Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Call the roll please. Chino here. B here. Eiser White is absent. Moody here. Oul here. Schneider here. And Madammore here. That's six present, one absent. Next item is uh staff. Any changes to the agenda? All right. Uh, look for a motion to uh, approve the agenda. Move. Second. Second. All those in favor? I I.

Uh, next item would be the planning commission meeting minutes from our minutes of 413 2026. Any comments, additions, or changes? Got a motion. Motion to approve. Second by Moody. All those in favor? I.

Next item of business is citizen comments. Uh this is on non-aggenda items only. if uh we have a big crowd. So, we're generally pretty generous on three or three minutes can stretch, but since we got a lot of people, try and keep it brief tonight. We've got a lot to get through. So, who would like to make any comments on non-aggenda items? Seeing none, clerk, is there anybody online? All right, we'll carry on with that. Planning Commission staff reports and comments. Got anything, Phil?

No announcements this evening. Right. We'll be going to current planning projects, old business, planning commission resolution 2026-04. Who's got this? Derek. Derek, can we do disclosures first?

Oh. Oh, disclosures. Yeah, I've got a disclosure. I have had conversations with uh Fred uh in his capacity with the land trust uh Fred Schmeckle who's the chair of the URA and with Wendy Chapman, but I always talk to Wendy Chapman. She's at my house once a week. So, I I'll disclose I've had conversations with Fred as well and down the hall from me. Unavoidable. Anything else? And I've emailed uh Siobhan Kelly and I also had a conversation with Sky. Okay.

With Moody. I' I'd like to disclose that I am on the advisory board for the Albany County uh Housing and Land Trust. Um I since they're not directly a party in this matter, um I don't feel that that represents a conflict, but I did want to put that out there so it could be discussed or um

All right. I don't see any objection. Carrying on. All right. We'll carry on. Uh we'll go back to planning commission resolution 2026-04. Chair, Commission. Um, what I'm going to do tonight is I'm just going to I'm going to go through a short presentation. Um, you've seen some of this information in past presentations that we've presented on on this topic. Um, but I think it's a nice overview that kind of sets the stage for the conversation regarding the resolution uh 2604 which is just the resolution of the city of Larmy planning commission with recommending approval of the westside urban renewal plan and project for the city of Larmy uh pursuant to Wyoming state statute 15910. Um, you know, tonight I'll what I my plan to do is I will go through my presentation. Once I get through that, um, we have our consultant with AVI who prepared the plan and project available. Um, may desire to to say a few things as well as potentially the city manager, all his staff as part of this project. Um, and then, uh, you know, be happy to take any questions after we get through the presentation. Um, and we'll go from there. So um tonight uh the the motion on the floor is a just recommendation of a resolution of planning commission. This essentially recommends uh this plan and project to the city council. City council is the one that makes the ultimate determination. So right planning commission is a recommending body. Um the westside urban renewal plan and project. This is the same document that you saw at your previous meeting that we had uploaded that we recommended postponement for. Um

there we go. So I'm going to talk just a little bit about the public engagement process that we've gone through blight status. Uh talk a little bit about where we're talking about project boundaries and where the property that's actually uh subject to this uh resolution. uh talk a little bit about the urban renewal authorities and activities that we'll be going that this goes through and then kind of outline some next steps just so that you all know as well as the public kind of has an idea of where where we're going to go after this. So just as a reminder, we've done some public engagement prior to this plan and project even being presented. Um, the intent of this is to try to get uh a feel of some of the important topics related to potentially the plan and project as well as for the property owner to understand uh what they may do in the future with their with their site. Um, as we went through there, we did a couple morning and afternoon session uh down at the um Lincoln Community Center. uh we had attendees attend provide diff se different different types of comments. There's a few of you that actually came to that. So um I think you were all familiar with that. And so you know this is just to point out we do do the public engagement. This is part of that process that helps us just kind of start to formulate and get the public involved in the process. So once again this is the plan and project. This is uh kind of the the second of kind of three pretty major steps in this process. Um the plan and project remember only sets the stage to allow for the property owner to then do a development agreement with uh for potential use of tiff funding. Um so that's kind of that third next step. And so up here you see just what what are we talking about? Do does this property meet this standard of a blighted area?

the city believes it does and it is what is outlined in the plan and project and I'll kind of speak to that a little bit here. You'll see there's quite a few other things that uh relate to a potential conforming plan and project site and becoming eligible for TIF funding through uh this designation. So when we do this, uh there's another section in state statute that kind of outlines um areas that we need to take a look at. And I'll once again talk about this in another slide here when I get to it. But once again, we believe that it's meeting this section of the Wyoming state statute. We don't have any concern with that. Um and we do are noting that there are conditions of blight on this property. Now, I'm going to point out again, remember, this isn't your just generic definition of blight. This is the definition of blight that's found in state statute. And I think that that's very important. This is talking about things like roads, conformance with the comprehensive plan, flood planes, and things like that that we've kind of talked about about this project in the past, but also I'll kind of spell out here in a in a moment. But, um, I think it's just important to note that that we're not just talking about a generic term here. So when we're looking at this, we're really concerned about are we con are we conforming with this 159 1110. And so um you'll see here kind of this criteria the main criteria and I don't know Ryan at some point if you'll move the box there's a just so that we can see that last part. Um but you don't have to do it right this second. Um, you know, this first one, you know, is a feasible method exists for relocation of families who will be displaced from this urban renewal area. And I'm going to kind of stop it there because this plan and project doesn't have any families in it. We're not relocating people. Um, there's no houses here. So, this is not really very applicable to this project, but we're noting that it does meet that

we're not going to be having to relocate and find other people new places to live. Um the urban renewal form uh plan conforms to the general plan of the municipality as a whole which it does. Um not only does this conform with our comprehensive plan, we even have shown up here. This is an area that was identified in our comprehensive plan within the city of Larmy that we want to see growth. It's infill location. It's located within the middle of the city and we believe that this is uh conformance with with those requirements. You also um in your role as a planning commission uh considered reszoning of this property and changes uh to this property related to that um pre in the last 6 months. And so once again, you know, you've kind of looked at some of that criteria. Um the urban renewal plan gives due consideration to the provision of adequate parks, rec areas uh with special circumstances related to health, safety, welfare of children residing in this area. So, you know, this plan is adjacent to one of Laram's parks, which is due south of this property. So, in this area, we have park space available for anything that would occur at this location. Um, this plan really isn't changing anything in that park space, isn't affecting it. And so, uh, we're not seeing any concern related to that. And it still provides for, uh, potentially growth in and around a park that already exists and already provides service to the community. And then if you want to move the bar just so we can see you can put it up at the top is fine. And then the last one uh that this urban renewal plan affords maximum opportunity consistent with the municipalities needs and re for rehabilitation or redevelopment of this urban renewal area plan by private enterprises. So once again this is I think a good time to remind uh the planning commission and the public uh that remember this is this was initiated by the property owner. the property

owner desired to have this plan and project to potentially provide them the opportunity to apply for additional funding through TIFF uh to fund development of this site. Um what we're seeing here um is this does help us and helps the property owners specifically potentially fund this project and which we know has some development difficulties. We've talked about the road connections. We've talked about the fact that there's portion of the property that's in a flood plane. It's actually an oddshaped lot considering it really doesn't have access to some of the public streets except Garfield on the south. So, we have some missing connections off to the east. Um, with this possible development, we do know too, we've done a phase one and phase two environmental study that was done through cooperation with DEEQ in the EPA because they noted it as a potential brownfield site. Um, this was able to provide for additional funding and site assessment through catalyst program that the DQ and EPA provides where they even did some master planning on the site just to try to generate interest because of its location and its perceived difficulty in development.

Thank you, Brian. Um so once again I kind of alluded to these a little bit in the last slide but these are just some of the areas that we see it u meeting those requirements of of blight designation. So inadequate street layout. Um you know we don't have those connections coming from the east side of the site. Um you do have access from Garfield to the south but then you have a river barrier. You have the Snowy Range corridor on the north which is a which is a a major street within the community operated by W dot which creates comp complexity comp complex access issues. Um and so you know all of those things kind of fall in that uh street layout. Uh we do have kind of that size um just making it kind of that long narrow space um that I'll show you kind of on another slide kind of the area we think's kind of mostly developable. And then just the fact that we're in a flood plane and so those considerations will have to be considered with any development that comes regardless of this plan and project. Um any type of development that would be here would have to take a look at that. So uh this just once again is just kind of showing that property boundary. Uh we just kind of put it in here just to kind of take out the kind of southern side once again as is as Garfield Street. There you have the river kind of going through that western edge of the site and then you have some property boundary on the east and then the snowy range uh on the north side there. Few things that we kind of wanted to talk about this project site. I mean when you look at this whole site you're probably looking only about 26 some acres give or take that is probably really developable. You'll see that yellow area we just kind of show it's kind of out of the bench. There's a little bench area where the river has kind of been. It's probably where likely

you would see any type of development anyway. Um really it's it's not going to impact the Larmy River green belt. Um so it's not that's not something that we're concerned about. And really um regardless of this plan and project being approved, um this developer can and this property owner can develop the property, right? Remember that. Um, and even if this plan and projects approved, it doesn't require the developer to use this funding. This is just another option that allows them to potentially go after this funding through that development agreement. So, that'd be the the next step where council would consider that um uh to potentially give them some ability to develop this property and maybe address some of those more difficult development constraints on the site. Um, so one of the things that we note within the the plan and project here is that we want to outline what we would use potential funding, so TIFF funding for. Um, so what we're looking at is mostly here kind of public type improvements. So we're saying, you know, some streets, curbs, gutters, sidewalks. That could be some of those connections. Um, adequate street and utility connections. So remember a lot of times in our streets that's where we put our utilities like water and sewer or storm water that would be a place where we would use those. Um any type of public or private utilities if we need to like underground power lines or move a gas line or something that could be something that tiff would be used for under this plan and project. Um we we would like to probably construct some other public improvements. One of those being storm water drainage. We've noted in this area that there are storm water concerns. It was one of the things we heard uh through the public meetings that we had and this opens that opportunity to use the money for that as well. If the developer chooses to apply

for TIF funding, um it could be used for remediation of environmental contamination. Um it could be used to demolish structures or do anything over to prepare the site for development. And then um under this section here too is it does help facilitate that economic development of the site's just general beautifification and it could include things like additional pathways, park trails, etc. that could be in here which we kind of wanted to note because of its adjacency to an existing park already. So once again kind of where are we at today? Remember with the plan and project, this is just that one more step in the process that is established through state statute to allow for the property owner to eventually ask for tiff funding if they so choose. Um the urban renewal authority has already considered and approved the plan and project. Um council has determined that this property is blighted uh through through their designation. We have had this item scheduled March 23rd in which you heard public comments and took public comments at and tonight which you will take public comments again related to this urban renewal project. Um if this uh body makes a decision tonight and it goes to the city council um which you will need to do is provide some sort of recommendation to them tonight. Um it will go to city council on May 6th. I'm going to point out tonight that's a Wednesday. It's not your regular Tuesday meeting, uh, Wednesday meeting because the, uh, city council, um, will move their meeting typically on election day, which, uh, May 5th is an election day. So, just kind of pointing that out for future future reference. And, and then, like I've mentioned before, really, this only is the conclusion on May 6th of the plan and project process. If city

council so chooses to approve the plan and project on May 6th, um there will be one more step which is the application, the TIFF application and the development agreement that would accompany that which would specify all the things in which they would plan to use the money for within those parameters that are found in the plan and project already. And so um with that um that's kind of the conclusion of what I want to kind of talk about tonight. Um I don't I know we've got Mark Christensen here. Uh he is with AVI. Um do you want to come up and and make a few comments and then we'll uh kind of conclude some of our staff presentation. We can take questions if you don't mind. So

uh good evening chair, members of the planning commission. My name is Mark Christensen. I am with AVIPC um out of Cheyenne. So, uh, really just wanted to introduce myself and let you know that I'm available for questions. Um, just wanted to reiterate, uh, what Mr. Teny had said previously that, uh, this is kind of that second step in the process that, um, should any development come forward and request tax increment financing. Um, they would go through an application process that is reviewed pursuant to the urban renewal agency's bylaws. um that item uh the tax increment financing application would not come before the planning commission. That just goes before city council. So wanted to make that clear as well. Um so the the planning commission's role really outlined in state statutes is uh certifying that this plan and project um is consistent with the current comprehensive plan. Um, in addition to that, uh, one of the things I wanted to highlight that we I know we've gotten a couple questions on is that, um, there hasn't really been a use specified in this plan and project, and that's really due to, um, some of the planning that has gone on previously, uh, that, uh, Derek had mentioned regarding, uh, some of the EPA brownfields, uh, some of that visioning and, um, the recent resoning and future land use map amendment. Um, the use really has kind of transitioned into that the idea of multifamily. So um that's why the the plan and project is largely silent on that matter. I just wanted to emphasize that and then um furthermore just wanted to um clarify you know this plan and project is has gone consistent with how uh urban renewal has been progressing through the state uh over the last approximately 5 years. So the city of Cheyenne has approximately half a dozen urban and oil plans and projects that have come through. Um and the the process really goes that these plans and projects come before planning commission. Planning commission

states whether they're conforming to the comprehensive plan that then goes on to city council and then applicants are able to apply for the tax increment financing. Um it's consistent with what has happened with the North Fourth Street planning project. uh that's currently an active plan and project in the community. Um as you can see there there has not been a development agreement that has come forward on that one yet. So this this effort is really signifying that the tax increment financing is available um pursuant to these um public improvements that are eligible through the uh document. So just wanted to clarify that and then state that I'm available for any questions as well. Thank you

commission. Go ahead, Sharon. Chair, I just have um one question to make sure I understand. Um then this is really um all of this is happening before the planning commission would be engaged um fairly far down the road where a specific uh project would come before us just as any other project would. This is just an additional role at the front end to evaluate the conformance with the comp comprehensive plan. Is that is that correct? I'll defer to Mr. Tenny on that one,

chair, commissioner. Yeah, correct. So, right, right now we don't have any type of development project proposed for the site. And so, um, planning commission, you're pretty familiar. you've seen, you know, plats come before you, which that'd be something that would logically potentially come before you that you would need to consider. So, um, you know, conditional uses, variances, um, any of those types of processes that you as a board typically see, you would see those things for this project if the project that's proposed there needs to go through those processes. This does not Yeah, this doesn't change any of that. And so, um, it's definitely something that it's likely you'll you could see something on this site in some form or another in the future. Um, just maybe not necessarily the development agreement, but development proposals if it needs to fall. Um, really the only thing you might not see is if there's no type of subdivision and there's only site planning that goes on the site for a permitted use on the property. um that'd be something that would be administratively considered. Um but um that's kind of the only time you might not see something really if I'm thinking them all through. So

anybody else? I have one. Yeah, Derek probably question for you. But going through this process, it doesn't provide any alleviation or circumvention of any permitting requirements processes. FEMA the core um anything EPA US fish and wildlife game and fish anything like that

chair through you no um not only does it require you to go through the processes here wouldn't exempt you from any state or federal processes I mean you know we've noted that this property is obviously adjacent to the river there's flood plane uh requirements here um that would that would come into play potentially even through the site plan process but also building permit process we requirements related to that as well. So, okay. Thank you, Kersh.

Yeah, sure. So just to emphasize that that is just regards to the tiff process of of financing whatever project is is proposed. And so, you know, whether all the the the questions that are embedded in this plan and project um that was received from the community as to what they would prefer and issues that that are um in that in that Westside area that people said, is is this going to going to come out depending upon what project the the property owner proposes and um and going through the process that that that processes that Jake mentioned, you know.

Yeah. I mean, share through you. Yes. I mean, you know, the the one the desire to engage with the public through the public process on something like this is important too to shape maybe what the developer wants to do

precisely. um regardless of the plan and project. Um you know, not all projects that come to the city of Laramie, as you all know, do any type of public engagement prior to maybe even potentially coming before you. I mean, we see subdivisions. They're not required to hold any type of public meetings or anything like that ahead of time. Most of your public meetings and engagement like that are done when we're doing neighborhood plans or specific plans for a certain type of project. Um, every once in a while a developer could maybe try to hold a neighborhood meeting, but generally speaking, you know, those those comments help shape some of the future probably thought process and when they know what the development's going to be, what should they maybe consider if they want to, you know, take all those public comments into and, you know, into the development plan that they come up with really. So,

it's not it's not guaranteed that those concerns are going to be addressed. It's it's a you know you see you see what the developer is proposing and and what can be done within that proposal right your zoning and your comprehensive plan and those types of documents that you all have participated in adopting and approving is what you know provides that guidance.

Thank you. So Derek, just did you have a question? Just so that it's clear for everybody that we're not saying these are going to be apartments. It's R3. We can have a mixed use. We could have duplexes. We could have single family residences. It all depends on what a developer comes in with a project. It's not set in stone that these are going to be apartments. chair. Correct. The anything that's permitted within that R3 zoning standard would be a permitted use or a conditionally permitted use if it falls in that category uh on the site. Um remember this is a pretty big site. I mean 26 acres it's we don't even have I don't think I don't even know if the university is 26 acres of dorms to be honest. I mean that's a large site for any type of use. So, it's probably looking at multiple types of uses across that whole property eventually someday.

Thank you. One another question. So, when a the 26 acres is is multiple projects, each one will have a TIFF application and and an administrative obligation for that particular project. Or is it would it would it really be one one TIFF application for the whole thing? I mean, it could be, right?

Um, probably not, I would say. I mean, you're most likely going to see a a TIFF application if they so choose, right? They don't have to. Um, for each, I'm going to say phase or project type that they're going to be going through. I mean, you know, you could see a project where maybe TIFF is applied for the first two things and then maybe not for the third because it's maybe not needed, right? Or it's unnecessary or I mean, and so I think probably on a site like this, my my belief would be you'd probably see multiple applications for TIFF. Now, remember though, TIFF ends eventually. And so if we're talking a long long time from now, it might not be really worth it to even apply for TIFF even if you're still working on development of the site because it might end pretty quickly and your your return on that might not be very uh uh beneficial to the project in the end. So I think all those things factors would play a role in in potentially that. So,

so I'm still vague about how the whole TIFF thing works and I hear that TIFF will give planning in the city additional ability to control what happens. What specifically are those powers? chair through you the I mean the the largest is that development agreement right the development agreement is going to help us spell out where we potentially want to use any of that funding for to help the project along right once again it has to still comply with the requirements there now as as member Schneider noted right that doesn't we can't put in the agreement that they don't have to provide parking or something or don't have to meet codes so I think I want to make that clear right the development agreement specifically gives us funding help related to the items that we put in the plan and project in order to be used on that property. And and that's the me that's really the large piece of the puzzle that we're talking about today and what we're allowed to do. Ultimately, council has to make that decision whether that's where they want to spend that money, right? Um, you know, if if you have a developer who proposes using funding for something that maybe council would like to not use, there probably going to have to be a discussion that council will have with the developer about where they want some of that that funding to go. So, um, that's where the that's really largely where that power lies. So,

but you're assuming the average developer, at least up front, is going to want to have TIFF funding. What if the developer decides no, I don't want to have the city make decisions about how this development will proceed outside of uh planning. Uh they're then freed from that. Correct. Correct. Yep. There's no requirement uh to to apply for TIFF funding or to take the next step after this. This only provides them the option. So, oh, you had another one.

Chair, if I could just just clarify that TIFF isn't saying, you know, you have to put in residences or anything that's in that list of R3 permitted uses. The city doesn't have any control over that. It's just these little bits and pieces, curb and gutter and easements and utilities and things that are listed that TIFF is used for. The city doesn't have the ability to say, "We want you to have residences in in your development. The that control does not exist because it's the developer who's deciding what he wants they want to do with the property.

Correct. Well, you could have a discussion. Let's say the Tiff funding has been granted. You could have a discussion with the developer to encourage the developer to go with to use the money for storm drainage.

I think that's going to be the discussion before the because the agreement that comes forward, we're going to specify that it will be used for storm drainage. So that's the key of the agreement is we'll have those conversations where we're developing the agreement so that we can be like, yes, this would be we think that using the money for this would be more helpful than this. But until we know what the project is, it's hard to know where the benefit might be, right? We could have somebody like for instance storm water. Um maybe the developer chooses to do that all on their own because it's a easier more in more in line with their project that they're doing where then we use tiff just on maybe some curbs, gutters, and sidewalks. That's kind of boring but easier for us to do or easier for the developer to do. So, I think that's where that's where a lot of the kind of unknown comes in terms of the development agreement until you know what the agreement is, where it's at on that property. And then that's where you start working through those negotiations and presenting the best agreement we possibly can to the city council to use the funding for the things that we know will benefit the community, but also the property owner in developing their site hopefully. Right. So,

I have a question for the consultant. You mentioned uh about a few projects at Cheyenne is approved. How many of them have been built? Uh cheer through you to the members of the commission. There's three. Uh I mean largely the hitching post area has been started to be built out. Um that was kind of facilitated through the tiff process uh to do the um remediation of those um the the old hotel building that had burned down previously. And then uh there's two apartment complexes under construction. So um three projects that are under construction vertical um a few of those hotels have been completed on the hitching post and then the the apartments will probably finish up this year but two projects.

All right. Thank you. Anything Donald? There's a question for uh for Mark. Mr. Christensen. Uh to your knowledge, has the presence of a flood plane ever been used previously as partial justification for granting tiff status in Wyoming? Uh cheer through you. Um it has I I don't know that flood plane specifically, but storm water certainly has but not flood plane. Not that you know. Not that I know of.

Okay. Does anybody know? So, so chair for you, I would say just in general, um, the urban interal statutes had been heavily utilized in the 60s,7s, and even into the 80s. And I would say there had been a pretty large hiatus after that point until um approximately 2021 when the city of Cheyenne started doing that. Um, so I'm I'm sure there is a each individual municipality might have some of those documents that would have been recorded previously. Um, but to my knowledge, I I don't know where those would be located. Uh, anybody else?

Did uh Todd want to say anything on this? Okay. Pass. Uh, thank you. Okay, we'll go to public comments. Uh just before we start with that, we've had a lot of discussion on this. So, you know, try and keep to the subject because the item before us tonight is the resolution to approve the plan such as it is. And uh we'll just try and stick to that and let's not wander off and try and be brief. It looks like we got a lot of people that want to speak. All right. Who's first up? Please state your name for the record. Did you have a sign in sheet?

Thank you very much for letting us participate. Again, appreciate all the work you're doing for us. Really important stuff. I apologize for sending you an email with an attachment so late. Uh I was working on this uh attachment that I'm going to present to the city council for the work session on water tomorrow. As you all know um the city is considering or preparing for uh putting water restrictions in on town should we not replenish our water sources this summer. Let's have the weather outside. Keep going. More rain, please. What the city water department um did not show and that's why I created this with the help of uh Bern Hinckley is that we are in a terrible situ. We are in dire straits water-wise. The city water department picked and choose benign information to present to council. The reality is much worse. What I'm asking you to do today is to not vote yes on this resolution. Do your due diligence. Look at my presentation. Again, I apologize. I just finished it at 2 o'clock today. We cannot afford two things. We cannot afford to have rampant development in the city of Laramie because we can't support water unless things change. I'm praying they change. Right now, we have abnormal

hydrographs for both the river and the aquifer. Please take a look. You will be shocked at what you see. So please step back. Don't just talk about money. It's not just about money. Our responsibility to our constituents is to provide all services and water is life. Please take a look at this. And the second thing is that we have to keep the integrity of the Laram River and its flood plane. And I'll put it very very bluntly. The only housing along the Laramie River should be Beaver Lodgers. I know it sounds funny, but that's the reality. Please, I beg you, delay your decision on this resolution. Don't think about money. Think about what we owe our constituents. Again, I apologize for sending you this stuff so late. Thank you very much. Brett, forget to sign in and state your name for the record.

I shall sign in. Uh, thank you, Chairman Matimore. Uh, members of the commission, thank you for giving your consideration to this. Um, you should at least defer your your decision and perhaps vote this down the way it's written. And I'm going to explain why. Uh if you take a look at the resolution that's before you, the first thing that it says is that uh it the city of Larmy found certain areas to be appropriate for an urban renewal project, including the westside urban renewal plan and project as described in city council resolution number 2022-55. Well, if you go back and look at resolution 2022-55, it did not include this area by the river, it did include parts of West Larammy west of I80, but did it did not include the area that's under consideration here. And thus, the resolution is faulty. It's not correct about this. And you and I have a copy of the page from the uh from that resolution. Um but you can also you can also see the complete resolution on your um on the on the city website. Um second of all the uh plan the the uh document which says that it's a plan was not developed legally because it was paid for and written before the city council approved a resolution to do so. Um section 107 of the law um says that says that the city council has to approve the expenditure first and the city went out and did and uh and commissioned the study before the city council had approved that. So it wasn't developed legally. Um now further down in the resolution which is being submitted to you, it says the governing body shall

have submitted an applicable re urban renewal plan to you for review and and solicit recommendations as to its conformity with the comprehensive plan. Well, the uh city's planning documents including the Laram growth plan which was adopted just recently don't include that area and the plan is not sufficient to be a workable program for development of the area as per sections 105 and 110 of uh of the statute. And because it doesn't include a workable program, it doesn't qualify as something that you can approve. Um, further down the resolution, it says that city council designated the property as blighted, but in fact, it's not blighted according to state statute. Um, it's just vacant land. Um, they cited things such as claiming, well, it doesn't have streets. Uh, that means that it's blighted. Well, of course it doesn't have streets. It's vacant land. So it's uh again that that that was also was also suspect. And finally, this resolution that you have before you doesn't actually give you the opportunity to make any recommendations to council. It is literally just a rubber stamp that says yes without including any input from you and you as the planning commission should be submitting input to the city. Um all it is as it stands is just a gift of a tiff to the property owner so that uh the property owner can sell the plan can sell the property for for more money without any actual workable plan for development. So these things should all be remedied if you pass any resolution at all. And so I would recommend that you not vote to approve it tonight. Look this over. At least make it some at least pass something legal, but

definitely don't pass this resolution tonight. Thank you. Thank you. Who's next? Please state your name for the record and sign the sheet when you're done. Brett, sign the sheet.

Uh, hi. I'm Brett Rston. I'm 29 and as a young person living in Laramie uh who has friends who also find it hard to find a place to live. Um and I know that this plan doesn't mean that anything will be built there and it's just funding just in case somebody does build there. I think it's important that we incentivize these things get done correctly. So if the streets need to be done, it should be done correctly. And if that can be incentivized through TIFF, um that's great. Same with the storm water issues, the flood planes. So let's make sure that a private developer who comes in and wants to use it as its zone for our three stuff and people come in want to build multif family houses, single family homes or whatever that we have that carrot on the stick to make them make sure they do it right or at least incentivize them to do it right. We can't make them do anything. Uh is my understanding. So again, young people want housing. I want uh my friends to be able to live in a place that they like. Um but it's just so expensive. Housing affordability is pretty rough here in Laramie. So um thank you Thank you. Next

planning commissioners. My name is Anne Brand and I'm the founder and executive director of the Albany County Conservancy. And I would like to point out that our members do not feel that they were notified and included in that public outreach component in those meetings at the Lincoln Center. There was no signage in that area. And so if it is indeed a FEMA designated flood plane and the EPA has done work there, why do I have members from East, North, West, and South Larie who didn't know this was going on until I told them initially while they were gone during spring break. So, I would like to draw your attention to some of the comments that have been made tonight regarding state statute 15 section 9101 through 110. Um, I'm pulling a quote that says, "Prior to approving an urban renewal project, the local governing body shall submit the urban renewal plan to the planning commission of the municipality, if any." So, boy, am I relieved you guys volunteer. I'm glad I have a planning commission. Thank you very much. um and that you all are supposed to then review and make recommendations as to its conformity with the general plan for the development of the entire municipality. So I would like to also I would like to mention the comprehensive plan and directly quote from the city of Laram's comprehensive plan um city of Larmy contra comp comprehensive plan chapter 11-3 conservation of these areas identified the Casper aquifer and the Laramie River were considered especially important the Casper aquifer protection plan. A plan that regulates use in the protection area was recently updated as a result of

concerns raised during recent development proposals. Many residents felt that the previous plan did not adequately protect one of Laram's main water sources, the Casper Aquifer. It goes on to state the Laramie River, unlike the Casper Aquifer, has no protection plan. However, the entire zone is protected by state and federal laws such as the clean water act which is administered by the core of engineers requiring permits and wetland mitigation for any proposed disturbance to the river and its accompanying wetlands. Chapter 11 further states, "Maintaining and contiguous riparian corridor provides highly desirable open space and water for the human and widely diverse wildlife population. I'm human and so I looked at that because I also love wildlife. Overlay zones similar to the Casper aquifer protection overlay zone should be considered for areas like the Larmy River corridor and other critical areas such as sensitive areas, scenic vistas, wildlife migration routes and winter ranges. And I'd like to let you know that my members encouraged me to reach out to the Laramie River Conservation District, which I did last night, very late, leaving a message because I was supposed to have a portrait tonight and the snow has and rain has affected that. and they called me back and left a voicemail for me at 8:07 a.m. this morning letting me know that they have been meeting with the mayor, the council, they've been in various meetings and they've also um met with Mark Christensen twice, the project planner. I want to know where my members were in those conversations. So, I really want you to take that 30-day review period and make sure we step forth in a legal way and that we do do

our due diligence. So, I'm asking you, our planning commission who serve voluntarily in the interest of the people living in and around the city of Laramie to take your full 30-day review period. And um this corridor contains an extreme flood plane. Please consider taking your full 30-day review. And I greatly appreciate all the work that you all do. And I thank you from the bottom of my heart. Next. Anyone else come up? We don't bite. At least not too big.

Oh, believe me, I've been into tougher rooms than this probably. Hello, I'm Lucas Freighic. I am a young professional in Laramie and I'm encouraging you to approve this resolution for a few reasons. I know I'm all about uh excuse me I'm not about development for the sake of development. I don't think that makes a lot of sense but to me this has a lot of constructive purpose for maintaining the future of our town. already heard from another person younger than me, which is shocking but true, who also of course uh is looking to want to make a life here, and that's important. And again, we understand there's a lot of long-term implications to this plan, but I think by approving this resolution, it kicks the can down for the next few steps, which is obviously important for the future. I think it's key. So, thank you all very much.

Thank you. Sign the sheet. Does anyone else care to talk? Wendy, come up.

Right. Uh, chair and commissioners, thank you for this opportunity to speak. My name is Wendy Chapman. I'm a longtime resident and homeowner of the in the historic Westside neighborhood. The public outreach and engagement was minimal. About 52 people attended the open house in January, many of whom were members of the urban renewal agency, city council, or city employees. I don't think this outreach can be considered a success with this low number of participants who weren't city employees, URRA members, or council members. Statements made by the URRA and city employees to make an argument for blight on the 4G land were wildly exaggerated. This land presents no danger to anyone as it is right now. It is a flood plane and a wildlife corridor. Any development which would include a lot of impermeable surfaces on the 4G land would present a danger to the current westside historic neighborhood in the form of increased flooding risks. Although council voted to designate the 4G area as blighted, this process is obviously not completed as evidenced by all of us being here and your upcoming vote on this topic. Because you all still have the option of voting either way today, I ask you to take the current historic Westside residents and homeowners into consideration and please vote no. Thank you. Anyone else? Siobhan. Um,

may I have permission to show maps?

Sure. As long as we name Siobhan Kelly. I am a westside resident and I urge you to vote no on the resolution today and to take the full 30 days that the state law authorizes you to take. I will just show three maps and I'd like to make three statements. Thank you. Thank you.

Are these the maps that were in your uh emails? Yes, this is the map from the URRA that ADI um prepared for the city and it's upside down and it's upside down. Thank you. That would make much more sense. Okay. I am so sorry. I tried. So, this is the site and we Yes. Thank you.

He's tall and huff. So this is the site and this is the map from the report and we saw today the the yellow showing the potential development area. This is um Ellen Bacher. So you can see the fence. You probably put the sign up. So and then this is west of there. So, this is the site that we're looking at. This area in purple is an accurate representation of the FEMA flood maps. This area and also the floodway is called a special flood hazard zone. And as you know there is special permitting with the um municipal code and even with the Army Corps of Engineers for disturbance in this special flood hazard zone. Okay, this is the FEMA map and again there's the river, here's the zone and you can see that again that FEMA has designated this much as flood as special flood hazard zone leaving approximately ely this much for development. There can be development in the flood hazard zone but municipal code discourages that.

Finally, if we zoom out, we can see again here's the river, here's the site. We can see that this area is uniquely vulnerable. Other parts of the city do not have the same level of flood threat as this particular area. And that's three three maps. So I pulled three statements that I wanted to share. The first is from the statute. You've already heard it today. Under state law, an urban plan must conform to the general plan for the municipality as a whole and be consistent with definite local objectives respecting appropriate land use. Two more statements. This one is from Laramie Municipal Code 1520. It is the purpose of this ordinance to promote the public health, safety, and general welfare and to minimize public and private losses due to flood conditions in specific areas by provisions designed to protect human life and health and minimize expenditure of public money for costly flood control projects. And finally again from the comprehens

the Laram comprehensive plan chapter 7 urban growth the flood planes and other floodprone areas in particular are hazardous due to the potential for the loss of life and the loss or damage of property. Government's responsibility for the public health and safety indicate that they should be protected. Again, I ask you to please take the 30 days that the state law authorizes you and to vote no on today's resolution. Thank you.

Thank you. Who's next? Eric,

state your name for the record.

My name for the record is Eric Henderson. And I thank you for the opportunity to speak uh to you as commissioners today. the the the information that I that I heard uh you from your group indicate was that we didn't know what was going to be built in this R3 uh designated zone. There are great number of allowances in that R3 R3 designation. Um, but I' i'd really ask that this group take take the vantage point to protect the citizens and put caution at the utmost importance for all of us. And I do that based on November 18th, city council voted uh without giving a proper accurate 15-day notice of hearing the the uh the R3 zoning designation was taken. Now that that comes and that's in the past, but I would ask that if we slow down, we might we might evaluate your your comment is we didn't know what would be uh happening in uh the R3 area. December 18th, city staff indicated in housing presentation that there would be not less than two 42 unit apartment complexes that were being discussed by developer at least that in that space that 32 acre area. So there's confusion. Um there's conversations that are being reported in one meeting, one setting, one way and one another way. I would ask that that you guys cast the safety net.

Slow it down and please uh vote for the uh extension of the 30-day allowance and let us get accurate information all on the same page where we are getting told the public in the same place at the same time uh in that 30-day notice window. I think it's I think it's a tragedy when uh area residents invest their entire their entire life savings in a home or a business and they have that opportunity to to uh speak. 15 days is not a lot of time, but city council chose that it wasn't important enough to uphold their notice, their right to notice. They advertised a date that didn't exist in the entire calendar year. Monday, November 18th did not exist in 2025. That was the date of error. And that is the type of diligence that I'd ask that this group slow down and give us 30 days uh time. Thank you.

Thank you. Anyone else? I don't see anybody. Oh, here we go. Hello chairman, members of the commission. My name is John Wanzel. I've been a resident for the city for number of years. Um, what makes Larmy special to me is open space, both developed and undeveloped. I really treasure these kind of areas. I think you've had comments tonight related to the flood control issues there in the short time. I've only been here for what, 27 years, 25, 26, whatever that I've been here. I've seen that area underwater several times. I think that area is not suited for development. I urge you to vote no on this proposition. Thank you for your time.

Thank you. Anyone else? Is there anybody online? Yeah, I have one that had signed up with us, Jamie Eagle. I'll let her into the room. Jimmy, are you there? He's coming in.

There you go. We see you. Hi chairman and uh commissioners. I'm Jamie Eiggo and I live at 159 North 6th Street. A couple of years ago, um, as has been over time since I, uh, built my office and my practice and my home at this location, I've seen flood waters come down my street, Sixth Street, and they stopped fortunately at my house, but they flooded the Ivincson Mansion basement and the house across the street from them. Uh, this was not expected, and I think that we have to plan for the unexpected. So, I urge you to vote no on this resolution because I don't think it's a safe place to establish housing. Uh, it also puts other uh residents in danger and other areas adjacent to it. Um, I would like to see it conserved as open space. Uh, it could be much more beautiful if um, city code were established at businesses in the area, which it doesn't look like. I drove over there and looked at the area and it seems as if um the these important businesses have not kept to code. Um I don't know that for sure, but it just seems like that to me. So that's all I have to say. Um I would appreciate your vote of no so that we can conserve this area. We have people populations coming from the Front Range. Um, I think we need to preserve our unique uh wildlife and repairarian areas. Uh, it's so important for us to have this in our city. Thank you.

Thank you, sir. Anyone else cares to speak?

Seeing no one else, close public comment and we'll discuss it amongst ourselves. I would like to ask the council a question. We've have heard a lot of public comment on it. We've studied this issue, you know, for quite a while. Does anybody think a 30-day uh extension to examine what we already have examined is going to improve our decision making?

I I don't think so. Um I I think our our task here is is pretty straightforward with respect to the tiff the the the the plan and project for the the urban renewal and and qualification of tiff and it's not all of the the the issues and concerns that that people have about flood plane and so forth um or wildlife are things that are going to be worked out down the road. We're we're not going to to rrestle those those issues to the ground and change zoning. I mean, we're we're not here to change zoning. It's R3. There's permitted uses. Um and when something is put forward, all those issues will be dealt with in a rigorous manner. We're just here to move the option for tiff financing and designation as a you are a planning project. Yeah, it's pretty much what

it's pretty pretty straightforward limited

what's before us. But you know, I just wanted to make the point that going back a long way, we've worked on this a lot. We have discussed flood planes, we've discussed repairarian zones, we've discussed wildlife long before we even changed the zoning. We worked those. We went through all that uh twice in two different meetings. So I don't see is there's any reason to put this off any longer. Does anyone else All right, Donald, your words of wisdom are always welcome. Not always. Uh Mr. Christensen's here and I don't want to be rude to Mr. Christensen. Uh, when I got this Westside urban renewal plan project, I had hoped it would have, as we would say in Ireland, more meat and potatoes in it.

Mhm. Uh, my problem is with the document is the so-called plan. Uh, I don't think it's a plan. There's just not enough detail there. And maybe I'm asking for something that uh a an engineer is not going to um deliver. And that is I guess I'm less worried about what's going on in the Larmy River as our rainfall patterns and our rainfall patterns changing. And there's no information about that because that's where the flooding is going to come from. It's going to come from hail storms and it's going to come from cloud bursts. Uh it can also come from the army river. And I would have liked to have seen some information because I don't have a sense of it. And I've lived here for 36 years. I don't have a sense of uh has our rainfall patterns changed and if they have changed, are they getting worse? and are they likely to get worse over the lifetime of this project? And is it going to create a problem? Because if you could bring up that map, uh Ryan, please. Uh I come from Ireland where it rains a lot, but is nice rain. It's kind of nice, right? Uh there's a quote from one of Iris Murdoch's uh novels where she was describing rainfall like a punishment of steel rods. And I love to see the rain here because it's so spectacular and terrifying when it occurs. And what we need to know is you know when a over a period of an hour or several hours is it one or two or 3 in and do we have the capacity

technically to control it. So this is from the Laram Street plan. So what you're looking at is the area with the kind of protected flood zone uh in kind of bluey greeny and I wanted to show three areas and the reason why I'm showing you this is at the bottom leftand corner is the Wyoming state vet lab where I worked for 32 years. So every day I used to go down Snowy Range Road and I used to see how the Laramie River would expand and contract and it always impressed me. And so you'll see there are in this area there are two uh zones that are going to be built upon areas one and two and they're in the 100year flood zone. But there's a third zone down at the bottom number three. And I don't know if you guys are aware of it. Nobody's mentioned this, but sometimes as CNA feeds when I go to buy stuff is sometimes islanded because that flooding in area three loops around, connects with zone two and then flows back into the river. So, this to me seems like a risky area to be building housing. And I'm coming at this as a veterinarian, very ignorant veterinarian who spent his lifetime cutting up horses and ducks, dead ones. Uh, but it just seems to me, plain old daft, given all the land we have around us, that we would choose this site to put purported affordable housing. It seems like, you know, that I I don't want to offend Derek here because Derek uses the

term we're going to do development. This seems like a well-developed area to me. It's a sponge and we should preserve that sponge. It's not working perfectly. I'm sure there's a way to make it work more perfectly. I know it's privately owned, but it seems unwise to put houses here and probably a fair number of people here and put them in harm's way. And I don't know if any of you remember Camp Mystic. So, Camp Mystic was that place in Texas and I forgot the name of the river. and they got some exemptions from FEMA to put I forgotten how many dwellings it was and they got the exemption and they didn't want regulatory control and they didn't want to have insurance problems but they ended up killing almost 30 people and I think we should try and avoid doing that here. One other point I want to make is when this report was written and maybe this should be a question question from for Mark and maybe Mark could just nod his head or shake his head. When Mark wrote this, the assumption was we would have $130 million coming in to control um uh flood waters. And now we don't. Now we don't. So I wonder whether you were aware of that when you finalized the report you were not aware of that if you knew that would your report be any different in other words we don't have the back sheet to do major flood prevention right now even with tiff money I wonder whether we can do it but we we certainly don't have the $130 million dollars to

do it would you have changed the comments you made about flood control in your report. Yes. No, I don't know. I know.

Okay. I'm a no on this. Okay. Anyone else? My my thing is with this is it's an privately owned property. He's trying to sell it. He's trying to do something with it. And rather than beat a dead horse cuz the horse is already dead, he's entitled to do something with this property besides convert it into uh you know, open space because he'll still end up having to pay taxes on it and it's not really a legit expense for him. if he were to since we changed it for R3 and if it wasn't a uh tiff property, he could start building apartments or houses on it as soon as he got approvals from for streets and zoning. He could start building tomorrow if he had somebody to build, if he had a developer. So there's really all we're talking about here is TIF and he's entitled to TIFF as much as anybody else is as much as the city is on North Fourth Street. I mean that's that's the issue at hand for us tonight is whether we can approve this and move forward with the tiff. It's not whether what's going to happen with the property, who's going to build on the property or what they're going to build or even the engineering involved to build there. And I've said from the beginning, this is going to be a tough property to develop no matter how you cut it. You know, we got a water table down there

less than 10 ft. You know, we've got uh you're going to need quesons, post tension slabs. You're going to need storm drains. You're going to need pumps uh to uh pump your sanitary. I mean, it's a it's an expensive project. So, you know, that's why I asked the consultant about you have five projects that were tiff projects were approved in Cheyenne. How many actually get built? And we approved uh four street and here it is two years later. We still haven't got a contract signed, you know? I mean, so I say if it helps move the process along and give them tiff, there's nothing on this property it can't be solved with good engineering and enough money. I know people don't like, you know, I mean, that's all there is to it. I mean, and I know they don't want nobody wants us to talk about money, but when you're talking about private property, it's always about money. That's, you know, that's what we're looking at. So that's my feeling on it. Uh I say at this point there's not a lot we can do. We can we can possibly make recommendations on this resolution but you know I don't know if there's much more to discuss on it but you know to go from there. Anybody got anything else

if appropriate? I I just had um two qu quick questions for uh the planning staff in response to a couple of the comments that were made and and I and they would go

I I agree our role is limited but it's focused on reviewing the conformance of the proposed plan and project with the comprehensive plan and and there was information on that in what we received as the attachment. So, I'm looking uh at page page eight of the attachment which is conformance with the comprehensive plan. Um I wonder Derek whether on that map or maybe it's a question for the consultant. Um the area the map that's provided in that document was um did that come directly from the comprehensive plan there's a reference the UR reference is is a label on there. Is is that an indication? What is that an indication of? Sharon, you're talking about the plan itself. Well, that's what I that's what I'm wondering whether this map um is from the plan

chair through you uh member Pino the so I'm looking at page eight and it's what you're what you're looking at is the um land use future land use map from the comprehensive plan and it's designated urban residential that's a urban residential um designation of of urban development type residential style development is what that really generically means. So,

and there was one reference made in one of the comments. Let me see if I can find my notes here. Um section 11-3 of the comprehensive plan which um addressed uh I think conservation of Casper Aqua. Could could do you have any more information on that uh section? I have let's see 11-31. Oh yeah. So that's the section of the plan that speaks to conservation. Um, and I don't know what specific section in there, but we, as we discussed before, um, I guess I can you give us some information on that specific section and if you have a view on the consistency of this proposed plan and project with that section.

Chair through you again. Um so yeah 11 chapter 11's the conservation chapter which just talks about areas that as a community we note um in terms of when we're talking about comprehensive planning that play a role in some of our decision-m I mean without going through the whole chapter I can't be like yeah that section conforms this one might not or whatever but remember I think remember the plan and project doesn't actually establish any development so it doesn't preclude us from being able to still protect the Laramie River. Um, you know, we we already know that we can't build in the Laramie River. We can't dam it up. We can't stop it. We can't do anything like that. And then as um was I think asked by member Schneider, you know, we still have to follow all requirements of flood planes and FEMA and core of engineers or anything like that if if a development was to propose even anything. Um, and so I think from from that standpoint, we're we're still protecting it. I think obviously the conservation chapter 2 talks about the fact that it's it's more than just like meeting the laws of the of of our, you know, federal government or whoever. And so, I mean, I think it's talking about too is we should consider that in our development. And so, you know, that is something that's built into our codes a little bit there. We have a whole flood plane chapter in our in our regulations that are specifically tied to federal regulations to ensure that we're protecting those flood planes. And then, you know, as we move through development processes, you know, thinking about, you know, how are we preserving those corridors in some fashion, which you can see we already do that through things like the green belt and the park next door. And so I mean, you know, we we we're we're we've have a proven track record of at least trying to do that.

And I think that this plan doesn't preclude us from being able to continue to try to protect the river in some fashion or another. I mean, that's but until we see the development, we don't know exactly what we're trying to deal with, I guess, is what I would say.

Go ahead. You got anything else? Uh Derek, as I recall the URRA, which by the way I voted against in commission and I spoke against at city council, but the URRA designated the entire city of Laramie as a blighted area as I recall. Is that correct, chair, commission? Correct. It did. Um it it it found that there were characteristics pretty much found throughout all of Larmy that meet those technical requirements of what the statute says. And so what it does do is it permits us at least at this time to make requests for tiff projects on essentially most properties within the city of Larmy. Now that doesn't mean that it meets all every property meets all that criteria. remember you still have to meet the criteria for each property or properties and so there are definitely properties that don't meet that. So um but that would be something that would have to be evaluated for each subject property and at the request of the property owner or property owners. Thank you.

One typo question maybe on the on the resolution itself on the on the 6th and the 7th. Whereas says April 8th, 2025 and April 7th, 2025. Should those be 2026? Hold on. I gotta pull up the right thing. Sorry. Could you tell me that again? The uh the 6th and the 7th whereas in the first page, April 8th, 2025 and April 7th, 2025. Should those be 2026?

Oh, yes. I would agree. So,

so do we need to amend the resolution or I I had a proposed amendment, too. So, maybe we could um roll it

take Yeah. take that together. Um, and while Derek's up here, my my proposed amendment, as my understanding, our role is not to approve this project, but to recommend to the city council that they do. So, um, as I understand our process, we need to move consideration of the resolution. Uh, but then I would like to amend it. can fix those two dates. But I would propose to delete um of the last whereas the Roman Roman numeral little three I uh referencing our approval. Um I I don't read that as our role, but I'm asking you uh to make sure uh I'm uh understand that correctly. chair commission through you. So you're saying in the last whereas removing approved the west side urban renewal plan and project as presented.

Yes. So that it would then um the commission has reviewed the plan and project one, two, found the plan and project to be in conformity with the Laram comprehensive plan and then three recommended that the city of Laram city council approve the plan and project.

So chair through you again. So I think I think we can look at this at two ways. one the the full resolution and its encompassingness of the fact that it's it's recommending approval. All you're doing is still recommending approval. I would say that if that's concerning, what I would recommend is for three recommend recommend approved or hold on, let me think about that. Let's see. So, you're saying just delete it all. Yes, because four contains the recommendation of approval. Yeah, it's kind of redundant.

I mean, I I think that that would be fine then if you're Yeah, I think that that would if that provides more clarity. Yeah, that's not a problem because city council is the approving official approving body. Um these are just the statements that come from the plan and project. So that's in the document that you have there and that's that's where we pull those from when we putting them in there. So, um, but I don't think that that that would be a critical issue. Council would still be able to have that and approve things and make their decision based on your recommendation. So, okay. Uh, so I guess to check with the clerk what we would need Well, before we do that, is there any further discussion on it for the commission?

Tom, can I just make one point? Yes. Uh you mentioned that we did approve this for R3 designation right now if I remember that vote we basically were boxed in by the uh state statute basically if it met any one of the following criteria it had to be approved

so and I voted because I wanted to follow the law I don't always want to do that But in this case, I did and I voted for it. But even then, I thought this is pretty dafted. Uh, this is dangerous. And so, yeah, we voted for it and it is now or three and we've given a cart blanch to the owner and subsequent developers to put houses up there in a flood plan. I don't think it's smart. Anything else? Go ahead. Okay. So, I just want to make sure I understand if the development if the urban renewal if we if we if we vote to recommend this to the city council is the likelihood that that accelerates development is that likely or does it not they develop it whether it was becomes a tax increment to a tiff or not? This is I'm not making this sound very intelligent.

No, I understand. with I just want to find out what's the ramification or what could be the ramifications to move it forward versus not move it forward based on development potential and speed of development like if I heard a lot of comments about us moving too quickly I just want to make sure that I understand what moving too quickly means

chair through you again uh member bull so right the purpose of this is to potentially create a financing mechanism for the development of the property. It doesn't guarantee this property develops or uses tiff or moves faster or slower really. Um there's no we have no ability to know that. Um now obviously what I will say though is you know a developer probably isn't going to go through this process if they don't think it will help their project. I think that that's disingenuous to say anything other than that. But remember we don't know still what's going to happen here. And so I think that it largely will depend upon what maybe the developer finds interest in the property and whether that makes sense to potentially use this funding for said project. Um it could be very helpful for the developer not to follow this process, not to do a development agreement, not to go before city council to make their project move faster without all of this. Um to be really frank, right, this process will require more time even and another public process in front of city council about the development agreement if they so choose to follow this. So I mean it then in theory really it does actually slow things down if they choose to go through TIFF and it adds another public process which may or may not happen depending upon the development proposal. And so that's

one just comment is that this whole process that we've been going through has provided tremendous opportunities for people to u on the west side and the community to state their concerns about developing on this on this property. So it it serves a purpose for the future developer to know precisely what what the cons the community concerns are and what they're getting into and you know the process that they're going to have to go through. So it's a buyer beware um shot across the bow um as to the the the level of concern that the community has. So I think it it serves a good purpose to go through this process. The one thing that distresses me is the actual applicant hasn't really presented anything. But on this particular resolution, the applicant's the city. It's not the land owner, right? So, the city is the applicant. I think it even says that in here as I recall uh that the applicant and on the agenda it says the applicant is a city. Yeah. I mean we we provide the application to the to the planning commission and then to city council um authorized by authorized by the property owner. So

okay. Well, what's the will of the commission here? Do you want to move it so it can be amended? Well, I'll entertain a motion. What are we voting on? We're voting on the amendment first. Well, we have to move on on a

We have to move the resolution before we can amend it. Is that correct? Yes. So, I have to I have a motion and a second on the resolution. All right. I'll move to we approve this resolution 2026. You get the actual legal wording here. Yeah, you got it there. Uh I I move to approve resolution uh 2026-04 recommending approval to the city council of the westside urban renewal plan and project for the city of Laramie Wyoming per pursuant to Wyoming statute section 15-9-110.

All right. Is there a second? A second. All right. Now we have an amendment. Sharon, would you

Yes. I'd like to move that we amend the resolution being considered in three ways. First the uh one, two, three, five. In the seventh whereas clause, we change the date to uh to read April 7th, 2026. Correcting uh the reference to 2020 five. Oops. Wait, let me do this in the right order. Yep. Six. Whereas we're wait 1 2 3 4 5 what right? Okay. Wait. One, two, three, four, five, six. Okay. So, in the sixth, whereas No, wait. First, we have to do this. The fifth one, right?

No. The sixth and seventh are the sixth and seventh are the ones with the wrong.

Okay. So, the sixth one is April 8th. And the sixth whereas we need to amend April 8th, 2025 to read April 8th, 2026. That's in the sixth whereas clause. In the seventh whereas clause, we need to amend April 7th, 2025 to read April 7th, 2026. And in the final whereas clause I propose deleting the clause Roman numeral three little I3 that reads approved the west side urban renewal plan and project as presented. And so I will read back that where as clause as I believe we should vote on it. It should be amended and we should vote on it. deleting that section. As I just read, the final whereas clause reads, "Whereas on April 27th, 2026, the city planning commission one reviewed the Westside urban renewal plan and project. Two, found the Westside urban renewal plan and project to be in conformity with the Larmy comprehensive plan. and three recommended that the city of Laram city council approve the westside urban renewal plan and project in the form presented to the planning commission.

I second that. You second it. So we vote on the amendment first. Okay. All those in favor of the amendment. Well, does anybody want to discuss it? All right, let's just vote on it. All those in favor of the amendment say I. I. I. Do you need a roll call on an amendment? You do either or. Well, for the amendment, why don't we just take a voice vote? Okay, we'll get a roll call on the resolution. Unless there's any if there's going to be if it's unanimous, it's okay. But you should ask if there's any any objection to

the amendment. Yes. The amendment. No, the amendment passes unanimously. Now we'll go to the resolution. Uh we have a motion on the floor. Clerk, would you call the role? Pacino I. Bull. Nay. Eiser White is absent. Moody I. Otul. No. Schneider. I and Madammore I

that is four yeses, two nos and one absent. Resolution passes. Want to thank everybody for coming and speaking. You're always welcome here. Thank you very much. Next order of business. Get my glasses back out. We are looking at uh plat 26-00003 Spring Creek Village fourth filing final plat. EMTT, take it away.

Good evening, planning commission. As you so eloquently stated, we are reviewing the final plat request for Spring Creek Village fourth filing submitted by Kelly Hafner on behalf of JR Real Estate Development. The request is to vacate portions of prior plats and create 18 residential lots on a 1.35 acre tract located south of Spring Creek, west of 9inth Street and south of Sanders Drive. As you see in appendix A, before getting into the findings, I want to briefly frame where we are at in the process. At the final plat stage, the commission is evaluating whether the plat complies with the approved preliminary plat and its conditions and the required findings and code are met. Importantly, conditions cannot be added or modified at this stage. This is a compliance check with the previously approved um by planning commission and city council preliminary plat. So, this project has a fairly extensive history. The preliminary plat was approved in 2018 and remains active today due to subsequent final plat filings. A final plat submitted in 2019 was denied primarily due to disagreement over construction and dedication of Bill Nye Avenue. Following that denial, the applicant pursued legal action and in 2022, the city and applicant entered into a settlement agreement. Since that time, a 2022 final plat resolved an unlawful subdivision issue and additional final platform continued final development of the subdivision in phases. The current request is pretty straightforward. It maintains the previously platted 18 residential lots in the area of interest. It adjusts lot lines to match the actual construct and improvements and corrects drafting errors and easement boundaries across previous filings. All required infrastructure, including

streets, utilities, and sidewalks, have already been constructed with the two most recent final plats that were approved and that each covered a portion of the current area of interest. So, there are no outstanding public improvements tied to this filing. Typically for something like this, we'd see it go through an administrative replat. However, since it covered two areas of two other previously approved final plats, it was recommended by the county to go through this um as another final plat just to have things and the record be clear in the future. The property is zoned B1 with residential overlay which does allow for residential development. The future land use designates the area as auto urban residential. There are some m mismatch between zoning and the future land use designation. But as a reminder, zoning is what is governing for the regulatory purpose. And this plat does not prevent development consistent with the comprehensive plan. And so then finally, I'll just walk through quickly the required final plat findings. So finding one, compliance with the preliminary plaque conditions. Staff finds this condition is met. All applicable conditions have been satisfied, previously constructed, or rendered not applicable through the settlement agreement. For finding two, substantial compliance with the layout of the preliminary plat, the layout and design are consistent with those prior approvals. For finding three, improvements, plans have been reviewed and improved. This is the case. For finding four, improvements constructed or financially secured. All required improvements have already been constructed. And then finding five, compliance with the development standards. This subdivision complies with the applicable provisions of the unified development code. Notice was provided with accordance in code and staff has received no public comments to date. Because staff finds that all recommended findings have been met, we do recommend approval. We're happy to

answer any questions and then the representative is also available and present. Thank you. Any questions? The applicant would like to say anything.

Mr. Chair, sorry, Mr. Chair. Kelly Abner, Civil Works. I'll make it brief. Um, apologies. This was not caught when we were going through the other platting processes, the construction plans. there's just a enough of a deviation between them and the plat that we're asking for your consideration to match what's out in the field with what's on paper. So, with that, um, apologies we couldn't do this administratively, but uh, we're asking for your consideration on this thing and any questions you might have. Thank you.

Well, we got to make Kayla and Chelsea happy. All their ducks are in a row. Uh public comment. Anybody online? Seeing none. Uh what is the wheel of the commission here? Do we It's a good project and like to see it finish, build some more. Go.

Got a ways to go, but you know, get cracking. We need more houses. I just just for the record chair and I wonder this may be for staff um or the or the applicant. Um I just want to get my heads around. So in the in the diagram there are the highlighted uh in orange. This is page I don't know what page it is of the PDF. It's appendix A. Um, so is those are the parcels that are subject of this final fourth plat? Yeah.

And was the third plat all of it together? Chair threw you. Um, so actually portions so like the I believe it was the northern four lots were actually part of the second filing. The rest were part of the third filing because this area overlaps two different final plats. Um, that's why the county recommended we go forward through this process. Thank you.

Well, any other questions? Chair will entertain a motion. I'll I'll move to recommend uh that the city council approve the Spring Creek Village fourth final fourth filing final plat plat 26-003 based on findings of fact and conclusions of law. We call a role. Second. Moody second. And I will call the role. Okay. Pacino I. Cole I. Eiser White is absent. Ludy

I. Oul. Yes. Schneider. Hi. And Madamore. Hi. That is six yeses, zero nos, and one absent. There being no other business before us tonight, I entertain a motion. Move to adjurnn. All right. All right. All those in favor leave. I had a pen that worked.