Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES Town Board Study Session with Larimer County Commissioners and Planning Commission 2008-06-04Minutes of a JOINT STUDY SESSION of the ESTES PARK TOWN BOARD, BOARD OF LARIMER COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, AND ESTES VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held in the Holiday Inn Conference Center in the Town of Estes Park on the 4th day of June 2009. Attending: Mayor PInkham, Mayor Pro Tem Levine, Trustees Blackhurst, Eisenlauer, Ericson, Homeier, and Miller; County Chair Rennels, Commissioners Donnell and Johnson; Planning Commission Chair Klink, Commissioners Fraundorf, Hull, Lane, Norris and Tucker Also Attending: Town Administrator Halburnt, Deputy Town Administrator Richardson, Town Attorney White, County Manager Lancaster, Town Community Development Director Joseph, Town Planner Chilcott, Town Planner Shirk, Recording Secretary Thompson Absent: None Mayor Pinkham called the meeting to order at 9:00 a.m. Planning Commissioner Klink explained Community Development staff has been working on various revisions to the Estes Valley Development Code; namely, Accessory Dwelling Units, Wildlife Habitat, and Vacation Homes/Bed& Breakfast Rentals. There have been issues in getting those code revisions approved by the Planning Commission and again by the Town Board. Therefore, he stated the Planning Commission would like to take a different approach and ask the Town Board to provide more details when requesting code revisions. A problem statement was suggested, which can be used as a check in order to ensure the goals are being met. It is a Planning Commission goal to address the issues and vote in a more timely manner with more positive feedback from the public. County Commissioners Rennels explained the relationship between the three boards, and noted the County Commissioners have a steering committee meeting to keep them informed of changes being made before they officially come to that Commission for approval. WILDLIFE HABITAT Community Development Director Joseph reported on the background of the proposed Wildlife Habitat code revisions. This item has been discussed by Planning Commission for several months, concluding with the item being tabled until an Open Space Study can be discussed by Town Board. The two main points of interest with the Wildlife Habitat code revisions were the desire to remove the Colorado Division of Wildlife from being part of the decision-making process, and the language stating a habitat assessment would be triggered in any area where calving occurs. Setbacks from river and stream corridors were a topic that generated much public comment and concern. Director Joseph stated the most important habitat areas in the Estes Valley are riparian areas and Bighorn sheep habitat. Discussion between the Commissioners and Town Board revolved around whether or not the wildlife in the Estes Valley is currently suffering from lack of habitat, and the economic impact to the Town (positive and negative) due to the close proximity of wildlife. Director Joseph noted the Habitat Assessment Study produced by EDAW included mapping of movement corridors and a narrative discussion about the connectivity of habitat areas. The current code does not address the connectivity issue. Comments concerning setbacks were about the proposed exemption of commercial areas, and the pros and cons of 30 foot setbacks. County Commissioner Donnelly noted current setbacks in the Estes Valley Development Code are smaller than what is required in the Larimer County Development Code. Town Board –County Commissioners-Estes Valley Planning Commission Study Session – June 4, 2009 – Page 2 Planning Commissioner Klink stated language has also been written which gives the Planning Commission the authority to disapprove a development plan based on the lack of an effective mitigation plan. Several Planning Commissioners requested feedback from the County Commissioners and Town Board. County Commissioner Johnson would like to see that the Planning Commission has the tools needed to avoid situations like Wapiti Crossing, and believes the code should give a clear understanding to make a confident decision. Mayor Pinkham thinks it is important to get balanced input from the community. Planning Commissioner Tucker stated the developer needs to have a clear idea of the problem in order to know what mitigation steps to take, and feels clearer definitions are needed before we can add regulations to the code. Planning Commissioner Klink noted the Commission will move forward on this topic after a problem statement has been created. County Commissioners Rennels suggested the problem statement include goals toward a positive code that is understandable to property owners and developers, and is clear to the developer as to what they will be judged on. A good mitigation technique is important, and it would also be helpful to find ways to remove the emotion from the situation. OPEN SPACE Community Development Director Joseph reported on the background of a proposed open space plan. A selection panel was formed that reviewed incoming proposals. The topic was tabled by the Town Board. It was said that close to 1/3 of land area within the Estes Valley boundary area is already designated open space. Comment revolved around minimum percentages of open space in new residential subdivisions, incentives to developers for clustering, and the general public’s anticipated views of open space. Planning Commissioner Norris indicated a desire to take the “critical” and “important” habitat maps from the EDAW study and overlay them with the open space map, then determine where the problem areas lie. He also suggested reviewing the Planned Unit Development (PUD) requirements to create more flexibility and diversity. Planning Commissioner Klink suggests using caution if redefining “open space” to avoid unintended consequences. Planning Commissioner Lane indicated the need to understand and realize the differences when dealing with open space on private property versus public property. Town Trustee Blackhurst’s opinion is public input needs to be obtained prior to code language being written. ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS (ADU) Community Development Director Joseph reviewed the background on ADUs, noting that Staff also spent time participating in local outreach on this topic with stakeholders. After months of discussion and public input, Planning Commission approved code language that included no detached ADUs, no minimum lot size, no rentals allowed, square footage cannot exceed 49% of the principal dwelling, and Planning Commission review for all applications. It was noted Larimer County allows detached units with approval, no rentals, 800 square foot maximum, entrance requirements, and a mention of neighborhood covenants. This topic generated intense interest on both sides of the issue. Finally, Director Joseph noted that the Town Board directed the Planning Commission and Staff to revisit the code and present it again at an unspecified date. Among other things, Town Board would like to see detached units and rentals allowed. Planning Commissioner Klink explained the reasoning behind the revisions that did not allow detached units or rentals. Discussion involved comments related to number of applications per year, the difference between renting a room in a home and renting an ADU, the complexity of aligning the ADU code to fit with the affordable housing statements in the Comprehensive Plan, the definition of a kitchen, future use and potential problems of an ADU once the original use has expired, the neighborhood concerns that zoning will change, water well issues, and proposed deed restrictions on properties with ADUs. Town Board –County Commissioners-Estes Valley Planning Commission Study Session – June 4, 2009 – Page 3 Town Trustee Miller believes there are five main issues facing the Planning Commission and Town Board today: 1) Overall land use code; 2) Changing demographics; 3) Affordable housing; 4) Economic development, and 5) Transportation. He stated the issues on the table have to be defined in order to be solved. Mayor Pinkham asked to have the items prioritized, and schedule a study session with the Town Board and Planning Commission to begin to move ahead with these issues. He suggested beginning with defining problem statements and process procedures and then discussion on the Wildlife Habitat code revisions. It was suggested for the Planning Commission to consider an evening meeting time in order to gain public input with more balance. Director Joseph recognized outgoing Planning Commissioner Wendell Amos for his years of service to the Estes Valley. There being no further business, Mayor Pinkham adjourned the meeting at 11:25 p.m. Karen Thompson, Recording Secretary