“Why does the Town keep
approving new Condo developments?”
By Jacquie Halburnt
August 31, 2007
Part I in a Series of II
This is a question
frequently asked by concerned residents and visitors
these days as there seems to be no slowing in the pace
of construction of multi-unit vacation homes and
residences that are sold as condominium ownership known
as “condos”.
The answer to this question
can be found in the real-estate market place. Resort
communities across the country are facing a surge of
affluent baby boomers approaching retirement and looking
for second homes so they can spend more time at their
favorite vacation destinations. Many buyers are
planning to eventually retire part-time or full-time in
these vacation condos.
This demand for condominium
ownership, which is relatively new to Estes Park,
creates an opportunity for land owners to profit if
their land is zoned for multi-family development. Every
community provides for multi-family housing (condos)
with the designation of a Multi-Family zoning district
where that is an allowed use. Estes Park is no
exception. Large areas of the Estes Valley have been
zoned for this type of development since the inception
of zoning regulations in the 1950’s. Often this land
sits vacant until the demand reaches a level that
motivates a developer to buy it and build the units.
The geographic extent and allowable densities of this
zoning was substantially reduced when the entire valley
was rezoned in 2000. The Estes Valley Development Code
(EVDC) regulates this type of development by setting a
maximum density of eight units per acre. The EVDC also
provides for building setbacks and height limits and
other standards that serve to moderate the negative
impacts of development on neighboring property. It is
important to note that the land owner and developer have
a legally protected right to develop the land in
conformance with the zoning regulations. The Estes
Valley Planning Commission cannot arbitrarily deny the
request of a developer to build condos if the proposed
development is found to conform to the applicable land
use regulations of the zoning district, even though the
neighbors find the development to be objectionable.
“So who’s responsible for
these regulations?”
The Town Board and the
County Commissioners are ultimately responsible to the
residents of the Estes Valley to adopt and enforce the
land-use regulations of the Estes Valley Development
Code. This land-use code can be revised by the elected
Trustees and County Commissioners. Residents and land
owners of the Estes Valley are encouraged to write or
talk to their elected representatives about these
regulations if they have concerns about the current
code.
Coming next week Part II:
“But doesn’t the Town profit from condo development?”
###
Land Use Decisions in
the Estes Valley
By Randy Repola
January 24, 2007
Land use is a sensitive
issue in nearly every community; and Estes Park is no
exception. Much interest has been expressed in letters
to local elected officials (and newspaper editors)
regarding a proposal to develop land adjacent to the
Lakeshore Lodge near Lake Estes. The development plan
application from the property owners is not yet final;
therefore, it has not been set for a hearing before the
Estes Valley Planning Commission. But it is a good
primer for a discussion about land use and how the code
is applied.
The Estes Valley
Development Code governs land use within the Estes
Valley. The Estes Valley Planning Commission is the
decision-making body for development plans. Rezonings,
plats and condominium (a form of ownership not a
specific use or building type, and considered
subdivision plats) maps start with Planning Commission
review but ultimately require Town Board or County Board
approval. A Planning Commission decision can be appealed
to the Town Board of Trustees or Larimer County Board of
County Commissioners (depending on the location of the
property involved).
The Town’s Community
Development Department reviews land use proposals for
compliance with the code. Approval or denial of any
project is based solely on the code. The code attempts
to strike a balance between the rights of the property
owner and the interests of the neighborhood. Prior to
Planning Commission meetings, staff provides a written
report to the Commissioners detailing how a project
either does or does not fall within code requirements.
The report is the result of a thorough review of
submitted documents and meetings with the property owner
and frequently their representatives (engineers,
builders, etc.), and includes review by several agencies
such as the Corps of Engineers, Colorado Division of
Wildlife, Estes Valley Recreation and Park District,
Colorado Department of Transportation, and various
utility providers. Projects that fit the letter and
intent of the code are recommended for approval while
those that do not are recommended for denial, or
approval with conditions that would bring it into
compliance. Ultimately, any land use action (approval
or denial) taken by Town Trustees or County
Commissioners must be based upon the development code
and not the popularity (or lack thereof) of a given
project. To do otherwise potentially violates the
rights of the property owner.
The Community
Development Department lists development proposals under
consideration on its website at
http://www.estesnet.com/ComDev/CurrentRequests.aspx.
The details of projects listed on the website are those
which have been submitted by the owner/developer and do
not necessarily reflect what will be approved. The
Planning Commission provides opportunities for
interested parties to be heard at its regular meetings;
only then does the Commission make a decision or
recommendation to the Town Board or County Commissioners
regarding a project or plan.
###
Town’s Actions on Fire
District…the Corrections
By Mayor John Baudek and Randy
Repola
October 18, 2006
In an October 2, news release
the committee opposed to the proposed fire district made
many claims about the Town and the district. They claim
that laws have been broken, that service cannot be
discontinued and that the cost to serve the outlying areas
is less than in town. In some instances their claims are
totally inaccurate; and assertions that the law has been
violated are serious and deserve a response.
No law prohibits the Town Board
from taking a position, pro or con, on a ballot issue.
Furthermore, the Town paid the costs associated with the
2004 fire district election as it has with this one. In
both instances, our conduct has been legal and done openly.
We have shared this information with the opposition
committee. The only editorial written by the town
administrator was on the plight of our fire department
budget. It can be viewed on the Town’s website at
http://www.estesnet.com/Administration/WhatsNew/muni-memo.aspx.
This claim is simply without merit and inappropriate.
The Town’s Fire Department has
served areas outside its limits under various agreements
with Larimer County. The current Intergovernmental
Agreement (“IGA”) was signed in 1992. This IGA can be
terminated with notice at any time by either the County or
the Town. The committee asserts that there is “ample
Colorado case law that shows that a Town cannot stop
providing services such as fire protection…” We can find no
such cases. It is important to point out that the Town
Board of Trustees has taken no steps to discontinue service
outside the area. Without a district, areas outside town
will eventually face reductions in service, but we are not
going to let a neighbor’s house burn. We have provided
coverage outside the Town borders for decades with and
without formal agreements and have always heeded the call
for help.
The opposition committee claims
that the cost to serve the area outside town is $90K. Total
fire department expenditures in 2005 were about $780K. Over
the past 4 years calls have been nearly evenly split between
in-town and out (51% and 49% respectively). And now, we are
faced with replacing a 31 year old wild land fire engine at
an estimated cost of $265K; this piece of equipment is not
necessary in Town. No matter how you allocate the cost, we
cannot serve the outlying area for only $90K per year.
Finally, the opposition
committee points to the valley-wide planning commission as
an example of how service should be provided. We couldn’t
agree more. The current arrangement for planning is under
an IGA with Larimer County. The County pays the Town an
annual sum to offset the costs of one planner and then all
fees charged for services outside town limits are paid
directly to the Town. This is a much more fiscally sound
approach to sharing service costs.
###
Fire
Department and Fire District: A Necessary Partnership
By Mayor John Baudek
October 4, 2006
The Estes Park Volunteer Fire
Department (EPVFD) will turn 100 next year. As the town and
valley have grown over this period of time so have the needs and
cost of the department. In 2005 fire department expenses were
$780,105. As these expenses increase more of the town’s general
funds are required to fund the department.
If this trend continues we will
have to cut other municipal services, increase taxes to town
residents and businesses or find another source of revenue. The
town presently helps to fund various things that are for the
entire valley. We provide over $400,000 in community grants in
addition to funding the senior center, museum, library district,
valley-wide trail system and a recent one-time contribution to
the school district to aid the pool. And in 2007 we are faced
with replacing a $265,000 wildland fire truck that is for use
outside town limits.
Looking over multiple years,
sales tax revenues (the largest portion of town revenue) are not
increasing fast enough to support all town functions; this is
not good news for future service levels. As a board we do not
want to reduce any community functions but we have to look at
the fire department, which is one of the fastest growing
expenditures, along with the others. The EPVFD provides service
to the community outside town limits based upon a mutual aid
agreement signed with Larimer County in 1992. It is interesting
to note that of the donations to the fire department this year
can be tracked by location (about 97%), 56% came from in-town
residents and 44% from out-of- town residents.
Without increased participation
by valley residents to help support their fire department, the
town will have to re-evaluate the level of fire service that we
can provide outside town limits. It may not happen next year,
but it will have to be considered. Fort Collins predicts a six
million dollar short fall in their 2007 budget and is having to
look at reducing the budget for certain services; none of them
pleasant.
When year after year about
fifty percent of the calls that the fire department responds to
are outside of the town limits and some of the fire equipment
purchased is specifically to service the out of town, more rural
areas, it is not, from my perspective, unreasonable to ask the
Estes Valley residents and businesses to help with the cost of
fire services to the entire valley.
###
The
Past, Present and Future of the Estes Park Fire Department
By Randy
Repola
Town Administrator
September 20, 2006
Fire
department services in the Estes Park area are provided via a
partnership between the Town of Estes Park and the Estes Park
Volunteer Fire Department, Inc. (EPVFD), a private, non-profit
corporation. The volunteer organization was created in 1907 (10
years prior to the incorporation of the Town). Demand for
services from the department has evolved from extinguishing
fires to include emergency medical services, water rescue,
hazardous materials response and fire prevention and
mitigation. Likewise, the Town has taken on more responsibility
over the years as the needs of the department have changed.
In 2005,
total fire department expenses were $780,105. This amount
represents expenditures by the Town and volunteer department to
operate and equip the department as well as a $19,000 payment
into a fund to replace vehicles in the future. In 2005 the
Town’s fire department expense was $496,013 (63% of the total
department budget). The remainder came from grants and
fundraisers managed by the members of the volunteer
organization. Herein lies the problem: giving to the EPVFD has
steadily declined over the last several years, while the demands
placed upon the volunteers in the areas of training and response
to calls have increased.
EPVFD
fundraisers have paid for services and equipment ranging from
training to trucks. In 1998, donations to the EPVFD totaled
$60,757; in 2005 donations amounted to $35,803. Over that same
period, the Town’s share of the expenses have climbed from
approximately $266,000 to $496,013. Expenses include personnel
expenses for a full time chief and part time secretary, vehicle
equipment and maintenance, fuel, utilities, training, protective
gear, etc. In addition, the town pays for workers compensation
insurance and a small pension for the roughly 40 volunteers.
The community benefits from a well-run volunteer department, but
the present service level is not sustainable under current
trends in expenses and charitable giving. There will come a day
when the Town will have to re-evaluate its ability to fund
service to the areas outside town limits. That is not a
decision that we look forward to considering.
At the
September 26th regular meeting of the Town Board of Trustees, a
presentation will be made on the proposed fire district. We
encourage area residents to attend, or tune in to become more
familiar with the issues surrounding the future of fire
department services in the Estes Valley.
