HomeMy WebLinkAboutPACKET Town Board 2017-08-08The Mission of the Town of Estes Park is to provide high‐quality, reliable
services for the benefit of our citizens, guests, and employees, while
being good stewards of public resources and our natural setting.
The Town of Estes Park will make reasonable accommodations for access to Town
services, programs, and activities and special communication arrangements for persons
with disabilities. Please call (970) 577-4777. TDD available.
BOARD OF TRUSTEES - TOWN OF ESTES PARK
Tuesday, August 8, 2017
7:00 p.m.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
(Any person desiring to participate, please join the Board in the Pledge of Allegiance).
AGENDA APPROVAL.
PUBLIC COMMENT. (Please state your name and address).
TOWN BOARD COMMENTS / LIAISON REPORTS.
TOWN ADMINISTRATOR REPORT.
1.CONSENT AGENDA:
1.Town Board Minutes dated July 25, 2017 and Town Board Study Session dated
July 25, 2017, and Strategic Planning Session dated July 6, 2017.
2. Bills.
3.Committee Minutes:
A. Community Development/Community Services Committee Minutes dated
July 27, 2017.
1.Revised Policy #402 Community Development Fee Waiver.
4.Family Advisory Board Minutes dated July 6, 2017 (acknowledgement only).
2. REPORTS AND DISCUSSION ITEMS: (Outside Entities)
1. ROCKY MOUNTAIN NATIONAL PARK UPDATE. Superintendent Sidles & PAO
Patterson.
2. DRAFT STORMWATER MASTER PLAN REPORT. Anderson Consulting
Engineers, Inc.
3.ACTION ITEMS:
1.POLICY #671 TOWN FUNDING OF OUTSIDE ENTITIES. Assistant Town
Administrator Machalek.
2.FEE WAIVER REQUEST – ESTES VALLEY FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT FOR
NEW TRAINING FACILITY. Director Hunt.
4.ADJOURN.
Prepared 07/28/17
*Revised 08/04/17
*
1
2
Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, July 25, 2017
Minutes of a Regular meeting of the Board of Trustees of the Town of Estes
Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held in the Town Hall in said Town
of Estes Park on the 25th day of July, 2017.
Present: Todd Jirsa, Mayor
Wendy Koenig, Mayor Pro Tem
Trustees Bob Holcomb
Patrick Martchink
Ward Nelson
Ron Norris
Cody Rex Walker
Also Present: Frank Lancaster, Town Administrator
Travis Machalek, Assistant Town Administrator
Greg White, Town Attorney
Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk
Absent: None
Mayor Jirsa called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. and all desiring to do so, recited the
Pledge of Allegiance.
AGENDA APPROVAL.
It was moved and seconded (Walker/Holcomb) to approve the Agenda, and it passed
unanimously.
PUBLIC COMMENTS.
Don Sellers/Town citizen stated Estes Park should achieve 100% renewable energy by
2030 because climate science and data on global warming have illustrated a dire
situation. Estes Park can join a number of other communities that are achieving 100%
renewable energy. Solar energy costs are cheaper and battery storage continues to
become more readily available. Mayor Jirsa stated Platte River Power Authority has
agreed to model 100% renewable energy for Estes Park by 2030-2035.
Linda Bensey/Town citizen and member of the local Patriots for Peace would support the
efforts for 100% renewable energy. The group supports building a culture of peace,
including peace within the environment.
Alice Reuman/League of Women Voters read a prepared statement from the League
requesting the Board explicitly address climate change by placing an action item on the
upcoming Town Board meeting, and requested Mayor Jirsa sign on as a Climate Mayor.
Michelle Hiland/Town citizen stated appreciation for the hard work by the contractor and
staff in completing the parking garage. To ensure the garage is utilized she
recommended the Town charge for parking close to downtown for the convenience. The
Town could use the additional funds to pay for other improvements or offset the cost of
the loan to build the garage.
TOWN BOARD COMMENTS
Mayor Pro Tem Koenig read an article by Maggie Koerth-Baker entitled The Paris
Agreement Would Have Been Less Partisan 30 Years Ago. The article outlines how the
agreement has become a partisan issue at the federal government level. She stated
support for renewable energy and encouraged citizens to participate in the Platte River
Power Authority (PRPA) renewable energy program. Large solar arrays can also cause
climate change through increasing the heat within the area and causing wind concerns
around the array. The issues are broader than what has been presented and need to be
viewed from an economy of scale.
DRAFT3
Board of Trustees – July 25, 2017 – Page 2
Mayor Jirsa stated the Northern Colorado RTA meet and discussed the need to address
the guardrails on projects and the need to change some of the projects. The State has
not been supportive of any changes. As there continues to be no TIF funds collected to
operate all meetings have been suspended until March 2018, the annual meeting.
Trustee Norris commented there appears to be widespread interest in the Town taking a
position on climate change. He recommended the Town consider a meeting to hear
information on the science of climate change. He reminded the public that bear activity
has increased. The Town and County Ordinances are helping to address bear incidents
within the valley. The Family Advisory Board would hold its next meeting on August 3,
2017. The Estes Valley Planning Commission elected Russ Scheinder as Chair and Bob
Leavitt as Vice Chair.
Trustee Martchink stated the Parks Advisory Board discussed the Downtown Loop and
the impact on parks within the area. Discussion also included suggestions for future park
locations and improvements to make the river more interactive.
TOWN ADMINISTRATOR REPORT.
The Transportation Advisory Board (TAB) continues to work on a Parking Master Plan.
Discussions have included paid parking in the downtown core and free parking in the
perimeter. The new parking structure cannot charge parking fees per the Town’s Special
Use Permit with the Bureau of Reclamation.
Town Administrator Lancaster provided a Board Policy Governance quarterly report on
Policy 3.3 Financial Planning and Budgeting, Policy 3.12 General Town Administrator –
Internal Operating Procedures, and Policy 3.13 Town Organizational Plan. He reported
compliance with all areas. He stated the first draft of the 2016 CAFR was delivered to
staff and the auditors should have it delivered to the State by July 31, 2017.
1. CONSENT AGENDA:
1. Town Board Minutes dated July 11, 2017 and Town Board Study Session dated
July 11, 2017.
2. Bills.
3. Committee Minutes – None.
4. Transportation Advisory Board Minutes dated June 21, 2017 (acknowledgement
only).
5. Parks Advisory Board Minutes dated June 15, 2017 (acknowledgement only).
6. Estes Valley Planning Commission Minutes dated June 20, 2017
(acknowledgement only).
7. Acceptance of Town Administrator Policy Governance Monitoring Report.
8. Revised Policy Governance Policies: 1.1 Governing Style, 1.2 Operating
Principles, 1.5 Reserved, 1.8 Board Standing Committees, and 3.1 Staff
Limitations – Customer Service.
9. Revised Policy 103 – Town Board Code of Conduct and Operating Principles.
10. Revised Policy 105 – Agendas.
11. Revised Policy 102 – Town Committees.
It was moved and seconded (Koenig/Holcomb) to approve the Consent Agenda
Items, and it passed unanimously.
2. REPORTS AND DISCUSSION ITEMS: (Outside Entities)
1. ESTES VALLEY PARTNERS FOR COMMERCE QUARTERLY REPORT.
Kirby Hazelton/President provided a review of the organization’s activities,
including sponsorship of the Bike to Work day events, support of America in
Bloom, commitment to provide financial support for the Board Governance DRAFT4
Board of Trustees – July 25, 2017 – Page 3
training in November, support Larimer County’s efforts with the Community
Health Improvement Plan (CHIP), identifying what capacity building means for
businesses in Estes Park and establish ways to collaborate and share ideas,
accepting nominations for EVPC Board elections in October, conducting a
housing survey to provide information to the Town Board and Planning
Commission, continue to conduct Explore Your Store events, membership dinner
to be held on October 19, 2017, and the regular Board meeting to be held August
15, 2017. EVPC has committed to providing a voice for the business community.
The business community has stated support for the ongoing Development Code
changes to simplify the code, changes to the Sign Code need to include
substantial community discussion, and some retail businesses are having a
down year in sales tax receipts because of the lack of staffing which are
impacting hours of operation.
3. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS: Items reviewed by Planning Commission or
staff for Town Board Final Action.
1. CONSENT ITEMS:
A. SUBDIVISION FINAL PLAT – ESTES PARK RESORT; LOT 1, LAKE
ESTES 2ND ADDITION, 1700 BIG THOMPSON AVENUE. Application
continued to August 22, 2017.
B. AMENDMENT TO ESTES VALLEY DEVELOPMENT CODE RELATING
TO OUTDOOR FOOD VENDORS. Continued to September 26, 2017.
It was moved and seconded (Norris/Koenig) to approve the Planning
Commission Consent Agenda, and it passed unanimously.
2. ACTION ITEMS:
A. SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLAT – ESTES PARK RESORT; LOT 1,
LAKE ESTES 2ND ADDITION, 1700 BIG THOMPSON AVENUE. Planner
Gonzales presented an application to replat the area as a townhome
subdivision with 32 units for individual accommodation units and 1 lot for an
existing hotel/lodge. The project received a variance to the 50-foot setback
requirements from wetlands. The new setback for the two delineated
wetlands was reduced to 25 feet. The Estes Valley Planning Commission
recommended unanimous approval of the preliminary plat. It was moved
and seconded (Koenig/Holcomb) to approve the Preliminary Townhome
Subdivision Plat, Estes Park Resort, Lot 1, Lake Estes 2nd Addition,
1700 Big Thompson Avenue with the June 20, 2017 Estes Valley
Planning Commission recommended conditions, and it passed
unanimously.
B. ORDINANCE 21-17 AMENDMENT TO THE ESTES VALLEY
DEVELOPMENT CODE REGARDING ADMINISTRATION OF THE
“COMDEV RECOMMENDED PLANT LIST” – FORMERLY THE
“PREFERRED PLANTING LIST”. Director Hunt stated the Estes Valley
Fire Protection District has not reviewed the plant list for fire safety, and
therefore, staff requested a continuance of the Ordinance to the August 22,
2017 Town Board meeting. It was moved and seconded (Norris/Koenig)
to continue the Ordinance to the August 22, 2017 Town Board meeting,
and it passed unanimously.
4. ACTION ITEMS:
1. ORDINANCE 22-17 AMENDMENT TO THE ESTES PARK MUNICIPAL CODE
SECTIONS 2.12.010, 2.12.030, 2.12.40. Mayor Jirsa opened the public hearing.
Attorney White reviewed the proposed amendments that would add 2 sections
to the Municipal Code to define the role and powers of the Mayor. Mayor Jirsa
closed the public hearing. Attorney White read Ordinance #22-17 into the record. DRAFT5
Board of Trustees – July 25, 2017 – Page 4
Mayor Jirsa closed the public hearing. It was moved and seconded
(Holcomb/Koenig) to approve Ordinance #22-17, and it passed unanimously.
2. RESOLUTION 23-17 SUPPORTING GOCO GRANT FUNDING AND
ASSOCIATED TOWN MATCH FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF FALL RIVER
TRAIL PHASE I. Director Muhonen stated the Town has submitted a GOCO
grant to fund the construction of the Fall River trail from its current location at
Sleepy Hollow Court to the Fish Hatchery intersection at an estimated cost of $2
million. The Town was selected as one of the top 8 out of 29 applications to
move on to the next grant phase. The grant application requires the Town Board
approve a resolution of support for the project application, construction
completion, 25% matching funds, public access, and future maintenance of the
completed trail. It was moved and seconded (Walker/Norris) to approve
Resolution #23-17, and it passed unanimously.
5. REQUEST TO ENTER EXECUTIVE SESSION:
It was moved and seconded (Martchink/Walker) to enter into Executive Session
per Section 24-6-402(4)(b), C.R.S. for a conference with an attorney for the
Board for the purposes of receiving legal advice on specific legal questions,
and it passed unanimously.
Whereupon Mayor Jirsa adjourned the meeting at 8:05 p.m. to enter into Executive
Session.
Mayor Jirsa reconvened the meeting to open session at 8:35 p.m.
ACTION ITEM:
DETERMINE POSITION ON MURPHY LODGE CLAIM.
It was moved and seconded (Walker/Norris) to authorize staff to pay $5,000 to settle
a claim with Murphy Lodge, and it passed unanimously.
Whereupon Mayor Jirsa adjourned the meeting at 8:37 p.m.
Todd Jirsa, Mayor
Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk DRAFT6
Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado July 25, 2017
Minutes of a Study Session meeting of the TOWN BOARD of the Town of
Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held at Town Hall in the
Rooms 202/203 in said Town of Estes Park on the 25th day of July, 2017.
Board: Mayor Jirsa, Mayor Pro Tem Koenig, Trustees Holcomb,
Martchink, Nelson, Norris and Walker
Attending: All
Also Attending: Town Administrator Lancaster, Assistant Town Administrator
Machalek, Town Attorney White and Town Clerk Williamson
Absent: None
Mayor Jirsa called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m.
POLICY FOR FUNDING OUTSIDE AGENCIES (INCLUDING COMMUNITY SERVICE
GRANTS). Assistant Town Administrator Machalek reviewed the proposed policy for
Town funding of outside entities. The policy outlines three distinct funding types,
including base funding, community initiative funding and event sponsorship. Base
funding would support the general operations and overhead costs for specific nonprofit
entities outlined in the policy, and would be reviewed on a three-year cycle to ensure
the list continues to be valid. Funding requests would be reviewed by Town staff with
recommendations forwarded to the Board for approval. Community initiative funding
would support specific projects and programs that advance one or more outcome areas
of the Town Board’s strategic plan. These funding requests would be reviewed and
ranked by the entire Board during the budget process. Event sponsorships would
include support for community events, and would be reviewed by the Leadership Team.
The policy addressed off-cycle funding requests and limits them to time-sensitive
projects or programming in which the Town has been requested to contribute the final
25% or less in funding, or a time-limited opportunity arises that would leverage
significant outside funds, such as a grant. The 25% was established in an effort to
ensure there would be broad community support for the effort before the Town
considers funding.
BBooaarrdd ddiissccuussssiioonn ffoolllloowweedd aanndd hhaass bbeeeenn ssuummmmaarriizzeedd:: tthhee ppoolliiccyy wwoouulldd rreeppllaaccee tthhee
CCoommmmuunniittyy SSeerrvviiccee GGrraanntt ccoommmmiitttteeee;; tthhee ccrriitteerriiaa ffoorr tthhee ttyyppee ooff oorrggaanniizzaattiioonn eelliiggiibbllee ffoorr
ffuunnddiinngg sshhoouulldd bbee bbrrooaaddeenneedd ttoo iinncclluuddee bbootthh nnoonnpprrooffiitt aanndd ffoorr--pprrooffiitt bbuussiinneesssseess tthhaatt
sseerrvvee tthhee EEsstteess VVaalllleeyy;; aanndd ccoonncceerrnn wwaass rraaiisseedd oonn ppllaacciinngg tthhee ssppoonnssoorrsshhiipp rreevviieeww oonn
tthhee LLeeaaddeerrsshhiipp TTeeaamm.. TThhee TToowwnn BBooaarrdd rreeqquueesstteedd tthhee ppoolliiccyy bbee bbrroouugghhtt ffoorrwwaarrdd ttoo tthhee
TToowwnn BBooaarrdd mmeeeettiinngg oonn AAuugguusstt 88,, 22001177..
TRUSTEE & ADMINISTRATOR COMMENTS & QUESTIONS
Mayor Jirsa stated Administrator Lancaster suggested the Visit Estes Park Operating
Plan be evaluated by a third party to provide the Board with additional insight on the
district’s operations. The Board agreed and instructed Town Administration to identify a
consultant and scope of the evaluation. Mayor Jirsa would contact Larimer County to
determine their interest in participating in the evaluation.
Mayor Jirsa requested members of the Town Board to participate in the review of the
RFPs for the Fish Hatchery property. Trustees Holcomb, Nelson and Walker voiced
interest in participating in the review process.
FUTURE STUDY SESSION AGENDA ITEMS
None.
7
Town Board Study Session – July 25, 2017 – Page 2
There being no further business, Mayor Jirsa adjourned the meeting at 6:40 p.m.
Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk
8
Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, July 6, 2017
Minutes of a Study Session meeting of the TOWN BOARD of the Town of
Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held the Museum, Town of
Estes Park on the 6th day of July, 2017.
Board: Mayor Jirsa, Mayor Pro Tem Koenig, Trustees Holcomb,
Martchink, Nelson, Norris and Walker
Attending: All
Also Attending: Town Administrator Lancaster, Assistant Town Administrator
Machalek, Town Attorney White, Directors Bergsten, Hinkle,
Hudson, Hunt, Kufeld, Muhonen and Town Clerk Williamson
Absent: None
Mayor Jirsa called the meeting to order at 8:30 a.m.
INTRODUCTION AND REVIEW OF CURRENT STRATEGIC PLAN
Administrator Lancaster provided opening remarks and reviewed the foundation of
Policy Governance. He stated the Strategic Plan outlines the ends or the outcome
areas. The Board’s current outcome areas include robust economy, infrastructure,
exceptional guest services, public safety, governmental services, transportation,
financial health and outstanding community services. The goal of the meeting was to
identify high-level strategic needs.
Director Hudson stated the sales tax outlook for 2017 appears to be soft. The next
couple of months collections would provide the Town with an understanding of the
annual collections. At this point he would recommend the sales tax collection be held
even for 2018 with no significant expansion. Sales tax revenue projections would be
refined during the budget process.
Assistant Town Administrator Machalek provided the Board with the proposed 2018-
2022 draft Capital Improvement Plan (CIP), stating there are still items that need to be
reviewed. The CIP was not presented in a priority of projects/programs based on the
Town Board policy for each of the funds. Staff requested the Board review the draft and
provide feedback on the format. He stated the 2018 requests are hard budget numbers
that would be included in the draft 2018 budget, and the 2019-2022 are estimated
budget numbers that contain variability.
Trustee Norris stated the individual worksheets capture useful information; however, he
requested an executive summary to outline the number of projects, criteria, how the
items are tied to the ends (Outcomes), funding needs, and if the items are required for
legal, safety or environmental reasons. He also recommended the summary contain
any uncertainties staff may be aware of such as the future availability of USDA grant
funding.
OUTCOME AREA DISCUSSIONS
TOWN FINANCIAL HEALTH
Discussion was heard on the need to develop and adopt a comprehensive debt/capital
financing policy to aid in future planning. Finance Director Hudson stated the policy
would identify when the Town would utilize debt and how much debt to consider. The
only debt option available to the Town at this point in time would be general obligation.
The policy could also address when to use a lease purchasing option and when to
refinance existing debt. Administrator Lancaster stated the Board could consider the
9
Town Board Study Session – July 6, 2017– Page 2
use of an Urban Renewal Authority to finance improvements proposed in the final
Downtown Plan. He stated Broadband may require the Town to use debit to finance the
project. Best practices have been identified by the Governmental Finance Officers
Association (GFOA) and would be used to draft a policy. Mayor Jirsa stated the Board
needs to further discuss the Board’s philosophy on financing projects. The item was
added to the 2018 outcome area.
Explore areas for enhancing Town revenues: An annexation policy would be developed
to address what properties should be annexed and to develop a policy on enclaves.
Home Rule would be removed from the Strategic Plan because it would require
community action. Staff continues to work on the issue of sales tax collection from
special event vendors. The collection of online sales tax has been reviewed; however,
staff can do little at this point in time to address the issue. Staff would continue to work
with CML and NLC on the topic. The overall consensus of the Board was not to move
forward with discussions related to marijuana.
ROBUST ECONOMY
The Community Development staff have identified the code sections that need to be
addressed and have presented the list to the Planning Commission and the Town
Board. The Sign Code revisions are nearing completion and would make the code
simpler and easier to understand. The current timeline would have the Planning
Commission reviewing the revised code in August with a recommendation to the Town
Board for final review in September.
A decision on the course of action and delivery model for Broadband in the Estes Valley
would need to be made to determine the next steps. The engineering and cost analysis
should be completed in August or September, and modeling to be completed in October
or November. Staff would bring the item forward for Board discussion in late November.
A request for proposals to establish broadband infrastructure yielded responses to run
or provide equipment to run broadband only. No business models were presented. The
grant provided to the Town was to build out the middle mile only with no direct service to
individual homes or businesses. The Town continues to be ahead of other communities
and meet with PRPA communities to discuss issues on how to move forward.
Discussion followed on the need to provide education on the current fiber connection
and how it is distributed to the individual homes. It was noted the EDC has taken the
lead on educating the community.
The 2018 outcomes would include the Town will create and sustain a favorable
business climate and attitude. Trustee Nelson stated concern on measuring the
outcomes attainability. Town Administrator Lancaster commented staff has outlined
how to measure business services.
The Downtown Plan would be completed by the end of 2017 for the Board to review.
2018 would contain a goal to implement the plan.
The Board discussed the goal to have a supportive role in the formation and operation
of a Creative Arts District and recommended removal because the group has decided
not to pursue official formation of a district. The Town would be supportive of the
formation in the future. Trustee Walker stated disappointment the arts would not be
included because successful municipalities have an art component. Staff would
encourage events, activities and development that enhances a year-round economy
and the arts. Director Hunt stated the inclusion of the arts has been a regular
discussion in developing the Downtown Plan.
The Town Board agreed the Town would continue to play a supportive role with specific
local and regional economic development projects, including but not limited to those
outlined in the EDC economic strategy plan.
10
Town Board Study Session – July 6, 2017– Page 3
INFRASTRUCTURE
Parking: Discussion was heard on the goal to address parking options throughout the
town and to aggressively pursue funding for additional parking. The Transportation
Advisory Board has been working on a Master Parking Plan that would outline priorities
and be presented to the Town Board. Mayor Jirsa stated the current method of
gathering public input from visitors has been passive and a more aggressive approach
should be undertaken. This would address the Town’s Mission statement to take into
consideration citizens, guest, etc. The Town needs to aggressively pursue market
research to determine the needs, and review other funding mechanisms such as a
public private partnership. The 2018 goal would include the implementation of the
parking plan recommendations and include funding options. Staff would review the
outreach plan and modify it to address concerns raised.
Utilities: Water continues to work on a redundant raw water source with the YMCA.
The division has documents in Water Court currently that leave Water in an ambiguous
state. Goals would be developed once more has been completed. The division has
made some significant improvements this year with roadway crossing; however, there
continues to be a significant backlog of replacement and infrastructure projects.
The Board discussed developing a statement or goal around renewable energy such as
a percentage of renewables by a certain date, development of solar farms, public
engagement, etc. Director Bergsten stated PRPA began the development of a
customized energy portfolio 3 years ago to model issues related to renewable energy.
PRPA is in Phase I of the program in which PRPA pays a balancing authority to
integrate renewable energy into the distribution system. Phase II would develop an
understanding of the renewable energy needs for each of the 4 communities through
public engagement. He further stated citizens have the option to sign up for renewable
energy through PRPA, however, few citizens sign up for the program.
Further Board discussion followed on a goal and has been summarized: Mayor Jirsa
stated there needs to be more public discussion on the issue before the Town moves
forward with 100% renewable energy. PRPA does not have the ability to achieve it at
this point in time; Trustee Nelson stated an upcoming Mayor’s Chat should focus on the
topic to engage the public and inform the citizens of the current capabilities for
renewable energy; Mayor Pro Tem Koenig stated the goal should be to actively educate
the citizens to participate in the renewable energy program through PRPA to provide
PRPA with a mechanism to expand the program. She stated concern the impact on the
cost of renewable energy may have on the development of workforce housing; Trustee
Norris stated there are 2 goals that need to be addressed one related to engagement
and the second to address the technical and financial concerns; and Trustee Martchink
stated the goals should be open ended because technology continues to advance,
explore incentive, and be environmentally sensitive in the decisions made.
The following goals were proposed: 1) Engage the community in discussions of the role
of renewable energy in Estes Park; 2) Explore options for incentives for developers to
include renewable energy infrastructure in workforce and attainable housing; and 3) Use
results from the PRPA technical and financial studies to establish long term energy
goals (3 to 5 year goal).
Facilities: A needs assessment for equipment and other storage, including the museum
collections and police evidence and property storage and alarm system should be
completed. Space needs for Town Hall should be established and determine if the
Town expands, moves, or relocates services. The Downtown Plan may address the
location of Town Hall and the need for additional retail downtown currently occupied by
government services. Further discussion was heard with a final decision to add it as a
2019 goal to develop a facility needs assessment.
11
Town Board Study Session – July 6, 2017– Page 4
Staff questioned if the replacement and repair of the security camera system should
remain as a goal in the Strategic Plan or if it should be considered an operations
function. The Board consensus was to remove the item from the Strategic Plan.
The Events division requested the Master Plan for the Events Complex be revisited for
2018. Staff continues to identify facility needs as multiple events occur at the Complex,
the need for additional stalls, and the need for additional storage. The acoustical
improvements to the Event Center would be included as a capital project for 2018.
Storm Drainage: The current objective states we will pursue flood mitigation measures
to reduce the risk to live and properties and minimize costs to the community. In 2018,
the Town would pursue implementation of flood mitigation projects and implementation
of the Stormwater Master Plan recommendations.
EXCEPTIONAL GUEST SERVICES
The Board discussed a number of items including the replacement of the mobile stage
in the 2018 CIP; development of a policy to outline support and subsidies for special
events; reexamine the findings and assumptions of the Johnson proforma projections to
be removed from the Strategic Plan; explore options for the future ownership and
operation of the Conference Center by Delaware North; the need for a comprehensive
visitor survey; and a renewed effort in developing the image of the Town. PIO Rusch
stated EPURA conducted that last branding of the Town. Trustee Nelson stated the
Town should work on promoting an image with the business community rather than the
visitors. A goal for 2018 would include partnering with other entities to conduct a visitor
needs survey.
PUBLIC SAFETY, HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT
Police: Chief Kufeld stated a staffing level analysis has been completed to determine
the number of officers needed to serve the community based on the Town’s population
and visitors. The recommendation would be the addition of 3 patrol officers in 2018.
The analysis outlined the need for a total of 27 patrol officers over the next 5 years to
address current events and to be prepared for incidents. The department currently has
11 patrol officers. This analysis has been based on a population of 12,000. The current
staffing does not allow the patrol officers to address community policing adequately. In
addition, the County Sheriffs are not available after midnight to aid in addressing issues
that occur in the evening. An objective was not added; however, staff would discuss
and review what other communities are doing to address the shortage of patrol staff.
Environment: The Town continues to be a participant and a partner in the County’s
development of a regional wasteshed plan. The Board requested the addition of a goal
that the Town would improve and protect the quality of the environment.
Staff questioned if the Board wanted to develop a goal to address resiliency or support
the Paris Accord. Mayor Pro Tem Koenig stated the Town Board is a bipartisan group
and not a political action group. Issues such as the Paris Accord are not the
responsibility of local government. Trustee Holcomb agreed with the statement.
Trustee Norris stated the Board should focus on actions that support environmental
issues. Mayor Jirsa stated the item does not belong in the Strategic Plan and advised a
Board member can bring the item forward for consideration.
Other Issues: The Board consensus was to delete the previous goal the Town will
conduct town business and provide services in a manner that ensures all our guest and
residents feel welcome, respected and safe in our community.
The grant funded Environmental Planner has been the floodplain administrator for the
Town during the flood recovery. The funding for this position would end on December
31, 2017. Director Hunt stated with the development of new flood maps there would be
an order of magnitude of work. The position has been identified as a critical need
12
Town Board Study Session – July 6, 2017– Page 5
moving forward and would prefer the position reside in the Planning division rather than
the Building division. The position could complete other environmental planning needs.
The Board requested the removal of the goal to integrate the Senior Center into the new
Community Center because it would be completed by February 2018.
Assistant Machalek reviewed the 11 strategies outlined by the recent housing needs
assessment. The new Senior Planner would have housing experience and would act as
the Housing Coordinator for the Town to establish what is needed and coordinate the
funding of a future position that would take the lead on the housing issue. Staff
requested direction on the proposed strategies to develop a framework for 2018.
The Board stated the Town would serve as a catalyst to develop housing. Define
housing needs and identify potential plans for action. Develop a strategy for addressing
seasonal workforce housing demands would be rewritten to refer to the housing needs
assessment implementation strategies. Develop and adopt appropriate code changes
to encourage housing development.
OUTSTANDING COMMUNITY SERVICES
Childcare: The community continues to have a shortage of daycare options. The Town
has been notified that Mountaintop Preschool would close in August and currently
serves 50 families. The YMCA has indicated they would donate their facility to be run
by a daycare provider and currently serves 40 families. The Town has been
investigating uses for the current Senior Center and it may be an option for an additional
facility. The Larimer County Boys and Girls Club has also expressed interest in
providing daycare facilities. After discussion, the Board agreed to add a goal to serve
as a catalyst to encourage infant and childcare solutions for our community. The Board
requested the codes be reviewed and changes made to encourage childcare services.
Downtown Plan: The Board requested the Downtown Plan goal be updated to state
implementation of the Downtown Plan for 2018.
Board of Appeals: The Board requested the removal of the goal outlining the Board of
Appeals to complete a review and make recommendations on procedures for
processing permits and operations of the Building division. Staff stated the goal can be
implemented by staff without the involvement of the Board of Appeals.
Avalanche Report: Staff reviewed the Avalanche Plan recommendations and stated 3
of the recommendations related to planning and codes have already been addressed
with the proposed code revisions staff has identified in its May 9, 2017 memo to the
Board.
Family Advisory Board: The establishment of the Family Advisory Board would be
replaced with the goal identified by the FAB and approved by the Town Board for 2018.
GOVERNMENTAL SERVICES AND INTERNAL SUPPORT
The Town has begun the implementation of Laserfiche, an enterprise wide electronic
document management and workflow program. The 2017 goal would be removed. The
Board requested the addition of a community survey to be completed in 2019. Further
discussion on the imaging/branding of the Town would be brought back for further
discussion with the Board.
TRANSPORTATION
Develop a 2040 Multi-Model Transportation Master Plan: Director Muhonen stated
the Town has a number of items identified by the Transportation Advisory Committee
that have not been implemented and a trails master plan that continues to be
implemented. The staff needs direction from the Board on priorities. The
13
Town Board Study Session – July 6, 2017– Page 6
Transportation Master Plan would be used to develop the CIP. There are more projects
than funding at this time. The current goal states we will reduce traffic congestion
throughout the Town.
Installation of left turn lane on US 36 at Community Drive: The Town committed to
the installation of a left turn lane on US Hwy 36 at Community Drive. Director Muhonen
stated a simpler project could be completed at the 4th Street intersection; however, with
the completion of the Community Center the turn lane at Community Drive would be
needed.
Explore potential for safe routes to school funding: There are grant opportunities to
address safe routes to school. The grants are generally labor intensive. The issue
could be addressed with the addition of a Development Engineer.
Further investigate the formation of a Rural Transit Authority: The goal would be
to investigate the costs and opportunities to expand transit services and possibly apply
for funding from the FTA during the June 2018 funding cycle. Staff has estimated 100
hours of additional staff time would be needed to further investigate the formation of a
Rural Transit Authority and estimates $11,000 to use and outside consultant to conduct
the survey versus $1,000 for an in-house survey.
Trails: Staff continues to pursue funding opportunities for the construction of the Fall
River trail and has completed a GOCO grant application for Phase I. Fish Creek trail
should be completed by fall 2017.
OTHER ISSUES:
Mayor Pro Tem Koenig requested staff provide a summary of items that have been
completed for the Board to review. Administrator Lancaster stated he would dedicate
one of his upcoming newspaper columns to the completion of strategic goals.
NEXT STEPS
1. Staff compiles info and prepares draft Strategic Plan outline and map.
2. Board reviews draft plan, making any adjustments deemed necessary.
3. Board adopts Strategic Plan.
4. Budget is prepared based on Strategic Plan.
There being no further business, Mayor Jirsa adjourned the meeting at 1:00 p.m.
Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk
14
Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, July 27, 2017
Minutes of a Regular meeting of the COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT /
COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMITTEE of the Town of Estes Park, Larimer
County, Colorado. Meeting held in Town Hall in said Town of Estes Park on the
27th day of July, 2017.
Committee: Chair Walker, Trustees Holcomb and Norris
Attending: All
Also Attending: Town Administrator Lancaster, Assistant Town Administrator
Machalek, Directors Hinkle, Hunt, and Fortini, and Recording
Secretary Beers
Absent: None
Chair Walker called the meeting to order at 8:00 a.m.
PUBLIC COMMENT.
None.
CULTURAL SERVICES.
RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE TOWN BOARD.
None.
REPORTS.
Reports provided for informational purposes and made a part of the proceedings.
Museum Quarterly Report: Staff received donations from the Estes Park Rotary
Club for inclusion in the “Community Collection”, including the first Duck Race
poster, pins and vests used in previous years from the Rotary Club’s 92 year
history in Estes Park. Other local community groups voiced interest in participating,
however Director Fortini stated space is limited until a new collections facility is
built. Staff provided Public Works with photographs to convert to vinyl and utilize
on the parking structure. Trustee Norris questioned the origin of the research
requests. Director Fortini responded the requests vary from scholar, to park
requests from students, to authors and general interests. One request was related
to the James family and Elkhorn Lodge which is the most photographed historical
lodge in the Museum’s collection. Staff partnered with the owners of the H-Bar-G
Ranch to conduct a historic tour, drawing 75 participants. Members of the family
participated in the tours, gave oral family history and shared family photographs.
Director Fortini introduced Jessica Michak the Museum Curator of Collections hired
in May 2017. She previously worked in South Dakota for five years as an archivist
primarily dealing with paper history.
COMMUNITY SERVICES.
RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE TOWN BOARD.
None.
REPORTS (Information Only).
Reports provided for informational purposes and made a part of the proceedings.
Monthly Sales Report.
Visitor Center Quarterly Report.
Transit Quarterly Report.
DRAFT15
Community Development / Community Services – July 27, 2017 – Page 2
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE TOWN BOARD.
Revised Community Development Fee Waiver Policy. Director Hunt recommended
amendment to the Community Development Fee Waiver policy to align the policy with
recent Estes Valley Development Code changes in December 2016 increasing the
average monthly income threshold to 150% of Larimer County for housing attainability.
Additionally staff recommended clarifying the approval process to remove action taken
on a committee level. The draft also modifies approval for waivers over $500 up to
$3,000 be approved by the department Director and over $3,000 considered by Town
Board. The policy was developed in 2012 and should be revisited every two years. The
Committee recommended the Revised Community Development Fee Waiver
Policy be included as a Consent Item at the August 8, 2017, Town Board meeting.
Fee Waiver Request – Estes Valley Fire Protection District. The Estes Valley Fire
Protection District made a request to waive the building permit and plan review fees for
a new training facility. The Fire District meets the policy criteria for waiving fees as a
public entity for public purpose, public safety and fire safety. Director Hunt corrected the
amount provided in the memo to include an additional $200 requested by amended
paperwork for a total cost of $4,210.63. The fiscal impact to the department would be
1.08%.
Committee comments have been summarized: recommend as an Action Item to allow
Board discussion; concerns raised with funding another taxing entity; and questioned
the lease amount for the property.
Administrator Lancaster stated staff has been in communications with the Bureau of
Reclamation (BOR) to transfer ownership of the Special Use Permit over to the Fire
District. The Town would continue to maintain the landscaping at the plant as a
stipulation of the transfer.
The Committee recommended the Fee Waiver Request, be included as an Action
Item at the August 8, 2017, Town Board meeting.
MISCELLANEOUS.
Director Hunt added staff has conducted the first round of interviews for the Senior
Planner position and anticipates a September 2017 start date.
Town Administrator Lancaster stated the BOR has halted shuttle operation of the
parking garage (through the parking lot). The Special Use Permit outlined the use for
emergency purposes only. Staff prepared an amendment to the permit to allow shuttles
to route on BOR land and the amendment was denied. Staff has developed an
alternative route for the Green shuttle, entering the west end of the parking structure lot
utilizing four parking spaces to turn the shuttle around to exit at the same entrance.
There being no further business, Chair Walker adjourned the meeting at 8:40 a.m.
___________________________
Bunny Victoria Beers, Recording Secretary
DRAFT16
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Memo
To: Honorable Mayor Jirsa
Board of Trustees
Through: Town Administrator Lancaster
From: Randy Hunt, Community Development Director
Date: August 8, 2017
RE: REVISED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 402: COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT FEE WAIVER POLICY
Objective:
Review and approve amendment to Community Development 402: Community
Development Fee Waiver Policy, to align the Policy to recent EVDC changes in
workforce and attainable housing qualification criteria.
Present Situation:
The current policy specifies qualifications for projects requesting waiver of some or all
Community Development permitting fees. This policy (originally Town Board Policy #1)
was approved by Town Board effective July 2012, and hasn’t been modified since.
Many elements in the policy still match current Code and current practice.
However, a few sections have been superseded by recent Estes Valley Development
Code amendments regarding attainable and workforce housing. The 2012 policy
specifies that housing-oriented fee waivers are only for “low-income housing”. Low
income housing is usually defined as below 60 percent of Average Monthly Income
(AMI) in the host county. EVDC was recently amended to incentivize attainable housing
up to the 150 percent AMI level.
Workforce housing (defined as one household member working within the School
District boundaries) was also incentivized in the same sections of EVDC. The current
fee-waiver policy does not address workforce housing waivers. To keep consistency
with the Code, it is recommended that workforce be added alongside income or
attainability qualification.
Proposal:
The attached draft revisions are primarily aimed at updating the housing-qualification
section. Other recommended updates include:
• Clarifying the approval process to reflect the fact that the CD/CS Committee does
not formally vote on actions. CD/CS operates on a general-consensus model.
The draft is modified so that CD/CS will review all requests for waivers over
17
$500, but final action and signature will be completed by either the Community
Development Director (up to $3,000) or the Town Board (over $3,000).
• Other changes are to clarify or fix minor wording problems and inconsistencies,
and to reformat the policy to the standard template now used by the Town.
Advantages:
• The new policy language will align with EVDC amendments and link Code
incentives to the Town’s ability to grant direct incentives in the form of fee
waivers. Attainable and workforce housing development and redevelopment are
Town-wide and Valley-wide goals.
Disadvantages:
• None identified for the community as a whole, but possible disadvantages exist
for Town revenues and Community Development Department revenues in
particular. It is expected that most developers proposing new workforce or
attainable housing will be interested in fee waivers. Depending on level of
interest, this could impact revenues in the Community Development Department.
Staff will remain diligent in monitoring and reporting trends in this area.
Action Recommended:
Staff recommends adoption of Revised Community Development Policy 402: Fee
Waiver Policy [TB #1], as presented.
This item was presented to the Community Development / Community Services
Committee on Thursday, July 27, 2017. The Committee’s consensus was to send the
item forward for placement on the Town Board’s Consent Agenda for approval.
Budget:
Unknown, but could be moderate to moderately high, depending on number of projects
requested for waiver and valuation of those projects.
Level of Public Interest
Low.
Sample Motion:
I move that the Town Board of Trustees approve Revised Community Development
402: Community Development Fee Waiver Policy, dated August 8, 2017.
Attachments:
1. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 402: Community Development Fee Waiver
Policy [draft: Revised August 8, 2017
18
Document Title Draft 1 8/4/17
Revisions: 0 Town of Estes Park, Community Development
Effective Period: Until Superseded
Review Schedule: Biennially - Summer
Effective Date: August 8, 2017
References: n/a
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
402
Community Development Fee Waiver Policy
1. PURPOSE
To establish a uniform policy for waiver of Community Development fees in
support of essential community needs.
2. POLICY
It is the policy of the Town Board of Trustees to support essential community needs such
as attainable and workforce housing, assisted living, and health care services through
consideration of waiving in-house fees assessed by the Community Development
Department. The Estes Valley Comprehensive Plan is used as a guide in identifying these
community needs.
The following entities may be exempted from some or all Community Development
Department fees, e.g., building permit fees, development review fees, and sign code fees
(except for direct expenses incurred in outsourcing):
1. Public funded government construction (federal, state, county, local); including tax
districts/special districts (e.g., hospital, library, parks and recreation); or
2. Organizations providing low-income health and human services or attainable or
workforce housing.
The following criteria will be used to qualify low-income health and human services or
attainable or workforce housing projects:
a. A critical service is being provided;
b. The permitted project or building will serve or support a currently underserved and
needy segment of the community;
c. The population being served is the general public and is not subject to any pre-
qualification other than a needs-based (attainability) qualification, or (in the case of
housing) a local employment (workforce) qualification;
d. Attainable or workforce housing is deed-restricted; or
e. In the case of housing, a project is eligible for the attainable or workforce incentive
criteria in Sec 11.4 of the Estes Valley Development Code.
19
Document Title Draft 1 8/4/17
Revisions: 0 Town of Estes Park, Community Development
It is not the policy of the Town of Estes Park to routinely waive fees for projects meeting
the above criteria. These projects may request exemption by submittal of a written request
to the Community Development Department. The decision-making body will hear the
request and may choose to waive some or all fees based on the merits of request.
3.PROCEDURE
Waiver Request Decision-Making Body
≤$500 per project; or
≤$500 per attainable or workforce housing unit
Community Development Director
>$500 and ≤$3,000 per project; or
>$500 and ≤$3,000 per attainable or workforce
housing unit
Community Development Director,
following review by Community
Development/Community Services
Committee
>$3,000 per project; or
>$3,000 per attainable or workforce housing
unit
Town Board, following review by
Community
Development/Community Services
Committee
Approved:
____________________________
____________
Date
Mayor
20
Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, July 6, 2017
Minutes of a regular meeting of the Family Advisory Board of the Town of Estes Park,
Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held in Room 203 of the Estes Park Town Hall on
the 6th day of July, 2017.
Present: Laurie Dale Marshall
Karen Randinitis
Nancy Almond
Courtney Hill
Bin Greer
Rachel Balduzzi
Jodi Roman
Marion Stallworth
Also Ron Norris, Town Board Liaison
Present: Travis Machalek, Assistant Town Administrator
Megan Van Hoozer, Public Works Administrative Assistant
Absent: Shannon Faith
John Bryant
Floyd Collins
Chair Greer called the meeting to order at 3:30 p.m.
PUBLIC COMMENT
No public comment
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
It was moved and seconded (Roman/Almond) to approve the May and June, 2017
meeting minutes and the motion passed unanimously.
UPDATE ON FOCUS AREA AND VACANCY RECRUITMENT
The Town Board approved the FAB focus area and vacancy recruitment submission.
One application was received. ATA Machalek suggested the Town could potentially aid
in providing contact names. Liaison Norris suggested extending the timeline to allow for
busy schedules and summer activities. Member Almond was approached today by an
individual that is interested in applying for the role. Liaison Norris stated the Town Board
would like the ability to select from a pool of individuals.
21
Family Advisory Board – July 6, 2017 – Page 2
Machalek will check with the Human Resources Department to confirm the ability to
hold applications if received during the period where volunteer position is not posted.
Per Liaison Norris, the application process extension will be discussed at the July 11
Town Board meeting.
Vice Chair Stallworth will reach out to the Estes Park Housing Authority to confirm
whether or not there would be a replacement for the opening left by the departure of
Jessica McGee. Vice Chair Stallworth will also reach out to other individuals that may
be interested in joining the FAB.
2017 FOCUS AREA NEXT STEPS
The draft proposal for focus area next steps was provided to the FAB as a springboard
to allow group to develop and fine-tune.
Member Randinitis suggested the FAB establish focus groups to involve the community
and community organizations in decisions being made by FAB and to check for
duplication/redundancy in efforts. Stallworth stated that it would be more efficient to
have folks come to us but it may not catch everyone. Member Almond stated that much
community input has already been received by a previously established group of
volunteers in the community (Associates Supporting Kids – ASK). That group performed
excellent outreach efforts provided within the past year. The survey results provided
need ownership. Norris suggested incorporating all data into one spreadsheet (current
information is a website). The suggestion was made to link the existing information to
the Town website. Machalek stated that there could be no linking to Town website
without authorization from the Town’s Public Information Officer. The data needs broken
down to determine any ‘holes’ in established focus areas along with associated
recommendations.
Stallworth suggested a select few FAB members break down all pertinent resource
informational available (low income families, etc.). Examples of resources available are
Restorative Justice and the YMCA. The member group defined to sift through the
resources consist of Stallworth, Marshall, Randinitis and Roman. If analysis is done
before the next meeting, it can send out to the FAB for review and comment.
At this point there is not a lot of local data provided, but is more regional/statewide.
Almond is looking to the Childcare Needs Assessment to answer many questions. The
FAB needs to focus on qualitative aspects within questioning/outreach (i.e.,What are the
22
Family Advisory Board – July 6, 2017 – Page 3
barriers with working/living in the Estes Valley?) Maybe combine questions with multiple
choice and optional comments. The FAB will flush out how to best approach the
outreach efforts.
DISCUSSION OF RECENT CHILD CARE DEVELOPMENTS
Member Almond reported that the owners of Mountaintop Preschool and Childcare are
moving out of the community and selling or simply closing their business. The business
serves up to 45 – 2.5 - 5 year olds. It is the only childcare center other than the YMCA
that is not a home child care service. This is a huge concern for the community. The
property (1 acre with facility) the business resides on is owned by another party and the
lease term expires in August. The Estes Park Elementary School provides half-slots
funding as part of a contract service to Mountaintop to provide services they’re
unequipped to provide.
Norris stated Town Administrator Frank Lancaster said the use the Senior Center
building for childcare would be a possibility. Due mechanical issues, this would be
unable to happen until February. There are currently 8 or 9 parties interested in utilizing
this facility.
Almond reported that the Mountain Top property is very moderately priced so there is
urgency in making a move on the property. For the Town, there is not much possibility
of making an offer this budget year. The FAB would like to make their case to the Town
Board with options/suggestions of what to do. Norris stated that the FAB would need
clear explanation of why this is a crisis to help the Trustees understand. A letter would
be drafted for the August 8 Town Board meeting unless prepared and approved sooner
and would then go to the July 25 Town Board meeting.
A motion was made to have up to three FAB members to draft a letter describing the
childcare crisis and requesting they work with local business owners and stakeholders
to help sustain current childcare capacity and the motion was seconded
(Stallworth/Marshall). These members are Stallworth, Greer and Almond and a draft
letter will be complete by Monday. All were in favor.
The Estes Valley Investment in Childhood Success (EVICS) is reaching out to
established childcare companies that provide high quality programs accepting infants
and toddlers and can help absorb the loss of Mountaintop. Previously when checking
into these companies, EVICS is typically told that Estes Park doesn’t have the volume
23
Family Advisory Board – July 6, 2017 – Page 4
for the companies to move to Estes Park. The YMCA would be interested in making
space available and joining the potential agreement with the childcare company.
A crisis may provide an opportunity for the community to address this issue head-on
understanding that Estes Park is in dire need of quality childcare. It would be extremely
beneficial to provide incentives for childcare companies (space, additional age group,
etc.). Currently Estes Park has 6 home providers with only 2 allowing children under 2
years old and there are 2 that will not take children under one).
OTHER BUSINESS
The question was posed as to whether or not a social media presence would be allowed
by the FAB. Machalek will check conditions with PIO and bring back necessary steps
and rules for social media. It was discussed that any press releases or information
distribution could occur through the Town’s existing channels.
With no other business to discuss, Chair Greer adjourned the meeting at 5:20 p.m.
24
Rocky Mountain National Park
A few updates …
Projects Updates
Pavement Preservation Project
Fall River Entrance
The public scoping process has begun and comments
are invited through August 14, 2017.
The Environmental Assessment (EA) will analyze a
range of alternatives to meet project objectives, and
will evaluate potential effects on visitor experience and
park resources and values.
http://parkplanning.nps.gov/romo
Upcoming Fee Free Days
• August 25
• September 30
Senior Pass
Staffing
Park visitation …
Rocky Mountain National Park
Visitation Numbers
0
500,000
1,000,000
1,500,000
2,000,000
2,500,000
3,000,000
3,500,000
4,000,000
4,500,000
5,000,000
Visitation
Rocky Mountain National Park
As of the end of June, park visitation is
up 2 percent year to date and up 5.7
percent for the month of June.
It’s up 37.6 percent from June of 2014
Bear Lake Road Corridor
Rocky Mountain National Park
Bear Lake Road Vehicle Restrictions
• Similar daily time frame as last year but
more frequently
Wild Basin Entrance
Rocky Mountain National Park
Visitor Use Management
Issues associated with visitor day use
Resource protection
Visitor and staff safety
Visitor experience
Operational capacity
Research including the deployment of traffic
counters – where are visitors going especially
when Bear Lake Road restrictions are in place?
Placed parking delineators along roadsides to
discourage parking off pavement in sensitive
areas (mainly in Bear Lake Road corridor)
Monitoring and addressing impacts at visitor
centers and key destinations (Beaver Meadows
Visitor Center, Alpine Visitor Center, Estes Park
Visitor Center)
Interdisciplinary Team – Visitor Use Management
Visitor Use Management Across
the National Park Service
• Haleakala National Park – Permits for sunrise viewing
• Zion National Park – Visitor Use Management Plan
• Yosemite National Park – Parking permits pilot project
Visitor Use
Management Planning
Visitor Use Management Strategy
Hiring a planner to focus on long term visitor use strategy
Gather additional information & monitor actions taken
Public Engagement
Community
Partners
Public
The National Park Service preserves unimpaired the natural and cultural resources and values of the national park system for the enjoyment, education, and inspiration of this and future generations.
PUBLIC WORKS Report
To: Honorable Mayor Jirsa
Board of Trustees
Through: Town Administrator Lancaster
From: Greg Muhonen, PE, Public Works Director
Date: August 8, 2017
RE: Update on the Estes Valley Stormwater Master Drainage Plan &
Stormwater Utility Feasibility Study
Objective:
This report introduces the progress update presentation by Anderson Consulting
Engineers on the Estes Valley Stormwater Master Plan (SMDP) and the presentation by
Headwaters Corporation on the Stormwater Utility Feasibility Study.
Present Situation:
The Town of Estes Park and the surrounding unincorporated Estes Valley suffer from
the lack of adequate drainage facilities to capture and safely discharge stormwater
runoff from storm events ranging from intense afternoon summer cloudbursts to
sustained rainfall experienced in the 2013 flood. No inventory of existing stormwater
infrastructure exists. While the Town has hired consultants to create two subbasin
stormwater improvement plans, no comprehensive master plan exists to define the
magnitude of the system-wide deficiencies and the associated projects to remedy them.
Maintenance staff, equipment, and funding are insufficient to respond to the stormwater
damage complaints received each year by the Public Works Department.
In 2016, the Town received a $300,000 grant to fund a SMDP within the Estes Valley
development code boundary area. Additionally, the Town Board appropriated $30,000
for the companion study to explore the potential of creating a Stormwater Utility to fund
the masterplanned improvements and the requisite operation and maintenance.
A public meeting introducing these two studies was held on May 11, 2017. It was
sparsely attended.
Conversations held with Larimer County staff indicate the County has reservations
about implementing a Stormwater District that would obligate residents within
unincorporated Larimer County to pay a new fee. Out of respect for this concern, the
Town’s feasibility study will focus on a new Stormwater Utility that serves only Town
residents.
25
Proposal:
The consultants will present updates on the progress made to date on the two studies.
The grant funding expires September 30, 2017. A joint study session with the Town
Board and Larimer County Board of Commissioners is proposed for September 26,
2017 to discuss the drainage issues (problems and potential solutions) that transcend
jurisdictional boundaries. A third study session with the Board of Trustees is tentatively
scheduled for October 24, 2017 to discuss the potential revenue, setup, and operational
issues associated with a new Stormwater Utility within the Town.
Advantages:
• A SMDP will tabulate and map the existing stormwater infrastructure.
• The need for potential improvements will be quantified in terms of prioritized
scope and cost.
• A potential funding strategy will be recommended.
• Implementation and sustained maintenance of the stormwater infrastructure will
reduce risk and recurrence of repeated property damage.
Disadvantages:
The disadvantages for the Town to assume this maintenance responsibility include:
• The Town is not staffed or equipped to take on this maintenance effort. The cost
of maintenance equipment and personnel will need to be determined.
• A new Stormwater Utility adds additional administrative effort to Public Works
staff.
• A new utility fee will be needed to fund this effort. Some residents will object.
Action Recommended:
This report is advisory only. No action is requested.
Budget:
New costs should be offset by new revenue. This will be evaluated further at the
October study session.
Level of Public Interest
Public interest on this proposal will move from low to high once a new utility fee is
proposed.
Attachments:
Electronic link to slides of the report presentation.
26
ESTES VALLEY STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT
Meeting No. 2 –Town Board Work Session, August 8, 2017
•Stormwater Master Plan Update
•Stormwater Utility Feasibility Introduction
Phase I. Stormwater Master Plan
Phase II. Stormwater Utility Feasibility Study
Agenda
•Introductions
•The Project Team
•Reason for the Estes Valley Stormwater Management Project (EV SWMP)
•Purpose of a Stormwater Master Drainage Plan (SWMDP)
•Phase I. Stormwater Master Drainage Plan
•Existing Facilities Inventory & Assessment
•Potential Improvements & Implementation Plan
•Phase II. Stormwater Utility Feasibility Study
•Introduction (Concepts, Samples, & Financing)
•Questions
Project Team
Town of Estes Park (and Larimer County)
•Greg Muhonen, P.E. (Mark Peterson, P.E.)
•Many Others
Anderson Consulting Engineers, Inc.
•Chris Pauley, P.E., CFM
•Jason Albert, P.E. & Brian Thompson
Cornerstone Engineering & Surveying, Inc.
•Mike Todd, P.E.
Headwaters Corporation, Inc.
•George Oamek
Reason for the EV SWMP
•Following 2013 Flood, Stormwater
Infrastructure Improvements Identified
•Provide for Health, Safety, & Welfare Citizens
and Visitors
•Phase I. Stormwater Master Drainage Plan
(FEMA Grant Funded)
•Phase II. Stormwater Utility Feasibility Study
(Locally Funded)
Potential Objectives/Responsibilities Of
Stormwater Management Program
1. Implement Capital Improvements Program (New and Old Infrastructure typically ID in
Master Drainage Plan)
2. Operation & Maintenance of Existing Infrastructure (clean out of inlets & detention
ponds, channel mowing, etc.)
3. Perform Stormwater Reviews (adherence to Design Criteria and Regulations)
4. Coordinates SWMP with other Corridor Planning (transportation, utilities, recreation, etc.)
5. Coordinate with Adjacent Jurisdictions Responsible for Stormwater Management
(e.g. Larimer County, RMNP, NFS, School District, etc.)
6. Floodplain Management (FEMA‐NFIP, State‐Regulations, Local)
7. Water Quality Management (MS4, NPDES, BMPs, etc.)
Purpose of a Stormwater Master Drainage Plan
1. Identify Stormwater Infrastructure/Problems
2. Develop Conceptual Solutions/Improvements to Fix/Improve Drainage Issues
3. Develop Concept Level Costs for the Potential Improvements
4. Provide an Implementation Plan based on a Prioritization of Identified
Improvements
5. Provide the Basis for Funding Capital Improvements Program
(solicit grants/loans/etc. & form the basis for fees/assessments/tax/etc.)
6.Provide a Flexible Document to Guide Program Implementation and
Integrate New Development within the Watersheds and the Community
PHASE I. STORMWATER MASTER DRAINAGE PLAN
•Five Major Drainage Basins
•Dry Gulch Basin
•Black Canyon Basin
•Fall River Basin
•Big Thompson River Basin
•Fish Creek Basin
•Development Code Boundary
•Town of Estes Park Boundary
Focus of the EV SW MDP
Existing Facilities –Inventory & Evaluations
•Drainage Facilities Portfolio
•Presented on Inventory Maps
•Inventory Summary
•Evaluations of Existing Facilities
Existing Drainage Facilities Portfolio
•Inlets
•Channels
•Detention Ponds
•Storm Sewers
•Culverts
•Bridges
Inventory
Maps
Inventory of Existing Facilities Summary
Structure Type
Summary Totals Jurisdiction Drainage Basin
Public Private Total
Town of Estes Park
(TEP)
Larimer County
(LC)Dry Gulch Black Canyon Creek Fall River Big Thompson River ‐Lake
Estes Fish Creek
Public Private Total Public Private Total TEP LC Total TEP LC Total TEP LC Total TEP LC Total TEP LC Total
Bridges 31 29 60 30 24 54 1 5 6 1 2 3 5 0 5 37 1 38 11 3 14 0 0 0
Culverts 94 131 225 69 39 108 25 92 117 15 17 32 11 1 12 5 0 5 63 50 113 15 47 62
Detention Ponds 7 21 28 5 15 20 2 6 8 3 2 5 3 0 3 1 0 1 13 6 19 0 0 0
Open Channel (lf)5,918 1,458 7,376 3,645 1,368 5,013 2,273 90 2,363 2,273 90 2,363 0 0 0 0 0 0 4,918 0 4,918 96 0 96
Storm Sewer (lf)27,031 9,215 36,246 25,934 5,596 31,530 1,097 3,619 4,716 4,239 37 4,276 2,225 0 2,225 1,420 0 1,420 22,557 3,257 25,814 552 1,423 1,975
Inlets 227 165 392 206 119 325 21 46 67 56 1 57 32 0 32 29 0 29 198 35 233 9 31 40
Manholes 37 17 54 37 12 49 0 5 5 4 0 4 6 0 6 0 0 0 38 5 43 1 0 1
Outlets 87 78 165 70 50 120 17 28 45 17 0 17 9 0 9 22 0 22 63 23 86 9 22 31
Notes:
1.Drainage Facilities Inventory Summary as of August 1, 2017
2.All Inventorying Completed within Estes Valley Development Code Boundary
Sample of Detailed Facility Summary
Notes:
1.Drainage Facilities Inventory Summary as of August 1, 2017
2.All Inventorying Completed within the Estes Valley Development Code Boundary
Culvert Structure
Summary Totals Jurisdiction Drainage Basin
Public Private Total
Town of Estes Park
(TEP)
Larimer County
(LC)Dry Gulch Black Canyon Creek Fall River Big Thompson River ‐
Lake Estes Fish Creek
Public Private Total Public Private Total TEP LC Total TEP LC Total TEP LC Total TEP LC Total TEP LC Total
TYPES
CMP 3331642413 37 9 1827 2 1315 8 0 8 3 0 3 2214362 0 2
RCBs 7815347 4 48202112000033448
HDPE 34 42 76 30 23 53 4 19 23 10 5 15 2 0 2 1 0 1 36 18 54 4 0 4
PVC 22421 3 0 11000000101213000
RCP 3 16 19 2 0 2 1 16 17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 15 17 0 2 2
Steel 10110 1 0 00000000000101000
Totals 80 99 179 62 41 103 18 58 76 14 18 32 11 1 12 5 0 5 63 51 114 10 6 16
SIZES
<=12" 13 28 41 12 7 19 1 21 22 0 1 1 3 0 3 4 0 4 11 21 32 1 0 1
18" 41 43 84 33 19 52 8 24 32 10 12 22 2 0 2 1 0 1 35 20 55 4 0 4
24" 13 11 24 11 6 17 2 5 7 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 6 20 1 1 2
36" 5 8 13 2 4 6 3 4 7 2 3 5 2 0 2 0 0 0 2 3 5 0 1 1
48" 03302 2 0 11011202000000000
>48" 8 6 14 4 3 7 4 3 7 0 1 1 2 1 3 0 0 0 1 1 2 4 4 8
Totals 80 99 179 62 41 103 18 58 76 14 18 32 11 1 12 5 0 5 63 51 114 10 6 16
Existing Facilities Evaluations
•Focus on Bridges, Channels, and Culverts
•Stormsewer Evaluations Require Higher Level of As‐built Data (Plans)
•Existing Capacities:Bridges to Low Chord
Culverts prior to Overtopping
Channels to Bank Full
•Drainage Design Criteria: Estes –Larimer County –UDFCD Criteria
•Drainage Criteria Applied Utilizing 2017 Estes Valley Hydrology Study
•DRY GULCH (6 Crossings)
•Generally Adequate Hydraulic Capacities and 3 in Poor Condition (Dry Gulch Road No.1, Devils
Gulch Road, LCR 61)
•BLACK CANYON CREEK (10 Crossings)
•Generally Adequate Hydraulic Capacities and most in Good Condition.
•FISH CREEK (11 Crossings)
•Mostly new Post 2013 Reconstructed Facilities in Excellent Condition and with Adequate
Hydraulic Capacity
•Notable Exception: US 36 Culverts to Lake Estes; Upstream Ends are in Poor Condition (would
recommend detailed inspection)
DRAFT
Facility Evaluations – Public / Major Drainageways
DRAFT
Facility Evaluations – Public / Major Drainageways
•FALL RIVER (20 Crossings)
•11 Undersized Crossings: 6 Road (3 Arterials & 3 Local) and 5 Recreation/Pedestrian most in Fair/Good
Condition
•9 Crossings Still Under Review (Upstream of Upstream W. Elkhorn Bridge)
•Channelized Reach from Water Wheel to Confluence less than 100‐year Capacity
•Nature Stream Reach from W. Elkhorn Upstream Bridge to Water Wheel less than 100‐year Capacity
•BIG THOMPSON RIVER (9 Crossings)
•6 Undersized Crossings: 4 Road (Crags, Ivy, Rockwell, Riverside) and 2 Recreation/Pedestrian
•Crossings Upstream of Crags Still Under Review (SH 66 & Marys Lake Road)
•Channel Undersized from Crags to St. Vrain Avenue
Potential Improvements –Primary Focus
•Life/Health Safety
•On Major Drainageways
•Dry Gulch, Black Canyon, Fall River, Upper Big Thompson, Fish Creek
•On Major Arterials
•US 34, US 36, SH 7, SH 66, Devils Gulch Rd, Marys Lake Rd, etc.
•On Critical Facilities & Access
•Hospital Routes –Crags, Prospect, & Stanley Avenues
•Police/Town Hall –Black Canyon Channel from Park Lane to E. Elkhorn Avenue
Potential Improvements – Secondary Focus
•On Property Damage along Major Drainageways
•On Secondary Drainageways
•On Local Roads
•Known and Repetitive Problem Areas
•On Property Damage along Secondary/Tertiary Drainageways
•On Tertiary Drainageways
•Minimal Focus on Private: Roads/Driveways, Culverts, Bridges, etc.
Potential Improvements –Minor Focus
PHASE II. STORMWATER UTILITITY FEASIBILITY STUDY
Organizational Options
•WHO CAN IMPLEMENT AND MAINTAIN A STORMWATER PROGRAM?
•Town, through the General Fund or an Enterprise Fund?
•Wastewater entities??
•Partnerships (IGAs, etc.)???
•A new ‘regional’ entity that specializes in stormwater????
•HOW IS A STORMWATER PROGRAM SETUP?
•Town Ordinance?
•Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA)??
•Colorado Revised Statute 29‐1‐203, State Constitution Article X Section 20 ???
•Other legal mechanisms????
Organizational Options
•EXISTING ENTITIES
•May already perform some stormwater utility functions
•Have administrative capabilities (funding streams & billings)
•Probably conduct a range of activities aside from stormwater
•Current jurisdictional boundaries maybe limited for stormwater
•NEW ENTITY
•Can be stormwater and watershed focused (not limited by existing boundaries)
•May achieve economies of scale (especially if multiple jurisdictions involved)
•Needs ability to issue debt, set fees, and possibly impose assessments
•Could be viewed as more bureaucracy and taxes
•Needs public buy‐in and acceptance
Examples of Stormwater Entities
•District: 1969 Denver ‐Urban Drainage & Flood Control District
•Authority: 2006 Arapaho County ‐Southeast Metro SWA
2008 Larimer County ‐Boxelder Basin Regional SWA
•Enterprise: 1987 ‐City of Loveland
2003 ‐Town of Windsor
2008 ‐Town of Frederick
2005 ‐2009 Colorado Spring
•Utility: 1980 ‐City of Fort Collins
Financing and Funding Options
•FINANCING INITIAL CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
•Influenced by organization structure
•Funding Sources:
o Reserves, phased Pay ‐as‐you‐go
o Grants (typically require local matching funds)
o Debt financing (Loans and/or Bonds)
•FINANCING ONGOING CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
•Development impact fees
•Debt
•Annual or monthly user fees to property owners
•Tax assessments; other tax options
•FINANCING OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
•User fees to property owners
•Tax assessments
Charges and Fees
•Develop Finance Plan pro forma, determine costs to be recovered from
customers and new development
•Benefits and costs should be fairly allocated across types of customers
•Costs are generally allocated based on impervious area
•An equivalent residential unit (ERU) is often a basis for billing
•Single family residence = 1 ERU
•Gas station = 5 ERU
•Retail store = 10 ERU, etc.
Utility Administration
•Evaluate billing systems and customer databases
•Billing options
•Policy issues and recommendations with respect to billing
Phase II. Implementation
•Recommendations Regarding Organization Type & Structure
•Develop an Implementation Timeline
•Draft and Finalize Finance Plan
•Draft Stormwater Utility Ordinance and/or IGAs (samples)
•Final from Town Counsel
•Final Utility Feasibility Report
Next Steps
•Phase I. Finalize Development of Improvements
•Phase I. Develop Capital Improvement Costs
•Phase I. Determine Prioritization of Improvements
•Draft SW MDP to Town Board and Public (September 2017)
•Phase II. Determine Preferred Stormwater Utility
•Phase II. Develop Financing Plan
•Draft Utility Feasibility Recommendations to Town Board (October 2017)
QUESTIONS???
INVENTORY MAPS AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW
Elkhorn Avenue, July 26, 2017, ~5:15pm
ESTES VALLEY STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT
THANK YOU
Meeting No. 2 –Town Board Work Session, August 8, 2017
•Stormwater Master Plan Update
•Stormwater Utility Feasibility Introduction
Phase I. Stormwater Master Plan
Phase II. Stormwater Utility Feasibility Study
36
ADMINISTRATION Memo
To: Honorable Mayor Jirsa
Board of Trustees
Through: Town Administrator Lancaster
From: Travis Machalek, Assistant Town Administrator
Date: August 8, 2017
RE: Policy 671 – Town Funding of Outside Entities
Objective:
Obtain Town Board approval of a policy governing Town funding of outside entities.
Present Situation:
The Town of Estes Park currently funds outside entities through a number of different
mechanisms. Some entities submit funding requests through the Community Service
Grants program, others receive transfers through Intergovernmental Agreements, and a
few receive funds through a line item in the Town’s budget. The distribution of this
funding has developed organically up to now.
One of the objectives of the 2017 Town Board Strategic Plan is to develop a philosophy
and policy on funding support to outside entities. Staff has developed Policy 671 – Town
Funding of Outside Entities to address this objective. The Town Board reviewed this
policy and provided feedback to staff at a July 25th Study Session.
Proposal:
The proposed Policy 671 incorporates feedback from the Town Board Study Session on
July 25th. These changes are detailed below for the Board’s information:
• Reporting requirement for entities receiving Base funding or Community Initiative
funding added;
• Criteria for Community Initiative funding eligibility changed to include any entity or
group serving the Estes Valley; and
• In-kind in event sponsorship (valued up to $1,000) included as an option.
If approved, Policy 671 would replace all of the Town’s current mechanisms of funding
outside entities with the exception of those funds transferred pursuant to a contract or
intergovernmental agreement. To be clear, the Community Service Grants funding
process would be eliminated and replaced with the funding mechanisms provided for in
Policy 671.
37
Advantages:
• Provides consistency in how and when the Town will provide funding to outside
agencies.
• Simplifies and reduces the time burden for outside entities applying for funding
from the Town.
Disadvantages:
• Some entities are eligible to apply for base funding while others are not.
However, there is a review process that would allow future Town Boards to
evaluate which entities are eligible for base funding (and add or remove entities
from that eligibility list).
Action Recommended:
Staff recommends approval of Policy 671.
Budget:
101-1900 and various other department funds
Level of Public Interest
High interest from nonprofit community
Sample Motion:
I move for the approval/denial of Policy 671 – Town Funding of Outside Entities.
Attachments:
• Policy 671 – Town Funding of Outside Entities
38
Document Title Policy 671 – Town Funding of Outside Agencies 8/4/17
Revisions: 0 Town of Estes Park, Finance
Effective Period: Until superseded
Review Schedule: Triennially
Effective Date: 09/01/2017
References: Governing Policies Manual 3.11
FINANCE
671
Town Funding of Outside Entities
1. PURPOSE
To provide a process by which the Town of Estes Park allocates and distributes funding
to outside entities.
2. POLICY
The Town of Estes Park recognizes the important role that outside entities play in
meeting the needs of the residents of the Estes Valley. Accordingly, when adequate
funds are available, the Town may make financial contributions to these entities in
accordance with the procedure below.
3. PROCEDURE
a. Base Funding
i. Purpose
Base funding from the Town is intended to support the general operations and
overhead of nonprofit entities that play a critical role in supporting the Town’s
Strategic Plan.
ii. Eligibility
The following entities are eligible to apply for Base funding from the Town of
Estes Park:
1) Crossroads Ministry of Estes Park
2) Estes Park Economic Development Corporation
3) Estes Park Housing Authority
4) Estes Park Nonprofit Resource Center
5) Estes Valley Crisis Advocates
6) Estes Valley Investment in Childhood Success
7) Salud Family Health Centers (Estes Park)
39
Document Title Policy 671 – Town Funding of Outside Agencies 8/4/17
Revisions: 0 Town of Estes Park, Finance
8) Via Mobility Services
iii. Review of Eligible Entities
The Town Board will review the list of entities eligible to apply for Base funding
every three (3) years in June (first review date June 2018). This review will also
include opportunity for public comment.
iv. Application
Eligible entities seeking Base funding from the Town shall submit a completed
“Base Funding Application” (Exhibit A) to the Assistant Town Administrator by
July 1st of each calendar year for the next year’s budget (i.e. by 07/01/2017 for
the 2018 budget year).
v. Process
Applications for Base funding will be processed as a departmental budget
request by Town staff and presented to the Town Board as such. The following
information will be presented by staff to the Town Board during the public budget
hearings:
1) The Base funding request from each entity; and
2) The Base funding support recommended by the Town Administrator.
vi. Annual Report
Any entity receiving Base funding must submit an annual report to the Assistant
Town Administrator by May 30th of the year following the year in which funding
was received (i.e. May 30th, 2019 for funding received for the 2018 calendar
year).
b. Community Initiative Funding
i. Purpose
Community Initiative funding is intended to support specific projects and
programs that advance one or more Outcome Areas in the Town’s Strategic
Plan.
ii. Eligibility
Any entity or group serving the Estes Valley is eligible to apply for Community
Initiative funding.
iii. Application
Eligible entities seeking Community Initiative funding shall submit a completed
“Community Initiative Funding Application” (Exhibit B) to the Executive Assistant
in Administration on or before August 31st of every year.
40
Document Title Policy 671 – Town Funding of Outside Agencies 8/4/17
Revisions: 0 Town of Estes Park, Finance
iv. Process
Applications for Community Initiative funding will be reviewed and ranked by
each Board member individually in advance of the annual public budget
hearings. Funding decisions will be made by the Board as a whole and will be
adopted along with the budget.
v. Criteria
The following criteria will be used in the evaluation of Community Initiative
funding applications:
1) Application Quality – is the application complete and does it adequately
describe the proposed project or program?
2) Strategic Plan Advancement – how well, or to what degree, does the
proposed project/program advance the Town’s Strategic Plan?
3) Initiative Reach – how many residents of the Estes Valley will benefit from
the proposed project or program?
vi. In-Kind Requests
Applicants for Community Initiative funding may request in-kind support from the
Town. Town staff will evaluate the request and include a staff recommendation
when forwarding the request to the Board.
vii. Project Report
Any recipient of Community Initiative funding must submit a project/program
report to the Assistant Town Administrator upon completion of the
project/program that received funding from the Community Initiative funding
process.
c. Event Sponsorship Funding
i. Purpose
Event Sponsorship funding is intended to demonstrate the Town’s support for
community events.
ii. Eligibility
Any nonprofit organization that is organizing a local event (serving the Estes
Valley) that is open to the public may request Event Sponsorship funding from
the Town.
iii. Application
Eligible entities seeking event sponsorship funding shall submit a completed
“Event Sponsorship Funding Application” (Exhibit C) to the Executive Assistant in
Administration.
41
Document Title Policy 671 – Town Funding of Outside Agencies 8/4/17
Revisions: 0 Town of Estes Park, Finance
iv. Process
All Event Sponsorship funding applications will be reviewed and awarded by the
Leadership Team. No sponsorship shall exceed $1,000 and an organization may
only receive one (1) sponsorship per calendar year. A budget for event
sponsorships will be adopted annually and will be distributed on a first-come,
first-served basis.
v. Criteria
The Leadership Team will evaluate Event Sponsorship funding applications using
the following criteria:
1) Vision Alignment – does the event align with the Town’s Vision?
2) Cost of Event Attendance – is the event free or affordable for the general
public?
3) Reach of Event – how many people does the event expect to attract?
4) Other Funding – have the organizers of the event received any other
funding?
d. Limitations on Off-Cycle Funding Requests
i. Definitions
For the purposes of this policy, an “Off-Cycle Funding Request” is any request for
financial support from an eligible outside entity that occurs outside of the
procedures established in Sections 3.a, 3.b, and 3.c of this policy.
ii. Purpose
The Town of Estes Park strives to consider all funding requests from eligible
outside agencies in a holistic manner in order to best prioritize these requests. To
this end, the Town does not accept or grant off-cycle funding requests with the
exception of those described in Section 3.d.iii.
iii. Exceptions
The Town will only consider off-cycle funding requests from entities that are
eligible for Community Initiative funding, and only in the following circumstances:
1) The Town is being asked to fund the final gap of a fundraising effort for a
time-sensitive project or program, and the Town’s contribution represents
twenty-five percent (25%) or less of the total amount fundraised; or
2) There is a time-limited opportunity to leverage a significant amount of
outside funding (at least a 1:1 match of the funding requested from the
Town).
iv. Application
Eligible entities seeking off-cycle funding must submit the following to the Town
Administrator:
42
Document Title Policy 671 – Town Funding of Outside Agencies 8/4/17
Revisions: 0 Town of Estes Park, Finance
1) A completed “Community Initiative Funding Application” (Exhibit B); and
2) A letter (no more than 500 words) explaining why the request qualifies
under one of the exceptions listed in Section 3.d.iii of this policy.
v. Process
If the off-cycle funding request application falls under one of the two exceptions
listed in Section 3.d.iii of this policy, the Town Administrator will schedule the
consideration of said request as an action item for a Town Board meeting.
Approved:
_____________________________
Todd Jirsa, Mayor
_____________
Date
43
POLICY 671 – EXHIBIT A
Base Funding Application
2018
Entity Name:___________________________________________________________
Contact Person:__________________________ Title:__________________________
Phone: ____________________________ E-mail:_____________________________
Address:_______________________________________________________________
Base Funding requested: $_________________
1. If your Base Funding request has increased by more than $5,000 from the
previous year, please explain what the additional funding would support.
2. Please attach the most recent fiscal year-end financial statements reflecting your
entity’s beginning and ending balances for the year. This requirement can be met
by submitting one or more of the following:
a. Financial statements as approved by your board
b. Audited statement or review by an outside expert
c. Most recently filed IRS Form 990
3. Please list all anticipated funding sources for the current and coming year. Be
sure to highlight any opportunities to leverage Town funds with external funds.
4. Please attach a list of your Board of Directors with names, Board titles, and
contact information (email, phone, and/or address).
I swear and affirm that all of the information included in this application, its
attachments, and its supplemental documents is true and correct to the best
of my knowledge.
_______________________________ _______________________________
Entity Director Board President/Chair
44
POLICY 671 – EXHIBIT B
Community Initiative Funding Application
2018
Project or Program Title:__________________________________________________
Entity: ________________________________________________________________
When was your entity established?:_________________________________________
Contact Person:__________________________ Title:__________________________
Phone:___________________________ E-mail:_______________________________
Address_______________________________________________________________
Dollar amount requested for 2018: $_________________
Description of in-kind service requested (if applicable): _________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
Please provide the following information to help us assess your entity’s eligibility:
Is your entity currently serving the Estes Valley? Y___ N___
1. What is the mission of your organization (100 words max)?
2. Describe the project or program that will be supported with the assistance to the
Town of Estes Park funding if granted (500 words max).
a. Please attach your anticipated detail budget for this project or program.
3. How does this project or program advance the Town’s Strategic Plan
(https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/townofestespark/strategicplan) (500 words max)?
4. What population and geographic area will be targeted for service through this
project or program (200 words max)?
45
POLICY 671 – EXHIBIT B
5. How many people in the Estes Valley (total and unduplicated) do you expect to
serve with this project or program?
6. How will you measure the success of the project or program for which funding is
requested (200 words max)?
7. Who will be responsible for the administration of the project or program for which
you are requesting funding (name, title, and entity only)?
8. Are there currently any other entities or organizations providing similar projects or
programs in the Estes Valley? If so, please identify them and describe any
cooperation (250 words max).
9. Please attach the most recent fiscal year-end financial statements reflecting your
entity’s beginning and ending balances for the year. This requirement can be met
by submitting one or more of the following:
a. Most recent financial statements as approved by your board
b. Most recent audited statement or review by an outside expert
c. Most recently filed IRS Form 990
10. Please list all anticipated funding sources for this project or program. Be sure to
highlight any opportunities to leverage Town funds with external funds.
11. Please attach a list of your Board of Directors with names, Board titles, and
contact information (email, phone, and/or address).
12. Please indicate the percentage of your Board Members who have contributed
funds to your project or program during the past year (please note that we are
not interested in the amounts given by individual Board Members, but instead in
the percentage of the Board Members who have financially supported the
organization).
I swear and affirm that all of the information included in this application, its
attachments, and its supplemental documents is true and correct to the best
of my knowledge.
_______________________________ _______________________________
Entity Director Board President/Chair
46
POLICY 671 – EXHIBIT C
Event Sponsorship Funding Application
Applicant/Entity Name:___________________________________________________
Contact Person:__________________________ Title:__________________________
Phone:___________________________ E-mail:_______________________________
Address:_______________________________________________________________
Dollar amount requested (maximum funding $1,000): $_________________
In-Kind Service Requested (maximum financial equivalent of $1,000): ______________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
Please provide the following information to help us assess your entity’s current non-
profit status:
Current Federal Employer Identification Number:_________________________
Registered with Colorado Secretary of State as non-profit?: Yes _____ No _____
Filed for 501(c)(3) with IRS?: Yes _____ No _____
Received non-profit status from the IRS?: Yes _____ No _____
Is another agency serving as your fiscal agent?: Yes _____ No _____
(If “yes,” list the agency’s name, address, and contact person)
__________________________________________________
1. Please provide the name, date, and location of the event.
2. Please describe the event (no more than 500 words).
3. How many people are projected to attend the event?
47
POLICY 671 – EXHIBIT C
4. Is there an event admission fee? If so, how much?
5. Please list all other committed sponsors.
6. Please list any event partners.
Town of Estes Park Event Sponsorship Applicant
Declaration and Acceptance of Conditions
1. In the event that any funds allocated are not used for the event as described in
this application, or if there are misrepresentations in the application, the amount
of the funds allocated will be re-payable immediately to the Town of Estes Park.
2. The applicant will make or continue to make attempts to secure funding from
sources other than the Town of Estes Park.
3. The applicant agrees that the event shall not be represented as a Town service,
event, or program in any way (the only relationship being that the Town has
approved and granted financial assistance to the applicant).
4. Any sponsorship recipient shall indemnify and hold harmless the Town of Estes
Park and its employees and officers against any claims, costs, fines, or any other
losses or penalties related to the event for which a sponsorship has been
awarded.
We swear and affirm that all of the information included in this application, its
attachments, and its supplemental documents is true and correct to the best
of our knowledge and is endorsed by the Entity which we represent.
_______________________________ _______________________________
Applicant Board President/Chair
_______________________________ ______________________________
Date Date
48
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Memo
To: Honorable Mayor Jirsa
Board of Trustees
Through: Town Administrator Lancaster
From: Randy Hunt, Community Development Director
Date: August 8, 2017
RE: FEE WAIVER REQUEST – ESTES VALLEY FIRE PROTECTION
DISTRICT FOR NEW TRAINING FACILITY
Objective:
Determine if the fee waiver request complies with Town Board’s adopted fee waiver
policy and take action on the request.
Present Situation:
The Estes Valley Fire Protection District (EVFPD) has applied for building permits and
other approvals to construct a new fire-safety training facility on their current property.
This would be a new tower replacing the current tower, with a larger footprint and a
taller profile. The new structure does require building permits; thus, building-permit and
plan-review fees would be required unless waived.
Proposal:
The attached letter from EVFPD requests waiver of the building permit fees for the new
structure. Although not explicit in the letter, discussion with EVFPD indicates they wish
to request a waiver of plan review fees as well as building-permit fees.
At the time the letter was written, calculation of fees had not been finalized. Since the
letter, the valuation and fee have been calculated by staff.
The following table estimates the fiscal impact of a full building fee waiver to address
the building permit and plan review fees for the Training Facility.
Building Division Fees
Building Permit Fees $2,873.75
Plan Review Fees $1,336.88
Tax *n/a
TOTAL $4,210.63
* EVFPD, as a public entity, is not subject to local sales and use taxes.
Staff estimates that waiving all Building division fees will reduce 2017 Budget estimated
total revenues as follows:
49
• Building Safety div. (2300 series): 1.08% ($4,211 / $389,210)
Staff is not aware of any other Town fees requested for waiver in connection with the
training facility project.
Advantages:
• Aligns with Town Board’s policy of supporting essential community needs through
consideration of waiving in-house fees assessed by the Community Development
Department.
• The request is supported by the Community Development 402: Community
Development Fee Waiver Policy (copy included elsewhere in today’s packet).
• Waiving fees will enable critical funding and timelines for the project to be realized.
Disadvantages:
• Approval of the request would reduce (by a small percentage) the ability to recover
expenses associated with the Community Development Department’s building
permitting and inspection functions.
• An argument may be made that if fees are not waived for a taxing entity, the public
will be aware of how much the various taxing entities are raising and spending, thus
promoting equity and transparency in public-sector funding.
Action Recommended:
Because the requested fee waiver is greater than $3,000, Town Board is the decision-
making body for this request, following review by the CD/CS Committee.
Community Development recommends approval of the EVFPD fee waiver request.
This item was presented to the Community Development / Community Services
Committee on Thursday, July 27, 2017. The Committee’s consensus was to send the
item forward for placement on the Town Board’s Action Agenda.
Budget:
Minimal. Building division revenues (2300 series) reduced by approx. 1.1 percent.
Level of Public Interest
Low.
Sample Motion:
I move that the Town Board of Trustees approve the requested fee waiver for Estes
Valley Fire Protection District, for a not-to-exceed total of $4,210.63.
Attachments:
1. Written request from the Estes Valley Fire Protection District, dated July 11,
2017.
50
51
52