Councilagenda

CITY OF STEAMBOAT SPRINGS
AGENDA
Regular Meeting NO. 2015-11
Tuesday, June 02, 2015
5:00 PM
MEETING LOCATION: Citizens’ Meeting Room, Centennial Hall;
124 10th Street, Steamboat Springs, CO
MEETING PROCEDURE: Comments from the Public are welcome at two different
times during the course of the meeting: 1) Comments no longer than three (3) minutes
on items not scheduled on the Agenda will be heard under Public Comment; and 2)
Comments no longer than three (3) minutes on all scheduled public hearing items will
be heard following the presentation by Staff or the Petitioner. Please wait until you are
recognized by the Council President.
With the exception of subjects brought up during Public Comment, on which no action
will be taken or a decision made, the City Council may take action on, and may make a
decision regarding, ANY item referred to in this agenda, including, without limitation, any
item referenced for “review”, “update”, “report”, or “discussion”. It is City Council’s goal
to adjourn all meetings by 10:00 p.m.
PUBLIC COMMENT: Public Comment will be provided as close to 7 p.m. as

possible (but not earlier), or at the end of the meeting (whichever comes first).
CITY COUNCIL WILL MAKE NO DECISION NOR TAKE ACTION, EXCEPT TO DIRECT THE CITY
MANAGER. THOSE ADDRESSING CITY COUNCIL ARE REQUESTED TO IDENTIFY THEMSELVES
BY NAME AND ADDRESS. ALL COMMENTS SHALL NOT EXCEED THREE MINUTES.
ROLL CALL (5:00 PM)
Steamboat Springs Redevelopment Authority Meeting – After roll call, the City Council will
adjourn and reconvene in their capacity as the Steamboat Springs Redevelopment Authority and
follow the attached Redevelopment Authority agenda.
At the conclusion of the Steamboat Springs Redevelopment Authority Meeting, the City Council
will reconvene as the Steamboat Springs City Council and proceed with the following agenda:
PROCLAMATIONS:
1. A proclamation recognizing June as Bike Month in Steamboat

Springs, Colorado. (DelliQuadri)
COMMUNITY REPORTS/CITY COUNCIL DISCUSSION TOPIC:
2. Parks and Recreation Commission Interviews.
3. Planning Commission Interviews.
4. School Site Impacts. (Anderson/Gibbs)
5. West End Townhomes Release of Deed Restrictions. (Gibbs)
6. Status of Emerald Park, Historical Intentions, Current Uses and

Current Uses of the Botanic Park. (Overstreet)
7. USAPCC Update from the Host Committee. (Weber)
CONSENT CALENDAR: MOTIONS, RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES FIRST

READINGS
ITEMS ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR GENERALLY REQUIRE LITTLE COUNCIL

DELIBERATION AND MAY BE APPROVED WITH A SINGLE MOTION. ANY MEMBER OF THE
COUNCIL OR THE PUBLIC MAY WITHDRAW ANY ITEM FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR
FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION AT ANY TIME PRIOR TO APPROVAL.
8. RESOLUTION: A resolution approving the Second Amendment to the

Air Program Contribution Agreement (2010-2015) between the LMD
and SSRC. (Weber)
9. RESOLUTION: A resolution approving the 2015 Summer Air Program

agreement dated April 1, 2015 by and between the Steamboat Springs
Local Marketing District and Steamboat Ski & Resort Corporation.
(Weber)
10. RESOLUTION: A resolution amending Resolution No. 2015-12, relating

to the “City of Steamboat Springs Local Improvement District Number
12, Snapdragon Way”; incorporating omitted exhibits; and postponing
the hearing date. (Anderson/Foote)
11. RESOLUTION: Ballot language to exempt the City from Senate Bill
152. (Small)
Staff is requesting this item be postponed until July 7, 2015.
12. FIRST READING OF ORDINANCE: An ordinance amending noise

pollution regulations to exempt City street sweeping operations for a
period of ninety days. (Anderson)
PUBLIC HEARING: ORDINANCE SECOND READINGS
THE CITY COUNCIL PRESIDENT OR PRESIDENT PRO-TEM WILL READ EACH ORDINANCE
TITLE INTO THE RECORD. PUBLIC COMMENT WILL BE PROVIDED FOR EVERY
ORDINANCE.
There are no items scheduled for this portion of the agenda.
PUBLIC COMMENT: PUBLIC COMMENT WILL BE PROVIDED AT 7 P.M., OR AT

THE END OF THE MEETING, (WHICHEVER COMES FIRST).
CITY COUNCIL WILL MAKE NO DECISION NOR TAKE ACTION, EXCEPT TO DIRECT THE
CITY MANAGER. THOSE ADDRESSING CITY COUNCIL ARE REQUESTED TO IDENTIFY
THEMSELVES BY NAME AND ADDRESS. ALL COMMENTS SHALL NOT EXCEED THREE
MINUTES.
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION REPORT
PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT
CONSENT CALENDAR - PLANNING COMMISSION REFERRALS:
ITEMS ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR GENERALLY REQUIRE LITTLE OR NO COUNCIL

DELIBERATION AND MAY BE APPROVED WITH A SINGLE MOTION. A CITY COUNCIL
MEMBER MAY REQUEST AN ITEM(S) BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR FOR
FURTHER DISCUSSION. ALL ORDINANCES APPROVED BY CONSENT SHALL BE READ
INTO THE RECORD BY TITLE.
13. PROJECT: West End Plaza, ACM Subdivision, Parcel 3 (DP-15-06)

PETITION: Conditional Use to allow a temporary building for a granite
business conducting retail sales and granite processing on the
property prior to and while a permanent building is under construction
on the site.
LOCATION: Highway 40 adjacent to Napa Auto Parts.
APPLICANT: Bob Childers/Stacey Bumgarner, 846-3237
PLANNING COMMISSION VOTE: Approved 7/0 on May 14, 2015.
(Stauffer)
14. PROJECT: Original Town of SS, B31, L7-12 & L11-12 S2, Lot 10, Block
32, YVEA Adaptive Re-Use (FDP-15-01)
PETITION: A Final Development Plan for a building expansion to add
three dwelling units, a 6 space parking garage, a parking lot at the
corner of 9th and Yampa Streets, and associated improvements.
LOCATION: 32 10th Street
APPLICANT: Blue Sage Ventures, C/O Stephen Shelesky
PLANNING COMMISSION VOTE: Approved 7/0 on May 14, 2015.
(Keenan)
PUBLIC HEARING – PLANNING COMMISSION REFERRALS
PUBLIC HEARING FORMAT:
• Presentation by the Petitioner (estimated at 15 minutes). Petitioner to state name and

residence address/location.
• Presentation by the Opposition. Same guidelines as above.
• Public Comment by individuals (not to exceed 3 minutes). Individuals to state name and
residence address/location.
• City staff to provide a response.
15. APPEAL: VHR-15-03.

PETITION: Appeal of administrative decision approving an application
for a vacation home rental at 1415 Delta Queen Court. MIS-15-01 and
MIS-15-02 consolidated appeal.
LOCATION: 1415 Delta Queen Court, Steamboat Springs, CO.
APPELLANTS: Frank and Jean Ariano and Mr. Gerritt Pon.
PLANNING COMMISSION VOTE: Denied on May 1, 2015; 6-1.
(Wheeler)
REPORTS
16. City Council
17. Reports
a. Agenda Review (Franklin)
1. Regular Meeting June 16, 2015.
2. Regular Meeting July 7, 2015.
18. Staff Reports

a. City Attorney’s Update/Report. (Lettunich)
b. City Manager’s Report: Ongoing Projects. (Hinsvark)
OLD BUSINESS
19. Minutes (Franklin)
a. Regular Meeting 2015-08, April 28, 2015.
ADJOURNMENT
BY: JULIE FRANKLIN, CMC

CITY CLERK
AGENDA ITEM #1.
CITY COUNCIL COMMUNICATION FORM
FROM: Winnie DelliQuadri, Asst to the City Mgr
THROUGH: Deb Hinsvark, City Manager
DATE: June 2, 2015
ITEM: Bike Month Proclamation
FORM OF MOTION: A proclamation recognizing June as bike month in

Steamboat Springs, Colorado.
___ DIRECTION
___ INFORMATION
___ ORDINANCE
___ MOTION
___ RESOLUTION
X PROCLAMATION
I. REQUEST/ISSUE & BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
In Colorado, June is recognized as Bike Month. The City is joining with Routt
County Riders, Bike Town USA, Safe Routes to Schools, the 2A Trail Committee
and other organizations across the state to promote bicycling and bicycle safety
during the month of June 2015.
II. ALTERNATIVES:
Council may always choose to not participate in bike month.
III. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:

To approve and present the proclamation recognizing June as bike month in
Steamboat Springs, Colorado.
IV. FISCAL IMPACTS:
None identified.
V. LEGAL ISSUES:
None identified.
VI. CONFLICTS OR ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES:
None identified.
A PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING JUNE AS BIKE MONTH IN STEAMBOAT SPRINGS, COLORADO.
Whereas, the bicycle is a viable and environmentally sound form of transportation and an excellent form of recreation; and
Whereas, the Steamboat Springs’ trail system attracts thousands of bicyclists each year, providing economic, health, and scenic
benefits to residents and visitors; and
Whereas, Steamboat Springs residents and visitors experience the joys of bicycling during the month of June through educational
programs, races, commuting events, trail work days, helmet promotion, charity events, or just getting out and going for a ride; and
Whereas, creating bicycle-friendly communities has been shown to improve citizens' health, well-being, and quality of life, to boost
community spirit, to improve traffic safety, and to reduce pollution and congestion; and
Whereas, Routt County Riders, Bike Town USA, Safe Routes to Schools, the City of Steamboat Springs and other organizations
across the state will promote bicycling and bicycle safety during the month of June 2015:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED, by the city council of the City of Steamboat Springs that the month of June be
recognized as Bike Month and that residents and visitors are encouraged to participate in the events planned and to share the road
safely with bicyclists.
ADOPTED THIS 2nd day of June, 2015
Attest:
_____________________________ _________________________________
Julie Franklin, CMC Bart Kounovsky
City Clerk Steamboat Springs City Council President
AGENDA ITEM #2
Parks & Recreation Committee Interviews
June 2nd-5:10 pm
6 applicants for 3 Parks n Recreation openings
5:10- Kady Watson
5:15- Debbie Grooman
5:20- Holly Weik
5:25- Chrissy Lynch
5:30- Julie Alkema
Helen Brown is out of town.

RECEIVED
City of Steamboat Springs APR 1 3 2015
APPLICATION FOR BOARDS/COMMITTEES/COMMISSIONS
Please type or print with black ink. If you have questions or need more
information, contact Julie Franklin, City Clerk at 871-8248. Return completed
application to City Clerk's Office. City Hal!. 137 10th Street. Post Office Box
775088, Steamboat Snrincis. CO 80477.
BOARD/COMMISSION APPLYING FOR: %ir^? ^V^\ I^Cl^^h^1
NAME: _YÂ\^__ \\f^7^Y^
RESIDENCE ADDRESS: ZSo J^.nes \\. ^4^-7-

MAILING ADDRESS: ÂrA
HOME PHONE: 1W_^^-M^2- WORK PHONE: ^ ID - h^^'IIW^
FAX: (^10' %/^ ^2^^ E-MAIL ADDRESS: \^^\\f ^VÔ'^^^v^ I - Q>/^
HOW LONG HAVE YOU BEEN A RESIDENT OF STEAMBOAT SPRINGS?!^ ^l(^
CURRENT OCCUPATION/EMPLOYER:
îA^ve. \^M^ U^^^' ^ N^wv^, 17^'i^^^-
(
<^/i/vitY plV&c^-tTY- (^^"WLL-K/1^ < PKîn(?|
PREVIOUS WORK EXPERIENCE:
fAWÂ y,^\\^ MÛ 05-1 6f^lA/^c/l :

y\Yec\rr \k Glu^V^ \ Cowâ-^-
APPLICABLE COMMUNITY ACTIVITIES/VOLUNTEER WORK:
"7 ê^-^-.^ ^ '^Vv^6- â^'A o.t- 'pivef/bY^-
^\lî^ ^ ^^^ -w^^\.

"7 V[^M^v \\vY\ô^ to-V'4
•7 ^W^VN/A •' "^^Mb-^ o.^ ^QvA ^

^vî \ Yt^rC ^'v^L ^V^
•7Â^Co' iWÛ. ,^^^^ ^^^^.l^W^'.
IC.MA\^ Y\A^^^ ' y\v\^
WHAT, IN YOUR OPINION, ARE THE THREE MOST PRESSING ISSUES
FACING THE CITY OF STEAMBOAT SPRINGS RELATIVE TO THE
BOARD/COMMISSION FOR WHICH YOU ARE APPLYING?
> MV^^^ '^^^ ô^&p'^ ^ ûsb-'in

{\ CA/\^\^CL ^ C\ U10 ^ ^ ;/ fW] ^>1^W^^ ^.
> V[^y^.\~ii\[ ^ 617t?(;a.-)î4 ^^ ?•(' i^b^S •h^
Viê ^TbvvvL v,S/A. ^ \0v\^\^ V^V)Vf\^ f |/'bw^<>6(^.
"7 ^p.}VL^'VZ( 1^1 ^ 'fV-;H($ ^ UvU/l/t^ l^'^Ht?^-
C\CC-€^ (fW ^C/^ Y?'\Vjt^ CAA^jc>'y- \{oiAl^ '[f-[[U^^,

OTHER COMMENTS:
-J: WISMA ^ W^Co /yi/z. \\Â^ V yftOY •^ \AA I
\^ û\y^ o^ û/l<? Comrî("hx ^ la^
\^r ^ \i.ca,^.
Th(?U/lK. ^rv^ ^ 't'^-
t&/V7l d Ol/Q K^ ^
Please attach any documentation that would enhance your application.
All applications must be turned into City Hall, 137 10th Street,
Attn: City Clerk's Office
}G^ \N^
Signaturev>
^l/i.l 7 ^.Oib
Date
City of Steamboat Springs
APPLICATION FOR BOARDS/COMJVIITTEES/COMMISSIONS
application to City Clerk's Office. City Hall, 137 10th Street. Post Office Box
775088. Steamboat Springs, CO 80477.
BOARD/COMMISSION APPLYING FOR: parks and Recreation
Debbie Grooman
NAME:
RESIDENCE ADDRESS: 22915 Snowbird Trail, Oak Creek, CO. 80467
MAILING ADDRESS: same
HOME PHONE: 970-736-8181 WORK PHONE: 970-875-1652
FAX: _ _. E-MAIL ADDRESS: groomster62@yahoo
HOW LONG HAVE YOU BEEN A RESIDENT OF STEAMBOAT SPRINGS?_L5 yrs
Risk Manager, Yampa Valley Bank
PREVIOUS WORK EXPERIENCE: Banker, teacher, coach, umpire, referee, ran city softball,
adult baseball leagues for 3 years in Laramie, WY., retail
APPLICABLE COMMUNITY ACTIVITIESA/OLUNTEER WORK:

I was a park and rec employee for 5 years in Laramie, WY. In addition to softball, I also managed
the youth and adult basketball programs. I also coordinated and ran weekend softball
tournaments for the city and for Triple Crown.
SPECIAL QUALIFICATIONS APPLICABLE TO THE BOARD/COMMISSION:
I'm passionate about recreation and participation by all ages. In addition to softball and
basketball, I'm also an avid mountain biker, skier, (all types of skiing) and whitewater kayaker. I'm
at the point in life where I want to give back and make it possible for others to be healthy and
active. Steamboat opportunities are amazing and I am looking forward to not only being involved
in my new community, but also to being a volunteer and a part of the planning.
WHY DO YOU WANT TO SERVE ON THE Parks and Rec Board

(Board or commission applying for)
Volunteerism is important to me and to my employer, and this opportunity is right up my alley.

With my vast sports and recreational background, and perhaps a bit of a different perception
being new to town, I think I can bring a lot of enthusiasm and ideas to the commission.
Funding; opportunities for participation for all ages, focusing on youth; and sustainability
OTHER COMMENTS: I would be a good candidate for this position based on my past
experience, love of sports and outdoor recreation, and a passion for
volunteering and being involved in the community in which I work and
play. While I've only resided in Steamboat since October of 2013,I have
worked for the Yampa Valley Bank since 2009. My husband and I have
spent a lot of recreational time in Steamboat, going back to the 1960s.
I'm very happy and proud to now call this beautiful valley my home.
Thank you for considering my application.
All applications must be turned into City Hall, 137 10 Street,

'b^bbi^' ^mwt^w-t/
Signature
5/12/15
Date
nFCEEVED
MAY 2 7 Z015
APPLICATION FOR BOARDS/COMMITTEES/COMMISSIONS
application to City Clerk's Office. City Hall. 137 10th Street. Post Office Box
775088. Steamboat Springs. CO 80477.
BOARD/COMMISSION APPLYING FOR: Parks and Recreation Commission
NAME: Holly Weik
RESIDENCE ADDRESS: _49d_Parkyiew Drive,_S_teamboat Springs CO 80487
MAILING ADDRESS: same as above
HOME PHONE: (612) 968-0022 WORK PHONE:
FAX: _ E-MAIL ADDRESS: groovyakspace@yahoo.com
HOW LONG HAVE YOU BEEN A RESIDENT OF STEAMBOAT SPRINGS?_21 months
CURRENT OCCUPATION/EMPLOYER: Retired US Air Force officer

I was commissioned as a 2d Lieutenant in 1990 and worked as a Space Operations officer in a
variety of locations, including remote overseas stations. I retired from the Air Force in 2010 after
completing a 2-year tour as a deputy group commander in Colorado Springs following a squadron
command assignment where we brought a new space-based sensor system to full operation.
APPLICABLE COWHVIUNITY ACTIVITIES/VOLUNTEERWORK:
i am currently the newest officer on the board of the Longview Park Owners association, as a
member-at-large. My husband and I are active members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter
Day Saints (LDS), and 1 am part of the presidency for the Young Women's organization in our
church, mentoring girls ages 12 to 18 in spiritual development and preparation for their adult
lives. I wil! be supervising them during Girl's Camp in June, when we combine with Young
Women's organizations from alt of Northwest Colorado for a week of outdoors education and
worship. I also served as the Secretary for the Relief Society in the local LDS community, prior
to being asked to assist with the young women. The Relief Society includes all adult women in
the church, and organizes social events, gospel education, individual outreach, and community
service.
I realize any public endeavor requires balancing the available resources against existing
maintenance requirements and desired improvements, just as my Air Force career required me to
balance mission needs against the personnel and equipment t was given to accomplish that
mission. Especially when fielding new equipment and developing training programs, I was forced
to make tough decisions about which items were vital and which were merely "nice to have". I
have also lived in a number of locations with various levels of recreation services and which
approached community needs with different views, from Alaska to Hawaii and California to
Florida, as well as Australia. I feel my wide ranging experiences will provide a broader
perspective when assessing our options and possible solutions.
WHY DO YOU WANT TO SERVE ON THE Parks & Recreation CommissiSn
My husband and I moved to Steamboat Springs in August 2013 after he completed graduate
school and are glad to be back in Colorado! I grew up in Divide, attended the US Air Force
Academy and was able to spend almost half my military career in Colorado. We love the
outdoors and came to Steamboat for the great recreation and sports available year round. 1 want
to be part of where we live, and contribute to the community by representing the residents of
Steamboat Springs and deciding how to best meet their needs and desires, in cooperation with
the Parks and Recreation staff. I was raised in a ruraf area of central Colorado and could only
have dreamed of everything available to us here! We are very impressed by the wide variety of
services and amenities available in Steamboat Springs, and I want to help ensure that the city is
able to continue providing quality recreation for all community members.
1. How to sustain the existing amenities and programs at the current level of excellence, in the
face of reduced funding and increasing demand. 1 think many families have changed their
spending habits as their incomes have been affected, and turned towards city programs for
recreation and entertainment to reduce their own costs. This increases the load on city facilities
and programs, and requires us to assess which items are the most beneficial to the largest
number of users.
2. Planning for future facilities and programs based on the expressed desires of users and
residents, possibly through cutting back on areas which may be historically important but
becoming less relevant as tastes and activities evolve. The development of Yampa Street may
add to the Parks workload significantly and wilt need careful planning and implementation.
3. Determining what the core mission is of Parks and Recreation and ensuring the staff is
structured and funded to accomplish that core mission. This may mean moving some efforts to
other departments which are more appropriate, even if traditionally accomplished by Parks
personnel.
OTHER COMMENTS;
All applications must be turned into City Hall, 137 10th Street,
c •"'"!
Signature
^ 6 fL^ ÔL^
Date ^
City of Steamboat Sprinqs
APPLICATION FOR BClARDS/CQMMITTEES/COMMISSIONS
application to City Cferk's Office, City Hal!, 137 10th Street. Post Office Box
775088, Steamboat SprinQs, CO 80477.
BOARD/COMMISSION APPLYING FOR: /^vks S~ êc^^^ttc^ Cc-.D^f^^D
NAME: Ahî'^y Lynch
RESIDENCE ADDRESS: ^(^_A{^^ ^V7<? Cn' _S-kfHr.^^..f ,(iC ^^
MAILING ADDRESS: " ^(WtJ - ____ _

HOME PHONE: §"7, - ^'1S WORK PHONE: _2^ J ^_/ (1 _
FAX: _ E-MAIL ADDRESS: &1 \^^Wl^^- V-''"

HOW LONG HAVE YOU BEEN A RESIDENT OF STEAMBOAT SPRINGS?^ ^^ '^
fiêntiy 1^1 V^yYU tW/<fy /?.^-'C^/ H^(.^ê^ F.C.
a^ ^ Pr^f-û1^. •< R/i^c/a/ ^^ri/"/-]'^'Ar^-/7r
Pl&a^ ^€c f^5un^^ arfac-^'^'
'APPLICABLE COMMUNITY ACTIVITIESWOLUNTEER WORK:
Nôndl /Vc-f(?ii<L Fvu.^â-ho^ 7âî^^r 2f:/S - pr^^^

/-IK^ ^C^'l ^-^ CÂfty $h C^ch ZCOL'- ZC'O'-}
<^b^, ^,,,J ^^n^-H ^,.-^ î^/^ ^'^1 _^^

fa,^ l^.n.^ C^r-^ ^^.^^ 2W/-^y
v/;
^ ^ c^r^^ ^77q ^4^:y9 ^^^ {A-'^-f- ^^
~^^-^d^^ Lt^^ ^)\A^ r-^-3 y^ A-'^ ?^ '^jOf v^^y^'^-"^
P^y. ^^^d.-^^^-y-p ^\^v J'/^(^^r^r^-ol f .^/ wiwwvi(?W
^//^>W,^d ^.i.î ••\/<,7.7J>>^-^/^ ^/^W^4^ ^ ^ <7^ '^d
v nj - h^ ^ 1^55 r^ i] ^<> ^f/ V i^^r^t-f v ^L/T^W?
^..^-ur^ /i/^vwA^ ^ ^'^^ ^/7^ r/-^^7-?q
o ly.-vi -/ ^ t? /.-$ ^Z^-.L.I/^ ^ .70^ pr;? ^ i.^-t> ^^) ÂA-^ ^f
(JO; Bui/idde UOISSILULUOO jo pjeog)
^/<;5?^n/.T) un^w^-y ^^ng~ 3Hi NO 3Ay3S 011NVM nOA 00 AHAA
>p^y^.^.^ SfP rL// ('LfS^'^^M^. û.fo'>c'-rVM. ^/v^ Auvu^- '^1^^^/^
F^/^ 4^/^^?c/;//^ ^^ V^\^ ^y^-o-y ^7(^7 ^ÔA^ f^^! ^1/;rvu/u-7"<,^'f
vt/^//-^^?^7 Â-?^/^? n//^/. /? y^^rj^\^ ^,)^^vc/ ^V^ ^ f ^.L^^^'P'V
-y^\ 'TW^V^W^/ L-r^Lc^/ty ^î-y •^z^ .r^v^?^-'c^/->^;JV^^ ^^,^^??^^/:?u'/^
.^n^^^V /f^y^pL^ ^^^ •^f^y^'û^^v ;7^ f-^-y}^^^^
^/O^W^T ~^^H f /ê^^--t/.7/^?.tlî^Y/ ^-i/^^-?F->7^ u/? c>v?y^7L/U
^ ^.vv} ^L^v.-^w,^7 P^?c/'v^ y^^^^f) ^ ^V 'CWu^rv^l^
L/ / ' -<i / ^
ty7>r^y1 ^ -^ 7^"^'?^v?rT;^^r' ^-^^^^'7^ ^ ^\'v^h .-^ v^/u? ^^'^ t"
:NOissiiftitAio3/ayvoa am 01 aiavoiiddv SNOiivoidi-ivno -ivi33ds
/. C'^^-^-o^ ^ .^..-r-^c-^^/ ^\-c-p^\ ^K.'n^^^y (i-r^/ ^pp^f ^•\ ^^CC
(\-f-^ Lû/\6<-.-k/y p^\t(^\-pL^ ^^^c/c:^ < /€<-.'/ •v^-^..:-n^/' ^</<1/<^.C^/)
/^. fvV^^^-.4/iru : L^ s /V\t.J<-^^ kA^^-i'^f<'-'
SpcC/< (-1 ( <'^^LCJ ' , . ,,.;;-
- TnZii^ <1-^ ^" ^')<.v,,. ,6^' ^t1^L')l/" t'C'T'^-^^-'n^y iL^pp^î^

f^^^.T^y- rliî $'L^ -/<»-/. ^•?'/ L'- ^^^^^;-^(^ •:~-'^/-iî^c^</-
^.c^>^-t fu^ ^^V///— ^-^ ^^c.^^-^- ^ .^^^/-

t.;/-^ f-/lt.1 /;^--^<1^ J
; ^/)a/-'^ ^ p-^/^^^ .A-nn^ ^^pU- ,v^^y ^ ^ L.^6^^

Vt/\/') ^-') f'7-'rt V1 -/ '^ ^ •)L^-^ ^ '-1 .
/ i/
^ 1^-^<:-V ^'\L'^..^- ^/uL<-î^Gc^^ /'U L'V;\-fc.L--?V:î^/V-L^.'/^ ( b(.U! /-LL/^ ^L<^'

Ccz.<..^ 5nL-^/-v-),<^/)^ , (^) t.^(.//-; ^^^rc-nry^^h^ ru^-î^ 1 î^\
CL^ /.s^^^.^ .
OTHER COMMENTS:
-j tv.'^ h!A.\\ <^V-^ ^^.^/.-/ ^'' '<'Li^<';<^c' <"^^ '^ ^^r^ ./^^-\<//V^ b-/L ./•m-iy
p^vw-r: ^î^ ^ ^/^.^-y -•<-/-•//^ n^^î H-C'^ A^Y^ rfct.v^, <-.W ^to(.^4'\
^.t ,i^^'<j -^W^ •K'l;;^-;u/(^l^/^'>'-' • /?'") -^^•'-<^^ AV^ ^•^d^ ^
^ ^^ ^'^^ ^^^^^^ ^;^, 'rk- 'Â^^^. ^••^ ^ ^.^,^(

fiidt^ti -/-'- ^^ .FW^-Î'^^-)^ ^//<'</^^<,.^^^,,^'
^vY^:fl' ^-1 C^^^ <-v.n^ /'/'—•^ ^va^/'fL^ A;^ y-'/^y.A.-^.^.
t.,^ ,- ,^ ^^^-^ rr. <i^\:cî ^ r^~^^ bc^.^ ^-p^^..^ c^ •ft^ h'^' ^
4/.ly <'/CA,VUU...( '3 .^[-^/ ••^.^ ' •'•^ ^•?<-/ fe l<"y '/ ^'-^ '•""y.
•/7^^^^ l/i. i'./ ,77 ycz^c' <?c-/^;.,' UA^^C r\

/ A.L/^./ -^,7,. ^Y
Signature /
/L- -26 -12

Date
CHRISTINA LEWIS LYNCH, CPA, MBA
PO Box 772015. Steamboat Springs. CO 80477

(970)846-3219
EXPERIENCE
2/07 to 7/12 Yampa Valley Medical Associates, PC. Steamboat Springs. Colorado
Practice & Financial Administratoi-
Job inciuded broad responsibilities for all administrative functions of the medical group, including
operations, marketing, finance, third party contracting, physician compensation and reimbursement.,
human resources, medical and business information systems, and planning and development. Oversight
of supervisor personnel and reported to the YVMA shareholders. Specific operational duties included
responsibility for compliance with insurance plans and govern incnt requirements and regulations.
Developed financial policies and oversaw their nnpiemcntation. Financial activities included budgeting,
analysis, financial statement preparation, practice management reports, payroll, billing, payer
contracting, collections and preparation o+ corporate and sales tax returns in addition to developing and
implementing pricing policies. Human resource function-s included recruitment and employment.
personnel records, employee relations, job evaluations, compensation management, benefit
administration including overseeing the YVMA retirement plan and compliance and organization
development and training. Responsible for understanding YVMA's software programs and equipment
such as the electronic health records and the practice managemenl system,
12/02 to 2/07 Fox Construction Inc., Steamboat Springs. Colorado

Finance Manager
Oversee all accounting functions. Financial statement and tax analysis review and preparation. Manage
all bonding and insurance matters. Assist in preparing commercial construction proposals and A1A client
contracts. Handle all cash management and banking functions. Adminisl-rator for retirement plan, profit
sharing plan and health insurance plan. In charge of all audits including financial audits, workers
compensation audits, and tax audits. Manage vehicle leasing company, Revised employee handbook.
9/99 to 12/02 Tredway Henion <& Kerr PC, Steamboat Springs, Colorado
CPA m public_accountinu tirrn
Work with a wide variety of individuals, corporations and not-for-profits preparing Federal and state tax
returns, financial statement reviews, compilations. monthly and quarterly reports. Also prepared
retirement and profit sharing plan returns and year end census data. Resolve and respond to 1RS
notifications, Responsible for client service and satisfaction.
8/96-6/98 Atlas Air Inc.. Golden, Colorado

Tax Manager
Responsible for all taK issues related to this airline company including Federal and multi-state income tax
returns, sales and use tax returns, multi-state property tax returns. Also maintained fixed asset system,
researched payroll and employee benefit issues. Assisted in numerous industry projects such as; aircraft
buy/lea-se analysis, prepared U.S. Department of Commerce statistical reports, and analyzed property
lease documents in various states. Managed and responded to IRS questions during a two year income
lax examination. Worked with all levels of management.
6/89-3/97 BetaWest, Inc.. Denver, Colorado

Contract Services, 7/92-3/97
Services rendered primarily for the preparation of'partncrship and corporate federal, state, and local tax
returns. Prepared partnership and corporate financial statements. Assisted in special projects as needed.
Christina Lynch
Page two
Assistant Tax Manager. 6/89-7/92

Responsible for tax issues related to 48 commercial real estate partnerships, including federal, state, and
local tax returns and research projects. Prepared corporate quarterly estimates. state and federal tax
returns, and monthly tax accounting entries.
6/86-6/89 Arthur Andersen & Co.. Denver. Colorado

Staff Accountant. Tax Division. I 1/87-6/89
Prepared tax rctunis for corporate. partnership, fiduciary, and individual clients. Responsible for research
documentation, client relations and supervising new staff.
Staff Accountant Audit Division, 6/86-1 1/87

Assisted in the preparation pt financial statements and special t-eports for various public and private
companies in the retail, manufacturing, T.V.cable, oil and gas. and banking industries. Worked integrally
with clients and other Arthur Andersen personnel. Assisted in the preparation and evaluation of two
major litigation support projects.
1978-1984 United States Ski Team, Park City. Utah

U.S. Women s Cross Country Ski Team.
World Cup Cross-Country Ski Team
World University Games Cross-Country Ski 1 earn
U.S. National Cross-Countrv Ski Team
NCAA Cross-Country Ski Team
Collegiate Alt-American
World Junior Cross-Country Ski Team
Middlebury College Cross-Cotintfy Ski Team
Junior Nationai Cross-CoLintry Ski Cliampion
Colorado Sports Women Hall of Fame: inducted in 1984
COMMUNITY ACTIVITIES & INTERESTS

• National Nordic Foundation Treasurer 201 1 - present
• High School Cross-Country Ski Coach 2006 - 2009
« SSWSC Nordic Coacli of the Year 2007-2008
• Strawberry Park and Steamboat Springs Middle School Parent Information Committee President
2001 - 2007
• Avid outdoor person.
EDUCATION
1990-1993 University of Denver. MBA. August 1993

1988 Certified Public Accountant. Certificate Awarded
1983-1986 University of Denver, B.S. Accounting, March 1986
1979-1981 Middlebury College. Mtddlebury. Vermont
REFERENCES
Available upon request
APPLICATION TO SERVE ON THE
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
DEADLINE TO SUBMIT APPLICATION TO CITY CLERK:
Please type or print with black ink. If you have questions or need more information,
contact the City Clerk's Office at 879-2060 extension 231. Return completed
application to City Clerk's Office, City Hall, 137 10th Street, Post Office Box 775088,
Steamboat Spnncis, CO 80477.
NAME: Julie Alkema
RESIDENCE ADDRESS: 303 9th. St
MAILING ADDRESS: PO Box 772750
HOME PHONE: 879-5653 WORK PHONE: 824-1146
CELL PHONE: _846-1074_ Email: _wzju I ie@gmail.com.
ARE YOU 18 YEARS OF AGE OR OLDER: x_ Yes _ No
ARE YOU A RESIDENT OF THE CITY OF STEAMBOAT SPRINGS?

x Yes No
IF YES, HOW LONG HAVE YOU BEEN A RESIDENT OF THE CITY? _32 years
ARE YOU A REGISTERED ELECTOR? x Yes _ No
DO YOU RESIDE x WITHIN CITY LIMITS OR _ OUTSIDE CIP^ UIVHTS

BUT WITHIN ROUTT COUNTY ?
CURRENT OCCUPATION/EMPLOYER: Nursing Faculty, Colorado Northwestern

Community College, Craig, CO
PREVIOUS WORK EXPERIENCE (PLEASE FEEL FREE TO ATTACH ADDITIONAL

PAGES:
Yampa Valley Medical Center
Updated 7/26/2010
RN, Nursing Leadership Team, Staff Development, Clinical expertise in IWedical-
Surgical, ED and ICU nursing

Parks and Recreation Commissioner, 2009-present
Strings, 1989-present volunteer
Steamboat Springs Orchestra 1995-present, volunteer
Holy Name Catholic Church, volunteer
Work of Human Hands Craft Fair, past co-chair, volunteer
EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: Bachelors in Nursing, Masters in Nursing

Leadership with a certificate in Nursing Education, Certified Nurse Educator
SPECIAL QUALIFICATIONS APPLICABLE TO PARKS AND RECREATION

COMMISSION:
Long time resident of the city and very dedicated user of parks, especially
Howelson Hill and Emerald Mountain
Experience on the commission: knowledge and history of the Parks and
Recreation issues and decisions
Updated 7/26/2010
WHY DO YOU WANT TO SERVE ON THE PARKS AND RECREATION
COMMISSION?
I am passionate about our Park systems. I feel our community parks add a great
deal to our community and need to be protected and maintained for the
enjoyment of the citizens
BRIEFLY, WHAT DO YOU BELIEVE ARE THE THREE MOST IMPORTANT ISSUES
FACING THE STEAMBOAT SPRINGS COMMUNITY AT THIS TIME, AND HOW DO
YOU BELIEVE THE PARKS AND RECREATION COMIVHSSION CAN PLAY A ROLE
IN ADDRESSING EACH ISSUE?
Maintenance of infrastructure: The Parks and Recreation commission makes

recommendations to the city. Currently parks need more money directed at
maintaining parks we own before acquiring additional properties.
Reduction in bus service, and lack of sidewalks in downtown neighborhoods and

connecting trails. Improved bus service/ additional sidewalks/ trails would
improve and promote our community as pedestrian friendly and reduce traffic
congestion. Parks and Rec can recommend priority areas for trails and sidewalk
connections to improve pedestrian use.
Lack of affordable housing and childcare to keep our community economically

diverse and keep young families within the city : the city can continue to offer
after school and summer recreation programs, assessing the cost to keep it
affordable and possible subsidizing low income families.
Updated 7/26/2010
PLEASE SPECIFY ANY ACTIVITIES THAT MIGHT CREATE A CONFLICT OF
INTEREST IF YOU SHOULD BE APPOINTED TO THE PARKS AND RECREATION
COMMISSION.
(If unsure, please call the City Clerk's Office)
OTHER COMMENTS:
Julie Alkema
Signature
5/13/15
Date
Updated 7/26/2010
APPLICATION FOR BOARDS/COMMITTEES/COMMISSiONS
application to City Clerk's Office. City Hall. 137 10th Street. Post Office Box
775088. Steamboat Spnnas, CO 80477.
BOARD/COMMISSION APPLYING FOR: T^^cv ^G->
NAME: H<^n '^f?<nv<^
RESIDENCE ADDRESS: Z^-7 ^'v>(?</CC- S^tZCtn S>^>. Qo^8-7
MAILING ADDRESS: "5 A^tT
HOME PHONE: <E?Z8-W.Û WORK PHONE: 170-870. |l?7
FAX: _ E-MAIL ADDRESS: Hdfc/i LinAô^ C cî^X^

HOW LONG HAVE YOU BEEN A RESIDENT OF STEAMBOAT SPRiNGS?^7_ V ^^^
VA^V(>A V^l<Y ^C&;cc<» C^W«L
Tfvrxer^v H&î^ ^cne.^ ôo<^^^^%
PREVIOUS WORK EXPERIENCE: _ ^^

<ST(S ft <ôAT SOLC (TR " d t/B - To >.(?A; î"<^° T

^—
(a ^.:.Y —; • c,^- ^.,-» '^^^^w
^ ^c.too^ Cl- ^ ZOIT - CATC^T^^^^T
ISW^ro.P ft^t^^P
7 \]Co.f f^>^^
\ûV^ -s^&cv^
c , . ,.. ^f ^^-p^^^ o^ ^^-\nCa^ÂC^

Cft^.^ VCnîAy 6
o^ w^ êv
WHY DO YOU WANT TO SERVE ON THE fPwCz r\^^ ?
V/^ C«.\\ 'SV1£^ôa,Jt- S.-^rô^ ô»<v^ -Fu<r <vv&ny diêwvV
teô^. 3^- '^ our u+o^ ^^^ t" ^ ^c-A^ o^- ^^

ôcKv Vl\^<^;^. 0"r Te°Plc 'mkc our toinon^^/ . ~rhc
CQ^^m'k/ ^^^ w \^\^fc v^v-< -^ -bite \/^><y +h^
l^ ooê^y^y^ v^,-^ C^RT^ ^ »j^b<^, b^-Vt^ ^c r^^

êoê co^ ^^ s^7. ~c ^ f^cer"^ a^.t-W d^cc^n
0^ TNW <- ^t-c C-n^ ^W &^ C^C^^ ^ yx-r-v^<-^<- ^^ i^'Y^
^ w^ (^ ^ , +^-^\ Thc ^co> û£" ^ ^ ^ ^

ê\^\ ouV co^^n><Vy ^ ^ >'V ^ ^ ^ht(v^ pA,^^ - ^T^ hon<L.
-L W se<-^ +t^ P"c<^ 05r 61AU^ r-ccfL"^ SP°<Z^ -^?"r-v <'e^/<
-^ a^ ^ ^^ ^.:^ ^ ^^ ^—^^
'+^^. 5... ^ ^ ^^ ^^^
^ s^"/^^—^^ ^-^^ ^ c^,la ^^,^
W»\ b<A h- ^ - CYp<- -1 <-^_^\^
^(?(?.<xv -©v ^ÎV^y Q^d h^y c^ro^^. ~Ir (vvaV Nu^'
ê c^c^. "-, ^>^ T ^^ ^ ^^ ^ ^^ ^ ôf

^^ ^nA cypk^ o.lôn^ ~T h&vc ^ ^^ iê-c^ .n
^t^c^ ^^^ S^b.c^ c^ p-4.^^ -^;a C^î^/.

T) TuÂ^^ o^lwv>
te^.,-^ ' -R^;^ ^/ c^pe v^\^s-<-^^ co^'—>^y
NW^,.-^ s^^'nol6er^
^<A
^ New pA^ -^^ »^.^"<r- ^ V- ^l'
OTHER COMMENTS:
Please attach any documentation that would enhance your application,
All applications must be turned into City HaJI, 137 10 Street,

^Signature
^//7/2^\
Date
AGENDA ITEM #3
Planning Commission Interviews
June 2nd-5:40 pm
3 applicants for 1 Planning Commission opening
5:40- Kathi Meyer
5:45- Brendan Ferrelli
Kelly Bastone is out of town.

rwpwuvE
S^LÎSIWKU
City of Steamboat Springs | ^ -^ ^ ^ ^01^
APPLICATION FOR BOARDS/COIVIIVllTTEES/COIt/IMiSSIONS- '"
THURSDAY, May 3, 2012

application to City Cferk's Office. City Hall. 137 10th Street Post Office Box
775088. Steamboat Spnnas. CO 80477.
BOAnD/COMIVHSSION APPLYING FOR: Planning Commission
NAME: Kathi Meyer
RESIDENCE ADDRESS: 28 Valley View Court, Steamboat Springs, Co 80488
MAILING ADDRESS: PO Box 883234, Steamboat Springs, Co 80488
HOME PHONE: 870-8976 WORK PHONE: 870-8976
FAX: none E-MAIL ADDRESS: kathimeyer@comcast.net
HOW LONG HAVE YOU BEEN A RESIDENT OF STEAMBOAT SPRINGS?

16 years
CURRENT OCCUPATION/EMPLOYER: Retired
PREVIOUS WORK EXPERIENCE: Held several executive positions with

various banks and other financial institutions, specializing in residential and
commercial real estate lending during a 25 year career.

Steamboat Springs Planning Commission, 14 years
Area Plan Co-ordinating Committee (APCC), 9 years
Yampa Valley Housing Authority, 5 years, Past President and Sec/Treas.
Regional Affordable Living Foundation (RALF), President/Treasurer 9 years
Routt County Habitat for Humanity, Treasurer, 1 year
World Cup B, Nordic Combined, Event Co-Chair, 5 yârs
US Ski Jumping and Nordic Combined Nat'l Championship, Event Co-Chair, 5 years
Extensively participated and approved the following Planning Documents:

Steamboat Springs Area Community Plan (May, 2004)
West Steamboat Springs Area Plan (Nov., 1999)
West Steamboat Springs Area Plan Update (June, 2006)
Mountain Town Sub-Area Plan (1999)
Mountain Town Sub-Area Plan Update (Nov., 2005)
Rewrite of the Community Development Code (1997 until adoption, July 2001)
Various Amendments to the CDC since adoption, including the current update
Other Qualifications: Ability to read blueprints, plats, etc.

Held a Colorado Real Estate Brokers license for 12 years,
therefore familiar with Coiorado Real Estate law and practices.
WHY DO YOU WANT TO SERVE ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION?

I'd like to:
1) Continue working on improving the Community Development Code
(CDC), in order to make it more closely reflect the vision in the Community
Plan, make it user friendly, and to fix those parts that remain problematic
(new zone districts encouraging greater density, design standards
throughout the city, lighting code etc.). :
2) By continuing to serve, I believe i can help make sure that future
development is the best that it can be. Consistency and predictability
remain in the best interest of the connnnunity,

1) Making sure that the vision outlined in the Area Community Plan becomes
reality.
2) Affordable housing. Continue to encourage and support a variety of types

of housing, thereby allowing our low and moderate income households to
live and work in Steamboat.
3) Support: quality development and/or redevelopment throughout Steamboat.

~£7
'' ^.^^
Date
City of Steamboat S&rlnas
APPLICATION FOR BOARDS/COMIVMTTEES/COMISSIONS
information, contact the City Clerk's Office at 879-2060. Return completed
application to City Clerk's Office, City Hall. 137 10th Street, Post Office Box
775088, Steamboat Sprinos, CO 80477. To return electronically, please send to
ifrankiind^steamboatspnnQs.net.
NAME: Brendan Ferrelli
RESIDENCE ADDRESS: 415^400 Strom Meddow Dr.
MAILING ADDRESS: 1815 Central Park Drive Box 98 Steamboat 80477
HOME PHONE: 954-826-8022 _ PHONE: _""

CELLPHONE:_""_Email: Brendanferrelli@)vahoo.com
ARE YOU 18 YEARS OF AGE OR OLDER: x_Yes _ No
ARE YOU A RESIDENT OF THE C\TT OF STEAMBOAT SPRINGS?

x Yes No
IF YES, HOW LONG HAVE YOU BEEN A RESIDENT OF THE CITY?

8 Months_
CURRENT OCCUPATION/EMPLOYER: Biomet Orthopedics/ Medical sales
PREVIOUS WORK EXPERIENCE (PLEASE FEEL FREE TO ATTACH

ADDITIONAL PAGES:
After attending Florida State University. I moved to Rome, Italy and taught
English an international language school for three years.
After that, I moved my home to Seattle and worked for United Airlines and
continued traveling for another year.
I've been working for Biomet in Orthopedics sales for the past six years in
South Florida which lead me to Steamboat Springs eight months ago.
Updated 7/20/2010
I'm a volunteer at the Fort Lauderdale Historical society.

I support the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation, Crohn's and Colitis Foundation of
America, Humane Society of Broward annually.
I am a part of the Young Professionals of South Florida.
My degree is an Economic degree with a minor in Urban and Regional

Planning. At that time, Florida State had the only college that offered an
Urban and Regional Planning minor. nfly focus was Affordable housing.
I have been around the hospitality industry all my life in South Florida. My
father was general manager of Fort Lauderdale's first corporate hotel for 30
years. My family and friends own and operate hotels and I have had a
sincere interest in the development of my beach community. Tourism has
always been a part of my life.
WHY DO YOU WANT TO SERVE ON

^Planning Commission/Urban Planning,
When I went to college, I learned that it's the cities responsibility for their
citizens' social and economic growth. This is done by the city utilizing all
of the amenities that the city has to provide. And it seems to me,
Steamboat Springs has some of Colorado's best amenities! Including its
residents!
I think Steamboat Springs is an International city in the making. It
really does have everything! Now that I am a resident, I'm interested in
joining the Planning board to see how Steamboat Springs grows over the
years. In doing that, I hope I can do my part as a Steamboat citizen to
help,, at any capacity.
Updated 7/20/2010
BRIEFLY, WHAT DO YOU BELIEVE ARE THE THREE MOST IMPORTANT
ISSUES FACING THE STEAMBOAT SPRINGS COMMUNITY AT THIS TIME
RELATIVE TO THE BOARD/COMMISSION FOR WHICH YOU ARE
APPLYING?
As I am new to Steamboat Springs, I'm more interest learning about
Steamboat's problems from the native residents. In this way, I'm open to
simply trying to understand and resolve problems. My background and
education prove I'm clearly interested in the creative ways of making a city
grow.
1.Affordable housing
2.Low income housing
3.New corporate business influence
4.Influence of off peek tourism.
S.Tourism.
OTHER COMMENTS:
I want to live in Steamboat for many years to come. Steamboat is a gem

that I'm fortunate to have been transferred too. It's not surprising that so
many people move from elsewhere to live in Steamboat. I'm looking
forward to friends and family coming to visit to see how great it really is.
Many friends of mine from South Florida don't know where
Steamboat Springs is. They know where Vail, Aspen and Breckenridge are.
But I constantly have to describe where Steamboat is. And maybe that's by
design and it's something I will learn about. Its probably the reason why I
like Steamboat so much.. its not those ptaces!
Growing up in a hospitality family in Fort Lauderdale FL. I think I've
learned about what it takes for a city to plan for successful comprehensive
growth in tourism while keeping its cultural sense.
It's exciting to live in a city that really is special. I'm looking forward
to growing with it and being more a part of this great community.
c.<- / ^^. ^. '. -
Signature
t. '.
1^
t
j. .-i[-_.'
f_/
Date
Updated 7/20/2010
BRENDAN L. FERRELLI
1815 Central Pk Dr. PO Box 98 • 954-826-8022 • Urendanterreili(a)vahoo.com
PROFILE
A results driven sates professional with a primary focus on reconstructive and trauma products who is skilled/ proficient
and experienced in the operating room with proven ability to build and maintain valued business relationships.
PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE
Biomet Orthopedics Ft. Lauderdale, FL 2009 - Current
West Palm Beach Territory Manager
Principal responsibilities include the sale and coverage of Biomet's complete line of orthopedic surgeries. I develop and
maintain relationships with physicians as to expand Biomet's Territory growth in this competitive market. I have
expertise of surgical procedure, product knowledge and design rational for all Biomet's elective product line with focus
on knees, hips, shoulders and trauma.
Selected Accomplishments
FY 2013 - Promoted to West Palm Beach Territory Manager
• Selected to distribute newly acquired Biomet product line from absorption of Depuy Trauma.
• Assisted in over 300 surgeries
o 8 new orthopedic surgeons
o $2 M in new Revenue
FY 2012 - Promoted to Senior Representative
• Assisted in over 650 surgeries
o Covered Biomet's leading total Joint surgeon in excess of over 500 surgeries
o Expertise across all of Biomefs product line from Nails to Limb Salvage
FY 2010 - Promoted to Area Efficiency Manager
• Developed/ designed and executed targeted marketing campaigns for specific surgeons
o Stream Line surgeries per patient with hospital cost and effectiveness in mind
and Territory growth
• Managed territory growth of 8 new Biomet Orthopedic surgeons
o 3 million dollars of newly generated business; 15% growth
o Developed an expertise in product knowledge and design rational for Biomet s elective
product line with focus on knees, hips, shoulders
FY 2009 - Junior Sales Representative
• Top New Hire of the Territory
o In 3 cases a day on average; assisted in territory growth of 7 new orthopedic surgeons
o $4 M dollars of newly generated business; 30% growth
English Teacher The New British Centre Rome, Italy Jan. '06 - Dec "08
Learned fundamental abilities to speak/ read, and write Italian in order to overcome language and cultural barriers.
Permitting me to organize and direct a monthly seminar for prospective students.
Sales Representative Non-lnvasive Solutions Coral Gables/ FL Jan. '05 - Dec."05

Responsible for aggressively prospecting and driving the sale of and after-sale administration of FDA medically
approved ESWT therapy to patients of practitioners.
EDUCATION
B.S. Economics Florida State University. Tallahassee, FL Fall "05
Reference upon request

APPLICATION FOR PLANNING COMMISSION
application to City Clerk's Office. City HalL 137 10th Street Post Office Box
775088, Steamboat Springs, CO 80477.
BOARD/COMMISSION APPLYING FOR: Plawtin^ Co^wu^K-m/
NAME: /<^/1^ K^^+CT^^

7~
RESIDENCE ADDRESS (residence within City Limits or within the RE-2

School District is a requirement to be able to serve on this Commission):
/</^?2- ^Lr^<^r/^^ <^/.
.^/(-A^^^/ s~^^ . <ô A) y^ 7
-7—/ <-/ '
This residence address lies (please check appropriate):
kl within City Limits
outside City Limits but within the RE-2 School District
MAILING ADDRESS: J^<^_^w ^_4
C&^c
HOME PHONE: A-7^<?/0 "-WGRK PHONE: ^70-S>Y^-7oB12^
FAX: __ _ _ E-MAIL ADDRESS: ^ll^nk^n&hohwîf' ^^v-
HOW LONG HAVE YOU BEEN A RESIDENT OF STEAMBOAT SPRINGS?

-S't^c^- 2.002-
S<2-(-T'^--iA<y>^y^ a^ ^ {r-e.&J^v-c^- (^^^^2_7>^_ i^/î {e-r^

ê- c^ <^_M-e_c^—^c

3^ j'^.ve^ £>-scs- cS^-^t ^(Â^^l
w^^v- ^ p^-k^— -0 t^^H-c^.
SPECIAL QUALIFICATIONS APPLICABLE TO THE PLANNING

COMMISSION:
^V.^ ^vr(/?A^T <-^<-<_'iv^ K-c^1v^v^ /lê-A't^ Wr\C^ IÂ^L^^
^^ {\SWÎ'T^ t-J^ ^ ^Pv^ o\^^ 5Lî+ r^J(/i4-fo^v^
^\^^ ^V^^^Le—-f ^ S^c^C^" €û^-^\ fS<2-o. M^ ^><^-J^<^^<_.
^ ^ \y^V>^-^^ T\<-^^ ^•(-^-c^^ls-o ^t- 0-JLr^—<_-y Q^-^ ^^(/?^
^v\^te/^-s+-^<\ \^l^j4~ J^~~^~^-U^ ^ tM^k^ <lv^ <?-^M^-^\T<-/
e^c-^ C^^-c* P?V^c^C^ dV^ .
WHY DO YOU WANT TO SERVE ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION?

"\/^ \\[^~}ry .S>r~^~ L='^CJL''^° ^-<- c^wi^^^ ^ IV-^t ^
C^\^<î+t<L^^> . ^û-<- ^=>^C-^ l^fi^€_ \^? ^J£<^_T + ^> t-
l>^ ^</ê- \^JLAf^^t l-c-^. 3^ (-</e-( '\V<<T<-o^=-<<- V^ \A^l^<^T
. ^ ,o(^^_ ^~\\{ [wi<-+ ^-f-s- I'it^-^ V~t- ^k'^+{o^-
^ ^^- eÂ eL^^J^ • ^'^ ^ +° J7^ ôlc^ ^

f5~^^<^. tV~--<?~t' •—-) / </\/' <T^JL^1~~^\ — <—\^ &—>—=• r~e^~y '
\AT(^— lÂÂ'^V V<- A-^êJ-c^t^^-^: tV^ffC^^/^-^ ts>J~f^lA/L<-0 C^^^
\ft^ —i v\^s^c^\ «^»&\/-(—T\Î^ '^n^^rj> O^l^V^-o^frv -f- C'J /•l~\yt-^
/\^>"^- \r\^ \0 k<-^, ^^<^.C,.^(- ^®j"i(^^^\-
/(: |yv^ -v^^ oK-^ ~^-c^ <G^^\^R^

PLANNING COMMISSION?
Uôt^r-^ S-^ô^S^Tv-yo^ c^>^^,k3+

^ \\^JL <^^c4^_(^^K-*--ô-='^''^k^ /
^J^r^.^ \^<(^c-oa ^ \/r^T<?>v^<i<_ - ^\-<^Ts^ c^ •(2<OL^b'hv^^
^-<^ v-\jLe ^J(<
p^DW-o kv^ ^<^-c^r^<-€ vv^t <-v^-o t)-^ ^STO^->^>n^
\r^^^Ji (co<s./) ^ ^~(-—-^\--<- C^' ^^ e-^}.
OTHER COMMENTS:
Ur^-^^.^^ ô^j;c;^"^CJ- ^<-^r g^^^.^^-^^-/ 1' \^>T> 4^

i^^r^'c/t^ ^ A-^ ^ c^l^^^ô^wc^Lw-^S^ ^v^-f^-
^^Y^ i^^ ^ ^ r\ C^-^^T -L) 4AjT^v - l^W V^ ^-y^ ^ t- -' U^,
i^-i^><v^?^/s-*A>-^(^ v4ê^<-*o ki^^liv^^^. &,.(-
^Jis ^ ^-^ -^S^L^^cJu^ \^r\ a^Cr- jeô&yvÂ^ ;3^ (T\^_^
Vî^c o^^ ^f^T -^ ^^^ Ae^-STfv^ tVv.^t 6^ î
\AJ tfV^< ^ S^"^ •
All applications must be turned in/ mailed to City Hall, 137 10th Street/ P.O.
Box 775088 Attn: City Clerk's Office
Or e-mailed to ikoenici(a)steamboatsprinas.net
Signatu?5—"
4^^ ^?, zo/^

Drfte
KELLY M. BASTONE
1482 Creekside Ct. (970) 871-7990
Steamboat Springs/ CO 80487 bellyrLken@hotmail.com
WORK EXPERIENCE
Freelance Writer/ 2002-present.
Sold travel/ food and cultoe articles/ including feature-length pieces/ to regional
and national magazines such as: Sunset; Backpacker; Arthur Frommer's Budget
Travel; 5280: Denver's Mile-High M.agazine; Outside, www.kellybastone.com
Hnglish Teacher
- Kent Denver School/ Denver CO/1999-2002.
Taught English/ grades 7-9. Directed Middle School Musicals/ served as shident
advisor/ organized volunteer programs/ led outdoor trips for students.
-Western Reserve Academy/ Hudson OH/ 1995-1999.
Taught English/ grades 9-12. Oversaw publication of literary magazine/ coached
softball and basketball/ managed girls' dormitories/ served as student advisor
mentored new faculty members.
Art Interpreter/ Denver Art Museum/ 1999-2002.

Taught adults and children about the museum's collections by using hands-on
materials. Assisted guests with their questions about the museum.
Columnist/ Hudson Life Magazine, 1994-1995.

Contributed monthly wine column to regional magazine.
EDUCATION
Middlebury College/ Middlebury VT. M.A. in English/ 2000.
Hiram College/ Hiram OH. B.A. in French and English/ magna cum laude/1995.
- Editor/ Hiram Arts Magazine.
- Arts Editor/ TJze Advance, Hiram College's newspaper.
PAST TRAVEI/WORK
Appalachian Trail: 4/2003 - 7/2003. Backpacked 1/200 miles from GA to NJ.
France: 8/2002 - 9/2002. Picked grapes for the wine harvest in Brouilly. .
Bolivia and Peru: 6/2002 - 7/2002. Traveled in the Andes/ including a five-day
trek in the Cordillera Real and a four-day trek to Machu Picchu.
AGENDA ITEM #4.
FROM: Stuart King, Community Development Engineer
THROUGH: Chuck Anderson, Public Works Director

Tyler Gibbs, Director of Planning & Community Development
DATE: June 2, 2015
ITEM: Information: School Master Plan
___ DIRECTION
_X_ INFORMATION
___ ORDINANCE
___ MOTION
___ RESOLUTION
The purpose of this report is to brief city council regarding the Steamboat Springs
School Board update of the School Facilities Master Plan as presented to the City
Technical Advisory Committee on May 26, 2015.
Background
The Steamboat Springs School District is in the process of updating the School Facilities
Master Plan, with the objective of identifying the best long term solution for the
community. The School District has engaged Jeff Chamberlin with the firm RLH to lead
the process and act as owner’s representative. The Facilities Master Plan is a strategic
plan which incorporates four major considerations:
• Demographics- enrollment growth
• Facility condition – capital renewal
• Educational programming- shift toward STEM / STEAM (Science,
Technology, Engineering, Art and Math), small group and project based
learning
• Cost/Affordability
The process identified four options each with a different impact on educational
programming objectives. Each option includes new construction and/or various
upgrades to existing school buildings as well as options for future use and/or disposal of
existing facilities. There have been several public outreach meetings and presentations
to Rotary Club, City TAC, County Commission, and open house meetings for the
community. The design team reports that school administration and staff prefer a new
High School (Option C) primarily from the educational programming perspective.
The district owns two vacant sites which could accommodate new buildings in addition
to the existing school facilities at Strawberry Park, Soda Creek, the High School and the
7th Street campus. Site A, Whistler Park is 9.2 acres. The site for Options B & C is 35
acres adjacent to the Steamboat II neighborhood.
Comments / Discussion Points- Option A
• Option A – New 67,000 square foot pre-kindergarten through fifth grade school
on the Whistler Park site.
• Renovations and additions would occur at the existing elementary, middle school
and high school locations.
Water and Wastewater would be served by the Mt. Werner Water and Sanitation
District.
Fire flows for sites within the city limits are generally good, fire flow code requirements
will be verified at the time of building plan review.
City Transit operates the green route with service on Whistler Lane, the closest stop is
at the Whistler/Skyview intersection. This route operates all year.
City Engineering commented that the school district’s concept plan shows an access
road crossing Walton Creek to connect with US Route 40 directly west of their site. The
City’s roadway plan shows a future connection being an extension of Stone Lane which
is just north of the school site. Development is currently ongoing on the west side of
the creek which is based on the future extension of Stone Lane. The school district
proposed connection to 40 is not compatible with the City’s planned right-of-way
extension and current property ownership west of the creek. A transportation study is
needed to determine needed road facility additions and upgrades.
Comments / Discussion Points- Option B
• Option B – New 90,000 square foot pre-kindergarten through eighth grade

school on the Steamboat II site.
• Renovations and additions would occur at the existing elementary and middle
school locations.
The Steamboat II site would derive water distribution and waste water collection
services from Steamboat II Metro District. Steamboat II would then convey the
wastewater to the City’s wastewater treatment plant. The City Waste Water Treatment
Plant (WWTP) is sized for the current city limit and special district service areas. The
capacity of the City WWTP does not automatically accommodate areas outside of the
city limit or outside of the special district service areas. The manager of Steamboat II
Metro District encouraged the school design team to contact him to discuss water and
sewer issues soon, since costs for WWTP plant upgrades, collection system upgrades,
and treated water availability could affect the school decision.
Fire Department requested fire flow information for the Steamboat II site.
City Transit commented that transit services do not extend westward to Steamboat II
and that there is no current plan or funding to do so. However, there would likely be a
perception/expectation that the City should serve the area if the school were located
there.
City Engineering commented that a transportation study is needed to evaluate roadway

facility upgrades such as auxiliary turn lanes and the almost certain need for a signal at
the intersection of CR 42 at US 40. The study also needs to include evaluation of
redistribution of traffic due to the changes proposed at the other school sites.
The concept level sketches appear optimistic with respect to the achievable density of
buildings, sports fields and parking given that significant topography, grading and
retaining walls must be considered.
Pedestrian and bicycle facilities such as neighborhood connections to Steamboat II, a

perimeter trail and core trail extension would be expected in order to provide great
healthy options to the on-street transportation system. However, pedestrian and
bicycle connections are not indicated in the school district’s current concept plans and
have no current funding.
Comments / Discussion Points- Option C

• Option C- New 198,297 square foot high school on property adjacent to
Steamboat II which is approximately 5 miles west of the current high school.
• Former High School would become the Middle School and District Administrative
offices.
• The sports stadium would remain at former High School site.
• The middle school would be moved to the current high school facilities.
Renovations and additions would occur at the existing elementary and middle
school locations.
The Steamboat II site would derive water distribution and waste water collection
services from Steamboat II Metro District. Steamboat II would then convey the
wastewater to the City’s wastewater treatment plant. The city Waste Water Treatment
Plant (WWTP) is sized for the current city limit and special district service areas. The
capacity of the city WWTP does not automatically accommodate areas outside of the
city limit or outside of the special district service areas. The manager of Steamboat II
Metro District encouraged the school design team to contact him to discuss water and
sewer issues soon, since costs for WWTP plant upgrades, collection system upgrades,
and treated water availability could affect the school decision.
Fire Department requested fire flow information for the Steamboat II site.
City Transit commented that transit services do not extend westward to Steamboat II
and that there is no current plan or funding to do so. However, there would likely be a
perception/expectation that the City should serve the area if the school were located
there.
City Engineering commented that a transportation study is needed to evaluate roadway

facility upgrades such as auxiliary turn lanes and the almost certain need for a signal at
the intersection of CR 42 at US 40. The study also needs to include evaluation of
redistribution of traffic due to the changes proposed at the other school sites.
The concept level sketches appear optimistic with respect to the achievable density of
buildings, sports fields and parking given that significant topography, grading and
retaining walls must be considered.
Pedestrian and bicycle facilities such as neighborhood connections to Steamboat II, a

perimeter trail and core trail extension would be expected in order to provide great
healthy options to the on-street transportation system. However, pedestrian and
bicycle connections are not indicated in the school district’s current concept plans and
have no current funding.
New Option
The School District is investigating the possibility of locating a new High School on a
larger site closer to downtown. This site would address a recurring comment from
stakeholders regarding the transportation issues for families, students and the district
associated with the Option C- Steamboat II site. Other possible benefits of a larger site
include locating a new sports stadium facility adjacent to the new High School,
reserving land for future school district expansion and additional land available for
potential partnerships.
Comments / Discussion Points- Option D
• Option D- Purchase Heritage Christian School and use as either: Pre-

Kindergarten through fifth grade, Pre-kindergarten through eighth, or as district
offices.
The Heritage Christian School site currently receives water and waste water collection
services from Steamboat II Metro District. Waste water is conveyed by Steamboat II to
the City of Steamboat Springs WWTP. Depending on the proposed use and
modifications to this building, water and waste water fees will apply.
Fire Department will need fire flow information for the Heritage Christian School site.
City transit services do not extend westward to Heritage Christian School and that there
is no current plan or funding to do so. However, depending on the proposed new use
of the Heritage Christian School site, there would likely be a perception/expectation that
city transit should serve the area.
City Engineering commented that a transportation study is needed to determine needed

road facility upgrades such as auxiliary turn lanes and the almost certain need for a
signalized intersection.
Pedestrian and bicycle facilities such as a perimeter trail and core trail extension would
be expected in order to provide great healthy options to the on-street transportation
system.
Summary
City Staff appreciates the opportunity to comment on plans for developing new school
infrastructure. Staff is in favor of sustainable low cost alternatives in both the short
term and the long term. Staff encourages decisions that allow and encourage multiple
choices for mobility and transportation.
Constructing a new High School on a site closer to town may provide value in several
ways:
Infrastructure Availability: The cost to provide waste water treatment is lower for
sites within the city limit.
Transportation: Save time and money for families and the district, as well as
highway maintenance over the life of the school. In addition, a closer west side
site would be more cost effective to serve with public transit.
Athletic Fields: Larger site could allow partnerships for athletic fields with city
Parks Department or future recreation district and maintain high schools sports
facilities on campus.
Community Accessibility: Closer proximity to city resources such as Howelsen

Hill, the Library, City Parks and local eateries.
Mobility: Location closer to more students would favor decisions to bike or walk
to school.
Environment: Shorter, in-town travel distance for some students who choose to
use motor vehicle.
II. ALTERNATIVES: N/A
III. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: N/A- Information Only
IV. FISCAL IMPACTS: Proposed Expenditure: N/A at this time,

Funding Source: N/A
V. LEGAL ISSUES: N/A
VI. CONFLICTS OR ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES: N/A
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS : N/A

AGENDA ITEM #5.
FROM: Tyler Gibbs, Director of Planning Services
DATE: June 2, 2015
ITEM: West End Village Townhomes Affordable Housing

Deed Restrictions. (Gibbs)
ORDINANCE
RESOLUTION
MOTION
X DIRECTION
X INFORMATION
I. REQUEST OR ISSUE:
The owners of several units in the West End Village Townhome subdivision have
requested the City to release affordable housing deed restrictions encumbering their
units.
II. BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
Current Townhome Deed Restrictions
At the time of development the West End Village Townhomes were provided a subsidy
in the form of fee and tax waivers. These included Building Permit Fees, Plan Review
Fees, 50% refund of Development Permit Fees, Use Tax and Tap Fees. A breakdown
of fees waived per unit is displayed in the chart below.
The following deed restrictions were instituted for the townhomes with the City as the
beneficiary in consideration of the fee reductions. Purchaser must:
• Work in Routt County (40hrs/week or 1800hrs/yr. whichever is less)

• Earn no more than 120% of Area Medium Income (120% = $93,600/family of
four in 2015)
• Spend no more than 30% of monthly income on mortgage
• Have a net worth no greater than $250,000 (annual CPI adjustment from 2006 =
$293,400 in 2015)
• No appreciation cap
During the first 5 years of ownership there was to be a penalty for resale. After 5 years
the penalty was terminated but the deed restrictions continued.
Contrast with other Deed Restricted Properties
In contrast, the single-family properties in West End Village had similar deed restrictions
but a different financial benefit. Purchasers of single-family property were offered
preferential subordinate financing comprising $15,000 in low interest down payment
assistance.
In 2011, the City and YVHA (joint beneficiaries in this program) agreed to remove
restrictions on maximum income and net worth restrictions on the single-family
properties in consideration of repayment of the original financing plus interest
calculated upon the difference between the historic average interest rate and the actual
interest rate received on the subordinate financing. Local employment and residency
requirements were retained.
The deed restrictions that council removed at Sunray Meadows did include appreciation
caps in return for substantial discounts to the purchaser. Removal of those restrictions
required repayment of a percentage of the original subsidies which ranged from
$61,000 to $165,500.
Recent Consideration for Release of Townhome Deed Restrictions
Since 2012, the City had received several requests for the release of deed restrictions
on the townhomes. The following factors were considered:
• There are few multi-family units of similar size and desirability in the affordable
housing program. It has been considered important to retain these properties in
the program.
• While the City has the authority to make this decision, YVHA has opposed the
removal of deed restrictions in principle due to the shortage of 3 bedroom units
that can accommodate families.
• The specifics of this program differ from other deed restricted properties in the
community and therefore the approaches applied to remove other deed
restriction are not directly applicable.
• City Council indicated a preference to no longer hear individual requests for
elimination of deed restrictions.
Therefore, individual requests for removal of the townhome deed restrictions were not
brought to council.
Policy Considerations
The City will soon be reconsidering affordable housing policies given the prospect of
increasing affordability pressures as the local economy continues to improve. Removal
of properties from the existing program may be perceived as exacerbating a situation
for which we may soon be seeking new alternative approaches.
The existing deed restrictions are primarily intended to make residential opportunities
available to the local work force. They do not include appreciation caps.
Reconsideration of income and net-worth caps may be warranted to ensure that the
desired market is being served without removing local residency and/or work
requirements.
III. OPTIONS
Council may consider the following options:
1. Maintain the West End Townhomes in the inventory of attainable housing in

Steamboat Springs by retaining the existing deed restrictions.
2. Relax the deed restrictions by removing limitations on maximum percentage of
monthly income that can go toward mortgage payments, maximum annual
income and net worth while retaining residency and employment requirements.
3. Remove the units entirely from the attainable housing inventory by removing all
deed restrictions in consideration of repayment of original financial assistance.
IV. LEGAL ISSUES.
None.
V. FISCAL IMPACTS.
Subsidy reimbursement funds paid to the City as condition of releasing deed restrictions
would go to the Housing Fund.
VII. STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
Staff recommends Option 1 or Option 2. Both City and YVHA staff believe that the West
End Village Townhomes provide a unique housing product that, due to their size and
configuration, provides a very desirable option for attainable local workforce housing.
AGENDA ITEM #6.
FROM: John Overstreet, Director of Parks and Community Services
DATE: June 2, 2015
ITEM: Emerald Park and Botanic Park History and Usage
FORM OF MOTION: Direction on how to proceed with permitting Emerald Park

for organized youth league play
_X_ DIRECTION
___ INFORMATION (Check one that applies to your item,
___ ORDINANCE then delete this instruction)
___ MOTION
___ RESOLUTION
At the City Council meeting on May 19, 2015, City Council requested that staff supply
information on the history of Emerald Park, the Botanic Park and current usage of each
facility.
II. ALTERNATIVES:
None at this time. Information to be given to City Council with direction requested on
future use of Emerald Park.

Allow staff to adopt a policy to comply with Ordinance #1511 (attached) and permit youth
play and Emerald Park fields.
IV. FISCAL IMPACTS:

Proposed Expenditure: n/a
Funding Source: n/a
V. LEGAL ISSUES:
Unknown at this time.

No internal conflicts or environmental issues. Draft policy is to comply with existing
ordinance.
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS
Copy of Ordinance #1511, passed on October 15, 1996
PowerPoint presentation
Draft department policy allowing use at Emerald Park fields
Economic Impact Overview: Triple Crown
Attachment 1
Attachment 2
Emerald Park and Botanic Park

History and Usage
June 2, 2015
Tonight’s Presentation
• History of Emerald Park and Botanic Park
• Ordinances, Grants and Governance Related to
Parks
• Historic Uses of the Parks
• Current Uses of the Parks
• Looking Forward
History of Emerald (Trafalgar) Park
• Land was purchased in 1991 for $270,000
• Associated with the purchase was grant funding from
Colorado Division of Wildlife ($47,569). Monies were for
lands adjacent to river
• Fields were developed with some monies ($50,000)
coming from a GOCO grant in 1995 and playground
developed with a 1999 GOCO grant
• Letters of fields grant endorsement were submitted by
Steamboat Little League, Routt County, SSSD, and
Steamboat Springs Chamber Resort Association
• Letters of support stated endorsements for local youth
play as well as developing facilities for youth sports
tournaments
Permitted Uses of Emerald Park
• City Ordinance 1511, passed
on October 15, 1996 stipulates
approved uses of the park
Ł “for the scheduling of youth

activities exclusively. This
does not limit adult pick-up
games and general passive
recreation”
Ł “there shall be no lighting,
outfield fencing shall be of a
removable nature, with the
possibility of permanent Photo: Steamboat Today
fencing in the future on the
two western most fields only”
Primary Users of Fields
• Yampa Valley Youth Baseball Association
• Steamboat Lacrosse
Ł Steamboat Lacrosse Tournament
x 2015 tourney had approximately 65 teams with five
local teams
• Steamboat Soccer
Ł Steamboat Springs Soccer Academy
Ł Steamboat Mountain Tournament
x 2014 tourney estimates show 147 teams with 19 local
teams
Field Orientation and Proximity to
Botanic Park
• Emerald South soccer field sideline is

approximately 35’ from the Botanic Park fence
and the corner kick flag is 13’ from the fence
• The “Blue” baseball field outfield fence (closest
to the Botanic Park) is approximately 235’ to the
Botanic Park fence
• 114 painted parking spaces plus 2 disabled.
Unpainted capacity estimated at 65
Botanic Park History
• Mission: “A Place of
Serenity celebrating the
Trees, Shrubs, Plants
and Birds of the Yampa
Valley”
• Parks and gardens built
by Bob and Audrey
Enever from 1995-1999
and run by the Yampa
River Botanic Park
Association
Events Held at Botanic Park
• Weddings and other
special occasions
• Private parties
• Group meetings
• Exercise classes
Ł Special events are
reserved through the Photo from Yampa River Botanic Park
parks and
community services
office
Botanic Park Bookings
• Bookings through the parks and community
services offices (including the Green and
Trillium House)
Ł 2012 – 36 events
Ł 2013 – 81 events
Ł 2014 – 64 events
Ł 2015 – 23 events (to date)
x Department also collects payment for reservations
Looking Forward
• New access road planned from US 40 to the park

• Would alleviate traffic concerns along Pamela
Lane
• Would provide 14 new parking spaces for the
Botanic Park and additional striped parking for
Emerald Park
Future Use
• Seek direction on how to manage field usage at
Emerald Park after the new crossing is
constructed
Ł Allow staff to adopt a policy to comply with
Ordinance 1511 and permit all youth play at
Emerald Park fields
Ł Other options
Thank you
Attachment 3
Policy #2015-01
POLICY RE: USE OF EMERALD PARK FIELDS

(See also Ordinance # 1511)
DATE APPROVED: JUNE 2015
AUTHORITY: DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND COMMUNITY SERVICES
The Department shall comply with Ordinance #1511, passed on October 15, 1996,
when permitting uses at the Emerald Park fields, as shown below. “Youth activities”
are defined as persons...
__________________________ _________________________
Director Date
Attachment 4
Economic Impact Overview:

Triple Crown
5/29/15
Yampa Valley Data Partners
Executive Summary
Yampa Valley Data Partners, a nonprofit 501(c)3 organization, provides unbiased, accurate, timely
and relevant data to governments, businesses and nonprofits in the Northwest Colorado region.
Our mission is to stengthen our communities by providing this data as a foundational piece to
facilitate discussion, collaboration and the best possible decision making.
This assessment of the direct and indirect economic impacts of Triple Crown includes the
following estimates:
x Triple Crown visitors bring about $8.5 million in taxable dollars directly into the Steamboat
Springs economy annually, based on summer 2014 figures. This amount equals roughly
6.5% of the approximately $131 million in taxable dollars that the city reported for the June-
July-August period in 2014.
x It’s estimated that 43% of this $8.5 million is spent on Lodging and 27% is spent on Food
and Beverage.
x In terms of money directly spent by Triple Crown visitors, Triple Crown generates
approximately $340,000 in sales-tax revenue for the city. This amount equals roughly 6.5%
of the approximately $5.23 million in sales-tax dollars that the city reported for the June-
July-August period in 2014.
x When various additional direct and indirect impacts also are considered, Triple Crown
generates approximately $404,773 in sales-tax revenue for the city. This amount equals
roughly 7.7% of the approximately $5.23 million in sales-tax dollars that the city reported for
the June-July-August period in 2014.
x Triple Crown also generates direct- and indirect-impact sales-tax revenues for the state
($287,050), Routt County ($98,983), the Local Marketing District ($73,100), Steamboat
schools ($50,597), the lodging-tax fund ($36,550) and the local air-service support program
($25,298).
x It’s estimated that 81.4 full-time equivalent jobs or FTEs are directly supported by Triple
Crown, with another 4.8 FTEs supported by associated indirect spending, for a total of 86.2
FTEs.
x The 86.2 FTEs directly and indirectly supported by Triple Crown are predominantly in the
Accommodations, Food Service, Retail, Entertainment and Recreation industry sectors.
Aggregated annualized wage for these jobs is estimated to average $25,632. Average
annual wage in Routt County as a whole is estimated to be $41,964.
Yampa Valley Data Partners Triple Crown Economic Impact Study 05/2015 Page 2 of 11
Introduction
Yampa Valley Data Partners, a nonprofit 501(c)3 organization, provides unbiased, accurate, timely
and relevant data to governments, businesses and nonprofits in the Northwest Colorado region.
Our mission is to stengthen our communities by providing this data as a foundational piece to
facilitate discussion, collaboration and the best possible decision making.
This assessment estimates the direct and indirect economic impacts of Triple Crown in terms
household Income by industry sector; job gains on a Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) basis; sales taxes
generated by industry sector; and sales-tax collections by taxing entity. Economic impacts of Triple
Crown are estimated using the following steps:
x Total estimated spending by Triple Crown visitors

x Visitor spending by category
x Tax revenue by spending category and tax funds
x Impact on local household income due to visitor spending and local vendor support
x Job creation
x Estimate of local spending and sales tax collections due to local household spending
x Estimated indirect impact by industry sector of households’ local spending
x Aggregation of sales tax collections by taxing entity from visitors and locals
These steps comprise an economic impact model developed by Yampa Valley Data Partners and
represent our organization’s best effort to account for direct and indirect economic impacts to the
community without understating or overstating any of these impacts. In a couple of the steps,
100% local spending was assumed, rather than figuring in a leakage factor. Reasoning behind this
is noted in the individual step where it occurs, and there is no instance in which the lack of this
leakage calculation significantly alters overall “big picture” results of this economic impact
assessment.
Data sources utilized include the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), the Colorado Department
of Labor and Employment, BizStats, City of Steamboat Springs financial reports, research by RRC
Associates, and chamber lodging data.
Step 1 - Total estimated spending
Direct total spending associated with Triple Crown visitors in the summer of 2014 is estimated to
have been $8.5 million.
Lodging data and summer 2014 research conducted in Steamboat Springs by RRC Associates, a
Boulder-based firm that has conducted numerous studies in Steamboat and other Colorado towns
and resort areas, were utilized to come up with this initial overall dollar amount.
Estimated amount Methodology

$8.5 million 16,200 guests x daily per-person expenditure of $104.39.
Spending per guest for 5 days/nights is $521.95. At 16,200
guests, total is $8,455,590.
Step 2 – Spending by category

This step takes the overall dollar value from Step 1 and divides the amount into primary spending
categories.
Category Percentage Amount Methodology

Lodging 43% $3,655,000 Spending per
Food and Drink 27% $2,295,000 category as
Retail 14% $1,190,000 identified in 2014
Recreation, Entertainment & Misc. 16% $1,360,000 RRC summer
Total 100% $8,500,000 research
Step 3 – Tax revenue by spending category and tax fund
Amounts from Step 2 are looked at here in terms of taxes raised per spending category and
revenues realized by each taxing entity.
Triple Crown generated approximately $340,000 in sales-tax revenue for the city in 2014. This
amount equals roughly 6.5% of the approximately $5.23 million in sales-tax dollars that the city
reported for the June-July-August 2014 period.
As shown in the table of 2014 figures below, Triple Crown also generates estimated sales-tax
revenues for the state ($246,500), Routt County ($85,000), the Local Marketing District ($73,100),
Steamboat schools ($42,500), the lodging-tax fund ($36,550) and the air-service support program
($21,250).
Colorado Routt City RE2 School LMD Lodging Airline Total

Tax Rate 2.9% 1.0% 4.0% 0.5% 2.0% 1.0% 0.25%
Lodging $105,995 $36,550 $146,200 $18,275 $73,100 $36,550 $9,138 $425,808
Food/Drink $66,555 $22,950 $91,800 $11,475 N/A N/A $ 5,738 $198,518

Retail $34,510 $11,900 $47,600 $5,950 N/A N/A $2,975 $102,935
Rec., Ent., $39,440 $13,600 $54,400 $6,800 N/A N/A $3.400 $117,640
Misc.
Total $246,500 $85,000 $340,000 $42,500 $73,100 $36,550 $21,250 $844,900
Note that the above numbers are initial direct-impact amounts. The tax-collecting entity totals will
increase by an overall total of 15.6% when additional impacts are aggregated into the tax-
collection figures in Step 8B (page 10).
Step 4 – Direct impact on household income due to visitor spending and
support services by local vendors
This steps looks at direct impacts on local household income in terms of direct visitor spending and
wages paid by local vendors to local workers.
Selling, General & Administrative (SG&A) customary to the Lodging, Food Services, Retail and
Entertainment industries were factored into the calculations to arrive at figures representing vendor
usage.
Vendor usage was considered to be entirely local, which does overstate local economic impact;
however, reliable data to the contrary was not available. It was then assumed that of the fees
collected by local vendors, half was spent on local labor. Again, this calculation may slightly
overstate local economic impact but was considered the best estimate to use in lieu of reliable data
to the contrary.
Step 5 - Estimate of job creation by category due to direct household income
(as a result of Triple Crown visitor spending)
This step produces an estimate of the jobs created as a direct result of Triple Crown spending.
Jobs are measured on an FTE (full-time equivalent) basis. The FTE calculation is done by taking
the average wage for the industry sector directly impacted and dividing it into the average annual
wage. Quarterly data from Q4- 2013 through Q3-2014 was used.
Since wages are shown before taxes, the value of taxes needs to be deducted to calculate
disposable income. However, in this study the wages/salaries are low enough that it is estimated
that the employees have no tax liability and in some cases are even eligible for Earned Income
Tax Credits (EITCs). This estimate is based on BLS Consumer Expenditure Data for incomes
between $20,000 and $30,000.
Step 6 - Estimate of local spending and sales-tax collections as a result of
direct local household spending
This estimate is based on BLS Consumer Expenditure Survey Data for households with earnings
between $20,000 and $30,000. This step also calculates the anticipated sales-tax collections by
taxing entity as a result of increased direct household spending.
In this step, it was assumed that the households would spend 100% of their disposable income
locally (with the exception of any Pensions and Social Security spending). This assumption likely
overstates the value – for example, if even modest leakage was accounted for by taking 80% of
the $2,138,973 total, that calculation would bring this figure down to $1,711,178. However, with the
impacted households being largely in low-income occupations, it was reasoned that a larger-than-
customary percentage of disposable household income would be spent locally. For example, it
stands to reason that a fair proportion of these households likely are renters paying a local
landlord, as opposed to homeowners paying an out-of-town mortgage company.
Category Amount spent
Shelter (Mortgage/Rent) $493,953
Utilities $216,803
Food (groceries) $205,627
Health care $203,392
Subtotal $1,119,775
Other $1,019,198
Total $2,138,973
80% of total (account for modest $1,711,178

leakage)
Step 7 - Estimated indirect impact by industry sector of direct households'
local spending
This step uses the calculations in Step 6 to estimate the indirect impacts by industry that are due to
direct household spending as a result of Triple Crown. The indirect spending associated with this
step sometimes is best understood by referring to it as “the first turn of the direct impact.”
The purpose of this step is to calculate the indirect spending by industry sector and the resulting
indirect wages created by increased spending by direct households. For Triple Crown, this step
results in adding another 4.8 full-time equivalents to the local job market.
Addition of the 4.8 FTEs in this step brings the FTE total impact to 86.2 FTEs.
The 86.2 FTEs directly and indirectly supported by Triple Crown are predominantly in
Accommodations, Food Service, Retail, Entertainment and Recreation industry sectors.
Aggregated annualized wage for these jobs is estimated to average $25,632. Average annual
wage in Routt County as a whole is estimated to be $41,964.
Step 8A - Sales tax factor as a result of indirect household spending
In this step the estimated sales tax is calculated for each of the taxing entities based on the
spending by indirect households. Again it was assumed that 100% of the spending by indirect
households is spent locally.
Step 8B - Aggregation of sales- tax collections by taxing entity from Triple

Crown visitors and locals
This step aggregates sales-tax collections due to spending directly associated with Triple Crown
visitors and both direct and indirect household spending. This step raises Triple Crown-related tax-
revenue amounts listed in Step 3 by amounts ranging from $64,773 for the city to $4,048 for the
air-service support program. Overall increase in sales-tax collections from Step 3 is 15.6%.
Summary
By generating roughly $8.5 million in visitor spending in 2014, Triple Crown directly accounted for
about 6.5% of the June-through-August taxable dollars in Steamboat, as well as 6.5% of June-
through-August city sales-tax revenues. Largest shares of the $8.5 million were spent on Lodging
(43%) and Food & Beverage (27%).
When direct and indirect economic impacts are considered, it can be reasonably estimated that
Triple Crown generates approximately $404,773 in sales-tax revenue for the city. This amount
equals roughly 7.7% of the approximately $5.23 million in sales-tax dollars that the city reported for
the June-July-August period in 2014.
Direct and indirect economic impacts associated with Triple Crown support a little better than 86
FTE (full-time equivalent) jobs in the lodging, food/ beverage, retail, and entertainment/recreation
industry sectors, with these jobs paying an aggregated annualized average wage of $25,632.
Average annual wage in Routt County as a whole is estimated to be $41,964.
Yampa Valley Data Partners, a nonprofit 501(c)3 organization, provides unbiased, accurate, timely and
relevant data to governments, businesses and nonprofits in the Northwest Colorado region.
AGENDA ITEM #7.
FROM: Kim Weber, Finance Director
DATE: June 2, 2015
ITEM: USA Pro Challenge update from host committee.
___ DIRECTION
_X_ INFORMATION
___ ORDINANCE
___ MOTION
___ RESOLUTION

City Council requested an update on the USA Pro Challenge regarding marketing
budget questions raised at the May 19th, 2015 City Council meeting. City Council
requested information to include previous contribution amounts from the City for
2011, 2013, and 2015.
The current budget for the USA Pro Challenge supplied by the Co-Chairs of the host
committee indicates that the event marketing budgeted about $10,000.
Additional details are located in the Fiscal Impact section of this communication
form.
II. ALTERNATIVES:
This is informational only, however City Council can:
1. Direct staff to bring back a supplemental budget request to fund additional
community support to USA Pro Challenge.
2. Use all or part of City Council contingency to fund additional community support
to USA Pro Challenge.
3. Take no action.
4. Provide other direction to staff.

Information only.
IV. FISCAL IMPACTS:
USA Pro Challenge Fund 2011-2015:
2011 2013 2015 Budget

Beginning Fund Balance $ - $ 36,009 $ 43,922
Revenue
City Contribution $ 35,000 $ 35,000 $ 50,000
Special Event Funding - Chamber 25,000 25,000 10,000
Sponsorships/Vending/Other Revenue 97,065 76,749 80,500 (Potentially $10k more in sponsorships)
In-Kind Revenue 146,786 66,439 175,000 (Estimated $140k-$210k)
Total Revenue $ 303,851 $ 239,197 $ 359,422
Expenditures
City Employee In-Kind Contribution $ 52,000 $ 31,000 $ 50,000 (Estimated)
Community In-Kind Contribution 94,786 35,438 125,000 (Estimated)
Expenses Paid with USAPCC Funds 121,056 128,837 182,935
Total Expenditures $ 267,842 $ 195,275 $ 357,935
Ending Fund Balance $ 36,009 $ 43,922 $ 1,487
V. LEGAL ISSUES:
None noted.

None noted.
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 1 – USA Pro Challenge Marketing Plan
Attachment 1
August16Ͳ18,2015
MarketingPlan
ExecutiveSummary
TheUSAProChallengeprovidesSteamboatSpringswithanunparalleledopportunitytopromoteour
communityonanationalstageasavacationdestinationwithaworldͲclassbikingculture.The
marketingeffortstosupporttheSteamboatOverallStartwillbebroadandmultifaceted,implemented
bytheMarketingsubͲcommitteeoftheLocalOrganizingCommittee.TheMarketingcommitteehasa
strongbackgrounddevelopingandimplementingmarketingplansforlargeͲscaleeventsandwillwork
withMedalistSportstoquicklyfinalizethedetailsandtimelines.

GoalsoftheMarketingCommittee
1. PromoteSteamboatonanationalstageasavacationdestinationwithincrediblebiking
2. TakeadvantageofUSAProChallengeopportunitiestoincreasetourism
3. Communityoutreach
4. Generateexcitementandenthusiasmabouttheevent
Markets
WeplantoadvertisetoboththeDenverandSaltLakeCitymarketsinadditiontocyclingenthusiasts
acrossthenation.TheChamberhasseenincreasedwebsitevisitationfromtheSaltLakeCityregionand
thusplacedsomegeneralsummerdestinationadsinthatmarket.AdsspecificallymarketingthePro
ChallengeinSteamboatSpringswillfollowthedestinationadsreinforcingthemessagetovisit
SteamboatinthesummerandtheProChallengewillbethecatalysttobookavacation.Additionally,the
Denver/FrontRangemarketwillbeseeingalotofmarketingfromtheotherhostcitiessowebelieveit
willbeadvantageoustoustoreachouttoSaltLakeCity.WewillhitcyclingenthusiaststhroughcontentͲ
specificwebsitesandtheirdatabases.

DedicatedSteamboatProCyclingWebsiteͲwww.steamboatprocycling.com
Duringthe2011and2013events,theSteamboatͲspecificwebsitegarnerednearly50,000pageviews,
withhalfofthetrafficgoingtotheCommunitypage.In2013weredesignedthesitetohighlightpopular
content.In2015thesitewillbehometoalloftheeventͲrelatedinformation.Forvisitors,lodging
packagesandeventscheduleswillbeeasytofind.FortheSteamboatcommunity,inadditiontothe
eventdetails,informationregardingroadclosures,routes,etc.willbeavailablesoeveryonecanplan
accordingly.

OnlineAds
WeplantorungeoͲtargetedcontextualandbehavioraldisplayadsinboththeDenverandSaltLakeCity
markets.WealsoplantorunadsonVeloNews.comtohitthecyclingenthusiastsnationwide.

BroadcastMedia
Inadditiontothedisplayadcampaign,wewouldliketorunradioadcampaignsinDenverandSaltLake
radio.TheChamberhasastrongradiocampaignrunningMayandJuneintheDenvermarket.Additional
radioadsfeaturingtheProChallengeinSteamboatwillagainsolidifythemessagetogettoSteamboat
thissummer.
WeareworkingwithBrianHarveyonaradiosponsorshiptosupportthelocalnewspaperoutreach.

EmailMarketing
WeplantoworkwithVeloNewstosendoneortwoemailstotheirdatabasetoadvertisetheOverall
Startweekendofeventsandlodgingpackage.InadditiontoChamberandSteamboatSkiandResort
Corporationemailcampaigns,lodgingpropertieswillsendtargetedmessagestotheirdatabases
featuringpromotionsanddetailsoftheevent.
2

MagazineAds
TheChamberhasdonatedadspaceintheVisitorsGuidetopromotetheOverallStart.TheMarketing
committeehaspurchasesadspaceintheJulyissueof5280toreachtheDenvermarket.Readersof
5280haveastrongpropensitytotravelandthemajorityofreadershavefamilies.Twokey
demographicswewouldliketohit.

SocialMedia
Socialmediaisapowerfulchannelthatconnectspeopletoevents.Wehavetwocommitteemembers
onpointtogrowengagementandfansoftheUSAProChallengeSteamboatFacebookpageandTwitter
handletoincreaseawarenessofandgarnerinterestintheevent.

NewspaperAds
SteamboatPilotispartneringwiththeLOCsothatwecanassurethecommunityandvisitorsknow
aboutalloftheexcitingeventsrelatedtotheOverallStartinadditiontothestreetclosuresandparking
information.

OtherPrintCollateralandSignage
Downtownlightpolebanners,streetbannerandpostersareallinthemarketingplan.

Budget
Website: Volunteerhours
OnlineAds: $10,000Ͳ12,000
BroadcastMedia: $18,000plussponsorshiptrade
EmailMarketing: $1500Ͳ3000
MagazineAds: $3500
SocialMedia: Volunteerhours
NewspaperAds: sponsorshiptrade
OtherPrintCollateralandSignage: $1500
Design: $1000Ͳ2000

TOTAL: $35,500Ͳ40,000

TheProChallengereceived$10,000fromSpecialEventFundingAllocations.
Withoutfurtherfinancialsupport,theBroadcastMediaandOnlineAdswillnothappen.Wewilldotwo
emailstotheVeloNewsdatabaseandplaceoneadintheJulyissueof5280thoughthatwillbetheonly
adbuywedooutsideSteamboat.

Conclusion
WiththeresourcesthataregoingintobikinginfrastructureinSteamboatnowisthetimetoeducatethe
worldthatSteamboatSpringsisBikeTownUSA.TheexposuretheUSAProChallengebringstoeachhost
town,butespeciallytotheOverallStart,istheopportunitytotellourstory.
3

AGENDA ITEM #8.
DATE: June 2, 2015
ITEM: A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE SECOND AMENDMENT TO

AIR PROGRAM CONTRIBUTION AGREEMENT (2010-2015).
FORM OF MOTION:
Approve the resolution approving the second amendment to the Air Program
Contribution Agreement (2010-2015).
___ DIRECTION
___ INFORMATION
___ ORDINANCE
___ MOTION
_X_ RESOLUTION

According to the State Statute pertaining to Local Marketing Districts, the Board of
Directors has authority to enter into agreements and contracts; however the By-
Laws of the Steamboat Springs Local Marketing District state that each agreement
or contract must be approved by City Council prior to execution.
The Air Program Contribution Agreement between the Steamboat Ski & Resort
Corporation (SSRC) and the Local Marketing District (LMD) dated June 15, 2010
and further amended on April 10, 2012 expires by its terms on June 15, 2015.
Amendments to the Agreement are being negotiated between the LMD and SSRC,
but have not yet been finalized. Both parties are requesting a 90-day extension to
the current agreement to allow time to negotiate the terms of the agreement. The
new expiration date of the agreement and amendments would be September 15,
2015.
Prior to September 15, 2015 the LMD Board will present a resolution to City Council
with the agreed upon terms.
II. ALTERNATIVES:
Council can approve the resolution, direct staff to work with the LMD Board and
Steamboat Ski & Resort Corporation to change the amendment, or not approve the
amendment.

Approve the Resolution approving the Second Amendment to the Air Program
Contribution Agreement (2010-2015).
IV. FISCAL IMPACTS:

None noted.
V. LEGAL ISSUES:
This process is in accordance with to Colorado Revised State Statutes 29-25-110,
Local Marketing District Act.

None noted.
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 1. Executed Air Program Contribution Agreement (2010-2015).
Attachment 2. Executed 1st Amendment to the Air Program Contribution Agreement
(2010-2015)
Attachment 1
Attachment 2
CITY OF STEAMBOAT SPRINGS, COLORADO
RESOLUTION NO. ___
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE SECOND AMENDMENT TO

THE AIR PROGRAM CONTRIBUTION AGREEMENT (2010-
2015) BY AND BETWEEN THE STEAMBOAT SPRINGS LOCAL
MARKETING DISTRICT AND STEAMBOAT SKI & RESORT
COPRORATION.
WHEREAS, pursuant to Colorado Revised State Statutes 29-25-110; the

Steamboat Springs Local Marketing District has the authority to enter into contracts
and agreements; and
WHEREAS, according to the By-Laws of the Steamboat Springs Local

Marketing District, the City Council must approve agreements and contracts
entered into prior to execution.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY

OF STEAMBOAT SPRINGS, COLORADO, THAT:
Section 1. The City hereby approves the Second Amendment to the Air
Program Contribution Agreement (2010-2015).
PASSED, ADOPTED AND APPROVED this 2nd day of June, 2015.
______________________
Bart Kounovsky, President
ATTEST: Steamboat Springs City Council
__________________
Julie Franklin, CMC
City Clerk
1
Exhibit A
AGENDA ITEM #9.
DATE: June 2, 2015
ITEM: A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE 2015 SUMMER AIR

PROGRAM AGREEMENT DATED APRIL 1, 2015 BY AND
BETWEEN THE STEAMBOAT SPRINGS LOCAL MARKETING
DISTRICT AND STEAMBOAT SKI & RESORT COPRORATION.
FORM OF MOTION:
Approve the resolution approving the 2015 Summer Air Program Agreement dated April
1, 2015 by and between the Steamboat Springs Local Marketing District and Steamboat
Ski & Resort Corporation.
___ DIRECTION
___ INFORMATION
___ ORDINANCE
___ MOTION
_X_ RESOLUTION

According to the State Statute pertaining to Local Marketing Districts, the Board of
Directors has authority to enter into agreements and contracts; however the By-
Laws of the Steamboat Springs Local Marketing District state that each agreement
or contract must be approved by City Council prior to execution.
The LMD Board voted to work with Steamboat Ski & Resort Corporation (SSRC) to
guarantee summer flights between Yampa Valley Regional Airport and Houston.
They approved spending LMD accommodation tax reserves for flight guarantees,
$50,000 for marketing with SSRC, and $10,000 in management fees to SSRC.
II. ALTERNATIVES:
Council can approve the resolution, direct staff to work with the LMD Board and
Steamboat Ski & Resort Corporation to amend the agreement, or not approve the
agreement.

Approve the Resolution approving the 2015 Summer Air Program Agreement.
IV. FISCAL IMPACTS:

None noted.
V. LEGAL ISSUES:
This process is in accordance with to Colorado Revised State Statutes 29-25-110,
Local Marketing District Act.

None noted.
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS
None.
RESOLUTION NO. ___
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE 2015 SUMMER AIR PROGRAM

AGREEMENT DATED APRIL 1, 2015 BY AND BETWEEN THE
STEAMBOAT SPRINGS LOCAL MARKETING DISTRICT AND
STEAMBOAT SKI & RESORT COPRORATION.
WHEREAS, pursuant to Colorado Revised State Statutes 29-25-110; the

Steamboat Springs Local Marketing District has the authority to enter into contracts and
agreements; and
WHEREAS, according to the By-Laws of the Steamboat Springs Local Marketing

District, the City Council must approve agreements and contracts entered into prior to
execution.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

STEAMBOAT SPRINGS, COLORADO, THAT:
Section 1. The City hereby approves an agreement dated April 1, 2015 between
the Steamboat Springs Local Marketing District and Steamboat Ski & Resort Corporation
for management and marketing of the 2015 summer air program.
PASSED, ADOPTED AND APPROVED this 2nd day of June, 2015.
______________________
__________________
Julie Franklin, CMC
City Clerk
1
Exhibit A
April 1, 2015
Via Hand Delivery
Steamboat Springs Local Marketing District

PO Box 774408
Steamboat Springs, CO 80487
Attn: Chuck Porter
Re: 2015 Summer Air Program
Chuck:
The purpose of this letter is to confirm the engagement of Steamboat Ski & Resort
Corporation (“SSRC”) to provide management, consulting and marketing services to the
Steamboat Springs Local Marketing District (“LMD”) as provided in Section 3 of the Air
Program Contribution Agreement between SSRC and the LMD dated as of June 15, 2010, as
amended by a First Amendment to Air Program Contribution Agreement (2010-2015) dated as
of April 10, 2012 (collectively, the “Agreement”) with respect to a summer air program for 2015.
The engagement involves negotiating and contracting for air service by United Airlines
for flights from Houston, TX (IAH) to and from Hayden, CO (HDN) during the summer months
of 2015 (approximately late June through early September). The LMD acknowledges that SSRC
will execute an agreement with the carrier for such service, and the LMD agrees to promptly
reimburse SSRC, on demand with customary documentation, for all costs of such service and
that SSRC shall have no responsibility for any such costs whatsoever, whether deriving from
minimum revenue guarantees in the contract or otherwise, and SSRC shall not be required to
make a financial contribution of any kind on account of such service, anything in the Agreement
to the contrary notwithstanding. For avoidance of doubt, any references to cost sharing by SSRC
for the Winter Air Program and/or Summer Air Program shall not be applicable to this Summer
Air Program and the parties agree there will be no cost sharing but all costs will be borne by the
LMD.
The LMD will pay SSRC a fee of $10,000 for SSRC’s services in connection with this
Summer Air Program, as and when provided in the Agreement, and will also pay any out-of-
pocket expenses incurred by SSRC provided that such expenses are approved in writing in
advance by the LMD.
The LMD also engages SSRC to provide marketing services for this 2015 Summer Air
Program with payment or reimbursement by the LMD up to but not exceeding $50,000 for all
such services (which includes agency fees, development of materials and placement fees, among
other standard costs of such a campaign, but SSRC will not charge for its personnel and their
time, only third party costs), per the approving LMD motion. SSRC shall coordinate the
marketing efforts with the LMD and the Steamboat Springs Chamber Resort Association
(“SSCRA”), and may subcontract certain of the marketing services to the SSCRA. The
marketing campaign shall be shared with both the LMD and the SSCRA prior to being launched,
1
provided that SSRC shall have the authority to modify various elements of the campaign to
respond to market acceptance and other considerations without advance approval.
The parties are in the process of negotiating a Second Amendment to the Agreement
extending the term of the Agreement to cover the period of the 2015 summer air program and
beyond until June 15, 2017. If for any reason the parties fail to execute such Second
Amendment or other extension of the Agreement prior to the current termination date of the
Agreement, June 15, 2015, by this signing this letter the parties agree that the Agreement shall be
deemed to have been extended to include the period of the 2015 summer air program and the
contemplated agreement with United Airlines as set forth herein, and the parties rights and
obligations with respect thereto shall be governed by the Agreement in all respects.
If the foregoing correctly states the terms of this engagement under Section 3 of the
Agreement please countersign below where indicated. By so signing, you hereby confirm that
the terms of this engagement have been duly approved by all necessary action by the LMD.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Rob Perlman
Senior Vice President – Sales & Marketing
Approved this ___ day of ___________, 2015
Steamboat Springs Local Marketing District
___________________________________
Chuck Porter, Chairman
cc: Tom Sharp

Chris Diamond
Janet Fischer
Deb Hinsvark
Kara Stoller
2
AGENDA ITEM #10.
FROM: Ben Beall, City Engineer
THROUGH: Chuck Anderson, Director of Public Works
DATE: June 2nd, 2015
ITEM: A RESOLUTION ADOPTING PRELIMINARY PLANS, COST

ESTIMATE, AND A MAP OF THE PROPOSED “CITY OF
STEAMBOAT SPRINGS LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT
NUMBER 12, SNAPDRAGON WAY”; PRESCRIBING OTHER
DETAILS RELATING TO THE PROPOSED DISTRICT;
CONDITIONALLY ORDERING THAT IMPROVEMENTS BE
MADE; SETTING A HEARING DATE; AND PRESCRIBING
NOTICE OF SAID HEARING.
FORM OF MOTION:
A RESOLUTION ADOPTING PRELIMINARY PLANS, COST ESTIMATE, AND A MAP OF THE

PROPOSED “CITY OF STEAMBOAT SPRINGS LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NUMBER
12, SNAPDRAGON WAY”; PRESCRIBING OTHER DETAILS RELATING TO THE PROPOSED
DISTRICT; CONDITIONALLY ORDERING THAT IMPROVEMENTS BE MADE; SETTING A
HEARING DATE; AND PRESCRIBING NOTICE OF SAID HEARING.
___ DIRECTION
___ INFORMATION
___ ORDINANCE
___ MOTION
_X_ RESOLUTION
On May 19th, 2015 Council approved this same resolution. Unfortunately two exhibits to
the resolution, the map of the district and the preliminary cost estimate, were
inadvertently omitted from the Council packet. This omission may have presented a legal
issue and therefore the resolution is being presented to Council for adoption so as to
include all required exhibits. The revised resolution does include a modification to the
public hearing date of the LID ordinance to be held on July 21, 2015. This modification is
not expected to alter the project schedule, with bid package release targeted for the week
of June 15th.
II. ALTERNATIVES:
Staff recommends adopting the resolution
IV. FISCAL IMPACTS:
Proposed Expenditure: $266,550 (preliminary cost estimate)

Funding Source: Formation of Local Improvement District via property
assessment (funds initially withdrawn from reserves
and lien filed against responsible adjacent properties.
Property assessments are then set and collected until
such time as the expenditure is fully reimbursed)
V. LEGAL ISSUES:
• Potential Property Owner dissent
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS
RESOLUTION NO. __
A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 2015-12, RELATING TO

THE “CITY OF STEAMBOAT SPRINGS LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT
NUMBER 12, SNAPDRAGON WAY”; INCORPORATING OMITTED
EXHIBITS; AND POSTPONING THE HEARING DATE.
WHEREAS, the City of Steamboat Springs (herein “City”) in the County of Routt,
State of Colorado, is a home rule municipal corporation duly organized and existing
under the laws of the State and, in particular, under the provisions of Article XX of the
Constitution of the State and the City Charter (the “Charter”) duly adopted by the
qualified electors of the City on November 6, 1973, and thereafter filed with the
Secretary of State of the State of Colorado on November 13, 1973, and last amended in
1989; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to said Charter, and particularly Article 11 thereof, the City
adopted Ordinance Number 450 (the “enabling ordinance”), read, passed, and
approved the 18th day of June, 1974, relating to local improvements and the financing
thereof, which ordinance, as since amended, has been duly codified as Chapter 13 of
the Steamboat Springs Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the Council is of the opinion that the interest of the City requires the
herein described street and drainage improvement project, including all improvements
incidental thereto, and that proceedings to effectuate the project shall be begun by the
adoption of a resolution as provided in the enabling ordinance; and
WHEREAS, for the purposes of designation and identification, it is desirable that

the hereinafter described local improvement district be known and identified as “City of
Steamboat Springs, Colorado Local Improvement District Number 12, Snapdragon Way”
(the “District”); and
WHEREAS, the Council on May 5, 2015 initiated proceedings to form the District
and ordered the City Engineer to prepare preliminary plans and specifications, a cost
estimate, and a map of the District; and
WHEREAS, on May 19, 2015 the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2015-12
adopting the preliminary plans and specifications, cost estimate, and map of the
District; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds it necessary and appropriate to the public
health, safety, and welfare to amend and re-adopt Resolution No. 2015-12 to postpone
the hearing on the ordinance creating the District from July 7, 2015 to July 21, 2015
and to incorporate exhibits inadvertently omitted from Resolution No. 2015-12.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

STEAMBOAT SPRINGS, COLORADO, THAT:
SECTION 1. Resolution No. 2015-12 is hereby amended to read as herein provided.

All action not inconsistent with the provisions of this resolution heretofore taken by the
officers of said City directed toward making the improvements hereafter described in
the District are hereby ratified, approved, and confirmed.
SECTION 2. The street and drainage improvement project hereafter described and
the improvements incidental thereto will serve a public use and will promote the health,
safety, and welfare of the citizens, inhabitants, and property owners in the District and
in the City.
SECTION 3. The preliminary plans and specifications attached hereto as Exhibit “A”,
the estimate of probable cost attached as exhibit “C”, and the map of the proposed
District presented to Council as Exhibit “B” on this 2nd day of June, 2015 are hereby
found satisfactory and approved and adopted.
SECTION 4. The District shall consist of the following property: Lot 3, Steamboat
Village Commercial Center, Replat F, according to the plat thereof recorded in the
records of the Routt County Clerk and Recorder at File No. 12894, Lots 2-4, Steamboat
Village Commercial Center Replat B, according to the plat thereof recorded in the
records of the Routt County Clerk and Recorder at File No. 10301, and the entirety of
Easement Area No. 1, also known as Snapdragon Way, as described in the Steamboat
Village Commercial Center Replat B, all as shown on the map attached hereto as Exhibit
“B”.
SECTION 5. The nature and location of the improvements to be made are described
in the attached Exhibit “A” and generally consist of the following improvements:
a. The relocation and adjustment of various utilities;
b. Various roadway and drainage system modifications;
c. The paving of Snapdragon Way.
Materials used shall be as specified in Exhibit “A”.
SECTION 6. All assessments made in connection with the District shall be due and
payable without demand within thirty (30) days after final publication of the assessment
ordinance. All such assessments may, at the election of the owner of the assessed
property, be paid in installments. In the case of a property owner electing to pay in
installments, the assessment shall be payable in five (5) substantially equal annual
installments of principal. No interest shall be charged on installments paid when due.
SECTION 7. The total estimated cost of the improvements in the District, including,
without limitation, the cost of constructing or otherwise acquiring such improvements,
engineering, legal, and advertising costs, interest during construction and until
assessments are made by ordinance against the properties benefitted, and other
incidental costs, as shown by the estimate of the City Engineer, is $266,550.00. This
amount is an estimate and is not a limitation on the amount of costs that may be
assessed against the benefitted property in the District. The City Engineer’s estimate is
attached as Exhibit “C”.
SECTION 8. The approximate amount or share of the total estimate to be assessed

against property included in the District and specially benefitted by the proposed
improvements is one hundred percent (100%). No portion of the total cost will be paid
other than by special assessment. Assessments shall be levied against each lot within
the boundaries of the District, said lots being specially benefitted by the improvements
to be made, and such assessment shall be apportioned among the lots on a front foot
basis. The share of the total cost and approximate amount to be assessed against each
lot in the District is as follows:
Lot 3, Steamboat Village Commercial Center, Replat F: 50% $133,275.00

Lot 2, Steamboat Village Commercial Center Replat B: 17% $45,313.50
SECTION 9. Construction of the improvements described in Exhibit “A” is hereby

ordered to be commenced upon the adoption of an ordinance authorizing the District.
Tuesday, July 21, 2015, 5:30 p.m. at Citizens Hall, Centennial Hall, in the City, are
hereby fixed as the time and place for a public hearing on the second reading of the
ordinance creating the District.
SECTION 10. After adoption of this resolution and introduction on first reading of the
ordinance creating the District, the City Clerk shall give notice of the hearing on the by
publication in the Steamboat Pilot, a newspaper of general circulation in the City, no
later than twenty (20) days prior to the hearing. In addition, notice shall be mailed by
first class mail to each property owner to be assessed for the cost of the improvements
who is to be included in the District, such addresses and owners being those appearing
on the real property assessment rolls for general (ad valorem) taxes of Routt County,
Colorado. The notice shall be mailed no later than twenty (20) days prior to the
hearing. The notice shall include the following information:
a) The extent of the local improvement district to be assessed and improved, by

boundaries or other brief description;
b) The kind of improvements proposed, without mentioning minor details;
c) The number of installments and the time in which the cost of the improvements
will be payable;
d) The probable cost as shown by the total estimate of the engineer, which
estimate shall not constitute a limitation upon the cost of the project nor for any
other purpose;
e) The amount or proportion of the total cost to be paid by other than special
assessments, if any;
f) The method of levying assessments;
g) The approximate amount or share of the portion of the total estimate to be
assessed against property specially benefited by the acquisition of the
improvement or improvements proposed;
h) The probable cost per front foot or other unit basis, which, in the judgment of
the Council, reflects the benefits which accrue to the properties to be assessed,
as shown by the estimate of the City Engineer;
i) The time when an ordinance authorizing the improvements will be considered;
j) That the map and estimate and schedule showing the approximate amounts to
be assessed and all resolutions and proceedings are on file and can be seen and
examined by any interested person at the office of the clerk within said period of
twenty (20) days;
k) That all complaints and objections made in writing concerning the proposed
improvement by the owners of any property to be assessed will be heard and
determined by the governing body before any final action is taken.
SECTION 11. The officers of the City of Steamboat Springs are hereby authorized and
directed to take all action necessary or appropriate to effectuate the provisions of this
resolution.
SECTION 12. All resolutions, or parts thereof, in conflict with this resolution are
hereby repealed. This repealer shall not be construed to revive any order, by law, or
resolution, or party thereof, heretofore repealed.
SECTION 13. If any section, paragraph, clause, or provision of this resolution is for
any reason held to be invalid or unenforceable, the invalidity or unenforceability of such
section, paragraph, clause or provision shall not affect the validity of the remaining
provisions of this resolution.
SECTION 14. This resolution shall upon its final passage and adoption be recorded in
the book of resolutions kept for that purpose and authenticated by the signatures of the
Council President and City Clerk.
INTRODUCED, READ, PASSED, ADOPTED AND APPROVED this 2nd day of June,
2015.
__________________________________
________________________________
Julie Franklin, CMC
City Clerk
EXHIBIT A
Know what's
R
EXHIBIT
EXHIBIT B
B
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, G eoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA,

USG S, AEX, G etmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User
Community
April 30, 2 015
Legend
Addresses Stre et
City La nd/Open Spa ce
SubAd dress
City Limits
Lots
Parcels Scale: 1:3,314
Miles
Own erProp erties 0 0.025 0.05 0.1
EXHIBIT C
Snapdragon Way Roadway Reconstruction

Estimate of Probable Costs
13-M ay-15
Design and Pavement Evaluation $ 20,033.00
Removals and Demolition $ 11,620.00

Revegetation, Erosion and Sediment Control $ 9,995.00
Earthwork and Subgrade Prep $ 38,407.00
Utilities $ 180.00
Drainage, Curb, and Gutter $ 50,321.00
Paving $ 54,615.00
Traffic Control $ 15,000.00
Mobilization $ 10,000.00
Construction Surveying $ 3,500.00
Dust Control $ 2,000.00
Subtotal $ 195,638.00
Engineering Inspection and Materials Testing 6% $ 11,738.28
Contingency 10% $ 19,563.80
City Administrative Cost 10% $ 19,563.80
Total $ 266,536.88
AGENDA ITEM #11
Staff is requesting this item be postponed until July 7,

2015.
AGENDA ITEM #12.
FROM: David Van Winkle, Transit Superintendent

Chuck Anderson, Public Works Director
THROUGH: Debra Hinsvark, City Manager
DATE: June 2nd 2015
ITEM: Add Street Sweeping as an Exemption to the Noise Pollution

Ordinance
___ DIRECTION
___ INFORMATION
_X_ ORDINANCE
___ MOTION
___ RESOLUTION
I. REQUEST OR ISSUE:
Public Works is requesting that Street Sweeping operations be listed as an additional

exemption in the Steamboat Springs Municipal Code, Article III - Noise Pollution, Section
7-62 (Exemptions). The wording of the ordinance for this exemption request has not
changed from the previous submission that was approved on a temporary basis on
February 24, 2015 by Ordinance No. 2523. The ordinance has been revised to codify the
exemption in Section 7-62 of the Revised Municipal Code instead of in Section 7-65.
II. BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
Monitoring for Particulate Matter (PM) 10, an air quality standard, began in Steamboat
Springs in 1985, when the City exceeded the EPA mandated threshold. It took the City
almost 19 years before it reached the Attainment/Maintenance designation it holds
today under the PM10 threshold. A principal technique used to keep this designation is
the requirement for street sweeping operations to occur. These operations use vacuum
sweepers to keep the roadways clear of debris, including the scoria used as part of our
snow management operations. Sweeping operations are successfully completed
throughout the day city-wide, with the exception of Yampa, Oak, U.S. 40, and the
associated side streets (3rd to 12th) which can only be cleared before early morning
traffic and during restricted parking hours. The Streets Division also receives requests
for sweeping from the Police and Fire Departments after accidents and spills, and for
special events such as the USA Pro Cycling Challenge. These cleanups are unscheduled
or last minute requests and can happen at any time, day or night. On February 24th
City Council granted a 90-day exemption to the ordinance request, so other options
could be explored. During this time, the Street and Fleet Superintendents evaluated the
mechanics of the sweepers and implemented changes to reduce the noise levels. Since
these changes were made, Public Works has not received any complaints about the
sweeping operations. On May 6th the Public Works Director and Street Superintendent
met with Mr. Geoffrey Petis, a concerned citizen who had raised concerns about the
noise levels associated with street sweeping operations. During the meeting the
equipment changes were explained to Mr. Petis, who acknowledged that the changes
seemed to have fixed the situation. Mr. Petis now supports this request for exemption.
III. RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Approve the proposed ordinance to add the exemption of the street sweeping operations.
Street sweeping is critical to maintaining our current air quality level and is vital to the
success of our PM-10 Maintenance Plan and agreement with federal and state entities.
IV. LEGAL ISSUES:
If the City exceeds the PM-10 standard, we could be required to implement more
stringent requirements from the federal and/or state level. Additionally, the City can be
held liable for any dangerous accumulation of snow, ice, sand, or gravel left on a roadway
in connection with snow maintenance operations. The Governmental Immunity Act,
Section 24-10-106(1)(d)(1) may impose liability if the City knew about a particular
dangerous accumulation of sand or gravel, had the existing means available to deal with
it, and had a reasonable time to act. Street sweeping as described above helps to mitigate
the safety and liability concerns caused by excess sand or gravel on roadways.
V. FISCAL IMPACTS:
None.
VII. SUMMARY AND ALTERNATIVES:
In summary, it is in the City’s best interest to add street sweeping operations to the
exemption list as reduced air quality would have a negative health impact on our citizens
and visitors. Also, the excess sand or gravel left on roadways after snow maintenance
operations implicates safety and liability concerns as well as environmental concerns from
an air, water and stormwater perspective. City Council could choose to not approve this
request, with the impact of having to increase operational budgets to provide additional
resources to perform increased street sweeping operations.
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS
1 –Steamboat Springs Municipal Code, Article III - Noise Pollution, Section and 7-62 and
7-65.
Attachment 1
x Sec.7Ͳ62.ͲExemptions.
(a)
Emergency vehicles. The requirements, prohibitions and terms of this article shall not apply to
any authorized emergency vehicle when responding to an emergency call or acting in time of
emergency.
(b)
Parades, fireworks and other special activities. The terms of this article shall not apply to those
activities of a temporary duration permitted by law for which a license or permit has been
granted by the city, including but not limited to parades, and fireworks displays.
(c)
Commercial refuse haulers. The terms of this article shall not apply to the activities of
commercial refuse haulers operating under a license issued pursuant to the provisions of
division 2, of article II, of chapter 19 of this Code when such commercial refuse haulers operate
between the hours of 5:00 a.m. and 7:00 a.m. in all industrial zone districts and in commercial
zone districts located within Old Town, Ski Time Square, [and] Gondola Square. For purposes
of this subsection Old Town shall be deemed to be the area bounded by Oak, Yampa, Third,
and Twelfth Streets, including all lots accessible from said streets. Ski Time Square shall be
deemed to be Ski Time Square Drive and all streets, alleys, and parking lots accessible from
Ski Time Square Drive, and Gondola Square shall be deemed to be all streets, alleys, and
parking lots serving Gondola Square and located east of Mt. Werner Circle, north of Apres Ski
Way, and South of Ski Time Square.
(Ord. No. 2399, § 1, 7-19-11)
Sec.7Ͳ65.ͲMaximumnoiselevels.
For the purpose of determining and classifying any noise as excessive or unusually loud as
declared to be unlawful and prohibited by this article, the following test measurements and
requirements may be applied. The point of measurement for determining violation shall be at the
property line of the impacted property.
(1)
Every activity to which this article is applicable shall be conducted in a manner so that any
noise produced is not objectionable due to intermittence, beat frequency or shrillness.
Sound levels of noise radiating from any property in excess of the db(A) established for
the following time periods and zones shall constitute prima facie evidence that such noise
is a public nuisance:
Zone 7:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. to
next next
11:00 p.m. 7:00 a.m.
Residential 55 db(A) 55 db(A)
Commercial 65 db(A) 55 db(A)
Industrial 80 db(A) 75 db(A)
Agriculture and recreation (including parks and open 55db(A) 55db(A)

space)
(2)
Individual citations for violations of maximum noise levels shall be separated by not less
than eight (8) hours.
(3)
Periodic, impulsive noise including low frequency and/or shrill noises shall be considered
a public nuisance when such noises are at a sound level of five (5) db(A) less than those
listed in subsection (1) of this section.
(4)
This section is not intended to apply to the operation of aircraft or to other activities which
are subject to federal law with respect to noise control.
(5)
Construction projects shall not be subject to the provisions of this article between 7:00
a.m. and 7:00 p.m. for the period within which construction is to be completed pursuant to
any applicable construction permit issued by proper authority or, if not time limitation is
imposed, for a reasonable period of time for completion of the project. Construction
projects in residential neighborhoods shall not exceed fifty-five (55) decibels from7:00 p.m.
to 7:00 a.m.
(6)
All railroad rights-of-way shall be considered as industrial zones for the purposes of this
section, and the operation of trains shall be subject to the maximum permissible noise
levels specified for such zone.
(7)
This section is not applicable to the use of property for purposes of conducting speed or
endurance events involving motor vehicles or other vehicles, but such exception is
effective only during the specific period to time within which such use of the property is
authorized by the political subdivision or governmental agency having lawful jurisdiction to
authorize such use.
(8)
In all sound level measurements, consideration shall be given to the effect of the ambient
noise level created by the encompassing noise of the environment from all sources at the
time and place of such sound level measurement.
(9)
This article is not applicable to the use of property for the purpose of manufacturing,
maintaining or grooming machine-made as well as natural snow.
(10)
This article shall not apply to the operation of snow removal equipment for purposes of
snow removal.

ORDINANCE NO. _________
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING NOISE POLLUTION REGULATIONS TO

EXEMPT CITY STREET SWEEPING OPERATIONS FOR A PERIOD OF
NINETY DAYS.
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that City street sweeping operations are necessary to
maintain City compliance with federal air quality and stormwater standards; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds street sweeping operations must take place during
early morning hours in order to allow for orderly and efficient conduct of street sweeping
operations and to avoid unnecessary conflicts with vehicular traffic; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that it is not feasible to conduct street sweeping
operations in accordance with existing provisions of the City’s noise pollution ordinance; and
WHEREAS, the City Council hereby determines that it is necessary to the public health,
safety, and welfare to exempt street sweeping operations from the provisions of the City’s noise
pollution ordinance.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

STEAMBOAT SPRINGS THAT:
SECTION 1. Section 7-62 of the City of Steamboat Springs Revised Municipal Code is hereby
amended by the addition of the following subsection (d):
“(d) This article shall not apply to the operation of municipal street sweeping vehicles.”
SECTION 2. The City Council hereby finds, determines and declares that this ordinance is
necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, and safety.
SECTION 3. This ordinance shall take effect five (5) days after publication following final
passage as provided in Section 7.6(h) of the City of Steamboat Springs Home Rule Charter.
INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED published, as provided by law, by the City Council of
the City of Steamboat Springs, at its regular meeting held on the 2nd day of June, 2015.
_________________________
Steamboat Springs City Council
ATTEST:
_________________________
Julie Franklin, CMC
City Clerk
FINALLY READ, PASSED AND APPROVED this ___ day of _____________, 2015.
___________________________
Steamboat Springs City Council
ATTEST:
________________________
Julie Franklin, CMC
City Clerk
MEMORANDUM
TO: President, President Pro-Tem and Members of the City Council
FROM: John Overstreet, Director of Parks and Community Services
DATE: May 28, 2015
RE: Parks and Recreation Commission Report
The Commission met for a regular meeting on May 28, 2015.
The Commission interviewed six applicants to be on the Alternative Funding

Committee:
• Jim Clark
• Jim Boyne
• David Scully
• Kady Watson
• Thomas Todd
• Nikki Knoebel
The Commission voted to appoint all six to the subcommittee with the
contingency that Kady Watson could not be on the subcommittee if she became a
member of the commission, which she also applied for. These six members would be
joining Commissioners Doug Tumminello, Julie Alkema, Councilwoman Sonja Macys,
and County Commissioner Kari Hermacinski bringing the group to 10 total members.
The first meeting is scheduled to be held either the morning or evening of Wednesday,
June 3rd.
Craig Robinson also brought the discussion item of changing the definition of
commercial river operators to include property management groups that shuttle tubers
to the river. Currently the Yampa River Management Plan does not include this group
because they do not charge a fee for the shuttle service. The commission agreed if they
were going to go down the road of changing the ordinance the retailers should be
involved in the discussion first. Chairman Koermer pointed out that identifying who
these users are will need to be specifically defined and making outreach to lodging
partners, retailers and others would be a good first step.
TO: CITY COUNCIL
FROM: JASON LACY, PLANNING COMMISSION CHAIR
DATE: MAY 22, 2015
RE: PLANNING COMMISSION UPDATE
During the month of May, the Planning Commission continued its ongoing Community
Development Code update by reviewing the zone district intent statements and the various
categories of zoning that exist throughout the City.
The primary emphasis of our discussion was to provide comments to staff on potential
edits and clarifications to some of the zone district intent statements. For some time, the Planning
Commission and staff have been discussing how we can better make decisions and
recommendations to City Council on development applications. We have had some concerns that
some of the zone district intent statements are not clear which thereby inhibits our ability to
advise City Council on whether certain applications should be approved (i.e. conditional use
applications, applications that include variances, Planned Unit Development applications, etc.).
The Planning Commission has given guidance to staff to revise some of these intent statements,
particularly in regard to the Multi-Family, G-1, G-2, CN, and CY zone districts. Several of these
intent statements need revisions and for CN and CY zones the Planning Commission has
proposed that multiple districts be established so as to clarify what development is allowed in
certain areas of the city.
We anticipate that staff will provide proposed revisions to these zone district intent
statements within the next couple months and then it would likely be appropriate to bring the
final product on these intent statement revisions to City Council so we can obtain input as to
whether you agree with our proposals. It is critical to have clearly defined intent statements for
all zone districts because without this it would be difficult for Planning Commission and/or City
Council to objectively evaluate whether development proposals that do not neatly fit within our
Community Development Code parameters should be approved or denied.
I’ll be happy to discuss any of these items or any other items from Planning Commission
at your convenience.
AGENDA ITEM #13.
FROM: Toby Stauffer, City Planner

Tyler Gibbs, AIA, Director of Planning & Community Development

DATE: June 2, 2015
ITEM: Development Plan for Conditional Use; Temporary structure and use
ACM Subdvision, Parcel 3 (West End Plaza)
FORM OF MOTION: Approve or Deny the Conditional Use request
___ DIRECTION
___ INFORMATION
___ ORDINANCE
_X_ MOTION
___ RESOLUTION

Request: A Conditional Use request to allow two temporary buildings and a
temporary use including retail sales, storage of retail and
construction materials, and granite processing and fabrication
services to be located on the subject property prior to and during
construction of a future building.
Location: ACM Sub. Parcel 3
Background Information:
The subject property is west of and adjacent to NAPA auto parts, across from Riverside
Plaza and below West End Village on Highway 40. Zoning on the property is Commercial
Services (CS) and the district is intended to provide areas for commercial services and
goods primarily for residents.
This request is part of a larger project which proposes to develop the site for immediate
proposed and future uses and build one building for various commercial uses. The
conditional use request would allow two temporary buildings to be used as a workspace
for the future granite business while the phase one permanent building is under
construction. The temporary buildings would be used for daily operations of the granite
business, including hours for public retail use, material storage and granite processing.
The buildings are proposed to be on site for five months. The buildings would be in
place while the permanent building is under construction. The temporary buildings
would be removed prior to or at the completion of the phase 1 building.
Temporary buildings or uses are processed as conditional uses in all zone districts and
they are intended to be removed or terminated within a prescribed time not exceeding
two (2) years or as set out in a building permit, development plan, or final development
plan.
II. ALTERNATIVES:
This is the second public hearing on this project and the only time this item will be
heard by City Council. Planning Commission has recommended approval. Alternatives
are approval, approval with conditions or revisions, table, remand to Planning
Commission, or denial.
Staff finds that the West End Plaza, ACM Subdivision, Parcel 3 Conditional Use request
(DP-15-06), to allow two temporary buildings and a temporary use including retail
sales, storage of retail and construction materials, and granite processing and
fabrication services located on the subject property prior to and during construction of
future buildings, is CONSISTENT with the Criteria for Approval for a Development Plan.
The Planning Commission recommends approval of DP-15-06, a Development

Plan for Conditional Use to allow temporary buildings and a temporary use in
the CS zone district on Parcel 3, ACM Subdivision with the following
conditions:
1. This approval shall remain effective for a period of two years from the date of
issuance. The approval shall follow all other requirements of the term and effect of
approval for a Development Plan.
2. No temporary structure shall be placed on the property prior to approval of
development permit DP-15-06 or prior to issuance of a grading permit for the
property.
3. The temporary use shall be allowed to commence after issuance of all required
permits for the use.
4. Any infrastructure necessary for the temporary use and buildings shall be installed
prior to commencement of the use or placement of the structures and shall receive
necessary permits.
5. The temporary building for the granite business use and any associated site
improvements not necessary for the future development of the site shall be removed
within 180 days from the issuance date of the first building or grading permit issued
for the property. The temporary building shall be on-site for no more than 180 days.
6. The construction trailer used during the construction of phases 0, 1 and 2 for this
project shall conform to standards and requirements for a construction trailer as
listed in the CDC.
7. Approval of this request shall be subject to approval of the access permit granted by
CDOT for the property.
8. Approval of this request shall be subject to approval of any permit or determination
about wetlands on site or wetland impacts to be decided by the US Army Corps of
Engineers.
9. Approval of this request shall be contingent upon approval of AFDP-15-03.
IV. FISCAL IMPACTS, LEGAL ISSUES, CONFLICTS OR OTHER ISSUES:
There are no fiscal impacts to the city. There are no apparent legal issues. Other
departments and outside agencies have had the opportunity to review and comment on
this project, no comments have been received. No objections have been received from
surrounding property owners. There are no apparent conflicts, environmental or other
issues.
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS
1. Planning Commission report and applicant background materials
2. Revised application materials
3. Minutes from Planning Commission meeting 5/14/15
Attachment 1
'(3$570(172)3/$11,1*$1'&20081,7<
'(9(/230(1767$))5(3257
3/$11,1*&200,66,21$*(1'$,7(0
3URMHFW1DPH :HVW(QG3OD]D$&06XEGLYLVLRQ3DUFHO'3
3UHSDUHG%\ 7RE\6WDXIIHU$,&3&LW\3ODQQHU
([W 3URMHFW
7\OHU*LEEV$,$3ODQQLQJ /RFDWLRQ
7KURXJK
&RPPXQLW\'HYHORSPHQW'LUHFWRU
([W
'DWH 0D\
3ODQQLQJ 0D\
&RPPLVVLRQ3&
&LW\&RXQFLO&& -XQH
=RQLQJ &6&RPPHUFLDO6HUYLFHV
:7*9HQWXUHV//&FR%RE
$SSOLFDQW
&KLOGHUV
5HTXHVW $ &RQGLWLRQDO 8VH UHTXHVW WR DOORZ WZR WHPSRUDU\ EXLOGLQJV DQG D
WHPSRUDU\ XVH LQFOXGLQJ UHWDLO VDOHV VWRUDJH RI UHWDLO DQG FRQVWUXFWLRQ
PDWHULDOVDQGJUDQLWHSURFHVVLQJDQGIDEULFDWLRQVHUYLFHVWREHORFDWHGRQ
WKHVXEMHFWSURSHUW\SULRUWRDQGGXULQJFRQVWUXFWLRQRIIXWXUHEXLOGLQJV
6WDII5HSRUW7DEOHRI&RQWHQWV
6HFWLRQ 3J
, &'&±6WDII$QDO\VLV6XPPDU\
,, 3URMHFW/RFDWLRQ
,,, %DFNJURXQG
,9 3URMHFW'HVFULSWLRQ
9 3URMHFW$QDO\VLV
9, 6WDII)LQGLQJ &RQGLWLRQV
9,, $WWDFKPHQWV

:HVW(QG3OD]D$&06XEGLYLVLRQ3DUFHO'3 3&+HDULQJ
6WDII3ODQQHU7RE\6WDXIIHU &&+HDULQJ

, &20081,7<'(9(/230(17&2'(&'&±67$))$1$/<6,66800$5<
&'&6(&7,21'12'(9(/230(173/$16+$//%($33529('81/(667+(3/$11,1*
&200,66,21$1'&,7<&281&,/),1'7+$77+(3/$10((76$//2)7+()2//2:,1*&5,7(5,$
6XEVHFWLRQ &RQVLVWHQW 1RWHV

<HV 1R 1$
&RPSDWLELOLW\ZLWK&RPPXQLW\3ODQ 5
&RQVLVWHQF\ZLWK6XUURXQGLQJ8VHV 5
0LQLPL]H$GYHUVH,PSDFWV 5
$FFHVV 5
0LQLPL]H(QYLURQPHQWDO,PSDFWV 5
3KDVLQJ 5
&RPSOLDQFH:LWK2WKHU6WDQGDUGV 5
9DULDQFH&ULWHULD 5
6WDII)LQGLQJ6WDIIILQGVWKDWWKH:HVW(QG3OD]D$&06XEGLYLVLRQ3DUFHO&RQGLWLRQDO8VH
UHTXHVW'3WRDOORZWZRWHPSRUDU\EXLOGLQJVDQGDWHPSRUDU\XVHLQFOXGLQJUHWDLOVDOHV
VWRUDJH RI UHWDLO DQG FRQVWUXFWLRQ PDWHULDOV DQG JUDQLWH SURFHVVLQJ DQG IDEULFDWLRQ VHUYLFHV
ORFDWHG RQ WKH VXEMHFW SURSHUW\ SULRU WR DQG GXULQJ FRQVWUXFWLRQ RI IXWXUH EXLOGLQJV LV
&216,67(17ZLWKWKH&ULWHULDIRU$SSURYDOIRUD'HYHORSPHQW3ODQ
,, 352-(&7/2&$7,21

,,, %$&.*5281'
7KHVXEMHFWSURSHUW\LVZHVWRIDQGDGMDFHQWWR1$3$DXWRSDUWVDFURVVIURP5LYHUVLGH3OD]DDQG
EHORZ:HVW(QG9LOODJHRQ+LJKZD\=RQLQJRQWKHSURSHUW\LV&RPPHUFLDO6HUYLFHV&6DQG
WKHGLVWULFWLVLQWHQGHGWRSURYLGHDUHDVIRUFRPPHUFLDOVHUYLFHVDQGJRRGVSULPDULO\IRUUHVLGHQWV
8VHV PD\ EH RI D KLJKHU LQWHQVLW\ DQG DXWRPRELOH RULHQWHG KRZHYHU LPSDFWV IURP YHKLFXODU
FRQIOLFWV VKRXOG EH PLQLPL]HG DQG YLVXDO DSSHDUDQFHV IURP SDVVLQJ PRWRULVWV DQG SHGHVWULDQV
VKRXOGEHFRQVLGHUHG
3ODQQLQJ &RPPXQLW\'HYHORSPHQW6WDII5HSRUW 3DJH


,9 352-(&7'(6&5,37,21
7KLVUHTXHVWLVSDUWRIDODUJHUSURMHFWZKLFKSURSRVHVWREXLOGWZREXLOGLQJVLQWZRSKDVHVIRU
YDULRXVFRPPHUFLDOXVHV7KHFRQGLWLRQDOXVHUHTXHVWZRXOGDOORZWZRWHPSRUDU\EXLOGLQJVWREH
XVHGIRUFRQVWUXFWLRQDQGDVDZRUNVSDFHIRUWKHIXWXUHJUDQLWHEXVLQHVVZKLOHWKHSKDVHRQH
SHUPDQHQWEXLOGLQJLVXQGHUFRQVWUXFWLRQ2QHWHPSRUDU\EXLOGLQJZRXOGEHFRQVWUXFWHGDQGXVHG
IRUGDLO\RSHUDWLRQVRIWKHJUDQLWHEXVLQHVVLQFOXGLQJKRXUVIRUSXEOLFUHWDLOXVHPDWHULDOVWRUDJH
DQGJUDQLWHSURFHVVLQJ7KHVHFRQGWHPSRUDU\EXLOGLQJZRXOGEHDW\SLFDOFRQVWUXFWLRQWUDLOHUDQG
PD\UHPDLQRQVLWHDIWHUUHPRYDORIWKHWHPSRUDU\EXLOGLQJIRUWKHJUDQLWHEXVLQHVV7KHEXLOGLQJV
DUHSURSRVHGWREHRQVLWHIRUDSSUR[LPDWHO\ILYHPRQWKVDQGIRUQRPRUHWKDQGD\V7KH
EXLOGLQJVZRXOGEHLQSODFHZKLOHWKH3KDVHSHUPDQHQWEXLOGLQJLVXQGHUFRQVWUXFWLRQ7KH
WHPSRUDU\EXLOGLQJVZRXOGEHORFDWHGRQWKHVLWHRIWKHIXWXUHSKDVHEXLOGLQJDQGZRXOGEH
UHPRYHGSULRUWRLWVFRQVWUXFWLRQ
7HPSRUDU\ EXLOGLQJV RU XVHV DUH SURFHVVHG DV FRQGLWLRQDO XVHV LQ DOO ]RQH GLVWULFWV DQG WKH\ DUH
LQWHQGHGWREHUHPRYHGRUWHUPLQDWHGZLWKLQDSUHVFULEHGWLPHQRWH[FHHGLQJWZR \HDUVRUDV
VHWRXWLQDEXLOGLQJSHUPLWGHYHORSPHQWSODQRUILQDOGHYHORSPHQWSODQ

9 352-(&7$1$/<6,6
7KHIROORZLQJVHFWLRQSURYLGHVVWDIIDQDO\VLVRIWKHDSSOLFDWLRQDVLWUHODWHVWRNH\VHFWLRQVRIWKH
&'& ,W LV LQWHQGHG WR KLJKOLJKW WKRVH DUHDV WKDW PD\ EH RI LQWHUHVW RU FRQFHUQ WR SODQQLQJ
FRPPLVVLRQ FLW\ FRXQFLO RU PHPEHUV RI WKH SXEOLF )RU D FRPSUHKHQVLYH OLVW RI VWDQGDUGV DQG
UHTXLUHPHQWVDSSOLFDEOHWRWKLVSURSRVDOSOHDVHUHIHUWRWKH&'&RUFRQWDFWWKHVWDIISODQQHU
&5,7(5,$)25$33529$/
&'&6HFWLRQG1RGHYHORSPHQWSODQVKDOOEHDSSURYHGXQOHVVWKHSODQQLQJ
FRPPLVVLRQDQGFLW\FRXQFLOILQGWKDWWKHSODQPHHWVDOORIWKHIROORZLQJFULWHULD
&RPSDWLEOHZLWK&RPPXQLW\3ODQ
7KH GHYHORSPHQW SODQ LV FRPSDWLEOH ZLWK WKH SUHIHUUHG GLUHFWLRQ DQG SROLFLHV RXWOLQHG LQ WKH
FRPPXQLW\SODQRUDSSURYHGPDVWHUSODQV
6WDII$QDO\VLV&RQVLVWHQW7KH:HVW6WHDPERDW6SULQJV$UHD3ODQFDOOVIRUDUHDVRIFRPPHUFLDO
DQG OLJKW LQGXVWULDO XVHV WKDW DUH HVVHQWLDO WR D EDODQFHG IXOO VHUYLFH FRPPXQLW\ 7KH SODQ
DQWLFLSDWHVWKDW FRPPHUFLDO DUHDV RQWKH ZHVW VLGHRI WRZQ FDQEHQHILW UHVLGHQWV DQG RWKHUV ZKR
WUDYHOIURPQHDUE\FRPPXQLWLHVIRUVHUYLFHVRIIHUHGLQ6WHDPERDW7KHSODQLQGLFDWHVWKDWWKHUHLVD
GHVLUHWRSUHVHUYHDQGXVHODQGIRUFRPPHUFLDODQGLQGXVWULDOXVHVDQGWKDWORFDWLRQVRQWKHZHVW
VLGHRIWRZQDUHPRUHVXLWHGWRWKHVHW\SHVRIXVHVEHFDXVHRIWKHFKDUDFWHURIWKHDUHD7KHRYHUDOO
SURSRVHG XVH DQG GHYHORSPHQW RIWKH SURSHUW\ LVFRQVLVWHQW ZLWKWKH JRDOVRXWOLQHG E\ WKH :HVW
6WHDPERDW6SULQJV$UHD3ODQ7KHWHPSRUDU\XVHDQGVWUXFWXUHDVDSDUWRIWKHIXWXUHXVHRQWKH
SURSHUW\LVFRPSDWLEOHZLWKWKHSODQ
&RQVLVWHQF\ZLWK6XUURXQGLQJ8VHV
7KH SURSRVHG GHYHORSPHQW VKDOO EH FRQVLVWHQW ZLWK WKH FKDUDFWHU RI WKH LPPHGLDWH YLFLQLW\ RI
WKH SDUFHO SURSRVHG IRU GHYHORSPHQW RU VKDOO HQKDQFH RU FRPSOLPHQW WKH PL[WXUH RI XVHV
VWUXFWXUHVDQGDFWLYLWLHVSUHVHQWLQWKHLPPHGLDWHYLFLQLW\


6WDII$QDO\VLV&RQVLVWHQW7KHVXUURXQGLQJXVHVLQFOXGHFRPPHUFLDOUHVWDXUDQWUHWDLOLQGXVWULDO
DQGUHVLGHQWLDOXVHV7KHWHPSRUDU\XVHDQGVWUXFWXUHDUHFRQVLVWHQWZLWKXVHVLQWKHDUHDDQGWKHUH
DUHVLPLODUVPDOOVWUXFWXUHVXVHGIRUEXVLQHVVHVQHDUE\VRWKHFKDUDFWHURIWKHWHPSRUDU\EXLOGLQJ
ZLOOQRWEHRXWRIFRQWH[WLQWKHDUHD7KH3KDVH]HURWHPSRUDU\XVHDQGSKDVHVRQHDQGWZRRIWKH
IXWXUHEXLOGRXWDQGXVHRIWKHSURSHUW\DUHFRQVLVWHQWZLWKRWKHUSURSHUWLHVLQWKHDUHDDQGXVHV
DQWLFLSDWHGRQWKHZHVWVLGHRIWRZQ7KHWHPSRUDU\XVHDQGWKHSURSRVHGXVHZLOOHQKDQFHDQG
FRPSOLPHQWWKHPL[WXUHRIXVHVDQGDFWLYLWLHVSUHVHQWLQWKHLPPHGLDWHYLFLQLW\
0LQLPL]H$GYHUVH,PSDFWV
7KHGHVLJQDQGRSHUDWLQJFKDUDFWHULVWLFVRIWKHSURSRVHGGHYHORSPHQWVKDOOPLQLPL]HDQ\DGYHUVH
LPSDFWVRQVXUURXQGLQJXVHVDQGVKDOOQRWFDXVHDQXLVDQFHFRQVLGHULQJIDFWRUVVXFKDVSURSRVHG
VHWEDFNV SODQQHG KRXUV RI RSHUDWLRQ DQG WKH SRWHQWLDO IRU RGRUV QRLVH VPRNH GXVW JODUH
YLEUDWLRQVVKDGRZVDQGYLVXDOLPSDFWVIURPWKHSURSRVHGGHYHORSPHQW
6WDII$QDO\VLV&RQVLVWHQW,PSDFWVIURPWKLVXVHPD\LQFOXGHQRLVHGHFUHDVHGDLUTXDOLW\RQVLWH
GHFUHDVHGZDWHUTXDOLW\RQVLWHDQGYLVXDOLPSDFWVWRDGMDFHQWSURSHUWLHVDQGWUDYHOHUVRQ+LJKZD\
,PSDFWVIURPERWKVWUXFWXUHVDQGWKHXVHZLOOEHPLQLPDOGXHWRWKHVKRUWWLPHIUDPHSURSRVHG
7KH WHPSRUDU\ JUDQLWH SURFHVVLQJ EXLOGLQJ ZLOO EH VFUHHQHG IURP +LJKZD\ E\ WKH WHPSRUDU\
FRQVWUXFWLRQRIILFH WUDLOHU WR PLWLJDWH YLVXDO LPSDFWV IURP +LJKZD\ ([LVWLQJ YHJHWDWLRQ ZLOO
KHOS VFUHHQ WKH SURSRVHG XVH DQG VWUXFWXUHV IURP WKH UHVLGHQWLDO XVHV QHDUE\ :DWHU LV WR EH
FROOHFWHGUHF\FOHGDQGUHXVHGPLQLPL]LQJLPSDFWVWRZDWHUTXDOLW\)DEULFDWLRQDQGSURFHVVLQJLV
WR RFFXU LQVLGH WKH EXLOGLQJ WR PLQLPL]H QRLVH DQG DLU TXDOLW\ LPSDFWV 7KH WHPSRUDU\ XVH ZLOO
FRPSO\ZLWKDOOWHFKQLFDOUHTXLUHPHQWVLQFOXGLQJWKRVHIRUQRLVHRGRUVRUDQ\RWKHULPSDFWVIURP
JUDQLWHSURFHVVLQJDQGWKHXVHVKDOOPLWLJDWHDQ\LPSDFWVWREHLQFRPSOLDQFHZLWKKHDOWKFRGHVDQG
QRLVHUHVWULFWLRQV
$FFHVV
$FFHVV WR WKH VLWH VKDOO EH DGHTXDWH IRU WKH SURSRVHG GHYHORSPHQW FRQVLGHULQJ WKH ZLGWK
JUDGHV DQG FDSDFLWLHV RI DGMDFHQW VWUHHWV DQG LQWHUVHFWLRQV DQG WKH HQWUDQFH WR WKH VLWH 7KH
DGHTXDF\RIWKHIDFLOLWLHVSURYLGHGIRUDQ\QHFHVVDU\VHUYLFHGHOLYHU\SDUNLQJDQGORDGLQJDQG
WUDVK UHPRYDO VKDOO DOVR EH FRQVLGHUHG :KHQ DSSURSULDWH SXEOLF WUDQVSRUWDWLRQ RU RWKHU
SXEOLF RU SULYDWH WUDQVSRUWDWLRQ VHUYLFHV DQG DSSURSULDWH SHGHVWULDQ IDFLOLWLHV VKDOO EH PDGH
DYDLODEOHWRVHUYHWKHXVH
6WDII $QDO\VLV &RQVLVWHQW $GHTXDWH DFFHVV LV DYDLODEOH WR WKH VLWH IURP WKH SURSRVHG DFFHVV
SRLQWIRUWKHRYHUDOOGHYHORSPHQW7KHDSSOLFDQWLVLQSURFHVVZLWK&'27IRUDQDFFHVVSHUPLW
RQ+LJKZD\$SSURYDORIWKLVXVHZLOOEHFRQGLWLRQHGRQILQDODSSURYDOIURP&'27
0LQLPL]H(QYLURQPHQWDO,PSDFWV
7KH SURSRVHG GHYHORSPHQW VKDOO PLQLPL]H LWV DGYHUVH LPSDFWV RQ WKH QDWXUDO HQYLURQPHQW
LQFOXGLQJ ZDWHU TXDOLW\ DLU TXDOLW\ ZLOGOLIH KDELWDW YHJHWDWLRQ ZHWODQGV DQG QDWXUDO
ODQGIRUPV
6WDII $QDO\VLV &RQVLVWHQW 7KH SURSRVHG XVH ZLOO FROOHFW DQG UHF\FOH ZDWHU XVHG IRU SURFHVVLQJ
JUDQLWH DQG VSUHDG DQ\ UHPDLQLQJ PDWHULDOV RQ VLWH ZKHUH EXLOGLQJ FRQVWUXFWLRQ IRU WKH SKDVH
EXLOGLQJ ZLOO RFFXU $OO SURFHVVLQJ ZLOO RFFXU ZLWKLQ WKH SURSRVHG EXLOGLQJ DQG WKHUHIRUH VWDII
DQWLFLSDWHVQRLPSDFWVWRDLUTXDOLW\6WDIIILQGVWKDWWKHHQYLURQPHQWDOLPSDFWVIURPWKHSURSRVHG
XVHZLOOEHPLQLPL]HGEDVHGRQWKHDSSOLFDQW¶VSODQDQGWKHVKRUWGXUDWLRQRIWKHXVH


3KDVLQJ
,I WKH SURSRVHG GHYHORSPHQW LV WR EH GHYHORSHG LQ SKDVHV WKHQ HDFK SKDVH VKDOO FRQWDLQ WKH
UHTXLUHGVWUHHWVXWLOLWLHVODQGVFDSLQJDQGRWKHULPSURYHPHQWVWKDWDUHQHFHVVDU\DQGGHVLUDEOH
IRU UHVLGHQWV RI WKH SURMHFW IRU WKDW SKDVH (DFK SKDVH RI WKH SKDVLQJ SODQ VKDOO PHHW WKH
UHTXLUHPHQWVRIWKH&'&RQLWVRZQXQOHVVDYDULDWLRQLVJUDQWHG,IWKHGHYHORSPHQWLQFRUSRUDWHV
DQ\DPHQLWLHVIRUWKHEHQHILWRIWKHFLW\VXFKDVWUDLOFRQQHFWLRQVWKHVHVKDOOEHFRQVWUXFWHGZLWKLQ
WKHILUVWSKDVHRIWKHSURMHFWRULIWKLVLVQRWSUDFWLFDOWKHQDVHDUO\LQWKHSURMHFWDVLVUHDVRQDEOH
6WDII $QDO\VLV &RQVLVWHQW 3KDVH ]HUR VKDOO LQFOXGH WKH QHFHVVDU\ WHPSRUDU\ DFFHVV IRU
FRQVWUXFWLRQ DQG IRU WKH XVH EXLOW WR DSSOLFDEOH &LW\ VWDQGDUGV 3KDVH ]HUR ZLOO DOVR LQFOXGH WKH
QHFHVVDU\ ZDWHU FROOHFWLRQ DQG GLVSRVDO V\VWHPV IRU SURFHVVLQJ DQG SDUNLQJ IRU WKH HPSOR\HHV
FRQWUDFWRUVDQGPHPEHUVRIWKHSXEOLFZKRZLOOEHDEOHWRVKRSIRUSURGXFWVRUVHUYLFHV

&RPSOLDQFHZLWKRWKHU6WDQGDUGV
7KHSURSRVHGGHYHORSPHQWVKDOOFRPSO\ZLWKDOORWKHUDSSOLFDEOHUHTXLUHPHQWVRIWKLV&'&
LQFOXGLQJDUWLFOH9GHYHORSPHQWVWDQGDUGV
6WDII $QDO\VLV &RQVLVWHQW 7KH WHPSRUDU\ XVH DQG VWUXFWXUHV VKDOO LQFOXGH WKH PLQLPXP
UHTXLUHPHQWVQHFHVVDU\WRXWLOL]HWKHEXLOGLQJVDQGPDQDJHDQ\LPSDFWV7KHWHPSRUDU\XVHDQG
EXLOGLQJVVKDOOEHFRQGLWLRQHGWRLQFOXGHDWLPHIUDPHXSWRGD\VDQGIXWXUHXVHVVKDOORQO\
FRPPHQFHXSRQDSSURYDORIGHYHORSPHQWDQGEXLOGLQJSHUPLWVIRUWKHVLWHZKLFKGHPRQVWUDWHWKDW
DOODSSOLFDEOHVWDQGDUGVKDYHEHHQPHW'HYHORSPHQWVWDQGDUGVIRUWKLVSURMHFWVKDOOEHFRQVLGHUHG
ZLWKWKHRYHUDOODSSURYDORIWKHSURSRVHGEXLOGLQJVDQGVLWHGHYHORSPHQWFRYHUHGLQ$)'3
9DULDQFHFULWHULD
6WDII$QDO\VLV1$1RYDULDQFHUHTXHVWHG

9, 67$))),1',1*
6WDIIILQGVWKDWWKH:HVW(QG3OD]D$&06XEGLYLVLRQ3DUFHO&RQGLWLRQDO8VHUHTXHVW'3
WR DOORZ WZR WHPSRUDU\ EXLOGLQJV DQG D WHPSRUDU\ XVH LQFOXGLQJ UHWDLO VDOHV VWRUDJH RI UHWDLO DQG
FRQVWUXFWLRQPDWHULDOVDQGJUDQLWHSURFHVVLQJDQGIDEULFDWLRQVHUYLFHVORFDWHGRQWKHVXEMHFWSURSHUW\
SULRUWRDQGGXULQJFRQVWUXFWLRQRIIXWXUHEXLOGLQJVLV&216,67(17ZLWKWKH&ULWHULDIRU$SSURYDO
IRUD'HYHORSPHQW3ODQ
5HFRPPHQGHG0RWLRQ
7KH3ODQQLQJ&RPPLVVLRQUHFRPPHQGVDSSURYDORI'3D'HYHORSPHQW3ODQIRU&RQGLWLRQDO
8VH WR DOORZ WHPSRUDU\ EXLOGLQJV DQG D WHPSRUDU\ XVH LQ WKH &6 ]RQH GLVWULFW RQ 3DUFHO $&0
6XEGLYLVLRQZLWKWKHIROORZLQJFRQGLWLRQV
7KLVDSSURYDOVKDOOUHPDLQHIIHFWLYHIRUDSHULRGRIWZR \HDUVIURPWKHGDWHRILVVXDQFH7KH
DSSURYDO VKDOO IROORZ DOO RWKHU UHTXLUHPHQWV RI WKH WHUP DQG HIIHFW RI DSSURYDO IRU D
'HYHORSPHQW3ODQ
1RWHPSRUDU\VWUXFWXUHVKDOOEHSODFHGRQWKHSURSHUW\SULRUWRDSSURYDORIGHYHORSPHQWSHUPLW
'3RUSULRUWRLVVXDQFHRIDJUDGLQJSHUPLWIRUWKHSURSHUW\
7KHWHPSRUDU\XVHVKDOOEHDOORZHGWRFRPPHQFHDIWHULVVXDQFHRIDOOUHTXLUHGSHUPLWVIRUWKH
XVH


$Q\ LQIUDVWUXFWXUH QHFHVVDU\ IRU WKH WHPSRUDU\ XVH DQG EXLOGLQJV VKDOO EH LQVWDOOHG SULRU WR
FRPPHQFHPHQWRIWKHXVHRUSODFHPHQWRIWKHVWUXFWXUHVDQGVKDOOUHFHLYHQHFHVVDU\SHUPLWV
7KHWHPSRUDU\EXLOGLQJIRUWKHJUDQLWHEXVLQHVVXVHDQGDQ\DVVRFLDWHGVLWHLPSURYHPHQWVQRW
QHFHVVDU\ IRU WKH IXWXUH GHYHORSPHQW RI WKH VLWH VKDOO EH UHPRYHG ZLWKLQ GD\V IURP WKH
LVVXDQFH GDWH RI WKH ILUVW EXLOGLQJ RU JUDGLQJ SHUPLW LVVXHG IRU WKH SURSHUW\ 7KH WHPSRUDU\
EXLOGLQJVKDOOEHRQVLWHIRUQRPRUHWKDQGD\V
7KHFRQVWUXFWLRQWUDLOHUXVHGGXULQJWKHFRQVWUXFWLRQRISKDVHVDQGIRUWKLVSURMHFWVKDOO
FRQIRUPWRVWDQGDUGVDQGUHTXLUHPHQWVIRUDFRQVWUXFWLRQWUDLOHUDVOLVWHGLQWKH&'&
$SSURYDORIWKLVUHTXHVWVKDOOEHVXEMHFWWRDSSURYDORIWKHDFFHVVSHUPLWJUDQWHGE\&'27IRU
WKHSURSHUW\
$SSURYDO RI WKLV UHTXHVW VKDOO EH VXEMHFW WR DSSURYDO RI DQ\ SHUPLW RU GHWHUPLQDWLRQ DERXW
ZHWODQGVRQVLWHRUZHWODQGLPSDFWVWREHGHFLGHGE\WKH86$UP\&RUSVRI(QJLQHHUV
$SSURYDORIWKLVUHTXHVWVKDOOEHFRQWLQJHQWXSRQDSSURYDORI$)'3

9,, $77$&+0(176
3URMHFW'HVFULSWLRQSURYLGHGE\WKHDSSOLFDQW
6LWH3ODQ
7HPSRUDU\EXLOGLQJSODQVDQGVSHFLILFVFRQVWUXFWLRQWUDLOHUDQGWHPSRUDU\EXLOGLQJ


"UUBDINFOU

"UUBDINFOU

"UUBDINFOU

Attachment 2
Attachment 3
Planning Commission Minutes
May 14, 2015 Draft
STEAMBOAT SPRINGS PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES

May 14, 2015
The regularly scheduled meeting of the Steamboat Springs Planning Commission was called to
order at approximately 5:00p.m. on Thursday, May 14, 2015, in the Citizens’ Meeting Room,
Centennial Hall, 124 10th Street, Steamboat Springs, Colorado.
Planning Commission members in attendance were: George Eck III, Jason lacy, Kathi Meyer,
Rich Levy, Martyn Kingston, Charlie MacArthur and Jerry Burns.
Absent: Michael Buckley
Staff members present were Director of Planning Tyler Gibbs, code enforcement officer Barb
Wheeler, and staff planners Bob Keenan Toby Stauffer.
________________________________________________________________
#2. ACM Subdivision, Parcel 3, West End Plaza (DP-15-06)
STAFF PRESENTATION
Toby Stauffer, Staff Planner:

This is a development plan for a conditional use request to allow temporary buildings and a
temporary use that includes retail sales, storage, retail and construction materials, also granite
processing and fabrication services on the property prior to and during construction of a future
permanent building. The property is zoned CS. It’s across from Riverside Plaza and adjacent to
Napa. The area is primarily for services to serve residents is what the CS zone district is typically
used for.
This request for a temporary use is part of a larger project that proposes one building to house
various commercial uses. The temporary building and temporary use is a conditional use in all
zone districts. For this one in particular, a temporary building would be constructed and used for
daily operation of a granite business including hours for retail public use and display of granite
and then some processing of granite primarily for countertops. The second temporary building
would be a construction trailer that would remain on site potentially longer while the rest of the
project is under construction. We have other rules in the CDC regarding construction trailers, so
that trailer would need to meet those. The granite processing building would be on site for
approximately five months and no more than 180 days. That allows it to be located without any
injury to our standards in regard to the building code and fire code. Any temporary buildings or
uses that are processed as conditional uses in our code would need to be removed or terminated
no more than two years, but for this particular use we’re requiring 180 days.
We found that the use is consistent with the area community plan. The area plan calls for the area
to be used for commercial and light industrial uses that offer full service to the community.
Balance those uses with residential and commercial in the area. We find that it’s consistent with
the surrounding uses. Other uses in the area are commercial restaurant, retail and industrial uses.
There are other small structures nearby as well so this doesn’t seem to be out of character with
those in the area. The processing and any retail sales are all going to be housed inside this
May 14, 2015 Draft
building, so we believe that will minimize any impacts from noise or air quality that might occur
from this use. In any case, the use would be required to meet our performance standards for noise
and air quality. They do use some water for processing the granite. That water would be recycled
and collected; any fines would be scooped up I imagine out of the drain. They also have access
available that has changed from the report. They’re going to be receiving access from the
adjacent property, which is Napa. They’ve allowed them to have access to and parking for the
temporary building through the Napa site for the term of the temporary use. They do also have an
approved access permit from CDOT at this point that we didn’t have when we wrote the report.
They could also use their access point for their future permit use if they wanted to do that. We
have found that it’s consistent with all the other standards in the CDC.
We’re recommending approval with a couple conditions. Some of the new information I’ve
provided to you this evening includes a revised use description which tells you a little bit more
about that use; the access letter from Napa; revised use description for the permit use, which
provides context for this approval; and then some revised site plans which demonstrate how the
display area is going to work and how the access is going to happen.
APPLICANT PRESENTATION
None.
QUESTIONS FROM COMMISSIONERS
Levy: You’re classifying this as light industrial. Can you go into that a little bit more and what
use classification you’re putting this under?
Stauffer: We’ve actually classified this as a building supplies and lumber yard use. It’s most
similar to that use in the zone district. Building supply and lumber yard use is an establishment
where construction or home improvement materials are offered or kept for retail sale. This may
include the fabrication of materials and outdoor storage of some material for retail sale. It could
also qualify as a standard commercial use because it’s all housed indoors, and the outdoor
display area, per our revised regulations, meets those display percentages (20% of 1500 square
feet,() so we’re not looking at that as storage at this time.
Levy: So to be classified as an industrial use it has to have outdoor uses?
Stauffer: I don’t think it has to have outdoor uses. An industrial use typically doesn’t have as
much retail use or commercial presence. It doesn’t always have hours of operation for retail use.
When a retail use is part of a light industrial use it’s usually a smaller percentage, so we thought
this had more of a retail component and therefore more of a commercial use.
Levy asked to be reminded of the use criteria for a building supply and lumber yard use.
Stauffer read the relevant code section including that the property shall not be located
immediately adjacent to property zoned OR, RE, RN, RO, MF and MH.
Levy: So is West End Village is not an RN zoned property?

May 14, 2015 Draft
Stauffer: West End Village is an RN zoned property. When we were considering this use on this
site, it’s a temporary use. Temporary uses don’t necessarily have to match the underlying zone
district. We also felt that the building supply and lumber yard use when it has outdoor storage,
these criteria are more applicable. So this use is special in that way because it doesn’t have any
outdoor storage associated with it.
Lacy: Why does it not apply when it’s temporary use?
Stauffer: The code allows temporary uses in any zone district as a conditional use I think mainly
because they’re temporary so we don’t anticipate them being there for a very long time.
Levy: Condition #9 says approval of this request is contingent on the approval of the
administrative final development plan. Since that is a separate application and it’s working its
way through the review system, obviously you’ve made it contingent. What would happen if the
administrative permit is either not approved or kicked to a public hearing? What happens to this
application?
Stauffer: If the administrative application isn’t approved, then this one could not happen. Some
of the other conditions outline that.
Meyer: The administrative permit is not a public process other than notification to adjacent
property owners. What does the community have as far as notice if the director finds that one or
more provisions of the code need to be varied or are not met?
Stauffer: So if the administrative project were to become public, we would schedule it for
hearing and it would have all the same notice that any other public project has and probably an
additional notice to surrounding property owners. This temporary use application would be on
hold until the outcome of the public hearing.
Meyer: For purposes of tonight’s hearing you’ve made a determination as to the use type within
the zone district. You made a comment that because it doesn’t have any outdoor storage you
didn’t feel that all of the porivisions apply?
Stauffer: Staff’s interpretation of the building supply and lumber yard use is that those criteria
apply to the outdoor storage component of that use. So if we looked at this just as a commercial
use, because it’s all interior it could qualify as a commercial medium use, which is a use by right
in this zone district. We’ve determined that the best fit for this use is building supplies and
lumber yard.
Lacy: And that use classification will apply to the permanent building that will be on the
property.
Stauffer: It will apply to the use that’s going to be housed in that permanent building, but the
permanent building can have more than one use.
May 14, 2015 Draft
Lacy: So how are you able to process the permanent structure administratively if this is located
next to an RN zone.
Stauffer: Through our interpretation that the use criteria apply to the outdoor storage component
of the building supply and lumber yard use. So the use and the permanent building do not
indicate any outdoor storage. The main difference between storage and display as we’ve recently
defined it is the size percentage, and I think it also helps how the material is displayed. If it’s
walkable and a person could walk through and look at everything as you would look at any other
large items that would be displayed.
Lacy: And you feel comfortable that outdoor storage will not be occurring here.
Stauffer: I do.
MacArthur: So our role as I understand it tonight is to evaluate this conditional use for two
temporary buildings. So I think if the applicant can come forward and provide us with some
information as to the need for this temporary use. What’s the driving force to allow for a
temporary use and temporary buildings, especially prior to the administrative decision being
made on the overall project.
Stacy Bumgarner, WTG Ventures/Columbine Granite:

I own both these businesses. Columbine Granite will be leasing from WTG. Columbine Granite
is the one that needs the temporary building. My lease expires on the current building I’m in now
at the end of June. I begged for an extension on my lease there, but they really want their
building back. So I need to be out of that property by the end of June; that’s why we have the
need for the temporary building. We’re hoping to only be in there for five months maximum and
then be able to move into the permanent building. That’s why we’re having to do it separately
and rushing to get this part of it in first. When we first talked to the Planning Department, I guess
they didn’t realize that it would require the extra step. If this passes, we’ll be able to meet our
timeline just barely. We’ll get that temporary building built in about three weeks and then have a
week to move. If it’s not approved, I have an alternate plan.
Commissioner Burns:
Are there parking requirements?
Stauffer: We don’t have any parking requirements for the temporary use. We would apply
something similar to a retail use. Parking will also happen on Napa as well.
Burns confirmed that there are enough spaces on the Napa lot to accommodate this. Only two
spaces would be required for this use. Stauffer offered to come back with a full analysis.
Levy confirmed that staff did not require a parking plan for this particular temporary use.
Levy asked Bumgarner whether she has a parking plan.

May 14, 2015 Draft
Bumgarner: The owners of Napa were pretty excited about the project, and they said we were
welcome to use any of their parking lot for parking. The back part of the parking lot backs right
up to where the temporary building would be, so we’re thinking there would be the easiest to
park.
Meyer asked about the hand-drawn exhibit that shows hard surface areas.
Bumgarner: We’re going to have to do a little temporary asphalt so that Chuck can pull through
and unload and load.
Meyer: Is that just a cross easement access through Napa? Or are they actually using…
Stauffer: We haven’t created a cross access easement. This use has permission to park and use
the access during the temporary timeframe.
Bumgarner: There’s no reason we can’t add parking out there. We’re just trying to hold the cost
to a minimum. The temporary building itself will need a hard surface, and we were going to have
a little space out in front of it.
Kingston: I don’t see any reference in the written record about disposal of waste. I understand
that the business involves cutting of rock and granite. I think we were told on Monday that the
plan was to dispose of some of that dust or material on site. Can you speak to that?
Bumgarner: The general contractor wrote that letter, and I didn’t review it before he submitted
it the first time. When I re-read that, I was like that’s not what we do. There’s a small pit the
water is filtered through. The sediment settles to the bottom of the pit, and we just shovel that out
and put it in our dumpster. That’s what we do now and that’s what we’d do in the future.
Kingston: That’s covered in the amended letter. We understand from staff that a possible longer-
term goal is to move from a two-building structure to potentially building out the second floor.
Bumgarner: We went through and changed that because originally I was only considering at the
present time building one building – the temporary building and then the permanent building.
But as we were going through it all, and there’s so many drainage issues on that property, and the
wetlands – it was becoming pretty extensive with all the excavation and site work. So our civil
engineer Walter Magill said you’d be better off just applying for two buildings right now
because later down the road if you want to build a second building or someone else would like to
buy that and build a building there, you’d already have approval on that. He just thought that
would ease the process down the road. I’ve thought about that in all the site development of the
entire property because it is a rare piece of property with a lot of drainage issues. The drainage
costs are quite extensive. So originally we were going to do the one building, then he suggested
two so we put the second building on there. But then after Toby presented it to you guys she said
people felt uncomfortable because they didn’t know if we were going to ever build the second
floor. The reason we didn’t originally talk about the second floor was because then it would have
gone over the 16,000 square feet. We dn’t have any intention right now to do a second building.
May 14, 2015 Draft
Kingston: Is there still a third phase component in the plan with regard to the second building?
The plan is still to build two stories but not to build out the second story?
Bumgarner: No, the plan and hope would be to build a second story. We don’t need the second
story, but my hope would be that there would be enough interest that we could lease that for
office space or live-work.
Kingston: Can you confirm the square footage of that second phase building in terms of both
floors?
Bumgarner: The first floor is 7500 and the second floor could be up to 7500.
PUBLIC COMMENT
None.
APPLICANT COMMENT
Bumgarner: We are going to build that temporary building to look pretty nice. It’s got siding. I
really want to be there for as short a time as possible. We think the project is going to take five-
six months maximum to build. We think the permanent building will add a lot to that end of
town. The costs to develop that land are pretty extensive; I think that’s why no one has bought it
until now. I’m willing to do it; I just hope that it will be approved.
COMMISSIONER DELIBERATION/MOTION
Commissioner MacArthur moved to approve DP-15-06 with conditions 1-9.

Commissioner Burns seconded the motion.
DISCUSSION ON MOTION
Commissioner Levy said he’s okay with it for a temporary use but has some concerns with the
administrative final development plan zoning and location.
Commissioner Meyer has no problems with the temporary approval and said that had
clarification been received earlier, she would not have had as much concern at the Monday
meeting.
Meyer: Had the project been able to be approved at one time, I think you would get a resounding
approval as opposed to just the concern of the timing. For staff’s benefit, the definition of the
building and lumber supply goes back to when the town was very concerned about a big box
going in. All of the requirements of the criteria for approval had to do with a big box, not
outdoor storage. So I would hope that as you look at it you’d be cognizant of that.
VOTE:
Vote: 7-0
Voting for approval of motion to approve: Lacy, MacArthur, Levy, Eck, Meyer, Kingston and
Burns
AGENDA ITEM #14.
FROM: Bob Keenan, Senior Planner, AICP

Tyler Gibbs, AIA, Director of Planning and Community
Development
DATE: June 2, 2015
ITEM: YVEA Building Adaptive Reuse (32 10th Street); #FDP-15-

01
FORM OF MOTION: Motion to approve #FDP-15-01
___ DIRECTION
___ INFORMATION
___ ORDINANCE
_x_ MOTION
___ RESOLUTION
Background
The Yampa Valley Electric Association (YVEA) building, located at 32 10th Street, was
constructed in three phases. The first phase in 1956 was for the construction of the
original building with two subsequent additions in 1964 and 1974. The original 1956
building and the 1964 addition were designed by prominent Colorado architect Eugene
Sternberg and are both found to be Contributing Resources to the Downtown National
Historic District.
The building has been occupied by YVEA since its construction through this past
December when the association moved its headquarters to the former TIC campus on Elk
River Road. The building housed most functions of the association including
administrative offices, line crews, maintenance, storage, and its fleet.
On February 24th of this year, the City Council approved a Development Plan for this
project, DP-15-01. Through this Development Plan the applicant received approval of a
variance to locate a 16 space parking lot adjacent to the intersections of Yampa and 9th
Streets. This Development Plan was also used to approve a change of use from an Office
or Institutional Use to office and retail.
Project Description
The applicant is planning to utilize and expand the existing structure that previously
housed the YVEA operations. The applicant is planning an adaptive reuse of this building
with a mixed use approach. The applicant is planning to utilize most of the existing office
space for a future tenant and convert the pedestrian level garage bays into functional and
flexible commercial space. An addition to the 1974 space is also proposed along 9th Street
side of the building and is to include three dwelling units. A six space parking garage is
proposed along the alley to support these units.
The project includes new infrastructure to support the addition and reconfigured building.
In addition to the six space parking garage, there is a proposed 16 space parking lot at
the corner of 9th and Yampa Streets. This parking area, combined with the alley parking
and the proposed elimination of curb-cuts along 9th and Yampa Streets, helps to create
sufficient parking to support the building and the anticipated uses. The parking lot across
10th Street that previously supported the YVEA building is no longer tied to this building.
The applicant is also proposing streetscape improvements to the 9th and Yampa Street
frontages that are in general conformance with Downtown Design Guidelines. The 10th
Street frontage will largely remain unchanged except that the applicant is proposing
landscaping along the sidewalk to better meet streetscape standards.
The project also includes a plaza area between the Yampa Street front façade and the
public sidewalk. The configuration of this plaza area is dependent on the type of tenant
that occupies the adjacent space but the applicant has provided a conceptual layout of
that area on the site plan.
Please see attachment 1 for more information.
II. ALTERNATIVES:
City Council may approve as presented, approve with additional conditions, table, or deny
the application.
III. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:
With a 7-0 vote for approval, the Planning Commission finds that the Final Development
Plan for the adaptive re-use of the building at 32 10th Street is CONSISTENT with the
Criteria for Approval for a Final Development Plan with the following condition of approval:
1. Obtain a revocable license for any sidewalk snowmelt located within the public right
of way prior to building permit approval. All snowmelt within the right of way shall
be on a separate zone from the snowmelt located within the private property
extents. The owner shall be responsible for constructing and maintaining snow-melt
and other private features located in the City ROW per the approved construction
plans. All snowmelt shall be terminated a minimum 3-foot from back of curb to
facilitate future sign placement
2. Civil construction plans prepared by a licensed Colorado civil engineer must be
submitted to Public Works for review by Public Works, Planning, and City Utilities for
review and approval prior to approval of any improvements agreement, building
permit, or final plat and prior to the start of any construction. We recommend
submitting the construction plans a minimum of five weeks prior to building permit
application to allow time for review, comment response, and approval. Construction
drawings shall specify the type of landscaping and streetscape amenities consistent
with the Downtown Design Guidelines specifications.
3. Prior to Certificate of Occupancy or Certificate of Acceptance, dedicate easement(s)
for public pedestrian use along all sidewalk surfaces that deviate from the public
right of way.
4. Prior to Certificate of Occupancy or Certificate of Acceptance, dedicate easement(s)
for snow storage at the alley corner.
5. Per the Model Traffic Code, Municipal Code Section 23-32 (b), the Director of Public
Works determines parking regulations. Parking restrictions, alignment, and
configuration is subject to modification. Any notation of parking restrictions shown
on the development application is subject to modification.
6. Prior to approval of building permit, developer shall submit contribution of $10,000
for the implementation of the City’s stormwater quality treatment program to
address drainage outfall to the Yampa River.
7. The following items to be identified for each phase on the construction plans are
considered critical improvements and must be constructed prior issuance of any TCO
or CO; they cannot be bonded:
a. Public drainage improvements
b. Public sidewalk improvements
c. Installation of street and traffic control signs
d. Access drive, driveway, and parking areas
8. Floodplain Development Permit required for all development within the Floodplain
prior to Building Permit or Grading Permit.
9. In order to comply with the landscaping requirement per CDC Section 26-137(c),
Yampa Street plaza improvements, as depicted on sheet FDP-2 or as subsequently
approved by the Planning Director, shall be installed at the time of tenant occupancy
or Final Plat, whichever comes first.
10. Phasing is approved per April 1, 2015 phasing letter from Steamboat Architectural to
the Department of Planning and Community Development, Attn: Bob Keenan.
11. Loading areas identified on the site plan shall be signed to allow parking during non-
loading hours or as determined by the Director of Public Works.
IV. FISCAL IMPACTS, LEGAL ISSUES, CONFLICTS OR OTHER ISSUES:
There are no fiscal impacts to the city nor are there any apparent legal issues.
It has recently come to Staff’s attention that the applicant may have to make changes to
the proposed application. Due to structural issues associated with adding another story to
the existing building, which is proposed to house part of the two-story residences, the
applicant may wish to eliminate this addition.
While this may be seen as a significant change, it only reduces the height, massing, and
parking requirements. Through provisions in the CDC, staff believes that these changes
can be administratively approved prior to building permit; otherwise, City Council may see
a revised application on this in the future.
V. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS
1. Staff Report and Plan Set

2. May 14, 2015 Planning Commission meeting minutes
Attachment 1
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

STAFF REPORT
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA ITEM # 1

Project Name: YVEA Building Adaptive Reuse (32 10th Street); #FDP-15-01
Prepared By: Bob Keenan, Senior Planner (Ext.

260)
Through: Tyler Gibbs, AIA, Planning Director Project location

(Ext. 244)
Planning May 14, 2015

Commission (PC):
City Council (CC): June 2, 2015

Zoning: Commercial Yampa (CY) 32 10th
Street
Blue Sage Ventures, C/O Stephen
Applicant:
Shelesky, 191 University Blvd,
Denver, CO 80206
A Final Development Plan for a building expansion to add three dwelling
Request:
units, a 6 space parking garage, a parking lot at the corner of 9th and
Yampa Streets, and associate improvements.
Standard CY Zone Proposed Staff Report - Table of Contents

(Lincoln Alley) Section Pg
Overview Dimensional Standards I. CDC –Staff Analysis Summary 1-2
Height 38’ max. w/upper most 38’ II. Background 1-3
floor residential III Project Description 1-3
Lot Coverage 85% max. 59% IV Overview of Dimensional & 1-4
Development Standards
FAR 2.0 w/ 3rd floor residential 51% V Project Analysis 1-6
Front Setback - >28’ tall = >55’- VI Staff Findings & Conditions 1-7
9th Street 8” VII Attachments 1-8
Front Setback - Bldg. < 28’ tall = 10’ min. >28’ tall = >29’
Yampa Street Bldg. > 28’ tall = 25’ min.
Front Setback - >28’ tall = >25’
10th Street
Side Setback None (3 frontages) n/a
Rear Setback 0’ min. 8’
YVEA Building Adaptive Reuse (32 10th Street); #FDP-15-01 PC Hearing: 5/14/15
CC Hearing: 6/2/15
I. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE (CDC) – STAFF ANALYSIS SUMMARY

CDC - SECTION 26-65(D): NO FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN SHALL BE APPROVED UNLESS THE PLANNING
COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL FIND THAT THE PLAN MEETS ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA:
Subsection Consistent Notes

Yes No NA
1) Reserved. No longer a criterion.
2) Consistency with Surrounding Uses 5
3) Conformity with building and 5
architectural standards.
4) Minimize Adverse Impacts 5
5) Access 5
6) Minimize Environmental Impacts 5
7) Phasing 5 Two phases are proposed.
8) Compliance With Other Standards 5
Staff Finding: Staff finds that the proposed Final Development Plan for the adaptive reuse and
building addition to add three dwelling units, a 6 space parking garage, a parking lot, and associated
improvements is consistent with the criteria for approval with conditions.
Planning Services Staff Report Page 1-2

CC Hearing: 6/2/15
II. BACKGROUND
The Yampa Valley Electric Association (YVEA) building, located at 32 10th Street, was
constructed in three phases. The first phase in 1956 was for the construction of the original
building with two subsequent additions in 1964 and 1974. The original 1956 building and the
1964 addition were designed by prominent Colorado architect Eugene Sternberg and are both
found to be Contributing Resources to the Downtown National Historic District.
The building has been occupied by YVEA since its construction through this past December
when the association moved its headquarters to the former TIC campus on Elk River Road. The
building housed most functions of the association including administrative offices, line crews,
maintenance, storage, and its fleet.
On February 24th of this year, the City Council approved a Development Plan for this project,
DP-15-01. Through this Development Plan the applicant received approval of a variance to
locate a 16 space parking lot adjacent to the intersections of Yampa and 9th Streets. This
Development Plan was also used to approve a change of use from an Office or Institutional Use
to office and retail.
III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION

The applicant is planning to utilize and expand the existing structure that previously housed the
YVEA operations. The applicant is planning an adaptive reuse of this building with a mixed use
approach. The applicant is planning to utilize most of the existing office space for a future tenant
and convert the pedestrian level garage bays into functional and flexible commercial space. An
addition to the 1974 space is also proposed along 9th Street side of the building and is to include
three dwelling units. A six space parking garage is proposed along the alley to support these units.
The project includes new infrastructure to support the addition and reconfigured building. In
addition to the six space parking garage, there is a proposed 16 space parking lot at the corner of 9th
and Yampa Streets. This parking area, combined with the alley parking and the proposed
elimination of curb-cuts along 9th and Yampa Streets, helps to create sufficient parking to support
the building and the anticipated uses. The parking lot across 10th Street that previously supported
the YVEA building is no longer tied to this building.
The applicant is also proposing streetscape improvements to the 9th and Yampa Street frontages
that are in general conformance with Downtown Design Guidelines. The 10th Street frontage will
largely remain unchanged except that the applicant is proposing landscaping along the sidewalk to
better meet streetscape standards.
The project also includes a plaza area between the Yampa Street front façade and the public
sidewalk. The configuration of this plaza area is dependent on the type of tenant that occupies the
adjacent space but the applicant has provided a conceptual layout of that area on the site plan.

CC Hearing: 6/2/15
IV. OVERVIEW OF DIMENSIONAL AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS –

COMMERCIAL YAMPA (ADJACENT TO LINCOLN ALLEY) ZONE DISTRICT
The following list was compiled by the project planner to provide an overview of key
standards applicable to the project. Interested parties are encouraged to review the
Community Development Code (CDC) or contact the project planner for a comprehensive
list of all applicable standards. There are no variances requested.
A. Dimensional Standards Analysis

Standard CY Zone (Lincoln Alley) Proposed
Overview Dimensional Standards
Height 38’ max. w/upper most floor residential 38’
Lot Coverage 85% max. 59%
FAR 2.0 w/ 3rd floor residential 51%
Front Setback - >28’ tall = 55’-8”
9th Street
Front Setback - Bldg. < 28’ tall = 10’ min. >28’ tall = 29’
Yampa Street Bldg. > 28’ = 25’
Front Setback - >28’ tall = 25’
10th Street
Side Setback None (3 frontages) n/a
Rear Setback 0’ min. 8’
B. Parking Analysis
PARKING AND LOADING STANDARDS, SEC. 26-139

REQUIRED PARKING
Proposed Uses AREA PARKING SPACES REQUIRED

Office 15,779 SF 31.5
Retail/Restaurant 10,642 SF 11.8
Condos (3) – <3,000 SF 6
Subtotal: 50
Total: 12.5% of 50 =
#44 spaces Required
# Includes a reduction or credit for parking lots of 50-100 spaces that serves more than one
use and is with 660’ of a public transit facility w/pedestrian connections provided.

CC Hearing: 6/2/15
EXISTING AND PROPOSED PARKING
Parking NUMBER OF SPACES PROVIDED

* Existing 9
Conditions on site
With Residential 11
Phase (along alley
and in garage)
With Proposed 16
Parking Lot (corner
of 9th and Yampa)
# Credit for New On 11
Street Spaces
Total Provided 47 (36 off-street)
Spaces:
* Please note that the parking lot on 10th Street across from the YVEA building is no
longer available to support the uses of the building.
# On street spaces count as required off-street spaces w/elimination of curb-cut or
driveway. ½ space credit/per new parking space created. 17 new spaces on Yampa and 5
on 9th Street = 21 for a total credit of 11 spaces.
C. Key Development Standards Analysis
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS - Summary
Standard Requirement Proposed

Landscaping Undeveloped areas from Yampa Street = Plaza area to be landscaped
Standards, Sec. the required front yard according to condition of approval #9.
26-135 setback (10’) to the edge of 10th Street = Trees and shrubs proposed to
ROW to the moderate meet the requirements.
category.
Lighting, 26- Downcast and shielded As required
138
Snow Storage, Off-site snow storage and Snow hauling and offsite storage proposed.
26-144 hauling is allowed in lieu
of the on-site snow storage
requirements.
Loading Three loading spaces are Three loading spaces are proposed. Two
Standards, Sec. required along Yampa Street and one along the
26-139 alley.

CC Hearing: 6/2/15
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS - Summary
Standard Requirement Proposed

Downtown Sidewalks and Streetscape Sidewalks and streetscape elements meet
Design per guidelines. the intent of design guidelines, along 9th and
Guidelines x 10’ wide sidewalk Yampa Streets. Due to the back-in
x Paver section at diagonal parking and the plaza area, the
intersection Yampa Street proposed sidewalk width is
x Street trees 9.5’ rather than 10’.
x Trash and recycling Impacts from the proposed development are
receptacles not commensurate with the requirement to
x Bicycle racks provide strict compliance with these
standards for the 10th Street frontage.
However, the existing 10th Street sidewalk
width of 6’ is functional and the applicant is
proposing street trees to further meet
streetscape standards.
V. PROJECT ANALYSIS
A) CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL
CDC - Section 26-66(d): Final Development Plan shall be approved unless the planning
commission and city council find that the plan meets all of the following criteria:
The following section provides staff analysis of the application as it relates to key sections of
the CDC. It is intended to highlight those areas that may be of interest or concern to planning
commission, city council, staff or the public. For a comprehensive list of standards and
requirements applicable to this proposal please refer to the CDC or contact the staff planner.
CDC - Section 26-66(d)(1) Reserved.

Staff Analysis: N/A.
CDC – Section 26-66(d)(2) Consistency with Surrounding Uses.

Staff Analysis: Consistent. The existing development and the proposed addition will include a
mix of uses: office, retail/restaurant, and multi-family. These uses are consistent with the uses
and character of the immediate area and that of greater downtown. The mix of retail/restaurant
has yet to be determined however the residential and office uses have been confirmed.
CDC – Section 26-66(d)(3) Conformity with the building and architectural standards.
Staff Analysis: Consistent. The project conforms to the general architectural standards as
contained within the CDC. The project was also found to be in conformance with the guidelines
for additions to historic structures per the Historic Preservation Commission. The applicant is
proposing building materials for the addition that complement and support the historical façade.
There are no specific CY zone district design standards.

CC Hearing: 6/2/15
CDC – Section 26-66(d)(4) Minimize Adverse Impacts.

Staff Analysis: Consistent. Staff finds that there should not be any adverse impacts to
surrounding uses by the proposed development as the project conforms to all CDC
requirements. The project provides for the required parking spaces and creates additional on
street parking than what currently exists.
All uses are subject to Performance Standards as contained in the CDC.
CDC – Section 26-66(d)(5) Access.

Staff Analysis: Consistent. Access to the site it plentiful. Pedestrian access is via perimeter
sidewalks on three sides of the development. Vehicular access is provided for the entire
perimeter of the property via 9th, 10th, and Yampa Streets as well as the alley along the rear.
CDC – Section 26-66(d)(6) Minimize Environmental Impacts.

Staff Analysis: Consistent. It does not appear that the project will have any significant
environmental impacts. The applicant is required to comply with the City’s water quality
drainage requirements and construction site management to minimize any adverse impacts.
CDC – Section 26-66 (d)(7) Phasing.

Staff Analysis: Consistent. The applicant proposes to complete the project in two phases. Each
phase is proposed to provide the necessary improvements to stand on their own in regards to
required infrastructure and compliance with the CDC. A detailed phasing plan can be found in
the attachments.
CDC – Section 26-66 (d)(8) Compliance With Other Standards.

Staff Analysis: Consistent. It appears that the project is consistent with all other applicable
standards as administered by the City of Steamboat Springs.
VI. STAFF FINDING & CONDITIONS

Finding:
Staff finds that the proposed Final Development Plan, #DPF-15-01, for the proposed
adaptive reuse and addition to the building at 32 10th Street and associated improvements is
consistent with the criteria for approval with the following conditions:
1. Obtain a revocable license for any sidewalk snowmelt located within the public right of
way prior to building permit approval. All snowmelt within the right of way shall be on
a separate zone from the snowmelt located within the private property extents. The
owner shall be responsible for constructing and maintaining snow-melt and other
private features located in the City ROW per the approved construction plans. All
snowmelt shall be terminated a minimum 3-foot from back of curb to facilitate future
sign placement
2. Civil construction plans prepared by a licensed Colorado civil engineer must be
submitted to Public Works for review by Public Works, Planning, and City Utilities for
review and approval prior to approval of any improvements agreement, building permit,

CC Hearing: 6/2/15
or final plat and prior to the start of any construction. We recommend submitting the
construction plans a minimum of five weeks prior to building permit application to
allow time for review, comment response, and approval. Construction drawings shall
specify the type of landscaping and streetscape amenities consistent with the
Downtown Design Guidelines specifications.
3. Prior to Certificate of Occupancy or Certificate of Acceptance, dedicate easement(s) for
public pedestrian use along all sidewalk surfaces that deviate from the public right of
way.
4. Prior to Certificate of Occupancy or Certificate of Acceptance, dedicate easement(s) for
snow storage at the alley corner.
5. The Director of Public Works determines parking regulations. Parking restrictions,
alignment, and configuration is subject to modification. Any notation of parking
restrictions shown on the development application is subject to modification.
6. Prior to approval of building permit, developer shall submit contribution of $10,000 for
the implementation of the City’s stormwater quality treatment program to address
drainage outfall to the Yampa River.
7. The following items to be identified for each phase on the construction plans are
considered critical improvements and must be constructed prior issuance of any TCO or
CO; they cannot be bonded:
a. Public drainage improvements
b. Public sidewalk improvements
c. Installation of street and traffic control signs
d. Access drive, driveway, and parking areas
8. Floodplain Development Permit required for all development within the Floodplain
prior to Building Permit or Grading Permit.
9. In order to comply with the landscaping requirement per CDC Section 26-137(c),
Yampa Street plaza improvements, as depicted on sheet FDP-2 or as subsequently
approved by the Planning Director, shall be installed at the time of tenant occupancy or
Final Plat, whichever comes first.
10. Phasing is approved per April 1, 2015 phasing letter from Steamboat Architectural to
the Department of Planning and Community Development, Attn: Bob Keenan.
11. Loading areas identified on the site plan shall be signed to allow parking during non-
loading hours or as determined by the Director of Public Works.
VII. ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 1 – Full Plan Set
Attachment 2 – Project Narrative and Phasing

© Copyright 2013 SAA, P.C .
THE COMPONENTS
THESE DRAWINGS
DO NOT INCLUDE
NECESSARY FOR
CONSTRUCTION
SAFETY.
A Development Plan for
32 Tenth Street
Steamboat Springs, Colorado
ELEVATION SHEET INDEX SIGNATURE BLOCK
FINAL
DEVELOPMENT PLAN Rev Date Description
FOR: - 16 Mar 15 DD-Estimate Set
LOTS 7-12 BLK 31 - 03 Apr 15 DD-Revision #1
ORIGINAL TOWN OF SS
also known as
32 10th Street
SIGNATURE BLOCK:
CITY TABLE
Property Owner: Date:
Blue Sage Ventures
c/o Stephen Shelesky
191 University Blvd, # 291
Lot Area: 3,000 s.f. (Minimum) Lot Size = 41,992 s.f. (.964 acres) 41,992 s.f. (.964 acres) Denver, CO 80206
Lot Coverage: 85% (Maximum) 85% = 35,693 s.f. 59% ~ 25,150 s.f. Date:
Applicant:
83,984 s.f. with 3rd level 39,360 s.f.
Blue Sage Ventures
Building Floor Area:
Floor Area Ratio: 1.5 (2.0 with 3rd level) .51 191 University Blvd, # 291
Denver, CO 80206
Building Height: 38' max w/ upper floor residential 38' max w/ upper floor residential
Front Setback: 10'-0" 0 Preparer: Date:

Steamboat Architectural Associates
Side Setback: 0 24'-843" and 55'-8" Bill Rangitsch - Architect
8'-0""
P.O. Box 772910
Back Set Back: 0
Building Separation: No separation Required No separation Required
Director of Planning: Date:
Unit Size: Determined by F.A.R. Determined by F.A.R. City of Steamboat Springs Department of Planning
Number of Units: Determined by F.A.R. Determined by F.A.R.
Tyler Gibbs - Planning Director
P.O. Box 775088
Parking Requirements: 44 spaces 47 spaces Steamboat Springs, CO 80477
CODE ANALYSIS DISCIPLINE
LEGAL DESCRIPTION PROJECT SETBACKS BUILDING STATISTICS OWNER

LOTS 7-12 BLK 31 ORIGINAL TOWN OF SS All structures shall comply to setbacks as follows:
Front Setback: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10'
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
This project is Phase 2 to the existing Building
Rear Setback:. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Side Setback: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
0'
0' VICINITY MAP
located at 32 Tenth Street, Steamboat Springs, CO.
- Phase 1 involves remodel of the existing 1955 SITE STATISTICS
and 1974 portion of the Building. Change of Use Site Area: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41,992 s.f.
has already been approved by Planning. The or 0.964 acres
proposed remodel will result in Lower Level Retail Building Envelope: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . NA
in the previous Garage Bays. or x,xxx acres ARCHITECT
- Phase 2 of the project involves an addition to the Minimum Site Size:. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,000 s.f.
existing 1974 portion of the Building. Selective for .069 acres
demolition and removals will allow a new Upper Maximum Lot Coverage: . . . . . . . . . . . . 85 %
Level addition for 3 Residential Condominiums, or 35,693 s.f
or 0.82 acres
ARCHITECTURAL
and three 2-car garages on the Alley.
ASSOCIATES
STEAMBOAT
LAND USE ZONING PARKING STATISTICS
CY - Yampa Street Commercial
Parking Spaces Required: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 spaces
CODE COMPLIANCE
2009 International Building Code Parking Spaces Provided: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 spaces
2009 International Existing Building Code GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER
2009 International Energy Conservation Code NorthWest Colorado Consultants, Inc. Date of Final Development Plan Approval: _____________
2580 Copper Ridge Drive
CONSTRUCTION TYPE P.O. Box 775226 Date of Final Development Plan Expiration: _____________
Type VA - Non-rated, Sprinklered Steamboat Springs, Colorado 80477
Phone: 970.879.7888

OCCUPANCY TYPE DESIGN CRITERIA Fax: 970.879.7891
Contact: Hal Schlicht
Group M - Mercantile Table R301.2(1) Climate & Geographic Design Criteria
Group B - Offices
Group R-2 - Residential Condominuims
Roof Snow Load - 75 PSF
Wind Speed - 90 MPH
SUBMISSION
Seismic Design Category - B CIVIL ENGINEER
Subject to Damage by Weathering - Severe
Subject to Damage by Frostline Depth - 48 inches
Subject to Damage by Termite - None to slight
Subject to Damage by Decay - None to slight
Winter Design Temperature - -15°F (-26°C) Final Development Plan
Ice Shield Underlayment Required - Yes
Flood Hazard - FIRM, February 4, 2005 17 February 2015
Air Freeze Index - Steamboat 2239
Mean Annual Temperature - 40° to 45°F
REV - 1 April 2015
THE COMPONENTS
THESE DRAWINGS
DO NOT INCLUDE
NECESSARY FOR
CONSTRUCTION
SAFETY.
N   N  
N   N  
ARCHITECTURAL
ASSOCIATES
STEAMBOAT

N   N  
FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN
17 FEB 15
(NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION)
N
 

-
-
Rev
THESE DRAWINGS
Date
DO NOT INCLUDE
03 Apr 15
16 Mar 15
THE COMPONENTS
NECESSARY FOR
CONSTRUCTION
 SAFETY.
Description
DD-Revision #1
DD-Estimate Set
STEAMBOAT © Copyright 2013 SAA, P.C .

ARCHITECTURAL
ASSOCIATES
N
 

-
-
Rev
THESE DRAWINGS
Date
DO NOT INCLUDE
03 Apr 15
16 Mar 15
THE COMPONENTS
NECESSARY FOR
CONSTRUCTION
 SAFETY.
Description
DD-Revision #1
DD-Estimate Set

ARCHITECTURAL
ASSOCIATES
N
 

-
-
Rev
THESE DRAWINGS
Date
DO NOT INCLUDE
03 Apr 15
16 Mar 15
THE COMPONENTS
NECESSARY FOR
CONSTRUCTION
 SAFETY.
Description
DD-Revision #1
DD-Estimate Set

ARCHITECTURAL
ASSOCIATES
N
 

-
-
Rev
THESE DRAWINGS
Date
DO NOT INCLUDE
03 Apr 15
16 Mar 15
THE COMPONENTS
NECESSARY FOR
CONSTRUCTION
 SAFETY.
Description
DD-Revision #1
DD-Estimate Set

ARCHITECTURAL
ASSOCIATES
N
 

-
-
Rev
THESE DRAWINGS
Date
DO NOT INCLUDE
03 Apr 15
16 Mar 15
THE COMPONENTS
NECESSARY FOR
CONSTRUCTION
 SAFETY.
Description
DD-Revision #1
DD-Estimate Set

ARCHITECTURAL
ASSOCIATES
 
 

-
-
Rev
THESE DRAWINGS
Date
DO NOT INCLUDE
03 Apr 15
16 Mar 15
THE COMPONENTS
NECESSARY FOR
CONSTRUCTION
 SAFETY.
Description
DD-Revision #1
DD-Estimate Set

ARCHITECTURAL
ASSOCIATES
 
 

-
-
Rev
THESE DRAWINGS
Date
DO NOT INCLUDE
03 Apr 15
16 Mar 15
THE COMPONENTS
NECESSARY FOR
CONSTRUCTION
 SAFETY.
Description
DD-Revision #1
DD-Estimate Set

ARCHITECTURAL
ASSOCIATES
THE COMPONENTS
THESE DRAWINGS
DO NOT INCLUDE
NECESSARY FOR
CONSTRUCTION
SAFETY.
Rev Date Description
- 16 Mar 15 DD-Estimate Set
- 03 Apr 15 DD-Revision #1
Color Elevation Rendering

NOT TO SCALE
SEE 2/A3.0
Photographic Panorama - Yampa Street
Materials Board Lighting Types

RESIDENTIAL SIDING RAINSCREEN SYSTEM GARAGE SIDING
FIXTURE TYPE 1 REVISED
#1 Viroc by Investwood - Unsanded Grey #1 Stucco - Warm Grey 30%
RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL OUTDOOR SCONCE
#2 Prodema ProdEx wood panel - Nux #2 Dri-Design Anodized Steel Flat Panels
LBL Tav 14” High Bronze LED Outdoor Wall Light
LBL Lighting
Style #3N529
Mounts down only, wet locations, ADA compliant,
California Title 24 compliant
RESIDENTIAL WINDOWS CONCRETE WINGS AT 1974 GARAGE PORTION
11 watt LED bulb
Sierra Pacific - Light Bronze 096 Anodized Collection Viroc by Investwood - Unsanded Grey
Dimmable with a low-voltage electronic dimmer
ARCHITECTURAL
ASSOCIATES
STEAMBOAT
ROOF FASCIA FOR NEW AND OLD RETAIL GARAGE DOORS AT 1955 PORTION
Hematite - warm grey 80% RETAIL STOREFRONT WINDOWS & DOOR 1955 PORTION
BP Glass Garage Door FIXTURE TYPE 2
Insulated Line RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL SOFFITS
BP-350 and BP-450 HD Recessed Soffit New Construction LED Downlight
Aluminum, to match existing RAB Lighting, Inc.
6GPVJ5VTGGV
Model NDLED4R-50Y-B-B LED Module - Wet
RESIDENTIAL SOFFIT RETAIL GARAGE DOORS AT 1974 PORTION
Wood stained to match wood siding panel RETAIL STOREFRONT WINDOWS & DOOR 1974 PORTION
BP Glass Garage Door
COMMERCIAL SOFFIT Insulated Line
Wood stained to Hematite - warm grey 50% BP-350 and BP-450 HD
Bronze
RESIDENTIAL ROOF
-';2.#0
TPO System Everguard Extremem
smoke grey

 
-
-
Rev
THESE DRAWINGS
Date
DO NOT INCLUDE
03 Apr 15
16 Mar 15
THE COMPONENTS
NECESSARY FOR
CONSTRUCTION
 SAFETY.
Description
DD-Revision #1
DD-Estimate Set

#
ARCHITECTURAL
ASSOCIATES

 
-
-
Rev
THESE DRAWINGS
Date
DO NOT INCLUDE
03 Apr 15
16 Mar 15
THE COMPONENTS
NECESSARY FOR
CONSTRUCTION
 SAFETY.
Description
DD-Revision #1
DD-Estimate Set

ARCHITECTURAL
ASSOCIATES

 
-
-
Rev
THESE DRAWINGS
Date
DO NOT INCLUDE
03 Apr 15
16 Mar 15
THE COMPONENTS
NECESSARY FOR
CONSTRUCTION
 SAFETY.
Description
DD-Revision #1
DD-Estimate Set

ARCHITECTURAL
ASSOCIATES

 
-
-
Rev
THESE DRAWINGS
Date
DO NOT INCLUDE
03 Apr 15
16 Mar 15
THE COMPONENTS
NECESSARY FOR
CONSTRUCTION
 SAFETY.
Description
DD-Revision #1
DD-Estimate Set

ARCHITECTURAL
ASSOCIATES

 
-
-
Rev
THESE DRAWINGS
Date
DO NOT INCLUDE
03 Apr 15
16 Mar 15
THE COMPONENTS
NECESSARY FOR
CONSTRUCTION
 SAFETY.
Description
DD-Revision #1
DD-Estimate Set

ARCHITECTURAL
ASSOCIATES

 
-
-
Rev
THESE DRAWINGS
Date
DO NOT INCLUDE
03 Apr 15
16 Mar 15
THE COMPONENTS
NECESSARY FOR
CONSTRUCTION
 SAFETY.
Description
DD-Revision #1
DD-Estimate Set

ARCHITECTURAL
ASSOCIATES
 
-
-
Rev
THESE DRAWINGS
Date
DO NOT INCLUDE
03 Apr 15
16 Mar 15
THE COMPONENTS
NECESSARY FOR
CONSTRUCTION
 SAFETY.
Description
DD-Revision #1
DD-Estimate Set

ARCHITECTURAL
ASSOCIATES
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
-
-
Rev
THESE DRAWINGS
Date
DO NOT INCLUDE
03 Apr 15
16 Mar 15
THE COMPONENTS
NECESSARY FOR
CONSTRUCTION
 SAFETY.
Description
DD-Revision #1
DD-Estimate Set

ARCHITECTURAL
ASSOCIATES
Model Rendering A
NOT TO SCALE
SEE A3.0
STEAMBOAT
A RCH I T E CT U RA L
A S S O CI AT E S
Model Rendering B
NOT TO SCALE
SEE A3.0
STEAMBOAT
A S S O CI AT E S
Model Rendering C
NOT TO SCALE
SEE A3.0
STEAMBOAT
A S S O CI AT E S
MATERIAL ELEVATIONS SOUTH
NOT TO SCALE
SEE A3.0
STEAMBOAT
A S S O CI AT E S
MATERIAL ELEVATIONS WEST
NOT TO SCALE
SEE A3.0
STEAMBOAT
A S S O CI AT E S
MATERIAL ELEVATIONS NORTH
NOT TO SCALE
SEE A3.1
STEAMBOAT
A S S O CI AT E S
MATERIAL ELEVATIONS EAST
NOT TO SCALE
SEE A3.1
STEAMBOAT
A S S O CI AT E S
City of Steamboat Springs 1 April 2015
Department of Planning & Community Development
124 10th Street, PO Box 775088
ATTN: Bob Keenan
RE: Final Development Plan TAC Response for a Development Plan for 32 Tenth Street,
Steamboat Springs, CO
Phasing Plan:
The project is a 2 phase development for the existing building located at 32 Tenth Street, steamboat
springs, CO.
Phase 1 of the project will be limited to the lower level of the existing building (the original 1955
building, 1964 addition and 1974 addition) as well as site work.
x Phase 1 includes the majority of the site work, including the 9 spaces along the back alley, gas
utility work in alley, landscaping along 10th street, new ADA sidewalk at from 10th street to
existing loading dock, the entire plaza, all the utility work along Yampa, the new Yampa
sidewalk streetscape, back in parking, driveway entrance to surface parking lot, surface lot and
surrounding landscaping sidewalks and retaining walls at lot, and 9th street streetscape.
x Phase 1 parking, and landscaping will be designed to accommodate at a minimum the existing
office and 1955 garage portion. Snow storage requirements will be met through off-site
hauling with a contracted snow removal service on a storm per storm basis.
x Phase 1 will include development of a sizeable plaza on Yampa Street, in place of the current
existing parking pad/garage entry.
x Phase 1 will include all the repair and/or reconstruction needed for existing utilities as well as
new utilities work proposed.
x All public improvements associated with phase 1 will be completed including landscaping,
curbs, gutters, drainage and storm water facilities, street signs, sidewalks, water and sewer
lines.
x Phase 1 also includes demolition of the existing alley warehouse, the upper level parking roof,
ramp and the 1974 office. The structural work related to phase 2 will also be completed after
demo in the 1974 lower level portion.
x Preliminary construction schedule estimate for phase 1 is 5 months to begin 6/2015 and end
11/2015.
Phase 2 of the project will be limited to the upper portion east half of the existing building (1974
addition).
x Phase 2 involves a residential addition to the existing 1974 portion of the building to include a
new upper level addition for 3 residential condominiums, and three new 2-car garages on the
alley.
x Garages in alley, residential entrance and associated landscaping, and the 5 alley parking
spaces closest to 9th street will be completed in Phase two, unless any of it can be completed
in Phase 1 per GC construction management plan submitted during permit application.
4/2016.
See attached civil engineering plans for specific details of requirements.
Phasing line indicated on 1/a1.0 - shown as 2d line, phase 1 occurs in a portion of the lower level 1955
building as well as the lower level 1974 addition, phase 2 occurs in the upper portion of the 1974 addition.
Phase 1 & 2 is being submitted concurrently for final development plan review.
2
THE COMPONENTS
THESE DRAWINGS
DO NOT INCLUDE
NECESSARY FOR
CONSTRUCTION
SAFETY.
A Development Plan for
32 Tenth Street
ELEVATION SHEET INDEX SIGNATURE BLOCK
FINAL
DEVELOPMENT PLAN Rev Date Description
FOR: - 16 Mar 15 DD-Estimate Set
LOTS 7-12 BLK 31 - 03 Apr 15 DD-Revision #1
ORIGINAL TOWN OF SS
also known as
32 10th Street
SIGNATURE BLOCK:
CITY TABLE
Property Owner: Date:
Blue Sage Ventures
191 University Blvd, # 291
Lot Area: 3,000 s.f. (Minimum) Lot Size = 41,992 s.f. (.964 acres) 41,992 s.f. (.964 acres) Denver, CO 80206
Lot Coverage: 85% (Maximum) 85% = 35,693 s.f. 59% ~ 25,150 s.f. Date:
Applicant:
83,984 s.f. with 3rd level 39,360 s.f.
Blue Sage Ventures
Building Floor Area:
Floor Area Ratio: 1.5 (2.0 with 3rd level) .51 191 University Blvd, # 291
Denver, CO 80206
Building Height: 38' max w/ upper floor residential 38' max w/ upper floor residential
Front Setback: 10'-0" 0 Preparer: Date:

Steamboat Architectural Associates
Side Setback: 0 24'-843" and 55'-8" Bill Rangitsch - Architect
8'-0""
P.O. Box 772910
Back Set Back: 0
Building Separation: No separation Required No separation Required
Director of Planning: Date:
Unit Size: Determined by F.A.R. Determined by F.A.R. City of Steamboat Springs Department of Planning
Number of Units: Determined by F.A.R. Determined by F.A.R.
Tyler Gibbs - Planning Director
P.O. Box 775088
Parking Requirements: 44 spaces 47 spaces Steamboat Springs, CO 80477
CODE ANALYSIS DISCIPLINE
LEGAL DESCRIPTION PROJECT SETBACKS BUILDING STATISTICS OWNER

LOTS 7-12 BLK 31 ORIGINAL TOWN OF SS All structures shall comply to setbacks as follows:
Front Setback: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10'
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
This project is Phase 2 to the existing Building
Rear Setback:. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Side Setback: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
0'
0' VICINITY MAP
located at 32 Tenth Street, Steamboat Springs, CO.
- Phase 1 involves remodel of the existing 1955 SITE STATISTICS
and 1974 portion of the Building. Change of Use Site Area: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41,992 s.f.
has already been approved by Planning. The or 0.964 acres
proposed remodel will result in Lower Level Retail Building Envelope: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . NA
in the previous Garage Bays. or x,xxx acres ARCHITECT
- Phase 2 of the project involves an addition to the Minimum Site Size:. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,000 s.f.
existing 1974 portion of the Building. Selective for .069 acres
demolition and removals will allow a new Upper Maximum Lot Coverage: . . . . . . . . . . . . 85 %
Level addition for 3 Residential Condominiums, or 35,693 s.f
or 0.82 acres
ARCHITECTURAL
and three 2-car garages on the Alley.
ASSOCIATES
STEAMBOAT
LAND USE ZONING PARKING STATISTICS
CY - Yampa Street Commercial
Parking Spaces Required: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 spaces
CODE COMPLIANCE
2009 International Building Code Parking Spaces Provided: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 spaces
2009 International Existing Building Code GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER
2009 International Energy Conservation Code NorthWest Colorado Consultants, Inc. Date of Final Development Plan Approval: _____________
2580 Copper Ridge Drive
CONSTRUCTION TYPE P.O. Box 775226 Date of Final Development Plan Expiration: _____________
Type VA - Non-rated, Sprinklered Steamboat Springs, Colorado 80477
Phone: 970.879.7888

OCCUPANCY TYPE DESIGN CRITERIA Fax: 970.879.7891
Contact: Hal Schlicht
Group M - Mercantile Table R301.2(1) Climate & Geographic Design Criteria
Group B - Offices
Group R-2 - Residential Condominuims
Roof Snow Load - 75 PSF
Wind Speed - 90 MPH
SUBMISSION
Seismic Design Category - B CIVIL ENGINEER
Subject to Damage by Weathering - Severe
Subject to Damage by Frostline Depth - 48 inches
Subject to Damage by Termite - None to slight
Subject to Damage by Decay - None to slight
Winter Design Temperature - -15°F (-26°C) Final Development Plan
Ice Shield Underlayment Required - Yes
Flood Hazard - FIRM, February 4, 2005 17 February 2015
Air Freeze Index - Steamboat 2239
Mean Annual Temperature - 40° to 45°F
REV - 1 April 2015
THE COMPONENTS
THESE DRAWINGS
DO NOT INCLUDE
NECESSARY FOR
CONSTRUCTION
SAFETY.
N   N  
N   N  
ARCHITECTURAL
ASSOCIATES
STEAMBOAT

N   N  
FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN
17 FEB 15
(NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION)
N
 

-
-
Rev
THESE DRAWINGS
Date
DO NOT INCLUDE
03 Apr 15
16 Mar 15
THE COMPONENTS
NECESSARY FOR
CONSTRUCTION
 SAFETY.
Description
DD-Revision #1
DD-Estimate Set

ARCHITECTURAL
ASSOCIATES
N
 

-
-
Rev
THESE DRAWINGS
Date
DO NOT INCLUDE
03 Apr 15
16 Mar 15
THE COMPONENTS
NECESSARY FOR
CONSTRUCTION
 SAFETY.
Description
DD-Revision #1
DD-Estimate Set

ARCHITECTURAL
ASSOCIATES
N
 

-
-
Rev
THESE DRAWINGS
Date
DO NOT INCLUDE
03 Apr 15
16 Mar 15
THE COMPONENTS
NECESSARY FOR
CONSTRUCTION
 SAFETY.
Description
DD-Revision #1
DD-Estimate Set

ARCHITECTURAL
ASSOCIATES
N
 

-
-
Rev
THESE DRAWINGS
Date
DO NOT INCLUDE
03 Apr 15
16 Mar 15
THE COMPONENTS
NECESSARY FOR
CONSTRUCTION
 SAFETY.
Description
DD-Revision #1
DD-Estimate Set

ARCHITECTURAL
ASSOCIATES
N
 

-
-
Rev
THESE DRAWINGS
Date
DO NOT INCLUDE
03 Apr 15
16 Mar 15
THE COMPONENTS
NECESSARY FOR
CONSTRUCTION
 SAFETY.
Description
DD-Revision #1
DD-Estimate Set

ARCHITECTURAL
ASSOCIATES
 
 

-
-
Rev
THESE DRAWINGS
Date
DO NOT INCLUDE
03 Apr 15
16 Mar 15
THE COMPONENTS
NECESSARY FOR
CONSTRUCTION
 SAFETY.
Description
DD-Revision #1
DD-Estimate Set

ARCHITECTURAL
ASSOCIATES
 
 

-
-
Rev
THESE DRAWINGS
Date
DO NOT INCLUDE
03 Apr 15
16 Mar 15
THE COMPONENTS
NECESSARY FOR
CONSTRUCTION
 SAFETY.
Description
DD-Revision #1
DD-Estimate Set

ARCHITECTURAL
ASSOCIATES
THE COMPONENTS
THESE DRAWINGS
DO NOT INCLUDE
NECESSARY FOR
CONSTRUCTION
SAFETY.
Rev Date Description
- 16 Mar 15 DD-Estimate Set
- 03 Apr 15 DD-Revision #1
Color Elevation Rendering

NOT TO SCALE
SEE 2/A3.0
Photographic Panorama - Yampa Street
Materials Board Lighting Types

RESIDENTIAL SIDING RAINSCREEN SYSTEM GARAGE SIDING
FIXTURE TYPE 1 REVISED
#1 Viroc by Investwood - Unsanded Grey #1 Stucco - Warm Grey 30%
RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL OUTDOOR SCONCE
#2 Prodema ProdEx wood panel - Nux #2 Dri-Design Anodized Steel Flat Panels
LBL Tav 14” High Bronze LED Outdoor Wall Light
LBL Lighting
Style #3N529
Mounts down only, wet locations, ADA compliant,
California Title 24 compliant
RESIDENTIAL WINDOWS CONCRETE WINGS AT 1974 GARAGE PORTION
11 watt LED bulb
Sierra Pacific - Light Bronze 096 Anodized Collection Viroc by Investwood - Unsanded Grey
Dimmable with a low-voltage electronic dimmer
ARCHITECTURAL
ASSOCIATES
STEAMBOAT
ROOF FASCIA FOR NEW AND OLD RETAIL GARAGE DOORS AT 1955 PORTION
Hematite - warm grey 80% RETAIL STOREFRONT WINDOWS & DOOR 1955 PORTION
BP Glass Garage Door FIXTURE TYPE 2
Insulated Line RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL SOFFITS
BP-350 and BP-450 HD Recessed Soffit New Construction LED Downlight
Aluminum, to match existing RAB Lighting, Inc.
6GPVJ5VTGGV
Model NDLED4R-50Y-B-B LED Module - Wet
RESIDENTIAL SOFFIT RETAIL GARAGE DOORS AT 1974 PORTION
Wood stained to match wood siding panel RETAIL STOREFRONT WINDOWS & DOOR 1974 PORTION
BP Glass Garage Door
COMMERCIAL SOFFIT Insulated Line
Wood stained to Hematite - warm grey 50% BP-350 and BP-450 HD
Bronze
RESIDENTIAL ROOF
-';2.#0
TPO System Everguard Extremem
smoke grey

 
-
-
Rev
THESE DRAWINGS
Date
DO NOT INCLUDE
03 Apr 15
16 Mar 15
THE COMPONENTS
NECESSARY FOR
CONSTRUCTION
 SAFETY.
Description
DD-Revision #1
DD-Estimate Set

#
ARCHITECTURAL
ASSOCIATES

 
-
-
Rev
THESE DRAWINGS
Date
DO NOT INCLUDE
03 Apr 15
16 Mar 15
THE COMPONENTS
NECESSARY FOR
CONSTRUCTION
 SAFETY.
Description
DD-Revision #1
DD-Estimate Set

ARCHITECTURAL
ASSOCIATES

 
-
-
Rev
THESE DRAWINGS
Date
DO NOT INCLUDE
03 Apr 15
16 Mar 15
THE COMPONENTS
NECESSARY FOR
CONSTRUCTION
 SAFETY.
Description
DD-Revision #1
DD-Estimate Set

ARCHITECTURAL
ASSOCIATES

 
-
-
Rev
THESE DRAWINGS
Date
DO NOT INCLUDE
03 Apr 15
16 Mar 15
THE COMPONENTS
NECESSARY FOR
CONSTRUCTION
 SAFETY.
Description
DD-Revision #1
DD-Estimate Set

ARCHITECTURAL
ASSOCIATES

 
-
-
Rev
THESE DRAWINGS
Date
DO NOT INCLUDE
03 Apr 15
16 Mar 15
THE COMPONENTS
NECESSARY FOR
CONSTRUCTION
 SAFETY.
Description
DD-Revision #1
DD-Estimate Set

ARCHITECTURAL
ASSOCIATES

 
-
-
Rev
THESE DRAWINGS
Date
DO NOT INCLUDE
03 Apr 15
16 Mar 15
THE COMPONENTS
NECESSARY FOR
CONSTRUCTION
 SAFETY.
Description
DD-Revision #1
DD-Estimate Set

ARCHITECTURAL
ASSOCIATES
 
-
-
Rev
THESE DRAWINGS
Date
DO NOT INCLUDE
03 Apr 15
16 Mar 15
THE COMPONENTS
NECESSARY FOR
CONSTRUCTION
 SAFETY.
Description
DD-Revision #1
DD-Estimate Set

ARCHITECTURAL
ASSOCIATES
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
-
-
Rev
THESE DRAWINGS
Date
DO NOT INCLUDE
03 Apr 15
16 Mar 15
THE COMPONENTS
NECESSARY FOR
CONSTRUCTION
 SAFETY.
Description
DD-Revision #1
DD-Estimate Set

ARCHITECTURAL
ASSOCIATES
Model Rendering A
NOT TO SCALE
SEE A3.0
STEAMBOAT
A S S O CI AT E S
Model Rendering B
NOT TO SCALE
SEE A3.0
STEAMBOAT
A S S O CI AT E S
Model Rendering C
NOT TO SCALE
SEE A3.0
STEAMBOAT
A S S O CI AT E S
MATERIAL ELEVATIONS SOUTH
NOT TO SCALE
SEE A3.0
STEAMBOAT
A S S O CI AT E S
MATERIAL ELEVATIONS WEST
NOT TO SCALE
SEE A3.0
STEAMBOAT
A S S O CI AT E S
MATERIAL ELEVATIONS NORTH
NOT TO SCALE
SEE A3.1
STEAMBOAT
A S S O CI AT E S
MATERIAL ELEVATIONS EAST
NOT TO SCALE
SEE A3.1
STEAMBOAT
A S S O CI AT E S
City of Steamboat Springs 1 April 2015
124 10th Street, PO Box 775088
ATTN: Bob Keenan
RE: Final Development Plan TAC Response for a Development Plan for 32 Tenth Street,
Steamboat Springs, CO
Phasing Plan:
The project is a 2 phase development for the existing building located at 32 Tenth Street, steamboat
springs, CO.
Phase 1 of the project will be limited to the lower level of the existing building (the original 1955
building, 1964 addition and 1974 addition) as well as site work.
x Phase 1 includes the majority of the site work, including the 9 spaces along the back alley, gas
utility work in alley, landscaping along 10th street, new ADA sidewalk at from 10th street to
existing loading dock, the entire plaza, all the utility work along Yampa, the new Yampa
sidewalk streetscape, back in parking, driveway entrance to surface parking lot, surface lot and
surrounding landscaping sidewalks and retaining walls at lot, and 9th street streetscape.
x Phase 1 parking, and landscaping will be designed to accommodate at a minimum the existing
office and 1955 garage portion. Snow storage requirements will be met through off-site
hauling with a contracted snow removal service on a storm per storm basis.
x Phase 1 will include development of a sizeable plaza on Yampa Street, in place of the current
existing parking pad/garage entry.
x Phase 1 will include all the repair and/or reconstruction needed for existing utilities as well as
new utilities work proposed.
x All public improvements associated with phase 1 will be completed including landscaping,
curbs, gutters, drainage and storm water facilities, street signs, sidewalks, water and sewer
lines.
x Phase 1 also includes demolition of the existing alley warehouse, the upper level parking roof,
ramp and the 1974 office. The structural work related to phase 2 will also be completed after
demo in the 1974 lower level portion.
11/2015.
Phase 2 of the project will be limited to the upper portion east half of the existing building (1974
addition).
x Phase 2 involves a residential addition to the existing 1974 portion of the building to include a
new upper level addition for 3 residential condominiums, and three new 2-car garages on the
alley.
x Garages in alley, residential entrance and associated landscaping, and the 5 alley parking
spaces closest to 9th street will be completed in Phase two, unless any of it can be completed
in Phase 1 per GC construction management plan submitted during permit application.
4/2016.
See attached civil engineering plans for specific details of requirements.
Phasing line indicated on 1/a1.0 - shown as 2d line, phase 1 occurs in a portion of the lower level 1955
building as well as the lower level 1974 addition, phase 2 occurs in the upper portion of the 1974 addition.
Phase 1 & 2 is being submitted concurrently for final development plan review.
2
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT
MEMORANDUM
DATE: May 14, 2015
TO: The Planning Commission
FROM: Bob Keenan, Senior Planner, AICP

Tyler Gibbs, AIA, Director of Planning and Community Development
SUBJECT: Conditions of Approval: YVEA Adaptive Reuse, #FDP-15-01
In response to Planning Commissioner questions at the May 11th worksession of the

Planning Commission, I have prepared the following to address questions regarding
conditions of approvals 5 and 6 as contained within the Staff Report.
Condition #5 –
5. The Director of Public Works determines parking regulations. Parking restrictions,

alignment, and configuration is subject to modification. Any notation of parking
restrictions shown on the development application is subject to modification.
Per the City Engineer, Ben Beall, the intent of this condition is as follows: The applicant
is proposing loading zones at the corners of Yampa St and proposing to sign it as such.
We are okay starting with this arrangement. The COA is intended to clarify any potential
future confusion if the DPW determines that those parking signs need to be changed. We
didn't want to get into a situation with a future owner that those were approved as such on
the development plan.
The other component here is that we are still in the "pilot program" of back-in diagonal.
Dating back to our original conversations with the applicant at conceptual plan we were
okay extending our pilot program to include this section of the street recognizing that we
are still in the testing phase of the pilot program. The DPW needs the flexibility to
modify this if standards change or the pilot program is abandoned. At this point in time,
we have found the back-in to be very successful and we are expanding the back in to
another location this summer. Again, the COA is to provide future clarification.
To help further clarify this condition it could be amended as follows (changes in bold):
1
5. Per the Model Traffic Code, Municipal Code Section 23-32 (b), the Director of
Public Works determines parking regulations. Parking restrictions, alignment, and
configuration is subject to modification. Any notation of parking restrictions shown on
the development application is subject to modification.
Condition #6 –
6. Prior to approval of building permit, developer shall submit contribution of $10,000

for the implementation of the City’s stormwater quality treatment program to address
drainage outfall to the Yampa River.
Per the City Engineer, Ben Beall, the intent of this condition is as follows: The applicant
would have otherwise had to install a water quality device on their private property.
Rather than have numerous individual private water treatment devices throughout town
that exacerbates maintenance needs, the City and the applicant discussed contribution
toward a publicly maintained device that would treat a larger drainage basin rather than
investing a proportionally greater amount of money to treat a smaller basin.
The $10k was an amount proposed by the applicant and we had numerous follow up
conversations to discuss the cost. The city is applying for a grant for the public device
and the applicant has gone so far as to write a support letter for the grant application
referencing his $10k as a public private partnership.
The $10k is likely less than the applicant would spend to put in an individual device that
the applicant/future HOA would then have to maintain. This is a win/win situation and
an example of the City working with an applicant to reduce their costs and provide
maximum benefit to the community.
2
Attachment 2
May 14, 2015 Draft
STEAMBOAT SPRINGS PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES

May 14, 2015
The regularly scheduled meeting of the Steamboat Springs Planning Commission was
called to order at approximately 5:00p.m. on Thursday, May 14, 2015, in the Citizens’
Meeting Room, Centennial Hall, 124 10th Street, Steamboat Springs, Colorado.
Planning Commission members in attendance were: George Eck III, Jason lacy, Kathi
Meyer, Rich Levy, Martyn Kingston, Charlie MacArthur and Jerry Burns.
Absent: Michael Buckley
Staff members present were Director of Planning Tyler Gibbs, code enforcement officer
Barb Wheeler, and staff planners Bob Keenan Toby Stauffer.
________________________________________________________________
PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA

None.
1. Original Town of SS, B31, L7-12 & L11-12 S2, Lot 10, Block 32
STAFF PRESENTATION
Bob Keenan, Staff Planner:

Before you tonight is an application for a final development plan for a building expansion
to 32 Tenth St, the Yampa Valley Electric Building. The applicant is looking to expand
the building with three dwelling units. This also includes a six-space parking garage
along the alley and a 16-space parking lot at the corner of Ninth and Yampa Streets.
The applicant is also proposing to build a plaza area in front of the front façade of the
building and Yampa Street and to build streetscape improvements along Ninth and
Yampa Streets consistent with the downtown design guidelines.
I wanted to note the memo dated today regarding the conditions of approval. You can
see Condition #5 dealing with the parking restrictions and noting that the director of
Public Works has the ability to reconfigure parking in the public right-of-way as needed
over time. It may be configured this way now with the back-in diagonal parking that’s
been in a pilot phase. All indications are that it is working well, but if it doesn’t work out,
they have the ability to reconfigure that. Within #5 if we’d like to amend the condition of
approval per the staff report, we could add that per the model traffic code (municipal
code section 23-32 B,) and then start the original condition.
In regards to Condition #6, this is dealing with the water quality treatment device: Rather
than having each individual property owner install their own water quality treatment
device with new development, the city has been trying to work a public-private
May 14, 2015 Draft
partnership to do a regional facility so the individual property owners don’t have to have
their own treatment device and do maintenance over time at their own expense. Rather,
they can contribute to a regional solution on Yampa Street. That’s what the Public
Works Department and the applicant have worked out.
There was also a question at the worksession regarding the parking along the alley and
sight distances for backing out of those spaces. On confirmation with the city engineer,
that setup is an allowed setup; there are no prohibitions on that in the Community
Development Code. It’s similar to other developments we’ve approved in the past, most
notably the Alpenglow Townhomes where you have garages along the length of the
alley. The parking garage for the residential units is set back approximately five feet
from the alley, so there will be some sight distances gained as one backs out of those
spaces.
Walking through the existing and proposed parking analysis, which includes the parking
credit: There’s nine spaces provided on site that are along the alley. With the residential
phase, there will be the addition of 11 new spaces. This includes new spaces developed
along the alley adjacent to the new garage and also the spaces within the garage. With
the proposed parking lot on the corner of Ninth and Yampa streets, that was previously
approved through a development plan to vary the standard to locate the parking lot on
that corner, that has 16 spaces, and then there’s a credit for developing new on-street
spaces. So along Yampa Street, there’s basically a continuous curb cut for that whole
length of the building because of the garage space, and that will go away and back-in
diagonal parking will come in. So we can credit a half space per new parking space per
the CDC. That creates 17 new spaces on Yampa, and then there’s five new created on
Ninth Street for a total of 21 new spaces. Cut that in half for the credit, and you get a
credit of 11 spaces that comes off their total required parking at the end of the day.
The final development plan and the proposed residential structure and all associated
improvements meets the development standards and criteria for approval. Staff is
recommending approval.
Erica Hewitt, Steamboat Architectural/Blue Sage Ventures:

We pretty much agree with everything in the report from Bob. We did bring in the
materials board. Any repairs are going to be made to the existing building that we need
to make. We’re trying to stick within the historic standards for all of that work. The new
residential we’re trying to make it look similar but not use the exact same materials. You
don’t really want to use the same materials as for the historic part to keep that historic
building more prominent. The conditions that are on the roof of the existing building are
going to be the same style, same everything for the new residential pieces. We’ve sort
of divided the look up into three different sections corresponding to the three phases of
the building: the 1955 phase and addition in 1964 that we’re calling the original building
and trying to keep that look as much as possible. Then there’s the 1974 part, which is
the five garage bays along Yampa. We’re using that as our transition piece between the
May 14, 2015 Draft
original and the new residences above, where it’ll have the same look as the original but
maybe the material in the garage doors matches the windows to keep it cohesive.
Commissioner Meyer:
When I look at this, if I understand the phasing correct, you’re creating a significant
number of spaces at the time you put in the residential portion?
Hewitt: No, we’re trying to do most of the parking during Phase I; the residential phase
is Phase II. We’re trying to do the majority of the site work and the majority of everything
but the residential in Phase I.
Meyer: I’m looking specifically at the 11 spaces that it says you’re going to create along
the alley in the garage with the residential phase. Is that incorrect?
Hewitt: No, that’s correct. So there’s six that are going to be in the garages themselves,
and then there’s four next to it that we’re going to use for staging for the residential
construction. So the parking lot below will be open; all the parking on Yampa will be
open; and then the nine spaces on the alley will be available.
Meyer confirmed that a total of 11 spaces will be created during the residential phase.
Meyer: If you don’t build those for a year or two, is there still adequate parking to
support the office/retail component?
Keenan: Yes, there is. It’s important to note that they’re continuing the office use from
Yampa Valley Electric, so that part is grandfathered per the existing conditions at that
site. So there would be 26 spaces provided. The retail/restaurant was 12 spaces; office
is 31. So until that Phase II is up and running, they’re going to be utilizing that
nonconforming status for the parking as it’s related to the grandfathered office use for
Yampa Valley Electric.
Meyer: So if this was new, they would not have adequate parking.
Keenan: That’s correct.
Commissioner Lacy:
So 17 and 5 is actually 22. Where are we off on our calculation there? Is 17 and 5
correct? Is it 16 and 5?
Hewitt: There’s 19 on Yampa and three on Ninth, I believe.
Commissioner Kingston:
Does that make sense with the addition of landscaping on Ninth? There’s obviously no
space there for more than three additional parking spots. My question concerned the
May 14, 2015 Draft
landscaping. I’m looking at model rendering B and C and also the south elevation, and
I’m seeing some significant additions of landscaping. I understand part of the
arrangement to leave the pavement at a six-foot width was the exchange of additional
trees My question on Monday revolved around you describing that landscaping and the
significance of it. And who is going to maintain that landscaping?
Hewitt: HOA is going to maintain the landscaping. The rendering is just an artist
rendering. On the Ninth Street side with that parking lot we want to have a lot of
buffering landscaping. We’re working with a landscape architect to figure that space out.
Kingston: Define buffer.
Hewitt: We’re putting more I think than probably would be required to sort of hide the
parking lot. It’s the residential side of the building, so we don’t want residences looking
down at just a parking lot. So we’re finding that balance between what works there and
sort of softens up the parking lot, too.
Commissioner Levy:
Loading ramp and restricted parking, are those part of the spaces that they are creating
and getting credit for?
Keenan: The two on corners of Yampa Street are part of what they’re getting credit for,
though we’ve crafted a condition of approval to address that concern.
Hewitt: We needed to provide 44 spaces, and we’re providing 47 because I wanted the
three loading spaces to be outside of that 44. I think our signage is going to say loading
during certain times and then parking in others.
Keenan: Condition 11.
Levy: How do you actually envision your deliveries? I’ve seen issues with vehicles
parked either blocking parking spaces or the bike path. How do we deal with deliveries?
Obviously most semis aren’t going to fit into that parking spot.
Keenan: I believe the one along the alley is deep enough. Working through TAC, it was
brought to our attention that the majority of the vehicles for their proposed use were
going to be vans that would fit in those parking spaces. So between the two on Yampa
and the one along the alley that’s deeper, that seems to be adequate. Anything larger
than that would utilize the alley for any type of delivery.
Levy: Do we have code parameters for deliveries?
Tyler Gibbs, Director of Planning:

There’s no doubt that we see the larger trucks just stop in the travel lane and double
park. That’s an enforcement issue. I’ve been out there when the police have been
asking those vehicles to move. They’re on a schedule, so sometimes they do what’s
May 14, 2015 Draft
most expedient for them, but it’s not legal. It’s a matter of trying to get out there and
intervene.
Commissioner MacArthur:
Condition #5 is crafted mostly as a reminder for people to check the code. It basically
states what’s already in the code. Is that correct?
Keenan: It’s basically to supplement the development permit plan. At some point in
time, somebody looks at the development permit plan and says city, you cannot change
these 21 spaces from back-in diagonal to parallel because it’s in the development
permit plan and it’s an approved development plan. This was to try and condition the
approval that the city still has authority over the right-of-way and how it’s parked and
how it’s signed.
MacArthur: Would someone be able to come in the future and make that claim without
that condition of approval?
Keenan: I think it just adds clarity.
Eck: For Condition 6 with the stormwater, you said the city wants to have a shared
device and they’re applying for a grant to help fund that. Is there a contingency if the city
doesn’t get the grant? Is this going to happen regardless? How’s it going to be funded?
Keenan: I believe it’s going to happen regardless.
Ryan Spaustat, Landmark Consultants:

The city is required to provide stormwater treatment as part of the Clean Water Act. So
ultimately there will be a water quality structure there. The grant would facilitate that to
happen sooner rather than later. It’s not a question of if but when.
Lacy: Is a private water quality device required based on the size of the development?
Spaustat: Based on the CDC, anytime you have more than five parking spaces, you’re
required to provide water quality treatment. So in this case it’s the addition of the
parking lot.
Lacy: And how many properties will this publicly maintained device service?
Spaustat: I don’t know. It’s a large section of downtown. The storm sewer goes all the
way to the other side of Lincoln.
Levy: We’re giving them credit for creating parking spaces. I was wondering why that’s
not required similar to putting in a sidewalk.
May 14, 2015 Draft
Gibbs: What triggered it is the fact that they were moving the curb cut. Once a new curb
goes in, we would expect parking to be created. The fact that they’re enabling that to
happen by removal of the curb cut is what allows for the credit.
Spaustat: I think it’s a carrot to encourage a use that doesn’t require the curb cut. In this
case, it’s a carrot to eliminate the use of garages.
Levy: We use the term “adaptive reuse.” Is there any special rules or regulations when
we use that? We’ve seen that in a couple different places.
Gibbs: It’s just a term prevalent in preservation-related projects. It’s the reuse of an
existing building. It doesn’t convey any special privileges in the code.
Lacy confirmed that this project was approved by the Historic Preservation Commission.
PUBLIC COMMENT
None.
STAFF COMMENT
None.
APPLICANT COMMENT
None.
MOTION
Commissioner Meyer moved to approve #FDP-15-01 with the 11 conditions of approval
including the revised #5.
Commissioner Levy seconded the motion.
None.
VOTE
Vote: 7-0
Voting for approval of motion to approve: Lacy, Meyer, MacArthur, Levy, Eck, Kingston
and Burns
AGENDA ITEM #15.

________________________________________________________
FROM: Barb Wheeler, CCEO, Code Enforcement Officer

Tyler Gibbs, AIA, Director of Planning and Community
Development
DATE: June 2, 2015
ITEM: Consolidated Appeal MIS-15-01 & MIS-15-02, Fairway

Meadows, Flg.1, Lot 85
NEXT STEP: If City Council denies the appeal the permit holder may
continue operating his Vacation Home Rental.
_____________________________________________________________
___ ORDINANCE
___ RESOLUTION
_X_ MOTION
___ DIRECTION
___ INFORMATION
________________________________________________________
PROJECT NAME: Fairway Meadows, Flg. 1, Lot 85, #VHR-15-03
PETITION: An appeal of an Administrative Decision to approve a Vacation
Home Rental permit.
LOCATION: 1415 Delta Queen Ct.
APPELLANTS: Frank & Jean Ariano and Gary & Christine Pon
PC ACTION: May 14, 2015: approved 6-1 to deny appeal
May 14, 2015: approved 7-0 to revisit and discuss Chapter
26 of the Community Development Code (CDC), including
Section 26-88 in the future.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1. Background Information
The Appellants are appealing an Administrative Decision to approve permit
#VHR-15-03 located at Fairway Meadows, Flg. 1, Lot 85, 1415 Delta Queen
Ct. Their appeal is based on several sections of the Community Development
Code (CDC), Chapter 26 and most especially Section 26-88 they feel were not
applied correctly to the approval of this permit.
Please refer to Attachment 1, Planning Commission Packet, for more

information.
2. Planning Commission Discussion

The Planning Commission found the criteria for approval of a Vacation Home
Rental permit was met as set out in Section 26-88 of the CDC and the appeal
should be denied. They also felt that Chapter 26 of the CDC, including
Section 26-88 may be flawed and should perhaps be revisited during a work
session sometime in the future.
Please refer to Attachment 2, draft meeting minutes, for full discussion.
3. Public Comment
No additional public comment has been received.
Please refer to Attachment 1 for written comment included in the Planning

Commission Packet and Attachment 2 for comment heard at the Planning
Commission meeting.
4. Recommended Motion
On May 14, 2015 with a vote of 6-1, the Planning Commission recommended
denial of the appeal for Vacation Home Rental #VHR-15-03.
The Planning Commission voted 7-0 to revisit Chapter 26 of the CDC, including
especially, Section 26-88.
5. Attachments
Attachment 1 – Planning Commission Packet, May 14, 2015
Attachment 2 – Draft Planning Commission Minutes, May 14, 2015
AGENDA ITEM #1
'(3$570(172)3/$11,1*$1'&20081,7<
'(9(/230(1767$))5(3257
3/$11,1*&200,66,21$*(1'$,7(0
%
3URMHFW1DPH $ULDQR$SSHDO0,6DQG3RQ$SSHDO0,6
&RQVROLGDWHG$SSHDORI$GPLQLVWUDWLYH'HFLVLRQRQ)DLUZD\
0HDGRZV6XEGLYLVLRQ)LOLQJ/RW9DFDWLRQ+RPH5HQWDO
9+5
3UHSDUHG%\ %DUE:KHHOHU&RGH(QIRUFHPHQW2IILFHU&&(2([W
7KURXJK 7\OHU*LEEV$,$'LUHFWRURI3ODQQLQJDQG&RPPXQLW\
'HYHORSPHQW([W
3ODQQLQJ&RPPLVVLRQ3& 0D\
&LW\&RXQFLO&& -XQH
([LVWLQJ=RQLQJ 5HVLGHQWLDO1HLJKERUKRRG7ZR0RGHUDWH'HQVLW\51
$SSHOODQWV )UDQN -HDQ$ULDQR'HOWD4XHHQ&W
*DU\ &KULVWLQH3RQ'HOWD4XHHQ&W
3URMHFW$SSOLFDQWV )UDQN3KLOOLSV'HOWD4XHHQ&W
5HTXHVW $SSHDO RI DQ DGPLQLVWUDWLYH GHFLVLRQ WR DSSURYH D SHUPLW WR
RSHUDWH D 9DFDWLRQ +RPH 5HQWDO DW )LOLQJ /RW )DLUZD\
0HDGRZV6XEGLYLVLRQ
, 67$))),1',1*
6WDII ILQGV WKHVH UHTXHVWV 0,6 DQG 0,6 DSSHDOV RI DQ DGPLQLVWUDWLYH GHFLVLRQ WR
DSSURYHD9DFDWLRQ+RPH5HQWDOSHUPLWIRU)DLUZD\0HDGRZV6XEGLYLVLRQ)LOLQJ/RW
'HOWD 4XHHQ &W WR EH ,1&216,67(17 ZLWK WKH &RPPXQLW\ 'HYHORSPHQW &RGH 6HFWLRQ
I&ULWHULDIRU$GPLQLVWUDWLYH$SSHDO'HFLVLRQ
,, 5(&200(1'('027,21
7KH 3ODQQLQJ &RPPLVVLRQ UHFRPPHQGV WKDW &LW\ &RXQFLO GHQ\ DSSHDOV 0,6 DQG 0,6
UHTXHVWV WR RYHUWXUQ WKH DGPLQLVWUDWLYH GHFLVLRQ WR DSSURYH D 9DFDWLRQ +RPH 5HQWDO SHUPLW
9+5DW)DLUZD\0HDGRZV6XEGLYLVLRQ)LOLQJ/RW'HOWD4XHHQ&RXUWEDVHGRQ
ILQGLQJVWKDWWKHDSSHDOVDUHLQFRQVLVWHQWZLWKWKH&ULWHULDIRU$GPLQLVWUDWLYH$SSHDO'HFLVLRQ

$ULDQR$SSHDO0,6DQG3RQ$SSHDO0,6 3&+HDULQJ
&RQVROLGDWHG$SSHDORI$GPLQLVWUDWLYH'HFLVLRQRQ)DLUZD\ &&+HDULQJ
0HDGRZV6XEGLYLVLRQ)LOLQJ/RW9DFDWLRQ+RPH5HQWDO
9+5'HOWD4XHHQ&W

,,,/,672)$77$&+0(176
$WWDFKPHQW6WDII5HSRUWIRU$ULDQR$SSHDO0,6
$WWDFKPHQW6WDII5HSRUWIRU3RQ$SSHDO0,6
$WWDFKPHQW$ULDQR$SSHDO5HTXHVW
$WWDFKPHQW3RQ$SSHDO5HTXHVW
$WWDFKPHQW9+5$SSURYDOOHWWHU
$WWDFKPHQW3XEOLF&RPPHQW
$WWDFKPHQW3XEOLF1RWLFHV
$WWDFKPHQW3KRWRV
$WWDFKPHQW1RWLFHRI9LRODWLRQ 0DLO5HFHLSW
$WWDFKPHQW3KLOOLSV6KRUW7HUP5HQWDO&RUUHVSRQGHQFH
'HSDUWPHQWRI3ODQQLQJDQG&RPPXQLW\'HYHORSPHQW 3DJH
6WDII5HSRUW

"UUBDINFOU

DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA ITEM # 3A
Project Name: Ariano Appeal of Administrative Decision on Fairway Meadows
Subdivision, Filing 1, Lot 85, Vacation Home Rental VHR-15-03,
MIS-15-01, 1415 Delta Queen Ct.
Prepared By: Barb Wheeler, Code Enforcement
Officer - CCEO (Ext. 274) Project
location
Through: Tyler Gibbs AIA, Director of
Planning and Community
Development (Ext. 244)
Commission (PC):
Existing Zoning: Residential Neighborhood Two,

Moderate Density (RN-2)
1415 Delta Queen
Frank & Jean Ariano
Appellants:
1430 Delta Queen Ct.
Frank Phillips
Project Applicants:
Request: Appeal of an administrative decision to approve a permit to operate a
Vacation Home Rental at Filing 1, Lot 85 Fairway Meadows Subdivision.
Staff Report - Table of Contents

Section Pg
I. Staff Finding 3a-2
II. Project Location 3a -2
III Background Information 3a -2
IV. Project Description 3a -3
V. Staff Analysis 3a -7
VI Staff Finding 3a -7

Ariano Appeal of Administrative Decision on Fairway Meadows PC Hearing: 05/14/2015
Subdivision, Filing 1, Lot 85, Vacation Home Rental, VHR-15-03, CC Hearing: 06/02/2015
I. STAFF FINDING
Staff finds this request, an appeal of an administrative decision to approve a Vacation Home Rental
permit for Fairway Meadows Subdivision, Filing 1, Lot 85, 1415 Delta Queen Ct. to be
inconsistent with the Community Development Code Section 26-50(f)(3), Criteria for
Administrative Appeal Decision.
II. PROJECT LOCATION
Delta Queen
Court
III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION

A request to approve a Vacation Home Rental application is processed as an administrative
decision and Vacation Home Rental application procedures are outlined in Section 26-88 of the
Community Development Code (CDC). The administrative decision process is outlined in Section
26-44 (Director role and authority) of the Community Development Code (CDC).
Vacation Home Rental applications are required to meet all applicable criteria as set forth in
Article III- Development applications, review and procedures, Division 2, Section 26-88. Any
comments received from surrounding property owners were used to evaluate the request to
approve the permit.
Concerns of the surrounding property owners are parking, noise, trespassing, snow storage and
safety of children & dogs. These issues are all addressed in Section 26-88 of the Community
Development Code. The way to properly handle these type of concerns/complaints are also
addressed in Section 26-88 of the Community Development Code.
Department of Planning and Community Development Page 3a-2

Staff Report

IV. PROJECT DESCRIPTION

The Ariano appeal (Attachment 3) cites several criteria where the Administrative Decision
approving a Vacation Home Rental permit is incorrect:
1. CDC Section 26-88(a) Purpose. After a number of public hearings during which the use of
residences as "Vacation Home Rentals" was the subject of spirited and often contentious
debate, the city council has concluded that it is necessary to repeal and readopt the rules and
regulations concerning Vacation Home Rentals to more adequately comply with the pertinent
stated policies of the city council, which are to "make decisions and recommendations based
on research, facts, and careful listening, taking into consideration short-term and long term
goals, competing community interests, and using measurable evaluation criteria whenever
possible." It is the intent of the city council in adopting these new rules and regulations to
acknowledge and reconcile the sometimes conflicting "purposes" of the Community
Development Code ("CDC") set out in section 26-1 of the CDC, which include to "preserve
existing neighborhood character" (subsection 26-1(11)) and to "foster the city's resort,
business and other economic bases" (subsection 26-1(16)). To that end, the city council desires
to eliminate those uses that are more closely associated with commercial, resort uses, such as
hotels, inns, lodges and bed and breakfast residences, which adversely affect existing
neighborhood character, but to license, regulate, and foster those uses that are more
residential in nature, which are compatible with existing neighborhood character, but which
complement the city's resort, business and other economic bases. 68(f)5: “Compatibility with
surrounding area. The proposed final plat shall be compatible with the character or existing
land uses in the area and shall not adversely affect the future development of the surrounding
area.”
Staff Comment: Section 26-88(a) addresses the intent of the City Council concerning
“preservation of existing neighborhood character”. Their intent is to license, regulate and
foster those uses that are more residential in nature, rather than allow more commercial uses
such as inns, lodges, motels, etc. while complementing the City’s resort, business & economic
bases. (More taxes, less people leaving town unable to make it financially, fitting in with our
ski resort image.)
2. CDC Section 26-88(c)(11) The owner shall sign and certify the accuracy of the information
submitted and agree to comply with all regulations.
Staff Comment: The application materials (part of Attachment 3) show the owner did sign
and certify the accuracy of the information submitted and agreed to comply with all
regulations. Mr. Phillips is the registered agent on file with the State of Colorado Secretary of
State office for “Hellbrook, LLC”.
3. CDC Section 26-88(e) Public notice. SPO notice and property posting in accordance with
Section 26-51.
Staff Comment: Attachment 7 shows the public notice was sent out in accordance with
Section 26-51(d)(2). Due to a glitch with the map site, the notice was resent because it did not
go out to all of the surrounding property owners within 300’ in the first notification. A second

Staff Report

notification did go out to surrounding property owners within 300’ which, per Section 26-
51(d)(3)d, is allowed.
4. CDC Section 26-88(i)(c) Overnight parking of vehicles outside of garages shall comply with the
following standards:
i. All vehicles can be parked on an all-weather, drivable surface.

ii. Sufficient maneuvering space is available on-site so that vehicles do not have to be parked
on the City Right of Way to accommodate the arrival and departure of each vehicle.
iii. Adequate snow storage exists on-site to accommodate the parking areas and maneuvering
space.
Staff Comment: Attachment 8 will show (i) there is a concrete drivable surface; (ii) sufficient
maneuvering space and (iii) adequate snow storage on the property.
5. Section 26-88 (O) Operating a Vacation Home Rental without a license. Any person, including,
without limitation, the owner, a property management company, or any agent or representative
of the owner, violating the provisions of this chapter by operating a vacation home rental
without a valid license shall, upon conviction, be guilty of a misdemeanor resulting in the
imposition of a fine of one thousand dollars ($1,000.00) for each day of operation without a
license. The property being operated as a vacation home rental shall not be eligible for a
vacation home rental license for two (2) years after conviction. Upon passage of the ordinance
creating this "vacation home rental chapter", any property operating as a vacation home
rental shall have three (3) months to apply for a license without violation of this section.
Staff Comment: This property owner has not been convicted of operating a Vacation Home
Rental without a license. Section 26-3(b) sets out enforcement procedures that must be
followed prior to a citation being issued into Municipal Court. Procedures were followed per
the CDC, compliance by the violator was received.
6. Section 26-1(e)(4) Lessen congestion in the streets.
Staff Comment: The purpose of the parking addressed in Section 26-88(d)(7) is aimed at
lessening the traffic in the street by requiring all parking of renters in the drive. The site plan
included in the application shows enough parking to meet the minimum (two vehicles)
requirements on a drivable concrete surface.
7. Section 26-1(e)(11) Preserve existing neighborhood character.
Staff Comment: This issue is addressed in Section 26-88(a) Purpose. “It is the intent of the
city council in adopting these new rules and regulations to acknowledge and reconcile the
sometimes conflicting "purposes" of the Community Development Code ("CDC") set out in
section 26-1 of the CDC, which include to "preserve existing neighborhood character
(subsection 26-1(11)) and to "foster the city’s resort, business and other economic bases.”

Staff Report

Because there are several VHR permits in the Steamboat Boulevard, Memphis Belle, Robert E.
Lee and Mark Twain neighborhood this permit fits in with the character of this neighborhood
8. Section 28-1(e)(17) Encourage the most appropriate and efficient use of land.
Staff Comment: This issue is also addressed in Section 26-88(a) Purpose. The City Council
desires “to foster those uses that are more residential in nature, which are compatible with
existing neighborhood character.”
9. Section 26-1(f) Basis. The policies, regulations and districts set forth in this CDC have been
adopted in accordance with the Steamboat Springs Area Community Plan and studies
prepared with reasonable consideration given to the following:
(1) The social, economic and environmental characteristics of certain areas and the
community in general;
(2) The compatibility of uses with each other, and with social, economic and environmental
opportunities and constraints; and
(3) The particular suitability of certain uses in certain areas.
Staff Comment: The VHR criteria set out in Chapter 26-88 was created by City Council to
uphold our Steamboat Springs Area Community Plan. Although it may not be perfect the City
Council felt it was the very best that could be done at the time of much dissension and
conversation, many times being very contentious and spirited. City Council stated this in
Section 26-88(a).
10. Section 26-2(a) Interpretation and application. In the interpretation and application of
provisions contained in this CDC, the following regulations shall govern:
(1) The provisions of the CDC shall be regarded as minimum requirements for the protection
of the public health, safety, comfort, convenience, prosperity, and welfare. This CDC shall
be regarded as remedial legislation that provides a means or method whereby causes of
action may be effectuated, wrongs redressed and relief obtained; and shall be liberally
construed to further its underlying purposes. Development shall be encouraged to exceed
the requirements contained in this CDC.
Staff Comment: Our criteria are in place to manage the impacts of the zoned areas. If the use
is allowed in the zone district where the VHR is located and it meets all criteria, the use is
consistent. If the criteria are not correct for that zone area, that conversation will not be
resolved with this one application. I have advised Mr. & Mrs. Ariano to attend a City Council
meeting with their neighbors to address the issues they have with Section 26-88 of the CDC.

Staff Report

11. Section 26-2(b)(2) The use of “shall”, “must” or “will” means compliance is mandatory and
not voluntary.
Staff Comment: After being reminded that he had a permit to operate a STR he was found
not in violation of advertising without a permit. Ultimately, Mr. Phillips did go ahead and
remove his advertising until after his permit to operate a VHR was approved.
12. Section 26-3(a)(2) Failure to obtain any required approval or permit.
Staff Comment: Attachment 9 shows the Notice of Violation letter that was sent to the
property owner via certified return receipt mail. The Notice of Violation letter gives the
violator fifteen (15) days from receipt of the letter in which to submit an application or receive
a citation into Municipal Court. The certified letter was received Feb. 18, 2015. The VHR
application which was sent overnight to the Planning Office is dated February 20, 2015. Well
within the fifteen days allowed.
13. Section 26-3(a)(4) Obtaining approvals or permits through fraud or misrepresentation.
Staff Comment: The letter of 2/20/15 contained in Attachment 10 refers to the property
owners’ operation of a Short Term Rental agreement, which they acquired in June, 2014. This
letter does not refer to the VHR permit approved on April 6, 2015. Mr. Phillips’ Short Term
Rental approval letter is also included in Attachment 10.
14. Section 26-3(a)(5) Proceeding with a development without proper approvals or permits.
Staff Comment: Enforcement procedures were followed as set out in Section 26-3(d) and
proper approvals were achieved.
15. Section 26-3 Violations, penalties and enforcement.
Staff Comment: All the proper steps of enforcement were followed during the enforcement of
the property owner to obtain a permit to operate a Vacation Home Rental.
16. Section 26-93 (k) Illegal nonconforming use. Nothing contained in this chapter shall be
construed to allow for the continuation of illegals uses. Illegal uses shall be removed subject
to the provisions of this CDC.
Staff Comment: An application for a Vacation Home Rental was submitted within the time
frame as stated in Section 26-3 Violations, penalties and enforcement. This is a legal
conforming use of the CDC.

Staff Report


V. STAFF ANALYSIS
Criteria for Review and Approval
An Appeal of an Administrative Decision is evaluated based on the following criteria in Section
26-50: (f) Criteria for administrative appeal decision. The planning commission and/or city
council shall find in favor of the appellant if it is demonstrated that all of the following exist:
1. The application for appeal is complete.
Staff Finding: Consistent with criteria. The application for appeal, submitted on April 15,
2015, was received and accepted as complete.
2. The appellant presents the same information that the administrator reviewed in making the
original decision (new information may be included in the appeal, however; the administrator
shall first review the new information to determine the information's impact on the
administrator's original decision).
Staff Finding: Consistent with criteria. The applicant has presented the same information the
administrator reviewed in making the original decision. No new or additional information has
been submitted.
3. The opinion or interpretation of the appellant is more consistent with the CDC or the
Steamboat Springs Area Community Plan than the decision of the administrator.
Staff Finding: Inconsistent with criteria. Staff finds the interpretation of the appellant is less
consistent with the CDC than the decision of the administrator.
The administrative decision to approve this VHR permit was based upon criterion in Section
26-88 Vacation Home Rentals. The applicant met all required criterion as set forth in Section
26-88. Section 26-88 does not exclude RN-2 zoned areas. In order to enforce any violation of
Chapter 26 the procedures set out in Section 26-3 must be followed. The City prefers to
receive compliancy rather than issuing citations.
The applicant provided no additional or new information that contradicts findings of the
Director in regard to compatibility.
VI. STAFF FINDING

Staff finds this request, an appeal of an administrative decision to approve Vacation Home Rental
permit VHR-15-03, to be INCONSISTENT with the Community Development Code Section 26-
50(f)(3), Criteria for Administrative Appeal Decision.

Staff Report

"UUBDINFOU

DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA ITEM # 3B:
Project Name: Pon Appeal of Administrative Decision on Fairway Meadows Subdivision,
Filing 1, Lot 85, Vacation Home Rental VHR-15-03, MIS-15-01, 1415
Delta Queen Ct.
Prepared By: Barb Wheeler, Code Enforcement
Officer - CCEO (Ext. 274) Project
location
Through: Tyler Gibbs AIA, Director of
Planning and Community
Development (Ext. 244)
Commission (PC):
Existing Zoning: Residential Neighborhood Two,

Moderate Density (RN-2)
1415 Delta Queen
Gary & Christine Pon
Appellants:
Frank Phillips
Project Applicants:
Request: Appeal of an administrative decision to approve a permit to operate a
Vacation Home Rental at Filing 1, Lot 85 Fairway Meadows Subdivision.
Staff Report - Table of Contents

Section Pg
I. Staff Finding 3b-2
II. Project Location 3b -2
III Background Information 3b -2
IV. Project Description 3b -3
V. Staff Analysis 3b -3
VI Staff Finding 3b -4

Pon Appeal of Administrative Decision on Fairway Meadows PC Hearing: 05/14/2015
I. STAFF FINDING
Staff finds this request, an appeal of an administrative decision to approve a Vacation Home Rental
permit for Fairway Meadows Subdivision, Filing 1, Lot 85, 1415 Delta Queen Ct. to be
inconsistent with the Community Development Code Section 26-50(f)(3), Criteria for
Administrative Appeal Decision.
II. PROJECT LOCATION
III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION

A request to approve a Vacation Home Rental application is processed as an administrative
decision. Vacation Home Rental application procedures are outlined in Section 26-88
of the Community Development Code (CDC). Administrative decision is outlined in Section 26-44
(Director role and authority) of the Community Development Code (CDC).
Vacation Home Rental applications are required to meet all applicable criteria as set forth in
Article III- Development applications, review and procedures, Division 2, Section 26-88. Any
comments received from surrounding property owners were used to evaluate the request to
approve the permit.
Concerns of the surrounding property owners were parking, noise, trespassing, snow storage and
safety of children & dogs. These issues are all addressed in Section 26-88 of the Community
Development Code. The way to properly handle these type of concerns/complaints are also
addressed in Section 26-88 of the Community Development Code.
Department of Planning and Community Development Page 3b-2

Staff Report

IV. PROJECT DESCRIPTION

The Pon appeal (Attachment 4) cites three criteria where the Administrative Decision approving a
Vacation Home Rental permit is incorrect:
1. CDC Section 26-88(i)(c) Overnight parking of vehicles outside of garages shall comply with
the following standards:
ii. Sufficient maneuvering space is available on-site so that vehicles do not have to be parked
on the City Right of Way to accommodate the arrival and departure of each vehicle.
Staff Comment: Attachment 8 shows (ii) sufficient maneuvering space
2. CDC Section 26-88(i)(c) Overnight parking of vehicles outside of garages shall comply with
the following standards:
iii. Adequate snow storage exists on-site to accommodate the parking areas and maneuvering
space.
Staff Comment: Attachment 8 shows (iii) adequate snow storage and maneuvering space on
the property.
3. Section 26-88 (i)(1)(e) No parking shall be permitted in public right-of-way or emergency

access easements.
Staff Comment: With approval of a VHR permit, renters may not park anywhere but on the
driveway area. Two vehicles maximum at this location are allowed outside of the garage.
However, this does not apply to friends/family of renters that will not be overnight guests.
V. STAFF ANALYSIS
Criteria for Review and Approval
An Appeal of an Administrative Decision is evaluated based on the following criteria in Section
26-50: (f) Criteria for administrative appeal decision. The planning commission and/or city
council shall find in favor of the appellant if it is demonstrated that all of the following exist:
1. The application for appeal is complete.
Staff Finding: Consistent with criteria. The application for appeal, submitted on April 15,
2015, was received and accepted as complete.
2. The appellant presents the same information that the administrator reviewed in making the
original decision (new information may be included in the appeal, however; the administrator
shall first review the new information to determine the information's impact on the
administrator's original decision).

Staff Report

Staff Finding: Consistent with criteria. The applicant has presented the same information the
administrator reviewed in making the original decision. No new or additional information has
been submitted.
3. The opinion or interpretation of the appellant is more consistent with the CDC or the
Steamboat Springs Area Community Plan than the decision of the administrator.
Staff Finding: Inconsistent with criteria. Staff finds the interpretation of the appellant is less
consistent with the CDC than the decision of the administrator.
The administrative decision to approve this VHR permit was based upon criterion in Section
26-88 Vacation Home Rentals. The applicant met all required criterion as set forth in Section
26-88. Section 26-88 does not exclude RN-2 zoned areas. In order to enforce any violation of
Chapter 26 the procedures set out in Section 26-3 must be followed. The City prefers to
receive compliancy rather than issuing citations.
The applicant provided no additional or new information that contradicts findings of the
Director in regard to compatibility.
VI. STAFF FINDING

Staff finds this request, an appeal of an administrative decision to approve Vacation Home Rental
permit VHR-15-03, to be INCONSISTENT with the Community Development Code Section 26-
50(f)(3), Criteria for Administrative Appeal Decision.

Staff Report

"UUBDINFOU

"UUBDINFOU

"UUBDINFOU

"UUBDINFOU
Ms. Barb Wheeler, CCEO

Code Enforcement
P.O. Box 775088
124 10th St.
Steamboat Springs, CO 80477-5088
April 6, 2015
Re: 1415 Delta Queen Ct. #VHR-15-03
Dear Ms. Wheeler:
As the owners of a property located within 300 feet of the subject property, we object to application
VHR-15-03 for a vacation home rental license.
The operation of a commercial rental business is inconsistent with the character of our residential zone
district. The residents of Delta Queen Court have already been subject to excessive noise, winter
parking violations, and trespassing related to the unlicensed operation of a commercial lodging business
at 1415. As full-time residents of the next-door property, we find ourselves in the position of advising
successive renters about the same issues again and again. This is not what we expected when we
purchased a home in our residential zone district! It is challenging to address issues in a neighborly way
when your “neighbors” are transient.
It is apparent that the owners of 1415 purchased the house with the intention of operating a business,
and based on the dates of comments on their VRBO listing, have apparently been doing do since the
summer of 2014, without a VHR license – contrary to what was indicated in their 2/20/15 letter to you.
They continued to advertise the house on VRBO even after you explicitly told them in your letter of
2/12/15 to remove the listing. Approval of an operation already in violation just doesn’t seem right,
and certainly does not augur well for future compliance with code requirements.
Thank you for your consideration of our comments and those of our neighbors who also object to this
VHR license. We respectfully request denial of the application.
Sincerely,
Jane and Andy Blackstone

1385 Delta Queen Court
970-846-8011

Rebecca Bessey
From: Barb Wheeler

Sent: Thursday, May 07, 2015 10:26 AM
To: Rebecca Bessey
Subject: FW: Scheduled Final Decision for a development action at 1415 Delta Queen Ct.
#VHR-15-03

From: Gary Pon [mailto:ponbroker@comcast.net]
Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2015 1:27 PM
To: Barb Wheeler
Subject: Re: Scheduled Final Decision for a development action at 1415 Delta Queen Ct. #VHR-15-03

Dear Barb,
As a follow-up to our conversation this morning and in response to the recent public notice
regarding the above matter please consider this our objection to the application by the owners of
the property at 1415 Delta Queen Ct. for a vacation home rental license.
We are filing this objection as the owners of a property within 300 feet of the boundary of this
property.
It is now common knowledge that the owner of the home at 1415 Delta Queen has been making
short-term rentals since the summer of 2014, presumably without a VHR license. Since last
summer, we have observed numerous vehicles entering and exiting the property including
several large pick-up trucks with trailers loaded with recreational equipment. Since the property
lacks adequate snow storage on-site, snow from the driveway has been moved to the public
right of way. Many times renters’ vehicles have been parked in the street creating an eyesore as
well as obstructing snow removal during the winter months. Recently we have encountered
renters trespassing through our property to access the Rolling Stone Ranch Golf Course
immediately behind our property. We believe that these activities constitute a nuisance to the
neighborhood, detract from the residential value of our neighborhood and adversely impact the
quality of our property. We sincerely believe that short-term vacation home rentals are
completely out of character with the predominantly owner occupied homes in our small court
neighborhood.
We strongly urge you to deny the application for vacation home rental.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Gary & Christine Pon
(970) 871-9282 (H)

1

Rebecca Bessey
From: Cindy Richmond <ccrichmonds@gmail.com>

Sent: Friday, April 03, 2015 9:38 AM
To: Barb Wheeler
Subject: Development action at 1415 Delta Queen Ct #VHR-15-03
Barb,
As owners of the property adjacent to this property, we would like to submit a major objection to the application
by the owners of the property for a vacation home rental. There have already been numerous instances with the
renters using the property taking total disregard to our property and that of our neighbors.
We continually have issues with the snow that the owners of 1415 have plowed into the street. They have
plenty of space in their yard to store snow, but it is obviously easier to just plow it back into the street. Between
what the city plow leaves and their driveway, we have a hard time keeping access to our personal driveway
open.
When we bought our property in 1997, we carefully chose a subdivision which had strong covenants. One of
those we especially looked for was that short term rentals were NOT ALLOWED. We wanted to build our
home in a true family neighborhood, not a ski in ski out rental location. Up until this property sold, our small
street had been perfect.
Now, we never know what to expect next door. Always an unknown as to how many cars, trailers, adults, kids,
and animals which may show up. It quickly gets frustrating when you have to get them to move vehicles from
blocking our driveway ( and even parking in our driveway), to cleaning up sleds and toys left in our driveway,
and of course cleaning up after the pets running free on our property.
They current owners, Frank Phillips and Mike Arzt, should have realized when they bought the property that the
HOA excluded short term rentals. That they chose to ignore that and immediately started renting the property
shows a great deal of disrespect to their neighbors and our community. To advertise, without bothering to
obtain proper license, that the home sleeps 10, only encourages large parties to rent. When a large group then
shows up with 4-5 vehicles, they proceed to block driveways with no regard to others. This property has
virtually no street parking in front of the house, but that has not so far not stopped people from parking as close
as possible with totally disregard to what they may be blocking.
We respectfully request that this application be denied. This is not the correct location to try to run a rental
business for large groups, which is what they are trying to accomplish.
To grant this application will ruin the neighborhood that everyone else on the street has enjoyed for many
years. We would hope that the desires of a majority would have more value than one property being able to
ruin the quality of life for the entire street.
Thank you for your consideration
Chris and Cindy Richmond
--
Cindy Richmond
1

Rebecca Bessey
From: Barb Wheeler

To: Rebecca Bessey
Subject: FW: 1415 Delta Queen Court: Application for approval of short-term rental

From: Bob Stevenson

Sent: Saturday, March 14, 2015 2:53 PM
To: 'bwheeler@steamboatsprings.net'
Cc: Sharon Buslepp
Subject: 1415 Delta Queen Court: Application for approval of short-term rental

Ms. Wheeler:
I understand that you are the Steamboat Springs City staff person with responsibility for addressing the
referenced request.
My wife, Sharon Buslepp, and I, own the duplex at 1348 and 1350 Delta Queen Court, a couple doors
down from 1415.
We oppose this property on our small cul-de-sac (house number 1415) being used for short term
rentals. We believe that inevitably, the situation would constitute a nuisance. There is insufficient room for
parking. There is insufficient street-area for traffic. There is insufficient room between homes to isolate
noise. And maybe worst of all, there is no realistic potential for supervision of the short-term rental
activity.
We moved from a nice enough townhome setting (Waterford, on Medicine Springs) to Delta Queen, in
great part to escape the mayhem of short term rentals. Our new home cost almost twice the price we received
for our Waterford unit. And in the year + since buying on Medicine Springs, we have put about $100,000 into
improvements here (all properly approved, etc.) We are not pleased at the prospect of seeing our investment
and quality of life diminished by a short-term rental neighbor. We lived with short-term rentals at Waterford
for 15 years. It is not pleasant.
Long-term renters are quite different. They are invested in the neighborhood. By nature, they need to
be reasonable in their activities and stewardship of the immediate environment. But short-termers are "one
and done." They are here to party and to get out. It is difficult to imagine a means of avoiding the inevitable
mayhem caused by short term renting. At Waterford, even with full-time professional management, and with
plenty of rules and attempts at enforcement, short term rentals were nonetheless horribly disruptive. Imagine
the fallout of short-term rentals taking place in one house in our small cul-de-sac, ESPECIALLY with absentee
owners.
This is not a situation where the owners would occupy one "side" of a duplex, while short-terming
the other side. At least under those circumstances, the owners would be heavily invested in keeping
order. Here, the owners would be at a safe and long distance, collecting their lucrative short-term rents,
and the neighbors be damned.
1

I expect that we'd have the Steamboat Springs Police on speed-dial. I might brush up on the Colorado
civil laws of nuisance. That sounds like no fun for anyone.
We urge denial of a permit for short-term renting on Delta Queen Court.

Will there be a public hearing on this? What is the process?
Thanks for your time.
Bob Stevenson and Sharon Buslepp
Bob Stevenson
Cell: (734) 395-1290
bob@skalaw.com
2

Rebecca Bessey
From: Barb Wheeler

To: Rebecca Bessey
Subject: FW: Phillips/Arzt house

ͲͲͲͲͲOriginalMessageͲͲͲͲͲ
From:PatWalsh[mailto:walshpat21@gmail.com]
Sent:Thursday,March12,201512:25PM
To:BarbWheeler
Subject:Phillips/Arzthouse

DearBarb,

Asanowner/fulltimeresidentonDeltaQueenCourtfor15years,Iappreciatetheopportunitytovoicemyverystrong
objectiontoapprovingthePhillips/Arzthouseforshorttermrental.

Theownershavealreadybeenrentingtheirhouseout,andtheneighborhoodimpactislargeandunwelcome.Aswe
areonacourtandallhomesfacethecenter,weareawareofhighlyincreasedtrafficͲasmanyas5SUV'satatimewith
assortedtrailersandsportsequipmentͲsomestreetparking,andoverflowfromdrivewayintothecourt.Thenoiseof
alltheincreasedvehicles,frequentcomingandgoing,thevoicesandmovementofmanymorepeoplethananormal
dwellingmakeitquiteapparentthattheyarerentingtomultiplefamiliesatonetime.Ourcourtis100%owner
occupied,andthepresenceofashorttermrentalhouseisdisruptiveandcompletelyoutofcharacterforthisquiet,
respectfulneighborhood.

Istronglyurgeyoutodeclinetheirapplicationforashorttermrentalpermit.

Thankyou,PatWalsh1370DeltaQueenCourt

SentfrommyiPad
1

"UUBDINFOU

"UUBDINFOU

"UUBDINFOU

"UUBDINFOU

Attachment 2
May 14, 2015 Draft
Voting for approval of motion to approve: Lacy, MacArthur, Levy, Eck, Meyer, Kingston and
Burns
#3. Appeal of Vacation Home Rental (MIS-15-01, MIS-15-02)
STAFF PRESENTATION
Barb Wheeler, Code Enforcement Officer:

We have a couple of appeals on a decision to approve a vacation home rental permit for 1415
Delta Queen Court. A couple definitions here that I think are relevant to this issue: We have
three rental categories. The first one is a long-term rental, which applies to any rental of a home
for 28 days or more. The second one is a short-term rental, which allows you to rent your home
no more than twice a year for up to 30 days total. The third one is a vacation home rental, which
is a nightly rental. This allows you to rent your home from night to night for payment and
requires a very strict permitting process – much more strict than what you guys have at your own
homes probably. The short-term rental there are really no criteria or restrictions other than that
you have to pay taxes and you have to give us a 24-hour contact person.
As I was looking through VRBO, I came across an ad for a vacation home rental that didn’t have
DRAFT
the required vacation home rental permit number on it. So I did a little research on it and found
out that they did not have a vacation home rental permit for that address. I sent out a notice of
violation letter. I gave them 15 days to submit an application. Mr. Phillips reminded me that he
did have a short-term rental agreement, which allows you to rent your home twice a year. The
only thing he did wrong was he put nightly rental rates in there instead of putting a weekly rental
or that this rental was only allowed twice a year. He did admit that he had rented it more than
twice this year. He acquired his short-term rental permit in June, 2014. He did have some renters
in there as well as family and friends that were staying there. Apparently, they had quite a few
people. They had several vehicles, which is okay with a short-term rental permit. There’s nothing
that says they can’t do that. When he got his notice of violation letter, he called me immediately.
He overnighted his application to me. The application was complete. All the criteria that were set
out in Section 26-88 of the CDC were met. The surrounding property owner notices were sent
out for people who live within 300 feet of the property. There was a glitch in the first mailing, so
it missed about 11 surrounding property owners. That was remedied and the notification was
resent as is allowed by the code.
There are only two ways that a vacation home rental permit can be denied during the process.
One is if the application is not complete; the other is if the applicant does not meet all the
criteria. His application was complete, and he did meet the criteria. There were no valid
objections, however, there were several complaints from surrounding property owners. Their
letters are included here. It was also noted in the approval letter that there were several letters of
concern from surrounding property owners. None of these, however, had a valid objection with
them. When a violation is found, enforcement procedures are handled as set out in the code.
Vacation home rental permits are issued under the authority of the Planning director. Most
projects are handled administratively; this one is. Tyler trusts what I’m doing, and he knows that
I’m doing what should be done with that.
May 14, 2015 Draft
I actually feel like I’ve done the neighborhood a great service by finding this property was
operating illegally, giving him a chance to remedy the situation within the allowed time period.
Vacation home rentals have much more strict rules than a short-term rental does or just the
regular neighbors that live in the neighborhood. We tell them how many cars they can have. He
is allowed per the code two cars outside of the garage/parking area. It looks like he has a lot
more room out there, but a lot of that area is public right-of-way. The city does use that for snow
storage. Another big issue that came up was the snow storage. I’ve been up there and taken
pictures. He has plenty of snow storage on his property – probably more than some of the
surrounding neighbors have on their property. He just needs to make sure that in the winter when
they start plowing that they push it as far back on his property as they can. Last year wasn’t a big
snow season, so it wasn’t much of an issue, but it could be in a big snow season. If he runs out of
room, he’ll have to have it trucked out of there.
Vacation home rental permits are issued on an annual basis. At the end of the one-year period if
there are a lot of issues with the neighbors and what’s going on in their neighborhood, He can
basically be denied renewal of this permit. However, in Section 26-88 in the Enforcement section
of the code, if he has three violations – and I’ve talked to some of the neighbors regarding how to
go about complaining – the complainant has to file a statement with the police report. Once the
police report is processed, they email that to me; I get that information, and I can request the
DRAFT
report, which includes the statement. I then take it to my legal advisor. We decide whether
there’s enough there to issue a citation. If he’s issued three citations within a one-year period,
city council can deny his permit to operate a vacation home rental for up to two years. After that
two-year period, if he wants to re-apply for a vacation home rental, it has to go through public
hearing and city council. At the one-year renewal period, I will look through the permanent file,
which includes all the letters from surrounding property owners. If there’s no additional items,
his permit will be renewed for another year.
APPELLANT PRESENTATION
Frank Ariano:
Gary Pon’s appeal addresses why we have appealed the granting of the permit. Gary will deal
more with the criteria that we feel are significant and what we have observed. I want to look at it
on a broader basis.
Delta Queen Court is a small street – pretty much single family. It’s a quiet neighborhood. The
applicants say in their advertising that their home is located on a quiet oasis. This is true, but it
has nothing to do with them. Last summer, we noticed the property had sold. The single-family
residence was sold to two separate families, each in an undivided one half interest. Shortly after
that, people started showing up mainly on the weekends, and I mean a lot of people and a lot of
vehicles. We thought it was the new neighbors. In March, there’s a notice stuck on the side of the
snow bank that talks about the application for vacation home rental. We all of a sudden realized
that these were paying customers of this business, not our neighbors. There was no notice to
anyone. We noticed as we looked at the VRBO listings that there had been a lot of people who
had commented. We don’t know the real number. So we came and talked to Barb and asked
questions like what about sales tax? Wouldn’t that tell us how many rentals are going on here in
May 14, 2015 Draft
violation of the requirements? We went across the street and were told that we’re not entitled to
that. So we filed an objection, and I looked carefully at the entire CDC. The appeal had some
technical points and some non-technical points. We gave Barb a new list. A week later, the letter
was issued that this license won’t be acted on on March 30 but April 6. We along with seven
other people within 300 feet filed our objection. All of a sudden we get a copy of a letter four
days into the ten-day appeal period to the businessmen saying their application was granted. We
found out the fee was $250 to get the opportunity to get what we feel should have been there in
the first place – a decision by the director, findings that are required under the CDC in both 26-
88 and elsewhere, a complete application, which we say has not been filed. We’re here with the
code as it exists; we’re here with what we were told we have to work with. And we raised
objections like for instance: The application is supposed to be filed by the owner. The owner, not
an owner. Here there are two owners. The LLC that was formed shortly thereafter, I see nothing
in the documentation that they would have to show that they conveyed to an LLC, so the
response of staff that they did sign and the registered agent of the LLC signed, so? That’s an
also. Where’s the other owner? That’s significant because the attestations in the application
about what each party attests to, and down the road when penalties become an issue they’re
issued against the owner, not just one of them. We don’t know what’s going to happen between
these two businessmen, and we don’t want any defenses raised along the way. The statute
requires owners; get the owners to sign it.
DRAFT
It also requires that the criteria be met. We raised a lot of objections, some of which can be
summarized by saying that this statute, despite what is interpreted by the Planning Department as
allowing only two things you can look at, the application and the criteria. I don’t believe it’s
limited to just that. I believe you have to look around the whole CDC, and that’s what I
attempted to do. We raised those points, and a response was made by staff three days after the
original notice was posted in response to someone else’s objection. The pertinent part was:
“There is no reason to deny this application.” That was signed by the code enforcement officer
who has also been talking to the businessmen from the front range since last June. We knew
nothing about any of this. So now we ask the Planning director. We believe the director should
be the one making the decision. The same person who has been working with the applicant has
also found that we had no valid objection.
The applicant’s business plan is to get large groups. That doesn’t fit on Delta Queen Court. No
one talked to the snow plow people who have nowhere to go. I do the end of the street with the
exception on their side with my snow blower. The city can’t do it because there’s nowhere to put
it. There are significant problems. The mindset of the Planning Department is you’ve got
nothing; go away. Call the cops. We never called the cops on what we thought were our new
neighbors. There were plenty of times we could have.
To just allow this rubber stamp procedure without any findings, not even asking the applicants
how often they rented the property, the garbage, whether they had control of the size. Nothing.
We’re the ones that are put through all the hurdles. All the Planning Department does under their
interpretation is wait out the number of days and send the letter.
No decisions that all the criteria are met despite valid objections; just a rubber stamp.
May 14, 2015 Draft
We didn’t know about the staff’s response until a friend pointed it out to us. There’s one part of
staff’s response that I cannot let stand. If this were a court of equity, there’s a document called
unclean hands. If you come in asking for relief, you should have clean hands. We have people
that were operating a business illegally, and this statement in here that there was a finding after I
sent the letter that all of the advertising was in relation to vacation home rentals. We were never
told that until I read that last night, and that’s outrageous. It defies logic. At the time the
complaint was sent about the VRBO listings, there had already been a list well beyond the two
times up to 30 days under a short-term permit. That was troublesome to me. We pointed out that
they were still advertising up to March 19. The letter of February 12 gave 15 days. Apparently,
nothing matters once the app is sent in. They can keep operating. It stopped, and Barb said they
voluntarily stopped because they didn’t want to upset the neighbors. I guess they think that we
don’t know it’s mud season. You’re not going to get anybody to rent now, anyway. So frankly,
that was a gesture that wasn’t as appreciated as we were told it should be.
In conclusion: I think there are a lot of options available, not just a rubber stamp. You can
investigate. There’s no such thing as every property in the city of Steamboat eligible for vacation
home rental because of criteria. You can put conditions on it. You can put a moratorium to allow
time to do some investigation. Nothing was done. And we feel that for those reasons and those
that you’re about to hear that, that action should be overturned.
DRAFT
Gary Pon, 1400 Delta Queen Court:
I’m sure many of you know that vacation home rentals has been a contentious issue in our city
for a long period of time. I can appreciate the difficulty in achieving a balance within the stated
purpose of the CDC 26-88, which is preserving existing neighborhood character and fostering
resort business and economic basis. My wife and I, like most of our neighbors, bought our home
on Delta Queen Court because it is a quiet community and a family-oriented neighborhood.
Certainly, we anticipated that we’d have issues with noise, dogs, parking, trash containers, kids,
etc. Yet because we live here and we know one another, we’re able to deal with one another very
effectively. We take care of our own issues. We did not know that this property was being used
for vacation home rentals.
I think it’s important to emphasize the distinction between short-term rentals and long-term. We
don’t really have an issue with long-term rentals. We have a couple duplexes in our
neighborhood that do make long-term rentals. Long-term renters become a part of the property.
On the other hand, short-term renters do not, and we continually have to train them in how things
should be conducted.
There were three bases to our appeal. We looked at the additional criteria in the code. One of
those was adequate parking for vehicles parked outside of the garage on the property, as well as
maneuvering space for vehicles on the property and snow storage. You have in your packets a
number of photos that staff have taken showing the driveway for 1415 Delta Queen. Barb
Wheeler has mentioned that there is a right-of-way for the city that has had snow stored on it.
The exhibit 3A I handed out to you shows how the snow comes out into the street, creating a
visual hazard as well as a maneuverability hazard for those of us on this side of the street. I’ve
seen it much, much worse in the past, and it’s just very difficult to get around there. Some of use
snow blowers, and we keep the snow on our property. I would expect to have a citation if I were
May 14, 2015 Draft
to put snow in the street, and yet that happens routinely. I don’t know if you hear from plow
drivers. The photo on Page 3.25 is typical of the types of vehicles that the occupants of 1415
Delta Queen Court have had. (small SUV, motorcycle, large pick-up truck attached to a trailer
with a large boat on it.) I’ve seen much worse than this photo depicts out into the right-of-way in
the wintertime because of the snow being there and there not being enough room on the property
to park these vehicles. I don’t know how those vehicles can be maneuvered on the property when
they have large trailers full of outdoor toys. It’s not appropriate for a residential neighborhood.
Our appeal was found to be inconsistent with the provisions of 26-50 in the code. To me, F3 in
the appeal, which states: “The opinion or interpretation of the appellant is more consistent with
the community development code or the Steamboat Springs Area Community Plan than the
decision of the administrator. In my opinion, subjectively, the property does not meet the criteria
included in the code for parking, vehicle maneuverability and snow storage.
I sincerely believe that the current process that this commission relies on is seriously flawed in
that it doesn’t appear to consider input from neighbors affected by vacation home rentals. In the
application for vacation home rental permits, the applicant is required to submit names and
addresses for all properties within 300 feet. The notice suggests that a criteria for a valid
objection includes item C, an objection filed by a property owner within 300 feet of any
boundary of the subject property. There are eight written complaints from neighbors that are
DRAFT
affected by this vacation home rental. So why suggest to owners that objections are a criterion
when the process relies upon the subjective criterion set forth in 26-50.
It feels to us as residents as Delta Queen Court as though our zoning has been changed without
an opportunity for us to voice our concerns with the ultimate effect that it’s going to reduce our
property values. I also think it’s important for me to inform you that I am a member of the
Steamboat Property Association Board of Directors. Our board has deliberated the issue of
vacation home rentals, and in our covenants, there’s a provision that prohibits conducting a
business, including nightly or short-term rentals less than 30 days, unless approved in writing by
our board of directors. When my wife and I bought the home that we own on Delta Queen Court,
we got a copy of the covenants, and we knew that we couldn’t do short-term rentals without
approval in writing by the board of directors. In view of the number of issues that have come
before the Steamboat Property Association Board of Directors, we recently after several
meetings and meeting with our attorney, we sent a resolution that was unanimously adopted by
our board to all 156 of our property owners informing them of a new process for applying for
permission from the board for short-term rentals. We also included a grandfather provision for
some properties – about a dozen – that had been previously approved. After our board reviewed
the criteria and our covenants, the board unanimously agreed to deny four pending vacation
home rental permits, including 1415 Delta Queen Court. A letter has been sent recently to each
of those four applicants giving them the reason for the denial of the use of the property for short-
term rentals.
While I don’t anticipate that my remarks are going to impact the staff decision on this matter, I
am hopeful that the commission will undertake a policy review of the current process with an
emphasis upon looking at the entire code.
May 14, 2015 Draft
Frank Phillips, co-owner, 1415 Delta Queen Court:

We purchased the property back in June. I talked to Barb right before we closed and asked her
what the process was and how that would work and indicated to her at that time that we weren’t
100% sure what our plan was going to be – whether we would try and rent it or not. Then I came
back to her and asked for the short-term rental, which allowed us the two times within a year up
to 30 days. So we put that through I think in August. We posted the house for rent on VRBO a
couple days later. I told Barb that if we rented it twice and it seemed like something we’d like to
keep doing, we’d come back and get the vacation home rental permit taken care of.
A lot of facts were claimed that were inaccurate. One thing that Gary said was that in a
neighborhood like ours, usually just a quick, congenial conversation and we can get things
settled. Nobody ever reached out to me and told me there was a problem until we were going
through the process and letters were sent to Barb. Barb shared those with me so I would know
the concerns that our neighbors had. That’s the first time I had really heard of those concerns. So
I wish we could have had a conversation, but that never took place.
To clarify a few things, before January 1, 2015, we did not rent our home. We had a lot of
friends come and stay. Mike and I have a few businesses in the front range. We are an action
DRAFT
sport marketing agency – especially winter. So we have a lot of friends within that area. One of
them brought up the boat. That small SUV was Mike Arzt’s, my business partner and co-owner’s
vehicle and motorcycle. There were no rentals prior to January 1, 2015, but there was a lot of
people. There’s a bunkroom downstairs with six beds in it. It’s a 10-bed home, so we can support
quite a few people within the home, and we have. January 1 we had our first renter in there, and
they stayed for four or five days. I never actually met them. We had another renter later in
January. I had gotten all the paperwork from Barb and had it all filled out. I was waiting to go
down and get it notarized. But before I turned in that application, we had two renters, and they
didn’t stay more than 30 days. So my feeling was that we were in compliance up to that point,
although as I admitted to Barb, at the point that I sent in the application, I had actually been
reached out to by people in the VRBO community and had actually taken some reservations. For
that reason, the city has issued me a fine of $250, which I’m happy to pay because I realize I was
out of compliance for having the VRBO posting up there and for taking more rental reservations
before I had gotten the permit application filed. As was stated, I did pull down the VRBO listing
once I realized that that was supposed to be pulled down before the application was actually
granted.
Regarding snow, the city makes a huge pile of snow at the end of our driveway, next to our
driveway. The company that plows our driveway tells me that they’ve never put the snow off of
our property; it’s always been on our property off the side of the driveway. That snow bank
extends well into our plat line. So I assume that’s correct that they’re putting snow on our
property. There is a huge pile there. I think it’s coming mostly from the city plowing the street
and leaving it right there. I haven’t complained about that to anyone, but that is an issue. The
maneuverability of getting around within the cul-de-sac is hampered by that, but I don’t think
that’s something we’ve created.
May 14, 2015 Draft
There’s an easement in the plat lines that’s on the other side of the house next to ours to get out
into the greenway, and that’s been fully landscaped over the past few months by the company
that does our landscaping. That easement is not available to us, our friends and potentially our
renters. So instead of telling our renters that they can use that easement to get to that green space,
I did tell them that if they go back down to the point in the back of our property, there’s about a
25-foot section that is a property line between the two property owners on either side of us. I did
tell them they should probably get to the greenway that way rather than going across the
landscaping. So I will make sure that I don’t tell people that that’s a possible way to get back to
that green space. When the appellants say that some people have gone across their property, I
think that’s the main thing they’re referring to. I will make sure that I post very clearly where the
property line is and make sure that everybody understands that any sledding stays completely on
our property.
I will also say that in all of our communication with our VRBO customers, we always make a
really clear point to talk about that it’s a quiet neighborhood, and that if that’s not in keeping
with what their plans are for their stay, they should consider a different place. There’s only two
parking spots, and if they need to have more vehicles, maybe this isn’t the right place for them to
stay. So we’ve been trying to talk about early morning noise, late evening noise, making sure
that everybody that is going to stay is understanding that it’s a quiet neighborhood and we
respect our neighbors and want to make sure that they are not inconvenienced.
DRAFT
MacArthur confirmed that the permit was issued April 6 and that the listing has not gone back up
since it was removed. There has been one renter during the application process.
MacArthur asked the appellants if they noticed any sort of improvement with the most recent
renter or with the conditions of the property since April 6.
Ariano: I would say the only change that has occurred is due to the season. The last time I took
some pictures, the open, empty garbage can was out from Friday to Sunday. That was two weeks
ago. One other point I want to make about the advertising: The Facebook advertising was
continuous; never stopped.
Meyer asked Mr. Phillips if he has a local property manager.
Phillips: We do have a local property manager. I think she lives within 300 feet. She lives behind
us up on Clubhouse Drive.
Meyer: Doesn’t the vacation home rental also require that there’s a notice on the property so that
if somebody came to the door they could find contact information locally.
Wheeler: It has to be inside the door.
Meyer: Do you know if that’s being complied with?

May 14, 2015 Draft
Wheeler: I don’t normally. I trust the people that have signed the rules and regulations. I don’t
normally go and check on a vacation home rental to see if they have their…
Meyer: But they do have to certify to you the criteria, correct?
Wheeler: Yes, they have to sign that they have read and agree and understand the rules and
regulations.
Levy: Do we enforce HOA rules?
Wheeler: We do not.
Levy: It seemed weird that it’s tougher to renew your permit than to get one in the first place.
Wheeler: Normally, it’s not. I have 175 vacation home rental permits within the city of
Steamboat Springs. I have never had any issues other than a couple noise issues. This may be
something that’s going to set a precedent here. Unless I hear within that one-year period that
there’s consistently complaints about this, I have no reason to deny a renewal.
Lacy: How do you determine if an objection is valid?
DRAFT
Wheeler: Valid objections are during the permitting process. So when he applies and the
neighbors get their surrounding property owner notifications, they have to submit a valid
objection within that 14-day period. The valid objection has to prove that they don’t have the
capacity to meet all the criteria. The only other way is if their application is incomplete. My job
is to make sure that it’s complete.
Kingston: Could you address the claim that the permit was issued four days into that period and
also specifically what criteria you used given the complaints were there to assess whether the
renewal should take place?
Wheeler: Their letters of concern and objections were all submitted before the final day.
Kingston: Was the permit issued within that 14 days?
Wheeler: No. It was issued on April 6. Everything that I received was prior to that time.
Ariano: My comment was April 6 was supposedly the decision date. We didn’t get a notice of
that until Friday of that week – four days into the 10-day appeal period. We couldn’t talk to
anybody until the following Monday, so we were left with a three-day window, a $250 payment,
to have someone listen to our objections. The statement made by Barb that these were not valid
objections, was there a finding to that effect? If so, why?
Wheeler: I think Mr. Ariano is stating that the approval was made on April 6. The letters were
mailed out by the date that they were supposed to be sent out, 15 days prior to April 6. I’m not
sure what he’s addressing here.
May 14, 2015 Draft
Ariano: The letter that we were told was the decision. April 6 was a Monday. The materials that I
just saw in the packet last night showed that Barbara wasn’t in the office on Monday. So it didn’t
go out until later that week.
Wheeler: That is not true. I had it ready to be sent out on Monday. Our staff assistant mailed it
out on that Monday.
Ariano reiterated his belief that the decision should be made by someone other than the person
working with the applicant from the start.
Kingston asked if Tyler could address the process that took place in making the decision.
Gibbs reiterated the criteria for making the initial decision (completed application, does it meet
code criteria.) If it meets those two criteria, there is no reason to deny. The objections would
have to relate to those criteria. Does it at the point of application meet the criteria to move
forward, and it did.
Kingston: By code criteria, are you looking just at 26-88, and if so, the appellants raised the issue
of looking at the entirety of the code and the spirit of the code, presumably. Is that normally a
DRAFT
part of this review process?
Gibbs: No, we do not look at the entire code. If there was something that we became aware of,
certainly.
Kingston: The appellants have made a pretty comprehensive case for complaining, and there’s a
question of whether these complaints have validity or not. Would any of those complaints violate
conditions of the code more generally.
Gibbs: Not the code as it applies to the short-term rental use that the property was governed
under previously. If some of those conditions had existed and the property had been approved to
operate as a vacation home rental, those conditions would have violated the criteria for a
vacation home rental.
Kingston: So it comes down to the claim that the property was rented more consistently and
therefore might violate some of those terms. It’s coming down to how often was the property
rented, and did it have the right permit issued for that.
Gibbs: The home was originally permitted under short-term rental. The applicant has stated that
it was advertised contrary to the limitations of short-term rental, which would have been renting
it more than twice, and they were cited for that. Subsequently, they’ve applied for vacation home
rental, so some of those conditions that weren’t prohibited under short-term rental would be
under the application that they’ve now filed. But they’re in two separate periods of time under
two different permits.
May 14, 2015 Draft
Kingston: So now we’re looking at a much stricter approval criteria. Tell me how that reasoning
took place given the weight and the volume of complaints. How was that adjudicated?
Gibbs: Those complaints were valid complaints under the vacation home rental criteria, which it
was not governed by at the time of those violations. Should those types of conditions continue,
they would be violations under vacation home rental. So by moving it to vacation home rental,
the criteria are much more strict and the limitations are much more strict. So yes, those would be
violations moving forward.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Rich Danter, SPOA Board of Directors, Friends of Appellant:

The facts here are very disturbing to me. What we have is an absentee owner or owners with no
concern to the community that ran a business somewhat illegally in two ways. One way for sure
is that they had the covenants for Fairway Meadows, but they never got the approval of the board
which was necessary to do a short-term rental. The second appears questionable. It looks like
they’re running a VHR without a permit for a period of time. Where is the onus of the
responsibility for all the problems created. The owners made a lot of money. While they’re
making money with no penalty other than a $250 fine, which is less than one nights rental, the
neighbors suffered continuously. They had constant problems and had to spend $250 just to
DRAFT
apply for an appeal. You need to put the onus of responsibility on the offending person, and it’s
not happening here. So there’s something very, very wrong with what’s going on.
Jim Webster, Steamboat Property Owners HOA:

I wonder if somebody could address the technical issue raised of only one owner signing the
application. Secondly, who actually enforces HOA rules?
Bo Stemple:
I’ve known Frank for 10 years. I worked with Frank when he bought his home. We read all the
required covenants. As I understand it, Frank sent a letter to the board requesting permission to
rent the home that he did not get a response from. I’ve known Frank and his family for a long
time – certainly longer than these folks have. What I hear from this group is a lot of fact
statements that really can’t be backed up with any kind of documentation. It’s wonderful to
create this huge case against a good guy with a good family who is making a shift to Steamboat
as many of us have through the years where we love the town and want to be here. Sometimes
you start by buying a house that you hope to eventually move to, and sometimes you rent it out a
little bit. Frank made mistakes; we all do. It seems like he’s stepped up to try to correct them
wherever he can. It’s alarming to me that the secretary of the HOA decides this house can’t get a
VRBO, but two blocks over it’s okay for that one. What’s the criteria for determining why these
four aren’t allowed and these 18 are? It’s a concern for me as a real estate broker because I carry
a certain amount of liability when I walk in and I say you may or may not be able to rent this
house. I have to now say to anybody who looks at a home in that neighborhood you probably
better not buy this with the intention of renting it because they may let you for a while and then
change their mind. The city has criteria in place to penalize an individual who makes mistakes.
Frank made them and he’s admitted them. That criteria took a long time to develop. I was talking
to Tom Ross this evening. 25 years ago we were discussing this issue. It came up again about
May 14, 2015 Draft
five years ago. We actually tried and we are trying to get our clients to comply with the laws of
this town because we don’t want it flashing back on us. We don’t want a good client or a good
friend to come back and say why didn’t you tell me this? We’re very careful about making sure
people know what the criteria is. He did what was asked of him. He sent the letter; they didn’t
respond. Our neighborhood has an HOA; it hasn’t met in 20 years that I know of. If we got a
letter, no one would know who to send it to. He did the right things, and now he finds himself
between a rock and a hard place. He’s trying to make it right. But my concern is these neighbors
are going to complain every time a screen door slams.
Pat Walsh, Neighbor:

On almost every weekend, there were four SUV’s and a few trailers. All that aside, what I really
feel should be looked at is the process itself. There’s something wrong with a town that will put a
rubber stamp on opening a commercial business operation in a residential neighborhood where
the residents can’t do anything to complain and address the issue without paying $250 to come
retroactive to this rubber stamp being issued. The process of meeting the criteria is how do we
know if they fill the application out correctly? That’s sort of where the criteria is. I just feel very
unable to respond to this – very limited in what I can do to protect my own neighborhood. I feel
the process is flawed. I’m sure it was born of great ideas of opportunity for everybody, but I
think it’s very flawed, and it’s hurting us as a neighborhood in a big way.
DRAFT
Lacy: Ty or Barb, do you want to address the two owner issue about one owner signing when
there’s two owners?
Wheeler: The code says: “the owner” must sign. It doesn’t say the owner(s). It does also say in
Section 26-88 that if they’re running under an LLC that they have to be registered with the
Colorado Secretary of State. That is the case here.
Lacy said that HOA rules are private matters outside the city’s jurisdiction. If matters aren’t
resolved within the HOA, they have to go to district court.
STAFF COMMENT
Wheeler: I just want to say – and I’ve talked to the Arianos and Mr. Pon about it as well – I’m
real sympathetic to where they’re at right now, but we can’t change the way the code is written
right now. I have advised them that if they want to be heard they need to go to a city council
meeting and make a public comment. That’s the only way that we can get things changed is for
city council to hear what you’re going through and what you would like changed and what you
feel is flawed. I’m sorry that it boils down to the police having to come and take reports, but
again, it’s set out in Section 26-88 in the code that that’s how the enforcement has to proceed.
And I can’t change that, either.
APPLICANT COMMENT
Phillips: One of the comments that Bo made is they might call the cops every time the screen
door slams. At what level of a complaint that the police write up is a valid complaint? Second, I
understand that what’s allowed gets a lot more strict with a vacation rental than it was before
May 14, 2015 Draft
with a short-term rental, but as I stated before, a lot of the folks coming to visit with the four
SUV’s and trailers are friends. How do I prove that it’s a friend and not somebody that’s a
paying customer?
Gibbs: If the police are called, they’re going to make an investigation. If it’s noise, there’s a
noise ordinance and specific standards that noise is evaluated by. If it’s a parking issue, they’re
aware per the code what the parking limitations are. So they would make an objective evaluation
of whether that has been violated or not. The police do have an objective set of criteria that they
would have to evaluate the complaint against.
Wheeler: Once I receive that report from the Police Department, I talk to my prosecuting
attorney about it. Between her and I and the code, we decide whether a citation can be issued.
Gibbs: Your second question is challenging, and I don’t know that I have a good answer for you
this evening, quite honestly.
Wheeler: One thing the code does say is that if you are there with your friends and your family,
all vacation home rental regulations go out the window – as long as it’s you.
Gibbs: If you’re not there, it’s going to be hard for somebody to make that determination. If a
DRAFT
police officer showed up and there’s no one there that can identify themselves as an owner, it’s
going to be difficult to figure out what’s going on.
APPELLANT COMMENT
Ariano: We’re going to city council June 2. We didn’t address what we’re going to talk about
there. What we addressed is our objections to this application. We need a decision, and we need
some findings. I haven’t heard that yet. That’s why we’re asking this body to direct them to do
that. You have the power as I understand it to do that. They’re not going to. To say that this is the
code and you’ve got to go to the city council because we’re stuck with it ignores our arguments.
If you agree that our arguments don’t hold any water, that the rest of the code doesn’t apply, then
so be it. We live with it. We want them to do what they’re required. We’re retired people in a
quiet neighborhood. We don’t want the police station on Delta Queen Court. What we want is a
residential neighborhood without a business operating where it doesn’t belong.
Pon implored the commissioners to take a look at all of the code from a policy review standpoint
and the flaws that have been pointed out in the process. I did receive a letter as secretary of the
board. I think it was dated late February of this year. I read no less than six, and I think there
were eight, comments on VRBO from renters who had stayed at your place and they loved it.
Meyer: I was a planning commissioner in the late 90’s and sat through hours and hours of public
hearings. The two issues that were the most contentious prior to writing and enacting the 2001
code were nightly rentals and secondary units. And what this community did was set out a very
extensive list of criteria to try to bring order to vacation home rentals. We did, subsequent to
May 14, 2015 Draft
2001, have a five-year review, and we did tweak it a little bit. We’ve had only one other public
complaint in almost 15 years. What I’m hearing tonight is two issues: 1) Were all the policies
and procedures adhered to, and I think that’s something that we as a planning commission need
to make sure that expectations versus what actually happens are consistent; 2) we have a
situation where there may be a nuisance in the neighborhood, but to me one of the things the
vacation home rental tried to do is make sure there was local property managers so when
neighbors did have an issue they could go immediately. That’s a really important component, so
to the extent that we need to strengthen that local oversight, the ability for neighbors to resolve
things immediately before there’s an issue with the city. I think we need to look at that process.
But I go back to the fundamental issue of responsibility, and it is with the owner to comply with
all the rules and regulations. We have an appeal. We need to make a finding and have a
discussion about whether or not there was an error in issuing the permit. I think nowadays with
VRBO and other websites we need to re-look at this and just make sure we’re current with the
technology that’s out there. We also have AirBnB where you rent a bed. We’re going to have to
be proactive with it. I see this as one more thing on our to-do list that’s growing ever long. I want
the community to know that we have been over a year in a review of the code, and this is one
other section we need to revisit. We may not recommend change, but we clearly need to revisit
this. Tonight is did the staff appropriately issue the permit. I think that’s the question. I don’t
think the whole process is broken. I think the question is can it be tweaked and can we refine it a
little more.
DRAFT
MOTION
Commissioner Meyer moved to deny appeals 15-01 and 15-02.

Commissioner Levy seconded the motion.
Levy: I agree with what Kathi has said. The things that I found disturbing in reviewing the
process is the requirement of the three citations. We’ve already had discussions about our
enforcement capabilities. If they need three citations, then we probably need to be issuing
citations at every opportunity or that rule needs to be changed and has to include complaints or
something else. I’m glad Barb spoke to the neighbors. They know what it’s going to take. It may
be ugly to call the police, but go ahead and do it. I’m surprised there’s nothing about good
standing. I understand that they have violations on the record but that doesn’t affect their current
application for a VHR. As far as the VHR rules, I think a good rule would be what Barb alluded
to – if the owner is on the premises, there’s a reason for it not to be charged; if the owner’s not
there, we have to assume it’s a rental condition and that all VHR rules should apply. Those are
my ideas.
MacArthur: The way your motion is crafted is in essence saying that when staff made this
determination, the determination was that the objections presented were not valid because they
happened in a vacuum outside this determination. And I’m not sure that’s right. I think in terms
of policy that would be the first thing I’d want to look at is: If a home is being rented out as a
short-term rental or the other category, prior to the application for a vacation home rental, the
complaints against that home during that time should come into play so you don’t have this
May 14, 2015 Draft
situation. But as our code reads currently, we look at a vacation home rental in a vacuum, and we
look purely at the question of whether or not a home has the capacity to comply with the
regulations as opposed to whether or not they have been previously because in theory they
shouldn’t have been renting in that capacity. That’s how I understand it tonight. I would support
the idea of taking a look at this sooner rather than later in policy.
Lacy: I’ll support a policy review on this as well. I don’t know what level of interest city council
has on this. This is obviously one of the areas of biggest controversy. Based on our criteria as
they are written now, which don’t seem overly stringent, I think the applicant has met those
criteria at this time. But I would like to look into some of these ideas that Charlie and Rich and
Kathi have mentioned as far as how we can improve this process in the future because I think it’s
a little bit unwise to totally ignore what’s happened in the past. That doesn’t seem to be
appropriate. I’ll be supporting the motion tonight, and I’m looking forward to talking about this
at a future policy session.
Kingston: I’m conscious of the fact that the code needs to be strengthened and revised, but I
wanted to go on record to council as suggesting that I think the process was broken or certainly
didn’t convince me that staff had addressed the complaints sufficiently well. I wasn’t convinced
that the criteria used in the code today was examined thoroughly enough for me to support the
motion.
VOTE
Vote: 6-1 DRAFT
Voting for approval of motion to approve: Lacy, Meyer, MacArthur, Levy, Eck, and Burns
Opposing: Kingston
MOTION
Commissioner Meyer moved to bring this forward to a future policy session.

Commissioner MacArthur seconded the motion.
VOTE
Vote: 7-0
Voting for approval of motion to approve: Lacy, Meyer, MacArthur, Levy, Eck, Kingston and
Burns
#4. APPROVAL OF April 30, 2015 PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING

MINUTES
Commissioner Levy wanted the final discussion on the last agenda item moved from below
the director’s report to the bottom of the item itself.
AGENDA ITEM #16
Anja Tribble
From: John Kerst <jkerst@yampavalleybank.com>

Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2015 9:39 AM
To: Bart Kounovsky
Cc: Charlie Macarthur; Anja Tribble; Anne Small
Subject: The Police Station Committee.
Bart–yourequestedashortupdate–hereitis;

AttheCommitteemeetingon5/22/15wetookapollofwhereeachCommitteememberwasasfarasa
decision.Themajority,anditmayturnouttobeunanimous,areinfavorofajointlydesignedfacilityWestofSteamboat
onthesitecurrentlyownedbytheCounty,wheretheSheriff’sofficeiscurrentlylocated.Wearenottalkingaboutan
addontothecurrentfacility,butinsteadafacilityatthatlocationdesignedforthecommonusebyboththeCitypolice
andtheCountySheriff.Wefeelthatwouldallowthemaximumcommunicationbetweenthetwoagenciesandmaximize
theusebybothofcommon/sharedspace.ItisourunderstandingthattheSheriffneedsmorespaceandtheCitypolice
needmorespaceaswell.
WedidcheckwithBillRangitsch,thearchitectusedbybothentities,andthereisdefinitelyenoughspacefora
30,000+/ͲfacilityatthatlocationwithadequatesecureparkingforstaffontheWestsideandpublicparkingontheEast
side.

IthinktheCommitteecanfinalizethisrecommendationoverthenext2meetings.Therewasdiscussionabout
thepossibilityofapolicesubͲstationisSouthSteamboat.

ThatiswheretheCommitteeisatfornow.Haveawonderfulday!

JohnL.Kerst
VicePresident
YampaValleyBank
GenuineHometownBanking
DirectLineͲ970.875.1610
MainLineͲ970.879.2993
Fax–970.875.1631

This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual
named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy
this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately if you have received this e-mail by
mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed
to be secure or error-free as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost,
destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. The sender therefore does not
accept liability for any errors or omissions in the contents of this message, which arise
as a result of e-mail transmission. If verification is required please request a hard-
copy version. Yampa Valley Bank, 600 South Lincoln Ave, Steamboat Springs, CO 80487
www.yampavalleybank.com
1
Police Station Committee
*** DRAFT ***
Minutes
May 18, 2015
10:30am – noon
Crawford Room, Centennial Hall
1. Call to Order
Co-Chair John Kerst called the meeting to order at 10:32am.
Committee members present: Gary Cogswell, Judy Tremaine, Tyler Goodman, Charlie
MacArthur, John Kerst, Nancy Kramer
Committee members absent: Tom Leeson, Steve Sehnert (alternate)
Council Members present: Bart Kounovsky, Walter Magill
City Staff present: Anne Small, Director of General Services; Anja Tribble, Executive
Assistant
2. Public Comment
There was no public comment.
3. Review all sites to be considered

- Anne handed out Attachment 1. The current Sheriff’s location has been added as
requested.
- Anne pointed out each location on a map and mentioned possible cons as they appear
on Attachment 1, noting that every site will most likely have some cons, and it’s up
to the committee to decide how to weigh them.
- Need a minimum size of two acres.
- Old gas station at 3rd & Lincoln would cost at least $2.5 million.
- Side note from Bart and Judy: “Everything’s for sale for a price”.
- Hospital withdrew their lots because they have plans for things like interim housing for
staff and housing for staff, and their long term expansion plan isn’t finished yet, so
they want to keep their options open. Hospital owns about 40 acres, including the
small parcel with the little house on it alongside Pine Grove Road. That parcel has a
sewer easement running through the middle of it though; can’t build on it.
5/4/15 PSC Minutes *** DRAFT *** 1

- John and Anne received a suggestion from a member of the public (Mr. Koftinow)
about an additional parcel at the Mt. Werner Road and US40 interchange. Anne
explained that said parcel lies in the 100 year flood plain; can’t build an Essential
Building on it.
- The TIC site was mentioned, and the thought that YVEA would probably like a Police
Station as a partner as they’re looking to secure their site. If that site was an option,
the City could remodel the existing building or build a new one. Bart to contact
Diane Johnson with YVEA and ask her opinion. (E-mail exchange is Attachment 2.)
4. Committee Poll: Each committee member’s position at this time (3-5

minutes per person)
- thoughts on current vs new, and shared vs individual facility
- general location
- other
Nancy
- “Not West of town” is not “sacred” to her.
- Would prefer a combined facility.
- Elements to be considered in a combined facility: direct interface, no value
engineering (learn from the past; may cost a little more up front but good return on
investment).
- Assume future growth.
- Klein property essential.
- Fair and equitable O&M of a combined facility would be challenging but worth the
effort.
- Doesn’t see a compelling reason to call West of town “not an option”.
- Agrees there will be growth in the Mountain area; presence will be necessary.
- It’s a long term investment.
- Vacate the downtown police station (current location). Allowing for commercial
development will result in financial gain.
- Every constituent she’s talked to said yes, combine them.
- Will take strong will and leadership to make it work.
Gary
- Agrees with Nancy.
- Craig facility tour was an overwhelming/compelling factor to convince him combining
Police, State Patrol, Sheriff’s office, and Communications is the way to go. The
attitudes and work relationships in Craig are impressive.
- Concerned with response time. Used to be a volunteer fireman; knows that it’s a big
responsibility to “go code red”.
- Look at a second station (substation), further South and East, including the South Fire
Station.
- Likes the Highway 40 location.

- Has seen the City and County go back and forth with working together and not with
the building department.
- Agreement: include a buy-sell option; if it doesn’t work out, need a second station.
- Before considering Klein property, do assessment if space is needed. County should
look at the property as well.
Judy
- The fact that the night shift is only staffed by two officers bothers her. It’s sorely
inadequate and unsafe for the officers. Reminder that a second location (substation)
would have to be manned. A substation closer to the mountain/population center
would be a waste of money and wouldn’t really serve the community. City can’t
afford more staff.
- Noted that while Sheriff Wiggins mentioned that his officers do write reports in their
vehicles, he also mentioned that at the same time, they need to focus on their
surroundings. Judy thinks having the security of an office is essential.
- Didn’t tour the Craig facility this time around, but has been there for business before.
- Thinks the concept of a combined facility is great. Voiced concern with Routt County’s
planned expansion map; what they can provide us would box us in. Parking will
become critical as well. Present Sheriff’s Office site is sorely inadequate for a
combined facility.
- The building would have to be designed to be shared. Would have to buy Klein
property, Routt County would have to abandon their building, then remodel it to
follow code, etc.. Jail can’t be left without admin. This whole idea is cost prohibitive.
- Would need a minimum of six acres for a combined facility.
- City Police Station should be within the area 85% of the calls come from. We’re a
small community; officers of various agencies work together fine.
- Response time is everything. Worked all of her career in law enforcement locations.
Safety first. Separate buildings would provide better response time to the mountain
area. Routt County Sheriff’s Office can and will respond to an emergency West of
town. Response time is a decisive factor in her opinion.
- 13th St. corridor, bottleneck, railroad track can create response time issues.
- Current Sheriff’s Office is too space limited, and moving both doesn’t seem sensible
cost wise.
Tyler
- Not in a hurry; would rather make sure we get it right.
- Spend more now; this is one of the biggest purchases ever for the City. You get what
you pay for.
- Shared facility makes sense. Wondering whether it is possible from a political and
logistical stand point. What do the numbers come out to?
- Hesitant with the location West of town. Agrees that response time is everything.
Majority of the calls comes from the restaurants and bars.
- Only way to go West is with a joint facility. If go with a separate facility, it should be
central, even if it’s more expensive.

- Suggesting taking a parallel track and look at numbers associated with more than one
location; give a first choice and a next best option recommendation.
- Current location is off the table in his view. Location is better served otherwise, and a
remodel would be cost prohibitive.
Charlie
- Generally agrees with Nancy and Gary.
- Joint facility saves the taxpayer money.
- Saw during the tour of the Craig facility that common sense is prevailing, and the
taxpayer is benefitting.
- Would like to see a shared facility built from the ground up to do it right. Need 20,000
sq ft; two story facility would work. Could use the existing Sheriff’s Office facility for
space that doesn’t have to comply with Essential Building Code.
- Thinks there’s enough room at the current Sheriff’s Office site; buying the Klein
property is not essential; there’s room for expansion.
- If do a substation, envisioning doing just “a desk”, not a full station.
- West is not unfeasible; community is small enough. Officers are in their vehicles
disbursed throughout the community for most of their shift, so impact on response
time is negligible.
John
- Existing PD location is off the table in his opinion; not big enough, cost for remodel
too high.
- In favor of shared facility with caveats:
*Designed cooperatively to encourage cooperation. If that’s not possible, option is
off the table.
*Up to the City Council to decide whether that’s possible.
*Location by the jail/court house; buy now if possibly needed for future expansion.
*If/when cost savings are realized due to the joint facility, look at a substation.
- Fire department has stop light control. PD & Sheriff should also have that ability. That
should mitigate some of the concerns with the location West of town.
- If the City and County can’t agree, the prime location would be South of Old Town;
South of the Hampton Inn, but would need a stop light.
Tom
- Tom wasn’t able to attend the meeting, but provided his thoughts in writing
(Attachment 3).
Steve
- Steve wasn’t able to attend the meeting, but provided his thoughts in writing
(Attachment 4).
Discussion of apparent majority consensus

- Judy: convinced it can’t be accomplished at the current Routt County Sheriff’s Office
location; won’t be fiscally prudent. If a shared facility could be realized on US40 this
side of 13th Street, absolutely for it. Police Officers don’t regularly have to go to the
Justice Center. Other than “starting over” for both, it makes more sense to have
separate stations.
- John: County has 15,000 sq ft available for expansion on a single level; could do two
levels, and only need about 8-9,000 sq ft. Can’t see why not unless an
architect/engineer says no. This should be looked at by professionals.
- Tyler: concerned with money and logistics. Would like to see a brief conceptual
design, and also look at a substation at the same time.
- Nancy: this is worth the investment. This is an opportunity to make sure we don’t
have our “back against the wall” in the future.
- Charlie: Doesn’t need to be done quickly, but right. Existing Police Station will do for
another two to five years.
- Tyler urged the committee to come up with a “Plan B” to have something to compare
to; could also be a good “bargaining chip”.
Majority consensus
- Shared facility if it can be accomplished. Needs to be done right, with leadership (City
Council & Board of County Commissioners) buy-in.
Bart
- Soda Creek Elementary experience proves the “do it right” approach is the right way
to go.
- Will talk to the County to see whether the City has a willing partner. There will be no
official Minutes for the County budget meeting; hasn’t seen the “notes” yet.
- Cautioned the committee not to “shoehorn” a station into a space without providing
sufficient space for parking. May need to buy additional property.
Anne
- Was present for the relevant portion of the County budget meeting. Shared what she
heard.
- Sheriff Wiggins requested additional space; was met with concerns that he needs
more space without more employees.
- City was characterized as not always a reliable partner.
- City has a more “lavish taste” was another comment.
- Sounded like a shared training room was received positively.
- Just discussions; no decisions were made.
Walter
- Walter was also present at the County budget meeting. Some of the things he picked
up on are below.
- Tim Corrigan and Doug Monger pointed out that because the City is ready, this
suddenly jumped into priority status for the County.

- County wants to move Dispatch.
- Walter thinks the County may have some Capital to put into current building now; if
not, when?
- County is just beginning to consider this topic.
- Suggested this may be a good topic for a joint City-County meeting. If so, would
recommend having architect/engineer do some schematics of the Sheriff’s Office
location so don’t have to “start from scratch” at the meeting.
- County is also looking at remote sites (such as in Hayden and Oak Creek); that would
reduce their space need.
- Anne pointed out that if the County does the building, they don’t have to follow the
City’s planning process (for parking, setback requirements, etc.); if the City does it,
we do.
- General consensus that we have to pay close attention to who owns what so the City
doesn’t end up renting “forever”.
- John reminded the group that the hospital initially bought 40 acres and only built on
five. Faced criticism then, but good for them now.
5. Emerald Crossing information from Ben Beall

- The location of the railroad crossing is being moved; Trafalgar crossing will close and
be replaced by one South of the Hampton Inn (known as Emerald Trail, or Ski Town
Way). The railroad is “on board” with this move. There are still “some” objections
from property owners; staff has met the concerns of others.
- CDOT feels it’s too close to the Trafalgar light to put in another traffic light.
- There will be no left turn out of that street; would have to use the Trafalgar light for
that (at least for now).
- Core Trail railroad crossing will still be at Trafalgar (bike/pedestrians only).
- If wanted to build a police station on that site, the setback requirements from US40
would be minimal to create an urban feel. Reminded the committee that there is a
site plan for that site.
- An Access Plan is in the works; it may change CDOT’s opinion of a light and the ¾
movement.
6. Approval of Minutes
-5/4/15
- VOTE: Approve 5/4/2015 Minutes. Nancy/Gary; passed 6/0. Tom was absent.
7. Upcoming Agenda
- John, Charlie (with Anja’s assistance) to get something out. Discuss a document at
next meeting.
- Option B

- Bart/Walter to see if elected officials are at all interested. Update at next meeting.
8. Other Business
None.
9. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 12:05pm.

Macys Council Report
June 2, 2015
Congratulations to the United Way for another wonderful day of caring! Thousands of
hours of service were committed to many nonprofits. Thanks go out to the volunteers.
Kudos to Tyler for putting together a spectacular public meeting on the Workman Park.
He and Danny Paul from public works really did a wonderful job of engaging the public
in a brainstorming charrette about the opportunities that the park presents. Engaging
the public early in an open and transparent strategy will definitely result in the best
case scenario for this park. Thanks also to John Overstreet, Craig Robinson, Scott Ford
and Deb Hinsvark for participating!
The City's historic preservation bicycle tour was well attended and, by all accounts,
successful. I thought it was wonderful that Scott Myller was willing to represent the
Council and go along with the tour. I participated wearing my Yampatika hat and, once
again, congratulate the planning department for engaging people in this educational
endeavor.
Constituent meetings:
Met with a constituent who is launching a new business and it was wonderful to hear
about the history of his current business and projected plans for the future.
Met with another constituent who is concerned about the urban renewal authority
conversation that has been occurring and whether or not the council members who
have been participating are free and clear of conflicts of interest.
As an aside, I have been to the haymaker golf course on number of occasions over the
past couple of weeks and it is just looking spectacular. The Chamber mixer occurred
there on the 27th and Yampatika did a Birdwalk there on the 19th. Looks like it's going
to be a great season. Thanks to the golf committee for helping with that!
Congratulations to Jay Gallagher for his retirement from Mt. Werner Water!!! Thanks go
out to Chuck Anderson, Ben Beall, Jon Snyder and Craig Robinson for making a strong
showing at his going away party! We will miss him but we also welcome Frank Alfone.
Sonja
Scott L. Ford
City Council Report
For June 2nd, 2015
Friday, May 22nd

Lunch with City Manager – Deb Hinsvark
Covered a variety of topic ranging from the benefits of City Council work/study sessions to
alternative ways to fund the proposed public infrastructure for downtown.
Monday, May 25th

Memorial Day Services – Steamboat Springs Cemetery
I would estimate that there was likely 150 people at the service. SST did a great job of
shuttling folks to and from the services.
Wednesday, May 27th

Steamboat Springs Economic Development Council
A presentation was given by the Steamboat Springs Arts Council about their efforts to receive a
designation of a Creative District for downtown.
Friday, May 29th

Steamboat Springs Community Survey Project Team
The compiling of results of the survey in the final stages of being completed. The survey
received over a 40% response rate which is outstand for a survey of this type. This simply
means that when the data is aggregated and crossed tab -confidence that the results reflect the
values and priorities of community is high.
Conflict of Interest Disclosure
Date: May 28, 2015
Name: Scott L. Ford
Positon: City Council Member / District II
Term Expires: November 2017
Disclosure and Description of Possible or Perceived Conflict of Interest I want to fully disclose associated
with discussions and decisions associated the Downtown District of the URA:
A. The name of my business is the Community Learning Company doing business as (DBA) Pinnacle
Economic Research Group.
I rent an office in the proposed downtown area of the URA.
My office is located in a suite of office located on the grown floor of the Olympian. The street
address is 535 Yampa Street Steamboat Springs, Colorado. I have rented an office in this
location since July 2014. My intention is to renew my office lease on or before June 30, 2015.
I have no business or ownership interest in the building in which my office is located.
The business relationship I have with the owner of this suite of offices is that of a landlord /
tenant.
B. I am listed as the Business Manager of the Valley Voice, LLC. This is a monthly magazine
publication distributed throughout Routt County. This is a member managed LLC. The two
managing members are:
a. Paulie Anderson
b. Matt Scharf
I provide bookkeeping services to support the business on a contract basis. I have no editorial
authority or input regarding the content or advertising that appears in the magazine.
The business has offices at 1125 Lincoln Ave., Steamboat Springs, Colorado. These are rented
offices on the 2nd floor of the building. This office location is also within the boundaries of the
proposed downtown area of the URA.
I was the source of funds to capitalize the business in April 2011. The funds were in the form of
a loan to the LLC with a fix repayment schedule with interest.
I personally feel that two situations describe above will not influence my judgment regarding any
discussion or decision associated with the proposed downtown area of the URA.
I am more than willing to discuss these items with my fellow council members in a public forum.
Scott Ford
Walter Magill
Council Report June 2, 2015
1. I attended a meeting of the Routt County Riders and the Parks and Open space team which was
a good conversation. Parks and Open space explained the limited budget for trails based on the
upkeep of fields, trash disposal, mowing and all other responsibilities outside of single track
trails. Also new amenities have been added over the last few years such as the bike park at Bear
River, but maintenance has not increased. Routt County Riders desires to take over a limited
paid role in the upkeep and trail work on the all of the Emerald Mountain trails. Both parties
agreed to continue the discussion. I would like to discuss a line item for soft surface trail
maintenance in the Parks and Recreation budget for 2016.
2. I aware development applications have increased in the City and TAC review comments are
taking a longer time than the estimated three weeks. Should the three week time frame be
increased for the summer/fall for new applications.
3. Fields were used hard over the last weekend for the lacrosse tournament but Parks and Rec are
working on them with the wet weather.
AGENDA ITEM #17a1.
*****TENATIVE AGENDA FOR JUNE 16, 2015*****
This agenda is tentative and the information is subject to change until the agenda is finalized.

AGENDA
REGULAR MEETING NO. 2015-12
TUESDAY, JUNE 16, 2015
5:00 P.M.
MEETING PROCEDURE: Comments from the Public are welcome at two

different times during the course of the meeting: 1) Comments no longer than
three (3) minutes on items not scheduled on the Agenda will be heard under
Public Comment; and 2) Comments no longer than three (3) minutes on all
scheduled public hearing items will be heard following the presentation by Staff
or the Petitioner. Please wait until you are recognized by the Council President.
With the exception of subjects brought up during Public Comment, on which no
action will be taken or a decision made, the City Council may take action on, and
may make a decision regarding, ANY item referred to in this agenda, including,
without limitation, any item referenced for “review”, “update”, “report”, or
“discussion”. It is City Council’s goal to adjourn all meetings by 10:00 p.m.
A City Council meeting packet is available for public review in the lobby of City
Hall, 137 10th Street, Steamboat Springs, CO, or on our website at
http://steamboatsprings.net/city_council/council_meetings. The e-packet is
typically available by 1pm on the Friday before the meeting.
PUBLIC COMMENT: Public Comment will be provided as close to 7 p.m.

as possible (but not earlier), or at the end of the meeting (whichever
comes first). CITY COUNCIL WILL MAKE NO DECISION NOR TAKE ACTION, EXCEPT TO DIRECT THE
THEMSELVES BY NAME AND ADDRESS. ALL COMMENTS SHALL NOT EXCEED THREE MINUTES.
A. ROLL CALL
B. PROCLAMATIONS
_________________________________________________________________
C. COMMUNITY REPORTS/CITY COUNCIL DISCUSSION TOPIC:
1. Education Fund Board Update. (Weber)

2. Community Survey Presentation. (DelliQuadri)
3. Compensation Survey Presentation. (Small)
D. CONSENT CALENDAR: MOTIONS, RESOLUTIONS AND

ORDINANCES FIRST READINGS
ITEMS ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR GENERALLY REQUIRE LITTLE COUNCIL DELIBERATION AND
MAY BE APPROVED WITH A SINGLE MOTION. ANY MEMBER OF THE COUNCIL OR THE PUBLIC
MAY WITHDRAW ANY ITEM FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION AT ANY
TIME PRIOR TO APPROVAL.
E. PUBLIC HEARING: ORDINANCE SECOND READINGS
THE CITY COUNCIL PRESIDENT OR PRESIDENT PRO-TEM WILL READ EACH ORDINANCE TITLE
INTO THE RECORD. PUBLIC COMMENT WILL BE PROVIDED FOR EVERY ORDINANCE.
4. RESOLUTION: Downtown Reinvestment Plan Area. (Gibbs)
5. SECOND READING OF ORDINANCE: An ordinance amending

noise pollution regulations to exempt City street sweeping
operations and providing an effective date. (Anderson)
F. PUBLIC COMMENT: Public Comment will be provided as close to 7

p.m. as possible (but not earlier), or at the end of the meeting
(whichever comes first). CITY COUNCIL WILL MAKE NO DECISION NOR TAKE
ACTION, EXCEPT TO DIRECT THE CITY MANAGER. THOSE ADDRESSING CITY COUNCIL ARE
REQUESTED TO IDENTIFY THEMSELVES BY NAME AND ADDRESS. ALL COMMENTS
SHALL NOT EXCEED THREE MINUTES.
G. PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION REPORT

________________________________________________________________________
H. PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT
I. CONSENT CALENDAR - PLANNING COMMISSION REFERRALS:

DELIBERATION AND MAY BE APPROVED WITH A SINGLE MOTION. A CITY COUNCIL MEMBER
MAY REQUEST AN ITEM(S) BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR FOR FURTHER
DISCUSSION. ALL ORDINANCES APPROVED BY CONSENT SHALL BE READ INTO THE

RECORD BY TITLE.

____________________________________________________
J. PUBLIC HEARING – PLANNING COMMISSION REFERRALS

x Presentation by the Petitioner (estimated at 15 minutes). Petitioner
to state name and residence address/location.
x Presentation by the Opposition. Same guidelines as above.
x Public Comment by individuals (not to exceed 3 minutes).
Individuals to state name and residence address/location.
x City staff to provide a response.
K. REPORTS
6. City Council
7. Reports
a. Agenda Review (Franklin):
1.) Regular meeting July 7, 2015.
2.) Regular meeting July 21, 2015.
8. Staff Reports
M. ADJOURNMENT BY: JULIE FRANKLIN, CMC

CITY CLERK
AGENDA ITEM #17a2.
*****TENATIVE AGENDA FOR JULY 7, 2015*****

AGENDA
REGULAR MEETING NO. 2015-13
TUESDAY, JULY 7, 2015
5:00 P.M.
MEETING PROCEDURE: Comments from the Public are welcome at two

different times during the course of the meeting: 1) Comments no longer than
three (3) minutes on items not scheduled on the Agenda will be heard under
Public Comment; and 2) Comments no longer than three (3) minutes on all
scheduled public hearing items will be heard following the presentation by Staff
or the Petitioner. Please wait until you are recognized by the Council President.
With the exception of subjects brought up during Public Comment, on which no
action will be taken or a decision made, the City Council may take action on, and
may make a decision regarding, ANY item referred to in this agenda, including,
without limitation, any item referenced for “review”, “update”, “report”, or
“discussion”. It is City Council’s goal to adjourn all meetings by 10:00 p.m.
A City Council meeting packet is available for public review in the lobby of City
Hall, 137 10th Street, Steamboat Springs, CO, or on our website at
http://steamboatsprings.net/city_council/council_meetings. The e-packet is
typically available by 1pm on the Friday before the meeting.
PUBLIC COMMENT: Public Comment will be provided as close to 7 p.m.

as possible (but not earlier), or at the end of the meeting (whichever
comes first). CITY COUNCIL WILL MAKE NO DECISION NOR TAKE ACTION, EXCEPT TO DIRECT THE
THEMSELVES BY NAME AND ADDRESS. ALL COMMENTS SHALL NOT EXCEED THREE MINUTES.
A. ROLL CALL
B. PROCLAMATIONS
1. Marijuana Update on Unlicensed Cultivation Operations

and Community Commercial Zoning Issues. (Foote)
_________________________________________________________________
C. COMMUNITY REPORTS/CITY COUNCIL DISCUSSION TOPIC:
2. 2016 Sales Tax Projection. (Weber)
D. CONSENT CALENDAR: MOTIONS, RESOLUTIONS AND

ORDINANCES FIRST READINGS
ITEMS ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR GENERALLY REQUIRE LITTLE COUNCIL DELIBERATION AND
MAY BE APPROVED WITH A SINGLE MOTION. ANY MEMBER OF THE COUNCIL OR THE PUBLIC
MAY WITHDRAW ANY ITEM FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION AT ANY
TIME PRIOR TO APPROVAL.
E. PUBLIC HEARING: ORDINANCE SECOND READINGS
THE CITY COUNCIL PRESIDENT OR PRESIDENT PRO-TEM WILL READ EACH ORDINANCE TITLE
INTO THE RECORD. PUBLIC COMMENT WILL BE PROVIDED FOR EVERY ORDINANCE.
3. SECOND READING OF ORDINANCE: Snapdragon Local

Improvements District Number 12. (Anderson/Foote)
F. PUBLIC COMMENT: Public Comment will be provided as close to 7

p.m. as possible (but not earlier), or at the end of the meeting
(whichever comes first). CITY COUNCIL WILL MAKE NO DECISION NOR TAKE
ACTION, EXCEPT TO DIRECT THE CITY MANAGER. THOSE ADDRESSING CITY COUNCIL ARE
REQUESTED TO IDENTIFY THEMSELVES BY NAME AND ADDRESS. ALL COMMENTS
SHALL NOT EXCEED THREE MINUTES.
G. PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION REPORT

________________________________________________________________________
H. PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT
I. CONSENT CALENDAR - PLANNING COMMISSION REFERRALS:

DELIBERATION AND MAY BE APPROVED WITH A SINGLE MOTION. A CITY COUNCIL MEMBER
MAY REQUEST AN ITEM(S) BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR FOR FURTHER
DISCUSSION. ALL ORDINANCES APPROVED BY CONSENT SHALL BE READ INTO THE

RECORD BY TITLE.
4. PROJECT:
PETITION:
LOCATION:
APPLICANT:
PLANNING COMMISSION VOTE:
J. PUBLIC HEARING – PLANNING COMMISSION REFERRALS

x Presentation by the Petitioner (estimated at 15 minutes). Petitioner
to state name and residence address/location.
x Presentation by the Opposition. Same guidelines as above.
x Public Comment by individuals (not to exceed 3 minutes).
Individuals to state name and residence address/location.
x City staff to provide a response.
K. REPORTS
5. City Council
6. Reports
a. Agenda Review (Franklin):
1.) Regular Meeting July 21, 2015.
2.) Regular Meeting August 4, 2015.
7. Staff Reports
L. OLD BUSINESS
8. Minutes (Franklin)
a. Regular Meeting 2015-11, June 2, 2015.
b. Regular Meeting 2015-12, June 16, 2015.
M. ADJOURNMENT BY: JULIE FRANKLIN, CMC

CITY CLERK
AGENDA ITEM #18
STAFF REPORTS:
a) City Attorney’s Update/Report. The above is a discussion item
b) City Manager’s Report: Ongoing Projects. Report to follow this page

CITY MANAGER REPORT
June 2, 2015
FOLLOW UP ITEMS FROM PRIOR MEETINGS
1. Howelsen Hill Update

∇ I have spoken with Jim Boyne again recently regarding the slide and he understands
that we are unable to make repairs or to know the full extent of the damage until the hill
dries. Going over info we already have, we are reminded that the costs of repairing
Howelsen slumps over the last 10 years are $730,000 for 6 slides. The City’s Lease
Agreement with CSI (Community Slide, Inc.) includes a paragraph on “Chairlift
Operations” that reads:
o CSI is authorized to use the Barrows chairlift at Howelsen Hill Park (or any
replacement chairlift in approximately the same location) on a non-exclusive
basis in connection with Slide operations and other activities permitted pursuant
to this Agreement. The City shall maintain the chairlift in an operational and safe
condition, in accordance with the requirements of the Colorado Tramway Safety
Board (“Safety Board”) and other applicable laws and regulations. CSI shall
reimburse to the City its actual cost, as determined by the City and demonstrated
to CSI, of routine maintenance performed on the lift during periods of Slide
operations and which are required as a result of Slide operations. The City shall,
at its expense, perform all necessary major repairs and replacements of the lift,
except that CSI shall pay all costs, including labor, material, and inspection costs,
if any, to install modifications on lift chairs necessary to accommodate its
operators or required by the Safety Board solely because the lift is to be used by
Slide customers. CSI shall provide personnel necessary to operate the chairlift in
a good, clean, safe and sanitary condition during periods the Slide is operating,
which personnel shall be trained by the City in the proper operation and use of
the lift. Throughout the term of this Agreement, the City shall locate a chairlift at
Howelsen Hill which chairlift shall commence and terminate (or have an exit
point) in the general location of the current Barrows chairlift. The City shall not
be obligated to provide such uplift capacity during reasonable periods the lift is
out of service for repairs or maintenance or due to factors beyond the City’s
reasonable control, such as catastrophic failure or interruption in utility service,
provided the City shall take reasonable efforts to restore service as quickly as
reasonably possible.
1
2. Central Park Drive Update
∇ This is the preferred plan for Central Park Drive’s summer facelift.
Councilwoman Macys requested an update. All rights of way needed for this
project have been obtained. Additionally, Alpine Bank, through Adonna Allen,
approved the relocation of the bus shelter onto their property as requested.
3. Investigation Costs/Data
∇ To date we have spent $18,000 on an independent investigation and $12,000 on
interim police chief services.
∇ As you know, I’ve removed myself from the investigation while it is ongoing.
However, as it winds down I am beginning to think about the dissemination of
data when it is complete. It is not my intent to let the public hang, wondering
what happened. Many of the details cannot be made public, of course, because
they contain items related to personnel matters, but as I speak to our HR
attorneys and other city managers who have experienced this type of police
investigation, I am aware that there is much “executive summary” type of
2
information that can be communicated. From Anne Small, I understand that Ms.
Nuanes is familiar with developing such reports and I have asked, again through
Anne, that a public summary be created for our citizens.
3
ITEMS NEEDING COUNCIL DIRECTION
4. New URA legislation

∇ We are waiting to see if Governor Hickenlooper allows the recently passed HB
15-1348 to become law. If it does, the law will be significantly problematic not
only to future plan areas, but also to our current one. In fact, this legislation is
causing problems even now – before it passes into law. A hastily crafted last-
minute addition to the legislation requires that already established plan areas
must pass through a series of steps if any of a list of events takes place. The
steps that must be entered into upon this occurrence include completing an
agreement with every taxing entity in the plan area. If an agreement cannot be
reached, the matter moves to binding mediation (which I am told by legal experts
is not a “real” thing). URAs are given 120 days to enter into the agreement and if
unsuccessful, the mediator is given 90 days to rule. The crux of the issue is that
while agreements are in negotiation or mediation, no money will flow to the
plan area. Of additional concern is the list of events that spur this exercise – it
includes things as uncontrollable as a change in mill levy within one of the taxing
districts in the plan area. Additionally, while the law takes effect on January 1,
2016, it is unclear whether this particular attribute of the law applies to plan areas
already in place at that time. The language of the law is so problematic that
currently planned projects are being halted as investment banks pull out because
they cannot quantify their risk when there are so many unknowns. Vectra Bank
has confirmed that they will not finance a URA planned project as long as this
legislation is even a possibility. Other banks are said to be following suit. I don’t
believe we could find URA financing for the planned downtown area unless this
legislation is vetoed; however, we could finance through a loan from the City of
CIP reserves or via a COP transaction. But, bottom line, the biggest risk is the
problem it could cause plans that are already in place, such as our Mountain
Reinvestment Plan Area. I need to ask if you are willing to sign the attached
letter to Governor Hickenlooper asking for a veto of HB 15-1348.
4
GOALS UPDATES
1. Community Survey
∇ The community survey data is being sorted now and the survey committee is
considering their options for benchmarking the data with other communities. Our
survey response has surpassed 45% which is extremely high. The typical
response rate for a community survey is 20%.
2. STAR
∇ The City received four applications for STAR intern positions and we hope to
have two interns in place to gather, sort and type data by mid-June.
∇ There are 516 different data points that can be collected as part of the
benchmarking process. Our Assistant to the City Manager, Winnie DelliQuadri,
has completed the crosswalk for these data points and is working with
appropriate staff to gather data.
5
GENERAL INFORMATION
1. Accolades
∇ The audit fieldwork has been completed. Our finance director, Kim Weber,
reports that the audit went very well. The auditors “were very impressed with
how prepared Greg (Neppl) and the rest of the finance staff were.” Tough job!
We account throughout the year on a budget basis which is reported in the
financial statements, but we also have to report the financials on a fund
accounting basis and a GASB 34 fully accrued (like a corporation) basis. Notes
must be compiled that comply with GASB (Government Accounting Standards
Board) regulations. It starts with a good, qualified crew – which we have!
2. Public Works
∇ The Engineering Division is hosting a one day training workshop on inspection
and maintenance of post-construction stormwater best management practices
(BMPs) on Thursday June 4th from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. The workshop will be
at Centennial Hall, 124 10th Street in Citizen’s Meeting Room. This workshop,
given by the Colorado Stormwater Center at Colorado State University, will teach
participants how to identify, inspect, and perform necessary maintenance of
BMPs.
∇ The Water Division responded to a lightning strike at the ¼ million gallon tank
(Fish Creek Falls Road and Deerclover Lane) last Monday. On-call personnel
received phone calls indicating customers were out of water, and upon dispatch
at 8:40 AM found that lightning had disabled the alarm, low level sensor and
phone line notification system. Finding the water tank empty, the technician
called in other personnel and all worked to start the pumps, flush the affected
pipes, perform chlorine residual testing, and hang door hangars or talk to
residents of the affected accounts. This was all accomplished according to the
CDPHE checklist. As a precautionary measure, BAC-T samples were taken and
transported to Craig for testing since local facilities were closed. These samples
were returned with negative findings. Water service was restored about 10:30
AM Monday morning and water crews finished all work at about 3:30 PM. The
grounding and surge protection of all the City’s Water tanks is being reviewed for
possible enhancements.
∇ The Wastewater Treatment Plant is hosting 5-6 elementary school tours this
week with more than 200 children in attendance. The timing is right as the
constant rainfall and Inflow and Infiltration has put the 24-hour flow back over 6
million gallons per day and the weekly total at 22.6 million gallons.
6
3. Planning Code Enforcement
∇ The convenience of using “temporary buildings” such as large steel shipping
containers, other similar containers, trailers, or manufactured buildings for long
term storage in commercial, industrial and residential areas has been growing in
popularity in Steamboat Springs. However, when these large containers or
“temporary buildings” are located on a property for an extended period of time
they are essentially functioning as an accessory building and are subject to City
zoning regulations governing such structures. Those regulations include building
location, set-backs, lot coverage, architectural requirements, and use. The City
will begin contacting properties that are utilizing these container structures to
determine if they can be brought into conformance with the Community
Development Code. Container structures that are not in conformance may need
to be relocated or removed from the property. Contact Planning, 970-871-8258
for additional information. .
4. City 101
∇ City 101 continues to wow a class of city employees who are beginning to see
the “big picture” of the City. In May, the class had a great day with Public Safety.
Participants had a hands-on fire training experience in the morning and learned
the critical role of police records technicians in the afternoon. They also received
a tour of the police station and heard an overview of policing in Steamboat
Springs.
5. Police Training
∇ In May, Officers Ingerick, Krebs and Malchow attended Reid Interview and
Interrogation training. Officers Laundy, Hunstad and CSO Suppeland attended
Patrol Bike training. Officers Ingerick, Laundy, Hunstad, Malshow and Cyphers
attended patrol rifle training. Officers Laundy, Gadbois and Cyphers attended
Search and Seizure training.
6. HR
∇ There are four open positions in the PD and on June 8th, we will conduct tests for
twelve potential candidates. Using a new advertising medium, we have garnered
more candidates than usual.
∇ A Meet & Greet was held at the FBO for the airport manager finalists. I heard
many positive comments from the flying community about the use of this venue
to allow for community feedback on each candidate. A decision will follow
shortly.
7
∇ We received about 100 applications for the Deputy City Manager position.
Applications were first filtered by HR and over 50 met the qualifications. A
second filtering cut the group to 33 and those 33 were sent 5 questions to
answer. Continued filtering and interviews will occur next via a committee of
community members.
7. Risk Management/Procurement
∇ The City of Steamboat Springs will receive an award from CIRSA at the General
Membership meeting on June 17th in Breckenridge for our overall efforts in
workers compensation. Way to go Shelly!! And to all of you who are out there,
on the job everyday – being more careful!!
∇ Duckels Construction has been awarded both the 5th Street Stormwater
Treatment Unit/Stormwater Sewer Improvements project and the North Park
Road & Woods Drive Water Main Replacement project contracts. Work on the
5th St project begins May 26.
8. Iron Horse
∇ Proposals are due June 22.
9. Parks
∇ Extremely wet weather is impeding our ability to mow. However, we were able to
prep fields and host the 12th Annual Steamboat Classic Lacrosse tournament
with 62 teams including 7 local teams.
∇ Local softball leagues start next week weather permitting. Watch out for that City
team! We’re stronger than ever.
∇ Triple Crown softball begins Tuesday, June 9.
∇ SSWSC summer jumping begins Saturday, June 12.
∇ The Howelsen Hill landslide continues to move and grow in size with all of the
moisture received. Staff continues to assess and work with experts to address
the issue.
∇ Staff has met with SSWSC to discuss 6 year CIP needs and vision.
10. Open Space and Trails

∇ Routt County Riders is working on flagging a new proposed route for staff to
review that provides easier, more sustainable access to the Bluffs Trail from the
Stables at Howelsen. Discussions have identified a need to update the Master
Plan for Emerald trail improvements and the community-wide trail system.
8
∇ Based on previous public discussions, Parks and Recreation Commission will be
discussing the definition of “commercial outfitter” for river recreation on the
Yampa and whether or not there is a desire to modify the definition to include
property management companies or other entities.
11. Ice Arena

∇ The ice arena will remain closed through the first week of June as annual
maintenance is performed. Major maintenance items include new ice and paint,
a freshly painted lobby area, installation of a new lobby floor and entrance way
post repair/renovation.
12. Teen/Youth/Sports
∇ 110 Teens attended the Steamboat Springs Teen Council night at the movies on
May 15th.
∇ Summer Camp registration is tracking higher than 2014 at this point. We still
have a few Group Leader positions to fill along with a Therapeutic Recreation
Aide.
∇ Town Challenge Bike Series starts June 10th at Maribou.
∇ The new rainout hotline system proved to be a very valuable tool for field
scheduling in May.
13. Finance
∇ We have started the 2016 budget process with CIP requests due last week back
to Finance. Finance will compile them for Management Team to begin
prioritization this month. Departments will also be working on their departmental
requests during the month of June in order to meet the July 13th Finance
deadline.
14. Downtown Reinvestment Plans

∇ A Community meeting to tour the downtown streets and discuss the design
elements of the Downtown Redevelopment Plan is scheduled for June 11 at 2.
Elements of design on Oak, Lincoln and Yampa will be illustrated. The tour will
take about 1.5 hours and it is a posted public meeting.
9
15. Fire
∇ It’s unusual that I don’t have an update for the fire department for this report. I
imagine that their recent training sessions on Wildland Fires and Swift Water
Rescues are keeping them too busy to comment.
10
Office of the Governor
136 State Capitol Building
Denver, CO 80203
Honorable Governor Hickenlooper:
Steamboat Springs, Colorado, has successfully used TIF financing to improve the traffic flow and resort
connections on our ski mountain, Mt. Werner. These changes are noticeable and desired by our resort
visitors and our community investors alike. As the economy improves, we are seeing renewed interest
in developments in the area enhanced by the plan area projects. These investments in infrastructure
are financed with a $20 million revenue bond financing that seems to be in peril if HB 15-1348 becomes
law.
According to the early interpretation of URA lawyers and bankers, it is possible that actions out of the
control of the URA can trigger a need to renegotiate agreements with each taxing entity and during that
period of time, no funds flow to the URA. This, of course, violates the commitment to our bondholders
and places our city’s credit at risk. We understand further that if agreements with all taxing entities
cannot be reached in 120 days, the issue goes to mediation with no direction to the mediator regarding
allocation outcomes.
Governor Hickenlooper, we have used TIF to invest in public infrastructure that has benefitted our entire
community and its economic health. It has spurred organic growth in the community. We used the TIF
tool in good faith and are opposed to these poorly drafted changes to the current law. We urge you to
veto this bill.
Sincerely,
Members of the Steamboat Springs City Council
________________________________________ _________________________________________
________________________________________ _________________________________________
_______________________________________ __________________________________________
AGENDA ITEM #19a.
Tuesday, April 28, 2015
Mr. Bart Kounovsky, City Council President, called Regular Meeting No. 2015-08 of the
Steamboat Springs City Council to order at 5:00pm, Tuesday, April 28, 2015, in Centennial
Hall, Steamboat Springs, Colorado.
City Council Members present: City Council President Kounovsky, City Council
President Pro Tem Myller, Council Member Magill, Council Member Reisman, Council
Member Connell and Council Member Ford. Council Member Macys was absent.
Staff Members present: Deb Hinsvark, City Manager; Anne Small, Director of General
Services; Tony Lettunich, City Attorney; Tyler Gibbs, Director of Planning and
Community Development; Kim Weber, Director of Financial Services; Julie Franklin,
City Clerk; John Overstreet, Director of Parks and Recreation; Ben Beall, City Engineer;
and Chuck Anderson, Director of Public Works.
NOTE: All documents distributed at the City Council meeting are on file in the
Office of the City Clerk.
Steamboat Springs Redevelopment Authority Meeting – After roll call, the City
Council will adjourn and reconvene in their capacity as the Steamboat Springs
Redevelopment Authority and follow the attached Redevelopment Authority
agenda.
At the conclusion of the Steamboat Springs Redevelopment Authority Meeting,

the City Council will reconvene as the Steamboat Springs City Council and
proceed with the following agenda:
COMMUNITY REPORTS/CITY COUNCIL DISCUSSION TOPIC:
1. Floodplain Management and Update.
Mr. Keenan provided a PowerPoint presentation reviewing the following: recent

activity; recent credit for City efforts; national flood facts; national flood insurance
program; community rating system; Community Rating System classifications;
avenues to maintain and increase classification; local statistics; local flooding; city
floodplains; and references.
STEAMBOAT SPRINGS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Council Member Magill asked about the Riverside neighborhood being in the flood
plain. Mr. Keenan stated that it was developed under County regulations and then
annexed to the City.
Council Member Ford asked if additional public outreach will get us a higher score and
if this is an attempt to get more people to buy flood insurance. Mr. Keenan stated yes,
that and awareness of the dangers.
Council Member Connell stated that at the Colorado Municipal League conference
they talked a lot about the flooding on the front range and emergency planning. He
asked if emergency planning is within Mr. Keenan’s purview. Mr. Keenan stated that it
could be; he is a planner and the flood plain work is done on the side. Additionally the
City coordinates with the Routt County Emergency Management on hazard mitigation.
Council Member Connell asked if the four foot flood plain regulation in the future will
severely impact the City. Mr. Keenan stated yes it would.
2. Downtown Area Investment Plan.
Ms. Weber provided a PowerPoint presentation reviewing the following: recap of

March 3, 2015 meeting; approximate project costs; utility undergrounding franchise
fees; and sidewalk assessments.
Mr. Beall continued with: sidewalk assessment inventory; sidewalk assessment

example 1; example 2; example 3; example 4; assumptions for scenarios; debt
issuance scenarios; project phasing - finances; General Fund Loan to Steamboat
Springs Redevelopment Authority (SSRA) (pay as you go); and decisions/options.
Council Member Magill cautioned against spending money on sidewalks that may be
destroyed with redevelopment.
Ms. Weber concluded the presentation with assumptions and scenarios.
Ms. Weber explained the Education Fund Board sales taxes and RE2 School District
Property tax scenarios, noting that it would be the same for Routt County.
Council Member Ford asked if the debt scenario with $6-7 million to secure through a
general revenue bond is subject to a vote. Ms. Weber stated no, it would be secured
with the tax increment financing (TIF) revenue. Council Member Ford asked if the
revenue stream associated and generated through TIF can be used. Ms. Weber stated
yes.
2
Council Member Connell spoke to the increase in construction cost of 3% and asked if
staff looked at Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) or other building
indexes. Mr. Beall stated that it has been looked at with the “pay as you go” scenario
but staff can look at a different scenario. Council Member Connell would like that
looked at as well as the project management of doing large projects as opposed to
many small ones.
Council Member Connell asked if, according to the Urban Renewal Authority (URA)
legislation, the City could take the Local Marketing District (LMD) and the quarter cents
sales tax. Ms. Weber stated yes, because those are municipal taxes that we collect.
Ms. Weber clarified the airline tax, not the accommodations tax.
Council Member Ford asked if the airline tax could be diverted to this project. Ms.
Weber stated yes.
Council Member Reisman spoke to the “pay as you go” scenario over 17 years and
asked if there is any way to speed it up. Ms. Weber stated not without an additional
loan from the General Fund. There is currently not enough unassigned fund balance to
do that.
Council Member Reisman spoke to the flow of projects in the three year cycle and
asked about the risks of the big gaps in the pay as you go option. Would the City end
up going back and redoing things? Mr. Beall stated that the intent is to get the projects
done and complete and walk away from them. The projects on the sides of Yampa
Street are year one.
City Council President Kounovsky asked about $ 3 million pay as go as a $3 million

replacement. Ms. Weber stated that would extend the projects out more but staff can
look at that.
PUBLIC COMMENT:
Mr. Chuck McConnell asked Council to reject the TIF methodology. While he thinks
that while the proposed projects are worthy, he does not support using a TIF because
it is bad for the other tax entities, especially the School District. He is concerned with
the quality of our schools with less funding from the State. He stated that he has
formed a committee to amend the Home Rule Charter to bring the issue of the TIF to
the voters. He asked that Council reject or postpone this until the voter’s voices have
been heard.
3
Mr. John Quinn stated that the Littleton URA rejection was very specific to bring a
Target to the community and is very different than what we are doing, which is
infrastructure. He supports this methodology because it is an opportunity to leverage
future tax gains for improvements that are needed today. He stated that we have great
School Board members but he disagrees with their conclusions. He suggested having
legal take a look at the 2007 no harm contract, pay the $148,000 to the School District
and try to build better bridges. No one wants to seem like they support the URA and
therefore don’t support schools. He asked that Council consider a sidewalk fee and a
contract with the School District where the funds go directly to the School District.
Mr. Scott Bideau was present and stated that he is not speaking on behalf of the
School Board. He stated that the statutory requirement to declare blight is missing and
that all Council members have questioned the blight report. He stated that the recent
sales tax report showed downtown up by 8.6%. He believes that the recent projects
developed since he moved here that are significant happened without a URA and
others are already planned like the Yampa Valley Electric Association (YVEA) building,
the Police and Fire Stations. He believes that the data is contrived and fear tactics are
being used. His other concern is that the business improvement district (BID) was
supposed to be a prerequisite to the URA. He believes there are several projects that a
URA would “hijack” including the historical sales tax increases which would result in
harm to the school district. He stated that there may be legal action against the City if it
continues with a URA.
Mr. Chris Paoli spoke to the comments that sales tax is increasing and the City is
rebounding, noting that compared to other towns we are down. There are many retail
vacancies downtown; we are not thriving and retail is not doing great. Steamboat is not
a bubble and recent development may have been an off shoot from the URA on the
mountain. The BID vote came at a time when the business community was very
stressed and they were being asked to pay for more things that they were not sure of;
this vote should not be correlated to the URA. And finally, we are not talking about a
huge amount of money to do something that would have a significant impact.
Mr. Jim Cook stated that we have a great education system and that reflects good
commerce in a community. However, we have 50,000 square feet of vacant space
downtown. We have not recovered and are missing out on $1-2 million in sales tax. He
supports the URA.
Ms. Megan Moore Kemp asked that if the URA moves forward and the property
owners on 13th are assessed that Council consider assessing both sides of 13th Street
to pay for a sidewalk on one side.
Tyler Goodman thanked staff for their work on this; something that is for the benefit of
the larger community. He does not believe that Steamboat has rebounded as quickly
as some of the other mountain towns and investing in ourselves sends a positive
message. He stated that we are in this together and supports the URA.
4
Mr. Stuart Orzach asked that Council consider “backing out” the property tax for YVEA
and the Police Station because they would be developed anyway; and he asked about
Riverwalk. He stated that this is the first time he has heard about property tax from the
County and School District only; is that legal? He stated that if we back out the
property tax component and have no external financing it would be a sales tax only TIF
and there is no difference between that and the putting all the projects in the capital
improvements program (CIP) process. He believes that staff wants to bind future
Councils and he is not comfortable with the term of “borrowing from ourselves”. This
may amount to just a property tax grab on behalf of developers and he is concerned
that Riverwalk will be flipped.
Mr. John Sanders stated that this conversation has gone on for 2 years and it is time to
get something done. The TIF is the fastest mechanism and will help the retailers, and
the schools will not lose. Their funding may not grow as quickly but as soon as the TIF
sunsets it will jump massively. He believes that parking garages are needed; he
encouraged the City to buy property next to the river and think bigger.
Mr. Bill Moser stated that if Council decides not to go ahead with these needed
improvements it sends a message that we do not care about the future of Steamboat.
He encouraged Council to look to the future and is appalled that people think that
doing nothing is good.
Ms. Kim Keith, Arts Council, stated that the URA goals are in alignment of their goals
of creating a creative district in Steamboat and the ability to navigate through
downtown is critical to that district.
Council Member Connell stated that the existing conditions study shows how many
conditions were found inadequate; is it a valid study? Mr. Gibbs stated that there are
11 conditions that the State defines that can be found. The threshold to declare blight
is 4 and the study found more than that.
Council Member Magill asked about the negative impact to the schools and talks about
not decimating the schools because a URA would help the community and therefore
help the schools. Ms. Weber stated that with 100% of property tax the maximum
impact would be $60,000. Council Member Magill stated that this is a tenth of a
percent of the school’s budget and needs to be kept in perspective; it is not a “the sky
is falling” situation. He would like staff to look at the claim that property taxes will
increase. Finally, he spoke to the comment that staff does not trust Council to get this
done; he stated staff is doing what Council directed them to do and Council will make
the final decision.
5
Council Member Ford spoke to the comments that we are not rebounding as quickly.
He did a market share study and if a small community has an increase it will show
more than with a larger community like Steamboat so the share is the same. We have
rebounded and maintained our share. There are also changes national wide with
regards to retail that are not unique to Steamboat. He asked about sidewalks; ones
that meet standards need to be replaced or retrofitted. Mr. Beall stated that retrofit is
for sidewalks that have an adequate width but no trees or lights. If a sidewalk’s width is
substandard it would be replaced. Council Member Ford noted the need to take into
account properties that have already made an effort to upgrade their sidewalks.
Council Member Reisman asked if it is determined that the assessment is 100% to the
property owner, do we also allow them to build the sidewalk themselves? Mr. Beall
stated that could be an option. Projects would be examined to realize efficiencies.
Council Member Connell spoke to the threatened lawsuit regarding blight noting that 7
of 11 conditions exist. This allows for successful financing options that many
communities have used. We have a study and he stands by it. With respect to the
motion he made about the BID and the idea that Council can’t go backwards, he stated
that he’s not good at making motions on the fly and there have been 3 or 4 motions
since then in favor of moving forward with the URA. In his opinion that subject does not
need any more discussion. He spoke to the negative factor to the School District and
stated that when he pays his taxes he gets a reduction for gravel production, and
social security and Medicare are unfunded. Should he take the deduction off and pay
it to the government with hopes that that “give” will be good to him? This is the same
argument here. Our school district funding is 90% of the average school district and
the community has repeatedly supported their tax. He believes that not investing in the
area and not being competitive will hurt the schools. The District will miss out on a
sales tax that is way bigger than the property tax.
GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT:
Ms. Renea Cowan spoke to the possibility of Triple Crown being able to use the
Emerald Park Fields. This would disturb the peace and negatively impact the Botanic
Park. These events would promote noise, and produce parking and litter issues. How
many more events would they be allowed? Other concerns are amplified sound,
whistles, glass and enforcement. The Botanic Park is loved and respected and they
are very concerned with these potential impacts.
6
Ms. Kathy Connell referred to a letter that Council received from Bob Enever (this letter
is on file in the Clerk’s Office). Staff is in negotiations with Triple Crown on the 2016
contract and she would like Council to recognize the importance of the Botanic Park,
which is the second most popularly above ground amenity in Steamboat. The vision of
the park was to provide peace and serenity in the valley and we would not have that
without the gift from the Enevers. She shared an article from a Delaware newspaper
about the park. She noted that they do not get money from the City, only assistance.
They fund raise and have events like weddings in the park and Triple Crown could
jeopardize that. Additionally they have a parking problem with the current conditions.
She believes in Triple Crown but it can have a negative impact on people and believes
it does not need to be everywhere. She asked that Council ask staff to look for other
alternatives and keep the negotiations transparent and open.
Ms. Sonja Franzel stated that when town is busy the Botanic Park is the only quiet
place.
Mr. John Sanders asked that Council consider purchasing the property at 655 Yampa
Street in order to build another bridge across the Yampa river.
Return to the URA discussion:
Council Member Ford asked if the City has formally accepted the blight study. Mr.
Lettunich stated that the format for establishing the downtown area plan requires that
Council pass a resolution; however that can’t take place before the 30 day published
notice (the earliest possible date being June 16, 2015). At this time Council would
adopt and recognize the blight study, establish the plan area and adopt the general
notion of a TIF.
City Council President Kounovsky confirmed that up until then Council has not
approved anything, rather is just discussing. On June 16, 2015 Council could approve
the resolution approving the plan area, and then could go into negotiations with other
parties on the size and scope of the improvements and how they would be funded. Mr.
Lettunich stated that there will be general discussion and general reference in the
resolution and the details can continue to be negotiated later.
Council Member Ford asked if the City uses $3 million of unassigned reserves and
experience an economic slide like that of 2009, what would the potential impacts be?
Ms. Weber stated that it would take longer to pay back the money and the projects
would need to be reprioritized. If sales tax drops below baseline, no money goes into
the URA fund and there would be no money to do the projects (not $3 million worth).
The URA would be a separate entity and the loan documentation would be between
the two and it may take longer to pay.
7
Council Member Ford asked if the City had to use reserves then would there be no
money to loan? Ms. Weber stated yes, but the loan would be happening up front and
the projects completed in the first three years.
Ms. Hinsvark stated that in the last economic downturn the City used $200,000 from
reserves; the City can withstand a downfall of 14% in one year without dipping into
budgeted reserves. City Council President Kounovsky asked if the City still has $7
million in assigned reserves. Ms. Weber stated yes.
Council Member Magill asked about excluding other entities like the library. Ms. Weber
stated that she added that scenario because she had not heard it before but there may
be legal issues that need to be explored. Council Member Magill stated that these
projects are housecleaning items that the City can’t do with the CIP and he is hesitant
to “throw out the grass that is good” in relation to retrofitting sidewalks. He suggested a
50% sidewalk assessment that is not as impactful to the land owner and have the
amount of the TIF set on the 70% sales tax and 70% property tax for a $ 7 million
budget minus assessments. This would fix a lot of problems without having to have
everything “new and polished”.
City Council President Pro Tem Myller likes scenario 2; as Council Member Magill
noted: 70% and 70% and a 50% sidewalk assessment.
City Council President Kounovsky supports moving forward, this is one of those
projects that is for the entire community good and invests in our assets. However the
details need to be decided. He likes having a 50/50 split for the sidewalks. Originally
he did not support financing but as he thought about not completing projects for 17
years it didn’t make sense when the City could go to the debt market to get the dollars.
Lastly, he stated that this is not a surprise; the community has been talking about it for
30 years.
Council Member Reisman stated the he is not a believer that this will get people here
form Boulder; however these projects will increase the experience for our community
and make it better, and when we have that it will bring people here. He stated he
thought it was interesting that we have John Quinn commenting on building bridges
while others are threatening lawsuits. He agrees with Council Member Magill’s
comments about the big picture for the schools and the dooms day scenario being way
over played. This will make our school better. He does not think the pay as you go
makes sense. He is looking to get the “nitty gritty” done and not the “bells and whistles”
and he is okay with $7 million. In the big picture it is not a ton of money.
8
Council Member Connell agrees with Council Member Reisman and wants to do more.
He hopes that cost savings will then allow us to look for other things like public spaces,
technology, art, and partnerships. However parking will be an issue and he wants to
add that in as well as bridges. He would like to see 80% common ground agreement
with the taxing entities; suggested having trigger points and spoke to
“time/value/money to do as much as possible right now. He thinks the sidewalk
assessment should be 100%. Lastly he would like to discuss procedure and giving 30
days to try and solve the issues with the taxing entities. He would like to try to build
trust and go in with a team and try to get 80% agreement and then do the 30 day
notice.
City Council President Kounovsky stated that he supports working toward common
ground Council hasn’t approved a scenario or plan, after which there would be
negotiations. He would like to set a date, decide if the URA is going to move forward
and then negotiate.
MOTION: Council Member Reisman moved and City Council President Kounovsky
seconded to set a hearing date for June 16, 2015 to create the district, identify the
URA area and scope of work for the area.
Discussion during the motion:
Mr. Lettunich noted that at the hearing the resolution will generally identify area and
scope.
Council Member Magill supports the motion but noted that the sidewalks need to be
reasonable.
Council Member Connell thinks that it does not hurt to wait 30 days so he does not
support the motion.
Council Member Connell provided a FRIENDLY AMENDMENT to set the hearing date
for July 7, 2015 to accommodate a meeting with the School District and the County,
and assign a negotiating team. Council Member Reisman noted that June 16 is still 48
days away and there is time to have these meetings. Council Member Connell would
like to have the two meetings prior to June 16.
City Council President Pro Tem Myller stated that the “catch 22” is that Council will get
criticized because they have not approved blight study yet. City Council President
Kounovsky stated that may be true but that is okay, they can still have the meetings
with Council intent. Council Member Connell would like to be a representative to meet
with the entities.
Council Member Ford does not support the motion.
The motion carried 5/1. Council Member Ford opposed. Council Member Macys was
9
absent.
3. Emerald Park Access Update.
Council Member Connell stated that he is an adjacent property owner. This has no
financial impact to him but he is stepping down anyway.
Mr. Anderson stated that the City has spent $200,000 to design the access. He stated
that Mr. Beall has been most involved so he will provide an overview.
Mr. Beall noted that the project is to modify the Trafalgar access to the park to bike and
pedestrian only crossing. The project includes boring a water line under the train
tracks, improving the parking lot and providing new sidewalk connections. He provided
a history of the project noting that on February 10, 2015, staff learned that the Union
Pacific would not contest the proposed crossing arrangement and that on February 18,
2015 staff engaged the property owners. Staff waited to do this because they wanted
to have a solid plan first. The neighbors have concerns with the change of access,
additional traffic and speed, snow removal and snow storage, parking during events,
drainage, construction time and additional train noise for the hotel. There was
discussion of the three potential access plans with the possibility of a signal and what
that would mean for the existing intersection. There are concerns with the access
being brought up to standards.
The plan includes implementing improvements includi9ng center medians at the

railroad crossing location to qualify for a partial quiet zone, an added parking lane, and
is designed for snow storage on the summer only sidewalk. The potential solution for
the carwash is to do traffic calming and increase storage for cars waiting to get into the
car wash. Staff is also looking into sidewalk issues.
Mr. Beall stated that staff needs to further refine the plan and present it to the
neighbors and noted that there is settlement with the hotel. The roadway designs are
well along aside from the CDOT access issues. Staff is hoping for CDOT access in
October of this year, to put the water line in this fall in preparation for Union Pacific to
get their work done and for spring and fall roadway construction in 2016. The crossing
signals would occur concurrently or following roadway completion.
Council Member Ford asked when cars would be able to cross the railroad. Mr. Beall
stated that there is a 12-18 month lead time on delivery of signals, so hopefully fall of
2016.
PUBLIC COMMENT:
10
Mr. Jeff Swoyer, Northwest Graphics, stated he is the manager of his building’s
association and owner of a business in the building. He reminded Council of the
roadway plan and stated that he did not know about this project until February and he
was disappointed in that. He is curious about the language in Ordinance 1511
regarding the specified use of the park and if Triple Crown use will change the
scenario. He voiced concern with traffic, vehicle flow and lack of snow storage. He
stated that a plat map from 1982 shows their snow storage and requested a perpetual
easement.
Mr. Scott Fox, Freshies, voiced concern with the lack of communication regarding the
new access and that their first notification was February of 2015. He questioned when
the discussion started and asked if Council has discussed it. He stated that they have
worked too hard in that building to be stepped down and out of this loop. He is also
concerned with loss of parking. The service road is theirs and they gave the City the
easement. There will also be drainage issues on three sides if this goes through as
well as snow removal and plowing issues. He wants the bid process to be done by
January because their businesses will take a huge hit. He would also like to see a
staging area. He voiced concern that this is being pushed and rushed by Triple Crown
and that the Pamela lane issue is being passed on to them. Lastly his footprint will be
significantly smaller.
Ms. Tracy Barnett stated that this change of access has been talked about and
promised for many years and will make a residential street safer.
Mr. Mark Walker agrees with Barnett that this has been talked about forever. A lot of
work has gone into it and it looks good. As a resort manager he voiced concern with
Triple Crown seeing those fields empty when their business is very important to the
community. He thinks it can be structured so that it works for everyone and is not a
“free for all”.
CONSENT CALENDAR: MOTIONS, RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES FIRST

READINGS
4. RESOLUTION: A resolution approving out-of-district water and sewer

service to Parcel Number 936093005 recorded on Page 106 of Book
142 (Padgett) for a single family residential unit plus one secondary
residential unit in conformance with Routt County Planning
requirements.
City Council President Kounovsky read the resolution title into the record.
City Council President Pro Tem Myller asked why this property owner does not want to
annex.
Mr. Jim Lucas, representing Mr. Bill Padgett, stated that the seller does not seem to
have the ability to consider the idea. Additionally, his tap fee will double if he annexes.
11
MOTION: City Council President Pro Tem Myller moved and Council Member Connell
seconded to approve a resolution approving out-of-district water and sewer service to
Parcel Number 936093005 recorded on Page 106 of Book 142 (Padgett) for a single
family residential unit plus one secondary residential unit in conformance with Routt
County Planning requirements.
The motion carried 6/0. Council Member Macys was absent.
5. RESOLUTION: A resolution acknowledging the appointment of Bob

Milne and Rod Hanna to the Local Marketing District Board of
Directors.
City Council President Kounovsky read the resolution title into the record.
MOTION: Council Member Ford moved and City Council President Pro Tem Myller
seconded to approve a resolution acknowledging the appointment of Bob Milne and
Rod Hanna to the Local Marketing District Board of Directors.
6. FIRST READING OF ORDINANCE: An ordinance vacating a portion of

an access, utility, and drainage easement located on Lot 19, Barn
Village at Steamboat Subdivision, and providing an effective date and
setting a hearing date.
City Council President Kounovsky read the ordinance title into the record.
MOTION: City Council President Pro Tem Myller moved and Council Member Ford
seconded to approve an ordinance vacating a portion of an access, utility, and
drainage easement located on Lot 19, Barn Village at Steamboat Subdivision, and
providing an effective date and setting a hearing date.
PUBLIC HEARING: ORDINANCE SECOND READINGS
7. SECOND READING OF ORDINANCE: An ordinance terminating an

employee unit deed restriction at 2670 Copper Ridge Circle, Unit #13.
City Council President Kounovsky read the ordinance title into the record.
MOTION: City Council President Pro Tem Myller moved and Council Member Magill
seconded to approve an ordinance terminating an employee unit deed restriction at
12
2670 Copper Ridge Circle, Unit #13.
The motion carried 5/1. Council Member Connell opposed. Council Member Macys
was absent.
A written report was provided.
PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT
A written report was provided.
CONSENT CALENDAR - PLANNING COMMISSION REFERRALS:
8. PROJECT: Copper Ridge Business Park, F4, Lot 7, DP-15-03 (Natural

Choice).
PETITION: Conditional use, development plan to locate medical/retail
marijuana cultivation and infused product manufacturing uses.
LOCATION: 1707 Copper Ridge Spur.
APPLICANT: Natural Choice, c/o Mia French.
PLANNING COMMISSION VOTE: To be heard April 9, 2015.
City Council President Kounovsky read the project title into the record.
Council Member Connell asked if this allows for other infused products. Mr. Keenan
stated yes, they currently have that; they are just moving their facility. Council Member
Connell asked about addressing odor. Mr. Keenan stated that is addressed in the
CDC’s environmental standards (if odor can be detected across the property line
without a device). Natural Choice is using the whole building and staff has added a
condition of approval regarding odor.
Council Member Connell asked about mold testing. Roland French, Natural Choice,
stated that in 2016 there will be container and mold testing for their product. The State
requires a level of hygiene and if mold were evident it would have to be addressed.
Council Member Connell suggested considering testing for molds when regulations
and best practices are reviewed for mixing grows with non grows. Additionally, staff
should look at the Denver caregiver designation.
CONDITIONS:
1. Approval of Medical Marijuana Licensing through the City of Steamboat Springs

Clerks Department is required prior to operation.
13
2. The applicant is required to employ odor mitigation techniques that will eliminate
any odors from the proposed use so that it complies with the Performance,
Operational and Environmental Standards as contained in CDC Section, 26-146.
MOTION: Council Member Connell moved and Council Member Magill seconded to
approve Copper Ridge Business Park, F4, Lot 7, (Natural Choice) a conditional use,
development plan to locate medical/retail marijuana cultivation and infused product
manufacturing uses with conditions 1-2.
PUBLIC HEARING – PLANNING COMMISSION REFERRALS
There were no items scheduled for this portion of the agenda.
REPORTS
9. City Council
Council Member Macys and Ford provided written reports.
Council Member Ford asked about the status of the $148,000 invoice from the School
District. Ms. Hinsvark stated that Ms. Weber has talked to Mr. Dale Melor about the
fact that they have different numbers and about the relationship with the School
District. Council Member Ford spoke to John Quinn’s comments about just paying it
whether we agree or not. Ms. Hinsvark stated that she will provide an update on May
19, 2015.
Council Member Magill asked about the money for the USA Pro Cycling Challenge and
the Chamber summer marketing. Ms. Hinsvark noted that she will report back.
10. Reports
a. Agenda Review:
1. Regular meeting May 5, 2015.

2. Regular meeting May 19, 2015.
Council reviewed the above agendas.
11. Staff Reports
a. City Attorney’s Update/Report.
Mr. Lettunich had no report.
14
b. City Manager’s Report: Ongoing Projects.
Ms. Hinsvark provided a written report and further asked that all Council read her
briefing on broadband.
Council Member Reisman asked for an update on the Howelsen Hill slide.
Mr. Overstreet stated that Mr. Robinson met with a surveyor and is talking to a
consultant and a tower engineer. It may take about a week to get the findings about
the slide. Council Member Reisman spoke to allocating $45,000 from contingency
which may pay for the engineering. Council Member Reisman asked if Council needs
to have a conversation about how much more money to put into Howelsen Hill. He
would like to get an update before money is spent.
ADJOURNMENT
MOTION: Council Member Connell moved and Council Member Ford seconded to
adjourn Regular Meeting 2015-08 at approximately 8:55pm.
MINUTES PREPARED, REVIEWED AND RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED BY:
Julie Franklin, CMC

City Clerk
APPROVED THIS DAY OF , 2015.
15

Councilagenda

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Councilagenda

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

CITY OF STEAMBOAT SPRINGS

PUBLIC COMMENT: Public Comment will be provided as close to 7 p.m. as

ROLL CALL (5:00 PM)

1. A proclamation recognizing June as Bike Month in Steamboat

COMMUNITY REPORTS/CITY COUNCIL DISCUSSION TOPIC:

2. Parks and Recreation Commission Interviews.

3. Planning Commission Interviews.

4. School Site Impacts. (Anderson/Gibbs)

5. West End Townhomes Release of Deed Restrictions. (Gibbs)

6. Status of Emerald Park, Historical Intentions, Current Uses and

7. USAPCC Update from the Host Committee. (Weber)

CONSENT CALENDAR: MOTIONS, RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES FIRST

ITEMS ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR GENERALLY REQUIRE LITTLE COUNCIL

8. RESOLUTION: A resolution approving the Second Amendment to the

9. RESOLUTION: A resolution approving the 2015 Summer Air Program

10. RESOLUTION: A resolution amending Resolution No. 2015-12, relating

12. FIRST READING OF ORDINANCE: An ordinance amending noise

PUBLIC HEARING: ORDINANCE SECOND READINGS

There are no items scheduled for this portion of the agenda.

PUBLIC COMMENT: PUBLIC COMMENT WILL BE PROVIDED AT 7 P.M., OR AT

PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION REPORT

PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT

CONSENT CALENDAR - PLANNING COMMISSION REFERRALS:

ITEMS ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR GENERALLY REQUIRE LITTLE OR NO COUNCIL

13. PROJECT: West End Plaza, ACM Subdivision, Parcel 3 (DP-15-06)

PUBLIC HEARING – PLANNING COMMISSION REFERRALS

PUBLIC HEARING FORMAT:

• Presentation by the Petitioner (estimated at 15 minutes). Petitioner to state name and

15. APPEAL: VHR-15-03.

16. City Council

a. Agenda Review (Franklin)

1. Regular Meeting June 16, 2015.

2. Regular Meeting July 7, 2015.

18. Staff Reports

b. City Manager’s Report: Ongoing Projects. (Hinsvark)

19. Minutes (Franklin)

a. Regular Meeting 2015-08, April 28, 2015.

BY: JULIE FRANKLIN, CMC

CITY COUNCIL COMMUNICATION FORM

FROM: Winnie DelliQuadri, Asst to the City Mgr

THROUGH: Deb Hinsvark, City Manager

DATE: June 2, 2015

ITEM: Bike Month Proclamation

FORM OF MOTION: A proclamation recognizing June as bike month in

I. REQUEST/ISSUE & BACKGROUND INFORMATION:

Council may always choose to not participate in bike month.

III. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:

IV. FISCAL IMPACTS:

VI. CONFLICTS OR ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES:

ADOPTED THIS 2nd day of June, 2015

Parks & Recreation Committee Interviews

5:10- Kady Watson

5:15- Debbie Grooman

5:20- Holly Weik

5:25- Chrissy Lynch

5:30- Julie Alkema

Helen Brown is out of town.

City of Steamboat Springs APR 1 3 2015

APPLICATION FOR BOARDS/COMMITTEES/COMMISSIONS

BOARD/COMMISSION APPLYING FOR: %ir^? ^V^\ I^Cl^^h^1

NAME: _Y^A\^__ \\f^7^Y^

RESIDENCE ADDRESS: ZSo J^.nes \\. ^4^-7-

HOME PHONE: 1W_^^-M^2- WORK PHONE: ^ ID - h^^'IIW^