Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

We're supposed to It's 5:30 and we'll call the meeting of the planning commission to order. Join me in the pledge of allegiance, please. To the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for it stands one nation under God with liberty and justice for all.

Here webban here. Fraser here. We have a corn. Thank you. Okay. And I'll just remind folks to make sure that we speak into the microphone so we can be heard and recorded. And I guess the system is back working the way it's supposed to. We believe so.

Good. Um, we received the agenda in the mail. Um, I would like or invite a motion for approval of the agenda. A quick point of clarification, chair, the uh agenda might be modified to uh change the minutes date for October 1st to October 15th. Um you have already approved the October 1st minutes. Um we just need you to approve the October 15th minute. So I apologize for the typo in the uh the agenda.

And I would for a motion for approval of the agenda as amended with the minutes of October 15th. So moved. Second. All those in favor? I. Any opposed? The agenda is approved. Um our next order of business is election of a chair and vice chair. Do we have any nominations for chair? I'd like to nominate for chair. I'd like to second them.

Thank you. Any other nominations? All those in favor? I. Any opposed? Thank you. I think famous first words and also an election for vice chair. Chair, I'd like to nominate Seth Webb as vice chair. Second. He's aware. Yes.

Communicated with him even though he's not present this evening. He said willing to do that. Any other nominations? All those in favor? I.

Any opposed? Congratulations, sir. I told him I'd be back in touch with him after tonight. Okay, we have two sets of minutes. um to be approved. First of all, the minutes from October 15th, 2025, and they were just distributed by Michelle if you want to take a look at those and then I would be glad for a motion to approve them. Do I have a motion for approval for minutes from October 15th?

So move. Second. All those in favor? I. Any opposed? Minutes from October 15th are approved. And in our packet, we have the minutes from December 3rd. Motion for approval of those.

Second. All in favor?

Any opposed? from October or from December 3rd are approved as well. Thank you. Um like to open the public comment period for any public comment that's not associated with our business tonight. Seeing no one, I will close public comment. Our regular business tonight is to uh consider the draft comprehensive plan uh both for public comment and um discussion of the of the plan. Um there will be this meeting tonight and we will do a continuation of uh meeting both for consideration of the discussion and any public comment tonight and the fact that we will have um more commissioners who expect to be here on the meeting on the 4th of March and we'll do a final comprehensive at that time. This point let me turn it over to Matt and Carl to do a staff presentation for us.

Excellent. Well, thank you very much. Uh we have a staff presentation and obviously I think most of the information will not be new to the planning commission. Uh but it's a good summary we attempt to do when we uh move towards adoption of any of our plans just so we can kind of lay out the process that we did, the key themes that are in this plan. Um this um share your screen. Yes. and uh just kind of uh do an overview of the whole planning process that led us to this point. We did include uh three pieces of information on the day tonight in printing. Um we received comments, I believe you already received uh the electronic version. So we received comments from Jefferson County. We also received comments a couple of days ago from the city of Arvada. Um, and then I also included uh a a edit for our community marketing language that we can discuss tonight, but it just would not it well it does fit on a slide, but it's kind of an egregious slide that's very hard to read. So, we just wanted to at least get it out there and get some uh feedback. So, the comprehensive plan, I think, you know, our our current comprehensive plan was largely adopted in 2011. There was a housing and sustainability focused update in 2017. Um but really time is only one of the drivers for why city council and staff looked at uh updating uh the comprehensive plan. Uh a large part of that was the expanded city planning approach. Uh so we've made a number of uh pretty large scale changes to how we manage development and land use uh in the last couple of years. Obviously the biggest one from a regulatory standpoint is our formbbased zoning code. Uh but we've also developed a more robust housing program with uh staffing and funding dedicated to it. Uh the city has also taken a different approach for rather than just having a comprehensive plan that addresses many many many topics uh we have uh a wide variety of new citywide plans that have been adopted in the last 5 years uh and

that are still ongoing and so really trying to sync up with those. We've also had a number of changes at the state level from a legislative perspective. Some of them uh we've already addressed as far as occupancy limits and uh accessory dwelling units. Others are uh addressed as part of this plan. Uh or others may have additional regulatory changes that Carl and his team will bring forward. But kind of those things together really said that it was time for us to update our comprehensive plan. So the kind of the three key themes that we that at least that I see in this plan uh is affordable and general housing support. Obviously this is not unanimous across our community and I think it continues to be a point of discussion and you'll see some of the feedback that we discuss uh would be kind of in opposition to this but uh the plan really encapsulates our housing program's focus and funding uh for where it stands today. Uh and then we'll have a housing action plan to help us meet state requirements uh which we'll start tackling later this year which will become part of the comprehensive plan but that will be led by Lauren McKini our affordable housing uh policy coordinator in support uh from community and economic development. We also again as we expanded that citywide approach we're really trying to lean into that system of plans. So understanding how all of our plans work together, how planning commission, how staff and how the community can use those. Um we really wanted to utilize that kind of adopted policy plan where there are really in-depth recommendations on transportation, on open space, on parks, and on our neighborhood plans. We really also wanted to honor the public and board and commission feedback that we've received as part of those plans and build them into our our overall community plan. Uh the last thing is kind of keep golden golden and I put that in slightly tongue and cheek. It's obviously not can casing our community in amber and saying that we're not going

to change but I think the plan is very much rooted in golden vision 2030 uh those vision those value themes and really come and talk to the heart of who we are as a community. And one of the reasons we didn't change those and redo a process to update GB 2030 was we felt that those were still very much representative uh of the community and I think that was reinforced with the feedback that we heard through this plan. But the plan does provide guidance so how we can navigate change uh while remaining true to our values. So basically, you know, I guess more informally, I view it as, you know, Golden is a a wonderful place. People want to be here. And I think we can welcome housing. We can welcome businesses. Uh but we can do it on our own terms. And I think the plan really recognizes that we're studying our own future, not just taking what comes towards us. So, I want to just kind of uh summarize the public engagement process that we went through for this plan, which honestly there's some things that I'd forgotten about. Uh we've been doing this since October of 2024. So, we did our first phase of engagement, which lasted from October of 24 to January of 25. We held four listening sessions and seven popup events. We had about 50 attendees. We had more folks at the pop-up events. It's just harder to catalog them because they're coming and going, popping by our table. But we really wanted to ask what people love about Golden, what would they change, what are some housing barriers and opportunities and engaging with uh and then challenges with engaging with the development review process. So you can see here kind of uh some of the things uh that we really heard. Uh obviously the what we love question that really became the basis for that special place graphic in uh chapter 2. Housing. And again, this was kind of recognizing that there's not agreement here where we heard there's too much, there's too little, but everybody largely agreed it's very expensive right now. Um, and

uh, a term that one person coined that's kind of stuck with me throughout this whole process is small town versus small city. And I think people have seen and appreciate the benefits of the visitation and the popularity of downtown and of our community as a whole. uh and seeing the benefits that that brings, but also the challenges that that brings for how uh how we continue to grow, how we continue to respect the things that everybody loves about our community. Uh we also heard a lot that we want more control of mine's development, but the mind's kids and staff are part of our community. Um and then I think just general better notification of development proposals. So I think there was a lot of requests that we greatly expand how we do development notification. Phase two public engagement then we tackled in June of 2025. So we held uh kind of four activity based public meetings. We had very limited attendance at these including one where we had no attendees but we the activities that we put together were basically helping evaluating a hypothetical development proposal against the the plans goal draft goals at that point. Um and then we also wanted to just get very direct feedback on the housing goals and implementation actions which it was becoming clear that that was a a point where we wanted to get very specific uh community feedback and we wanted to make sure that we were kind of going down the right path in that particular uh topic. Um so definitely I think we've been pretty clear you know given the low attendance we kind of cautioned drawing any large scale conclusions. Uh but some of the feedback that we got was we and we've heard this and our housing planners heard it that there's concerns about concentration of affordable housing in our central neighborhoods. Uh parking is a concern that we should not be reducing parking. Uh but also that we need a variety of affordable of affordable housing for a variety of

incomes and recognizing that the average or the area median income which sets a lot of those thresholds for uh affordable housing is very high in Jeffco. Uh I think it was somewhere in the 70 or 80,000 range uh for AMI. Uh but then also folks said we need to get some more local perspective. Maybe we need to do additional neighborhood planning. Um and then folks, especially when we talked at uh Golden Terrace, they're very worried about their ability to stay in their home and not be displaced should something happen to Golden Terrace in particular. So, we took all of that feedback and we started to consolidate it into uh a draft document. And so, we had two 30-day public review periods. Uh one in August of 2025 and another in December of 2025. Uh it basically mirrored uh our planning commission and city council study sessions from that time. uh where we're asking the same questions and really asking people to uh provide targeted feedback on the draft document and any edits that they would have. We largely solicited that via a guiding golden survey. So we had about 17 responses for the August uh window and four responses for December. Um we heard some feedback that folks were disappointed on our focus of expanding versus limiting housing. Uh we got a lot of parks focus uh focused feedback particularly in uh August that we forwarded on to our park staff to incorporate into their master planning process. Uh folks also felt that the plan was soft on historic preservation at the time. Uh and I think we've definitely strengthened that chapter subsequently. Uh and then there are additional parking concerns particularly related to affordable housing. Uh and then uh there's requests again to add uh discussion of the benefits of density. Uh folks wanting more de control over

mines development, curtailing student housing, uh trying to address ENL uh or should say now the national laboratory of the Rockies. Uh clay works and cores and folks even going as far as saying that core should be funding a gine extension into the city. Um, we also got a request to address the informal housing market, which we weren't quite sure exactly what they were getting at. We've talked extensively with our affordable housing planner. Um, there's a lot of co-l livingiving, which they said is not illegal, and I think with our I think it was just reflecting the changes to occupancy uh allowances within the state. So, so now we are today we here. So, we're going to have public hearings, obviously one today, uh, and then one on March 4th. Uh, these are state required public hearings, uh, prior to formal plan adoption. We also solicited feedback from communities that are within three miles of our municipal boundaries and and, uh, the county. That's also required by state statute. So, we've heard back from Arvvada and Jefferson County. We haven't received any response thus far uh, from Wheat Ridge and Lakewood. We'll reach out again uh, to see if they do have any feedback. um what and kind of a summary and so what we handed out but Jefferson County's largest comment was they surprised that we were not directly addressing uh transit oriented communities legislation that was passed at the state level. Um Carl, I'm going to take a crack at this week and kick under table. Uh so staff are working we're going to add some language just very brief language to chapter 8 which is the strategic planning and water uh planning section which is a chapter largely focused on addressing some of that state legislation and the requirements that we now have on us. Um, we're going to add some language, but we believe that this is largely kind of a a technical piece of legislation that's looking at uh determining how much

housing units we can have under our current zoning. Uh, we believe we're in compliance with our past foreignbased code uh and uh AD regulatory changes and Carl's conversations with the state kind of confirmed that we're looking good in that regard. So, we didn't put a ton of effort and analysis into this because we largely think that we've done that work previously and on our own terms rather than just responding to state requirement. I get all that perfect. Uh, Arvvada didn't really indicate any concerns. I think they were more noting uh their email to us said they were noting issues of mutual interest with Golden. uh they are kicking off their own comprehensive planning effort uh this month and so uh we're expecting to kind of work with them and Jefferson County on future state highway 93 projects. We have a highway 93 project going on their public works team is leading right now. Um, so we'll keep working with them and I think that whole it's called the North Valley, but that that whole area, uh, you know, we're not envisioning anything other than kind of the we have boundary agreements, uh, with, uh, with our VA and I think it's just depending on most of the land there. I think both communities are saying it should be preserved largely as open space and I think that's what the county the county is not as clear about that uh that future in their plans. Uh but I think we'll at least similar with the junction we'll have a degree of control over what kind of development happens on our boundaries. Um and then working with C dot and and other communities on on the highway itself. Uh we did not receive any public feedback uh prior to the meeting after the packet went out. I have talked with uh Rivera Walton who's with the Golden Terrorist Resident Council. Uh obviously they're really heavily engaged right now in the PD amendment for the property. Uh

but we did give her uh a lot of information. They've previously submitted in uh comments to planning commission on the comprehensive plan. I kind of gave her our time frame. So, I'm expecting that we'll get some comments hopefully by the next meeting. Um, but that's just that that's the only conversation that I've had outside of uh outside of the meetings. So uh based on the feedback that we received at the last two planning commission meeting uh study sessions um as we kind of put in the memo there were a lot of smaller edits which uh Slate our designer has made. Um and there are a couple of uh edits that we said we had to go back and discuss internally. So, we put uh verbatim those changes that we're proposing. I put them uh in the presentation, but they're also in the memo as well. We just wanted to get some feedback from planning commission tonight uh on if if we're going down the right path, if we need to make any additional changes, uh anything else. Um and uh that would be helpful for us. So, uh so, Mr. share. We can go slide by slide if that's easiest or um or if there's, you know, general comments since folks have had time to digest. I think everything but the visitor based economy uh language. I think everything else was included in the packet. I found in other things we've done that if we go topic by topic or this case slide by slide it's easier for the conversation and makes it less confusing.

Does that seem agreeable? Let's let's do that.

Okay. So, one of the the kind of the first edit that we had was in the introduction to the housing chapter. This was some language that was regarding home ownership and kind of the historic uh causes for the uh different rates of homeownership. So, we would look back uh there was a Bell policy report that was put together for housing in Jefferson County. So, we were able to take some language for that. Planning Commission's feedback was to add some more context I think and make it look make it more forward looking. Uh so these are the proposed edits that we we put in kind of recognizing that home ownership and housing is essential for economic mobility and that there is a difference and that there's a lot of barriers but kind of looking forward it's it's addressing those but then also really doing targeted interventions uh to try to reduce those gaps um that we see right now. So I think we tried to strike that balance of recognizing the challenges um recognizing the the datadriven kind of differences but then also again putting it in context and and making it so there's kind of an action helping guide us as we move forward on this.

Okay. Did talk about this I think in the last study session. Um, any thoughts, comments, reactions to the proposed edit on the introduction? I still think that, you know, this is supposed to be a comprehensive plan for the city of Golden, not Jefferson County. So, I'm not sure what the statistics for the county, which is considerably more diverse and broader than the city of Golden, how that should impact the way that we plan for our city.

That's true. And I think this is a big challenge that we have at times when you get larger scale data because we we only have two census tracks in the city and they extend outside of our city limits. So, the way we've been approaching affordable housing, the affordable housing planner is I think we're seeing the county step up and and give some more guidance and give some more data. Um, so I think we're finding that this is kind of some of the best data that we have. Um, we can go back and look. I think there are some tools from the state department of public health and environment um that we typically use for grant applications but it's called envirro score but that breaks down some of that information at a slightly more granular level and we can see if there's kind of some additional additional golden centric data that we could get in this um that could help drive that uh to get I guess more local data as best we can. Or the other option would be that we could just take out that data point. Um, but I think from what we hear from the public when we talk, especially in in the south part of town, that there are that they they do recognize a lot of these challenges. Um so yeah

I will speak to the uh difficulties of tracks are much larger than the city um for demographic purposes um and census data. So um and when you get down to the more granular level you drop off on some of those um potentially identifying characteristics. you know, I think maybe just adding um potentially um some qualifiers that you know, that is really speaking to the county as a whole and you know, maybe isn't you know, and there might be different circumstances for Golden. Um you know, but just that's one of the the frustrations, you know, for anybody who tries to work with demographic data. Um it just doesn't always scale down to specific boundaries.

Yeah. I just think that what's true for the county and for Jefferson County isn't necessarily the case for the city of Golden. And I and I caution that we distinguish between the two. And I think to Matt's point, I think we can look to see how far down we can, you know, get to go specific.

And once you've been able to do that, we may also look at crafting some sort of sentence which gives you just a little bit more context or acknowledgement that um a lot of the data is county based and that to the extent that we've been able can't identify golden data or to acknowledge that it's we really county data, whichever it turns out to be. But it just um makes that includes that point, I guess.

Yeah, I can do that. And I think we've had instances where we've worked with Dr. Cog at a regional level where we've just worked away from projects because we're like, well, this data is really irrelevant to us. Um, so I think so we're fine doing that if we need to, but I think uh I'll go back and I'll talk with Lauren McKenna and we can uh we can strengthen this further. So thank you. Other comments? I know we we talked about this a little bit last time, but that last sentence still making some really strong statements.

I agree. and in particular confront the injustices and achieve true recall. I think that could be really toned down or removed. Yeah, it's just those are so strong and I'm not sure if I agree it should say that. Yeah, I um I think we would take whatever direction we get. Confront the injustice could be the issues or something to that effect. Okay.

And I'm not sure if achieve true quality is you should say that. So I'm hearing confront injustices change to address the issues and then potentially remove the language after the word interventions.

Yeah. Sorry, apologize. Any other comments about that section or should we move on to the

Yeah. So, uh we were also asked to uh look at uh couple of the housing goals. So, the first one was goal H5. Um the goal itself was fine. This is one I was focused on funding the affordable housing trust fund. Uh so we asked to add some implementation actions. We've uh added these uh the two proposed here um that largely reflect how we generally try to find funding uh outside of uh when it would when there would be a partnership between local and and other funding sources. Um, and then also kind of recognizing with the second bullet point that there are some ongoing conversations above at least my pay grade um about this and that we would probably incorporate that as part of the housing action plan when we develop that later this year. And then with housing goal uh H6, uh this is one where we talked a little bit about context and then kind of had a a really productive discussion about um how we could encapsulate that. So we have made a proposal to change the goal to read support construction of diverse housing opportunities across all income levels and housing types consistent with adopted neighborhood and housing plans. So, we really changed I think it was housing uh we changed it to housing opportunities and we added that uh the context statement of really trying to tie it into the neighborhood. Uh and then we also added housing plans um which is really just trying to futureroof this a little bit knowing that we have a housing action plan forthcoming. So, um, but really trying to give that neighborhood context at a policy level, um, and not get, um, I think it seemed like we were trying to avoid getting too hard into architectural review, but, um, but

having a lot of the good discussion and recommendations and context that's in our neighborhood plans, really daylighting that uh, explicitly as part of this goal. And then sort of you want to go on to keep

sure. So yeah, and then we review revised that first implementation action. Um so again uh this is us being planners. We're trying to use the existing language that exists within our code. Uh so we could really tie the policy and the code together. Um this re previously read as kind of monitor the number of housing units constructed for each form type but we expanded that out to say each municipal c code form type the form zone and then neighborhood plan area and then proposed regulatory regulatory changes as necessary. So some of that was based on the conversation we had too where the form code doesn't necessarily cover every part of the city. So that's where we really tried to capture that with that neighborhood plan area. And the caveat to that is our neighborhood plans don't cover every single square inch of the community as well, but they do cover a lot. So um but things like fossil trace are are uncover, you know, are not covered things like that. So mines was not covered by a neighborhood plan. So I can stop with the housing stuff and our economic vitality here, but I can

Okay, why don't we stop with the housing and see what thoughts, ideas, reactions, suggestions. We did about the trying to find a way to to um consider context and when we met two weeks ago and this seems to me um to be an effective way to get to that. There may be suggestions for some I don't have particular suggestions for other wording um but I think this is a really good in terms of trying to acknowledge that and give us a under that first implementation action real identify some direction for how we use the form based housing to really kind of track or keep track of what's happening and so on. I don't know what other thoughts you all have. I think that sounds better. Um let's move on to economic vitality.

Okay. Uh so economic vitality similarly we were asked to add some implementation actions particularly to the first goal which didn't have any. Um we did uh add one and these are kind of largely recognizing the work that our economic development team does right now. uh but developing these targeted business grant opportunities and outreach uh to support the local business needs. Uh good example of that is uh DDA uh often will develop uh kind of almost responsive grants uh when things come up. So I know there's conversations going right now about a potential uh grant local grant program in response to the XL outages over the holiday. Um but there's been other opportunities as well where they can uh they can really f they can go in and find a specific need whether it's geographic or or other uh framing uh and uh put some dollars and staff resources there and then also coordinating coordinating these business roundt discussions and other engagement events. That's largely uh that's something that we do in partnership uh and obviously we try to make this very generic but nonprofit and private sector organizations. So they do a lot of work with the chamber of commerce, with the welcome center, with DDA, with the civic foundation. Uh but really and then also with mines and and local business uh groups, but really trying to spur that collaboration and opportunity. Uh that's I think the hard work that the economic development team does where they build those relationships and that pays off years down the line when there may be an opportunity to bring in a new business. Uh we also use that term business centers which sounds really wonky but it's basically recognizing that we do have areas throughout town where there's industrial hubs there's uh light and kind of more warehousing manufacturing hubs where they there is benefit for

them to be close to each other and we really try to support those like out at the the core uh the clay works or course tech industrial park or off of uh US6 and Kfax places like that. We really try to support uh when we get you know a concentration of of unique businesses thoughts or comments. I think having those implementation actions um really helps um define what the goal is and and some particular action and as you say some of the I think we're see seeing some of it currently um going forth as they do the follow to the outages in December and so on and so forth. There's a real active interest in that.

Yeah, it'll be interesting because we have our new economic development manager starting I think next week um shortly. I gave him a parking permit this week. He's making the rounds.

Oh, I already see him yet. So, uh and then we also have and this will tie into the next section is my very egregious slide. Uh the visitor-based economy. So, we have a community marketing specialist as well, Derek, uh, that's on board. Um, we handed this out um, in advance of the meeting. This is obviously a lot. If there's additional edits um, to be made, we can send this out electronically. You can make direct edits. Uh, but this would be so page 63. We kind of wanted to bring that visitor-based economy discussion. It was buried in a to be done box on the goals page of this chapter. but we're going to bring it up to the kind of front part of this uh of the chapter to to really recognize it. And I think um so kind of the this will be another one where we have a we have a new community marketing board. Uh they are going to be doing a community marketing strategic plan basically this year. Um, and they are kind of some of the tenants that you'll see that we tried to capture in this is one, I think the perception of visitation is that it's seasonal and we're just not finding that to be the case anymore. It is year round. Um, and I think for those of you that live especially close to downtown, it is year round. Um, and so we talk a lot about how it's outdoor recreation driven. A lot of that has just been historically because we're really close to the mountains, but I think uh community marketing is going to be much more uh deliberate on how they push that aspect of visitation. Um and that obviously expands beyond tubing which we really do not promote in any way. Um it's more to the other aspects of our outdoor lifestyle. Um, and then we also talk uh in a lot about how the associated tax revenue really does help fund citywide benefits. And so I know

the biggest one for me is the Orcart shuttle system that I operate is largely funded out of of tax revenue gleaned from visitation. Um, we didn't get too deep into it here and I think their strategic plan will because we have multiple we have thriving communities which gets uh visitation money. We do have a community marketing fund that also gets uh dollars, but then we have DDA, the downtown development authority. Uh they have funding as well. Um, so we do find that a lot of that tax revenue that comes in, the city's pretty deliberate about trying to spread that and provide communitywide benefit, which again goes back to our general strategy of economic vitality of how can we use our position and our unique community to create unique benefits where we're not just taking anybody and everybody who comes, but how can we create these kind of uh good partnerships uh and create an environment that businesses want to be here um and then people want to be here as well. So that was what we tried to summarize in two paragraphs. It took a lot of back and forth but I think if there are any additional edits uh that would be really helpful but I think we'll definitely be bringing this up earlier into that chapter to really recognize its importance uh to the to the community. We have that in the papers that were at our places.

Yes. Um but I would ask given that we some members is not here um if we could send that out um electronically. Yeah. In fact, I I think it would be helpful if we did the PowerPoint presentation um as a for us to remind ourselves, but also for folks that aren't with us tonight to to be able to uh get get good information about um what's happened since the study session and how how you all have responded to the thing that we raised in the study session.

For sure. And we'll definitely send it directly to the commissioners. Uh Michelle got it posted on Granicus today as well. So, anybody that's following along at home will see that as part of the packet. So, they could they would be able to pull this up um if they're listening along right now. So, yeah, we definitely want to get feedback on this. There's another area where we tried not to lean too hard into the more like we know there are aspects of this that are highly controversial within the community. Um

I think we're largely trying to recognize this is kind of what's going on. This is why people are coming. These are the benefits of this visitation. Um, we view it. There's other avenues, the the annual events meetings and Clear Creek meetings that the city hosts and solicits feedback and makes operational changes. Um, and then this upcoming strategic plan, I think we'll really delve into like are there enough events? Do we need more? Do we need more visitation? What does that visitation look like? I think those are things that the city's really going to be looking at. So, questions or comments? Um, just a timing question because I noticed it said that staff will be developing a new community marketing strategic plan with the CMV,

community marketing board, starting later this year. that will provide additional direction. So that direction is probably going to be post publication and approval of the comprehensive plan, right?

Yeah. And this plan's more f I mean the comp plan is more focused on land use and development. I think any policy guidance or programmatic or funding guidance for visitation would come out of the community marketing group. I think here we're just trying to recognize that it's an important part of economic development. Um, but not providing a ton of policy direction in this plan as it relates to kind of the community marketing approach. And I think some of it is, as you said, a timing issue where the community marketing board, we we tried to go to talk to them, but they're still in the phase of just setting themselves up as a board. And they're like, we're really trying to figure that out. Derek's only been with the city for a couple of months. Uh, I think they're unearthing contracts and other stuff like that. Really just trying to get a handle of what's going on at this point. But I think that that process will be more of the guidance than the comp plan.

Okay. Uh, historic preser Oh, sorry. Apologize. Go ahead.

So, historic preservation. Uh we again we were asked to add a number of implementation actions below the goals. Um so we did that. I think the one exception that we uh um we had um I think H2 had a implementation action already underneath it. Um and H4 this is another balance kind of similar to the affordable housing trust fund question. we kind of felt that that one was pretty is both a goal and an implementation action. Uh so we we did not propose any uh further implementation action for that one. But for for goal H1 uh we added uh some language about integrating historic preservation and rehabilitation. also calling out specifically archaeological resources and then historic context into both city's capital projects and uh private development proposals. Uh, and then just making sure that we're doing a regular review and refinement, which Lauren Simmons is in the process of doing with the Pass Forward initiative, but just kind of doing a regular review of our processes and regulations, uh, to make sure that they're consistent with the value themes, our equity, and best management practices across historic preservation. Uh for goal H3, uh we added uh one implementation action item to focus on uh aligning the historic preservation programs processes and public engagement criteria with the larger zoning code. Uh to really try to create consistency and improve in public uh community engagement, uh which sometimes we struggle with on historic preservation, especially when it's not a developmentbased uh historic preservation uh case. Um and then also uh updating the architectural review criteria to recognize a broad range of architectural and historic styles

representative of our built environment and that is uh that one is currently in progress. So um that will be something that the historic preservation review board uh would be adopting those updated criteria. Uh goal HP5, we added one implementation action item uh just talking about providing resources and establish education and training metrics for historic preservation staff and board members. I think we ripped that one directly from Commissioner Yoshida's recommendations. Um and then goal HP6, uh I believe this is another one that we uh shamelessly stole from Mr. Yoshida. uh identify align and integrate specific resources and incentives uh to support equity based historic preservation and rehabilitation. Um so talking with Lauren and and internally I think we feel this gives us a lot of good policy direction. Uh and then implementing a lot of that uh which he's currently doing um with past forward uh really pri providing that bridge from the comp plan into like how this stuff is actually implemented as part of a development review or a historic preservation review case. comments.

Sounds like we're looking for

Cool. Just as a sort of a side note, um part of that conversation two weeks ago was um once we get through the work of the comp plan of um having some conversation about in which the planning commission and historic preservation board can do some work together or make sure that there's ongoing communication what's happening in the planning side as well as what's happening historic preservation board. Yeah. So, I think those are that those are all the changes that we discussed previously. Um, I'm happy to just wrap up the presentation quickly and then if there's any additional comments or guess new business, new edits. Um, I'm happy to we can kind of talk through those. Go ahead.

Cool. So obviously tonight we're doing our public hearing as required by uh state statute. Um coun uh planning commission would adopt this plan via resolution. So we'll draft that up next time. Have people review it. Um we've really directed all public feedback. So we've done messaging out in Golden former with social media with Mondays with the mayor. We've really tried to funnel all the feedback now into these public hearings or if people cannot make it that they could email or call me directly. Uh we're not doing surveys or kind of additional things are going to be out for x number of of days. Um really trying to to focus it in on since we'll have a number of weeks that this hearing is is legally open. Um so we're trying to get all the feedback that we can right now uh directly to planning commission. Council's approval uh is tenatively scheduled for April 14th. Obviously, that can change, just depends on the planning commission schedule. U and then we'll have this plan available digitally on the city's website. There's probably things that you may or may not have noticed, like the little home logo, like there's actually little navigational things that make your life easier within the document uh electronically. Um and so our uh our designer's finishing that up as well. So, we'll have it available. It'll uh be ready to go at that point then. And then, uh we prepared with this hearing continuing to the March 4th meeting. We just proposed a draft uh hearing continuation motion should you just want to have some language that you can bounce off of. But obviously, you can make whatever motion you would so choose. We have no I should say so at this point staff has no formal recommendation for planning commission regarding the adoption of the comprehensive plan. Obviously we wanted to go solicit additional public feedback hear any

additional edits. We will bring a final plan document to you at the March 4th hearing. Uh we'll have that prepared as part of your packet that will go out next Wednesday. comments or questions from I appreciate the uh public comments being included in the packet. Is this all we've gotten? Wow.

I mean, I could give you the verbatim guiding Golden stuff. U and we've been keeping I mean, I basically copied and pasted that off of Guiding Golden. we've been keeping a log uh throughout the whole process. Um I think I'm pretty confident in the the general approach to community engagement that we've done with this because I think it's something the city's spent a lot of time and our communications group has spent a lot of time over the last couple of years of we try to engage folks uh multiple times and via multiple avenues. And so we have print publications like The Informer and Highlights. We have social media for those that use it, and that's Facebook and Twitter. We used to do Next Door a little bit more, but they're kind of, uh, antagonistic towards municipal government for some reason. Um, but then also, um, I believe we sent a postcard out to the entire community when we started this process. Um, and then I think Mondays with the mayor, following up with folks who have signed up for updates with Guide and Golden, really trying to get as much feedback going out to different parts of the community for all those meetings. So all those phase one and two meetings. We're being pretty strategic about holding those meetings throughout the city, knowing when we're say Golden Terrace, you know, in South Golden, we have folks that we've worked with for the past. So reaching out to them, really trying to create as much awareness as we can. Um, and I think I had a similar experience when we were doing the the bike and pedestrian plan where when we were talking about what do you want to see and where and then what projects but in the middle we were like who wants to talk about policy and like our engagement really was a challenge. Um, but we've been using this citywide kind of communications strategy and our engagement processes. I've been using

them on multiple projects over the same time frame as the comp plan and we've been getting really good engagement. And so I I agree it's frustrating. I want more people to be engaged in the comp plan. Um, and I think we've seen there's been a lot of engagement in the transportation master plan. The parks and recreation and open space plan has been getting a lot of engagement as well. Um, so I'm confident in the process and I think sometimes we've done as we we've done a lot and we've tried to get as much engagement. We try to be creative with like let's build those activities because like nobody just wants to come and be like what do you think about these goals or like these land use policies and so really trying to make it more interactive. Um and that's kind of worked and I think we take some lessons from that but I think we've gotten a lot of good feedback. Uh we've really tried to incorporate what we've heard. I think particularly for the conversations we've had with planning commission. uh we've really built this plan to think of where it was at the beginning of last year to today and it's a very different plan and so I think that's really representative of the thoughtful review that this board has brought to it as well.

Absolutely. I would simply just add I think it's you know one part the best efforts um you know I think it's also the uh testament to all the things that we heard through phase one and then you know the responses to the iterations of the draft and you know if somehow when we got to the policy phase um if you know as we draft those goals and carry this forward if it doesn't meet the mark or you know far misses that expectation um we heard it from planning commission on all of those drafts and we were able to respond but it's also from the broader community if we you know were to miss that mark in that policy phase um the community will let us know and you know the fact that despite all of those best efforts that you know this is the extent of the comments you know I think that's a uh a data point as well so Um thank you um not just for tonight but for that whole effort you know being reminded that this is um a year and a quarter or coming up on a year and a half um effort. Um kind of amazing that we've you know been working with it but there's tangible It's made a tangible difference is clearly looking at the feedback and the conversations that we've had in the study sessions with the planning commission and your response to those comments and conversation are much appreciated. Um, Lucas, is this u the recommendation a

recommended approach for us to do to do a actual motion for continuation? Uh, yeah, I think so. This is uh to to keep on with the hearing until March 4th and continue the rest of it until then. Yes, this will be the way to do it. I guess to be to be official, we need open the public hearing part and close it here tonight. I mean, you can uh open the give the floor to the uh public here for a moment and then move on.

Seeing none is the we'll close public comment. Um and there's an opportunity now for the commission to raise any other questions, comments, that sort of thing that we have. that would like Matt to be able to take into account between now and the time that we meet in two weeks or actually between now and I've got like three days. So yeah, I was told our designer is moving on to a new project next week. 12 things.

Yeah, obviously anything I joke but anything you like changed we can make a change. Any suggestions, comments? Going once, going twice. Um, thank you. Um, in the packet or actually up on the on the board is a draft um or motion to continue the public hearing till next till the 4th of March. Is there someone like that motion? I move to continue the public hearing for adoption of the 2026 City of Golden Comprehensive Plan to the planning commission meeting on March 4th, 2026 to allow staff to consider updating its recommendation and plan based on public feedback and to allow additional commissioners to present for the public hearing. Second that motion

discussion. Are we ready to vote? Colbert, yes. Yes. Yes. Fraser. Yes. Motion passes.

Thank you. Um as part of the not necessarily deliberation but um I wanted to ask the commission um this what next when we meet on the 4th presumably we will be able to um make a decision about approval of the comprehensive plan and forwarding to whether or not we forward it to city council. Um if we do that um I from other groups that I've worked with in the city um have the committee or commission board um has sent public comment to go to accompany it to be read as part of the public statement at the hearing when city council holds that and I don't know that that's necessarily been the pattern for the planning commission in the past but I wanted to raise that question and give u us a chance to think about that as to whether or not we would want to do that um so that when the public hearing is held with the city council that we might have a statement in addition a vote that forwards the plan with approval. Is there any problem with us doing that?

This would be a resolution. Correct, Carl? That's direct during a resolution. Um suppose if you have if if it's so the basic idea is you know we uh we adopt this we send city council I think you can include any other relevant considerations in there. What do what do you think Carl?

Well I I think what commissioner Frasier chair Fraser is is mentioning is when it goes to the public hearing with city council that there's a planning commissioner there to also um speak at public comment um in that portion. um you know in addition to just forwarding the the resolution. So I think that's um the question is whether that's appropriate and you know something that planning commission would allow. Is that right? That that is yes. Thank you. you took my rambling and so you the board would um assign one of your members to take that task and go and be president of the city council meeting to be sort of the person right

the point person to relay any information or answer questions and things like that and would we if we wanted to to have develop a statement that then that member would put into Um, is it feasible for that to be, you know, looked at or considered by the commission um and then the person um authorized or requested to go and make that?

Well, to some extent it depends on what city council wants to hear from you all, you know, so they're going to be considering that. Um, right. They may or may not say yes, we would like to hear from commissioner so and so. Um, so I mean to some extent it's going to be up to the council how they want to handle it. I mean he can send someone and be ready.

I think yeah from a written statement I think you know it it would be depending on the brevity of it might be part of that resolution as well if you wanted something as a warehouse clause um could also be handled there. Yeah, because you will have a written product and that is the resolution. So if you wanted something that you wanted to be sure was in the record and would be read maybe not out loud but by the council resolution probably pretty good place to put it. Yeah, I think the wear if you wanted to give us feedback on or direction on the whereas clauses we would need that pretty. I need to get you a direct resolution fairly quick. Yes, but they can they can amend the resolution when it's adopted. I mean if you wanted them included

if if you have any thoughts now that'd be great but but otherwise we can uh if you have thoughts we can hopefully relatively simple so that we can type them up at the time at the hearing you know next time but and I think the experience that I' I've seen seeing when like seac members would speak at you know from that committee would speak at the public hearing part um you know as part of that plan. So I think having a planning commissioner there if planning commission wanted to you know delegate the authority to speak on behalf of the commission you know that's I think something that seems reasonable um you know if they wanted to put in their three minutes at the public hearing.

Um what I if if the commission thinks that's a helpful idea I might draft short something we could look at in two weeks. Um then either could be incorporated as part of the res the resolution or

is that something that you could type up send to Carl and then Carl could distribute it to us before the meeting? Yes, I think it would I think it would have to be correct. Yeah, we'll staff will happily disseminate the Yeah, I'll put it as an attachment. Y if you can get it to me by Wednesday morning or prior if we get it. Well, yeah, we can we can work through our channels. I drive Carl not too everything.

Okay. Um sheet I guess I believe we have concluded deliberation for tonight and continue the hearing for till the 4th and we'll see what comments and so on we have at that point. Um, also an opportunity for any last feedback from staff um before we deliberate on approval. Think is there anything else that we need to address this evening?

I don't think so. From a scheduling, we'll have the hearing on March 4th and then uh we plan to have some regular business in a study session on March 18th at that meeting as well. I appreciate that.

I would be happy then to entertain a motion to adjourn. So moved. Second. All those in favor? Any opposed? Thank you very much. Thank all of you. particularly. Thank you team effort. Thank you.