P&z - Regular Meeting

Thank you. Excuse me. Welcome to Town of Basalt Planning and Zoning Commission meeting for March 3rd. Can we have a call to order, please? All right. Uh, Bill Marin. Yo, Kyle Obereter. Eric Foszic here. Rob Levit, yes. Cindy Hersshfield here. Mike Horvath. Bob Kaplan. and bin fire steel. So this is a presentation. You're not voting. So you can proceed. All right. Great. So we have a work session on our land use code and development regulations rewrite. And I will leave it up to staff and consultants.

Yeah, just to introduce we have Jessica Garrow here from Design Workshop and we have Kristen Weber on the Zoom here from Design Workshop as well. Um, just as a brief background, uh, the town hasn't done a full update to the town's development and zoning regulations, uh, in quite some time. Um, we've done a series of peace meal amendments over the years due to, um, issues um, that have come up and u, so we haven't done a full There we go. Came back. Um so so we've uh contracted with design workshop uh last year uh we selected them through an RFP process and they have done 50% drafts to this point and have been working with a land use code subcommittee uh that has three uh PNC members on it um of those members bills on the committee. uh the others aren't here this evening uh but this evening Jessica is going to give you an update and uh discuss some various topics with you.

Thanks James. Um we're really excited to be with you all uh to run through the progress on the code update. Um Christian is gonna share his screen with some slides. Um, and what we wanted to do is go through uh just a little bit about where we have been kind of the foundational principles of the code update and then go through some of the key pieces that are proposed to be changed um in the current 50% draft. We've got a couple of key questions that we wanted to ask you um at the end and then also welcomed uh and really wanted to hear any other comments and questions that you have about um the uh update thus far. So um next slide. We are um a uh land use planning landscape architecture uh urban design firm. Um our office is just around the corner here. Um and so we're really excited to be working in our own backyard. Um there are three key folks from design workshop working on the project. I am the uh principal and working through uh overall um pieces. Riley Timonss is not able to be here tonight. Um she's our project manager and then Christian is online based out of our Denver studio um and supporting the work. You might have seen Christian um from some previous meetings. He's also been working um with Eric on the housing amendments um that you've been going through. So um that's been our team. Um Christian, did you want to run through a couple of these next intro slides and then I'll pick back up?

Yeah, for sure. Um so again, as James mentioned, um hasn't completed full updated, uh development code in many years. And so uh these PC code over the years kind of added up. So that is a good point to recess and uh do a follow. So um with that to touch on where we are in the process. So um we off um currently working through work group and leadership meetings and have finished up the 50% code draft that we've u shared with um town staff and are sharing with you guys uh today as well. Um, and so with that, uh, what will come after this is our 90% draft and, uh, some more upcoming engagement opportunities where we'll be meeting with you guys again, town council, and kind of going back and forth before, um, spring and summer of 2026 where, uh, the final draft um, the final draft would be administered. Um, so the methodology with you guys. So um when we first started the project so um first to make sure it was clearation for the average person trying to use it so locate understand what they're looking for um and also articulate why in the regulations why certain things are the way that they are um provides don't over complicate um including clear language enforcement options and reinforcing ideas and uh others and building up the master process not duplicating any others um there. So some of the high topics that

are established organization usability um the person can go and really understand and find what they're looking for pretty easily um integration ongoing events that I'm working on as well as this preservation work um community character design um there's continuity between residential districts um and PDS and standards and then the districts uh like that. So um the way this uh is out is um into three categories understand. So first structural these are pretty quick easy changes that just languual charts um just improve utility. Um the next two are uh we're looking for feedback on some of those sort of work in progress topics. So uh second one administrative processes and enforcements. Um this is where we're looking to consolidate and simplify administrative procedures and um where we staff authority for final minor approvals to speed up review processes. Um and then new policy concepts. These are new things that have been in the code. So um an example of this would be the uh ongoing ADU work that we're doing with the full new ADU section. Um so these new concepts are again also things that uh looking for feedback on and love to speak to you guys about it. So uh I'll touch briefly on the integration ongoing commitments. So um as you mentioned the work which focuses on this affordable inclusive living um goal of

the 2020 master plan. And so some of these goals um goals goals include um providing housing that serves residents across a range of demographics. So one of the goals is producing 500 units of affordable and attainable housing, discouraging affordable housing projects that are connected to the transit system and encouraging smallcale higher density starter housing. Um with that another piece of the work that uh we did for the um uh housing work along with um EPS was creating a tool kit to deliver that supports the community to mitigate voluntary displacement of people. So this included the down community assistance program involved in local program that we propose um as well as establishing reliable funding sources. Uh this was EPS work that they did understanding what your communities are doing and how they're funding some of these programs. And then uh lastly promoting the development of innovative and diverse hazard types closely land. So um use integrated redevelopment of existing neighborhoods or the development of big parcels. Um and again small scale higher density starter housing that's available for more people. Um so with that uh just this last Tuesday the second council reading. So um these amendments have been approved. So I'll kind of roll through this pretty quickly and we'll get into the actual um code structure for the update for this 50% draft that we're working through right now. So, um, just kind of wanted to walk through, uh, some of the larger changes of where pieces are moving around within the code. Not actually changing any of the language, but just their location. Um, so on the left column, you'll see the existing table of contents, and then on the right, you'll see the 50% draft table of contents. So, um, as is chapter 14, there isn't a chapter 14. There's nothing located there. It's just reserved. And so, um, because we're breaking out a couple chapters, chapter

14 in the new draft is now the annexations chapter. Chapter 15 is becoming the zoning chapter. Chapter 16 is a new chapter um titled development. And so these two chapters are splitting what is the existing um chapter 16 zoning where chapter 15 becomes just the zoning districts and 16 is kind of everything else. I'll show you that in a second. But uh chapter 17 remains subdivisions. So again, no real change for annexation, just the numbering of the chapter. Um so the existing zoning chapter as is uh has all the district regulations and then um so many other things that go along with it plan developments signs mobile home parks etc. So uh our idea was to sort of break this out and look at district regulations on uh sort of a a broader level and so what we proposed to do was breaking it out by um each land use type. So, as you can see, um, chapter 15 now, the zoning chapter just includes each of the districts broken out by residential, commercial, industrial, other, and then the supplementary um, uses that go along with them. And then this chapter 16 is um, most of that other stuff that was included in the zoning chapter with the addition in red text. You can see some new um, some new articles. So again, as I mentioned, the accessory dwelling units article and then we're pulling in some of the environmental hazards um and steep slope regulations from the subdivision chapter into here. So um all those natural and environmental hazard sections live together. Um a new thing we're introducing with this 50% draft is uh conditional use and special review application requirements. So, uh, special review is already within the code, but we are, um, introducing and proposing, uh, conditional use being added to that as, um, maybe an easier way that's somewhere in between

permitted and special review. Um, and then just administration and enforcement. Um, subdivisions, not much of a change here, just kind of consolidating where possible. So, just one fewer article. Um, with that, I'll pass it back over to Jessica and we can walk through some of the uh some of the changes chapter by chapter.

Great. Thanks, Christian. Um, so on the annexation chapter, these are pretty straightforward adjustments. Um, we are updating uh the language to make sure that it reflects uh state statutes. One of the key pieces here is the addition of disconnection eligibility requirements. So if there is a parcel of land within town limits that for some reason um should be disconnected and and go back to county jurisdiction, there is a procedure for that within state statute and so that has been incorporated here. That is a um very much a one-off process that is unlikely to happen. It requires a very limited scope of criteria to be met including that they have not gone forward with any development approvals that they have received from the town of Basalt. So it would it is truly a very limited circumstance but wanted to make sure that um that was incorporated uh to relate to state uh state statutes. Um this 50% draft has some kind of vagaries of graphics, right? We've introduced um some ideas in different sections. Um within annexations, we would anticipate in the next 90% draft that we would have flowcharts and tables here to really describe what that annexation process looks like. Um so from a new policy concept, we've um added and just clarified applicability. Um and we have added uh different annexation review criteria. This was something we talked about quite a bit with the working group and there were some comments in those discussions that um maybe go further in the review criteria as it relates to things like consistency with the master plan. So right now the draft simply says consistency with the master plan and instead maybe going further. What do we mean by that? Is it related specifically

to transportation access, housing, things like that? So, that's something that we've we've heard and and would anticipate um incorporating and moving forward. Um next is zoning. Um zoning has some um more significant uh adjustments. One of the actually really significant adjustments falls in the simple and structural category, which is consolidating all of the definitions across all of the chapters into one place. And so there's still some work to be done to make sure that there's no redundancy and things like that. Um but there's a lot of it looks like a lot of red lines and it's actually just a kind of a relocation of of things from a PUB section, a subdivision section, etc. into one area. Um we've started to include ideas about where graphics might be um included to help describe things. So this would be um opportunities to show how do you measure height on a slope? How do you measure height on a flat piece of land? Um how do you measure setbacks? Things like that. So really kind of getting into some of those pieces where visuals would be helpful. Um we have uh relocated uh medical marijuana facilities as well as natural medicine to chapter six. So you'll see kind of a movement of some of those pieces from kind of the land use code portion of the municipal code into chapter six of the municipal code. Um similarly we've really consolidated some of the um pieces related to land use categorization while also trying to provide a little bit more detail. So on a new policy concept we've added a new section that talks about the categorization of land uses. And so Christian sort of shared this on the um outline that we are um breaking things up into kind of the larger buckets that you would typically see residential

uses, industrial uses, commercial uses, civic and other and then creating a list of if in five years a business comes around that is not something we would think of today. um there are breadcrumbs, there's direction for the town staff to be able to determine where does that fall within these land use categories and be able to share that with the planning and zoning commission, town council to make sure that that um is uh in the right spot. So that is an important piece. We have also uh consolidated definitions around adult businesses. Uh because the code has not been updated in a while, it has a lot of definitions for a lot of things that in kind of as codes are modernizing um throughout the country are being consolidated. And so that is an area that um we've done some consolidation. Um we have updated as Christian said uh the idea of conditional uses. So, the conditional use uh criteria and requirements are in chapter 16, but within chapter 15, we need to update all of the use tables that you're familiar with. And so, making sure that we have the right mix of what is permitted, what is a conditional use, and what is a special use, special review use. So, a conditional use is one that would come to planning and zoning commission, and you would make a decision, and it would be done. a special review use would continue to have a recommendation from the planning and zoning commission and then final decision by town council. And so we've tried to outline where are some things that make sense to be in a conditional use category. Um and so that's included in in the use tables here. Um two other kind of key changes in this chapter. Um there is a uh developing resources district um that is sometimes

assigned to properties when they are annexed into the town and then they need to go through um a separate development plan and kind of work its way through through the kind of PD process or the subdivision process. Um a key change is transitioning that to a legacy zone district. So, keeping it in the code for any properties that are currently in the developing resources district, but not providing any new designations of developing resource district to things that are annexed. Instead, when you're going through the annexation process, you would need to identify and and go through with the town what is the right zone district and and um uh development standards for that. Um we've also provided some language related to formula businesses or chain businesses wanting to create some of those um uh requirements and just clarity around those businesses. Um chapter 16 is development. So a good way to think about this is these are all of the kind of typical standards that you um would go through as you're evaluating an application in in in front of you or or staff would in in front of them. um simple and structural are uh kind of moving some pieces out of subdivision into this section to be really clear about um definitions related to uh development orders. Uh what are those and and how does that work? Um consolidation of hillside, steep slope regulations, flood damage prevention, rivers, wetlands, and environmentally sensitive areas. those are kind of spread out a little bit and we're trying to consolidate and make it a little bit more simple for people to follow. Um from a process and enforcement perspective, there are a couple of additional and updated changes here. Um

so providing opportunity for consolidated review for um projects with 100% affordable housing units. So on the one hand there is um Prop 123 compliance that is um needed. So, we've added a section that is related to um Prop 123, which is the state's way of encouraging local governments to have a fasttrack process for projects that include affordable housing. So, that is um included in in the code. In addition, PUDs that would have 100% affordable housing, there's a a process for a potential expedited um or consolidated review process. um the ability to approve uh PUD amendments administratively is included uh within this section and then we've also uh identified uh some additional criteria for uh parking reductions and mixeduse developments and so allowing through the PP PUD process planning and zoning commission to make an evaluation and a recommendation to town council about if a um a parking reduction uh should occur up to 25% and then town council would be able to u make that final decision. Um there are maybe some opportunities that we've talked through about administrative approval for parking reductions, something that's much smaller. So not the 25% but is it a one space or a two space? That's something that we would like to get some feedback on if if that feels like it's an appropriate um adjustment. Um and then new policy uh concepts are really thinking about um approval standards and process standards. So within the current code, you go to a lot of different places to understand am I going to PNZ, am I going to town council, is this administrative, what is my public notice requirement? So it's in a couple of different places. So we've

consolidated all of that into one section. That's really the first section of chapter 16 to create what we've called standard development procedures. So people can just go to the one section of the code and understand what is my public notice requirement, what is my review process. And we've created some review criteria that really should apply pretty broadly to all types of applications. It has proper utilities. it is addressing any um wildfire or natural hazard pieces. Um so some consistency um within those um as Erica said ADUs has um been updated uh and that is already part now of of the code as part of kind of moving through that process and we'll make sure that that is integrated appropriately. Um and then establishing um particularly the conditional use and special review uh requirements as I mentioned. So finally subdivisions um would say this is a pretty light touch the changes to the subdivision um section and I've already mentioned it consolidation of things that are in multiple places. So definitions are not in subdivision anymore. Those have moved into chapter 15. um technical review committee um references are uh moved to chapter 2 and then uh vested rights is only right now in the subdivision um chapter of the code and vested rights are kind of linked to having a sightsp specific development plan and so we've included that in chapter 16 when it talks about um the uh basic requirements for applications. So, that was a lot to go through and wanted to try to get through relatively quickly so that we could have um more of kind of conversation with you and hear if there are any things that we've

missed, anything else that you would like to um to talk through. So, we have a few discussion questions to maybe prompt things um that are related specifically to um the different sections. So, we're happy to walk through um these as appropriate or maybe pause here and see what additional comments or questions you might have at this point.

I have a general question. Um the design guidelines guidelines that we've been looking at for the downtown area, are those getting incorporated into this or is that an entirely separate project? it it's separate. They're design guidelines. So, similar to the way we have affordable housing guidelines that they're still requirements, but they're going to be referenced in the code, but they're going to be a separate separate document. Okay? So, they're not they're not part of the code at all. They're just right

on their own. Okay. and we'll make sure that there's the correct link right in the in the code to to reference that and and incorporating anything. I think the other piece that we've talked about is from a graphics perspective, does it make sense to have a similar graphic style to what's being included there? And that's something that I think we're still working through, but wanting to make sure that there's just kind of consistency amongst all of the town's documents. I have comments if you're ready for that. Yeah. And I can go through these questions if I think it's conversation.

Okay. Good. Because I was part of the the whole early discussion, but some of this will be reiterating what I've said before, but I kind of want to say it out in front of everybody, and some of it is is somewhat new. Um, first off, um, I'm uncomfortable with the idea of discouraging any sort of housing, even if transit's difficult. We've done that before and people have gone away,

and that was unfortunate. You know, it was it was part of a three-mile review for like the ski company out by Elabel, but they just didn't do it. they were gonna like increase the density and you know we were really harsh on them about it especially Susan was like this is just not okay because it's too far from transit I mean you could see transit stop from there but it was outside of the our metrics and and so I felt bad that we used that and styied or at least it appeared that we were stying affordable housing by having that as a condition. Um um this is a comment.

So I was just staring that point. So are you suggesting that it making your point now? Are you suggesting that that Well, it was up there that that's a thing we want to discourage and I'm uncomfortable discouraging housing. I'm okay with it. I mean, so Well, I know. No, but this is affordable housing. You know, discouraging affordable housing just because it's not close to transit. Not everyone needs to or wants to leave. But with the caveat that there's the new 100% thing. If it's 100% are they being discouraged versus a normal thing where we get 25% at at best. I'm just I'm not I'm just I'm not arguing with you. I'm just I'm just saying it's like to discourage affordable housing is seems like counter to what we're trying to do.

And I don't think that's what we're trying to do. I I think that relates to the potential for parking mixeduse parking reduction if you're further away from transit. I think the idea is that there's less justification for the mixeduse parking reduction as well that's that's part of one of my further comments. I think if we're going to have I'm in favor of all sorts of parking reductions as long as there's alternate, you know, mass transit or other mobility options available, then all kinds of parking reductions could could be at least discussed, you know, and our appetite as a town for that changes over time. So, I don't want to sty it for what our appetite is now.

Yeah. and and that statement on discourage affordable housing projects and residential developments that are not connected to the transit system or which do not have a well-lighted safe pedestrian protect protected pedestrian access to and from transit stops is from the master plan. So, it's part of where we're getting guidance. But I think the important piece is kind of what this conversation is is that it's not a no, it's a how are you getting people around and what does that look like? And we're also going to encourage you to do 100% affordable housing whenever you can essentially. And I was uncomfortable with that in the master plan too. And here comes my next comment about the master plan.

Okay. I'm sorry to interrupt you, but what are we just discussing these things or are we making a recommendation or like right now? I'm just discussing what my ideas are. Okay. I don't think we're making recommendations. I think we're just a sounding board. Okay. Because this is only 50%. Right. So, if there are items that you have um that you guys are split on and that we need to do more research on or you want to have al alternates brought back, this is the time to get that information.

Sorry. Okay. My my my next one of the master plan connection is um I think in contrary to the code documents, the master plan's is envisioned to be but isn't always a more living document. And I think there should be more clearly worded um connections because there isn't the beginning of each chapter is a mention of it. But I think it it should be more, you know, stronger language, more shall than coulds and things like that. you know that that it that the the master plan is more of a guiding document and then the town as ideas and thoughts about count from council and planning commissions change over time that could be reflected that way as opposed to trying to change too many documents.

Change one and it reflects in the other. Um um my next comment is um uh ADU acceleration. Um I think that's a great idea. We've talked about this before, but I'm uncomfortable with ADU acceleration if there's not a residency requirement because you know if you're going to get something like that, you should give something. You know, if it's just part of the regular review process, then it's just part of the regular review process. But if you're going to get an accelerated process, the town should get something for that.

Piggybacking on that, is there residency requirements talked about in other places in general? I know it's come up now several times here, came up with big development down this down the road. Is that something that we should look at? Well, in in terms of the ADU requirements, we we did bring up with council the P&Z recommendation and had a discussion at second reading with them about that. um they they chose not to add the residency requirement uh for the standard units um just for the units that were part of the um incentive program. Um, but I I would guess that the conversation there is probably not done on that topic and probably will get more evaluation as part of the larger uh code rewrite

as long as the point I'm making is brought forward. Yeah. Yeah. Sure. Okay. Um, do you have more comments about it? Well, I did I don't it was about the residency requirements that we talked about and if this is the appropriate place, but is is this even the document that we would want to discuss? You know, it talked about having smaller units, you know, local firsttime homeowners, but there's nothing stopping people from Denver from buying those units. And that's the struggle that we have every time we have one of these conversations. Is this the place, you know, to have that conversation? Are you talking about micro housing?

Even if it's micro housing, there's nothing stopping people from Denver from buying it for the weekend. So, I want it, you know, for if it's workforce housing, then I want it to go to the local workforce and can we work that into the That's what I'm trying to get to with the ADUs, you know, which is why I brought it up now. Exactly. That's my point, too. Yeah. And um Cindy, I think if you and this have have this conversation Yeah, because those would be, you know, every in Denver

and um it the code is is the appropriate place to put these requirements. And um I think that an important kind of principle about uh land use codes is it should be easy for people to do the things that you want and it should be more difficult for people to do things that require a certain level of review, might have community impacts or are uses you may want to be discouraging. And so making it easier for housing development to move through is part of um some of the principles behind this code and some of the um things that are happening at the state legislative level. So um a consolidated review process for instance for 100% affordable housing is is an important part of of this and it's for affordable housing. So, it has a deed restriction and like a residency requirement with that.

Okay. Um, another thought I had and this came up in our last meeting, but I don't the more I thought about it, the more I think it's important is um a land a data set center land use. Yeah. You know, I could see that being used or misused by various well-meaning or nefarious characters. Um, Yeah, to piggy back on that, I think the big issues are electric electricity use and water usage, right? So, who's responsible if they're moving in? Is it us? Is it them? Because I I don't even think we have that as a land use. Probably not.

Yeah, we we don't. And I think what we would do is include it in um probably an industrial land use category. And so thinking about um then in our industrial areas what what might be appropriate uh review criteria or limitations. I would guess and kind of correct me if I'm wrong, but that it's something that would go through a special review process as something that goes to council versus a conditional use or a permitted use. That would that would be my recommendation. Another issue of mine because it's happened to me is uh historic preservation demol demolition. Um I you know I've seen a lot of it go by the wayside over the time I've lived here. a disturbing amount of like really good, you know, square, clean, structurally sound buildings that just, you know, it's always easy to get a contractor to tell you it's cheaper to tear it down and rebuild it because it it it is. Um, and the last one was my uh my parking reduction given alternate modes of transit. That's all my comments.

We just talked about the historic preservation about on Midland, right? Yeah, but that was that's guidelines, right? The actual zoning where you control what you can demolish and what you can't isn't here. Okay. And is it well covered? Are you comfortable with this? We're 50% right now. So I wants to make sure I want to make I want to make sure it's really covered. Also that that's that's um a decision that the town has shied away from before for a long time about prohibiting people with historically we don't designate any buildings historically for one thing.

So we don't really even have them. I mean we have them on maps where we say they are but they're not technically designated. And so once you designate them you have more control over what happens with them. But we as a town have been loathed to do that and I think at this point where there's only a few left that we should start at least having the discussion about doing that. I agree. Seems like that's another project above and beyond what this is though. But this is the document that controls it,

right? But you have to have you know form designate people or form a committee. I mean we don't have a preservation committee like up in Aspen. So it's kind of f first you have to like you said designate that stuff. Yeah. Exactly. Decide what's of value.

It's a big discussion because like say you have um like HAR and Tellide which is like you know a quasi authoritarian group that has the strangle hold on the development of the town. So it's like it can go in really bad directions too. So um it's a it's a discussion you have to take carefully. But I think there should be hooks in our code for when we decide what to do that allows us to control the demolition of historically designated houses, right? But it might require a pathway to Yeah. I mean, you're putting the course that's not a discussion for here, right? That's a council type thing.

Yeah. And I think staff agrees with Bill that there have been issues over time. Um we we do actually have designated structures, locally designated structures and and there are uh protections against demoing those locally designated part part of the issue is that from a residential standpoint uh the town has always kind of taken the position of uh simply uh doing a voluntary u historic designation there. hasn't been a forced designation like you get in some other communities.

Um and and so there there are some houses that are old and and probably should have been historic resources that that weren't historically designated because the owners chose not to voluntarily designate them and so they had the ability to demo them because they weren't designated, which is Yeah. But it it's over time as they become less and less of them it becomes a higher and higher priority for the communities I think. So I kind of this is a conversation piece forward to the next phase to think it's a good idea

anything I just want to touch on um Jessica one of us said workforce housing and you said affordable housing. Are we using those interchangeably now? Um maybe affordable housing is under the guidance or the opices of our of a deed restriction. Yeah. Where workforce is more of a basket of low-end.

Yeah. And um what I would say is that in in our experience in working in similar communities um kind of use the word workforce housing or essential housing, but unless it comes along with an actual deed restriction, it becomes over time less and less likely to fill that initial goal of housing the workforce. So it it might on the first purchase or the first renters, but then as it kind of turns over in in time, it turns more into a market rate, right? Which was what I was asking if could be addressed somewhere in here. Not just the affordable, but also the the

attainable. Yes, that's what we're calling it. That's what we're calling it this week. Last week it was workforce. Yeah. And our guidelines currently call it community housing. So, anything that's deed restricted, whether it's a a category unit that has price or rent caps or or a RORO unit that just has a occupancy requirement on it. That that's kind of how it's been termed, right? Those aren't the units that I'm questioning. Yeah. It's the ones that get sold to us as being workforce and don't end up housing our workforce. Got it. Yeah.

Yeah. Um and then uh this is sort of the first time that we've addressed updated our codes. How often is this should this be done every 20 years, 10?

Well, I I think what's been happening over time is that this has had multiple different code amendments over time as needed. um doing a comprehensive overhaul is is a decent thing to do. There's not a magic number. Um but certainly every 10 years is ideal. It it really just depends. There's a lot of moving factors going on right now, right? Like the difference between basalt being affordable as a neighborhood community or or community versus what it was 10 years ago. Totally different. um where we are with our energy codes, where we are with people riding transit and taking multimodal trans, you know, transportation, totally different. So, it's just something to maybe keep in mind as we update the BU um master plan as well. Um really, it's when staff is having a hard time negotiating how to implement and really be precise on the land use applications that are coming in front of you. And when we keep hearing kind of similar concerns, we're not interested in that. We don't want historic buildings that aren't historic being torn down. We need tools to help support those community goals.

Yeah. And some of it is also just from a user standpoint. You know, when we get basic questions, we can't find the process in your code. All right. Our code is old. It doesn't have the process lined out like a new code does. It's not user friendly. Um, so it's it's sort of one of those things. That's all.

Um I don't I don't have that much. I do um kind of question the whole data center thing which I mean I think data center and I think AI. I don't know what other I mean I guess they're like big server things. I don't know how many of those are still being built, but um I mean I think given the lack of water in our valley, which doesn't seem to be on the verge of improving, I mean I think we want to do anything possible to discourage that type of use. I don't think our our valley is in any way, shape, or form that I mean, I don't know where is appropriate, but certainly not here

for for resource reasons. So I think whatever whatever we do should have some, you know, pretty strong teeth to discourage that. For me, the thing we haven't talked about so much on the list up here is the idea of formula businesses.

Um, is the new grocery store a formula business? Is Philip 66 a formula business? Those are really the only ones downtown really. Obviously go over to Willix, it's different. So um, For me, I don't want to have a lot of formal businesses downtown. I don't think that's what Oldtown's about. Um, but again, how we define that, I think, is kind of becomes a factor. What that looks like.

The the intent right now is to prohibit formula businesses that don't already exist in the C2 zone, which is basically along Midland. So they can exist in Willlets or anywhere else, but um as part of potentially retaining your charm and your historic character um along Midland is prohibiting them there. How do you define that?

There are lots of different definitions. Sometimes it's if there are three or more businesses of the same owner throughout space. Sometimes there are chains. Um we are kind of referring to using what Telleluride has as a baseline um for their downtown for formula businesses um which I think is the three or more

and um Telleluride is um I think on a far end of the spectrum on um the formula businesses and sort of surprisingly Aspen is actually a little bit further away from that. So that definition is 10 businesses or more. Um so a little bit more. Um but it it includes things like a standardized branding or standardized kind of color palette. Um thinking about kind of drive-thru businesses like the Napa Auto Parts or um Grease Monkey or uh McDonald's, you know, those types of things. So um kind of thinking about it from from those pieces as well. So um having some definition around that so that it's pretty clear for staff to evaluate is this a formula business or not. And then what um what Aspen does is if you wanted to open a formula business or a chain in an area where it's not allowed um you would go through a conditional use review with the planning and zoning commission. So there's a an off-ramp and so I think that's something to think about is do you want that off-ramp? Um there are pros and cons to that. It is much easier to administer if it is just a no. You had to be in existence on a certain date. Um it it makes it kind of clearer and predictable versus the offramp of you can go through this conditional use review or this special use review um and kind of try to take a bite at the apple. So just kind of depends on how you want to

like ask in a formula business is Louis Vuitton and Gucci. True. Sure. And it is by definition it is. I'm curious ju just from a planner's point of view um what happens when a town has a business that then becomes a formula business. This is why actually Aspen went with a number 10 because they wanted to make sure Paradise Bakery was okay. Okay. Yeah. Yeah. It's funny. I was thinking of the Cosbar up there because the owner of that used to letters into the paper all the time complaining about chains, but yet if you look at that business, there's probably like six of them.

There's about six. Yeah. So, so that is why they went with a larger number than a telluride because they kind of as they were going through that code amendment process was we actually have some small businesses who have been wildly successful and we want to support them um and not make them kind of a non-conforming use. So, you know, the last poor Le France just closed in Denver in the airport. Really? Really? I was just there. I was just there as they were taking it apart. Oh, wow. I was heartbroken. It is heartbreaking. what's going in there. So, that being said, you know, that that is the joy of code amendments. You can start with something and then readjust it later on if it's not working in whichever direction. Yeah. Yeah.

Anything that's come up since we started talking clarification or more input? I guess maybe that on the formula businesses, do you have a strong feeling or a preference on kind of pick a number and that's it and there or thinking about what is the process to maybe allow some of these through a conditional use review or not? Do you have a kind of gut thought on on that because that'll help us as we move forward? I mean, I do like the Midland restrictions in general and then beyond that. Yeah. Where are they?

Right. But do you want Willlets to go? I mean, obviously you have a big coffee company there and a large supermarket chain, but do you really want Kentucky Fried Chicken and Taco Bell? And wouldn't Wouldn't this be the place to make a suggestion? Yeah. Yeah. And it could be that it's a straight prohibition in C2 and there's a conditional use review for other areas. That could be another way to think about it. So, we can come up with a couple of options to consider for the next time we're together.

Unfortunately, we're still critical mass. We're probably below a lot of the big places wanting to come in here. But if we keep rolling right now, you could be a holiday express there and come in. remember the whole frenzy about Trader Joe's. We just we we're about to prohibit them. So, uh interesting.

Um I think that the um other question that I have is related to the parking reductions piece. Um, and so in the the draft that we've pulled together, um, it's including, um, five different criteria. And I want to just see if there's anything else that you would want to see there if you think that these are are too strict. Um, so someone who has a a um is requesting a parking reduction um up to 25%. Um they need to be in proximity to um transit. Um they uh if they're providing um shared parking kind of demonstrate that there are shared parking opportunities between different uses and peak demands um times for a commercial business and and residents uh on the same parcel. that there are good um high quality pedestrian, bicycle and multimmoal facilities. So um sidewalks, bike paths, things like that. That they are um implementing uh transportation demand management measures. So things like shared parking agreements, strategies to reduce auto dependence, unbundling the parking from the housing unit. So if you get a housing unit, you actually have to then kind of purchase or rent the parking unit parking space rather than just getting the parking space. Um and then also considering uh surrounding parking conditions both on street and off streetet um to think about the spillover impacts. Is there anything else that you would want included there? Is there anything that fits?

I think we should allow for offsite. Okay. storage as well. Yeah, because right now we're it has to be within a certain Yeah. limit and it I don't think that really matters as long as you know some of those other conditions like transit and multimodal things are being met then it could be offsite. How do you define proximity to transport? Um so it's typically quarter mile to half mile. Do we want to have some kind of option to to fund or support the ride share programs? Wasn't that that was one of the options, wasn't it?

Um, it generally says transportation demand management measures, but that we could kind of be more explicit about it. Yeah, we might agree is what I Yeah. Yeah. HUD has rules about what they consider a TOD, a transit oriented development. So, you just use those which I think she was talking about quarter mile or half mile, right? Like Willlets. Yeah. Or um it's kind of most of town frankly. Yeah, it is. Yeah. Not all of it, but Well, Willlets was built as that I'm sorry, Willlets Town Center, but and Jadwin,

but you see a lot of people driving around through there. You know, the thing about Jadwin that I thought was was a missed opportunity was that it was within a quarter mile of of a BRT. BRT, right? Yeah. And that's what I thought was the major feature of that other woman we looked at was it was adjacent to a BRT. So that the BRT is is is a big designator and Willis is that. Wait, Jadwin, the one next to by the post office. Yeah. Yeah. What BRT is that near just basalt? Yeah. That's not It's within a quarter mile. Really? I had some clients who were looking at the parcel and I measured it.

As the crow flies walking up this way and over, it's I can't remember. We've had that discussion at the code meeting too because Ben was a little hot on that. Yep. And that's an area where it is a like wonky detail, right? Is it as the crow flies or is it the walking distance? But those are the types of things that we are still working to identify with you and with the working group to make sure that there's some clear definitions around that. So yeah. And for different things, it means different. Yeah. Like say for when you're talking about like um you know a weed business next to a school, it's one thing, but when you're talking about getting to transit, it's a little looser of a designation.

Okay. Um great. So I think um just quickly we'll cover some next steps. So we have um a meeting with town council next week uh kind of similar work session to get some of their feedback and then we will work on refining the 50% drafts that you had in your packet today. Um so that's going to include updates that um reflect the comments as well as graphics tables and the process um illustration. So starting to move from the very dry word document to something that's a little bit more formatted and and easier to use. And then um as we're moving forward, working through community engagement um and relying on website and um uh potentially open houses. So those are our next steps.

Thank you. Appreciate it. Good luck. Thanks. And if you have other comments or questions that come up, um, get them to to staff and we'll make sure to incorporate it in our updates. Thanks. Thank you. Thank you very much, Christian. Thanks, everyone. Thanks, Chris. Next item on our agenda, commissioner comments, staff updates.

You guys, you never give me a break. You like anything up here? Just kidding. Um, let's see. So, the candidates forum was last night. Um, that election is coming up. I think it's April 7th. Um, so that's in the works. Um, and if anyone wants to review that forum, it's on Grassroots TV and you can replay it at your leisure. Um, oh, I don't know. Um, what else do we have coming up? Well, we have u PNZ meeting uh on the 17th of March. You'll have a public hearing on uh 540 Basalt Avenue uh for special review for addition of a deed restricted unit. Um and then you will not have a meeting the first meeting in April which is April 7th election night. So we'll

we won't have a meeting that night. Uh, additionally, some of you may have noticed that 72 Sunset Drive has fallen off the agenda. Um, if they come back with uh an appropriate uh amendment to their their building um that allows them to accommodate their proposed usage. We'll bring that back to you guys. They're working on it. There was some back and forth today between the build. Which one is that? What are they trying to do there? Uh so they had proposed the addition of an event space to what is currently a catering kitchen or

preparatory kitchen um over in the industrial district. Um and so they uh applied for a PUB amendment uh without actually having a space that could accommodate um hosting events. Yeah. Okay. From a building code perspective. Do you want to update them about the proposals that came in for Cliffs?

Would love to. Uh we received six proposals, five qualifying for Cliff's Hillside Park renovation. Um we have scheduled interviews with three of those consultants uh which will be held this weekend next and those uh proposals will be presented to Post next weekend uh for a recommendation. Both staff and post will provide a recommendation on those. And the three qualifying proposals will be in the post agenda on Friday if you're so interested. Um yeah, the hope to bring a contract to council um end of this month or beginning of next um a note on theou.

Okay.

Um BPAC had 18 grants submitted this year. So every year that's going up about 20%. So, that's really exciting. Um, BPAC will be reviewing those at their meeting um, Thursday night this week and then ultimately making a recommendation to council on um, some selected winners there. So, that's really awesome. Um, there's a call out to artists for consignment art pieces to go into Willlets this year. So, hopefully you've been able to walk around the Midland streetscape and see the pieces there. Um, we're going to do the same thing over in the Willlets area for 2026. And then in 2027, we'll be looking at securing some bigger pieces on this side. In 2028, bigger pieces over in Willlets the next year. So, um, fun stuff there. Um, I think that's I don't Is there anything else? Um

there's a work session on the WOOI um the wild land fire wildfire urban interface code required by the state with council next council meeting. It's a work session before 5:00 just to go over the general um uh state requirements of that and the general direction that Basalt's heading. It's a pretty big lift. Um, and and that'll when we have code amendments, that'll be coming to PNZ and then back to council. Yeah, I think that's most of them. Has anybody been by FedEx and see their lights at night? Yeah, we wrote them a letter. Okay.

Uh, we we wrote him an enforcement letter. Uh, we have not received a response yet. So, um, our next step is to contact the town attorney and, you know, he he can either require us or ask us to send another letter uh or, you know, there is the potential to cite them into municipal uh court. Um, we usually like to send a couple couple letters though to make sure we're on good footing.

Did they change something? Because I noticed that too. Um it seems to have gotten brighter. Um our our um enforcement letter kind of discusses uh the fact that the lights are not uh fully shielded which is one of one of the requirements. Um and uh also the the light output. Um so if hopefully we can get them, you know, kind of working with us as staff to try to try to reduce those impacts. It's fantastic. Thank you. Sleep. Well, my wife won't be poking me, so yes.

Have a motion to adjurnn. Motion to adjourn. Second. All in favor? I meeting is adjourned at 703. Oh man, you are good.