Skip to main content

Status: Closed — this petition is no longer accepting signatures.

Peak View Zoning Meeting - Change Date

Peak View Zoning Meeting - Change Date

Closed — 55 supporters Verified

Final supporters

N
Norma M.
D
Diane C.
B
Betty N.
J
Jo A.
C
Calvin P.
L
Linda P.
D
David E.
B
Bruce B.
M
Matt P.
J
Jimmie S.
+45 more
JJ
Started by Jerry Jacobs 3 years, 8 months ago

Per Estes Park Development Code - Chapter 3 -Review Procedures and Standards - Section 3.2 Standard Development Review Procedure - Step 2

Procedure. If a neighborhood and community meeting is held by the applicant, it shall generally comply with the following procedures:

(1)

Time and Place. The neighborhood and community meeting shall be held at a place that is generally accessible to neighbors that own and/or reside in the notification area to the land subject to the application. It shall be scheduled after 5:00 p.m. on a weekday or at any time on a weekend day.

(2)

Written Notification. The applicant shall provide notification of the neighborhood and community meeting a minimum of ten (10) business days in advance of the meeting by placing notice in a newspaper or display advertising of general circulation in the Estes Valley and by mailing notice to all owners and occupants within the notification boundary of the land subject to the application. The list of owners within the notification area of the affected property shall be obtained by the applicant from the most recent version of the property owners of record provided by The Town of Estes Park. The notification shall state the time and place of the meeting.

Posted Notices of Neighborhood and Community Meeting. Required posted notice requirements shall be on a standard sign with format and material as determined by the Planning Department. The following additional requirements shall apply to posted notices pursuant to this Section:

a)

Any posted notice shall be legible from a public street or public right-of-way in clear weather conditions. "Legible" is defined as meeting the legibility requirements in the Estes Park Municipal Code Chapter 17.66 (Signs).

b)

Projects abutting more than one public street or public right-of-way shall be required to post one (1) additional sign for each abutting public street or public right-of-way.

c)

Posting of all notice(s) required by this Section shall take place no later than ten (10) days prior to any given neighborhood and community meeting for which the posting is required, and the posted signage shall remain until the close of any such neighborhood and community meeting, including the closing dates of any neighborhood and community meeting that may be continued or postponed.

d)

Proof that the required signage was posted in accord with this Section shall be provided to the Planning Department prior to the opening of any neighborhood and community meeting. A date-stamped photograph of the posted notice in context shall be deemed adequate proof for purposes of this Section.

e)

Removal, damage or destruction of a properly posted notice by weather or other natural occurrence shall not be construed as failure to comply with the public notice provisions of this Code.

As of 12/12/2022 there's been no public posting of the meeting per items A,B,C, and therefore no proof of D can be provided.

The following petitioners are requesting the meeting be postponed until January 19, 2023, as the applicant has not followed appropriate procedures as outlined in the current Development Code. Meetings held during the Holidays will not allow the community the ability to participate in meetings.


Updates

December 13, 2022

The current meeting time blocks out working people who deserve to be in the room. Contact the Planning Department today to demand they reschedule this hearing for a weekend or an evening.

December 13, 2022

The momentum behind this push proves that our community expects the town to follow its own rules. Now we need to turn this energy into action by emailing your town representative to demand a schedule change today.

34 Comments

D
David Edwards
3 years ago Featured

While I'm not opposed to this development in principle, it is crucial that all laws and regulations be followed without exception. It seems the developers in this case have failed to post the necessary info as required. For this reason, I support a delay until all requirements have been met.

C
Charles Nugent
3 years ago Featured

The rather fragmented notice of the re-zoning activity initiated, has put affected residents in a difficult position for acquiring accurate information about the proposed rezoning or even that such a change has even been proposed! Required signage in the affected areas has not been done. Timing for the upcoming meeting creates a difficult issue for many residents considering the Holiday Season. Notice for the proposed change must be as required by the Development Code and reasonable for residents to digest and participate the proposed change. The proposed change has large impact on residents, including economic. Thus residents must be fully informed and permitted to fully participate without conflicts inherent in the Holiday season!

V
Vicki Papineau
3 years ago Featured

Meeting letter sent does not reference correct zoning changes — RE-1 should be E-1. Owner’s name not listed. Letter not signed by owner.

S
Stephanie Ahrndt-Pawson
3 years ago Featured

I drive Peak View twice a day during the week for school route everyday and have not seen a sign of any notice on 685 Peakview.

S
Stephanie Ahrndt-Pawson
3 years ago Featured

Meeting is schedule the evening before school break of EPES. I have to bring my child on what should be joyous final break week to a zoning meeting scheduled 10 days before Christmas and night before final day of school in which events are planned in community

J
Jacqueline Adams
3 years ago Featured

Notifications were mailed to many residents that are out of town for the season and do not have the opportunity to respond or attend December meetings.

N
Norma McKern
3 years ago

I agree with petition

D
Diane Caddell
3 years ago

too much density for this area