The map of the Town's incorporated and unincorporated areas shows a ragged boundary with many enclaves and peninsulas. Residents who live inside the Town's boundaries can vote for the Town Board members. People who live in unincorporated Estes Park do not get to vote in Town elections.
“I do think we should have a policy on annexation, just for consistency and predictability for the residents, for landowners, and for the county,” said Town of Estes Park Trustee Frank Lancaster during last night’s two-hour study session that preceded the Town Board meeting.
The Town’s community development director Steve Careccia explained the ragged boundary of the Town of Estes Park was formed by annexations that required the property had at least one-sixth of its boundary adjacent to the Town boundary.
Over the years, additional requirements have been put on annexations but no formal policy other than the one-sixth boundary rule, which is dictated by state statute, has been adopted by the Town Board.
Advantages to property being annexed by the Town would include infrastructure support, Town services such as road maintenance, and more. Disadvantages include additional mill levies on property included in the Town boundary and additional regulatory requirements. Annexed properties have, in the past, been required to upgrade infrastructure to Town standards before being approved.
“If we do a policy, we probably need to address enclaves and peninsulas,” Careccia said. “How would we want to address those in the future?” These unincorporated neighborhoods are surrounded or adjacent to Town of Estes Park land, such as Carriage Hills. Town staff were directed to investigate and prepare a draft Town annexation policy for board review.
Town Clerk Jackie Williamson presented on hosted, short-term rentals. This category is similar to the bed and breakfast licensure that was passed by the board in August of this year but does not include the “breakfast” portion.
The current definition of a vacation home within Town limits prohibits the owner from living on-site while their property is being rented, so one option – which Williamson said would be the easiest to enforce – would be to remove the one sentence that creates the prohibition within the language of the current vacation rental homes licensure.
Another option would be to create a separate category for hosted, short-term rentals, allowing homeowners or their representatives to rent out a room in their home to visitors. Whether such a category would be subject to the current vacation home rental cap of 322 or be subject to the linkage fee would need to be discussed.
A third option would be to do nothing.
After much discussion by the board members, Town staff was asked to favor the simplest approach and to be involving the public in the discussion.
The Board asked Reuben Bergsten, the Town’s utility director, to explain why properties located outside the Town limits were paying a higher water rate as a result, but electric rates were consistent throughout the Power & Communications service area, reaching far beyond Town limits.
Bergsten referred to a “confidential letter” that was forwarded to the Board that essentially included a court case precedent for higher water rates outside Town limits, but to raise electric rates just because the customer is outside of Town limits would be a complicated process that would involve the Public Utilities Commission and a burden on the Town to prove the higher rates are justified.
“It would involve an added administrative burden to address just 19% of the Town’s electric customers,” Bergsten added.
Town Board Study Sessions are an opportunity for the elected board members to explore subjects of interest before bringing action items to the regular Board meetings. Whether public comments will be heard during such a meeting is up to the discretion of the Board of Trustees.
Barb Boyer Buck is the senior public affairs and environment writer at the Estes Valley Voice. She has a long history as a reporter, editor, and playwright in the Estes Valley and is also the creative...
More by Barb Boyer Buck
Annexation, STRs, and electric rates discussed at Town Board study session
“I do think we should have a policy on annexation, just for consistency and predictability for the residents, for landowners, and for the county,” said Town of Estes Park Trustee Frank Lancaster during last night’s two-hour study session that preceded the Town Board meeting.
The Town’s community development director Steve Careccia explained the ragged boundary of the Town of Estes Park was formed by annexations that required the property had at least one-sixth of its boundary adjacent to the Town boundary.
Over the years, additional requirements have been put on annexations but no formal policy other than the one-sixth boundary rule, which is dictated by state statute, has been adopted by the Town Board.
Advantages to property being annexed by the Town would include infrastructure support, Town services such as road maintenance, and more. Disadvantages include additional mill levies on property included in the Town boundary and additional regulatory requirements. Annexed properties have, in the past, been required to upgrade infrastructure to Town standards before being approved.
“If we do a policy, we probably need to address enclaves and peninsulas,” Careccia said. “How would we want to address those in the future?” These unincorporated neighborhoods are surrounded or adjacent to Town of Estes Park land, such as Carriage Hills. Town staff were directed to investigate and prepare a draft Town annexation policy for board review.
Town Clerk Jackie Williamson presented on hosted, short-term rentals. This category is similar to the bed and breakfast licensure that was passed by the board in August of this year but does not include the “breakfast” portion.
The current definition of a vacation home within Town limits prohibits the owner from living on-site while their property is being rented, so one option – which Williamson said would be the easiest to enforce – would be to remove the one sentence that creates the prohibition within the language of the current vacation rental homes licensure.
Another option would be to create a separate category for hosted, short-term rentals, allowing homeowners or their representatives to rent out a room in their home to visitors. Whether such a category would be subject to the current vacation home rental cap of 322 or be subject to the linkage fee would need to be discussed.
A third option would be to do nothing.
After much discussion by the board members, Town staff was asked to favor the simplest approach and to be involving the public in the discussion.
The Board asked Reuben Bergsten, the Town’s utility director, to explain why properties located outside the Town limits were paying a higher water rate as a result, but electric rates were consistent throughout the Power & Communications service area, reaching far beyond Town limits.
Bergsten referred to a “confidential letter” that was forwarded to the Board that essentially included a court case precedent for higher water rates outside Town limits, but to raise electric rates just because the customer is outside of Town limits would be a complicated process that would involve the Public Utilities Commission and a burden on the Town to prove the higher rates are justified.
“It would involve an added administrative burden to address just 19% of the Town’s electric customers,” Bergsten added.
Town Board Study Sessions are an opportunity for the elected board members to explore subjects of interest before bringing action items to the regular Board meetings. Whether public comments will be heard during such a meeting is up to the discretion of the Board of Trustees.
Barb Boyer BuckSenior Public Affairs and Environment Writer
Barb Boyer Buck is the senior public affairs and environment writer at the Estes Valley Voice. She has a long history as a reporter, editor, and playwright in the Estes Valley and is also the creative... More by Barb Boyer Buck