Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

If you'd like to count us down. I now call the Wednesday, July 1st Planning Commission meeting to order. The time is 6.30. If you could please rise for the Pledge of Allegiance. Could the Secretary please call roll?

Commissioner Booth?

Here.

Commissioner Leaf? Present. Vice Chair Dreckman? Here. Chair Sawish? Here. Commissioner Schatz? Here. Commissioner Rodas? Here. Commissioner Hemphill? Here. Do you have a quorum?

We have an agenda before us. Does staff have any changes?

No changes.

Is there a motion?

Motion. Second.

There was a motion by Booth and a second by Dreckman. All in favor say aye. Aye. This leads us now to the approval of the minutes of- Point of order. Please.

You need to call the vote.

You need to announce that the vote passed. Okay, that was a pass unanimous. That moves us on to the approval of the minutes for the June 17th Planning Commission meeting. Is there any changes that need to be made?

Motion to approve.

Second. That was a motion from Hemphill and a second by Broadus. All in favor say aye. Aye. All right, that is unanimous. That now leads us to the public comments portion of the meeting. Is there anybody signed up or online?

There does not appear to be anyone signed up or online. Okay.

All right. That now leads us to the general business items. The first one is 2026 400 discussion of annual report to town council. And I will be presenting that. So I'm going to hop over there real quickly.

And you get the diaspora.

All good.

okay last time i did not speak into the mic so um okay so the first item that we have is the planning commission annual report to the town council um last time we had some minor changes that we wanted to make so i'm just going to go through the changes unless there's anything that anybody wants to bring up um first actually a present of this um the first item that we had changed was there was a individual from planning staff which was uh removed a new one was added so welcome daryl We also on these slides, we changed it to June 2026 and we'll have July 2026 on in the next report to council. And we had also the next couple of slides, the same thing. And the only additional item that was added on here was the informational presentation intro to Erie Town Hall 101. And that brings us to everything through June of 2026. And then for this slide, we had said we were striking the capacity column and obviously then removed out item D that was at the bottom for notes because we no longer need it with capacity column removed. And I believe that is everything. Any additional changes that would need to be made

Questions, comments? One extremely minor change. Please. On the slide three, the font for Tim Burns' term ending is slightly bigger than this. Slightly.

It is. I can make that change if anybody has any disagreements or if anybody is okay with that.

All good.

Thank you. Any other comments, questions, feedback? OK. And obviously, this isn't something that we are going to take an official vote on. But if anybody has any qualms or objections to this being presented, could you please speak now or forever hold your peace? all right looks good i i appreciate the discussion we had definitely yeah all right so that is that uh so staff i'll make that update and then i'll send that over so that it can get posted to the clerk's office and look at us we're nine days ahead of where we need to be okay

gonna and okay we'll conclude that agenda item and then move on to our next one which is 2026-401 discussion in preparation of joint study session with council and i will let chair sawish talk to us about that all right andrew sawish uh planning commissioner for the town of erie planning chair for the town of erie sorry um all right so

This wasn't able to get posted in time for the agenda due to the deadlines required for staff for internal approval. So this will be added to the July 15th meeting. It will be posted. There will be a follow-up item after the two QJ items just in case there's any other comments, questions, things that we wanted to bring up because that will be our last opportunity to actually discuss it. Last week, I was able to get the list of items that staff had, confirm those with Mayor Moore, and we now have the topics, and I'm gonna say tentative because this of course could potentially change, but the tentative list of items that will be discussed for our joint study session with town council on July 28th, 21st, sorry. So first one is the Prop 123 fast track overview, the fast track process, funding feedback. Then we'll have the comprehensive plan amendment update. This is one that was requested by Council and we'll go into it in just a moment. We'll also then have an update provided by Planning and Development in regards to the 2026-2027 work plan. And then we'll have time at the end for the Planning Commission rules and responsibilities. So I'm going to go through this. A lot of this again is informational. If anybody has any questions, staff, please keep me honest. If there's anything that I miss or should add, please let me know. This is to help the Commission refresh where we were in these conversations as well as for the two new appointments. A way to get up to speed. I know it's not going to be as as in-depth as we went on some of these, but hopefully it helps you. If you have any questions, please ask. This is the time to do so. So we'll start with Prop 123. So just as some background, The town of Erie, in 1999, they established the Erie Housing Authority. So this is Title 29 of Colorado Revised Statute that was used. Typically, this is used by counties to create a housing authority, but the town created this because of an initiative that they had, which was in 2001, the Victor F. Smith Senior Housing Units, which are on the north end of Briggs. This was the first attempt by the town for affordable housing, and it was town... owned land that was that was provided over it did change hands in terms of ownership as well as who managed the properties but to this day it is still 12 units senior housing that is within the town Around that same time, so 2005, so we had a comp plan in 1998, 1999. It was then had some updates in 2005, technical updates in 2015. The 2005 and 2015 comprehensive plan both noted that there should be additional strategies to increase the supply of attainable housing. So this was not in regards to affordable housing. It was understanding that we needed something that could reach these different age ranges, income levels, those kinds of things at that time, just that diversity in terms of the stock. In 2020, the then Board of Trustees, they had a resolution where they adopted the Boulder County Regional Housing Partnerships Priorities and Strategies for Expanding Access to Diverse Housing for Our Community. That was the actual title, so that's why it's a run on. And I'll get into that in a moment and explain what that was. Then in 2021, they mirrored that in terms of a town goal, which then brought us to 2022 and 2023, the development of the housing needs assessment and the affordable housing strategy. This is when at the state level, there was a lot of conversation that was occurring and a lot of legislation that began to move towards affordable housing. So I'm going to stop and ask staff, is there anything that I missed? Anything within the timeline or anything to add?

No, I don't have anything to add.

Okay. Try to be as thorough as possible, but I know I'm missing some things, so please keep me honest. So that brought us to that Boulder County Regional Housing Partnership. So this was a collaboration of 10 jurisdictions within Boulder County, and it was set to establish a goal of 12% of the region's housing inventory permanently affordable by 2035. And if you ask what does permanently affordable mean, it is no more than 30% of monthly income or rent and utilities, or in the case of monthly mortgage, payment of housing expenses, where there is a long-term restriction in place, so deed restriction or likewise, to make sure that that stays affordable. um this there's the plan itself that you can go into but uh the plan at that time was establish a regional goal bolster financial resources secure land developments preserve affordability and then consider regulatory processes so it's pretty comprehensive in terms of how to get to that point We then had that housing needs assessment. This was looking at it comprehensively, looking throughout the town in terms of what was our current stock, what are the different gaps that we have, taking into account what some of the state or national trends look like. and basically trying to identify what does it look like in Erie, because a lot of the development that has occurred in town has always been residential. Now is that single family, is it multi-family, et cetera? If you haven't read it, I know most, some of you were on the commission when the comp plan moved through and that was part of some of the items that you looked at but it was very thorough that was a consultant who had done that it took a i want to say like nine months to complete it was you know pretty in depth on what they were doing um and then obviously they came back with these key takeaways lack of diversity in the community's housing stock, more housing choice for local workers and aging homeowners, high development costs, density in public subsidies likely required, and then to explore connected strategies. Part of this housing assessment also looked at that goal of the 12% by 2035, and I believe the number was 400 units per year in order for us to meet that ourselves in the town of Erie. And again, the reason was because we only had 12 units and that was the Victor Smith location that I had gone through a moment ago. So at that time we said, well, we can't get to a point where we're going to have 12% of our stock by 2035 here in the town, but we can try to make a dent. So then Prop 123 moved through. So this was a ballot initiative that was approved by the voters of Colorado in November 2022. It set a dedicated fund that would be used for the purpose of affordable housing, attainable housing initiatives, etc. The fund allocation was or is 40% to the Department of Local Affairs, 60% to the Office of Economic Development and International Trade, which is administered by CHAFA. And this is a dedicated fund that is At 0.1% of the state income tax revenue, it was already existing and got extended to encompass that. The funding provides then grants, loans for nonprofits, community land trusts, local governments, and of course, each program has its own application process, program guidelines, selection criteria, so there are specific Reasons for having the DOLA and specific reasons for having the OEDIT, CHAFA, they're two different purposes. So there could be some crossover occasionally, but typically it's one is for the renter's home buyers, versus one is for those who help develop these different housing affordability or attainable housing initiatives within within community statewide. I know I just went through that pretty quick staff. Anything to add on that so far?

OK, thank you.

um so after this was approved the question was well how do we make it so that we have the guidance provided how do we actually have the statutes related to this so that we can enforce it to basically broadly understand what was identified as the whole purpose but how do we make this actionable itself so Of course, there are five items on here, some Senate bills, some House bills, and these were to move jurisdictions as well as, you know, CHFA into a place where they could start to have this as a mechanism used for, again, affordable housing, attainable housing. So now we come to the town and how we used it. I know there's a bunch of links. I know I wasn't expecting anybody to get through all these links, but basically when this occurred, we used ARPA funds for an acquisition of 765 Cheesman Street, County Line Cheesman. We then later also got a DOLA grant through Prop 123 that was able to facilitate THE DEVELOPMENT COSTS BASICALLY WE WERE ABLE TO BUY DOWN THE DEVELOPMENT COSTS FOR THE DEVELOPER IN ORDER TO DRIVE THAT COST AS AS FAR DOWN AS POSSIBLE IN JUNE 2023 WE ACQUIRED THE PROPERTY AT 3942 COUNTY COUNTY ROAD ONE AND A HALF THIS IS NOW THE PAGE PROPERTY WAS AT ONE POINT THE IT WAS A VILLAGE AT COAL CREEK PROPOSED In order to, as the legislation started to move down the path of how do we make this enforceable, actionable, we started to see what was occurring and I believe we were one of the first municipalities in the state to actually have an ordinance that actually proposed a fast track or administrative review process. There are other items in there that included some density bonuses. The idea was that to get to this point, if somebody were to bring in affordable housing, I think it was 12%, we said at the time, if they brought 12% affordable housing, they would have the ability to get to some of these expedited review processes. Um, we then had a resolution to approve the Pre development agreements, which is where we actually transferred the land over to house pad Erie so that they could begin development over there. And then we had the resolution that was adopted in 2024. This actually came before the planning commission at that just before that as well. Adopting the updated housing needs assessment, affordable housing strategy, resolution adopting the town of Erie affordable housing policy. And then there was also the resolution approving the development agreement accepting dedication. So everything had been deeded over to that developer. And now the town was suffice with what was occurring over there so that they could actually have build out start to occur and then last year in august from the request of council ordinance 23 2025 was approved this is one that we saw as well that repealed ordinance 17 2023 but we left the definition of affordable housing So when we look at the items that were brought up by council in terms of why we did a repeal, because again, this is all about the fast track process. It was identified that there were concerns with some elements within the process that it could skip some steps in what a typical application would require. Now, granted, staff had been the first to say, hey, we were really early on this. We had started this right when the Prop 123 funding was announced, and we wanted to be able to get after that as quickly as possible. And it was still that legislation was moving through. So that was August 2025. You can see we've had things as recent as April of this year where they're still trying to make it so that this Prop 123 is actionable, enforceable, and has everything laid out. So now comes to us on the Prop 123 side where we had the recommendation to council that we provided last year. We took the 60 days that is provided within the UDC to discuss this item instead of immediately providing a recommendation for approval or denial. We took the time to talk this out to then come up with a resolution. It just so happened that the resolution we created was one that was denial with conditions, which it can only be approved with conditions or denial. So they weren't even able to look at it. I know we had updates from staff last time, three meetings ago now. But from my understanding, and confirm if this is the case, The information that we have received now from the state, from the consultant that was aiding multiple municipalities, we may not actually need an ordinance update, but we'll find out more about that at the study session, correct?

Correct.

Okay. So before we get on to the next item, I'm going to stop because I know that was a lot. It's probably just word vomit everywhere. Does anybody have any questions, comments, anything that you can think of that we might want to discuss before we go into that July meeting with counsel?

Would it be possible for us to get the consultant's report to review before the meeting?

Yeah, if not before, I mean, it will be included in the packet information, yeah.

Which will be given to us like three days before? Is it possible to get it sooner? Or probably not?

I'm looking at Josh.

Last we heard, it's not supposed to be available until the end of July.

Oh, okay.

Sorry, I misunderstood. I thought you had it now.

I'm going to put you on the spot. Would you mind coming to the podium? Thank you.

Thanks, Josh.

Josh Campbell, senior strategic planner for the town of Erie. We have met with the consultant several times throughout this process. And last we spoke, they were supposed to be finalizing the official report for us to distribute in July. So I do not know at this point in time if we'll have it at least before our discussion. However, we have had a verbal confirmation with them through meetings and so on.

Thanks.

Thanks, Josh. Just a refresher. I think it was my first meeting. We were having a conversation on this topic. And in terms of conforming to the Prop 123 funding eligibility criteria, I think we had concluded at that meeting that the ordinance that was repealed was no longer necessary. is that a fair summary of where we're at like we're only forward looking in terms of prop one two three or is there remedial work that needs correct okay that's probably worth putting in your summary somewhere with the for the joint session

Well, staff is going to be coming up with a presentation for the joint session. It's going to have a lot more information than I have and very specific. But that was my understanding from what we had heard comments from staff saying. It looks like it's the administrative process and basically front loading the pre-application side. Once we get to that point, we know everything is good, then that shot clock starts and we can begin the 90-day process. which still I don't understand how you're going to do it, but if you say you can, I'm going to try. That's a key point. Yeah. Go ahead, please.

The other item that I just wanted to bring up is, like you said, we did take that 60 days to, I think we had three meetings or something on this. And we did quite a bit of deliberation with our resolution that was a denial with i already forgot the phrase but i think there there was a lot of value in that discussion so at least um bringing that resolution up because that brought up a lot of the concerns even though there's not going to be a forward ordinance uh just being aware of because i think we captured a lot of the concerns that the council had but just making sure that everyone here is aware of that resolution that we had from effectively a previous commission i think it was a it was good discussion

Yeah, I would agree. It wasn't at the one that we were drafting the resolution or the proposed draft that Commissioner Broadus had done. It was the meeting before where we just went in depth on everything. So spoiler, if you want to try to get up to speed on the discussion, please review that meeting. But yeah, I'll send the links out to you. It was a very good discussion. It does make me think one of the things that we had was that administrative review and you are able to receive that bonus density. Is that something that we still wanted to potentially have because it was a carrot versus a stick situation? We provide them the carrot, you get the bonus if you bring this to the town, and I believe a lot of the My concern at a time for repealing was we have nothing that is on the books as an incentive to bring affordable housing. Sure, you can get access to these grants and other things, but you're not... you're not guaranteed to receive that so um and plus from what i believe staff had said well we had thought the preliminary plat um preliminary plats rezonings uh subdivision uh general subdivision like those don't apply in in some cases now it's only specific applications so the question is Is that something that we potentially want to bring up during the joint study session to say, do we want to have an incentive that works for the town? The idea of the 25% density, if you bring X amount, do we want to have that incentive? When we're looking at Prop 123, this is if they come in with 50% affordable housing, they are now required, as per the state, to have an expedited process. So this is not going to be in every situation. What happens if they come with 40%? Well, they're not applicable to that. Do we still want to maybe say you can go through this process? Again, do we want to have density bonuses? So these are ideas that if this body was inclined to move forward on and wanted to bring this up, we could do so at that time so that we could discuss this with council.

During my discussions with DOLA, it was clear You must have a fast track, as you were saying, if it's 50%. They were encouraging a fast track, and they had no minimum. I thought the minimum was 12, but it wasn't. Or you could have a fast track. But things have changed too, it seems, since that time. And so it'd be really nice to understand what those changes are. But I guess that would be in the consultant's report. So we have to wait.

Yeah. I'm sure more will change before it even gets to that date. Yeah.

But to your point, I think having incentives would be good because Erie right now has, even if you include the 35 units from Cheeseman, which would meet our commitment for around seven years, I think, for the 3% growth. I think it would be good to have an incentive because we have virtually no workforce housing in Erie today.

And I'm actually turns half I know Mister school yet provided some information regarding the commitments that we had met it even though it was 22 that were currently sold because of the state's determination that it has to be under 100% AMI and some aren't actually under 100%. It's not 22 that is going towards that commitment. It's slightly under that. Josh?

Josh Campbell senior strategic planner to date we have sorry I'm doing math today we have 23 of the 35 cheeseman units sold with that being said we do have three that are scheduled to close within the coming week so that'll put us at 26 of the 35 so roughly about 75% of the 26 sold, including the ones coming in the coming weeks. 21 of those will meet DOLA's requirement of 100% or less AMI. The other five units are above 100%, but are below the 120% limits that the Cheesman Street residents list.

Thank you so. Commissioner brought us to your point.

Yes, we met our commitments.

However, not all of them meet the state's definition of the commitment. And that's that's the struggle that we get into. And also, if you always talk about having that incentive so that they can get access to these grants and want to. Well, what happens if you have two applicants that are from different municipalities? One is saying, hey, we're going to provide 80% AMI, up to 80%. The other one is 120. And they only can give this to one because there's only so much money. Which one could they potentially give it to? You turn towards the 80%. So even though staff has done a great job, there's still a lot of questions. would ask in regards to this topic in particular if there's additional questions additional topics that we want to bring up during that joint study session please let let us know because this is our time to ask these questions so that staff can either advise us or provide an answer to it or they could potentially look into it because this is not going to be uh commissioner leaf yeah i'd like to

echo what commissioner broad has said about incentives other than an expedited process i'd certainly like to understand what the menu of options would be because certainly we're not inventing the wheel here this is something that other jurisdictions are grappling with have tried in other instances and i think it would be really helpful to understand kind of what the best practices are and what what's been successful and what hasn't been successful

I will say how we got to this point, so going back over here, 88% single unit detached. That was because that was what the market had dictated. It was single family, and this was a prime area for those. Then the market started shifting, and that's when we started seeing the alley load of products. We started seeing some quadplexes, some duplexes, some townhomes. I think it was multifamily started coming into it. So the town does the monthly development activity where it indicates how many units are actually, how many units were brought online within the community, how many were built essentially. We didn't have multifamily listed until I think it was 2021, 2022. So, I mean, it was, we just didn't have anything that was there because nobody was bringing these online. Even though we have in the UDC, you have to have a certain amount of diversity of product. You have to have different architectural styles, those kinds of things. They would propose one type in different styles and just change how that type was looking. It met the criteria of the UDC, but a lot of these, they would say, yeah, we'll add this in here. Erie Highlands, Collier's Hill, Flatiron Meadows, all of them basically said, yeah, we'll give another product, but it was at the very tail end of the project.

That's when you started to see all these different products.

PROPERTY TYPES AND NUMBER OF UNITS STARTING TO COME ONLINE BECAUSE THEY FIRST DID SINGLE FAMILY AND THEN THE MARKET SHIFTED AND FINALLY AT THE END THEY BROUGHT THESE ON. SO I'VE PERSONALLY BEEN AN ADVOCATE SAYING HOW DO WE ENFORCE DENSITY AND DIVERSITY OF HOMES. So that it's not just, hey, you have to have diversity when it's all filled out. How do we maintain that diversity of product as we go through? Because when we talk about attainable housing, that is a wide range of different styles and price points, essentially, so that we can't have first seniors, first-time homebuyers, and so on.

And unfortunately, the three neighborhoods you talked to, none of them are affordable or, by definition, affordable. And so another thing we should look at, and we started when we had staff, but the staff is no longer around, is looking at infill. Infill is another area where you could potentially have things that would be more affordable. So that's something I would at least bring up.

that was uh the housing needs assessment said that that was one of the key things that should be taken into account um infill development so that we start filling out these areas that are um you know old town um some of the empty you know lots that are within the central area so we don't have that sprawl that occurs so um there was the uh the fiscal analysis that was also taken into account at that time and basically said that there's going to be a lot of capital needs as time goes on because as that sprawl occurs, you have more roads, you have, you know, more miles that are actually being driven on versus we have, you know, in dense areas where maybe there's, uh,

Public transit or filling in these areas so that it's not you have to drive everywhere to get to get you know somewhere and I guess that is how it is in Colorado in general, but that was one of the recommendations Yeah, I just want to share I attended a Seminar sponsored by the American Institute of architects a couple months ago where the city of Denver presented Actually as a contest around affordable housing And the conversation that was led by the Denver city planners was related to a consultant that they're working with to redefine their development code. And so they were dealing with issues of accessory drawing units. They were dealing with density incentives. And I think there's probably a lot that we could learn from what they're doing in terms of how that might be applicable to our community.

And you bring up a to use a to use our are permitted everywhere throughout the state essentially in all residential areas now so that was something that they said it was a a state issue of concern and we cannot prohibits correct me if I'm wrong we cannot prohibits a to use in any residential areas anymore.

Yeah, anywhere that a single family home is allowed. So I would just add. I think it's all great discussion. For the joint session, we do have two hours. We have four big topic areas to cover. And I think our hope was to really hone in on the Prop 123 commitment. And we can explore any other incentive code changes and things with the UDC.

update that will be kicking off this fall in a more comprehensive way so yeah i know a lot of what we're going to be doing with council is talking and discussing and getting informed on these and then we'll go back and you know, ourselves, we'll, we'll talk about it more and then staff will basically come with this plethora of, of options and presentations for us. So yeah, I, I totally understand. And maybe some of this that we're talking about just becomes, you know, food for thought for you all. So, yeah. Okay. Anything else before we move on to the next topic? Okay, so I'm actually going to ask Mr. Haskell if you can just clarify what this comprehensive plan amendment high level summary is that was requested by council and why it's coming. Obviously, we're going to receive more information, but just high level.

yeah um you'll see this in august um but um january of this year we got feedback from council that they wanted us to look at um select parcels that were designated residential medium in the 2024 plan um specifically um the parcel at 111th and arapaho the page property um Is there one other one, Josh? I'm so sorry.

Josh Campbell, Senior Strategic Planner.

Yes, there was three parcels that were examined with this amendment suggestion from Council. Ms. Driscoll mentioned the first two. The other one was about four and a half acres southwest of Old Town, kind of the intersection of High and Anderson adjacent to Whittier Park. Yeah.

Yeah. So they wanted to examine that for a new residential category, residential medium low. And so that would be a kind of an intermediary designation between residential low and residential medium. They did provide feedback in May on the page property, so that will change from any sort of housing to the parks open space protected lands designation. We've had some zoning cases and other preliminary plots and things come forth that may be on the edges of towns, surrounded by some rural or agricultural development. And they wanted to see a little bit more policy on some context-sensitive design. So, yeah.

so so three of those properties um three properties one of them being town owned two being privately owned um so essentially uh this kicks off the community engagement process not to the extent that we did last time community engagement process which is required by statute it includes the notifications when the time comes discussions with the property owners, all to culminate in the amendment of, and if I understand it correctly, basically it's a low medium, I guess. It's like just inside of the medium residential, just past low residential, basically the equivalent of the previous that we had or like kind.

Similar, yeah. Yeah, so it would result in basically a map update and then one small addition to policy in the community building box chapter.

Okay.

So I know we've talked about some potential updates, additional additional updates, and obviously the scope of this specific update that staff is going to be informing us on is what has been discussed. um i know that we again have talked about some items i think it would be good for us ourselves to have some discussions for a future amendment obviously with a comprehensive plan it is supposed to be the vision of the town but it's it's supposed to be something that is malleable and that is iterative that continues to be improved upon or updated over time so without going into other items that haven't just been noted as what are going to be the highlights of what this update is going to be are there any questions comments feedback related to those okay Okay, so we'll then also have the 2026-2027 planning development work plan that Ms. Driscoll and team are going to go over. And again, Ms. Driscoll, if you could just high level exactly what this is.

Yeah, so there will be several large projects that you all will be very involved with in our work plan for this year and into next. um the unified development code update um some short-term rental regulations and licensing um obviously the comp plan updates um some old town visioning exercises we do have to do a housing action plan as well um so those those big things will be coming to you as well as um tandem with parks some open space rezoning investigations that will be starting in 2027

SO I KNOW A LOT OF WHAT WE'VE DONE TO DATE AS A PLANNING COMMISSION, UDC UPDATES, COMPREHENSIVE PLANS, QJ ITEMS, SO THERE WILL BE MOVING FORWARD SOME SPECIFIC UDC ITEMS, SAY WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A, I DON'T KNOW IF WE CAN SAY WHAT IT IS THAT'S GOING TO BE IN BOULDER, BUT KIND OF LIKE THE the big game in february you know if it's one of those but uh you know we're gonna have a lot of needs next year for uh the film festival and there have been a lot of individuals that have been asking even online saying how can i have this unit available for individuals for when it comes to town and and the short answer is you can't in erie so it's long term or nothing here so this is something that is a long time coming yes there are individuals on airbnb vrbo but we do not allow short-term rentals in the town of erie so we are basically going to have to address that sooner than later and there's an immediate need to do that. And then obviously we've talked about this other item that is going to be that we have proposed the joint study session with ostab um so i uh did um talk with the ostab chair and they are gonna again i know i said this last time but they hadn't met yet they're gonna be at their next meeting talking about this i did re-watch their meeting two meetings ago when they found out about all this that hey We have zero properties that are currently with the reserve open space. So we're still trying to coordinate to see if it is possible to have October, November joint study session. Obviously, they have to accept and approve it first on their end, say, yes, let's do that. And then also for staff, we don't want to be a burden on them. I know during the OSTAB meeting, Parks and Rec Director Bollinger had said, we have time restraints on our side. We have other projects going on. This is definitely a 2027 on our side, and Parks has to be the lead on it over there. So we're still trying to work out to try to get that October, November joint study session with OSTAB to start. not to come up with, these are the properties, these are the ones that are going to, but instead to say, what are the different nuances? How can we address this? What do we have to take into account so that staff, when they do start this, they have all of this already addressed, attended to, and basically, They provide the list of properties. OSTAB is understanding of what the difference is between the two. There's been conjecture about whether or not we actually, whether our reserve open space and the uses that are currently available there are what we need. Obviously, it's charter designated for reserve open space, so it is in perpetuity, unable to be sold, dispositioned, anything of that effect, unless it's brought to a vote of the residents. And so that's been one of the things that has been discussed. Is it even within the right use categories that we want? SO THERE'S A LOT OF DISCUSSION THAT CAN OCCUR, BUT AGAIN, IT'S GOING TO BE A BRAINSTORMING. IT'S NOT TO SAY, HEY, STAFF, START ON THIS, BECAUSE THERE'S NO WAY THEY'RE GOING TO. SO ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, FEEDBACK ON THIS ITEM? SEE SOME GEARS MOVING, BUT OKAY. OKAY, SO THIS NOW GETS US TO THIS ITEM, AND WE'VE HAD 2020, 2021, we had conversations about this. It's been brought up in every single presentation to council, I think, since 2021 of discussion of what are the roles and responsibilities? What else can we do? So obviously, we just had that slide that we were going through for the presentation to council showing, hey, we've had a lot of council meetings. There's other things that we've had identified as we could potentially do, not Not something that is, if you will actionable, even maybe it's something that is informative for us educational for us so that we can grow our knowledge and expertise as. You know, the planning commission, obviously, the roles and responsibilities, revised statutes, homework, char, the code. the roles and responsibilities within the udc and then i have obviously a lot of links here basically we have a council that is amenable to this conversation we have a planning commission A previous planning commission, a previous planning commission that is amenable to having this conversation. So I know I toss a lot in here just as some of the items that we have discussed some background information. So what I want to do is I want to stop talking, and I want it so that everybody else is talking. So roles and responsibilities. When we've talked about this, it's always been, hey, this may not be within our wheelhouse. It may be something that is outside of our current breath, maybe something that we just have to learn. So I know we've, again, had these conversations. Does anybody have thoughts, questions, feedback, anything that comes to mind when we talk roles and responsibilities?

Please.

Sure. First of all, this dovetails with the earlier item where we're reporting to the town council workload. That's going to be my kind of summary of the importance data provided in that report. And then you look at this table. So maybe back up one. Is that where the table is? Yeah. And I'm not going to say I know what the relationship is yet. I haven't been involved in this process for more than three meetings but this table is the key I think to a discussion that can be productive and can talk about well how does this compare with other jurisdictions and what their planning commission does how does this table compare with the workload that we're seeing on planning commission and where we could do more that's probably where I would start with the conversation with the town council that said i don't have enough experience to say i know the answer to the question is because we don't get involved in initial zonings that's an interesting choice on this table to me is that the planning commission would normally be or in my experience involved in initial zoning it streamlines the process that we're not and the town council is the one that makes the decision on annexation but that's a point there's other jurisdictions where special use review is bifurcated into, for example, Adams County, special use, conditional use. They're more and less intense between those categories. There are some choices there. But this table, I just want to say from my perspective, is a key to a productive conversation. And I will have more observations and just background, but I'm not sure what the direction is yet. Just wanted to offer that.

Okay, so if I understand correctly, it's basically saying, okay, Within what we currently do, where else within the UDC specifically can we have an effect? And Arapahoe 111th is a perfect example because you're correct. The annexation initial zoning was a legislative matter, so the annexation got approved, but then the initial zoning was not approved. But that did not come before this body, and I know that could have helped with the You know, the public hearing process, the community outreach, you know, individuals to voice their concern before it was six hours of testimony that we heard from the residents.

So, Mr. Chair, if I may, I think my offer is this is my observation today. I will develop more of those type of observations for your consideration, this body's consideration to walk in. with a productive conversation, if that's the will of the board here.

Thank you. I'm sure. Were you going to say something, Commissioner Booth?

So I think we've talked about the zoning examples from other communities. I feel like maybe you've given examples of, is it Greeley? Do they do some of the zoning on the planning commission there?

That is...

And that's just clarification, because I think we've talked about that a little bit.

Let's see. This was actually, there was a full list that was done in the past. September 2021. And yes. Yes. Okay, so full transparency, I was the one who initially did this in 2021 when we started having these conversations. Let's see, it was Greeley. I believe Greeley did do initial zoning. I will say... Well, specific to the UDC and the applications, Weld County is a good example where um they have their planning commission take the authority route on approval for certain applications kind of like we have one single one which is a site plan planning commission review um they also do that and they purposely do that so that they don't get into some legal issues there um the there's been conversations about well what if we have something where it's planning commission approval but any of the items can be called up by council so that's similar in nature to what they do in well county so they have certain applications where it's the planning commission approves it but if necessary the board of county commissioners can call it up and bring it forward for an ultimate decision so not a final decision an ultimate decision um right now it's you know recommendation That's essentially what we do. And yes, they do. So they will review annexation of land or initial zoning at that time because there's a lot that goes into it. However, and I can't speak for what the town attorney's office feels now, but at that time the town the former town attorney believed that that was a legislative matter and basically if it is something that is legislative it should always and in some cases only go to the governing body for approval so that's potentially something where we could you know have that discussion and i say that because there's also the cop plan amendment and i know um for a while we just we didn't have any comp plan amendments in terms of that zoning map because there were some disagreements in terms of the public hearing process and so from 2020 1 to 2025. I don't think we had a or 2024. We didn't have a single complaint amendments. In terms of that map and prior to that we had multiple frequently. So maybe it's something that you know the the town attorney's office feels could be something that we could do. Ultimately, yes, it's going to be. An ask of the Council, but also we need to have our legal team say why or why not. is this or isn't, is this not a good idea, right? So there may be a reason that we're unaware of why we don't get involved in the initial zoning or the annexations. Yes, annexation and initial zoning happen at the same time because that's what our UDC says, but it doesn't necessarily mean we should, but it doesn't mean that we shouldn't. So, Lisa.

So, can I just go back to my question? Sure. And I thank you for this link because your work back in 2021, directly on point. And certainly if other jurisdictions are doing it, You know, there is, while it's not our council, not our jurisdiction, there is some of that preliminary work to vet, you know, is it even legal? So I just want to go back to the question of is there any interest in, I'd love to tag team with you on let's make this a tabular, like maybe let's put this in a order of priority that maybe dovetails with what we're seeing from workload. And then bring it to the Commission for consideration prior to the meeting with the town council. Is there interest?

Yep, and I you know, I will I will say for the you know, first off annexation initial zoning It's basically the peripheries around the town now, right? I think there's three major properties within central of our boundaries that aren't currently annexed and everything else that isn't annexed is now on the peripherals. So we're talking about unincorporated areas that are at the edges of town. We just had the north annexation that occurred 2023, I believe it was, of the Kenosha Road area. But a lot of now annexation initial zoning is going to be elsewhere. And it cannot be on the south end because that is basically

uh hard line in the sand with lafayette so please yeah so i'm asking broadly um and and just to clarify uh for example from your link here review of urban renewal site plans i think i've been exposed just enough to say whatever you found here in And again, this isn't tabular, so one of the things I'm offering is like, let's put in a table. Broomfield sends those to the planning commission. I don't believe that occurs in Erie. So broadly speaking, not talking about any one category, but you know broadly speaking what are the differences between our table of responsibilities between different staff level and boards and commissions types of projects and other jurisdictions i mean i just think that might be instructive but i don't know if that's the sense of the commission

I agree. I don't see a problem with it. Does anyone else see a problem with that? I think that's Maurice. Andrew, you're fine. Or Chair Sawish, you're fine doing that. Like working on that with him, I think. And is everyone else on board with that too? Just to review before we meet with the...

The only comment is it's 2021. If there's been any changes. So I know that... I don't have any issue with it, but tabularizing it seems like a lot of work. So do you want to do that?

We'll find a way to make it. It's just, it is, I did not know that this had been done. So thank you for doing that five years ago. But maybe, you know, summarizing and tabulate, whatever the word for putting in a table is. And then I think working on what, relates to the workload we're seeing in town and may see. So thank you.

I agree. Yes, I think that's a good idea. Now you're waiting a long time.

That's all right. So one question is, are we limited to the lines in this table? That's what seems currently in the UDC. But I'm not sure what the bounds are at this point and what types of things we would propose.

Yes. The UDC sets forth your roles and responsibilities. Anything beyond that would require a code change.

I understand. And that's what I'm asking. Is that within the realm of possibility or not for this discussion?

So... This discussion is what more can we do?

Right.

Right. And if there are items that we identified as, Hey, this is a major time savings for, for you all, or something that is neglected, missing deficient, or, Hey, we just think it's a really good idea to do this. We can make that ask. This is the time. Now, again, we have a council that is amenable. It does not have to be in this list. Okay. But if there are items that are pertaining to this list, that is also a bona fide ask as well.

I do agree with what Commissioner Zets was saying as far as using this as a way of doing things. I'm just wondering if it may be overly limiting. And I don't have anything in the top of my head saying, oh, well, we should do this.

but i don't want us to constrain our thoughts if we don't have to if we do have to then we should yeah and in regards to that uh the one thing that i we have the uh water allocations that just went into effect right we're we're not gonna we haven't been and we're not going to see the development applications like we have in 2020 2021 2022 like it just isn't going to happen All the land, you know, the massive ones have already moved through. And now they're larger preliminary plats that are moving through instead of like Erie Highlands had, what, 18, I think, or something like that, like individual areas that they did at a time. So it wasn't like one major one like we saw recently with Spring Hill, for instance. It was smaller in terms of how they're moving around. So we're just we're not going to see the application. So how else can we be efficient and benefit the town?

um let me come back to commissioner leaf yeah i was going to just i support everything that's been said so far i think the idea of benchmarking is a great place to start i don't believe in reinventing the wheel so i think that's a great baseline but i also think it's good to kind of think about outside the box how can we be more effective as a planning commission there are some really important issues facing town and I think as systems thinkers we should be connecting the dots and whether that's just an educational process or it's something that's more legal I think is something that we can we can tackle but I think approaching it in that way is productive for this commission

Commissioner Schatz.

Yeah, I just want to thank the commissioner for the question. It's a good question. In the interest of no surprises, I think if we're totally confined to the UDC, it's not even a discussion. Unfortunately or fortunately, you know, that's the nature of what we're talking about is, you know, right now initial zonings go to the town board. So that's the UDC. uh to have the conversation though doesn't require us to change the udc it's it's a conversation so i hope that comports with the staff's understanding of yeah yeah so okay good question thank you yeah commissioner

um i when i'm looking at this and i'm just focusing on this table i think there's two schools of thought um one of them is if we take the workload off of the council and recommend that we take decision authority for more items that takes workload off the council but it also gives the public less opportunity to provide input it also is a benefit to whichever developer is working that land so there's that balance is if there's one fewer hearing it does help and if correct me if I'm wrong the town council hearings are pretty much exactly the same as the planning commission hearings like there's no real efficiency between the two like they take a so we have a hearing that takes an hour and a half town council's hearing will probably also take about an hour and a half or they yeah there's probably a correlation yeah so it's just so there's that Inefficiency, effectively, for the developer, the way we have it now, where planning commission reviews, council is decision. And if we recommend that we take that decision away from council and put it on planning commission, it's just it doesn't provide that opportunity to the public, which I know is... it's how a lot of things get caught i mean we we have no one here we rarely have public coming to a planning commission so if it it seems and this would be a decision for the council to decide um that if they give the planning commission a lot of power With decision authority, it may seem like things are getting just pushed through without the public input. So I think we need to balance that desire because we're not elected. We don't. We aren't really responsible to the electorate, because the electorate can't remove us. Only the council can remove us. So I think as we recommend going decision authority, and I think there are some value in some of these items just being point and commission decision, that we balance that need from the public to give more comment and have that opportunity.

Have you seen the way that Broomfield does their process? No. They start out with a period of time that is a public input period. And it is meant for having all of this all these comments and discussions about these things upfront. So an application comes in, they basically have this period where then they receive all these comments on it and they publicize it. So they get it known so that individuals in the community can state their opposition, proponent for. So what you're saying is, hey, I understand that, yes, it might do that, but how do we still get the comments? Because people will come out to ours or might not come out to ours, and then they come out to the council one. You know, so I, I do think that is extremely valid because obviously the public. Common process and hearing from the community is is. Amazingly important in any of these. So, if we did go that route now, we're talking about how.

How do we change the process?

Because we have to have, you know, the community's input. What can we do differently? And, I mean, there could be situations where it does make sense to do something like that, but now we're talking about a completely different process that is going to be staff having to deal with that. So I'm not saying I'm against it by any means. It's just a different process than what we currently have.

Yeah. I just wanna make sure that we're balancing the need of the public with taking workload off the council. Agreed.

I don't know that that's the dichotomy here. And you just had on the one hand, and I didn't hear what the other hand was. But I just want to say I view it as a much broader set of things that we're talking about. So I wouldn't concur that that was the impression I had of the conversation to take decision-making authority back. I think we're talking about, you know, um goes only to council um and just let's let's compare let's see what the data is on on what our other jurisdictions have done and and what we can do and i think you'll find there's a lot broader uh set of choices um so um thank you uh to go on to what commissioner helped people saying what um we've had applications that have come before planning commission and council

where it was in addition of five acres to the property. By code, any change to the boundaries of that property for PD, et cetera, requires an application that is heard by the Planning Commission, by the council. So there are actually applications that have been seen where, you know, when I was on council, we were going, why are we seeing this? Well, because they're adding five acres. Basically it was, you know, was a cutout and then they just added it in. That now triggers the full application process. So I will say there are specific Specific applications that have been seen that we should probably take into account and saying how do we improve this process where Council doesn't have to see this because honestly we look at it like this is easy to prove, you know, so if I may please.

Yeah, the standard zoning enabling act is special uses are approved by the planning Commission, but that is evolved in so many different directions that again. I may say the same thing you're saying, which is, yeah, some of this stuff, probably final decision at the planning commission makes more sense. But I just think it's, it's broader than that, that we're looking at a lot more dimensions to the planning process than just who has authority.

Yep. And first off, for everybody, this is probably the most pinpointed we've been to date on some of these aspects of what roles and responsibilities. So this is very good to hear. Obviously, this is going to take a while for us to come up with all these, but I like the conversation that we're having so far. But to your point, are there items that may not be within this grid here that we're seeing as would be beneficial for the planning commission to either get involved with or to assist on? Say, for instance, we said, hey, Um, joint study sessions with the other boards and commissions, because there's a lot of crossover. Um, you know, we, we all said that is a good idea. Let's see what we can come up with obviously topics and purpose for those we will come up with as time goes on. Um, are there any other things that we've. Either discussed or anybody has had as an idea of. I've thought of this and I think that we may benefit the community if we did this, or if we were to help push something along.

Please yeah, I think it came up early on that the comp plan process has all these functional plans on particularly like adequacy of public facilities has been a question I know and some of the. Scant stuff I'm aware of that's come through planning commission and council and functional plans can help make that more robust. Looking at some of those really specific parts of the comp plan may be worth discussing. Again, from the sense that that could be initiated by the planning commission where it has not and traditionally isn't. But that is a good conversation point, I think.

Okay, so if I understand this correctly, adequacy of public facilities. So are you referring to like the infrastructure?

There's like a capital facilities plan as a component of the comp plan in Erie.

THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN AND THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND WHICH WE HAD GONE OVER LAST TIME. YES, THERE ARE THOSE AND THOSE ARE BASED ON IMMEDIATE NEEDS OR LONG-TERM NEEDS. SO THAT WAS THE REASON FOR THE DENIAL BECAUSE DURING THE PROCESS WE FOUND OUT THERE WEREN'T ADEQUATE FACILITIES FOR STORM TRANSPORTATION, YOU KNOW, LIKE WE SAW THAT AS THE ISSUE AND THAT'S WHY IT ENDED UP, YOU KNOW, BEING DENIED. SO IT IS SOMETHING THAT YOU'RE RIGHT, IT IS IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. SO I WANT TO ON THAT NOTE, I WANT TO GO TO THIS ITEM HERE AND JUST ASK STAFF. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLANNING. WHAT I KNOW THAT THIS IS very broad, but what exactly is the growth management planning? Because it looks like it was 2026 for Q1 through three, and now we're finally in Q3. So what exactly is the growth management planning?

Yeah, that was a joint effort across basically all departments to deal with the water allocation situation.

Okay. Has that also been adapted to the other enterprises, storm drainage? storm drainage, wastewater, or any of the transportation side. I know I've advocated saying, hey, we should literally have projections out there based on these times we anticipate forecasts this population. Okay, now let's track that against the capacity of our water treatment facility, our wastewater facility, et cetera. Has that encompassed part of that?

not that specific item there are those functional strategic plans that that do that level of um and the water master plan is um starting soon or already has i can't remember i believe it's underway okay thank you are you finished that discussion

uh yeah yeah i'd be curious from staff if you think of any areas where our involvement that you think would be a help rather than a hindrance i mean speed things up rather than slow things down and you'll have to answer off the top of your head but it's something to think about

Sorry to bring us back to that last conversation, but similar question to where we're talking about the UDC, which is, is there a sense amongst this commission that at least for the purposes of the joint session, we should ask the town council and certainly ask staff. the same question you're asking, which is can we help? I don't have any particular impression other than seems like some criteria to say like adequate public facilities is a true factual inquiry and is related to say urban drainage, now mile high flood district planning and implementation of specific plans that had specific CFS that weren't being implemented in the case we just talked about. something that can guide that process in a way that has not occurred before and maybe it is too much of a hindrance or too much work or something that the council has in priority but i think if the sense of this commission is we should at least ask yeah i'm happy to do that yeah because we're talking about taking workload off council is there potential areas we could take workload off staff

I'm not saying there is. I'm saying I don't know.

Or how can we be a sounding board more for some of the initiatives? Because obviously, you know, there's very bright individuals up here that are in a range of different industries, backgrounds that have always provided, you know, this this good insight. Is there anything that we can do to assist you in some of the initiatives that you have have currently moving through or plan to move through?

Yeah, I mean, I think, you know, we've talked about all of those things that are coming before you, the UDC update, the Old Town planning, the comp plan amendments. You all will weigh heavily in all of those. Yeah.

When I look at what happened with the water allocation policy, I know that it was done through an emergency ordinance. It was necessary, or emergency resolution was necessary to do this as soon as possible so it wouldn't affect the next day. But that had never come up before us. We would have been unaware unless one of us had watched what had occurred. So that is something that personally, I can't speak for the rest of the body, was very much a surprise, has major implications to so many initiatives, economic development, residential development, just basic growth for the town. And it causes a ripple effect through so many different departments now where We have been reliant on development activity. I think it was 10 to 15% of our total budget is development activity from development activity funds. And now we're severely limiting those. Granted, the market has also been, you know, curtailing what we've seen in the past, but that alone and for the next five to seven years is going to be extremely impactful because we only have so much water, right? So, you know, how can we be informed about these things before they reach that point? Because, again, this is, you know, this is comp plan related, adequate facilities, water management plan, et cetera, that goes into this as elements.

How can we stay informed of these better?

And also be something that we you know we could potentially has of staff I would I would assume.

So the water allocation policy, as you said, was highly sensitive. Highly, yes. And there's a reason it stayed at the level it did and went through the emergency ordinance level. So we didn't have a run on the bank, so to say, of what we do have left. And council is the policymakers, and it was a policy decision. So that's why it stayed at that level.

questions comments anything okay so personally when I hear that I you know my question is how do we get to that point where we had to get to the emergency emergency resolution and ordinance that basically identified hey we only have so much per year how do we get to that point I don't I know it wasn't somebody dropping ball I know in this situation it was the uh chimney hollow um specifically and then what has been going on with nis but um you know that isn't planning and development specific obviously that's the other department so a question would be how can we get some other departments involved in this so we can stay informed of what's going on because as we ask questions we get better insight and as we ask questions and get better insight There's questions asked that staff may not have asked or, you know, addressed. I know that there's always the times when I see staff writing something like, that's a good one, you know? So how can we also get the other departments, utilities, public works, our transportation division, because they're no longer in planning development, how can we get them involved? Or finance to talk about the capital improvement plan, you know, those kinds of things for our educational purposes. Is that possible?

I would have to talk with the town administration.

Haven't we kind of discussed that, too, though, in the past, like the subplans coming before us for review? The what plans? The subplans coming before us for presentation. Haven't we kind of discussed that in past meetings? Because I think that would be how we would become aware of those issues, right? I mean, I just think we've discussed that, so I think that would probably be the best way to...

I know one of the things we do to those staff, for example, is we had the water department come and give presentations to us saying, this was probably five years ago when everything was rosy and it looked like we were great, but it was trying to do the things you're talking about is down the road, where are we getting our water from? And it was just one example. And I think we could ask for presentations from other departments to

Okay, so anything else that is top of mind? Because what I'm going to ask, the follow-up discussion is we have an ask. Say if you are a nonprofit and you have an event, you always ask for something, and it's always, in their case, a donation to supplement their funding. we're going to want to have an ask of counsel so that we can say, hey, these are things that we feel we can do. I know that we're not at the point of us knowing what that is. I think we're close, though. So I'd prefer if we could have one or two next time that we say, hey, we're going to ask counsel of this because these we really feel we can do. And I will say we also have, you know, the uh, joint sessions with the other boards and commissions. That's one that we're doing. Um, I don't know if we do or don't need council approval to do that.

Uh, but, um, you know, that's, that's what we've said we want to do.

So if you come back and say, Hey, yeah, that has to be added in, please let us know. Um, but, um, if we could, the next, I know we've had a lot of discussion on discussions on this, but, um, 11th hour, we're almost there. So if we can come to some uh, finality or semi finality for next, next time we meet. And, um, I think I have 15 minutes on there for that so we can, you know, um, stretch it out a little, but we have two QJMs next time. So we actually only have one, one QJ. So we can stretch it out a little. So let's, um, brainstorm. Um, if you want to work on, you know, that, um, more than, more than happy and willing to, um, but let's, let's try to have one or two asks saying, Hey, we really feel through the conversations we've had through what we've, discussed this is where we do feel we can serve the community and council best any objections to that okay any last questions comments feedback anything

I have a question about the joint sessions with other boards and commissions. You had mentioned questioning whether we need council permission to meet with another board. Why would we need council permission to meet with another board?

Well, because it's not in our duties. THE DUTY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ARE AROUND THE DUTY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ARE AROUND TITLE 10. TITLE 10. IS THERE ANYTHING IN TITLE 10 IS THERE ANYTHING IN TITLE 10 THAT SAYS WE SHOULD BE MEETING THAT SAYS WE SHOULD BE MEETING WITH THE COMMISSIONS? WITH THE COMMISSIONS? BUT THERE'S NOTHING THAT SAYS BUT THERE'S NOTHING THAT SAYS WE CAN'T. WE CAN'T. I UNDERSTAND. I UNDERSTAND. TOTALLY UNDERSTAND. TOTALLY UNDERSTAND. I GET IT 100%. I GET IT 100%. I'M GOING TO TURN TO OUR TOWN I'M GOING TO TURN TO OUR TOWN ATTORNEY'S OFFICE TO LET US KNOW ATTORNEY'S OFFICE TO LET US KNOW WHETHER OR NOT THEY DEEM IT IS OR WHETHER OR NOT THEY DEEM IT I know we've discussed, there is some privileged communications in there related to the question of possibility of us having a resolution. Is that something, resolution for the RO process? Are you able to explain a little bit what you had told me about whether our body is or isn't able to provide a recommendation for RO?

Yeah, I think, um, As been said here before, I think the rules, the duties and responsibilities of the Planning Commission starts with the charter and then refers to chapter three and then the UDC. That's the crux of what the duties are. Primarily a recommendation body for various land use applications. If the Planning Commission and what's been discussed here, if the Planning Commission wants to expand the authority to have additional ability to act on applications, provide additional guidance or assistance to Town Council, I think it is best to have an ordinance to amend either the duties in Title III, where the Planning Commission responsibilities are set forth, or in the UDC. So there is clear guidance from town council on what the duties and responsibilities and expectations of the Planning Commission are.

So, and I brought up the example of RO because the question is, do we even have any authority? Say we meet with OSTAP and say, that's great. Can we have a resolution? Do we even have any authority to do that? Technically, we may not because the charter provides that to OSTAP. So that's where it's. we are provided only what is within the udc and generally this is it so if we want to expand it out yeah there may be some smaller things we can put into the bylaws since council does have to approve that but if there's certain things that we identify saying hey this is where we see a fit and we want to do more in even if it's a broad topic and we're not saying you know this specific aspect if we want to be a little broader and um you know expand out our mission probably would be a code change that would be required to do so, so that there is explicit permission to do so. Because again, right now, we don't have explicit permission to say, hey, we want to meet with, you know, OSTAB, tree board, sustainability. Like, does it fall into anything within the UDC? No. Then technically, we may not be able to at the moment.

I mean, to that point, did the sustainability board break the law by meeting with the tree board and putting on a leaf collection event?

No.

That wasn't laid out in the code. I get it.

I think consulting the town attorney is not a bad idea, though. I don't see any negative in that.

That's his whole job. When you look at the other boards in Title III, Chapter II, there's specific duties on where they advise, where they recommend, and certain actions they can take. So I think the authority for those boards is vested in the enabling ordinance. The Planning Commission, the enabling authority, is limited to what's set forth in Title X. So to meet with OSTAB or other boards, it should be tied somehow to the roles and responsibilities of the Planning Commission. so if you want to expand and provide additional advice or guidance recommendations to town council i think it would be you ask town council for those additional responsibilities and that will be implemented through an ordinance change to to specify those additional responsibilities either in uh title two or chapter two of title three or in the udc yeah because one of the issues with talking to ostab

is you could run into some quasi-judicial issues.

So I'd be very careful about that.

Only because I know we've had, from when I was on OSTAP, we had hearings and things, or well, review development applications.

Yeah, and I think anytime that a potential application could come through and not even quasi-judicial because that kicks in when an application is filed, but there's just a potential appearance of bias, not impropriety, but impartiality. If you're meeting and providing recommendations on potential rezoning and taking a position on a rezoning before an application is filed.

So this may be a stupid question, but when you look at the UDC, which we're given authority to weigh in on, in the general provisions, it says that the UDC is to ensure the service demands of new development will not exceed the capabilities of existing streets, utilities, or other public facilities and services. So by extension, since we're responsible for making sure that the UDC does this, should we not be talking about these things? And which section are you looking at? It's in the general provisions, chapter 10, 1-3, subsection B-18. That's in 10, so.

And also the comprehensive plan.

Right, right.

And those are generally incorporated in the criteria that you all look at, at the various land use applications.

I know. Approval conditions, you know, for most of them, you know, adequate facilities, right? That is one of them that, what does adequate facilities mean? You know, is it development by development or is it us looking at comprehensively because um you know the arapaho 111th situation it was not only specific to that property it was the entire area around there that was inadequate and that was you know one of the issues right so please i just want to say i mean

When you develop a decision in a quasi-judicial case, it has to be on the record. So going outside of this process for information that we're going to use in decision-making is problematic. I'm just trying to get you back to your normal seat by saying I think we have general consensus that the next thing we're going to do is talk to the town council. And certainly we are well advised by our town attorney before we proceed with such a thing.

Yes. So that's one of the reasons. Let's try to come up with one or two asks so that we can run it through staff as well as the town attorney's office so that they can deem whether that is something that we could potentially do, whether there would be a code amendment. and then staff capacity because obviously if we say hey we want to do this we know we're volunteers it is going to rely on staff time and they have a number of priorities maybe it's something that we could tack on to their you know future work plan um but we can't ask them for their time if they don't have it so yes i thank you for allowing me to get back to my seat any last questions thank you thank you thank you thank you all Okay, that was the last general business item. So now comes down to staff reports, and we are right on time somehow. Are there any items to know from staff?

Just a couple things.

I want to thank Josh Campbell for not only being here tonight and answering some of those technical questions, but as I'm sure you all are aware, MJ Adams retired, Eric Leverage left, and Josh has graciously folded in those remaining affordable housing functions into his job. So thank you, Josh. And you may notice a new face around the dais here. This is Daryl Wolnick. He's our new planning manager. The planning manager does serve as staff liaison, so we're transitioning that. I'll be here for a while as Daryl. daryl gets used to erie particulars but daryl's got many years of experience comes to us most recently from the consulting world but has also worked in municipality as well Welcome. Yeah. We're very happy to have more staff to help. We are transitioning to a new agenda management software. So the iLegislate app will go away. There will be a new one. It is a lot more intuitive. That won't happen until August for Planning Commission. We're going to test it out on council first. Yeah, our next meeting is the 15th. We do have only one public hearing. There was an issue with the neighborhood meeting notice for one of them. So they're going to redo that. And we don't have a date for that yet. So we have that one public hearing and then the further discussion on joint study session.

That's it. Okay. Let's start with Commissioner Leif. Do you have any Commissioner reports?

No.

Other than to say I just enjoyed this evening's conversation and I look forward to continuing. Thank you.

Commissioner Broadus. I just want to thank staff for getting back to all the people emailing us about the golf course.

Sure. And I hope everyone has a wonderful Independence Day.

Yes. I love your nails.

And Commissioner Schatz?

Just a reminder that on the second July meeting, so July 15th, I am going to be out of town. I can join remotely. I will have that ability if that's desirable. I certainly will deliver something for everyone's consideration, hopefully in the next week, to assist the conversation we just had.

Nothing for me. Thank you.

And I don't have anything.

I just want to also reiterate, thank you, Josh, for joining us. I feel like any time we have one of these conversations, you just have a plethora of information. So please feel free to join us more. um but uh really i i do want to also um reiterate what was just said thank you all for the conversation we just had i've been through a dozen of these one of these links you saw it was a continuation of a continuation of a continuation of i think we had like six meetings back to back where we talked about that and we didn't get into a place where we said i feel we can do this and this is something specific so i'm hoping Hoping one or two next meeting we can get to, but I wanna thank you all. So with tradition, I am going to ask for a motion.

Motion to adjourn. Second.

Time is 8.06 and we are adjourned.