Time is now 6 30 p.m.

and I call the July 15th meeting of the planning commission door.

Please rise and join me within the Pledge of Allegiance.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America.

Under God, individual liberty of justice for all.

Will the Secretary please call roll?

Commissioner Booth.

Here.

Commissioner Leaf.

Here.

Vice Chair Dreckman.

Chair Sowish.

Present.

Commissioner Schatz.

Commissioner Brodus.

Present.

Commissioner Hempel.

Here.

And I will note that Commissioner Schatz is out on an excused absence.

Thank you.

We have an agenda before us this evening.

Does that staff have any changes?

No changes.

Do any of the commissioners have any changes?

All right.

Is there a motion for approval?

Motion to approve Hempel.

Second.

That is uh Hempel with uh motion and Booth with the second.

Can I have uh actually let's just go voice vote?

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

All opposed say nay.

That is unanimous.

Um we have the now meeting minutes from the July 1st Planning Commission meet uh meeting.

Are there any changes to be made?

Can I have a motion?

Motion to approve.

Second.

That is a motion by Brodus and a second by uh Dreckman.

Uh let's do a voice vote again.

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

All opposed say nay.

That is unanimously again.

This now brings us to the public comments portion.

Is there anybody signed up for general public comment?

It does appear that two people are signed up uh online.

Uh Tom and Shane.

Okay.

Um just to confirm it that's for general public comments, not for the uh hearing that's upcoming, correct?

Yeah, I just have some comments about you guys just approving uh construction on that prop piece of property in Vista Ridge.

Uh as in the PD, that is Yeah.

Isn't that on the agenda for today?

The general business item.

Yeah, we're we're gonna have public comments specifically for that when we open up the public hearing.

So it'll be 1520 minutes or so.

So you already all approved it, correct?

No, that was that's that's the hearing for tonight.

Okay.

Okay, and then uh you said there were two virtual.

Yeah.

Yeah.

I have one virtual or Chris McGranahan.

Um you raise your hand, Chris, if you will like to speak virtually.

He's with the applicant team.

He's the traffic engineer on the Vista Reserve project.

Okay.

Other than that, we have no one else online.

Okay, so then I will end the public comment and that will lead us to the first item that is on our agenda for tonight.

Um that is a public hearing resolution of the planning commission of the town of Erie recommending approval of Vista Ridge PDF amendment number eight with a condition, and two a resolution of the planning commission of the town of Erie recommending the town council approve the Vista Reserve preliminary plat with a condition.

This is item 2026, 421.

And the time is now six thirty-three.

I will open up the public hearing and I will turn it over to Seth.

Thank you.

Chris Laru with uh planning and development here to present the Vista Reserve PD amendment and preliminary plat.

So the project is 19.05 acres.

Uh it's proposed 50 single family detached lots and four tracks.

Proposed density comes out to two point six two dwelling units per acre.

Existing zoning is planned development and Vista Ridge.

And currently the properties used for a single family home and there's some outbuildings.

It's an agricultural use.

This is basically the first step.

It's been annexed for many years or since approximately 2000.

Here they're proposing to expand the PD slightly, and then the preliminary plat is just a high-level review of the application, the proposed lots.

Next step for this would be planning commission makes a recommendation.

Next step would be town council who makes the decision on both of the applications.

If that is successful, they'll need to come back for a final plat and development agreement.

And that's typically heard on our consent agendas.

So the presentation tonight goes over several things.

We'll talk about the background of the project, the proposal itself, the review, valuation, and then the recommendation from town staff.

Here's the location.

It's located southeast of Vista Parkway and single tree lane.

Tried to put it in this sort of overall area map to give you a good indication of where it's at.

This is Bonanza Drive on the west, highway seven to the south.

This is Vista Parkway that runs up through the development.

The site is highlighted in the red on your screen, and single tree lane is to the north of the site.

The existing zoning for the property, it's in the Vista Ridge plan development.

The PD currently does allow single family detached, and it also has a maintenance area, and I'll go over what that looks like.

This is the existing plan development map on how it looks out there today.

Area 26, which is this main area that you see, has allowed for up to 50 dwelling units since 2000 when the original zoning was first implemented.

An area 210 then has been vacant since 2002 is when these areas or village areas took their current form in the maintenance area and then the other single family area.

And so the maintenance area has never developed, and it is privately owned by the property owner that owns two six.

She also owns two ten.

This typically involves a transitional range of detached and or attached houses.

To be clear, the project tonight would be for detached homes.

The PD itself for this area would allow up to three.

So it is under the overall density, and that's just because they're expanding in a slight area.

We have found that the proposal is consistent with several of our comprehensive plan policies.

I have some of them listed on the screen here.

Just talking about connectivity within in the neighborhood, making sure that the area is accessible, usable, good design, make sure that it meets comprehensive plan, vision, priority, and goals, require the new development to provide adequate public facilities at the time of the development.

Encourage infill and adaptive reuse of properties.

This is Vista Parkway and single tree lane.

The arrows basically represent as you go around where the pictures were taken.

This is looking south.

I should note I did get the mop Google maps.

This is looking south at Vista Parkway and single tree road looking into the site.

This next property down here in the south is looking south on Hickory Drive.

And then there's another shot that's just looking further along single tree lane up the road a little bit.

And here's the site over here to the right.

So now we'll go over the proposal that the app can is applied for.

The PD amendment combines areas 210 and 2.6.

I guess I would note that the top map that you see is the existing PD and how it looks today.

The one on the bottom, if successful, just shows how 210 would be combined into 2.6 to create one new planning area.

There are no changes to the existing 50-unit cap that is still maintained.

It reduces the overall de use from acre dwelling units per acre from three to 2.62, and it maintains the existing low density development standards that are established in the PD itself, and that's for setbacks and architecture and those kinds of things.

So really what this PD does is just sort of restate those requirements for this area and make one big piece instead of two.

This is the preliminary plat for the site that shows the 50 single-family detached lots, and you can see it just expands into the maintenance area, but does not increase any density than what's already allowed.

There are four tracks that are used for landscaping and connections to the surrounding area.

Lots themselves range anywhere from 8,277 square feet up to close to 20,000 square feet.

Average is right around 10,000 to 11,000 square feet.

Now the next several slides will go over different things with the preliminary plat itself.

But this is the overall illustrative site plan.

It looks a little, it's a little easier to see than the plat itself.

The yellow that you see are the proposed lots.

There are green areas that show plantings, trail connections, and I'll cover those here in just a second.

Oh, and there's the detention area that you can see.

There is a capped and abandoned oil well on the site that shows the appropriate clear area, and I have a slide for that in just a second.

So we'll go over the review and evaluation of the proposal.

Just a quick note on the schools that there is no land dedication required from the school district.

They are required to pay a fee of cash in lieu.

That's required at the building permit.

It would be noted in the future DA with final plat submittal.

Schools that serve the site include Black Rock Elementary, Erie Middle School, and high school, and possibly then, of course, the new high school that's being built to the north of town.

This is a look at transportation for the site.

There would be a new entry over here at single tree lane and Ramuda Place, and that would be a three-way intersection with a stop sign.

There'd be a new entry down here off of Peach, be full movement.

And this is at Hickory.

And then they would include all new local streets within the development itself.

Pedestrian-wise, there would be trail connections off cul-de-sac here.

There'd be another trail connection over to the east that comes down to Hickory and connects over to a park in the area.

And this slide will just kind of show overall the park requirements.

The park and open space requirements already met by the PD.

All these 50 lots were always factored into the overall development for many years.

There are two parks nearby, one to the north here along single tree and Vista Parkway.

There's another one over here to the east.

And of course, there's the golf course in the area.

There's the Columbine Community Park that's also in Vista Ridge that serves the overall area.

And then there are amenity areas in the subdivision, and it's fully connected with sidewalks throughout, and then connect to the surrounding area.

Here's the oil and gas well that I'd mentioned a minute ago.

There's only one site.

Normally the standards require 150 foot SIP setback, but it can be reduced to 50 feet by 100 with proper documentation showing that it's safe, safely capped.

Our environmental team reviewed that and found that it was appropriate.

So the red area is approximately the location of where that 50 by 100 foot area is located on the plat.

So in terms of infrastructure for the site, there's already water and sanitary adequate to serve the site.

They're already in the area.

Of course, with final plat submittal, we'll want to look at the final reports for that.

And then easements and final plans are reviewed at the time of the final plat itself.

All the appropriate public notices have been met for the planning commission hearing tonight.

That includes being published in the paper, the property being physically posted, and then letters sent to adjacent property owners.

It was an online meeting.

All of that information is in the packet with their sign-in sheet.

But they had several questions at that meeting.

Just highlight, include questions on consistency with the PD, the types of homes that were planned, prices of what they would be offering, traffic impacts, landscaping, drainage, and timeline of the overall development itself.

So now we'll get to the staff recommendation.

I'm not going to read through all these criteria because there are a lot of them on here, but uh here are the approval criteria for our the PD amendment.

Uh and we have found that the through our review that they have met all the requirements of these criteria.

And then these are the ones for the preliminary plat.

Um a lot of these are similar with the PD, talked about consistency with comp plan, zoning regulations, making sure that it's safe and appropriate for the area.

So staff has found that the PD amendment and the preliminary plat comply with these review criteria.

We recommend the planning commission to recommend approval to the town council for the two resolutions before you tonight.

They include resolution number P2612 for the PD amendment and resolution number P2613 for the preliminary plat.

So with that, that concludes the staff presentation.

Uh the applicant does have a presentation prepared.

I'll pull that up and they can join us here in a second.

Uh and I'm happy to answer questions when you're ready.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Now we'll move to the applicant presentation.

I assume the individuals who are online can hear us and um can we can hear you.

Seems Chris got briefly disconnected.

I think he's working on getting back on right now.

Okay.

We can just wait a moment while he reconnects.

Looks like he's back on.

Yes, Chris is here.

I can hear everything just fine.

Perfect.

Okay.

Um, feel free.

Thank you.

Can you hear me okay?

Yes, thank you.

My name is Paul Shukas.

I'm with PCS group.

We're located at 200 Kalamath Street in Denver, 80223.

First, I just want to thank you for taking the time to listen to our application and your service on the planning commission.

Um, I'm here tonight to speak about the development plan amendment for Vista Ridge along with the preliminary plat.

My goal is to keep things straightforward and as be as transparent as possible with the intent of our application.

So before we get started, I just want to quickly introduce the project team.

We're mostly here tonight, as you know.

Like I said, I'm with PCS group.

I'm representing the land planning and landscape architecture for the project.

We're joined by the applicant and the developer Affinity Holdings.

LSC provided the traffic analysis, and as you know, is called in remotely to answer any questions since Chris is out of town.

So the applicant affinity holdings is represented tonight by Cade Bader.

Affinity is a custom home builder focused on developing and building higher end single family residential communities along the front range.

Um their homes have won numerous MAME awards in the past and have a strong architectural presence.

We feel like this is reflected in the site design and the overall vision for the Vista Ridge neighborhood.

This just gives me a quick opportunity to thank staff, specifically Chris LaRue and Nicole Johnson for helping us through the process.

I appreciate that very much.

They put a lot of time and effort into getting this application to this point tonight.

Um, as Chris mentioned, we hosted a neighborhood meeting in January and have had subsequent conversations with some of the members of the community.

We heard feedback related to architecture, parking, traffic, density, and open space.

Um, and that has kind of helped shape the development plan amendment and how that translates into the preliminary plat.

So I think staff did a good job presenting the application, so I'm gonna do my best just to fill in the blanks here and not be redundant.

Um we're here tonight to talk about Ms.

Johnson's property.

She's lived on the site for many years, as Chris had mentioned, and she's been pretty instrumental in the development of Mr.

Ridge over time.

The sites proposed, as Chris mentioned, for single-family detached homes.

And the density we're proposing is lower than many of our adjacent neighbors around us.

The site's also an infill site, and we've done our best to make it in keeping with the residential character of the surrounding area.

So, as Chris mentioned, we followed the guidance of the comp plan.

The site has been identified as an opportunity site for development.

It's an infill site with existing infrastructure all around it.

The comp plan designates the property for residential low.

The infill sites are a smart way to grow and develop.

They're also tough to design because everything is grown around them.

So there's a lot of parameters that you have to meet.

So for our PD amendment, I'm just gonna briefly reiterate the request.

We've got two parcels.

And parcel 2.6 is identified for single family residential development in the zoning dock.

What we're requesting is the ability to combine those two parcels and to change the use of parcel 210 from a maintenance area to allow for single family detached residential.

The biggest thing to note is we're not, like Chris said, increasing the total number of units allowed.

That was allowed in planning area 2.6.

We're just increasing the land mass.

The current development plan allows up to 50 units, and we're staying within that limit.

What we're asking is to disperse those units across both parcels of ground rather than limiting them just to one parcel.

So our request is mainly about land use, and we're not increasing the approved residential density within Vista Ridge.

So there's a lot of charts here and guidelines.

I've kind of gone over the core request.

We don't really want to increase our residential density.

We just want to increase the area, and like Chris said, that'll go down to 2.6 dwelling units per acre.

We're also not changing the setbacks.

We're not changing the average lot size, which will stay at 7500 square feet.

If the development plan is recommended for approval this evening, the next step is the preliminary plat, which accommodates that request.

Our site plan shows 50 single family lots, averaging around 10,700 square feet.

We intentionally laid the plan out as a small residential enclave.

The idea was to internalize the homes as much as possible so that no new driveways would front directly onto the existing neighborhood streets along Hickory Drive or single tree lane to minimize impact to the people that already live there.

In doing so, we've added landscape buffers along the edges to soften the streetscape.

The plan also includes pedestrian connections to the surrounding open space and park areas.

One of those connections is across to Linden Park.

The other one is across Hickory Drive to the or single tree lane to the north.

And I'll highlight these in just a little bit more detail.

So this slide shows some of the key elements of a site plan.

The small yellow areas, the yellow arrows show how each homeowner would access their home from a driveway.

So it shows the internal circulation pattern and the way homes are oriented within the neighborhood.

The green areas represent the landscape buffers and some of the tracks and common areas that are provided throughout the site.

And at our good neighbor meeting, we heard from residents to the south regarding existing drainage conditions from the horse property.

In response, we've tried to improve that condition by adding storm drainage to Peach Place, which is right here, along with the drainage swale along the south end of the property, which connects to storm sewers and the detention facility to Vista Parkway.

In the bottom left, you can see that the diagram shows the approved setbacks that we haven't changed from the development plan.

We're not revising any of these.

Each lot will still have a minimum 20-foot front yard, a 25-foot rear yard, and five-foot side yard.

On the site plan, the blue area here was where the existing maintenance or where the maintenance area for the development plan would overlay.

But we feel like this is probably a better use.

And you can kind of see how now the two parcels work together.

This highlights some of the existing sidewalk and trail connections around the site.

So the red dashed lines are the existing sidewalks along the perimeter of the property.

The blue lines represent new sidewalks that we're proposing within the project.

They're primarily five-foot detached concrete sidewalks or trail connections.

And these walks connect into existing the existing network and provide pedestrian access to the park areas to the northwest and the northeast.

These are some of the homes that are proposed within Vista Reserve.

They're intended to be semi-customed starting around a million dollars.

Each home will have a two-car garage and will comply with the HOA for Vista Ridge.

We will be part of the district.

The vision is to create a high quality residential community with strong architecture that fits within the surrounding area.

So I'm going to show you a couple of perspectives and then wrap up.

This is a perspective showing what the community would look like from the perimeter along Hickory Drive.

Kind of looking north.

Kind of shows that streetscape and the undulating setbacks we've provided along with the landscape buffers along the edge of the property to soften the view from the existing neighborhood.

This view shows what the pedestrian corridor would look like as you walk towards the existing park to the east of the property.

These are pockets of planting along the trail with seasonal interest and all the trail connections are planned to be ADA accessible.

We plan on carrying the same signage and overall vernacular that you see through Vista Ridge to this neighborhood as well.

This image was taken from the corner of Hickory Drive and Peach Place.

It helps the community maintain that character.

This was taken from Vista Parkway and single tree lane.

In this area, we have a large setback which accommodates water quality along with a more open and inviting edge to the community.

This is the parcel where the maintenance facility would be located under the current development plan, but this once again feels like a better transition to the neighborhood than that.

This is the same general area, but looking west along the perimeter trail rather than east.

That trail continues along the east the edge of the property and then connects with the existing pocket park to the north.

This is an internal passive park within our community.

It's just intended to be a small gathering area.

So I'm going to wrap up.

I'm not going to like Chris read these verbatim.

Just to summarize, we feel like the PD amendment is consistent with the intent of the district, and it supports the town's comp plan, parks, trails, and overall guidance.

We feel like the plan maintains the approved residential density, allows for a little bit better site planning, open space, landscape buffers, and connections within Vista Ridge.

All the roads are going to be public.

They meet town standards.

We feel like there's adequate parking.

It's good sidewalk and trail connections to nearby parks and open space.

We don't think that this is going to create significant adverse impacts.

And a lot of the technical items as it relates to drainage and utilities, public services are being addressed with uh the review process with the town.

So same here.

This is the preliminary plat.

I'm not going to read these.

We just feel like the layout meets the town standards for lots, access, utilities, drainage, public safety.

It also provides good sidewalk and trail connections to the surrounding neighborhood.

Overall, the subdivision is supported by adequate infrastructure since this is an infill site.

We believe it meets the applicable criteria here.

So with that, I just want to thank you very much for listening to our presentation.

We're here to answer any questions you might have in respect to the request your recommendation for approval.

Thank you.

Okay.

Um we are now going to move to uh public comments.

Um I'm assuming we have individuals signed up for public comments.

So I do have a little vertige that I'm going to read right now, just so everybody is aware.

Public comment is intended for items not already scheduled on wrong one.

Um public comment is not a uh question and answer time.

When you are called upon or admitted virtually, you'll be asked to state your full name and city of residence for the record.

It is again not interactive, but rather a time for you to state your comments on this particular item.

You'll be given a 20-second warning when your three minutes are almost up at the three-minute mark.

We will ask you to wrap up your final sentence.

If you are giving public comment virtually, we'll ask you to wrap up and mute your microphone.

You are more than welcome to continue watching the meeting or end your call at that time.

So I'm going to turn this over to the secretary if you'd like to call the first individual.

It is Tom Meyer.

Hi, so Tom Meyer, I live in the Erie.

I live in this neighborhood.

My property does not uh butt up against this property, just so you know.

Um, but I was going through the information uh on this property and this proposed um development, and under I, the staff says that it's not gonna lead to any significant adverse impact on their properties in the area.

I don't believe that is true.

We already have a property that butts up against this property that is has not been able to sell, and they've reduced the price uh dramatically for the neighborhood.

It also says construction activities may present an inconvenience.

Inconvenience is like re redoing your street, not two years of development.

So we live in this community.

We're gonna have two years of development of dust and concrete trucks and workers.

We I already have a ton of workers on my street because you're putting not you, but the HOA is putting all the rocks in in Vista Ridge.

And so uh I all I want to know is what benefits is the developer providing to the neighborhood itself for the opportunity to develop this out.

And also, I would like to know what the city is gonna do about the traffic.

50 homes is about 400 daily trips in and out of the in and out of our neighborhood.

So you know, that's the big impact that's gonna be happening to all of us that live there already is the amount of traffic during construction for two years.

We're not gonna be able to sell our homes for two years, and then once people move in, we're gonna have 400 trips coming in and out of those two little roads.

So thank you.

Thank you.

Next would be Shane Fresco.

Name is Shane Fresco, Erie, Colorado.

Thank you very much for listening to me.

Just wanted to bring to everybody's attention.

We've talked about it already.

The traffic, a big thing coming into that neighborhood.

We've got that one road coming over to uh Vista Parkway.

That's the main road going in.

We've just done reconstruction on the roads.

We've worried about our community with our kids running around.

We've reduced the size of the roads, making sure that we've got speed limits involved there.

So putting those extra vehicles there is going to back up some traffic for us.

This is after the construction is completed.

We do have along the fence line where I actually stay.

We do have water um problems there, runoffs.

A lot of the houses weren't fitted with the French irrigation systems, so flooding up basements as well as the soil type that is there, uh is pushing up on these foundations.

We've had some issues with properties in the area when it comes to that.

In going into the construction, very good points.

Two years of the construction going through.

We don't have many outlets going into our main roads going on to 7th highway seven.

Uh so traffic will be quite heavy over there.

Also bringing it through the communities, backing us up and causing more chaos there.

If we can come up with a solution how to sort that out, how to rectify it, I think that would be great.

Um, yeah, the thing that I was looking at is the infrastructure when it comes to our waters, right?

I heard in the presentation that we do have enough water.

Uh we do have enough uh treatment facilities that would give enough water.

I haven't seen that.

Uh and this is hearsay of what I've heard.

Unfortunately, I don't have documentation on it, that we trying to strike up deals with neighborhoods in the area that we can actually work on high infrastructure with getting water to the neighborhoods.

We've just gone through a heavy drought.

Everybody's lawn is showing it at the moment in Vista Ridge.

Thank you very much for your time.

Thank you.

I don't have anyone else signed up for public comment.

Say that again.

I don't have anyone else signed up for public comment.

Okay, is there anybody online?

No one raised their hand.

Okay.

I was gonna ask if there was anybody else in the room that would like to provide comments.

So um feel free to come up to the podium.

Hi, name's Michael Morgan.

Uh my wife, Katie and I live in Erie.

We are one of the uh abutting properties to uh the horse farm that we have behind us.

Uh part of my day-to-day was going to Costco to get a bag of carrots, celery, and apples to continue feeding them.

That's something we really enjoy.

But to echo a lot of what everybody else has said, um, obviously, we just got done redoing the roads, making them smaller, uh, single lanes for two years of construction.

I'd have to imagine it would be a decent amount of excavation work going on.

Uh heavy machinery, equipment, large trucks in and out.

Um there's all kinds of young kids in our neighborhood that are always out in the streets, and um we've in the past year have had our rows road close multiple times from other infrastructure projects.

I think water mains or something was being redone, and um I think having a lot more traffic is really gonna be a burden on everybody trying to move in and out of our neighborhood on the drainage issues.

Not long after we moved in, our neighbor's basement flooded after heavy rain.

Um the area in which we live is straight downhill from that area, and um even this most recent a couple weeks ago, there's little sandbars in our backyard of just water coming off that hill and flooding, and um, in terms of trying to understand what kind of drainage will be put in place is gonna be something that would be very interesting to us to see how that will affect us and are we able to use that as well if we were to try to regrade our homes back into that area.

Um then third, on with everything else, you know.

Um, I believe Tom had mentioned it.

We understand that what value does it bring to our neighborhood?

It doesn't seem like it is helping us specifically, it is hurting us, and it doesn't seem to be adding much to the neighborhood that is already that's not already present.

And um, you know, that that two-year inconvenience again is much more than just an inconvenience.

Um kids, new kids having to have that in their backyard, new people.

Um it's just gonna be uh a struggle of a period to go through everything, having to deal with that.

That it was such a beautiful and nice open space already.

Adding 50 homes is not gonna increase the beauty of it, it's not gonna increase accessibility.

Um people are already really enjoying that area.

So I appreciate your time and thank you for letting me speak.

Thank you.

Hi, my name is Cheryl Phipps.

I live in Erie, and we do have a home that we just bought about three and a half years ago on single tree lane.

And I'm kind of just echoing what's already been said.

My concern, my biggest concern is the traffic.

Um Vista Parkway has become a main thoroughfare from highway seven all the way down going towards Arapaho and stuff.

Um to the point that when I want to cross Vista Parkway with my dog to take them for a walk.

A lot of times I can't cross because during commute time, the traffic is so heavy on Vista Parkway.

So I can't imagine adding that much more traffic.

Yes, it has two entrances into this new um project that they're talking about, but it still takes them down single tree lane, and they're going to be trying to get onto Vista Parkway.

Um, and as they mentioned, there's young families in this area, a lot of kids, and the traffic is very, very concerning.

Um, I don't like being on single tree lane with this project coming.

Our neighbors to one side of us just sold their home.

The corner house up a little further up on single tree lane, just sold their home.

And I'm not at my age, especially not looking forward to the next two years of construction when we move to this area to retire and enjoy.

Um, I do feel that the people that own the property have every right to sell it and make the decisions, but I think it's going to totally change the dynamics within our community right there.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Is there anybody else who would like to provide a comment?

And we still have nobody online, correct?

That is correct.

Okay.

All right, so we'll now bring it back to the commission for commissioner questions.

Um, I'm gonna start on my left side with uh Commissioner Humphill.

And real quickly, this uh two questions, and please keep it to questions.

We'll have a round of deliberation where we can do uh comments, so just questions at this point.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you.

Um probably for the applicant, there was talk about drainage.

Um we've heard from previous uh residents in different areas that drainage gets worse during construction.

So construction impacts of drainage, it sounds like drainage is already bad.

Can you describe um some of the drainage mitigation that will occur to when this is complete and what will happen during construction?

Hey Chris, yes, can you put on my slides again?

Did you uh the supplemental thing that I say?

Yes, just tell me which one you'd like.

Um I got you.

Oh, you got it.

Okay.

So I'm gonna do my best to explain this.

I'm gonna turn around to my civil engineer.

If I do an adequate job, then he's going to come up and fill in the blanks.

Currently, what's happening is the property has got a high point, and there is quite a bit of drainage that flows down to these existing lots.

These are some of the folks that are adjacent to us.

What we've done is mitigate that by making sure that almost all of the drainage flows into the streets.

So lots now that are adjacent to Peach Place, water will go into Peach Place, and the fronts of the yards will go into peach place.

So now we have the backyards that are draining down the hill, as opposed to all of the water from the high point draining down the hill.

What we've also done is we have inlets along the backs of these property lines, and this is a 12 to 18 inch pipe that comes down the back into the detention area and then out into Vista Parkway.

That's how we're trying our best to mitigate this and improve the drainage situation that is currently happening on site.

Was it was that is that eloquent?

Kind of a two-part question skirting the rules, but how how do you do drainage during construction?

I'm not a construction guy.

Can anyone else answer that?

Hi, I'm Tom Ackerman, the civil engineer on the site, and I would imagine one of the first things they do when they start accessing the site is they'll cut a swale on the back of that fence.

So all the stuff coming down is diverted in the same direction toward our detention pond.

So I think that's about the best we can do.

Okay during construction.

All right.

I could add a little to that in terms of the construction.

Uh prior to beginning activities that are required to do uh a conference meeting with the town to go over the construction plan, any kind of traffic mitigation that has to occur.

Uh we share hours of operation, nuisance control, we require uh numbers and contacts in case of nuisance.

Um go over watering plan for construction site and basically make sure that they understand the rules of the town and that there is a contact point so that we can take care of any problems should they arise.

Thank you.

Um second question about traffic.

I'm looking at application materials number two in our packet, uh starting around PDF page 42.

Um that figure three existing traffic lane geometry and traffic control.

There are sites seven and eight, which are the traffic components that will be the intersections of the new site, and they're uh labeled as intentionally left blank.

Um first wondering why there wasn't any traffic data collected at these um exits of the site, and then an explanation of the peak traffic um that's going on to Vista Parkway from the site, which is figure seven in that debt packet.

I I'll answer a couple of quick questions, but I'm gonna defer to the Afghanist transportation engineer that's online.

I believe that's Chris McGranahan.

He'll be able to answer those questions.

But uh, in terms of um volumes, um, I guess just generally it's projected generate about 360 trips on the average weekday.

Um, that's with half entering and exiting in a 24-hour period morning peak is six vehicles um in with about 18 out.

That's a two-hour window in the morning, and then the peak afternoon.

Um about 17 vehicles entering, 12 exiting.

Um, but I just wanted to share that information.

Um, they provided uh levels of service for surrounding area.

Uh town staff reviewed that, found that it meets uh acceptable levels at this time, and I'll turn it over to the applicant's technical team from there.

Chris, are you online?

Yes, this is Chris McGranahan.

Uh can everyone hear me fine?

Yep.

Yes, sir.

Great.

So my name's Chris McGranahan.

I'm with uh a principal uh with LSC Transportation Consultants, 1899, 1889 York Street, Denver 80206.

Uh we did complete a traffic study for the project.

Um the reason that we had some intersections that said intentionally left blank is that we analyzed the intersections that the town would want to may have questions on whether maybe a capacity issue some of the busier intersections around the site, but some of the internal intersections where the volumes are quite low, we're not worried about capacity there, but we wanted to be able to document where the traffic's coming to and from within the interior parts of the project.

So those those intersections that say intentionally left blank are not intersections where we looked at overall level service, but we wanted to assign trips so that someone doing an accounting process could see where all those trips come to and from.

Um it's worth noting that the uh I think it's been mentioned a couple times before that the master overall Vista Ridge development planned for residential in this area, so all the major roadways and connectivity uh accounts for these lots, and so there, you know, that it makes sense that the traffic study shows that these lots can be accommodated because it would this is nothing new that it's new to the to the current existing condition, but it's not new to the long-range planning document.

So I think that that that'd be the end of my response, but I'm happy to answer follow-up questions if there are any.

Thank you.

Commissioner Ruth.

I'm continuing on those two topics.

They're always the big topics.

Um, so on the drainage, um, and I'm gonna cheat and do a two-part question as well, because he set the the tone.

Um I just wanted to see if you reiterate, I was thinking that with this plan, the drainage issues that are being seen today could be and will be improved with what you're putting into the project.

I'm gonna say they're gonna be significantly improved.

And that's mostly because the the uh the amount of volume that will now be draining towards the south is going to be cut significantly.

So I wish I could draw on this screen, but if you can see my hand moving, we'll just say that right now.

Part of the site was draining, half of the site was draining this way, and we'll say half of the site was draining this way.

Now it's going to be just the backyards of these lots here.

Let me go to a colored site plan.

Now it's going to be the backyards of these lots right here that are going to be draining south, and they're going to be caught in an actual pipe and a swale that's going to daylight in this detention facility here.

Okay, and then my second part of the question might be for you.

Um, in the DRT report on page 31.

This is under the engineering um comments.

They um ask a question is an under drain system plan to be installed per the recommendation of the geotech report.

I I'm guessing that that was for the actual foundations for the home.

Oh.

So like so what I'm talking about is like site-wide, and then there's like the under drain system that's like a perforated system that goes around the foundation that captures water and pushes it out so that like basements don't flood and foundations don't crack.

Okay.

Yeah, that probably that's also referencing.

We received comments from Colorado Geologic Survey.

Um, they noted that any mitigation measures proposed are acceptable, but they're probably talking about expansive soils.

We know that they exist in Vista Ridge.

There's a lot of special care that has to be taken for site prep for that.

I won't get into all of that, but um, yes, also looking into the middle of those comments too that might have been kind of midway.

There's like over 90 comments in there.

Um so typically earlier on as you go through, there'll be a lot more detailed and a lot of questions, and hopefully through time we've resolved those, which I think which we have in terms of the staff review of the engineering drawings.

And usually when we look at drainage plans, I mean they cannot make the situation worse in terms of a drainage situation.

They should um at a minimum not release past historic.

But as we've heard, there's a lot of um parts of this plan that are actually gonna dramatically increase it beyond historic to dramatically improve the scenario.

So I think I just wanted to add that.

Thank you.

And then my second question is about the traffic as well.

So I think that the the traffic report in there was from 2025.

I need historical help when county line road didn't go all the way through to Highway 7.

Did that happen in 2024?

Where people are starting to use um just a yeah, this to Parkway as kind of the new thoroughfare.

Is that was that in 2024?

I don't, I'm not sure on that one.

Okay.

Exact date.

Chris, can do are you are you able to hear the question?

Yeah, I heard the question.

I'm not sure the exact timing, but that that interim condition uh will be will go away once uh Cole Creek Boulevard is extended from basically a rap ahoe down to where the the nine-degree turn is now.

So that is an interim condition.

I couldn't tell you exactly when that happened, but I think it's been at least a couple years.

Okay.

Two things too, I would note.

I mean, the application was originally submitted in 2025.

Um, so that was submitted along with that.

I'd have to see if there was an updated version based on comments.

Obviously, with final plat, we'll be looking at refreshed uh documents.

Uh I I do know the town is fully aware of all the projects that we had in in place, even if I don't know all of them here tonight.

Well, that's my next question.

Yeah, do you think that red tail would be considered as part of that traffic?

The red tail development that's north of here.

Yeah.

Um we currently don't have a proposal for that on the books that would be part of our review.

If that were to come in, that would need to be factored in on existing conditions when and if that project does come forward.

I mean, we did do a preliminary plat approval of it.

They haven't come in with the final.

Um so until something is completed, probably not.

I'll double check with our team on that though.

Uh this is Chris, I can comment on that.

Okay.

So the long-range scenario in the traffic study that we did in 2025 relied on the town's transportation mobility plan, which assumes build out of all the potential properties that could be developed for the comp plan.

And so, you know, you have to assume that the area that Red Tail Ranch is would have been assumed in the long-range modeling that the town had, which we would lie to relied upon.

So whether the numbers are exact or not is hard to say, but I think you could say that our long-term analysis assumed a sufficient growth to accommodate that to assume that that project is in place regardless of how it ends up happening.

Okay.

We'll confirm with our team too, prior to um if it's successful prior to going forward to town council.

Okay, and we'll uh move on to uh commissioner leaf.

Is there leave?

Yeah, Commissioner Leaf.

Okay.

Questions?

Um Yeah, I want to go back to the drainage issue, and this is maybe a question for the Silva Engineer.

Um certainly the amount of overlot drainage will be reduced, but with uh grading, it seems like the velocity will be increased.

And do you anticipate having riprap or something to prevent that flow from crossing the property line into adjacent property?

Tom Macron with Hurst and Associates again.

So the hill is pretty steep as it is.

So but there will be so if you've got the existing fence level, the swale will be lower by a couple feet from the fence where it is now on the back of the lot.

So it'll the water would have to come down, hit the swale, and go up about two feet before it would enter the back of the lot.

So and then my follow-up question is who's responsible for maintaining that?

Because as you get uh sedimentation of that drainage swale within lenses, and that has to be maintained.

I'm thinking will that be the individual property owner or the HOA?

So that I think it would usually be the HOA would have to enforce inless, you know.

Yeah, typically with that kind of thing, um, we'll look at um long-term maintenance for that in terms of the final plat review.

Usually there's notes concerning that.

Um there's money that is put up front, of course, for uh development agreement in terms of building that infrastructure, and then long-term uh maintaining typically those are HOA maintained that higher out to keep that um clear and functioning.

Okay.

My other question is also kind of infrastructure related.

Um, with regards to the water utilities, I guess there's kind of two parts to this.

One is understanding that there's sufficient infrastructure in terms of uh water and sewer.

And then the other question is really for staff as to whether or not there's truly water, uh the town has sufficient water to support this development.

So two things is there enough infrastructure in place to support water and sewer lines?

Yes.

There's plenty of it that exists in the surrounding area.

Uh it's relatively easy to extend to the site, no concerns on that front.

Uh water supply.

Um, we've planned for growth uh for the town.

As you know, there's an allocation policy in place.

Um so as development comes in and they apply for building permits, uh it'll be applied at that time.

Uh at this point, um, we're confident that we'll be able to serve.

Okay, thank you.

Given the restrictions that we have.

Okay.

Can I say anything, or is it not?

No, no, ma'am.

Sorry.

Thank you.

Commissioner Burr.

Okay.

So I used to live in the neighborhood.

Um, and so I'm well aware of the soil heaving stuff.

And in the geotechnical report on page 12 of 27, there was a big table of the heaves.

A lot of them are listed as high.

And so I remember what happened in my house there was there was an open area, uh almost like a crawl space, two feet that would allow the soil to go and that was ventilated, which actually made it great because I didn't need a radon system because that was natural.

Uh are you planning to do something similar to or how are you planning to deal with the heaves?

I I can only answer that generically by saying that we would follow the over X plan.

Yep.

Um, but maybe Kate, you you can speak to that slightly more.

So typically the soils report will say, hey, you have to over-excavate by a certain amount, treat the soil, compact it, wet it, put it back so it mitigates the heaving.

That that's how I I know to mitigate that.

Yeah, they there's um CGS commented on this as well.

Obviously, that area is highly expansive.

Um, so you have to take great care.

Uh CDS noted that um would use floor systems mitigated through drilled drilled pier foundations, designed to resist uplift.

Uh you do uh over X and sub-excavation uh to try to cure the soil and make sure that it's safe as possible.

Basically, they uh stated no objections to the approval uh as long as the recommendations from the report are rigorously here adhered to.

So I think that's very key, especially in our area to make sure that that's done carefully.

Okay.

My the questions were all related to traffic and water.

Actually, there's one little one.

On slide 12, Chris, of your presentation.

There was a little red triangle.

I couldn't figure out what that was for.

Oh, let's see.

This one, this is slide 12.

Uh that's a delta that's shown on the red line version of the PD document just to show what's changed.

I'll cover at this what's going on.

And that's just noting that they're combining it in into one.

Oh, okay.

Thanks.

That'll go away once we record.

We don't record with red lines on.

So directment.

Um associated with the equestrian facility now, Paul.

Is there any detention ponds or inlet currently on the property?

There is not.

Okay.

Um Chris, when if we were to approve this and town council were to approve this, and then they had to go on to the next step.

Would an updated traffic study be required for any of those steps?

Um, I would want to get confirmation from engineering, but potentially we would want to make sure that it's refreshed, updated.

Okay.

Um, and then my last or sorry, can I ask one more question?

Go ahead.

Okay, thanks.

Um my last question is just about uh the water capacity for the town.

If the town determined their current portfolio could not support this development, um, would the developer be required to bring that water to the town then?

Is that another option?

It doesn't automatically fall to the town's portfolio, correct?

That's correct.

Okay, thank you.

Yes, that's obviously a complicated question, but in short, it could happen.

Okay, sounds good.

All right, thank you.

Um for the applicant, I understand that the PD indicates uh that low density single family detached, allowing up to 10 horses, existing irrigation wells operated until such time as the first home site is developed.

Obviously, there are many conditions that can occur.

Um water allocation situation could be a situation that you um face at as well.

Typically from preliminary plat to final plat, we see about two to three years or so before uh shovel in the ground.

What is the tentative timeline for that first home site?

As soon as we're Kate Bader, I'm the developer.

Uh thank you for reviewing this this evening.

Uh nice to see everyone.

Um that's all conditional on the approvals, of course, and then immediately after we receive our final plates soon as we can start, we'll start.

Um for staff, uh obviously the water allocation is uh an issue that we all know all developers are going to be facing.

Um I'm uh from what I heard from Mr.

LaRue, this is at the time of permits when they are pulled, that is when the determination will be whether the town does or does not have the water to facilitate these units.

It is all conditional at the time in which this all occurs.

It is when they pay their raw water fee.

Okay.

Yeah.

That is when they are allocated water.

Okay.

Thank you.

Um, we'll go back to Commissioner Help Hill.

Thank you.

On the current PD amendment segment two ten, the maintenance area.

Was that originally developed as like a maintenance area for the golf course, and the golf course doesn't need that, or the property owner doesn't want to do that?

Is that well the the quick answer is it's never been developed as a maintenance area.

I think it was originally contemplated uh that way for the golf course use, um, but never came to fruition.

Subsequently, they it got sold to the private property owner uh Linda Johnston who owns the overall property.

Okay, thank you.

Those are all my questions.

Commissioner Booth.

I was gonna ask about that one as well.

Um I'm good.

Great minds.

All right.

Commissioner Leaf.

Yeah, I have several.

Um I want to take a look at the site plan and wonder uh Mr.

Larue if you could indicate where the existing pocket park is located.

And also let me show a different bike trail, bike lane, and um multimodal path along Vista Ridge.

Yes, hang on one second.

I can show a few on this one.

Ugh.

Having trouble with my mouse.

Let's start with this one.

So there are two pocket parks in existence in the area, one's to the north, the single tree lane.

There's another one over here to the east off of Hickory Drive.

The applicant, um those pocket parks would serve the needs for the development.

The appkin is proposing this amenity area, long peach, and uh Bermuda Place that's located here where I'm circling.

Uh trail connections will be throughout the development with sidewalks.

Uh they have a trail connection off the cul-de-sac here through singletree, and then there's another connection over here to this area that comes down and connects over.

And that'll allow access over to this park as well.

I'm sorry, I forgot everything you asked.

Did I miss it?

The existing pocket park.

Say again, the existing pocket park that's off of single tree.

Yeah, it's right here to the bike lane and uh multimodal path.

There's one along Vista Parkway, is that right?

Um, I believe so.

I don't think they don't have any internal here.

I mean, these paths that I pointed out would accommodate pedestrian walkers, bikers, that kind of thing.

So regarding the location of that sidewalk or trail off of the cul-de-sac, it looks like it comes in several hundred feet from the intersection of single tree and Vista Parkway, um, which would be more of a mid-block location to cross the street to get to the pocket park.

Has it been considered that a better connection might be to Vista Parkway where there's a bike lane, a six-foot pathway that would lead to the intersection and a um uh signed crosswalk over to the other side of single tree?

Yeah, I think we looked at it some.

I would not take that suggestion off the table.

Obviously, there's final plating that we could look at with that, but I do know there's some elevation um with the drainage in the area and the gas well.

We did want to steer clear of all that.

Um I would maybe talk to the append a little bit about that suggestion, see if they have any thoughts here tonight.

Maybe they could explore it moving forward.

My other question is um the um applicant materials and uh reference and enhanced streetscape.

Uh, can you elaborate on what that means?

Um was that was that from the applicants um items that they were sharing?

Oh, okay.

Um yeah, so what that's probably uh I think talking about is that they have a large buffer along both singletree.

Uh there's also one on Vista Ridge.

Uh there's also one proposed on Hickory.

Um you saw on some of the uh artists or the mock-ups, um they had large green areas.

So those are um, I think what they're referencing probably is the enhanced areas.

Um then obviously throughout the development, you've got street trees and then the amenity area.

And just as a follow-up, to what degree are those vignettes binding as we move forward in the process.

Oh, you mean the things that they're proposing on their landscaping plans and things?

Well, all of that, um, especially as we go to final plat and we finalize those um plans and we have them put money in the form of the DA.

Once that is approved, that is the plan that we are going to expect that be developed.

At this site.

Um it does lock it in pretty well.

If they were going to propose any kind of changes to that, once the plans are finalized and approved, there's an amendment process.

But I don't think we'd be very supportive of reducing anything that they have on this plan at all.

I think it it works well and looks good.

So I don't think they have plans to do any of that, but it does lock them in.

Thank you.

Commissioner Bruce.

Yeah, I don't have anything else right now.

Thank you.

Vice Chair Jerkman?

Nothing for me, thank you.

Okay.

Um I know there was uh uh Commissioner Bros had uh alluded to this, uh, the geotechnical about the recommendation to perform radon testing of completed residential structures to determine the level of radon gas accumulations, typical mitigation methods consists of sealing soil gas, yeah, yeah.

If the developer does test, is this going to be every home that is tested or is it up to the resident to test at that time?

No, it's it's up to you.

No, uh, it's it's up it's up to the builder to sell a home that is certified.

And uh it's my understanding too that there's borings done too on each each foundation.

So like I think it's a it's way more detailed than just taking a soil boring in four different parts of the site.

And these are going to be pretty nice homes.

So and obviously Affinity Homes has got a reputation to uphold.

So but barring that no, that there'll be radon mitigation if that's necessary.

Okay, so each home will have radon mitigation if it is deemed necessary at that time.

Absolutely.

Okay, and it will be the builder that covers that.

It will not be on the resident to either test or to actually have mitigation performed.

That that's my understanding as well, yes.

Correct.

Thank you.

Um for staff.

Actually, I'm gonna come back to that.

Um blend them to I'll I'll play what you guys have.

Um so in the DRT comments that it notes twice that there were many agencies and local pseudo agencies that were not requested, which were requested to provide comments.

However, there were no comments provided.

Specifically Ostab, Vista Point HOA, Vista Ridge Metro District, Vista Ridge Master Association.

So first off for staff with OSTAB, I'm assuming because this was a smaller property, um, they didn't have much comment.

Was this actually referred to them?

Did they bring this up at all?

I could comment on that.

Um I'll mention briefly uh I I don't have their agenda in front of me.

I can't confirm, but we typically would send platts, preliminary plats to um that group to review.

This probably wouldn't really have much in the way of significant value on any of the plans they have.

Um I'm guessing the connections and things were appropriate.

Okay.

And the applicant.

Um is is Kathy Crohn part of that?

Kathy works for our parks department.

I I think that she sometimes uh is a liaison for that board, along with Luke, the director.

We went through so um we went through when we did the pre-app process uh quite a few comments and tried to address them as we went through the actual preliminary plat submittal.

So we heard from them up front.

And that's where some of these connections are coming from, like to Linda Parkway and to the park to the northeast and things like that.

So it's it's pretty common when uh referral agencies don't have anything to say they don't comment on it.

Usually it's a revision.

It's nice to see that there's when we get comments back that say no comment, but sometimes that's not the case.

I thought of something else I should have added.

I apologize.

Um parks also, since they are the liaison with OSTAB.

Generally they would receive the comments.

Um sometimes we get the letters direct, but I maybe they they probably incorporated it perhaps in their comments.

I'm not sure.

I could double check with them.

Okay, thank you.

And that would be typical too.

Um still within that line.

Um Vista Point, HOA, Vista Ridge Metro District, Vista Ridge Master Association.

Yeah.

Is this property going to be part of any of these HOAs?

Will it have its own HOA?

Will it be included within the master association?

Yeah, I'll let the applicant respond, but uh my understanding is yes, they would be part of the Vista Ridge overall uh development.

We always refer um projects when they're in the area or nearby to those different different agencies.

Honestly, it's rare to get comments from them.

So this is not a typical to not get a response.

And the developers in current conversations with the district because this will be part of the district as well.

Okay, um let me make a quick note.

Okay.

Ummissioner Leaf, did you have any other questions?

I did, thank you.

Um I wanted to ask um about the perimeter fencing.

Um will that what's the nature of the perimeter fencing?

Do you mean material or where it runs, that kind of thing?

Yes.

Yeah, I mean, we certainly can defer to the applicant on that, but typically those are individual on lot fencing that encompass the individual lots themselves.

I don't know whether or not the builder is planning on installing those.

Sometimes it's the homeowner that does it, and then they have to build it in accordance with whatever HOA guidelines they have for the fencing.

Yeah, I don't know anything to add.

I don't think we've determined what the fencing is going to be yet along the open space and tracks.

Typically along open spaces though, like where you have um next to homes, it's required to be a certain height and not screen, so you don't create a sort of narrow experience through trails and and things through Erie.

So there are requirements in terms of how that looks, like where the trail would connect through uh certain homes, if that helps.

Okay, those are those are essentially code or staff requirements.

Code requirements.

Okay, good thing.

For fencing along trails open space.

And I want to follow up on the question about the maintenance facility that was in the original um development plan.

Um is there any implication of eliminating that from this plan that may have impacts on other projects that may come before the planning commission?

I know that that maintenance facility will a maintenance facility uh rezoning will be before us again.

I just want to understand if there are any impacts that we should be considering.

I can um briefly mention that that is a separate application that's completely different from this one.

Like we would never consider the two together in any way.

Um that being said, I don't think there's any impact.

I I think looking at this individual site and its merits is what we would need to do.

It's never been developed as maintenance, it's privately owned.

No reason to think that it would develop that way.

Um so I guess in short, I I don't see a connection between the two, but I don't know if there's any nothing to add that to what Mr.

LaRue said.

Okay, thank you.

I want to make sure we're not closing the door.

Yeah, I mean every application is reviewed on its own merit and review time.

Um that is another project, but we'll look at that one when it comes.

Right.

That's all my questions.

Thank you.

Um, okay.

Um there is the former oil and gas site that has been plugged in abandoned in 2015.

It says that the town staff has reviewed the associated documentation, found is it acceptable for the reduced 50 by 100?

Um, just to confirm the that 50 by 100 area is not within the detention area that is proposed at the very northwest.

It is not.

We had a lot of back and forth with the applicant on that.

Originally it was shown in there.

We really didn't want it.

There's not actually a rule against it, but we didn't think it was really the best idea.

I want to give credit to the applicant for working with us on that and removing it out of there.

So we did spend a lot of time on that.

Just gonna make a note of that.

Thank you.

Um for the applicant or staff, how is the detent there have been many concerns with some of the detention and retention ponds within the HOA or HOA controlled as well as um just generally within VISA rich?

How exactly are these detention ponds going to float and incorporate with that current system that is in place?

I'll look to the applicants expert on that.

I'll speak to that.

So I think our two ponds are going to release rates at the historic rates from the site.

So I don't think we're making it any better, any worse.

So I think our release rates are at like 90% of historic, so there is a little margin for making it better, but we're sending the water to where it is now going at at the rate.

So thank you.

Um there were comments about the construction traffic.

Um for staff, I don't know if you can answer this.

Um, is there currently a weight limit that is on Vista Ridge Parkway?

I don't know for sure on that one.

I'm sorry.

Does anybody know?

I don't know if you know, Kelly.

I don't know.

Well, we can certainly find that out, but I'm sorry, I don't know right now.

Okay, I vaguely think there may or may not be.

So please I don't want to guess.

I know.

I'd like yeah, I I don't know.

I mean, local streets often have limits.

Uh it excludes deliveries.

I mean, if you're doing work, you they gotta go somewhere.

Uh if there's a construction project, it's not gonna prohibit them from accessing the site.

Same with oil wells and rigs.

Um I'm not 100% sure how that works.

I don't know if there's a permit for that.

Um, something I would like to find out.

Thank you.

Um, and uh as access was just brought up.

Uh what is the plan for ingress and egress from that construction site?

Because there are some um mature developments around there.

How exactly and what exactly is the applicant thinking of how machinery will access and come off of that location.

We haven't done a construction management plan yet, just really because we're we're not quite there.

Um I I couldn't definitively answer that.

I just know that we would be following the town's rules as it related to when construction would be happening.

Um, but in terms of circulation, uh I don't I don't know yet.

Sorry.

Okay.

Uh for staff, do we know what those rules or regulations are or policies that we have in place?

Um I generally I don't know the specifics on it, but I had mentioned earlier that there's always pre-construction type meetings that happen before construction projects where we go over all the rules of the town, hours of operation, uh nuisance mitigation, good watering, etc.

We're not interested in making this hard on people in any way.

I definitely understand your line of questionings.

I think that's something we'll need to really consider, especially given the developed nature of the area.

Want to make sure that we're very careful on that front.

Okay, and uh going back to your presentation in terms of timeline.

Where exactly would a construction management plan be for future steps?

Um definitely um you would want to see that after final plat approval, uh, something developed that they would go into the pre-construction meeting with.

Um I think that's probably where it plugs in.

I can check with our team too on uh most of the plans review or drainage, the engineering, and sort of like the final built product of these, but we can we can figure that out.

Okay, and just uh repeat what I just heard after final plat, which includes the development agreements, after that point is when the final construction plan would be put into effect.

Final construction plans, drainage, engineering are all approved as part of the final plat development itself.

Once the development is approved, the uh developer would enter into like the construction phase, and there's permitting and reviews that occur at that point.

It's my understanding that in order to pull a permit, you have to have a traffic control plan, which I think is what you're asking, which roads are going to be used for egress and ingress.

That's true.

They have to come up with like on any construction project up road closure plan if that's a thing.

What are the mitigation measures?

Are there temporary uh stop signs in place, flaggers, locations if any of that's used?

That's all considered with that post-final plot approval next step, construction phase.

Okay, and looking at have since staff obviously have done many of these, have worked with many applicants of the past for development agreements, final plats.

When we look at this property and at the site, where does staff initially assume?

And I I you know don't want to say we're assuming you know by any means, but typically where would we recommend this ingress egress to occur because there are limited options for this property?

Yeah, I I really don't want to guess.

I'd rather consult with our transportation folks.

I don't want to say anything today and have it be wrong, but we definitely would want to minimize impacts to the extent we can, but again, I don't think I'm prepared to locate that at this point.

Good good answer.

Um for the applicant, do you want to take a stab at it?

Uh any idea or are you are you gonna plead the fifth on this one?

I yeah, I mean when you start getting into construction questions, that's really not my realm.

I I I am around it, but I I I couldn't begin to I'm not qualified to even do a traffic control plan.

So I I don't know.

Sorry.

Like I said, we're we're not quite there yet.

We were just hoping for recommendation tonight to move to move on.

So I I'm sorry we're not prepared to talk about that, but it just wasn't something that we were really thinking of quite yet.

I would say those are excellent questions though.

I think there's something that should probably be considered prior to our town council meeting.

I think the applicant should put a little thought into that.

Maybe we could check in with them on it.

Um get some ballpark idea of how that's looking and what's involved.

We'll obviously have somebody from engineering at that hearing as well.

Sorry, we don't have one tonight.

Um, but I think those are great questions.

I think probably we that will we should direct the applicant to have a look at that.

Okay, thank you.

It's high level.

Um are there any other questions from any of the commissioners?

Okay.

Um at this time, I'm going to close the uh public hearing portion, and we are going to move into commissioner deliberation.

Um, I will start again with Commissioner Helm Hill.

Nothing too exciting for me.

I believe this application meets our approval criteria.

Um I think there's nothing too too crazy for me.

So that's all I have.

Thank you.

Uh Commissioner Booth.

Um agree with that also, but I do think um, I do like the suggestion about having some of that ready for town council on the ingress egress.

Um traffic seems to be an overwhelming topic for residents there and some of that construction.

So I think that that would be helpful to to come to counsel with.

Thank you.

Uh Commissioner Leaf.

Yeah, I'll just uh I think overall it's a it's a reasonable application.

I do have a few concerns that I'd like to just mention.

Um the first one is really regarding drainage, um, and there are kind of three aspects to this.

One is that I understand the requirement to look at historic flows, and I think this is an issue that can't be addressed here, but I think in the future um we're seeing extreme weather events, and I think historic flows are no longer applicable.

And I think in our planning process, we need to be thinking about those requirements going forward.

Um, with regards to the drainage swale that abuts the private property uh owners, um, I think that we should really pay attention to the construction of that as well as the maintenance of that.

And I'd like to see a condition that the HOA be responsible for that ongoing maintenance.

If there's an opportunity to update the traffic study, I think that should be embraced.

When we think about the uh destinations that residents here will have in mind, there's two really one is the pocket park off of single tree, and getting there is I think problematic, encouraging kind of a mid-block crossing to get there.

Um the other destination would be for uh bicycle commuters going to the retail area out at the main um uh throughway there um at Vista Ridge and Route 7.

And to get to that, um you really need to get out to Vista Parkway.

So I I'd like to see a secondary connection out to Vista Parkway explored as part of the the final planning.

Um and finally, I want to ensure that um some of the promises made in this application are binding um and encourage staff to um enforce those, and then actually finally um with regards to this construction uh activity.

Um I think once the roads and curb and gutters are established, then a lot of the workers will maintain um will will be within the limits of uh of the development, but up until that point during site work, um you're gonna have traffic, you're gonna have construction uh contractor parking issues in the neighborhood, and I think that needs to be uh looked at as we go forward.

I'll ask for some help from my fellow commissioners as to what we can put into conditions uh of those.

Okay.

Um let's come back around to that in just a moment.

Okay.

So um Commissioner Brothers.

Okay, a few things.

Um, one I can appreciate the concerns of new development in an area that you've gotten used to being open.

Um I've lived in many neighborhoods through my life that have had new development come in.

This was approved in a long time ago.

So it was always planned to be a housing.

It's not like it's a rezoning from something else.

There's a small maintenance area, but that's kind of a very small portion of this.

So while I can appreciate the concerns, I'm not sure they're reason to hold anything up here.

Looking at the map of the area, and I said I used to live in that area.

Um, it seems they're really two or maybe three places.

I think single tree would be kind of hard to ingress for the construction.

Just a parkway seems like the logical place, possibly hickory.

Um as far as dust and things like that, builders typically, my experience has been do whatever they can to keep the neighbors happy for things like that.

Um if problems do come up when it does eventually get to construction, uh that's something you should let the town know if there are issues, and the town would I think help take care of that for you.

But candidly, I don't see any reasons to reject this application.

Thank you, uh, Vice Chair Dreckman.

Um I'm going to echo what Commissioner Hampell and Commissioner Boots said as well.

That I think I see the reason to recommend approval for this, and um I appreciate Chris acknowledging that we should have some traffic studies and drainage updated before it becomes or comes before town council.

Thank you.

Um we have very specific approval criteria um when it comes to both a preliminary plat as well as a rezoning uh specific to PD.

There is one item on here specific to the preliminary plat that I am unsure of the subdivision will not result in significant adverse impacts on adjacent properties or such impacts will be substantially mitigated.

There is a bona fide concern, it's a real concern for the traffic that occurs on Vista Parkway.

When we're looking at this property and understanding we're in a very mature residential area and we're trying to get machinery to and from that site, it does become a concern because you're stuck in between a point where we have these traffic circles, roundabouts that are on either side.

So you're gonna have those navigating through there.

Plus, also, as has been said, it's a two-lane road.

I am definitely in agreement that with staff in their recommendation saying you don't have to have you don't have to know exactly what you're going to do when the time comes for the development agreement and final plat, but that is something that should definitely be addressed because ingress and egress probably should not happen on the on the residential streets, but then the question becomes how do you actually ingress and egress on and off of Vista Parkway?

So I understand that this is not the time where we would have a plan, a full-on construction management plan.

However, this is a very large concern as evident by all of the comment that we've received, as well as the comments from the individuals out there.

When we get to the referrals and we see um the master association has not provided comments, neither of the HOAs are providing comments.

This is um, as has been said, it's it's going to be part of this area and most likely will be part of the Metro District.

So that is one thing that I would like to see as a condition for the development agreement that a an agreement is in place with the master association and/or HOAs because when we're looking at who maintains most of that property around there, it is the Metro District and the HOA.

So it would make sense where the current development is paying their fair share and has um you know skin in the game, if you will.

So I would say um going to Commissioner Lee's point, that is something that I would want to see as a um as an additional recommendation as part of uh this if it does um you know move towards approval for recommendation.

Um I would also want to see the radon mitigation aspect incorporated into the DA or the final plates somebody who is uh resident of Flatiron Meadows.

It was hit or miss whether or not radon affected my my home.

I had neighbors on on you know sides of me where it did affect them, they had the testing that was done post-closing, and it turned out that they had to front the bill for the radon mitigation.

So if this is something that the builder will be addressing through the mitigation as well as the testing, I would like to see that as was said, um, making sure that that is in writing at the time of DA and final plat.

Um I'm gonna go turn to Commissioner Leaf.

Um, were there other items that you were thinking would be warranted potentially for um additional items as considerations?

Uh relating to the approval criteria, I think um subsection G about uh the subdivision being integrated and connected uh to sidewalks, trails, and similar features relates to my comment about the connectivity to Vista Ridge uh trails and bike lanes, um, and um my comments and concerns about the drainage um construction and maintenance relates to um the uh sub the subsection H not resulting in significant adverse impact on adjacent.

Okay.

Um I'm gonna turn to the other commissioners.

Um obviously I have proposed two conditions for approval.

Um, and then there's uh sounds like a third potentially.

Um are there to the bike connectivity um to Vista Ridge and also the the drainage uh construction and maintenance.

Okay, my apologies at property line.

Um radon radon mitigation, HOA metro district involvement, bikes and walkable connectivity and drainage, right?

Those are the four you guys are I just want to make sure I think those are the four that are uh under consideration for the radon.

The other thing I brought up was about the heaving and making sure that that is addressed.

Uh Mr.

LaRue mentioned that there we need to make sure it's done right or there will be issues with these houses.

Yeah, and I know that there was uh in the geotech report, it was saying um over excavating five feet away from the toes, and I mean basically they knowing that if they are approved and and whatnot, they would have to monitor how they're actually doing the excavation.

So, but um I totally totally understand.

Yeah, okay.

Um Commissioner Helm, Commissioner Booth, questions, comments um related to these?

Can you read out the conditions again?

Radon, oh sorry.

I'm gonna come to you in a moment.

Okay.

Um radon mitigation, HOA metro district involvement with the current community or neighborhood, bike and walkable connectivity and the drainage maintenance, soil control.

Or like like not worded exactly like that, but that's just what I wrote.

And then the egress ingress.

We um I'm gonna I'm gonna come back to you in a second, but uh just uh clarify um this does not require a construction management plan, even though we may have a criteria that is specific to adverse impacts, were not requiring at the time for this applicant to have exactly what they're going to do, that is going to be covered in the development agreement and the final plat.

Correct.

Yeah, there is the uh engineering standards that apply to all developments.

So the applicant um at the time uh they move forward with construction is required uh to submit and comply with all of our engineering standards, which covers things like um you know the construction of streets, uh street um uh the materials used, traffic plan.

Um it also covers things like stormwater management, um, the requirement to have an operation and maintenance plan uh for stormwater management facilities and other public infrastructures and those private infrastructures related to stormwater management that is uh uh installed as part of this development.

So uh some of what you are talking about today is covered through those engineering standards as the the project goes through the uh continues through the development review process.

That was that was my question.

Is out of those four, which ones are is it repetitive for us too that would already be covered regardless of what our conditions are I think the um and looking at the preliminary plat, there's a drainage easement that's proposed to be granted along the back of the homes, which would indicate that that's part of the the overall stormwater management plan.

Um that would be covered in um the uh the stormwater management permit and the operation and maintenance plan.

Um so I I don't think that is something that needs to be addressed today.

Um I was just saying looking at the notes on the the radon, uh there is state law um that applies to the purchase of all um residential homes.

There's certain notices that need to be provided uh in all purchase and sale agreements that uh indicate whether a property has been tested for uh elevated levels of radon and what those results are, and it advises all uh purchasers to uh obtain a radon test before closing on the home.

Um so there is some state law that applies to uh the the radon discussion that that the planning commission is having.

Okay, but radon mitigation is not required by the builder to take on the costs of if radon testing does deem it is beyond the safe levels.

I I don't know offhand.

Um I would say that if it is likely a something that could be negotiated as a purchase and sale agreement.

Um I think it's once we get to that point where there's uh a contract between two parties, uh they could come to an agreement on an adjustment of the price or uh someone undertaking that the mitigation responsibilities if there's a need to do so.

Okay, is is that something that we if the developer is willing to include as um an item where the builder is required to um take on the cost of rate radon mitigation?

Is is that something that we if the developer is willing to include as an item where the builder is required to um take on the cost of rate radon mitigation is that something that we can put into the development agreement or the final plates they are required to do that instead of any potential homeowners down the line.

It would not be something that is typically included in a development agreement.

Our development agreements traditionally address the construction of public improvements um the the obligation uh uh related to those responsibilities and uh providing guarantees and assurances and I think having that on a note or as a condition on a plat does present some practical issues uh because platts you know though there will be owners that uh you know the the the platishes the the boundaries and the lot lines for the properties that are sold um lots will be resold so it it's difficult to to craft a condition specific to one it's hard to enforce hard to enforce yeah yeah on the initial sale from the developer to it's obvious and it's just not standard of a real estate agreement like in any minutes pality in Colorado I mean VA loans do require a radon mitigation test but like beyond that it's just not I've never seen that in 10 years in an agreement so I just don't think it's standard Commissioner Lee had a comment.

Yeah I have actually a couple questions one clarification for legal counsel is it within our purview with regards to the drainage which I understand will be addressed through engineering standards uh for us to require that the HOA be responsible for maintaining that as opposed to individual property owners I think that also presents issues uh because you're imposing a condition on a party who's not in this proceeding um you know we can't unless we have a code provision or um that there's uh another mechanism to another mechanism in our code uh to enforce that responsibility um if the planning commission imposed the a condition on any party who's not uh in this proceeding um as part of this application it's you know it wouldn't be enforceable okay and then my last question we've talked about the need for additional traffic studies understanding that the original um plan um addressed that initially but we know that those planning assumptions may or may not have actually occurred um to what degree can we uh require or request additional study as this moves forward I I had an opinion on that I mean I I think that we need to rely on our expert um our traffic team at the town to make that determination and that's something we'll consult with them on.

And just to confirm with our um with our legal counsel that is something that will be reviewed again and and confirmed in terms of the impact from the traffic the study could be the one that's actually used but that will be something that will be reviewed at the time of final plat for consideration correct correct yes.

Okay.

Yeah and it's important to note the traffic study identifies uh where there's issues and then solutions on how to solve those I mean it's largely already done that so we're in some significant problem it's probably gonna remain largely the same but we definitely want to check with our team just to make sure that um it's submitted correctly with final plat.

And I also just want to say the traffic study that was included was from like the end of 2025.

So it's not yeah it was consistent at the time of uh submittal we did several rounds I know there were many trans or so a couple of transportation comments related to that feel confident that we're in a good spot with it but again you're yes we'll want to make sure uh that our team is on board with that so it's not very old yeah I'd I I would say when we're talking about the traffic uh the traffic study um again knowing you know final plat this is going to be reviewed again in terms of that traffic study our TMP is uh projecting the 2050 vehicle trips per day at 12,000 along uh Vista Parkway so if we could just confer to verify that what the TMP also what the TMP indicates is the same as what this traffic study is indicating um just so that we can make sure that there is congruence.

Yes 100% we can have them relook at that okay so me personally I am not comfortable with the radon mitigation condition or enforcing the HOA to maintain the drainage okay only because I I believe the HA would be responsible for all of the open space including the drainage as per any community with drainage issues but I just I think that's beyond what we're approving right now.

But I just I think that's beyond what we're approving right now.

Um that's my personal opinion.

If anyone else has anything, I would generally agree with that.

Um the connectivity, I'm not sure what we enforce with that.

I do love adding bikes, but I don't know how we put anything in this thing that says a sidewalk must connect to Vista Parkway, which maybe that doesn't make sense for one reason or another.

Um, but the other item about HOA or working with the HLA and Metro District.

I that does make a lot of sense.

You can't make someone comment though, so I don't know how that works.

Um if they don't if the HLA doesn't talk to them, that shouldn't.

That's not part of our approval process.

Um so I think the PD amendment, I don't think anybody has any issues with the PD amendment.

Um and then preliminary plat, really, my opinion is as is, but maybe potentially something with the HOA metro district um working together.

Okay.

Um so it sounds like uh also for staff if they could uh verify the service plan for the metro district to see if this property is already included in it, and same thing um for the applicant to see if there is if this is already identified as future developed land part of one of those HOAs where it is essentially required that this will be part of the HOA.

So we had four potential conditions at the top.

Um too, Vice Chair Drekman.

Yeah, um, I don't think I mean I don't know.

I'm not on board with any of the conditions personally.

Like I don't I don't I don't believe any of them make sense for what we're trying to approve or not approve right now.

Okay.

So and then it sounds like Commissioner Hopel agrees in the I don't Commissioner Booth, I'm not sure.

I concur.

And okay, team.

Yeah, and if I could jump in just for one quick second again.

Um looking at the preliminary plat and make sure I'm looking at the correct one.

Uh, but there is uh the track summary chart, which does indicate um which tracks are intended to be owned by uh non-developer entities, so the landscaping um and some of the the tracks that are within this preliminary plat are intended to be owned or conveyed to Vista Ridge HOA.

Um that would indicate to me that there has been communications with the HOA.

Um and there's also a note that maintenance will be the responsibility of the HOA or the Metro District, which is typical in some of these preliminary plates as those uh discussions progress and the development gets further on who is responsible, ultimately responsible for um the maintenance of of landscaping, storm drainage, and other other aspects related to uh a development.

Yeah, all right.

So we're down to zero conditions.

I think so.

If if I may, please.

I I'd like to speak on behalf of the uh connectivity issue because I think both our comprehensive plan and our transportation mobility plan both encourage us to create multimodal transportation in our communities and a very connected community.

Um the um Mr.

Larue has indicated uh interest or willingness to explore connectivity to the trail system along Vista Ridge, and I certainly think that that's worth exploring just a comment is for my time on OSTAP.

Uh the connectivity to the trails is part of it.

And I believe that was uh it's mostly spine trails, I think you're talking about and it looked like there was connectivity, uh, but I agree we should have this little room just verify that.

But I think it is covered.

Okay.

Yeah, well, we're we're happy to look at that and explore that possibility with the applicant.

The um safest route isn't always a direct route uh depending on conditions.

Um obviously we've reviewed this.

I know transportation weighed in.

We didn't have any issues as proposed, but we can look.

Yeah, and I I will say um if we can have transportation, take a second look at this one because if you're looking at the TMP, there's nothing even planned, it's just a big blank space right there.

Um you know, no future improvements um like we seen some other areas.

So if we could just see if there was an idea of what the future looked like for this property, and if it does, in fact, meet that vision that the TMP set for.

Um, something else to say, no?

Okay.

Any other items?

Okay.

So we have two items that are gonna need to receive a motion in a second.

So I'm gonna start with the first one and see if there is a motion for resolution P26-12.

This is the plan development amendment.

Motion second.

Do we need that is out enough?

That is a motion from uh uh Commissioner Booth and a second from Vice Chair Vice Chair uh Drekman, and if we could get a roll call vote on this one, and just for the record, each of those has one condition on them.

Okay, that's what I thought we had to read it out.

I will read it out.

So just so we have it for the record as well.

So give me a quick second.

Um, so this is uh resolution of the planning commission of the town of Erie recommending that the town council approve the Vista Ridge Plan Development Amendment number eight with a condition, and that's good enough.

That is good enough, yes.

So roll call vote, please.

Commissioner Booth, yes, commissioner leaf, yes, Vice Chair Drekman, yes, Chair Sowish, yes, Commissioner Schatz, Commissioner Brodis.

Yes, Commissioner Hempel, yes.

That is a six to zero yes, okay unanimous.

Um all right, now we are going to move on to resolution twenty-six thirteen, a resolution of the planning commission of the town of Erie recommending that the town council approve the Vista Reserve Preliminary Plat with a condition.

And is there a motion?

So moved.

So second.

So that is a motion by Commissioner Brodus and a second by Commissioner Hempel.

Um again, a roll call vote, please.

Commissioner Booth.

Yes.

Commissioner Leaf.

Yes.

Vice Chair Drekman.

Yes.

Chair Sowish?

Yes.

Commissioner Schatz.

Commissioner Commissioner Brodus.

Yes.

Commissioner Hempel.

Yes.

That is again a six to zero yes vote.

Okay.

So thank you.

Obviously, there is a lot that we have discussed.

Um, our job is to prepare you for counsel who makes that ultimate decision.

Um, so um, for all the residents out there, please, when the time comes, feel free to uh provide your comments as well at that time.

Um but at this time uh this agenda item is done.

So thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

We'll just wait a minute or two for the public um thank you for okay.

Um so now we will move on to the last of the general business items.

This is 2026 402 discussion and preparation of the joint study session with council, and I will be presenting, but I'm gonna stay right here this time.

So um, so last time we had discussed the agenda that is gonna be coming up for the July 21st joint study session with town council.

Um the uh proposed topics, uh the Prop 123 fast track, the comprehensive plan amendment update, the 2026-27 planning and development work plan and uh overview, and the planning commission roles and responsibilities.

Um we discussed this last time we had a very good conversation.

We came up with a lot of ideas.

Um we did have uh Commissioner Schatz, who wasn't able to be here who provided some comments uh that I had provided to all the individuals up here.

So I'm gonna just quickly go through the four items and see are there are there items that um immediately come to mind as hey, we want to have this address.

The first three items, these are items that are largely going to be staff led.

Um this is Prop 123 Comp Plan Amendment and the 2026-2027 planning development work plan.

Obviously, that last one, this is that discussion for council and us to have.

Um is there anything with those first three that we have a strong desire to have addressed in some way by staff in their presentation potentially, or for them to uh uh note at in terms of any questions or lingering thoughts that we might have for 123, just the deadlines and any costs that we would have to assume.

Anything else on those three?

Okay, okay.

So now it's that planning commission roles and responsibilities.

So the last time that we met, I had asked um the the hope would be that we would come out of this meeting tonight with um one or two askes of the council in terms of this roles and responsibilities.

Um, one of the things, you know, just like if you're fundraising for a nonprofit, you always have to have that ask at the end of will you, you know.

Uh so um this is our chance to obviously work with council and speak to them um about this.

And I know we're gonna be limited on time, so I'm very well aware of that.

Um, were there any specific items?

Um anything that came to mind as hey, this is one that I really feel strongly about.

I have one.

Please.

Uh I don't know how amenable they'll be to it, um, but last night they did talk about the how advisory boards are appointed in that process, and I know they're gonna be working with staff on streamlining that process and refining it, and Mayor Moore made a comment about his desire for overseeing planning commission.

But I think there is value in the point of commission reviewing applicants, maybe not interviewing them, but I think having some sort of visibility from the commission on the people who will sit on this board, I think would be something I'd recommend if others think that's good or not, or we're happy with the town council just appointing people to this board.

Okay.

Anyone have any thoughts on that one?

I see some gears moving.

So is this something that we want to have as an ask of council when we meet with them in um a week?

Who came up with like that was their suggestion?

No, no, this is just my suggestion that the planning commission is more similar to how the other boards so the other boards like we elect our own do not necessarily elect our own, but have a say um and have a formalized say.

I know when we were going through the process of recommending you to reappointment.

Um Commissioner Chair Salish talked about previously, they were told they can't do that.

Um told us we could do that, so it seems like it's ambiguous.

So if there could just, in my opinion, if the planning commission was consulted or review authority, similar to what we just did for preliminary of applicants to the planning commission, whatever that review means.

Again, I don't want to waste if an applicant needs to interview twice, that's kind of a lot for a volunteer position.

Okay.

Um that that's my thought.

Yeah, and um, I I'm gonna turn to staff on this one, uh, specifically our deputy town attorney because I know that you all are working with uh town administration for this, and from my understanding from that meeting last night, they're trying to standardize things in a way.

So there it is possible that um they say yes, have the boards and commissions review, provide recommendations, or it's possible that they say no, we'll take all applications, we'll review them, we'll create our own task force among ourselves and make a recommendation from there, or status quo.

So there's three options on the table, and that status quo is we still are interviewed for planning commission, and the applications are reviewed by the town council for determination on who is actually gonna be interviewed.

So to confirm those are the three options on the table right now.

I I believe so.

I have not been involved in these conversations with town administration on what the process and how they look to change it or streamline it.

So I I don't have any inside information on what they're looking to do.

Um so I don't really have any insight on whether they're looking, yeah.

I don't have any insight on what they're looking to do on the overall appointment process.

Okay, I agree with Commissioner Hempel, and I would be fine discussing that.

Okay.

Yeah, so is the real question whether or not Planning Commission is treated the same as the other boards or differently.

Yes, and yes and no, but mainly yes.

Yeah, that's what I'm getting out of it.

Um I'm just trying to process whether because we have a quasi usually roll, but then so does OSTAP.

So on the surface, it would be nice to be consistent, but we do have some other considerations.

So that just to clarify, OSTAB is not quasi judicial.

Um board of adjustments.

I'm sorry, you're right, it's not quite sure.

They do yeah, okay.

They act as a uh referral, yeah.

Um thank you.

Could we discuss it and then Elliot can tell us if it's not the case?

I mean, if he wants to bring it up, I just feel like we should bring it up with town council, and then if LA determines that it's not possible because of our quasi judicial, then the answer.

How would it not be possible?

Oh, yeah, I what I wasn't saying that no, I know I'm just saying like if you want to discuss it, I feel like we should discuss it.

It was brought up uh about um the board of adjustments and uh the other term now that we appeals appeals, yes.

Um where they said, hey, these are very specialized individuals that are required over here, so we could staff recommend individuals and help filter through these.

Um I I from what I understand though, it's um and we don't I I know that they are trying to standardize all the boards and commissions just like they're trying to do with the bylaws, the code adjustment.

So basically saying, hey, if you wanted to have everything standardized, where we also review the applications and provide our recommendation, um that is something that we would be willing to do as a commission.

Is that what I'm hearing?

Yeah, and yeah.

I I think so, yes.

And that I mean, because they can always decide not to accept recommendations, right?

So it's not that we're taking anything away from them, we're just making some things easier for them, hopefully, by doing a first step.

And I guess the the code again.

Um I don't want the pointing commission to choose its members, but I believe the code, I don't have it up right now, but it says pointing commissioners shall be interviewed.

Correct.

I don't think it specifies town council, so technically we could.

I don't know.

But that's not what I want to propose.

It would just be more again like a referral authority.

That'd be my and not again.

I don't think an interview makes sense just because of the the timing.

Maybe it does.

Um, but reviewing applications, that would be um as far as I'd probably take it.

Yeah, making a first cut.

Yeah.

And um, you know, I I don't want to I I want to make sure that we're not you know uh interjecting ourselves in their decision making authority because all appointments are at the discretion of the council.

So um if they're amenable to that, um I haven't you know even brought we haven't brought this this specific aspect up before.

So I don't even know what their thoughts are on it.

Um I'm sure we could find out so we could bring it up as a potential idea.

Obviously, this isn't gonna be something um potentially uh something that we come out of where hey, tomorrow we're gonna have this code code amendments, you know, for our authority.

We know it is gonna be something that administrative services, uh the town attorney's office, staff will most likely have to work on.

So um I'm fine with us bringing that up if that is what this body feels we should do.

Yeah, I say there's a very short discussion.

Yes.

Yes, okay, one item, got it.

Okay.

Check.

Okay.

That's all I had.

Okay.

I don't have anything.

Just to follow up on our prior conversation, did we determine that we need delegated authority delegated from council to meet with other uh boards?

And is that a question that remains?

I I think if you meet with other boards that are tied to your roles and responsibilities, I mean it would be within the scope of the planning commission's purview.

I mean, I think the difficulty right now is your role is primarily a recommending body in quasi-judicial hearings and applications.

Um so I think if you if the planning commission desires to expand their authority to uh more of a recommendation capacity for whatever um recommendations you want to provide to town council, um I mean I would recommend that you have in your pocket what what and how you want to expand your purview.

Um, and then we would tie you would tie that to meeting with other boards and commissions.

I don't know if that directly answered your question.

Um but I you know I don't think you need explicit authority to meet with other boards and commissions, uh, but it should be related to your roles and responsibilities as the planning commission.

Okay.

Understood.

So I I had an opportunity to uh sit down with uh Commissioner Schatz before he uh left town.

Obviously, he put together that memo.

Um as we had said, we were gonna you know meet on it, you know, last last meeting.

Um what occurred to me during the conversation and seeing the list of items that are are noted on there.

Very very good ideas that he had um in terms of very specific procedural changes or changes in terms of the UDC.

And then we look at some of the historic items that have been discussed, as well as the Lindney of various items from Greeley, Superior, Lafayette, Brighton, you know, the list goes on.

I look at us as being now a home rule municipality where we have our own destiny that we can set as as uh as a town.

When I look at these items, they're really two item two sides of an equation.

Um as uh deputy town attorney uh Schaefer just said, um it real whatever we do has to be within our purview and within what we're supposed to be doing.

And when we look at the items, they're really UDC related and they are comp plan related.

So when I'm looking at how do we knowing that we're gonna have to have a code amendment occur where we have additional authorities that are provided to us from council, the question is do we be very specific or do we be broad?

When I'm looking at this, I um I'm gonna turn to our uh deputy town attorney in a moment.

Um I don't know if we have authority to make a recommendation of a potential amendment to staff and counsel for the UDC.

I don't know if we have a have the authority to suggest and recommend a potential update or for implementation to the comp plan.

When we look at all these items, they are UDC and comp plan related.

It is either specific items that we are identifying as holes or items to um to address very specific criteria.

And then when we look at the comp plan, we are looking at the implementation of the vision of how we get to that ultimate build out.

So I said I was gonna turn to the deputy town attorney.

Um I know um during our meeting on Monday, I had I had brought this up.

The question is, do we be very specific in what we're trying to ask of the council, or do we ask something broad with specific items that could potentially be in our say work plan upcoming?

So again, the requests could potentially be um the authority to make recommendations to council and to staff on potential UDC amendments, as well as the um authority of the planning commission to make recommendations um for amendments as well as implementation to council and staff.

Are those two items that sound like they could be something that would be facilitated through a code amendment that seem rational in terms of these conversations we've been having?

Yeah, I the first one, yes.

I'm not sure I I completely process the second recommendation uh uh the the way you qualified it, but I think if if the planning commission desires um to be able to provide recommendations to either staff or uh resolutions or recommendations to council on potential code amendments, um comp plan amendments, I would recommend that that be explicitly within the code.

So that'd be an explicit task that you have as part of your discussions with council.

Um so we could add that to your roles and responsibilities.

Um I think for just as an example, I think um, you know, I've worked in jurisdictions where planning commission has explicit authority to file text amendments, um, but that's specifically granted in uh the enabling authority of the planning commission for those particular jurisdictions.

So I I think part of the discussion for the planning commission to have is you know, internally is what do we want our role to be?

How do we want it to expand, and then how how do we present that to council uh to bring forward an amendment to expand our roles and responsibilities?

Okay, um, specifically to the comprehensive plan item.

Um obviously our um authority that's you know vested to us through the code, it says um the town council shall be responsible for the creation adoption of the town's comprehensive plan, the planning commission shall advise the town council on the comprehensive plan as outlined in Title 10, which I'm assuming is 10721 comprehensive plan, which basically says um the town council may, after recommendation from the planning commission adopt and thereof amend the town's comprehensive plan in accordance with this section.

But it largely sounds like this is something that is derived from staff or council that is not something that we say, hey, we have this recommendation that staff and council invest some time in this specific topic for a potential amendment.

So again, I go back to do we even have authority to make recommendations for potential amendments that are not staff or council derived.

I'll need to look at the comprehensive plan section again.

Um and are you looking at 107 21?

Yep.

Yeah.

Yeah, I I think um yeah, I would need to look at the structure of that, but I think the way you are explaining it, you know, potentially the the planning commission, there may be authority in there to provide recommendations outside of a true application or amendment process, but I'd want to just look at the structure of the section a little bit more.

Yeah, and I and I I'll I'll be the first to say um I know some municipalities they do vest in the planning commission the authority to have a planning commission initiated rezoning or comprehensive plan amendment.

I'm not saying that because I know that is you know essentially us filing that.

And that is not at all what having the ability to make a recommendation in general to invest our time and to then invest staff's time in coming up with these because this again cannot just be us saying this, it has to be that council and staff have the time to look at what we provide because they have their own work plan, we're planning on having ours.

We would need to make sure that it gets the treatment that it would need if we are to recommend something.

Does anyone else have an opinion on that?

What energy has discussed?

So again, two items.

Um, the ability to make recommendations uh of make recommendations to council and staff for potential amendments to the UDC, as well as same thing for the comp plan, um, which entails also implementation of the comp plan.

They're broad enough, but they're you know, we'll have we'll need to have the specifics that we've been talking about, and that's the throw it against the wall and see what sticks, but we're gonna have the work plan that will determine what exactly we're able to do.

Commissioner Hampel, do you have anything to say about that?

Yeah, I think it is interesting, I guess if it came from us.

It it seems to me that code and um comprehensive plan updates should come from elected officials.

Um I'm not sure exactly what sort of code change would make sense.

I mean, obviously they need to update it.

Um but it sounds I'm okay with asking it.

Don't get me wrong.

I think it's worth having that discussion.

I don't know if I agree with it though.

So that's my understanding is that in other municipalities often the comp plan comes from staff and the planning commission for the town council to review rather than coming necessarily from the town council town.

So I may be wrong there, but that's my understanding.

The other thing I would add a third one, which is asking town council, do they have rec thoughts about other things we could be doing?

Yep.

Agreed.

Um Commissioner Leaf.

Yeah, I was just gonna agree with Commissioner Hempel that I I think our elected officials should be the ones making that decision.

Um but I think having room for a bottom-up process uh invites potentially good ideas from first surf surfacing.

So I I would be open to that.

I mean, we're not saying we approve it, we're saying we would make recommendations, correct?

Right, correct.

So they maintain the authority agreed.

Correct.

Yeah, yeah.

Absolutely.

Um because you know we can't direct staff, right?

So we can say, hey, we want to take you know these two months to do this, we can't direct staff.

You know, even council can't direct staff, they can only direct those that are you know directly uh in line with them.

So um Commissioner Booth.

Agree.

Okay, okay.

Uh Vice Chair exactly.

I agree.

I think yeah, it's a recommendation, it's not a change coming from us.

That's not an elected official, it's a change by a board that hears public comment and sees these applications come before us.

It's extremely common to update a comp plan.

It's happened all the time.

Um in all municipalities in Colorado, so I think I'm on board with discussing that.

So that is one, two, three, four, five.

Thanks.

We have this question.

Okay, what uh could you run that?

Um just reviewing applications or um like when we change commissioners, or we have new commissioners.

Bob mentioned to staff presentation, the Prop 123 fees and schedules.

Meeting with other boards and commission, um, the amendment to expand our roles and responsibilities, which would be the recommendations for changes to the UDC or the comp plan and implementation, and then asking town council what they want us, uh what they envisioned for us.

Okay.

Anyone have any objections to those?

Are we good with it?

No objections.

Okay, so two of those obviously are for staff.

Um so the prop 123 schedules, um, is this the third one on there?

Sorry.

Boards and commission.

Or is it commissions?

Um, yeah, because I know that one is currently working with administrative uh services.

So okay.

Uh so I think we have that means three asks that we'll have of three items that we will bring up in terms of the roles and responsibilities aspect.

Um review uh the boards and commissions uh meetings.

Um let's go through and what they have for us.

Yeah, what they have for the thing.

Okay, perfect.

Okay.

Um I think we're in a good place.

Any last comments?

Staff, any last comments, thoughts, questions about any of that.

Okay.

All right.

Everybody feel ready.

Yeah.

Okay.

All right.

Um let's see.

That was the last item on our agenda.

So we will now move to staff reports.

Does staff have anything to report?

Um, just that you all have your joint meeting next week.

Don't forget about that.

Um, and then your annual report on the 28th.

Um we've already sent in the presentation to the clerk, so we're all good to go on that.

Yeah.

Thank you.

Um all right, now we move to commissioner reports, and I'm gonna start on the opposite side this time with uh Commissioner Leaf.

I just want to publicly thank uh Commissioner Schatz for his thoughtful uh document that he shared with the commission.

Thank you.

Uh Commissioner Maros.

Vice Chair Directman.

Nothing.

Okay, Commissioner Humphill.

Uh I just sent the email and I will be traveling next week.

So I plan to at least be on the Zoom call.

Um, and if I can't be accommodated hybridly, I'll at least be there.

Um so that's what I got it came up.

So I'm upset about it, but we somewhere somewhere a lot nicer.

So that that's all I have.

So appreciate whatever I'm looking forward to uh at least watching the meeting.

And uh Commissioner Booth.

I don't have anything.

Okay, um so I have uh um so two items, and um you did allude to it last night.

Uh um town administration council had all the different policies on the board that they were talking about.

Um so there are some policies that are gonna be changing.

Um one of them that was brought up was that virtual policy, um, but it actually wasn't something that was we're going to remove it.

It was well, we may actually be able to allow this for more boards and commissions because now they have the community room behind us.

So um, but again, there are five different policies.

Um they did uh dress was the um the rules of order procedure, and it was brought up explicitly saying hey, there are boards and commissions, specifically the planning commission, which actually emulates what is put in here.

So that is something that will probably be coming our way where there will be in uh uh an amendment to our rules of order and procedure.

We don't have any uh decision on that.

That is something that they do through resolution, but um just wanted to let everybody know.

Um the other item is um October 21st tentatively is going to be the OSTAB joint study session with planning commission.

So um we I'm gonna be working with uh Chair Marn from Ostab to uh come up with an agenda for that.

Um Commissioner Brodis, I know you've having your background in the OSTAB previous to there.

Um obviously um we'd also be leaning on you to provide some recommendations of what exactly it will be.

Um we will talk about this at one of the future meetings in terms of what exactly we have as an idea of topics.

Um obviously one of the most pressing is the reserved open space.

That is something that they have had uh constant communications about and discussions in their meetings.

Um we have to be cognizant that there is tentatively a um uh potential rezoning as it is for the page property upcoming.

That is council directed, so it has not we do not have an actual application.

I know it's weird, it's uh staff as the app or town as the applicant, town as the reviewer, so um, but there isn't an application in in process yet.

Um the tentative October 21st is if for whatever reason the page property has to be pushed back, knowing that that will come up during the conversation, we may have to push it slightly back, but um I'll leave it to staff to let us know if and or when that time might come.

So that is all I have.

And um with tradition, can I have a motion for adjournment?

Motion to adjourn.

Second.

And the time is now 8 52, and we are adjourned.

I don't know if you noticed, but there are you