Planning and Zoning Commission - Regular Meeting

Okay, I'm going to call the August 25th regular meeting for the Planning and Zoning Commission to order. This meeting is held in person as well as via Zoom. And I think before we do the roll call, we need to make a motion to seat alternate, to seat our alternate. Okay.

Okay.

I can do that. Commissioner Connerton.

I make a motion to see Jim for Braille.

Commissioner Jones, I would second. OK, we have a motion and a second to see Commissioner Frail, ultra commission Frail. We'll just do a let's do a hand vote. All in favor. Any opposed? OK, it looks like welcome, Jim. Okay. Let's do the roll call.

Turn. Kyle Jones.

Present.

Jim Frail.

Present.

Amy Connerton.

Here.

Peter Waller. Here. Joy White.

Here.

John Houghton.

Present.

Connie Guymon.

Here.

Okay, one thing that's not on the agenda, but I see Ryan, you've been doing a good job. Is there any conflict of interest? I'm sure there's not what we have going on today, but I'll just ask that. You're teasing? Okay, no conflict of interest. Okay, let's go through the receipt of the minutes. I need a motion for the June 23rd meeting minutes. Commissioner Connerton?

I can make a motion to approve the June 23rd, 2026 meeting minutes.

Okay. Commissioner Jones?

I will second.

Okay, we have a motion and a second. Any comments, additions, deletions? The only commonality, the meeting minutes are very good, by the way. I think they're very well written. Okay. Okay. Well, let's vote on the June 23rd minutes to accept. Do we not do it online? Okay. Okay. Okay, it looks like we accepted them unanimously with one abstention.

Motion passes unanimously with one abstain.

Okay, now for the July 28th meeting minutes.

Mr. Chairman, if I may, I do know that there was one misspelling of Commissioner Frail's name. So if you'd like to make that change, if you intend on accepting the minutes. Is this for the July 28th? Correct.

Okay. Let's have a motion to accept those and then we'll get into that. Commissioner Frail.

I'd like to make a motion to the preferred spelling of F-R-A-L-E. Or first make a motion to accept them and then we'll... I'd like to make a motion to approve. Approve, yep. Thank you. The spelling. Okay. Thank you. Thank you.

We have a second. Commissioner Helton. I'll second that. Okay. We have a motion to approve the minutes with the spelling correction for Commissioner Frail. And there's a second on that. Any other discussion? Okay. Well, let's vote to approve those meeting minutes for July 28th.

HAB-Jacques Juilland, Motion passes unanimously with to abstaining.

HAB-Jacques Juilland, Okay, next thing on the agenda is comments from citizens appearing for items not on the agenda. I see no one here. It looks like no one's online. So we'll close that part. Okay, the next item is old items. CDA 49, the 2026 code amendment for short-term rental and accessory tourist rental. The applicant is a city. Emery?

Emery Ellingson, community development. I'll be sharing my screen. Okay, so this is a continuation of this item, which was previously considered. So the action item is just the code amendment to that one section in code. And then also I put together a memo that followed up on some of the questions that came from the last conversation we had. And so again, there's one action item. It would touch two pieces of code covering short-term rentals and accessory tourist rentals. And all it was was, again, based on the input from planning and zoning commission. This is what we have. So changing a permit holder who fails to rent the unit for at least one night and collect and and remit more than zero dollars in lodging taxes shall be not permitted to renew. So just adding more clarification on exactly what is required of someone when they need to. And again, the role of planning and zoning commission in the code amendment is to make a recommendation to city council. And so those options would be a recommendation for approval, denial, or continue the item. And two, if we want to talk about adding or editing language, that's certainly within the realm of what commission can do. So again, making that same change for both sections, accessory tourist rentals and short-term rentals. And then again, the criteria for code amendment, which we went through at the previous meeting, the proposed amendment aligns with all the criteria. Again, it was a small clarification, not really adding any new concepts. So just kind of touched on these already. And again, no public comment has been received on this. It's like no one's here tonight. And so again, as far as action items, this is what's before you tonight as far as decision, making a recommendation. And then these are some sample motions. And then just to get into your questions from the last time, we covered a couple different topics, minimum number of nights, average number of nights, owner occupancy, fees, and then also I just said police calls and activity. So first off, I used these communities as comparisons for looking at how other communities do it. Picked them partly because some of them, you know, some similarities, but then also, you know, there's some differences in these communities, you know, geographic size of the community demographics. So tried to get a good. Good sample. So that's what I used. And then just to start, I guess, from a base is this is where short-term rentals in the city stands as of today. And so there is for short-term rentals, which again, that's where you can rent the whole house. There's 126 active permits and that's of 210 available. And that cap is based on, it's 5% of how many housing units are in the city total. So that's citywide. And then the accessory tourist rentals, that's where you are limited to one bedroom. There's only 11. And then there's no cap on that one. And then this graph below just shows from its inception when we started permitting vacation rentals to today, how that number has changed. I would probably point out that in 2018, 2019 was when there was the peak. That year, there was a moratorium on rentals, new short-term rental permits. There's a lot of public input. And then the regulations were adjusted, and that included adding building inspections. And then we saw basically a big fall off in that year. And then slowly, permits have started to rebound towards that peak, but haven't reached that peak. And part of that, too, is because of the 250-foot rule and having that buffer. There have definitely been some permits that once the house was sold, that new owner was not able to have one. and then also other reasons too people just not wanting to do it anymore on different reasons and so where we are is right now is 126 short-term rentals city-wide So again, getting into minimum number of nights. So city Glenwood Springs in code, like what we see in that code amendment, we don't set a specific minimum number of nights. Now there is the requirement that you remit accommodation tax. So de facto, that's basically you have to do at least once, but it doesn't outline in code any language of doing it for a certain number of nights. Looked at Steamboat Springs. They have one special category permit where they have a requirement like that. It's They have a legal whole class of permits that are legal non-conforming. So that was where basically in order to maintain your permit, you have to rent it at least once every 12 months to continue that. And then they just have three classes of permits where two of them are very similar to what we have with the short-term rental permit and the accessory tourist rental permit. And then they also have a third permit. temporary short-term rental which is kind of a in between of those but the majority of the permits in Steamboat are like our short-term rental permits where you rent the whole house as you can see and then another community I looked at is Crested Butte they have two types of licenses one is basically available to if you're a long-term resident or you rent it long term but you're limited to how much you can do it and then the other license they have is unlimited where there's a limit of how many licenses are in town, but then you have to rent it at least 29 nights a year. So Crested Butte, that's how they regulate the number of nights. And then the other communities did not, the ones I looked at. And then as far as average number of stays, uh, so unfortunately could not really get a good data set for Glenwood. As far as number of stays the data from Colorado tourism office tracks, total number of nights. And then it had total number of listings, which is again, that four 52 is going to get double counted. Uh, because some people will list on multiple hosting sites. And then also that's not, uh, that's eight one six Oh one zip code. That's not like geo fence to the city. So really that gives you like 30 nights a year per rental, which given all the variation and what that data is, I wouldn't really take that as a statistic. And then same thing goes for the permit renewal. And so since the requirement for permit renewal is showing accommodation taxes being paid, we got data in a variety of sources. Some people provided us with an Airbnb report, which had both the financial side of it and a nightly summary which was great like that that was all the data but then other people would just give you just the financial data from airbnb which for my purposes for renewal worked so really the and then also too is just the timeliness of it is the renewal period starts september and runs to the end of the year so if someone gave me their information as of september 1st of 2025 that's not accounting for the rest of the year or they would have been renting So really don't have a good data set to determine the average number of stays in the city of Edmonton Springs specifically. And then owner occupancy was another thing that was talked about. And so Salida, they do limit, they basically split up their city in zones and that's how they cap their permits. And then some zones are limited to just residents of Chaffee County. And Carbondale also does something similar. They have what's called the Historic Commercial Core Zoning District, which kind of similar to our GAD, where you have to be a primary resident in that area. And then the rest of town, it's basically open to everybody, but there's a limit on total number of permits. So those are some other communities that have done that. Fees was another thing to look at. And so a big thing I think here is that of the communities I picked to compare us to, everybody else does it on an annual basis. And so you can see what those permit fees amounts are and then what ours are. And so I would divide ours by two to compare. Tom Preston- Breckenridge I'll point out they charge by bedroom. So that's why they're there have such a range. So you can see Tom Preston- A variety and then like crested butte and carbon. They'll have the different classes of permits. So they charge different rates. Tom Preston- And then also, I think, to point out is steamboat springs, you'll notice is definitely lower on that list, but they also have a specific short term rental Tom Preston- It's 9% sales tax on all short term rentals. So that's where The application fee might be less, but they have a much higher tax rate than we do. We have 5% total accommodation taxes. So that's how that turned out. And again, some communities do by bedroom, see a variety of amounts. And then code compliance. So just, that was a little bit of a review. Community Development Director does have the authority to revoke a permit without a hearing for any violation of code. We haven't done that yet. Another option too would be to bring it to a public hearing for revocation. And then also in code, there is an automatic permit relocation that if someone, it's basically a three strikes and you're out. If there's three cumulative convictions of Article 110 or 20, the permit's automatically revoked. And those sections of code deal with property maintenance and trash. And so what a cumulative conviction would be is basically going to getting a ticket written and going to court. So it would have to happen three times. So again, we haven't had that happen either. And then at each renewal, community development department does get police reports for all of the short-term rentals in town. They're up for renewal. Last year, there's 137 renewals. 47 of them had associated like a police call record. Now I should point out that that can be literally anything. So that could be medical assistance, EMT, EMS, ice on the sidewalk. Probably the ones that are most common are like noise, guests, please show up. Tom Preston- Tell people to quiet down trash and then parking. So those are the main ones. But again, nothing. We didn't have anybody have, you know, through convictions and and a lot of those reports are for a variety of things. Tom Preston- So yeah, so that's all is in the memo. Tom Preston- So again, one action item and that there's an a discussion and questions on those items.

Thanks memory. Tom Preston- Questions for memory. Commission White.

I wasn't here. Why did we, was this item continued? Why did we continue it?

Sure. So there was an appeal. So basically last year renewal period was 2024 and 2025. There was a person who had their permit not renewed because they did not collect and remit any accommodation taxes. And so they appealed that decision first to planning and zoning commission and then to city council. And it was ultimately upheld and that permit was not renewed.

So we needed to wait to change the code until that was cleared up?

Correct. We wanted to discuss it with Planning and Zoning Commission. Yeah. In an effort to clarify because it's not clear apparently.

And I was just curious that the 29 night requirement, I wonder like it's such a random number for that other city. I wonder what...

I actually represent Crested Butte. There was a lot of discussion with the council on the unlimited licenses in Crested Butte, whether or not that should be somewhere between 29 and 90 days. The theory being I don't remember exactly how they landed on 29, but the range of thoughts on that on, you know, these were much like Glenwood limited geographically, and so they were sought after licenses that were supposed to be part of the mix of accommodations available to the tourist economy. And so that a minimum number of nights was appropriate at some level. Similarly, in their other class of license, they have a maximum number of days as well. You can just, the idea in there, and I know it's totally consistent, the idea in there being that You're trying to encourage, you know, allow somebody who's like, say, a school teacher to take the summer off and rent their place out as a way to supplement their income and hang on to their housing and, you know, Chris would be it kind of makes Glenwood look affordable if you're a local workforce. So that was kind of the thinking process behind it. And it is a little bit of an arbitrary number, but they just felt like something should be required because it was such a valuable license to hold.

Which I kind of have that opinion about our own licenses here. It seems like even just paying over zero dollars still leaves a lot of room for people who are just capturing those licenses just to prevent their neighbor from getting one. And I suspect that's why that number is really low, that average number. Anecdotally, I know that like KeyLink, who manages short-term rentals, I think they usually quote 120 days as like a good gauge of what you can expect for short-term rentals here. 120 nights of rental. Anyways. Any more questions? Very, very limited amount of questions there.

Okay. Commissioner Gaiman.

That was actually really interesting. Thank you for doing that. I learned a lot. I think it was Crested Butte and one other town as far as like the minimum nights, but then you said the rest of them don't have any minimum nights. Is that what you said?

Not that I found when I reviewed the website, it looked like they didn't have any similar requirements. Steamboat Springs got back to me and told me no. And then that's where they have the non-conforming one.

I know I kind of remember when we started getting short-term rentals. And I remember the moratorium and I kind of have a different view than that. I don't feel like the city of Glenwood is in the business of like we need to have short term rental short term rentals are not bad. They bring tourists, but it felt like the city of Glenwood was more trying to make sure that it didn't affect our housing. So I don't know if we really want to get the business of making sure people rent more. I thought we were more in the, like more of it was trying to prevent people from everybody turning their property into a short-term rental. So I'm not sure if I have the same view as making sure they rent 29 nights. And I really don't care. I just don't want everybody to have a short-term rental. So I appreciate the cap.

That wasn't a question. You kind of made it a question at the end.

I have a question with a question mark at the end. Because I wasn't here last time. So I apologize if you've already answered this. But would it be would there be an administrative problem requiring a modest amount of rental nights for these STRs, say five or 10 annually, rather than simply requiring the tax to be greater than zero?

I mean, it would just come down to requiring different information from people that are renewing. The one thing, and I thought about this, is if you have 10 nights, you do have, what about seven nights? I couldn't rent it this year. Or any number you set, inevitably, you are going to run up against that. an extenuating circumstance. But as far as administratively, it would just be basically requesting different data at renewal. Because again, most people list on Airbnb and VRBO. And if you print off the right report from either of those sites, it gives you a really concise report. So it would just be different information request of the permit holders.

I mean, I guess because every other community annually makes people reapply or look at it annually. Is there a reason why we shouldn't follow in line? I mean, uh-oh.

No, it's a really good question.

I wasn't here. OK. That's bigger than all of us. Laughter is happening.

A big, a big word just from what I observed is for me personally, like whether it's yearly or biannually, like pretty used to it. I think the bigger strain is actually on our building department. And so all of those require re-inspections. And then that also takes away their time from being able to do inspections on active construction projects. So that would be my biggest, maybe, um, If we went to an annual, it's not so much like the paperwork side of it, but the actual getting out and doing the inspections, because that takes a big chunk of their time. And then that takes away from active construction projects. So that's my two cents.

I would completely agree with that. I mean, it would just, it would double the administrative burden that we currently have for it. And the two year cycle seems to work well. But specific to the building permit inspections, it's condensed to those last two months out of the year too, which makes it really tough. It makes it really difficult into the year for those guys. So, you know, I, I think that we're certainly making sure that these spaces are safe for the guests on the two-year cycle.

Okay. I have another one, but I'll let...

In terms of the number of nights, I would just say there's not really a wrong or a right answer. You know, I could go both ways on this. You know, one, I think the language intended that you should rent it, right? But folks didn't want to get involved with what that minimum number is. In the case of some folks, they may only want to rent out maybe some super busy weekends during the year to help supplement their income. You know, other folks may be using it to block their neighbor from being able to have one. What the balance is, you know, are the right answer, I think, is just kind of what we want to set as a policy for our community.

Okay, Commissioner Jones.

I guess my question is, is like, what's the intent of the city with the rules? Like, do we want to encourage people to use these permits? Or are we trying to discourage the use? Because we created a system where it's, you know, there's scarcity here. And so we have this kind of competition with the 250 feet and everything like that. And so like, do we want to see these rented? Do we want to see that taxable income or are we trying to protect the diversity of a neighborhood, right? And so I think when we're talking about The intent of the code was to say, you need to rent this place. Okay. Well, if we're going to run with that, then I think having a minimum amount of rentals is a fair follow-up question with the days. And so I guess my question is, why don't we, because there is such a big disparity between your example of like, there's a busy weekend. I want to get out of town, get a little extra income and somebody who's trying to make a huge business. decision, like we saw in the last appeal, purchase a place specifically for that. I mean, I feel like it would be fair to have kind of different levels or different tiers of short term rental app or permits within that. But I guess, did we discuss that because I wasn't here when the original discussion happened?

Well, actually, neither was I. No, but I think a lot of it was balance and flexibility. So balance in the sense that a neighborhood, because I think what happened is without that distance between the two, you had neighborhoods that there'd be like three on one block. Those people living there would have to kind of deal with some of the negative impacts of maybe having that many. So that's where I think the 250 foot came from. was balancing and, you know, spreading that out in the community. So I think that that is one piece of it. And then I also think just, just the flexibility of, we have a lot of different types of people that operate. And so again, having that lower level of maybe a couple nights a year, strawberry days, something like that versus really purchasing a home as a It's purely a vacation rental. And so that's when I've interacted with permit holders and enforces regulations, that's what I've seen. And I think that really is the intent. And that's where, again, that was a lot. There's a lot of public input as part of that moratorium. I don't know, Brent or Carl, if you have any more to add.

Well, I suppose, but these permits carry the same weight. If somebody is renting one day a year, they're still blocking everybody else in that neighborhood from renting.

I think it's important that we do have a secondary option, and that's where you can just rent one room and still be on site. It doesn't prevent you from doing it for a full – the other option still allows for a full rental of your entire single-family home. But we also have the alternative of you can just lease a room if you want to do it for supplemental income.

And I would also maybe add another part of this piece that's really in the background is also the larger housing conversation is that the city wants to encourage things like accessory dwelling units, wants to encourage things like home ownership. And so kind of background, if someone doesn't have that option to short-term rental, maybe they would consider doing an ADU on their property. I wouldn't say that's like a primary intent of these regulations, but I think that very much influenced some of those decisions.

To your point, It probably would be worth maybe talking to some of the, I mean, not for tonight's discussion, but the question around housing, to Emery's point, was a big part of the discussion in the, I think it was two years ago when Crested Butte updated their regulations. And so they have those two classes of licenses The there is one, if it is your primary residence, meaning you are a local resident living in at that location, you have up to that 90 days that you can you can rent it out a year versus one that goes to your point of like, this is your business. It's rented out year round all the time. And that is the twenty nine minimum versus the 90 maximum on it. That's your primary residence. And I think they struggled with a lot of those same questions about. How do you address housing? How do you help people stay in the community? How do you make sure that it doesn't turn over into something else? And I think their approach, whether it worked or not, I don't know. You'd have to talk to their CommDev director, I think, is that idea that if it's your primary residence, that's somewhat different than if it is your business, right? And you're not living there in terms of addressing that housing issue.

I'll share the dais.

Okay, Commission Frail.

As Councilwoman Guymon complimented you, I do the same. Nice packet. I appreciate the memo. My question is, you have the one night and more than $0. Is that a starting point? Because I know this is in here because we got into a sticky situation with not having anything, but do you consider this a good place to start? And then if we want to change those numbers?

Yeah, I would say I wouldn't go any backwards. Like I wouldn't remove that requirement.

Um, and then I was more thinking about a number. Yeah. Um, It seems like a good place to start. Yeah, yeah. Because of what we endured.

And I think whatever you would pick would be to some degree arbitrary, right? Like you are picking a number. But yeah, I think one night, I think the biggest thing that I see, and I think what we saw with the appeal is, and again, it's like when you make those cutoffs, those hard cutoffs, you will inevitably get, you know, if we set it at 10, we might see an appeal because someone could do a week and stuff happened in their life and they didn't want, they couldn't do short-term rentals, but they really want to keep the permit or so just as something to keep in mind if we set that number, so. Okay, thank you.

Commissioner White.

Do any of those other communities have buffer zones like we do?

I didn't, no, they were all, a lot of them were by zones. So even the Crested Butte example, it's like they just split up the city, just like a zoning district, but just sort of like short-term rental districts. So like Salida had it where, okay, these zones, you have to be a resident, and then these ones are open to anybody. And so I didn't see any other communities that did it quite exactly how we did.

Yeah, there again, CB is a hybrid. They have kind of like a GID zone, a commercial district, and then it's

two per block face, I want to say, or something like that.

Right. Something like that. Yes. I don't administer it, so I don't remember.

I mean, I feel like as a community, we have been exemplary in some of the things that we've put into practice. And I think it's working. We've controlled the amount of short-term rentals that we have. So I think the housing stock is being protected, which I think was our goal. To me, I just kind of utter the same sentiments that these... permits are valuable and they are something that should be used. And so I don't know if there's a way that we can just make a recommendation to city council that they think about putting in a number of nights required. Um, I don't know.

So, so it isn't that I'm going to ask the process question here. So right now we're asking you questions and then we come back and then we make a motion and then, and then we can edit it for sure. We think, I mean, but I guess, I mean, but, but it is, is that our, is that the process we're going through? Cause we're, I mean, and then it goes to city council and they do whatever they want to do.

That absolutely is a process. And I think you guys could do a couple of things in there just on process on, you could, recommend approval of the language as it is with a asterisk that says council needs to decide what its goal is with these STRs. And that may impact what they want to do on the number of nights or something like that. I mean, I think there's a number of ways. I do think from a staff perspective, we'd like to see a recommendation go up to council. you know, at a minimum of what's in the staff report, just so that we can clear up the perceived ambiguity in the code just to get that moving forward and done.

I don't go ahead.

I was just going to say, that being said, I'm hearing a similar kind of feeling from a lot of folks that, you know, that's the true intent. And that language was put in there originally to try to prevent kind of the boundary, you know, stealing and the permit stealing. So if we want to enforce that original intent, it's perfectly okay for you to recommend a specific number of nights to counsel as part of that language.

I just see that buffer zone as being a very unique thing to us. And it does create kind of this competitive, you know, I see it from a sales side, so I see it hugely. And so, yeah, you run into these scenarios where people are going down and applying before other people and, you know, it's just, which that's just, that's fine. But I just feel like, we have controlled the housing stock. I feel like the permits should be used, you know, if people have them. I will say also the other thing, I don't know if you put this in your report or if people know this, but I think it's a really interesting way that we've dealt with the short-term rental code, but the ADUs are not allowed to be rented as short-term rentals i don't know if that was covered but it has to be the main house and the intent of that was to preserve kind of that workforce housing right which is typically a lower it's greater than 30 days yeah so i think that's also a great thing we've done okay commissioner connerton

yeah but yeah that's my sentiment as well i do think it would instead of having this you know we i like to see more diversity in neighborhoods as well but these strs um i would like to see it actually with a number um instead of just because it it did create some chaos in the last hearing that or in the appeal that we all encountered. Um, I mean, if we're talking two years and we said 10 nights, that's a quarter of what you showed us in the stats, which is I think 29 nights, I think so like 10 nights in two years. would be five nights a year, that would be a suggestion for language that I would like to see as well. Because going and applying for a permit to prevent other people from getting one to me is just totally sideways from the intent, I think, of what we're trying to get at. What's that?

No. Commissioner Gaiman.

Technically, this is a question, but is it really sideways from the intent? Because the intent was to make sure that we don't have STRs everywhere. And I guess, yeah, you can't. So that was the intent, though. I don't think the intent was to ever make money for the city. Was it?

I don't think that was a huge consideration from my recollection.

I mean, I, so I don't understand, but it was two, it was two or five nights. I don't, I don't know if that really, I don't know. I feel like, I feel like people feel really strongly, but upset, like justice wise to take a, a permit from somebody else, but I don't know if that's a justice thing. It's just, you got your permit first. And if you want to do one night in two years, you can do one night in two years. And I don't think the ever, the ever effort that the, the, the, um, permit system was ever meant to be money-making. I think it was meant to limit the number of short-term rentals. No, I don't think that was why it was there.

It was meant to be on permits generally to be used. Yeah, I agree.

Well, they do use it once every two years.

Okay, we have one person talking. Okay, Commissioner Helm.

The 126 out of 210, that's 210 outside of the GID? That's citywide.

So that includes the GID? Correct. So there's 28 available in the GID, and all 28 are taken. And then that 28 is also part of the 126. And is it, I mean... 210.

In your estimation, is it possible to hit 210 permits with the legally existing units we have now and the 250-foot buffer?

I think it would be difficult spatially just because when you also add in HOAs that might have covenants that don't allow short-term rentals like those areas, even though they may appear available on the map. There are not. One interesting thing about the GID, though, is, for example, the 210 A Street project, which you all reviewed, the amount of units that that would add to the GID would actually bump the cap up. But conversely, if someone took an apartment building downtown and made it into a hotel, they would put it down because they're not residential units anymore. So citywide, I think that'd be very hard. The GID, because of its size and the numbers are smaller, that becomes more variable.

And then was there ever any thought about, they currently permits end with the calendar year, right? Correct. And speak from experience at least, November and December are already busy times for the building department with people trying to get into their homes before Thanksgiving or before Christmas. Was there any thought at all about shifting the STR permit out of that already busy period?

Never. I don't know why they picked that originally, probably just calendar year. And since we haven't really talked about changing it, be open to that idea. I think keeping the two years would be more important than maybe necessarily where it falls. And it is a busy time for people. Thank you.

Mission to Frail.

Is the short-term permit, is it, I heard someone say about rushing down. Is there a wait list for that? Or how does that, uh, how does a permit holder who either gives up or loses their permit? How does the next person in line or is there a line or how does that work?

Uh, so given the way that it's, it's regulated is by buffer, uh, your property is either eligible or you're not eligible. And so if like your neighbor has a permit and you find out that they sell their home and you submit your application, and you're the first person to do it, and you complete the application and pay the fee, then you've submitted an application. And then if your other neighbor on the other side of that comes in 10 minutes after you, they're out of luck. So we don't do waiting lists, but part of that's because of the way that we do it spatially, is it's not just like, oh, here's your district, and there's a total number of 50. It is very dynamic.

Okay, thank you.

Commissioner Connerton.

Yeah, I just want to speak to something. I mean, I think that a permit is definitely designed to be used, hence the name permit. But also, I mean, I think that keeping the threshold We should be, you know, would be to be deliberately modest in the threshold of the night of how many nights I mean, because the goal isn't to force people to actually have to, you know, maximize their rentals. But it should distinguish between I occasionally operate a short term rental and I hold an STR permit because I don't want someone else to have one. And so that's why I would suggest that language change.

OK, any more questions? I've got a couple of questions. I mean, one thing is, first off, a comment. I support having a number bigger than one. But I guess we'll get to that. But the other question I have is, I thought you said Carbondale, when I was reading your thing, had that it needed to be an owner resided. So it couldn't be like a second home investor that owns the house. Is that correct?

In the, I don't know exactly where their historic commercial core begins and ends in that area. Yeah. Primary occupant. And then elsewhere it was, it's up for grabs. It's whoever, but those are, it could be a second.

This could be someone that doesn't even live here. So it'd be a, like a third home or something outside that core area.

Yeah. And then, but those types of permits were capped.

And did, did, did I see the Carbondale set? They had, they, I thought I read that they had to, the owner had to reside in the house. greater than half a year. It was like one day over or something like that, I thought.

Yeah, 183.

Anyway, I'm just trying to get it not being like... Yeah, Carbondale was 183 days. Carbondale, yeah. Yeah. I mean, I thought that was an interesting... take on it of trying to make it be not a second owner that then has a you know it's like another mother from another brother and whatever kind of thing so do they do they have the atrs too No, I'm just talking about the short-term rental one. And then another question I kind of had is on the, and when we did talk about this before on the police calls, when that happens, and it's probably a small thing, but does, so is the owner responsible for that or do you chase after a lowly weekend party animal person? Any of us, but I'm no, but you know what I mean? I mean, because, you know, so you have some clout. So when that comes in.

Previously, we had, we did a code change to address this. So previously we, we didn't have a way to link those two. So if you had a guest that had got a noise ticket that went to the person you're making noise, you get the ticket. And that's why we changed it to a permit is automatically revoked upon the conviction of a property owner, tenant, or guest for a violation. So the ticket, like you're at the house, you're going to get the ticket and the property owner. They're responsible for that. Okay, cool. That was my question.

Okay. Let me just ask another. So I think we're finished with our questions, but, um, so there's no one I'll open it to the public. Um, I don't see anyone here or online, so we'll close that. So, so I guess here's a question I have before we bring it back for motion. I mean, it sounds like there's some consensus on that. I mean, can we have kind of a, you know, maybe continue our conversation and then. put it together in a motion, or should we make a motion, kind of like what Carl said, that we approve the basic language and then we add caveats or whatever on top of that. It could be numbers of times. I mean, how should we proceed on that?

Yeah, again, I think it's up to you. Any one of you can make any motion you wish. I also hear that consensus, and if somebody wants to make a motion on a specific number of nights, and then you can discuss it.

So how about if we go with kind of what Carl was suggesting? Let's go with the wording first, and then we can add on.

I think Aiden's done. Well, let's see if it's...

It was kind of strange last time when you went home.

And we survived. Could I suggest you turn on her microphone if she's going to make it?

Yes, Chair Connerton.

So I move to recommend approval of planning file CDA 00049-2026 to City Council. incorporating staff findings because the application meets the approval criteria for code amendment, suggested findings one through five, suggested conditions. And we can talk more about this, but for a regular STR permit require at least, and I'm going to say 10 regular nights in the two-year period, evidence through lodge tax filings with narrowly defined administrative hardships. exception. Ah, I could take that sentence out. I retract that last sentence. And I say evidence through lodge tax filings. So just the whole beginning part that I said, for an SEO permit 10 nights. And the two period.

Okay, we have a motion. I'll second a second by Commissioner white.

Okay.

conversation amongst us.

I'd be curious to explore kind of more of like a tiered type of rental where it is, I mean, the option should be there for a family who wants to get away on the weekend, like we discussed once, but I think having a more serious short-term rental as well Um, and whether they both carried the 250 foot restriction, if you're just leaving for 1 weekend, perhaps you're not blocking. 250 feet but again, I think that's for. counsel to decide a little bit more of what the intent of the short-term rentals is.

So are you, and I'm just asking a clarifying question. So you're saying that if you just, if you picked one or two days, then you can do it. Then you're not within the 250 feet. Maybe.

Just to help allow people who want to use their short-term rental more to use that permit. And if people are looking not to block it, but looking to use for like a weekend perhaps they're not blocking around them but i think it's just thinking about like the quest of beauty i think it was example where there's a minimum number of rentals for the people really trying to use the permits but then a maximum amount for people who are more casual users of that permit um but i think we could explore that more

Okay. Commissioner Houghton.

I'll just say I'm not convinced that adding a number of nights will necessarily convince people or prevent blocking per se. I'm example ed and I have a permit. There's something saying I can't rent it to sample Sally for 10 nights for a dollar a night. Who knows if she stays there, right? I assume there's an affidavit. I don't know how you confirm that someone has stayed at residents. You don't have to put it on Airbnb. You don't have to put it on VRBO. I mean, how do you confirm nights stayed? Two cents.

Okay. Commissioner Connerton.

How do other communities prove it? I don't know. But I was just going given based on the local average of 29 nights, right, which is what Emory presented to us, 10 nights is about a third of the average activity. So I just think that making it just a little bit more accountable, is it going to prevent people? Probably more than just saying more than zero, at least from the experience we had with that appeal.

Commissioner White.

I agree with Amy. I think that you could apply that same argument to requiring to them being required to file more than zero dollars for sales tax. And so why do we do it? We try to uphold what the intent is of the code. I actually like the buffer zones. I think that people, I think it kind of attacks the idea that people don't want a ton of short-term rentals in one location. So I think it addresses that. I do like the buffer zones. I like the system we have. I just think that holding a little more accountability for the use of those would be my... Um, opinion and requiring, and like Amy said, 10 nights over two years, what is that? You know, it's very nominal. So I think it's, um, approachable for people that have those permits and very realistic for them to use them for that purpose. And I, and I agree permits are meant to be used. Why, why would you get one? Otherwise it's like you get a permit to use the park, not just to block the park from being used. So. It's my 10 cents. 10, not two.

Other comments? I almost think 10 is too, for two years, I think 10 is too low. That's my own two bits. But I think one thing that's difficult, though, too, when we had that with the last appeal that came in here, was that when they got their permit, you know, was like October. So they had like two months, you know, whatever to, to, to do that. So it's, it's what, it's not like a rolling period of time. I think that's a, I think that's a difficulty with how we manage it. And I don't know if for your first year getting in, I mean, the way we do it, you know, because I think that's a difficulty with the two-year period that once you get in, you're already, if you get in at a year and a half, you have six months to do it versus someone else had two years to do it. I think it's... I would say that's probably why everyone else does a year. So I don't know how that plays out, but I think 10 days in two years is too short. Yeah. But at least it's something to give to counsel, I think, to talk about. And then a couple other things that I kind of like. One was I like John's idea that's kind of a small thing, but changing it to a fiscal year versus calendar year. And maybe it's on June or, you know, staff could pick that is that is based on their slack time. You know, if there's this slack time kind of thing. But, you know, why would you punish yourself? You know, it seems like a. Seems like a crazy thing that you can have control over that of when you say that time. So that would be another thing I would throw in. And then the last one, I guess I like that for people that do it, I think you should be a resident. of um 81601 i mean you shouldn't be a second home owner and um that was that was kind of part of our thing that we saw but but maybe the money guy signed up a couple local people kind of thing and then that's that's how it is that that's kind of how it goes but um um and I don't know if that's you know Carbondale had it maybe different and I don't know if other towns have that but I think it's it should be helping our residents is kind of what to me that's I mean that's what it's about so that would be the two other things I would add on to the 10 days and I could see that being more but okay any other comments or Commissioner Connaughton.

When you say fiscal year, how does that change things for?

A fiscal year versus a calendar year. That's how you do.

Right. Okay.

So I'm just saying for them, for this, well, their period starts from June to June.

They're less busy.

It's not from December, January to December.

Yeah. I was going to say, it's kind of aggravating whenever we do it. And I mean, if you did it in the middle of summer, that's also the busy building season. Yeah, but you can pick whenever. But we could certainly consider a change in our permit.

But I mean, to me, it seems like for me bringing that up, that's up to you guys. If they're, you know, maybe it's February. Maybe it's, you know, shoot, I don't know. But maybe you're busy 100% of the time. There's no slack time. Yeah.

So is it administratively too difficult to just do it on the sunrise of their of an individual permit holders expiration so that they're not all done at once and things just that they go through a renewal from the time they apply to the next two years out, then you're actually spreading the work out over the year.

If I may, I don't actually know any jurisdiction that does that. And it's mostly because of how hard it is to go through the renewal process. And then if you have a rolling waiting list and certainty for people to know when that they should be looking for a new permit to be available in terms of getting in, like, you know, if the one down the street from you, you know, that selling or whatever. So I think because of all of that, most jurisdictions pick a date that everybody renews on for simplicity.

and i would also add i mean you have companies that manage multiple properties and if every single permit has a different expiration date you know i think for like transparency and simplicity having that one date is good for not just regulation but also people that operate them okay any other comments or so we have a motion in the second

um which was which is basically emery's um motion or amendment plus you added on the 10 days basically um emery you have something i just point out clarification is this motion to affect accessory tourist rentals and short-term rentals i think that the 10 days is just for the short-term rentals right Commissioner Houghton.

Sorry, I mean, at the 11th hour, but maybe a friendly motion to require the number of days rented to be submitted as part of the renewal, regardless of what our day limit is, we can start collecting that data and we can codify that requirement.

Are you saying that that's like a recommend? I mean, that if they don't hit that, they're not in trouble or they?

I'm just saying we have no clue right now how much these are used.

Yeah, if I may, I think what the commissioner is suggesting is a friendly amendment to Mr. Connerton's motion, which would be to include when it goes up to council language requiring submittal as the total number of days for which it was rented as well as setting that minimum number, something along those lines.

Okay. Will you accept that?

I will. Ditto.

Okay. And see who did this. Okay. Okay.

I mean, is that something we actually put in the code or do we actually just put it in as an application?

I think that... there is value if you want to enforce it and having it in the code because it then becomes a requirement that trent and his department can enforce uh like by both by not renewing and also by some other means in the code in terms of an enforcement mechanism versus just being data that we're trying to collect so that if it's important to you guys to know that information i think it's good to have it in the code that it's a required as part of that submittal I mean, it sounds implied, but as we have seen, what's clearly implied in the code isn't always obvious.

Right. And not that we would require this, but it'd be interesting to see what the nightly rate is. Because if you're charging $5 a night, you know, for 10 nights, then you know you're not using it as a short-term rental. But not making that suggestion.

Commissioner Connaughton.

Yeah, I want to stay at John's house for a dollar a night. But yeah, I mean, that's what we bumped up against in that appeal was exactly what we're trying to... adjust this evening was just, there was a lot of ambiguity and I think, you know, it would be good when they reapply that they have to bring forward exactly what they've done on the course of the last two years, because that was kind of part of the problem as well. It was like, Both sides, right? They didn't have any rentals. They never used the permit. And but they said they had done XYZ. So yeah, I think that's a really good thing.

Mr. Gaiman.

Um, I don't know if the planning and zoning committee is like, if we're tasked with trying to figure out who's getting permits for personal reasons, who's getting them to try to prevent permits from other people. Um, and I don't think that is part of our job is, I don't, I don't think it's been brought as a problem except for this. one condition that was a maybe even an anomaly and I like that it's just more than one more than one night and more than zero dollars I don't think putting a number on it is going to help solve I don't I think that's going to cause more problems than it's going to solve I agree with John that people can just make up days and really for doing it for the people of Glenwood, then not putting a requirement on it would actually be more helpful to the people of Glenwood. I think that there's a lot of money in short-term rentals from the people who are using it as a business that don't live here with making a business of people live here. I'm sure the real estate agent that sold people that house felt really bad that all of a sudden they couldn't have a short-term rental. So I feel like it affects a lot of different things. And I just don't feel like we should be in that business. I think keeping it more than zero days is the most, the best way to help our fellow citizens. I don't think we need to regulate why people are getting permits. And I have a, I have a state park permit that I like just supporting the state parks. I don't ever really go.

Okay, I'm gonna, I mean, ask something for it. So is so I would like to add, or offer to people to add that in order to have a short term rental, that you have to be a resident.

I don't know if, I mean, is that, yeah, you can't do that, but that's a good idea.

I thought, well, I thought, I thought that's what Carbondale has with air.

They do is that it has to be your primary residence in which you live for 183 days. Yeah. But that is very different than just saying you have to be a resident, have a short-term rental. You can't understand the distinction I'm making. You could require it to be somebody's primary residence that's being rented out and they live there 183 days. You can't say that you've got to generally live as the owner in 81601 or something like that.

Well, I guess I like the Carbondale thing. I mean, it's kind of like, what is the number of days you're just... trying to get something out there. So I guess I would like to at least have it be our intent that these are people, that this is their residence. Got it. I guess that's what that, and I don't know how you, well, I don't know how Carbondale does that, but that was something that resonated with me that I thought that was good versus someone having a second home and they're not.

Right. And I think what you're suggesting is a fairly significant structural change. And so I think sending that up as something that council should potentially look into I don't know that we could actually buy like we'd be back in front of you with some fairly significant changes to the to the current regulations to get to that point. So I'm just suggesting that it may be two separate things. It may be something for later consideration as opposed to attach to this motion.

Okay. Okay. I'm okay with that. I would like to find out how does Carbondale do it? I don't think there are any, I know they're not smarter than Emory. So.

Well, and what I was saying is that I think what it is, it's just that we have a current system where you can be a second homeowner, you can own it as a business. And I think what Carbondale is doing or the one class of license in Crested Butte is, is that you have to be, that has to be your primary residence for that class of license. And we absolutely can do that. It's just not the way we're structured right now. Okay.

And I guess I have a follow-up. You don't have to have an answer. Just something to think about, too, is what if you are a resident of the city of Glenwood Springs, and you live here, and the house you rent just is a second house that you own, but you live here? Because we see that a lot.

And that's the situation that you can't make that mandatory. But if you make it a single family, if you make it, you have to live there to be able to rent it as an STR, then that scenario can't happen either.

Right, right. Yeah, and that was one thing that we heard at that last, at that appeal was it, I guess some of those people, they had multiple short-term rentals that they purchased. Okay. Okay.

And that's something too, where we would have data on is because people are, they have to list their primary address. So I could go through and be, this is a primary occupant, you know, that we could have data on that.

It would be interesting to know. I mean, I mean, maybe it's not a problem at all, but I know that was presented to us that they own several short-term rentals. Joy. Okay.

The only thing I would just remind you of is a lot of those communities don't have that buffer zone. And so, like, we are already pretty restrictive with our rules. And though I understand the sentiments of, like, protecting our residents' income, I think it's already pretty onerous to get a permit.

Yeah. It's like another block kind of thing. But okay.

Okay.

I think let's, any more comments or let's call the question. Yeah. And let's restate what is our motion. Do you have it?

Sure. I think I can, it's too long. Let me summarize. I think the motion is to approve the language as presented, except with 10 days over a two year period as being the required number of days. And that for the short term rental for only for the short term rental permits, and to require a reporting of the number of days actually rented as part of the renewal process.

Okay. Okay, let's go.

Motion passes six in favor want to post.

Okay. No, no. That's Ms. Guymon. No, I know. She's been gone for a while.

I'm sorry. No, it's okay.

Okay. Good job, Emery. Good job. Okay. Okay, now we have a new item. The new item is the Economic and Community Development Year in Review. Is this you, Trent?

It is. Thank you, Sharon.

Goodbye, Emery.

Congratulations. Congratulations, Emery.

Emily.

I'm getting married, right? Is that what you're referring to? Yes, yes. That's why we missed him last month. Continued it a couple months. Good evening, Mr. Chairman and Commissioners. Trent Hyatt with Community Development. I'll go ahead and share my screen with you here. Okay, saw an opportunity for this evening with a fairly light agenda to kind of come in and chat with you all. It's been about approximately one year just shy maybe 1520 days or so of my being back with the city. and spoke with Chairman Waller a couple months back, and he said, it might be good to hear from you guys. We hear land use cases, we hear code amendments, but we don't really know what's going on outside of the activities and the land use cases that come before us. So, I wanted to take the opportunity to chat with you a little bit about just some of the actions that we've taken over the year and what type of permits and actions and activities that our department's involved in. Because you may or may not know, and I'm happy to take some questions. And feel free if you want to interrupt me at any time, I can jump into things. Just to talk a little bit about our department, we wear a lot of different hats. What you see is mostly the first line there in that we do planning. We do development reviews, zoning, subdivision, short-term rental permits, accessory dwelling units, any and all of the above. Another major aspect and always have been of our department is building permit review and inspections. We also have Lynn Springer that works in our office, who is our neighborhood services specialist, who does a lot of code enforcement related activities in terms of if we have a violation on a property, she's kind of the first one that tries to make contact with those folks and to try to address those violations and to bring a property into conformance. She also is service part time with the water and wastewater department and that she does our fat, oil and grease inspection of all of our restaurants around. So making sure that folks are cleaning out those grease traps so it's not ending up in our sewer system. She also is responsible on the water side for any complaints of folks watering outside of our required schedule. We also have economic development. That's where we provide some business resources, grant opportunities, and a lot of data requests of folks that are either interested in developing in the community, investing in our community, or opening up a business here. Housing, of course, is one that you all see a lot of as well, and dealing with our inclusionary housing requirements and managing all the deed restrictions for the city. Joel, he's kind of our pit bull at the front counter, if you will. However, he's very more like a sweet puppy. He's been one of the great additions to our department. Yeah, golden retriever boyfriend. You guys heard that term, I don't know. Anyway, he has been a huge addition in that one of the goals or directions, directives to me when I came on with the department was we really wanted to improve our customer service offerings, whether it's on the building side, the inspection side, the planning side. Whether warranted or not, there have just been some concerns about the delays in permit reviews, the time it took for folks to get things addressed or responses from the city. And so You know, I made it my job, my responsibility to try to make sure that we we had a plan moving forward on how we were going to address maybe some of the perceptions of our department out in the community. Right. So one of the things that I did was immediately I put together a strategic plan for the department to how we were going to address some of these issues and. And that strategic plan focused on three different topics. One, staff development, two, process improvements, and then technology, how we can use technology to help improve all of our processes and our staff development.

And just to tell you a couple of the things that we've done to date.

You know, one of the things I did was to make sure that we had kind of guidelines, our standard operating procedures for communication within a department and responsiveness. You know, it could be that you call our department with a simple question. What's the zoning of my property? Or it could be that you call our department with a very in-depth conversation. How many units can I fit on X, Y, and Z properties if I develop them? Some are very simple for us to answer. Some take a number of days, right? But one thing that I think that the public needs to understand is that whether it's gonna take us 24 hours or it's gonna take us 72 hours, we're working on that question, right? So one of our requirements is that we try to respond to all emails voicemails, front desk, folks that come into our front counter within 24 hours. Whether we have an answer for you within that 24 hours or not depends on the complexity of that question, but it's still something we try to attempt. Also, just making sure our staff is accessible. Right. You know, we have Joel who's at the front counter now full time. But when Joel steps out, maybe to go on an inspection with one of our building inspectors who's covering that front counter, always making sure that we've got a staff person there that if someone comes in, they can be seen and heard. So that's very important. Also having a planner of the day that's always on duty to make sure that those questions are answered at the front counter. Um, there's a little bit of concern about building permit review and who was responsible. You know, sometimes it feels like you can submit this permit now into our, our new, um, permitting technology, um, our platform, EP and L enterprise permitting and licensing. And it's like, what happens, where did it go? Um, so we've also assigned a planner to kind of be the project manager of, of any building permit application. Right. Regardless if that comment comes from engineering or else if that comment comes from public works, it's your responsibility to make sure that that is relayed back to the applicant and that they understand where they need to go to address those issues and those problems with their application. Um, developing new hires, obviously Joel's very, very easy. Um, but you know, um, we, we, we, we lost our housing development manager last year. So we, so Watkins is instead stepped into that role. So he's doing both his planning duties as well as the housing, um, responsibilities and so you know what does he need to kind of continue his education in the housing realm he's already very good but you know does he need certain certificates and he's one of those is that he's working on he's been accepted into a du program for a housing certificate to kind of continue that education also um you know succession planning um i'm not always going to be alive i may not always be with the city um so we want to make sure there's we want to make sure those folks that that are are taking development um or you know management courses to to be able to fall fall into that role into the future right um there's we're lucky enough that the city also has kind of made this a big priority as well you know putting dollars towards professional development and one of those opportunities for um a few of us is going to be a public manager certificate So that you're, you know, you can step into those roles as need be, but you understand all aspects of budgeting management, you know, personnel, all those details. So that's something that we're starting here next month. Work product improvements. I don't know if you guys noticed that there are a couple of changes to the staff report upon coming here. You know, we want to really focus those staff reports so that if there were ever a challenge, you know, whether it's legally or due to process, that, you know, we've dotted all the I's and crossed all the T's in those staff reports. That is the record for these hearings. You We do a very condensed version of that staff report to you and we answer your questions. But really, it's the record of that staff report that goes into that file so that if we were ever sued, a judge could evaluate the evidence as to why we made the decisions that we did. That's also why we kind of come to you sometimes when we say, hey. If you are going to go against staff's recommendation, what are your findings? What did you use to determine that you made that decision? And something we're always happy to coach on and continue to do that. In terms of process improvements, one of the things I kind of embarked on as soon as I got back to the city was reaching out to specific stakeholders that we work with, whether that's folks in the building industry, whether it's folks in the design industry, whether it's contractors or consultants that we work with to say, hey, what are your experiences within the department? Where are your choke points? What issues are you having? And just taking that feedback and sharing it with the staff and trying to make sure that we're addressing those points throughout the way. That was a really beneficial process. I tried to meet with folks off-site in a safe location, like a coffee shop that wasn't inside the building to say, okay, what challenges are you down with? And in some instances, those were not real challenges, right? It was typical development. And you'd hear from somebody and say, well... You guys are great, you know, working up in X community. It's nothing, nowhere near as bad here as it is there. So that's refreshing. But also as a leader, and this comes from the top down in our organization, we always want to get better, right? We always want to be making small improvements. So we still took that information and tried to make changes where we could. We also developed a survey so that folks could, you know, give us feedback about our department. If you want to fill that out and give us a positive review, I've got it right here. Just kidding. We have actually, no one's actually fit out the survey. It's kind of been in recent development here in a couple of months, but it was important. You know, it turns out folks don't usually want to respond when things are going well. It's usually when it's not going well. And thankfully we don't have many incidents in our department, but anonymous. It is. It is anonymous. So you're welcome to and always you're always welcome to come to me and chat about any issues that you have. But it's also a line for a little bit of flexibility in our process. Right. You know, I had heard that we were a little rigid in some instances. My philosophy is that if it's not a life safety issue, you should consider an alternative if it's within the guidelines of the code. Someone having a mishap along the way in the process or wanting to change, let's say, a portion of a building permit application, but to continue forward with other aspects of that process. If we can accommodate it, we will certainly try to if it's within the bounds of our regularity.

So I have a question. So on the survey, I think the survey is awesome, by the way. I think it's great. And it seems like that would be an interesting thing for us, for this group to see data on. you know, because I mean, if there's code or if there's different sorts of things that comes up, it might be, you know, something that, that maybe we need to address, you know, like, like, you know, versus variances, it's once in a while thing happens, but if it's a continual thing, I mean, is that something that we could maybe see in the future?

Absolutely. Yeah. I mean, I say, you know, if we want to do this on an annual or biannual basis, you know, we can certainly share that information with you.

And does that go out to anyone who has applied for a permit?

Yes, it does. So we've got that on our EPNL software when folks apply for planning and building permit applications. And it's right there, you know, one, because we want to make sure that we understand any hiccups that folks have within that program and the application process. But, you know, we also want to take any feedback that they can provide. We have two surveys, one kind of this more general community development. and one that's more specific to building permit inspections. So yeah, available and we'll share that in the future as it comes forward. Plan review thoroughness. This is something that I really kind of harp on and folks probably get sick of me hearing me say it. I want as many comments and as thorough of a review as is possible on the initial review upon submittal of an application. I want to limit the opportunity for our applicants to say, why am I just now hearing about this? And this is the third time that I've submitted this application. You know, again, I kind of I'm kind of the opinion that, you know, you had your chance to review that application early on. If the changes that you requested are not things that are associated with this current comment or current issue that you've brought forward, you may have missed your chance to get that change made again, unless it's a life safety issue. That's just things we don't play with. You know, we always have to address those. Code amendments, you guys have seen a ton of code amendments throughout the year. Some requested by you, some we just saw that were necessary. We'll continue to bring those forward. Technology, one of the important things too for me is that when we're in meetings and we're sitting around for an hour and a half, two hours talking about specific topics that maybe Joel's not interested in as a full department, or maybe we're talking about a building issue that the rest of the team's not important. towards the conversation, you have your laptop available for two reasons. One, so you can help answer questions if that information is needed. And two, so that you can be doing other things, working on emails. That's time wasted where we could be doing some other work. um efficient presentations that's something that we've worked on here again just trying to make those roll through my my opinion on on public hearings is that you know we're going to get up here we're going to give you an overview of the application but you likely came in the door with the questions you want to ask already and it probably is not going to be providing that presentation so get through that presentation it this is your show this is your opportunity to ask questions that you have about the application not time for us to perform also if we have a contentious hearing It's about the public that's sitting in this room, right? It's for you to be able to hear from them, not for the staff. EPNL, again, we have constant review meetings. Joel's kind of our liaison for that. He's really the one that's the power user of the group at this point because he's in it on the code side. He's in it on the licensing side. He's in it on the permitting side. He's in it on the plan side. So he kind of is the collector of all of the comments and the issues that we have from that program, whether we hear it from staff or whether we hear it from the public. And he meets with our IT team. Is it quarterly now or is it monthly?

We are every other month because some people are going on a vacation.

Yeah. So originally it was monthly. And then I think maybe now it's every other month. But just to try to address those issues as quickly as we can. Training needs, we talked about a little bit earlier. Joel, as an example, you know, Joel kind of, and his role kind of leads into this. He kind of has aspirations to be in inspections and to further his career on the building side. We know that some of our official, our building official and our building inspector are going to be wanting to retire over the next two to five years. So we have planning in place to say, okay, Joel, he's working on those certifications now so he can step into that role when the time comes into the future. Also, some of the succession plan I mentioned previously. Information that we heard that folks wanted to hear about. We've added an active applications portion to the planning webpage as well as the recently approved projects. Those are kind of questions that we get a lot. Folks, what's happening at You know, the meadows today what's happening across the river, there's going to be a couple building permits coming up soon that are going to be very prominent locations downtown that we want folks to know what they are, regardless if it was a development permit that was associated with it folks are going to see that activity and want to say hey what's happening there.

New website coming.

That's going to be something that's forthcoming next year that we're starting to talk about now with a little bit better functionality and user friendliness for that. So I think that'd be a big help. And then, you know, social media promotion. It's something that we're planning, but, you know, it's boring. But I want folks in the community to know that, hey, if you have a building permit issue or question, you know, I want to build an addition on my home. Come in and chat with Victor. Victor is happy to sit down with you and have a meeting and guide you through the process. Come talk to Joel. Come talk to our folks. We're here. You know, we had heard some feedback about folks were scared to get permits because of, you know, how difficult the process may be. You know, rules are rules. We have to apply those, but we certainly have many folks in our department that are willing to help. And just to finish off, you know, that's kind of the strategic plan that we've been working on, things we've been implementing throughout the year. But just wanted to give you a little idea of kind of the work that we do. You know, in building last year, and you can see this year to date, last year's numbers are a little bit short-sighted because we didn't start using our online permitting until March. So last year was a very busy year. This year, actually, is busier than I thought to date. You know, I thought we had a little bit of a lull. But, you know, in terms of permits and inspections, you can see, you know, last year inspections, we did 1,500 inspections. You can usually contact our department and get a building permit inspection within 24 hours. So, you know, we hear things about, you know, I can't get this person or I can't get that person. We strive to get those scheduled within 24 hours. Last year it was 1,500. This year so far just under 1,100 to date. So we're still pushing that. Now, you know, that can include anything from a roof, you know, permit inspection to making sure a water heater is hooked up correctly, right? So there's a ton of inspections, but, you know, they vary in time and the expertise that's needed.

I have a question. Do you have internal goals for how quickly you turn around a permit? I know a roofing permit is different than a new construction. It's based on size and that sort of thing, but do you have any internal goals of how quickly you try to turn them around?

Two weeks. two weeks for i mean is that just for everything no no that would be for your your single family home construction um mep mechanical electrical and plumbing permits we try to do is that three days or is it five days we say five days but it's usually same day or three days what's that No, we don't do electrical. That's all handled by the state. John can tell you those nightmares associated with that. It's a whole other ballgame.

But that so that's for a response.

That doesn't mean that the permits issued in that time frame. So that's that's really something important to distinguish. That's our review by our staff. Those comments are then provided back to the applicant. The amount of time it takes the applicant to provide us with a revision is completely out of our control. So there are a lot of questions that I ask. I know John can relate to this. There's a lot of questions that I ask when someone says, well, it took me six months to get a permit from your city. My first question is, how much of that was your team's time? How long did it take you to get your engineer to make those revisions to submit those back? Because I know it takes my team two weeks to review the application. And that is very fast for any community that I've ever worked in and any community that I hear about. So, you know, I'm a little defensive about my team. You know, the joke of why one restaurant in town's not open yet comes up over and over and over again.

It's my joke. It's in a city small.

It is.

It's not just that.

That restaurant owner receives an email because I know that it's so visible and so many people in the city are asking about it. Gets an email from my office every single week asking where they are on those requirements. We can't throw emergency egress lighting out the window. We can't just say you can open a restaurant and you don't have an emergency egress that's identified for someone that we can't see in the dark of the power. Sorry, we can't. But that's kind of what we're dealing with.

Colorado does have an issued CO right now, if that's what we're talking about.

What are you talking about?

I'm not sure what you're talking about. I'm not talking about anything. I'm not so sure. But anyway, planning applications.

Turnover in that job.

planning applications 128 process last year 105 to date that's everything from a signed permit to a major development proposal like 210 8th street so i mean that there's a lot a lot of variation there and in terms of the time commitment our planning applications our code is set up so that Any application, if complete, should be submitted and come to you within two months. Now, does it take longer sometimes? Yes, but that's usually because we're working with the applicant and we're giving them the grace to say, hey, you have some issues that we've identified in your application. We need to revise those so that we can support your application before it moves forward. And they usually take us up on that. Neighborhood services, enforcement cases, sometimes Enforcement cases don't even become enforcement cases. If someone calls and says, you know, XYZ's got an alligator holding up a parking spot or on 8th Street, we go over, we take care of it, right? But when it does become an enforcement case and we send out letters and notices of violations, that's what's represented here in the 31 and 19.

Questions?

Do you put this on your, are you going to put this on your new website? Can we turn on all the mics so that we can be frank?

I mean, to just be able to chat.

Do you have this posted? Is it going to be on your new website? Because that's a pretty busy view. If you look at how many permits you issue, how many building things you do, how many inspections. It would be nice to just have a flash of that somewhere. I don't know if you're going to have a flash page or...

We're trying to get better about promoting the good things that we do. That takes time, too. There's other problems to address, but it's certainly something that we're considering. I like the idea, though.

I always get this social media post. Maybe I'll find it and share it with you, but it has good news for today. It gives you a summation of good news around the world, but maybe just good news for Glow-in-Springs and just Bulletproofs or bullet points.

I don't know. Yeah. You know, my mentality, I kind of weigh that with, well, that's your job. So, you know, don't be boasting, but I think it is.

No, we need to know.

I would just say, I appreciate all that you guys are doing to help just keep people in the department interested in furthering their careers and, within the department. I like that. It's like a more City of Glenwood Springs question. And I love that everybody only works 410s, but why was that created, the 410s? And people complain a lot about utilities not being open on Fridays.

Yeah. In large measure, it was employee retention. There is a high percentage of the employees across the city that live in the school district to the west that does not have school on Fridays. And so the impact on retaining those employees because, you know, what do you do, right? I mean, that is the four-day school week is really hard on employees. parents, frankly. And so I think that was a big part of that was looking at what the options were to be able to address the reality that most of the workforce doesn't live in town because of the expense of being in town. So that was part of it. I will say that, you know, obviously, providing utilities, wastewater operators, water operators, that kind of thing, those guys are are still on pretty much a normal schedule and there's somebody on call on the operational side all the time. It's just that this building in particular, not being open, um, and those four tens.

And then the other question I, I, I kind of joked about it, but we have seen a lot of turnover in Joel's position. Do you, do you know why that's been, or what would your guess be? Maybe Joel better answer this.

Tell us how he really is.

Well, Joel seems amazing, but...

My guess is it's just like it's a job for getting a taste of things, and then you just go to other places.

Okay. So that's where the development is good, or having that.

Yeah, like Hannah took an interest in GIS, and so she went to college for GIS. She might recircle back. Who knows?

Yeah.

Sweet.

And wasn't Watkins there once too, right? No. No. No. Not at all.

I sat in that position in a different jurisdiction, but it's the entry-level position, right? So you find out if you like it or not pretty quick and how long you want to stay.

I'm sure that makes it hard for you all, though, to have that be a revolving door. It is.

It's a really important position, I think, because it's the, it's the face of the department as soon as you wake in or walk in. So to have someone that has a smiling face, that's helpful, that's willing to go around to the other side of the desk and sit down and hold people's hands all the way through this middle process of EPNL, if they're not computer savvy, it's a big deal. At the same time, you know, we have a succession plan for Joel, you know, and not in this next year's budget, but the year thereafter, we're going to fund an additional part-time person so that, you know, for approximately six months, while Joel's going out on more and more inspections with Peter, he can also spend time in the office with someone that would hopefully fill his position. It also gives us a long time to try to plan and to recruit maybe the right person. But it's, it's always going to be.

Yeah. Yeah. I do like, I don't know if the planner of the day is, is a new concept that you've implemented, but that just seems like a really good thing to do to not burn out one person being up front constantly and answering all the questions.

Not new. You know, I think they were doing it before, maybe more regimented, just to make sure it's absolutely, you know, available. But it's important to Joel's actually going out, you know, we're trying to get him up every Wednesday out into the field. Yeah, really, it's because that's, that's the best training is the on the job out in the field, learning things.

You know, one thing I like, and maybe it's because I'm a builder, engineer, not a person, but I really like the data, you know, that shows how busy you are from, you know, that last page that you did, number of permits, code informing, all of that kind of stuff. And it almost seems like it'd be good to have, and maybe no one would ever look at it. Maybe that's it. an issue, but, but it would almost be good to have it on your, on your webpage or something up, you know, where people can see that because holy moly, I mean, if you look at this year versus last year, you guys are way busy and, you know, people would go there, you know, there's nothing going on, blah, blah, blah, but it's, but it's not true. And I think it's, you know, it's kind of to what Amy is getting at. It's, it's maybe you're not publicly blowing your horn, but, but you are, you know, you're not pushing it in front of people, but if, someone comes on and they're looking to enter the, the online permit form or whatever, you know, this is something that they see. Yeah. I mean, that they just see, man, I mean, you guys are doing a lot of stuff. I mean, you have your fingers in a lot of different pies and, you know, a lot of different things that's going on. And I think it's, I think it's, you know, it's, it's, it's important and, and, and good job, you know? So I think that's a, that's a good.

Yeah. Good thing. Yeah. I see how, if we can, um,

Or a placard when people walk in. Seriously.

It's almost like days without an injury, you know. But it's like numbers of permits.

And also be kind. We're dealing with a lot. Yeah, I don't think you need to.

But I think, you know, blowing your horn, I mean, I think it's a good thing. I mean, you know, you guys are doing a lot of stuff.

You guys are also our ambassadors out in the community. Connie, did you have a question?

I was just going to say, I really appreciate Emory and Watkins and their presentations. I can tell they're very thoughtful. I mean, I don't know if they do the research all on their own or if they have people like help research. help research their projects, but I always really appreciate what they bring. And you can tell that they're very knowledgeable.

Yeah. I think a lot of that, that's all them. That's all them. I think a lot of that comes from just, you know, being so in depth into an application by the time it comes here, you know, you just did a lot of moving parts that you just really get accustomed to.

Well, and they seem very fair and you can tell that they're working with applicants and they're not anybody's adversary. So yeah. And if they are in agreement with it, they never let you know. You can tell that they're unbiased or maybe more for the applicants.

Thank you.

Make sure you're passing them. Any other thoughts, questions? What's your next building code adoption? Oh, boy.

I don't know. Don't bring it up.

You said it, not me. Yeah. If you say it three times. It happens.

You die.

On a six-year cycle?

When I first got here.

We had been on a four. We tried to be on like a four-year cycle. So.

Codes come out in three years.

Or three years. Sorry. Yeah.

Yeah.

So. I think we were on a six-year cycle, but three years behind. Does that make sense? Like, so like the, whatever the. So nine years. Come out, we would be adopting the three-year fire code. I think they had. Like, sort of allow that, not be on the leading edge of what the new school is. I think that's what they were doing.

You're telling us 2027 would be a good time to adopt 2024?

There's some state mandated messes, as that's what I'm going to say.

And there are some of those, you guys don't see them, but they have been like, you know, there are things that are being pushed through that we have to adopt that have been being adopted along the way. But as far as that overall, like a revamp of the IRC or the IBC, I don't remember the last time we went through that.

Bill Fawcett, yeah in fact I had a question, this is probably kind of offline but but but similar to what john was getting at is it so so we haven't adopted the new. Bill Fawcett, or all the new energy code yet and I guess what i'm getting at is i'm seeing that new house going up on Blake that's just tied back you know there's no. there's no insulated board in there any sort of thing that's going into that house that's um we're snow the person that i think that's um building that house but you can still use 100 cavity insulation yeah yeah it worked yeah still on the 2021 so it's it's there's still have to do energy requirements associated with that and it's not a in fact there are some some ways the 24 yeah i mean that's another we should talk about it like dogs well thank you very much for that yeah thank you you know appreciate it thank you very much joel for all you do and good luck in your next job when you move on not leaving yet pushing them out Okay. Commissioner comments. We're all turned on here. So go down the line file method.

Thank you for everything. That was great. I do believe that you guys should put that good news on a slash page where it's always kind of running, you know, and then if you want it to become static, you can click into it as a public member. So

I guess I have a question. So the appeal on Polo Road, is that finished? Because that went to council, right?

It is. I mean, we're still in what would technically be the 28D period for a 106 from the council decision. Meaning they could appeal to council's decision to the district court under Colorado rule of civil procedure 106. What was council's decision? Council it held six to one upheld your decision.

I just got to get it off my chest. The trash is driving me crazy this summer. There's stairs every day in trash. It's I don't know if it's just the way it is or if it's improperly secured, but my girlfriend's sick of hearing it, so someone else.

I think it's probably a little bit of both.

Downtown, you mean, John?

Yeah.

Alley.

I would certainly say, if you can report it, John, we'll see what we can do, but it is a... particular problem this summer um there's a lot more bear activity in town due to the drought i think there's you know we're seeing even moms and with their cubs coming through in the middle of the day crazy yeah but but due to the drought conditions but um yeah certain if you see um folks that are constant violators of that too please let us know

HAB-Masyn Moyer- I think he has.

HAB-Masyn Moyer- Call in.

HAB-Danny Teodoru, Okay, director comments.

HAB-Danny Teodoru, Nothing much else for me to the opportunity to chat with you all tonight because we expect to have some additional menus applications next month. HAB-Danny Teodoru, That may take a little bit more time or or understanding so

So next month you think people won't be ready or they will be ready?

I think they will be ready. I don't know that it's going to draw a crowd. It's just one of them is a 1041 permit. Those are a little bit more technical. You don't see those all the time coupled with an L&E application to a certain extent.

Okay.

I will not be here next month.

Thanks. HAB-Danny Teodoru, I'm not saying thanks that you're not going to. HAB-Danny Teodoru, tell me to say.

HAB-Juliette Boone, i'm getting.

HAB-Juliette Boone, me in trouble.

HAB-Danny Teodoru, Okay. HAB-Danny Teodoru, amir john did you all want to report anything from little parking subcommittee do or. Oh.

John, why don't you start? Parking, soap committee? Yes. That's our new thing.

We met with a couple of other boards and city staff, members of other boards. There's not a quorum of any board. Just talking about the GID specifically and the parking. Well, I think it was spurred by the parking requirements in the GID. And it frankly kind of turned into a consensus that we need to move towards paid parking. It was pretty remarkable, actually.

Even though I think everybody did have come from a different space, place, and genre in town, it was pretty amazing that the consensus really was paid parking is much needed.

And better.

Yes, and better enforcement. Yes. Yep.

So that's an all of the GID?

no decisions yeah but i mean was that what you talked about i think we were talking about like two hour spots to pay parking so yeah um and then the city on lots so that's i guess half the lot over here the other half is the counties yeah um the lot across from the library on cooper um but again it's nebulous right now i think still

Yeah, it was people who live downtown too. And so it was a good mix, actually. Business owners.

Thanks.

We'll be meeting again.

Anything else, Trent?

Pete, I got a question. Is there any, is this question for you, Trent, about the parking garage while that's going along?

I'm not as familiar with it as like our folks in engineering and public works would be, but what's ongoing now is maintenance of that garage. I think the first kind of major overhaul and it's 20 years or so.

So that was anticipated probably when we built the garage, knowing that there'd be a maintenance plan and we're just sticking to that.

Yep. Yep. And I think that the closure is what, two months total? About halfway through that. Is that right?

Yeah. That's what Matt said.