Board of County Commissioners Business Meeting - Regular Meeting

Good morning, everyone. I would like to call the June 23rd, 2026 business meeting of the Arapahoe County Board of Commissioners to order. In attendance today are Acting County Attorney John Christopherson and Cooney Saraceno, Administrator to the Board in the Clerk and Recorder's Office. Also joining us to facilitate remote public participation is Michelle Halstead, Director of the Commissioner's Office. I'd also like to note for the record that Commissioner Warren Gulley is absent and excused. Mr. Saraceno, will you please call the roll?

Commissioner Fields. Present. Commissioner Baker. Here. Commissioner Campbell.

Present.

And Commissioner Summey.

Here. Thank you very much. And now I would like to lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance. Please join me.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Thank you. Mr. Christopherson, are there any changes to the agenda as presented?

There are no changes today.

Wonderful. May I get a motion to adopt the agenda? Madam Chair? Yes, Commissioner Campbell? I move we adopt the agenda as presented. Second. Thank you. It's been moved by Commissioner Campbell and seconded by Commissioner Baker to adopt the agenda as presented. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? The ayes have it. The motion is adopted. Next is our public comment period. You are invited to speak to the commissioners about any topic that is not on the agenda for general business. If you'd like to speak on a topic that is included on this agenda, we ask that you please wait until that item is called until you speak. For those on the line who'd like to get in the queue to speak, please press star 3 at this time. And as a reminder, only press star three once to get in the queue. If you press it multiple times, it will remove you from the queue. Those in the room wishing to speak should approach the podium when your name is called. And each person has one three minute time period for comments, which will begin after you state your name and address for the record. While the board does not respond to individual comments during this section of our agenda, please note that we do listen. to your concerns and take note of the issues for resolution and follow up as appropriate. Candice Rutledge.

Can you hear me? Thank you. My name is Candice Rutledge and I'm a street cat from here in Littleton. Recently I was unlawfully redirected to something known as an M1 mental health hold during which my constitutional rights that had been drilled into my head all my life were violated, during which I was not violent, not on drugs, and did my best to explain where the police and I left off in the legal process. You see, I was told by officers of Littleton PD that I was under arrest. A charge communicated to me after and I requested that I get an attorney and then they told me I could have one and then they rerouted me to this mental health BS. I'm not very pleased with that and when I was in the room, I tried to talk to the medicos and tell them where we were in the legal process And I said that I do not consent to being touched, medicated, stripped, or messed with. I said all of those things in four different sentences, and I did it anyway. And I woke up with a new IV rig in my arm and not knowing what was done to me. And in the past, over the years, I've been primed with cognitive warfare bits that made me feel like this event was actually something that was more creepy than it may have been otherwise. So I'm very displeased with this and that's more of the attrition that I always talk about and in other news I've met a street cat who said they were in jail for nine days they have celiac disease like I do and They said that although they tried to explain to the authorities that they have celiac disease they kept being served contaminated plates with gluten on them and And so they starved themselves out, and after they got out, they ended up throwing up when they were trying to eat. I don't find that to be very good of Arapahoe County Jail, and I hope that that is corrected immediately. I also want to say, as someone with celiac disease, you can't just serve it in a kitchen without taking a lot of preparation. and consideration to the cleanliness and separation of utensils, surfaces, plates, things like that. It's not just not having bread on the plate. So I'd appreciate that getting changed. And then in other news, other than all the bad information or all the sad information always come up here to talk about, I don't know where I am in any case. I've not been kept up to date with any status of anything that I've communicated to police. I'm really displeased with that, and I think that's also something that's lawfully required of the cops to do. I'm always seen at the city council meetings. I'm always around. I live in my vehicle right between here and 255 Westbury. So it's not like someone can walk a block and find me or leave a note. Thanks.

Thank you. Gregory Sullivan.

Good morning, commissioners. I'm here this morning because the proposed Costco fuel center at West Mineral Avenue and Littleton would introduce a large-scale fueling operation into close proximity to schools, neighborhoods, and children. The proposal includes 32 gas pumps, which would become one of the largest fuel centers in the region. There are significant public health and safety concerns that deserve equal consideration. On April 27th, our community experienced a tragic reminder of the risk associated with the fuel distribution system. A fuel tanker driver lost his life while driving gasoline, leaving behind five children. He was performing essential work that supports our insatiable appetite for fossil fuels. His death reminds us that every gallon of gasoline reaches consumers through a chain of transportation, storage, and delivery. activities that carry real risk for workers and communities. The concern before us is not that catastrophic events occur every day. The concern is that a facility dispensing tens of thousands of gasoline daily would increase fuel tanker traffic, fuel transfer operations, vapor releases, fire hazards, and in an area where hundreds of children learn to play and grow. The greatest threat to children's health is not a single accident. It's a daily exposure to air pollution associated with large fuel facilities and traffic they attract. Gasoline stations and fuel centers emit benzene, volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, and fine particulate matter. Benzene is a known carcinogen. Children are especially vulnerable because their lungs and immune systems are still developing and because they breathe more air relative to their body weight than adults. Approximately 600 children attend Primrose School in Littleton and Littleton Academy within less than 500 feet of the proposed fuel center. These children would experience accumulative effects of fuel tanker traffic, increased vehicle congestion, and fuel dispensing operation. Today, I'm asking the Board of Commissioners to act. I ask you to formally request an independent health and safety assessment of the proposed Costco fuel center. and to support a countywide policy establishing a minimum of 2,000 feet setback from large-scale fuel centers and schools, children, facilities, parks, and residential neighborhoods. If we know that children are more vulnerable to our air pollution, if we know that benzene is a carcinogen, and if we know there are alternative locations to fuel centers, then placing one of the largest fuel operations in the region next to schools is not responsible planning. It's a policy of choice. The children attending Littleton Academy and Primrose School could not choose where the facility is built. Adults can. I ask you to stand with children, parents, and residents of this community and make clear that children's health comes from before the convenience of cheaper gasoline. Thank you very much.

Thank you, Dr. Sullivan. Carol Baker, no relation? Just checking.

I am Carol Baker from Aurora, Colorado. My address 2975 South Argonne Court. I have participated in the voting process here in Arapahoe County. I have been an election judge. I do vote and I encourage my neighbors to vote. And I have a concern about how our county clerk is arranging for deciding which ballots get mailed out to folks. I was in the facility one time when I saw, and it's probably happening this week, When I observed so many trays full of returned envelopes from the post office, that is ballots that have been mailed to addresses that the voter did not live at that address anymore and they were undeliverable. While there's a lot of concern about election integrity and voting processes and things like this, one of my thoughts is something you might be able to look at is the money that is wasted. When perhaps it could be anticipated which envelopes, which ballots would have not made it there. Has that same voter been... having their ballots returned before. I don't know that our county clerk has been aggressive about cleaning up our rolls and moving voters from active to inactive to prevent wasting the money on postage to having envelopes sent out to places where it's maybe expected that these envelopes would have come back. So when I see that and I just think about the postage, I think about the postage. It makes me concerned, and I wonder if you are a body who could ask for a report, do an investigation, consider how much is being spent there that doesn't really need to be. When I became aware of it is as a precinct leader and other precinct leaders in the Republican Party sent out postcards to voters a few months ago to remind them the caucus was coming up. We used the county clerk's voting records and we had so many of those just in our precincts returned. That voter did not live at that address. I don't know that these have been corrected since February. So that small example got me to thinking, I'd appreciate you taking a good look at that. Thanks.

Thank you. Is there anybody else in the room who'd like to make a comment that did not have a chance to get their name on the list? All right. Michelle, is there anyone on the phone who would like to speak?

Just a reminder for those listening, if they would like to speak for general public comment, if you could press star three at this time. There is no one in the queue for general public comment.

All right. Thank you very much. With that said, I will close public comment at this time. So thank you all for your comments. As a reminder, while the board does not respond to individual comments during this section of our agenda, please note that we do listen to these concerns and take note of the issues for resolution and follow up as appropriate. Again, we encourage you to email us at commissioners at arapahogov.com if we weren't able to hear your comments today. We have 12 items on our consent agenda today. Does any commissioner wish to remove an item? Okay. Then I will entertain a motion to approve the consent agenda. Commissioner Fields.

Madam Chair, I move to adopt the consent agenda as presented.

Second. It has been moved by Commissioner Fields and properly seconded by Commissioner Campbell to approve the consent agenda items as presented. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Aye. Great, the ayes have it and the motion is adopted. There are three items on our general business agenda today. The first is consideration of a 1041 application for an electric transmission line in Arapahoe County. Our presenter is Molly Orkild Larson, Principal Planner with the Public Works and Development Department. And our attorney of record is Matt Hader, Senior Assistant County Attorney. Good morning, Mr. Heater. Could you please set the foundation?

With regard to the first matter before the Board of County Commissioners at this time for public hearing, specifically case number ASI 25-001, the 1041 permit application for the Colorado Power Pathways transmission line, The record contains evidence consistent with requirements of Chapter 5, Section 2 of the Arapahoe County Land Development Code, indicating that notice was provided via publication, mailing, and the posting of signs. The Board of County Commissioners has jurisdiction to proceed with the public hearing this morning.

Thank you very, very much, Mr. Hader. Ms. Orkild-Larsen, would you please provide the presentation?

Good morning, Commissioners. Good morning. Before we get started, I did put a handout in front of you in regards to response from Xcel Energy to the conditions of approval that are being proposed. So I just want to make sure that you had that in hand. Okay, Molly Orkild-Larsen, Principal Planner with the Public Works Department. What's before you this morning is the Colorado's Power Pathway 345 kilovolt transmission line 1041, case number ASI 25-001. The applicant is Public Service Company of Colorado, also known as Xcel Energy, and they're proposing to construct a 345 kilovolt transmission line located along East Quincy Avenue, east of Colorado Land Board property and along East County Line Road. Our case engineer is Sue Lou, so if you have any questions for her, she is available. This is the transmission line alignment. It's indicated in red. On the left-hand side of this slide is the harvest mile substation, and this is where the transmission line would start, and that's indicated in blue. It will follow East Quincy Avenue just past South Toms Bay. It will turn south for five miles and then 1.3 miles along East County Line Road, and it's about 11.5 miles along East Quincy Avenue. This application is being reviewed through the 1041 regulations for a major electric facilities of a public utility, and it must comply with the 1041 regulations approval criteria in Section 5, Parts A and C. Also running concurrently with this application was a location and extent, and both the location and extent and the 1041 were before the Planning Commission on May 19th, and both received approval. Just to give you a little project details on this application, the applicant has indicated that the Eastern Plains region in Colorado is one of the best areas for wind and solar energy, but presently doesn't have a way to connect to the state's Grid system this application is an effort to meet Colorado's clean energy energy targets as well as Colorado's growing electric electricity needs Excels pathway projects consist of five segments this application is part of segment five Which starts as I mentioned at harvest miles substation and then is to extend to the proposed sandstone substation to be located in Pueblo County This transmission line is approximately 18 miles long. There is one mile that is within the city of Aurora along Quincy Avenue there. The poles will be steel and will be a brown to rust color. The typical height will be 105 to 140 feet tall. and a maximum of 199 feet. The typical span between the poles is 950 feet, but can go up to 1,400 feet, and that's usually done in cases where there's floodplain or wetlands they want to avoid. There is a lay down yard proposed at the northwest corner of East Quincy Avenue and South Brick Center Road. And that has been reviewed through a temporary use permit with our zoning division. Now that has been approved and the permit is in place. They're proposing a maximum number of 95 employees working a 12-hour shift Monday through Saturday. There will be portable toilets and bottled water provided to their employees. And also low-flying helicopter exercises occur over Colorado State Land Board property. And so the original alignment was closer to the state land board property, but they have moved it further to the east to avoid any conflicts with that exercises. As part of our review, we do look at the comprehensive plan. I have listed nine here, but there is many more in the packet if you had gone through that. And just basically encouraging new development, energy development, supporting it, alternative energy, retaining agricultural uses, and such. We also put it out for referral and taken public comment during our review. This transmission line does go through three fire districts, Bennett Watkins, Aurora Fire Rescue, and Sable Altura District, and they didn't have any concerns, and they also said they could serve the application. The Colorado Army Aviation Support Facility, also known as Buckley Space Forest Base, Colorado Air National Guard wants to be notified before and during the construction of the transmission line because of these exercises on the Colorado State Land Board property, and that has been made a condition of approval. Also, Arapahoe County open spaces, the applicant, they did have some comments about traffic on East Quincy Avenue and the applicant has agreed to work with them, especially in front of the fairgrounds. At this time, this division doesn't want to pursue a trail within that easement, but that could be addressed in a later date if they so wish to move forward. Arapahoe County Public Health Department had some concerns regarding the impacts of the easements. The easement may have on existing water wells and septic systems. There is one, I believe it's at Poll 695, and there's a condition of approval that addresses that to protect it and take precautions. And then through further research with the Health Department and the applicant. There's no septic systems that are impacted They were also concerned about the easement proximity to two landfills and the applicant has indicated that their contractors would be monitoring any gas from those those sites Colorado Parks and Wildlife has commented and there are some conditions of approval and reference to that and CORE also indicated that the proposed access routes are within their transmission easement. But the applicant is working with this agency to prevent conflicts. And then we did receive one comment from the public. And that was wanting the alignment to be moved further to the east due to Box Elder Creek and the training exercises on Buckley. And the applicant has done that. So the applicant was, or not the applicant, the public was happy with that response. There was a neighborhood meeting that was conducted on March 18th of last year and they held it at the Arapahoe County Fairgrounds. A total of seven people attended and the response, only got one response, and they said that they were happy that experts were there to answer the questions and that they were acting proactively with this application. So there are 12 conditions of approval and the Planning Commission did approve those, three of which staff is proposing to change and this was after meeting with CPW. And those are conditions F, G, and H. F and G were changed after the meeting with CPW, and they indicated they wanted the conditions that the applicant originally suggested, which didn't require surveys to be conducted before construction and grading for mule deer and pronghorn. And this was requested since CPW doesn't have a survey protocol for these species. And staff was okay with that. and the applicant also was in agreement with that. Condition H was rewritten and that was in reference to the burrowing owl is just basically to provide better clarity and it didn't affect the meaning of the condition. So everything else was the same. Based on the findings in the staff report, staff is recommending approval for the 1041 application and that concludes my presentation. If you have any questions for me.

Commissioner Baker. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, Molly, for all your hard work on this. I had a couple of questions. For the majority of the transmission lines journey, so shall we say, through Arapahoe County, they are right along existing lines, is that correct, along Quincy?

Yes, there's it'll be on the north side.

Okay.

And then there's some on the south side that are existing. Correct.

Okay. So as I recall, those existing lines have been there for a long time. There were some added since I've been a commissioner. So since 2017, I remember us hearing. a case from Excel in which they put up additional lines. One of the other questions I have, and it may have been already covered, but we have occasional fires out east, grass fires, and I think more than once, There have been cases where birds have landed on transmission wires, and that sparks the birds don't survive. They fall to the ground, and that begins a fire. Do you know if any of the conditions of approval have specifically addressed that, either from CPW or from the fire districts that you've talked to?

Not from the fire districts. CPW has recommended, and that's condition L, about putting in bird diverters. So that could help. The applicant also will be removing any kind of, well, when they go in to put in the line, any trees and vegetation that would be within the easement. And we can ask the applicant on the maintenance plan. I believe they'll be maintaining the easement area through mowing or some kind of keeping the vegetation down.

Excellent, thank you. And I do know that there's two kinds of bird repellents. There's one for larger raptors, which we're always worried about, and then there are some for smaller birds. And the smaller birds are the ones that I think that maybe there's something, and that could be for the applicant to talk about too.

Yeah, I have some examples if you want to look at those of bird diverters that I found online. If you want to look at them, I have them available. I'll look. They're right here. These are just some that I pulled off the line.

Excellent.

There hasn't been anything specified in the condition of approval and condition L of what type of bird diverters would be put in or they're wanting to see, but these are a couple.

Excellent. Thank you for that information. That was more than I expected to have available. But, yeah, it's always something that's a concern for us. We take great pride in our wildlife out east in my district and want to do everything we can to protect those. So thank you. I don't have any other questions.

Thank you, Commissioner Baker. Are there any other questions for staff at this time? No.

Okay, we do have the applicant here today. Wonderful. We do have a presentation, and I'll turn it over to them.

Great, thank you very, very much.

Okay.

How are you all doing? Good. Good to see you again. Thanks for having us. So we are going to talk about power pathways a little bit. Good heads up, Jeff. Commissioner, thank you.

And would you introduce yourself, please, sir?

My name is Nathan Steele, and I manage community relations for Xcel Energy in Arapahoe County. Thank you. Douglas and Adams as well. So today we're going to run through a little bit about the company, the power pathway as a whole, and then the county-specific project information. Then we'll do Q&A. So Xcel, we've got a million and a half electric customers in Colorado and 1.4 million natural gas customers. Electric reliability is 99.9%. So Power Pathway as a total here, $1.7 billion investment. All of the renewable energy we're building out in Eastern Plains and everybody else, wind, solar, et cetera, this is what's going to bring it all into the metro area here. So we've got five segments. This is the final segment we need to get approved, and it's going to bring in roughly 5,000 megawatts of renewables onto the system. So we're not going to be able to hit that 80% goal unless we get this done. This is the most crucial piece to that. That last part down there, potential segment six, has not been approved by the PUC, probably is going to come back later. But right now, the first segments are already in service. Other segments are going to be in service this year and next. And then I'm going to bring on Senior Manager, Siding and Land Rights, Jen Chester, to talk a little bit about the PUC process and the rest of the details.

Thank you.

Thanks, Nathan's a little taller than I am, so adjust the microphone. As Nathan mentioned, my name is Jennifer Chester. I'm the senior manager of our siting and land rights team, working with a group of folks that handle permitting applications like this and acquisition of land rights needed for our projects. One of probably the big questions is how does a project like this come to be? And a big part of that process is approval from our regulator, the Public Utilities Commission. through a CPCN, so certificate of public convenience and necessity for the project. We did submit that application in 2021 and received that approval from the PUC in 2022. That decision from the PUC identified a number of things about the application that are listed on the slide related to carbon emission reductions, the amount of generation the line could carry, The looped configuration, which you saw on the slide previously, and as Nathan mentioned, segment five is the last of those to be constructed that will complete that loop. They also made decisions regarding the EMF and noise levels, as well as the decision to place the line overhead versus being underground. Lots of benefits from Pathway, not just the bringing of new generation resources to the metro area. The project has been under construction since 2023. It'll continue through 2027 or into 2027 for this last segment. So we certainly see short-term benefits related to that construction in areas, whether that's tax revenue, revenue to local businesses, the customers that we serve that benefit from this, including nearly 300,000 in Arapahoe County, and then certainly connecting to the grid here in Arapahoe County at the existing Harvest Mile substation. Long-term benefits include the generation project interconnections, certain job opportunities that exist with those and other types of projects, and then electric reliability. We also pay a state assessed tax to jurisdictions, including Adams County, based on the facilities that we have, or excuse me, Arapahoe County, based on the facilities that we have installed. And that will continue and increase with the installation of additional facilities here in the county as well. It's been a long road to get to today, to be before you as the last jurisdiction we're visiting with on land use permit approval for Pathway, and particularly segment five. This slide outlines a lot of the work and community engagement that's been done over those years for the project. from the very beginning when this was an idea and a concept put forth in that CPCN application to today. That includes a lot of communication with community members through mailings, through website updates and visits, public meetings, public hearings like this one on our applications, newspaper ads, radio ads, emails, letters, and so on. As part of this, we've evaluated a great number of route alternatives to get to that line that Molly showed in her slide a little bit earlier. So that routing process that brings us here today to the route that we have in the 1041 application began in 2021 and continued all the way through really 2025 when we submitted the application initially to Arapahoe County. We began with very large study areas with our substations as endpoints and worked to figure out how do we connect those two dots on a map. That required evaluation of resources in a study area that involved a lot of field time, looking to make sure that the data matched what was on the ground. Community feedback that you see kind of in the loop on the graphic to get to the line on the map. As mentioned, we made a modification to the route here in Arapahoe County as well as others. Segment five for us is a very unique one in the routing process. Lots of lines on maps here on this graphic, but wanted to show the evolution of that study area that I mentioned over time. So on the left hand side, that narrow corridor is what we had in our CPCN application. We then shifted that a little further east. We've narrowed it down and heard from folks that that wasn't quite right. So we expanded, looked in additional areas to the west, to the east, went back out to the public and talked to folks about how we implemented the feedback provided to us, whether that be concerns about training areas, airports, wildlife, conservation areas, and we iterated through that all the way to where we are on the right-hand side, which included evaluating 4,000 square miles of area along Segment 5 and the evaluation of hundreds and thousands of miles of route alternatives across Segment 5 as a whole. And that brings us to Arapahoe County and today. And Corey's going to come up and talk about the details specific to this area.

Thank you.

Thank you, commissioners. My name is Corey Miller and I'm a siting and land rights agent with Excel. To build off of what the siting and land rights manager indicated, I'd like to talk about routing considerations within Arapahoe County specifically. We analyzed about 175 potential miles or potential route miles within Arapahoe County before we eventually settled on the 18-mile corridor that you see represented by the yellow line. I'll show a slide in a minute that'll show that a little bit better. When we initially route, These transmission lines, as Commissioner Baker alluded to, we like to find locations along other linear facilities, such as established transmission line corridors, roadways, interstates, or established railroad corridors, etc. We consider those sort of like disturbances that we can co-locate next to. And I think it should be mentioned that of the 18 miles, about 66% or 12 of those 18 miles are co-located adjacent to other linear facilities. In areas where we can't afford that opportunity, we try to avoid sensitive land uses to the greatest extent possible. The easiest one for us all to think of is established residential areas. The green color that you see on this map that's sort of speckled across this geography are established residential areas, developed residential properties to which we try to avoid. There are other elements or built improvements within Arapahoe County that we have also tried to avoid. Obviously the Aurora Reservoir and the fairgrounds area and then other infrastructure such as some solar fields that I believe have been constructed in this area as well. There's also elements of the natural environment that we try to avoid. So although it's not shown on this map, just to the east is the West Bijou National Natural Landmark area, which is over 7,600 acres of land that is reserved by the federal government. So we understood that we were gonna have to wrap the transmission line around that area. We always try to get, ideally, the shortest distance between point A and point B, so we chose to locate on the western side of that area. As Jen alluded to, we did, and Nathan and Molly as well, so apologies for the redundant information, we did have a route that was adjacent to that property that you see in light blue, that is the state land board property, who generally allows us to locate on their properties, but the Box Elder Creek area is operated by the Army National Guard for helicopter training and apparently they operate some aggressive maneuvers and tall infrastructure would create a pretty precarious situation for them. This is a better look at that map and that route, which you can see represented by that yellow line. We do enter Arapahoe County from the south, and we do hug State Line Road for a short distance to the west before we head to the north, where we're located between Tom Bay Road and Brick Center Road, eventually meeting up with East Quincy Avenue. And we interconnect with the Harvest Mile substation off of Harvest Mile Road. There are no additional improvements for the substation planned for this 1041. However, there is construction at the substation at this point, but that was permitted through a previous 1041 application. There are, in addition with our application, the needs to acquire which we have temporary construction easements. This is for any time when we need to cross private property. Those are temporary. Those agreements will lapse and everything will be restored to pre-construction conditions, including the lay down yard, which you see represented by that orange polygon on the northeast side of the line. This slide, to repeat what staff provided, gives you some information about the equipment that will be utilized. Our route consists of a 150 foot wide transmission line right of way. That's a graphical representation of that right-of-way. The cross arms do not actually stick out that far and or over the line of the right-of-way, but the poles can range from 105 to 140 feet on average, sometimes higher, sometimes lower. The height of a pole is very unique based on its specific geography on the ground. We have to make sure that the conductor between poles has a minimum depth requirement or height requirement above any elements of the built or natural environment. So if we're crossing something like an interstate, which has a very, very wide right of way, we may have to make the poles taller to hit that minimum height, just as an example. But the spans of the conductor can be up to 1400 feet and they are constructed of that weathered brown material. that is constructed of steel but takes on sort of that muted rust color when it's exposed to the elements. We do and are as a regulated utility required to meet the standards of the National Electric Safety Code, which our facilities are designed to. We have provided a rendering or a series of renderings to show what the line would look like once constructed. The photographer in this imagery is standing just to the south of East Quincy Road looking east There is the existing transmission line corridor that was mentioned previously on the south side and then you can see on the north side of the roadways where pathway would be constructed. Likewise, this is also south of East Quincy, although looking west, you can see pathway constructed on the north side of the roadway. There was some mention about our proposed schedule. This is part of segment five. Segment two and three have all been constructed and are energized. Segment one is anticipated to be completed and energized this year. And segment four has recently begun construction as well. We do need to move fast based on our schedule that was agreed upon with the Public Utilities Commission. If we do receive approval, We will begin construction as fast as reasonably possible once we satisfy all conditions. And that construction would likely take us into spring of next year or late spring, depending on different factors that might arise during construction. To proceed, we do realize that and recognize we have to satisfy all requirements of the 1041 approval criteria. There are many And I have provided them on these slides. I wasn't prepared to go into each one in detail during this presentation. But for the benefit of the record, I did plan to scroll through these so that they are included. Obviously, we're happy to answer any specific questions that you might have regarding the conditions of approval. That does conclude my presentation. As Molly mentioned, we did have a letter regarding conditions. Just some notes. It's typical for Excel to provide a response letter to conditions. The first we thought was perhaps just a redundancy because the location and extent permit had already been approved. Perhaps we could eliminate that. As I mentioned, we are trying to be timely here, so any condition that we can sort of make sure we don't have to check, help speed up the process for what it's worth. There was questions about bird diverters. I can bring up our engineering manager to help answer questions about those. We just hope that after the hearing is concluded, we can continue to meet with CPW. It's not typical that we install bird diverters per a certain metric as described by this condition. We usually meet with them and they say these are the specific areas of sensitivity. That helps us avoid a rather costly precedent to be set. But with that said, we are in the business of installing diverters and are by no means wishing to sidestep that requirement. So with that, I'm happy to answer any questions that you may have. And I can invite up some subject matter experts as well, depending on the nature of the question. Thank you.

Thank you very much, Commissioner Baker.

Thank you, Madam Chair. You talked about the height of the poles. I'm wondering about the height of the lines. And this correlates a little bit to the question I asked about bird diverters. is that I believe it was mostly core energy lines that are lower. And also any that are across the road, the height of those. We have farm equipment out there. Sometimes we have balers and harvesters that are pretty tall. I'm just wondering if there's any consideration for that in the height of the lines. especially over roads.

Yeah, I did hear some of the questions before. I have a feeling that those might have been distribution lines. Those are substation to end user, which can be shorter. The minimum height of the sag of the conductor, which of course is escaping me, is much, much taller. I don't think any vehicle would ever come close to making contact with those conductors where they exist over the roadway. But we do have our engineer.

Subject matter expert. Please introduce yourself.

Good morning, commissioners. Parker Roszak, the senior engineering manager for XL Transmission Line Engineering. Yeah, so like Corey mentioned, we comply with the National Electric Safety Code. And then we have our own internal standards. So on top of that, for ground clearance, we use a five-foot design buffer. on top of the ground clearance requirement. So for a 345 KV line, we're designing for 30.5 feet of ground clearance at the maximum sag. So at any point, we'll be at least that high. But as Corey also mentioned, with the terrain, the topography, we can be much higher. And also, the wires do change with the conditions of the amount of electricity flowing, the conditions outside, how warm it is, things like that. So we should have plenty of clearance over any farm equipment and things like that. So there should be no worries there.

Excellent. Thank you very much. Um, I think that's it for now.

All right. Commissioner Campbell.

Cool.

So, okay. Um, so it was the PUC who decided that you guys would go overhead, uh, versus underground. Can you just give me a little insight into that decision?

Yeah, we present the project to the Public Utility Commission and they, I think, make a determination on whether or not it's prudent based on how much they would allow us to charge for the project based on how much rates would go up for the utility users across the state of Colorado. Undergrounding is very, very expensive. It's on like a 20 times scale as far as how much money it would require, not to mention the cost of and duration of construction is much, much longer. You would have more surface impacts than a right-of-way easement. You would have specified pulls that take the conductor out of the ground. You would have these specialized stations that help, I'm not an engineer, but charge up the amount of energy that's traveling through the line when they're underground, the amount of flow of electrons that you have can be diminished and also the overhead lines help cool the line and keep it insulated better than an underground configuration there's lots of technical reasons and

I was going non-engineered. I was like, the vibes are, I get it. Yeah, totally.

Yeah, just to elaborate on what Corey was talking about, there's a significant cost to underground construction. But the big thing is at the higher the voltage, the harder it is to go long distances with underground transmission. So capacitance builds up in the conductor and which impedes the flow of electricity. So basically, the electricity just does not go. There's so much resistance in the wire that it can't go. And so at 345, there's kind of like a theoretical maximum of around 25 miles, of which then you need to have another substation to allow for a bunch of devices to be installed to remove that issue and then continue on. So you're constantly building substations everywhere, basically, in that case. So... It's not insurmountable, but again, then it just goes to cost, and when there's an overhead option available, that's obviously the preferred solution. One of the other issues with underground construction is the time for restoration. It can take months to almost a year sometimes to get the equipment needed to replace underground cable if there's a dig-in or someone accidentally drills into it. For example, we had a horizontal directional drill for a communications line, hit a 115 underground line, and it took us about a month to go in, dig it up, replace the wire, re-terminate, and everything else, where in an overhead situation, you usually can fix it within a day or two.

So overhead means more power, faster, cheaper.

That's generally the sense, but yeah. It's not that we don't do underground. We do have about 100 miles of underground versus about 5,000 miles of overhead. So it's magnitude or difference, but it is something that we do consider when needed or appropriate.

Cool. And Madam Chair, please. Okay. Let's see. You guys referenced there being six segments, but you said this is the last segment, segment five. Where what's happening with the sixth segment? When would that is that our friends to the south? This is the best hearing.

Got a whole team. It takes a village to do one of these projects for a city. So segment six was put forth in the CPCN application, and the PUC essentially said, yeah, that sounds great. Come back when... You know, that's a little different of a situation with renewable generation connecting to it and so on. So a little unclear at this point when or if that will be built, but we would be back in front of the PUC on that. Do you guys have a map of that or was that?

Because that's where because it looks like you had an alternative way to connect anyway without having to do segment six. Sorry for making you nervous. This one, yeah.

Yeah, segment six is kind of what we've called like the dog leg. It's not part of the loop. Got it. So it would be kind of called the extension for a reason. It would extend the loop radially down. Your 911 system really wants you to... They don't know where you are, Corey. It's very, very concerned. So segment six isn't needed to complete that loop to move power around the main part of pathway. It is an extension that would get to a wind and solar rich part of the state in the event those resources were developed and we needed the interconnection to bring it. It would ultimately interconnect at May Valley substation, which is built today as part of that.

Right. And then I'm so the where else was I do, do, do. You said it'll be finished more or less you'll have to go into late spring of 2027 so when would it start assuming you get a thumbs up today.

As soon as we can. Our construction crew would like to be out there tomorrow. Recognizing we have some conditions of approval and some construction permitting that may take us days or a couple of weeks, hopefully. A July start would be fantastic for us if we can make that happen.

Okay. And then with the traffic, you guys are kind of going where... even though you're tracking and co-locating where other lines already exist, you're still going to have to build these new facilities, install these new facilities, right? So how disruptive to traffic will that be? And I believe some of these conditions refer to specific timelines of mating and nesting. And so all of that will be timed out because I think like there's an Yeah, April to August I saw for different animals. So assuming all of that will be scheduled out to not disrupt our animal friends.

Yeah, we have a whole team that tracks on that. They're with us here. They do the pre-construction surveys to go out and look and see what is there. Then we have bio monitors on site or available during construction to keep an eye out during certain seasons. So for example, when the burrowing owls are hanging out, they're looking to see if they're there, they're moving. or our construction crews can call them out. Hey, we think we see something. Can you come tell us if that is a thing we need to be concerned about? So something we're very, very versed at doing and have been successful at doing for the 400 miles of construction that's underway or completed so far.

Cool. And Commissioner Baker knows the area better than I do, but how disruptive will this be to travel?

On Quincy, for example? Yeah, we don't have any plans to shut down Quincy, so we'll see increased traffic with construction vehicles coming in, but then they leave Quincy and get into our right-of-way, and the construction will be within our right-of-way. So it wouldn't be disruptive in the sense of closing down Quincy and having to go way around to get other places, some increased traffic to get to the right-of-way.

And Madam Chair, just one more. So, all right, bird diverters. You have a problem or you don't have a problem with the bird diverter because, Mr. Hall, the way that you described it, you said normally, like, we are in the business of installing bird diverters, but this seems slightly more prescriptive and would set a more expensive precedent for you. But it seems like... If I recall correctly, you said we normally work with CPW to look at the kind of existing conditions and where it would be appropriate. As written, this is applying to what would be existing conditions because it says shall be installed, and it is prescriptive about the distance, but shall be installed within 0.25 miles of any lake, drainage, or riparian area within the Raptor nesting buffer. So it's not like it's saying, every 0.25 miles just throughout regardless it's saying where these conditions exist so what is the problem with the bird diverters you want me to do and whoever would like to answer you were looking at cory so i wasn't sure if you were looking for well he he had spoken to it

Yeah, no, we certainly recognize CPW provided the recommendations on that. And as noted in our letter, we do install bird diverters and are installing bird diverters on other sections of pathway. The feedback that was provided through the Arapahoe County process regarding the bird diverters is very different than what we saw in other jurisdictions, which is why we're kind of reacting to that wording. We put in our letter based on our calculations, that it's, I think, four and a half miles. Is that number right? Four and a half miles of the line would have bird diverters. And the style that we typically install are kind of like spirals that go on those. I don't know if you've driven 76 around Bar Lake and have seen all of those on the line. That's one example. And you probably noticed that.

Can someone call 911? and just let him know we've got Corey.

Let him know he's okay. He's okay, he's fine. And so it really does highlight the line because it places something kind of bulky on it. So from an engineering perspective, we're prepared to install those across the four and a half miles. We just want to make sure that the county understands that it does really draw your eye to the line. And given the residential out there that folks may wonder what those are, have concerns about the increased visibility. You're increasing the visibility for the birds. You're also making it more noticeable to the humans. So four and a half miles is what we calculated, and we're prepared to install those if the county would like. Just wanted to make sure you were able to answer questions if you got them from the public about what are those things and why are we looking at them. We don't have them on the lines to the south, on the south side of Quincy.

Okay. Madam Chair, I see Nate Fogg here. I may have a question for him, but I just want to make it very clear that I understand what you're saying, is that when you set a precedent, to me that sounded like a financial aspect, and then what you're talking about is an aesthetic aspect, right? Yeah. just want to say, well, we'll get, I'll have, I've got questions for Nate. I just want to clarify something that commissioner Baker had said earlier. Um, cool. Thank you.

Yep. Thank you. Thank you very much. Commissioner fields.

Thank you, Madam Chair. First of all, I want to thank staff for processing this application. I can tell that it took a lot of work and research as it relates to the analysis and to excel. I'm looking at all of the attachments that you submitted to this application and I have a question about two. One of them is a question regarding your neighborhood outreach meetings and then also just a little bit more insight as to your study on noise. So I'm wondering what you learned from those two surveys or those attachments and if that influenced any of the proposals that we're seeing today.

Not sure if the engineer would like to come up and Regarding the community meetings. Those meetings were held as sort of a project wide effort several years ago, but we did have a follow up meeting about a year ago and we engaged with the community. I think that they were pretty project specific as far as locations. I think people did show up to talk about the location where it was originally conceived along Box Elder Creek. I would say the remaining communication we got from the county was just general inquiry as to how these lines originate how you start a routing study, how do you place these lines and then just different technical questions about. The infrastructure used curiosity questions.

And I'm not quite sure if I heard this. What about from the neighborhood outreach? Was there any key themes that came from your outreach from this study or this attachment?

I don't think so, other than very specific desires to have the line placed in very specific areas.

Thank you.

Thank you. Very, very good. Come on, come on down.

So you had a question about noise calculations? Yes. Just in general or like a specific question?

The question was about, I looked at the analysis and it showed that it was far below the standards. And I was trying to couple that with the neighborhood outreach in reference to if that was a topic or concern that came up. But it sounds like from the analysis that it's far below what is standard in but sometimes residents might have a different interpretation of what noise is like for them. And so I was wondering if there's any connectivity between your neighborhood outreach as it relates to concerns overall, as well as concern connected to noise.

Right. So I think as Corey said, we didn't really get any specifics there. We do provide all the information at, the public outreach meetings. So we have boards showing the graphs from the modeling and the analysis. The 50 DBA level is a PUC regulation. So we strive to achieve a level below that. So it's usually a non-issue generally, but I don't think we have any specific concerns.

We didn't receive any questions, I think. We didn't receive any concerns at the community meeting related to noise.

Thank you very much. I have one, a question. I just wanted to make sure that, um, with all of the conditions that the, uh, at the public hearing, did you all agree to the conditions at the planning commission? Correct.

Okay. Change a bit as Molly mentioned between that hearing and now, but, um, this is a timely project, so we are prepared to move forward.

Okay. I just wanted to double check. Thank you so very much for everything. Do we have any other, Commissioner Campbell? Why did they change?

Just wording related to sort of mule and deer migration patterns. We just needed more specificity about whether or not they show up in the winter, does that mean we have to shut down construction on the entire 18 miles of the line? Typically, CPW will say, if there's one deer, if there's two deer, you can continue construction so long as those animals aren't hazed. But when they start to show up in mass, you need to either employ a biomonitor who has the ability to shut down construction or cease operations for a few days until they disperse. I think our problems with the conditions were that they were worded in a way to suggest that we could not construct anywhere on the line. If there was deers present at mile one, are we still allowed to proceed at mile 16? That kind of thing. And that was the only condition you guys had a question about. There were two separate conditions that dealt with two separate species of deer.

Okay. Okay. And so you are, you're good to go with the conditions that exist now.

We can accept the conditions. Yes.

Okay.

Thank you very, very much. Listen, this has been great, but guess what? Now we have public comment. So I will now open up this item for public comment. Please press star three to enter the queue if you're listening on the phone or come to the podium if you're here in person. Provide your name and city or address for the record, and you'll have three minutes for your comments. For those in the room, the lights will count down while I will tell those on the phone when they have 30 seconds left. if I remember. So we do have public comment on this item, and that is Candace Rutledge.

Hello, can you hear me? Hi, my name is Candice Rutledge, and I'm a street cat from here in Littleton, but I've been all over the metro to all kinds of counties in the bin of C470 and E470, and then up to I-70. So I wanted to talk a little bit today to say that I heard a few things that are concerning to me. I'm not someone who's gonna say you should say no to this, but I think it needs further analysis. When birds fry, it's not because they landed on a wire, it's because they touched another part of the assembly. And I think steel poles could be looked into. I don't know, I don't remember what the NREL, the National Renewable Energy Lab was renamed, but I think they might be able to direct us to something that is more insulating than conductive than steel. So I think they should be consulted about that. 12-hour shifts, that seems kind of dangerous to me, just like the birds, if the linemen of the county touch the steel pole leading down while they're tired or something and have an accident, that's not a good thing. If you hire four people who work nine hours, that'd be the same as three people working 12 hours, only those people that are four four people at nine hours, they'll be more alert and aware. I'm also concerned about the fact that I hear that there are co-located lines. So your field of energy down a line is like a cylinder with the line going down the middle from top to bottom. But in this case, it's lateral, you know. And then when you have co-lines, you get a Venn diagram of energy And in that part where the Venn diagram overlaps, you end up with signal mixing. And that is where having people flying overhead or even EVs driving, you know, concerns me because, as you all know, I howl about Havana syndrome and things like that all the time. So I think that should be considered. And then also I went to a radio operators meeting last Wednesday and then I walked from Lakewood PD down to one of the bus stops close to one of their power plants and I heard absolutely no noise and I'm like, man, I should be hearing something. you know, but I didn't. I don't know what they're doing right in Jefferson County there, but I know I hear a lot of noise at Federal and Bowles in the north of Arapahoe and Hawley, so I think you guys should reach out to Jeffco and see maybe to compare notes on what they're doing that keeps the noise down. And then... Anyway, I think that's everything that I wanted to mention. Oh, one last thing. I don't know if line height ever changed when the voltage was reduced in America as a standard, and I can't find it online. Gemini won't talk to me about it, but I believe I read in a textbook at one point, and then current increases when you drop voltage and it makes a bigger field. Thank you.

Is there anyone else who'd like to make a public comment on this item who's in the room? Great. Michelle, is there anyone online who would like to make a public comment on this item?

There's no one in the queue at this time.

All right, well then with that, I would entertain a motion, or not.

Yeah, I just wanted to have Nate Fogg, our director of our Office of Emergency Management, come on up. And this is, I want to recognize, and I'll have other things to say about the project broadly, but I recognize that you said you guys are good with the conditions, but since... Ma'am, you said that, you know, in case people are asking about like, why does it look like this? Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. Just wanted to get on the record the importance of the bird diverters based on the experiences we've had in Arapahoe. So, Mr. Fogg, as Commissioner Baker referenced earlier, we had a pretty quickly spreading wildfire caused by an unfortunate interaction between a bird and a power line, correct? Can you just sort of describe that and describe the damage and the breadth of the damage in terms of size as well as cost?

I think it was about two years ago we called it the Quail Hollow Fire. It was on core infrastructure and it was actually not a transmission line. It was a step-down transformer for distribution to residential. Mr. Fogg, would you just introduce yourself? Oh, I'm sorry. Sure. Nate Fogg, director of office emergency management for Arapahoe County.

Thank you. Go ahead.

So two different pieces of infrastructure, two different types of interactions on those step down transformers that reduce the voltage as it goes into our homes. The smaller birds can get into those areas, even if they're wrapped or protected and ultimately create an arc, follow the ground. in a windy environment with the grass, start a grass fire, which is what we saw then. The bird diverter systems are completely different from that as far as I can tell, and I don't see that there would be a fire mitigation component to that that is meaningful from our side of the equation, on the emergency management side.

Okay, so, but CPW thinks there's a, reason for the mitigation?

I'm not clear. It's not clear to me whether that's related to the, uh, a fire danger reduction or some other type of, of, uh, animal welfare for, for the birds.

Okay.

And so, but with that fire that happened, how fast did it spread?

We've almost 1200 acres in three hours, one structure, one house and multiple structures out buildings.

Cool. And I am recalling a conversation we had with you all in study session a couple weeks ago. Time flies when you're having fun. One week, two weeks, three weeks. And can you just give us a little recap on our fire danger situation as we are?

today? Drought continues to be high. Our fuel moistures are lower. We haven't seen the precipitation. We have the lowest across Colorado, the lowest snow water equivalent. Our snowpack is the lowest on records. We've been keeping records and we have not had significant rains this year. So fire danger conditions are currently high and continued The predictions continue to stay high, if not moving into very high and severe later in the summer. Pending monsoon changes based on ENSO El Nino conditions.

Yeah. Madam Chair, one more. So whether we're protecting the birds or we're protecting the... Protecting birds from... interacting with the lines, which may or may not cause a fire or whatever we're doing. From an Office of Emergency Management perspective, and I know that Excel has a lot of plans for when you guys shut down lines, when there's winds and all of that, but I haven't heard any reference to kind of any interaction. Do we have a concern about about increased risk of fire with these lines going here? I mean, it just is a risk, right? Sure. Okay.

Inevitably, there's some risk anytime there's any kind of interaction with the landscape. I don't see any concerns that would raise flags from my perspective.

Cool. Thank you very much.

Any other commissioner discussion or questions for Mr. Fogg? Well, you don't have a question, but Commissioner Baker has something else to say. Thank you for being here. Thank you very much, Mr. Fogg.

I actually have a question for Mr. Hader, our attorney of record. I was looking at the letter from Accel Energy, and one of, I think it's the first condition of approval, seems to be more of a condition for the location and extent plan rather than for this item. Is that... That your take as well.

Thank you, Commissioner. Well, while the condition does address requirement to update the location and extent, I would just note that the L and E plan interacts with the 1041 in an unusual way in this case, because the 1041 does not have is more analysis of whether the application is the criteria. The LNE is where the actual plan exists and where it's shown. So the 1041 and the LNE kind of overlap in that way because together they give you the complete picture of what's actually been approved. And of course, the Planning Commission did approve the LNE at their recent Planning Commission hearing. Thank you, Mr. Hader.

Just a follow-up is if... That condition of approval was to be removed. Is there still something compelling the applicant to update those location and extent plan sets that the condition requires?

That would compel them to do that or yeah, I don't really have an answer for that. I would say that having those recordation numbers across the property someplace in a documented permit does create greater transparency. And it's something that can be recorded against those properties where they are acting so that future purchasers or. or successors of that property would know what property rights they have and how it's restricted. And I believe that the intent was to make sure that that was documented somewhere within the records so that otherwise it would not be. And the concern there was just really to protect the public or the future purchasers with what's going on in that property.

Thank you very much. May I just make a comment is that what I've seen over the years with these kind of applications, especially from those that come from large companies, large businesses, is that after We get done with our hearings. It seems to me that there's a lot of work that goes on behind the scenes to make sure that our animal population, the CPW, continues to have interactions with the applicants and our staff. And any concerns that are raised can always be addressed. Later on, the written conditions that we require, it seems that the applicant in this case is okay with them. So even though they thought in their letter that it would be best to maybe remove that, I don't see that there's any harm in leaving it in right now, but I do want to make sure that our staff hear this loud and clear, is that we expect follow-up as the construction proceeds, and then in the maintenance. I know one of the other reasons why they're above ground is for ease of maintenance. When we do have high winds, when we do have... something that happens to those lines. You don't have to disturb the ground. You can go right there and maintain them in a timely fashion and prevent fires from that happening. So I'm fine with the renegotiated conditions that I think we've heard that staff have worked with the applicant on.

Any other Commissioner comment or discussion? Commissioner Campbell?

Yeah, just a comment. As you all know, I'm a huge fan of renewable energy. And a lot of the questions that we've been having are, even though we have 99.9% reliability, part of the application before the PUC, which has been of much discussion, And of course impacts rates, but of course impacts our service and deliverability of our transmission and distribution of the electricity we need for electrifying our grid, for EVs, for storing solar, all the kind of things that we need to do to make more renewable energy. It takes work, it takes money, it takes all those things. I just really appreciate the thoughtfulness because I think and I understand it takes it has cost and it takes time. But I think at least one of the things we've learned in the last 30, 40 years is to look beyond just what's in front of our face. Right. And it takes money to make money and to make things sustainable. And so thank you to our team that has invested a lot of thoughtfulness in this. Thank you to you all for investing a lot of thoughtfulness and working with the variety of... of agencies and departments and divisions that are involved. One of the things you were talking about, we first put this in front of the PUC in 2021. And if Commissioner Warren Gulley were here, she and I would have looked at each other and been like, ah, government. It takes a lot. And as you said, it takes a village, right? And so teamwork makes the dream work. And hopefully... This facilitates a greener and more sustainable future for us all as we get into more renewable electrification and renewable energy sources. So just wanted to, Commissioner Fields took a moment to sort of say, hey, this is great. And so I wanted to just echo the possibilities here As you know, Centennial Airport, we already have orders for electric planes coming. We approved the development of what will be the first vertiport and electric plane hub. And so that takes energy. And so for a lot of different reasons, from home appliances to vehicles on the ground to vehicles in the air, this is pretty exciting. So I know it takes a lot of work. I know it's been in discussion a lot, but also we want to set ourselves up for the future and that also includes taking care of our ecology and our wildlife. And so I, as an attorney, I get kind of the, Oh, let's make sure this language is clear. Um, but, uh, I'm glad to hear that you all are good to go with the conditions and, um, that is all. And I can make a motion if nobody else has any comments or did you want to make it?

You go, you make it. I don't want you. I just want to make sure we're finished with the discussion.

Yeah.

All right. And so I will entertain a motion at this time.

Madam Chair, in the case of ASI 25-001, Colorado's power pathway, 345 kV transmission line. 1041, Areas and Activities of State Interest, I have reviewed the staff report, including all exhibits and attachments, and have listened to the applicant's presentation and any public comment as presented at the hearing. And based on the record before me, I hereby move to conditionally approve this application and adopt the resolution with the conditions as amended by the specific language in the board summary report to conditions F, G, and H as stated on pages four and five therein. Second.

It has been moved by Commissioner Baker and properly seconded by Commissioner Fields. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any nays? Any abstentions? The ayes have it and the motion is adopted. Congratulations and thank you very much. This has been a lot of fun. Y'all come back anytime. The second item is consideration of a rezoning and a general development plan submitted for the residents at Platt Canyon. Our presenter is Cat Hammer, senior planner with the Public Works and Development Department, and our attorney of record is Mr. Matt Hader, senior assistant county attorney. Mr. Hader, could you please set the foundation?

Of course. With regard to the next matter before the Board of County Commissioners at this time for public hearing, specifically case number GDP25-003, the General Development Plan and Planning and Development Zoning for the Residences at Platte Canyon. The record contains evidence consistent with requirements of Chapter 5, Section 2 of the Arapahoe County Land Development Code, Indicating that notice was provided by a publication mailing and the posting of signs the Board of County Commissioners as jurisdiction to proceed with the public hearing this morning Thank you, Corey.

Make sure that 9-1-1 knows that you have left the room Thank you go ahead miss hammer morning madam chair and commissioners cat hammer with the Arapahoe County Public Works senior planner the Engineer on this case is Joseph boating who is also available for any specific questions. You have related to those documents. I The application before you today is the first step of a three-step PUD process, which would be rezoning eight parcels owned by five property owners from mixed-use residential 1A and open space to plan unit development to allow for single-family detached homes at a density of up to 16 dwelling units per acre. The applicant did meet with staff last week with a pre-submittal meeting indicating, and that application indicated that they were planning to develop at a density of four to six dwelling units per acre. On the screen now you'll see the location and the surrounding zoning. To the north is higher density attached housing and detention open space. To the south is the South Platte Reservoir. And then to the west is single family detached and is located in Jefferson County. So this application does have single-family attached or single-family detached units. The applicant is proposing two access points. The northern access is proposed as emergency access only, and the southern access point is actually in Jefferson County. On-site and open space and detention are proposed to the north with this application. And if this application is approved, oops, pardon me, they will need to submit a specific development plan and a preliminary plat, as well as an administrative site plan and a final plat if those other two applications are approved as well. The properties are unplatted and zone mixed use residential 1A and open space. The mixed use allows for one residence, office, and self storage. And the properties are largely vacant and separate for single family homes. The applicant did conduct neighborhood outreach in July of 2025 at the Columbine Library. They indicated that about 12 members of the public attended with a summary of concerns about the building height, landscaping, improvements to South Platte, will serve, trail connections. This property is located within the urban residential single family detached and attached land use designation in the comprehensive plan. And it is intended to contain primarily residential development with a variety of housing types combined with non-residential secondary uses. In the packet provided to you, staff did provide a number of goals and policy that this application is consistent with. And I'm going to read through these generally quick. And if you have any specific questions about the criteria for this type of application, I'm more than happy to address those. As mentioned, this application does comply with the Arapahoe County Plan and the conventional rezoning. CONSISTENT WITH THE PUD DISTRICT AS STATED, THE BUILDING HEIGHTS WILL NOT INCREASE SIGNIFICANTLY ADVERSE IMPACTS ON SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, EFFICIENT USE OF LAND AND FACILITIES, AND IT EXPANDS ACCESS TO EXISTING OPEN SPACE AND PRESERVES AND PROTECTS NATURAL FEATURES. STAFF IS RECOMMENDING ONE CONDITION OF APPROVAL, to address Colorado Geological Survey's comment requesting a comprehensive preliminary geotechnical investigation that covers the entire property. The applicant did provide a geotechnical report, but it did not include all parcels. And the comment that staff received from Colorado Geological Survey was that they wanted to see one of those with the next application. There is an existing off-street trail across from the South Platte Canyon Road, which is owned and maintained by South Suburban Parks and Recreation. Arapahoe County Open Spaces requested that safe access for pedestrians and cyclists be ensured. So on the screen here, you'll see a note that was added to that general development plan indicating that the applicant will move forward with talks with CDOT and Arapahoe County Engineering to ensure safe access across South Platte. The applicant is currently working with and will continue to work with the South Canyon Water and Sanitation Districts. These properties are currently not within a district's boundaries, but an agreement in principle has been reached and it was included in your packet. So these public comments were received before the Planning Commission hearing. One person called staff requesting a copy of CDOT's comments and the TIS. And then two people sent emails to staff, I think it was the day before, that public hearing with the Planning Commission with some concerns about existing traffic discrepancy in the project scope, parking, light, noise, and property value. So this application went to the Planning Commission for recommendation on May 5th. The Planning Commission did vote 6-0 recommending approval of this with the one stated condition of approval that staff had, and then also added a condition that there needs to be a neighborhood outreach prior to the SDP. At that public hearing, two members spoke from the public regarding traffic and the trail connection and safety of crossing South Platte Canyon Road. This is from the engineer, but the level of service for total traffic ranges from A to D as shown in that report. And that report did study the highest permitted density of up to 16 dwelling units per acre. So staff findings is that this is generally consistent with the comprehensive plan and it meets the Land Development Code zoning regulations and procedures stated in the Land Development Code. and staff is recommending a conditional approval with the first one relating to Colorado Geological Surveys and the second one added by the Planning Commissioners at the Planning Commission. I stand for any questions you may have and the applicant does have a presentation.

Thank you very much. Are there any questions for Ms. Hammer? Look at you, great, thank you very, very much. Oh, whoop, never mind. Sorry, can you go back

Yeah, no, yeah. Okay, so two members of the public raised concerns about the increased traffic and the trail connection and safety of crossing South Platte Canyon Road. The level of service for the total traffic ranges from A to D as shown in the traffic impact study. This study is the highest allowable density, dah, dah, dah, dah, dah, targeted level of service as D, so it can be concluded that no major impact is expected, okay. I think where we have... had fun conversations about trails and development and what we from an engineering and traffic level think about as a high impact versus what a lay person or somebody who living their experiences, traffic impacts. Can you, since we don't have the definition of what D is, can you just unpack the difference between A and D just for the record so we can get that on there. And so what does D look like? And we're talking about level of service for total traffic ranges. So what is the traffic range that then would require a level of service as D?

We've got Mr. Boateng. Come on down.

I get this stuff through. This is yeah.

Good morning. My name is Joseph Watson. I'm the case engineer for this project. So when we talk about level of service, we just mean the measure of traffic congestion. simply put. So we have about six different kinds of level of service. So level of service A, which means high speed, high comfort, able to maneuver around. Level of service F is when there is total breakdown of traffic. The level of service D, it is when it is approaching unstable flow. So that is what Arapaho County 2040 transportation plan requires that the county, we require that, we require level of service D or better. So that is the range that our county requires.

Okay, so... I am, I don't see the traffic impact study. Is it, is it, is it included within one of these other reports? I don't see it attached, um, in our materials. So I'm just going to ask some more questions. Um, what is the current level of traffic? What is what, how would we rate or show the level of service that exists currently?

Okay. So, um, We have something called background traffic. So the background traffic is the traffic volume without the proposed development. So we take... uh... it's analyzes assessors also give about four assessors you know unsupply canyon and the few streets of black and mineral street subplot canyon and the assessors the two assessors that the two assessors but um... that is so proposal it cannot be part of the background traffic so um... the background traffic is what we have the assessors and the route that we have existed so uh... in with the existing conditions, what we have now is between the level of service A to D. the proposed development comes to be the level of service between these accesses that I've also included is between level of service A to D. So that's why we concluded that there's nothing, the level of service did not degenerate. We didn't have any traffic congestion too.

Okay, and manager, when you were describing it earlier, you said there are seven levels Six. A, B, C, D, E, F. You described F, E, and then D. What are A, B, C?

A is high flow, high speed, free flow, high comfort. You can maneuver around. There's no traffic. Level of service B is... Close to free flow is also better. Free flow, partial free flow. Level of service C is stable flow. Level of service D is when it is approaching unstable flow. Level of service E is when it is at capacity. And level of service F is when it is total breakdown of traffic. It's where? Total breakdown of traffic, like you can't even... Oh, backed up.

Yeah, backed up traffic jams. Yeah. Yeah, okay. Like beyond capacity. Okay. And what you're saying is that the current volume with the existing conditions, the range goes from A to D. Okay. And this development... is You're saying even though at times it is at D which is approaching capacity That this development is not going to tip it over into E or F Because of the current capacity that's art that is on the streets And it, but this will allow single family attached in town home products at a density of 16 dwelling units per acre. Um, but they will. Okay. So they'll develop up to four to six dwellings per acre, not all the way up to the 16. And so what will the total number of, um, uh, what's the total number of dwelling units we think will be going in here?

That's Cat Hammer in planning. The applicant has indicated in their pre-submittal application they submitted last week on this property that it would be around 30 to 35 units, and they can correct me if I'm misremembering that number.

And, sir, do you have off the top of your hand what the current traffic volume is, not in terms of its range and the impact and the level of service, but just in the volume so that we can compare it to the increase of uh, residents that will be there in that 30 to 35, how does that look compared to what's already happening on the road? You know what I mean? Like if I, like, if I'm talking about I-25, I'm like, oh, there's no 30, 35 dwellings. It'd be like, okay, spitting in the ocean. Right. But if I'm talking about, I don't know, Christensen lane, just for example, and we were going to add 30 to 35, that's an inside joke for, okay. Um, that, uh, We were going to add 30 to 35. That would have an impact, right? We could see that. So on the cross streets that we already have that you were referring to, what is the current volume of traffic with the existing conditions?

Yeah, I can't recall what is on South Platte Canyon, but I know what the proposed development is going to add. The proposed development is going to add about 839 vehicles per day to the existing traffic volume. How many? 839. 839. About 839. Oh, in terms of trips?

Yes.

No, for the proposed development, only for the proposed development. On the South Platte Cajon, I can't recollect the existing volume that we have. Okay, cool.

Okay. And we believe that there is that, and so what we're hearing from the two members of the public is that there is a trail of Across South Platte Canyon Road and they are concerned. There's sorry. There is a trail connection and they are concerned that the 839 vehicles will impact the safety of Accessing that trail. Is that what we heard from the public is our on our understanding?

So currently there is no trail connection connection right now to my understanding. This is an opportunity with this development to install a safe crossing for a trail connection.

Okay.

Okay. Now we're talking. And so community one. And so the idea is with this, we can work with the developer to get a trail crossing.

Yes, so South Black Canyon is under the jurisdiction of CDOT. So CDOT and the applicant will work together as well with Open Space and staff if this application is approved to further define what options are available. And where, sorry, Madam Chair?

We need to wrap up. Yeah, okay, yeah, I'm sorry.

Go ahead, I mean, go, if you've got one. I think I was actually getting there. Yep, there you go. And so, Ms. Hammer, where, when in the process with that coordination between the developer, CDOT, Open Space, and Public Works? Was that the fourth one? Where, and then...

where or when in this process from this point would that happen so with the next application if this one is approved the applicant will have to identify the specific type in density and then they will be able to work with cdot to indicate what cdot thinks improvements are required the actual construction docs for any type of crossing or improvements would not come until the administrative site plan which would be the third and final step of the three

process pod right so we're on gdp goes to sdp and that starts to get we start talking about the trail then and then the administrative site plan that's when we'd really see pencil and paper and have something to approve regarding a trail yes and does that come before us or does that just go to planning commission

The administrative site plan is administratively. Administrative. Yep. But along with that would likely come a final plat, which does come to the board for decision. And the SDP goes to planning commission. The decision on the SDP is planning commission. Correct. Cool.

Okay. So there are multiple opportunities left to talk about the trail.

Correct.

Sweet.

Thank you. I did want to mention, Madam Chair, late last week I did receive an email with a number of questions from a concerned citizen. I uploaded those to Legistar, but I failed to mention it, so I wanted that to be on the record, that those are included in your packet.

Great. Thank you very, very much for everything. So now, and thank you, Mr. Biltang. I was watching you like I'm pulling this out right here, you know? No, that steel trap of a brain that has it all. So, yes, we would like to invite the applicant up, please, for their presentation.

Hello, good morning.

Hi. Please introduce yourself.

Will do. My name is Matt Norcross. I'm with PCS Group. And on behalf of Highland Development Company, we are here presenting the general development plan for the residences at Platt Canyon. Thank you for your time and consideration. I'd like to introduce the project team. I'll start. I'm Matt with PCS Group, as I mentioned. I'm the landscape architect on the project. We have Dash Steedham here with the developer. He's with Highland Development Company. We have Charlie Keener with Bright Lighter Civil Engineering. He is here as well. Unfortunately, I don't believe our traffic engineer is here. But SM Rocha is our traffic engineer on the project. We will be available to answer the questions the best we can, you may have. Next, Dash is briefly going to talk about Highland Development Company.

Great, thank you.

Hi, good morning, or maybe afternoon. I'm Dasty Dum. I'm with Allen Development Company. We are a locally owned and operated developer construction vertically integrated group. We office out of Denver, but we love this site in Arapahoe County, and we're really excited to take it through a rezone. We kind of focus on this part of the business. We're not one of the big guys. We're not one of the super small guys. These medium sized sites are really nice for us. So 11 acres is a great fit. We're excited to offer housing into a community, and we've done it multiple times before. So I'll keep it brief, but hopefully we can answer questions, and we're really excited to get our driver's license to start driving the car. So that's some of these questions. We can't give you information until we have this cleared, and we're really excited to get past that point and answer all these questions. So thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you, Dash. Well, Kat did a great job of summarizing the project, but I will be redundant and cover some of the same topics. This is a vicinity map, shows the project area, which combines eight privately owned parcels into approximately an 11-acre site. The site is bordered to the west by South Platte Canyon Road and an existing neighborhood of primarily single-family detached homes with some attached and multi-family units sprinkled in there. There's open space buffers generally located to the north and south, and the South Platte Reservoir to the east. A multi-family apartment complex is located further to the north and there are two small commercial pads located to the south. On the left, you'll see the existing zoning. Most of the site is zoned R1A with smaller areas of mixed use and open space. There is a separate half acre portion in Jefferson County that is zoned industrial. We will not be seeking any rezoning with Jefferson County. We're only going to seek access through that parcel of ground and we're gonna leave it as a landscape buffer otherwise. On the right, the urban land use plan envisions redevelopment as single family attached or attached units. To provide flexibility, we're requesting a planned unit development with zoning that allows single family attached at a maximum of density of eight dwelling units per acre or single family attached within a density range of eight to 16 dwelling units per acre. Back in August of 2025, we held a community meeting. We mailed about 51 notices and 12 community members attended. Key concerns included traffic, which has been brought up, vehicle safety along South Pike County Road, and existing views to the east. As mentioned, if approved today, we will hold another community meeting. with our SDP to keep the residents informed of what's going on and to speak to the trail crossing a little bit. We plan to hold this meeting once we've made a submittal on the SDP so that we can coordinate with CDOT and start to gain an understanding of what this trail crossing might look like, what the process we need to go through, so that we can provide an informed opinion back to the residents, because I know this is important to them. And although this is a GDP and we are showing a more detailed concept to demonstrate the intended site layout, development is generally concentrated to the central portion of the site with open space and attention located to the north and primary access coming from the south aligned with West Canyon Trail. While we are seeking flexibility that allows either single family attached or attached units, the current direction is to build 30 to 35 single family detached homes. Emergency only access will be proposed to the north of the site building heights will be capped at 35 feet and the slope of the site generally goes from west to east towards the reservoir and we will work with that slope and the height restrictions to hopefully mitigate any impact of use out towards the reservoir from the existing residences. As I mentioned, the applicant also intends to provide that safe crossing to the trail on the west side of Platte Canyon Road. We believe the application meets all the approval criteria for the general development plan and planned unit development zoning. The project will be designed to comply with applicable land development code requirements and we will continue to address potential impacts through subsequent review processes. And with that, we'll take any comments or questions you may have. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Are there any comments, questions for the applicant? Commissioner Campbell?

Yes, and thank you, Madam Chair. I'll do this quickly. So just to clarify, the trail connection is not, I'll say, germane to this current application in front of us. Broadly, yes, but not specifically.

Broadly, yes, that is correct. It was requested by Open Space and Parks that we make it considered the best we can to make that connection to the trail.

Excellent. We do like micro-mobility and walkability and bikeability around here. Yes, healthy, thriving, sustainable. Two, but this process is not where we see the specificity on that.

That is correct.

And you had a community meeting based on the requirements of this application. Of this process of... The GDP.

Yes.

Per the GDP requirements.

Correct. When we held the community meeting, we hadn't actually submitted our application yet.

Okay. And so it was a request, and as you know, something before us from the Planning Commission to add a condition that you have a community meeting before the SDP is submitted. Correct.

It just said, they said before the SDP, they did not specify when.

Okay. So a little vague. Okay. And so you're saying you will, you are committing to having a community meeting after you have submitted the SDP so that you can then connect with and coordinate with CDOT, right?

That is correct. We would like to receive comment from them to get this process started so that we can go to the public with an informed understanding of what this crossing might look like, what the process is going to be. We're not real clear and coordinate with open spaces, of course.

Yeah. Um, but you kind of need to get some of those ducks in a row before you kind of have something more concrete from an engineering and all of that perspective before you can go to community.

That is correct. I don't want to go to the community and go, I don't know.

Right. Yeah. Well, and, and it, yeah, I mean, yeah, it makes sense to sort of have an idea of what's possible and what will be required and the cost and what's feasible in terms of the development and all of that. And then you can have, you know, options. What are we dealing with? Here's our range of what's possible. Then talk to community about it, get some further input and, and, it is common for there to be amendments to applications and all of that, then you can refine, amend the SDP. That will go to Planning Commission.

Correct. We hope to have the, I guess, the broad details sort of in place before we get through the SDP.

Yeah. Yeah. Good. Yes. Okay. And then there will be public comment at the Planning Commission as well.

That is correct.

Okay, great. And then we'll get even further detail at the administrative site plan. Yes. And then that will then, while it is administratively approved, there will probably a plat approval that coincides with that, and then that will come before this body.

Yes, I believe that's the case.

Great. So a lot of opportunity for public input on that. Yes. Okay. Madam Chair, I have a question for our attorney. Last one. Yep. We have a condition before us. that is slightly vague in nature. I think planning commission was right in conditions on the fly, which we've done and isn't always the best. Think so given what the our friend here is saying and committing to on the record do we need to amend that or can we just remove that condition and Understand that based on his comments He is committing to that public hearing and we will feel confident or public meeting After they've submitted the SDP and we will feel confident about that

I think to the latter part, your level of confidence is just going to be a matter of whatever that is. It's not something that necessarily would be mandating by this. The concern I have that you've made very clear in your discussion with the applicant here is that that condition is vague as to what's supposed to occur. So from an enforceability perspective, that's difficult to say, hey, you were supposed to do this, or for them to know what exactly they're supposed to do and when. That being said, I think the record is clear with regards to what you would expect and what you expect to see in those documents that will come in there and the opportunity for public comment or public outreach, at least in the future. But I'm not seeing necessarily the need for the condition as expressed in this application because it relates to a future document. Right. It's not yet been, not yet, even at issue.

Yeah. A little cart before the horse. Yes. Okay. In terms of process. So, okay. So thank you for your commitment. Yes. To having that community meeting. It's going to look real bad if you don't do it. I think you understand.

We will 100%. We want to be good neighbors. So we are here to be transparent, be good neighbors. We will hold the meeting.

Rock and roll. So thank you so very much for your presentation, for your commitment. We appreciate that. Does anybody else have any other questions, comments, or concerns before I open it up for public comment? Nope, okay, great. Then I will open this item up for public comment. Please press star three to enter the queue if you're listening on the phone. Come to the podium if you're here in person. Provide your name and your address for the record, and you will have three minutes for your comments. Mr. Saraceno, is there anyone in the room who wishes to speak? Okay, it appears that there is. Is there anyone in the room that, well, hey, there we go. There's one person. Oh, wait, so we don't, okay. We are going to circle back. Normally we have a sign-in sheet for everyone to sign, and Mr. Saraceno brings it up to me. So since we are moving a little differently today, would you please give your name and your address for the record, and you have three minutes to talk, and then knowing that there are other hands raised, we will call you up too.

Hello, my name is Alexis Benz. My address is 7740 South Sheridan Court. That is directly across the street from the proposed development. As they move forward and want to have the public meeting, I speak on behalf of the Columbine Knowles Association. Please, please, please give more than a month's notice. The notice of this public hearing is dated on the front June 8th. It was received in my mail on June 14th. I have multiple neighbors that wish to attend this meeting and due to the short notice could not do so. The last meeting was held on a day where there was a large snowstorm and ice. There were a number of us that wanted to make it, but for various reasons due to the storm could not. This has been discussed at our local community meeting more than once, but we have not been able to get attendees here due to the way that the notice has been served. So I have owned my home, which is directly across from this, for eight years. I know that they mention in their letter that they do not anticipate a problem because it is classified as a state highway. That state highway is a two-lane road with a 35-mile-an-hour speed limit. I can show... Directly across from there, I'm pretty sure it's 35. The closest sign says 35. I just looked at it yesterday.

I need everybody to talk to me.

We are debating if the speed limit is 35 or 45, but it is not highway speed. And it is definitely two lane directly across from that area. I have video of you can see that street backing up for three quarters of a mile fairly regularly at around the five o'clock hour already with the current usage. Our neighborhood mostly has concerns about the traffic backup. Personally, it was discussed when this was originally proposed at a much higher density of all duplexes. and they reduced it from three-story homes that were originally proposed down to two-story homes. However, they have maintained the max height. The original proposed max height was 35 feet. The still proposed max height is 35 feet. If you look up on Google what the average height of a two-story home, which is what they're proposing is, it says 20 to 25 feet. If the average height of a two-story home is 20 to 25 feet, why are they proposing a max height of 35 feet? Which... which was the height that was originally proposed when they were doing three stories. Honestly, if they want to put them down subterranean, I don't care how many stories. But my deck looks out on that reservoir and is, like, I will actually want my house reappraised if these go in with 35 feet because we will not see the view that all of those houses back up all have second story decks so you can have views of the reservoir. And at 35 feet, those views will not be there anymore. They're trying to make a debate because the land sort of slopes down that you may still. It's hard to judge how tall is what. But for sure, saying that they're going to go from three story down to two stories in the current plan without reducing the height does not actually gain a benefit. It is the height, not the number of stories, that is relevant to me as a resident. Also, I heard discussed here, they mentioned 30 to 35 homes. What was published and came to my house specifically says 35 homes. Your time is up, ma'am. Thank you.

Thank you very, very much. I gave you a few extra seconds.

If you want info about where those connections are and where that path is, I can speak to them. Okay.

Thank you very, very much. And we are happy to engage and have staff engage if there's more that needs to be added to the record. Next is Peggy Knight.

We are on the opposite side of the street where they're going to put this development in. And already, I'd really like to have a traffic study that we know exactly how many cars are ready because it's an issue already. we have one entrance and one exit to our subdivision, well it's 11 homes, they're patio homes. And already, traffic is backed up on a normal day, like last Thursday I had an appointment to have my car serviced on Broadway, we went to pick it up when they said it was ready, and I got home fine, but my husband, I mean the traffic was backed up as far as I could see down from our place. And we're at the mercy of being let in if we want to travel north already. So the concern for me is primarily traffic. I'd really like to know what the studies show about that because, like, She currently said the traffic backs up. It backs up, and if there's any accident on C470, sometimes they route all those cars. This is a two-lane, and they keep saying it shouldn't matter how much traffic gets added, but it's only a two-lane road. And so that's my concern is the traffic. And like I said, we have one entrance and one exit and we're close to Mineral there. Okay, thank you.

Thank you very much. And then I have Gary Knight.

My name is scary night and I live at 76 49 South plaque Canyon drive. I hope the glare doesn't hurt your eyes.

We're good.

We're good.

There's concern about traffic of course, but also that's a wild, not wildlife area passage. We have, believe it or not from, uh, the dam up above, we have deer come down, we have coyotes, we have raccoons, we have all of this that comes through that area and walk around. And also there is geese. that come in, land in our yard, land across the street, and especially in that area where they're trying to build, I mean, we have a lot of that. So that's my concern. And also, right now, when I ride my electric bike, The, to get across, to go down to Chatfield Dam and up over, I sometimes have to wait five or 10 minutes because of the traffic coming down there already. And I will not do it between 7.30 in the morning to about 8.30, 9, because the traffic is that bad. It backs up probably 50 to 100 cars and the same thing at night. So if you add 50 to 100 more cars that are going in and out of this area, it's going to be a mess. And the thing that we got back, it's a state highway. That doesn't matter. The traffic is there. So from the roundabout all the way to Platt Canyon Drive and Mineral at that light, It's in the morning and night. It's a mess. And like I said, It really there's no easy way to get across there, except if you go down to the light and then down to Platte River. So that's my concern. And I thought I'd address it. And I thank you very much for listening. And, oh, I appreciate the gargoyle watching over us, too.

You are most welcome, sir. We have another one.

Yes, I saw that. Hey, I appreciate that. After all, the relative of the dragon.

Yeah, I love it. I love it. Thank you very much, sir. That was my contribution to the board. So, yes, that will be what I talk about forever. Thank you. I had the knights on my sheet, so I am assuming no one else wants to speak in the room. Great. Then, Michelle, you shared with me that there is someone online who wishes to speak.

Yes, commissioners, we do have someone online with the last four digits of 2012. If you could go ahead and state your name and address for the record, you are live with the Board of County Commissioners. Go ahead.

Yes, my name is Taylor Harris. I will live at 4615 West Mineral Drive right off the South Platte. I think my questions have already been answered by CATA since then about 20 to 30, but the biggest concern here in today is the traffic conditions. I heard the study was done back in August 25. So that was before the completion of the new facility, which has the volleyball and the pickleball courts. And already on the weekend into those neighborhoods, there's about 200 to 300 cars that line up just on the side streets, the car wash everywhere. And then in general, the traffic, it is gotten to the point where most of the traffic always backs up to the entrance to where the neighborhoods are. So getting out of there and getting into those neighborhoods is almost impossible, and we're now seeing more people take that traffic off South Platte Canyon and going to the apartment complexes that are connected and using those roadways to get onto their other streets. So it's just a big concern hearing that the traffic hasn't been completed yet or haven't done that study. And then also with the trailhead crossing, I don't see anywhere that it could connect to due to the outlying businesses. You have a boat center over there. You have a self-storage center right there with the reservoir entrances. So just concerning to hear that they said that they're looking into a crossing where there's not applicable crossing right there. Um, so that's all I have mostly is just about that traffic condition and also the transparency of the signage for these meetings. Currently, the 2 signs, unless you stop and mid traffic to take a picture of the sign, you cannot even read it unless you have a binoculars to take it from the actual side of the road. So I think that's going to be something big too, is the transparency from this project has been very little and that's all I have. Thank you.

Thank you very, very much for your comments. Michelle, is there anyone else online?

Commissioner, there's no one else in the queue at this time.

Okay, well, thank you very much. Then I will close public comment and would ask if there's any commissioner discussion at this time or a motion. Commissioner Campbell?

Yeah, keeping it with a boogie pace, Madam Chair. Thank you. So I asked staff if the aspect of height was before us today, and what I learned from Mr. Hayter is that the maximum height is included in the bulk standards of this GDP document. The 35-foot maximum height is applicable to both residential single-family attached and detached. And so, yes, we are approving the maximum height it could be. And So what I hear is that the concern is that if we go up to 35 feet maximum, it could block current residents' views. And regardless of whether it's two stories or three stories or what have you, that's the concern. May I ask the applicant a question?

Yes.

Yes, where's our applicant? Come on back up, please.

Could you remind me of your name, sorry?

Yes, Matt Norcross.

Matt, thanks, Matt. Can you unpack this a little bit for me? Your thoughts on the impact of 35 feet blocking views, Obviously, the community has heard something about, well, the slopes and that and that. So maybe they won't all be blocked or kind of whatever. But are you planning on going to 35 feet for every residence where something is higher? Might you consider not going to 35 feet? Obviously, this is a maximum. It doesn't require you to go to 35 feet for every resident.

That is correct. I would back up a little bit and say. at the heart of this is a GDP, we're setting standards, and we're looking for the most flexibility that's allowed under the land development code. So that is what we've put forth to give us the range of flexibility. As I mentioned, the current plan is to do 35-ish, 30 to 35 single family detached homes, I believe, I believe it is slated to be two stories at this point, and we will not be approaching. I don't believe we'll approach 35 feet. That'd be very tall for a single family attached home.

Yeah, I love a vaulted ceiling, but that's a lot. Okay, and so where the next step in this process that we will see then that get more specific is the SDP process.

That is correct. And that'll have pretty extensive architectural standards associated with it.

Okay, great. And then, Madam Chair, one more question, just reflecting the comments around notice and that kind of, we've heard that before, especially because this second community meeting is based on your word and honor.

Yes.

Um, let's, uh, work with staff. I believe whenever we have people submit public comment, uh, via email or reach out, we compile a list and, or an email list or how would we, uh, facilitate more, um, uh, uh, more forward future notice. Uh, could you, uh, also offer an online resume option. That way, if people, if there is weather in whenever that, I mean, it's Colorado, right? We had summer in June and we had summer in November and snow in May. Um, so, uh, Will you commit to just making sure that that gets communicated since you already said on the record that you care about transparency and all that and I am not imputing any sort of ill will or or malfeasance I just am I logistics and all of that, let's make sure we hear from people.

Sure. I would make it very clear. We've complied with all of the County noticing requirements.

I'm not saying otherwise. Yeah.

It's unfortunate that when we put those letters in the mail, it took over a week to go from South Denver to here in the mail. That's unfortunate for that resident. We will continue to comply with all noticing recommendations. And if we will work with planning staff, if, to be as transparent. I think we already expanded the noticing area once. So we will continue to work and be transparent. The conditions of the site do make it difficult to read the signs that are posted on site. it is what it is. So we have to post them on site. It's along a road that is opposed to speed of, I think 45 and people travel much faster down that road. Um, so as said, we will comply with anything that is put forth to us.

Thank you very much. We appreciate that. And we're moving on. Thank you. Um, and I'm certain that we can work through any details offline, um, that, uh, need to be addressed. So thank you very, very much for that. At this moment, if there's no more commissioner discussion, I will entertain a motion.

Commissioner Baker.

Oh, great. I needed to look left. Look left. It's okay. Commissioner. Yes, ma'am.

In the case of G D P 25 dash zero zero three residents at Platt Canyon, rezoned to plan unit development, general development plan. I have reviewed the staff report, including all exhibits and attachment, and have listened to the applicant's presentation and any public comment as presented at the hearing, and hereby move to conditionally approve this application and adopt the resolution in the record approving the rezoning to plan unit development and general development plan, including the conditions stated herein.

Is there a second? Second. Thank you, Commissioner Baker. It has been moved by Commissioner Fields and properly seconded by Commissioner Baker to approve the application. All in favor say aye.

Aye.

Aye. Aye. We got an aye from you too, ma'am? I'm sorry? We got an aye vote from you too? Aye. Okay. I thought there was a question. Nope, no questions. Any opposed? Great. The ayes have it. The motion is approved. And I know we are continuing conversations to make sure that everything goes the way it goes for everyone. So thank you very, very much. We appreciate that. So we have no pulled consent agenda items, but we do have a very, very special item before us today, and that is recognizing the immense contributions of our Arapahoe County Coroner, Dr. Kelly Lear, celebrating her next adventure. And I've been... Oh, wait, we got a fire ban. Listen, I was like, we've been here too long. We're just going to move on. We have a whole other attorney. Sorry, Dr. Lear, we still had to wait to celebrate you. Boy, oh, boy. Tiffany's up here saying, hey, you need to hang out. So we now have a whole other thing to do. Ms. Blue. Ms. Blue. On this final item regarding an amended and restated ordinance regarding an open fire ban, our presenter and attorney of record is Tiffany Blue, Senior Assistant County Attorney. Ms. Blue, could you please set the foundation and provide any background as needed? And again, my apologies for just completely changing the agenda.

That is absolutely fine. Yes, this item, the ordinance has been published and noticed as required by state statute. and Nate Fogg, the Director of the Office of Emergency Management is also here to provide any further information on the ordinance.

Great. Are there any questions for staff at this time? This seems so simple. All right, I will now open up this item for public comment. Please press star three to enter the queue if you're listening on the phone or come to the podium. If you're here in person, please provide your name and your address for the record, and you will have three minutes for your comments. And so we will start in the room with Candice Rutledge.

Hello, my name is Candace Rutledge and I'm from Littleton here in this area. And I wanted to say in the case that we debate fire in a literal sense, I want to ask the board to remind the Arapahoe County Sheriff's Office that the website has been confusing in the past and that if the rules change, not everyone's aware of that immediately. And if they catch someone starting a fire and it's not completely unsafe, that I'd say to give them a pass. So that's my only request in that regard.

Thank you very, very much. Is there anyone else in the room who'd like to speak on this item? Great. And I got a message from Michelle that there is no one online who would like to speak on this item. And so I'd like to ask if there's any commissioner discussion. No questions either. Well, then I would ask for a motion, please. Commissioner Baker.

Thank you Madam Chair. I move to adopt ordinance number 2026-03 authorizing the declaration of fire bans by the Board of County Commissioners or the County Sheriff. Allowing the Board of County Commissioners or the Arapahoe County Sheriff to declare fire bans and further establishing civil and criminal penalties therefore.

Second. It has been moved by Commissioner Baker and properly seconded by Commissioner Fields to approve the motion. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any nays? Any abstentions? Wonderful. The ayes have it and the motion is adopted. Now we get to talk about Dr. Kelly Lear. We, I mean, we've just been here. It has been like Christmas, you know? So, uh, and thank you, Ms. Blue. We appreciate you too. And again, my apologies. So, um, with this very, very special, uh, recognition today, Dr. Lear has been with Arapahoe County for over 20 years and and has served as coroner for almost 13 of those. I am honored to read the resolution acknowledging some of the great work Dr. Lear has accomplished during her time, but before I say that, as a graduate of Doherty High School, go Spartans! So here we go. Whereas Dr. Kelly C. Lear has served Arapahoe County with professionalism, compassion, and distinction, dedicating more than two decades to the Arapahoe County Coroner's Office, and whereas Dr. Lear began her service with Arapahoe County in 2004, whoo, serving as forensic pathologist and chief deputy coroner before being appointed coroner and medical examiner in 2014. And whereas as a board-certified physician in anatomic and clinical pathology and forensic pathology, Dr. Leah brought exceptional medical expertise, scientific rigor, and professional integrity to one of the county's most sensitive and essential public service roles. And whereas throughout her career, Dr. Lear has performed thousands of medical legal examinations, provided expert testimony in criminal proceedings, published peer reviewed work in forensic and medical journals, and shared her expertise with colleagues locally and nationally. And whereas Dr. Lear's work has supported families, law enforcement, prosecutors, public health officials, and the broader community during moments of profound loss, uncertainty, and grief. And whereas Dr. Lear has helped uphold the independence accuracy and credibility of death investigations in Arapahoe County, ensuring that residents are served with both professionalism and humanity. And whereas Dr. Lear has been a dedicated leader in child fatality review and prevention, including her service with the Colorado State Child Fatality Prevention Review Team, the Arapahoe County Child Fatality Review Team, and national work related to sudden unexpected death and childhood. And whereas Dr. Lear has contributed to broader public health and prevention efforts, including work related to preventable deaths, prescription drug abuse, suicide prevention, and community education. And whereas Dr. Lear's leadership has extended beyond Arapahoe County through her involvement in state and national forensic pathology communities, where she has represented the county with expertise and distinction. And whereas after a career marked by service, compassion, professionalism, and dedication to the people of Arapahoe County, Dr. Lear is looking forward to retirement. I'm going to go ahead and say yes, and spending more time with her partner and children. And whereas the Board of County Commissioners wishes to express its sincere gratitude for Dr. Lear's years of service and her lasting contributions to Arapahoe County. Now, therefore, be it resolved that the Arapahoe County Board of County Commissioners honors and congratulates Dr. Kelly C. Lear upon her retirement and officially recognizes her contributions during her tenure as an Arapahoe County elected official and hereby declares her future shall prosper as Arapahoe County has prospered under her dedication and service. And so, Dr. Lear, we're going to talk about you for a little while. I'm going to ask the commissioners if they'd like to say a few words, and you can either receive the words there or come to the podium, because after we're done, you get to speak. Come to the podium. Come on down. And Commissioner Baker would like to start.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I just wanted to share two, briefly, two memories that I have of Dr. Lear. The first one, I was employed by the Aurora Police Department crime lab. and taught a class at the Community College of Aurora called Forensic Science. I was about forensic science. And Dr. Doberson, your predecessor, used to come and give a class, and he eventually passed that on to Dr. Lear. And I think that was the first time. I'm not sure exactly what year that was, but it was, I think, before 2004, if I'm not mistaken. I asked Dr. Doberson, I said, you know, what did you tell her about being a coroner? At that point, he said, yeah, Kelly's going to take over for me. And he said, I told her that it's a grave undertaking. And so.

Sir.

No? Okay.

Mr. Baker.

So that's the first memory. The second memory is when my sister, who ran a parent participation preschool at Wilder Elementary School. asked me to play Santa Claus one Christmas. And I agreed. She didn't ask me back. But I was playing Santa Claus and talking to the children in this preschool. And at one point, a little girl came and told me that I think she wanted a trampoline for her birthday. Christmas present and I jokingly said you need to talk to your mom about insurance you know homeowners insurance because if other kids come over to play it was then that she pointed her mother out in the audience and it was Dr. Lear who did not recognize me at all because I was yeah so I called her later and I said um Need to talk to you about some homeowner's insurance.

What?

And I finally said, I was Santa. So those are my two favorite memories. I have many others. I know that you're going to enjoy retirement and that you are going to continue to be the parent that you are, that I know you are, the good parent. And I wish you nothing but happiness in the future, Dr. Lee.

That is too funny. Commissioner Fields.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Just want to recognize your retirement and all the good work that you've done for Arapahoe County. Did not know you during your 12 year career, but I know a little bit about the role of the corner and often that role is performed behind the scenes. It's often under difficult circumstances and it requires professionalism. It requires compassion, integrity. and an unwavering commitment to serving families during the most sensitive moments when they have to come into the coroner's office. So it takes a lot of diplomacy to kind of do the work that you do. And throughout my understanding of your tenure, you've been able to perform your responsibilities with dignity and respect and providing the kind of awareness that families need during these trying times, as well as supporting law enforcement and public health efforts. to ensure that every individuals that entrusted with the coroner's office is treated with that kind of professionalism and it's not easy. I'm quite sure it takes a toll on you in reference to what you see over the course of your time and how you have to kind of walk alongside what you've seen. and the performance of the work, and then carry it on day after day, month after month, year after year. It's not an easy thing to do. So I just want you to know how much I appreciate your work. We all appreciate your work on behalf of Arapahoe County, and thank you for doing it with such class. We will miss you deeply.

Thank you. Commissioner Campbell?

Thank you, Madam Chair. I just immediately got emotional. Um, coming in as a new commissioner, it, um, first of all, I think that Arapahoe County has the best elected officials personally, present company, obviously excluded. No, um, no, we, and, and we work together as a team and, um, um, We hire great people. They make us look good. But no insult to the rest of our electeds, including ourselves. It is clear that you stand out as a preeminent expert in your field and your service to this county as well as to the other counties who do not have the elected coroner staff to perform the work that needs to be done for their families is beyond measure. From educating the field to training your staff to as Commissioner Fields was talking about the work of the emotional labor and how you you guys guide and work with families going through those times to managing highly charged political situations with, um, class and sophistication and professionalism coming in. And, you know, we were running in 2022 coming in and 2023 and still learning about the impacts of COVID. And as we're going through our tour, our tours and everything that you had to do and your staff did, and you led them through a pandemic then, and then, and alongside it was the pandemic of fentanyl and the accidental deaths and the increase in, in suicides and increase in substance abuse. You have served during a time of gun violence and Just a time that has been incredibly tumultuous and rife with conflict in a time where science has been questioned, in a time where budgets have been tight and you have been scrappy and you've gone out and you've gotten things and you've been resourceful and you say, okay, we can use this for this and this for this. as somebody who sits on executive budget committee and as we all sit on BOCC, when somebody comes to us and says, okay, yeah, we are really only asking for what we need and we could do this and could do that. And here's what we need. Um, you, you, you don't sugarcoat it, but you don't fluff it up either. You know, you're like, this is what we need. This is what's going on. And, um, I, um, it being a new commissioner and getting to learn from and know that you can trust the person who is in your office and, and be able to learn and to be able to just know that everything there is handled well, that we're not, you know, going to find things, places as have happened in some other counties who shall not be named. Um, and, It is, you've been a blessing and an asset to us, to your staff, and to Arapahoe County. And thank you so much.

Thank you. I am excited because El Paso County Colorado Springs girls showed up today. So thank you very, very much. And I echo what my colleagues have said about you. But my own introduction to your world was the tour of your office as a new commissioner. And I can tell you, I was just so impressed by all of it. I was never really good at science. So somebody that has all those letters after your name tells me that there's a whole lot of science and a whole lot of being in the weeds. And I trust, I trust you implicitly with absolutely everything scientific. Because of who you are, it is just so obvious that you have a passion for what you do. And anybody who has a passion for what they do, I like to talk about, you know, there's the science and then there's the art of anything. And so you have taken that and taken the science of what you do, added the art of what you do to be stellar. And that makes you a cut above everybody else. And just a personal note on your last or your 2022 election. So, yeah, your last election. I'm really glad you won. I'm really glad you won because I was seeing at that moment that if you didn't, there would be a lot less science in the most scientific department of our county. And so thank you so, so much for your work. It is an honor to know you and to just go, yeah, that's Kelly Lear. We got Kelly Lear. and doherty high school so um so thank you so very much for your work we are excited for what you do next uh and um you know hanging out with your with your girls and showing them what it looks like to be a strong woman uh and um just i'm just happy for you i'm just happy for you so With that, Dr. Lear, you get to say some stuff. If you want to say a few words, you can, but we thank you for your work, and then we're going to go take a picture.

Thank you. I did write down some things to say, but then I thought, it's better just to speak from the cuff. I do love working for Arapahoe County. I've always loved being here. This has been the place I've developed as a physician. I first walked into the office 31 years ago, so I've not really wanted to be anywhere else. So it is a bittersweet to be leaving. I've definitely had some teary moments of cleaning out my office, um, and thinking about not being there every day, not being with my staff every day. Um, but it has been the best place to be. And I can't imagine having been anywhere else. I've worked with a boards of commissioners and department directors over the last 20 plus years. And everybody brings something different. And I think I have learned a lot from all of those different people in different ways. I've really enjoyed learning that part of it. As a forensic pathologist, we don't go to medical school to be a politician. we are about the science as you said we are about being professional we're about doing our job and serving our families and our community so I have learned a lot along the way about that other part of it and and it's been a good journey and I'm I'm glad that I am leaving the office in a better place than I found it. And that's not a dig at Dr. Doberson. Obviously, he left it in a better place than he found it as well. But I am very proud of the work we've done over the past 20 years. And I think the office is in a good place, in a better place than when I started. So we've got some great staff. We've got some new positions that I think are serving our community in the way that meets my vision for that. So, so. Hopefully that will continue in my absence. Yes, it will.

Yes, it will.

Thank you.

Thank you, ma'am. Yay. Meet us in the back for a picture. Oh, come on down, Mr. Lampert. You have something to say for Dr. Lear?

I do. All righty. And some of you might not know, but besides all the things that you said, she has a unique talent to deal with kids. Many years ago, I witnessed a time at the sheriff's open house when she did something that I thought was so amazing that we had to promote it. And that's called maggot art. When we mentioned maggot art, People don't know what it is until they see it. And we have exploited it to many of the fire musters that we have run over the years. And the kids and the parents always come and they ask, are you going to have fire truck rides? Are you going to have water hoses? And are you going to have maggot art? So, again, she has started something that her staff has done an excellent job in continuing that. So we thank you from all the families. Well, thank you. We appreciate it. Thank you for the opportunity.

Thank you, Mr. Lambert. We appreciate that. Let's go take a picture, and then we'll get out of here. You want to come down too? Wait. All right, now I'm sitting down. I'm sitting down. Thank you, Dr. Bidding. Thank you, commissioners.

Dr. Lear. Dr. Lear's achievements as a forensic pathologist and coroner in Arapahoe County are extensive. Office accreditation with the National Association of Medical Examiners. child fatality committee responsibilities and publications, youth suicide prevention awareness, establishing Colorado state law HB 24-1100 to limit applicants for coroners in larger counties to forensic pathologists and certified death investigators, building a healthy office staff, which now include a family assistance liaison and an office coordinator, presenting at national conferences, writing board exam questions for the American Board of Pathology, serving as a clinical case writer and editor on the forensics committee for the College of American Pathologists, testifying in dozens of homicide trials in the 18th Judicial District, managing the coroner office budget and staff, mentoring and teaching pathology residents and fellows, and of course, coordinating with Aurora Police Department and the 18th Judicial District following the Aurora Theater shooting. Dr. Lear has led the county as coroner since 2014 and has served as a forensic pathologist since 2004. Next month marks 22 years of service for Arapahoe County. We all owe her our thanks for serving the county so well. And I especially owe her my thanks. Thank you, Dr. Lear, for sharing your experiences with me these last eight years. I wish you all the best in your retirement.

Oh, yay.

And with that, be there, no other business before this board. We are adjourned and we're taking a picture.