Town Council - Regular Meeting

Good evening and welcome to our Tuesday, August 11th Basalt Town Council meeting. Before we get started, just a couple notes. If you're looking at making comments online, you can do so if you're watching on YouTube or grassroots. You can join the Zoom link or the Zoom instance and get on there. Go to basalt.net, go to the agenda and minutes tab, find the August 11th meeting packet, and there's all the instructions and links that you need to join. I will go ahead and call the meeting to order. And Pam, will you please call the roll?

Absolutely. Let's begin with Angela Anderson. Here. Rick Stevens. Hannah Berman.

Here.

Angel Dupre-Bouchard. Here. Greg Schaffran.

Here.

David Knight.

Here.

Elise Huddle. Present. And I know Rick's here somewhere.

Yes.

Everyone is present.

OK, next up we have our consent agenda, item number two. That consists of 2A, the minutes of July 14, 2026. 2B, continue to August 25th, 2026, the public hearing and second reading of Ordinance Number 19, Series of 2026, in ordinance of the Town Council of the Town of Basalt, Colorado, granting necessary development approvals to the Jadwin Black Mountain development, including 64 dwelling units, 12 short-term rental cabins, and associated improvements, together with extending and increasing the corporate limits of the Town of Basalt and providing initial Town zoning for the Jadwin Black Mountain property 431 Emma Road. Item 2C on the consent agenda is resolution number 31 series of 2026, a resolution of the Town Council of Basalt, Colorado adopting the Basalt Town Council Charter for 2026 to 2028. And item 2D is resolution number 32 series of 2026, a resolution of the Town Council. of Basalt, Colorado, naming the town property colloquially known as Codgers Corner, bless you, as Dollenbeck Park. So I entertain a motion to approve the consent agenda items as presented unless there's other discussion that we need to have on any of those.

Mayor, I move that the town council approve the consent agenda items as presented. Second.

It's been moved and seconded. All those in favor, please signify by saying aye.

Aye. Aye.

Thank you very much. Next up is item number three, which is our call to the public. Just a few ground rules. Make sure you limit your comments to three minutes and address your comments directly to me. Identify yourself by name and address when making comments and also make sure you sign in the back of the room. Comments should be courteous, civil, and constructive, most importantly. Town council will make no decision or take action except to direct the town manager. And just some guidance. We do have some public hearings tonight in the agenda, several of them. So if your public comment is related to those public hearings and the topics those cover, you're welcome to speak. But in order for your comments to be on the record for those public hearings for those specific agenda items, you've got to come up for that part. So I would encourage you to wait until then if you're going to speak about those. But the floor is open for public comments, so please come on up.

Hello.

Thanks for this opportunity. Can you speak directly into the microphone?

I know that. Thank you for the opportunity to speak with you tonight. My name is Kathleen Brenza and I am running for County Commissioner. A little bit about me. My husband and I have lived in Eagle County for over 28 years. Raised our son here. My grandmother, Frances Haskins, was born and raised in Menturn. Her four sons, my mother's two brothers, all went and served in World War II, came back and worked the mines to Colorado. They came back and worked the mines, the railroads, and the ranches in Colorado. I have served children and families in myriad capacities. Um, as a teacher, as a special ed director, as a principal, I currently serve the courts as a court appointed parent coordinator, decision maker, most important to me, mediator. I am a commissioner for the fifth judicial, which means I evaluate the judges along with my fellow commissioners. This is my second term doing that. I also, um, because I love it. work for Colorado Mountain College, Mountain BOCES, and Adams State University as a field supervisor, supervising teachers who are working toward their license. And last but not least, Like you, I serve on a town council. I serve on the Gypsum Town Council, and I'm in my second term. Why I'm passionate about this? I love Eagle County. I love where I live. I love what it has to offer, and I feel that, for me, it's time to give back. I'm passionate about early childhood, as was Gina McQueenie, who's now timed out. 1989, the superintendent in Lake County and I got together. We created, along with the town, a family learning center that earned state as well as national recognition. Yale University deemed it as a school of 21st century. Tom Brokaw did a quick bid on it as well. I am equally passionate about aging with dignity. I believe that our seniors just did an amazing job with our county, and we need to make sure that we have all the amenities for them to live a quality life. I want clean rivers, not just for I'd better hustle. Oh my goodness. Clean rivers, all of that. So I will tell you, I have a website. And that's something I never thought I'd be saying. Kid from 1129 North Corona who used to eat a loaf of Wonder Bread with her five siblings. Anyway, www.BerenzaForEagleCounty.com. I hope you'll look at that. Not just because to see that I am experienced and qualified for this position, but also contact me. And I have a card. Is it okay if I?

Yeah, you can leave those.

Okay. But thank you for your time. Thank you.

Thanks for coming to introduce yourself. And good luck in your campaign.

I might make our comment. We started at 7. Who would like to go next?

Hi, all. Stacy Stokes. I live on the corner of Few Lane and Alexander. Thank you for getting us some soon to be put in speed limit signs. They will help a lot. But I still don't think we're going to have a stop sign yet at Few Lane and Alexander. It's a very important place that we need a stop sign. I actually sat on my deck with a friend who used to work at a municipality and sat there and we watched the show. The traffic, the almost hitting, the backing up, the beeping, the screeching. She sat over there and she goes, are you kidding me? I said, no, I'm not kidding you. Every day, this is what I see. She goes, no accidents yet? I said, only one. I said, but we'll see what happens. Couldn't believe that the town wouldn't do anything yet. We need a stop sign there. People come flying down that road. Now people on Allison Lane are putting signs in their yard saying, please slow down, there's kids. People are in a hurry. And I know that we can't control people's behavior. I don't want my behavior controlled. But we can put enough in people's faces to make them wake up and pay attention. And I would just hate to see that the reason people wake up and pay attention is because somebody gets hit. And that that's the gossip on the street is, my God, did you hear? Let's not have that. And I know you're probably waiting for 555 and all that to get done. It doesn't matter. Whatever happens with that piece of property, a stop sign needs to stop people when they're coming flying in that neighborhood with kids on bikes. It just needs to happen before somebody gets hurt or dead. Thank you.

Thank you for your comments. Gloria, is that something that's on your radar, that stop sign? Yes. Do you have anything you want to comment on or can comment on there?

I don't have anything right now, but I can bring that back to the next meeting.

Okay, that sounds good. You guys good with that? Here. That's the stop sign. Yeah, yeah. Bring it at the next meeting.

I'll bring it at the next meeting. I'll bring it at the next meeting, yeah.

Have we made any decision about that, or that's for the next meeting?

Okay. Thank you for your comments. Who else would like to go? Okay, we'll move on. Mayor and council reports and comments. Floor is open. Water line.

The National Night Out was a huge success. Thank you. Yes, the National Night Out was a huge success. Thank you so much to everybody from the town who helped out. It was so fun to see everybody. And to the assault PD. Everybody did a wonderful job. There was a huge turnout. And the kids were excited. There were so many families. So I just love that we have that event at Triangle Park. So thanks to everybody that made it great.

Yeah, it was amazing, nice work. I did, just to address a lot of messages that I got on Sunday, we did have an ice activity in Basalt, and I just wanted to kind of Daylight that that happened and thank everyone that reached out to me with their concerns and I feel like I've heard a lot of concern and fear from a number of community members and I looked into it and we don't have the authority to ensure any sort of information gathering or accountability with that unfortunately but i guess what i'd like to reiterate for folks watching is that we do follow colorado law colorado law prohibits local police from coordinating with ice unless there's a judicial warrant tied to a criminal case and I think it's a good reminder that this is a place that values all of our community and that it's a good reminder that it's a time where we should be looking out for our neighbors and so I appreciate everyone that that reached out and checked in with each other.

Thanks, Anna.

Where are you going to talk about Rwapa and water releases?

No, go right ahead. I mean, the town staff is all over it. Justin and Gloria are very well aware. I think we all are, but just to put it out there in case people haven't been seeing the posts online and the stuff that the town and a lot of the water and power have been putting out there has been a large increase in releases from read I this week. But I think are scheduled to continue and so mostly the concert the messaging is just about water safety. So the flow water down the frying pan and then below the pan here. on the Roaring Fork will be high enough that you should watch out, let your angling friends know, children playing in the river, just be aware and be careful.

That's a good comment. It's about 500, a little over 500 CFS now, right?

The safe zone for fishing apparently is 350. So it's like well above that. And now the kayakers are out. I know, and now the kayakers are out. It's actually kind of fun to see people kayaking on the pan.

It could go as high as 700.

They promised to keep it below 700. Exactly.

yeah i mean it's it's nice to see that it's helpful for the river though we need some a snow proclamation do we have a snow proclamation any other uh comments

Yeah, we had a nice retreat with Northwest Council of Governments last week at the Hoffman Hotel. Sorry. We had a good retreat with Northwest Council of Governments last week at the Hoffman. David and I were there, and it was really, I thought, very eye-opening for me to see how much they're involved and generally kind of relate them to what goes on at the state level. But A lot of what goes on at the local level and getting educated about that group is was one of the main goals I think of the retreat was to pass along how much value they add. And what we talked about was it's pretty hard to get to the meetings. They want to make the meetings more dynamic. So what we talked about with them was actually doing more local meetings with, for example, just the Roaring Fork Valley or the lower I-70 corridor or the Eagle River Valley. And then getting together generally over in Breckenridge or Keystone is where they meet. regularly, but that's hard to get to and it's a big commitment. So I think the idea that they're going to be more involved here in our valley, which is a little different from the I-70 corridor, which is a little different from the Eagle Vale Valley, is really a good step in the right direction for them. Also, they are hiring an economic development director. Which to me is kind of exciting as well because we all of our values have different economies. The I-70 corridor is a little different than the Roaring Fork Valley. So they're going to be looking at how these economies are kind of Working together or working in opposition to make our western slope side of the state successful. So a couple pretty good advances that they're making in terms of their organization. The other thing I'd like to say is just thanks to staff. Trevor and Matt and everybody that allowed us to use the Wednesday night Willits Clubhouse down there for lacrosse. And that group of men, they refer to it as the best night of the week. There's a lot of nice social, emotional wellness going on there and a lot of physical activity, but they all look forward to it. They're very respectful. And it's a great opportunity for those guys to get together. We have a great demographic of anywhere from Matt Gianneschi down to young guys that just came here to be fishing guides for the summer. And some high school kids that have started to come out. So thanks for that opportunity. It's a great spot. And best sunsets on the river are best sunsets in town at Willits right there on Wednesday nights. And we're done for the summer, so catch you next year. Thanks.

Thanks, Rick. Anyone else? Just a quick comment for me on the tennis courts.

I know everybody got that email, I believe. I did go out there and play on Saturday and saw it firsthand.

It's peeling. You've probably been over there, too. So we do need to make sure that we're addressing that. I know it's on your radar, but just want to make sure the public knows that we are addressing that. And that's, I think that's it for mayor and council comments. We'll move on to manager's report.

All right. Ski Co would like to schedule a work session before their season starts. They estimate it would take about an hour. Is the council okay with me putting this on the books? I could schedule it before a regular meeting since it would be just an hour or a dedicated work session that we're trying to move towards. So I just wanted to kind of get some direction on either way.

So it was kind of, what is it? It's a little distorted.

Yeah, it is. SCECO is asking for a work session, and they estimate it will be about an hour. And so I wanted to.

A session and not a presentation?

I think I wanted an agenda before I commit to anything. Yeah. Is this like what they presented at other... It's the state of the business thing. Yeah, they've already presented similar stuff to Snowmass and Aspen.

And so I was thinking it could be just a presentation prior to the meeting if you guys were amenable with that.

But for an hour? I kind of want to know what we're going to go over. I want an agenda.

I don't know about you guys. That's a lot of time.

Yeah.

It is a lot of time, and it's been in the paper. It's the same presentation they give to Snowmass and Aspen. It's been in the paper. It's...

Yeah, it's their road show.

Yeah.

Right?

They were already here a couple times.

Yeah, and so I know we've been kind of evaluating our meeting times, and so I wanted to run this by you before scheduling.

I don't know if it's the most important thing that we could be spending our time on. It would be just my thought.

Is or is not.

I don't think it's the most important thing that we could spend our time on.

We've read the articles in the paper. I think most of us have about what has been discussed so far. I'd like to get an agenda before we make that call.

Yep. I'll ask for an agenda. And then we have an open house for public service facility project at the library on Monday. That's August 17th from 12 to 2 PM and from 4 to 6 PM. We have our last concert tomorrow night. So I hope you all can join us. And then tomorrow as well, Midland will have a full day closure scheduled starting at 7 a.m. And this is to hang the catenary lights. We have scheduled it from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m., but they did a lot of work today with intermittent closures, and we're hopeful that they'll be done early tomorrow. So that's our goal. And then we have our work session next Thursday, and I'm going to be adjusting that to 530 so that we can accommodate everyone.

Does everybody know what catenary lights are online or watching maybe?

Twinkle lights. Yeah, I don't know if I have the definition. I would call them, you know, like twinkle lights across the street.

So, you know, if you see... streetscapes in the world where they have lights strung from one side to the other. It's pretty cool. It's not going to be a dull thing when it's done. It will be pretty amazing.

Worth the wait.

Yeah, worth the wait. I mean, it's like the cherry on top at night out there.

We also have them on Market Street in Willits, correct? Yes. Okay.

So you can see. Catenary lights. Catenary lights.

The 20th is the work session? Yeah, the 20th at 530.

And that will be held in the planning building right across the way here. So we're going to try out a new system. Shake it up.

One of the bollards got popped pretty good by one of those kids. Oh, no. In front of Alpine Bank, it's like flat.

We'll have them like that.

Work hard at that.

All set, Laura? Yep, all set. Thank you.

Okay, yeah, I forgot one thing. Saturday, August 22nd, from 5 to 8, Basalt Education Foundation is having their annual Motors on Midland.

Which is coming up, yeah.

Yeah, exactly. So come out and support BEF. Sorry, what day? Go Longhorns. 22nd. 22nd. Right, okay. Saturday the 22nd. A week from Saturday. Correct.

call out.

All right. Let's go ahead and move on to our presentations. Next up, we have item 6A, which is a proclamation dedicating Dahlenbach Park. And I don't have a printout of that. So give me a second to scroll. Oh, there we go. Thank you. So I'll go ahead and read this off. So this is a proclamation. And you guys want to come up, Janice? I don't know if anybody else is here. So just a little bit of background. There's going to be a dedication this Saturday at the parade at 2 and the dedication itself at 2.30. The park over there, if you recall from the consent agenda, colloquially known as Cotter's Corner. So that is now Dollenbeck Park. And We have a proclamation to read for that. And so whereas Wally and Pepe Dolenbeck have demonstrated unwavering dedication, outstanding service, and lasting commitment to the people and community of the town of Basalt. And whereas through their leadership, generosity, volunteerism, and tireless efforts, the Dolenbecks have made significant contributions that have enriched the lives of countless residents and strengthened the spirit of our community. And whereas the legacy of the Dolenbecks Reflects the values of compassion, integrity, stewardship, and public service that inspire present and future generations. And whereas it is fitting and appropriate, this community permanently recognizes extraordinary contributions by dedicating a place where families, friends, and visitors can gather and celebrate community. Now therefore, I, Mayor David Knight, on behalf of the town of Assault, to hereby proclaim the official dedication of Dollenbeck Park in honor of Wally and Pepe Dollenbeck. May this park stand as a lasting tribute to their remarkable lives, enduring service, and positive impact upon our community. May all who visit this park be reminded of the values of kindness, leadership, and commitment exemplified by the Dollenbecks. In witness thereof, I have here unto set my hand and cause the seal of the town of Salt to be affixed this 11th day of August 2026, which I will do momentarily. But Janice, would you like to say anything?

I just want to say thank you. It's a dream that we've been working on for a year. I started with talking to Pam. Thank you, Pam. Then I went and talked to Michelle, who was the planner. And there were four of us ladies and Janet, who works for Colorado 500, who got together and just said, we need to do something these people have just done so much for the valley and they've been recognized all over the united states but they haven't been recognized in their hometown and so i just felt sometimes it's just one of those things that needs to be done and so i want to think there's a lot of financial assistance we want to thank them um justin and his crew helped set this the marble uh rex up in marble is a um designer, sculpture, And we went up and found this laying in his pile of marble, and we fell in love with it. And then he engraved it and put it in. And we just want to thank everyone. We're going to have a little parade. It's going to be the mini parade. But there are 250 motorcycle riders coming in for the 50th Colorado 500, which is a spinoff from Wally, who had, way back in 1974, had five guys come out who were big shot race car people. and rode the mountains and then there were 10 guys that wanted to come and then there was now there's 250. it's a charity ride these people pay a lot of money and they ride 100 miles for five days they leave from snowmass village and come back to snowmass village it used to all happen up the frying pan They, they camped out there and then we just don't have the facilities for it to leave the salt anymore. So it's moved, but anyhow, there's a quantity. I don't know how many from 50 to a hundred motorcycle riders. Some of them are probably famous. Some of them have been here forever. Every year for however many years are going to come from the elementary school through town about this, take about this much time. pull into the Albany I mean to the Alpine Bank and park and then we're going to have a dedication of the park there with all three members children are coming back for it and the dignitaries from the Colorado 500 so I just want to thank all the townspeople this all happened it's kind of been a dream and I'm excited thank you all if you can come we'll see you at two o'clock Thank you. On Saturday.

Janice, would you mind sharing an anecdote of one of the things that they've done for the town? I had the pleasure of knowing them, but I would love for everybody, anybody who doesn't.

You know, it started out with Pepe and the ladies. And the story is that the school cheerleaders back in the 80s needed cheerleading outfits. And then it went to the... The uniforms for the the teams and then it was school they gave to the school the libraries while he started the first basalt rescue he brought an ambulance back from the Indianapolis and they raised money and And that ambulance actually is coming back. It's being restored and being brought on a flatbed and will be in the parade, we hope, if they can get through Nevada because of all the fires and Utah and get here. But it's just exciting. They were people that never said, No, they said yes to everything. Every town they go to, they give money to the schools and the libraries. In Gunnison, they fry 250 hamburgers for the 4-H and make money there. They give to all the trails throughout Colorado. and they give some this year they gave 17 scholarships to basalt seniors and so they give them in every town i mean they give millions of dollars and and they bring money right in here to this town because i'm sure someone will be here eating lions club used to fix them breakfast up at dollenbeck's and they kind of just outgrew outbrew our town, which is sad. So it's going to be fun to see some of these guys come back and ride their motorcycles. I mean, it's just a lot of fun to see these guys. So yeah, they are a wonderful, and Wally would not be, he wouldn't sit here beside me. He's a very humble man that would say no. He would have said no, no, no. We did this from our heart. We don't need recognition, but their family does need recognition. So thank you so much. We will all enjoy the park. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Thank you so much for all your efforts and everybody else who's been volunteering with this. It's going to be a nice event. All right, next up. We have another presentation. It's item 6B, sidewalk snow removal in Midland. And Justin, you're up for this. I love it. Everybody has nameplates now.

Matching.

I know.

It's amazing. good evening mayor and council i'm justin foreman public works director and with me tonight is jeff levins our streets foreman the midland avenue streetscape is now complete and it represents a significant investment by the town and community oh thank you the project improved the sidewalks pedestrian connections public spaces landscaping infrastructure and created a more attractive inviting downtown As we transition from the construction warranty period to routine maintenance, we need to establish an approach for winter snow removal. Tonight, we're asking council for direction on how we maintain the pedestrian portions of the streetscape while protecting this investment in maintaining safe, accessible routes throughout the winter. Next slide. So this. Sorry, you're stuck here. You're locked up. Yeah. I think every time I give a PowerPoint, it does this. Yeah.

If you want to keep talking, I'll try to catch up.

So on the slide that you'll see here in a minute will be two drone pictures side by side of the areas we're talking about. So Public Works currently and historically has plowed Midland Avenue and the adjacent public parking spaces. The proposed pedestrian snow removal area we are discussing tonight would cover the north side from Midland Spur up to the Boone driveway at 234 Midland Avenue, and on the south side from Codgers Corner in Dallenbach Park to the eastern property line of 211 Midland Avenue, along with the Luxinger Stairs and the center pedestrian islands. With the completed streetscape, we actually have adequate areas where snow can be pushed and stored in the center medians and landscape islands. The issue isn't a lack of snow storage location. The issue is timing. When the sidewalks are cleared early in the morning before businesses open and before vehicles occupy the parking spaces, we can move snow into those areas and coordinate its removal with the public works street piling operation. Once the parking spaces are occupied and the downtown is active, that becomes much more difficult. So the key to making this operation work efficiently is coordinating the timing of sidewalk clearing with the town street plowing operation. Next slide, please. You're still frozen. I'm sorry. So Public Works has had the opportunity to test this approach over the past two winters while the project was still under warranty. During those two winters, the town contracted sidewalk snow removal for these areas. The contractor worked early in the morning before businesses opened and before on-street parking spaces became occupied. That timing allowed the sidewalks to be cleared and snow moved while we still had good access to the areas where it can be placed. From an operational standpoint, we believe that it worked well. We were able to maintain consistent pedestrian routes, reduce conflicts with parked vehicles, and minimize the accumulation of snow and ice along the pedestrian and parking areas. So staff has looked at three options for what we believe is a feasible approach to sidewalk snow removal. And I know the PowerPoint is not working, but all of this is outlined within your packet. There's a three-page memo as well.

Sorry, I forgot to mention that.

So staff has looked at three options which we think are feasible approach to sidewalk snow removal. The first is to continue with contracted snow removal. A contractor provides a dedicated resource for the pedestrian areas and can begin early in the morning. This allows the sidewalk work to be coordinated with the public works plowing operations. The second option is to return responsibility to adjacent business owners consistent with the town code. This would reduce the town's direct operating costs, but it also puts the timing of sidewalk clearing in the hands of multiple individual businesses. Many of those businesses have limited onsite snow storage, so they need to coordinate snow placement with the available landscape islands and medians within the streetscape. If the sidewalks are cleared early, this can work. The challenge is when snow removal happens later after parking spaces are occupied in the town is already plowed the street. At that point moving is snow becomes much more difficult and may require additional manual handling to the designated islands and medians. The town could also work with the businesses on a coordinated private arrangement but that would require participation in agreement among the many property owners. And finally, a third option is for Public Works to take over the sidewalk snow removal directly. This would give us direct control, but it would require our crews to add these pedestrian facilities to our existing snow removal responsibilities. As you've heard me state before, every Public Works employee already has a snow removal route. Staff would have to reprioritize snow removal and routes and it will affect the level of service as Midland is considered a high priority area. So when we compare the three options, the biggest operational factor is timing and coordination. We feel it's best to get the sidewalks cleared early to take advantage of the available snow placement areas and coordinate this work to minimize conflicts. Based on the last two winters, staff believes the contracted approach provides the best way to accomplish that. So on the next slide, we talk about the financial picture and that has also changed since the original arrangement. For the past two winters, the town contracted this work at approximately $15,833 per month for the six month winter season. That previous contract was initially set up as manual snow removal because the new streetscape was still within its warranty period and the concrete was still curing. The warranty period is now complete. We can now allow appropriately sized mechanical equipment to be used where appropriate, which would reduce the cost of providing this service. Based on informal discussions with a few contractors, staff estimates this cost would be approximately $6,000 to $9,000 per month. Those are just preliminary estimates. The actual cost would be determined through the procurement process. Staff will also look at various contract structures, including a monthly retainer, a per event or per visit pricing, or a combination of these approaches. So with that, based on our experience over the past 2 winters the operational requirements of the completed streetscape in the potential potential reduction in costs staff recommends continued contracted snow removal from Midland Avenue pedestrian facilities. We believe this provides the most consistent level of service allows us to coordinate sidewalk and street operations and allows public works to remain focused on the community was no response. If Council is supportive, staff will move forward with procurement this fall with the goal of having a contractor in place before the upcoming winter season. With that, we're happy to answer any questions and we're looking forward to Council's direction.

Thanks, Justin. Your memo was great. It was very clear, great on the background. I'm in favor of the staff recommendation as well. At that price point, I think it's the most economical and efficient way to protect the town's assets. And I think it's also something, you know, we're always looking for things we can do for Our business community, this is something that we can do to make their lives a little easier in the long run, at the same time protecting our public assets. So I'm supportive of that. Other questions or comments?

I was just curious. if it's even an option to hire somebody for the season on staff i know you guys are short-handed so i don't expect you to reallocate short resources to this but i know that you could probably benefit from having another pair of hands and they wouldn't have to shovel every day just when there's no events and you could put them to work doing something else seems like for $90,000 60,000 to $90,000. That would be a nice seasonal job for somebody. I don't know if that's a possibility or not. I'm definitely in favor of some kind of a coordinated approach though and not putting it back on the businesses. I think to David's point, it is a nice thing to provide our Midland businesses.

Thanks, Elise.

And one more thought. I would be in favor of some kind of a per event structure over just a flat fee. I'm afraid with climate change and our seasonal fluctuations and snowfall that that might be a really cushy job for somebody as a contractor.

And just a quick thing. I don't know if you said 60 to 90, but it's 6 to 9,000 per month. I just want to make sure.

Well, I did. Yeah. Yeah, I took 6,000 times. Yeah, no, I took 6,000 times six months. Well, actually, that would be 36,000. But the original 90,000 was the 15,000 that we had paid previously. Yeah, which is quite a lot.

Yeah. Yeah, 15,000 last year. Although, obviously, I understand that it was manual. Yeah. That increases the cost. But putting out snow, we got less.

Last year was an anomaly, too. Yeah. Pardon? Both times they do. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

But for this year, we recognize that hiring staff in the time frame that is at hand is probably unrealistic. So I would say for 2026, I'm in favor of the contract and then maybe looking for 2027 at whether a staff person made sense.

Sure. I think having a dedicated, whether it be a seasonal person or a contractor, is paramount. Because I call the first person in at 4 o'clock in the morning. And we just start getting after it. And if we've got, like our last contractor was Snowway, I mean, they're there. We know they're going to be there. Yeah. you know, some people don't show up and then you've got snow, you know, that freezes or thaws during the day and then freezes at night and then you get slip and falls. So it's got to be somebody that's, you know, it's going to be there. Yeah, for sure.

Days of problems if that morning is not taken care of. Yeah. Anyone else?

I prefer the contracted services on the pedestrian areas just from the point of view of getting it done and the risk involved in not getting it done. And then in terms of coordinating with the public works staff to put the snow where it needs to go, that's critical because it has to happen right after the other. And everywhere else I've ever seen anybody having business owners or residents clear their own sidewalk in front of their own property has been a complete disaster. so those guys aren't equipped we'd have we'd have 25 guys out there in front of 25 different businesses all showing up at different times and it'd be like it it's not gonna it wouldn't work and uh unfortunately we tried that effort with for many many years and decided it was too much of a hassle to try to do it we had it uh it really takes a specialty guy with specialty equipment and there's some really cool snowmobiling equipment out there now, too. Smaller, high-powered stuff that's clean, efficient. You can see what they have for equipment when you put the qualifications together because that made a big difference in one of the neighborhoods we do. It was all sweeping and blowing, not plowing and pushing. So it worked a lot better. And it was a lot more environmentally friendly, too.

Thank you. Anyone else? Otherwise, I think you've got the direction you need. Yes.

All right. We'll work on the contractor-driven, looking at the per event versus retainer, and we can talk behind the scenes about potential seasonal staff in budget out years. Okay. Thank you all very much. Thank you. Appreciate you, Justin, on this.

All right, next up, we're going to have our first council action. Item 7A is to continue public hearing and first reading of ordinance number 18, series of 2026, an ordinance of the town council of the town of Basalt, Colorado, granting special reviews, site plan review, a PUD amendment, and associated development review actions to develop a mixed-use development at 555 Basalt Avenue, Basalt, Colorado. And this is, James has this one.

They probably didn't believe we'd be on time.

I know.

Fair, fair. Last time.

So thank you. This item is a public hearing and first reading of an ordinance. It's a continued public hearing on an application submitted by MREH LLC. And it's to construct commercial storage, multifamily residential, live work spaces at 555 Midland Avenue, which is the Myers and Company property. And the process so far, as has been outlined in the prior meetings, includes land use requests requiring review by the Basalt Affordable Community Housing Commission, BOC, the Planning and Zoning Commission, and the Town Council. And it would also require subsequent subdivision review by the Town Council to condominiumize portions of the project. The application has been reviewed at four council meetings so far, with the last one being on July 14th. Since that meeting, the applicant has adjusted the application further. And specifically, there is an addendum to the application in the packet materials that starts on page 76 of your packet. It's similar in terms of the site plan and development program from the July 14th meeting. It includes still 30 residential units in the two residential buildings on the north portion of the property, as you can see there. They also still include 12 live work units that are incorporated into the storage area in the south portion of the property as well as 42 commercial storage units so those numbers haven't changed similar to the site plan you still have the two residential buildings on the northern extent and then the combination of storage and live work development on the southern portion of the property. Of the 42 units that are residential, nine are still proposed to be category price capped for sale units in the residential buildings that are on the north portion of the property. And then also in the section on the north portion of the property, six are also proposed to be primary resident RO units without appreciation caps. And then the applicant has amended the application such that the 12 live work units that are in the storage portion are all proposed to be resident occupied now. So that the total makeup of the project would be 64% being deed restricted with the nine category units and then also the additional 12 RO in the live work and the six RO in the two residential buildings. In addition, the applicant has proposed for five of the live work units. TO BE DESIGNATED WITH A LOCAL PRIORITY AS WAS DISCUSSED AT THE LAST MEETING. THERE IS SPECIFICS IN THE LOCAL PRIORITY AND THEY'RE INCLUDED IN THE MIXED USE AFFORDABILITY PLAN THAT THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED THAT IS IN YOUR PACKET MATERIALS STARTING ON PAGE 70, I'M SORRY, 66. There are also specifics in this affordability plan related to some of the other community benefit programs that are included in the packet materials. The applicants have also updated their FIU Lane proposal and it's identified in the packet materials on page 77 and page 78. The update has been to have the applicants propose to be responsible for making the full improvement to the FIU Lane to enact Charlier's recommended alternative number four up to a cost of $175,000, which is based on a cost estimate that has been done by Roaring Fork Engineering. And once again, that's included in page 77 and 78 of your packet. The applicant has also proposed to update fixing the drainage issue on Cody Lane to replace 90 feet of Cody Lane road width to improve the crown and the drainage near the intersection of the project's access road with Cody Lane, up to a cost figure of $180,000, which is based on another Roaring Fork engineering cost estimate. for the improvements. We'll let the applicant go into more detail on those revisions to their application. Staff would like to identify some adjustments that have been made to the ordinance since the last meeting. Condition number 18 that you have in the ordinance represents changes that have been made to the applicant's proposal. related to the number of affordable housing units that are included in the project. It's been updated to include the nine for sale category units, the six RO units that are in the condominium buildings, and then the 12 live work units that are now proposed to all be RO. Additionally, condition number 21 has been updated to represent the locals program that has been proposed. on five of the RO units in the live work area so that the administrative concept is as established in the affordability plan that's attached to the ordinance. Other changes that have been made to the ordinance, condition number 23, that you have in the ordinance reflects the Planning and Zoning Commission's recommended phasing of the deed restricted units, which suggests that the deed restricted units be completed proportionally and receive COs proportionally to the free market residential aspects of the project. and that all the deed restricted units would receive COs prior to a CO being issued on any of the storage units. The applicants have proposed an alternative condition related to the timing for the phasing of the project. and it's included and highlighted in your draft ordinance for discussion. It would reflect that no more than 50% of the market rate condos would be issued a CO prior to a proportional share of the COs being issued on the deed restricted condos and that all 27 of the residential units that are deed restricted would obtain a CO prior to the issuance of the final CO on a market rate unit. And then it also would identify that the issuance of COs on the residential would be proportionate to the issuance of COs on the storage component of the development. So that's a discussion item for consideration. Condition number 26 has also been updated to reflect the applicant's proposal on Phi U Lane that they would fund all of Alternative 4 improvement for Phi U Lane based on the recommendations from Jim Charlier. up to $175,000. The language also allows for the $175,000 to be contributed to another improvement if council ultimately decided that alternative four wasn't the approach that council wanted to take to Fee U Lane. Similarly, condition number 28 has been updated related to the Cody Lane drainage improvements to reflect the applicant's proposal to fix the drainage issue on Cody Lane up to 180,000. those are the main adjustments that have been made to the conditions of approval that are in your packet this evening staff would suggest hearing some comments from the applicant on their adjustments to the application in their addendum and then asking questions of staff and the applicant and then taking public comments because it is a continued public hearing. And then ultimately staff would recommend providing council discussion. Staff has identified that there are several decision options for the council this evening. Those decision options could be to either approve the ordinance on first reading and set a second reading date. You could direct amendments to the ordinance and approve it on first reading with those amendments. or you could deny the application if you're not comfortable with it or a fourth option could be to continue the public hearing and provide direction on additional information needed if council needed further information to make a decision so with that I will stop sharing my screen here And plug in the applicant's presentation. We have the applicants here this evening. We've got Justin Fries and we've got Mark Blodgett.

So good evening. For those of you that weren't here at the last meeting, my name's Mark Blodgett. I'm the owner of Meyers. I have to say, waiting in the waiting room there, I was impressed that you guys are talking about snow removal when it's 95 degrees outside. But I suppose that's forward planning. Before Justin goes through the specific changes we've made, and James has already briefly touched upon them, I just want to make a few comments here since our meeting in July. The project has evolved significantly over the past year. We now have had eight meetings with PNZ and town council, along with numerous meetings with neighbors, as well as meetings with HOA representatives. We've listened carefully to the feedback, considered the concerns that have been raised, and made a genuine effort to incorporate that input into the project. The proposal you see before you tonight is not the project we originally brought forward. It's changed substantially, as I'm sure most of you know, and in our view, it has changed for the better. We believe the result is a thoughtful balance between the character of the community, the realities of this property, and the opportunity to create something that will benefit Basalt for many years to come. We also recognize that change on this property is inevitable. The question is not whether the property will change, but what the change will look like, and whether it will ultimately contribute positively to the community. We believe this project does that. It will bring new vitality and activity and long term value to this part of Basalt, talking about the other side of the highway, while creating benefits that will endure well beyond the completion of the project. We're proud how far this proposal has come, grateful for the feedback that we've received along the way, and confident the project before you tonight is a strong outcome for the town of Basalt. So with that, I'll turn it over to Justin to briefly, because I think everybody's heard so much of this for quite some time, so we'll try to be brief.

All right, if we can jump to the next slide. Yes.

All right. Good evening, everybody. So based on previous meetings and discussion with planning and neighborhood feedback, we have revised the application further. A lot of what we're going to discuss is really refinement of the details and less so of the program on the site. And we feel these details have made a large impact towards providing further clarity from some of the discussions we've had in the past. The big items are the revised deed restrictions, the revisions to the scope of work for few and Cody Lane improvements, and the affordability program details and administration. Sorry, we were frozen. There you go. I'll check the next one. So the site plan has evolved and we've always been cognizant of the master plan. We feel it's aligned with the 2020 master plan by offering a mix of uses, providing infill development versus greenfield development, providing housing near transit, and providing affordable housing options near transit, and a mix of housing options. The only two master plan amendments that remain and we kind of discussed this at the last meeting are allowing residential in the, it's the Basalt Business Center South PUD, which is an industrial zone district. That currently doesn't allow residential, but the housing mitigation from the zoning code requires housing with any new development. And then it also requires an amendment to the master plan from an existing use to a mixed use, which is part of the master plan. So in previous discussion, we talked about providing kind of an outline of how this plan has evolved over time. In your packets, there's this same chart. I'm sorry, I got squeezed a little bit in here. But starting with our first planning and zoning meeting, we had three multi-story buildings with 48 units, 12 of which were deed restricted to be affordable and 54 storage units. Over that timeline, the next meeting with planning and zoning, we revised the architecture. We also revised the configuration and we limited certain industrial uses in the industrial zone to make it less intense. From there, we proceeded with Bach, which both Bach and PNZ requested more affordable housing units. So coming out of those meetings, we had increased the overall amount coming into our first meeting with planning. We went from I believe it was 25% to jumping up to 26%. And then our first city council meeting. I say it might be out of sorts, but from PNZ approval to city council presentation, we jumped from 26% to 50% affordable housing. That was with the three buildings and 48 units. From there, there was comments about density and the overall Intensity of development so we eliminated one building But in that elimination have always maintained that 50% affordable housing so less units, but still maintaining that amount and then The last two meetings with council we have since added the live work component of which all 12 are now deed restricted So that number starting at 25% is now at 64% deed restricted units in one fashion or another. And it's a mix of studio, one bedroom, two bedroom, and live work units for the residential components that have a deed restriction on them. And then I'll just point to the chart in the middle. I think this was mentioned in the last meeting. This is our estimate of just improvement costs and fees associated with the development currently as we're estimating them. That is cost for improvement of few, cost for improvement of COTI, permitting, plan review fee, water tap fees, water fees, and RETA taxes. And right now it's right around 2.7 million or so to the overall cost of the development. I'll jump to the next one. So here we have the evolved site plan. The biggest change from the previous is the deed restriction of all of the live work units to primary resident or employer owned employee housing. And then five of those would also have the rider of the locals program. We still maintain the two commercial spaces in the mixed-use buildings that would be prioritized to nonprofits, government-serving or community-serving users for purchase. So this is again a chart you've seen before just with updates that with the live work deed restrictions were now at 64% overall affordable housing ratio with the 12 live work and the 15 for sale condominium units and that exceeds both BCC and Jadwin which were at 50% in their applications. And I guess I'll also point out on that one real quick. We did, with the removal of that third multi-story building, the open space is now at 25% of the site. The minimum open space is 10%. And the allowable FAR, Florida Area Ratio, is actually 2 to 1 of the site. So we are, with this Right around I think we're at point three of F.A.R. of the site so you know it could be developed much more intensely but as we've discussed traffic is one of those limiting factors with the development plan. This is our industrial warehouse page, just noting that we now have deed restricted 15 of the units to industrial use, three to flex, craftsman, maker, or incubator spaces, and an additional 12 would be a locals first storage type use, leaving just 12 free market storage warehouse units of the 42. That is 71% deed restricted of the overall warehouse units. So since the last meeting, what we've provided to James to provide additional clarity is a housing plan. It's not just a housing plan. It's an affordability plan because it's both commercial and residential. It outlines how it will be marketed in the presale. So it would be 120 days locally. 30 days. Sorry, I got to get this right. We, um, cause we updated it to match the basalt occupancy priorities. So priority one would get their first kind of bite of the apple during presale, then priority two. So critical town, uh, town employees, then critical employees, then basalt employees, then non-essential basalt employees matching the priority guidelines. And that would happen at the presale and then also at certificate of occupancy. We created that phase over again in a condensed timeline. And then we also added that at resale to the units. So in perpetuity, you keep getting that bite at the apple for local residents, local employees to get a chance at purchasing both the commercial units and the housing units. We've also added that in the initial sales period the sales team the real estate agents would handle applications documentation and getting that information to the city and then from there out the HOA would be required to add a property manager that would then manage that eligibility requirements to basically streamline to the city what they're receiving as a package so that they can approve in a timely manner and that doesn't burden timelines there. Okay, so we have few lane. Excuse me. After reviewing this with Roaring Fork Engineers, we looked at both of the improvements at Few and Cody. This is Few Lane to complete the Charlier Option 4. And so that is the two red arrows would create a one-way street from the Somerset intersection down to Allison Lane. The estimated cost came in around $175,000. That is to provide curb and gutter. along the south side of the property, or the north side of Few Lane. That is to remove asphalt to the center line of the street and repave. That is to revegetate along that property line and then also create the soft path along the buildings. And in addition to that, we have added in the scope that it would take in that red dashed highlighted area to complete Somerset Lane, which right now is a one-way street with a concrete pan for water and then a bike path. So that would be continued north to the intersection. And that is that clearing and grubbing and asphalt road estimate on there. The developer is proposing to provide a financial bond for the scope of all of that work to be completed as a part of this development project to make sure that the full option gets installed.

I'll jump to the next page.

And so this is the exhibit we've shown before on Cody Lane. There is a very faint purple square over the sidewalk and the drive access. This is the CDOT access that would be a 20 foot asphalt road and a five foot attached sidewalk that would wrap around and attach to the RAFTA ADA ramp that crosses Cody Lane. And then the diagonal square is what, after looking at it with rowing fork, there seems to be a crown that's happening right at the intersection of the access and, um, and Cody. And so it would require flattening that. And for just fail safe, we ended up saying to replace the full cross section of the street to make sure that we could get grading, uh, appropriate versus just going to the center line at that point. And we believe that that should help to solve the drainage issues that are happening there. There are two inlets kind of at the top and the bottom left of the square that both go into little drainage detentions. The top one goes into the drainage ditch there and the bottom one goes into a bit of a swale that looks like a holding pond. that Anthony from Roaring Fork recommended. We kind of cut it at those two inlets there. And so that is the resulting scope. And again, the developer is proposing to pay for all of those improvements as a part of that, provide financial surety at time of building permit. Thank you. So in summary, we believe the improvements to FEW and COTI and the surety to complete them, along with the evolution of the plan to provide locals programs, flex space generators, some light industrial use spaces on a small scale, And also the affordability definitions and the evolution of the plan over time to provide more affordable units, along with providing affordable units near transit, are really the key components to this plan and its evolution. And from there, I will open it up for any questions you have of us.

Thank you. Before we do questions, as is typical for us, I'd like to do public comment. So we'll go ahead and open the public hearing. Remember, the same ground rules as public comment at the beginning. Three minutes, give your name, address, write it in the back of the room, all that good stuff. And I'll go ahead and open the floor here. Anyone would like to come up and speak?

Don't turn it off until I get my mic set.

No, I got you. I got you.

Sorry, John.

That's OK, Bill. I get on that side.

Hi. You know who I am, Stacy Stokes. I live on Few Lane. I don't have any problem with the development of 555. In fact, I think it's going to do something that it's at least permanent there, because otherwise, we don't know what's going to happen there. However, I was under the impression that on Few Lane, there was going to be a hard path, not a soft path, because that's just going to bring mud into the road. We also need trees along that way. And my other comment that I just thought of is I think we need to have a timeline, if it's approved, on construction. I think that it needs to be done in a timely manner. happen. There's a development down over here on 82. I have a friend moving into it. It's three months behind. So people don't have housing because they were told they could move in and they can't move in because the developers just kind of wishy washy. So I think that's an important piece is a timeline for construction. I do think that the hard path is essential because then that if you lane is made one way, that gives us a two-way in and out in an emergency situation or if basalt avenue has to be closed so those are my main comments i actually think the development is going to be fine because it stops an industrial building being in there and then we have trucks and tractors and everything else which already basalt avenue isn't in great shape because of all the trucks and traffic and there's potholes and there's rocks and there's divots and there's trash and the whole thing so hopefully this development will actually clean up that area a little bit so um and i live right near it so i think it's also going to stop a lot of the dust blowing into our neighborhood and it's going to give people housing and if there's enough if there's something this town does need it is a place for people to operate a business because a lot of the people are going all the way to rifle to store their lawnmowers or whatever when they and have to come up to aspen or basalt every day so thank you again for listening bye thank you for your comments it's resetting come on

Thank you. My name is John Fitzpatrick. I'm the president of the Basalt Business Center East Homeowners Association. This development will have a significant impact on to us on Cody Lane. Just adding the amount of vehicles that are going to come off of, you know, a large housing development. It's going to add substantial traffic to the intersections of Cody Lane, Basalt Avenue, all ending in an overloaded intersection at Highway 82. I feel there should be no more development on the south side until a second form of egress another intersection that gets to Southside is completed done and then we can move forward with any more development over there. And then I was also feel that when we add residential to a existing industrial zone. We just, we mix things and it takes away from the limited amount of industrial that's out there. You know, I've been at every meeting all the way through either Zoom or back and the main thing I've said, we've got to straighten out another entrance onto Highway 82 that gets into Southside. Thank you.

Thank you for your comments. Anyone else? I see someone online. We can go online. Brandon Weinstock online. Go ahead and give you a minute.

Hi, Brandon. If you would like to make comments, please unmute.

Thank you. Can you hear me? Yes. It's a little soft, so I might speak up or get closer to the mic. Can you hear me now? A little better.

Yeah. Do your best. OK, thank you. Good evening, Mayor Knight and members of the council. My name is Brandon Weinstock. I'm a property owner at 336. Allison Lane, Unit B in Southside. I have followed this application closely and spoken before and I am here again on this proposed development. I support housing on this site. I want to be clear about that, but I am opposed to this project. This is not the highest and best use of this property. I am asking you to deny this application and to recognize that this parcel deserves a better plan than the one in front of you. My central objection is the storage. This proposal is built around 42 storage and warehouse units. The applicant has told you that so much of it must remain storage only in order to stay within the road network's capacity. Think about what that admission means. The storage is not there because it serves Southside, it is there because the site cannot support the traffic of a more vibrant community serving use. That is a symptom that the project is the wrong fit for this parcel. A property at the gateway to Southside should not be anchored by storage units. The master plan envisions this site as an integrated live work and community serving space, the kind of vitality we see in Willits. And this points to something larger. Southside has changed significantly since the 2020 master plan was written. This area needs a new vision developed with the community, not a property-specific amendment to fit one application. This parcel will redevelop eventually, so the choice is not this project or nothing. This is a discretionary decision. Meeting their criteria on paper is the floor, not a mandate to approve. A denial is harder than an approval, but you are deciding what sits at the entrance to Southside for the next 75 years. Two specific requests, however, if this does move forward in any form. The fence. On July 14th, the applicant's architect said on the record that they are open to providing a fence along Fiu Lane. But the draft ordinance still contains no condition requiring it, and the applicant's own narrative still lists its removal. We do not want to see this project as we drive in and out of our neighborhood. So I ask that the offer be written in as a binding condition with three parts. The existing fence retained or an equivalent barrier built upon completion. that the applicant include the south side hoa in the design of that barrier and that the applicant and any future owner be responsible for maintaining it in perpetuity second few lane and somerset mayor knight you said converting somerset from a trail to a road is a significant community decision that deserves its own public process i agree the draft ordinance still assumes alternative four which makes fu one way and turns somerset into a road i asked the council to substitute an alternative that keeps vu two-way and leaves somerset a path The applicant has improved the housing and I respect that work but a better housing package does not fix a project whose core is storage. This neighborhood did not ask for and I ask you to deny it. Thank you. Thank you for your comments.

All right, anyone else online or in the room? All right, I'll go ahead and close the public hearing. 723, I didn't give you a time, Pam, on the opening.

Thank you. That's 715.

All right. So opening the floor to questions and comments from my fellow counselors.

I'll start off with just the fence. What would remind me? What did we decide about the fence?

So there's currently the fence there. It's kind of in a falling down state. And so then it was raised as a neighborhood concern. We would be open to adding that. We We just need to provide fire access. James, I think the last time we were going to reach out to Brooke at Roaring Fork Fire, but we don't have an answer on that because the fire needs the ability to pull a truck up and fight fire there. whether it be gates or something like that, that could be an option. It's kind of tricky because the soft path or the path needs to be adjacent to buildings for fire to fight along the buildings. And so you would have fence and then you would have 20 feet or 10 to 15 feet of landscape and then you'd have this path against the building that the neighborhood would be using to circulate with so if a fence was desired as an option the applicants have multiple times said would be open to adding it as a condition but it just kind of with new landscape with pedestrian users using that path either walking and riding bikes for whatever it seemed kind of Redundant but if it's about shielding and screening the building they would be open to that Yeah, I guess I just I know that there's been mixed Requests from

the residents of that area as far as we would prefer landscaping we would prefer fencing but i think if if it's going to be something that we're going to ask the applicants to do, we should make a decision on that.

There is, can we jump back to that few lane slide? Sure. There is towards the kind of where Somerset dies in, there's like 10 evergreen trees there that we're trying to preserve as part of the plan, which are some of the taller ones right there. And so. That one.

And so as it stands as strong, it would be, Maybe the significant screening, landscaping, looking at the backside of storage units. So again, excuse me, as it's drawn right now, It proposes removing the dilapidated fence and adding significant screening landscaping that then would screen the backside of storage units. Correct.

Correct. And if you look at our property line in this drawing, that's about where the fence is right now. And so the fence is being removed and you're creating 20 feet of landscape and a path. The building setback in that area is 30 feet. And so you've got 20, 20, 25 feet of landscape and then the path.

and a lot of existing trees.

Those are the really light ones by that block of blue, kind of where James's arrow is right now. And then the landscape architect has proposed based on the basalt zoning code, the new planting plan along the I'll call it the southern portion of the fueling.

Yeah, I mean, my personal I tend to think that's a much nicer option, but I also don't live in Southside.

James, did we pass the I'm getting my municipalities confused. Did we pass the fire wise codes?

We did the fire resiliency code for the state. We passed it.

And so some of that might actually dictate this anyway.

Yep. So we're aware that has passed since we started in the process. So this would need to be revised somewhat. The good thing is we have a pretty good defensible barrier so we can push any plantings of trees kind of out or limit that. I do believe there's probably a landscape plan in there with Some boulders, some shrubs that can make that path a little bit more welcoming and meandering in that area. Also, these buildings are just in their use, need to be sprinkled. So they would be fire sprinkled and fire retardant buildings with metal as siding.

I'm just more thinking about the planting, the screening, the fencing. None of that can be within five feet of the building no matter what.

Which that path pushes, that takes care of that. And we actually, I mean, we do have the room to make it a little bit wider to make a kind of a more generous path if that was of consideration.

I think that the planting for screening is just more neighborly than a fence. And I know it might be hard to get your mind around that since you've had the fence. But at the end, I think shrubs and boulders and trees would be nicer.

Oh, yeah, I mean, I agree. I just want to acknowledge the comments from local residents that seem to want to keep the fence and that are we just hearing that we're not hearing enough of people who prefer for the fence to go away. It's hard. It's difficult to know in this case.

Yeah, I'm along the same lines of I think I, if that were me, I'd probably prefer having some assurance of like an amount of screening from shrubs, from bushes, from things like that, but I'd love to get a better sense from the HOA and neighbors, like how proportional is what we're hearing to what the neighbors are thinking.

And I can tell you the first city or neighbor comment was from the large triangle lot right? Nope, the other way. That's her property right there. It has not raised any concern about wanting a fence there or not.

That's her lot, right?

Yep.

Yep. To be open.

That's Stacy's property, Stacy Stokes. Yep.

other questions comments i have some um okay so to make sure that i understand about the community serving commercial spaces so let's say that one of them is purchased outside of that 90-day window right by somebody who is not local When they go to sell it, you're saying it goes back through that local waterfall?

Correct. In a condensed manner because it's a resale versus the window we have for presale and certificate of occupancy. So it would go back through that community eligibility requirements program and market it to that.

Thank you.

And that's the 30 days then?

Correct.

great um yeah i do appreciate having that timeline for the pre-sale and then a second opportunity let's see i think my my only issues are with the phasing schedule i don't think that the live work spaces spaces should count toward deed restricted you know in the phasing schedule um you know they're not deed restricted units and i don't think it should count toward the completion of true deed restricted units i think that your phasing schedule is a little lax um that lets affordable housing take a back seat in the phasing I'm not sure if your phasing schedule is based more on your financing. But that was my takeaway from reading your phasing schedule. I think if we did proceed with the project that the affordable units should be our primary focus as a council. So I would rather see those units linked up one to one with the free market units as they get CO. And I could be amenable to no storage COs until deed restricted units reaches a minimum threshold, if that's more helpful to your phasing. I went and rewatched the presentation that Mr. Curtis did from Kenley Horne of the traffic study today. at Gloria's recommendation. Thank you, Gloria. I was just trying to pull it from my brain and it wasn't there. So I went back and watched it. And compared that against, you know, the master plan. And anyone feel free to stop me if I'm misunderstanding any of this. But my understanding is that the master plan states if we're going to develop over there, we can approve redevelopment when it results in approximately the same number of vehicular trips entering and exiting the redevelopment site and is generally consistent with the existing land use patterns. Mr. Curtis stated that In his estimation, he is assuming that 24 of the units, so that's more than half, right, are high use and that it still resulted in four less morning trips and one less afternoon trip. And after revisiting that, you know, I feel confident in his estimation that it's going to be kind of net zero there as far as the traffic goes. And then I think, you know, the improvements to Cody and Few Lane would be, you know, fantastic improvements for the neighborhood. so with that in addition to the affordable housing in the workspace i i really i do think this project has come a long way and i think that it could be a good fit for the neighborhood that's all i have for now thank you i too revisited the master plan

And I think the thing that really struck me is how similar the programming is. Of the Myers property to what was called a lot J. In the master plan in terms of affordable housing, some live work. And. In the master plan, it identifies up to 50 units of housing to be added without triggering the need for some kind of underpass or separate egress. And I do want to acknowledge that that is really important. That is not on you as the developer. We do need to figure that out. And it feels like where we've gotten to in this conversation as really close to what was proposed for Lot J, you just got here first. And so I've kind of just sort of twisted my head around thinking, okay, we're not going to be able to have the bandwidth of the carrying capacity of the town resources to do a lot j also but they're not here you're here so with that i'm feeling better much better about this development I think the only thing that I would note is that in the consideration of Lot J on Southside development, they did mention having like some kind of a small bodega type grocery thing. This is like one of the things that I harp on. I'm just going to admit it. but like it is a pain to haul down to city market to get eggs so like having something local that just a small bodega there's one in basalt base village where you can just get a couple of basic things I would even be willing to give up some of that 800 square feet of commercial and the mixed use for something like that that would be community serving so

You're talking about one of the two units that we have in, which I think would be a good idea, actually.

I don't know how the rest of Council feels, but I just noted that that was something that was mentioned in the master plan for the Lot J development and it kind of was like, yeah, that makes sense now that we have the 27 additional units of Basalt Vista, 113 units in Stotts Mill, and then as you're proposing 42 additional units, it would be a nice place to grab a soda.

That could be added to part of the community serving the restrictions that if a bodega wanted to to purchase that to use it as such and that could just be in addition to nonprofits government serving we could add in.

My turn to my fellow counselors to see if there's an option that would be hesitant to making that use a requirement for any amount of square footage just because So we do have, just under the pedestrian underpass at least, right, we have the convenience store, which has quite a, you know, I think a good offering, and then we are going to have something right here, right, as part of the requirement, which I realize isn't like super close, but it's a lot closer than City Market, and isn't a whole lot further than just like me and Elbrun, So, like I said, I have no issue with adding it as an option for some of that square footage for those spaces, but I wouldn't want to make it a requirement because it could be that there isn't actually enough density in our town for the center. That's not in whatever is over there at the round about this new convenience store. This new market, you know, to support it all. That would be my concern. But I think it's a good idea to add it as an option.

Others. Throw some thoughts out. So I appreciate all the changes, all the work you put into it, meeting out eight meetings with council and PNZ and HOA. That's a lot. But unfortunately, I think tonight's the night to say no. I think that I just can't find that this project can be compatible with the neighborhood. I think there are significant impacts to the surrounding area that aren't fully mitigated. I think the community benefits are overstated for a lot of reasons that have already been addressed. And the only new one I'll add tonight is I just think the live work housing does not meet the livability standards that we should expect. So I think we should deny it. I do go by this property almost every day. So I don't share Brandon's feeling about the fence or some of the other comments we've heard about the fence, but I do echo what Brandon said there at the end. I think this parcel deserves better than the plan that's in front of us. So I would vote to deny.

Thanks, Craig. Who else hasn't gone yet? Who wants to go?

I have a couple questions. And I went back, I apologize for missing July, but I went back and watched that meeting. And sorry if I missed this, but one of the things that was talked about is the egress. And where is that currently in the phasing? I think one thing we've heard is getting people out if there's a fire, and if that could be towards the beginning of the fire, or not the fire, beginning of the project. That would make me feel pretty good about it.

Originally, we submitted a construction management plan. The access to CDOT would be utilized as part of a construction management plan, entering onto Few, exiting Cody, and then exiting out to Highway 82. The completion of Cody would have to coincide with the completion of any CEOs certificate of occupancies of the residential units. So they would be paired up together. The final paving sidewalk and improvements to Cody on that side. Similarly, few lane and that access that would be tied to a certificate of occupancy on the warehouse side.

Okay, thank you. Apologies if I'm missing this one, but is it all electric or is there a gas line into the building? I know they're plumbed for kitchens, but I wasn't sure.

Currently, we really haven't evolved the design that far. It could be all electric. Most building codes are going to that. The state NEC code is going towards that. And so it would likely end up as such. Also, the roofs of the warehouse would be solar ready and provide a pretty large footprint for that as well. And the residential units could have that as well. It's just the offset of how much roof footprint they have versus the building would be kind of a minimal trade-off, but they could be solar ready as well.

If you guys would be willing to make commitments to be all electric, I think that's where, like you said, that's where building codes are going anyway as part of this multi-jurisdictional process. And certainly one of the reasons I ran for council was to act with some urgency on climate.

What is the objection to gas, though?

Think carbon emissions regionally there about our missions about 2 thirds of them come from from buildings and so for our region having Holy Cross energy is our utility going towards a 100% clean energy means that that that building or all electric development would have no carbon footprint.

Is it dark sky compliant, yes, great any any site lighting would be dark sky.

Great. Thank you. You all mentioned that you wouldn't be the developer. Who would be the developer?

My understanding is they've been in talks with a few developers just because of the overall size of the project, but haven't settled in on any specific person at this time.

Are those folks local, not local?

Definitely.

You can just repeat it, paraphrase it. What she was just saying is we've had interests from industrial buyers.

where it wouldn't require entitlements. It's hard to have real discussions with developers, even if we're involved until we've achieved the entitlements. But some of the people that, I mean, people have approached us over the years. James knows this. We talked to James probably three and a half years ago originally. So we've had unsolicited interest in the property both from developers that live in the valley as well as one developer that doesn't live here but has a home here.

Sorry, I know I guess I have to get up. We haven't talked to anyone, any developer that doesn't have any local presence for what it's worth, but we have marketed it either.

Yeah. Okay. I think it would be nice to know as those conversations progress, but I also get like you can't get too far down that road before knowing what you've got. Do you guys have any examples of the locals first sale of the efficacy of that. I think I asked because the only examples I've seen haven't actually landed with locals, so I appreciate the creativity, but I'm trying to think of what will actually happen and if that would actually end up with a local, given that there's no price cap.

Currently, we don't have. We're kind of following the Jadwin project and what they've offered as locals, but also looked at Eagle County, Pitkin County, Crested Butte and San Miguel for the different counties and what they offer as deed restricted priorities. And as a response to some of the comments we've gotten in the past, we felt that that would be. good program and an enforceable program and then with the renewal of it at resale and marketing it twice so not just at pre-sale but also at certificate of occupancy kind of creates multiple capture points versus you know putting a shovel in the ground pre-sale marketing it for 120 days and nobody knowing about the project we feel the outline on that creates new kind of entry points to try and catch that multiple times

Got it. Those were all my questions.

Do you have anything? Take a motion. Nobody else has any. I have a comment, but I don't really have any questions.

What are your comments?

Well, my comment is thank you for complying with the town's master plan, which has long stated that density near mass transit and respect for the ESAs and community amenities and benefits and pedestrian improvements and safety things and All those site improvements we asked for, all the infrastructure, but that's just the common thread of what we asked for in the land use process. It's not anything that's particularly unusual or not specific in terms of what we're looking for for land use. So you've done a great job addressing all those things. I think there was a bigger vision for the south side in the first place, which included an underpass. pedestrian connection that wasn't over here. There was a direct shot and I'm what I'm hearing and thank you for allowing us to have the discussion a little bit longer. Because I've kind of wrapped my head around a couple things. One is that the congestion issue that's happening on Highway 82. The Mid Valley is now being targeted as the source of the congestion. So I have a different opinion about that. And I don't want to add to the conversation anymore about what the mid-valley growth is doing to the valley total. I also think that When the high school decided to move out there, the vision was that we were going to have a transit corridor on the Rio Grande right away. And that didn't come to fruition. And that was also connected to this idea of a second access, second egress from the south side and make basalt connected. Right now, this is a ridiculous intersection that we have here. And it was plan B and we're still talking about plan B on the other side of highway 82 and I'm not really ready to go there. I think we've lost a couple of opportunities to achieve the vision that we had out there. I think this is a good project. I just think that timing wise it's it's I also look through the referral comments again and there's some things in there that demonstrate that the lack of infrastructure that is out there in terms of maybe taps that you have to pay for up front, pedestrian improvements that have to happen to few lane and around that area to make people happy. There's a significant amount of work to make it a neighborhood before it even has a development. And I don't see how that fits into the program at all. So my point of view here, I guess, is I'm with Greg. I don't really have an interest in making you guys jump through any more hoops. I think that if you have someone that wants to – you've got seven people that are going to vote for it, so you don't – you'll see how the vote goes but that's kind of where i'm at i think if we had a more programmed approach to what we needed to provide what we need to provide out there now then you know maybe it would work but i don't see this project happening for five six seven years and you know you talk about development versus investors there are a lot of people that want to invest here because it is easy to get a return quickly on anything you do around here. And that's been stated over and over again. So I think that's, you know, part of a pushback on my part here on this is just to suggest that there are needs other places that we need to accomplish. This is not one of the priorities for me. But I really appreciate what you've done. You set the tone for a development that could work given the appropriate infrastructure.

Thanks, Rick. I'll make some comments here, and then I guess we could do a motion after that. Appreciate what you guys have put into the application up to this point and all the amendments and revisions. I think from a affordable housing standpoint, there is a lot of good stuff in here. However, I still go back to some of the similar points to what Greg and Rick have, but specifically the master plan talks about protecting the industrial areas and providing a job housing balance. Salt Business Center should be maintain its zoning. Doesn't envision any additional housing or adding any housing into this area or not additional any housing in this area than that allowed by the current zoning. So I think the issues that come up here is it's out of character with that spot. It's an industrial spot. People aren't living there now. You guys know I love affordable housing. I just don't think this is the right place to do this project. I don't think it fits with what's there now. What fits there now, if you walked up and somebody said, hey, there's a steel fabrication, they'd be like, wait, really? It's next to a neighborhood? But it fits. Everything works there right now as it is. I don't see this. improving that I see this being detrimental to the overall South Side neighborhood. So I'm going to be not supporting this application respectfully.

Mayor, I move that the Town Council approve ordinance number 18 series of 2026 on first reading and set the public hearing and second reading for August 25th, 2026. Second.

It's been moved and seconded. Pam, will you please call the roll?

Absolutely. Let's begin with Angel Dupre-Bouchard.

Yes.

Greg Schaffran.

No.

David Knight.

No.

Elise Huddle.

Yes.

Hannah Berman.

Yes.

Angela Anderson.

Yes.

Rick Stevens.

No.

Four to three. Motion carries.

all right we'll see you guys next time thanks for your presentation thank you any uh takeaways or i guess you kind of offset your comments as far as what we can make amendment wise or changes or conditions you want to see that could improve the proposal as we come back okay thank you

All right. Next up, we have item 7B, which is a public hearing and second reading of ordinance number 15, series of 2026, an ordinance of the Town Council of the Town of Passau, Colorado, granting a PUD amendment to amend the allowables total square footage at 7039 Hillcrest Drive to 5,474 total square feet, Passau, Colorado.

Thank you. We have the applicant here again this evening. We've got Glenn Yeager. We'll just pause for a second. Okay, are we good? This is a continued public hearing and second reading of an ordinance for consideration of a PUD amendment request submitted by Glenn and Laura Yeager to increase the allowable total floor area on the property at 739 Hillcrest Drive to above the town-wide maximum of 5,000 total square foot. to a proposed 5474 total square feet. In order to accommodate the expansion of the first floor of the existing residence by a 605 square foot addition to allow for it to be retrofitted with a first floor bedroom and bathroom that will be accessible for the applicant's mother that has recently become wheelchair bound. The application discusses that the applicants believe that the additional square footage is a reasonable accommodation under the Fair Housing Act, as was discussed at the last meeting. And as was discussed at first reading the review, in terms of evaluating the request, staff consulted with the town attorney about what constitutes a reasonable accommodation under the Fair Housing Act. And the town attorney's office provided a memo that was in your first reading packet. It's once again in your packet today on page 82, I believe. And as was discussed at the first reading, the memo outlines what is believed to be a reasonable accommodation is qualified by three factors. One, whether the accommodation would undermine the legitimate purpose of the zoning requirements. Number two, whether there would be consideration of the benefits that the accommodation would provide to the handicapped individual. And then number three, whether alternatives exist to accommodate the, accomplish the benefits more efficiently. And council discussed the merits of those three items as part of the first reading review on July 14th and approved the ordinance on first reading. There have not been any substantive changes to the ordinance since first reading, and it was noted that the P&Z supported the request and recommended approval with the conditions that you have in the draft ordinance. So this evening, staff would suggest taking additional comments that the applicant has, taking public comments as it is a continued public hearing. and providing council discussion. If you're comfortable, you could make a motion to approve. And once again, as I noted, we do have the applicant here. We've got Glenn Yeager with us. Glenn, do you have any additional comments for the town council?

Only if you have questions. Just here to answer any questions you have.

We'll go ahead and do the public hearing. Is this a public hearing opening at 7.57? I don't see anybody in the room who will come up, who would come up rather. Anyone online? I'm not sure we're going to get any there either.

If you're online and you would like to provide comments, please raise your hand.

Okay. So we can go ahead and close the public hearing. And questions or comments for James or the applicant? Elise.

Can you please explain again why the proposed unit is not ADA compliant?

All the bedrooms are on the second floor.

No, sorry, the new square footage.

It's the bathroom. There's a chair, I think, a bathroom. Oh, the toilet. Toilet, yeah. Right.

The commercial ADA rules are for a person who can transfer on their own. My mother cannot transfer. We have a Sarah Steady lift that we use. And so when we designed the bathroom, we met with Shirley Ryan Ability Lab where she does her therapy. and laid out the safest, most efficient way to toilet her. If I had to demonstrate it, she's on a lift, and the lift has to go in, and then she gets seated onto the toilet. So that's how she toilets. She doesn't come in a wheelchair, do the transfer, where you would need more room on the side. It's a straight shot in. So that's... That's why it was designed that way. If you have other therapists or rehabilitation people who think otherwise, we would certainly discuss it with them. But this is the safest and most efficient way to toilet my mom.

And if I'm if I may I'll just add from a legal standpoint the ADA is separate from the FHA. So here we're looking at this application in terms of the Fair Housing Act which regulates private residential properties. The ADA mainly governs places of public accommodation. and so this application, this residence would not fall under that. Fair Housing Act is looking for reasonable accommodations for the specific individual with the disability and that is based off of the person's medical request. As the applicant explained, the application would address the specific person with the disability and what their needs are.

Okay, thank you for the clarification. And then can you also address why you can't do a lift on the stairs?

It's not efficient for safety. The number one priority is the safety of my mom. And using a lift when she has no mobility, none. We can't transfer her into a lift to go upstairs.

So it's not the functionality of the lift?

No, it's not an option.

Other questions or comments? Otherwise, I would entertain a motion.

I appreciate what you do, Mr. Yeager. I think it's a noble thing. I don't think this sets a precedent. I think that I do not want to be in the way or impeding you taking care of your mother. So I'm in complete support. I don't think this does set a precedent. I think this is the type of thing that we should be allowing. Thank you.

I'd echo that. I've been dealing with a lot of senior care this week so and I just read the Age of Dignity which I would recommend to anyone listening about how much better aging in place is for people's health and their dignity and their longevity and that is a massive undertaking for the family and I really respect that and I'm starting to learn how much work and effort and energy that takes. So while I want to make it clear for the record that this does not set precedent, there's great data from the Pitkin County 2050 study on how much more intensive larger homes are in terms of traffic and carbon emissions. This is the reason to expand a home to make sure someone can take care of an aging family member and I want to support that.

Thank you.

I'm not unsympathetic. I just think that a home that already has such a huge amount of square footage that there's probably a way to do it. I mean, I have 994 square feet in my ground level and it has two bedrooms and a very large living area and room for a kitchenette so I just it's hard for me to wrap my head around the need for actually adding 474 more square footage and not being willing to do the trade-off of cutting off some of the upstairs square footage That's just, I'm the bad guy.

No, I hear you at least. I don't like it either, but that's where I just look at this and I think that this is a unique circumstance. I don't like that either. I think if it was a different circumstance, a different case, I would 100% be on that same boat. I don't love it, but I appreciate what you're doing.

And we have a nice test here in the Fair Housing Act to kind of make this makes it easier for us. I mean, so I like the one of the accommodation under my legitimate purposes. No benefits would provide the handicapped individual. Yeah, they would. And alternatives exist. I think it sounds like you guys have exhausted them. This is the best alternative. Yes. So that helps clarify for me anyway.

Yeah, I think that on the third one, it's not whether alternatives exist, but whether alternatives exist to accomplish the benefits more efficiently. And I think for me, that's the kicker. Do alternatives exist? Absolutely. In my opinion, would the other alternatives justify, you know, is it justified to ask the Yeagers to kind of, you know, make a huge, sacrifices, if you will, to accommodate them. And that's where it seems like this is a fair ask in this situation. And legally, I mean, we have, it's very clear that this does not set a precedent and that we reserve the right to review all of any other future cases that would come before us individually and against the same criteria. So, yeah. May I move the Town Council adopt ordinance number 15, series of 2026 on second reading? Second.

It's been moved and seconded. Pam, will you please call the roll?

Absolutely. Let's begin with Greg Schaffran.

Yes.

David Knight.

Yes.

Elise Hoddle. No. Anna Berman?

Yes.

Angela Anderson? Yes. Rick Stevens?

He had to run out.

He's out of the room. I'm sorry. I didn't realize that. Angel Dupree-Bouchard? Yes. So motion carries 5 to 1 at this point. Thank you.

All right. Good luck with your project and with your mom. Next up, we have item seven C, which is public hearing and first reading. We're just number 20 series of 2026. Or this is the town council town of salt Colorado referring to the registered electors of the town of the salt or new election. You know the 3rd 2026 a ballot issue to increase sales tax by 0.5% saying the ballot title and content for the ballot issue and providing other matters related to the election and I think we have Gloria Doug and probably Harper.

Yeah, thank you. I do have a slide to pull up. Can you let me share my screen here.

Yes.

I also sent it to you.

You can go ahead and share your screen because you're a panelist.

Okay, excellent. Thank you. No, it won't let me. Well, I was trying to save James from trying to pull up another slide deck.

Let me try this real quick. I can promote you.

I got it, thank you.

You should be able to share. Got it here.

see if it's coming up yeah it came up excellent okay so before you all tonight is the ballot language presented on first reading for 0.5 percent sales tax to fund the financing of a public service facility that would house our Public Works and Police Department the project is estimated at about 25 million and we anticipate borrowing around 18 million for the project As it is currently drafted, the tax, the 0.5% tax, would sunset after the loan is paid off. This was a change from our previous direction after hearing public comments as we've been going out into the community at Sunday Market, at the events. And that was one thing that was asked is why can't this sunset? And so that's why it's drafted this way. And for an example, Pickens' current rate is up here at, so we have two tax rates in the town of Basalt. And this would be the impact for both of those tax rates as shown here. So if you had a $10 purchase, currently you're paying 99 cents in tax and so future would be a dollar and one cent in tax so and then an eagle you're currently paying for a $10 purchase you're paying about 85 cents in tax and then future um with this tax would be a 0.95 cents so the nine 95 cents yeah in tax so that's uh that's how it's drafted right now and i would open it up for any questions or um comments

Nothing for me, but this is a public hearing. Let's do that really quick, then we can make comments. 808, I'm opening the public hearing. Anybody has any comments? I mean, there's no one in the room anymore who would make comments. If you want to raise your hand online if you're interested in making a public comment about item 7C. Please do so. Seeing none, I'll close public hearing at 8 or 9. And, Angela, what do you got?

My only comment would be to encourage anybody who is listening or watching this meeting to take advantage of the public tours that RVPD or Public Works are offering or town staff are offering if you want to see current conditions and better inform yourself why this is important.

And if you don't take the public tour, you can watch like any kidnapping movie and like the abandoned warehouse in that movie is basically their office right now.

I do have an entire presentation, but I thought I'd spare you all and get to the chase on this one.

Mayor, I move that the town council approve ordinance number 20, series of 2026 on first reading and set the public hearing and second reading for August 25th, 2026. Second.

It's been moved and seconded. All those in favor, please signify by saying aye.

Aye.

All right. Thanks a lot. One step closer. All right. Next up, we have item 7D. And we are right on time. Nice work, everybody. Item 7D, public hearing and first reading ordinance number 21, series of 2026, ordinance of the Town Council of the Town of Passau, Colorado, authorizing the financing of the acquisition of certain real property, including six housing units in the construction, equipping, remodeling, and improvement of certain capital assets in the town and in connection therewith, authorizing the subsequent leasing of certain town property and the execution and delivery by the town of a site lease, a lease purchase agreement, and other documents related to the financing. And this is, I'm assuming, Doug. Yeah. Sounds like it has your fingerprints on it.

Right. I'll take it from here. So for the benefit of the council, we did close on the six units last week on Wednesday. So we did get those. We should have got the keys today. We got one of them. Yeah. So we did a walkthrough. We're going to be now marketing them to the pecking order of people for renting those units. And so what we're asking for tonight is further direction. There's further approval to proceed with the issuance of the COP for the actual borrowing of the money and the intention and why we're doing this. Is that the general fund is out to me and $380,000. We want to reclaim that money. The general fund and have that be part of our capital stack that we had presented. I don't know seem like a couple maybe a month or so ago. on how we're going to be funding the police public workstation. So I can tell you that rents are going to pencil out, if they're fully rented for the entire year, about $140,000. I know our condo fees will be at 12. It's not likely that they'll be rented the entire year will be people moving in and out so maybe 80% occupancy rate. Time will tell what that number will be but it seems like will be well north of a $100,000 in net rental income. from that property and the way we'd be structuring this cop is that the rent we're just actually setting parameters we haven't marketed this yet this would be marketed to banks throughout the area and what we're actually asking for is the approval to do this so we haven't issued the rfp yet so the idea would be to issue the RFP, a bank isn't going to commit to a rate for more than 30 days, and our process takes longer than 30 days. We need to have two readings. We've got to wait, I guess, 10 days to actually have a publication in the newspaper, another two weeks after that. So there's a little bit of a timing difference here in why we're doing what we're doing. So we're setting that the term will be 10 years. and that we'll be borrowing, we're anticipating the borrowing cost being $60,000. But we added a little bit of a cushion to what the amount of the COP could be listed on page three of the ordinance at 2550. And that we're setting a maximum rate of 4.75. And the way this ordinance is written is that if we're in these parameters that Gloria and I are the town manager and finance director can actually close the deal, have the approval to close the deal. assuming that these parameters are met and they were going with the best bid. So that's kind of the ordering here. We'll have a second reading on the 25th. We'll do the publication on the 4th, I think it was the 4th we talked about. And then it's effective 10 days after or 14 days after. So we'll be closing these things like in mid-September. And again, the idea would be then to reclaim that money that the general funds out and keep the funding stack in place. So with that that ask any questions.

So this is this is a public hearing school that will go and do that opening the public hearing 8.14. If anyone in the room would like to make comments or anyone online if you'd like to make comments, please raise your hand. Seeing none, I will close the public hearing at 8.14 and then open it up for questions, comments, et cetera. Seems pretty straightforward to me.

Gloria, can we tour a unit?

Yeah. So we are going to organize some tours for council, PNC, and staff to look at the units. Cool.

And for the motion, I would just say make sure you say August 25th, not 28.

I'll make a quick comment, which is just to thank Doug and Jenny for their always ever creative financial guru, just finding ways to stretch our dollars. And I appreciate it in smart ways. And with that, may I move that town council approve ordinance number 21, series of 2026 on first reading, continue and set the public hearing, second reading for August 25th, 2026. Second.

It's been moved and seconded. I'm going to do a voice vote for this one. Pam, would you please call the roll? Sure. Since this is money stuff, I'd do it.

Let's begin with Elise Hoddle.

Yes.

Anna Berman.

Yes.

Angela Anderson. Yes. Rick Stevens. Yes. Angel Dupree-Bouchard. Yes. Greg Schaffran.

Yes.

And David Knight.

Yes.

Unanimous vote. Thank you so much.

Thank you very much, everybody. Doug. Next up, we have our last item, which is 7E, resolution number 33, series of 2026. Resolution of the Town Council of Basalt, Colorado approving the acquisition of a deed restriction on a free market residential unit at 405 Park Avenue, unit B5 in partnership with Eagle County in allocating funds from the town's Basalt Forward bond for such purpose. This is James, you have this one.

Yeah, thank you. This would be the second buy down through the Good Deeds Program that the town would be working with Eagle County in partnership to make happen. The resolution would approve allocating the $103,500 towards providing 15% of the funding to buy down a deed restriction on the property. The town staff and the town attorney have reviewed the draft deed restriction and believe it appropriate. So the funds as the mayor noted would come from the current bond funds that we have available and so staff would I'm sorry staff would recommend approval of the resolution this evening all right

Pretty straightforward. I just had one comment that's separate from this but related. And I appreciate using the bond funds for this from Salt Forward. I would, though, like to get the short-term rental fee money that some of us, we've talked about. at some point allocated towards West now has a close to their D by down program. You guys were back at something that resolution for that later. But that's something just looking at this and looking at the financing options. I think this makes sense and we should also do that in the future.

You know that the other say that that short-term regulatory fee, yeah. The feed attacks and that the fee was offset by expenses incurred actually forcing the word. So we have software others costs associated with that I don't know if there's actually yet margin there that the town is enjoying to have that be a source of funding for other projects.

We had the software previously, correct?

We did, but we added modules to it. And we've got areas of noncompliance we're now enforcing. So, I mean, I don't know if it's zero sum game. But I'll just sort that out. I just don't know if we could just look at that number and have that be a funding source. That would be my thought on it.

I'd definitely like to see kind of an analysis of that. That's not a problem.

I think what I just heard is that it's we're not gaining any net.

Well, there's incremental revenue.

But it's largely costing us almost as much to execute the program as it is

i don't know if i said that if i did i don't know you didn't say that but it was costs associated with license it had as a sound that there was like a lot less money available than we might have thought like at one point i think it was 97 000 and change that's gross right but yes you know is it costing that much yeah i'd like to see the net number how much were how much is cost incrementally to incrementally from previous short-term rental regulatory

I know we just switched providers on our software, too. So anyway, there is cost to it, is my point.

I think the proof is in the number. Like how much incremental expense is there for this program?

Yeah, the funding source you didn't mention is the 2% lodging tax.

That is a source of funding.

And that's tracking $200,000. We're only at seven months into the year, so that's tracking $200,000.

So, sorry. Go ahead.

No, I was going to say, so I guess what I'm hearing is that we need a more comprehensive strategy for funding affordable housing.

Well, that's the road map.

I mean, yeah.

Correct me if I'm wrong. We were spending we were spending money on that software to track SDRs before we ever had the SDR fee, correct? To make sure that people were in compliance with being registered.

There was a cost of the software. Right. It's different now. It's more than it was. And so that's an answer to your question. Do I have the exact dollar amount? No.

But we were in need of the software anyway. Whether we were charging the STR fee or not, we needed a software to make sure people were in compliance, correct?

And I think we look at our, I'm just looking at the numbers. I mean, we had far more people submitting lodging receipts than we do this year. And there's a lot of people filed for exemptions. Okay, now whether or not they're really meeting the exemption or not, I don't know. And how much more resources do you want to actually again go to see whether or not People are doing what they say they're supposed to be doing. And how much of an investment do you want to put into this? So.

So I had this thought when we received the comment via email today. And we did, when we passed this SDR fee ordinance, we, I remember, or recall at least, and correct me if I'm wrong, that we always talked about hey let's come back to this in a year and let's look at let's have an analysis of have people just stop registering their sdrs did we did we lose business license you know revenue and and really look at what's what have we lost, what have we gained, and what's the end net number, and then we can reevaluate if it was in fact a good and worthwhile program. So I think that this conversation and some of the comments we've received lately, I think what we're saying here is that maybe maybe we'd like to do that. It's too soon, though.

I agree. This is August now. The year needs to elapse before we...

When did we...

The budget is January to December. You can't look at through August and say, oh, well...

I'm asking. When?

Well, if you want to affect January 1.

Okay.

So to David's point, you've got seven months.

Yeah.

I just want to make sure we don't forget to do that.

Yeah, but I will also need, like, kind of, you know, what are this new software modules and the functionality those provide, all that. I mean, it's like we don't set up programs to break even. You know what I mean? Like, that's just the worst thing that I think government could do.

Well, again, I don't know if I said it was break even. I just said I wouldn't look at that gross number and say that money is free and clear, ready to spend. Because there's cost against it. Just to be frank, we're not running a P&L here though.

That's not how our accounting works. I can get a P&L. I'd like to know what incremental costs we're bearing right now to administer this program.

And we can bring that back at the next meeting for you.

Yeah. What we're seeing in the high end is that people are remodeling, redeveloping, taking an old house and building a new one, and they're keeping it for the family. They're not short-terming it. So we're not seeing an increase in the 200 homes in the list that there's an indication they're trending towards short-term. They're trending towards... Family homes, family accommodations, family amenities, and no visitors. And vacant homes. And vacant homes, yeah. 41% vacancy. So that's going to go up.

And I'd love to talk about this too holistically as we look at all of our housing funds that we have, our affordable housing funds, so that we can make those decisions. And I hear your support for West Mountain Regional Housing Coalition, and that can be part of our roadmap. We're hoping to solidify that by probably mid to late September. So you'd have a presentation on that roadmap and what we're thinking of where the funds would be coming from. And maybe that's a point, too, that we can kind of look at budgeting for next year for West Mountain Regional Housing Coalition.

and to the point about the strs i've also like had the grocery store conversations with people that say that it's hurting them so we definitely need to revisit it and understand what's going on so yeah obviously on the agenda in the future so that we have that data to look at but this is not an isolated comment is what i'm saying

and I'm sorry I did not receive that comment if somebody could forward it along to me before did I forward it over to you oh that one okay yeah okay

I had one question for this James has Eagle County already approved their allocation of 103,000.

I believe they have. Yes. And it's contingent on the town stepping in with the other 15%.

I don't see the contingency though in the ordinance. It just says that like under to be it says that in partnership with Eagle County. But there's nothing in here that says that it's contingent on.

You could have that if if you prefer. Eagle County actually brings the good deeds opportunities to us. so so they're saying they're putting in their 15 town will you match yeah i guess it's just more of a clarification like what would happen if eagle backed out that that's fine to make that addition that that that's better yeah mayor i moved that the town council adopt resolution number 33 series of 2026 with the clause about contingency on eagle county funding

Second.

It's been moved and seconded. All those in favor, please signify by saying aye. Aye. Thanks, Doug. All right, and that's it. Adjourning. A new day.

We are three minutes.