The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPACKET Town Board 2002-01-08Prepared 01/03/02 â€¢*Revised 01/08/02 The Mission of the Town of Estes Park is to plan and provide reliable, high-value services for our citizens, visitors, and employees. We take great pride ensuring and enhancing the quality of life in our community by being good stewards of public resources and our natural setting. BOARD OF TRUSTEES - TOWN OF ESTES PARK Tuesday, January 8,2002 7:00 p.m. AGENDA PUBLIC COMMENT - TOWN BOARD COMMENTS 1. CONSENT AGENDA (Approval of): 1. Town Board Minutes dated Decernber 11, 2001. 2. Bills. 3. Committee Minutes: A. Public Safety, January 3,2002: 1. Furniture Purchase, $10,000 2. Estes Valley Victim Advocates Contract for Services, $5,000. 4. Estes Park Housing Authority, November 14, 2001 (acknowledgment only). 5. Estes Valley Board of Adjustment, January 8,2002 (acknowledgement only). 6. Estes Valley Planning Commission December 18, and Special Meeting December 20, 2001(acknowledgement only). 7. Firemen's Pension Board, December 12,2001 (acknowledgement only) 8. Resolution #1-02 - Public Place Designation to post notices of meetings. lA. PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA (Approval of): Mayor Baudek will open Public Hearing(s) if the Town Board, Applicant(s), Staff or the Public wish to speak on a particular item. Public Hearings are conducted as follows: A. Mayor - Open Public Hearing B. Staff Report Â· C. Public Testimony D. Mayor - Close Public Hearing E. Motion to Approve/Deny 1. CONDOMINIUM MAP. Preliminary and Final Condominium Map, Sunset Ridge, Intersection of Big Horn and Virginia Drives, Roy & Michele Johnson/Applicants. 1 Continued on reverse side ,Â£ , r.,4 2. CONDOMINIUM MAP. Preliminary and Final Condominium Map, Creekside Suites, Lot 1, Block 4, Fall River Estates, Randy Collins/Applicant. 3. SUBDIVISION. Brown Subdivision of Lot 8A of the Amended Plat of a Portion of Lots 7 and 8, Summervilla Addition, EPCO, Inc./Applicant. 4. REPLAT. Replat of Lot 2, Pine View Subdivision, David & Brenda Lemke/Applicant. 22 2. ACTION ITEMS: 1. STAUFFER ADDITION ANNEXATION AND FINAL PLAT: A. Mayor - Open Public Hearing B. Staff Report C. Town Attorney White read Resolution #2-02 and Ordinance #1-02 (Accommodations A-1 Zoning) D. Public Testimony E. Mayor - Close Public Hearing F. Motion to Approve/Deny. 2. TOWN ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT. 3. *REQUEST TO ENTER EXECUTIVE SESSION: 24-6-402(4)(a), C.R.S. - Purchase, acquisition, lease, transfer or sale of property interest. Motion: I move the Town Board go into Executive Session based on C.R.S. Section 24-6-402(a). 2 NOTE: The Town Board reserves the right to consider other appropriate items not available at the time the agenda was prepared. This new year will be a year of many challenges while being a year with much potential on the international, national, state and local levels. Some of the September 114 tragedy and its consequences will carry over into the new year and how that will ultimately affect Estes Park is not clearly defined. However, we have and must continue to keep a positive attitude and carry on with our business and personal lives. Because ofthe overall uncertainly in the economy ofthe world today we certainly will monitor all national and local financial trends during the year however, it is important to note that The Town ofEstes Park comes into the new year very fiscally sound allowing us to continue our mission to provide reliable, high-value services for our citizens, visitors, and employees. Here in Colorado, in the year 2002, we will be electing a governor and a United States senator. We will also on the state level be electing all 65 representatives in the state house and 17 ofthe 35 state senators. In Estes Park, in April, we will be electing three town trustees which when you consider that there are only six trustees will be a very important election for the town. i While in some ways we hope that 2002 will be a quite year we also realize there are many issues, which will be on the political/community table during the year. Growth will be again on the state agenda and some oftheir decisions might well effect us locally. The State will be looking at state wide transportation issues while we will be receiving the Estes Valley Transportation Study Report, later in the Spring, which willlook at our transportation needs for the next two decades. Our very active Housing Authority will be evaluating several affordable housing options during the year as well as working on their on-going housing projects; and we certainly hope that the Good Samaritan Assisted Living complex will be well underway this year. The Estes Park Urban Renewal Authority will be busy with among other things the West River Walk project and the Estes Valley Planning Commission will, I am sure, have another busy year serving the entire valley. I think that the Knoll property may will be on the town's agenda sometime during the year determining its land use status. I am pleased to say that electric energy will not be an issue here, as it has been in many parts of the country, in part because of our membership in the Platte River Power Authority which has and will continue to provide reliable, cost-effective power to our member cities. Platte River is presently constructing 3 natural gas fired turbines at the Rawhide energy station to handle peak power demands. . While on this subject I would also state that our infrastructure because of our fine staff and the fiscal responsibility ofthe town over the years to do what may not have been glamorous, but necessary, has resulted in our infrastructure being in good order and well maintained and the envy ofmany towns and cities in Colorado. Because ofthe strong business community that we have in the Town ofEstes Park, the professionalism ofthe town staffand most importantly the residents of Estes Park, I believe that this community will continue to be one of the premier resort communities in the United States in the year 2002 as well as in years to come and will continue to be a good place to live and raise a family. Town o f Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, December 11, 2001 Minutes of a Regular meeting of the Board of Trustees of the Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held in the Municipal Building in said Town of,Estes Park on the 1 1 th day of December, 2001. Meeting called to order by Mayor John Baudek. Present: John Baudek, Mayor Susan L. Doylen, Mayor ProTem Trustees Jeff Barker Stephen W. Gillette David Habecker Lori Jeffrey-Clark G. Wayne Newsom Also Present: Rich Widmer, Town Administrator Vickie O'Connor, Town Clerk Gregory A. White, Town Attorney Absent: None Mayor Baudek called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. PUBLIC COMMENT None. TOWN BOARD COMMENTS Trustee Habecker questioned the status of the new Town Newsletter and was advised it will be mailed on Friday, 12/14. Trustee Jeffrey-Clark commented on the 78th Annual Congress of Cities Conference, In Atlanta Both she and Trustee Barker attended the conference and a snapshot of the seminars and lectures was presented. Trustee Barker added that the President of the Bar Assn. commented on the proposed military tribunals pertaining to the Terrorist Attacks 11/12 and that the majority in attendance supported President Bush. In a lecture on the economy, it was stated tourism has historically led the way out of recessions. 1. CONSENT AGENDA (Approval of): 1. Town Board Minutes dated November 27, 2001. 2. Bills. 3. Committee Reports: None. 4. Estes Park Housing Authority, October 17, 2001 (acknowledgement only) 5. Estes Valley Board of Adjustment, December 4,2001 (acknowledgement only). 6. Estes Valley Planning Commission, November 20, 2001 (acknowledgement only). Board of Trustees - December 11, 2001 - Page 2 It was moved and seconded (Doylen/Gillette) the consent agenda be approved, and it passed unanimously. lA. PLANNING COMMISSION "ACTION" AGENDA (Approval of): 1. CONDOMINIUM & FINAL PLAT. Mayor Baudek opened a public hearing to consider the Preliminary Condominium Map and Final Plat of Fawn Lane Condominiums, Portion of Lot 29, White Meadow View Place Addition, Thomas E. Adams/Applicant. Planner Shirk presented the Staff Report advising that the Applicant desires to condominiumize five existing residential units, there is no expansion of existing units being proposed, and the applicant is not reserving future development rights. The Planning Commission has recommended conditional approval of the preliminary condo map. Conditions 1-4 have been met, and Condition #5 pertaining to the recorded declaration will be met in the future. There were no public comments., thus Mayor Baudek closed the public hearing. It was moved and seconded (Habecker/Newsom) the Preliminary Condominium Map and Final Plat of Fawn Lane Condominiums be approved to include Condition #5 as stated in the Staff Report dated 12/06/01, and it passed unanimously. 2. SPECIAL REVIEW & FINAL PLAT. Good Sarharitan Senior Housing Project, Good Samaritan First & Second Addition, Evangelical Lutheran Good Samaritan Society/Applicant. Trustee Doylen declared a potential conflict of interest and stated she would not participate in discussion not vote on this item. Mayor Baudek opened the public hearing. Special Review. Planner Shirk presented the Staff Report advising that the EVDC Nquires a special review for senior housing proposals within the multi-family zoning district. The Applicant is "required to demonstrate compliance with all applicable criteria and standards set forth in Chapter 5 of the EVDC, and the application for the proposed special review use mitigates, to the maximum extend feasible, potential adverse impacts on nearby land uses, public facilities and services, and the environment." Staff explained how nearby land uses have been mitigated (Staff Report Items 1-8). Final Plat. The Town Board previously approved the Preliminary Plat, and the proposed Final Plat complies with said Preliminary Plat. The Final Plat subdivides the 62-ac. parcel into 3 open space lots, two multi-family development lots, one senior assisted living lot, one lot intended for a church, and 8 single-family residential lots. Street rights-of-way, various pedestrian and utility easements are being dedicated. Public comments was heard from Jan Gilhausen, 1926 Stonegate Dr., (Lot 11) who commented on traffic concerns pertaining to access for this development and her driveway (headlights). Planner Shirk stated that this Final Plat finalizes what has already been approved; potential conflicts relative to multiple actess have been minimized; and any changes would require the Applicant to submit a new preliminary plat and development plan that would be re-submitted to the Planning Commission. Applicant Representative Prochaska added that the roadway lines up approximately 40' east from the Gilhausen driveway, Board of Trustees - December 11, 2001 - Page 3 and setback from the intersection meets Code. Stonegate Dr. is one of three accesses into this development; Ptarmigan Trail has been aligned to, mitigate headlight intrusion; the Applicant is paving Stonegate Dr.; and all adjoining property owners were notified of the development proposal. Discussion followed, and as there was no further public comment, Mayor Baudek closed the public hearing. Staff confirmed that snowplowing would occur on Ptarmigan Trail, and that section of Stonegate Dr. that was annexed and paved. It was moved and seconded (Newsom/Barker) the Special Review and Final Plat of the Good Samaritan Senior Housing Project, Good Samaritan First & Second Additions be approved with Condition c. on Page 4, as listed in the Staff Report dated 12/5/01, and it passed with Trustee Doylen Abstaining. 2. ACTION ITEMS: 1. RESOLUTION #44-01 SETTING MILL LEVY FOR 2002 (Continued from 11/13/01). Finance Officer Brandjord stated that the Town is required to certify its property tax mill levy by 12/15, and the Larimer County Assessor has now provided information pertaining to annexations on the certification of valuation. Town Attorney White read the Resolution levying a mill level of 1.892 mills for 2002. The mill leVy has been reduced from 2.22193 mills in 2000. It was moved and seconded (Gillette/Jeffrey-Clark) Resolution #44-01 be approved, and it passed unanimously. 2. LEASE/PURCHASE AGREEMENT - PUBLIC WORKS EQUIPMENT. Finance Officer Brandjord reported that an RFP was provided to four local financial institutions for a Model 2001 John Deere Loader. Staff is recommending awarding the 4-year lease financing agreement (with one-year renewals) to the First National Bank of Estes Park at the interest rate of 4.480%. Interest rates as compared to 2000 and an "out-right" purchase was also discussed. It was moved and seconded (Jeffrey-ClarldNewsom) the Lease/Purchase Agreement with the First National Bank of Estes Park be approved, and it passed unanimously. 3. LIQUOR LICENSE: B&B FOOD MART. Clerk O'Connor presented the Liquor License Transfer Application of the 3.2% Retail Beer License, Off Premises, from James & Lloyd Barleen to CBR, Ltd., dba B&B FOOD MART, 1110 Woodstock Dr. Required T. I.P.S. training is scheduled for 12/17 and the application is in order. Applicant representative Bob Howell was present. Trustee Barker commented on the seriousness of selling liquor, adhering to the Liquor Code, and avoidance of selling to minors. It was moved and seconded (Newsom/Doylen) the Transfer Application submitted by CBR Ltd. be approved, and it passed unanimously. 4. ORDINANCE #19-01 - AMENDING CHAPTERS 2.52.020 & 2.52.040 MUNICIPAL JUDGE & COURT CLERK SALARIES. Town Administrator Widmer reported that the proposed Ordinance increases the Judge's salary from $15,488/yr. to $17,037/yr. and the Court Clerk's salary from $6,988/yr. to $8,810/yr. The Judge's previous increase occurred in 2000, and the Court Clerk's salary is being adjusted due to the increase in workload and new procedures that require a 12-hr. workweek in lieu of the historic 8-hr. workweek. A salary survey for the Court Clerk position was conducted in accordance with the Compensation Policy. The 2002 Budget anticipated the Judge's salary increase, and the additional cost of approximately $2,500, including benefits, for the Court Clerk was not budgeted; however, adequate funds are available for this purpose. The Ordinance includes an emergency clause to raise the salaries Board of Trustees - December 11, 2001 - Page 4 beginning December 22, 2001. Trustee Gillette (Public Safety Chairman) confirmed that the Annual Court Report has confirmed that the caseload has grown considerably. It.wah moved and seconded (Gillette/Doylen) Ordinance #19-01 be approved, and it passed unanimously. 5. ORDINANCE #20-01 - - AMENDING CHAPTER 5.20 BUSINESS REGULATIONS AND LICENSES. Clerk O'Connor presented an Ordinance amending Business License Section 5.20.010, 5.20.050 and 5.20.060. A "general business license" definition i& being added; a title error pertaining to the ability to transfer business licenses is being corrected; and the payment of the license fee affecting new businesses is being proposed. In summary, new businesses applying for a license between 1/1 and 6/30 would pay the full fee. Businesses applying between 7/1 through 9/30 would bay one-half of the fee, and businesses applying between 10/1 and 12/31 Would pay one-quarter of the fee. Town Attorney White read the Ordinance, and it was moved and seconded (Newsom/Gillette) Ordinance #20-01 be approved. Trustee Habecker noted that said fees generated approximately $218,000 in 2001. Trustee Barker added that perhaps business licensing should be included in future discussions relative to the Town's economic issue. Trustee Habecker questioned whether the word license" could be amended, as there is a perception that the Town is "qualifying" businesses. Town Attorney White stated "license" is provided by State Statute. Clerk O'Connor clarified that when applications are submitted, the Clerk's Office does confirm that the license merely allows the applicant to legally provide a product or service within Town limits-it is not a license confirming the ability of the provider to perform a service or provide a product. Mayor Baudek added that these funds are generally used for advertising. The motion passed unanimously. 6. EMPLOYEE BENEFIT PLAN. Assistant Town Administrator Repola presented an adjustment to holiday and vacation benefits that would increase vacation leave for erhployees with 4 yrs. through 15 yrs. by 2 hrs./mo., and 16 yrs. plus by 1 hr./mo. Vacation leave would not change for those employees with 3 yrs. or less of service. The proposed changes to holiday leave include adding 8 hrs. of holiday leave for a total of 11 paid holidays as follows: New Year's Day Memorial Day Independence Day Labor Day Thanksgiving Day Christmas Eve Day Christmas Washington's Birthday, Martin Luther King Day and Veteran's Day would be converted to floating holidays, and 8 hours would be added for a total of 4 Floating Holidays. Additionally, Municipal Offices will be open for business on these 4 floating holidays. Trustee Gillette questioned whether employees were surveyed and staff confirmed that no, the proposal was submitted from an administrative perspective. Employees have, however, been notified. Trustee Barker stated that this proposal is artificially inflating the pay by attempting to be 'average" in comparison markets-while inflation may not occur in this case, the future does bear concern. Trustee Habecker questioned the additional floating holiday in lieu of last year's substantial salary adjustment, the COLA and merit increases this year, and the Town's absorption (1/2) of the health care benefits-it is difficult to justify additional benefits to constituents. Trustee Jeffrey-Clark questioned the impact of direct cost, with staff responding accrual does have an impact, as leave is paid-out when an employee terminates-the Budget does not Board of Trustees - December 11, 2001 - Page 5 automatically increase with approval. Trustee Barker rebutted that the result is an extrA 103 days ofUyear, reducing productively. Mayor Baudek commented that this proposal will help keep the Town in a competitive market, not leading the market. Town Administrator Widmer added that vacation and holiday leave have not been increased in a number of years. Trustee Doylen questioned whether employees are staying because of the environment or the money, and she echoed Trustee Barker's and Habecker's comments. Trustee Newsom noted that the Town has been in a "catch-upÂ» mode. Concluding discussion, it was moved and seconded (Habecker/Newsom) the 4 Vacation changes be approved as requested. 4 The additional floating holiday be denied. 4 The three existing holidays (Washington's Birthday, Martin Luther King Day and Veteran's Day) be converted to floating holidays. 4 The Municipal Building and Shops be open for business on the above-stated floating holidays. Those voting "Yes" Trustees Barker, Doylen, Habecker and Newsom. Those voting "No" Trustees Gillette and Jeffrey-Clark. The motion passed. 7. TOWN ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT. A. Zahourek Lawsuit. Town Attorney White reported that the Colorado .. Court of Appeals has rejected all arguments and ruled entirely in favor of the Town, and awarded attorney fees. Mr. Zahourek does have the right to seek Colorado Supreme Court review. B. Town Board Room and Dispatch Remodeling Projects Update. The west entrance to the Police Dept. has been closed, however, the east entrance will remain open at all times. Work is going well. The Dispatch Remodeling is also going well although staff is experiencing difficult working conditions. C. Newsletter. Copies of the new Town Newsletter have been distributed to the Town Board. A team of employees has been working on this project and staff is proud of the product. The first issue of the quarterly newsletter should be delivered to the Post Office by Friday, 12/14. Following completion of all agenda items, Mayor Baudek noted that the December 25, 2001 Town Board meeting has been cancelled, and he adjourned the meeting at 8: 13 p.m. John Baudek, Mayor Vickie O'Connor, Town Clerk Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, January 3,2002 Minutes of a Regular meeting of the PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE of the Town of Estes Park, Larimer County Colorado. Meeting held in the Municipal Building in said Town of Estes Park on the 3r of January, 2002. Committee: Chairman Gillette, Trustees Jeffrey-Clark and Newsom Attending: All Absent: None Also Attending: Town Administrator Widmer, Police Chief Richardson, Fire Chief Dorman, Deputy Clerk van Deutekom Chairman Gillette called the meeting to order at 7:30 a.m. POLICE DEPARTMENT Dispatch Furniture Purchase - Approval. Chief Richardson explained that funds were budgeted as part of the 2001 remodel project to replace existing Dispatch furniture that does not meet ergonomic recommendations. The following bids were received: Watson Furniture Systems $ 11,344.56 Wireless Advanced Communications 9,608.00 The 2001 Budget includes $10,000 for the purchase of new furniture. The Committee recommends acceptance of the bid from Wireless Advanced Communications to replace the Dispatch furniture as presented. Estes Valley Victim Advocates' Contract for Services - Approval. Chief Richardson presented a Contract for Services between the Estes Park Police Dept. and Estes Valley Victim Advocates for crisis intervention and counseling. The term of this agreement is from January 1, 2002 through December 31, 2002. The Committee recommends approval of the Estes Valley Victim Advocates' Contract of Services as presented. Loading Zone Petition - Approval. Chief Richardson noted that each year, from May to September, "Loading Zone/No Parking" signs are posted along E. Elkhorn Ave. (between E. Riverside Dr. and Moraine Ave.) The Town recently received a petition from downtown merchants and delivery companies requesting that the "No Parking" signs remain in place year-round. In Staff's opinion, the request will improve safety as ample parking is available during the off-season, the impact of losing these parking spaces should be minimal. The Committee recommends changing the parking spaces along E. Elkhorn Ave., between E. Riverside Dr. and Moraine Ave., to year-round "Loading Zone/No Parking" spaces and immediately posting appropriate signs as indicated above. If problems arise with the permanent signage and bollards, staff will revisit this issue at a future Committee meeting. REPORTS Chief Richardson explained the Community Safety Project in Partnership with CSU Cooperative Extension program and presented the Partnership Agreement between CSU, the Estes Park Police Dept., and the Community Representative. The goal of the program is to identify and train a group of diverse community representatives to address public safety issues that affect local citizens. The Committee acknowledged the Department's participation in the partnership. The Committee reviewed the NIBRS 2001 3rd Quarter Report. Counterfeiting and assault statistics were discussed. 6 Public Safety Committee - January 3,2002 - Page 2 A summary of the Estes PArk Police Dept./Larimer County Health 2001 Tobacco Program was presented. On behalf of the Committee, Chairman Gillette commended Sgt. Kufeld, and Officers Marciniak and Trenholm for their participation in the program. Chief Richardson briefed the Committee on House Bill 1114 and the Colorado Progressive Coalition, a non-profit civil rights organization addressing the issue of racial and ethnic profiling. House Bill 1114 was signed into law on June 5. Chief Richardson reported that Officer Ryan Alberts has submitted a letter of resignation. Officer Alberts has been with the Dept. for 5 years and has accepted employment with the Larimer County Sheriff's Dept. FIRE DEPARTMENT (EPVFD) New Members - Report. Chief Dorman reported that 6 candidates successfully completed a written, physical, and oral exam process. The candidates will attend Loveland's Firefighting Academy to attain Firefighter 1 status. Volunteer Incentive Program - Update. Chief Dorman discussed volunteer incentive program options under review. Bear Lake Fire - Report. Chief Dorman briefed the Committee on the recent fire at Bear Lake in Rocky Mountain National Park. Both fires are currently under investigation. There being no further business, Chairman Gillette adjourned the meeting at adjourned at 7:56 a.m. Rebecca van Deutekom, Deputy Town Clerk Estes Park Housing Authority (EPHA) Board Meeting I)ate: November 14,2001 Members Present: Eric Blackhurst, Sue Doylen, Lee Kundtz, & Louise Olson Members Absent: Karla Porter Staff Present: Sam Betters, Carolyn Coffelt, & Jean Michaelson Others Present: Guests: Larry Bonner, Norm Carver, Jack Dinsmoor, Jay Gentile, Rita Kurelja, & Joe Wise The November 14th meeting of the Estes Park Housing Authority was called to order by Sue Doylen, Chairperson, at 8:33 a.m. in Room 203 of the Municipal Building ofthe Town ofEstes Park. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Sue Doylen asked if anyone had any changes, comments, or questions to the October 17th minutes. Jean Michaelson asked to reflect that the hold over rents have been increased to current rates for Cleave Street. Eric Blackhurst moved to approve the minutes with the changes reflected, and Louise Olson seconded. Minutes approved. MONTHLY FINANCIAL REPORTS Cleave Street Karla Porter, Sam Betters, and the staff from Ponderosa Realty & Management met on the Cleave Street financials. The accounting will be moved to the Housing Authority in Loveland. Ponderosa will handle tenant accounts receivable, and pay normal monthly expenses. Housing Authority in Loveland will prepare the monthly balance sheet and income statements. Cleave Street is doing better than projected. Net Income year-to-date is $857 with the inclusion of the principal payment. The heat in the winter months will impact this. Jean Michaelson and Ponderosa staffwere congratulated on a great job! EPHA Management Company Sam Betters reviewed the financials for the EPHA Management Company. The assets reflect the transfer of money from the Town of Estes Park for predevelopment and land acquisition. On the balance sheet, $17,400 in expenditures are reflecting the pre-development funds spent for the design of affordable housing for Dry Gulch Village. On the operating side, we are converting to more of an approved accounting system. Sue Doylen will meet with appropriate Town staff to discuss the $10,000 that should be received from the Town of Estes Park. Development funds will eventually be moved to a specific Dry Gulch budget and become its own set of books like Cleave Street. EPHA November Board Minutes - Page 1 of 3 COMMITTEE REPORTS-None REPORTS UPDATES & OTHER MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS Dry Gulch The Estes Park Board of Trustees approved the zoning and annexation request for the Good Samaritan development on October 23rd at a public meeting. This included Lots 3&4 which will be sold to EPHA for development. Sam Betters is moving forward with predevelopment work. Engineering and architectural pland will be submitted to the Town of Estes Park Community Department. The Planning Commission will hear the EPHA request for approval of these predevelopment plans at their mid-December meeting. Cornerstone Engineering is reviewing the possibility of bringing in the water and sewer line from the west rather than from the Honda (Eagle Rock School) line along Dry Gulch. The Town of Estes Park Public Works Department may prefer the west route to improve overall service to the area. The Town would need to grant an easement to bring the lines in from the west. We are also in the process of coordinating a meeting with potential funding partners i.e. State Division of Housing, CHFA, USDA Rural Development, and perhaps Fannie Mae. Plans are to bring them to Estes Park for a luncheon meeting, tour of the sites, and present our vision. Local invites would include Town Board of Trustees, EPHA Board, and key local supporters. We would like the funding partners to see how much local support there is, and have them participate from the ground floor in this great opportunity for Estes Park. Mr. Larry Bonner was present from the school-district. Mr. Bonner and Jean Michaelson are - working on a survey that will go out to major employers to gather information on housing needs. He also indicated how important the Good Samaritan project is to recruit and retain staff for the school district. He also offered their assistance in whatever the school district can do to attract funding partners for this project to be sure it is as cost effective as possible. Mr. Bonner asked for assistance in introducing the housing project to his staff in an effort to get the best response from the survey. Jean Michaelion and Mr. Bonner will coordinate this. Mr. Bonner asked what the school district needed to consider for their budget for this project. Sue Doylen suggested that they contact other school districts and see if they have participated in housing needs and what they are doing similar i.e. pros and cons. Joe Wise, 1St Colorado Realty, also indicated that his office will facilitate the transfer of the land from Good Sam to the Housing Authority with no commission. Katie Spear, who writes grants for Crossroads, has offered her assistance is writing grants to funding sources as well. Sam Betters indicated by the next Board meeting, we should have some form of financial pro fo]ma. It will reflect the income mix and what this means in raising additional grant monies. EPHA will place an application to CHFA for Low-Income Housing Tax Credits in February, 2002. Section 8 Vouchers EPHA November Board Minutes - Page 2 of 3 Forty-seven households applied for the 14 Section 8 Vouchers. Jean is in the first phase of initial eligibility review, then the applications will be sent to Loveland for processing. Applicants were asked to complete a survey when they applied for the Voucher. The survey asked how did you hear about us, and do you live and work in Estes Park. All but one of the applicants lived in Estes Park, 20 have lived in Estes for 5 years or more, and 17 worked in Estes for three years or more. Over M heard about the Vouchers from the Trail Gazette, friends and family, and different community organizations. Jean Michaelson indicated that Loveland Housing Authority gave her another 15 Vouchers for people with disabilities. The new 15 Vouchers are specifically targeted for the handicap and disabled using Disabled Resources of Larimer County to determine this. Those interested should contact Disabled Resources of Larimer County who will then refer them to Jean at EPHA. All together the total Vouchers for Estes Park is 45-50 now! Volunteer Jack Dinsmoor offered to volunteer his services to EPHA. He has engineering experience and computer skills. Jean Michaelson indicated that she does need the help and perhaps there is hope for more space in the Town building once the construction is completed. Louise Olson offered to look into obtaining a student from high school as well, as sometimes they have school work programs. Jean has discussed with the Town of Estes Park insurance coverage for volunteers while they are working on site. Market Study Jean will be working on a request for proposal for a market study for Estes Park related to the home ownership and rental projects. Colorado Housing Finance Authority (CHFA) requests a market study as part of the tax credit application. Anticipated cost for the market study is $5,000-$10,000. ADJOURN Sue Doylen entertained a motion to go into Executive Session, and Louise Olson seconded. Sue sited the following statutory citation in reference to topic discussions in the Executive Session: C.R.S. Section 24-6-402(4)(a) to discuss the purchase, acquisition, lease, transfer, or sale o f real, personal, or other property interest. Topic of Discussion: Potential Land Acquisition Matter to be Discussed: Same as above The meeting adjourned at 9:30 a.m. Respectfully submitted, Carolyn J. Coffelt Assistant to the HACOL Director EPHA November Board Minutes - Page 3 of 3 BRADFORD.U....ING.0 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Regular Meeting of the Estes Valley Board of Adjustment January 8,2002,8:00 a.m. Board Room (Room 130), Estes Park Municipal Building Board: Chair Jeff Barker, Members Joe Ball, Judy Lamy, Wayne Newsom and Al Sager Attending: Chair Barker, Members Ball, Lamy, Newsom and Sager Also Attending: Senior Planner Joseph, Chief Building Official Birchfield, Planner Chilcott and Recording Secretary Wheatley Absent: None Chair Barker called the meeting to order at 8:00 a.m. The following minutes reflect the order of the agenda and not necessarily the chronological sequence. 1. CONSENT AGENDA The minutes of the December 4, 2001, meeting were accepted as presented. 2. ELECTION OF OFFICERS It was moved and seconded (Lamy/Sager) that Joe Ball be nominated for Chair and it passed unanimously. It was moved and seconded (Lamy/Newsom) that Al Sager be nominated for Vice-Chair and it passed unanimously. The Community Development Secretary was appointed as Recording Secretary. 3. PORTION OF LOT 1, BLOCK 10, Pit.TZ RESUBDIVISION: 214 SPRUCE DRIVE, APPLICANT: KAROL & DENNIS MACK - VARIANCE REQUEST FROM SECTION 4.3, TABLE 4-2 OF THE ESTES VALLEY DEVELOPMENT CODE Planner Chilcott reviewed the staff report. The applicant proposes to expand the existing house, which is nonconforming as to the "RM" Multi-Family Residential zoning district front and side yard setbacks. The lot is undersized for the zoning district. The minimum lot size for the RM zoning district is 40,000 square feet. The size of this lot is 3,055 square feet. The existing one-story house was built in 1909 and is nonconforming as to the 15-foot front yard setback and ten-foot side yard setback. The front of the house is 3.67 feet from the front property line and the east corner of the house is 1.45 feet from the side property line. The original request was for a 10 ft. 9 in. variance from the mandated fifteen-foot front yard setback and an 8 ft. 7 in. variance from the mandated ten-foot side yard setback; however, per staff suggestions, the applicant has revised their proposal to minimize the variance request. Specifically this is now a request for a 6.5-foot variance from the mandated 15-foot front yard setback, to allow the studio addition to be built 8.5 feet from the front lot line. The request also includes an 11-foot variance from the mandated 15-foot front yard setback, to allow the bedroom addition and deck to be built four feet from the front lot line. The request also includes a 6.5-foot variance from the mandated 10-foot side yard setback, to allow the bedroom addition to be built 3.5 feet from the side lot line. Expansion of the house may not substantially alter the essential character of the neighborhood. Adjoining property owners have not contact staff to comment on this proposal. The variance would not affect the delivery of public services. The applicant purchased the property after the February 1, 2000 effective date of the 8/ADFORD PUBL IS HING CO. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Board of Adjustment January 9, 2001 Page 2 EVDC and with knowledge of the requirements. The applicant could add a second story to the existing one-story house that conformed to the setbacks. The applicant could also remove the existing deck and construct the bedroom and bathroom in the deck area. This would remove the need for a side yard variance. An approximately 320 square foot expansion of the first floor is possible within the setbacks in this area; however, it may disturb rock outcroppings in the southern corner of the lot. Paul Saunders was present representing the applicant and answered questions from the Board. He is the designer of the plan. The owners are agreeable to the suggested revisions. They have placed the studio over the existing deck. The separate entry for the extra bedroom is not for the purpose of a rental and when the remodel of the kitchen is completed, that door will be removed. The site plan was not updated; the 1/4 scale drawing is the current proposed plan. Chief Building Official Birchfield advised the revised plan would require no fire resistive construction. The Building Code requires fire resistive construction for single family dwellings that are less than 3 feet to the property line. Board Member Sager complimented the designer on the improvement of the plan to correct an undesirable situation. He commented that the change in bathroom fixtures may require a change in plumbing requirements for water and sewer service. Public Comment: None. Based on the applicant's revised plan, it was moved and seconded (Sager/Ball) to approve the variance request to allow for construction up to 3.5 feet from the side yard property line and 4 feet and 8.5 feet from the front property line, with the following conditions and it passed unanimously. All variances granted by the Board of Adjustment shall become null and void if a Building Permit has not been issued and paid for, and the work commenced within twelve (12) months from the date the variance is granted. 1. A registered land surveyor shall set the survey stakes for the foundation forms. After the footings are set and prior to pouring the foundation, the surveyor shall verify compliance with the variance and provide a setback certificate. 2. A detailed grading and drainage plan shall be submitted with the building permit application. 4. REPORTS Board Member Lamy requested that the Board discuss the letter from Jean Smith, River Spruce Cottages owner. Director Joseph reviewed the background and answered questions from the Board. Ms. Smith is upset that no advance warning of the floodplain regulations were provided at her hearing before the Board of Adjustment. When she applied for her building permit through the County, Ed Woodward, the Larimer County Floodplain Coordinator, required a hydraulic report be performed. Only a professional engineer can provide this information. Routinely, staff submits a copy of the variance application to the County Building Official; however, it apparently does not get routed from there to the Floodplain Coordinator. In the future, staff will forward the request directly to 8*0*'OR'PUILISHING.0. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Board of Adjustment January 9, 2001 Page 3 Ed Woodward, County Floodplain Coordinator. Staff was instructed to draft a letter to Ms. Smith stating their position. Chair Barker asked Chief Building Official Birchfield about Building Code regulations regarding a change of use. CBO Birchfield advised that the Building Code requires any change of use be reported to and approved by the Building Official because the Code regulations do change with the use of the property, i.e. distance to property line which triggers fire resistive construction. There being no further business, Chair Barker adjourned the meeting at 9:10 a.m. Jeff Barker, Chair Meribeth Wheatley, Recording Secretary .. BRA'FOROPUBLISHINGCO. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Regular Meeting of the Estes Valley Planning Commission December 18, 2001, 1:30 p.m. Board Room (Room 130), Estes Park Municipal Building Commission: Chair Joyce Kitchen, Commissioners Wendell Amos, DeeDee Hampton, Ed McKinney, Cherie Pettyjohn, Edward Pohl, and Dominick Taddonio Attending: Vice Chair Pettyjohn, Commissioners Hampton, McKinney, Pohl, and Taddonio Also Attending: Town Board Liaison Habecker, Town Attorney White, Director Joseph, Planner Shirk, and Recording Secretary Wheatley Absent: Commissioners Amos and Kitchen Vice Chair Pettyjohn called the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m. 1. CONSENT AGENDA a. Estes Valley Planning Commission Minutes dated November 15 & 20, 2001. b. PRELIMINARY CONDO MAP, BLACK CANYON INN, Applicant: James Sloan, - withdrawn for additional revisions to be resubmitted at a later date. c. DEVELOPMENT PLANS 01-17 AND 01-18, DRY GULCH VILLAGE, LOTS 3 & 4, GOOD SAMARITAN SUBDIVISION, Applicant: Estes Park Housing Authority - continued to the January 15, 2002 meeting at the request of the applicant. d. SUNSET RIDGE PRELIMINARY CONDO MAP, PORTION OF SECTION 25, T5N, R73W, Applicant: Roy & Michele Johnson - Condominiumization of eight dwelling units in four buildings. It was moved and seconded (Pohl/McKinney) that the Consent Agenda be accepted and it passed unanimously with two absent. 2. PUBLIC COMMENT None. 3. PRELIMINARY CONDO MAP, CREEKSIDE SUITES, LOT 1, BLOCK 4, FALL RIVER ESTATES, Applicant: Randy Collins. Director Joseph reviewed the staff report. This is a preliminary condominium map application to condominiumize Creekside Suites. Creekside Suites, Ltd, currently owns the property. Condominiumizing the property will transfer ownership of the land, structural components of the buildings, and all other common elements listed in the Declaration to the Creekside Suites Condominium-Owners Association, Inc., a Colorado Nonprofit Corporation. Ownership of the 23 existing units will be transferred to purchasers of the individual units. The Declarant has chosen to restrict use of each unit to accommodations use. The property is zoned "A" Accommodations/Highway Corridor and existing development was approved by the Planning Commission on February 17,1998, Development Plan 97-13. The property is conforming as to the density and dimensional standards set forth in EVDC Table 4-5. Comments from the reviewing agencies have been incorporated into the staff recommendations. Paul Kochevar of Estes Park Surveyors was present representing the applicant. The applicant does not have any problems with the staff recommendations. In responding to questions from the Commissioners, Mr. Kochevar was not certain about the identification of several storage areas identified as portions of Unit 23. Discussionwas tabled to give Mr. Kochevar the opportunity to speak with the applicant by phone. BRADFORD PUBLISHINGCO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission - December 18, 2001 Page 2 4. BROWN MINOR SUBDIVISION, LOT 8A OF AMENDED PLAT OF A PORTION OF LOTS 7& 8, SUMMERVILLA ADDITION, Applicant: EPCO, Inc. Planner Shirk reviewed the Staff report. This is an application by Estes Park Company, Inc., (Dennis Brown) for a minor subdivision to divide one lot into two lots pursuant to Section 10.1,8.2 of the Estes Valley Development Code. The property is zoned E-1 Estate, with a one acre minimum lot size and 100 foot minimum lot width. The two proposed lots meet these minimum lot standards. Staff recommends that the owners of Lots 1 and 2 share the existing driveway entrance. Staff recommends placing the existing trees outside the limits of disturbance as shown in the Staff report. The site is located withiri a mapped geologic hazard area (alluvial fan). As such, an engineered foundation accounting for soil type should be required with building permit applications. The site is within a mapped deer habitat area. As such, this proposal shall comply with wildlife mitigation as set forth in the Estes Valley Development Code, specifically by removing the existing wire fencing prior to issuance of a building permit. Public Works Staff commented that the Town limits shown on the plat need to be clarified and a 15-foot wide drainage easement should be dedicated along the east property line to allow for historic drainage from Prospect Park Drive. Light & Power noted that the easements for the existing overhead power lines need to be shown, or those lines will need to be relocated at the property owner's expense. Reference was made to the letter received from the Prospect Park Homeowners Association regarding additional right of way, road maintenance and a sidewalk. Staff recommends the applicant participate in the Prospect Park Homeowners Association and pay dues accordingly. It is Staff's opinion the proposal to add a single residential lot does not warrant the construction of a sidewalk. However, Staff does recommend the dedication of a 10-foot wide pedestrian access easement along the east property line. Community Development Staff has discussed the right-of-way with Town of Estes Park Public Works and suggests a 10-foot reserved right-of-way along the east property line. Kerry Prochaska of Cornerstone Engineering was present representing the applicant. After reviewing the staff report and recommendations, they had the following comments. Change the required 20-foot wide access easement to a private access easement since it will only be for Lot 1. Since there are rock outcroppings on the property, this precludes this being defined as an alluvial fan geological area; however, the note will be added. Staff agreed to the requests and advised the geological notation would be left as a condition of approval, but need not be noted on the plat. Mr. Prochaska advised that the overhead power lines would be relocated. . Public Comment: Paula Steige representing the Homebwners Association asked for clarification of the dedication of additional right-of-way. Staff advised that the 10-foot dedication of right-of-way would be reserved until such time as the adjoining property is annexed and will be included with the road right-of-way annexation at that time. There being no further comments, the public hearing was closed. It was moved and seconded (Pohl/Taddonio) to recommend approval to the Town Board of Trustees of the Brown Minor Subdivision with the following conditions, and it passed unanimously with two absent. 1. Easements for existing overhead power lines shall be dedicated, or the lines shall be moved at property owner's expense. 2. Recording of a shared maintenance agreement for the driveway. This shall be submitted for recording with the final mylars. 3. Temporary sheds and wire fence shall be removed prior to issuance of building permits. 4. Submittal of an Improvement Guarantee, subject to approval by Public Works. Said Improvement Guarantee shall include removal of fence and temporary sheds, and if no easement for overhead power lines is dedicated, the relocation of said power lines. DRADFORDFUSLIS'ING.0. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission - December 18, 2001 Page 3 5. An engineered foundation accounting for soil type shall be required with building permit applications. 6. Submittal of a revised plat incorporating the following: a. Dedication of a 20-foot wide private access easement across proposed Lot 2 for the existing driveway. b. As per Section 10.5.B, a Limits of Disturbance shall be established as shown in Image 1 of the Staff Report. c. Delineation of the Town limits shall be corrected. d. Dedication of a 15-foot wide drainage easement along the east property line. e. An additional 10 foot of right-of-way along the east property line be reserved for future dedication. This reserved right-of-way dedication area should align with the utility easements and be dedicated as a pedestrian access easement. f. The following note: Lots 1 and 2 shall share the existing driveway entrance, and no new curb cuts shall be allowed. 5. MINOR SUBDIVISION, REPLAT OF LOT 2, PINE VIEW SUBDIVISION Applicant: David & Brenda Lemke. Director Joseph reviewed the staff report. The property is zoned "RM" Multi-Family Residential, with a 40,000 square foot minimum lot size, a 60-foot minimum lot width for Lot 1A, and a 200-foot minimum lot width for Lot 2A. The two proposed lots meet these minimum lot standards. Prior to Planning Commission review, a building permit was approved to begin construction on the site as a single family dwelling unit would be allowed Â· in either case. The purpose of the proposed minor subdivision is to remove the northern , acre of Lot 2 from the condominium association. This will create a separate lot for a new duplex. To accomplish this the Lemke's must subdivide Lot 2 and amend the condominium map recorded in 1999, which condominiumized Lot 2. The Town will not review the revised condominium map for compliance with the EVDC since the map was recorded prior to the adoption of the code. Review will not occur, provided no changes are made to the condominium map and declaration except removal of Lot 2A from the condominium. Staff recommends that the Decision-Making Body waive the access road paving requirements. The Lemke's are building one new unit on Lot 2A (replacing an old unit that has been removed) and the impact of this new dwelling unit on the adjacent roads will be minimal and insignificant. Approval of this plat includes the waiver of the road paving requirements. Building additional units or significant expansion to existing units on Lot 1A or Lot 2A may, however, trigger the paving requirement. The applicant should submit a grading plan to the Chief Building Official for review and approval to demonstrate compliance with applicable Code provisions. Staff does not recommend dedication of public trails/sidewalks because the existing right-of-way is wide enough for the provision of public trails/sidewalks. Other concerns were reviewed and included in the staff recommendations for approval. Brenda Lemke advised they had no problem with staff recommendations and the grading permit issue had been resolved. Public Comment: None. It was moved and seconded (McKinney/Hampton) to recommend approval to the Town Board of Trustees of the Minor Subdivision of Lot 2, Pine View Subdivision with the following conditions, and it passed unanimously with two absent. 1. The applicant shall submit: (1) the amended condominium map; (2) amended declaration; and (3) a certificate by an attorney duly licensed to practice law in the State certifying that the Pine View Condominium Association, Inc., amended map and declaration comply with the Colorado Common Interest Ownership Act (Â§38-33.3-101 et seq. C.R.S.). This includes certifying that the removal of Lot 2A is completed in compliance with Â§38-33.3-112. 2. The amended condominium map shall be recorded at the same time the minor subdivision plat is recorded. This condition cannot be met until Town Board approval of 0 . BRADFOR/PUBLISHING CO. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission = December 18, 2001 Page 4 the minor subdivision plat. 3. Reference to limited common elements shall be removed from the minor subdivision plat. 4. A note shall be placed on the Plat indicating that approval of this Plat does not change Unit 5's non-conformity. 5. Limits of Disturbance shall be shown on the plat placing significant trees, steeply sloped areas and rock outcroppings outside the limits of disturbance, as shown in the staff report graphic. 6. The Dedication Statement shall be changed to remove the terms "recreation area, rights- of-way, streets, future streets." 7. Future development shall comply with the non-native vegetation, fencing, exterior lighting, refuse disposal, and domestic animal requirements outlined in Â§7.8.G of the EVDC. 8. Field staking shall remain in place until the minor subdivision plat is approved or denied by the Town Board. 9. Unless otherwise noted, all conditions shall be met by January 2,2002 to be placed on the January 8,2002 Town Board agenda. Vice Chair Pettyjohn reopened discussion on: PRELIMINARY CONDO MAP, CREEKSIDE SUITES, LOT 1, BLOCK 4, FALL RIVER ESTATES, Applicant: Randy Collins. Paul Kochevar had contacted Randy Collins who advised that the Unit 23 storage sites were Limited Common Elemonts (LCE) and would be conveyed with the office. Mr. Kochevar suggested that the office should be designated as Unit 24 and the clubhouse as Unit 23. It should be identified in the Declaration that Unit 23 is not to be separated from the condo association. The applicant also advised that the sdwer easement was replatted by Upper Thompson Sanitation District and was relocated to the lot to the north and extends to this lot. Public Comment: None. It was moved and seconded (McKinney/Hampton) to recommend approval to the Town Board of Trustees of the Preliminary Condo Map of Creekside Suites with the following conditions, and it passed unanimously with two absent. 1. If there is a recorded easement for the sewer main running north/south through the property, the condominium map shall show this easement. If there is not a recorded easement, a utility easement shall be dedicated with this plat. 2. A 20-foot public trail/sidewalk easement paralleling the property line along Fall River Road/US 34 shall be dedicated with this plat. 3. A description of the proposed lighting fixtures shall be submitted for staff review and approval and lighting fixtures that meet the Code requirements shall be installed. 4. The map title shall include reference to Units 1 through 23. 5. The clubhouse and the office shall be identified separately on the condo map. The storage areas shall be designated as LCE of the office. Declaration shall include that the clubhouse is an accessory use not to be conveyed separately from the other condominium units. The clubhouse is to be used only as part of the condominium development. 6. The applicant'shall submit a certificate by an attorney, duly licensed to practice laviin the State, certifying that the Creekside Suites Condominiums-Owners Association, Inc. complies with the Colorado Common Interest Ownership Act (Â§38-33.3-101 et seq. C.R.S.). 7. A copy of the recorded declaration shall be submitted to the Town within thirty days of final plat approval. This condition cannot be met until Town Board approval of the final condominium map. 8. Unless otherwise noted, all conditions shall be met by January 2,2002 to be placed on the January 8,2002 Town Board agenda. BA//FORDPUBLISHING CO. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission - December 18, 2001 Page 5 6. REPORTS None. There being no further business, Vice Chair Pettyjohn adjourned the meeting at 2:30 p.m. Cherie Pettyjohn, Vice Chair Meribeth Wheatley, Recording Secretary BRADFORDPUBLISHINGCO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Special Meeting of the Estes Valley Planning Commission Public Hearing on Estes Valley Development Code Revisions December 20, 2001, 1:30 p.m. Board Room (Room 130), Estes Park Municipal Building Commission: Chair Joyce Kitchen, Commissioners Wendell Amos, DeeDee Hampton, Ed McKinney, Cherie Pettyjohn, Edward Pohl, and Dominick Taddonio Attending: Chair Kitchen, Commissioners Hampton, McKinney, Pettyjohn, and Pohl Also Attending: Town Liaison Habecker, Town Attorney White, Director Joseph, Planner Shirk, Planner Chilcott and Recording Secretary Wheatley Absent: Commissioners Amos and Hampton Due to Chair Kitchen's health, Vice Chair Pett~ohn chaired the meeting and called the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m. PUBLIC COMMENT None. ESTES VALLEY DEVELOPMENT CODE REVISIONS Director Joseph reviewed the proposed revisions in Block 2 for discussion. Item 1. Â§13.3 Definitions - Definition 103 for Family Home Day Care was updated to read: Family Home Day Care shall mean a facility for care in the permanent residence of the provider for the purpose of providing day care and training for adults or children who are not related to the provider. The maximum number of persons for which care is provided shall comply with State of Colorado and the Colorado Department of Human Services rules and regulations. Item 2. Â§11.C in Appendix D was clarified with the following: 2. A shared driveway may provide access to not more than four (4) single- family residential lots. 3. Multi-Family Development. A driveway may provide access for not more than 100 vehicle trips per day. Item 3. Â§12.7 Enforcement Procedures was corrected to read: A. Nonemergency Matters. In the case of a violation of this Code that does not constitute an emergency or require immediate attention, written notice of the nature of the violation shall... Item 4. Open Space Set Aside and Minimum Lot Size Â§4.3 C. DensitWDimensional Standards - The following note was added to Table 4-2: [1] a. See Chapter 4, Â§4.3D. which allows a reduction in minimum lot size (area) for single-family residential subdivisions that are required to set aside private open areas per Chapter 4, Â§4.3D.1. [The existing notes will be renumbered accordingly.] Â§4.3 D. Additional Zoning District Standards A third column was added to Table 4-3 reflecting the Adjusted Minimum Lot Size/Area for residential subdivisions that are required to set aside private open areas. eFADFOROPUBLISHING CO. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission - December 20, 2001 Page 2 Table 4-3 Minimum Private Open Areas 2-Â· Zoning . Minimum Private Open Areas Adiusted Minimum Int Size/Area District 0 (% of Gross Land Area) Itt<-1 JO 7.1)11 :triÂ·n RE 30 1.75 :icriÂ·% E-1 15 0.85 acres E 15 0.43 acres R 15 0.21 acres R.1 15 4,250 square reet R.2 15 Single Family = 15.300 square reel; Duplex = 22,950 square feet RM 15 No Reduction in Minimum Lot Size The following text was added after the table: 2. Lot Size a. General Rule. Subject to the exceptions'listed below, the minimum lot size for lots within residential subdivisions that are required to set aside private open areas (per Chapter 4, Â§4.3.D.1) shall be as shown in Table 4-3 above. b. Exception for Lots with Private Water/Sewer. The minimum lot size for lots serviced by private wells or private septic systems shall be two (2) acres in all districts, except the RE-1 zoning district. c. Exception for Development on Steep Slopes. Lots with an average slope of greater than twelve percent (12%) shall be subject to the lot area adjustment set forth in Â§7.1.A of this Code. The minimum lot areas set forth in this subsection shall be used as the base for any required increase in lot area due to steep slopes. Matthew Heiser's suggestion regarding reducing the 15 foot rear yard setback for the R-1 Zoning District to 10 feet was noted and will be taken under consideration by staff. Item 5. Stream and River Corridor Setbacks 44.3 C. Density/Dimensional Standards - Note 3 to Table 4-2 was revised to read: [3] See Chapter 7, Â§7.6, which requires, generally, that all buildings and accessory structures shall be set back 30 feet from the delineated edge of stream corridors and 50 feet from the delineated edge of river corridors and wetlands. Â§4.4 C. Densitv and Dimensional Standards - Note 4 to Table 4-5 was revised to read: [4] See Chapter 7, Â§7.6, which requires, generally, that all buildings and accessory structure shall be set back 30 feet from the delineated edge of stream corridors and 50 feet from the delineated edge of river corridors and wetlands. In the CD zoning district, building/structure setbacks from the edge Â· of a stream/river corridor may be reduced to 20 feet and the parking lot setback may be reduced to 12 feet. See Â§7.6.E.1.a.(2). Â§7.6 Wetlands and Stream Corridor Protection B.2. was deleted and the remaining items were renumbered accordingly. D.2 had the following text added: Regulated stream and river corridors shall include only those streams and rivers as identified on the Stream and River Corridor Resource Map found in BRADFOROPUBLISWINGCO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission - December 20, 2001 Page 3 Appendix A. The rivers delineated on the Stream and River Corridor Resource Map are the Big Thompson and Fall River. Streams delineated on the Map include various named and unnamed streams and minor drainages, some of which are intermittent. It was noted that the drainage off the south side of Prospect Mountain would be added to the Map. E.1.a. (1) through (3) was changed to read as follows: (1) Stream Corridors (Except in the CD Zoning District). All buildings and accessory structures shall be set back at least thirty (30) feet horizontally (plan view) from the annual high-water mark of stream corridors or if not readily discernible, from the defined bank of the stream. Where defined banks are not readily discernible, the setback shall be measured from the thread of the stream. See Figure 7-10. (2) River Corridors (Except in the CD Zoning District). (a) General Rule. All buildings and accessory structures shall be set back at least fifty (50) feet horizontally (plan view) from the annual high-water mark of river corridors or if not readily discernible, from the defined bank of the river. (b) Exception for Lots Developed Prior to the Adoption of this Code. All buildings and accessory structures shall be set back at least thirty (30) feet horizontally (plan view) from the annual high-water mark of river corridors or if not readily discernible, from the defined bank of the river. See Figure 7-10. (3) Stream and River Corridors in the CD Zoning District. In the CD district, all buildings and accessory structures shall be set back at least twenty (20) feet horizontally (plan view) from the annual high-water mark of stream or river corridors, or if not readily discernible, from the defined bank of the stream or river. Where defined banks are not readily discernible, the setback shall be measured from the thread of the stream. Where a principal building in the CD district provides public access, including a primary entrance, on the side of the building facing a stream or river corridor, the setback may be reduced to ten (10) feet with the approval of the Decision-Making Body. E.1.a.(4) was deleted. E.2. Wetlands was revised to include the following: Development on lots of record that were approved for single-family residential use prior to the adoption of this Code shall be exempt. Â§13.3 Definition for "Thread" was added. Thread shall mean the center line or low-flow course of a stream. Items 6 & 7. Discussion on Gross Floor Area and Lot Coverage will be deferred until direction is received from Town Board following their Study Session on January 15, 2002. Item 8. Minimum Lot Sizes for Attainable Housing Development and Development of Steep Slopes Â§4.3.C. Densitv/Dimensional Standards - The following notes were added to Table 4- 2: [1] b. See Chapter 11, Â§11.4, which allows a reduction in minimum lot size (area), for attainable housing. [1] c. See Chapter 7, Â§7.1, which requires an increase in minimum lot size BRAOFORDPUBLISHINGCO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission - December 20, 2001 Page 4 (area) for development on steep slopes. 84.4 C. Density and Dimensional Standards - The following note was added to Table 4-5: [7] See Chapter 7, Â§7.1, which requires an increase in minimum lot size (area) for development on steep slopes. Item 9. Condominium Process Â§10.5.H Condominiums, Townhouses and other forms of Airspace Ownership - Item 3 was revised as follows: 3. Exemptions. This subsection shall not apply to condominiums of two (2) units or less. The number of units shall include any units reserved for future development. ADDendix B.ll. Subdivision Submittal Requirements for Condominium Projects will be reformatted and reviewed at a later meeting. It was moved and seconded (McKinney/Kitchen) to recommend acceptance of the above Code revisions to the Town Board of Trustees and County Commissioners. Motion passed unanimously with two absent. These Code revisions will be referred to the governing boards at a Joint Meeting of the Town Board and County Commissioners on January 22,2002. Meeting was adjourned at 1:55 p.m. Cherie Pettyjohn, Vice Chair Meribeth Whdatley, Recording Secretary eRADFORO PUBLISHING Co. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, December 12, 2001 Minutes of a Regular meeting of the FIREMEN'S PENSION BOARD of the Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held in the Municipal Building in said Town of Estes Park on the 12th day of December, 2001. Board: Mayor Baudek, Fire Chief Dorman, EPVFD Secretary Landkamer, EPVFD Member Deats, Treasurer Brandjord, Clerk O'Connor Attending: All Absent: None Mayor Baudek called the meeting to order at 3:30 p.m. ACTUARIAL STUDY - PRESENTATION. Treasurer Brandjord presented the Actuarial Study dated as of January 1, 2001 prepared by The Actuarial Consulting Group, Inc., adding that in the future, the Actuary should personally present their report. In summary, a review of the basic $325/mo. retirement benefit indicates that the current level of expected contributions will support a basic monthly retirement benefit of $400/mo. State Statute provides for a 90% match, not to exceed 1.5 mills. Treasurer Brandjord expressed concern with the "Pension Fund Provisions", particularly the Post-Retirement Death and Lump-Sum Death Benefits due to conflicting language within the Statute. Additionally, staff believes an Investment Policy for the Pension Fund should be implemented, and an RFP process would be utilized to maximize investments. Consensus was reached for staff to proceed with preparing an RFP for an Actuarial Study, to include a formal presentation by the certified actuary. The study is estimated at $2,500, the Finance Dept will fund it, and the target date for receipt is June/July, 2002. PENSION BENEFIT INCREASE - DISCUSSION. Discussion followed on a proposed benefit increase and the affect on the Pension Fund. Pursuant to the Actuarial Report, it was moved and seconded (Dorman/Landkamer) the monthly pension benefit be increased from $325/mo. to $400/mo. Treasurer Brandjord expressed concern with the motion due the above-stated items, and suggested a friendly amendment to raise the pension benefit to $350/mo. effective in January, 2002 contingent upon an additional actuarial study proving the affects of an increase to $400 on the Pension Fund, and, if the fund can withstand an additional increase in 2003, the increase be $400/mo. Chief Dorman, as the original motion maker, agreed to the amendment, and Member Deats seconded the motion (amendment), and it passed unanimously. Treasurer Brandjord distributed a worksheet identifying target practices and policies that should be place, and requested they be distributed to all EPVFD members for completion. Additionally, during the six-month interim (new Actuarial Study), Chief Dorman will poll EPVFD members to ascertain their preference on increasing the monthly pension benefit or the spouse benefit. There being no further business, Mayor Baudek adjourned the meeting at 4:06 p.m. Gfli, O -qÂ»ajo Vickie O'Connor, CMC, Town Clerk . RESOLUTION NO. 1-02 WHEREAS, Section 26-6-402(2)(c) of the "Colorado Sunshine Act of 1972" as amended, requires a municipality to designate a public place to post notices of its meetings. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO: 1. That the lobby area immediately adjacent to the Administrative Offices in the Estes Park Municipal Building, located at 170 MacGregor Avenue, Estes Park, Colorado, is hereby designated as the Public Place for Posting Notices of Town Meetings. DATED this day of ,2002. TOWN OF ESTES PARK Mayor ATTEST: Town Clerk Community Development Department Memo To: Honorable Mayor Baudek Board of Trustees Town Administrator Widmer From: Robert B. Joseph, Director Date: January 3,2002 Subject: Sunset Ridge Preliminary and Final Condominium Map Background. This is a request by Roy and Michelle Johnson to condominiumize a ~ previously approved development ,-1 .6- plan. The development plan includes 7---42. ~ Wonderview Ave TA- eight units in four duplex buildings. The development plan and - ~ ~--- ~~ ~~ condominium map meet all applicable .7----- ~ - _ \'irginia.DE requirements of the Estes Valley - E-1 Development Code, and is currently under construction. The condominium RM map is consistent with the approved / ~ L-bE 1 development plan. The Estes Valley 71-9Â»1\\\ Planning Commission reviewed this yzz% RM L proposal on December 18, 2001, and recommended conditional approval. Budget. Not applicable. Action. Staff recommends approval of the Preliminary Condominium Map; and, ~ approval of the Final Condominium Map conditional to: 1. A copy of the recorded condominium map and declaration shall be submitted to the Town within thirty (30) days of final plat approval; 2. Placement of utility line locations on the final map; 3. An attorney's certificate verifying the Fawn Lane Condominium Association, Inc. complies with the Colorado Common Interest Ownership Act (Â§38-33.3-101 et seq. C.R.S.) shall be submitted with the mylars; 4. Compliance with Town Attorney White's memo dated December 18, 2001; and, 5. Placement of the following note: "Approval of this Plan creates a vested property right pursuant to Article 68 of Title 24, C.R.S., as amended." â€¢Page 2 *.t Town of Estes Park Community Development Department Memo To: Honorable Mayor Baudek Board of Trustees Town Administrator Widmer From: Alison Chilcott, Planner I and Bob Joseph, Director Date: January 3,2002 Subject: Preliminary and Final Condominium Map for Creekside Suites Condominiums Background. This is a preliminary and final condominium map application to condominiumize twenty-two (22) existing accommodations units and to condominiumize the office (unit 23) and clubhouse (unit 24). No expansion of existing units is proposed and the declarant is not reserving future development rights. The site is located at 1400 David Drive, within the Town of Estes Park and is owned by Creekside Suite, Ltd. The lot is zoned "A" Accommodations/Highway Corridor and the existing accommodations use will continue. Location Map NX.-1 \ IN 1 | Fish Hatchery Roacl L -~ Â»<~pa United Methodist ~ 1David_Drive|j Â·Â· - Â·Â· 1 A, -~ Church r' t><*00, David Drive I CreekES.Suited \~ Creekside Condos] 1 1 The Planning Commission voted to recommend conditional approval of the preliminary condominium map. The following conditions remain: 1. A description of the proposed lighting fixtures shall be submitted for staff review and approval and lighting fixtures that meet the Code requirements shall be installed. 2. Declaration shall include that the clubhouse is an accessory use not to be conveyed separately from the other condominium units. The clubhouse is to be used only as part of the condominium development. 3. A copy of the recorded declaration shall be submitted to the Town within thirty days of final plat approval. Staff Comment: This condition cannot be met until Town Board approval of the final condominium map. Staff anticipates that Item #2 will be addressed prior to the January 8th Town Board meeting. Budget. None. Action. If Item #2 is addressed prior to Town Board, approval of the preliminary and final condominium map with the remaining condition #1 and #3, and requiring that condition #1 be met prior to recording the condominium map and declaration. â€¢ Page 2 4 Community Development Department Memo To: Honorable Mayor Baudek Board of Trustees Town Administrator Widmer From: Robert B. Joseph, Director Date: January 3,2002 Subject: Brown Minor Subdivision Background. This is a request by Estes Park Company Inc. (Dennis Brown) for a ~ minor subdivision. The applicant proposes to subdivide Lot 8A of the Summervilla - Addition to the Town of Estes Park (2.604 acre lot) into two lots (1.25, 1.35 acres). The proposed lots meet - .9.Pl ~ v~ A-1 'fli minimum lot size and other Timbef mit Â©... - , applicable standards set forth 1 A ~ a in the Estes Valley Development Code. The Estes Valley Planning E-1 Commission reviewed this I, proposal on December 18, - 2001, and recommended conditional approval. E-1 Budget. Not applicable. RE .*.â€žt t Action. Staff recommends approval conditional to: 1. Recording of a shared maintenance agreement for the driveway. This shall be submitted for recording with the mylars. 2. Submittal of an Improvement Guarantee, subject to approval by Public Works, incorporating removal of fence, temporary sheds, and relocation of power line. 3. Amendment of the Limits of Disturbance as shown in the image below: 7///Iti".--*///B 1/ill//IMIFy.- Ar - -' 4, F. T n.+ Mt,84141, .ji> 2 8 JÂ¢rÂ· 0 We t Â¥* r.'AE#41377 1 , 14; I:. ah' .4 1 â€¢4 r 9 . -- Â¤ *a~r L ~ *~i ~, ~ ; ... . I t. LE2_ -1,33?13..~,1,4 â€¢ Page 2 *4 Town of Estes Park Community Development Department Memo To: Honorable Mayor Baudek Board of Trustees Town Administrator Widmer From: Alison Chilcott, Planner I and Bob Joseph, Director Date: January 3,2002 Subject: Replat of Lot 2 Pine View Subdivision (Minor Subdivision) Background. This is a minor subdivision application for Lot 2 of the Pine View Subdivision to subdivide one lot into two lots. The site is located at 755 Elm Drive. Lot 2 was condominiumized in 1999 is owned by the Pine View Condominium Association and individual unit owners. , The lot is zoned RM" Multi-Family Residential and the existing multi-family use will continue. The purpose of the proposed minor subdivision is to remove the northern acre of Lot 2 from the condominium association. This will create a separate lot, Lot 1A, for a new duplex. To accomplish this the Lemke's must subdivide Lot 2 into two lots, Lot 1A and Lot 2A and amend the condominium map recorded in 1999, which condominiumized Lot 2. The Town will not review the revised condominium map for compliance with the Estes Valley Development Code since the map was recorded prior to adoption of the Code, i.e. prior to Town review of condominium maps. Review will not occur, provided no changes are made to the condominium map and declaration except removal of Lot 2A from the condominium. Location Map - [storage units L Â¢ Irâ€ž 6 Ts,===1 Y Sold W /ite Reoylir,g Cent.4 Isingie Famjlyl \ j /1 755 Elm Road -~Elrn Road 1 4 Lazy R Cottagesl ~ f F7 A Moraine Avenue (US 34)'ir \ ~ W est by S out hiest D es Ign~ - 9, Twin Sisters Cafe | American Wilderness Tours I 9 JL .. The Planning Commission voted to recommend conditional approval of the minor subdivision plat. The following conditions remain: 1. The applicant shall submit a certificate by an attorney duly licensed to practice law in the State certifying that the Pine View Condominium Association, Inc., amended map and declaration comply with the Colorado Common Interest Ownership Act (Â§38-33.3-101 et seq. C.R.S.). This includes certifying that the removal of Lot 2A is completed in compliance with Â§38-33.3-112. 2. The amended condominium map shall be recorded at the same time the minor subdivision plat is recorded. Staff Comment: This cond#ion cannot be met unt# Town Board approval of the minor subdivision plat. Staff anticipates that Item #1 will be addressed prior to the January 8th Town Board meeting. Budget. None. Action. If Item #1 is addressed prior to Town Board, approval of the minor subdivision plat with the remaining condition #2. â€¢ Page 2 MEMORANDUM To: Honorable Mayor Baudek and Board of Trustees From: Bob Joseph, Community Development Director Date: 1-4-02 Subject: Stauffer Addition Annexation Background: This property is located on Riverside Drive. The existing zoning is A-1. The existing land use is single family residential. The property is eligible for annexation and can be served with adequate utilities, police, and fire protection. A request has been made by the neighborhood to re-zone that part of this property lying south of Riverside Drive to single family residential. This would be consistent with the historic use of the property, however the owners object to this rezoning. Prior to the recent rezoning to A-1, this property had been zoned T-Tourist. Recommendation: Annexation with A-1 zoning. .. PROSPECT PARK HOMEOWNERS' ASSOCIATION Current Association Officers President: Paula Steige Secretary: Rachel Williams Vice President: Sue Spooner Treasurer: John Jensen December 11, 2001 r-----Â·----- 1 i [FAE (0 5-3 9 87 E P. 1 1 , The Honorable Mayor John Baudek 111.4 [- 1 6 q ir iii and The Estes Park Town Trustees :[r,\* Ij Municipal Building 4 th DEC 11 2001 4 W Estes Park, CO 80517 f..0 1 RE: Stauffer Addition ---- Dear Mr. Mayor and Trustees: The Prospect Park Homeowners' Association has for many years represented the nearly fifty homeowners of the Hondius Heights, and Summervilla subdivisions in the Prospect Park Road area. As such, we have a concern in regard to the zoning for the Stauffer Addition. The current zoning for the parcel under consideration is A-1, Accomodation. Under the previous zoning, the portion adjacent to the river, which will become lot 1 ofthe addition was zoned "tourisf' while the portion on the South side of Riverside Drive was zoned E-Estate. Since it would be impossible to have a single lot with two zoning designations, the earlier zoning must have been intended to reflect the intent to zone the property.along the river as accomodation, and the property across what is now Riverside Drive as residential, i.e. Estate. It is our opinion that if the property had been subdivided prior to the rezoning of the Valley, the property South of Riverside Drive would have been zoned E-1, which would be in keeping with the residential nature of the neighborhood and other zoning South of the road. The Homeowners' Association members feel strongly that the property South ofRiverside Drive should maintain its residential character and that it would be appropriate for what would become lot 2 to be zoned E-1, as a condition of approval. The residence located on the property actually conforms to the E-1 designation. We appreciate your attention to this concerns, and will have our representatives at your meeting on January 8,2002, to address them further ifneed be. Thank you. Sincerely, 42Â£45 Li225./ Paula Steige, President / John and Sue Spooner 527 Hondius Circle Estes Park, CO 80517 TO: Estes Valley Planning Commission FROM: John and Sue Spooner RE: Stauffer Addition 580 East Riverside Drive Estes Park As adjacent landowners to the above referenced property, we received a copy of the Preliminary Plat for the proposed Stauffer Addition. We are not opposed to the proposed subdivision, however there are two issues we would like to bring to your attention. 1. The current zoning on the original lot is A-1 accommodations. It is our opinion that, at the time the valley was recently rezoned, there was an attempt to zone the property along the river as A-1 and the property across Riverside Drive as E-1, which would be in keeping with the existing neighborhood. Because the subject property (and the one immediately east) were both one lot, this resulted in A-1 zoning in the residential area. We believe that this would be an appropriate time to correct this and to rezone the proposed new lot 2 as E-1, thus having this zoning conform to the single family residence which exists on the lot and to the neighborhood. 2. There is considerable pedestrian traffic along Riverside Â·Drive. The Big Thompson Timberlane Lodge property immediately west o f the proposed addition does have sidewalk on Riverside Drive. We believe it would be appropriate to consider an extension sidewalk along the road on the proposed addition. Thank you for your consideration of these comments. Sincerely yours, Sue and John Spooner L, ..y v V 1 1 F RESOLUTION NO. 1-02 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO: The Board of Trustees of the Town of Estes Park, Colorado, in accordance with Section 31-12-110, C.R.S., hereby finds that with regard to the proposed annexation of the following described area, that the requirements of the applicable parts of Sections 31-12- 104 and 31-12-105, C.R.S., have been met; that an election is not required under Section 31-12-107(2), C.R.S.; and that no additional terms and conditions are to be imposed on the annexation. The area eligible for annexation known as "STAUFFER ADDITION" to the Town of Estes Park is as follows: A portion of Section 26, Township 5 North, Range 73 West of the 6~h P.M. more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the SE corner of said Section 26; Thence along the south line of said Section 26 N 87Â°39'00" W 380.01' to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; Thence continuing along said south line N 87Â°39'00" W 454.00'; Thence N 00Â°00'00" W 296.91' to a point in the center of the Big Thompson River; Thence along said river along a non-tangential curve, concave to the north with a radius of 208.75', a delta of 46Â°25'02", and a chord of N 86Â°11'22" E 164.53' a distance of 169.12'; Thence N 62Â°58'51" E 117.14'; Thence leaving said river S 37Â°35'19" E 303.42'; Thence S 00Â°00'06" E 139.24' to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing 3.018 Acres. DATED this 8~ day of JanuarY ,2002. TOWN OF ESTES PARK Mayor ATTEST: Town Clerk . ORDINANCE NO. 1-02 AN ORDINANCE APPROVING THE ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN TERRITORY TO THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO, TO BE KNOWN AND DESIGNATED AS STAUFFER ADDITION BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO: Section 1. That a Petition for Annexation, together with four (4) copies of the plat of said area as required by law, was filed with the Board of Trustees on the 13~11 day of November, 2001 by the landowners of one hundred percent (100%) of the area and owning one hundred percent (100%) of the area, excluding public streets and alleys of the area hereinafter described. The Board, by Resolution at its regular meeting on the 13~h day of November, 2001, accepted said Petition and found and determined that the provisions of Section 31-12-107(1), C.R.S., were met; and the Board further determined that the Town Board should consider the annexation plat on Tuesday, January 8, 2002 at 7:00 p.m. in the Municipal Building for the purposes of determining that the proposed annexation complies with the applicable provisions of Sections 31-12-104 and 31-12-105, C.R.S., and is considered eligible for annexation. Section 2. That the Notice of said hearing was given and published as provided in Section 31-12-108(2), C.R.S. Section 3. That the hearing was held pursuant to the provisions of Section 31-12- 109, C.R.S., on the 80' day of January ,2002. Section 4. That following said hearing, the Board of Trustees adopted a Resolution determining that the proposed annexation met the requirements of the applicable parts of Sections 31-12-104 and 31 -12-105, C. R.S.; that an election was not required under Section 31-12-107(2), C.R.S.; and that no additional terms or conditions are to be imposed upon said annexation. Section 5. That the annexation of the following described area designated as STAUFFER ADDITION to the Town of Estes Park, Colorado, is hereby approved: A portion of Section 26, Township 5 North, Range 73 West of the 6th P.M. more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the SE corner of said Section 26; Thence along the south line of said Section 26 N 87Â°39'00" W 380.01' to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; Thence continuing along said south line N 87Â°39'00" W 454.00'; Thence N 00Â°00'00" W 296.91' to a point in the center of the Big Thompson River; Thence along said river along a non-tangential curve, concave to the north with a radius of 208.75', a delta of 46Â°25'02", and a chord of N 86Â°11'22" E 164.53' a distance of 169.12'; Thence N 62Â°58'51" E 117.14'; Thence leaving said river S 37Â°35'19" E 303.42'; Thence S 00Â°00'06" E 139.24' to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing 3.018 Acres. Section 6. The Town of Estes Park, Colorado, hereby consents, pursuant to Section 37-45-126(3.6) C.R.S., to the inclusion of lands described above into the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District and the Municipal SubDistrict, Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District. Section 7. Stauffer Addition is zoned A-1 Accommodations District. Section 8. 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 8~h DAY OF January ,2002. TOWN OF ESTES PARK Mayor ATTEST: Town Clerk , I hereby certify that the above Ordinance was introduced and read at a regular meeting of the Board of Trustees on the 8~h day of, 2002 and published in a newspaper of general circulation in the Town of Estes Park, Colorado, on the day of , 2001, all as required by the Statutes of the State of Colorado. Town Clerk Community Development Department Memo To: Honorable Mayor Baudek Board of Trustees Town Administrator Widmer Fronn: Robert B. Joseph, Director Date: January 3,2002 Subject: Stauffer Minor Subdivision Background. This is a request by John H. and Stanley H. Stauffer to subdivide a 3- acre parcel into two separate building . 4Â© lots. The parcel is currently developed 7 18 1 with a single-family dwelling unit with Riverside Do associated outbuildings. Riverside Drive bisects the lot; this plat would iniberlan dedicate right-of-way for Riverside o ge Drive and create two separate lots. The proposed lots meet minimum lot size and other applicable standards ~ set forth in the Estes Valley Development Code. The Estes Valley rown E-1 Planning Commission reviewed this Subdivision ~ proposal on December 18,2001, and Â·Â· *1 l recommended conditional approval. Budget. Not applicable. - Action. Staff recommends approval conditional to: 1. The dedication statement shall be subject to review and approval by the Town Attorney.