Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Okay, it is 4.01 and I'll go ahead and call this plating commission meeting to order. Do a roll call of plating commission members, Joey Edwards, Jason Marufo.

Here, sorry, I'm on Zoom. This is the last minute thing.

No worries. David Jurich.

Here.

And Heatherland here, we will get commissioners in the room for the 2nd, 1, but I know we have commissioner Lee is here. Yep, here and. We actually, you're welcome to stay on and listen to the back country application. That's the 1st item on the agenda, or we can text you when we're ready for the 2nd work session portion that we need you for.

How does this work procedurally? Is this something that I'm going to have a decision on later?

No, this is just the backcountry site plan review that just gets approved through us.

Okay, I'll stick around.

Okay, cool. We have minutes to approve from July 13th and August 10th. And I did see both of those. Do we have more things to approve?

They are both there. David, did you have any changes to make to the minutes? Yeah, Edwards moves to approve the minutes for July 10th. July 13th. Sorry, July 13th. We'll get there in a second, in August. Sorry, July 13th and August 10th minutes. Second second.

All in favor that is I I. No, that's great. We'll get update from staff.

Great thank you so much. I think the first thing that we wanted to mention is that we will have hearings coming up in. September and October November we're going to that first meeting in November we're hoping to help hold the public hearing on the comprehensive plan with a tentative decision by the board on November 17th so just wanted to Make sure that you're updating the calendar that Melissa maintains to ensure that we have a quorum also our second meetings regular scheduled meetings in November and December may be problematic for the Commission November. 23rd is just a few days before Thanksgiving and December 28th is just a few days after Christmas. So in the past, we've always kind of asked the planning commission to start thinking about those dates. If you'd like alternate dates for those November and December time frames or if you'd like to forego those meetings. And we might want to just hold off making a decision on that because we don't have any Public hearings yet that we're trying to schedule in that time frame until we kind of hear the outcome of the Planning Commission interviews that are going on right now. That's kind of a good segue into that we had a couple really positive interviews with applicants wishing to serve on the Planning Commission. We have a third meeting or interview that we are trying to put together for, is that this week or next week, Rachel?

Yeah, just whenever we can find time.

Okay. We'll schedule it. Okay, so Rachel's going to be reaching out to see if we can set up another interview with the intention of hoping to bring that in as a discussion item for your first meeting in September, September 14th. for a recommendation for appointment of some of the applicants. So that will really increase numbers and capacity, which will make it a little more convenient for everybody to have a life instead of always being super concerned if we're going to have a quorum. So, but excited already for the interviews that have been happening. We do tentatively believe that early indicators are that we're going to have the CMC housing review in hopefully September. We've got Hayden Meadows or Ranch, whichever way you'd like to refer to it, is an upcoming PUD that's upcoming. Another substantial application that's in review in the planning department is the Lake Fork PUD, which is an expansion of the manufactured home community. We are working with Root Policy, our housing consultants, on just kind of looking at affordability and what that means in these communities. We're going to move into some focus groups with residents in that area to better understand the social and economic makeup of that community. And this also really leads into one of the action items that's coming out of our new comp plan. implementation, and that's really looking at the zoning for all of these areas. And since we have the PUD application before us, this is a, you know, just kind of great timing to be leaning in and starting with Lake Fork and taking a look at this. Already talked about kind of the tentative schedule, but that's looking like it's going to have more traction. Tonight we're going to talk a little bit and give you during the work study part of the agenda. update on the strategic growth planning piece of the comp plan but November 9th I think is really where we're headed for that public hearing Wednesday night this week we're well first I should say we're making significant progress again a part of our work session this evening will be focusing on the moratorium And we've had some engagement that we're gonna talk about with the emergency management providers. And then this week, Wednesday night, we're going to be hosting a public engagement to really hear from the public on the proposed changes to rule lodging and event uses in the code. So significant progress on that and nearing the completion of that work and so that's one of those the first meeting in October that we're hoping to have good attendance from the Commission on and the board Angel View 2 we're still waiting on some critical review items that came up through the completeness review and particularly around access and water. So that will be coming up for public hearing in the preliminary stage of the subdivision, but still waiting on some critical aspects to come in and be reviewed. So I think that is, and I'll just, do you have anything else, Melissa or Rachel, that we should?

Yeah, on September 14th, we don't have any land abuse cases. We do want to get somebody on board that makes a recommendation to the board. So I wonder if we don't want to do a call for that purpose.

Well, and I'm not sure that we want to. Yes, we definitely. So I think some discussion, if we don't actually have something that we'd like to bring forward for discussion on September 14, we certainly want to hold. regular meeting because we do want to make sure that we're talking about the interviews and what we'd like to do to move forward so we'll see as we get a little closer if we've got anything that we would like to add to the agenda or if we can maybe streamline that meeting into an online version instead of an in-person version we won't we certainly won't have any public hearings on the 14th so it just kind of depends on if you have any other items that come up that would be

be beneficial to me personally okay that's it okay um for our zoomers i have a db on there and then one with a phone number um three three one four three six six if you can either unmute and give us your full name or change your name on the zoom for public record that would be helpful please and hopefully you heard that all right we'll just move into our first item under new business and that is file 25-30 which is 6663 smuggler backcountry site plan review We'll do the opening statement. The Lake County Planning Commission will now conduct a public hearing. The statement I am reading shall be incorporated into and made part of the record on these proceedings. The Planning Commission has jurisdiction to conduct a public hearing on a backcountry site plan review under Section 5.2.27.1 of the Lake County Land Development Code. The purpose of this hearing is to consider whether the proposed site plan should be approved. In considering that matter, the Commission will address the approval criteria that are set forth in Section 5.2. 2.27.1 of the Lake County Land Development Code. The procedure this evening will be as follows. Number one, members of the Commission will disclose if they've had any ex parte communications. Two, staff will make their initial presentation. Three, the applicant may then make their own presentation. Four, after that, any other persons supporting or opposing the application may present evidence. five supporting and opposing witnesses may be questioned by the commission once questioning is concluded no further questioning is permitted unless granted by chair and six the applicant may then present any rebuttal evidence the parties and witnesses are asked not to submit redundant irrelevant or cumulative evidence if someone has already made the point that you wish to make please simply say so the chair will also require that all comments be made to the planning commission there be no dialogue between the applicant and members of the audience At the conclusion of the evidentiary portion of the hearing, the Chair will entertain a motion to close the evidentiary portion of the hearing and the Commission will discuss and weigh the evidence. Then there will be a motion to close the discussion phase of the joint public hearing. The Chair of the Planning Commission will entertain a motion on the application. The motion may take the form of any of the following recommendations. One, approve the application with no conditions. Two, approve the application with recommended conditions. Three, approve the application with newly identified conditions. Or four, deny the application. The planning director shall make a record of any substantial discussion on the motion and include that in the record with the decision of the commission. Are there any objections to the jurisdiction of the commission or to the form or substance of these proceedings? Hearing none, I will now ask each planning commission member if you have any ex parte communications to disclose, and if so, to please do so now. Joey Edwards?

None.

Jason Ruffo?

None.

David Dirich?

None.

This is an application.

We've had a few of them this year that were sort of existing structures. So this cabin was built in about 1973 at 9.98 acres. And Mike Glenn purchased it in 2004 and we started working with him. I put this background in here because Gives you a little idea how we got here. So we started a site plan application in 2025, but it didn't get complete until this evening. And so Mr. Dunley, John, is here with us this evening, and he purchased the property in April. So now we're kind of moving this site plan and the structural license process forward for an existing cabin. so the cabin was built long before we had our backcountry zoning standards which came about in 2021 as you know so the cabin doesn't is a little bigger than what was contemplated by the backcountry zoning and so the board of adjustment granted a variance that relieved the maximum building height which is 20 feet allowing the 24 feet that was built and the gross floor area which is restricted to 600 square feet is allowed because it was built at 905, a little over 900 square feet. So there is also a variance granted in September of last year for the existing composting toilet and vault tank. So both those actions really allow the structure as it's constructed to move forward. And as you know that Well, you would know, but it's for his personal use. And it's on a temporary basis, right? No more than 180 days per year. So this is the site plan. This is where the cabin exists. And this is the access road that kind of gives us an idea how you get to that cabin. There is some mining remnants that are in this sort of southeast corner. But the Division of Natural Resources looked at it and had no concerns about those kind of activities that happened long ago. So that's the site plan for this. It is in an area that is really defined as disturbed but low scoring habitat. There was a lot of mining activity, as we all know, in this area. You know, this has low impact to our wildlife, and it's been here since 1993. So we don't anticipate any increase in that activity. Wildfire mitigation is an important issue. This is an area that was a pre-evac. It's part of what took us a little time to get to this public hearing. This was an image that's growing familiar to all of us in terms of how that mitigation should occur. And our former fire marshal is the one who brought this forward to the applicant and had these recommendations, which we're seeing pretty routinely and are important in terms of smoke detectors, fire extinguishers, having some sort first aid so people are really prepared to be in a fairly remote area. So that addresses the wildfire mitigation. So there are approval criteria for these site plans, as you know. And the comp plan is always the first. And so we believe that the backcountry zoning itself really complies with our comp plan. While it's a little bigger than contemplated in terms of square feet and height, it really kind of matches with the low intensity that we expect in our backcountry zoning. It does conform to the code, as you have seen in the staff report. And the application was complete as we reviewed it. It's in harmony with the other types of uses that are similar in that area. And as I mentioned, the Division of Natural Resources looked at it and had no concerns about any manmade hazards. So with that, we have eight conditions of approval that are pretty typical of what we're seeing for backcountry. Again, there's a limited occupancy, both because of the zoning and the septic variance that was granted. The backcountry license is required And we will work through that even though it's already constructed. Any soils that get revegetated, we need to follow the noxious weed plan from the conservation district. The CPW, the classification, we're looking at best practices for living in an important wildlife migration area. And to follow the recommendations that we reviewed for the fire, District making sure that we have bear proof trash facilities inside or outside of the cabin that the light fixtures are shielded as required and Any other statements are made that are made tonight are part of the record and a condition of approval so that really covers the application we are recommending it favorably with these conditions and and I'm available to answer any questions and John is here as well.

Great, thank you. John, do you have anything you want to add?

Just that the cabin itself, it's been around for 30 years. It's held up incredibly well. It's very well built and it is a 600 square foot cabin. So the spirit of the of what ended up being the backcountry laws, it's perfect. It's 23 by 28 on the exterior, and the other, it's the use of the loft because it's a very high-pitched roof, and that high-pitched roof is reducing snow load. It's a 12 by 12 to 45 degree roof, which provides lots of area to use for a loft, but then that's a benefit because of reducing the amount of load. The longevity speaks to the quality of the construction, so I don't foresee any problem in inspection. And the prior owner, the last 20 years, is a very meticulous engineer, and so I feel very confident with the slight modifications. We've already begun fire mitigation from the minute we owned it, was to begin providing a better barrier to fire. The dark sky compliant lighting is already installed. We replaced the current lighting. So it's installing a pump tank.

The soil's conducive to a septic system. So we have a variance to that septic for a single compartment tank. It has one currently, but it needs to be improved to a larger capacity. With the composting toilet, it is sink water and

That installation is particularly challenging. And so we think we can move through the process. We appreciate that we're going through this. And we want to be in compliance. It's been just sitting there doing its thing, continuously owned. But there are things in the backcountry that I'm hopeful that other landowners are willing to go through this process. And so we want to work with this commission work together because I understand as well this sets a precedent for what is approved within certain variances so I know that it is it's important the scrutiny is important but I do know that from the get-go fortunately this was built in spirit of those laws yes any questions that you have for me though planning commissioners have any questions road access is is reasonable road access. It is a rough road, quite, but it is maintained by the property owners because it is historic mining road. The county does not want to maintain it. The Forest Service does not want to maintain it. So it is for us, and we have a good relationship, and I've heard back from other landowners. I, previous to this and currently, own the adjacent, the touching property, 2026 Ryan. And that's how, and I've owned that for a few years. So access through my property gets to this one and the other landowners. So it is, it's accessible and we maintain it.

Accessible for a truck that was servicing the toilet or something like that?

Yes. A fairly small pump tank would be or pump truck would be able to, it's anticipated that I would, if it ever came to it, to have a transfer tank and be able to pump that out myself. As far as like a well truck, like a well, I don't, probably not. That's a pretty wild well guys, but yeah, it's pretty limited as far as what you're getting up and down that hill.

And you're going through your property to get to this property. So yeah, right. That makes that, that answers that question. Just the direct access.

Uh, any other questions from planning commissioners?

Uh, this is Jason. I just, I know you mentioned that, uh, benefit of the a-frame to the snow loads and whatnot and I agree with that but that like two feet at the upper level that's at below your knees that's just unuseful in an a-frame I don't know how you deal with that so I just had to throw that out there thanks Jason um yeah I think my only thoughts which sounds like you're doing anyway but just

For due diligence, as I feel like. The fire rescue recommendations should just be requirements like you should have to put in the smoke detectors and the CEO detectors like they're just written in here as recommendations saying that they'll comply with the recommendation, but like I feel like it just should say that's required because feels like.

Is there water on the phone.

We bring it on going that's right Yeah, yeah, so I just yeah, I mean it sounds like you guys are doing it anyway But I think we just won't change the wording on that to be consistent in the future with any of these site plans that it's not a recommendation It's a requirement And that's the only comment I had Are there any members of the public that have any comments about OKAY. I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

EDWARDS MOVES TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC PORTION OF THE HEARING.

I SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR?

AYE.

AYE.

YOU READY FOR A MOTION? That was quick.

Well, unless there's anything else in there.

No, did we want to change one of these, the wording on one of these? Which one was it? We just want number fives to be. Number five. Requirements. Should be, yeah. Got it. All right. Edwards moves that the Planning Commission conditionally approve file number 25-306663, Smuggler Backcountry Site Plan Review, pursuant to the standards of Section 5.2.27.1, Site Plan Review. We further find that the approval criteria pursuant to the Lake County Land Development Code, Section 5.2.27.1D, have been met as evidenced in the staff report dated August 24, 2026. For file number 25-30, it is conditioned as follows. Number one, the occupancy of the structure is limited to the terms of the septic variance of 180 days per year maximum. Number two, a backcountry license, if required, ensuring compliance with the backcountry regulations. Number three, applicant shall re-vegetate any disturbed soils developing an noxious weed plan based on Lake County Conservation District recommendations. Number four, the applicant shall consider best practices for complying with the CPW classifications to protect the important habitats surrounding the property. Number five, the applicant shall comply with all recommendations as required of the Lake County Fire Rescue, including Due to access limitations and distance from the closest fire station, Leadville Lake County Fire Rescue will have a delayed response or cannot access the site due to seasonal snowfall. Require owner install smoke detectors and carbon monoxide detectors. Require owner mount fire extinguishers throughout the structure. And require that the owner provide and stock a first aid and trauma kit. Leadville Lake County Fire and Rescue strongly requires owner mitigate property envelope from wildfire guidelines attached. Number six, there should be bear proof trash facilities located inside or outside the cabin. Number seven, all exterior light fixtures shall have the necessary shielding to comply with dark sky requirements. Number eight, all statements and representations made by the applicant through the application hearing shall be binding and considered as conditions of approval. In further finding that, as conditioned, the proposed site plan is in substantial conformance with the expressed purposes, intents, goals, and policies of the Lake County Comprehensive Plan and any ancillary county acknowledged or adopted documents pertaining to natural resource protection, affordable housing, infrastructure management, or any area-specific community plans. Number two, as conditioned, the proposed site plan conforms to the requirements and provisions of this code. Number three, as conditioned, the proposed site plan adequately addresses the submittal requirement items. Number four, as conditioned, the proposed site plan is consistent with and in harmony with the neighboring land uses and future intended land uses of the area. And number five, as conditioned, any potential manmade or natural hazards will have been adequately medicated. Thank you.

Do I have a second?

I second.

Any discussion on the motion? Okay. David Jurich?

Yes.

Jason Marupo? Oops, sorry, I didn't hear you. I'm just asking for you to vote yay or nay on approval.

Oh, sorry, yes.

Joey Edwards?

Yes.

And Heather Lind, yes. So that moves you forward to the signing department to move along. Thank you for bringing it into compliance.

Yeah, thanks for going through the process.

I know it's a lot of steps.

Yes, so we'll be in touch. Yeah, thank you for your time.

The next item on the agenda, and we can go ahead and text Elsa to join us.

Or go in there and grab her.

That was easy.

That was easy.

There's no... When we approve one that was already existing and we approve it as larger than, there's no grounds for a new applicant to come in and say, well, they did it... No, because that's the Board of Adjustments piece.

The fact that they had to get that approval from them takes that piece of it off of our plate.

That's my question, and I knew that there would be a...

I wondered it originally.

If we were setting ourselves up for a future question, no, we're not. That's great.

Okay. And I'm sure they got grouped because it was pre-existing. Okay, we have the One Community Project EPS and Strategic Growth Element Update.

Awesome. I'm going to go ahead and get the portal up here. I think Melissa and I are going to go over this a bit together. So, yeah. And then do you want me to share it? Yeah. Let's get it shared. That's the other one. Let me just turn it on. Yeah. That's dramatic. It's a dramatic. So we're going to start off by just kind of talking about why is strategic growth planning important. And really what this is, what we're looking at trying to do is identify where growth should go. the type of intensity it should be at, and what will it cost in the long term as far as sustaining this use and the cost to serve it? So it helps us make housing in more appropriate places and reduces the pressure on really pushing development out into what we would call as rural sprawl. And it encourages development and redevelopment and it helps us identify really those vacant and underutilized parcels and reduces the need to extend infrastructure and services that in some cases are very expensive and difficult to maintain. And basically, overall, what we're trying to achieve is developing in a very sustainable way. Also, the reason that it's important to have this discussion now is because it is a requirement that we're addressing through the comp plan. So Senate Bill 24174 made this a required element with certain populations as part of your comprehensive plan update. It has to be redone every five years. And the required elements or the list of items that can be within this are kind of identifying those growth policies and tools that can be used, as well as doing an analysis and really identifying all the vacant and underutilized land within the area, particularly near existing transit or job centers, and then identifying what's really can accommodate that infill or what would be good adaptive redevelopment. And then also looking at what lands are currently under review for development and considering what is the infrastructure needs of that, what's the service level in those areas, and what's the long-term fiscal impact. So what we're going to talk about this evening is a little bit of things that I think that we all kind of readily identify, but we're going to really lean in and kind of understand what that means in Lake County. So EPS is our planning consultant that is working to develop the SGE or strategic growth element of the comp plan. And we're going to really lean into those second and third items that we have listed there of DOLA required elements, and that's where are our vacant, underutilized, or lands currently in consideration for development. We're going to compare the opportunities and constraints of developing in two very broad parts of our community. So first is the city-county interquarties area in Harris, start to call that the CCI. And this is really like we talked about before, where jobs are located, where transit and centralized services are concentrated, what's within Parkville Water and Lindo Sanitation. And then the second category of course then would be our rural areas of unincorporated Lake County. And then from there we're going to put them in, so first we're going to take the parcels into different categories. We're gonna look at infill. So infill opportunities are that CCI area, including, so these are pretty much the areas around the city of Leadville, including some of the parcels in the north portion of the county of where we've contemplated like gateway development and the areas just south of highway 24 and north highway 24 that intersection of 24 and 91 and the other areas are greenfield and so greenfield are terms of dispersed development areas and just broadly include everywhere else in in the county and so then We're gonna further classify those into whether they're vacant areas or they're underutilized. Underutilized means that relative to the size of the parcel, the amount of vertical construction on there is either zero to 0.1% of development that's occurred onsite. So the data so far, which is pretty probably recognizable, is within the CCI, the amount of vacant parcels we have, the amount of underutilized parcels, and just the total acreage. What we've found is that we've got about 15,500 acres of vacant or underutilized land across a little over 1,700 parcels. With a vast majority, two-thirds of this area is outside the CCI. The analysis is also taking in constraints like slopes and active mining and wetlands and flood hazards. And things that we already know that outside of the CCI, expanding centralized water or sewer and decreasing emergency response times is really not a very realistic prospect.

That's a huge amount. It's more than I thought. Yeah. But Heather, you're in real estate.

Does that seem... Yeah, I mean, the vacant versus underutilized is the piece I guess I'm, I still, I don't know what classifies vacant.

So vacant meaning there's no improvements at all.

And underutilized has some improvement, but not very much.

I mean, 4,000 acres in the CCI feels like a lot to me. I feel like every time I've heard somebody talk about, like, developable land within our county, they say it's very, they've said it's very small. I haven't heard that for a few years, but I'm just saying. I've heard it from POCC members, I've heard it from county staff, I've heard it from all sorts of folks, so.

Yeah, the number that gets passed around is 5%.

Yeah, but 5% is more than like Chafee. Chafee's got like, anyway.

Yeah, it is interesting. Well, and the CCI, not knowing that total parameter. Totally, yeah. Right, because if you're just, if you're counting everything that's close enough to water and sewer, then the CCI is all that empty stuff on County Road 4. You know, you've got a lot of Boulevard. Yeah. Like, I don't know where their boundary is. Yeah, yeah, I'm really curious. Because if their boundary, and are they saying it's Central Water and Sewer is right there, or it's accessible, then you have all those vacant things down Boulevard. You know, so that would make sense. Then same thing with, like, around the college and stuff, probably.

Yeah, but this count, would the, like, airport industrial park, the 500 acres over there, be in the CCI? No, that would be outside.

That feels like it would be outside, but just... Right, right, but just like trying to know how that, how they're defining...

I know. Yeah, this is part of that, so we're in the very preliminary stages, so we'll have spatial recognition of this with mapping to kind of help, you know, inform this, because it is kind of hard to get this data without, you know, that visual tool to really identify it, but largely this combination of infill sites, and I can take a pause real quick. Go ahead, Andy.

yeah i'm just looking at this very last statement beyond the cci the analysis found no realistic prospect of extending centralized water and sand and and decreasing emergency response times is this basically saying that they were looking at all three of those criteria hand in hand or that And by how much, like decreasing emergency response times by 5% or was it only increased by a little bit? That one leaves a lot of gray area to me.

Really good question. And we're writing some of this down or taking notes this evening to go back to the consultant to ask those kind of things. The report is going to, we'll be talking about it in another slide coming up, who they are working directly with. So they're working with the districts, they're working with emergency response, they're working with fire. So they're really engaged to look at that. Part of, I think what, there are some constraints around emergency response time. associated with the lack of having dedicated staff at the Southern Fire Station on a daily basis. They do rotate staff out. So we'll get into more as we put the finishing touches on the report from APS around where this information is coming from because each of, we've got one example this evening to show with you from my public work standpoint about roads and maintenance as well as building roads, maintaining roads, those kind of things. But they're working directly with all of these providers to really look at what are the opportunities and what are the constraints that goes into informing this. So we're also going to, one of the things that it will also inform is What type of revenue would it need to change some of these things? And where would we direct those revenues if we were able to establish them to make some changes in these areas?

So a great observation. And part of the reason we don't have mapping view tonight is the mapping, we saw a lot of errors in that mapping. So these numbers could change based upon that.

Yeah, some of the areas that we immediately saw were some of what they categorized as underutilized in the county. So when you look at outside the CCI of 22 underutilized parcels, we immediately thought that those weren't really classified correctly. And so that's one area too that we're that we're questioning and thinking, well, that's not quite accurate. So we're really working on the accuracy of the data right now. So this will get refined. Yes, David.

If you're talking, we can't hear you, David.

I'm having difficulty unmuting myself. Is one of the filters contamination from prior mining activities? From a practical point, it seems like the cost is just prohibitive to try to develop those kinds of properties.

Right. Absolutely. So yes, it is part of what we are looking to have as screened analysis to include. So this doesn't include the Eastside Mining District. This also takes into account active mining and so in this particular reference it also includes sites like the slag project that's currently underway as well as the mill site as well as so anything that already holds an entitlement or is being used hits that active mining. or if it's areas like the industrial mining area of the county. So those are not included in these numbers.

So it does include the near east side, but it doesn't include once you get up to the mining district itself? Correct, east side. OK. There's still quite a bit of the infill.

And maybe like every single lot. Right yeah i'm just like i'm trying to I mean i'm super interested to see what they have, and I would assume that includes that lead the line top of the rich there, but I even think about like I know somebody else for single lots together like is that for properties or is that one property. So it'll be interesting to see what happens.

We're so excited.

Yeah.

The takeaway is we're so excited.

The takeaway is we're very interested in knowing what this all is.

Show us the data. Where is that?

Yeah. So there will definitely be more coming. And I am happy, Melissa, if you want to take it from here. I think I did about half, but you can do the rest.

Oh my. Yeah, so it's interesting to be working on our comp plan and also talking about the city of Leadville. But since we have a joint comp plan, it's relevant. So this addresses the difference in the fact that Leadville has smaller lots that are already developed. But obviously, we know there's lots of vacancy. These usually do exist, though, close to water and sewer. So they're in a very different circumstance. that key questions are looking at have to do with the right mix of housing types, the densities, and the patterns, trying to sort of maintain the character of our community. And then the larger parcels that sit just outside the city limits but also fall outside of water and sand district boundaries. So those are projects, places that we will be talking about as time goes by. So that, as Ann mentioned, there's a big section of the report that looks at opportunities and constraints and really interviews all of these districts, basically. And looking at a lot of the outcomes, you'll be like, yep, we knew that. But it really documents it and quantifies some things, like Lake County Public Works has 360 miles of roads. like maybe y'all knew that, but things like that, which are helpful in terms of really understanding and quantifying some of these numbers. So that's a big piece that really informs and describes the challenges, which I think some of how a comp plan gets used are by people from the outside coming in going, do I want to develop here? How does it take to develop here? How does the community feel about development? And I think it will really help kind of fill in that puncture. So this is an example of how it works. And looking at what the opportunities are, and then looking at what some of the constraints are. And obviously, as we know, and you all know very intimately, it costs a lot of money to take care of the roads that we have now, let alone have new ones to the next. And so I think that's a lot of what this is intended to do, is really look at When we add roads in particular, we add cost to what we have to do. And so how do we weigh that against what we're getting in terms of development? So that was an example. We can talk more about that. So the early conclusions are really looking at the within the CCI is better suited to accommodate future housing growth in particular. And they really sort of divided it between housing and sort of non-housing areas, and we feel right now a little more comfortable with some of that. The housing conclusions are, you know, I think these are things that we know, but again, especially on the state level, they want to make sure we're thinking about it. So, you know, And especially if we look at affordability, it has to be in close proximity to water and sewer, right? And our emergency responses have to be quick and right there. So that's a piece of the conclusion. The county and service providers are challenged by the existing pattern of undeveloped and previously planted lots in some of the unincorporated areas. you know, I think about the conversation we had tonight, which isn't exactly what we're talking about, but looking further out, you get the less response there is and the more responsibility people need to take for that. And then most of the development of dispersed areas are, you know, they're talking about our large second homes and vacation homes, which, you know, this is a conclusion, and especially when you and we review the final draft, Is that really a conclusion that we want to draw? But it's saying that this doesn't serve our local population as we know. And then in dispersed areas, there's unlikely to be enough development demand to really increase, to generate the level of, it takes a lot of density to pay for the extension of any municipal level water and sewer. And so I think we know, and a lot of the mapping in our comp plan really supports, where do we want that? We really are going to grow and extend services. It probably needs to be very close in to what we have right now, and certainly not in our more dispersed areas.

So really quick on that, because I think this, to me, is one of our biggest problems, is that it isn't municipal water and sewer. I mean, I would argue right now that it might be cheaper to drill a well than pay a Parkville water tap fee and fill a water line. So it's where, I mean, are they taking that kind of stuff into account? Because it's like, I mean, the Leadville sanitation costs are so high now that it's like, if you're out of district, I mean, the people like, oh, Westwood's house with an ADU, like their every other month bill is like four or $500 a month.

or a house in an ADM because they're out of district.

So like what, like, I just feel like that, that's a big piece. Like, yeah, you can say that about pulling water and sewer lines, but, and I'm not saying that's wrong because you still have to have larger lot sizes for septics. But I just think like, that's a piece of the conversation that's like, if we were in charge of water and sewer, like many municipalities are, this, this, like all of that becomes even one step truer about it. I just think we have a huge barrier with water and sewer, and what's our step with those two companies, I guess, to figure that out.

Yeah, I think you're 100% right.

With water concerns, going along with Heather's question, with water concerns, is there a chance that some of these outside areas won't be able to get road permits in the future?

Well, they'd have to buy water rights to subdivide, so for sure there's a huge

So it might be that they can't develop it.

Right. Dispersed areas are just not where we're going to point our high debt to these two. Both from not having centralized services or fire flows to support it or proper fire mitigation. Basically, it's also just talking about it's unlikely to be able to meet a development demand at those densities.

The density is the thing. And so, yeah, I totally agree with that. I just go to affordable, and because we need to connect to meet, I just have to choose. Things don't go together right now.

Yeah, and it's not changing very fast.

It's getting worse.

Mm-hmm.

Yeah, absolutely. But I think you bring up a good point that our consultants, they know these things. They're working directly with districts to build that awareness. But what is that impact when we don't have the ability from a municipal provider to leverage some options around affordability?

Yeah.

Yeah, and probably really articulating what you just said would be important. But it doesn't say that right now. And we've had this conversation before. So we'll make sure that that feedback is given. This just adds another layer. OK. So here we're talking about the increase in service costs.

That seems like they're referencing places like Gordon Acres, the far out, areas that potentially could be sparsely and slowly developed despite our best efforts. Where else are they talking about? Outside of...

I think I guess maybe another Beaver Lakes or something, but I don't know. I mean, I guess they could say that.

We've had some large parcels off of Towning Road 11A that have talked about subdivision development. There are some parcels out there.

So there are a few kind of in several different places. Okay. All right.

Yeah.

It's not just south.

So, yeah, and that second bullet point that Melissa was talking about is that it's really hard for us to quantify the exact impact of these preexisting subdivisions like Warden Acres, the majority of everything down south. is all pre-1972 or we have that unprobate situation. So we have all of these. Properties with entitlements are basically the right, a use by right based on those outcomes. And so that'll be a real kind of sporadic impact to our demand for services.

Yeah, just think of what you release. That's 30 minutes access at the best of times.

Well, also, no matter where you build, even if it's closer, it's more gross. Period. Right? So that's a given cost no matter where you're doing it. But I agree.

But if you're offering a mail order... at least that minimizes that impact.

I'm sorry, I didn't catch that.

What did you say? At least if you're on a main artery, thinking about Canterbury IV, Canterbury VIII, then it minimizes that impact. But you're right, it's still increasing.

It's not one-to-one property tax to the maintenance cost.

Sure.

That's true.

Yeah. And we're commenting that it sort of starts to really support impact fees. You know, some of the background for impact, which is part of why we hired APS to start with and then put them on pause, but it starts to get to that.

Yeah, that makes sense.

Does it also support, like, districting as well? What kind of districting? I don't know. I don't know. Sanitation covers everything. I don't know. I'm just wondering. Somehow has to figure out how to pay for the rights. These extra costs to the infrastructure that property taxes afford. You have to add some sort of extra tax just to that area.

Or if they assess the whole metro district.

Yeah.

Which I think is what you're getting at.

Yes.

Which none of it points to affordability. No. No.

No. Yeah. There's been a lot of contradictions, you know, from our mandatory things to we do have some legislation from meaning affordability.

It would be interesting to see the overlay

yeah yeah and they'll once we get them fine-tuned a little bit more we're hoping to do that we have a meeting tomorrow um that the consultants are meeting with us to go over all the comments that we shared but the biggest ones that we found that we gave them feedback on for the mapping so um wanted to go ahead this was on the agenda we wanted to give you an idea of what some of those early indicators are and i think you know these are items that we all know

where we want direct development and those entities are towards the periphery of the city.

But this gives just further alignment into your distribution ranking and gives it an easier way for you to find compliance with the call plan or not and then develop that application that would come up for you. So just one more tool. be able to preserve, protect, and be really informed about the decisions that you make as far as land use applications. I appreciate that.

Yeah, I think this is something we talked about before with previous land applications. It's like, OK, just because they're developing something, they're not necessarily developing the type of subdivision that is going to actually be what we're needing. But we have nothing. outlined and this does that, this will at least help us form that and understanding where our priorities lie and yeah.

What is the process for evaluating and then implementing impact fees in the future?

So this is a great study. You have to create a nexus. You have to create, you know, identify the The amount of impact and then you know, be able to apply that in some type of fee structure that's defensible. And so you know, this is a great first step to go into that so like Melissa said contracted with EPS really identified that we got idea of wanting development to pay its way to think about the long term carrying cost when we add this so. What we needed to do first step was create basically a fee study or we were starting to call it an infrastructure funding mechanism. Then this requirement came out from the state and said, wow, this is going to be a great way to start into that conversation so that we've got a solid defensible approach to looking at development paying its way and identifying what that impact is. So this is, you know, it's all to be very integral to one another, as well as this is a tool when we look at those future land use maps, and we're trying to direct and identify what growth looks like in our community. This is just one more tool to apply to it, so it'll do kind of, has some duality here in helping inform those decisions, as well as giving us a basis to start working on that nexus for maybe moving into some impact base or recommendation

We have a really big follow-up question. We might have a really simple answer. So with second homeowners or vacant properties even, those folks who don't have permanent residence here or whose home is empty, they are not contributing to sales tax, which is a large portion of a county's budget to provide services as well. It's not just property tax. And they're also not working in the county, so they're not, we're in the state even, so they're not paying state income tax. And then again, you know, state sales tax. So does it, like, can we create impact fees that encompass that entire revenue that we miss from non-permanent

It might be really hard to do through this particular, I think, you know, more like a lot of things around the second home and vacant homes. Sure. Taxi mechanism. This would be really hard because we're asking for development to pay for really quantifiable impact based on kind of the things that we're talking about, roads, emergency services, those kind of things. So that's what we can align that to. how the property is going to be occupied.

You'd have to do a tax base. South Carolina does taxes, but it's a state thing. I don't know that Colorado allows the jurisdictions to do it. So the state has to pass it where it's not here.

Totally. I'm just wondering if this is a time where you can collect that information because like we've talked about in this room a lot, the county does more than just roads and

infrastructure we don't even do like two of the major infrastructures that other municipalities do right but we provide lots of other services and the impact on those services is not just roads and bridges i wonder if that impact fee study couldn't if the impact fee couldn't take that into consideration because we have done a couple of neighborhoods um thinking of one outside of twin lakes where they the entire development is going to be second homes. There would be very few primary residents down there. I wonder if an impact development fee couldn't take that into consideration.

We can certainly run it past EPS. They really do have their poll sign. We've got very stringent laws that govern impact needs and what we're allowed to consider and what we're not. But we can absolutely look this up. Is there any way to capture that impact? That would be great. and see if there has been any, I mean, we're not the only community that's struggling with that kind of feeling of that, you know, we've got a community, or a portion of our property owners in our country, and we've got that disparity, so we could absolutely see if there's been any approach to that. That's a great point that you made.

Someday, someday the state will give us a tool to do this.

It is, and I'll just play devil's advocate, but it's a big argument.

Somebody can sit across from you and show you that a property, a second homeowner pays more taxes in this community than a primary. And so that's the problem, and that's probably why it's never gone that far. So I think we would want to approach it from more of a, to me it's more of an affordability rather than, like, our tax income.

Yeah, you need subsidies to also help with affordability, right? It's where you get the... No, I know.

Yeah, totally.

Yeah, I'm just wondering, like, I want to see the data go all the way. Right. So I was just curious if this was the time. Where you could implement.

Yeah.

Yeah, this sounds partly like it's connected to that vacancy tax discussion.

Yeah. Yeah. How do we... where we find this through a legal mechanism. But we'll bring it up to EPS.

Just to see if that question's ever been asked before.

I'm certain it has. Sure, sure. We'll get some information on that and bring it back.

I just want to also offer that the only way to get the state to create any of these tools is to give them data. And they're not collecting this data. So if this is an opportunity for us to give them any more information about impact, And I'd like to not miss the opportunity. That sounds great. Thanks. All right.

Here we are. Let's see. Where am I trying to get to?

I'm going to go to our next share here. So you can stop sharing. Oh, we already did stop sharing. No, that one's that you're seeing. Or here. There we go. But you'll need to share it. Share it. So go into the zoom.

This is the shortest for last.

So yeah, we're really excited too that our emergency management folks were able to find time after all their hard work to talk about the moratorium. And so we met with them and some of the highlights of what we talked about was, you know, what are some concerns about campground school lodging? So one of the things that we talked to you about was that accessory use. to be able to have a vent as part of an accessory use for that semi-developed campground use. And they liked that idea, or their concern was going above certain thresholds. So, you know, the thought of, and I think this was a shared feeling that you all had when we workshopped this last is that 100 total on-site at any one time for the semi-developed use. I'm going to make you call on some of the things that we talked about a while ago. But that is semi-developed is what we would kind of say is currently our boot camp. that's not your brick-and-mortar scenario that was the we showed you girls scenarios of that so they did align with thinking that if we maxed out that occupancy at a hundred that seemed like a good number to them that if we went beyond that that might be hard especially in hard-to-reach areas and not allowing large gatherings in semi-primitive so again we had alignment with keeping it 32 person occupancy in semi-developed we talked to them about a 20 acre minimum so that we were immediately reducing the amount of parcels that this could potentially happen in the semi primitive backcountry use so alignment on that alignment with the semi developed at a hundred people not to exceed that and then when we got into those more rural lodging situations or modern or developed campgrounds the numbers and the density made a lot more sense to us So it was a good time to just check in about that and there was alignment between what you all had thought in our last work session and what we discussed with them. So some of the things that they're really concerned about is access and how only having one point of access and really considering they're going to be working with us drafting some thoughts around considering an additional point of egress even if it's not readily used but having a separate emergency egress and what are the benchmarks for when would this need to happen what are the side constraints and what are the numbers where you know maybe this is also just like a showstopper So they're really going to work with us to look at the access area. They did want us to just kind of better define with the fire department. We had a standard in the draft that the fire department would approve fire access. When we have a built environment, with brick and mortar that are required to follow the international fire code as part of the building permit process. But when we have tent sites and yurts that don't follow a building code, they were just concerned like how in those instances are we going to address it. So we are fine tuning that with fire and then waiting to have further discussion with them on just kind of what are those benchmarks when we really need to have a secondary means of egress? And when is it a site that just simply can't support the use? requiring Starlink or satellite for communications so it doesn't you know if there's cell reception there and it's adequate that would be a sufficient communication plan but when a cell reception is not reliable then requiring satellite communications on site And then we're working together with them how to ensure that people utilize it and follow it. So we had some ideas around customer welcome packets and marketing that they could follow like a QR code. They can get set up with Everbridge alerts. They can, so just part of the check-in routine for customers of sites that they would be required to follow certain protocols as part of their check-in to the site. So we've been talking about how can we effectively make sure that we've got processes to ensure that people are following this and we can have that plain time of where we know people are at, as well as that they're getting notified if we have emergencies in the area. So the other things that we are working on with them is we've asked them to help us create what a standard emergency plan should consist of. So we had some ideas. We gave them to them. And they're going to further refine that with us so that we can give clearer direction on what should the emergency management plan consist of. And then we really wanted to, you know, what are the risks of if we don't put some of these measures in place? They're going to help us kind of scenario that out for the final public hearing and consideration. and just kind of looking at what is occupancy is reasonable. We were talking, and you need to be kind of careful because this is going to be a quasi-judicial hearing coming up, but we talked about some scenarios that they're aware of, and they were going to kind of do a little research and say, okay, what is reasonable occupancy? That's what Melissa and I struggle with all of the time, It's just what is the occupancy load of a site when it's constrained, and we know it's constrained. So is there a pathway forward that really gives us some type of matrix to figure that out? They gave this scenario of having 100 youth on site feels completely different than a scenario of having 20 youth on site. and manageable in the event of emergencies. So they're really gonna help us try to fine tune what that means so that we have a defensible legal approach to that. And then we've been working on just reviewing the Forest Service really looks at accessibility in a pretty articulated approach and just seeing if that is something that they felt like really helps us of marry all of these thoughts together in creating an approach for looking at group camp around semi developed camps in some of these more remote areas bless you so and again not in backcountry backcountry is that semi primitive limiting it to 32 people but even we wanted them to even think about whether or not that that's even a possibility. So the emergency management plan, they've added an evacuation plan, they've added including a 24 hour contact, and then the final plan being recorded with OEM. So making sure, putting the burden on them to record that and so that it's always at the ready for incident command in the event of an incident. And then just clarifying those alerts and if there's reliable communication and the ability to contact 911 or emergency dispatch and then adding like we talked about that Everbridge sign up and included as part of the welcome packet. This is just a comparison of where we left off with our code review were mitigating impacts. And I can take a real quick break. Are there any questions before we get into kind of how the code is looking at mitigating impacts?

Anything on the emergency management side? The mapping that we're going to be getting from the consultant for the one community project work we just looked at, will that help inform maybe how far emergency management can and can't And what emergency plan will need to be a little more fleshed out? Absolutely. I would use that, but just double checking. Yeah, yeah.

And these are all meant to give you great tools to be able to look at entitlement through a very coordinated lens that's complementary to one another, so yes. And so this looks at, so first, any entitlement that we do around these uses will first have to go through the site plan review process if it is anywhere but in backcountry. So in a site plan review, we're going to look at all of these different attributes particular to the site. If you're in the backcountry, everything that is on the very left side under site plan review and including all of the things that are listed. If it's in the back country site plan review, you have to do from roads and easements all the way down to flyer flow adequacy, plus we look at the degree of site disturbance. We look at slopes, we look at wetlands and water setbacks, making sure there's natural colors, discouraging things like fencing unless it's wildlife friendly, we look at more making ensuring setbacks from different attributes of the property we want to make sure that we've got good fire mitigation plans we want to make sure that we've done an analysis on any hazards that might be present on the property and there has to be a way to mitigate those and then in the backcountry we also limit the amount of the impact of the use so those are ways that we're immediately mitigating any of the impact from development for this use and then on top of that we also have standards that are specific to the use itself so whether it's a semi-primitive campground a semi-developed or one of the more brick and mortar the rural lodging the or the more developed campgrounds, all of these attributes of it, of the use, will be in review. And there's specific guidance in the proposed draft that speaks to all of these different areas of the potential impact. Okay. That's right, so you don't have to know all of these things. This just goes into, and we'll provide this slide deck. I'm not going to have it go into too much detail. Yeah, basically, you know, just goes into a little more description on those items that we've already listed. And we'll share this if you have any interest in looking at this. And I think that's about where we're at. I think the exciting thing is that we are nearing the end of our engagement work. Um, our code draft is in review with, um, the county attorney's office. And so, um, he's reviewing that and it says it's ready for crime time. We'll be bringing that out for your review as well. And, um, meeting with public this week to hear what they think. So the same presentation that we gave to all of you in the work session a couple weeks ago, we'll be adding just this little bit on standards. to that presentation that we're doing at Windsor United College and excited to hear back from the public and see what they think about the proposed changes.

There are a lot of our property owners who are interested or have projects in this category, so it's pretty targeted.

Yeah, we specifically invited anyone that was in the pipeline, anyone decided that they'd like to take a pause, So any interested parties that we're aware of are invited, as well as our economic development partners have been specifically invited, our natural resource partners, and the advertisement is out on the website. And so if you know of anyone that is interested in this topic, please have them join us. And the website is always a portal for public input. If you know anyone or you hear from anyone that would like to provide us their thoughts on the matter, it's at the ready anytime, so it's available. Any questions?

No, you guys have done great work on it. Thank you. That's good. Incorporates everything we kind of talked about.

right i know i know this has been a huge lift for your whole department and i just wanted to say thanks to you guys for all the work that you're putting into this i've viewed this as sort of like a deferred maintenance component not not unsimilar to the the roads and buildings that need fixed up around here and you guys have put a lot of good work into this so thank you yeah thanks for your patience and walking through it time and again so yeah that's good

All right, that's all we got for tonight. Awesome.

Well. Motion to adjourn.

Move to adjourn. I second.

All in favor. Have a good night everybody.