P&z - Regular Meeting

Commission meeting for Tuesday, August 4th. Do we have a call to order?

Do we want to make a roll call? Yes, please. Kyle Oberketter? Yes. Eric Vosick? Here. Rob Leavitt? Yes. Cindy Hirschfeld?

Here.

Mark Horvath? Here. Bob Kaplan? Here. Ben Fierstein? Here. And Bill Marin is absent. You have a quorum.

Excellent.

Good evening PNZ Carlton Henry Planner 2 with the Town of Basalt here to reintroduce our continued public hearing on 218 East Valley Road the former moving land site for a site plan review special review PUD amendment housing mitigation report and associated other development review items The purposes, again, of this application is to review a development proposal at 218 East Valley Road for three deed-restricted for-rent residential units and an associated 93 key residence in by Marriott Hotel. We do also have the applicant, Walsh DuPart, or representatives from the applicant team, Walsh DuPart and Bowtie Partners, here with us this evening, hereby referred to as the applicant. to present changes made since the last Planning and Zoning Commission meeting and answer any questions that may come up tonight. Just a quick background on the review process for those uninitiated. This application went through the Basalt Affordable and Community Housing Commission back in June before being introduced. introductory meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission on June 16th. There it was continued to the July 7th meeting of the Planning and Zoning discussion back in June and a Staff has also included information responding to planning and zoning discussion on July 7th. I'll just address that briefly here. But to address planning and zoning concerns from that meeting, staff has included clear language restricting the permitted use and dimensional standards on the property through the draft conditions. So those have been updated to capture those concerns. A future change to the proposed use would require an amendment to the annexation agreement. So staff worked through some of the discussion at the last meeting, including counsel from the town attorney. There was also discussion at the July 7th meeting regarding the permitted uses and dimensional standards on the property should the vested rights on the property or on the proposed development expire. And staff just wanted to reiterate that vested rights in the town of Assault insulate projects against code changes during the vested rights period, which would be three years. However, it should be noted that development approvals do not expire when the vested rights period expires in the town of Assault. um due to the conditions included here should the applicant decide not to proceed with the construction of the proposed hotel following approval an amendment to the approvals would be required to build something other than a hotel given that language that's been added to the annexation agreement for recommendation this evening planning and zoning commission has the following recommendation options to town council to recommend approval with conditions outlined by staff recommend approval with amending conditions or recommend denial Staff recommends this evening that Planning and Zoning Commission hear presentations from staff and the applicant hear public comment provide discussion and provide a recommendation for the Town Council's consideration also following The July meeting staff would recommend that Planning and Zoning Commission reserve some time for something similar to a work session this evening to work back and forth. Work iteratively with the applicant on design items that have not been addressed since the last meeting. With that I can answer any initial questions. Otherwise we have the applicant to talk about some of the changes that have been made since the last meeting.

Carlton, I have a question.

Yep.

Can you try to clarify in the discussion items consistency with the master plan? I just don't quite understand this. It says the proposal of a hotel is compatible with service commercial, which is what this property is designated by the master plan. But then it says the future land use map also identifies the site as existing land use, which will need to be amended in conjunction with the other development review actions. So what is the future land use map and how would that need to be amended?

So the future land use map is Part of the 2020 basalt master plan certain properties call them key properties in town were identified to in addition have a use designated for it to be designated for to be anticipated for in the future, continuing the existing use on the site. And so this was one of those properties. James, do you have anything else you'd like to add there?

Yeah, the future land use map has properties that were anticipated to be redeveloped through the life of the master plan, and they have future land use designations on them. They're kind of the brighter color properties that are on the future land use map. And then basically the rest of town, except for those properties, have an underlying future land use designation, but then kind of an overlay that's existing land use because they weren't anticipated to be redeveloped during the life of the master plan. And so it's similar to other development applications that have come through. that are redeveloping a site. They had existing land use designation so that would have to be removed because the entire site's being redeveloped.

So what do you know what the map says about this property the future land use map.

Well on the future land use map it's designated for service commercial service underlying. Yep. And so then the uses would be compatible but that additional designation of existing land use. At the time, kind of as James mentioned, of the master plan update, there was considerable effort put into envisioning what some of the larger scale properties could look like, including the BCC and Jadwin.

So it's not one of those properties. So what would need to be amended?

That existing land use overlay. Would just need to be removed from the property.

I have a question here. Within the recitals of the annexation agreement that has been modified, the language specifically does allow for this hotel to incorporate food service in the future, is that correct?

One moment, could you give me a page number?

It says page number, sorry, got it overlaid. Sure, Carlton said that they worked with the applicant on that, so. Page 69. Yeah, I'm fine with asking the applicant.

All right Absolutely, let me share my screen here Thank you very much for having me commissioners again this evening grant to part on behalf of the applicant bowtie partners and Walsh do part I So after our last planning commission meeting we went back and took a look at the items that we felt received the most comment and obviously welcome the opportunity for you to give us some direct feedback and there are a couple areas here we just wanted to add some clarification to some of the the items in the application that we put forth, and then a few where we have some specific questions for your feedback, which we'd appreciate it sincerely. Just jumping through this, we're gonna talk through PUD structure, which has been addressed, but very briefly, traffic and pedestrian circulation, architecture and design, and then master plan compliance. So this is just an outline of where we started on our June 16th proposal to where we are today. One of the major takeaways that we wanted to make sure you felt comfortable with is that we are intending to build a hotel here. We don't have any intention to do another project here. We did add specific language in just to concrete, solidify that our PUD amendment is going to lock us into doing a hotel on this site. So there's no question about what will eventually be allowed. Commissioner, first sign. With regards to the question about food and beverage, we serve breakfast at residence in, but there's no intention to do bar service or a full service restaurant. It's not to do bar service or a full service restaurant. It's not designed into the plan as it stands today. So no full service restaurant. Two reasons for that. One, it increases traffic when we do full service restaurant service. And the other reason is that early on in our planning process about a year ago, we got a lot of feedback that it would be beneficial for the community to have our guests eating in town, not at our own restaurant. Regarding traffic and pedestrian circulation, so we had our, we reached out to CDOT and had them provide CAD drawings for the recirculation and the redrawing, redesign that's happening right now around the property. And we put this in here for two reasons. One is to talk about traffic, the other is to talk about pedestrian circulation. We had some comments out of the last commission um, regarding pedestrian circulation and making sure that we weren't directing people to the wrong direction. And so I have another slide here that will zoom in a little bit tighter here, but just want to point out, um, on the screen one where the, uh, crosswalks are going to be redrawn to once this project is completed, um, at the top left. which is where the bike path will intersect the crosswalks and then take you over to the Rafta station and then across from the retail condo building on the right that takes you over towards the highway down and then back over to the bus facility. A widening of the crosswalk up closer to the Rafta station and then there are two areas here namely that are actually expanding on the traffic side. This redesign was done to increase decreased traffic congestion, increased flow in the area. So right at the entrance to our property, we're going from two lanes to three lanes there with a turn lane, and then up closer to the larger, to the major intersection there, actually adding a turn lane in, which is gonna help with the traffic congestion. Again, the site here is always planned for obviously a movie theater, which has greater traffic counts, but this will help to alleviate some of the traffic concern there. And really specifically looking at the pedestrian circulation here, we are trying to direct people in two directions out of the hotel, that's signage. If you're going to take the Raptus bus to the airport to go skiing, to go to work, We want you to take the bike path or we want you to go right out towards the highway and hit the crosswalk. We don't want to be directing people nor would see that to the middle of the road just planned north of our property because there's no crosswalk there. And so this is it was intentionally designed and we thought that this would help with just layering in the. rationale for why we designed this the way that we did. Then just a reminder on the orientation of the building, the reason why it's not oriented to take over where the movie theater is currently is both reduces massing up against the neighborhood to the south, and then it also ensures that we don't have to touch the water line that runs through the middle of the property. My question after reviewing this is if you have any recommendations on alternates for pedestrian circulation that you think we should be considering or if you feel like we've satisfied the goal to produce strong pedestrian circulation in this area.

Did they receive Bill's comments? They don't have this, right? We did. You did? When did this get sent? This morning. Yesterday? He sent it.

Okay. think if and i don't know what bill's thoughts would have been but i was certainly hoping we would have been able to show that this pedestrian circulation was intentionally done to satisfy that a couple other notes we did reach out and try to connect with we cycle on this they don't have a desire to have a location on this property because there's already a location at the raft to stop and there's location at the city market we've offered to help expand the capacity at both of those stations, and we're ready, willing, and able to do that. We'll also be producing or providing e-bikes for our own guests, shuttle service to the airport, and raft or bus passes to employees who need them.

What's your... You mentioned that you think the massing, if you moved it to the west, would affect the neighborhood more to the south.

Yeah, if you turned it 90 degrees.

If you turn it 90, but if you fit it in a horseshoe where the horseshoe parking is, can you still get the same amount?

Only on the location where the movie theater is right now? No, there's not enough density where we'd be too close to the lot lines there to do it. You could turn it 90 degrees and basically run the same building, but you couldn't stack it in there without going up higher.

Did you guys ever run what it would take to fit 94 there is that five stories four stories didn't even look at it.

We looked at it in just the 90 degree format and it was already getting tight. But I would I could come back to you on it. My guess is it's it's probably six or seven floors.

Yeah. Do you want us to go through your questions as they come up?

If that works for the commission, I think that's our preference.

And I can keep talking through traffic. Any other thoughts or suggestions as far as the pedestrian circulation? It's a little different format than we normally do this.

Could you look into any other additional access points?

We did. One of the access points that we looked at having was off the planned south side of the property here. Of course, the goal here is not to add traffic to the road south of the property. And so that's where we worked with the fire department to come up with the knockbox idea where we would have access for the fire department, but we are not going to have access for guess and so we did look at that other access points for vehicular traffic but it is without coming off of the planned south side which i think would be a negative impact on the traffic for the neighborhood what about the plan north side in conjunction with the improvements that eagle county is doing plan to come off of Eagle County Road. Our architect is on here. I know we've discussed this before. I think that there is not capacity to add it to that side, but maybe table that. And if Nick has comments, they're happy to have him add into it. But I don't think that the traffic off of Plan North, sorry, Plan North, so is the highway side here or the side where the Rafter bus station is? To the bus station, northeast.

I don't think that they're... Or northwest.

Yeah, okay. I think adding in traffic to that side serves the same problem of bringing people around towards the neighborhood, but... Yeah. for just vehicular traffic to spread it out? Would that be the intent?

It really, conjunction, it's in conjunction with the existing conditions that are at lot 2A as well. Okay. This application is not looking at both 2 and 2A in totality, it's looking at just two.

there is a curb cut there now yep which we presumably could access i think if we wanted to yep um i i think we'd be happy to have additional access there if cdot would allow it and if the town would allow it um the county or the county um right i think we'd be happy to have it but uh i don't i don't believe that would be better for the overall site plan but that's our perspective We're trying to keep people coming in and out of the property closest to the highway.

So you talk about shepherding your guests or people staying there, you know, to use the crosswalks, like signage? Is it going to be in the hotel? How is this going to manifest itself? Are you, I'm assuming the entrance to the hotel will be mostly to the north?

This is the entrance to the hotel. This is where the workforce housing is. Both, I think, are going to predominantly, depending on why you're going to the bus stop if you are and I and I will just say I think that there's a fair amount of people who will want to use the bus but I don't think that it's going to be everyone in the hotel and so signage absolutely is part of the plan which we have included in our good neighbor plan in terms of making sure that people know that the neighborhood behind us is private that you shouldn't be using the playground behind the hotel that you should be going to Crown Mountain Park and not to the neighborhood behind us, so I think it's very easy directional directional signage to add in to the Walking path for guests to say this is the public bike path. We're improving it and This is how you get to the raft of bus station. I think it's part of the the check-in process too, right? When someone's coming in and asking, hey, I want to go skiing, how do I take RAFTA? We're going to explain how you walk over there.

I'm hearing bills in the back of my head like using pavers and other formats to kind of make it pretty clear, you know, would make it a little bit more obvious and unique. Yeah, we'd be happy to do that, of course.

Are there any CCRs or ECRs or shared maintenance agreements between Orchard Lot and the City Market Lot, particularly pertaining to the shared access path that splits between Sophros Village and those two properties? We are required to maintain the path.

the totality of the path, or at the end? At our property lines. At your property lines. Yep, and then in addition, we heard some comments on just trash that comes up behind City Market, which I agree with, and I will just say, if there's anyone who's gonna be vocal about what the back of City Market floating dock looks like, it's going to be us, right? Because we don't want our guests to have a bad experience. And so we are obviously very focused on and would do right by our own hotel and investment to make sure that that's clean. We did add into our good neighbor execution as a perceived benefit, I think, to the community that we'd be happy to take our whole team once a month and clean all the way to the roundabout and do a trash pickup. Whether or not that matters to the the commercial uses behind us and over by city market I'm not sure but I think that it would create a better experience over there. I can't do we can't do much more with that path behind the commercial uses but we've documented it we put it in our application and we're happy to do it.

Has there been any consideration of trying to keep So there's a mid-block crossing directly north of the hotel?

Here.

Just to the right of that, yeah.

Here, yeah, sure.

Has there been consideration on extending that sidewalk on the south side of El Jebel Road to connect in and have the pedestrians cross at an intersection versus a mid-block?

So crossing over here or over here versus here?

Yeah, I mean, realistically, no one's going to the north side of the road and going, if you're turning right out of the hotel, you're staying on the south side because you're going to City Market.

To do it here, you mean? Is that right? I don't know if you can see my cursor, but sort of. no i'm saying all the way to that intersection getting rid of the mid block rfb i think we'd be open to getting rid of that one to your point i don't think that this is going to be i mean this is connecting the city market we need this access for city market people who are going to come to We are not opposed to that, but I think that the neighbors south of us, City Market and everyone who's using RAFTA to come to that area are going to prefer to potentially come out this way versus using the bike path and coming in the back side of the retail.

And it's a frequently crossed stop.

I'm not saying, I'm saying eliminate that crossing, extend the sidewalk on the side side of Algebel all the way to the intersection. You get rid of a mid block crossing, which I don't think is predictable. And you're adding a ton of users to it. If people decide to cross, if that's where you're sending people, you don't want to have interruptions to traffic as part of what you're selling here. Can you extend that sidewalk on the south side all the way and connect it in?

I believe, I don't know this for sure, that on the south side here with CDOT's expansion, it's going to get tight to add in that sidewalk, but we could make that a takeaway.

They're expanding that road?

Yes, widening. That's where the additional turn lane is coming in to help with traffic. And so that's part of the location and the squeeze for pedestrian traffic up on this side.

On page 61 of the package, you can see how tight it is. It's a pretty good visual of that.

Any other questions or comments about traffic and circulation?

Can we talk about overall floor layout right now? Or do you want to wait for that?

I think we're going to tick off. We're going to get into architecture next.

Has your team discussed the impact of a CDOT access permit? I'm not familiar.

access permit for which part of the project we have reached out to sit out on this yep and they've said that there's no uh approval necessary for the entrance that we have here so i don't think that we're going to need an access permit here but i'd need to consult our traffic engineers but CDOT has responded and said that this is okay.

One last thought. I appreciate you offering shuttle to the airport and that alleviates car traffic perhaps, but would it be better just to partner with a raft of bus that leaves every 15 minutes and it's right in front of both doors and then you don't have a shuttle service? I don't know how that works economically. I don't know if your clients would appreciate that, but it also gets them immediately hooked into using Rafta.

I think we're absolutely open to it. We did reach out to Rafta. There's two attributes that I think we have to consider when we're doing that. One is the execution of a season pass and how we would use it. Rafta doesn't, they won't provide us with a, basically like a blanket, give it to any guest pass, but we are open to the idea of doing day passes for people if they want to use Rafta. think that's definitely a possibility for us my sense is that guests will prefer the shuttle um just out of convenience but i think it's what they're used to the idea of promoting mass transit making this a mass transit project and supporting what's here thank you could you reach out to town assault for the basalt connect program at all um we have had an early just uh discussion on uh basalt connect and uh what that program looks like and how we could potentially contribute to it, but we haven't advanced the discussion further.

I would just note that it is within the Assault Connect service area.

And so there, and I guess this is more a question for staff, but there's no connection from that entrance into Soper's Village into Crown Mountain, pedestrian-wise?

there is the path that goes on the west side of the current Movie Land property, and so it's going to connect up to the crosswalk to get into Crown Mountain. Is that what you're asking about?

It doesn't look like there's any actual connection there. That's just going to be a user path.

Well, here's the crosswalk. Can you see my cursor? Yeah, I can see that. And so it connects up with a current path that is in Crown Mountain.

There is no shown connection there, is it what I'm saying?

We just didn't highlight that in purple.

No, there's no sidewalk shown on this CAD. There's not, and I think that there's been a disagreement between two parties that are not privy to this conversation as far as that...

finishing of the connection ownership you're talking about that's where it just plays into them you're you're making it more difficult for folks to get to crown mountain and it's a highly used park that is not a public park is kind of where i'm going with that yeah and so that's i mean i know it's not that they're talking about here correct yeah

There's no sidewalk shown there. Just to clarify that, and I think that's not our part of the project. We would love for it to be there.

Just more of a question of staff.

We can talk to Eagle County about that. Okay.

If more transportation questions come up, we can come back to it, but let's move on to the architectural aspects that you were talking about.

I will briefly touch on just traffic. We've already talked about a couple of these items that kind of lived in together at the pedestrian conversation. We did just ask our traffic consultants to put forth a couple of the uses that have been discussed and also uses that are permitted because there's been so much discussion about reusing the building as it exists now. So we looked at a sit down restaurant and then we looked at like a hardware store use. In all cases, there's more traffic that's generated by those uses. Rec center is not a permitted use under the current zoning, but we did also look at what the traffic impact would be under a rec center. use if we were to convert the full building into that project and there's also additional traffic versus what we're proposing in those uses. So we just, I know we talked about this very early on in the project. Our partners have owned this land for decades. We have tried very, very hard to find uses that make sense for this project, for this location in an infill redevelopment and hotel continues to be the item that checks the most boxes for something that is developable here. Um, moving on to updated architecturals, um, got some comments about, uh, massing also, uh, exterior elements of the project. Um, so, uh, building height is, is now 34 feet, five inches floor to top parapet again, adjacent building to us is 34 feet. We went back and readjusted some of the materiality that we have on the exterior of the building and then changed the exterior facade as well. So this is real stone on the exterior, additional glazing, timber members, wood tone siding, and then hardy and hardy plank where the where the black vertical board and batten is. So it's a much higher quality finish. It's certainly more expensive. This is similar to the execution that we're doing on some of our other projects. We think it's a really high quality material. It has a very strong and long lasting warranty. Again Marriott's one that is going to also do exterior views on materials. The building has to look high quality for a long term. But this is our readjustment of the exterior. I'm just going to show you the side looking from Sobers Drive here to bring more stone up the side and bring in that wood toned siding. Again, we on the height perspective, the question that we have and we are agnostic on this to just be clear, we have to put solar in here. We have to put mechanical in. and we do think there's right now there's one foot of parapet here to help guard against that there is an argument that architecturally it would look better if you had a higher parapet to guard against some of that i know there's a lot of examples in the valley of what buildings can look like when you see some of those penetrations we are um We are okay with the plan as we've set forth here in terms of height, but we would, the question here is if the Planning Commission has any thought on a preference in direction, really with regards to parapet.

What's the dimension height again?

Apologies. This is 34 feet 5 inches from finished floor to top of parapet right now. And that would take us 33 feet finished floor to top of roof.

With the parapet.

Top of roof sits one foot, roof, one foot below.

Yeah, top of roof, sorry. But the PUD recitals or the annexation agreement recitals allow you for 35 feet 11? 35 feet.

And that's from average grade. And so it's, this is measured finished floor, average grade, but taking the points around the building, decreases the technical measurement by a foot but again trying to compare this to what is not only allowed under the PUD but also what's surrounding us and looking at the master plan the goal has always been to surround the buildings by similar massing and height and 34 feet adjacent to 34 feet 5 inches I think accomplishes that from a height perspective.

I'm just confused here because it says the town hereby irrevocably approves and permits the construction of a building with a maximum roof and parapet height of 35 feet and 11 inches from average grade versus finished floor.

So average grade grade changes under the civil drawings, depending on which measurements you take from around the site. And we have a number of measurements that are getting taken. And so you have to adjust for the grade.

I'm wondering if this is a typo here because then it says an IE 34 feet 11 inches the building height says 34 feet 11 inches is that is that a typo on page 69 yeah and we've we've captured that in the draft conditions okay to 34 11 34 11 okay so 34 11 in the conditions

30, they're building in six inches of wiggle room, essentially.

I wonder if it was 18 or six.

So this rendering does not show your mechanicals or your solar panels?

From the angle that we're looking at it right now, I actually think you'd be in pretty good shape with mechanicals. But like Bill's comment was, coming into town, when you're further out, it's easier to see. And so as you get closer to a building, obviously it gets screened better. I think pedestrians, when you're closer to the building, drive aisles right along the building, we're going to look actually pretty good. Further out, you probably see some penetrations.

And this rendering does not have the parapet, correct?

This does.

It does. It is that little. Yes.

The height's probably not as we're talking a foot here. We can probably get to some place of agreement. But you've got the most hotel rooms backed up right into someone's backyard. And so you want more height. But how do you screen those third stories from just looking straight down? And if you tell me it's a tree, then you're going to tell me you're going to buy a 30 foot tree and not something that's going to be 30 feet in 10 years.

Sure. So I'll just kind of zoom in on our floor plan here. This side of the building has the fewest hotel rooms outside of this north end. Okay. And the screening we've looked into the challenge that we have is that this area, which is part of the property, we would be happy to plant more trees. It's utility easements for the whole town. It's not possible for us to do more. There are some there now, but we can't add more to that side of the building. And so we did, and this was going back to the directional of, do we turn it 90 degrees or not? We've tried to keep them as many rooms as we could against the backside of city market, the loading dock there. I would guess execution wise for further, that's not the case. Um, but this is the best way to lay out the building with the fewest number of rooms there. And we would plant 30-foot trees if we could. We just can't.

About how many rooms are we talking? There's 10 on the third floor.

One, two, three, four, five.

But then you go wrap around the back three, and then you look down. The second floor is arguable that any building is two floors.

These do have very tall 30-foot trees on this side of the building here.

And you think you're going to be able to preserve those with your footprint?

Some, not all. Because we do have the patios here for our affordable housing.

Did you guys ever look at flipping this building? Pushing the L to the street side?

Pushing this further up here. We did look at an execution there. It's been a long time. I think that the challenge that we had there was putting more parking down along this side of the building and the access for the pedestrian path was not as strong. But at one point we did look at that.

And I feel like that's one thing a lot of residents, there's letters here, have spoken about that we just have not addressed and basically said, sorry, you're gonna have 30 feet looking straight into your backyard with lights on that you can't control. And you guys haven't really taken a look at that. It's probably my biggest thing that I've probably grown to think about more and more.

pushing this away from the houses other thoughts or comments about the architecture the layout the materials I would second Kyle's concern I think this building probably should move closer to the highway versus the neighborhood

what that looks like and then the only thing i'll say to other members of the community like the eight inch water line whatever gets built in here is going to be building and could affect your water line so i i hear the concern but anyone who develops here is going to have that and we'll have to deal with that privately so i just want us to at least notice where yes but we aren't relocating the lines totally but there's an argument that you do have to do a lot of work and something could happen and be affected but yes any development could lead to that if there are no other comments on the architecture i think the last item on your agenda was the master plan

Looking at the master plan here, we went through all 197 points, point by point, created by the master plan for the town of Basalt to determine how many of the master plan points are satisfied, not applicable, or neutral, or just not supported by the project. Of the 197 points, we identified 69 that are relevant to an infill development like this and the location where it's located. The full consistency review that we did is located as exhibit four in the resubmitted PUD amendment package. We talked a lot about which items we have checked the box on in terms of adhering to the master plan. This has been a guiding light for the project and we We believe that we support 93 percent of the points. I think it's very difficult and you'd be hard-pressed to find any project that satisfies 100 percent of any master plan supported points. With this, look, we're here to ask for approval to get moved on to city council based on the merits of the project adhering to zoning, the maps, the planning that we've put forth for the project. that if it's a question around use that we continue that conversation and we'd love to hear perspective on use. But I think that we have done a very good job at handling the vast majority of the master plan points put forth by the town. We've checked them all off. We've shown them where we think we adhere. For that, we've asked to get moved to approval to discuss with city council if hotel is an appropriate use for the location.

Any questions or comments for the applicant around the master plan use? now i did appreciate your going through all those point by point not many people do that thank you thank you very much thank you um at this point um i'll see are there any other questions we have as the group like we normally do uh staff or applicant can i just ask one question about the water line and the well when we were on site there was a mention that

The storage tank is on the other side of the highway?

That's correct.

But the well is on this side? So the water is literally getting pumped under the highway to the storage tank and then it runs back into the HOA?

That's my understanding.

Okay. Just wanted to verify that. You wouldn't have engineered it that way? And the 8-inch line is owned by who?

I believe it's the HOA.

The HOA owns the H line.

Awesome. Ben, did your question get answered regarding food service, the limited food service?

Yes, as the intended use for the items that are limited or noted within point two of that recital gives them the ability to provide continental breakfast continental breakfast as a as a food limiting item health fitness those items as well I do see that as applicable just trying to understand the limits of where we're at

excellent um we're gonna open this up for public comment uh before we do a couple things one um not to protect us but we are just an advisory board so we don't have the final say on this so as you approach us and how we might vote or might not vote just kind of keep that in mind two as this is our third public hearing a lot of you have spoken already um not to dissuade you from saying anything again repeating yourself but we do appreciate new comments if you can that would be appreciated And three, we're going to hold to the same time limits of about two to three minutes just to keep things moving so we're not here all night. But we want to hear from everybody. I know some people have submitted comments also online that we also have privy to and we're accessed to. When you come up, please state your name. If you don't mind where you live, that would be great. Carlton's going to kind of keep track of time. So we'll open up for public hearing at 649. James, do you want to say anything about online? Or it looks like we have some people.

Yeah, if you're online and would like to make comments as part of the public hearing, please raise your hand and we'll get to you, intermixing you with people in the room.

Thank you. We are open for public comment.

Hello.

My name is Michael Miners. I live in Selfress Village. And I have quite a few comments. I'll try to be brief. But I did spend some more time going through this application. And the first thing I'd like to talk about is the parking for the project. The applicant themselves admits that they're only going to provide 0.95 space per unit. I mean, how's that work, really? So that said, we all know where the cars are going to go. They're going to go to the park and ride, and they're going to come into Sopras Village. So I'd like you to seriously consider parking as part of any approval or condition of approval. My comments about traffic studies are more of a joke than anything. They're AI-generated. Anybody with a car who drives highway 82 laughs. Every time they look at one of those things, try to get between the four stoplights from upper Willits to algebra at this time of night and tell me that those traffic studies are accurate. You know, the plans for the meeting with the fire Marshall, which is on page. C9, which shows the turning radius for a ladder truck into the proposed emergency access on the south side of Sopras Village Drive. What's not shown is that a ladder truck or any truck is going to have to negotiate that hairpin curve where Valley Road meets Sopras Village Drive. They're not showing any kind of turning radius for a vehicle. If there's any cars at that intersection, how is that truck going to get through? And even when it does, it's got to come through the hairpin, make a left, make a right, go down the road, and take another left to get in front of the hotel. To me, common sense would be just to move that emergency access to the west side where the turn lane comes to the end and move that parking over. A truck could turn left and come straight into the project and then go left or right as needed. It wouldn't cost them any parking, and it would be a life safety issue. So something to consider besides the hotel is those of us who live in Soper's Village. The Marshall Fire should be an example to everybody that any kind of wind-driven event is critical. So the time it takes to get someplace and to get men involved is more than just a consideration. It should be a fact. So I'd like you to instruct the applicant to not only provide the turning radius for the truck around that hairpin turn, but also as part of any conditional approval that they address this emergency access. You know, it's not just a matter of traffic in Soper's village drive. Uh, like I say, it's a matter of, um, life safety. So, you know, going forward, um, you know, the good neighbor plan, it was nice to see that I did recognize that the town has already put as a condition that the monitor well will have to be done an agreement done with that again. But their comments about the good neighbor plan, that parking instructions can be given to guests that check in, I think it should be more of a sign off that they're going to acknowledge that they can't park over there instead of just a friendly little please don't park in their neighborhood. Also, I want to mention that our park is private. We've always allowed anybody and everybody that needed or wanted to use it. But honestly, Crown Mountain has been abusing it for some time now. Every time there's an event there, there's not only extra parking in our neighborhood, but there's a ton of trash, there's been vandalism. There's basically a lack of respect from people who come from outside the area and treat that park like it's part of Crown Mountain or whatever. We'd like the applicant to consider not just signage, but maybe even a landscaping buffer on our side to discourage that sort of thing. And it's not just about pets. It's about everything. So, you know, that's really important to us. So finally, though, one thing I did want to mention was that From my point of view, and I'm sure many of my neighbors, we'd like that if you're going to consider approval of this project, that one of the considerations be that the construction site be completely fenced at all times so there's no construction traffic through Sopras Village. It's still a family neighborhood. There's a few second homes, but there's a lot of kids and a lot of pets. And it's just not going to be acceptable for a year or whatever to have every pickup truck in the valley racing through there. Thank you.

Thank you, Michael.

Hi. My name is Susan Chisholm. I live at 126 Kiowa. For context on my comments, I'm a landscape architect. I do not support the parking variance that the applicant has asked for because 19 of the spaces are compact and only 16 feet deep. That does not correspond with the type of clientele who the applicant has mentioned might use this hotel that comes with big work bands, pulling trailers with equipment, bike racks hanging off the back. I don't think that's going to work in their favor with 19 of the spaces already being compact. One of the commissioners mentioned that there has been no study presented to show how the height of the hotel relates to the finished floor of the adjacent homes. A section could just be cut across there to show what the height differential there is. That's something you could ask for. And in terms of the trees that are proposed, only four evergreen trees are proposed in between the trail and the rear yards. Two of those trees are only specified to get 20 feet tall, which would not happen in any of our lifetimes. And they are spaced quite a bit apart. That could be because of the wildfire resiliency code. But the screening is very minimal proposed so far. Also, one of you asked about what happens to the trees being removed by the affordable housing units and the city market loading dock. And I see on the landscape plan five trees are being removed and I did not see anything being proposed to replace those. Let's see, there's something else. I don't see the trash enclosure or the trash receptacles are bear proof. We do have bears in Sorpas Village, so they're going to come over to the hotel. and the last thing is i didn't see in there and maybe i missed it i do not know if this project is currently conforming to the ton of assault wildfire resiliency code which changes potentially the landscape plan and also is something for the applicant that has to deal with in terms of the materiality of the building so hopefully i answered some of your questions thanks susan

Good evening. My name is Susan Sullivan. I live at 325 Milburn Court, Knatson, Missouri Heights. I've heard a lot of things discussed today, and one of the main things that is asking to be changed is the foot area variance, which increases the floor area by 400% of what's initially required or allowed right now. That's something you're asking to change. A lot of things we discussed here tonight are things that can be changed, but the biggest problem are the things that can't be changed, like water use. We're in a 25-year drought, and we are draining Rudai Reservoir right now to send water down the Colorado River that live here. This place is located Right next to a raft to stop, there's WeCycle, there's City Market, there's Healthcare, there's Willits, there's Crown Mountain Park. There are so many walkable opportunities here for the residents that live here now to move into this area and make it a walkable, beneficial community for the people that are already here. So let's think about that before we develop a big hotel. We already have two in Willits. I'd like to know how full they get every night. Why do we need this? We don't need this. We need something else. And like I finish with all my speeches, yeah, tourists matter. But guess what? We matter more. Thank you.

I'm Jen Engle. I've been like a 23-year resident of Soper's Village. I've also been a real estate broker in the community for about 25 years. So I'm not against development. But we had the Soper's Village HOA had our attorney submit a letter as part of public comment. I think you all have it. rather than a lot of people with that, but I think that that, you know, and there's people in the neighborhood that have been in construction and worked for developers, I think it will definitely be an issue and I think it should be addressed, you know, more comprehensively than it is. So anyway, I would just, you know, we as a subdivision, I think the majority of us would request that you recommend denial. That's it, thanks.

My name is David Johnson. I live in Sopers Village. I did walk behind our subdivision over towards the new hotel area. As I walked behind, I started with at RJ Paddy Wax and walked down to New York Pizza, I found two forklifts. These were just in the back in the alleyway. Two forklifts, several pallets, storage bins, a refrigerator, cardboard boxes, several chairs, about 15 beer cakes by the time I got down to New York Pizza. There's also on the side gravel right next to RJ Paddy Wax. There's a truck that's been there probably 20 years. It's got a license that expired in 2013 on it. They use it for storage at RJ Paddy Wax. And also there's a person living in a van right there next to that truck. And my point is, if these developers will say anything to get this passed and get past PNZ to the town board, But, you know, I mean, the town of Basalt passed that project, and look where it is now. There's that meandering path that's all dead because the water has been feeding that area for probably 10 years now. They've pulled down trees. It all was passed by Basalt. The traffic is going to be a huge problem for us. Just look what happened in Spokane, Washington. We tried to get out on July 4th of 2018 when fire almost took out Basalt and took out Sopras Village. The 82 was packed going towards Glenwood and it was just a mess, so keep that in mind too. This hotel will even cause more traffic issues. Has anyone noticed the traffic in Milledge lately? It's really a mess. The hotel looks like it belongs at DIA. Please build something for the community. Thank you.

Hello. Alan Stiers. I've been 20 years in Silpress Village, seeing all this development going on. Been in the Valley almost 40, so been here quite some time. It sounds like we're getting a hotel. Sounds like all from the first meeting that I came to, all they could talk about was how much tax revenue we're all going to get and how much we're all going to benefit I've yet to hear one comment about how Sopris Village is going to benefit. Because I don't know if you've noticed how many for sale signs are going up in Sopris Village. It's daily. And the prices aren't going up, they're going down. Okay? Because now they have to put this on their records to state this will be done or it's under review. Okay? But there's no benefit to Soper's Village whatsoever in any way, shape, or form. Like this one individual, I appreciate what your comments were, Kyle. You got people 30 feet up looking down into people's homes. Okay? Is that proper? Would any of you like that? I don't think so. And also, what about the 162 or whatever units that Skeco is going to be building next to Eagle Crest? And then the 1,500 units that they're proposing down where the old go-kart track was going to go in. Okay? What about all that? And then you're going to add this hotel on top of that? It's too much. It's way, way over the top. If they want to put in some nice, whatever, boutique, maybe that'd be all right. But right now at 35 feet, and what about the PUD? How big is the massing on the PUD? Isn't this like four times the size of the PUD? And they're asking for approval that you may give them? That's wrong. Why did you pass a PUD if you're going to just amend it all the time? Why don't you hold to some values? Hold to the values that this community has instead of ripping it apart for what? For a buck that you guys can make? For tax revenues? And you know what's surprising? They could quote you to the penny what the tax revenues were going to be, but they couldn't tell you what the cost of the building was. That's odd. How can they know one but not the other? I can look it up on my phone and tell you roughly what the square foot cost is. They can also put those RTU units in the basement. They can put all that stuff in the basement. It doesn't have to go on the roof. Nobody's talked about that, but it can happen. There are lots of different options here. You guys are just looking at it going, oh, it looks pretty. They're going to use some type of siding. They're going to use real stone. Big deal. It doesn't benefit, none of that benefits Sopris Village. Zero benefit for us. We don't get any tax revenue.

Thank you.

Nothing. So I vote to deny it. Go back to the drawing board.

Thank you all.

Hi, I'm Joel from Sopris Village. I'll start by saying I kind of like the idea of a hotel. I just don't like the idea of this hotel, an international hotel with kitchens in each room. And so I'll go through a couple of things that I saw in the application. The applicant addressed the master plan, but I think some of the compliance percentages were a little misleading. 1.1, the goal is to create a safe and vibrant community where all people feel valued and motivated to be involved in Basalt, the amazing place to live. They wrote that it was not applicable. The first thing I would say is putting an international hotel with Marriott employees, it doesn't increase our brand as a valley. So it's detrimental to us. It's detrimental to the individuals. And the fact that I made this point last time, but I think it's worth making again, when you put kitchens in there, you're gonna get out of state Texas drywall contractors competing for jobs with your basalt contractors. You're undermining your own residents by creating construction dormitories. 1.2 goal, maintain a small town character by promoting high quality gathering places, buildings that are scaled to the rest of the buildings around them. They say they're neutral, there's no three story buildings around it and they're backed up to a six foot fence in a residential neighborhood. 1K in the master plan, strive to retain the quaintness of basalt and the existing quirky elements that contribute to a small town feel. That's ridiculous. It's an international hotel. It doesn't do any of those things. And here's one they were honest about, said they didn't support. I thought it was curious. Promote healthy lifestyles by requiring active recreational facilities to be included in new developments. I'll point out that the W in Aspen, which is another Marriott hotel, has a pool, and that pool is available for public use. So if there is a hotel that eventually gets built, hopefully a small boutique hotel, I would suggest that you guys demand that the pool be public access. um 4j ensure urban design of buildings include scale size reflect their surroundings again three-story building doesn't fit this and i'll close with this last one 5.2 goal strongly enhance basalt's environmental identity that considers its place in the valley in the world So we're talking about a discretionary business that serves people from out of town. There's 93 rooms, means 93 showers, 200 sinks, 93 kitchenettes, 100 toilets, 93 rooms with AC blasting in the summer, 93 rooms with heat. in the winter and what that means is heat pumps and condensing units spewing heat and noise all the time this business serves people thank you one second this people this serves businesses or serves people that are not from this area using our resources i don't know how the town can approve and allow it to go forward at some point it's difficult to pretend that we care about the environment or our identity as a town when you approve a 70,000 square foot building that doesn't need to exist. Thank you.

Anybody else interested? We will close the public hearing then at 7. Online. Online. Sorry, there's no one with their hands up. If you'd like to speak to the PNZ online if you could please raise your hand Seeing as there's no comments, we will close the public hearing at 713 We'll open this up for Commissioner comments at this time our as per our normal kind of kind of setup I guess we'll start with Ben any comments at this point. I

You don't have to. No further comment. Um.

Yeah, I'll just pass for now. Thank you.

Thank you so much. I mean, something's going to get built there, right? Yeah. The river's going to be too tall, and it's going to have lights that shine, and it's going to drive traffic, and that's just what's going to happen. I'm not happy about it either, but it... Yeah, I don't know. what are we we heading towards a motion tonight yes we are even if it gets denied they still go to council with the denial right that's just what we heard last time yes and and yeah so my biggest feeling from the last time we did this was that the conversation isn't what should it look like the conversation is do we want to have a hotel there but

punting that to town council you know maybe that's more their purview than ours i'm not sure it's punting if we still take a motion they'll hear what we say how we vote we don't we're not we're not deciding no we're not deciding so either way it's whether we approve or not it's not up to us but gentlemen i want to take away your comments but to rob's point i think that's the big question right is this the right use because you're right no matter what happens there right there's going to be an impact of what that looks like so it comes down to is this the best use on that space And normally I personally normally I usually defer to our advisory tendencies say what we have to say and punt it up to the council. This is the first time in a long time where I feel I can't do that personally. I just don't think it's the right project for myriad reasons personally. And to be honest I think what you've done you've hit check every box you can check at this point in the process. I really do. Would I like things differently and a little better? Sure, a little different siding, whatever else. But I think they've done a good job for what the process is. But for me, I'm not gonna be able to approve this.

What I think is missing is this is an opportunity for infill in the parcel that is located centrally at the adjacency of of of eagle county of rafta of the community that's that that adjacents us and here in sopress village and and as i read through the phenomenal list that's been provided here of every single master plan point and i think about it in totality this is this property is the opportunity to link all those elements together and create improvement at a corner that is abhorrent. And this applicant, whoever it is, whatever development goes here, has an opportunity to provide community benefit to all the adjacent users and start to bring connection into this community, and I don't think that this application has proven that.

I think it's an appropriate use for the location. It is infill. It is in a retail section of Willits, of Basalt, and the use is appropriate for commercial. It's not like it's new development. It's not like it's outside of a commercial, highly dense, highly active area. I am concerned about the shortage of parking I'm concerned about the light into the neighboring community but recognize where it's located in it for where it's located this is an appropriate use and I think we have seen evidence that currently there's demand for hotel rooms for moderate price hotel rooms in the mid valley so would i like to see you're not going to get affordable housing there if you had affordable housing how comfortable would those people be living between at the back of a city market well it doesn't even meet the zoning underlying zoning yeah i'm going to get some of the other uses that that people would like to see there so i think it's an appropriate and acceptable use would i like to see something else perhaps but i think it's acceptable i would like to see it flipped to where there were fewer units next to the folks in Suburbs Village that have that light issue?

Well, it could be an appropriate use and an inappropriate plan.

Perhaps. And what's your definition of infill? Just putting something in a place to fill in an empty space, that's a definition of infill, but is it the right project in infill?

It's infill within a commercial area. True. It's commercial use within a commercial area.

So if I can comment, I mean, you guys know me. I'm usually the naysayer on projects. And I don't feel as strongly saying no on this one because I'm trying to envision what else can go there. And yeah, it would be nice to see these other community benefit things, but I don't know how we get there. I mean, unless somebody is going to get together and find some deep-pocketed investor, start their own fundraising scheme I don't see this realistically as just flipping to you know a community center which is not approved for there anyway does not seem like location wise being close to transit would be great for housing but within a commercial development like that it's not the best for employee housing you know a restaurant is gonna drive probably more traffic at all times a day I just yeah I kind of don't know what to do with that I mean you know the thing that's being proposed over by Southside like do we need you know 35 more storage units no like that's easy or you know I mean I don't know do the people sitting here do you realize that after you all left last time you know a project was approved just down the road for 64 units and 12 hotel cabins I mean surely that's adding a lot of traffic to 82 but you know we don't we're only hearing about this one so we're well aware how all these things fit together and all the traffic that is here now and will be coming yeah so I'm not I'm not opposed to a hotel in general I think it seems like from you know everyone's comments that this is not yet at a point where it would be acceptable to the majority of people, this plan could certainly be refined and hopefully come up with something that more people can buy into. But yeah, borrowing a windfall from somewhere, I just don't know. And I've said before, my fear is that it's going to sit and sit and sit and then we're going to get a disaster like across the street.

Mike, any additional comments?

Sure. Please do. Um I tend to agree that I mean is is the hotel the greatest use of this? I don't think honestly that's for us to decide unfortunately I think that's just council piece it fits within their development right um I think the plan presented disrespects the neighboring neighborhood. To me, I don't think the building should be removing any of those large trees on the city market side. I think that's disingenuous to those affordable housing units. So now they have a patio that looks at a loading deck. that's not exactly a livable standard in my eyes. I think they could remove the third story South of the hallway adjacent to the neighborhood and get rid of that and stage it back. So there wasn't a view as much into neighboring yards and they can maybe get shift that building more and get create more landscaping for screening. I mean, there's a million opportunities for them to to work with their neighbors. And I don't think this plan has as presented does that I think they could go smaller. So the parking worked because yeah, I think the parking even though they're spending at the park and ride. You hear the projects come down the pipeline that parking is is is going to be under demand. I don't want to tell gas parking in a rapid parking lot. I don't think that helps our community at all. You know, I think I worry about the private use of that part. I worry, you know, again, I'm not so hung up on the idea of the hotel. I'm hung up on how it's affecting the neighbors.

Cool.

One last comment for me, and I've been listening to Rob a lot over the years. Rob you like to talk about jobs created and jobs for the community um you bring that up a lot and a lot of times it's not really our purview per se or what that looks like this is great it's creating 20 something jobs but it's also we remove 20 something jobs from high school kids at the movie theater back in the day these are service jobs that people in the valley have somewhere else they're probably going to offset it coming here and a few extra jobs Are there other uses we can have on the site that would create more jobs? I don't know the answer to that, to your point about like, is it the worst thing?

But do we even need more jobs? I feel like we can't find places to house employees.

But jobs are for people here. Instead of competing, like Joel said in his comments, are we just creating opportunities to compete with the people who already live here and we're creating a bigger problem? I don't know the answers to these things, but these are the questions going in my head that I want to put in the record when this council's going to look at this. Are these the right, whatever, tax revenues, I don't think any of us really care about that at this level, maybe at the higher level. But jobs, good jobs, jobs that people can have that don't compete and take away other jobs, that don't add to our traffic that we're all talking about, it's just playing around in my head. none of these people are going to come to school where i teach and be in the high school here or very few of them they're already here it's not creating long-term longevity that's an issue for me and again i don't know what the right answer is i don't know if there's another project that's going to come along to be better but it's another thought to go in with how it affects the village the the neighborhood and all the other things that we've talked about so that's just where i'm coming from So here we are.

I'd be ready to make a motion.

Okay.

I'd be ready to make a motion to deny and see what council has to say.

Flat out nothing. Do we have a second? Is that how you would want it worded? That's my question.

To recommend denial. And so if that gets seconded, the vote would be if you voted yes, it would recommend denial. If you voted no, it wouldn't support the denial. I'll second it. Roll call. How do you want to do this?

Somebody can amend if they want.

no you can imagine the question is if you vote not to deny are you then voting to approve no because there's also no there would have to be a subsequent motion if if that were the case if the motion to deny was not supported very well but are other options or motion to approve or approve with conditions yeah or continue or continue contingent and it's recommendation to deny

I don't think continuing is going to change anything.

Do you want to hold your second? I'll hold my second. Go ahead.

Quick question. So then council will get our transcript and understand all of our comments so we don't need to develop those through our denial.

They'll get your minutes.

It would be more beneficial to add additional language if it was a motion to approve. I would say that they'll get plenty of context should denial be recommended.

Understood. Sorry.

No, I was just making sure Mike was heard.

Okay. Before we roll call or you want to?

Let's do roll call. Okay. We'll start with Eric. Yes. Rob. Yes. Cindy.

Yes.

Mike. Yes. Bob. No. And Ben. Yes. And Kyle.

No.

Motion passes five to two.

Thank you for your work and your time. Thank you everybody. I know, I know, it's just a little weird.

I can bring it up here. Just take a minute and then we'll get on to the next one. Let me do that real quick here.

we could suggest. Eric, do you want to take a two-minute break here? Yeah.

Chair?

On August 4th, it is 732. We're going to move on to our next item, which is an update on the police department and public work facility planning.

So I'm Gloria Koshberger, I'm your town manager, and I'm going to each one of the committees to give them a heads up on one of our biggest prioritized projects and get some ideas from you all as well. Kind of like an introduction to the project. So I'll start with basically what is being proposed right now so we are proposing a new public service facility this would house both our police and Public Works and combined facility and it would be in between Willits and downtown on original Road where we already have a yard it would be that yard would be expanded and that would then host, hopefully, this building. It's a cool opportunity because it is a great location to service both sides of our town. Currently, and we'll go through kind of the issues that have led up to this, just for your all's understanding, you all are ambassadors in our community, and we want to make sure that you have kind of the right information going out there.

Next slide, please.

So our current facilities are a bit deplorable right now. So the bottom picture there is our police department. And my deputy police chief said that he puts, that's where everyone eats, that table right there that you see in the bottom. It's where everyone eats. That's also where they process all the evidence. Sorry. I won't tell you what he exactly said.

I never would have got to evidence.

The DNA.

Yeah, yeah. So it's a tough place to have a nice meal. Next slide, please. And so what we're hoping for is evidence processing room, as well as we're getting more demand on town services, we're having trouble recruiting police, so we're hoping that a new facility with nice amenities, but reasonable amenities, can help us really plan for our future and how we grow and who we service.

Next slide please.

So what we're doing right now is community engagement. And we have engaged with Wold Architects and Engineering. We chose them because they have specific knowledge in designing police departments. And there's a lot of... specific things that you need in a police department as far as an evidence room needs to have so much security between the walls. What's that? Security right now on our evidence room, but we need to do better. So it has been estimated that would be about 26 to 25 million is our cost.

For this is just the police building. This is for both.

And that's so we combined both of these. So our public works and I'll get to them in a minute. I don't know why the slides are a little out of order, but basically they operate over five locations around town and that creates some inefficiencies. Right. They also have a and I'll We'll jump to that in a minute, but they also have a couple of modular buildings that have our past their life So needing to and we get dinged on that in our insurance every year and they're finally like you're done with this building so We need both. We need a new place for our police department. We need a new place for our public works. And combining them will save us significantly, unlike the mechanical rooms and toilets and just roofs and maintenance. And so the council decided last year, I think it was in November, that let's combine these two and get the most bang for our buck. to combine them? Oh, I don't have that off the top of my head, but it was very significant. Because we actually just looked at it again as we're kind of thinking about this project and being like, well, maybe we should split them up. And it just does not pencil that way. So I can get that if you need it.

So we've got... What's the square footage? Sorry, do you go into the... What is the square footage?

About 15,000 square feet, right?

Yes.

Yeah, about 15,000 square feet is what we're looking at. And... We've got about $7 million in reserves, so we would basically drain our reserves to put as much as we can towards this project. That's not to say we wouldn't have our reserves that we're required to have through TABR, but this is on top of those reserves.

How does it affect the timing of some of the...

So that's a different fund. So this is coming out of our general fund and we have different funds for specifically earmarked for affordable housing. And so this would be, we would need to then borrow about $18 million to complete this project. And how we're gonna do that is we're gonna propose a .5% sales tax measure on the November ballot. This is drafted right now that that would sunset once the building is built. So it would probably be about 20 years is what we're estimating right now, but could be paid off sooner. And then the tax would go away.

So it doesn't sunset when it's built. You said it would sunset when it was built.

Oh, when it's paid off, yes. So it's being built, it's only to build the building, and then once we pay off our loan, yes, sorry about that, once we pay off our loan, we would then sunset the tax and it would go back.

So that's the 20 years would be the payoff.

Right.

Okay.

up to 20 years is how it's being drafted right now so to look at our sales tax rate and we have to look at both Pitkin and Eagle County so our current Pitkin County is nine point five five and this would boost that up to ten point five or oh five and then our Eagle County is eight point four five and this would boost that up to eight point nine five for potentially 20 years

Do we pay rent?

Do we pay rent at the current police station, or is that town-owned property?

We pay HOA dues. It is a current town-owned property, and that's contemplated to be sold or leased out. I know Pitkin is interested. OK.

So on the Pitkin side of the sales tax, what businesses are most affected?

midland midland is picking i thought we're across the no uh south side businesses mainly midlands mostly midlands equal right yeah mostly yeah so yeah so it's the south side businesses yeah okay all right no downtown is eagles there are some businesses like 7-eleven and and those are picking they are picking the king county line is in the center of the school it cuts like in front of the 7-eleven it goes through the 7-eleven parking lot okay so

Timbo's is picking. Correct. Okay, because the signs are like right there.

You're worried about your village. I'm on my sandwich, man. My number three.

Next slide.

So some other stuff I've talked about of kind of the current police facility, as you alluded to, we do own it and we are contemplating possibly selling or leasing that out in order to pay for that. We're also looking at other properties that we own around town on how we could potentially monetize those as well. But I think the biggest issue with the police department right now, besides it being in a condo building and limited workspace and evidence room and storage, is there's only one bathroom for everyone. That is for anyone that they bring in, as well as their own officers. And it's kind of reached a little bit of a breaking point as we are recruiting more women and men into our force and need facilities, proper facilities for them. So yeah, that's all. Sorry, some consultants did this one for me. And then the public works, so that you can see this trailer over on Fueling, that's the one that we keep getting dinged on our insurance for. And likely they will need to find a new... Sorry, hold on. I don't think our slide...

Sorry, I thought I was doing that. Sorry. I was like, that looks nice. I don't know what you're going to do. That's not...

Before you move away from the police thing, I'm just curious, how might that affect response timing if they're down there versus here?

We're hoping that it actually improves response timing all around town. So them being more centrally located and being able to go either east or west on 82 and exit out onto 82 quickly will hopefully help with that response time.

Would they, what about, I'm just thinking of police having to go on 82 when it's super crowded versus right up here, like would they just take original road then if they need to get into town quickly and the highway's backed up or?

What do you get those lights for? What do you do when you see a car?

I just pull out in front of it. I don't envy anyone having to, like, what do they do? I guess they go on the shoulder or something? I don't know. It always makes me nervous. Like, how do they get through all that traffic, even if they're...

don't know if I have the response for that but that might be an emergency access likely programmed in that goes to Willits Lane ride-along would be interesting Oh, is there any other ones? Oh no, that's it, okay. And so the public works facility that we're hoping to incorporate into this is we don't really have covered storage. We have the annex up here on Soprus, which serves as our covered storage, but you wanna get in and out of there as fast as possible. It's a scary building to be in, and we're also looking at monetizing that potentially as well. And that heated, protected storage is a huge thing. So there's a big... I don't know, like steel building on the site already that would stay there and then be closed in to kind of provide for that. The cool thing about putting them together is they work together a lot on keeping our roads open or when a tree's down. So they're always coordinating together and they're actually really excited to have their departments in the same building.

Next slide.

So that's kind of the presentation, and just wanted to get it ahead of all of you and see if you had any questions, thoughts, or comments.

Is there room within that structure to squeeze in a couple employee housing units for them?

So we're going to be using our Stotts Mill as our employee housing offset, basically. So we're doing the four units over here, Stotts Mill, and James can probably speak better to that, but that's how we'll be offsetting that. It wouldn't really be the appropriate place for someone to live given the heavy equipment around and the sirens and just, I just don't think it would be appropriate.

I think you should be careful with that statement because you are putting it right next to where people are living. So if you're going to say it's not okay for us to have people living there.

Well, if you were living right above where someone's being put in. And working for the town and giving them a little bit of space. But we do have that done.

But because that was a concern of community members when we move stuff over there now was all the noise and lights and everything. And now that the ski co has been built out there, like you are going to be putting a bunch of stuff. The other thing there, I live in the lakeside townhome, so use that intersection all the time. That light intersection, you can only fit like three cars before you back into the intersection. Yeah. And now you're going to put big trucks and everything in there. You guys, I think, are going to have to look at a traffic study and tell the community why this intersection isn't going to become really busy and kind of hard to manage.

Yeah, that's a great point, and we'll bring that one up.

It's a really tough... It's just there's not much runway to that light now, so...

you have the optional stop sign there when you come to east valley road left turns up yeah yeah yeah i think there's five of them so you gotta pick and choose what what's the town doing about the main the gas main that's running through the center of the site so i don't know if it's a gas main i know it's a sewer main there's both is there both we are proposing to move those okay so a single building

single building we've looked at that's why we actually looked at splitting it up again yep and actually the cost to move them fits better as one building relocate that man then if you were to relocate good oh yeah we're gonna have to move those it's the right thing yeah it's good location it's great So they will our council will finalize the ballot language by the end of August and then it's off to the races.

Is the cameras. Speed cameras. Speed cameras, are they going towards this project at all?

Hopefully. We don't see that as an infinite source of funding. Hopefully people are slowed down like they have in Glenwood and we don't see as much revenue from that. But yeah, that is the plan that that would help with this as well.

That would be earmarked for this project?

It's not officially earmarked, but it is something we're talking about using, yes.

Well, it looks like the police are now ticketing on Midland in the center there, so that should be a good source of revenue. For a couple weeks.

I still don't understand. Is parking allowed there or not? No, it is not allowed in the loading zone.

Would you park in a loading zone in Denver? You would not. That is the same thing here. We just need to train people not to.

How big will the police department be of the 15,000? Is it like half and half or like what's a...

So the police department is more, it takes up more space than the public works because they don't need as much interior space. It's more about the yard space for them. But they will finally have a place to convene. I don't know if you've seen our public works director around. He travels around with a backpack because that is his office basically right now. Solid, solid man there.

He also has to carry evidence for the police.

With his lunch. Yeah, with his lunch.

How many acres is the site?

Two. It's 1.95.

And so 15,000 foot building and a lot of parking space and yard space in the back.

Yeah, I don't remember if you were here for the meeting, but part of this project has been annexing the umbrella roofing site, which is adjacent to the existing public works facility. And so together, it's like 1.16 and then like 0.75. It comes out to about 1.95.

There's also some CDOT right-of-way that comes in there that they're looking to dispose of, so hopefully we would have more parking.

That is being vacated, the emergency access through lane from Widget to... No, the town is looking, and the fire district has asked for the town to... um accommodate that through way from willett's lane to the original intersection through the property as part of the design so to then vacate the existing one at widget Well, you're talking about the road that goes through Widget through Willits Bend, right?

Yeah, there's like a historic CDOT emergency access easement between Widget and the property.

Yeah, and so that would be further perfected to go through to original. Okay.

You could fit a Bedell Court in there somewhere for the public. I'm a big fan of that. Great community benefit.

We are looking at incorporating a community room in there, and that could also serve as a home for, like, an emergency operations center if we needed that as well. And they found that really useful when – or they found that need when we had the Lake Christine fire is needing those gathering spaces for –

for our emergency operations and then it could be also used as a community center where you know people can book their own basically and the monetization of the other sites in town is that money go back to the general fund does that go to this project to shorten the length of payback and tax burden on the citizen that would be our goal is to um put that all back into the project okay

How does, like Amazon, we get paid full, when you order on Amazon now, it's full sales tax, right? Yes.

You order online, we get that sales tax, yes.

We should just put the thing on Amazon orders now that there's the... We just rejected some sales tax, so get on Amazon, will you?

Wait, I'm in Piggy County. You guys are killing me.

Whoever buy local, drop local. Awesome.

Thank you, Gloria.

thank you all right thank you last item on our agenda then is commissioner comments and staff updates yeah in terms of staff updates your next meeting will be september 1st where we'll have a special review public hearing and possibly some code amendments to evaluate and We'll also be likely setting up a walkthrough for PNZ and BOC to go walk through some of the BCC units, deed restricted units, to take a look at those. There it is. Across the Salt Center Circle. Every building. Units, the deed restricted units.

James, is there occupancy now happening?

Yes, the first units are being occupied and um the town is purchasing and closing on the deed restricted units that the town is buying in the building so so they're done construction is done construction's uh you know wrapping up basically they've got tcos on the residential aspect of it What about the supermarket? They have a permit and they had to put up funds in escrow to secure the finishing of it. They have an operator? Yeah, that's the CP group. And so they've got a certain amount of time after the TCO on the residential to finish out the market space.

Who's the operator?

CP Group.

CP Burger.

Did the developer put the escrow up or CP put the escrow up?

Developer put it up.

For liquidated damages, should they not be able to finish?

What is the timing for them to have to open?

I think it's nine months to a year after the TCO.

I clicked on something basalt. I don't know if it was your link to the agenda or not, but it still showed Michelle as our director, and it still had Katie as one of our members. So something on the website needs to be updated. Okay. We'll take a look at that, the P&Z.

And then, you know, other comments update on the FedEx lights. I heard from the property owner on Friday and they've hired Carter Electric to come up with some adjustments to the fixtures to help better downcast the current fixtures. So we are hopefully seeing some adjustments actually happen. And then kind of last of all, this is Carlton's last meeting with the town. So I wanted to say thank you to him.

So this is my last meeting. I've taken a senior role with the town of Snowmass Village, so I'm going to work with Mike up there. And I just wanted to say thank you to everybody for all your time and attention and opportunity to grow a little bit here. So thank you.

you did a good job what are we gonna do without you now is James gonna be like three people in one I will have less hair than I currently

Dude, I know. I'm right there. I can't say much.

However, there are still two more Basalt summer concerts, and I hope to see you there. And following that, the Friday night series goes until the end of the summer, the weekend of Labor Day. So keep going to those two.

Awesome.

Towns have to get, like, a non-poaching agreement going. Yeah. Yeah, you'd be working with Michelle.

Wait, did Michelle get this?

Or you should be, like, soccer teams where they got to pay, like, you can trade. Yeah, the transfer fees. You know, there's transfer fees. Yeah, we got to make some sales tax. Yeah, we need some money. It's all, like, yikes. I'm coming.

If there are no more staff updates, do we have a motion to adjourn?

So moved.

Do we have a second? Second. We'll give it to Bob. All right, all in favor? Aye. Aye, meeting adjourned at 7.57.

Thank you. Thank you.