HomeMy WebLinkAboutPACKET Town Board 2015-07-28The 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, July 28, 2015
7:00 p.m.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
(Any person desiring to participate, please join the Board in the Pledge of Allegiance).
PROCLAMATION – Proclaiming July - September 2015 as the “Estes Park United
Campaign” in the Estes Valley.
PRESENTATION – Rodeo Parade Award to Rocky Mountain National Park presented by
Western Heritage and Mayor Pinkham.
PRESENTATION – Best Senior Rodeo presented to the Town of Estes Park by the Senior
Pro Charity Rodeo.
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 14, 2015 and Town Board Study Session Minutes
dated July 14, 2015.
2. Bills.
3. Committee Minutes:
A. Public Safety, Utilities & Public Works Committee, July 9, 2015:
4. Estes Valley Planning Commission Minutes dated April 21, 2015 (acknowledgement
only).
5. Transportation Advisory Board Minutes dated June 17, 2015 (acknowledgement
only).
6. Parks Advisory Board Minutes dated June 19, 2015 (acknowledgement only).
Prepared 7/14/15
*Revised: 07/24/15
*
NOTE: The Town Board reserves the right to consider other appropriate items not available at the time the agenda was
prepared.
2. LIQUOR ITEMS
1. NEW BEER & WINE LIQUOR LICENSE FOR HIMALAYAN CURRY & KEBOB,
INC., DBA HIMALAYAN CURRY & KEBOB, 101 B W. ELKHORN AVENUE, ESTES
PARK, CO 80517. Town Clerk Williamson.
2. TRANSFER OF OWNERSHIP FROM GAST HAUS ESTES PARK, INC., DBA
MOLLY B RESTAURANT TO LEE ENTERPRISES, INC., DBA MOLLY-B, 200
MORAINE AVENUE, TAVERN LIQUOR LICENSE. Town Clerk Williamson.
3. DISCUSSION AND REPORT ITEMS:
1. SECOND QUARTER FINANCIAL REPORT. Finance Officer McFarland.
4. REQUEST TO ENTER EXECUTIVE SESSION:
24-6- 402(4)(b). C.R.S. - A conference with the Town Attorney for the purpose of
receiving legal advice on specific legal questions on the Loop.
.
5. ADJOURN.
Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, July 14, 2015
Minutes of a Regular meeting of the Board of Trustees of the Town of Estes
Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held in the Town Hall in said Town
of Estes Park on the 14th day of July 2015.
Present: William C. Pinkham, Mayor
Wendy Koenig, Mayor Pro Tem
Trustees John Ericson
Bob Holcomb
Ward Nelson
Ron Norris
John Phipps
Also Present: Frank Lancaster, Town Administrator
Travis Machalek, Assistant Town Administrator
Greg White, Town Attorney
Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk
Absent: None
Mayor Pinkham called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. and all desiring to do so,
recited the Pledge of Allegiance.
PUBLIC COMMENTS.
None.
TRUSTEE COMMENTS.
Trustee Ericson reminded the public the Transportation Advisory Board would meet at
noon on July 15, 2015 to discuss various projects related to transportation and continue
to work on the development of a Master Parking Plan. The Community
Development/Community Services Committee would meet on at 8:00 a.m. on July 23,
2015.
Mayor Pro Tem Koenig congratulated Western Heritage for their efforts during the
Rooftop Rodeo. Attendance was down 20% the first three nights due to weather and
weekend attendance was sold out. Contestants stated they attended the rodeo
because of the new format, added money and stock contractor.
Trustee Holcomb thanked everyone for their good wishes during his recent hospital stay
and he thanked the hospital for their excellent services provided.
TOWN ADMINISTRATOR REPORT.
Administrator Lancaster thanked the Parks division employees Keri Kelly and Brian
Berg for their efforts in coordinating the Community in Bloom (international competition)
and the American in Bloom events.
The Town Board reviewed the draft RFP for the Downtown Plan during the Town Board
Study Session. Staff received clear direction from the Town Board to exclude the
residential area north of the downtown area. The Stanley Village was included as an
option for the Board to consider. Board discussion followed with Mayor Pro Tem Koenig
stating concern with including an area outside of the downtown area and increasing the
cost of the plan. Trustee Nelson and Ericson would favor adding the area to the
Downtown Plan RFP to address traffic and signage in the area. It was moved and
seconded (Norris/Holcomb) to include the Stanley Village to the Downtown Plan
RFP focusing on traffic, safety and way finding, and it passed with Mayor Pro Tem
Koenig voting “No”.
Board of Trustees – July 14, 2015 – Page 2
Administrator Lancaster provided a quarterly monitoring report for Policy 3.3 Financial
Planning and Budgeting, Policy 3.12 General Town Administrator – Internal Operating
Procedures and 3.13 Town Organizational Plan. He reported compliance with all
policies with the exception of partial compliance with policies 3.3.4, 3.3.5 and 3.12. He
stated there is a considerable amount of uncertainty in the current budget due to the
flood recovery expenditures and the fact the Town has yet to receive planned
reimbursement from the State, FEMA and other agencies. Fund balance dropped to
20% in 2014 due to flood recovery and staff anticipates fund balance would remain at
20% in 2015. Internal procedures continue to developed, with draft financial and
personnel policies to be completed in July.
1. CONSENT AGENDA:
1. Town Board Minutes dated June 23, 2015.
2. Bills.
3. Committee Minutes:
a. Community Development & Community Services Committee, June 25, 2015.
4. Estes Park Board of Appeals Minutes dated May 7, 2015 and June 4, 2015
(acknowledgement only).
5. Estes Valley Board of Adjustment Minutes dated June 2, 2015
(acknowledgement only).
6. Audit Committee Minutes dated June 26, 2015 (acknowledgement only).
7. Resolution #12-15 - Setting the public hearing date of July 28, 2015, for a new
Beer and Wine Liquor License for Himalayan Curry & Kebob, Inc., dba
Himalayan Curry & Kebob, 101 B W. Elkhorn Avenue, Estes Park, CO 80517.
Mayor Pinkham requested Consent Item 4 be removed for discussion. It was
moved and seconded (Koenig/Phipps) to approve the Consent Agenda 1-3 and
5-7 Items, and it passed unanimously.
Items 4 - Estes Park Board of Appeals Minutes dated May 7, 2015 and June 4,
2015: Mayor Pinkham stated page 9 of the minutes of June 4, 2015 had a
misspelling and the word “close” should be “clothes”. The item was not voted on by
the Board as the minutes were acknowledgement only.
2. ACTION ITEMS:
1. 2014 COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT (CAFR).
Eric Miller/CliftonLarsonAllen presented an overview of the annual financial
reporting process. The auditing firm of CliftonLarsonAllen, LLP conducted an
independent audit of the Town of Estes Park’s financial statements as of
December 31, 2014 and have expressed an unmodified opinion (clean) that the
financial statements presented fairly, in all material respects, the financial
position of the funds and activities of the Town of Estes Park in conformity with
Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP). Areas of improvement
noted in the Management notes included audit entries, journal entry processes,
purchasing processes, user access rights, control procedures, year-end
financial reporting, accounts payable and liability accounts, and Visit Estes Park
(grant reporting). No areas of material weakness were cited; however, one
area of significant deficiency was noted in grant reporting/management. An A-
133 Single Audit would be completed by the end of September as the Town
expended more than $500,000 in governmental grants during the calendar
year.
Trustee Ericson stated a number of minor issues were identified by the auditors
and have been addressed by the Finance staff. He thanked staff for their
Board of Trustees – July 14, 2015 – Page 3
efforts. He pointed out the useful information provided in the statistical charts
within the audit, including major employers and an increase in school
enrollment.
Johanna Darden/Town citizen questioned if the families with kids in the school
system were employed locally and questioned the types of items that did not
have proper purchase orders in place prior to the purchase. Mr. Miller stated all
internal controls were in place and the items were budgeted but the purchase
order was not completed prior to the purchase.
It was moved and seconded (Ericson/Holcomb) to approve the audit report
and Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the year ended
December 31, 2014, and it passed unanimously.
2. FUNDING FOR CASCADE COTTAGES. Cascade Cottage contains
approximately 40 acres, one of two private resorts within Rocky Mountain
National Park (RMNP), bisected by Hwy 34 and has been placed on the market
by the family. The acquisition cost has been estimated at $3.6 million. RMNP
has obtained the assistance of the Trust for Public Land (TLP) and the Rocky
Mountain Conservancy (RMC) to acquire the property. The Park has submitted
to the NPS Land Acquisition Ranking System to secure Land and Water
Conservation Fund monies to acquire the property. This requires matching
funds which are being raised by RMC. TLC has obtained an Option Agreement
to purchase the property that expires the end of 2015. RMNP and RMC have
requested $100,000 in assistance from the Open Lands Advisory Board.
Larimer County has donated $50,000 and challenged the Estes Valley Land
Trust and the Town of Estes Park to each provide $25,000. The Land Trust
has committed $25,000.
Charles Money/RMC Executive Director stated the non-profit partner for the
National Park was requested by the Park to secure the funds necessary to
purchase the Cascade Cottages. The family continues to honor a long
standing verbal agreement to offer the purchase of the property to the Park
first. He commended both Larimer County and the Estes Valley Land Trust for
their support for the purchase of the property.
After further discussion, it was moved and seconded (Nelson/Norris) to
approve the allocation of $25,000 of Open Lands funding toward the
acquisition of the Cascade Cottages RMNP inholding by the Rocky
Mountain Conservancy provided the funds are returned if the purchase is
not completed, and it passed unanimously.
3. CONTRACT TO REPAIR CONFERENCE CENTER ROOF.
The Conference Center roof has been leaking in multiple areas and causing
damage to the interior of the building. The original roof had a 15 year warranty
and has been in place for 24 years. Staff advertised the project in the local
papers, Loveland and Fort Collins. Public Works received one proposal from
RTN Roofing Systems from Loveland with a bid of $118,700. There are two
additional areas of the roof that need to be addressed and fall outside the
scope of the work. The contractor can address these issues for an additional
$10,000. The total budget for the project would be $129,000, well within the
projected cost of $165,000. It was moved and seconded (Koenig/Holcomb) to
approve a contract with RTN Roofing Systems to complete the
Conference Center roof repairs at a cost of $129,000, and it passed
unanimously.
4. SCOTT PONDS REHABILITATION DESIGN DIRECTION.
During the flood of September 2013 the dams in the Scott Pond Natural Area
were damaged and the eastern dam was breached. In an effort to address
public concern and a modification directive from the State Engineers Office
(SEO) regarding this, the Public Works department held an Open House in
Board of Trustees – July 14, 2015 – Page 4
January 2015. Public opinion was divided with some advocating for removal of
the two dams and others arguing for the rehabilitation and retention of the two
dams. A project funding opportunity was pursued in March of 2015 through a
CDBG-DR grant. It requires completion of the project within one year. An
application was submitted and a conditional grant award in the amount of
$925,000 was received. This award was partnered with another award in the
amount of $146,000 for river restoration near the Fall River power plant. In
April of 2015, Public Works solicited proposals for consulting services and
awarded a design contract to Cornerstone/Deere Ault in May. The consultant
team submitted a Hazard Classification Study to the SEO in June 2015 and
awaits comments. On July 7, 2015, the Town and its consultant team
conducted a second Open House meeting to outline two design concepts.
Concept 1 – removal of the dams with a cost of approximately $360,000.
Removal of the dams would meet the SEO inspection mandate, removes
completely the risk for a dam failure and damage from it, no ongoing state
jurisdictional inspections or reports required, maintenance and operational
resources and costs would be minor and require no additional Public Works
staff time, a new raw water augmentation plan would not be needed, and lower
construction and operating costs. The community would lose a recreational
and wildlife amenity and home values for adjacent properties may be affected.
Concept 2 - retains the current configuration of the ponds and rebuilds the
spillway and outlet to meet SEO requirements. To create ponds in a manner
similar to what currently exists would require augmentation of water and
acquisition of additional water rights. The preliminary estimated construction
cost would include $828,310 for construction labor and materials and $133,000
for augmentation and water share acquisition with a total cost of $961,310.
Additional annual operational expenses would occur. Repairing the dams
would bring the dams into compliance with SEO inspection mandate, maintain
a community recreational and wildlife amenity and one “fishable” pond,
preserve the property values for parcel adjacent to the upper pond, retains a
water body source for fire protection, and dam structures would provide an
attenuation of runoff benefit in the peak flow condition. The costs of the repair
are significantly higher than removing the dams, augmentation plan increases
the cost and requires annual operation/maintenance costs to be incurred by
Public Works, increase staff time to monitor and maintain dam inspection
records, and Town to incur additional liability in the event of a breach.
Mike Todd/Cornerstone Engineering stated the new dam standards for a
significant hazard dam would require the dam and spillway to handle a 100
year flood with one foot of free board and no failure of the dam. The lower
dam has to be designed to pass a 50 year flood event with no free board and
not overtopping of the dam. The new design would provide significantly more
protection than has been in place for 40 years.
Jay Blackwood/Town citizen stated it would be premature for the Trustees to
vote on an option as the State Engineers Office has not rated the hazard levels
of the dams. He stated concern the Town may expend nearly $1 million to
repair dams and increase the liability to the Town. He proposed a third option
of returning the area back into a natural area with small ponds and no dams.
Those speaking in favor of Option #1 included Chuck Bonza/Town citizen,
Susan Durnford/Town citizen, Mary Banken/Town citizen, and Gary Miller/Estes
Valley Watershed Coalition. Comments were summarized: return to a natural
area with small ponds that would not require future repairs, maintenance or the
purchase of water rights; concerned with the potential damage a future dam
breach may have on the properties downstream; if the dams are rebuilt there
should be an annual emergency evacuation exercise for the area below the
dam; the grant funds could be used to address the Fall River corridor rather
than rebuild dams; Option 1 could turn into a beautiful wildlife area that would
be natural; dams are not natural; natural flows are needed to maintain a health
Board of Trustees – July 14, 2015 – Page 5
natural area; dams are being removed throughout the nation due to cost to
maintain and public safety; concerned with the cost of maintenance as well as
increased use requiring parking, trash removal and perhaps restrooms in the
future; the Coalition would support an environmentally resilient restoration of
the Scott Ponds Natural Area and not the repair of the dams since it would not
be an ecologically resilient solution; dams carry risk of failure, risks to public
safety, risks to ecological health; and the area should be restored to natural
ponds, wetlands and stream channels.
Those speaking in favor of Option #2 included Johanna Darden/Town citizen,
Joe Holtman/Town citizen, Hattie Schetzsle/Town citizen, Carol Rood/County
citizen, Sue Doylen/Town citizen, Lorraine Nelson/Town citizen, Garth
Lewis/Town citizen and Libby Rehm/County citizen. The property should be
restored to pre-flood conditions to preserve the wildlife, maintain property
values and intrinsic value of the area; prevent the Town from selling the
property to a developer in the future; dams built to the new standards would
help prevent damage to properties downstream during a major flooding event
and provide further resiliency; the areas should be placed in a conservation
easement; the Town should not abandon water rights; stated concern with the
removal a potential water source in the event of a fire; Option 1 would likely
lead to an area full of noxious weeds; not repairing the dams would be a
disservice to the flood recovery effort; the dams are an asset to the entire
community; and a stream corridor would not provide the recreational activities
now enjoyed on the pond area.
It was moved and seconded (Holcomb/Norris) to extend the meeting to
10:30 p.m., and it passed unanimously.
It was moved and seconded (Norris/Holcomb) to direct Public Works staff
to proceed with design Concept 2 for the final design and construction of
the Scott Ponds Natural Area dam modification, and it passed unanimously.
5. FUNDING OF MID-YEAR SALARY ADJUSTMENTS AND POLICE BODY
CAMERAS. During the review of the proposed 2015 budget the Board
approved to fund additional 2013 Compensation study adjustments; however,
some employees did not realize the full adjustments identified in the study. The
Police body cameras were cut from the proposed budget as there was not
adequate funding. With the 2014 General Fund balance finishing at an
acceptable level of 20% and sales tax up 10% for the year, funding would be
available to for the additional items. Staff recommends funding the final
adjustments to the 2013 Compensation study and the purchase of body
cameras for each Police Officer. It was moved and seconded (Koenig/Norris)
to approve the funding for the 2013 Compensation Study adjustments and
to purchase the body cameras for the Police Officers, and it passed
unanimously.
6. PARKS ADVISORY BOARD INTERVIEW TEAM APPOINTMENTS.
It was moved and seconded (Norris/Koenig) to appointment Trustees
Holcomb and Ericson to the Parks Advisory Board Interview Panel, and it
passed unanimously.
3. REPORTS AND DISCUSSION ITEMS:
1. DRY GULCH ROAD REHABILITATION CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT.
Engineering Manager Ash stated the Town received no bids for the project.
Staff reached out to the contractors that attended the pre-bid meeting to
ascertain why they did not bid on the project. The contractors stated they
already had full workloads through the end of the year and an aggressive
schedule was not doable. Staff would engage the consultants to prepare a new
bid package with a two phased approach: Phase I – utilities and trail work this
fall/winter and Phase 2 – road work in the spring with the project completed by
Board of Trustees – July 14, 2015 – Page 6
June 2016. Discussion with contractors has demonstrated a favorable
response to this approach. The timeline would have the bid package ready
within a month.
Whereupon Mayor Pinkham adjourned the meeting at 10:08 p.m.
William C. Pinkham, Mayor
Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk
Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado July 14, 2015
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
Rooms 202/203 in said Town of Estes Park on the 14th day of July, 2015.
Board: Mayor Pinkham, Mayor Pro Tem Koenig, Trustees Ericson,
Holcomb, Nelson, Norris and Phipps
Attending: All
Also Attending: Town Administrator Lancaster, Assistant Town Administrator
Machalek, Town Attorney White and Town Clerk Williamson
Absent: None
Mayor Pinkham called the meeting to order at 4:30 p.m.
TRUSTEE & ADMINISTRATOR COMMENTS & QUESTIONS.
Trustee Norris commented on the success of the Rooftop Rodeo. Hs stated the Public
Safety, Utilities and Public Utilities Committee was provided a briefing on the design
issues related to the new parking structure. Concerns have been raised by the Estes
Valley Recreation and Park District on how close the garage is to one of the greens;
therefore, altering the structure to address concerns has removed 16 spaces.
Administrator Lancaster stated the current IGA with the Local Marketing District calls for
two members of the Board to serve on a Destination Leadership group. This group has
not met on a regular basis; however, he questioned who besides the liaison should
serve on the group. Discussion followed and the consensus was to eliminate the group
as it would not be needed moving forward because the group has developed and
matured, and regular updates from the LMD would be sufficient. A new service
agreement would be developed to outline the Town’s obligations related to the Visitor
Center and Fairgrounds and the LMDs obligations. The IGA would be amended to
remove the group.
Mayor Pinkham stated the LMD has requested the Board appoint a new Board liaison in
an effort to expose additional Trustees to the LMD and a working knowledge of the
group. Trustee Holcomb expressed an interest in serving on the committee.
Town Administrator questioned the original Audit Committee make up and inclusion of
the Finance Officer, Administrator and Assistant Town Administrator, stating the
auditors work for the Town Board and staff representation would not be appropriate. He
suggested the Committee be amended to include Trustees and perhaps an outside
individual. Staff would be a resource for the Committee. A proposed amendment to the
Audit Committee would be presented to the Board for consideration at an upcoming
Board meeting.
Mayor Pinkham stated the Parks Advisory Board has a vacancy and an interview team
would be needed. Trustees Holcomb and Ericson expressed interest in being on the
interview team.
FUTURE STUDY SESSION AGENDA ITEMS.
The Board agreed to schedule the items under consideration as listed.
Town Board Study Session – July 14, 2015 – Page 2
Trustee Ericson questioned when the NEPA study draft report for the Loop would be
finalized for the Board’s review. Staff stated the item has been delayed due to
hydrology concerns, and therefore, the timeframe has been delayed.
Items to be scheduled:
Noise Ordinance discussion in November.
Storm drainage to be brought forward as soon as possible.
Status report on the Event Center revenues and expenses to be discussed at the
end of August or first of September.
EVRPD UPDATE ON COMMUNITY CENTER.
Kathy Asche/EVRPD Board President stated Sklyer Rorabaugh/Executive Director has
accepted a position with the University of Colorado as the Director of Campus
Recreation. His last day with the district would be July 31, 2015. Mary Davis would act
as the Interim Director as the district begins the search for a new director and
anticipated having a new director by October. The district has four primary areas of
focus: flood recovery, Stanley Park Master Plan, Trails, and the Community Center. In
an effort to continue to move the center forward a project manager would be pursued.
The EVRPD requested funding support from the Town to move the capital campaign
forward in the spring. The District was committed to seeking all possible funding
options to construct the center and has spent 18 months reviewing over 40 potential
private and public funding sources, raising approximately $210,000 to date. The
foundations dollars and grants are being awarded to fund reconstruction of flood
damaged infrastructure. Grant application pools have been diluted to include a wider
range of applicants and deadlines extended to allow additional applications to be
submitted. The District has not competed favorably for the center; however, the grants
have been excited to see the multi-agency support for the center as it is unusual.
The community questioned the district’s ability to break ground by January 1, 2017 on
the center through a capital campaign only. The District Board realized the difficultly to
mount a capital campaign with limited resources and the need for concrete evidence of
community support in order to secure major donors, pledges and grants. The district
concluded the fundraising campaign should be postponed and questions should be
placed on the upcoming coordinated election for a mil levy for construction and a
separate mil levy for the operations of the center. The fundraising campaign would be
postponed until after the election. President Asche stated the intent of the fundraising
efforts was to address not only the construction but the operational subsidy, planned
fixture, furniture and equipment replacement, and planned facilities maintenance. It was
the intent of the district to request the Town’s support to fundraise for all aspects of the
center and not just for the construction of the center. A positive outcome from the
election would aid in the fundraising efforts for the other aspects of the center.
The design of the building has been simplified to reduce costs, be efficient, flexible use
of space, and meet the highest priority needs based on the feasibility study. The
building would not meet all the needs but would contain multi-use spaces and be multi-
generational. Scheduling of the building would be key and require additional staffing to
get the maximum use from the building. The new design would retain the beauty of the
original plan but would streamline the building.
The Friends of the Community Center has a steering committee with 10 subcommittees
including communications, community programs, economic impacts, testimonials,
Larimer county support, community engagement, child care, other community centers,
support letters, and speakers bureau. This group has been key in continuing to move
the center forward with over 100 individuals actively engaged. The Larimer County
Boys and Girls Club has also been actively involved and has a $15 million capital
campaign and the Estes Park community would receive approximately $2.5 million to
help fund programs such as camps, activities and after school care.
Town Board Study Session – July 14, 2015 – Page 3
The Board questioned how they could support the district in fundraising and provided
concrete support. President Asche stated the MOU with the Town and the District for
the construction of the center would be needed. The Board requested the District come
back to request support for the fundraising efforts after the election for the other
operational items.
RFP FOR DOWNTOWN NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN,
Director Chilcott provide a brief overview of the Request for Proposal (RFP)
development for the Downtown Plan and the grant received in the amount of $190,000
to complete the plan. The Town has worked with stakeholders in the development of
the RFP and incorporated comments received during the review process. Comments
received on the plan to date have been mainly positive with some commenting on the
need to address a transportation plan prior to moving forward with a neighborhood plan,
question the need for a consultant, questioned whether the plan should be conceptual
or detailed, and if one plan or a number of smaller plans would be the final product.
Staff requests feedback from the Board on whether key issues are being captured in the
draft RFP, are expectation being met with the scope of work, and what should the plan
boundary incorporate.
Board discussion followed with Trustee Norris acknowledging that staff has addressed
the main issues. Trustee Phipps would not include the area north of downtown as the
plan should only address the downtown business area. He stated the Planning
Commission should be involved in the discussion and a decision should be reserved
until such time. He stated the plan should be a vision and commented the scope has
grown considerably. Trustee Ericson stated the plan should have clear deliverable and
would request the RFP come forward in the next two weeks for Board approval. He also
supports the inclusion of the Stanley Village and Lot 4 to establish a district boundary
for a future URA or DDA. Trustee Nelson would request the RFP incorporate the issue
of an arts theme downtown (art overlay) and would eliminate the inclusion of the
northern residential area. Trustee Holcomb stated concern the Town may be limiting
itself if the additional area to the north of downtown are not included to grow the
downtown. Mayor Pro Tem Koenig questioned the need for a 20 year plan and would
recommend the plan be limited to 10 years with clear direction. She would recommend
the plan identify grant opportunities to aid in the completion of the changes outlined in
the plan. The Town would need to help property owners with funding mechanisms to
encourage change. The Board would continue the discussion at the Board meeting to
determine what areas should be included in the final plan.
There being no further business, Mayor Pinkham adjourned the meeting at 6:47 p.m.
Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk
Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, July 9, 2015
Minutes of a Regular Meeting of the PUBLIC SAFETY/UTILITIES/PUBLIC
WORKS COMMITTEE of the Town of Estes Park, Larimer County,
Colorado. Meeting held in the Board Room of Town Hall in said Town of
Estes Park on the 9th day of July, 2015.
Committee: Chair Norris, Mayor Pro Tem Koenig and Trustee Nelson
Attending: Chair Norris, Mayor Pro Tem Koenig
Also Attending: Assistant Town Administrator Machalek, Chief Kufeld,
Director Bergsten, Superintendent Lockhart, Managers Ash
McEachern and Fraundorf, Supervisor Kearney, Consultant
McFarland and Recording Secretary Limmiatis
Absent: Trustee Nelson, Town Administrator Lancaster and Director
Muhonen
Chair Norris called the meeting to order at 8:00 a.m.
PUBLIC COMMENT.
None.
PUBLIC SAFETY.
REPORTS.
Reports provided for informational purposes and made a part of the proceedings.
1. Verbal Updates and Committee Questions – Chief Kufeld stated the Fourth of
July fireworks and the Rooftop Rodeo Parade went without incident. The
attendance at both events was less than anticipated due to rain. On Wednesday,
July 8, 2015 an individual was apprehended on an arrest warrant after running
from the Police.
UTILITIES.
REPORTS.
Reports provided for informational purposes and made a part of the proceedings.
1. Verbal Updates and Committee Questions – Director Bergsten provided updates
on several items including the Water Master Plan, the Water Shop certified
laboratory, the introduction of a new coagulant at the Glacier Creek Water Plant,
the installation of smart meters on Elm Road, the progress on the Upper
Thompson Sanitation District lift station, and the future request of funds to
maintain the project management positon held by Linda Swoboda after grant
funds have diminished.
Superintendent Lockhart informed the Committee bids received for the Water
Shop certified laboratory were much higher than anticipated and staff would
contact designer Thorp & Associates to reach an understanding of why
projections were so far off. He also provided an update on the recently
purchased four drum wire puller, which has become an invaluable piece of
equipment by saving hours of staff time and providing safer working conditions.
Manager Fraundorf assured the Committee steps are in place to minimize the
risk of unauthorized access to the Town’s network including modern firewalls,
network switches, authentication software and network probing tools.
Public Safety/Utilities/Public Works Committee – July 9, 2015 – Page 2
PUBLIC WORKS.
CONFERENCE CENTER ROOF REPAIR CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT. Manager
Landkamer stated the Conference Center roof has met its useful life and a Request for
Proposal (RFP) with a mandatory pre-bid site walk was placed in the Trail Gazette, the
Loveland Reporter Herald and the Fort Collins Coloradoan to solicit interested
contractors. Four contractors and one consultant attended the pre-bid site walk. One
qualifying bid was received from RTN Roofing Systems which came in under budget at
$118,700. An additional $10,000 would be requested to repair two areas of the
membrane system which are beyond the RFP scope of work. The Committee
recommended awarding the Conference Center Roof Repair Contract to RTN
Roofing Systems for $129,000 at the July 14, 2015 Town Board meeting.
REPORTS.
Reports provided for informational purposes and made a part of the proceedings.
1. Dry Gulch Road Rehabilitation Construction Contract – Manager Ash informed
the Committee no bids were received for the Dry Gulch Road Rehabilitation
Construction Contract although several contractors appeared at the mandatory
pre-bid hearing. Ash reached out to these contractors to learn what deterred
them from submitting bids. The contractors stated they would have been more
likely to place a bid should the job have been for the spring of 2016 as they are
already booked this fall. Ash stated the project would be sent back out to bid with
a March to June 2016 timeframe for completion.
2. Verbal Updates and Committee Questions – Manager McEachern thanked the
Committee for the support of the purchase of the pot hole repair truck. A
demonstration of how the truck works was done on June 25, 2015 and was well
received by the public. Streets Supervisor Kearney demonstrated a new feature
on the Town’s website which shows when, where and how many potholes have
been repaired to date. When a citizen sees the need for street repairs, a call
should be made to the Public Works Administrative Assistant who would
complete a work order which is then prioritized with the regularly scheduled work
of the streets division.
Manager Ash informed the Committee of the community support received for
rebuilding the dams at Scott Ponds from the July 7, 2015 public meeting. Two
options to either rebuild or remove the dams were presented. Should the Board
order staff to rebuild the dams at the July 14, 2015 Town Board meeting, several
issues would need to be addressed such as safety, security, financial
implications, long term costs and water rights.
Manger Ash provided an update on the Fall River Trail Design public meetings to
be held on July 22 and 23, 2015. Consultant Loris & Associates would present a
preliminary survey. The project is in the design phase and staff is gathering
public comment.
Consultant McFarland presented the Transit Facility Parking Structure design
revisions. Staff would examine all options to provide for public safety and
aesthetics while optimizing parking stalls.
Manager Landkamer informed the Committee of the progress on the restroom
expansion at the Visitor Center. A staff meeting provided insight on the regular
problems experienced with the lack of stalls in the women’s restroom, the need
for a family restroom which would assist with ADA compliance, and for more
efficient fixtures. Landkamer’s goal would be to have construction begin this year.
Manager Ash stated the Barnes Dance Study would take place on July 11 and
18, 2015 with video collection times at 11:00 a.m. until 3:00 p.m.
Manager Ash informed the Committee of the Fish Creek road and trail repairs
public meeting scheduled for July 13, 2015 at the Museum.
Public Safety/Utilities/Public Works Committee – July 9, 2015 – Page 3
There being no further business, Chair Norris adjourned the meeting at 8:51 a.m.
Barbara Jo Limmiatis, Recording Secretary
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Planning Commission 1
April 21, 2015
Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall
Commission: Chair Betty Hull, Commissioners Doug Klink, Sharry White, Russ Schneider, Nancy Hills,
Steve Murphree, Wendye Sykes
Attending: Chair Hull, Commissioners Hills, Schneider, White, Sykes, and Murphree
Also Attending: Community Development Director Alison Chilcott, Planner Phil Kleisler, Town Board
Liaison John Phipps, Larimer County Liaison Michael Whitley, and Recording Secretary
Karen Thompson
Absent: Commissioner Klink
Chair Hull called the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m. There were two people in attendance. Each Commissioner
was introduced. Chair Hull explained the process for accepting public comment at today’s meeting. The
following minutes reflect the order of the agenda and not necessarily the chronological sequence.
1. PUBLIC COMMENT
None.
2. CONSENT AGENDA
A. Approval of minutes, March 17, 2015 Planning Commission meeting.
It was moved and seconded (Hills/White) to approve the consent agenda as presented and the motion
passed unanimously with one absent.
3. RIVERVIEW PINES DEVELOPMENT PLAN & PRELIMINARY TOWNHOME SUBDIVISION PLAT
Planner Kleisler stated the applicant officially withdrew the application, and will resubmit at a later date.
4. ESTES VALLEY DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT CONCERNING PET GROOMING IN THE CD–
COMMERCIAL DOWNTOWN ZONE DISTRICT
Planner Kleisler reviewed the staff report. He stated this code amendment would only apply to the CD–
Commercial Downtown zone district. Several months ago, staff received a request by a downtown business
owner with a desire to have a dog‐grooming business in the downtown area. In the Estes Valley, dog
grooming businesses are allowed only in the CO–Commercial Outlying zone district. Planner Kleisler stated
this particular proposed code amendment would allow pet grooming in the CD–Commercial Downtown
zone district as an accessory use.
Planner Kleisler stated all property owners in the CD–Commercial Downtown zone district were notified by
mail of the proposed code amendment and today’s meeting. A legal notice and press release were
published in the local newspaper. Additionally, staff reached out to other local pet‐related business
owners to explain the request and receive initial feedback. Several were opposed to the allowance of pet
grooming in the downtown area. Staff also met with the Colorado Department of Agriculture, who
administers the Pet Animal Care and Facilities Act, which includes pet grooming businesses.
Planner Kleisler stated valuable feedback was received from other grooming businesses located in the CO–
Commercial Outlying zone district. Concerning enforcement, he stated the Police Department enforces
much of the Estes Park Municipal Code, and staff found regulations for animal grooming are best left in
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Planning Commission 2
April 21, 2015
Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall
that code rather than the development code. The state health department requires approval of this type
of business. The sanitation district also requires a certain process for this type of business.
Planner Kleisler stated the proposed code amendment would have the following restrictions: 1) permitted
as an accessory use only; 2) service shall not exceed two (2) animals at a time; and 3) shall not include
Animal Boarding. The limit on the number of animals is to ensure a small capacity. The intent is to allow
one animal being groomed, while another is waiting to be picked up. Concerning boarding, staff expects
the waiting animals to be held in crates. No pet daycare will be allowed. Planner Kleisler stated the
Planning Commission was the recommending body for this proposed code amendment, with both the
Town Board and County Commission being the decision‐making bodies. The Planning Commission could
recommend approval, make desired revisions, or recommend denial. They could also request it be put on
hold and examined during the process for the downtown neighborhood plan. Director Chilcott cautioned
the Commission the downtown plan would most likely not reach this level of detail, and would have a
lower priority than other items.
Staff and Commission Discussion
Commissioner Schneider requested adding ‘at any time’ to restriction number three (3), to read “Shall not
include Animal Boarding at any time.”
Public Comment
Pam Dewitt/applicant stated the desire was to have a small, clean, organized, and a committed space in
the back of the store. She stated there is a similar business in Golden with a framed and glassed‐in
grooming area that takes one animal at a time. She would like to have a similar setup. Guests to Estes Park
have inquired about a grooming station in the downtown area. She estimated it would take approximately
one hour per animal for grooming. The hours of operation being considered are 10:30 a.m. to 7 p.m.,
which are the store hours. Her plan is to build a separate glassed‐in area specifically for grooming. She
would take walk‐ins only.
Christine Kalencki/Town resident was concerned about allowing animal grooming in the downtown area.
She stated other groomers have been forced to locate outside of the downtown area, several have left the
Estes Valley, and others have struggled. She stated it was unfair to other dog groomers in the Estes Valley
to now change the regulations and allow this type of business in the downtown area. She was opposed to
the code amendment.
Donna Elston/Town resident was concerned about the demographics of pet grooming in Estes Park, stating
she did not think the community could support another groomer. She recommended limiting the number
of groomers in the area. She stated noise can be an issue, and overhead expenses can be large. The
sanitation district regulations are strict for this type of business. She was opposed to the code amendment.
Michael Palmington/Town resident has a grooming business near Dry Gulch Road. He wanted to relocate
to East Riverside Drive, but was told it was not zoned appropriately.
Staff and Commission Discussion
Will Birchfield, Chief Building Official, stated the building code addresses sound transmission only for
dwelling units; accommodations, apartments, hallways in residential buildings, etc. It does not regulate
sound transmission controls for commercial businesses. If the ceiling was removed to try to abate noise, it
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Planning Commission 3
April 21, 2015
Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall
could trigger the installation of fire‐resistive construction in the entire building. The town has the ability to
require soundproofing either as an amendment to the building codes or the development code.
Comments from staff and the Commission included, but were not limited to: if this amendment was
implemented, any grooming business that complied with the requirements could have a grooming
business as an accessory use in the downtown zone district; all grooming businesses are required to
comply with the state regulations; the Code Compliance Officer would be the person to enforce the
number of animals being held for grooming; code compliance issues would be driven by complaints; the
grooming business must be an accessory use to another pet‐related business in the same location; no
changes to the current definition of animal boarding are proposed; noise complaints would be addressed
by the Police Department, as they have sound meters. It should be noted that sound measurements are
taken from the edge of the property line. Director Chilcott stated if the Planning Commission recommends
approval, it could recommend consideration of a building code amendment to require some noise
mitigation. She stated the Board of Appeals is currently reviewing the 2015 International Building Codes
and Local Amendments, with adoption scheduled for the end of 2015. Planner Kleisler stated he would
provide a list of the regulations during the building permit process. Any violations to the EVDC would
require the normal processes and procedures.
It was moved and seconded (Schneider/Hills) to recommend approval of the EVDC amendment to allow
animal grooming as an accessory use to a pet‐related business in the CD–Commercial Downtown zone
district, with the addition of the words ‘at any time’ to the code language concerning boarding; and with
a request for the Town Board to consider an amendment to the building code for noise abatement in
commercial buildings and with the findings and recommendations provided by staff, and the motion
passed 6‐0 with one absent.
5. ESTES VALLEY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MODERNIZATION
Planner Kleisler stated the Transportation section will be continued due to Senior Planner Shirk’s absence.
He stated the Economic section is directly related to the 2010 census data. He provided an interesting
history of the US Census, stating the first US census was conducted in 1790. The boundaries are political
(state, county, etc.) rather than statistical (geographic boundaries), and the Federal government
determines the topics on the census questionnaires. The Estes Valley is a political boundary, and
encompasses more than one census tract boundary. Planner Kleisler explained how the census data is
organized. Census tracts were created to capture a population of 4,000, which is a manageable area to
attempt to contact citizens in person who did not respond through the mail service. Local jurisdictions
have a say in the determination of new tract boundaries when an area grows larger than 4,000 people.
For the Comprehensive Plan modernization, data is compared between 2010 census versus the American
Community Survey (ACS). The US Census tracks the official counts and population totals once every ten
years during a certain point in time. The ACS provides sample estimates and population characteristics on
an annual basis during the entire calendar year.
With the data provided to the Commission, staff regenerated all the graphs to be current with the most
recent data. The documents included in the Planning Commissioner meeting materials will be the basis for
the narrative section of the comprehensive plan over the last couple of decades. Planner Kleisler discussed
the residential construction graph, stating the trend since 2011 is larger single family dwellings, 3000 to
6500 square feet, with higher valuations.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Planning Commission 4
April 21, 2015
Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall
Staff and Commission Discussion
Comments included but were not limited to: appreciation of staff time to complete this section; desire to
show statistics of full‐time residents versus part‐time residents; suggestion to have a very definitive outline
or introduction stating why this information is included and how it is to be used; no matter how good your
intentions are, they can be used against you; spikes in building permits and subsequent valuation can
make the numbers look skewed; Commissioners Schneider, Murphree, and White would appreciate a
meeting with staff to further discuss this information. Director Chilcott stated staff could address those
suggestions, and present an analysis for the characteristics of our community that are unique.
Commissioner Schneider is interested in seeing the data that was used to modernize the transportation
section. Director Chilcott stated Planner Shirk was referencing the citizen’s surveys that were originated by
Public Information Officer Kate Rusch, and they are statistically valid surveys. Copies of the survey will be
provided to the Commissioners for future reference.
REPORTS
1. Town Board Approvals
A. Director Chilcott reported the Aspire Wellness Complex at the Stanley Hotel Special
Review was approved
B. An easement vacation on Pinewood Lane was approved
2. County Commission Approval
A. AT&T Monopole on Prospect Mountain was approved.
3. Board of Adjustment Approvals
A. A variance request was approved for Backbone Adventures on North Lake Avenue.
B. A variance request was approved for Earthwood Collections on East Elkhorn Avenue to
allow the outdoor sales of merchandise in an area set back from the sidewalk immediately
adjacent to (and owned by) the existing Earthwood Collections.
4. Parking Structure Update
Public Works Director Greg Muhonen provided an update on the status of the proposed parking
structure. He stated the Planning Commission reviewed and approved a parking structure on the
north side of the Big Thompson River, east of the Visitor Center. When the bids came in over
budget, the Town Board authorized the Public Works Department to revisit the idea for the south
side of the river, off of Highway 36. He stated the access is superior to coming off of Highway 34,
there is a substantial reduction in utility conflicts, has a larger footprint and will allow building at a
lower cost per stall with less visual impact. The project has faced several challenges, with one of
the larger ones being the land is partially Town‐owned, and partially owned by the Bureau of
Reclamation. Maintenance of the river in the immediate area is one of the BORs concerns.
Director Muhonen stated the project will most likely be heard by the Planning Commission in July
or August, 2015, with hopes for construction to begin in January, 2016. He stated a shortened
construction period was planned with a two‐story structure instead of three stories, and will take
approximately eight months to complete. He welcomed engagement and input from the Planning
Commission. There will be additional public outreach with this project. Phase I would increase the
existing 102 spaces to 198 spaces. Each additional floor would add 99 new spaces. The final build
out would triple what is currently there.
5. Flood Recovery/Mitigation Update
Director Chilcott reported the Town received $105,800 for the Hydrology Study of Fall River, Big
Thompson River, and Black Canyon Creek. This will help determine what the actual flood risk is for
the properties along those rivers.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Planning Commission 5
April 21, 2015
Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall
The Town received a grant for $190,000 for a Downtown Neighborhood Plan. This will be used for
a long‐range plan looking at how transportation, land use, floodplain management, etc. fit
together in the downtown area. We will revisit the vision for the downtown area, and further
articulate and/or refine that vision. The RFP will be released soon.
The Town was not awarded the Channel Migration Hazard Zone and Risk Mitigation grant;
however, the Colorado Water Conservation Board (CWCB) may consider completing some of
those studies.
On April 28, 2015, there will a joint meeting with the Downtown Business Partners, the
Community Development Department, and Insurance Associates. The meeting is geared toward
downtown business owners to inform and educate them on flood insurance, floodplain studies,
mitigation projects, grant updates, and floodproofing measures. Representatives from the CWCB
and FEMA will be attending. The meeting will be held from 8:30 – 10:30 a.m., and will be
streamed live so business/property owners not living in Estes Park can watch the meeting and ask
questions.
6. Term Expirations
Director Chilcott reported Chair Hull and Commissioner Sykes terms expire June 30, 2015. Chair
Hull has submitted her application to the County Commissioners to request reappointment.
Commissioner Sykes will not be living in Estes full‐time and will be stepping down from her
position.
There being no further business, Chair Hull adjourned the meeting at 2:45 p.m.
___________________________________
Betty Hull, Chair
___________________________________
Karen Thompson, Recording Secretary
Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, June 17th, 2015
Minutes of a Regular meeting of the Transportation Advisory Board of the Town of
Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held in the Rooms 202 & 203 of Town
Hall, in said Town of Estes Park on the 17th day of June, 2015.
Present: Kimberly Campbell
Thom Widawski
Amy Hamrick
Belle Morris
Stan Black
Gregg Rounds
Bryon Holmes
Also Present: Greg Muhonen, Director of Public Works
Kevin Ash, Public Works Civil Engineer
Jen Imber, Public Works Administrative Assistant
Brian Wells, Shuttle Coordinator
John Ericson, Town Board Liaison
Abscent: Cory LaBianca
Ann Finley
Chair Campbell called the meeting to order at 12:03 p.m.
GENERAL DISCUSSION
Public in attendance declined to comment.
Minutes from the March 18th regular meeting, March 31st special meeting, April 15th
regular meeting and May 20th regular meeting were reviewed by members. It was
moved and seconded (Black/Hamrick) to approve all aforementioned minutes, with the
motion passing unanimously.
Brian Wells presented a brief shuttle update. Trolley numbers are in for the limited
service that was offered in the spring and the 2015 numbers are ahead of 2014. A
special Thursday morning service starting at 7:45 will be offered in July, running from
the Fairgrounds to Bond Park for the Farmers Market event. TAB members suggested
this could be marketed as a test run for downtown business employees. A shuttle rider
appreciation event will be held August 5th, with the 500,000th rider receiving a goody
bag from the Mayor.
Transportation Advisory Board – June 17th, 2015 – Page 2
Charley Dickey gave a brief presentation of the results of the recently conducted
downtown parking survey. Estes Valley Partners for Commerce and the Downtown
Business Partners Committee of Government of Affairs created the survey and
distributed it to the community.
Trustee Ericson commented on the grant received by the Community Development
Department for neighborhood development of the downtown district. A request for
proposal is currently underway to hire a consultant for the project. Trustee Ericson
expressed an interest in seeing TAB integrate efforts with this grant. TAB discussions
would be more philosophical in nature, while letting the experts get into the nitty gritty
details of concept and design. It would be helpful if TAB began defining areas as
downtown, peripheral and remote when discussing parking concepts.
STAFF UPDATES ON TOWN PROJECTS
A public meeting on was held on Thursday, June 11th, on the Dry Gulch Project. The
biggest concern voiced by citizens was the full road closure for two months, especially
in regard to emergency services. The Town is addressing this by attempting to create a
path around the construction for emergency services vehicles. The project currently is
out to bid and will close on July 2nd. Negotiations with private property owners are still
underway regarding easements.
A reconstruction project on Highway 7 is beginning, with culvert replacement and then
overlay. Belle Morris requested an opportunity for input for bike lanes.
Amy Hamrick inquired about the school zoning on Hwy 7. Trustee Ericson
recommended speaking with Rick Life of the Police Department for details and
information.
Fall River Trail Extension project is underway with consultant Loris and Assoc iates. The
consultant is exploring trail placement along Fish Hatchery Road and into Aspen Glen
campground in RMNP. Public outreach for this project will begin mid to late July.
CDOT is going to reconfigure north-bound double left turn of Hwy 34/36 intersection on
June 22nd and 23rd.
CDOT shared the bid for the requested Barnes Dance study in the downtown corridor.
CDOT will pay the $30,000 for a two-weekend study, but the additional $30,000 for two
extra weekends would have to be paid for by the Town. Director Muhonen will present
the Town Board with an action item for this project at the June 23rd meeting.
Transportation Advisory Board – June 17th, 2015 – Page 3
On July 1st, two variable message boards will be added along Hwys 36 and 34 to best
direct guests to the two RMNP east side entrances.
A public meeting on the Estes Park Transit Facility Parking Structure was held on June
10th. Twenty comment cards were received from community members, with positive
feedback. The consultants are currently working on submitting an application to the
Estes Valley Planning Commission.
The new pothole repair spray patcher has arrived and is ready for operation. The Public
Works crew is trained and working to repair potholes. The new equipment will be
debuted with a public event featuring live demonstrations on June 25th.
DOWNTOWN PARKING STRATEGY
Chair Campbell passed out an outline of the parking strategy plan, as well as the portion
of the plan Stan Black drafted since the last meeting.
TAB members agreed more parking is imperative. Studies indicate an additional 500
spaces are needed, with the additional parking spaces from the construction of the
parking structure still leaving the Town 200 spaces short. TAB members considered if
additional parking should be provided in the downtown district or on the perimeter of the
downtown corridor. Downtown parking maps were provided to each member and viable
options were explored for a future parking structure. Extensive discussion centered on
the Post Office parking lot site. Downtown business owners want more downtown
parking, not an exchange of parking for additional business space. Mixed development
would find more support from the downtown district. Also heavily discussed as an ideal
location for a parking garage was the Piccadilly Square site, which is currently privately
owned.
With no other business to discuss, Chair Campbell adjourned the meeting at 2:03 p.m.
TOWN CLERK Memo
To: Honorable Mayor Pinkham
Board of Trustees
Town Administrator Lancaster
From: Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk
Date: July 28, 2015
RE: Liquor Licensing: New Beer and Wine Liquor License Application for
Himalayan Curry & Kebob, Inc., dba Himalayan Curry & Kebob, 101 B W.
Elkhorn Avenue
Objective:
Approval of a new Beer and Wine liquor license located at 101 B W. Elkhorn Avenue,
Estes Park, Colorado. Application filed by Himalayan Curry & Kebob, Inc., dba
Himalayan Curry & Kebob.
Present Situation:
An application for a new Beer and Wine liquor license was received by the Town Clerk’s
office on June 24, 2015. All necessary paperwork and fees were submitted; please see
the attached Procedure for Hearing on Application – New Liquor License for additional
information. The applicant is aware of the Town Board’s Training for Intervention
Procedures (TIPS) requirement and has provided the Clerk’s office with a copy of a
current TIPS certification card, verifying successful completion of a TIPS class offered
by certified trainer Barb Boyer Buck.
The liquor license application has been sent to the Colorado Department of Revenue
Liquor Enforcement Division (LED) for a concurrent review as requested by the
applicant. This allows the LED to review the application simultaneously with the Town
and expedites the issuance of the new liquor license.
Proposal:
Town Board review and consideration of the application for a new Beer and Wine liquor
license.
Advantages:
Approval of the license provides the business owner with the opportunity to operate a
liquor-licensed establishment in the Town of Estes Park.
Disadvantages:
The owner is denied a business opportunity to operate a restaurant licensed to serve
beer and wine to locals and visitors to downtown Estes Park.
Action Recommended:
Approval of the application for a new Beer and Wine liquor license.
Budget:
The fee paid to the Town of Estes Park for a new Beer and Wine liquor license is
$1112. The fee covers the administrative costs related to processing the application,
background checks, and business licensing. In addition, the annual renewal fee
payable to the Town of Estes Park for a Beer and Wine liquor license is $662.
Level of Public Interest
Low
Sample Motion:
The Board of Trustees finds that the reasonable requirements of the neighborhood
are/are not met by the present liquor outlets in the neighborhood and that the desires of
the adult inhabitants are/are not for the granting of this liquor license. Based upon
these findings, I move that the application for a new Beer and Wine liquor license filed
by Himalayan Curry & Kebob, Inc., dba Himalayan Curry & Kebob, 101 B W. Elkhorn
Avenue, be approved/denied.
Attachments:
1. Procedure for Hearing
1
July 2002
PROCEDURE FOR HEARING ON APPLICATION
NEW LIQUOR LICENSE
1. MAYOR.
The next order of business will be the public hearing on the application of Himalayan
Curry & Kebob, Inc., dba HIMALAYAN CURRY & KEBOB for a new Beer and Wine
Liquor License located at 101 B W. Elkhorn Avenue, Estes Park, Colorado.
At this hearing, the Board of Trustees shall consider the facts and evidence
determined as a result of its investigation, as well as any other facts, the reasonable
requirements of the neighborhood for the type of license for which application has
been made, the desires of the adult inhabitants, the number, type and availability of
liquor outlets located in or near the neighborhood under consideration, and any other
pertinent matters affecting the qualifications of the applicant for the conduct of the type
of business proposed.
OPEN PUBLIC HEARING
2. TOWN CLERK. Will present the application and confirm the following:
The application was filed June 24, 2015.
At a meeting of the Board of Trustees on July 14, 2015, the public hearing will be
set for 7:00 p.m. on Tuesday, July 28, 2015.
The neighborhood boundaries for the purpose of this application and hearing
were established to be 3.13 miles.
The Town has received all necessary fees and hearing costs.
The applicant is filing as a Corporation.
The property is zoned CD which allows this type of business as a permitted
use.
The notice of hearing was published on July 17, 2015 .
The premises was posted on July 8, 2015 .
2
There is a police report with regard to the investigation of the applicant.
Status of T.I.P.S. Training:
Unscheduled Scheduled X Completed
There is a map indicating all liquor outlets presently in the Town of Estes Park
available upon request.
3. APPLICANT.
The applicants will be allowed to state their case and present any evidence they
wish to support the application.
4. OPPONENTS.
The opponents will be given an opportunity to state their case and present any
evidence in opposition to the application.
The applicant will be allowed a rebuttal limited to the evidence presented by the
opponents. No new evidence may be submitted.
5. MAYOR.
Ask the Town Clerk whether any communications have been received in regard
to the application and, if so, to read all communication.
Indicate that all evidence presented will be accepted as part of the record.
Ask the Board of Trustees if there are any questions of any person speaking at
any time during the course of this hearing.
Declare the public hearing closed.
6. SUGGESTED MOTION:
Finding. The Board of Trustees finds that the reasonable requirements of the
neighborhood are/are not met by the present liquor outlets in the neighborhood and
that the desires of the adult inhabitants are/are not for the granting of this liquor
license.
Motion. Based upon the above findings, I move that this license be granted/denied.
Page 1
To: Honorable Mayor Pinkham
Board of Trustees
Town Administrator Lancaster
From: Jackie Williamson
Date: July 28, 2015
RE: Liquor Licensing: Transfer of Ownership from Gast Haus Estes Park, Inc.,
dba MOLLY B RESTAURANT, to Lee Enterprises, Inc., dba MOLLY-B,
200 Moraine Avenue, Tavern Liquor License.
Objective:
Transfer an existing liquor license located at 200 Moraine Avenue to the applicant, Lee
Enterprises, Inc.
Present Situation:
A Tavern Liquor License is currently held at the location referenced above by Gast
Haus Estes Park, Inc., dba MOLLY B RESTAURANT. The applicant is requesting a
transfer of the license and submitted a complete application to the Town Clerk’s office
on June 18, 2015. A temporary permit was issued on July 1, 2015. The temporary
permit authorizes the transferee to continue the sale of alcohol beverages as permitted
under the permanent license while the application to transfer ownership of the license is
pending.
The applicant has submitted all necessary paperwork and fees and is aware of the TIPS
training requirement.
Proposal:
Town Board review and consideration of the application to transfer the existing license
to Lee Enterprises, Inc., dba MOLLY-B.
Advantages:
The transfer of the license provides the business owner with the opportunity to continue
operating an existing, liquor-licensed establishment without an interruption of service to
its clientele.
Disadvantages:
The business owner is denied the opportunity to continue operating an existing liquor-
licensed business during the licensing process.
Town Clerk’s Office Memo
Page 2
Action Recommended:
Approval to transfer the existing Tavern Liquor License to Lee Enterprises, Inc.
Budget:
The fee paid to the Town of Estes Park for a Tavern Liquor License transfer is $1319.
The fee covers the administrative costs related to processing the application,
background checks, and business licensing. In addition, the renewal fee payable to the
Town for a Tavern Liquor License is $869 per year.
Level of Public Interest:
Low
Sample Motion:
I move to approve/deny the Transfer Application for a Tavern Liquor License filed by
Lee Enterprises, Inc., dba MOLLY-B.
ATTACHMENTS:
Procedure for Transfer of Liquor License
April 2003
PROCEDURE FOR TRANSFER OF LIQUOR LICENSE
TOWN CLERK.
Will present the application and confirm the following:
The application was filed June 18, 2015 .
The Town has received all necessary fees and hearing costs.
The applicant is filing as a Corporation .
There is a police report with regard to the investigation of the applicants.
Status of T.I.P.S. Training:
X Unscheduled Completed Pending Confirmation
MOTION:
I move the Transfer Application filed by Lee Enterprises, Inc. doing business as Molly-B
for a Tavern License be approved/denied.
Page 1
FINANCE Memo
To: Honorable Mayor Pinkham
Board of Trustees
Town Administrator Lancaster
From: Steve McFarland – Finance Officer
Date: July 28, 2015
RE: Financial Report through June 2015
Background:
Attached is the Draft Financial Report through June 2015.
Due to the “busy-ness” of summer, Staff is focusing its comments on high-level items,
primarily in the General Fund. This presentation is something of a companion piece to
the Budget Study session that will be held prior to this presentation, from 3pm-5pm.
Dashboard page
General Fund – to distill General Fund activity to the most important points:
o Expenditures are right at 50% of Budget (in line with 50% of the calendar
year having elapsed). Most operational activities are running at or under
Budget. However, flood expenditures are moving more quickly than a
calendar % basis. This has pushed the Streets Department (where
Community Drive, Fish Creek projects reside) to 76% of the annual
budget.
o MPEC revenues are significantly trailing expectations ($490k annual
budget; $36k actuals so far). Staff is meeting this week to discuss action
steps to mitigate the situation.
o On the plus side of the ledger, sales tax is 8% ahead of budget. With only
26% (Jan – May) of the fiscal year elapsed re: sales tax collections, Staff
is cautious about “counting on” a banner year, but we are hopeful.
Utilities – Both L&P and Water are close to the budgeted revenue pace.
Expenditures are significantly under budget, mostly due to capital projects yet to
be started.
Investments – the investment box has been expanded to reflect restricted and
non-restricted categories.
Page 2
FINANCE Memo
o Restricted categories include the remaining certificates of participation
monies for MPEC, money segregated to meet L&P bond requirements,
FLAP, and Theater.
o Non-restricted investments have been expanded in accordance with the
adoption of the new investment policy, which now allows for investment in
corporate paper and bonds.
o Interest rates have crept up very slightly (at the rate of about $1,000
annualized in extra interest income based on $25,000,000 of investments)
– not material, but we will take every dollar we can earn.
Other Funds of interest
Community Reinvestment Fund – while most of the CRF’s funds remain
committed (a Fund balance of only ~$50,000 is forecasted by the end of 2015),
activity in CRF has been relatively quiet so far this year. MPEC is nearing a
conclusion, the parking structure has not begun (although planning is
proceeding). The conference center roof repair project was recently approved at
a cost less than what was budgeted.
Open Space Fund – Open Space is significant resource for funding appropriate
flood-related projects, such as Scott Ponds. Open Space had ~$400,000 in fund
balance at the end of 2014, and should take in ~$300,000 this year.
1A Ballot Funds – these funds continue to accumulate sales tax revenue at a
pace commensurate with General Fund sales tax (ie, 8% ahead of last year, and
14+% ahead of budget).
Sales tax
While on target for a banner year, some cautionary observations:
Only 26% of the fiscal year is complete.
Estes Park ranks 16th of the 25 reporting CAST communities, 2015 vs 2014.
On the positive side:
The 12-month moving average on sales tax shows that sales tax is increasing at
14.3% - this means that the rate of return is accelerating and is at an all-time
high.
Page 3
FINANCE Memo
Flood cost/reimbursement update
The Town has hired (February) a grant-funded flood accountant and as such is making
progress towards bettering our reimbursement process. Reimbursements are made
complicated due to various factors, including:
Fragmented information (first days of flood)
Scope changes in projects (need approval from Feds)
Unexplained denials by Feds on reimbursement submittals
Waiting on other partnering entities for reimbursements
The gap between flood expenditures and reimbursements is rapidly reaching a
level such that the Town will not be able to continue to fund projects, or at the
least, the Town will have to complete projects over an extended period of time.
Budget:
N/A
Staff Recommendation:
N/A
Sample Motion:
N/A
UPDATE: Financial and Sales Tax Report(through June 2015)Steve McFarland –Finance Officer
FINANCIAL INDICATORSTOWN OF ESTES PARK – THROUGH JUN 30, 2015GENERAL FUNDLIGHT & POWER FUND2015 2015 % of 2015 2015 % ofYear‐to‐Date Budget Variance Budget Year‐to‐Date Budget Variance Budget% of year elapsed> 50%% of year elapsed> 50%REVENUES* $5,105,011 $13,843,422 ($8,738,411) 36.9% REVENUES $7,335,159 $14,428,662 ($7,093,503) 50.8%EXPENSES 7,788,170 15,617,634 7,829,464 49.9% EXPENSES 7,462,540 18,954,544 11,492,004 39.4%Net increase/decrease ($2,683,159) ($1,774,212) ($908,947) Net increase/decrease ($127,381) ($4,525,882) $4,398,501 *sales tax included through May 2015SALES TAX ‐General FundWATER FUND1st QAprilMayTotal2015 2015 % ofYear‐to‐Date Budget Variance Budget2015 1,229,265 453,563 704,696 2,387,524 % of year elapsed> 50%2014 1,094,090 480,439 635,358 2,209,887 2013 1,035,558 383,935 625,667 2,045,160 REVENUES $2,030,718 $4,236,253 ($2,205,535) 47.9%EXPENSES 1,816,977 5,988,164 4,171,187 30.3%2015 vs 2014 12.4%‐5.6% 10.9%8.0%Net increase/decrease $213,741 ($1,751,911) $1,965,652 2015 vs 2013 18.7% 18.1% 12.6%16.7%SALES TAX ‐New 1A funds INVESTMENTS (Fair value)Apr‐15 May‐15 Jun‐151st QAprilMayTotalTown FundsMoney markets/CDs 17,877,254 17,591,387 15,731,631 Emergency Response 7,632 2,812 4,393 14,838 U.S. Treasuries 3,095,531 3,092,793 3,090,129 Community Center 76,324 28,123 43,933 148,380 U.S. Instrumentalities 5,618,673 5,617,928 5,619,746 Trails Expansion 38,162 14,062 21,966 74,190 Corporate 0 0 1,509,084 Street 183,177 67,495 105,438 356,111 subtotal: 26,591,458 26,302,108 25,950,590 RestrictionsCOPs 1,254,849 1,255,000 1,255,157 L&P Bond requirements 450,344 450,398 450,454 FLAP 4,201,081 4,201,582 4,202,108 FOSH/Theater Fund 459,363 459,421 459,483 Total 32,957,094 32,668,509 32,317,793 annual pooled govt mmf rate: 06/30/15 = 0.16%; 0.02% locally.
FINANCIAL INDICATORSTOWN OF ESTES PARK – THROUGH JUN 30, 2015GENERAL FUND STRETCHEDEnd of year fund balance forecast: 20%Current fund balance position: 5% (Jun 14: 15%)~$1,000,000 in flood expenditures (Fish Creek, Community Drive); reimbursements: $0MPEC: ~$500,000 revenues budgeted; actual through June: $36,000Seasonality of sales tax (26% of fiscal year; 50% of calendar year)
FINANCIAL INDICATORSTOWN OF ESTES PARK – THROUGH JUN 30, 2015COMMUNITY REINVESTMENT FUNDFor easy reference, major projects (MPEC, Parking Structure) budgeted for completion in 2014. Nothing over budget in 2014. Items restated in 2015:MPEC rollover of $830k, project wrapping up.Parking Structure revenues/expenses moved to 2015, increased.Elm Road numbers revised up $170k –final estimate received.$50,000 fund balance forecasted Dec 31, 2015.
SALES TAX FACTS•Through May 2015:•8.0% ahead of 2014. Rate is accelerating.•14.6% ahead of 2015 budget. Great news, butonly 26% of fiscal year.•25 CAST communities currently reporting:•2015 is another strong year.•We rank 16th.
CAST COMMUNITIES
SALES TAX RATE OF CHANGE
NEW SALES TAX INFO ON WEBSITE•www.estes.org/salestax•Updates to new funds (including financial statements)•Emergency Response•Community Center•Trails•Streets•Five year history of General Fund•Sectors
1
TOWN OF ESTES PARK
EXECUTIVE SESSION PROCEDURE
April 27, 2010
Executive Sessions may only occur during a regular or special meeting of the Town
Board.
Limited Purposes.
Adoption of any proposed policy, position, resolution, or formal action shall not occur at
any executive session.
Procedure.
Prior to the time the Board convenes in executive session, the Mayor shall announce
the topic of discussion in the executive session and identify the particular matter to be
discussed in as much detail as possible without compromising the purpose for which the
executive session is authorized, including the specific statutory citation as enumerated
below. Prior to entering into an executive session, the Mayor shall state whether or not
any formal action and/or discussion shall be taken by the Town Board following the
executive session.
1. To discuss purchase, acquisition, lease, transfer or sale of any real, personal, or
other property interest – Section 24-6-402(4)(a), C.R.S.
2. For a conference with an attorney for the Board for the purposes of receiving
legal advice on specific legal questions – Section 24-6-402(4)(b), C.R.S.
3. For discussion of a matter required to be kept confidential by federal or state law,
rule, or regulation – Section 24-6-402(4)(c), C.R.S.
4. For discussion of specialized details of security arrangements or investigations –
Section 24-6-402(4)(d), C.R.S.
5. For the purpose of determining positions relative to matters that may be subject
to negotiations, developing strategy for negotiations, and/or instructing
negotiators – Section 24-6-402(4)(e), C.R.S.
6. For discussion of a personnel matter – Section 24-6-402(4)(f), C.R.S. and not
involving: any specific employees who have requested discussion of the matter
in open session; any member of the Town Board; the appointment of any person
to fill an office of the Town Board; or personnel policies that do not require
discussion of matters personal to particular employees.
7. For consideration of any documents protected by the mandatory non-disclosure
provision of the Colorado Open Records Act – Section 24-6-402(4)(g), C.R.S.
2
Electronic Recording.
A record of the actual contents of the discussion during an executive session shall be
made by electronic recording. If electronic recording equipment is not available or
malfunctions, written minutes of the executive session shall be taken and kept by the
Town Clerk, if present, or if not present, by the Mayor.
The electronic recording or minutes, if any, of the executive session must state the
specific statutory provision authorizing the executive session. The electronic recording
or minutes, if any, of the executive session shall be kept by the Town Clerk unless the
Town Clerk was the subject of the executive session or did not participate in the
executive session, in which event, the record of the executive session shall be
maintained by the Mayor. If written minutes of the executive session are kept, the
Mayor shall attest in writing that the written minutes substantially reflect the substance
of the discussion during the executive session and such minutes shall be approved by
the Board at a subsequent executive session.
If, in the opinion of the attorney who is representing the Board, and who is
present at the executive session, “all or a portion” of the discussion constitutes
attorney-client privileged communications:
1. No record shall be kept of this part of the discussion.
2. If written minutes are taken, the minutes shall contain a signed statement from
the attorney attesting that the unrecorded portion of the executive session
constituted, in the attorney’s opinion, privileged attorney-client communications.
The minutes must also include a signed statement from the Mayor attesting that
the discussion in the unrecorded portion of the session was confined to the topic
or topics for which the executive session is authorized pursuant to the Open
Meetings Law.
Executive Session Motion Format.
Section 24-6-402(4) of the Colorado Revised Statutes requires the specific citation of
the statutory provision authorizing the executive session.
THEREFORE, I MOVE TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION:
_ X For a conference with the Town Attorney for the purpose of receiving legal advice
on specific legal questions under C.R.S. Section 24-6-402(4)(b) – The Loop.
_ For the purpose of determining positions relative to matters that may be subject
to negotiations, developing strategy for negotiations, and/or instructing
negotiators under C.R.S. Section 24-6-402(4)(e).
____ To discuss the purchase, acquisition, lease, transfer, or sale of real, personal, or
other property interest under C.R.S. Section 24-6-402(4)(a).
3
_ _ For discussion of a personnel matter – Section 24-6-402(4)(f), C.R.S. and not
involving: any specific employees who have requested discussion of the matter
in open session; any member of the Town Board (or body); the appointment of
any person to fill an office of the Town Board (or body); or personnel policies that
do not require discussion of matters personal to particular employees.
____ For discussion of a matter required to be kept confidential by the following federal
or state law, rule or regulation: under C.R.S. Section 24-
6-402(4)(c).
_ _ For discussion of specialized details of security arrangements under C.R.S.
Section 24-6-402(4)(d).
____ For consideration of documents protected by the mandatory nondisclosure
provisions of the Open Records Act under C.R.S. Section 24-6-402(4)(g).
AND THE FOLLOWING ADDITIONAL DETAILS ARE PROVIDED FOR
IDENTIFICATION PURPOSES (The Mayor may ask the Town Attorney to provide the
details): .
The Motion must be adopted by the affirmative vote of two-thirds (2/3) of the quorum
present.
Retention of Electronic Recording or Minutes.
Pursuant to Section 24-6-402(2)(d.5)(II)(E) C.R.S., the Town Clerk shall retain the
electronic recording or minutes for ninety (90) days. Following the ninety (90) day
period, the recording or the minutes shall be destroyed unless during the ninety (90) day
period a request for inspection of the record has been made pursuant to Section 24-72-
204(5.5) C.R.S.
If written minutes are taken for an executive session, the minutes shall be approved
and/or amended at the next executive session of the Town Board. In the event that the
next executive session occurs more than ninety (90) days after the executive session,
the minutes shall be maintained until they are approved and/or amended at the next
executive session and then immediately destroyed.
4
ANNOUNCEMENT
ANNOUNCEMENT SHALL BE MADE BY THE MAYOR AT THE BEGINNING OF THE
EXECUTIVE SESSION. MAKE SURE THE ELECTRONIC RECORDER IS TURNED
ON; DO NOT TURN IT OFF DURING THE EXECUTIVE SESSION UNLESS SO
ADVISED BY THE TOWN ATTORNEY.
It is ____Tuesday, July 28, 2014___, and the time is (state time)_.
For the Record, I am ___Bill Pinkham _________________, the Mayor (or Mayor Pro
Tem) of the Board of Trustees. As required by the Open Meetings Law, the executive
session under C.R.S. Section 24-6-402(4)(b) a conference with the Town Attorney for
the purpose of receiving legal advice on specific legal questions on the Loop, is not
being electronically recorded.
Also present at this executive session are the following person(s):__ Mayor Pro Tem
Koenig, Trustees John Ericson, Bob Holcomb, Ward Nelson, Ron Norris, and John
Phipps. (Also include any others who will be present for the executive session in this
announcement.)
This is an executive session for the following:
For a conference with the Town Attorney for the purpose of receiving legal advice
on specific legal questions under C.R.S. Section 24-6-402(4)(b) – The Loop.
I caution each participant to confine all discussion to the stated purpose of the executive
session, and that no formal action may occur in the executive session.
If at any point in the executive session any participant believes that the discussion is
outside of the proper scope of the executive session, please interrupt the discussion
and make an objection.
The close of the executive session is in the Mayor’s discretion and does not require a
motion for adjournment of the executive session.
The Mayor shall close the executive session by stating the time and return to the open
meeting.
After the return to the open session, the Mayor shall state that the Town Board is in
open session and whether or not any formal action and/or discussion shall be taken by
the Town Board.