,000/year $7,500/year 89,400,000 4,735
Westminster $19,176/year $16,440/year $13,704/year 397,000,000 114,561
Compensation data was collected from the Colorado Municipal League Compensation Survey System.
ATTACHMENT 1
Mayor Annualized Salary - Low to High
City Mayor Population
Total Operating
Budget in Millions
Firestone $4,200 17,299 18.7
Mead $4,992 5,336 44
Black Hawk $11,200 128 29
Erie $12,000 31,686 48.6
Avon $12,000 6,072 59
Loveland $12,000 77,194 442.1
Vail $12,000 4,735 89.4
Boulder $12,449 104,175 513.5
Lafayette $13,120 31,002 87
Superior $13,200 13,271 43.6
Durango $13,404 19,223 74
Estes Park $13,500 6,362 48.6
Louisville $13,968 20,975 87.6
Northglenn $14,144 37,333 70
Greeley $14,393 109,323 367
Fort Collins $15,168 168,538 827
Steamboat Springs $15,807 13,390 56
Arvada $18,000 124,402 319.5
Breckenridge $18,000 5,024 132
Longmont $18,000 100,758 444.5
Westminster $19,176 114,561 397
Broomfield $21,000 75,325 457.5
Telluride $23,316 2,595 41.6
Thornton $24,000 142,610 554.8
Snowmass Village $26,400 3,093 720
Aspen $39,900 6,871 222.9
Average $15,974
*Municipalities marked with a black solid line indicate the average.
$1,000 $6,000 $11,000 $16,000 $21,000 $26,000 $31,000 $36,000
Firestone
Mead
Black Hawk
Erie
Avon
Loveland
Vail
Boulder
Lafayette
Superior
Durango
Estes Park
Louisville
Northglenn
Greeley
Fort Collins
Steamboat Springs
Arvada
Breckenridge
Longmont
Westminster
Broomfield
Telluride
Thornton
Snowmass Village
Aspen
Annualized Salary - Low to High Mayor
Mayor ProTem Annualized Salary - Low to High
City Mayor Pro Tem Population
Total Operating
Budget in Millions
Aspen 6,871 222.9
Black Hawk 128 29
Breckenridge 5,024 132
Durango 19,223 74
Greeley 109,323 367
Fort Collins 168,538 827
Longmont 100,758 444.5
Telluride 2,595 41.6
Snowmass Village 3,093 720
Vail 4,735 89.4
Firestone $3,600 17,299 18.7
Mead $3,600 5,336 44
Avon $9,000 6,072 59
Loveland $9,600 77,194 442.1
Erie $10,000 31,686 48.6
Lafayette $10,138 31,002 87
Superior $10,800 13,271 43.6
Estes Park $11,500 6,362 48.6
Northglenn $11,627 37,333 70
Louisville $11,664 20,975 87.6
Boulder $12,449 104,175 513.5
Broomfield $13,200 75,325 457.5
Steamboat Springs $13,852 13,390 56
Arvada $15,000 124,402 319.5
Westminster $16,440 114,561 397
Thornton $21,000 142,610 554.8
Average $11,467
*Municipalities marked with a black solid line indicate the average.
Communities without Mayor Pro Tem salary did not distinguish the role within the
CML data.
$3,000 $5,000 $7,000 $9,000 $11,000 $13,000 $15,000 $17,000 $19,000
Aspen
Black Hawk
Breckenridge
Durango
Greeley
Fort Collins
Longmont
Telluride
Snowmass Village
Vail
Firestone
Mead
Avon
Loveland
Erie
Lafayette
Superior
Estes Park
Northglenn
Louisville
Boulder
Broomfield
Steamboat Springs
Arvada
Westminster
Thornton
Annualized Salary - Low to High Mayor Pro Tem
Trustees Annualized Salary - Low to High
City Trustee Population
Total Operating
Budget in Millions
Firestone $3,600 17,299 18.7
Mead $3,600 5,336 44
Avon $6,000 6,072 59
Loveland $7,200 77,194 442.1
Vail $7,500 4,735 89.4
Greeley $9,600 109,323 367
Lafayette $9,542 31,002 87
Erie $10,000 31,686 48.6
Estes Park $10,000 6,362 48.6
Fort Collins $10,104 168,538 827
Northglenn $10,109 37,333 70
Durango $10,404 19,223 74
Superior $10,800 13,271 43.6
Black Hawk $11,200 128 29
Louisville $11,664 20,975 87.6
Steamboat Springs $11,869 13,390 56
Longmont $12,000 100,758 444.5
Boulder $12,449 104,175 513.5
Westminster $13,704 114,561 397
Arvada $13,800 124,402 319.5
Breckenridge $14,400 5,024 132
Broomfield $14,400 75,325 457.5
Telluride $14,916 2,595 41.6
Thornton $18,000 142,610 554.8
Snowmass Village $20,400 3,093 720
Aspen $20,000 6,871 222.9
Average $11,433
*Municipalities marked with a black solid line indicate the average.
$3,000 $5,000 $7,000 $9,000 $11,000 $13,000 $15,000 $17,000 $19,000
Firestone
Mead
Avon
Loveland
Vail
Greeley
Lafayette
Erie
Estes Park
Fort Collins
Northglenn
Durango
Superior
Black Hawk
Louisville
Steamboat Springs
Longmont
Boulder
Westminster
Arvada
Breckenridge
Broomfield
Telluride
Thornton
Snowmass Village
Aspen
Annualized Salary - Low to High Trustee
Population Comparisons Population
Total
Operating
Budget in
Millions Mayor Mayor Pro Tem Trustee
Aspen 6,871 223 $39,900/year $20,000/year
Estes Park 6,362 88 $13,500/year $11,500/year $10,000/year
Avon 6,072 59 $12,000/year $9,000/year $6,000/year
Mead 5,336 44 $4,992/year $3,600/year $3,600/year
Breckenridge 5,024 132 $18,000/year $14,400/year
Budget Comparisons
Total Operating
Budget in
Millions Population
Estes Park 88 6,362 $13,500/year $11,500/year $10,000/year
Vail 89 4,735 $12,000/year $7,500/year
Louisville 88 20,975 $13,968/year $11,664/year $11,664/year
Lafayette 81 31,002 $13,120/year $10,138/year $9,542/year
Durango 74 19,223 $13,404/year $3,600/year $10,404/year
Town of Estes Park
Board Salary Comparisons
Board Salary
Ordinance 32-19 :
Ɣ Board member elected in April 2020
ż Mayor - $12,000
ż Mayor Pro Tem - $10,000
ż Trustee - $9,000
Ordinance 17-21 :
Ɣ Board member elected in April 2022
ż Mayor - $13,500
ż Mayor Pro Tem - $11,500
ż Trustee - $10,000
Market
Communities
Under 20,000 population
Under 100,00 population
Over 100,000 population
Codifying
Board Salaries
By CPI
Ɣ CPI Calculations
ż October 2021/October 2022
Ŷ $10,000 $10,774
Ŷ $11,500 $12,390
Ŷ $13,500 $14,546
ż October 2022/September 2023
Ŷ $10,774 $11,123
Ŷ $11,500 $12,802
Ŷ $13,500 $15,073
Ɣ Round up to the nearest $100.
ż $11,200
ż $12,800
ż $15,100
Questions ?
Town Board Insurance Premiums
Ɣ Family Monthly/Annual Premiums
Year Premium Percent Change
2020 $444.55 / $5,334.60 N/A
2021 $444.55 / $5,334.60 0%
2022 $462.50 / $5,550.00 3.88%
2023 $485.63 / $5,827.56 4.76%
2024 $524.48 / $6,293.76 7.41%
Percent of annual compensation devoted to a family medical premium
Ɣ 2021 - 59%
Ɣ 2022 - 62% or 56% for newly elected
Ɣ 2023 - 65% or 58% for newly elected