Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES Town Board Joint Study Session 2018-02-22 Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado February 22, 2018 Minutes of a Joint Study Session meeting of the ESTES PARK TOWN BOARD, LARIMER COUNTY COMMISSION, AND ESTES VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION 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 22nd day of February, 2018. Town Board: Mayor Jirsa, Mayor Pro Tem Koenig, Trustees Holcomb, Martchink, Nelson, Norris and Walker County Commission: Chair Johnson and Commissioner Donnelly Planning Commission: Commissioners Doyle, Foster, Hull, Leavitt, Murphree, Schneider, and White Also Attending: Town Administrator Lancaster, County Manager Hoffman, Attorney White, Larimer County Attorney Haag, Community Development Director Hunt, Planner Becker, Code Compliance Officer Hardin, County Planner Whitley and Town Clerk Williamson Absent: Commissioner Gaiter and County Planning Director Gilbert Meeting was called to order at 6:00 p.m. by Mayor Jirsa and co-chaired by Larimer County Commissioner Johnson. Mayor Jirsa commented the meeting would outline the expectations of the Estes Valley Planning Commission. Commissioner Johnson stated the importance of the Planning Commission’s role within the community and the recommendations to the elected boards. The Planning Commission provides the community with an initial hearing before the elected officials hear a proposed project. The Planning Commission protects the property rights of all parties involved, including the developers, the neighboring property owners, and the community as a whole. He spoke to the importance of a quasi-judicial hearing and the need to review a proposal based on the laws in place at the time, i.e. the Estes Valley Development Code (EVDC). Estes Valley Planning Commission Chair Leavitt commented the Commission would request additional joint study sessions to gain an understanding between the entities. A summary of County Commission and Town Board expectations and role of the Estes Valley Planning Commission was reviewed and comments summarized: 1. Planning Commission members are appointed by the Commissioners and Trustees to serve the entire community. Planning Commission members do not independently represent any constituency. 2. The purposes of the Planning Commission are limited to the following: a. Adopt the Comprehensive Plan in accordance with community goals (including identified strategic goals of the Town and County), with community input representative of all stakeholders, and with resources as available through established budgetary and administrative processes. Joint Town Board Study Session – February 22, 2018 – Page 2 Comments: A discussion was heard on the Planning Commission’s responsibility to administer the Comprehensive Plan as outlined in the Colorado Revised Statutes. The elected bodies provide the direction and the resources need to complete a Comprehensive Plan. The current Comprehensive Plan should be modernized and would require the three entities to outline goals, processes, etc. The Planning Commission members commented on the fact the citizens view the current Comprehensive Plan as relevant and should be considered when reviewing development proposals. It was reiterated EVDC implemented the Comprehensive Plan and is the law when reviewing development proposals. b. The Comprehensive Plan has been implemented through the adoption of the Land Use Code by the Commissioners and Trustees. Any project or project component which is in compliance with the Land Use Code is considered to be in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. Comments: The Planning Commission commented the EVDC states the Comprehensive Plan must be considered in the review of development proposals. This statement in the code has led to confusion among the Commissioners and the citizens during the application review process. The Town Board and County Commission made a specific finding when adopting the EVDC which found the code in compliance with and meeting the goals of the Comprehensive Plan. It was suggested the EVDC be amended to clarify the language as it relates to meeting the goals of the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan should be viewed as an advisory document only with the EVDC as the law to be utilized in the review of a development application. Any development application in compliance with the EVDC is therefore in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. c. Administer the Land Use Code as a neutral, fair and unbiased hearing body. d. Make recommendations to the Commissioners and Trustees on current planning applications. Such recommendations will be included in the application review packet provided to the Commissioners and Trustees for final action along with comments from referral agencies, direct citizen input and the staff recommendation. Comments: The Planning Commission would provide clear reasons for the decision made on future development application recommendations to the Town Board and County Commission. The Planning Commission’s minutes should be detailed and provide an understanding for the recommendations made to the elected bodies. e. Perform work as requested by the Commissioners and Trustees such as studying specific planning issues and making recommendations for Land Use Code changes and undertaking structured efforts to update specific provisions of the Comprehensive Plan. The Planning Commission does not have the authority to perform work that is not specifically requested by the Commissioners and Trustees. Comments: It was noted the expectations do not clearly outline that Planning Commission reviews changes to the EVDC and makes recommendations to the elected bodies. The Commission also makes final decisions on certain development plan applications. Joint Town Board Study Session – February 22, 2018 – Page 3 3. Planning Commissioners are subject to open meeting and open records laws which mandate: a. Planning Commissioners must not meet privately about Planning Commission decisions, activities, issues, or matters outside of properly noticed public meetings. This prohibition includes all forms of communication: verbal, written, and electronic. This prohibition specifically includes ex parte communications with members of the public on development-review matters. Comments: Planning Commission recognizes the problem and would address the concerns. The EVPC would follow the rules of the Open Meetings law and Open Records law. The Planning Commission’s emails would be made available on the Town’s website. All comments on the agenda would be forwarded to Director Hunt to compile and send out to the entire Commission for review. b. All email related to Planning Commission business is considered public record unless otherwise defined under the Colorado Open Records Act. To ensure compliance and to facilitate any CORA requests received by the Town or the County related to Planning Commission business, all Planning Commission e- mail must be received and sent using the assigned Town of Estes Park email addresses. The use of private accounts is not allowed. Comment: Providing public access to the Commission’s emails ensures transparency. 4. Planning Commissioners are appointees of the Commissioners and Trustees and assume the following responsibilities: a. Conduct hearings, discussions and all other activities associated with their work in a courteous, respectful, and professional manner which includes interactions with the public, the assigned staff, project applicants and fellow commissioners. b. Take timely dispositive action on applications coming before the Commission so as to avoid delaying final consideration of recommendations and action by the Commissioners and Trustees. c. Follow legal advice by counsel for the Town and County. d. Concerns regarding job performance of Staff should not be made in public meetings but privately to the Community Development Director. Mayor Jirsa stated the three bodies would need to work together to outline the financial resources for staff and the Planning Commission, and to provide initial and ongoing training to enable them to fulfill their respective roles. Comments were heard on the need for additional land use training for both the Planning Commission and Town Board. Land use should have a higher priority within the valley. Areas with the greatest potential of conflict should be addressed first. Next steps would include a quarterly meeting. The Planning Commission could bring issues forward to the Larimer County Commissioner’s study sessions. Additional items to be discussed at the next meeting would include the Intergovernmental Agreement, revise the bylaws, and revisions to the EVDC. There being no further business, Mayor Jirsa adjourned the meeting at 7:44 p.m. Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk