Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

and call this meeting to order i'll do a roll call of planning commission members and then county commissioners joey edwards here jason rucco here david jurich here heather lind here county commissioner tharp president and commissioner bullock here and um commissioner lee is not going to make it this evening um any changes or additions to the agenda we don't have anything for you okay we have minutes to approve for june 8th

that would be the change yes okay yeah we don't have that so we we already approved the June 8th okay so there were some edits that we have picked up but I think that was part of your motion so got it we don't have any other great updates from staff so just wanted to remind everyone that we are looking to start the interview process for candidates to join the Planning Commission

And so what we're hoping to do is set up those interviews next week. So traditionally, we've had the chair and vice chair. So we're going to be looking for Heather and Joey to join us. And Matt and Elsa, through your CMO ops, you may have heard about this. We're wanting one of the members of the board of chem commissioners to join us for those interviews as well. And so we're hoping that one of you would be interested in doing that next week. And so I think Rachel will work setting up, maybe sending out a doodle poll or maybe some other means to kind of look at what your availability is next week to interview the candidates that we have thus far. We have been running an ad in the newspaper and if you know anyone that would like to serve on the Planning Commission and you can share your lived experience of what a huge contribution it is, a meaningful contribution to the community it is. So we are still interested in receiving letters of interest for the Planning Commission. So if anyone knows someone, please encourage them and we'll start these interviews next week. We currently have two alternate positions available and one regular member. with Steve Stevens and Ryan Hill's resignations.

We have two or three applicants today.

We currently have two. And I think we've furthered those on to you, and so we'd like to start interviewing and keep looking for interested parties that might want to participate in that. So if you know anyone, please pass the information along or have them contact the department. We'd be happy to help them.

The only requirement is that they be a resident of Lake County.

Correct. And excited to dress on Monday, two Mondays a month. So, great. I think that's, you know, we're going to get right into our presentation. I don't think we have any other updates.

Great.

What do we know, feed diets? It's a candy service.

Thank you so much, so the planning department is really excited to share with you where we're at in the moratorium roll lodging and events. scope of work and. So tonight we're going to go through and just look at the different use types that we're suggesting. We're going to define them, talk a little bit about each one of them, and then we've used, we're really excited, we've used some AI-generated modeling. So to further identify them and kind of give them an identity, as well as look at them through a spatial context, really to look at the densities and kind of the impact in real time. So we're, you know, kind of our first stab at bringing in some modeling, but we thought that this was an appropriate way to do that. So I'm excited tonight to share with you what this can look like. And then we're going to go through and do a comparison of the changes that we're proposing. So we're going to look at the existing code and then apply these proposed changes and take a look at that. We're going to talk a little bit about impact mitigation, which comes in the form of standards in the code. So we're gonna kind of briefly touch on this a little bit around emergency management. That's one area we're gonna talk about a little bit tonight. Another part of this work that we've been able to bring in that we think would be really beneficial is a CUP amendment process. So you may recall that there is no current ability to amend a CUP, and this brings in an administrative ability as well as for minor amendments, it defines that in major amendments. We're going to talk about that. And then we're just gonna review our timeline, what's left to do in our scope of work and where we've been. But just wanna preface that all of this work has been done, this is the culmination of all of that last work session that we shared with you, that we've gone out and we've looked at peer codes, we've met with stakeholders, we still have some stakeholder engagement left to do that we'll talk about. But this is just all of that information that we are bringing forth together and putting into where we're at right now so let's go ahead and get started here we're going to start off with just a quick reminder on this process of where we have been through the moratorium time frame and timeline so this may look really familiar to you where we started at the first of the year to kind of inform all the information that we're going to bring to you tonight So specifically, to kind of dial into where are we today, we've got a draft code, a rough draft, that is under review and being edited. So the planning department has worked on this. We've submitted it to the county attorney's office for legal review. We are looking to have public engagement take place fashion to what you're going to see tonight and we're going to expand on it with some of the standards that we're going to briefly touch on tonight before the end of August and then our last stakeholder group really focus group that we need to touch base with and have conversations around our emergency providers which you can probably understand that is And these two groups were really why we extended the moratorium. We were set to be done in August, but we have extended until October. And so largely because we needed to get this feedback and information before we could finish the work. So this just gives you a time frame that we're hoping to work with those emergency providers this week into next and then work with Matt Hobbs on the legal review of our proposal. And then in October, we'll be looking at the actual implementation, which means our public hearing process and our adoption and then actually applying these changes in the code. So we're gonna go ahead and start with the new use categories that we are proposing. And so the first one is semi primitive campground so we felt as though that the back country really needed to have its own unique commercial use. And that we had been using root camp to address this this commercial use in the back country. But we've come in with a more refined approach on how we think this should actually be present in the backcountry. So it's still a conditional approval, but now this is unique to backcountry. So you're not gonna find a semi-primitive pecan ground allowed in any other zone district. We've increased the minimum lot size from five acres to 20 acres. When we get to our comparison chart, this is a significant change and we're going to want to kind of dive into this a little bit. So I'm going to put a pin in this, but this is a significant change and it does have a significant impact to it. So we want to talk about that when we get to the comparison. And then density. So in two ways, we feel like the minimum lot size and the density really represents the intent of conservation and preservation that's prevalent within the zone district's intent and purpose. So density is restricted to no more than 32 people housed in up to two structures. Again, you may remember we talked about this in our last work session. This is kind of the 10th mountain model. Melissa had looked into this, and I think that that's kind of how you frame this, is that this seems to be really kind of sustainable in keeping, again, with the purpose and intent of backcountry. So those are going to be two significant changes that we're going to talk real quick is structures include temporary yes okay yeah it encompasses everything everything yeah and traditionally that's kind of what you're going to see so and we're also going to be very intentional in the code about prohibiting this activity above timberline because of that impact to delicate tundra that you can't reverse those kind of irreversible impacts in that area. We're looking at simultaneously looking at our OWTS regulations, our septic system regulations. So where we're starting to work towards is that vaults and vault privies would become a conforming use for cemetery waste in the backcountry. These are areas that it is difficult to put in traditional OWTS systems. It also potentially has a greater impact on the land. And so, again, trying to keep that purpose and intent strong with all of this. You're going to see that we're considering those conforming, which means today you have to go before the Board of Health to get a variance. In this particular case, we would update the regulations, so this is a conforming way to address sanitary waste. There'll still be reporting requirements and such, but you won't have to go through that extra layer of variance. And then for water, looking at water supplies as the ability to have alternative methods that are supported by public health, and that may be the kind of pack in and pack out idea for potable water. and still needing non-potable for extinguishing campfires. And we really need some discussion with our emergency management, our appointed and elected about do we need additional water supplies for significant events given where we've been. So those are some changes that you're going to see in the code. And this is a new use. But we have previously considered these under group camp. On here so here's our first very exciting. modeling AI generated models, so what this is showing you and giving you kind of that spatial. context and seeing how this presents on the property so we've got more of a primitive access. More primitive structure types, and this is the maximum allowable density on a 20 acre property in their personal in the back country, so this is what is going to typically look like, and so we think these models really kind of give a good identity and visual understanding. Certainly happy to take a little bit of a pause here, if you have any questions.

So it's not necessarily to scale the houses because they would be giant enormous houses at 600 square feet. Right, but I mean the scale.

So this scale is 1 inch equals 100 feet and these are I think the data that was given in these is that they are Let me just see, we've got all the attributes on here. So these are two primitive campgrounds at 600 square feet each. So this is...

Right, just the visual. No, they're not. Okay. There's nothing saying that the two units couldn't be adjacent to each other. Correct. There's no space requirement or anything like that.

Right. The only thing that we'd keep certain... Elements like that are, you know, like fire separation and things like that. We're not applying a building code here, but we still want to think about fire separation.

These are relatively minimal separations. So in the 20 acres, it doesn't matter what shape those 20 acres take. It could be a long, skinny strip. It could be any number of different things. But 20 acres aggregate.

That's right. They have to be adjacent. So they all have to be within one parcel.

Right.

Traditionally, these are going to be those long, skinny mining claims, those 10.33 acre mining claims. So they're really going to be kind of those rectangle properties on the east side.

So it would, the new acreage change would make it so that no longer could somebody just buy a 10 acre one and only put eight people in there. for any kind of hub use or commercial use.

You'd still be able to do the backcountry structure, which is not commercial. But just no rental. But no group camp. But no group, no semi-permanent. But exactly. So this is how it would represent for commercial use.

And then my next, sorry, one more is that if you, I'm assuming because this is just a summary, but 32 people is a lot of people, but I also understand that that's how so are there other parameters we're going to have in there and requirements for how many people. Like as far as in that is that just part of the hearing or are they going to be outlined like. If you're going to have more of your occupancy is going to be as big as 32 people, you know similar to the huts you would need the staffing for that you know so like I guess that those are kind of my.

Yeah, those are great questions, and so those are things that we are, and I'm happy to share the actual proposed code, which will have these, so after this meeting, we will share that to you that we've given to legal, and so we have gone through, similar to kind of what we had done in event facilities, is you have to look at the natural occurring hazards on site or the attributes about the parcel to determine that the 32 is our max allowable it's not again not an assumed it's max allowable depending on whether or not the site has the ability to house that many people on it so through the site plan review process so one of the first criteria is site selection So when we provide all of those standards, so yes, we apply eventually when we, the next stage that we're going to bring to you are all of the standards that we're going to apply to these. But there is a whole series of those to make sure. So today we're showing you maximum allowable, and then eventually we are going to apply the standards that then will help define and inform if that's appropriate or not.

Okay. With the ability or the requirement of vault toilets and potentially having to have cisterns, is there a minimum road requirement to the structures for service of those things?

That's going to fall a little more into, for the vaults, there has to be the ability for a licensed person to be able to come in. So we're going to be looking through the regulations for a contracted situation that they've got someone that will come in and service the vaults.

And that requires some type of at least a minimally maintained road. Same thing with a water truck to come in if they were required to have a cistern. Correct. Okay. Correct. Thanks. Yep.

Exactly right. So our next new use is semi-developed campground. And so this is what the other type of use that we lump in under group camp. This is, when we met specifically with our economic development partners, we found that this really is the model that we'd really like to incentivize, this business model, and that it needs to have some fluidness to it, be a little more nimble. So this is really kind of a good economic driver. This is what we need to see as far as sustaining visitation and and really be supportive of that, so this use is really designed it's going to be one of our most flexible uses that you're going to see in our proposal. it's still conditional everything you're going to see tonight is still requires conditional review, so we can really adjust it site specific. But we're going to remove this type of use from the back country and it's got its own use specific. Only to back country and we're going to keep this in our forestry recreation and resort so that's where you'll find it today, we currently don't have any parcels. zone to resort but resort has a good intent behind it that potentially someday we might, and this would be a use that would support. That type of selling so we wouldn't change the minimum lot size, it still needs a five acre minimum. but we would increase the density from five to 10 people per acre. So again, another reason that we really wanted to give you some kind of spatial context to these changes to allow a greater density, again, if the site-specific and the site plan review can sustain this. So this, again, is none assumed, maximum allowable. It's allowable if the site can support that. Sanitation would still allow for vaults and vault privies as conforming use without having to go through a variance process. However, they still have certain parameters like we just talked about. Oops, sorry, I'm the one driving this. About needing a company that is registered to deal with the vaults and service them. There was a time that we allowed owners to transport their waste to a dumping station, and the new regulations are going to see that we get away from that. We've had conversations with the state. We want to make sure that this high-strength waste is properly at all times handled and disposed of. So we'll be making, in one way we're going to get a little less regulatory in the OWTS regulations, but then we're going to also make sure that we're being good stewards of that discipleship method. Water, again, this can be a series of different things. Semi-developed campgrounds can have both some built structures, they can have camping sites, it can have you know it's going to be more nimble so you're going to be able to see things like domes and yurts and van camping and tent sites but it may also have built structures if they're built structures they're going to follow the building code but they could be a variety of different places to house people so really wanting to make sure that that this has got a lot of different Abilities to kind of meet whatever the market demand is non potable water, of course, for campfires and then again may require additional existence for support and more significant events and. Everything is kind of the same, so let's we did two models of this one that just shows like campsites. um for a semi-developed campground so this is the five acres the 25 just campsites on it it does have a toilet structure because you still need for like those ball previews you'll still need to have one designated for each gender or i think the code also allows for a non-gender specific toilet structure. It just, it typically, for 25, there's certain, define how many, based on your flow rate. So engineers come in, they design, you know, how many of these ball privies are needed to sustain the density on site. So it does show that toilet structure and then just these different sites. And then the other model that we have prepared for you is a more of a glamping retreat. So this would be your semi-developed that has a series of different types of lodging opportunities within it. So everything from yurts and domes to just tent sites. And then it also has just kind of a gathering space like a pavilion. These would all fall into that semi-developed use. So really trying to again kind of beat the market where it's at, listen to our economy experts and what the demand is and what we'd really like to incentivize and what really matches our identity as a community. So there's one other kind of cool thing that we believe that we're adding in here and that is the accessory use. So allowing for The ability for these semi-developed campgrounds to have things that we're defining as small-scale, low-impact events, things like yoga retreats or corporate gatherings, some type of bicycle group or a training camp, things that don't necessarily associate with amplified noise. They can easily abide by those quiet hours. Bless you. and that they don't exceed 100 people per day, and that they don't go for a length of time more than three continuous days. They could do these up to four times per calendar year as an allowable accessory use, but they will have standards. They are gonna have to address adequate parking. They will have to be able to demonstrate adequate water and sanitary waste, but in these cases, This could be a temporary solution. That means that whatever their solution is with their privies, they could add courthouse for this use. They don't necessarily have to invest immediately in the infrastructure to sustain this type of extended use beyond four times a year. So what we're hearing is that small businesses need the ability to be a little more nimble, to be more sustainable, and test their market. So they need the opportunity to have these test periods to ensure whether or not they want to invest those big capital dollars into infrastructure, or can they meet their needs four times a year under this accessory use. If they want to expand that, and go beyond four times a year, then the temporary use permit is still available. or you could come under and get a CUP and become an event venue, an event facility. So there are other opportunities. This is just an automatic way, again, to support that small business development. What we've really heard is essential in our community and really fits what we're trying to kind of reach to incentivize local business with. um and uh so that's there was an image there is an image let's take a picture or take a look at the picture buddy something else i was going to mention but i can't remember what it was right now so let's see what that looks like if we add um so here we have kind of that area that we've got the camping going on. I would say that it's supporting an event with a built structure and some outdoor quality, so it's a little bit of a mix. It does have to be able to present adequate parking. It may not all look like this image. you know, lean in with us, these aren't 100%, you know, they're just conceptual, so it may not represent itself like paved parking. It's more about do we have enough adequate spaces to provide parking on this site? So this, to me, is a little more developed, what you'll see in some of our other examples moving forward, but we just wanted to kind of show you how a semi-developed campground could also have some space for this accessory event. And sometimes I think going back and even looking at some of these other models, you know, so is there an area that you could put, you know, a gathering space over here? Is there adequate parking if you get people off of the right of way and have a good evacuation plan and things like this? So some of these could potentially accommodate this accessory use as part of the review. And some of them may want to go, you know, as far as having it a little more well-defined. But we want to give the nimbleness to be able to kind of embrace all of this and support that.

Yes. Four events, three days maximum. If they want to do a seven-day event, does it go straight to a CUP and it's a different deal?

You could just use the temporary use permit through a special event permit. Now those numbers are not set in stone. So I think I need to point out for we've heard everything from three to six.

Well, even a three-day event would require six or seven days with setup and breakdown before and after the fact. So a three-day event is

be almost impossible to put something like that together. Three days of a hundred people on site is the idea, right?

Exactly. So three days is kind of when you would have the people actually gathered for the event, but that's a really good point. Maybe we need to further refine that up, you know, that we consider that there will be time to set up and break down. We can extend that to seven days. So those are movable numbers that we want to hear back from you to say, hey, does that work? Is four the right number? Is three the right number? Is 100 people on site overwhelming? Does that feel, as an accessory use, too much density? Part of this will get reviewed through the site plan and the CEP, because you're going to put all of those use specific standards to the test with each one of these. So it's going to get, you know, this isn't, this will never be a broad entitlement. Everything will be site-specific once you apply standards.

So the 100 people for the special accessory event, is that inclusive of all the other glamping sites that might have, so... 100 people total on site? regardless, so it's like if you got some people that are still camping, you could only limit it to 80 people if there's 20 other campers.

And so that's, we'd like your feedback on that. So it's being, you know, we're looking at this, actually the way that this represents right now is kind of having in addition to. So when we tried to kind of model this spatially, we thought about, okay, what if we had both of this occurring on the same site at the same time? Is that too much? Is that too, you know, are we, we're going way too more than the site can sustain? And should it just be a hundred people total? So that's going to be one of those decision points that we'd really like you to weigh in on as well. Yeah.

I think like one of the things that I feel like you're, you end up really straddling the line with is at one point, is really at the end of the day of better for them to come forward and become an event venue or you know come and have a more specific event permit because i'm trying to think of like i i just can see i think this is awesome and i think this will open a lot of doors for people but i also think it's going to open a lot of doors for people and so i think like you're going to end up having a lot of people come in and they won't know every event they're doing to know if the site can sustain what we think it's, you know, like your version of what they could do versus your version versus what their version is could be like totally different things. And so I just feel like because you're not analyzing the specific event of 100 people, you're giving them a blanket to have an event with 100 people. I just think we have to think about that. Like, so that's the only thing I would say is like, I think I really like it. I just want to think about the repercussions a little bit. Like, I don't necessarily think, I don't know of any necessarily right this minute, but I just, it does worry me a little bit that you end up with.

Well, I, yeah, and I could see, like, just to add to that, is, like, if there was a pack burrow training camp and you had 50 people with, you know, let's say 25 trailers with a couple of burrows apiece, the next thing you know, you have this, like, really giant event

happening and that's exactly what I was thinking whether it's a small music festival or some really hyped training event of some type you have all of those campgrounds filled up with people who were intending to be a part of the event but then you have a hundred other people show up for the event so you end up with an event with 200 people that you really didn't see in advance that's the only thing that I would

Wonder if the hundred, in my opinion, should include the campers because that's the whole idea behind the site, the site is like. we're we're creating this space for campers and there's going to be event so to me it's all this like i'm assuming i'm having this event for the people that are staying at my place, and so I think that, in my opinion, the hundred whatever the number is should be inclusive of. Yes, like it doesn't have to include your employees or anything like that. But I think everyone on the guests should be 100 people backs.

And because it would be so easy to work that backwards and end up with twice as many twice as much density is what you're paying for.

And I would say that I would just keep separate staff. So if you have if you need to have 10 staff people helping out, I just can't see limiting that part of it, because I would rather see some extra staff helping to manage everything.

No, that's what I'm saying. I think the $100,000 doesn't include staff, so we have nothing to do with that. It's just that it doesn't have to include your staff, but it should include everybody you have as guests on the property.

Whether or not they are involved in the event. Right.

That's great feedback. That's really good.

just thinking of all the people that would want to come a couple of days early and go camping but still want to be part of the event well usually that's the reason you would have an event is right but usually but yeah same time right well somebody could have a wedding there and these people aren't there for the wedding and so looking at the business side of it is that if something had to be delayed so a wedding had to be delayed for whatever reason maybe fire i don't

Is that business owner, if they push something to the next month and now they're double booked, are they just kind of out of, I mean, I would hate for that to be detrimental to their bottom line if they had to bump something too because of things outside of their control.

Well, I mean, if they're booked, they're booked. Like, I don't know how they would.

Right, but wouldn't they lose out money if they were, I don't know how that would work.

Yeah, but that's like free. Like if your wedding gets canceled and you pick a wedding, a night where there's another wedding, you can't do it. They have to say no.

Yeah. Can I offer something? Yes. I feel like what we're talking about is the capacity of the site and we don't need to like make it too conceptual. We're just talking capacity. It's like the same as a building. You've got a capacity of 300. That's 300 guests. You don't have to count your staff. You can't have more than 300, even if you had to double book it. Right. It's just not different. A site is not different from a building, and that might help a little bit. Yeah.

Very good. Thank you. Great feedback. Great feedback. awesome anybody else before we move on that wants to talk about okay so thank you for that feedback so what we've kind of heard is that we should keep this during those times of events to 100 people total, but it still has the ability to operate as a semi-developed campground, but it can pivot to support events and just, you know, we can be supportive and meet that need that we're hearing to really support small business. So that's great. I'm going to go ahead, Melissa's going to talk to you a little bit about the other uses. So we're going to trade off here.

So the next category, where the next couple of, well this category in particular, we don't see a lot of change. But this is our developed and modern campground. We are simplifying kind of what that means in our minds anyway. We've kept this a conditional approval. We removed backcountry from this category. The minimum lot size remains at two acres. And the density remains at 25 sites per acre. So, you know, we haven't had these applications. This is a portion of our code that's very prescriptive. If you do this, it's pretty much laid out how you do it.

And so... And we don't have those in the business, regular commercial district? They've not been in the business. No.

This is what we give them out. Yeah, so we do have our conforming OWTS or a public system, because they could be within those boundaries. And again, our permanent water supply. So not much creativity needed in terms of that. This is a lovely image, but it does demonstrate what 50 units look like. So two acre parcel at the densities that we're talking about. And most RV parks, as we've probably all been in, are pretty linear and pretty geometric, because that makes it very efficient. So this demonstrates what that could look like, including the bathroom-shower facility and the dump station. They actually are conditional in the business.

Yeah, I was just thinking, because I was like, there's that section of business along 91, and I feel like it should be conditional if it's not in the commercial or business, whatever you call it.

I would add to the AI-generated image that an RV typically has slips that are angled. because nobody wants to try to pull in things.

Oh my gosh, you aren't allowed to look at the AI images anymore.

I'm just saying, I mean... Yeah, this is where my mind goes to, too, so I'm right there with you. Who's going to pull in all those?

These guys have been talking me off the ledge today, too. It's okay.

I understand. See how wrong AI can be?

Those are pull-throughs. But these all, sorry, just, I think you mentioned this, but modern campgrounds, the difference between the two is these all need to support independent units, so they have water, sanitation, and electricity hookups. I'm sure you assumed that, but that's the big difference. And so this represents that kind of.

But they can be a mix of that, right?

Yes, but modern would have those type of hookups, whereas developed is your boondocking in a developed campground.

I just know that a lot of develops also have tent sites.

As long as they have RV hookups, then our code would consider them modern. Okay, that's what I meant.

Yeah, they are just, yeah, okay.

They don't all have to be.

Right.

Yeah, so here is the developed campgrounds. So these are dependent. unit, so just vans, spaces, again, our yurts and domes, as well as the tent sites. This kind of lays it out pretty clearly and that well. I do have a...

The modern and developed are the same zones. That was on the same... two slides back.

Yeah, that's right. We kind of are saying developed slash modern. And maybe we need to lay that out a little differently. But they do slightly different things because these are dependent. They don't bring their own, you know, you're going to use these facilities for bathrooms and water, etc. So, yeah. This is the kind of density that we're talking about. But again, the difference in probably our semi-developed and developed is pretty obvious. The level of utilities are significantly different.

Can you say again what the people count was for you? I don't remember.

This one is a two-acre parcel. There's 50 campsites.

And the, let's see, what is it? I don't think it says it on here, but I know two slides back, I think it shows it.

You get 25 campsites per acre, and it doesn't define the how many.

So there's no people count.

The people count on the other one was for the events they could automatically do.

It wasn't for the actual campground section. So is there a people count for this new category?

No, it follows, and this follows our camping, state camping regulations of 25 sites per acre.

So the other one wasn't attaching people to the campground type. It was attaching the number of people to...

So you have 25 people per tent, I guess is what I'm, like, there's no limit? I guess that's what I'm failing to understand.

Well, some things, like, so in a developed and modern campground, you're gonna be, you're also, you're gonna have to size all of your facilities like that. So generally you don't see 25 people per campsite. In pretty much any model I've ever seen. You're gonna, because, and partially is A, because that's probably not very marketable, But the other is, so all your infrastructure is going to have to be designed around your occupancy and your flow rates. So eventually, absolutely, we're going to know how your infrastructure is sized to support how many humans you have on site. So campsites will have to, when you start putting in your infrastructure, particularly your water and your sanitation, you're going to start having to determine how many humans you're going to have on site at any one time. that'll be really your defining moment of how many people you're going to have on site so 25 campsites generally you're seeing somewhere between two to six people per site and that's just a industry standard and that's going to rough up to something like 100 people as a typical maximum but for the purposes of somebody saying i want to have there's no limit as long as you're you're

There's no limit, but your sanitary system supports it.

But they have to base it on something, and that's where the 25 sites kind of limit you to somewhere around 100 people.

Right. I'm just thinking, like, so if you have two acres and you have 25 sites per acre, 50 sites, you have 50 RVs, and an RV can sleep 10 people, that's 500 people. as long as your sanitation system supports one and two for 500 people is the only, I'm just.

You're going to put in, you're going to have to put in collection lines and you're going to have to. So, you know, they will typically, you know, the modern and developed campgrounds will typically put limitations or have infrastructure that can support that.

So we're not limiting it in the code here. But it's limited in, I guess, I just don't understand why it's spelled out in one place, but not in another place.

The other place was simply an event. If a campground, if somebody wanted to put together a campground and they wanted that automatic use of an event without having to get a special event permit for an auxiliary event, that event has a max of 100. It had nothing to do with the campground. As the campground operates, there was no People limit it was just campsite.

I just think it's a little bit strange that you wouldn't have.

So there are places in the code that we are going to limit how many people per acre you're going to see that they're going to be more in our areas that we have vulnerabilities or sensitivities to the lands in the areas and compatibility with the Jason uses. in our areas that we've got, so we're less worried about how many people are per acre in places that we've got traditional infrastructure and brick and mortar buildings and things like that that support it. So we're more sensitive about how many people that we have on the land in different areas that have generally more environmental sensitivities because we think about the impact of the degree of use on the land. So in an area where it is more defined with centralized infrastructure and paved roads and good turning radiuses and site distances and in certain zone districts that we don't have as many environmental sensitivities, we're less concerned about how many actual people are on the ground.

I guess where that then leads, my next question is, is there anything that prevents that from becoming permanent residence? So we have someone so like with the 50 RVs so then the slide before it that's what you know could that potentially become hey we're just gonna all hang out there forever is that or is that what we're trying are we not preventing that or are we is that something that needs to be that's a great question because I don't know because there are some

like the Salida RV Resort, you can buy a tiny home and live there full time.

It's probably 50-50 at this point.

And half of them do and half of them don't. So we would want to talk about that as part of the conditional use permit. But again, these are conditional use permits, so they're not automatic approvals. So somebody would have to bring in their presentation, and you're going to ask, are you allowing 500 people Are you going to do well that's all part of the condition right so it's like, are you going to allow these are you gonna allow some sites to be used for more than you know for long term basis. Then we're considering that based on that and if their infrastructure meets that and supports that but similarly to like a house. with a septic system, they're going to size it based on number of bedrooms. It doesn't mean you can't put 20 people in your one bedroom and still have 50 people in your house, but your septic system requirements aren't going to be based on people. They're going to be based on your bedrooms and bathroom paths. So that's the way that we're going to have to model the code initially for them to then put forward the permit, the application for what they want to do. And then us, but like this at least gives them a parameter of like, You know, generally, these are the parameters now you bring us what you're trying to do and we'll decide if your site works for what you're trying to do.

Okay, so you can further restrict during that conditional use permit based on their site and their application of these items and creating an opportunity in the code where a property owner that wants to entertain that has the ability to bring that forward for you to consider. So if someone has an opportunity that they want to do long-term rentals in here with tiny homes, we're providing an opportunity for them to bring that proposal to you for consideration. What does that mean? What does that impact, you know, if you've got long-term rentals instead of temporary occupancies in there? So we're creating a place where you can have those conversations. and look at this on a case-by-case basis.

Inside of the framework.

Right.

Make it easier to do. Jason, those would be good questions to ask at CUV hearings, long-term rentals, daily rate, monthly rate, that kind of thing. Those are good questions.

And we're not putting any regulation in the code right now that would preclude that.

Right, OK. That's what I just wanted to make.

Yeah, you're going to see some RV codes in some of our peer reviews that wouldn't let the RV rentals for longer than or less than or more than 30 days. And so there are some codes out there that will really want to keep these more of a transient lodging kind of idea than any type of long term. But with our housing crisis and different things, you're starting to see that model evolve to be some supportive housing options. So our code will allow the option to come in and a business owner could have that conversation and see if that's something. But we're not going to preclude them from doing it as we've got it right now.

Do you guys have other thoughts about whether that should or shouldn't happen?

I think it should be open for them to bring forward because I think they're, you know, like I said, this Slida RV Resort is a great situation down there for affordable, longer-term stays. You know what i'm assuming at least another still somewhat new but it's still pretty well kept down there and everything like. Assuming that they have lots of parameters on that application right and so i'm sure that when you're talking through some of those longer time you longer term use options you've got stricter guidelines on you know refuse and you know. yeah yeah all of us, so you have all those extra things that you're going to apply to that specific application. versus, no, we're going to have max seven-day stays at our park or whatever, then you're like, okay, well, we don't have to think as far into some of those other pieces.

Yeah, there are one or two new RV parks down in BD or just this side of BD, and they've come in with full, I mean, it is full residential infrastructure. It is incredible to see how much work they put into sanitation.

Right, and I guess what I'm saying is, are you going to see that along 24? Like, there's just 20 different developments of all RVs.

24 is a side corridor for us, so no, we won't. That's going to be part of the CUP process. And no, that's really not an option. But things like the tiny home RV park in Salida has actually driven a tremendous amount of, I mean, that entire area at this point has been developed. The vast majority of it has gone long-term is permanent structures. So that didn't spawn a bunch of other short-term campgrounds. It actually spawned a bunch of permanent development. So that wasn't a bad thing, what they did. And they've done a really, really good job with maintenance. I mean, the place is usually spotless. That's another thing that'll be something for us to try to uphold.

We really heard that in kind of the early conversations. Commissioner Lee's not with us tonight, but this was a question and a model that he wanted us to look at and think about. So we're ensuring that there's nothing in the code in any of these developed or modern campgrounds that would restrict that from being a possibility for a brand new elective to consider. So we're leaving that pathway open. for you all to look at because we do think it could also maybe be a supportive housing strategy too, just like it's been used in our communities. So that is an open possibility.

All right, very good. So moving to our rural lodging, kind of simplifying the name, keeping this a conditional approval, removing it from backcountry, there's a theme. really redefining it as built structures or a group of built structures. So they would really be building code compliant. That wasn't so clear before. And then on lot size, it's 20 acres. That's not a change. And the density of 20 people per acre remains the same. And so the same level of infrastructure is required. These are really permanent, intended to be permanent facilities. So here is a pretty fun image of a lodge that could hold 400 people with a restaurant and stables and a parking area to kind of accommodate. We haven't completely verified the parking count, but the idea is conceptual. So this again is sort of maximum density for this type of use.

Is the automatic event attached to all of these, or just that one?

Just semi-developed is the one that has the accessory event. Going forward, there's an image here we have of if there were an event facility with a lodge. But I wanted to pause here.

So my only thing. have 400 people staying there but only half of them get to eat because you have two buildings so you could have 400 people eat since all 400 people are i guess i don't understand 400 and 200 so far it's lodging versus dining capacity it says on the site summary yeah and not everybody that stays there

Yes, you could put it that way.

I didn't feed her that information. Let's just assume they're not all going to eat at one time. Yeah, like they're in stages or something.

Some of them aren't going to have a picnic at all.

Like the middle school versus the high school, right? They eat at different times.

So what's the what's the thought behind the event option only attaching to the one?

Well I think at this scale we can go to our this is a look at it as a cabin and we can go back here but an event facility on the full-on

And permanent structure, so it has water, it has the grass, it has all of the safety things that you would need to be able to do this on a full time basis for the other doesn't necessarily have. Because the other one, you can allow for portage ons and things. don't necessarily have water on site, I guess, I just am thinking.

Yeah, go ahead. So the rule lodging, I think we wrote the definition as some of the common uses could be restaurants, could be a whole array of different things. And I think that events, obviously, they're going to have weddings, obviously, this kind of thing. So I think it's written in that it doesn't need to have this kind of accessory event to it, it could encompass all of those things. Because it's going to be . It's already going to have the parking available. It's going to have all of these kind of, because it's brick and mortar, it's our most developed, it's our .

So it's not removing it, it's just assuming that it is. It's just kind of assuming that it could do more. Encompassing all of it anyway.

So the closest thing that Lake County has to this potentially right now would be like Angel View's lodge that is pre-planned. I know that's in residential development, but that's what this is kind of intended for, is some type of a high-end event space.

Kind of a destination resort, right? It's a destination resort that they're going to have. You could do weddings. There's recreation associated with it. I think that's what it's called. Recreation could be associated with it. Education could be associated with it. Weddings and events could be. That's just when you own one of these rural lodging Moderate density places it couldn't it could be kind of all things.

But heather I want to hear you wondering about is should we have an accessory.

No, I think I was just trying to think through the times like you created that potential for an event like for the I forget what it's called but I know the semi developed campground if they wanted to just have that three day. 100 people without needing to get a temporary use permit. And what I hear Ann saying is that these applications could likely just work in the events that they're allowed to have and not need that extra addition because it's already going to meet all of those.

Yeah, they really have an unlimited capacity in terms of the number that they would, you know, they just need to design it for the number of people that they would want to host.

But what we put in the code, because we were talking about how we were thinking about how many actual occupants. So this is one where you're gonna see that we've maxed it out so the max is 400 per 20 acres because we assume those kind of things are happening in addition to lodging. So this is one place where we have thought about how many people are on there because of all of the different things that we think could be occurring as part of A rural lodging center. We got 10 acres with 20 people per acre, so it was 200. And so, yeah, the model here just showed what would the event center look like if it was, you know, we just paired them up together. But it could also, obviously, it says there's some stand-alone rehearsal. And it's kind of cool because it's anti-episodic. Everything from an amphitheater to think outdoor to indoor and the parking that would be needed. So this is when you invest in, okay, we're becoming an event facility, we're gonna put in the infrastructure and this is what our primary use is gonna be. Whereas with the semi-developed campground, we just wanted to have that ambleness of them to be able to flex and accommodate things other than just lodging because there's a mark for that from what we're hearing. So we're just trying to kind of think, you know, how can we create opportunities that align with what we're hearing is needed.

That covers a lot of ground. It's aspirational. I like that.

I mean, we're not seeing. We've all heard through the years different ideas about this rural lodging retreat. It's going to happen any day now for the last two decades. But this is what it would look like, we think. And so we want to create that space for it.

I think there was supposed to be bar slides, I think, right? Yeah, that's right.

We didn't put the indoor water. It's housed under one of those roof lines over there.

One of these days.

Yeah.

Yeah, so we did jump over the options. Oh, yeah, there we go. Yeah. So this is sort of example number two. This isn't perfect math, but the idea is a smaller lodge with cabin. Again, permanent, you know, It's like Mount Princeton.

Yeah, yeah.

I have just a question. Is this kind of how like Grand West originally kind of looked before?

Yeah, this is what I used today as an example. You know, a lot of those are duplexes, so I'm like, oh, these could even be duplexes. But yeah, that's what I thought of, too. Yeah.

Other questions? So our event facility, you know, Elsa's the one who said, why not just take out the word special? Simplified a lot of things, Elsa. But anyway, we kept this as a conditional approval, removed it from backcountry. The minimum lot size has stayed the same, and the density has stayed the same, like I said. And as we talked about it, these are really kind of permanent water and sewer solutions. So... Here, we've been sort of rambling around this, but here's a chart that really kind of helps understand the accessory event, the temporary use event, and then an event facility. So right now, and I suspect we'll have more conversations with community members, how many times a year should an accessory event take place, or how many should a temporary Should somebody be able to get a temporary use for events before it goes to kind of that permanent facility? And these are the numbers we're starting with right now.

Can those two be combined?

Could you have four times under an accessory and pull four temporary event permits? Potentially. The way that it's written right now, you get the automatic accessory.

Mm-hmm.

and then you could come so we updated our temporary use code language to put into code all the submittal requirements and amendment process so the wildfire is a perfect example of and so is COVID but there are times that we have to amend these so we added that in there but right now you know what our intent is is that you don't circumvent the conditional use permit process And at what point do you need to commit to being an event venue? So how many times can the same site operate? So under this, our limit for accessory use is four. We haven't put anything that said if you've used all your accessory uses, you can't have the same as everybody else and still get four temporary use permits for the same site. So there is a possibility right now. As the draft is written, you could use your floor accessory. You could come in and apply for a floor temporary.

At the limited attendance. That would be a nice driver for development. So somebody doesn't take advantage of the situation and never, ever actually put any money into infrastructure. If they hit that wall, that's a good incentive to make a larger investment.

So what this does, it gives that accessory four times, and then four times you come in under the temporary use permit. Temporary use permits are a couple hundred dollars. I can't tell you how many it is. But it goes through the review process and we're looking at those impacts for under 100 and your other four.

Do you want that yeah I mean i'm not necessarily I think it's more just something we should be thinking about I don't necessarily disagree with that, but I agree, so then, then my question is this. Because we're talking about an event facility in a lot of ways, being accessory. To some of these things we're talking about but camping wise or logging wise, but you also could have about facilities be auxiliary to other uses in our code and they're kind of an auxiliary use, but you'd be getting a conditional use permit for it, even if your. Primary use doesn't need a conditional you know what I mean like, how does that work, so you still have your primary use doesn't need it right. you would just get a CUP for the event venue? Is that how somebody would do that?

So one site can operate hosting events up to four times annually, same premise, same site. But yeah, you'd have to transition at some point beyond that. If you're doing it more often than four, then you have to go to the event. I don't think I'm answering your question exactly.

So I have the... What was it called? Semi-permanent? Semi-permanent. I have this land and I've got 20 yurts on it and I am going to do... No, I'm the cookhouse and I have yurts. But there are weddings and there are more than four or eight of them a year. But the primary use is this restaurant, which I'm approved for, and then this lodging piece. So you get... separate conditional use permit, like do you get a conditional use permit for the venue to become a wedding venue because you're doing more than eight a year?

At that point, the way that we're suggesting it is if you're going to do more than eight a year, because we can get you there between the two of them, then yes, then you would need to come in and get SEP for an event facility.

Okay. So yeah, my question was like, and I guess it's just because I've never dealt with this, where A portion of the business needs a cup, but not the main do you know what I mean, so I think that's where i'm like So what if both things can you work like a pod where you have multiple things and they all fall under one cup.

A lot of you know and so that's the way our code was written before that if you hit 500 people at any of these that you would go to a pod pod is the most nimble right, you get to create your own zoning you get to create what your uses are what's allowable you can do. Mixed use, you can do whatever. So PUD is always an option to avoid systematic CEPs. Does it make more sense? Do you get to come in and maybe you got a different idea about parking?

For some reason I felt like PUD was only like subdivision?

subdivision development but okay so you can do PUD without subdividing your land that's just coming in and creating your own land unit development where you it's a hybrid zoning you get to be do your own designing designer zoning you just have to prove that it's an improvement to the underlying from the underlining zone district but that is available um without subdivision got it okay sorry those are good questions because I think you know we really

have wrestled and continue to wrestle with how many times a year is this allowed before you really invest in permanent infrastructure. And I think there's a real concern about, you know, rolling in porta-potties, you know, how many times a year is that a good idea? And then it's like, okay, you need to put it in a vault system or something. Yeah, it's time to check the box, right? And I think, you know, we've wrestled with four to six I hadn't thought until you brought it up that you could add these two together. And I think that was the intent.

They have to come before us for the use permit.

Yeah. Not the temporary one, right?

That's administrative.

The temporary use is administrative up to 500 people and then it's a board's decision at 500 or greater for that. The accessory event, so what we're going to look at is, you know, they need to provide I think that they still will need to provide some type of event. They're still going to have to do an administrative review with us, because they're going to have to show us that they have all of these things, because the code asks them to make sure that they have the sanitation, they have the water, they have those. So there will still be, it's an allowable use, but they're going to need to file their event information with us.

That's good, though. if they came to us four times for an accessory event, we would have the background information. Well, they've done 12 of this other. So then it becomes a different conversation as far as future investment and infrastructure development goes. So there is still a way to control that if you kept four and four.

Right. And we're really trying to find that balance of how do we support small business but also have favorable environmental outcomes. So we want to think about

And so the accessory event is right now written, the proposed way is three days. What was the temporary event? Was there a limitation on days? I don't remember seeing that.

We don't, I don't think the code gives, I'd have to look it up. I'm not sure if they give any timeframe on that. Temporary events don't typically last. All the ones that we permit in Lake County, they're usually

I didn't know if there was, like, on the accessory it said, I think it was three-day, right?

But they're kind of, they're kind of like, I'm applying, it's similar to a conditional use, like, I want to do this special event, can I get approval? For so many days. And then they put in their days, they put in their people, and then they have the option of being like, if that doesn't work.

Right. I just didn't know if it was written like the accessory where it said three-day.

Right. I'm not sure it is because I think it's like, if anything over 25 people... So it could be three days with only 50 people, easy. But if it's a three-day concert with 300, 499 people, then they're going to have different requirements for that.

So administratively, if they came in with 50 people and they said it's only three days and they were asking for a temporary event, you could say, well, you could just use an accessory event.

Yeah.

As long as it's low impact. So we want to look at the impact. You can have amplified music. is it you know is it are the end so can it be defined so it would be can it be refined as low impact is the duration at a certain threshold is the the amount of people you know meet those thresholds those would be really three of them so scada is going to fit into those categories to the accessory and there's still an opportunity um if one of those is known And we actually, when we were, I think Adam's on this call too, when we were, we heard everything from like six to 12. Like one, you know, you should be able to do a special event once a month, every month to kind of subsidize your business and being able to do those things. So this kind of lands in the middle of that, like six to eight.

It's fine until, if it's not, then we look at it again.

So yeah, this is where we wanted to kind of, I don't know if I can move that little talking thing. Moving it over here. So this is the table and some of the kind of significant changes that we really want your feedback on. So the first in the semi-primitive, this is what used to run as a group camp. It's only applicable in back country. So we used to back group camps that you have to have a minimum of five acres. We are intentionally raising this to 20 acres. This has huge significance because most parcels in the back country are 10.33 acre mining claims. So this immediately says that, and we've got roughly 450 parcels in the backcountry. So this immediately diminishes the degree of impact by saying, well, I'm going to have to own two adjacent parcels in order to even entertain the ability to do a commercial use in the background.

It is stipulated that they're adjacent parcels.

They'd have to be in order to be contiguous in order to be able to put the use on the parcels. So they would have to come in and consolidate that into a singular parcel in order to realize the use on it. So this is a significant way. to minimize the degree of impact in the backcountry. It is intended to align with the purpose and intent of the backcountry, which specifically says it's not designed to support commercial use. But this would be a significant change, also something we'll be working with Matt on to make sure that it's legally defensible to look at it in this manner. But this is one of those places that we want to just let this slip through for a little bit See what you think. If you have any immediate feedback on it, we'd love to hear it. But this is a significant change. So thoughts, ideas, like those. I think it's awesome. Yeah, you guys have done a great job.

Okay.

Great.

And talk, Melissa, out of making it 40 acres.

Or 35 acres. On the backcountry one?

It was impressive.

In the permitted zoning column, there's no new areas that it's only being removed in the backcountry in those four bottom categories.

Yeah, developed, modern, or changing, right, to allow it in business? Yes.

So no longer an option in the backcountry, which is also an excellent change. Right.

Right, but there's no other new on that list? No. Those are all existing? Okay.

Yeah, we're just removing it, you know, we're taking all of these uses out of backcountry. Got it. They were there, we're going to take them out. That was the first iteration. We did an amazing job after 20 years of hard work on backcountry, so it's just time to refine it. And then the density of 32 people max between two structures. Thoughts, ideas about that? Obviously this is our most restrictive occupancy, but again, firmly based in the purpose and intent of the zoning.

The HUT model has been tried and tested here for generations now. I think that's a great model to continue. There are very stringent rules and requirements, the way things are built, the way things are controlled, that'll be easier to replicate. I think that makes good sense.

Elsa, go ahead.

Thanks. I'm not firing all cylinders, so maybe this is a silly question, but when it comes to the two structures, I'm thinking like backcountry, you've got like a, imagine you've got your hut, and then you've got like a little porch out to your vault toilet. Then could you also have like utility shed or do these have to be like occupied structures? Would that be three structures?

Great, great, great, great question. So what we're talking about is hodlable structures. Backcountry zoning allows you two accessory structures, I believe, that can't exceed a certain square footage. So they're still allowable accessory structures, and you would obviously, a use like this would need some supportive structures, most likely, even if it was like a privy or something. So there are allowable accessory structures. This is just the habitable ones, the ones that are gonna house people.

So like a sauna.

Yeah, a sauna. Okay, great. Any thoughts about conforming vaults and vault privies becoming a conforming use? Any thoughts about that?

We're just going to want to have some, not restrictions, but some requirements for access.

Yes.

Some ongoing maintenance requirements for access. Same thing if cisterns are required for certain laws. That's right, that's right.

We do have a few providers, the rates that I've seen them go up to. They're crazy.

And that'll be part of the site plan review, you know, something we're not, again, we're not getting into. I'm going to just kind of go through those categories before we end, just so you kind of have an idea of what we say, site specific, what kind of things we're going to look at. I'll just share those with you because they're kind of universal through all of the uses. But we'll dive into those a little bit next time. semi-developed campgrounds so you know really the biggest change here is increasing that density if the site can support it so again this is very much based on that site selection piece every single one of these have to go through that site planning process that the Planning Commission approves before the CUP is approvable so can't approve the CUP And we usually do them concurrently and condition them similarly so that we're doing them at the same time. But we're looking at all those attributes. So this does give the ability to look at that. And that's why we wanted that spatial modeling piece to kind of look like, is this just a crazy amount of people? But we think that it looks like it is manageable in the right instances based on those site reviews. Um, not a lot of changes to developed in modern other than, you know, great conversation because we're definitely creating that space to think about these as supportive housing options too. Like, you know, if a project came in and wanted to have some longer term occupancies, would that be allowable? And okay, if utilities were, were sized appropriately and, and the infrastructure gets afforded. Sounds like we're open to that. Um, rural lodging, um, you know, our, our moderate density. Most. built environment and again 1020 people per acre so highest amount of. density when we actually look at that we don't talk about it like you're like you say we look at it as in units and campgrounds on the rule lodging why we've got the 20 people per acre is because we have people. Recreating at events outside on the property doing things so we want to look at like what so that's why we're looking at that degree of impact When we look at another thought maybe Jason to think about undeveloped and modern campgrounds. It's very transient They're kind of come in they're pretty self-contained if they're going to go out and recreate They usually do it out and away from the facility. So it's really kind of me They may have a campfire. They may listen to music. They might go to facilities on the site but generally rural lodging is are you going to go to a wedding where you're going to go to do those things so we're we're more thinking about the impact of people per acre on that site, moreover, so a little bit different impact we think. But want to make sure that that resonates with everyone. And then event facilities are the same. So that same type of density as long as there's that permanent infrastructure to support it. Lots of pathways to look at this accessory event use and temporary use. So that's all certainly still options. Questions? Thoughts? You think we're on the right track?

These are good changes. set up what your options are very clearly.

Awesome. I think this is where I turn it over to Melissa, but right before we do this, do you mind if I take your sample quote? I just want to go through, I'm just going to name them really quick. Every single one of these, when we start talking about standards, we look at site selection criteria. We're going to talk about each of these different uses what type of site can sustain this type of use so you're going to get parameters of what that means we're going to look at the size and density we've talked a lot about that tonight but that's part of the standards we're going to talk about what the setback requirements are so we mitigate impact from these different uses the beginning on the degree of impact you're going to see that that's a little bit you know greater distance in some areas than others. We talked about the water supply. We talked about the sanitary waste. We talked about that tonight. Melissa is going to talk to you about emergency planning and operations. We talked about building codes and utilities. We talked about what's allowable for accessory use. We talked about noise and refuse, disposal, access, lighting. Just to give you an idea. What are your favorite things? So we talked about dark skies. And what are your favorites? And just to give you an idea, so all of these things are, we apply those type of standards to all of the uses too. Let's take a look here.

Yeah, and I think we're doing a good job at making it clear what's required, because some of the language before was a little ambiguous. So this is a placeholder for our emergency management plan. Now that the fire has subsided enough that our emergency partners are available, talk through this with them. But, you know, making sure we have some sort of an incident action plan, an evacuation plan. We've talked to them for a while, OEM, about satellite communications. How do they know where people are? How do we let people know if there's an incident or, you know, outside a cell range? and then looking at probably additional emergency resources depending on how remote that area is because some of these we're talking everything from backcountry to things that are like our rural lodging so very different needs and then we have done quite a bit of look at what the US Forest Service does in terms of how they manage what a maximum capacity is because when we entered into this we had I really wanted someone to tell us what a good number would be. Like, can you quantify for us how we know when there's too many people? And it doesn't really work that way, of course. You know, it has a lot more to do with what are the roads that are available? You know, one of the questions that get raised a lot is when is there a secondary means of access really important? What if that's not available? I think those are the really hard questions that come before you all. And that we have to work through is sort of what is the capacity, but the Forest Service has been doing this a long time and has some good direction. So that's kind of our emergency management kind of spectrum of issues. And Ann mentioned at the beginning, the conditional use is that those regulations will be modified. When the regulations come to you, you will see this. so that we have a minor amendment process as well as a major amendment. And so that 10% is pretty common, I would say, throughout codes. Maybe a best practice, you could say. But looking at 10% increase is that in the size, the location of, you know, if they've mapped out certain uses on the property or the way they're going to do it, and they're modifying that in a sort of 10%. size, intensity, configuration, that kind of thing. So we'll be specific enough that we can apply that very clearly. And again, that's an administrative approval. And again, no previous minor modifications. We don't want people to just sort of add up 10% once a year for five years. You know, you get the idea. So we've needed this for a long time.

So this would be a good tool to have.

And then we kind of starting or ending in the same place here we are in August we're going to complete our stakeholder engagements, as well as our public engagement. And more toward refining this draft this discussion tonight's been very helpful, so we get through August and September in preparation for October when we plan on the adoption of new regulations. So that covers it.

So if this is in context for me, how many of these types of facilities have been proposed over the last 10 years? Or do you see it changing over time?

Have we seen 10 over the last two or three years, probably?

We probably have. We're seeing an uptick in the interest in doing these.

The glamping thing with creating the domes, all of that has become a very trendsetting newer thing, I think, so I think that I would attribute that to the majority of the uptick is like that's a more affordable way to put something like this together, rather than building a motel or building a hotel.

So I think there's been a lot of... Yeah, post-COVID sort of everybody wants to get out and move around and hike the tree and... What are some of these as

We have some special event people up here that are doing a really good job with different events and there's projects like the MUDGs and Climax Revival kind of stuff. It starts to get off the ground and we'll see more people looking at doing that as well.

And it's almost been, I think it's been actually all exclusive to group camps. I think everything I've done in the last 13 years has been But group camps was kind of this catch-all, and it wasn't really well defined, and the industry was evolving, and our code didn't, you know, they were saying, you know, glamping wasn't a thing, tiny more important thing, you know, all these different temporary lodging units, you know, so it's just been an industry that has really taken off, and so we were just kind of trying to make things fit in, and it's like, well, how do you, how, you know, How do you universally apply this? Well, we were trying to kind of do it a bit case by case, which is the worst way to do it. I mean, in one way you can do that site specific, but applying the regulations, they should be very transparent and very user friendly. And we're having to make a lot of interpretations, and that's not a great space to be in. So we want them to be very intentional and supportive, particularly through a campus somewhere that needed some work to be able to be sustainable and really support our local economy. So that's one of the big goals coming out of this.

Do you think this will encourage or be neutral to these kinds of developments?

Yeah, that's something we'll kind of watch, but I think that our goal and our hope is that it'll incentivize. It'll be an easier pathway for small business to develop and to test their market before they make large investments in capital infrastructure. So hopefully they're more resilient, more supportive, and we can incentivize. We're really trying to support those economic development goals of providing more lodging and So, you know, we also, yeah, we look at the rule logic model and we still want those higher densities to be closer to the city periphery and the city around the periphery. But, yeah, definitely we're hopeful and we'll be monitoring it to see how it's doing. But we also saw something that we felt like we had to protect in the backcountry.

Well, and this will drive development toward more appropriate land and we'll eliminate a lot of those people, well I can buy a really cheap parcel, how do we make it pay? This eliminates a lot of that, which will be a good thing and help protect that country and help make it easier for us to defend if and when we need to do that.

Exactly. You know, just knowing the resources that it takes or the events, you know, now after this lived experience that we've had, you know, if you could just really supports those goals that we felt were really strong in the beginning before this. But now we really think that this is intended to make sure that we're not encouraging development in areas that we don't have the resources to support or that we could do long-lasting damage.

Great. It's good you guys. You put a lot of work into it.

Yeah, thank you. That's awesome. I think it's good you got a lot of thought. Great. And really, the current plan being adopted, that's still on?

Yes, we just got the draft of, that's a good, that probably was one update. I haven't even had a chance to look at it yet today. But we got the draft in of the strategic growth plan from EPS. So I do think that, do we have anything set for tomorrow morning?

We're talking to our project management team. But for it to come back here, we don't have it set up yet. So we can look at our next agenda.

Yeah, I don't think that we have an application being heard for this.

No, we do.

We have one. So you have a backcountry site plan that's coming up. But that probably is a great agenda for us to just Bring the standards, you've heard everything else, now let's have a look at how do we look at the impacts and have we properly mandated the impacts of all this use? That'd be kind of our focus for our next discussion on this. And we could also bring the draft, we can get this out to you, of the strategic growth plan. Really looking at infill versus greenfield development. Obviously, we already know That info is more cost effective and easier to support, but we needed to do a little bit more work around that to be beat our statutory obligations for a comp plan. So we'll get that information out to you if you just got it.

We know that we've needed to then integrate it into the document. It's got to go back to DOA. DOA needs to bless it. And so that's why we don't have a hearing date, because all these things need to move a little bit. I imagine that'll be October.

Yeah, that's what we're shooting for is somewhere in there. We're synced with the city. They've got to go back and do a bit of an amendment just because we got a little ahead of the strategic growth plan. So now we decided that the best thing to do is just kind of take a minute. DOLA's already queued up. They've already reviewed our comp plan. We got that feedback, really great feedback. But there were a couple of things on this. So they're poised and ready to put it back through the review process, but not the whole plan, just the strategic part. So we're almost there with that.

Hopefully in October, because we're not here in the first half of October. Oh, right. Well, we are. Well, you have our dates already up through October.

And if, yeah, again, just another plug, if anyone knows somebody that would love to serve on the Planning Commission, we'd love to get them in and get them interviewed, so. See if you've got anyone that you think would like to make that commitment. Did you have anything for us in the room?

No. Okay. I haven't had a chance to look at it yet. I sure don't. Yeah, it looks like a really worth a lot of changes.

Well done everybody.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I'm like waving and I don't have my video on. Oh my God. Hi. Thanks for not saying you're going to sleep. You're riveting.

Thank you for that.