Board of County Commissioners Business Meeting - public_hearing

Come to order. If everyone will welcome everyone to the Board of County Commissioners Land Use Meeting and Public Hearing. It is Tuesday, 05/12/2026. If everyone will please stand and join me in the Pledge of Allegiance.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of The United States Of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Alright. Turning to the county attorney for certification of the agenda.

Yes sir. The county attorney's officer reviewed all items on the agenda. Appropriate posting has been made where necessary and you have jurisdiction over these matters.

Thank you, Councillor. Commissioners, do we have any disclosures for items on this agenda?

I have none, Mr. Chair. Thank you.

No, I do not.

All right. Nor do I. Thank you, Commissioners. All right. Let's begin our land use meeting agenda. Our first item is 3640 North State Highway 67, five year annual fundraiser major entertainment event. Project file is EE2020. Matt Jacobowski presenting for staff.

Good afternoon commissioners. Matt Jacobowski representing Community Development. The request as mentioned is a five year entertainment event at 3640 North State Highway 67 project number EE2020. Owners John and Bernadette Spillane of Happy Dog Ranch Horse Sanctuary are here as applicant. The five year entertainment event request includes an open house dinner dancing and music for up to 300 guests.

The five year approval includes 05/30/2026 in successive years on that same weekend through 2030. The event is proposed within the indoor riding arena with parking to occur within the outdoor riding arena. Entertainment events are processed via zoning section 22B, the intent of which is to provide for the orderly control of entertainment events. As background, the site is zoned Agricultural I or A1. The A1 District allows entertainment events as an accessory use.

The applicant has held similar events on-site in previous years 2024 and 2025. However, with the applicant requesting a five year approval, the regulations and zoning require that it go before the board. The entertainment event process includes a referral period after submittal of an application. The comments received at referral were standard in nature. There were no comments from anyone in the public.

The applicant is complying with Douglas County Health Department regulations. West Douglas Fire and the county sheriff have no comments on the application. As the event requires access from State Highway 67, a referral was sent to CDOT and the State Highway Patrol who had no concerns especially since previous years had no traffic impacts. A walk through inspection may be required by a county building prior to the event and as the applicant has capped the proposed event at 300 persons per year, county engineering does not require a traffic study. Following the board's decision, the applicant will be required to complete any walkthroughs, inspections or other permits which would also occur in successive years through 2030.

The property marked by a red star is located on State Highway 67 Southwest of Sedalia. The site outlined in red, again, is located in the A 1 District and is 81 acres in size. The applicant also owns the property adjacent to the Northeast. This aerial provides some site context. The driveway actually from 67 goes a little bit through the the site to the north which is allowing adequate queuing on the site.

This is the event exhibit. Parking to occur within the outdoor riding arena. Within the indoor riding arena is where the dinner, open house and music are to occur. Portalettes will be proposed outside as per the request of Douglas County Health. This slide includes the approval standards for a five year entertainment event.

Staff's assessment of the approval standards is within pages five and six of the staff report. Staff has evaluated the entertainment event request in accordance with section 22 b of the zoning resolution. Should the board find that the approval standards have been met, staff proposes four conditions for inclusion in the motion. Condition number one, a major entertainment event permit is approved for 05/30/2026 and in successive years in May 2027, 2028, 2029, and 2030 as described in the staff reported narrative And attached narrative: Proof of inspections, permits, approvals and agreements that may be required from all applicable agencies and county departments shall be submitted prior to the start of the event in 2026 and prior to the event in successive years through 2030. Condition number two prior to final event permit issuance each year all building and electrical permits that may be required shall be obtained by the applicant and the applicant shall pass all on-site inspections that may be required by the Douglas County Building Division.

Condition number three, prior to final event permit issuance each year copies of valid food service licenses that may be required for all vendors shall be provided to the Douglas County Health Department. And condition number four, all commitments and promises made by the applicant or the applicant's representative during the public meeting and or agreed to in writing and included in the public record have been relied upon by the Board of County Commissioners in approving the application. Therefore, approval is conditioned upon the applicant's full satisfaction of all such commitments and promises. The parameters for the board's decision on a five year entertainment event are listed for you on this slide. This concludes staff's presentation.

I'm available to take any questions on the staff report if the board wishes. Otherwise, John and Bernadette Spalane are here as applicant and have a few photos as well and are available to answer any questions you may have.

Thank you. Alright. Thank you, Matt. Board, questions for Matt?

Alright. Great job, Matt. I'll reserve my questions following the applicant's presentation.

Commissioner. Thank you, mister chairman.

I I did examine the the whole packet last week and have no additional questions.

Matt, going through it, I mean, one of our conditions for approval or one of our standards for approval is that there's no adverse effect to the public, to the surrounding area. Mean, have we they've been doing these last couple of years. Have we gotten in any complaints about?

Matt Jacobowski for staff, no complaints.

Okay. Okay. All right. Very good. Well, that's because I told you guys not to have any complaints and you did a good job. Okay. No sweat. Board, any further questions or should we hear from the applicants? Mr. And Mrs. Splein, if you guys could come on up. And John, good to see you again. Bernadette, good to see you again. John, when you're ready, please begin. Pointing at the screen there, John.

I think you'll do alright. Once once Matt gets it up for you.

There we go. Good afternoon, commissioners. John Spillane. That's s p I l l a n e. Appreciate you taking the time this afternoon. I'm with Happy Dog Ranch Horse Sanctuary. With me here is my wife, Bernadette, who's essentially the she's the founder and president of really the heart and soul of our organization. I guess my my real title is head volunteer. So that's why I'm here today. If it we've been part of the proud members of the Douglas County community for over fifteen years.

And previously, we were located just across Sterling Ranch next to Chatfield State Park and enjoyed our time there. And then in 2003 excuse me, 2023, we acquired the beautiful and historic Chart Creek Ranch property. It's 117 acres, as Matt mentioned, just Southwest of Sedalia. And we're home to over 60 horses and other animals. And although we're proud that we maintain a sanctuary for the horses and other animals, our real mission is to help people.

And we feel that our facility is where humans and horses connect. For thousands of years, these magnificent animals were part of our everyday lives. And it's only in the last one hundred and twenty, one hundred and thirty years that our society has lost touch with, for the most part, in terms of the many good things that these magnificent animals bring to our lives. And we're proud to say that we're part of Douglas County that has not forgotten that heritage and is, in fact, fostered in many ways, making sure that we bring the things that these animals can provide to us as part of the conversation about mental health, about connection, and just generally making our lives better. As many of you know, as most of you know, believe that we're home to the Aspen Effect, which is a program for teens, a mentoring program mostly for Douglas County.

Believe Commissioner Layton, you've been out to see what the facilities we offer to that program. We offer mental health programs. We offer educational training programs. We offer community services. This is the Aspen Effect Group.

We also are home to the Costalde Institute, Equine Institute of the Rockies where they teach other psychologists how to do equine therapy. We work with veterans and first responders. Mental health is a big part of what we do. As Matt mentioned, this is the third year that we've had our annual fundraiser at concert dinner at the ranch. It's essentially the same as what we've done in the last two years.

And basically, the reason it's coming before you today is because we're seeking the five year approval just to help streamline the process. We're actually pretty excited about the agritourism regulations that you're going be considering later this afternoon because many of the piecemeal things that we've been working on, I think, will become part of an overall package that would, I think, facilitate the kind of services that we provide. And so we're happy that those are going to be in front of the board this afternoon. I really just want to let you know that we're here to answer any questions that you have and to tell you how pleased we were with working with the staff. They've just been terrific to work with. And we look forward to seeing all of you back again at the ranch as soon as possible.

That sounds like a great invitation, John. It's a gorgeous place. Did you ever fix the ghost in the ranch house?

We're still working on that part.

All right. All right. No sweat. Board, questions for the applicant? John, I don't

have any questions, but just wanted to say thank you. I have been down to visit a couple of times, and it's just tremendous. And what you're doing for young people in particularly those that are facing mental health challenges, it can't be overstated. We really love and appreciate the Aspen effect and their great work. So thank you for being a wonderful partner.

Thank you, Commissioner.

And I'll just say ditto to everything they just said. Thank you for your hard work here in community. Thank you for your great work here in Douglas County. Really do appreciate it.

Thank you so much, Commissioner. Yeah. It was

really neat when they were up and they were just right across the street from Titan Road from Sterling Ranch. And John had me out, then we took a trip down to the new property before you guys were about to buy it. And I mean, I thought it was great. It's a historic ranch here, and so I think you guys are optimal caretakers of it. And so really happy to see you guys back in. I know this is a part of your planning on how to make the ranch work. So yeah, I'm really glad to see you here and looking to do the five year permitting. Thank you. Cool. If there are no further questions from the board, John, you can go ahead and take a seat.

And we'll hear from public comment. I did not get anyone signed to speak on public comment. Is there anyone who would like to speak on public comment? Seeing none, board, any more questions needed for the applicant?

None from me. Okay.

Board, we do have an annual fundraising major event permit before us. How would we like to take action on it?

Mr. Chair, if it does please the Board and there's no further discussion, I have a motion to approve 3640 North State Highway 67, five year annual fundraiser major entertainment event because it does meet all of the approval criteria with the four conditions as presented. Project file EE twenty twenty six-three. I'll second the motion.

Okay. Motion and a second. Discussion. Matt, can we please have our approval standards back up? Okay.

Cool. Board, I hope you will forgive me for just getting on high horse here for a second, all puns intended, by the way. But I really feel like this permit hits every one of these approval standards. We know it is absolutely compatible of preserving agritourism, John, as you pointed out, but preserving culture that we've had here in Douglas County for over one hundred years will not have a substantial adverse effect. We did hear from staff that we've received no complaints when these have been around in the past.

And then, of course, not detrimental to health and safety, complies with general requirements. But more specifically, every one of our approval standards but gentlemen, the thing that I really believe that not that I'm hearing a lot of argument from you guys, the reason why we need to approve this and quite frankly other permits like this is to help preserve that equestrian culture that we've had and valued here in the county as John said for over a century. So I very much speak in favor of the motion. Further discussion? There is a motion and a second.

All in favor? Aye. Aye. And it is approved. Thank you, guys. Appreciate it. Good seeing you guys again. And, yeah, you you guys let us know when we can come out for another visit. It's just a gorgeous, gorgeous property there in Jar Creek. All right. That was our only land use meeting agenda item. Moving on to the public hearing agenda items. Our first one is Pinery Meadows Plan Development First Amendment. Major Plan Development Amendment, project file is ZR2026-three, Eric Pavlunik. You're not Eric Pavlunik.

Kurt, go ahead. When you are ready, sir.

Okay. Good afternoon, commissioners. Kurt Whitekount filling in for Eric Pavlonek. This request is for a continuance due to a lack of quorum at the planning commission hearing on May 4. So we're asking for a continuance to the May 26 public hearing. This will allow the Planning Commission to provide a recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners on this item.

Alright. Thank you, Kurt. Board, any questions pertaining to the continuance? Okay. I did not receive any sign up for public comment. Moving to discussion or a motion.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move to continue the Pinery Meadows Plan Development First Amendment Major Plan Development Amendment. It's project files ZR2026-three. And we will the motion to continue is for 05/26/2026 at 02:30 p. M.

Is there a second?

And I'll second that motion.

Alright. Motion is second to continue. Discussion. All in favor of continuing, say aye. Aye. All right. That item is continued until 05/26/2026 at 02:30PM. Our next item is Highlands Ranch Plan Development, eighty fourth amendment, major plan development amendment, project file ZR two zero two six dash zero zero two. May Matt Jacobowski presenting for staff. I looked this time because, you know, Kurt snuck in on us.

Good afternoon, commissioners.

Thank you, sir.

Good afternoon, commissioners. Matt Jacobowski representing community development. The request is the Highlands Ranch plan development eighty fourth Amendment Project ZR twenty twenty six-two, David Foster of the Foster Graham Firm and Daniel Jennings of Norris Designer here on behalf of the applicant Page West Acquisitions. The request is a major planned development amendment to the Highlands Ranch planned development to add three fifty dwelling units to planning Area 85. The applicant intends to develop two parcels, four point six one and ten point two acres in size) into a multi family development.

A future site improvement plan process would be required for the development of the site. A PD amendment request shall be considered a major amendment if it meets one or more criteria as stated in zoning resolution section fifteen nineteen. In this case the addition of new dwelling units to the planned development triggers the major PD amendment. The process begins with this middle of an application. Following comments by staff the request is forwarded to referral agencies.

At the beginning of the referral period courtesy notifications of an application in process were sent to notify property owners of an application in process. The applicant is given an opportunity to address referral comments and other issues before public hearings are scheduled before the Planning Commission and Board of County Commissioners. Referral comments were standard in nature. The applicant has obtained a will serve letter from Highlands Ranch Water and received approval of the proposed rezoning from the Highlands Ranch Community Association. Parks and schools fees will be addressed during a future site improvement plan process if the PD amendment request is approved.

County engineering provided no comment on the proposal. Engineering accepted the traffic study for the proposal which would be implemented at site improvement plan. No comments were received from the public or property owners within or abutting Planning Area 85 regarding the proposal. The Planning Commission heard the request at its 04/06/2026 public hearing and recommended approval by a vote Of Five-zero. The Planning Commissioners asked questions regarding the applicant's concept plan and its relation to the Children's Hospital site which on a map I'll show you is just to the south of one of the parcels in question.

The Planning Commissioners agreed a traffic signal which is also part of the proposal will benefit the area. One member of the public spoke during the Planning Commission hearing whose child attends Ben Franklin Academy, that's a charter school directly south of the site. The citizen indicated the proposed traffic signal would benefit traffic control and traffic safety in the area and that residential development is generally complementary to the school. The applicant is prepared with presentation to address the details of the concept plan and how the plan has evolved. Planning Area 85 is identified by the red star on this map.

It's located in Highlands Ranch very near C-four 70, specifically the C-four 70 and Kendrick Castillo Way interchange. Zooming in a little bit on zoning, the whole brown area is the PD color in our zoning map so it's within the Highlands Range Plan Development as mentioned. The blue area is Planning Area 85. The yellow area is Planning Area 85A which used to be part of Planning Area 85 and has an adjacent multi family development. The red parcels are the parcels that the applicant is proposing to develop as multi family.

The area will provide some site context. Here is Kendrick Castillo Way, C470 Plaza Drive. Again, Planning Area 85 in blue, Planning Area 85A in yellow, the red are the two parcels the applicant is proposing the multi family development. Plaza Circle is a loop through this area. As far as some adjacent development, this is Ben Franklin Academy Charter School as I mentioned.

This is the children's hospital. There's some office development, some other residential housing to the south. The vacant parcel to the north of the site is owned by RTD and is a potential end of the line light rail station and bus station for potential future park and ride and transit. As some background, the Highlands Ranch plan development was approved in 1979. In 1988 Planning Area 85 was established.

Although residential development, including multi family, is a use permitted by Wright, no dwelling units had been assigned to Planning Area 85 when that planning area was established. In 2015, Planning Area 85A which is that yellow area I pointed out on the map was created and two eighty five dwelling units transferred from another planning area to allow for residential development on that property. Also in 2015 planning Areas 85 And 85A were platted into the current configuration you see on the maps that I provided. In 2016 a site plan was approved for the two eighty five unit multi family development and planning Area 85A to northwest of this parcel. In 2025, the applicant proposed the addition of 400 units to the planned development in this same area.

The Planning Commission recommended approval of that proposal but the request was ultimately denied by the board. The applicant's presentation will provide some of the changes that have occurred based on board feedback through that process. Before you is a portion of the plan development plan map which shows the addition of three fifty units to Planning Area 85 which would increase the subtotal of residential units and the overall number of units within the Highlands Ranch plan development to a total of 36,418. And again the applicant will provide some more detail on the proposal that they have. Following are some site photos.

This view looks east through what I would call the easternmost parcel that's directly adjacent to Children's Hospital, so the Children's Hospital building is visible here on the right side of this photo. This view looks Northwest through the Plaza Circle area and the other portion of the site visible in the photo more on the right side is the Planning Area 85 Development which is multi family and visible in the corner is the Ben Franklin Academy charter school building. This view looks north from Plaza Circle through the parcel that's owned by RTD with C-four seventy visible further in the background. This view looks Southwest through the site from Plaza Circle with Ben Franklin Academy visible. And this view looks northeasterly from the Ben Franklin property.

The adjacent multifamily development is visible on the left side and the open land in the Plaza Circle area directly ahead. The approval standards for a PD rezoning are set forth in section fifteen twenty of the zoning resolution enlisted on this slide. Approval standards are discussed in greater detail on pages five through seven of the staff report. Staff has evaluated the major PD amendment request in accordance with section 15 of the zoning resolution. Should the board find that the approval standards have been met, staff proposes two conditions for inclusion in the motion.

Condition number one, prior to recordation, all technical corrections to the Highlands Ranch plan development eighty fourth amendment document shall be made to the satisfaction of Douglas County. Condition number two, all commitments and promises made by the applicant or the applicant's representative during the public hearing and or agreed to in writing and included in the public record have been relied upon by the Board of County Commissioners in approving the application. Therefore, such approval is conditioned upon the applicant's full satisfaction of all such commitments and promises. Section fifteen twenty two point zero eight resolution sets forth the parameters for the board's determination zero of the PD amendment. This concludes staff's presentation.

I'm available to take questions on the staff report at this time if the board wishes. Otherwise, as I mentioned, David Foster of the Foster Graham firm and Daniel Jennings of Norris Design are here on behalf of the applicant Page West acquisitions and have a presentation as well. Thank you.

Alright. Thank you, Matt. Board, questions for Matt?

I have none. None at this point.

I don't think I have any questions for you at this time, Matt. I'm okay to go right to the applicant and hear from them. Counselor Foster, please come forward and please give us your name for the record, give us your credentials. And when you're ready, sir, please begin. Thank you.

David Foster, 360 South Garfield, Land Use Counsel for the applicant today. Other credentials might be that John Spillane was my first boss. So I just want to get that on the record. And I know he stuck around, so this is super intimidating for me. I do want to acknowledge that we've got a team here with us today from Norris Design, Daniel Jennings, Mallory Mooney, Mitch Black from Kimberly Horn, Jeff Plank, who is our traffic engineer and of course, Adam Wallace and Zach Holt, who are Page West.

And I want to also just acknowledge Matt Jacobowski, who's just an amazing planner as you all know. So just kind of going back for a moment, I was hired last year right at about August or September after the Board of County Commissioners denied the application. And frankly, I will convey to you that the conversation back then in August and September was only about one thing. How do we put a team together, take back the information that we just gleaned from the Board of County Commissioners through that process and do it better? And I thought that was a worthwhile client to take on because I appreciated the fact that right after a denial, they were just trying to figure out how to do it better.

And that's not always the case as the three of you undoubtedly know. So that's how we're here. And so I want to give you I'm going to go through just a couple of slides. I'm going to turn it over to Daniel Jennings to kind of go through the meat of the presentation and then I'll conclude with a couple of last comments. These are things that you already know because Matt disclosed them.

In total, it's about a 15 acre site. And when you look at the addition of three fifty residential units to the overall density of Highlands Ranch, it's actually under 1% of that total number that is being sought today. Multifamily is already a permitted use on this site. Low and medium density residential is not permitted here. And there's an additional component that is at play on this site and that is that this is a ninety nine year lease.

The owner of the site is Inglewood. And so having something in the for sale universe is out of a discussion with a ninety nine year lease. So that kind of creates some built in limitations to the kind of development that occurs here. And of course, we're abutting C-four 70, we're abutting existing apartments and the context really does lend itself to this use. And of course, multifamily is a use by Wright.

And as you know, this is one of the processes that needs to be sought. A site improvement plan will, of course, need to come in front of you. And so we look forward to that. But let me really kind of this is what I think is probably one of the important slides for today. And this is really the feedback that we gleaned from the hearing, from the process and from some subsequent conversations prior to refiling an application as to what mattered.

So let's just talk about density initially. We reduced density from the 400 that was being sought to three fifty. That isn't an easy ask as developer had put together their plans to build 400. But density was a concern by this board identified last August. So sharpen the pencil and you figure out how to do it better with less density.

And so they reduced the density from 400 to three fifty. What that did by reducing the density is it gave us another opportunity based on feedback. And how do we add more green space? You'll see it in a slide that will that Daniel will show shortly. But how do we add more green space, particularly abutting Children's Hospital, which is our neighbor kind of to the east, south and east our site.

And you'll see how our ability to reduce the density added an opportunity for a group more green space and in fact reduced an apartment building altogether from the site. Third, we reduced the overall height by seven feet and we will show you some additional slides and we'll go through some of that engineering analysis as

well.

But I think maybe one of the most important components is doing additional outreach. And we come pretty frequently here. We hear from you that we need to reach out to our neighbors. We need to reach out again to our neighbors and maybe even a third time to our neighbors. And so that's what we did.

We began by reaching out to Douglas County Economic Development Corporation. We wanted to be good partners in the county And that gave us an opportunity to then kind of create conversations with some of our neighbors, both including the Ben Franklin Academy and Children's Hospital. Because what we wanted to do was we wanted to meet with our neighbors. We wanted to discuss what the plans were. We if we weren't going to get their support, we certainly didn't want their opposition and you won't see any opposition from our neighbors.

But we also as has been discussed over and over is how do we create living opportunities for people who work in the neighborhood. So as it relates to that, a preferred leasing program for employees of both the school and the hospital are going to be made available. And so we think that that is also being a good neighbor and being a good citizen. And then we offered up an additional neighborhood meeting. There will be discussed a traffic signal that you will see on the plans shortly.

I want to be really clear about this traffic signal. And I heard the conversations last August about traffic in this particular neighborhood. You probably need it now based on what now our traffic engineer might say it's just a D, but D doesn't always feel good even in the traffic context. So it may be required now what is for sure the case is we're not the cause even with our three fifty units of the traffic signal. Notwithstanding that, we are planning to be the we are going to participate and we are going to build that traffic signal as you'll see on the site plan shortly.

And then finally, and I'll turn it over to Daniel, is the criteria are important and you focused on a couple of the criteria last August. Daniel is going to spend some time going over the exact criteria that you felt were not met and we hope that at the end of today's presentation and public comment you will indeed support this application this afternoon. So I'll turn it over to Daniel.

Good afternoon, Commissioners. Daniel Jennings, Norris Design, 1101 Banning Street, Denver, Colorado. So I'm going to share our new conceptual site improvement plan, which reflects the changes that David just spoke about on the previous slide. The plan is still to develop a townhome community on the Western parcel and then an apartment community on the Eastern parcel. Just to point out some of the changes that we've made.

So David mentioned adding open space, expanding the open space on the site. So on the eastern portion of the eastern parcel of the apartment community, we have removed the building to expand our open space to add more green space and provide a thoughtful buffer from the hospital. And it's difficult to tell in this plan view two d image, but as David mentioned, we have lowered our roofline of the apartment buildings, again, to be respectful and thoughtful of our neighbors to the south. And we've also moved these apartment buildings further away from the hospital. Our closest building is now nearly 300 feet away from the hospital building.

And we feel that these changes, reducing the number of units, removing expanding the open space, lowering the building heights and moving our buildings further away from the hospital, they all work to address the Board's concerns with the previous plan, ensure that our new plan is compatible with and thoughtful of our neighbors at Children's Hospital. We are committed to installing a traffic signal at the intersection of Plaza Drive, Plaza Circle and Greensboro Drive. The intersection as it exists, it's not operating well and it could really benefit from a signal. That's something that we've heard from area residents. They have concerns about the prevalence of speeding at this intersection and they feel generally that the traffic conditions here are unsafe.

So by putting in a signal, we're going to solve an existing traffic issue by making this a full service intersection, improving safety and enhancing traffic flow. We wanted to give you a sense of what the development may look like once it's built. So this is some imagery of the architecture and the character of the townhome community. The programming is for three story buildings, high quality masonry, building frontages which are oriented to the street and gathering spaces for future residents. And this is some character imagery for the apartment community, buildings three to four stories in height, high quality masonry, outdoor community spaces.

These images are just for the purpose of conveying character. We're, of course, going to work with the Highlands Ranch Community Association through the site improvement process to get their input on the architectural design and the materials that they feel are appropriate for Highlands Ranch. Here's a map of the nearby land uses, everything around our site. And as you can see, our site is surrounded by multifamily and commercial properties making it an ideal location for multifamily development. This is not the location for low density residential given the proximity of these higher intensity uses.

The map also highlights the number of employment centers that are in the area, which also drives the need for housing at this location. Future residents in our community will be healthcare professionals at Children's Hospital, at UC Health. There'll be employees at Lockheed Martin. There'll be staff at any number of the retail establishments just down the street in Central Park. And in addition to providing housing for local employees, our development is going to provide a reliable customer basis for those base for those nearby shops and services.

So given these surrounding land uses, we feel that multifamily development of the site will really be a welcome addition to this part of Highlands Ranch. We went out and we sought will serve letters from the various local service providers to ensure that they have the ability and capacity to serve our development. All of these letters are in your packet. Douglas County School District have confirmed capacity for the development. We've met with Highlands Ranch Metro District.

They have no concerns with our application. We've met with Highlands Ranch Water. They confirmed they have capacity to serve our project. We've also met with South Metro Fire and Rescue and they have reviewed our application and confirmed that they will serve the site. And we've also been in touch with the Highlands Ranch Community Association and they stated they have no objections to our proposal and we look forward to working with them in the future.

David mentioned the additional outreach and we really have put a lot of effort into going out, introducing ourselves and our project to our neighbors. We've held two neighborhood meetings to date, one for the previous application, one just this past month for this application and we've received no opposition to our project. We've met with the Douglas County Economic Development Corporation. They are in support of our project. They feel it will be a boost to the local economy.

We've met with Children's Hospital. They have no objection to our project. We've offered a preferred housing partnership to support the housing needs of hospital employees. We've had multiple conversations with the Ben Franklin Academy across the street to make sure that we won't be impacting their school pickup and drop off patterns. We're going to be installing a sign at the intersection of Plaza Drive and Plaza Circle that restricts left turns during those pickup and drop off hours.

And the Ben Franklin Academy has does not have any concerns with our development. They've indicated that they would prefer to see the site developed as with a residential use as opposed to commercial. And then we've met with RTD's district director to discuss their plans for the land adjacent to our site and they feel that placing housing next to what might be a potential transit station is an appropriate use. This is a letter of support which we received from the Douglas County Economic Development Corporation in which they state they believe our development will really be a benefit to the county by providing housing for local employees and customers for the commercial uses in the area to support the local tax base. So we've really put a lot of effort into going out, meeting our neighbors and garnering their support for the project.

Our application is in conformance with the county's comprehensive master plan addressing several of the stated goals and policies such as encouraging compact development patterns that conserve natural resources through a proposed infill development that improves existing infrastructure and achieving compatibility between residential and nonresidential land uses as our proposed PD amendment will allow multifamily residential, which is consistent with the surrounding land uses. We know that in evaluating our application, you are tasked with considering specific approval criteria listed in the zoning resolution. And we believe that our application meets each of these criteria and the reasoning is very well covered in the staff report. So I'm not going to walk through all of them. But by way of an example, I'd like to comment on a couple of these.

Starting with criteria one, which asks you to consider whether the amendment is consistent with the development standards, commitments and overall intent of the plan development. We believe our application is consistent with the Highlands Ranch plan development and I'll give you three examples of consistency. First, we're contributing housing options to Highlands Ranch in accordance with the PD stated intent that Highlands Ranch is planned and designed to provide a wide variety and range of housing. Second, we intend to develop the site with multifamily residential housing, which is an allowed by right in Planning Area 85, not rezoning. We're not proposing new uses.

We're consistent with the land use that is assigned the site in the existing PD. And third, we're not proposing any changes to the development standards of the PD. Our site will be developed in accordance with those existing standards, so we're consistent with the development standards of the Highlands Ranch PD. And then I'd also like to touch on criteria number three, which asks you to consider whether the amendment will adversely affect public interest or enjoyment of the adjacent land. We believe our application will not adversely affect enjoyment of the adjacent land as we have revised our site plan to strengthen our compatibility with the adjacent properties based on the Board's feedback on the previous application.

We have also gone out and, as I mentioned, conducted extensive outreach with all of our adjacent neighbors, Children's Hospital, RTD, Ben Franklin Academy and the Highlands Ranch Golf Club community, and we have received no opposition to our project. So we've made sure that our development will not adversely affect our neighbors. But more than that, we believe it will actually be a benefit and have a positive impact on the surrounding community as our installation of the traffic signal will make the neighborhood safer. And we're going to be providing needed housing for local employees as the Economic Development Corporation noted in their support letter. So that's just a couple of examples of how our application meet the approval criteria and the zoning resolution.

Again, we believe we meet all seven. We're happy to answer any questions about any of these. And with that, I'd like to hand the presentation back to David. Thank you.

Thank you, sir. Counselor?

Thank you. And then just to sum up in summary fashion. It is a use by Wright on this site. I think that we've shown that it is appropriate. It's an appropriate use and this development is consistent with the surrounding context.

This is an infill site, so all of the infrastructure is in place as it sits. We are installing the traffic signal. The outreach, extensive outreach efforts, you can sometimes only ring people's doorbells so many times. And we've done it as many times as we can. We've had the meetings with our neighbors.

We've had an additional neighborhood meeting. In fact, it wasn't until we made it to the Planning Commission and the Chair of the Planning Commission happens to be a neighbor right across the street in the golf course community. And he spoke very positively about this project. And hopefully, you've had a chance to review some of the comments from the Planning Commission meeting. Meets and exceeds frankly all of the approval criteria.

And of course, know that we have the unanimous recommendation from the Planning Commission. And we really do hope that we heard you last August that we heard you, we made the changes that were accommodating to some of the concerns that you had and we think this is a better project as a result. It didn't feel good probably for Adam to be here when you denied the project last year. But I think we can say with certainty, this is a much better project than the project that you reviewed last year. And so we look forward to any public comments that there may be today and we're looking forward to your approval today. Thank you.

All right. Thank you, counselor. Board, questions for the applicant?

Thank you for that. Thanks to the applicants for the thorough presentation. Matt, you know, the application was or I guess the staff report was a little bit thin on the history. Do you want to go back and speak to some of those issues that led to the denial? And then maybe walk us through the contrast between what we saw then and what we're seeing now to the extent we're legally permitted to do so.

Matt for Excuse me. Matt for staff. I'm going to pull up the the previous exhibit from my presentation. The applicant may be able to provide any details that I'm not exactly able to add. Going back to last year's hearing, comments from the board were related very much to the juxtaposition of the hospital and the eastern parcel that was where more of the comments came, it was related to views, the grade, the height of the buildings, how the height of the buildings would have impacted views of the I think there was an open area or maybe some general areas in the hospital that might have been impacted by that.

There were concerns very much related to that. There had been some questions about traffic from the commissioners. The applicant at that time, as mentioned by the applicant in their presentation, went back to the drawing board and provided a concept plan that took into account the site grades. The building sits a little lower. I just looked at the previous concept plan and it had there was a building on the easternmost finger of of this area, which has been removed.

There's green space now. The building was shifted a little more to the north to provide some buffer between the hospital and that building. The previous application had no public comments, negative or positive. We didn't have any comments at all. HRCA in that previous review had no objection to the proposal, just laying out some of those things.

With the comments from the previous hearing, the applicant came back, reduced the number of units. Of course, as mentioned by the applicant, the planning area has always by right allowed multi family development so the differences really came to more in terms of how the applicant proposed the concept. We of course would have to go through a site improvement plan process going forward, but that's sort of a breakdown of how we got from one to this point.

Yeah, thank you for that, Matt. It's refreshing my memory and that was was sticking out in my mind is that young patients of Children's Hospital would have their views impaired by this development. That's what stood out to me. If that is no longer the case, I think it'd be great to see some renderings around that. I know we're not at site improvement yet, but I know that was certainly a big consideration in my mind. Thank you, Chair.

All right. Thank you, Commissioner. Commissioner, any questions?

No, no questions. I think the presentation was excellent, especially there were a couple there were two slides, one laid out very well the kind of differences And every single one of those bullet points, I think it's clear that the whole team heard us last time and responded very positively. We're reducing the overall unit count by 50 full units, removing an entire building, and making a green space over there by the children's hospital, lowering those the rooftop heights. And, really, I truly appreciate, and I actually wanted to ask the applicant, but it also seemed almost unnecessary because it was mentioned so several times during the presentation. Very thankful for the outreach, the additional outreach.

It's a it's kind of a a very busy strange part of Highlands Ranch with a charter school, a large children's hospital, the big senior community, all packed in the on one little road right there and being in and reach and in the the water district too. And it's Range Waters right across the street. So to be able to go back to them one more time, check-in with them all, listen to their concerns also, incorporate everything, and then come back here today. I think it's frankly a breath of fresh air to see that these new plans.

Alright. Thank you, commissioner. Commissioner?

Thank you, chair. So for the applicant, do you have renderings that we could see? View view corridors? And I ask only because that seemed to be fairly salient and determinative last time.

Danger Jennings Norse Design. We we do not have any renderings with us showing what you're asking about.

Okay. So can you help me get a sense of where what would the patients see from Children's Hospital looking west? Would you like to speak to that?

Sir, please do give your name again

and Yes, where you're Adam Wallace, 2106 West 32nd Ave, Denver, Colorado. So I believe the patients, the actual rooms of the patients up there sit relatively high. I think they're on the 3rd Floor of that hospital. And so between that and reducing the heights of our roofline by seven feet and the fact that we sit considerably lower on our site and the distance, all that, we feel really confident that the views of the mountains are maintained with that. So we're not blocking this really critical view plane, which Commissioner Lane, believe you're referring to, is going to remain intact.

And I think part of the changes that we did really meant to very clearly cement that. So that's all that I wanted to add. Thank you.

Okay. Thanks. So you said seven feet? Or is there with the lowering of the grade? I mean is that what's the total reduction in height?

Seven feet is the total combined reduction between compressing our floor plate and managing the grade and moving to this, what we call a three, four

split. Seven feet? Correct. Okay.

Further questions gentlemen? Alright. Counselor Foster or the actual or the applicant, I do have a question for you and Matt, if I could please ask you to put up the conditions again. Alright. So, counselor, do you does the applicant accept the conditions?

Yes. We do accept the conditions.

I do want to just to just for the record, make sure that it is emphasized condition number two. I mean, I'm hearing a lot of the work that has been done in order to change the project that was brought forward beforehand won't necessarily it doesn't impact our approval criteria at this stage. It will be critical though at the site improvement plan. I draw your attention, gentlemen, to condition number two that I'm hearing commitments on what we're going to see on the site improvement plan. Once again, does the applicant accept these conditions?

Yes. Yes, sir. We we do accept these conditions and I, you know, I I appreciate commissioner Layton's comments around height. Seven feet is, you know, more than half a story. And the and there were a couple of additional components there.

One is the additional setback from the property line. The second issue is the removal, complete removal of a building, which was actually closest to the rooms that you were mostly considered concerned about when I watched that hearing the last time. And that's not been replaced by anything other than open space. We'll still figure out how to program that space, pickleball or something that the community may want. But I think those combination of things are going to be very satisfactory to when you see the site improvement plan come back.

And then I also just want to reiterate this point. Adam has met on a couple of occasions with the hospital. And so they've seen the plans, they've seen the revisions to the plans. And it's kind of the point that I was making. Mean, you can only we can only do so much in terms of outreach and sharing of plans and programs.

And still, unfortunately, they're not here to support the program, but they're not here to oppose the project. And I think that's also a reflection. And that hadn't happened, by the way, before last August hearing. There wasn't that initial outreach, independent outreach to the hospital. They were certainly noticed for the public meeting, the neighborhood meeting, which they did not attend. So we went to them on this particular occasion. So again, I just want eyes wide open on our level of outreach.

Well, counselor, thank you. And I appreciate that. I echo my colleague sentiments that my sense is that you have heard us and that public engagement is a considerable value to us. I would remind our board, our listening public, certainly the applicant that we're pretty invested with this particular facility. We just drew down about $3,400,000 from the Opioid Council to establish a crisis stabilization unit And that's on the 1st Floor.

So part of my concern is we have young people with suicidal ideation that might have dual diagnosis being treated on the 1st Floor. And I'm not saying view sheds of our mountains is determinative of outcomes for health care, but it makes a difference. And I think when you talk to those health care providers, views and well-being do make a difference. So I'm very protective of those kids, of that hospital, of our public investment of public dollars over there. I am not fully persuaded that seven feet and the setback does it.

And I'm a little concerned that we don't have a representative from Children's Hospital here. I love the comment that nobody's here. Therefore, that's probably good news. It'd be even better if somebody were here from Children's to say, hey, here's what is important to the kids that we're treating, to our providers, and we feel really confident that we're good to go. I recognize the Chair's comments that obviously site improvement is going to be significant for us.

I can certainly be persuaded today if part of your commitment was to ensure that those view shed considerations that we just discussed have really been taken into consideration and your focus is to ensure that we preserve those for all patients of that facility, not just the ones on the 3rd Floor.

Yes. Again, I will say we've certainly heard you and you've articulated it very well, very clearly. It is in fact a truth that a building has been removed. So there can really be no doubt that the view shed, the view corridor, although not protected, understand the value of that is better considerably than it was when you denied us last year. And so we'll continue to take in that information.

And when we hopefully are back in front of you with our site improvement plan, you'll see how we've made that progress from 2025 to hopefully later this year. Yes. Are you able to show with a pointer with your renderings that building that was removed? Daniel can. Okay.

So previously, there was a building over here on the easternmost portion of the apartment community that we took out.

Okay. And then where is the hospital? Just right it's just south of that, right?

Yes. Right there. You can sort of see the gardens in front and the buildings down here.

Yeah. Okay. Thanks.

Further questions for the applicant?

Thank you, Mr. Chair. And I do recall and looked at it previously, but there the hospital sits up above. Is there it's something like eight feet or something. Right? So the front ends were taken down by seven feet. It's buried a little bit deeper, but there's a natural earth movement down hill, correct?

Yes, there is. And I know that you drive by this site. And so there is a natural grade. So we're getting the advantage of being in kind of down, I don't know if is eight feet about right? Is that? Yes. So downgrading at eight feet just to start.

Okay. Thank you. Okay. Any further questions or are we ready for public comment? Let's move to public comment. First person signed up for public comment is Ellie Reynolds. Ma'am, please come forward, give us your name, tell us where you're from. Even though you're hardly a stranger to the board.

Hi commissioners. I'm Ellie Reynolds. I'm with the Douglas County EDC and I reside in Sterling Ranch here in Douglas County. First I I have some prepared remarks but I do want to address Commissioner Layden's questions about Children's Hospital. I can vouch for the applicant and that we convened these meetings together with Children's Hospital and a representative of our board who directly oversees the Highlands Ranch facility.

That was important not to be having conversations with representatives in Aurora facility, but that Highlands Ranch facility. And I can tell you that they have made many offers to help the employees and really have went above and beyond to offer leasing and things that honestly we don't see from a lot of developers here in the county. And I can tell you that those meetings were incredibly productive and fruitful and them not being here is is not that they are in opposition. It's more that they don't interject in land use but are willing to be a great community partner and willing to offer those leasing options that Paige West has talked about. So with that, we are here on behalf of the Douglas County EDC to support the project.

Like I said, have went above and beyond to engage the business community, which oftentimes residential projects are not necessarily neighbors of commercial development and so this was really a unique project. As we continue to also see successful leasing activity with economic development along Kendra Castillo Parkway, this

is

a increasingly important project to supply housing, really a workforce housing product to not only the employees at that Children's Hospital we've mentioned, but also the employees at Lockheed Martin and more that we know are coming. We have held very productive meetings like I've said with Children's Hospital discussing long term benefits of this collaboration and ultimately we're here to not only support the project but really what they've done with the community since their denial in making sure that they could be a successful community partner. So with that we would ask for you to go ahead and approve this product and make it so that the employees also have some leasing benefits here in Colorado. Thank you.

Thank you ma'am. Appreciate your comments. Kelly Marie Paulson? Alright. Well, ma'am, I'm gonna ask you to state your name for the record and tell us where you're from.

Hello. My name is Kelly Marie Paulson. I'm at 10222 Silver Maple Circle, Highlands Ranch, Colorado 80129.

Please begin, ma'am.

Wonderful. Hi. I'm just here to talk to you as a parent of children who go to Ben Franklin Academy and how important I feel like this development is going to be. I think that it's a great space and it's going to eventually be developed at one point. I think we're starting to feel that in Highlands Ranch and I think that they have excellent job reaching out to all of the community as well as the school and I really look forward to having a traffic light as well as an opportunity for more parents who are maybe not in the possibility of being able to own a home yet.

I know that the average homeowner is 40 years old and so but the average parent is starts it at 30. So we have ten years of possibility of having some of our students come from that particular parameter and we would love to see more families be able to access our school as well as our community. So I look forward to possibly slowing down with the traffic light all of our people who like to drive. There's a couple dealerships that are right there that like to cruise around the circle and I think that the stoplight would be a tremendous asset for keeping our students safe. So thank you and I hope you all have a great day.

Thank you ma'am. You have a good day too. Appreciate your comments. That is all the individuals I had signed up for public comment. Is there anyone else who would like to give public comment? Seeing none, we'll bring it back to the board for action. Board, we do have an amendment to a planned development. How would we like to proceed?

Well, if I may, Mr. Chair, I certainly appreciate the hard work of the applicant and the applicant group bringing this back in the conversations that have occurred. Obviously, we've said this for many years that we really believe in private property interests and the right of those who own property to do as they see fit with those properties, especially in Douglas County within the boundaries of our zoning resolution and obviously some of the public considerations that we have. I'm pretty pleased that a lot of progress has been made. I still feel like through my lens, feel like I'm missing some information.

And because I am so deeply protective of Children's Hospital, I would love to have the opportunity to get that input. I can't have a conversation with them now. That would be ex parte. And I really respect the testimony of our EDC partner and it sounds like some really productive meetings with them. I don't know. I would be curious to know who you met with if you have that information. You don't have to share that now, but I'd be really curious if that individual were interested in providing us more. But perhaps the Board is convinced. I'm probably not there today. Where I'm hanging my hat is really fifteen-twenty-three, whether the amendment will adversely affect the public interest or enjoyment of the adjacent land.

So I'm close. I just I'm probably not fully there without some additional information.

Thank you, Commissioner. Commissioner? Well, thank

you, Mr. Chair, thank you, Commissioner Leighton, for your thoughts. I've shared those same feelings, particularly with the first application where I had very serious heartburn. And I mean, there's no hiding that at this point. We voted.

Vote is part of the public record. But when I was able to go through this packet, see the the changes that were made, particularly removal the removal of that whole building. I I think I've come around to be much more okay with how the land will be developed. This little stretch of Highlands Ranch is gonna be about the last part of development in Highlands Ranch. There's something else going down the street, which isn't doesn't pertain to this application today, but it was actually approved previously, a couple years ago.

So it's a very unique piece of land. It's a piece of land that is prone to high density. Do very much appreciate it going down from 400 to 350 units. Appreciate the removal of that building, lowering the roof lines, and I think that will probably be further discussion upon the site improvement plans that are to follow if this is to be approved today. But I do appreciate the the further outreaching, the changes that have been made from the the previous application to this one.

The school seems to be, free of heartburn. The hospital seems to be likewise. Water district doesn't have an issue. The senior community went from Crest Community doesn't seem to have an issue either. And so I'm inclined, to make a motion to approve, this with the criteria that we did go through, previously today.

I do appreciate the the thoughtful input into what oh, I did also wanna mention two other things that I do like. The move towards preferred housing for for, say, teachers, for nurses, that is always appreciated in the high end of community because we we have a lot of teachers. We have a lot of nurses, but not a lot of places for them to live. And then also the townhome component. That is something that is sorely lacking.

If it was up to me, I I would become a developer and build townhomes, but that is not in the cards for me. I don't I I love being a county commissioner. I don't wanna do that, but, townhomes are are just that part of our housing supply that are in too short of need. And so for that to play a key role into this project's future, is yet again something that I appreciate. So, mister chair, if I could, I move to approve Highlands Ranch plan development eighty fourth amendment to major plan development amendment because it does meet all the approved criteria with those two conditions as presented. It's project files, ZR2026Dash002.

And Mr. Chair, I'll make a second out of professional courtesy. And I wish to speak to the motion.

Very good. Motion and second are heard. Commissioner.

Yeah, that's and I really appreciate the deliberation of the Board. And I think my colleague makes a great point. That is such a big part of our economic development focus is workforce housing, housing for teachers, housing for those in health care. That really does go a far away with me, that those conversations have occurred with health care providers and professionals that they need to live where they work. We talk about that all the time because it's also a traffic solution.

When people aren't commuting an hour to get to that hospital, we unclog our roads. So that is really meaningful. I was kind of 49, 51, and I think I want to be in support of this really because I want to assume best interests and assume that what the applicant presented is true and that there is a desire to truly serve this community and be mindful of what's happening next door with those very sick young people. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

All right. Thank you, Commissioner. I will go ahead and speak in favor of the motion. I do like the improvements. I do appreciate the work. You were not the first applicant before me, either here or down the street in my municipal service, where I said, you know, give me something I can say yes to. This isn't it. I very much appreciate the leasing preference. Thank you for seriously taking the traffic concerns and committing to the traffic light. I do believe that the elimination of the building will address the concerns, Commissioner, we've heard from you.

Granted, we will need you know, I did draw your attention to the commitments portion of the second condition, for a reason. Because, I mean, you're still going to need a site improvement plan. And we will be relying on you that the commitments that you have made that are not perfectly germane today will be we will see that again. I think this is the right solution both for the vicinity to the charter school and the children that may reside in this development when built can make use of it. But the commitment you're making for leasing preference for jobs in the area, I think that's all very critical.

We will need you to continue with that commitment as you go through this process. But I speak in favor of the motion. Think you guys have the right formula on this one at this time. Further discussion? There is a motion and a second. If there is no further discussion, all in favor of this amendment to the Highland Ranch plan development as the eighty fourth amendment say aye.

Aye.

Aye. And the amendment is approved. Congratulations. Great work. Good work. Good good well, way to be a good neighbor. We like good neighbors here in Douglas County. Well done. Moving on to our next item. Does the county zoning resolution amendment to establish agritourism regulations project file is Doctor 2025Dash006. And I have Brett Thomas presenting for staff.

Good afternoon, commissioners. Brett Thomas representing community development. Application is an amendment to the County zoning resolution to establish agritourism regulations. Project number DR2025006. The request is for approval of amendments to zoning resolution sections three, four, 21, 36 and a new section 22 c, which is agritourism certification and permits.

Zoning resolution amendments are processed pursuant to section one zero nine of the zoning resolution as outlined on this slide. This slide provides an overview of the regulation amendment process. In July 2025, the board directed staff at a work session to develop draft regulations for agritourism activities and related uses. Staff drafted regulations, sent the proposed amendments out, for a month long referral period beginning 12/17/2025. Planning commission heard the application at its 04/20/2026 public hearing and voted to recommend approval by a vote of six to zero.

There were no questions from the planning commission, and no public testimony was received. Regulations included a series of new definitions, including this definite definition for agritourism. While many of these uses are currently allowed in the zoning resolution, the intent is to consolidate them into a single definition combined with scalable review process. Land use processes are proposed to match the scale and intensity of the proposed agritourism activity ranging from low intensity activities requiring no or limited county oversight to more significant agritourism operations. The proposed zoning resolution amendment would allow agritourism activities and related uses in the a one and LRR zone districts.

The amendments proposed to update sections three, four, 21, and 36, and also introduce new section 22 c. Accessory agritourism activities with no more than a 100 participants per day would would have no specialized zoning review required. Minor agritourism activities would typically be a one day event with up to 500 participants or occur over seven days with up to 300 participants per day. For these activities, plan and staff would provide a certification to allow the activities. Major agritourism activities exceed the limits of the minor.

Brief referral to other relevant agencies and encouraging those to abutted landowners would be required for major agritourism activities. The board would ultimately make the decision on the application at a public land use meeting. For property owners wishing to establish more permanent agritourism operations, the amendment establishes a new agritourism center use. Such centers could include a variety of ongoing agricultural and agritourism activities. Centers would be allowed through a site improvement plan process on conforming a one zone parcels and through a use by special review process on conforming LRR zone pros parcels.

Public workshop was held on 01/08/2026. Several members of the public attended, representing the Deerfield community, Franktown, Parker, and Castle Rock. Attendees asked various clarifying questions, expressed concerns with some existing activities on properties in their communities. After evaluating the amendment proposal, referral agency comments, staff report, planning commission recommendation, and public testimony, The board may approve, approve with modifications, table for further study, remand to the planning commission, or deny the amendment proposal. This concludes staff's presentation. I'm available to answer any questions regarding the staff report at this time.

Alright. Thanks, Brett. Board questions for Brett. Brett, I guess, so first and foremost, thank you everyone for taking this work on. This came to us from, I don't know, a couple a string of residents who desired us to do this work and to come to this amendment today. But Brett, I mean, this is still a part of the zoning resolution. Just as we are amending it today, as we go forward, we can still tweak it through further amendments. I have that correct, don't I?

Correct. It would be adopted and then subject to amendments if the board desired.

Okay. So it's kind of a new application that we're seeing here in of our land use regs here in the county. These are things that we can still change. We can still refine as time goes by.

Correct.

Okay. But this is place for us to start. Yes. Okay. Those are my questions, gentlemen. Any questions before we move on to public comment? Okay. At this time, we'll go ahead and open for public comment. I did not get anyone signed up for public comment. Is there anyone who would like to make public comment at this time?

And seeing none, let's bring it back to the Board for further discussion and action.

Mr. Chair, I'm really pleased to talk about this today. I mean thankful for the work. I would agree with you that the conversations we've had have been very productive. This seems extremely pro business, exciting, innovative, and can bring some new opportunities to our county. So if there is no further discussion, I'm pleased to make a motion to approve the Douglas County zoning resolution amendment to establish agritourism regulations project filed Doctor twenty twenty five-six.

And I'll probably second the motion. I know this is an effort that we've talked about a couple of times on this board of how can we really take, the more rural parts, the agricultural parts of our county and welcome in, the rest of the county that might live in suburbs and might be the nearest horse might be, you know, several miles away from them. But combining those, connecting those two communities, boosting up our agricultural parts of our county and those industries and that economy, very important. So very much appreciate these changes that have been made. We'll see what comes of it, but I think all good things and all things you know, the room's not completely full of people here today, but I I bet there will be hundreds and thousands and thousands upon more enjoying the potential agritourism that might come of this in the future, whether that's an increase in farmers markets, whether it's increase in fall festivals, things like that.

So very, very good updates here to our agritourism regulations. All

right. I was surprised that we would actually need to be here today making these amendments to our zoning resolution. And I think for like my first year or two on the board, I touted agritourism here in Douglas County. And Commissioner Leighton, it was one of the residents of your area, just East of Parker, who invited me out and had me look at their operation. They just want to grow flowers, like lilacs.

And they wanted to get a permit to just have a little place to bring people in and teach them how to grow more flowers. And they expressed their frustration that it just seemed like we had an unwieldy system that they would have to go through just to teach people how to grow flowers here in Douglas County. And, you know, Mr. Splane, you had an opportunity to tell me what you guys were doing at your old site with Happy Dog Ranch, And I thought that was agritourism, too. And then, gentlemen, when we were talking about short term rentals and establishing those regulations, we heard from a couple of residents who talked about they wanted to have short term rentals to be able to do agritourism with equestrian and cattle on their property.

And so thank you, gentlemen, for putting up with me and giving us the ability to give planning staff something to do and good work being done, by the way, in order to bring what I think is very common sense regulation or regulatory framework that landowners who do wish to capitalize on their land, and that is something I do believe in, that our landowners has that right to capitalize on their land, in a way to share the agricultural bounty that we have almost like an oasis here on the Front Range, where with all the rest of the development that we do see and preserve, give an economic way to preserve our rural way of life and our equestrian culture and also our cattle raising culture. I think this is a great step in that direction. I think these are good common sense regulations. Therefore, I do speak in favor of the motion.

Well, Mr. Chair, on that point, I'm glad you brought that up because I think that this is a perfect example of great commissioner work and great leadership. And I over your time, you have exhibited multiple occasions where you've engaged with citizens directly, particularly around land use and private property rights, and found ways to maximize the highest benefit of that land. So good job.

Well, thank you, Commissioner. I very much appreciate it. We say the same thing about you often, saying similar things. Gentlemen, there is a motion and a second. Is there any further discussion?

All right. All in favor of this amendment to our zoning resolution to establish agritourism, please say aye.

Aye. Aye.

Aye. And those changes have been made in the past. Thank you, staff, for all the really great work because I know I came to you with a couple of vague ideas, especially back there, Steve. I came with a couple of great ideas, and you guys made it real. So I very much appreciate it.

Okay. We have one final item on the agenda this afternoon. We do have a resolution supplementing the twenty twenty six adopted budget for the County Of Douglas, Colorado to recognize new revenues received since the annual budget adoption appropriate restricted, committed, assigned and unassigned fund balances in the amount of $54,260,127 Kim Hirsch presenting for staff.

Thank you, commissioners. That's a mouthful, isn't it? I would like to formally present the second supplemental for your review today. The total amount requested as stated is $54,260,127. More specifically, the supplemental request will be increasing appropriations for new revenues that have been received since the formal budget adoption, allow for unspent project dollars to be carried forward into the current year and appropriate spending authority for new initiatives.

A few of the larger carry forward expenditures in the packet are $8,400,000 in information technology needs, 2,000,000 in the form of wildfire mitigation grants, and 15,500,000 in capital improvement projects in the various road and transportation funds. Within the board's packet, I've submitted 54,000,000 as presented, only 1,400,000 has not been formally approved by the board. And of this amount, 1,300,000 is completely offset by new revenues received. Thus the supplemental is more clerical in nature and the budget is being revised at this time due to simple timing restrictions. Again the total request is presented today is 54,260,127 With this supplemental the new amended budget for Douglas County will be $747,958,499.

On page 14 in the board's packet you will see a quick worksheet that details how each specific fund has been changed since January 1 and this supplemental had 12 funds on it. Also within the board's packet I've included a fund statement for each of the funds being impacted demonstrating how each can absorb the request before you along with the estimated remaining fund balances. With that, I know it's a large number, I'd be happy to answer any questions that you may have.

All right. Thanks Kim. Questions for Kim guys? Know, Kim, going through spreadsheets, it's either fascinating for me or it's like crazy for me and frustrating. But I appreciate the update. I appreciate how you broke it down. It looks like good accounting to me.

Thank you.

Board, any further discussion?

No, you all do such a great job. And I see Martha in the back as always managing all of that money and making sure that the citizens' dollars are protected and well accounted for is a very big deal. So thank you so much.

Thank you. Okay. Let's go to public comment. We did have someone who seemed to sign up, but then it looks like they crossed it out. I guess they wanted to comment on another item. So is there anyone who would like to make public comment at this time? I'm seeing no public comment. Board, let's bring it back for any action on this resolution supplementing the 2026 adopted budget.

Well, thank you, Mr. Chair. And it is altogether proper and even if it is a clerical motion to align the actual revenues coming in with the budget line items. And therefore, Mr. I move to approve a resolution supplementing the 2026 adopted budget for the county of Douglas, Colorado to recognize new revenues received since the annual budget adoption, appropriate appropriate, restricted, committed, assigned and unassigned fund balances in the amount of $54,260,127 in no sense.

And I'll second that motion.

All right. There is a motion and a second discussion. With no further discussion, all in favor of approving this resolution, please say aye.

Aye.

And the resolution passes. Once again, Kim, Martha, great work. Thank you. Thank you for keeping us straight. And that concludes our land use and public hearing. Our next land use and public hearing will be held on Tuesday, 05/26/2026 at 02:30 p. M. We are adjourned.