Consensus surrounding the thorny subjects of zoning and housing was not reached when the Estes Park Planning Commission and Town Board members met last week, but there were no contentious discussions either.
Coming to common ground on how to move forward when dealing with the subjects was the mission of the work sessions. The two boards plan to meet quarterly.
Zoning and definitions for varieties of housing in the community consumed the two-hour meeting. Town staff received requests to provide additional information to the boards for their next session, which may occur in May.
In discussing rezoning, the board balked at language in the current development code requiring that rezoning requests be compatible and consistent with existing growth and development patterns in the Estes Valley in order to be approved.
“It makes sense to me to have that with compatibility with the neighborhood,” said Marie Cenac, town trustee, but she indicated compatibility with the entire Estes Valley was not appropriate.
Richard Mulhern, a Planning Commission member, reminded those at the work session that they needed to be mindful of the process used to develop the current development code.
“We need to have a way of showing how much work went into the comprehensive plan. One meeting had 348 people at 17 tables,” he said.
“I suggest not waiting,” said Mayor Gary Hall.
Frank Lancaster, both a Town Trustee and liaison to the Planning Commission, was clear in his opinion that the group should not wait to address the issue and, after hearing all the other speak, said he believed the group was in general agreement that conditions surrounding rezoning should be considered soon.
Trustee Bill Brown recommended researching the language used by other communities. Planning staff will investigate alternatives.
Housing consumed nearly as much time in the conversation as annexation and rezoning, which became combined into one subject.
The boards agreed they wanted more information about units already in the marketplace: how many units there are; how many are vacant; how many have been leased; and other pertinent information such as rental prices; types of restrictions that may be in place on housing units; and other details, such as demographics of the Estes Park workforce.
In addition to housing type definitions, the two boards touched on the potential need to codify definitions for density bonuses attached to specific types of housing and how that can incentivize developers to provide various types of housing.
When and how incentives for providing subsidized housing became a philosophical question that some members of the group thought should be addressed. It was agreed that the discussion should have included input from Scott Moulton, executive director of the Estes Park Housing Authority.
Further details surrounding the definitions of different types of housing conflicted with approved definitions used by the EPHA. Moulton had been in attendance, but because the meeting was conducted as a work session, he was not allowed to speak.
All agreed that Moulton would be invited to the next meeting of the group as an official attendee, so similar information would be factual and address information pertinent to existing conditions.