Right, I'm gonna call to order the uh town council special meeting on January first, twenty twenty-sixth.

Will you please rise and join me in the Pledge of Allegiance?

I pledge allegiance to the United States America or religious under God's council, please take roll council member Hoback.

Council Member O'Connor.

Present.

Council Member Bear.

Present.

Mayor Pro Tem Bell.

Here.

Council Member Mortalero.

Okay.

Council Member Passamarelli.

Present.

Mayor Moore.

Here.

Mayor, you have a quorum.

All right.

Thanks.

Um first uh item on the agenda is our consent agenda of which we have one item tonight.

It's uh 2026, a resolution of the council of the town area designating the town's official posting location for 2026.

Mayor.

Yes.

Actually, it's the approval of the agenda first.

Oh, I'm sorry.

Do we have a motion to approve the agenda?

So moved.

Second.

All right, a motion second.

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

All opposed say no.

All right, we have an agenda.

Now we have the consent agenda item.

I just read.

Do we have a motion to approve the consent agenda?

So move.

Second.

All right, motion and a second.

All in favor, say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

All opposed, say no.

All right, motion carries.

So we will go on to uh public comment.

Um I don't actually have my script, but uh um the gist of this is just to be um friendly and uh understand that we have a lot of people watching at times, some of them may be in our youth, and so your comments should be productive um for us to hear.

Um so with that, I'll look to our town clerk to see if we have anybody signed up tonight.

We do it.

First is Michael Barrel.

All right, and Michael, if you just go up to the podium here and state your name.

Um just your name and uh location, and um you've got three minutes.

Good evening.

My name's Mike Barrow.

I live at 1103 Alexandria in Lafayette.

And I'm here to talk about the comprehensive plan and implementation twenty twenty-six-13.

Uh first of all, I want to thank this council for actually going out and running a survey to find out what the residents of Erie want in a comprehensive plan or what they want their town to look like in 20 years.

And I am most concerned about the uh corner of a hundred and eleven around.

Um I can see the uh the intersection for my backyard.

And I have seen an increase of traffic and snarls and experienced the pain of going eastbound or westbound on Arapahoe from 1111th to the other side of two eighty-seven.

Sometimes that takes close to eight to ten minutes because the clo the lights do not work well together.

And uh I see from your from your uh agenda the the the slides that that are on there that uh proposing to put in more development in there, and I'm thinking are we gonna have to have another light?

I mean, this area is a problem today.

And adding more development in that area is not going to make that problem go away.

So I would strongly suggest that you fix the problems that you currently have, not get more development.

And I just don't uh I think it's inappropriate.

It's out of your town center area.

Services are difficult to get to uh this thing uh from a relative standpoint and era area.

Where's your where's the closest uh fire station?

Oh, it's Lafayette's.

I know you worked well together, but I'm I've I've just got a problem with that.

Um anyway, I would hope that uh you uh consider this carefully and try and minimize the development impacts from that area.

Thank you for your service.

Thank you.

Next is Brandy Unray.

Hi, good evening.

Um I wasn't fully prepared to to speak in front of everyone, but um I did send an email to you, um, Andrew.

I am a resident of Erie.

I've been here since 2007.

I've watched this town grow exponentially.

I've lived in several neighborhoods in Erie.

I am very familiar with our infrastructure problems that we have, our schooling problems.

I also work in real estate.

I'm hearing about these problems every single day from my clients, from other people who may or may not want to consider living here in Erie because of some of the problems that they're having.

They're choosing to live other places.

This is becoming abundantly clear in today's real estate market.

I'm specifically concerned about not just the area that he mentioned, but the area just yonder um what has been known as the Golden Run area or Aaron Harbor's land being developed.

Um that particular plot of land is massive.

It's essentially could be a town in itself.

It's that big.

We do not have the infrastructure in that area to support it.

The roads are not big enough.

It's very difficult to get around in that area at all, much less building that many homes in that area at this time will diminish the value of the homes that are in our area already existing.

We are already seeing this problem in several new build areas where homes that are trying to resell are competing with the builder who is essentially doing extreme things to get their properties off of their books and therefore decreasing the value of already existing homeowners' homes.

I realize that that area will eventually be developed.

It just feels like now is not the right time for that because we have so many areas that are being currently developed at the exact same time.

The builders move fast when they want to sell homes, even if they don't know for sure if their homes were will, they still end up pumping out a lot of product, therefore diminishing values of homes around it.

That area in Boulder County has already experienced some setbacks in that area, and I'm happy to go into more details regarding that at another time.

But it really is causing some serious problems in our town for the current homeowners who will pay the price if that area is developed developed today or in the very near future, especially with all of the new builds that are gonna be coming all over Erie.

Um I thank you for your time.

And again, I'm happy to go into further details if you have questions later on.

Thank you.

Um excuse me, Alison Wagner.

I'm gonna pass everything that she said.

I don't want to be repetitive.

Okay.

Okay.

Um Timick.

I hope you obviously.

Good evening.

Uh, my name is Tim Dernick.

I live at uh 3040 Cherokee Court over in the air park.

And uh common theme here, I just wanted to bring up specifically uh some of the other things that are uh, you know, the densities that are going on, obviously we're all concerned about that.

But specifically something that I haven't seen uh come up very often is the uh zoning proposals that are coming up for the corner, the the area that is on Bonanza and Highway 7.

So there's a lot of density going in there.

Currently, we're talking about a uh zoning change in there.

It's uh currently set up as employment, which I think there's a bit of uh confusion about.

So the employment as the people who currently own that land are interpreting it is um commercial mixed use.

They're talking about having possibly retail in there, and that the which is not a problem in itself.

The issue is that it's directly uh up against the rural residential area.

So there's there's no buffer, there's no step up into that sort of industrial entertainment.

What the air park is concerned about is having, you know, um nightclubs and things just outside their their bedroom doors.

And the, you know, so what we're trying to do is perhaps uh when when it gets to that zoning, I know this is not specifically the comprehensive plan, but uh when we get to that zoning issue, we're just wondering if there would be some way of maybe making a step up.

It currently is zoned for low residential and it going directly into the mixed use is uh is a big step up for us, not only for traffic and everything into that little what is essentially a giant cul-de-sac, uh, but also uh just directly up against the houses there.

So not specifically against the uh against the um comprehensive plan, but related to it as it comes up in the uh as it relates to the employment.

So there's a lot of the the people who are doing the uh who are doing are currently trying to get the zoning changed are are basically telling us the residents that are uh have gone to those meetings that you know this is we're just doing what the we're just doing what the town wants us to do.

The town is asking us to do this.

So that's their sort of rationale.

And I'm not sure.

I think they're taking a sort of an optimistic uh take on uh on what the town perhaps wants there.

So that's all.

I just wanted to bring up that.

I don't I haven't seen that particular spot uh uh really talked about in all the other you've got uh some bigger areas, obviously, that are going on, but this is for for the air park, that's a that's a big one.

And anybody who's driven past on seven on the uh King Supert's area, if you've seen the density of the units that are going in there, not to mention the stuff that's on the other side of the street in Broomfield.

There is a lot of density already going in.

We're just gonna make it worse, I think, with uh bringing that up and bringing it too far away from the current uh lower low uh density residential.

Thank you.

Christine Hackett Eisenberg.

Good evening.

I'm Christine Hackett Eisenberg, and I live in District One in Erie.

And I want to thank you all for holding this meeting and addressing the topic of the new land use designations and density classifications in the 2024 comprehensive plan.

I've come to understand a good deal about the planning principles that are being incorporated in the comp plan, but there is still a lot I don't understand.

The big picture that says we have to double our population in order to be fiscally solvent is still elusive to me.

The fiscal analysis by verdunity focused a great deal on the cost of road maintenance associated with growing outward physically.

So the argument was made that we have to grow on top of ourselves with higher density homes per acre in order to keep our road maintenance costs down.

But the TMP shows road improvements throughout our 20 square mile community, and the higher densities don't seem to reduce those road investments.

In fact, they seem to increase them.

Then I'm accused, confused about the simple multiplier that was added to the equation to cover the increased costs associated with the expanded parks and rack and police and fire, water supply, et cetera, to accommodate plant residential growth.

The multiplier didn't specifically tie together how much new residence cost the whole town's taxpayers.

So that's my first question.

How many tax-paying residents are needed in order to keep our town's finances solvent?

Is it really 80 to 90,000 people?

Because I keep going back to Councilmember Mortarolero's assessment showing that increasing our sales tax revenue by a modest amount is equivalent to doubling our property taxes without the need to dramat drastically increase our town's amenities and services.

So why the big focus on dense residential development?

True.

Businesses and retailers need buyers and employees.

But Erie isn't an island.

We have nearby residential growth that can help serve that need.

So is the purpose of denser residential development to achieve lower cost housing?

I can understand that goal.

But why does the answer have to be tall apartment buildings?

Why can't the conversation include tiny home communities and more manufactured homes, duplexes, and four-unit rental homes?

It doesn't feel like we're being creative enough in our visioning.

For example, the medium residential density classification has a huge range from eight to eighteen dwelling units per acre.

For one site, the 19-acre parcel at 1111th in Arapahoe, that could mean 154 low-scale one to one and a half story homes with gardens and dogs, walking paths, or a whopping four-story building with 346 apartments.

Those two options have very different demands on our town's resources.

So what really makes sense in that location?

Surely not this catch-all classification.

Let's take the time to push ourselves to adopt more creative options that are specific to the few land areas that aren't already entitled.

Let's consider other solutions that maybe better align with what truly makes Erie special.

Thank you.

Cliff Swart.

Hi, good evening, everyone.

Um my name is Cliff Swart.

I live in Rappo Ridge in Erie.

Uh Mayor Moore, Mayor Pro Timbell, and Council members.

First, I want to express my gratitude for your service to the town.

Um I'd like to address the densities that are being taught to tonight.

And just to reinforce what Christine spoke to earlier.

One thing is the comp plan process itself that was followed last year.

If you remember that process, um the density changes were not mentioned by staff for the almost the entire three years of that process.

And it wasn't until a resident pointed out that there's no markups between the old and new comp plan that the density changes, the densities had changed in definition across the board, much higher, medium, 50% higher.

That it was finally talked about by staff, but it was late within months of voting, voting to be approved.

So therefore, I think for the folks that 111th Arapo area, some folks felt deceived, betrayed by staff in council, some.

So and I think that was uh part of the defect that was in the process of the comp plan update.

For 111th Arapaho itself.

The new medium definition of the medium definition has raised the new one to almost what was at the upper end, the highest end of high density.

Imagine that.

Medium density, the upper part of medium density being changed to almost the upper part of high density.

That's the severity of the change of medium.

That would allow 346 units at 111th Arapaho.

That's higher than Thompson Thrift.

And it could be up to four stories.

And part of the problem with the comp plan again is the building types that were described, um described uh garden apartments in the comp plan.

But if you look at your slides tonight from staff on medium density, apartments are not listed in medium density, but are in high.

So therefore there's a trust.

So what am I recommending?

I'm recommending an outcome.

An outcome that density seconds.

Thank you.

Densities like medium density is there's a category added, a new category for medium that's closer to what was medium, and then maybe a medium that's for commercial or apartments.

And for me, that would be the best outcome.

Thank you.

I don't see anybody else signed up, and I don't see anyone online.

All right.

Is there anybody else in the audience tonight that would like to address this during public comment?

I would.

All right.

Yeah, just uh join us at the podium and just name and location uh for the record.

Uh excuse me.

Uh my name is Ruskin Denson.

I live in uh Call You Hills uh in Erie.

Oh sorry.

Can you guys hear me?

All right.

Yeah, I live in Call You Heels in uh Erie.

And um the reason I'm here today is because I saw your post on Facebook about the density in the area, and this is something I went through.

I think my fourth town, I moved around.

It was military and for work.

It's my fourth town that I've gone to where we had this conversation.

And I'm gonna tell you it all turned out bad.

They said that excuse me.

They said that you know the higher density will lower your property taxes, blah, blah, blah.

Never happened.

I still own two of those properties.

All the bond measurements and all that for the schools, for the infrastructure.

Uh there's a cost to it.

Higher density, there is a cost to it.

Uh if it doesn't come with California was mandated by the state, you know, for different areas for the higher density.

They didn't, the state didn't bring any money for the infrastructure for the schools, any of that.

So the local communities had to pay for it.

And that was in the form of bonds and higher sales taxes.

So when I look at this community when we moved here, when me and my wife decided to move here in 2023, uh, we looked at the community and we did not look at the master plan.

I think you guys called it something else.

Uh well, we didn't look at it, and now we see all this density building is just turn into California, you know.

And that's where we came from, Southern California.

So I'm just saying to you guys, you know, a warning.

Do not believe it when they tell you that the higher density is going to lower your property taxes.

I have I can show you my property taxes bill from written Washington and uh from Tino, California.

Don't be to see.

So I guess anybody else like to address this tonight.

Okay, then we're gonna go on to our first agenda item, which is not the density uh topic.

It is our um legislative agenda.

Bring it back my computer.

Um you have your lead on this one.

Julian and I'm gonna go.

All right, I'll turn it over to you and uh some physical ones around.

Thank you.

All right.

Hello, Mayor Council.

Um it's been a while since I've seen you all.

Hello, glad to be here.

We're talking tonight about your 2026 legislative agenda.

Um, I am Gabby Ray, your director of communications and community engagement.

I'm gonna pass it to Julian because I do believe we have a special guest or two.

Um, so I'll let him do some introductions.

You got it.

Uh thanks, Gabby.

Evening everybody, mayor council.

Appreciate your time tonight.

Um, I'm joining Jack from the Towns Director of DeCon Development.

Um, here tonight on behalf of our new legislative action team, the staff's put together.

Gabby and I are chairing that initiative, kind of an internal team of staff, some of which are in the back of the room.

We'll get into here in a little bit.

Um, taking a new proactive position and being more involved in the Capitol here in Colorado.

Um to kick off before we jump into our slides tonight.

We also have with us uh Senator Wallace, our representative from District 17 in Colorado legislature.

Um, I asked Senator Wallace to just come and give us a brief intro and preview on what's expected to happen uh this session coming up starting next Wednesday.

Um she has to leave in 20 minutes or so.

I told her five-minute intro is probably good to go.

Uh I know we've got a lot going on tonight, but I'll pass it to Senator Wallace.

All right, wonderful.

Thanks, Gabby.

Welcome.

Thank you, Mayor.

Thank you, council members, for having me.

It's wonderful to see all of you.

If I haven't met you yet, I was appointed in March to serve um for SD17, which is Erie, Lafayette, and Longmont.

Um, and so jumping into now in less than a year, my third legislative session, because we had the regular, the special, and are now going back to a regular one just next week.

So excited to be here.

I'll I'll tell you very quickly.

So each legislator is guaranteed five bills at the Capitol.

So we will see five hundred over five hundred bills this coming legislative session.

Um I have five.

I am happy to meet with you all, anyone in this room to talk about the specifics of those.

Um I'll just run through quickly top lines.

So I have a bill on LGBTQ rights and protecting kids' identity.

Um, I have a bill making it easier to serve in the state legislature while also keeping your daytime job.

Um, I have two pieces of environmental legislation.

So a bill around TV battle battery recycling, and then a bill around justified use for neonictinoids in seeds, which is a pesticide.

Um those are my two environmental bills, and then I will have a bill assessing uh trauma when sentencing um survivors of violence um in the criminal legal system.

So huge big array from just me alone.

And then, of course, as I mentioned, we have 500 bills coming up, right?

So we'll see things and everything from data centers to housing and transportation, like you find folks have been talking about tonight, water rights, uh, Cat Bill, I'm sure, right?

It'll it'll really run the gamut.

But I'm excited to hear what you all have to say tonight.

Um, the main thing that I want to highlight is is our budget.

Um, we just what you know earlier this evening heard about another Colorado is one of five states seeing a 10 billion dollar cut to child care block grants, TANF, and social services, um all of which is going to directly affect us as localities.

Um, and we are currently, I talk about I'm less than a year, and I'm also about to cut the budget for a billion dollars, the state budget for my third time.

Um, so we are in a crisis, it is a structural crisis that without changes to TABER, our state will continue to operate in, and we will not be able to help localities and ourselves assist when it comes to the failing federal government.

So I'd love to talk to you all about what you see from for the budget in particular, but also here for your thoughts tonight, what's on this agenda and anything that comes forward, right?

When you hear about a bill, I love that your team is getting so engaged.

When you hear about a bill that I need to know about, please feel free to contact me.

That goes for all the citizens too.

Feel free to contact me and we can work through what those specifics will mean for Erie for residents here and for each of you.

Thanks, Senator.

Yes, sir.

Uh and so everybody knows we did also invite representative WUG.

Um, who here has seen growing up Schoolhouse Rock?

Um just a bill.

Everybody, let's go.

Um, so at least for state legislature purpose, there's a house and a Senate.

Um, from the most recent redistricting, we have one senator and one representative.

So Senator Wallace represents all of Erie in district 17.

Uh representative Wug, who was invited but couldn't make it tonight, represents all of District 19, which is also all of Erie.

Um so depending on where a bill originates, whether in the Senate or the House or when it passes that chamber move to the other side of the hallway.

We have representatives on both sides of that hall.

Um so we can get into that.

Um we do have a couple different parts to go through tonight.

Gabby's gonna kick it off on our agenda, and then I'll pick it up on some of our actions with the new team, and what we'll be doing when the session starts here next week.

Uh yes, this is our quick agenda for the evening.

Um, first we're gonna talk about how we got to this version of the legislative agenda.

It has been edited from our 2025 legislative agenda, which you've been working on throughout the year.

So we'll look at that and and look at some of the um some of the changes that we made to this version.

And then we'll talk through the use cases.

What is the legislative agenda for, what can it be really useful for, and what can happen if we don't have one.

Um, and then Julian will go over that internal legislative action team that has just been created and what that means and what that's gonna look like and how we're gonna track bills that impact us, and then we will have some discussion, answer questions, and hopefully you will vote to approve the 2026 um legislative agenda.

The resolution is in your package.

26 years.

Um, so first I'll start with kind of the timeline of how we got where we are today.

So we did have a very first discussion about uh the legislative agenda as an item in March.

Um, and we and we started talking about what it looks like to either at that point edit the 2025 version, which we were so far into the session already we decided that wasn't necessarily um useful and effective for us.

So we did start talking about what it would look like for the 26 version.

Um we paused the completion of edits until later in the fall, which gave us sometimes internally as staff to start talking about what are we seeing, what is still useful, what can be updated for this next version of it.

So we had some internal discussions in about August in the summer there.

I did come back to you and talk to you all in September, and we had a presentation from CML, uh, the Colorado Municipal League about legislative agendas and the legislature in general.

Um, and I sent out the the draft to you all to send me back your edits and your thoughts.

So that was due in November.

We were scheduled to have a meeting with you, I think at the end of November, early December, um, and scheduling got in the way, so we're here today.

But we did get your edits late in last year, and now we will see kind of what that looks like.

Um, there were not many major changes to this um version of the legislative agenda.

In your packet, there is a red line version, so you can see what was like physically redlined.

Um you have the final design version in front of you, but your digital packet that was sent to you has the red line version in it.

One thing I'll note is we also did fully remove the RTD related question because it was about being a split community, and we did just have an election last year that put all of Erie under the RTD area district.

Thank you.

It is a district district.

Um, and so that one was completely removed, and I didn't add it to this review of the changes.

Um, but otherwise, when I went through the edits that I received from council members, one of the things that was removed or added, I guess the first thing that was added was clarification that we don't support unfunded mandates.

So we did hear some from our public comment about some unfunded mandates that could be a problem.

Um so that was something that we had added in there.

We do support a lot of different issues, but we support them with funding.

Um, one of the other things that we did was add or edit language, so it would be stronger support for homeowners and landowners in Erie.

Um, so that was added to various different items within the legislative agenda based on the edits that I received from council members.

Again, you can review those red lines.

There are some comments on how that happened.

And then finally, uh removed from quite a few of our topics in the legislative agenda was any reference to race, gender, and other specific protected classes and references to diversity, equity, and inclusion.

So those were the biggest changes that got us to this version that you see in front of you.

And this is the version that then you would be uh discussing and potentially approving with resolution tonight.

And I'll pause for questions.

All right.

Sounds good.

Gabby, thank you.

Very clear.

And by the way, I want to say thank you for speaking loudly enough because we don't have microphones in front of us, and Adam in the back is um thankful as I am.

So all of us need to take notice.

We speak as well.

Um all right, I'll bring it back to council for any comments, questions.

Um, thank you.

Thanks for the work on this.

I was going through the red lines, and I was like, that was so many months ago I can't even remember everything.

Thanks for including joint service plan.

I think that'll be the first probably um the first bit that we see for from each passenger rail.

Um and then beyond that, I was like, I don't know what else I probably unfunded mandates, who knows.

But um, I had some things that jumped out as me out at me as concerns in the red lines on page seven in the red lines.

Um eliminating advocacy for disproportionately impacted communities and environmental justice is called out.

Um and so I've been very active in the environmental justice space over the last decade.

Um that's something that's been really important to me and my constituents.

Um, and so I was curious why I'm trying to remember, I didn't write down who asked to have that removed.

Um but hoping we can have discussion about that.

Um I was really active in the environmental justice action task force as they were drawing up their recommendations to the legislature and developing that department at the CDPIG.

Um, and then met with the CDPNG as they were talking about the environment screen tool.

Um I commented last year at the PUC on rates um and incoming and in the Excel just transition plans and incoming um theta centers.

Um I regularly comment at AQCC and APCD as well as the ECMC, and those are all acronyms that you um but it's it's something that I find really important um and I've been involved in over the last 10 years, and so I'm curious why we should not include that in our advocacy um and and who it is that feels strongly about that, and just have I just want to enter into conversation about that first of all.

So okay, and I'm not clear on which item you're specifically referring to.

So it was page seven.

Um it's it was address the disproportionate impacts of environmentally insensitive activities, supports um policies and regulatory actions that advance environmental justice and protect disproportionately impacted communities from landfills, oil and gas activities, and other environmentally and resource and intensive activities.

Oh, it was um Mayor Potem Bell and Councilmember O'Connor who supported eliminating that entirely.

So it looked to council member um it's been a while, so I was just trying to remember what I have for breakfast as well.

Um I think a lot of this was trying to streamline language.

I mean, just looking at what the um what the edits were.

Um I think uh the other thing that I know just as far as uh uh disproportionate impacts that were um addressed, I think, in the last legislative uh session.

Some of the definitions did not necessarily meet some of the um the demographic makeup of of Erie.

So um it mentioned this in turn of a good meeting or two ago.

So I I think those were some of my thoughts at the time, but I I would honestly have to go back and review the per previous study session to um I think I know one of the things as far as like the flaring and and uh uh some of those things, and I know we talked about uh is uh oh direct referring to her.

I know that I I had mentioned uh this you don't have to come up here, but I just there we go.

Yeah.

Um I mentioned this uh uh previously that I know that we had um it was more of a communication thing with with some of our um uh some of the oil and gas operators in town that there was uh there was a flaring incident that occurred that when they set the notice of why they did it, it it made logical sense on why they were doing it.

The problem was we you know, why are we hearing this about in retrospect?

So those types of things I think are are things that you know we want to make sure we're uh in communication with the the oil and gas operators uh in town um and that that's transparent to the public and that that we're getting the information at the same time.

So I I that's I guess my thoughts with from what I can remember.

Can I ask no question?

So what is the relation or more demographics for the business with uh what they define for disproportionately impacted communities uh with what the state standards were, those um and I don't have the whole list, but um uh there was a whole bunch of things as far as like uh uh measuring uh how areas that were below the certain percentage below the poverty line, those types of things that you know in in Erie were you know, not to say everybody's in the same boat, but generally we're a more affluent community that were things that that I don't think applied uh from those standards, but is it isn't the point of this though to address those that maybe are not a part of the majority of the community and they would be recognized in in one of our regulated or whatever bills are are brought forth.

I yeah, I I uh yeah, it's fair point.

I I don't know.

I mean, I guess since you and I are listening here, I I don't remember.

Yeah, this is kind of going by this was my first time around with the legislative agenda and some of the some of my feedback is questions and trying to understand how much how big the disproportionate community is within Erie.

Yeah.

Um trying to understand is a lot of do we have a lot of that?

And if we do or we do feel that um I wasn't this was one that I wasn't this is not one of those tables for me.

Okay, well, I can share some of my experience then with through the environment screen um tool work that we did.

Um the the you know, one dot oh version eerie met a lot of the requirements.

The 2.0 version, which is what is in place right now, um, eliminated a lot of eerie because of that.

Um, you know, the falling below the poverty line.

There's a lot of different demographics.

There's also um BIPOC communities um and under resource.

There's there's a I can't even remember all of them, and I know that um director Frank is sitting in the back room just jumping at the bit.

But anyway, just to kind of keep it brief.

Um our disproportionately impacted community that qualifies under that term resides in old town.

So um and so my experience though has been to advocate when we advocate for the disproportionately impacted communities, the the people who are um most underserved or most impacted.

Um the intent then is to bring everyone along and to when we're meeting the needs of that group, then we are also you know, making policy that protects um the wider public.

And and so um that's been some that's been a focus of mine for all of these years that I have worked on that.

Um so I I think it's beneficial for us whether enviroscreen identifies you know our our air quality, which is at 90 to 100% um air toxics.

We when you use the environescreen tool and kind of go through there are a lot of areas where the pop the entire population of Erie does meet um some concerning things such as air toxics or oil and gas development within proximity of our homes and schools um and that kind of thing.

So I think it's important that Erie remains at the table and that we continue to advocate um an environments and um Senator Wallace can talk more about we have the grand bargain in place right now.

And so we won't be seeing probably a lot of oil and gas legislature this year.

But there are other ways that we can advocate for disproportionately impacted communities and specifically an environmental justice conversations.

So it's important to me.

And I would advocate that we continue.

I mean, I have been at these tables for the last decade, and and I will continue my commitment to show up at these tables and advocate.

But I think it would be great to be able to represent our entire population.

Okay.

Other comments from council?

I think there was a question about what what parts of Erie currently meet the disproportionately impacted community definition.

And council member Bear is correct in the in the initial version, which was based primarily on the impacts and how disproportionate they are.

Pretty much the whole town and indeed this whole region, mostly due to oil and gas development, did meet those criteria.

So then the demographics, income, um percentage of the population that are persons of color, these sorts of things, those those attributes were sort of amped up.

And in the final version, which is from November of 2024, late 2024, I believe none of the town qualified it as a disproportionately impacted community, except for the three mobile park homes, mobile home parks in Erie, which by definition, no matter what environment you live, is live in mobile home communities are considered disproportionately impacted.

Not regarding this, but can I want to guess?

No, I think we should get closure on this topic before we move on, otherwise we'll have to loop back.

I think I have a just a question from a practical sense.

If we left the version as um as Julian and Gabby have it in here, does that preclude us from your continued advocacy?

Or does it harm us in any way to lobby advocate if a bill does come to the floor?

Um you've not known more than I do if you want to start.

I don't actually know what I don't actually know what you're limited in doing in your official capacities if it's not included in here.

So I'll defer to you.

Yeah.

Uh I mean the legislative agenda is meant to be kind of a broad platform document.

Um it establishes positions on major statewide issues.

Uh so that when there's bills introduced throughout each legislative session, our team, and when I say team in this regard, it's mostly our uh staff legislative team that's been formed to review the bills and see how they align or don't align to the legislative agenda.

That gives us the authority to really go and testify on behalf of those bills.

Um if it's if the bill is really in support of our agenda or in opposition to our agenda, that allows us as town of Erie representatives to then go sit in the Senate committee, House Committee, and say, I'm Julian Jackman with the town of Erie, and I'm here speaking on behalf of the town and our legislative agenda.

If with that without this type, and this is an example, but without a statement like this being in the agenda, we cannot do that.

You can still go and speak in committee on your own behalf, but you cannot say I am here on behalf of the town of Erie.

You can say I'm here speaking on my own behalf.

The alternative to that, and before we had an agenda and had an established platform on these types of issues, each individual bill had to come and be presented and discussed by council at a future meeting.

I think as a senator knows things happen rapid quick uh in the legislature.

I've seen bills go fast track from initial introduction to pass by both chambers in two weeks.

The nature and the speed at which things operate at the Capitol doesn't really allow for the time for us to schedule discussions with council in a week or two weeks, talk about it, say whether or not it's a position, and then go back and go to the committee and testify.

Um having the position in the legislative agenda gives us as town representatives a lot more ability to go and advocate for or against the bill instead of doing it the other way.

And the other thing I would add was that has always also applied to council members as well.

Um, was that if it was in the agenda that you have approved as a council, you could go and speak and testify on behalf or against a bill, but if it was not, you would have to come and discuss it.

So not just for staff for council as well.

Yeah, on behalf of the town.

Correct.

As as an individual as a resident, you could always go testify in that way.

So in this case, we're talking about this specific language enabling council members and staff to be able to talk about the disproportionately impacted communities as a specific topic in Erie specifically.

Correct.

Well, I mean, disproportionately impacted communities can be on our outskirts.

Um there are a lot in Weld County.

There are you know along the I-70 corridor.

So as we talk about transit bills and some of the other things that might touch on greenhouse gas emissions reductions or transit access, um, then disproportionately impacted communities also come into those conversations.

So I think both languages include that, if I'm reading this correctly.

All right.

Just kind of thinking back, I I think that the landfill portion was one thing I had a concern with because we are we did annex the landfill into the town to collect revenue from there.

And I think we need to be careful.

Uh I've I was the one that advocated for getting the task force together to get the landfill entrance moved.

So I'm certainly concerned about safety aspects and operations around the landfill, and that's gonna as we grow, that's gonna become a larger impact.

Um, and I'm thankful we were able to get that task force in place.

Um, but on the flip side of this, if there's I I think we've done a good job in the last five years.

When I came on, we had a very adversarial relationship with with the landfill that I think we have re-established trust over that time.

And um uh I would be worried if there uh depending on what it is, if there are bills that are that um you know, pretty much there's around here, it's waste connections, but it uh uh you know it could be waste management, uh, some of the other larger landfill operators, those guys have a lot of lobbying power, and and if you get into a session where um we're on the one hand trying to negotiate with the landfill, but then we're advocating for a bill that may be negatively impacting them.

I think we might risk our own thing.

I I would rather deal with those as sort of one-off situations than have just a general um I certainly we are uh we're we're concerned about the impacts of landfill and um and and have been there's a number of communities, and I don't know uh Brian here right behind one.

I'm just right uh south of the closed one.

So um, or north of the uh Deborah regional.

So yeah, those are things we need to keep in mind, but I I think that was one of the concerns that I had.

Um yeah, so yeah, I think where I'm at on this particular one is I understand your point.

Um, and I understand your point that it's hard for some bills, not all.

I'll bring up the AI bills just for a brief second.

That one's still trying to be worked out a couple years after, right?

So something's moved slow, something's moved fast.

Um but I would be okay with leaving the language the way the Gabby and team have updated it for now.

But if there's a bill that you guys see that is like David's coming to you and saying we really need to be pushing back on this, then you know we can always call a special meeting, we can do a virtual meeting, we can do whatever it is in a timely fashion.

Sure.

Um I have the all of the questions and then we can just give staff guidance right here.

Because of the broadness that the mayor pro tem just articulated, it becomes more carte blanche as opposed to something specific to to Erie.

Here's my concern with that.

The environmental justice piece is what's eliminated.

The landfill language is still in the um the legislative agenda.

So we're not eliminating anything to do with the landfill.

We're eliminating uh our ability to say staff go and advocate for for the community um when it when we're considering environmental justice and when we're um talking about you know disproportionately impacted communities.

So we could, I mean, it's the same argument, right?

That if there's something that comes up along those lines, we can assess the the broader picture on the any that's just where I'm at, right?

And I don't need to debate it, I just that's where I'm at.

I don't know if you have any further comments.

This one it was more of trying to get just answers about what this really means.

Um also understanding how large our disapportionate community is.

Um, I had asked another question.

I think we have around 115 manufactured homes, which I guess would be the ones that would qualify.

I don't know the exact definition of a manufactured home.

I mean, there's there's like modular homes, and I don't believe those are mobile homes.

Okay.

I think these are specifically there's one on the north end.

Two on the north end and one on the south end of the old town here.

Yeah, that are traditional mobile cars.

Yeah, yeah.

So it's the numbers aren't that big.

So I think that's where I was at with it.

It's just trying to understand the numbers.

Why I would like to leave it in there as a as a as the representative for district two, which is old town always.

One of the reasons I think we're it's good that we have districts, uh, the charter out of a home rule is that home old old town feels very underrepresentative, underrepresented.

So I would push very hard for this to be put back in.

I'm fine with that.

Okay.

It was more of a I I would at least like it to be edited.

I I don't think putting it back in as is and I don't know at this point.

Remove landfills from it or something.

Um I mean with well, let me go back to you guys.

I don't want to like we're only on the first bullet point here, and I know there's more to discuss, but yeah, I don't want to reinvent the will here, but I'll mention I know we just to keeper of the clock.

We have this for 45 minutes.

We still have some more slides to go.

Um, our intent here with Gabby and me, we've been talking about this agenda for the last year.

Yeah.

Um, several meetings, going through the details.

I know Gabby sent out for comments and the red lines and all that.

Our goal tonight is to have this agenda approved by you all tonight.

If there's an amendment or two within that approval, great.

Um, but session starts next week.

Yeah, and so we're we're I think I mean I'm a little blunt here, but I think we're as staff kind of ready to move uh because we need this agenda ready before the session starts.

Um we would like to make sure that this agenda in some form is approved tonight, um, so that our legislative team that I'll get into here in the next couple of slides before we uh move on to the next topic tonight, is ready to act on that agenda.

Um so uh I'll defer to you all and please um uh up to you, but I would like to limit as much of the individual red line edits and comments tonight as much as possible.

Yeah, and I I certainly feel that and support that.

Uming that there's a pathway that if something does come up, um we could certainly address it and and deal with whatever we need to.

Otherwise, I think we're just gonna get into um you know, on each one of these, um the personal energy on either side.

But before you go, I have one question on this one or a different one?

Different.

Yeah, okay, we're gonna go around to different ones.

Um let's jump into that.

Let's see if there's a pile of these changes that ultimately want, or yeah, whether or not.

So I had this question for um Mayor Burton and uh John Martler and so the equity and inclusion on um page number eight.

So it was asked to be removed or eliminated.

So the question I have is do you have problem with the meaning of those words or the do we need to find synonyms?

We already told our LGBTQ friends that uh you're not included here by removing the right flags, and I don't look like any of you here.

Do you want me to be included on this table or uh what is this about?

So as I recall the the agreement that we had at the last meeting was we were going to what was in our preamble and the town charter, and that was what was agreed on as the language.

Am I correct?

That's what I remember.

But the language is the same here.

So you're eliminating the whole thing.

Okay.

So what is the language?

The advice from staff based on what was coming down from the federal was that did we change the preamble?

We no, we aligned with it.

We aligned with the preamble.

So you want any diversity in no, that's not what we said.

Anil, you you can't go back when we've already discussed this.

Why can't we discuss this?

We can't, we did discuss this.

So you're going in circles because you can make a political point.

Can we please it is not a political point?

Why is it?

Or how is it going to be asked your question again?

Yeah.

Do you want me to be included on this table?

Absolutely.

Absolutely.

But you just said you don't want it by eliminating all of you you are equating the elimination of the DEI section with the what is diversity.

I don't I don't look at it that way.

But you want it to be re-eliminated.

But I want what you want it to be eliminated, but you don't see it like the words and actions are not.

This is was also part of a conversation coming down from the federal government that funding is getting cut in lots of places with this.

And there was no reason to three words.

What's that?

With the three votes.

Yes.

That does not exclude anybody.

It does.

Okay.

I disagree.

All right.

Next uh topic, next question.

On any of the red lines that are in here.

Okay, so is that the only one then that we're all from?

Well, I I also have issues with eliminating page eight.

The town of Erie supports equitable and inclusive statewide policies as government institutions.

And is the ethical responsibility of the town and state alike to actively evaluate and resolve institutional discrimination, which can manifest through policies, practices, and behaviors.

I don't understand why we would eliminate that.

And I I would like for those who would like to see it eliminated to defend that to me.

But like I'm five.

Like explain it.

I don't understand why we would not advocate for equitable and inclusive statewide policies.

I think by nature they should be equitable.

Um inclusive, they should not be discriminatory.

And I think there's already language in our laws to not be discriminatory.

I am more concerned about the money side with the state budget the way it is.

I know Colorado is getting hit on many fronts.

I think you just mentioned child care.

I hadn't heard about this one.

That came down recently, I'm guessing.

It came down today.

There's a New York Times piece about it.

10 billion dollars cut from across five Democratic states.

Yep.

And those cuts will have disproportionate effects on community, right?

It won't it won't come equally.

And we we can set out with you know the clear eyes full hearts.

We're trying not to be discriminatory.

Yeah.

That's not how it comes out in practice.

And and so that's what what I would say.

I think that defending those things, stating them clearly, ensuring that they are in what involved in what you all are going to bring forward to us at the state is important to voice.

And on the flip side, the states that are have taken this path are the ones that are getting hammered right now with um funding being cut.

And so, you know, us putting this in here isn't certainly going to help that effort either.

Or at least I don't see how it helps.

That does that doesn't mean we should write laws that are discriminatory, right?

That just the two are not equate, they don't equate to me in my mind.

I think for me, it's when does it when do we stop giving in to that pressure to ensure that we don't allow discrimination?

So if we're going to be bullied through that federal funding into bad action after bad action after bad action, where does that stop?

And that's that's what the line is for me.

Yeah.

And I hear you.

I don't know that Erie is the front lines for that battle, though.

Until it is.

Yeah.

Other comments on the red lines.

Maybe you got a couple more slides to go through.

You got it.

Um, so we will be asking tonight um after we finish these next couple points, uh, that you do have a resolution in front of tonight, 2600 three, uh, approving the legislative agenda for 2026 as presented or up to you with any amendments therein.

Um the more practical piece, we kind of talked about what the legislative agenda is.

This is how we really implement it in the next step.

Uh having an approved legislative agenda by this body, as we said, really allows representatives of the town to go advocate for key legislation um at the Capitol for and against.

Um we've talked about how bills introduced every session can really fall into these categories and how the legislative agenda gives us gives us that support, opposition to be able to go uh act on behalf on that behalf at the Capitol.

Um also we mentioned you know, there's things that occur regionally with Dr.

Cog and other entities that allow council members to sign on to policy statements uh when those issues align with the legislative agenda well.

So it's not as much locally focused at the Capitol, it can also be regionally with these other groups.

Just show some use cases, just uh show practical how this agenda has and can be used in the past.

Um, since I uh was lucky one to write the slide, I picked three that I've testified on the last three years.

Sorry, my name's on there three times.

It's the only slide it is.

Um so the last three sessions House Bill 25, 1272 last year, House Bill 24, 1172 two years ago, and by contrast, I'll mention SB 23273 three years ago.

Um, each of these three bills that were introduced all had some impact to our legislative agenda.

The first one from last year, um, I know several in the room were very involved in this bill.

Um it pertained to construction defects and missing middle housing, really the lack of privately owned condos in the state and why it's darn near impossible to build condos in the state of Colorado.

Um the policy statement about supporting efforts to increase the availability of for sale condos through construction defects or other platforms, allowed me on behalf of the town to go and sit in that House Committee chamber in March and testify in support of that bill.

Ultimately, the bill got approved, but it changed a lot before the governor signed it.

And fortunately or unfortunately, it changed a lot, not in a positive way and is not going to be too helpful for us for the foreseeable future.

But nonetheless, we were able to testify on it in the initial onset.

Uh, second one is protecting powers of annexation.

This is from the economic health chapter.

There was an incentive bill introduced two sessions ago in uh 2024 that allows counties to establish basically a county version of URA.

It challenges our ability to annex because it gives county property owners a reason to stay in the county.

Um, so this was also another bill that we were able to go testify on behalf of the town based off that policy statement and the agenda in opposition of that bill.

It ultimately did get approved, but um we were still able to go make our mark and put a statement on the record in opposition to it.

And the last one, um, this is kind of back to what happens if we don't have an agenda.

There was a bill that um I think a lot of us talked about in the former trustee chamber downstairs around changing the URA statutes around the inclusion of ag land and TIFF areas.

It was centered around a project in a property in Loveland by McQuinney, the Sintera project that would have changed the state statutes around how you can and cannot include AG LAN and TIFF areas.

Um it was using state policy to influence local land use, which is not the job of state policy.

Um while we did not have a legislative agenda, I serve on public policy committees for the state economic development council, for ICSC, for NAOP, for a few others, and every one of those entities took positions against that bill.

So I was able to go testify on behalf of those groups opposing it, but I had to say in public, I'm here not on behalf of the town because the town had not adopted a policy statement in that regard.

Um, but same thing goes for that one.

So this just shows three examples of how our legislative agenda over the last three years has and can be used to really go influence actual legislation at the Capitol.

And then the last is our new action team debuting for the first time here, 2026.

Um, this is also to be more proactive.

We we've been active in the last couple of years.

This is just another step in the right direction to be even more proactive as staff as as counsel to properly administer administer this agenda.

You know, in the past, councils approved the agenda.

Um as staff, we flagged a couple bills here and there when they look when they land on our lap.

Um, representative Wuog and his office had sent us bills every session when they may or may not have impacts on Erie and we might respond to those, but we've now formed this team as of November to be more proactive in administering the the agenda and presenting regular updates back to this body for each session.

Um we've uh created some tools we can use to help track those key bills each session and let you all know when they pop up and how they do or do not align to our legislative agenda.

As much as time allows, which I know is limited, bandwidth staff time, et cetera, um, when available, that does allow us to go testify and advocate on behalf of those bills at the Capitol when they're in the Senate committee, when they're in the House Committee, um, as we've done the last couple years.

Every member of the legislative team I'll hit on here in a sec, uh would be authorized to then go act in that behalf on behalf of the town as they those bills uh pertain to legislative agenda.

Uh lastly, keeping you all informed, um staff and everybody in their own respective field uh is obviously most focused on bills that pertain to them and their profession.

Uh, we will use that experience and expertise to flag bills that we think matter most to the town of Erie and projects occurring in the town of Erie via a tracker tool that we have now uh created.

Uh it's on a website called Fast Democracy.

It's just kind of an online bill tracking tool that allows us throughout the session to monitor, track, uh establish positions for or against these bills and follow where they are.

Have they been introduced?

House committee, when are they going to committee hearing?

Have they been amended?

What's the amendment say?

What was the vote at committee?

Did it make it out of committee?

When's it going to the governor's desk?

This kind of tool does all of that for us, and then some.

It also provides a public URL version that we can create that anybody as staff as counsel can view which bills have we flagged, which bills have we tracked, and seeing, okay, what's the position we've established on those bills, where are they going, how do they impact Erie, and so on.

Um, so that'll be coming to an email near you here in the next probably couple of weeks.

And then last, because I know we're over on time, this is a preview of who's on that team.

Uh, Gabby and I get the privilege of chairing this new body.

Uh we made sure to select folks from their different respective departments, uh, kind of the who's who of uh what bills are traditionally introduced through uh legislature each year, whether they're around home rule and local control, environmental issues, sustainability, uh parks and open space, planning, housing, transportation, uh police, and so on.

So we have primary staff members from each of these groups uh as part of this team, and then backups when those primary folks cannot attend.

Uh we meet every two weeks.

We'll be meeting uh this Thursday, actually, to make sure that we're all aligned before session starts next Wednesday.

Uh and every those that are in the room, please raise your hands again, Josh, Meredith, Lou, Patrick, Dave, Gabby.

Son of got a solid squad in the room.

And with that, I will take any questions and request approval of the resolution.

All right, sounds good.

Thank you for all this work.

And although we were debating a couple items on here, there are a ton of items on here, and I don't want it lost.

Um, that uh there's um numerous items that we're all in agreement on, and we'd like to move forward.

Um, so I'm first gonna see if there's a resolution to approve this as is, and then if that fails, then we can go through the amendment process.

So is there a resolution to approve a motion to approve resolution 26003?

So moved.

Second.

All right, we have a motion and a second.

Any further conversation?

I think it's really important to include environmental justice.

It's something I have a lot of experience with over the last decade, and I really would like to be able to show up at these.

It's not just the legislature, it's all the rulemaking tables.

Um including you know, all those different acronyms that I spoke about and signing on to all the different um letters, which I send you guys several over the last year that we had the opportunity to sign on to.

Um so I I think it's important for us to include environmental justice in our priorities.

I also think it's important for us to include um the diversity equity inclusion piece to recognize the different groups and stand really intentionally.

Um and it kind of circles neatly back to our August 26th meeting where I I really you know raised the awareness that when we're talking about immigrants' rights and disability rights and women's rights and LGBTQ rights and civil rights, they're all tethered together.

And when we crumble the structures of one, they will all tumble.

And so um, I really think it's important that you know, when we're talking about things like the Bumble Road Users bill last year and um gosh paratransit and things like that.

We have the ability to go and speak with the force and power of the town and in our positions to say, yes, we want the this the disability community to have assured access to transit to be able to be gainfully employed and um and we stand with our immigrant community and and things we can't imagine yet, right?

So um I think it's impactful to be able to do that with um you know our whole chest to be able to show up and say I'm here and with the support of my council and the support representing my town.

So those are very important to me, and um, I hope you guys can support that.

All right, other comments through the motion and second, other comments.

Yeah, I also wanted to uh keep the diversity part and urge you to be an example for the other cities and towns to stand up against this and not just fall into the agenda that is being driven.

And internally, you also believe inclusivity is there.

You said that you want me on this table.

You do you like the meaning of it?

Your action is not there.

So I urge you want to consider that and keep everybody included.

So I'm voting on that.

All right, other comments.

All right, then I'll uh council members.

I think some of the redlined out items.

Um Richard Mayor have actually politicized this document and created even more bureaucracy by create having staff have to come back to us on certain items.

Um I think that's an appropriate.

I actually wanted to make a friendly amendment to add the uh address the disproportionate impacts environmentally intensive activities back into it.

Okay.

So we have a friendly amendment.

Um made the motion.

It was yeah, so I'll accept the amendment.

Can I make make an amendment to the um can I uh find it?

Is it definitely no?

Uh sorry, does somebody have the which one you need?

Do you want the red line?

Yeah that's the last one that has the red line.

I'm sorry, okay.

Um can we basically just have that from uh uh disproportionally impacted communities from environmentally and resource intense activities?

So we just cut these specifics, but just kind of make it a broad and uh environmentally and resource intense activities or intensive activities.

I see we're going with that.

Um the red one since you have my copy what are your thoughts, Council Member Bear?

Supports policies and regulatory actions that advance environmental justice and protect disproportionally impacted communities.

How about we end it right there?

That's fine.

Okay, so I'm gonna um friendly amendment.

Why don't you drop your friendly amendment?

I can remove it.

I'm gonna see if council member bear will make a similar friendly amendment and just repeat what you said again.

Yeah, to to add um address the disproportionate impacts of environmentally intensive activities, support policies and regulatory action that advance environmental justice and protect disproportionately impacted communities.

All right, so we have a friendly um um amendment, you accept it.

Do you accept the second?

All right, okay, and then I also would like to include um language that allows us to um ensure state and federal policies are developed with a lens toward diversity equity inclusion in some fashion.

Um because that comes down to being able to sign on to you know support letters of support for things like the paratransit bill last year, which was really important to multiple road users, and those impact our community members language from the preamble or something similar to that.

That's what I thought we would have to do.

That would be that would be appropriate, I think.

I thought that's what I we probably don't have one word.

I didn't look at the specific thing, but I thought that's what we added back in.

We were referring that to the grants to communities.

Oh, okay.

So whatever the equivalent to that is for those.

So we're gonna I want to move this along because we do have a long agenda tonight and some other items.

Um is there a friendly amendment to include the language from our preamble?

I think that's what if I understood, Councilman.

Under the equity and inclusion part, I guess maybe that would help.

I don't know if that's Claire.

Go ahead.

Yeah, yeah.

I was gonna say, just to make sure I'm clear on that.

The section for equity and inclusion then would say something to the effect of the town of Erie is going to support and uphold the preamble to our charter, which is and then include the preamble to the charter.

I think that works.

I can support that to be I think so.

I mean, it's been what's redacted, it says that the town of Erie supports equitable and inclusive statewide policies.

Um do you just need paragraph drop that back in then?

So for clarification, is it paragraph three from the preamble?

That's a treatment.

Yeah, that looks like I've got it up here.

I apologize.

Your preamble is four paragraphs long, and I want to make sure that we're if you're republishing the entire four paragraphs, that's great.

But if you are looking for the language, I would suggest paragraph three.

Yeah, I think that's what they attempt.

Okay, which is fine.

I'm okay with that, and I should certainly support that.

Yeah, um, but we should be able to say um we should support our charter, period.

Well, you support home world charter communities.

I think paragraph three is is great if we have to reprint, you know, include that in it.

Yeah, uh so we pledge to uphold the principles of democracy, equity, and and justice, and to foster a community that's inclusive, diverse, and welcoming to all.

We value the contributions of our residents, businesses, and institutions, and we seek to promote economic growth and opportunity while preserving the quality of life that makes area desirable place to live.

Director Frank, I think was alluding to paragraph two.

Well, so we've got paragraph three um for our attorney that that's the right one for this particular conversation.

So that's a friendly amendment, I think as well.

Coming back to our except all right, and that'll look a second.

All right.

So we've got two friendly amendments.

I'm gonna call the vote.

Let me can I add one other thing.

I don't know.

I'm not gonna add it.

I'm not asking, I just want to mention this.

Um we can look at this for the next one.

Um I am concerned with costs and what how some of these impact uh residents.

So one of the first things we said though is we don't want any legislature that is an unfunded mandate, but it's not.

Let me so this and I'm not making a change.

I just want to put this out there.

Um, there was one that was assist with the transition to modern building energy codes.

Um, and I wanted to know how much it would add to the cost of a house.

Assuming an average new home in Yearie is approximately 2800 square feet, and construction costs average 300 per square feet.

The total construction cost for a 2021 IECC compliant home would be about 840,000.

A comparable net zero home would therefore cost approximately 957,000, representing an estimated 17,000 increase in construction cost.

And I really think that well, the first home would be compliant, which is what the agenda is advocating.

Sure.

But it's just it's just in two or three years, we're gonna see the prices of our water heaters increase and the prices of our furnaces increase because of them being more energy efficient upwards of say 40 percent.

It's I think we need to look closer at how much we how much things like this are gonna cost the residents.

So I'm in that topic for another story.

I know it does.

I am, and that's it.

I just wanted to put some conclusion.

I just wanted to put it out there that everything we do it seems like it impacts the pocketbooks of our residents.

Yeah, we really should look closer at that.

I think everything we have another conversation, just not not right now.

All right, sounds good.

We have a motion and a second.

All in favor, say aye.

All opposed, say no.

All right, we got there.

Um, I'll just add as in closing.

I'm so excited to see your team down there.

I also serve, I will most assuredly be on the local government and housing uh committee, and then there's a couple other committees that we'll likely will find out in the next couple of days.

But I'll be seeing you down there, I'm sure a lot for that.

I'm so excited to work with all the directors.

Thank you for your work and look forward to having it.

Yeah, thanks for being here.

Thank you for having me, Council members.

Mayor, I appreciate the conversation.

Yeah.

You too.

Thank you so much.

Yes, don't even worry about it.

Yes, at least let me know when you're going to sound good.

All right, we're gonna move on to item uh 2026 13, the comprehensive plan in implementation.

And I believe I'm going to turn it over to Sarah, but Sarah is Oh, yeah, there's Sarah.

Sarah Namela, our uh director of clean development.

Thank you.

Please hold Sarah Narvella, Planning and Development Director.

Slowly trying to find our where we can coming out.

I don't have to do anything.

All right.

Um so um tonight, we are happy to be with you to continue the conversation about the comprehensive plan.

Um, we have a couple of things that we wanted to address with you.

One was to get to some of the continued questions and concerns that we've heard from our the mayor and council.

And also we have also brought to you some implementation efforts and updates on those.

So we hope that it'll be a healthy and productive conversation and get us into some next steps that are much needed for the town.

So my name is Sarah Normella.

I have brought along uh Kelly Driscoll, our planning manager, and Josh Campbell, our senior strategic planner, and we're all three going to be presenting to you.

If you want to go, oh is it?

Oh, it's one of those.

Okay.

I really hate the scroll.

Um, so tonight we're gonna provide you with just a touch of context for this conversation, and then Josh is gonna get into more of the detail around the residential land uses within the comprehensive plan.

I think that's where we'll spend a lot of time.

Um we'll touch on also just affordable housing overall and how that plays into the uh comp plan, and then we'll hit some of that implementation that I mentioned earlier.

So just for everybody, our comprehensive plan includes a very broad suite of topics.

And one of the key elements of our comprehensive plan is our land use plan.

And that is the overall vision for the community.

You can sort of imagine that the specific land use designations that are on this map are like paint colors for just a nice vision that we have for the community.

These paint colors can certainly change if we want to do so, but they are not the last in how we develop.

They are a guide, but they're a guide for council, for our planning commission, for our community and developers.

So I'm going to hand this over to Kelly to just dive a little bit more into what happens after the comp plan.

Yeah.

Paint colors are shown.

Yeah, so you know, a color on the map.

A lot of things have to happen before you see construction and building happening.

So sorry, this is rather annoying.

Yeah.

So this flow chart kind of gives you an overall view of our development process.

And you know, the the colors on the land use map.

It's important to recognize that there can be more than one zoning category that fits within those.

A good recent example for you all is the Northwesterly development.

That was a PD, but um the map colored that all that light blue, that mixed neighborhood.

So it had a lot of different um zoning categories in there that allowed a lot of different things like retail, office, uh live work, apartments, single family detached townhomes, things like that.

So where the map shows it as this all everything's purple, getting to getting to the zoning entitlements is often a lot more nuanced and detailed.

Um thank you.

That's so much better.

Um just under two square miles within the town isn't already constructed entitled or planned.

Um so, but that doesn't mean you know things are frozen in place, you know, people can request to change their zoning.

Um if they were to decide to develop it different than what their current entitlements are, it would involve a lot of these steps in our development process.

And the map and the comp plan are a reference guide in that in that development process.

Every single application starts with a pre-application, these are free.

Um, it helps us, we assemble a team of internal and external folks, and it helps uncover any really big issues at the forefront of a project before a lot of work has been done.

Um but say a property owner does want to rezone, they want to do something different than what their current entitlements are.

Um, so they would go to that, they're already in the town, they're already annexed, so they would be on that third um square there.

And while it looks simple, it's just a square, there's a lot of iteration that happens with that development team review team.

There's a lot of technical evaluation, a lot of rounds of review before you all even um see that application, and that's to make sure all of those concerns are addressed and they're meeting our standards.

Um they also are required to go to the neighborhood and have a neighborhood meeting within um six months of their first public hearing that's scheduled, and that's for um the developer to you know present and answer questions that um those surrounding might have.

Um and then as you all are aware, there's public hearings often um that goes to planning commission first.

They give a recommendation, and you all are the decision-making body for most everything on that process with the exception of the the larger site plans, those just go to planning commission.

Um let's see.

Yeah, nice.

So we understand that um that you all wanted to consider some potential updates to the comp plan.

So if you'll just keep those in mind as we're moving through, Josh is gonna go through some more details on um the mixed use and residential designations.

But just remember any amendments do need to have an accompanying technical analysis and then some community engagement and education.

And of course, it'll go through that same process with Planning Commission reviewing and it coming to you all for that final decision.

So I will turn it over to Josh.

Oh, you don't need to.

Awesome.

Well, again, my name's Josh Cable.

I'm the senior strategic planner with the town and was very heavily involved in the process of the comprehensive plan update.

And again, I want to thank Sarah and Kelly for also assisting in that process.

It wasn't just a single individual, but rather a joint process from everyone throughout the town.

What we have in front of us, I'm specifically going to be going through the different land uses that pertain residential components.

And as Kelly and Sarah mentioned, I do want you all to remember or consider and think about that land use truly is a vision.

It's a guide.

It's not our regulatory item that ends up being the decision maker.

That more or less is our zoning of the parcel and the additional UDC factors that come in and play with it as well.

So again, these are just visions that help us understand the resources, the infrastructural needs that we could pertain to or need to think about for the future.

So again, that's just something I want us to remember in addition to those previous revisions that we can consider, and we'll circle back to those after we've gone through these.

So I am going to go through a few of these a little bit more quicker.

However, if there are concerns that we are not aware of, please feel free to let us know.

We want to have that discussion, that conversation.

But the few that we do know of, we will try to have a pertain and stick stick to those a little bit more deeper.

So I do want to point out that you know we keep saying that it's a guideline, nothing's really done in it.

But you know, all the neighborhood meetings that I've been to before I was on council and since I've been on council, the reference to comp plan multiple, typically reference to complan multiple times by the developer.

So they're using the comp plan is more than a guideline.

They're using it as this is the voice of the town saying this is what we can do this you know in this range, right?

So I think that's really important that we all understand that that the developer uses this document more than just maybe as a guide, but as a strong guide when they're communicating in these neighborhood meetings.

That's a great point.

Um, Councilmember Mortalero, that it is part of the criteria for when you are evaluating, considering the zoning change.

So we don't want to lose sight of that, and that's certainly why we're here tonight to make sure everybody's comfortable with the ranges.

Thanks.

So again, like I said, I'm gonna move through some of these just as more of a remembrance of where we are at right now.

Um, so first, right, the first one we're gonna focus in on or maybe talk about is our residential rule.

Um, this really is as we can see on the map, more of our outskirts of town where we're seeing more of our agricultural uses, our uh large lots, um, estate homes, again, focusing in on that zero to two dwelling units per acre.

Um, what you are seeing on the map front of you, uh, with the exception of a few parcels, um, uh, are already developed.

So a lot of these map are a lot of these parcels are indicated as what they are currently seen as in terms of development form.

Moving on to the next, we have residential low, and as you can see, that is a majority of what Erie is.

That is our single family detached homes that make up the community, um, ranging from what we have as two to eight.

Uh, in reference to the 2015 plan, uh, which did not see an increase from the 2005 plan.

Um, that is um just an increase of two units.

So it was two to six increase to two to eight units, um, on par with what we are seeing in terms of development right now.

Oh, wrong computer.

Uh and uh this is where I think we'll we'll first jump into one of our um our our concerns or concern residential um land uses that we are been hearing about uh specifically is residential medium.

Uh yes, there was an increase from the 2005 or 2015 designations, uh, which range from six to twelve units.

Uh, we did see an increase of that from eight to eighteen.

The reason why we did that increase is we looked at what market realities are showing right now, um, whether that's currently in Erie or even the surrounding municipalities.

What are they utilizing as their residential medium ranges, as well as what is actually penciling out or being developed?

And specifically, that's the wrong computer again.

I need to switch this.

There we go.

Um I want to zoom in and specifically just pinpoints that when we're talking residential medium and eerie, we are only talking about three parcels specifically that are undeveloped or not entitled.

So every single thing else that you are seeing in that orangish yellow color on this map is currently already developed as residential medium within that range in which we have we have right now.

Um excuse me.

And I also want to call attention specifically to the images that you are seeing on the left.

Um, and for a few of you that were uh may recall, these is from the walk that we did last year, specifically within Bradburn community in Westminster, as well as the holiday neighborhood and boulder.

Um, all of these neighborhoods or these two neighborhoods that we walked through were a representation of what a built-out density range of eight to eighteen dwelling units per acre could look like.

Um we specifically wanted to take you all to this to remind you that it's not necessarily high-rise apartments.

There's cottage courts, there's townhomes, there are single family detached, there's single family detached, there are apartments.

It's a mixture of different types of developments.

It doesn't have to necessarily be just high-rise apartments.

Um again, it can be.

Not high-rise, let me rephrase.

Um, it can be um per our comp plan uh cottage or garden apartments.

Um, so not I misspoke when I said high rise.

So I want to use a garden apartment versus an apartment.

So what uh how would I?

So for this does not pertain to everyone, uh, but if you recall in the Holiday Park neighborhood uh that we walked through, there was a garden court community uh that was focused in on the central area being a gathering space, um, whether it had community gardens, it had recreational pads, uh, but also had just small unit apartment buildings surrounding it.

So it was focused in on the communal space and frontage being that garden focus rather than being uh let's good example is that bottom of all correct facing parking lots.

Um so it's looking more on that smaller scale and associating with the public experience, the image, the branding of what that looks like, um and trying to get back more to that public space rather than focusing in on infrastructure.

So parking lots, um, sidewalks are included, but less pavement and more green.

I would add that it's um typically about two and three stories, stair accessed, not elevator, and these open spaces are um integrated throughout the development, and you do typically have surface parking.

So I think the Collier's Hill is probably um the I forgot the name of it.

The Aurora apartments in Collier's Hill is similar to it's that's a little bit on the denser side.

That's actually 25 units to the acre.

But in terms of its layout with the open spaces and a parking, uh the surface parking, you can sort of imagine if it was just a little bit shorter.

And so another aspect that goes into understanding you know where these land use specific parcels are assigned, is taken in consideration, you know, what is the built environment.

That does still include infrastructure, um, but also association to what is the surrounding uh building typology and what is the availability to needs, resources.

Uh, typically your higher density developments, um, and I'm saying higher density, that's anything increasing as we go up the spectrum, uh, is more closely knitted or closely associated with areas of transportation and other services and amenities.

Uh so if you focus in on some of these parcels that are indicated as this that are undeveloped and entitled, that is looking at proximity of what those services, transportation corridors are, um, and understanding that uh higher density development would be suited for the neighboring developments as well.

Next, moving on to residential high.

Um, I do know this was one that was spoken on as well with that increase from 18 to 30, which was previously seen as 12 to 20.

Again, this is looking at what market realities are.

The one thing that I do want to call attention to this is that there were zero properties that were brand new that aren't already developed that are situated in residential high.

Meaning that with the future land use map, we are not proposing any future residential high development within the town planning boundary.

Just for reference of what that is, you are looking at nine-mile apartments on the left-hand side of the screen, as well as the Aura apartments across from Erie High School.

Those are residential high, currently already developed units within the community.

So that is what that residential typology would look like.

But again, I do want to just reiterate with the comprehensive plan, there were no new parcels designated as residential high within the future land use map.

And that moves us into mixed-use neighborhood.

And these next two mixed use uh categorizations are a little bit more hard to understand and interpret just because it does play into a role of residential, commercial employment, potentially industrial to a degree uses all fitting into one categorization.

Unlike the 20205/slash 2015 plan, um, our mixed use designations did not have a dwelling unit per acre counted.

So what we did for um the update for the 24 plan was to look at market realities, understand what is happening with our neighbors, um, as well as understanding what our economic potential is to set those dwelling units.

So mixed use neighborhood, a good way to think about this is this is uh horizontal development.

Um, this is seeing a corner that has commercial components, maybe right behind that, having town homes, feathering off into single family detached homes as you go across.

It is not saying the entire development would be 12 units to the acre maxed out.

Um, this is just a range.

Um, for reference, um, I do want to call attention to Northwesterly.

Um, I do recognize it is not developed at the moment, so you're not able to physically see it, but Northwesterly is a mixed-use development.

It's going to have commercial employment, retail opportunities, a range of housing typology.

Their gross density is coming out to be five units to an acre.

So while we are seeing six to twelve, in terms of gross density, when we calculate in the infrastructural demands as well as the parks and open space requirements, we see the actual gross density tend to be less.

And that's what we see consistently throughout the market.

Um, I do know one of the properties that we do have on this map, mixed or shown as mixed use neighborhood.

Um, some have referred to it as the the Golden Run or specifically Aaron Harbor's property, is a property that we do see as very high potential for being mixed use development.

Um, and again, I want to reiterate potential.

What we are seeing on this map, if they are colored in, is not saying that development is going to happen, um, especially in instances with an apartment property is not annexed into the town.

This is us hypothetically thinking forward to if things were to happen, what we might want to envision by that.

Again, that is seen as a vision and a guide that is supported by our zoning and then our UDC, as well as the different various policies throughout the documentation of the comp plan.

So, again, these are a range of housing typology.

And the best way of thinking about it is horizontal development.

And that's that moves us into our mention to I you know, I remember when we we uh did preliminary platform uh Northwester, there's a lot to like about it.

And you know, I there were a lot of features that I really liked and like the idea.

But what confuses me is you know, Lafayette, Longmont, and Boulder all have these mixed use where the the retail is vacant and has been for for a long time.

And so I don't under we understand why that is.

I I mean I'm it just surprised me and then I drive by it you know for over a year and they're still vacant.

And um, so like I say, I love the idea, but what's not translating?

Well, it's if those include vertical mixed use, that's the hardest uh mixed use to accomplish.

Vertical meaning you're at the retail at the ground floor and the residential above.

Right.

I think that's what you're referring to.

Yeah, and all three that I'm referring to are those.

And when you have that mix and you don't have a lot of residential around to support the retail, it just takes a long time for that retail to hold.

And if you don't also have enough retail, like a critical mass of retail, it's difficult to you know attract additional retailers right now in our current market.

It's also very difficult to attract retailers as a whole if you don't have some type of drive-through or a lot of parking right in front of the retail space.

So all of those factors play into the difficulty, and I know I know Julian's itching back there as the economic development track.

I was like teams chat, you guys.

Oh, we're feel free to lay in if you want to.

And I would just say that our mixed use designation does not require vertical.

Horizontal is a lot more accomplishable.

That's what you saw proposed and approved in the northwesterly development.

But go ahead and feel really short.

Yeah, join me up here.

Thank you, appreciate it.

Uh, Julian Jack Red Development Director.

Um, so what I've seen traditionally in Superior, Longmont, Lafayette, and others for the vertical mixed use, typically it's uh residential developer building a mostly residential project, including commercial the ground floor to meet zoning requirements, but they're not commercial developers, they're not commercial brokers.

They may not know how to build spaces to fit the tenants they might want to attract.

Um there are also a lot of times in more suburban bedroom communities where there's just not the demand.

There's not the residential density, there's not the daytime traffic that is not supporting the retail interest to fill those spaces.

In some locations, I did a tour in downtown superior pretty recently.

The spaces they built on these ground floors just are not conducive to attract the tenants they want.

The height, the ceiling heights are not appropriate, they don't have allowance for vents and hoods for restaurants, the support columns that are needed to stabilize the building to build to a certain height are right in the middle of these spaces and create very challenging, unusual dimensions and fit for spaces.

So even though well located corner units that they're like, this is great for a restaurant, not a single restaurant will touch it.

So vertical is extremely hard to fill.

Okay.

You need the right builder, the right location, the right size, the right dimensions, the right construction, which is a fragile formula.

Okay.

Yeah, I just want to make sure you guys understood you know what their challenges were and make sure that we're not doing the same kind of thing here.

So yeah, appreciate it.

Okay.

Well, I think that opens up into a good transition because we do move into our secondary mixed use land use, um, which is mixed use of village, um, which admittedly is more of a focus of a vertical development.

Um, so knowing the issues and constraints with that, this is a very targeted um where this land use logistically would make sense.

It's looking at our areas that are amenities, has services, already has existing retail and commercial, um, or has the potential of being a potential.

Sorry, I keep saying potential, has the ability to be a logistics hub if you want to call it in the future.

Um, so for instance, looking out towards I-25, um, that is a transportation corridor that provides a lot of opportunity for growth and see you sees a potential of seeing more of that vertical mixed use developments, not only serving the residents of Erie, but also the surrounding municipalities as well.

Um, so what you are seeing on the map are only a handful of what are designated as that mixed use village being um undeveloped or entitled parcels.

Uh so again, I didn't mention this earlier, but undeveloped and entitled means that uh we do not have an approved development plan for it.

Not entitled, sorry.

We do not have a development plan uh approved for it.

Um, and we uh it fits underneath um lost my train of thought.

I'm sorry, I just no worries.

Uh undeveloped is essentially um as you might think, an undeveloped parcel um that meets certain criteria um that we apologize was brought about in our comp plan, and I do not have the exact definition.

I do not want to give you the wrong thing right now.

Um had to do with value.

Um, I would say I I'll just add that um we also do not require vertical mixed use even in mixed use village, it may be encouraged by potential zoning for that area, but that's um the flexibility is there, the densities, the allowable densities are a little bit higher, and you can see an existing um site with that kind of meets the the densities of mixed use village that's already entitled is the town center.

So that's a while, it's still building out.

Yeah.

Um it's it's what we have.

So on the I-25 corridor, I mean, I've heard, I don't know if this is true or not, that we're gonna have seven, eight plus story buildings out there as this is designated.

Is there any truth to that?

The proposed drafted hasn't even been brought to council yet.

Um standards for gateway, which is the town owned property, the gateway south, that does include a range, a density range that for one of the land use designations that goes up to seven stories.

More likely than not, based on the market, we're gonna be looking at four stories, maybe five.

Um, if we develop that in the next 20 years or so, so it gives a flexibility.

If let's say a larger hotel wants to come in, um, you know, that might be able to go up to something higher.

Residential, very unlikely that an area like this would have would be doing structured parking and getting up to seven stories.

So it's maybe more on the commercial side, you'd see it.

So we but again, it's not entitled yet.

So I totally know that there's no PD, and right.

If I had my way, there would be no PD, and we would use the UDC and they would follow that.

That's a whole different discussion though.

But how do we take into consideration what the capabilities of our existing fire department is, right?

I don't know that we have seven-story buildings that they have equipment to evacuate, fight fires, you know, do whatever.

How is that taken into consideration before it gets further enough along where developers feel like they're entitled?

Or is it just for us then and all the residents here to pay for tax increases for the fire department to upgrade their equipment?

What right?

How does that work?

Well, the fire department would have to look at what's approved and plan accordingly and see if that's something that they want to invest in.

It does take about two years to order a fire, uh, a new fire vehicle.

So I imagine that they'd have to plan ahead if they saw that something like that had been approved or you know, permitted building permit wise.

That's and they they do their review body for every single referral request and be able to comment on something like that.

And they do, they comment on you know, needing the truck turning radius and all that stuff.

Yeah, they're very involved.

Yeah, which then comes back to is growth paying its own way, right?

So let's just play that scenario out a little bit.

I'm the fire department, and I don't have a truck to fight fires in a seven-story building.

So now I have to do what needs to be done in order to procure one and to get the staff training and all that.

Okay, that's going to be more operating costs.

So then what we get is tax increases from the fire department, which aren't just charged to that one development, right?

They're charged to all of us, which is really a micro way of saying what we're really talking about here tonight is the community survey.

And the community survey that came back pretty clearly saying we don't want the density, we want to protect the character of Erie.

And so really um, I think a fundamental question here in front of us tonight is why do we have to do this type of density anywhere in our our town?

Uh, and what's driving that uh to make it happen.

So when when we were doing the comp plan through extensive outreach, we heard from residents, current residents, that it is really painful to get in your car and drive to the edge of town for goods and services, and they want more restaurants in town, they want more services, they want to be able to stay in town and keep their money in town.

In order to do that, we can't just be a bedroom community.

We can't just be large lot single family development.

We have to have the population to support the commercial development.

So, how do you reconcile that with the survey results that actually ask the question?

Would you rather have lower density and higher taxes or higher density and lower taxes?

Because what you're describing to me from the pop-ups and all the community outreach is in conflict with what we saw with the written word in the survey.

And I I think that's really the ultimate reason we're even having this conversation here tonight.

Part of that reconciliation process, and it is a process, it's not just that black and white is more education of the community and put some context around what those tax entries look like, what the density looks like.

Just in are you willing to pay your own way or has more density?

They may think it's pennies on the dollar.

Or it may be pennies on the dollar.

They may be not maybe maybe significantly go.

If they know the dollars involved, they might go no, let's let's let's look at this density thing.

Yeah, I don't get that sense, but I understand your point.

So I I think another important point to bring up is that you know, we bring in about 25 million dollars in sales tax, right?

Each year, and we bring in seven to nine million dollars in property tax to double our property tax.

You know, we let's say we went a hundred percent increase on our property tax by doubling our size.

We only have to increase our sales by a third to get that same dollar amount.

And sales tax doesn't require as much infrastructure, doesn't require schools, um as many roads during rush hour, as well as um, you know, so uh less taxing on water, things like that.

So we're able to get the same dollar if we increase our sales by uh by a third versus increasing our population by 100%.

But it's not that binary to Kelly's point.

We need the density to get the track.

We've already got 40,000 people, and with a some of these with a plan to go to businesses are saying that's not enough.

And we don't we don't meet some other criteria.

It it goes hand in hand, it's not binary.

So it I understand it's just not binary, but it's certainly we have a population to you know attract a lot of businesses, and so let's focus on on those who you know feel that 70,000 people is plenty, right?

Restaurants and and shops and whatnot.

I mean, I don't see where you know we have to go to 100,000 people to attract them versus 70.

But yeah, that's the so that's no other people talking over each other.

I think Mayor Pro Tim has the floor, then I'll come to you and then I'll come back to you.

So I I think there's a couple different things you're talking about.

Totally totally agree that that yeah, residents want more shopping opportunities.

That's something I've heard for a long time.

I another thing that's come up when we start talking about you know going to 100,000.

I'll tell you somebody, you know, uh well.

I don't know.

I don't know.

Your first round is mayor, what people were talking about, the full build out, but when I came on, we were talking about 85, and now we're talking about 100.

We are not talking about 73 to 80,000.

Okay, so it's never higher than that.

But the Torty Gallus report that we had for I thought we we had for that was talking about no what is the official number?

Let's let's get it on the right.

Yeah, let's okay.

So it's in the company.

It's in the comp plans to uh I believe 73 to 80,000, but I will so roughly somewhere around doubling our population today, roughly 73 to 18.

Okay, uh this full build out.

So okay, that brings up other questions, but I'll say that for um so I I think another thing is is um uh talking about the the areas somebody brought up um the Aaron Harbor property because that's that's something that's kind of had a long history to it.

Um I don't I don't know if you're around for the first go-around of that.

That's totally around the um and we heard from some residents tonight that uh there's a concern with does what we do that fit in with what's the existing area because I think that's also important for uh residents and ensuring now again mixed use neighborhood.

If we're talking six to twelve dwelling units, I I think that might be a little bit different than what we're talking about, the new kind of medium density.

And that's that's the other thing that's confusing to me about this because when we did 111th in Arapaho, um we were doing a zoning application or the old uh zoning districts.

So what was proposed is a high density uh development there, um we we denied that application, and right now it's just ag holding, but I think when we talk about applying uh a zoning of a potential zoning for that area, I think for us, like one is that area if you did mixed use neighborhood, well, that's six to twelve units, but is that a big enough area to do a mixed use development?

And then we're stuck with if we don't have that, then if we're talking about medium density, then we go up to those higher densities, which puts us back to what we denied in the first zoning application.

So I think one of the problems that I think is a difficulty for us is finding the right the right solution for the right area, and and because that particular area we have a ton of issues with access with sewage, and I know we're working on on some of the solutions around that.

Um finding a solution for whatever would be the uh if if Mr.

Harbor determines a one points who wants to try to annex back into the town, what what would be for that?

And is that does that meet the expectations of what the residents are asking for?

I understand that that yeah, we do want to see more commercial development.

Um, but I I think there's there's certain looming questions that have been, I think, looming for a while.

And I I think specific to 111th.

I think we'll come back around to each of the these sites.

Yeah.

Um so as far as like does the mixed use, how does that work with um surrounding neighborhoods?

I think if you look at you know, the the northwesterly site, there's that rural residential neighborhood that it kind of wraps around.

Well, what what they did, and because of the comp plan and the policies in the comp plan, there there was an open space buffer provided between those properties, and they cited their lower density products near that stuff.

They didn't put, you know, the apartments were down off the parkway, they weren't up against you know a 10-acre uh rural subdivision.

So it's it's policies in the comp plan that can kind of help us when we're doing that development review and getting those um those things that help fit in with existing development.

Okay.

That makes sense.

Okay.

That's also a product of the neighborhood outreach.

Yes.

That's required as part of zoning.

And so those conversations that the applicant had with those uh rural property owners resulted in um that type of adjustment to that to their plan.

Sure.

All right, let me come back to councilman.

I just had uh add one bond where we have less number of businesses, and to your point, they have to spend like like the residents have to spend four or five times in those smaller spaces on the limited spaces, and expanding businesses will come into picture when you know they'll look at how many people are there, and then they'll probably back out and say there is not enough demand for me to be successful.

So in order for the new businesses to be successful, we need population, and in order for the existing businesses to survive, it is still like we need more people are like the people have to spend three times more in these same spaces, which is not going to happen.

So I just wanted to bring that point.

And and we don't have a lot of land that isn't already developed or entitled.

And that's yeah, the commercial uh like availability is very, very low, right?

Yeah, but I think population, but also um we're pretty affluent uh community, uh high incomes and whatnot, that attracts businesses.

So it seems like Erie without having to grow much has a lot to attract businesses.

No, no, even the affluency point, right?

So I didn't only refer two days.

Third day I want to go out.

I can't have only two or three places are with me for if we even did my family.

Yeah, great.

So it goes to Lafayette or goes to Bloomfield or you know, right.

Let me okay.

Sorry, go ahead.

Let me come back to Councilmore Hoback.

Yeah, one more comment.

I was is when you spoke of talk about these small pockets of potentially medium mixed use, medium density versus having it all be suburban sprawl.

We also it also creates an opportunity for saying, okay, we're gonna have a little bit of high high density here, density here, we're gonna have the income.

Maybe we buy buy some open space, and you can create more diversity there and you know, a very nice community.

All right, let me come back to staff um to keep going so that we can then start talking about parcels that are on our lines.

Yeah.

So um as far as affordable housing, um, best practice are to locate, you know, where it is already served by transit, plan to be served, uh, near jobs, near uh commercial or neighborhood centers, and really intermixed within all all kinds of housing types.

Um, I will note something got messed up with our graphics here.

There should be a lot more neighborhood centers, um, the little orange uh stars.

There should be um some down on Highway 7 and 287 and Arapahoe, Erie Parkway and County Laden Road, Gateway.

So just bear that in mind when so the blue circles show the properties that are either already developed or entitled for that have an affordable housing component.

So there's the cheeseman residences a little bit to the north and east of that is the um senior housing, uh just north of Old Town.

And then, of course, um Northwesterly has um an affordable component as well, and then the red ones are those that are more in that vision uh stage.

So can you go back for a second?

Yeah, sure.

So the bus transit line, I think will be important when we talk about Aaron Harvest property because that yellow line is not going to go by its property shortly.

Yeah, um that yellow line that goes up is actually getting replaced with that dashed line.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Yes.

The green dashed line.

Correct.

Sorry.

Yeah.

Yeah.

So we can pause here for some discussion on the policy options before we talk about implementation, some of the implementation items.

Um I think it would help me, but I'll also take guidance from council to talk tangibly.

And so it helps when we actually look at an actual parcel.

Okay.

And so, unless there's um strong feelings to go a different way, what I'd like to do is just start south and go north.

And I think when we set this up, we said there were three parcels, although we can add more.

Um, 111th and Arapo, Aaron Harper's property, and then I-25 gateway.

And so I think the the question about Arapaho and 111th is that when medium density was changed to essentially be the same as the prior high density, it allows for basically Thompson thrifts still under the garden apartment variant of whatever that would be.

And I think you saw the uprising.

I mean, two of us are probably here tonight because of that.

Um, or at least it was the catalyst for that.

And so do we have to have that kind of density on that particular property?

Um, well, currently the comp plan, because uh the comp plan was actually adopted after the Arapaho and 111 um application came through to council, it was assigned medium density, which goes up to 18 units to the acre.

The um that proposed project had about 25 units to the acre, so that was in the high density category.

So we chose more because we heard that the community was more comfortable with up-to-town homes in that area.

So that's why we designated it as medium density, which is primarily duplex townhomes, very small lot.

You could get a low density garden.

You can get low density garden apartments, but it's not going to be something as dense as Colliers Hill or the um nine projects because those are both at 25.

Yeah.

So I guess the question that we have for you is um, you know, the density ranges that we have in the comp plan.

Um, you know, we did, as Josh mentioned, adjust them to the realities we were seeing throughout the town in terms of built development.

Um, but that is an option for council to take a look at and just revert back to the um comp plan designations that we had in 2005 and 2015.

Um we it it is usual to take a look at those and to adjust to market realities.

That's why we started in the 90s at I think our maximum density was two units to the acre.

So we have evolved and you know, and we have done that work before, but if there's a desire to um kind of stay up, have that middle ground and kind of stick with 2005-2015, we can certainly you know propose lower density ranges.

Um that's one option.

The other option is to specifically go in and reduce um densities on specific parcels or change land use designations.

Can you do that?

That's part of the comp plan update that we would get direction from you tonight.

That's adjust to the existing.

But then it'll go to technical analysis and then community outreach.

Like it'll change it.

We don't just change.

Right.

Yeah.

We would take it through, it has to go through community planning commissioners.

I'm sorry, my question wasn't clear.

Are you saying that for a parcel you can designate its own density?

Or are you saying I thought that would be kind of weird.

No.

No, sorry if I uh confused you on that response, but we would either the options are change the whole density ranges as a whole that you we've shown you tonight, or change the designations on a particular site.

Right.

The color.

Yeah.

I I just want to clarify one thing.

Thompson Shrift was actually the pre-application and the application was going through a 17 units per acre, um, which is still it, which is not within the old medium, but is is within the new medium.

And unfortunately, I I know the details of that property far too well.

Um, but that's where they were planning.

Now they were going to be asking for more, as we found out in one of the later council meetings because of the money they felt that they had put in that they were they were going to ask, come back and ask for a higher density, but what they put in was 17 units.

You're right, they started there.

Yeah, so on that particular parcel, I mean I think some of my neighbors would love to see it as open space, and I totally get that perspective.

I'm under the um, I want to step down, right?

We talked about I think feathering was the term you used, or or step down.

And it would be nice to have a step down from the apartments there.

So in all reality, even if they were to do the max at 18, that would still be a step down from the nine-mile apartments that are currently redeveloped.

So even at because if we recall from this image, the neighboring parcel to 111th and Arapaho is currently developed as I.

So as medium, this would be a feathered step down from the neighboring, at least to the west.

Yeah, correct.

Yeah, but if you step it down there, then it still steps down to the north as well, right?

In the sense that you're going from low to medium.

Yeah.

If it's um town homes or duplexes, uh that type of thing.

I think the concern is that it doesn't necessarily have to be town homes or duplexes.

Um if it's medium, does it preclude uses like um uh assisted living or memory care?

No, it doesn't it does not preclude assisted because that's a kind of living, it's just then it's units per acre again.

Yeah, yeah.

Just the scale in general.

I mean, at 18 units to the acre max, you're probably gonna get up to two and three-story um buildings, not all of it being three-story, just because that would again move you well, you know, well into the mid-20s.

Um, if you recall the um nine mile project, which I know has a name, um, is uh all is it's a mix of two and three stories, but more primarily three.

What is it called?

Savannah.

Silvana Savannah.

That's a very fancy way of saying that, but yeah.

Um but uh yeah, that's um what you you know, so with the up to 18 units of the acre, that would be like a dense town home, similar to the denser town homes that you see um shown on the pictures on the slide here, and um or it could be again the garden department, but it would be more like a two-story primarily, and that's kind of where um at 17 units to the acre, the original proposal with um Thompson thrift was primarily two stories.

There are two stories along Arapahoe, they were three stories on the west side, I believe, and West side in middle uh were three-story, but um along arapahole was two story, so yeah.

So the that's the current the makeup of the medium density residential that's assigned to the site.

So if you're you know wanting to potentially move it to low density, as we have defined low density, which is two to eight units to the acre, we could take direction on that, or again, um if you want to just overall change what median density looks like so that it's back to six to twelve units of the acre, um that's another option.

So I mean, for for me, the there are multiple reasons why that was young for there was a five to one uh rejection of of that proposal.

Um and for multiple reasons, right?

The infrastructure wasn't there.

Um the traffic pattern, you know, uh clearly in the survey came out that you know that stretch of road is probably the most you know mentioned in the survey is you know, traffic congestion, whatnot.

We still have a drainage issue in that area that hasn't been you know fully uh sorted out, plus we're going to be draining the um Tebow property, which is on the southwest corner of uh 287 and Arapaho, probably down 11 as well.

So we're gonna be adding that.

Plus, if we develop on that 11 in Arapaho, now we instead of just nine mile draining down there, you you got the Tebow property and one eleven and Arapaho.

Uh so for all those, you know, for the many infrastructure issues, you know to have it still designated as at the density that was rejected, um, it is a concern to me.

All kinds of second but um so so those are my concerns uh with it being you know the 8 to 18 um designation still um in the comp plan.

Again, developers look at that and say, okay, this is this is what I can go to.

Um, and they build a plan around that density, and then they come with the application and they have neighborhood meetings where they say we're abiding by your comp plan, right?

So um could could we do like um a medium low and a medium high, keeping the medium we have today as medium high, and then the medium low goes back to what the medium was for decades.

So thinking like six to twelve is medium low, and then twelve to eighteen is medium high.

I think I think that's what I'm thinking.

And then that would take the this whole I think fear that is out there, it would it would take it away that garden apartments aren't going to be put through why because the compliment says we can do that, and we all know that once the process gets started and it goes into quasi judicial, then we all have to just look at it from the criteria, and it's uh it becomes what it is.

We're taking direction from you all right.

I just said that is a that could work.

I mean, that fits in the Montillero, and would that work from your lens?

Yeah, I think the lower medium, you know, to where it it used to be.

Um I still have a little bit of concern about traffic going down Beacon Hill.

Um, and at some point, you know, I know that Arapaho being widened isn't in the C dot plan uh you know in the next 10 years.

So I yeah, I'm still concerned about that, but it's certainly a less concerning.

Yeah, this is kind of a catch-22 on this side.

Go ahead and then I'll get my thought together here.

So the C doc plan, the segment C, which is one nineteenth and Arapaho, um, is not part of CDOS plan.

They did the study in the design, but that ultimately will fall on the town and Lafayette if we partner with them to do that.

Um, and so colour seven goes straight up baseline over across 287 and then up Arapahoe.

Um, so the only way that we'll see improvements for traffic for um multimodal for uh widening of Arapahoe, that's what you choose if we take that on, and the only way that we take that on generally is through requiring development to pay for it, and so a lot of the concerns that we hear from residents will could be addressed, will continue until they're addressed by likely development.

So I think being careful about you know planning, what it looks like, having walkable community there.

Um site was identified as a great alternative for um affordable housing from the um village of Cold Creek property.

Um this was the the alternative site, if I remember correctly.

Um so you know, I think that there's a lot of opportunity to be really thoughtful.

I think that you have you know taken the lead on being really thoughtful about this corner.

But I I do think that if we are gonna really truly address the drainage issues and the um traffic that we hear about in this area and all the traffic lights.

Um I've been thinking about you know uh roundabouts what makes sense over there.

We talked about roundabouts uh to avoid traffic going up the Beacon Hill neighborhood.

Um, there's just a lot that can be done, I think.

Um, having maybe a low residential, low, medium, medium, low, whatever you call it.

Maybe that could um encourage the kind of development that you're wanting to see there.

Um, but I think for us to really address the issues that we see on Arapaho will require something to happen.

Yeah, I think I agree with everything you just said.

I I I totally agree.

And but Thompson's thrift was only willing to put in like two a couple left turn lane, right?

They weren't gonna widen you know, Arapaho, they were gonna put that kind of money into us.

But we can require that when the development does happen, right?

And it either pens out or it doesn't.

Is that right?

We can ask for improvements that are wonderful.

Like, when's my jump?

All right, and here it is.

Miguel Igular principal transportation planner for the town of Erie.

Um, with that development, we would require them to widen Arapaho Road between US 27 and 11th Street.

Um, they would make and they would make improvements to 1111th.

Um, and they uh we would guide them on what kind of connections they would have from their development onto Arapaho Road or onto 1111th or both.

Um I think at the time, as you're mentioning, we were talking to them about um uh roundabout to access onto 111th as far south on their property as possible to keep it away from the Arapahoe and 111th intersection.

Um, and then the connection on Arapaho Road would just be a right in right out, and they'd be uh required to put in a median to prevent left turns from getting out of the development onto Arapaho Road.

Yes, all that makes sense.

All right.

Um is anybody uh counsel-wise against on that particular um parcel doing this medium low for that, so we don't have to mess with all the other mediums, which then become the medium high.

Is that an option?

If we add a does the designation, then you label that one.

Yeah, we could essentially so what is that process look like?

The same as any change to the car plan.

We'll do a technical analysis to make sure we can do that, and then it'll go to the public outreach, and then we'll go to planning commission, and that'll come back to the okay, and then we would approve it as an amendment.

Correct to a company.

The only question that I had was um I was looking up Lafayette's uh comprehensive plan and uh to the land just to the south.

I mean, I think it's just smart, it says housing area, and yeah, that's their plan.

Uh you know, just kind of ensuring that that we want to be good neighbors.

One of the things that I've said before was that I would I was it this goes back before any of us, but like in the in the global settlement, like I would have hoped that we had a joint solution for both those areas.

It was kind of weird because I remember in 2021 uh this came up and we were trying to uh there was something where we're trying to do a comp plan amendment before we did the amendment to the whole thing, and then that got pulled off.

Um anyways, I just want to make sure that what we do there are uh don't want to negatively affect Lafayette if they have plans for that.

I know there is still a house on their property, but I know it I know the previous owners, but I don't know if anyone's currently in there or what you know what do we do a referral to the Lafayette on something like this?

Okay, so our engagement process is not only to our residents as a whole, but also extending opportunities surrounding municipalities to review any amendments as well as the entire document.

So they would have an opportunity to review anything before we would come to blank commission and cancel.

All right.

So the densities would have five categories.

Yeah, we'd have rural, low, medium, low, medium, high, and high.

Thank you.

All right.

I think you have direction to do that to take it through the actual process.

Create some medium low.

Repeat back the density you would use for the medium low.

Six to twelve.

Six to twelve.

It aligns with the mix number.

That's what it was before.

That's what it was.

So okay, so and then for the specific site, 111 is the direction that that would be medium low.

Yes.

No other parcels are we designating that, not at least at this moment.

As we go further, maybe there's others.

Yeah, we could take a look at that as part of our um update for the amendment.

Just if we suggest any others that we think might fit well into that category, we will bring that back.

Okay.

And then I think going south to north, I think Aaron Harbor's property would be the next one.

By the way, for those that might be listening at home or look at the tape later, we call it Aaron Harbor's property because the gentleman named Aaron Harbour lives on the property.

There's no other mystery behind that other than he lives there.

And he's wanted to develop it for a long time.

He actually annexed in.

I don't know if any of us were on council when he annexed in and annexed out.

No.

It was 13.

Annexed in, and then there was some falling out with the town, some litigation of some sort.

Bottom line is he got annexed out, if I remember.

Were you here already by then?

2013.

That was for you.

And so uh it's been sitting there.

The vision for that property was uh what I would call ultra high density.

Anybody can go out to Goldenrun uh.org, I think it is, and you can see the renderings of the eight-story buildings.

I uh I spoke with Aaron uh for almost an hour over the weekend, and um great conversation.

I've known Aaron for a long time, and he does have this vision, this kind of utopian vision, and it'll tell you where he believes cars should be banned, and that there's enough density in there uh to make things happen.

I think the way we have it today, it would never allow that to happen.

Um I think there's concern that that property is right in the middle of the town.

And if you look at the actual comp plan with all the colors on it, it is surrounded by low density.

This one.

And so it's the purple um piece on there.

And so talk to me a little bit.

Talk to us, talk to the public about what does that purple mean relative to the low density that's around it?

And in the back of my mind is the survey, right?

People are they don't want that traffic, they don't want the density.

So take a look again, you know, northwesterly is a good example of that light purple adjacent to rural open space and low density residential, and the example that Kelly made earlier about the feathering or the you know, the context sensitive development adjacent to low density residential.

So that would be something that we would look at as that you know, as development is proposed there.

We'd certainly be looking at well, how does it relate to the adjacent development?

That's something that's very important to all of us.

Um we are all living in, you know, several of us are property owners and you know, have been property owners in the past.

We all know how that feels.

Um, and so I think it's important, and we've heard it from residents too, um, even through this process uh through the comp plan process, they're concerned about what happens next to them, as anybody would be.

So um we take that very seriously, so that would be something again, too that would come before planning commission and council and the residents.

Yes.

Um, because it would need to be zoned.

So more more broadly, maybe low density versus the densities for this mixed use neighborhood.

If you just looked at them and compare them, how do they compare?

So again, Northwesterly's a good example.

It's it's a gross density, right?

So it's like not even six.

I get that.

I'm looking more.

The mixed use for what is written, forget about Westerly for a moment.

Yeah, more asking this is a blank slate, and around it is low density, which is how many units for you.

Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't understand.

Two to eight.

It's up to eight.

And then how many are possible on Aaron's property as it's designated today?

Six to twelve.

Six to twelve.

Okay, so it's still relatively in that area.

Yes.

And some of that property would be commercial retail, right?

Which takes away some of the density, the amount of people.

Open space.

Yes, open space and parks.

Open space and parks structure.

So technically that then is lower than our current medium density.

Up to 12.

Yes.

It would it the new medium low is the same density range as the mixed use.

So we could do apartments, townhomes, single family, so we can get the diversity of housing, which helps with affordability.

Okay.

But it's not so dense that anybody should fear that that's gonna look extremely different to than the property to the north or to the west.

Right.

We might have elements like you said, there might be apartments and you know, right along county line, or I you know, just that could fit into an overall density with single family when you blend it together.

You could have even large lots in there for some of it to balance out to make the densities work.

Yeah, okay.

I think I'm okay.

I just you know, I want to I want to articulate it in public.

So the people that have the fear of golden run, right?

I'm hearing golden run cannot happen the way that we have it in the comp plan today.

No, is there a height?

There's a height restriction, right?

Um golden run wouldn't uh would would violate our code for uh so the complan we don't have we don't have in the compan.

You see, so we have yeah, we have building typologies, um and then yeah, the zoning, which needed in the presentation is something that um we also need to align to the cop plan.

Uh they have been out of alignment for quite some time, and um that's where you would have height.

Okay.

I I know in Lafayette third code is three stories or 35 feet.

I know you mentioned on the page property, 30 foot limit.

Um maybe that's what the design came back is 30, it was 30 five, 35.

That's 35 is pretty consistently most all of our districts area five.

So is the the parkdale is the those ones off uh one that's 35 feet like that for the well the way we parkdale is in a PD.

Yeah, I knew that, but I think so they can set you know their own height, their own setbacks, their own is that I I don't know for sure.

I don't know.

Okay, I was just yeah, they look 35 feet, so the devil's in the details because also the way that you measure height and the way that we measure heights like the midpoint of the roof, so you could have a point that goes higher.

So yeah, okay.

I do think there's a point to be made that if you have density that doesn't look like a skyscraper that that is more appealing to people than this is what our I grew up in Boulder, and there used to be that they were so strict on building heights because they did not want to block the view of the mountains, and at some point long after I moved out of there, the kind of went out the window, and uh yeah, we do it, yeah.

So on any of these new developments, are they um it's an affordable housing question?

We have this agreement with Boulder County, and it was done before I was here, so I I know enough about it, but I don't know all the details.

So it's that all new developments are 12 percent affordable.

Is that a true statement?

No, it's a goal to achieve 12 percent over time.

Okay, so how do we we've made this commitment to Boulder County?

It applies to Weld County as well, but Westerly has affordable housing segments as part of their pre-development agreement in relation to their metro district.

And the the cooperative agreement with Boulder County Housing Partnership, it's not just Boulder County, it's the surrounding jurisdictions of Lafayette.

Uh Lewisville goes all the way up to Lyons.

It's a commitment to pursue as a region 12% affordable housing in the region.

Right, which would, I mean, some people will look at that and say we each need to do 12%, or somebody has to do more, but you know, somebody isn't likely to feel like they should do less.

At least I don't feel that way.

If we have an agreement, we have an agreement.

But I think we also have to recognize that uh if Westerly is doing floating housing, and what is their percent again?

Is it 12%?

Maybe it's 10%.

I think it's 10%.

They're making that up somewhere else, either by cutting their own profits or by doing other things in the development to offset it.

Really hard for us to know how the money plays out in there, but there's no free luncheon in this, right?

Somebody is moving the money to make it happen.

Yes, and they're they're not as deeply affordable because the metro district policy does not have the same definition that we ultimately you know came up with and have in our code now for affordable housing.

So that's it's 80 to 120 um percent of the area median income.

So it's you might want to call it more attainable versus affordable.

Yeah.

And then you know, I think of things like tiny homes, right?

I it it feels like there's a place for those somewhere.

Um, but I don't know that we have really figured that out.

Um there's some shown in the town center plan on the T-boat property in the north.

I think that Stephen's gonna do that.

You usually want cheaper land to be able to, you know, you're not netting a high dollar per square foot sale price um to pay for you have to make it up somehow.

We'll likely have another session on affordable housing, attainable housing at some point in the future.

So but it does play into this to some degree, as at least I'm trying to understand the densities and everything.

All right, I'm not sensing any change needed for Aaron's property after this conversation.

Yeah, and I wouldn't see I'm good with it where it is, but if we were going to go higher density on his property, I would be okay with a long county line road, not one nineteen, right?

Because um county line road, that's just our main thoroughfare.

Yeah, county line road and Erie Parkway are our main thoroughfares.

Um, and if we're gonna put density, I would say that would be where it is within reason, not you know, and not anything more than three stories.

As we move um the jump bus away from 119th, his property loses the ability to say, hey, I want high density here because I got a bus line, right?

Where 111th and arapo doesn't fall into that.

To be honest here, all right.

No, let me go like uh correct on that.

However, we're working with RTD.

This is brand new.

I don't think anybody knows about this.

Maybe Malcolm.

Okay.

Um we were working with RTD to extend the dash, which goes to uh Lafayette the Willoughby uh development that's at 120th Lemma.

Yeah, we're working with them to extend that to Highway 7 to Cochreek Boulevard, up Coe Creek Boulevard to County Line Road to the community center.

Oh, so that's the next one in in line, and so far they've agreed to it.

So we're working on that few years out.

Second line.

This is the value of having the transportation mobility.

Yeah, so even though he uh there will be no line on 119th, there will be one coming to County Line Road, which is a perfect place for especially if we want to do more apartment higher density on the transit corridors.

We could um add a policy about about banking, Mr.

Agabin.

Um we could add a policy about the development or some a little bit of guidance around the development of the harbor property to talk a little bit about um you know where the density might want to be, you know, height compatibility, accessing transit.

So that's always something you can add into a comp plan.

It's just a little more guidance.

So if uh if you guys we have a general policy about like density being appropriate along arterials and um but yeah, if we if we want to add something specific to that property, it's a big site, so it's we do have some call-outs specifically with um you know county line isn't our corridor of special consideration, so that does introduce additional um policy criteria about how we want frontages and landscaping buffers and things like that.

Um, so we do have that area of special consideration guidance to um apply to this property should a development proposal come forward.

Um but to Sarah's point, we we can explore that even further for additional policies if need be.

So I would leave that to your judgment if after this conversation and the understanding of um the dash coming down that if you feel it's appropriate.

If we're gonna go through this public process, it seems to me that's the time to interject those things that staff think are appropriate to go in there as well.

This kind of gives you a second bite at the apple for anything that throughout the comp plan that you maybe think needs to be clarified, added, whatever.

Yeah.

Um you want to move on to gateway?

I think so.

Yeah, and I know gateway is uh at least for me a little more nebulous, other than of its designation here.

I know there's a PD that we've at least temporarily put on hold.

And so yeah, I think your overview would be a great place to start.

Do you well we could start with the fact that we've done a visioning plan?

We started in 2018 doing um visioning for the site, and um it evolved into a draft plan development document with more detail on taking that big picture vision into um you know what it might it look like for zoning categories and densities and uses.

So we do have a draft plan development for that site.

Um that is, and that's actually just been kind of sitting now.

It it did go to the you know community several times through that process and it tapped into the existing uh residents that are on the west side of the town owned property.

This PD is just for the town owned property, it does include a vision for all the way over to County Road 7, uh up to 10 and and down to Erie Parkway.

And so um as developer or as property owners want to develop their site over time, they can come into that PD.

Um you did take a look, Josh, at just the overall gross density that um is kind of the result of what that plan is, and I'll talk slowly while sorry, um but we are uh we thought that would be helpful to sort of relate to what the um comp plan designation is for the site.

You can see the lowest portion of our just for anyone's reference.

The um the east side of the square that I've been talking about between County Road 10, County Road South on the west, Erie Parkway on the south, and I-25 on the east.

The right side of that is the town-owned property.

So those um the brown, the dark purple and the and the purple triangle above.

Those are the two properties that we own.

Is that RTD right away?

And bisecting.

Yes, yes.

And then right to the north of that is um North Station.

Correct.

And is it I mean it's it's North Station is less dense, it kind of goes back to the Saren Harbor property, right?

It's the similar to that.

Yes, it has the mixed use um the wait, what are we calling it?

Mixed use neighborhood neighborhood.

Sorry.

So the gateway gross density as the PD is currently drafted, is uh eight about eight dwelling units per acre equally.

Okay.

For sorry, for for north station for gateway.

For the gateway for the town property, yeah.

So it could almost it would it would fit into the mixed-use neighborhood.

There would be portions in that southern section that would be possibly over, you know.

I don't know.

Could we didn't, I don't know if we broke that out, but we can take a look at if it would even exceed 12 units to the acre, but certainly that's where the highest densities are envisioned.

I think before the plan the PD comes to us, that would be helpful so that we kind of understand what we're being asked to approve.

And then all this land out there, and Miguel, you may need to come back up here.

It's the it's the underpass or the um the on ramp on ramps and off ramps uh for road 10.

I think it is.

And I know that uh there's been some pushback, but I think the town is still pursuing that.

Is that correct?

It directly, yes.

Um, we have the I-25 interchange and multimodal study that we're had just started back in November.

Um, though when we apply for that grant, we could not look at a any additional capacity, which would mean a new interchange.

However, we are implying um we changed we change the scope of the study to imply that there's gonna be so much traffic in the area that we are going to need um an interchange without saying we're gonna need an interchange.

So um we're trying um we have that underway if we uh kind of enable it uh to present to C dot to let them know hey, this is coming.

What are you gonna do about it?

Yeah, all right.

Because it's looking at several interchanges, like highway 52.

Yeah, and it's looking at Erie Parkway interchange and highway 52 interchange, and um and then CDOT has their own, which is also looking at another one further north, under 19th.

Um regarding gateway, how does the Eagle Mine factor into that and developing that land?

In terms of constraints on development, yeah.

Currently, with our due diligence, it did not show that it was overly burdened by the undermining, so it's pretty deep there.

Um the intention is to keep the water tower.

Yes, preserve that area as a historic property.

I believe Luke is working on yeah, yeah.

So yes, because that's it's that's in the regional commercial part of that.

But the idea is to not basically create an area for the eagle mine to preserve that site.

Yes, yes, yes.

We don't know.

I I I at this point I don't know enough to say if it has to if it can't move or not.

So that would be thank you.

I'm not as agile as we go.

I'm uh working with the State Historical Fund and Historic Preservation Advisory Board.

We actually submitted a grant for to State Historical Fund for a survey and planning grant to really analyze that entire area based on what we know.

There's a lot of old foundations out there.

Obviously, you have the existing tower uh structure out there.

So once we designate that site as a historic site that or as a once we designate the site as historic, then we can look at preservation activities.

So making sure the tire doesn't fall over and then integrating it with the rest of the the game.

So cool.

Thanks your question.

Yeah, I mean I just was that was the bath I was looking.

Yeah, it was curious how how is the eagle mind gonna work with that area.

Yeah, we'd like it to be integrated and something people can visit.

That'd be awesome.

Yeah, definitely good history that if we could build on it.

Yeah.

Um any other questions, density on pathway for I25 gateway.

So I I guess I'm still confused on if there's we're gonna have other, you know, there's North Session or the reader property, other what you're saying that they could possibly get into R PD for what we have for what you want to clarify.

She was saying that the the properties to the west of the town owned property.

We've talked with some of those property owners, and they are interested at some point in the future.

Oh annexing into town and then applying the PD to their okay, I got you.

Okay.

So should provide them value to do that.

Right.

Yeah.

Yeah.

And I guess the other thing I was confused on that you were saying the dark purple, that was the that was what you're saying was eight DUs right?

Or what it's the entire thing.

So the eight would be the entire gateway in terms of what town specifically home.

Yeah, okay.

Yeah, sorry.

And that's as the PD is currently drafted.

And it could exceed eight in the dark in the dark area, because right now we don't have a lot of residential envisioned in that northern triangle, right?

It's more it's more important.

Okay, okay, all right.

Okay, that makes all right.

So it might make sense.

There's a little bit of residential there, but yeah, it's mainly important.

Yeah, okay.

Okay.

All right.

I think you have a few more slides with regard to the DDC.

We did I have a question about a different property that's not I-25, but it is we had a commenter here this evening, Mr.

Durneck was asking about 27.

And it wasn't, and I don't want to get into quasi-judicial stuff, so please cut me off.

Um, but if we can you know have these requirements around like the Aaron Harbor um property in the company, is do we have the possibility to do that along highway seven to address things like feathering for rural residential out there?

So, do we have the ability to address kind of those issues on that property, even now at this point where we're at?

I believe the community building box chapter does have a lot to do with context sensitive design and um you know respecting adjacent existing development, but we can we can look at that further and clarify it if and if needed.

Um what particular area are I noticed if we go back, I don't know what slide it is, but there's there's one slide, it's a high density slide that shows um a section that's off of highway seven, but I think it's it's off a street.

Okay.

And then the section that's right off Highway 7 and Bonanza, kind of in between Sandwich Cream Bonanza and Airport Road, is there is no, it's just gray.

It looks like it's not included in the slide.

In this slide, that means it was not one of our residential land uses, so it was probably in this case going to be employment, public quasi public corridor commercial or neighborhood commercial.

So does that mean it'll require resilling?

If we were including any kind of residential for anything along highway seven, that's mostly just commercial zone.

So um to add residential into anywhere along there, they're most likely gonna have to rezone.

And then would we at that point have the opportunity in rezoning?

You have the opportunity to require things like feathering or okay.

And that's something that again would come out of conversations with the neighborhood, and then you know, more staff.

And that's also and also for us.

Why we need to update our code?

Sorry, too far.

Yes.

Um, can I just I'll so just leave.

We did talk about gateway and any other land site, land uh or any other sites.

Are we good with designations as they are otherwise?

I think so.

I mean, village of Cole Creek is um still kind of hanging out there, and we're gonna have to revisit that at some point.

If I understand it is designated medium, so it'd be medium high in this realm at this point.

And most likely, you know, with the cut the surrounding context, we'd be looking at you know, maybe medium low for that, just because of that existing surrounding development.

Um, I don't think it needs to be medium high, but we can look at that for and come back to council with a proposal on that.

Now that you have direction to create another category, medium low, then if that's appropriate, then I'll yeah, we will bring back this for consideration.

Okay, you do see the good stuff.

So when comp plans are uh updated significantly as we did in 2024, it's it's pretty common to update our our tools.

Um, one of those being the unified development code.

As you all are aware, the 2026 budget and our work plan includes 250,000 to have a consultant assist us in this.

Um, we'll have a lot of again stakeholder engagement and feedback.

Um come through planning commission and you all, of course.

Um, and we do expect to hopefully be done in 2027.

Um, yeah.

So and then as far as other updates, Josh has been working on um all town and wanted to give you yeah.

Before you go off in UDC, um, I'm just um looking forward to study sessions before it goes to the planning commission and goes to us.

We will come back to you with just an overview.

Either we'll give you a memo of what that process is gonna look like, or we can always just come and do a brief overview of the outreach and make sure that you feel like we're engaging enough with both um the council and planning commission.

So we're just really excited to finally get them in a place.

Yeah.

All right, so I know we have 12 minutes left, so I'm gonna try to keep this relatively brief.

Um, but another implementation item uh specifically had to do from the comp plan was uh related to historic old town.

Uh, if you recall on June, I believe it was June 3rd of this year.

I initially came to you all uh to give you a brief 15-minute presentation of us kicking off what we were called the historic old town social capital exercise.

Um, the reason we were doing this is we wanted to uh take a deeper dive to make sure that we were building relationships and having close-knit conversations with the community before we came out with a preconceived idea of what we needed to do.

Um I would say that paid off.

Uh those conversations were great, and I think it gave us an opportunity to take a step back from our initial thought of doing a um neighborhood plan that was a deep dive of everything related to what old town could be.

Um lack of better words, I would call it a miniature comprehensive plan.

We're able to get a little deeper into just old town specific.

Um, over the course of approximately like three and a half, four months, we did 11 events.

Um, seven of them were us tacking on to already town wide events such as Erie Fest, uh farmers markets.

Um, as we know, that doesn't just attract eerie old town residents, it attracts everyone.

Um so in that conversation, we also um responded by hosting four uh invite events specifically to old town residents.

Um, and I want to thank uh thank people who are able to make it out to those events and also acknowledge that do you realize they were after hours?

People have other things to do.

So not everyone was able to make it out.

Uh, but again, I do want to appreciate the a few of you who are able to join for some of those events and have conversations.

Um, over those 11 events, we had over 200 direct correspondence.

Uh now, caveat that's also residents outside of just old town.

Um, but if we're looking at old town specific events that we hosted invite only, uh, we saw a range of anywhere from nine to 20 people coming out specifically from old town.

Um, and those were for some neighborhood coffee events on a Saturday morning, an ice cream social on a Sunday afternoon, the last day of the splash pad.

Um, as well as we did a neighborhood walk where we had residents come along with us, and we were able to stop at some individuals' households to have conversations, really get to know each other.

Uh, through that, we learned there is a lot of community in Old Town, but a lot of community that is not integrated with each other.

Um, what we saw is they were pockets of each other that knew each other's neighbors, but they didn't know anyone else past that.

But when they were hearing the stories of the communal dinners that these block parties were host or these blocks were hosting, they saw it as opportunity to grow and become more.

Um, so that's what this comp this quote was is community is our strength, but individualism is our struggle.

So there's opportunity.

They want to grow their community, they're they're they're buy-in with each other, but they're stuck in this individualistic struggle of how and what can we do to become more of a strong-knitted community.

And then we also heard there are two old towns.

Um, this one took a little bit of a deeper diving to understand.

Um, but well, their response was that there's old town Brick Street, it's our commercial corridor where you see a lot of vibrancy, a lot of life, and then there's old town residential.

They're two different old towns existing together in the same geographic neighborhood.

How can we mesh and create a stronger identity throughout each of these moving forward?

Having these conversations really helped us understand what potential action items that we as a town might want to explore even before getting to a neighborhood plan.

Um, so what we have on the screen in front of you are some quick term, medium-term, and long-term action items that we as the town want to explore and begin to understand are these items that we can bring forth to the community that hold value.

Um again, this is very early on in the process.

These are just exploratory items that we see as being benefit for the community.

Um, we do note that obviously some of these may require funding.

Um, it wasn't necessarily set aside for the budget.

Um, so that requires us to take an opportunity to step back, see if there's other grant opportunities out there that can assist us with these programming initiatives, um, or even it gets to the point of coming to council for supplemental budget requests.

Um, so I do want to uh reiterate that we do understand there could be funding, um, and that's a next step that we need to evaluate.

Um, but these are just some of the items in which we're considering uh bringing back to the community.

Obviously, we would like to go back with uh more community engagement and inputs on some of these programs and see if they would be buy-ins.

Um, I would say arguably probably all these would be buy-ins right now because they were framed off the conversations and the feedback that we were having with the community.

Um, but again, last thing we want to do is bring a project that doesn't have community support.

So again, we're going to explore these and um take the next steps of bringing these to the community, um, whether they are a program assisted through another grant or if it's something we need to seek funding elsewhere for.

We're on computer again.

Um so that kind of brings us up to um, I guess our our our next steps, uh recap.

Um so, in terms of the comprehensive plan revisions, uh, the changes that we have discussed tonight uh was introducing a secondary medium density.

So we would have medium low at 6 to 12, a new medium high of 8 to 18.

We would be a value to eight or sorry, yeah, 12 to 18.

We would look at air at the arabbit hole at 111th to move down to that medium low density, which is that six to twelve.

On top of that, we as a team would be evaluating any potential out uh parcels that are currently designated as the medium density residential to evaluate whether it makes sense to uh change those as well down to that six to twelve range or that medium low.

Um, for instance, potentially village at Cole Creek for reference.

Um there were no changes for Aaron Harbor's property, uh, with the exception of we are going to evaluate potential new policies on trying to get the higher density alignment along county line.

Um, and that is another policy revision or amendment that we would be evaluating.

Um that is what I have for the comp plan.

Um I think there was one more, and I it was council's recommendation for any verbiage uh um on the property at Bonanza and Highways.

Oh, it's 207.

Yep, to do a similar type exercise if there needs to be call-outs on that.

I don't know how that works into what's happening as the gears are already moving, but as we're able to, I think that'd be great.

Okay.

So that is the next steps for the comp or at least the items that we would be evaluating.

Um again, just wanting to re reiterate that's there is some technical um reviews that needs to go along with this, um, as well as some community engagement general awareness for the community, plan commission, town council as a whole, um, even reaching out to our neighboring municipalities to provide them for an opportunity to review, provide comments, um, and then we would go into the um plan amendment process, which would start with plan commission and then move on to council for um hopeful approval.

Um next, or I guess not next, at the same time, uh, we would also be moving forward with issuing an RFP for our unified development code update, um, recognizing that we would want to bring back to council a memo or at least a discussion of understanding of what the process and steps of that looks like, especially including the engagement and outreach to make sure that we have buy-in and support throughout that process.

Um, and then moving into historic old town, again, reevaluating those quick, medium, and long-term um action steps to see if they are uh viable to move forward with old town um with their support and also recognizing if we do need to bring back any items to council, we would.

Uh but obviously I think we would want to just bring general awareness and um uh education on what we're doing continuously throughout these efforts moving forward.

Um I did it with three minutes.

We have questions and discussions if anyone uh has anything or if they want to circle back on kind of what our closing next steps were based off today's conversation.

I think you captured it well.

Okay, so back to our last meeting and Red Tail Ranch and that property.

Are there any are you aware of any other properties out there that come with problems that we should look at gets discovered um during the due diligence process as somebody is getting into the zoning and yeah, development?

Um yeah, I I oh wait, take Mr.

Frank.

Perhaps uh not off it's not like we have a list of problem properties.

Maybe Mr.

Frank.

We would all certainly love to, you know, hey, you know, a new house or landfill is never going to be found again.

That would be ideal.

But the fact is that each property as part of the development process is reviewed for many criteria, one of which is environmental issues.

Um environmental side assessments required.

This can lead to additional studies if the results of those initial studies indicate there could potentially be a problem, like historic landfilling, presence of oil and gas, uh mining activities.

Uh, even if someone's like, hey, I want to tear down my garage and build an apartment complex.

Yeah, what'd you store in your garage?

Um, those sorts of things can cause um yeah, flags in a in a development process, and those are just issues you have to work through on each and every property.

Um, some are cleaner than others.

None are totally clean.

Okay.

So thank you so much for that.

I really enjoyed all the stories, and um look forward to doing more walking tours because for example, do you guys know about the catalpa trees?

Um the homeowner changed herself to and called the um the news media out so that the town wouldn't cut down the trees to pave her the roads.

And they're still there.

Yeah.

It's just it's a lot of fun stuff like that.

Like we would lose the history and so I just appreciate getting that chance to hear from people that you have some folks who've lived here their entire lives on these streets.

All right.

So I think we take a at least a five minute break there, and then we'll come back to the work plan.

I've done this in past years to try and make sure that what staff is working on really reflects council's top priorities.

And what we've done, we talked about this a little bit at the September retreat, and that version had a ranking that all of you participated in, and we sort of sorted them based on that.

This version first disclosure when I looked at it yesterday morning.

I and I started going through the priorities, and I saw that a number of the priorities are number four, which says it's not a priority or none.

Disclosure, I meant it doesn't require council time, council involvement.

It didn't mean that it's not a priority.

It just means we don't need to spend council meeting time doing those things.

For instance, uh Compass Park and Morgan Hill Park, we're doing those.

We're uh they're on the list, they're top priorities, we're doing them.

They don't need to come back to council for further discussion at this point.

Um but the priorities do reflect how much time council uh it's a it's a priority to have time in front of council.

And this is also one of the ways we try and figure out is workload manageable?

Uh do we have enough council meeting time, both regular meetings and study sessions where you can discuss these issues and have adequate time to really go through them and make decisions on them and give direction to staff.

So uh we put both a list of everything we're working on and how much time we think council needs to spend on it and tabulated all that and came up with we're gonna probably have to add four regular meetings and uh a couple of study sessions for you to be able to talk about these things if you want to spend the amount of time that we've allotted for for each particular project.

So that's why I wanted you to take a look at this in advance and say, hey, um, we need to spend more time on this issue, or that issue's not that big of a deal.

Uh staff just take care of it and bring it to us when it's done, or let us know if there are any problems you run into.

Otherwise, we'll assume it's just gonna get done based on the direction that we've given to you previously.

Um so it's kind of a high-level overview of how we use this tool.

Also, things inevitably come up during the year that aren't on this list.

And one came up yesterday when Mayor Moore and I were talking about the planning commission interviews and how you want to do those.

That's not listed on this.

That's probably gonna take at least three hours of a meeting where you're interviewing the candidates for the planning commission.

So we need to add that to this list.

Um it's okay, that makes we need to have even another uh regular council meeting to be able to handle that.

So as issues come up, uh I will say, hey, if it's something that requires a full meeting uh or something like that, I'm gonna ask you where does this fit in your priority list?

How do you uh do you want us to bump something that's already on uh on the list off?

Do you want to make time for additional meetings?

Uh do you want to stay late at night?

Uh yeah.

And this assumes that we're spending uh three and a half hours in regular meetings, so go on to 10 o'clock for regular meetings.

We're spending three hours for study sessions, and that we're having two regular meetings and one study session um a month.

Okay, that we we're I think for the first several months we're already violating that one study session a month, and we're having a couple of more than one.

This is a conversation that Malcolm and I had trying to um back off the number of study sessions now that we've all been through a year, and I think the the more controversial things that um were happening, I think are pretty much done.

And now I think we're getting more on okay, we got lots of projects to get done.

Um, and I'm hopeful that it will take less time.

But to your point, right?

Interviews for the planning commission, that'll be an ad somewhere in here.

Um so my ask for you tonight is is there anything missing from this list that we ought to add?

Is there anything that uh a topic that you think we've got either too much or too little time on it?

Um and uh is there anything on this list?

Do you think we ought to take off the list to uh reduce the amount of time that that you have to spend on something or that you want just get it done?

Don't we don't need to spend time.

Send us memos of updates on it.

So it's not like you have to be in the dark on things.

We can keep you updated in lots of different ways.

And maybe for some of these things, the way to do it is to say just send us memos on the updates, or we'll talk about it during our our one-on-one meetings or meetings with each of you.

Um two on two, two on three, whatever it is these days.

Regarding um Wendy Gap NISP.

Um let's see.

Is there another utility group?

They're in the utility group.

Yeah.

Is there well without saying that?

The last I think we've got uh an exec session on the um second regular meeting in January to talk about so that those numbers do seem appropriate knowing.

Knowing the complexity of those two issues, um, yeah, I think it is likely to take that much time.

I know.

And just to be on the safe side.

And as you scroll down to the bottom of this, you'll note I I have included a contingency of roughly 30%.

So a little bit of flexibility, maybe that if we stick to all these numbers, uh great.

If as has been the case in the past, if meetings go longer than anticipated, or we bump issues, or takes multiple meetings where we were only planning on one.

Okay, I'm hoping that contingency can handle it.

Um that contingency also covers regular development issues that come forward that aren't on this list that we don't have any control over, but it comes in and we have to uh fit those into the agenda and a public hearing on a controversial issue could um take uh a full meeting or more than one full meeting, as some of the issues that happened last year did.

So I I um things that are missing.

Um I don't see county line to airport drive.

I think it's in yeah, I thought I did see the umbreviated differently.

If anybody's got a line number, oh I just saw it a second ago.

Uh uh CLR7, yeah.

Oh no, that's changed minimum.

Line 11.

Yeah.

County line to highway seven portion north south roast roads.

Perfect.

Um let's see the whole mineral valuation work that you're working on.

I didn't see that on there.

Okay, right.

Okay, some notes.

Um, a topic that comes up a lot in different tables that I'm at is a plan for the older film festival that's coming 27, I think.

Um so different communities.

Sundays.

Sunday's, yeah.

Um, different communities are developing plans around short-term rentals, around added transit options, around trying to pull some of that into their own communities, whether it's like you know, park screenings or having some kind of incentive to come and stimulate the economy in your own town.

So I think that could be actually very interesting for us to think about.

Uh I do think lines to our airport, maybe.

Yeah.

I mean, we have a unique opportunity there.

Game up in the consortia most city something.

Yeah, the BCP has done excellent.

Actually, at the invite of the Boulder City Manager, we had a multiple city managers had a meeting with several representatives from the Sundance Film Festival right before Christmas.

And they talked about having a short-term rental policy.

That's why I did add it to the bottom of this list, number 38 discussion of that.

Um has developed a festival short-term rental license where during the period of the Sundance Festival you can get a license for up to 29 days.

Uh they're trying to coordinate housing options through one website or one site so that anybody who's interested in coming to the festival can go to that website and find housing in any jurisdiction wherever it is.

And we can encourage local people who want to rent out their houses to go to that and use that location to be able to market their facilities without completely opening up short-term rentals for the entire year and creating that whole potential hornet's nest, which short-term rentals can be.

I've also talked with RTE directors about that, and they're looking at adding or prioritizing, I guess, lines.

So if we can um you know pull in an extra line in the eerie, that would be great.

Yeah.

But um hopefully our B will be running and we'll have that as well.

And coordination with Lafayette's flex ride, long months, flex ride, and and Lewisville would like to launch one as well.

I think they'll still hear no left.

So street light purchasing conversion.

I know we had done we've got part of that, but what is left?

Yeah, we've got the the XL side done.

We're still working on the United Power side done based on the latest rates that United Power has adopted.

Uh unless they change those or we come up with something else, it's not looking like it makes economic sense to acquire United Power side.

So we maybe bump that.

Um that one's yeah, that one's iffy.

So it's on the list, still possibility.

May need to have some briefings on it to get council direction on it.

Um, but it's not looking nearly as optimistic as it is.

Is it something that could go out in a memo or something like that?

Yeah, okay.

Yeah, definitely.

Yeah.

Even the ADA plan, ADA transition can be a memo.

Uh which one?

Um that one we do.

Actually, that one's on the agenda for next week's week.

Yeah, so it's a kind of a big ticket item, but something we have to do, and uh we should do.

Yeah, we should do what does council need to go into the ADA plan?

It's like mostly administration looking at what is complaints and how do we complain?

Yeah, I think that part you're probably right.

But I think there's uh since there's an economic piece to this, we need to understand it.

Over time, it has a big dollar dollars associated with it.

We're we're planning that into our long-term budget.

Yeah, cool.

In addition to that, we actually need council to sign the resolution adopting the plan.

Yeah.

If we were to find ourselves in a lawsuit, um that document that you've all formally adopted the plan um becomes absolutely critical.

So um that, but that'll be coming before you next week.

Next week be pretty it's got some dollar stuff to it.

Um, but you'll see some of that stuff on there.

Yeah.

The other thing that's uh it's the the last one in the green section is the street renaming.

I really want to get moving, especially on the Erie Parkway to 287 um one.

I mean the other one, um 111th and um flat iron meadows.

Yeah, um, is important, but less important than the Erie Parkway.

Yeah, I want our name out on 287 is what it really comes down to.

Josh is working on Josh is Josh is kind of we we were oh go ahead.

Uh just reporting in we so we are first creating a policy we'll bring to council just so that everybody is in agreement on how the naming process would occur, and we also uh are just making sure our our internal process is um established.

So we will do that.

And we can also pair that with the renaming the bureaucracy of government to stop the Erie Parkway one.

I mean, we gave direction, I think through a motion early on, and whatever we need to do at the county, uh the county process is let's get that going.

I'm okay with the naming policy.

Yes, I just don't want the Erie Parkway to be held up because of that.

Good point.

And we are um I believe we're doing that, those will all in Tiandum together.

Just now that there's the bureaucracy piece too coming soon.

I I get it.

I work in government, I get it.

So is 29 months of title or dollar and we need the new agenda management software.

That one's in the budget for 2026.

It's not a big dollar item.

I just put half an hour there in a work session just to make sure that we had an opportunity to make sure you're all up to speed on using whatever new software it is we come up with.

So not a big dollar item.

I'm just saying, can it be a memo?

Like basic time on that.

Um possibly if if it's completely intuitive and we think you'll be able to hit the ground running and no instruction needed, then yeah, we'll do it that way.

There it is.

You might call it Benzels.

Yeah, you're yeah, I think either it is gonna require some training for you guys because we're going entirely away from the system you're used to to a new system.

Does that include Granagus going away?

And yeah, okay.

So hopefully it will look like something that doesn't come out in 1992.

Yeah.

So um with any luck, it'll be really intuitive, and that won't take very long.

Okay.

I had one other one, and that's uh Mayor Van Loan's recognition.

This is um Patrick gave some good options um that weren't the renaming of the street because of um where did Sarah go?

Um just there you are.

Um just because of complexities there, but there were other things that we could do.

Um I've been attention-based with Dory, his um widow off and on, but then um shouldn't reply to my last deal.

So I need to pick that back up here in the new year.

So I'm not expecting you to do anything at the moment, but I have the recommendations and once we get there, I do this passing was in May, I think, of uh last year.

That sounds right, yeah.

And so maybe it it coordinates with this the one-year anniversary, something like that.

Um Landfill Task Force for recommendations and implementation.

So this is one of those lands long standing items, and I know like when I don't know the timing of everything, but I know when we had um the approval of the setup with red tail with the the street going in there, it it'd be nice.

I I don't know if it'll work out.

It would be nice if we could have the entrance moved before they get the street in, you know, just uh yeah, you know, kind of less it impacts, yeah.

There we go.

Yeah, so yeah, I've I did add the red tail ranch final plat on there so we can make sure we coordinate this too.

Sure, okay, awesome.

Yep.

Any other comments?

You okay?

All right.

I think as far as our input, we're okay.

Are you okay?

All right, we don't want to talk.

Go ahead.

Um this probably so one item we talked about, I think it was when we met uh um putting our arms around airport, all things airport.

Yeah, what we can change, what we can't change, starting to separate out fees versus traffic patterns versus economic development.

So uh we should we do have an item in there that um we wanted to make sure this group was okay with, almost setting up a group similar to what we do with landfill task force.

So it would incorporate in airport advisory board.

Um, but we are starting at least from the staff's perspective to see kind of two almost three factions of information about the airport, and we we are feeling like we need to get some type of education in our arms around it.

Um so probably a little bit different than the actual advisory board, though they'll have a huge role in it, but we are starting to see multiple groups with multiple agendas focus on that area.

So our thought, like we often will do with landfill or the police directive task force is let's get everybody together, let's go through it factually, let's talk about it.

Let's let's fully understand what can and can't happen, and then have uh education campaigns around it.

So that was probably a net new item that we added since we had our retreat with you all in September and wanted to make sure that we were all okay with that.

So we've got 16.

We've got a couple of hours for that.

One in a study session, one in a regular meeting.

Yep.

Thank you.

Yep.

Right, anything else?

With that, this meeting is adjourned.

Thank you.