City Council - Regular Meeting

Thank

Are you is is Amy going? No. Okay. I'm not going to go either. We have I don't know if Brian's going either. We have three if we don't. That's funny. Five. Guess we got to wait anyway.

Brian Brian be a couple minutes late today. Um, what we do for the Oh, notice.

Um, I'm glad you had a good time. We had a good crew and it's fun. Yeah, that probably makes it difficult. going to Oh, geez. Everyone for everyone in the audience, we're going to be running just a couple minutes late here. Um, we're waiting for someone, but it shouldn't be long. though.

minute. But welcome to everyone on our regular city council meeting number 2026-10, Tuesday, April 7th, 2026 at about 5:07 p.m. And I did want to announce that we will be taking public comment on subjects, topics not on the agenda tonight. We'll be taking those at either 6:00 p.m. or after the city manager report, whichever comes first. Uh we also have tonight um three proclamations which will be coming up. But before we do that, let's take roll call. Brian Swint here. Dave Barnes here. Amy Dixon here. Steve Montine here.

Galgar here. Donaga here. Michael Pacino. He's here. He's here. Okay, let's all rise. Here. Yes, I'm here.

There's a flag in the back and one up front. 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. I do apologize. We will need a few minutes to do these proclamations. So, are there people here who are going to are here for the proclamations? Good. Just be patient. I don't think it will be long. So, what we're going to do since we have to also adjourn. Oh, hold on. In the nick of time. Okay. Thank you. Okay. So, I do. So, I think what we're um we're going to do is we're just going to do this little liquor license thing which won't take more than a couple minutes and then we will do the proclamation. So, if that's all right with everyone out there. So what we're going to do is I need a motion to convene or adjourn from our regular meeting and reconvene as the liquor license authority. Can somebody make that motion?

So moved. Second. Okay. So we have a motion that's um moved by Gail Garry and seconded by councelor Augusta. Everybody who's in agreement say I. I. Opposed.

Okay. We are now into our liquor license authority and we have two things to do on that. One is a request for a new liquor license application and one is for the approval of the minutes. So, this is a public hearing before the liquor licensing authority of the city of Steamboat Springs to determine whether or not the application of Loco Taco Mexican Grill LLC to be located at 2179 Curve Plaza B 101 Steamboat Springs, Colorado for a hotel and restaurant liquor license should be granted or denied. This hearing is conducted pursuant to the laws of the state of Colorado and the rules of the liquor licensing authority of the city of Steamboat Springs. The purpose of this hearing is to receive information, data, and testimony by interested parties in order to enable the city council to make findings and reach conclusions required to be made by state law as to whether or not the liquor license applied for should be issued. A record is being made of these proceedings so that those who desire to be heard must identify themselves by name and address. Interested parties are residents of the neighborhood under consideration or owners or managers of any business located in the in the neighborhood. The neighborhood has been preliminarily established as follows. The relevant neighborhood is West Steamboat area. Any challenges to members of council conducting this hearing must be stated at the onset of the hearing. The burden is upon the applicant to satisfy the council that the reasonable requirements of the relevant neighborhood for the kind of license applied for are not presently being adequately satisfied. The burden is also upon the applicant to show the council that he or she is a person of good moral character entitled to hold a liquor license. Is the applicant ready to proceed? Who can you um come down here and identify yourself for the record by giving us your name and address?

How you guys doing? I'm David Gutierrez, owner of Local Taco Mexican Grill, uh located 2079 Cur Plaza B101. Okay. Can you raise your right hand, please? Do you swear that the testimony you are about to give before the council is the truth? Yes. Okay. And do you wish to make a statement regarding your liquor license application? Nope. Okay. Julie, does the city have any exhibits to introduce? Wait, can he put his hand down? Yeah, you can put your hand down. What was that? You were making him hold his hand up the whole time? Oh, I'm sorry. Sorry. If um Do we have any exhibits?

Yes, we have exhibits A through G. Documents required by the Colorado Liquor Enforcement Division. Okay. If there's no objection, the city exhibits A through G will be admitted. Okay. Julie, does the applicant have any exhibits to introduce? Yes, they submitted a petition containing 37 signatures in support of the application exhibit D.

Okay. Are there any objections to the admission of applicants exhibit D? If none, exhibit D shall be demitted. Are there any other interested parties who wish to be recognized? Okay. At this time, the council may immediately make a decision, provide for public discussion of consideration of documents or testimony or table this matter. Any motion to approve or deny must contain findings and conclusions. The city attorney has prepared an outline of findings to assist in a motion to approve or deny which is in your agenda packet. Can I have a motion to approve or deny this application? Motion to approve. Second.

Okay, we have a motion to approve from councelor Barnes, second by councelor Dixon. All those in favor say I. I. Opposed. Okay. Motion passes 70. Congratulations. All right. Thank you. Okay. And the second piece tonight is just to approve the minutes from our March 3rd liquor license authority meeting. I assume you've had a chance to look at those. Are there any questions or revisions or would someone like to make a motion to approve the minutes? I'll make a motion to approve our minutes from the Tuesday, March 3rd, 2026 meeting. Okay. Motion by councelor Gary. Second. Second by councelor Dixon. All those in favor say I.

I. I. Opposed. Okay. Motion passes 70. And the minutes are approved. And now I'll take a motion to adjourn from our liquor license meeting and return to our regular meeting. So move somebody. Okay. Councelor Aosta second. We have a second. Councelor Gary. All those in favor?

I opposed. Okay. We're back to our regular meeting and thank you all for being patient here. But we have at the start of our meeting, we are going to have three proclamations tonight. And I'm going to find the first one here. That was it. Okay. And since we are running a little late, pardon me very quickly, but I do need to sign this one. This one's first. Okay. And Brian, is that you? Yeah.

Um, okay. So, Brian, this is for the proclamation recognizing National Donate Life Month. So, whoever is accepting that, would they come on down to the front, please?

Proud organ donor. I'm happy to read this. I'm going to turn it this way so I can face out. All right. This is a proclamation recognizing April 2026 as National Donate Life Month. This April 2026 marks the 23rd National Donate Life Month. A time to raise awareness of organ, eye, and tissue donation. Encourage Americans to register as donors and honor those who have saved and healed lives through the gift of donation. Colorado has been a leader in the nation with nearly 900,000 Coloradoatans registering to be organ, eye, and tissue donors at the DMV. Donor Alliance along with their Colorado State team community partner the Chris Klug Foundation educate residents in Colorado and Wyoming on the life-saving benefits of organ and tissue donation. Inspire them to register as donors and encourage them to share their decision with their family. One donor can save up to eight lives through organ donation, restore sight up to two people through cornea transplants, and save and heal more than 75 lives through tissue donation. In Colorado and most of Wyoming in 2025, a rec record 314 heroic organ donors provided 1,36 life-saving transplants and 1,880 heroic tissue donors saved and healed more than 140,000 lives with tissue grafts. Registering gives hope to more than 1400 people in Colorado and Wyoming waiting for a life-saving organ transplant while compassionately celebrating donors and their families for the gift of life. Organ, eye, and tissue donation would not be possible without our community coming together for one united purpose. Saying yes to be an organ, eye, and tissue donor means you are not just checking a box. You are saving and healing lives. So therefore, be it

proclaimed. The city of Steamboat Springs recognizes April 2026 as National Donate Life Month. Thanks, Jess. Would you like would you like to Would you like to say a few words? Here's yours.

I mostly just wanted to say thank you for having me. Um, we are based the Chris Clug Foundation is based out of Colorado, but or I'm sorry, out of Aspen, but we do work statewide and nationally to educate and inspire people. We're a twoerson full-time team with one um part-time subcontractor. So, any opportunity to speak with people and get in front of an audience is greatly appreciated. I'm the daughter of a transplant recipient. My dad received a heart 10 years ago. So, this work is deeply personal to me. Um and again, I'm just appreciative of your guys' time tonight. Any chance I get, I like to remind people how important it is to register your decision. Um and then make sure your family knows your wishes. That's a really important step. registering a step one, telling your family step two. And then there's a lot of things you can do while you're still alive. You can donate blood. If you're between the ages of 18 and 35, you can register for the bone marrow registry. And then there's living donation. You can donate a kidney, part of your liver, part of your small intestine, part of your pancreas, um, one lung lobe. There's a lot of options out there. Um, so yeah, thank you for having me.

Well, thank you for all the good work you're doing. We appreciate it. Okay, our second proclamation tonight is uh recognized in April 2026 as child abuse prevention month. Councelor Dixon, and do we have someone in attendance who can come on down? Okay, Dana. So, this is a proclamation recognizing April 2026 as child abuse prevention month in Steamboat Springs. Whereas the foundation of a strong and thriving community begins with the well-being of its children and every child deserves a safe, nurturing environment to grow and flourish. And whereas in 2025 there were 333 reports of suspected child abuse and neglect in Route County, reinforcing the need for collective action to to strengthen families and protect children. And whereas the route county department of human services recognizes that preventing child abuse requires widespread community support and engagement as strong families in safe environments are built through efforts of individuals, organizations, and local leaders. And whereas the Department of Human Services collaborates with key partners including Brighter World Child Advocacy Center, Route County Sheriff's Office, and the City of Steamboat Springs Police Department to ensure a coordinated response to child abuse cases and provide critical services. And whereas by investing in prevention,

education, and awareness, we empower families, caregivers, and professionals to recognize signs of abuse and take action to protect children. Now, therefore, we proclaim April 2026 as child abuse abuse prevention month in Steamboat Springs. We encourage all residents to participate in efforts to strengthen families, support prevention programs, and foster community where every child can rise strong and resilient. So, thank you for your work on behalf of all of us. We have so much gratitude for all your work and your tireless effort to protect our most vulnerable community members. So, thank you. Would you like um would you like to say a few words? Just giving more information about why child and abuse um prevention month is something we wanted to recognize. um is just kind of given a little brief history and some data regarding um what we're seeing here in Route County. Um so in 1983, April was designated as National Child Abuse Prevention Month. While progress has been made, the work is far from over. In 2025, Colorado saw 117,467 reports of alleged abuse and neglect with um 30,75 of households meeting the criteria for assessment. specifically more here in Row County. For 2025, we had a total of 333 reports of alleged child abuse and neglect with 88 reports meeting criteria for assessment. To date, we received 100

referrals and have worked with 29 families and it remains our collective responsibility to strengthen families and communities to ensure children are safe and supported. Well, thank you for everything you do and your organization does. We really appreciate you. Yeah. Thank you. All right. Thank you.

Okay. We have one more proclamation recognizes April 2026 as National Safe Digging Month. So, Councelor Gary and do we have someone Oh, well that's good. You didn't you didn't bring your shovels though, did you? you she don't call ahead.

All right.

So again, this is a proclamation recognizing April 2026 as National Safe Digging Month. Whereas National Safe Digging Month is observed in April to remind homeowners, contractors, and any professional excavator to keep communities safe by calling 811 before any digging project. Digging without knowing the approximate location of underground utilities can result in disruptions to critical services, serious injuries, and costly repairs to underground utility utility lines. It is simple and easy to make a free request online or over the phone before digging to help communities maintain essential utility services, promote safety, and reduce the likelihood of accidental digging into buried lines, utility lines. And whereas the call 811 service is free, safe, and required by law. And whereas as part of National Safe Digging Month, Atmos Energy asks everyone to become a safety ambassador by taking the Atmos Energy Call 811 pledge at atmosenergy.com/call811 pledge. And whereas homeowners are further encouraged to take a few precautionary measures when planning any digging projects this spring. If work is scheduled for an upcoming weekend, make a free 811 request call on Monday or Tuesday, providing ample time for the approximate location of lines to be marked. Confirm that all the lines have been marked and consider moving the location of your project if it is near utility line markings. If a contractor has been hired, confirm that the contractor has contacted 811. Don't allow work to begin if the lines are not marked. And please visit 811 beyond uh before you dig 811 before you dig.com for complete information. And whereas with any incre increased number of public infrastructure projects and expanding economic development, pipeline damage resulting from excavation remains the most common cause of outside natural gas leaks. And whereas everyone who contacts 811 a few days before digging

is connected to a local notification center that will take the caller's information and communicate it to local utility companies. Professional locators will then visit the dig site to mark the approximate location of underground utility lines with spray paints or both. And whereas all parties agree that safe digging is a shared responsibility. Call 811 before you dig. Now therefore, be it proclaimed by the city of Steamboat Springs, Colorado, that the month of April 2026 is hereby declared as National Safe Digging Month. So, thank you for your work. Yeah. Would you like to um make some comments?

Thank you all for that proclamation and for um giving us a voice here tonight. Um we uh recognize that there's so much growth uh here in this area and there's lots of um developing and lots of contractors working in our area and this uh past year. Uh, Atmas Energy as well as um other utility companies experienced a lot of damages from excavators either not calling in locates or not respecting the marks and digging too close to our utilities with um their uh machines and causing a lot of damages. And we're very passionate about protecting life, protecting property, and when those are damaged, all that stuff is in jeopardy. And uh we need the help of the fire department to come uh protect the people around us when there's blowing gas. Um protect the employees here. And so it um requires a lot of resources when those things are happening. And so this proclamation and any education that gets out there is so much of a benefit to u make that educational awareness to the excavators and to homeowners who are digging uh so that everyone remains safe. Again, thank you very much. No, thank you all too. Yeah, thank you. Okay, we are going to move on in our agenda and as I said, public comment will happen either after public comment on topics that are not on the agenda will happen either at 6 pm or after the city manager report, whichever comes first. So, we're going to move on to our council reports. Who has a report for us tonight and would like to go?

Not everyone at go and jump at once. No, start. Um, I guess I can give you an RTA update. Um, you know, f first thing is we are still working through the legal doc documents to stand up the authority. There's it's amazing how much paperwork we have to do there. we have get our we should have our final document this week to open up the bank account and so our our hope is by next week we'll have um a million dollars from Ski Corp in the bank but um they're just crossing our fingers on that one. Um second thing is we formed an executive direct director hiring subcommittee. You may have seen that in the paper. Um, so that subcommittee consists of myself, Bri Brian Ranks, mayor of um of of um um

Brian Banks, Hayden.

Hayden Hayden, sorry. Yeah, Brian Ranks is is uh um Hayden. And then also Jonathan Flint um of SST here in uh out of the um Zot Springs. And so the three of us will be formulating that committee. The first our first job is basically to define what the job is. Um and then so we're working on that. The um third thing is a longtime community uh volunte uh longtime community volunteer um that a lot of people know um Sarah Jones has joined the RTA as a volunteer clerk. Um this is really going to help us because we desperately need desperately need um some assistance um on the clerk side. So she's joining us on that team. Um, fourth thing is the Colorado Statewide Internet Portal Authority, uh, SEIPA. Uh, they've agreed to actually stand up an RTA website for us. Um, this is this is awesome news that basically they're not going to charge us. They're going to do do the work, you know, um, for us. That that'll be um a place for us to put meeting notes, recordings for of meetings, um, announcements, and, you know, basically archive, you know, location. So, that's uh great news. And then the last thing is the u there's a Colorado Executive Transit Summit happening on June 3rd in Denver. I'm going to look to join that. And councelor Swinte, I don't know if you're you probably are on the emails that you you know, you are also invited, you know, to that. So, that is my RTA update. Um I have one more update. Um just bring this up. Okay. So, um I've you know I' I've taken note that we we've gotten about 28 letters from the community talking about uh you know the parking and the paid parking. And so I started looking at that data and you know bottom line is over 90% of the people oppose the policy

from in the in the community. Um they site affordability local you know local disadvantage uh traffic spillover and and transit gaps. Um what else did I find in that? Um people you know the high level concerns in terms of a summary of the high level concerns is basically fiscal burden and rising costs. They feel disapportant disapprop proportionate of impact of of on the locals. Uh traffic redistribution into into the neighborhoods. uh lack of viable transit alternatives and um base area worker access issues. Um some other things that they they kind of highlighted which I thought was interesting is basically um that locals you know ski you know spontaneously and in short in short sessions you know of often time you know that locals ski solo or in small groups and are li and have limited ability to plan ahead because hey I have an hour here I'm going to drop out of of my work while visitors they plan their trips they stay near base u they use hotel shuttles and so so basically the feeling that there's you know one policy does not fit both groups um and propose a policy that you know right now the proposed policy kind of assumes more the visitor type of behavior versus the local type of behavior. Um what else uh did I come out of here? So, one thing I did on my own and that basically I reviewed the paid parking uh transition plans and how they how that how they work through for Aspen, Park City, Veil, Whistler, Jackson Hole. And one of the, you know, the big things, you know, out of what I saw of those studies is basically that a tr a strong

transit before having a pricing model was always key to their success. And that was the, you know, the really the number one piece of success is actually having a really solid uh complete transit system. And it identified things that that are not working that did not work in those studies. And basically, you know, the things are charging without alternative options. Number one, ignoring local versus visitor behavior differences, incomplete transit systems, and no spillover parking management um solutions. So, that was basically a summary and some investigation I did. I just wanted to share with everybody. Thank you.

Thank Thank you, John, for that. And that is good information to have certainly. And I'll remind everyone that um the city is going to have a meeting on April 13th with Ski Corps to start a process of understanding how to mitigate um their proposal around prey parking and the impact it'll have on the community. So, thank you for that. Um who else has a report?

I think this would be a good piggyback on what councelor Goa just said. I've been thinking a lot about this upcoming meeting that we're having with the resort and I I would love for us to discuss opening it up as a public meeting like we had with the housing authority, not necessarily where we're taking public comment, but that anyone can join and listen because this is a community issue. We are partners with them. It's not a negotiation. If anything, I worry if we do it like this where it's a private meeting between the city and this and the resort, it just creates this atmosphere where it's as if we're hashing something out when really the point is it's two partners meeting to discuss what's going on and okay, it could have gone better, but then how do we work together? So, I would like to propose to council as to talk about opening it up so that anyone could listen in, especially because there are businesses around there that want to know what's going on, hear what's what the thought is. Um, I just think it would be best for the community without transparency. So, we can discuss afterwards, but that's the one thing I wanted to flag.

Okay. Thank you. Others? I mean, we have a Brown Ranch report, but if you want to go ahead. Well, it doesn't. Yeah, go ahead.

Um, okay. So, um, I'm not sure if Michael will have a report out as well. Um, we have our URAC meeting on April 2nd. Um, so just some updates at the complete street segment for B phase 2. We actually did receive bid this go around. So, this is a sidewalk on Mount Warner from Amble. Sorry, I mean to have my back to you all. um Amble up to like um upper null parking lot. So we did receive three bids and we're hoping construction will begin uh this May. Um so that's good news. Um the other um topic was around Mount Warner Circle and Mount Warner Road, that intersection. Um and we have an um engineering company looking at this um and providing different options for intersection control. um and really looking at a 20-year plan um for what the traffic will look like. So, would it be a roundabout? Is there some other type of modification to that intersection? Um so, I think at the next year meeting, we're going to have more information around that. Um, we talked about the consolidated shuttle and I think at the last council meeting I mentioned that based on the um, study that was done um, it was determined we no longer need a consolidated shuttle system. Um, I think that's really unfortunate, but we'll probably talk more about it um, at our SSR meeting. Um and um so the conversation then went to um what does that look like for now once again every shuttle system being able to zip around town and pull into the GTC and drop off. um we will have to have a lot of

conversations around that and SSR has got to have some really um strategic and critical conversations around that because right now if that um area where the shuttles will pull in, if it is not managed appropriately and shuttles are not pulling in and out in this like it'sin amount of time that they have um it will back up and it could potentially back up onto Mount Warner Circle. And my question was, could that then impact our city buses accessing the GTC? And the response was probably. Um, do they are they saying that's absolutely going to happen? No. But these are the things that we really need to be talking about. Um, so that will come up probably with the SSR. I would love to know more um once I'm done. um why SSR was moved, I think it was originally scheduled in April. I think he got moved to May. Um which is fine. Um the other comment um that I would like to bring up, I am going to be really looking at um the ordinance around who is on your rack. it. Um, recently the meetings have felt more um, they felt unproductive to be honest with you. Um, EUR members continue to dig their their heels in about wanting um, gas powered snow melt. Um, when we've talked about this for over a year now and the city has said we don't need it. Actually, SkiCore at one point said they weren't looking at either. we're moving down this other passive path of geothermal. Um, so I really I'm I'm concerned that we're losing any type of community perspective in this group. Um,

and I understand the reasoning why we currently have the makeup um, which is predominantly businesses that sit on this um, committee. Um, I'm just really concerned we're losing any type of community voice. Um, and what the community benefit will be for the GTC because I'm really struggling with that. So, I will probably be doing a little more work and maybe bringing something back. I might not, but if anyone um would like me, you know, definitely encourage me to, I will. But um, just know those are some concerns that I have currently um with. And I do appreciate people's time. Don't get me wrong. people have been on it for a very long time. I appreciate their commitment. I just am concerned we're losing any type of community voice at the table. Um, okay. That was it for I'm wondering Tom if um or Michael if we're going to talk about our meeting for the 4th of July. I I didn't reach out to you all. Do we want to bring that up now? And um

yeah, I think giving them a update on that would be would be appropriate. Okay. Michael, did you want to take that? Or I'm sorry. Councelor Bino. No, go ahead and and it was just going to be about the 4th of July, but I'll summarize if you don't cover all the good stuff.

Okay. Um, so Michael and I sit on some type of committee. I don't know what it is, but we talk about um additional events for um the Fourth of July weekend um and whether we want to open up because right now it's a blacked out time to add more events. So um we've opened it up for the past couple years. We did received one bid um for this upcoming Fourth of July. The bid was to have an event at Howisonson Hill and Michael and Tom, I think it was for a concert, you know, something fun like that. Um after pulling together uh the rodeo folks, um the winter sports club folks and others, um it became not feasible to have it at um Hston Hill. And you know, we have the concert um by the jumps. Well, there was there's an issue with um they have to water down the jumps for um the Fourth of July um what do they call that G?

The jumping jambourine. Thank you. And so then what happens is you get um a lot of water in that grass area and the concern is um having so many people there will potentially damage um Woodstock.

I know I don't wear shoes. Um so anyway, so I think at that point the the committee decided it was um in our best interest not to move forward um with the proposal for this year and we agreed that next year we'll provide more guidance that there are other areas within um the Hamilton Hill Park area where they could potentially set up and have a concert. So this year we will not be having any type of concert um on the 4th of July or drone show. Well, actually, yeah, let's summarize. Uh, in addition to that, thank you, Amy. Um, we would have to say that there was quite a bit of other events happening on that Saturday. So, in the past, there wasn't, you know, concerts and and things. It was just kind of a quiet Fourth of July and that's we were trying to avoid. This Saturday there's going to be actually uh the rodeo's got a lot of concert. They're they're having a concert. Uh, I did call and reach out to um the ski resort and they are still planning to have a um band up there and uh and I don't know if they're doing their drone show, but I know that they're definitely having a band up there. And so we know that the crowds will be dis dispersed a little bit more. And with that diversity of events and having the jumping and jamming up until about 2:30, 3:00, it would be hard to set the stages up and get ready for a concert. And we even talked about moving the concert venue to a different location, maybe out of the wet. Uh it's just a lot of logistics um right now getting that done for this Saturday. So, we appreciate that, but our recommendation is to not have any additional um funding going out this year for those applications.

Okay. Any other report, Councelor Pacino, from you? No, that was the only one that I was going to add. Uh it's been a great couple of weeks hanging out with the family in South Carolina. New baby. Okay. Well, congratulations on being a grandpa again.

Thank you. Um, besides the Brown Ranch update, which we will have, as well as the um, housing subcommittee update, does anyone else have anything because I have a couple things I wanted to share before we jump into those. I want No. Okay. I wanted to give you a brief update on Yep. Valley Housing Authority. Uh, since the mutual separation agreement has been approved and that's, um, now behind us, um, the work on the board is going to start moving in kind of three different directions. Uh, one of the primary pri or the priorities is going to be putting together a search committee, a selection committee to find a new ED for the housing authority. Um, the hope is that we will discuss that and select members for that very shortly, hopefully this Thursday for that committee and um get that process started. The second thing is in addition to that the board has um done some work with outside consultant and had a board survey results that came in uh a few weeks back and now we need to start working on the gaps or the areas of opportunity there that show up. So that program or action plan is being put together as well. And the third thing is as far as the I don't want to steal your thunder here and say Slate Creek neighborhood, but as far as the as far as the Brown Ranch that's Slate Creek Neighborhood Steering Committee, uh the housing authority will be also finalizing those participants hopefully this week as well. So those are kind of three things that are on the agenda for the next uh the next meeting hopefully. Um, couple of other things. I don't know if everybody has signed up for the May 6 economic summit. It's always a good use of time. If you haven't, talk to Myra about getting a ticket for that. It's on May 6th. Um, we have also talked about

having a midsummer midyear retreat in July for council. And if everybody is agreeable to that, I think we've picked July 17th as the date we're looking at. Probably what time? 12:00 to 5:00 or what were we thinking? It's typically in the morning from 8:30. Okay. 8:30 to 1:30. 1 1:30. Okay. I just wanted to get it us happy hour, but I guess it's not going to work. Um, so is that good with everybody to have a midyear retreat? Yeah. You say 17th.

July 17th. Yes. And let's say 8:30 to 1:30 probably somewhere along those lines. And then the only other thing I I just want to mention, I believe uh councelor Swintech and councelor um Augusta are out the week of of our meeting April 21st. Is that correct? Yes. And myself, you'll be there, but councelor Barnes will be out. Is there anybody else who will be out on that meeting which is two weeks from tonight? I know it's spring break, so I just want to make sure we don't show up and have two or three people here. Don't you remember how productive that meeting was? Well, yeah, it is productive. Okay. So, that's that's really all that I wanted to add. So, but can I

ask you a question? Yes. Um, so with the housing authority um and the hiring of a new executive director, I think about the IG, we had um the conversations around the IGA. I mean, I personally would recommend that we wait, we hold until we get a new ED um at the housing authority, but I just don't know where we where that's sitting at this point. Do you know? Well, we took back all the changes that we recommended um to the county and shared those with them. And I think um and Tom, you can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think we reached pretty much agreement uh to everything that we had in there. So, we will get it back and everybody can take a look at it. I think it's being should we should have the new version soon, right?

You're developing a redline version that we'll share with everybody. Yeah. So, everybody get a chance. But it was pretty agreeable on both sides. Yeah. Okay. And then we'll talk about these other things. But before that, why don't we talk about

Okay. We'll talk about the Brown Ranch Governance Group and I'll start and then Councelor Barnes can add in anything um that he'd like to call out, but hopefully everybody had a chance to look at the minutes from our last meeting that were in the packet. And um I think just what I'll do is kind of focus on if you kind of scroll back to like page four really is kind of the full notes and what we really encourage the consultants to do is to be as inclusive as they can as you know as possible in terms of capturing what happens at those meetings. Um they all are are they they are all recorded so if anybody wants to go back and watch those they're obviously public meetings so if anybody wants to attend um I think we've certainly stressed and that we need to be 100% transparent and be you know accountable and try to get the information out as soon as pos possible which is a lot easier said than done in terms of with the processes that we have in terms of publishing agendas you know getting the information. So hopefully we will get into a cadence where we have the opportunity to have the discussion about what's coming up at the next meeting pri with here at the council dis before we actually have those meetings so that we can get council input and I know I think Tom is working and Brad and Rebecca are working with the consultants in terms of kind of the communication strategy and how we um how we do that but it's absolutely the goal that this be done in a transparent way. So, we did spend a little bit of time um talking about and confirming what the membership of this group would be and really the goal is to focus more on entities as opposed to the individuals. So, we did land with the two city council seats with the staff, two county commissioner,

one staff, two YBHA and one staff. Um so again that will be the group and again the focus here is really on collaboration and not negotiation. We also spent some time talking about the name of the group and so I think there was disc there was discussion about move about moving away from Brown Ranch and really talking about as a Slate Creek neighborhood. So um with the focus being kind of really more on the getting kind of on the physical and on the geography of the area and we that's still I think um going to be a conversation at the next meeting hopefully not too long but really trying to capture what the you know what the purpose of this group is. So whether you know it's it's a collaboration a neighbor um I think we've as I say as you look at the notes we've settled on Slate Creek neighborhood but um there's maybe a little bit more in terms of definition um as to how we kind of present the group and and again and I you know there's a lot of questions about what what is the whole purpose here and so just want to highlight in the notes that you know the purpose statement is to build a collaborative effort to define the next decision-making steps for and at this point it was Brown Ranch, right? That's kind of the shared goal. And um in addition to kind of talking about membership, we also talked about, you know, kind of what's going to be the end state. What what are we working toward? And once we get clarity and definition and agreement on what the end state is, then kind of what are the milestones that need to be um reached before we can, you know, get to that end state. And again, the um that's kind of all laid out on, you know, page seven and page eight. Um you know, what we talked about in terms of an instate being some sort of, you know, scaled development neighborhood. We want to make sure obviously that it's affordable.

Talk about community supported and really talking about homes for our community. And again, focusing in on neighborhood and understanding that, you know, that may mean more than homes, but it's it may mean, you know, having some sort of commercial, some sort of industrial, but but that's all kind of yet to be determined. And again, really making sure that it's fe feasible and as I mentioned, kind of a mix of complimentary uses as well as again continuing to stay affordable. And as you look in here, you know, there are some diverging opinions that need to be worked through. And then um there's kind of a I guess a picture that talks about kind of the time timeline and brainstorming in terms of okay the last page is if this is what our end state is what are the milestones what kind of questions do we need to have answered in order to get there and then also a key as I say I can't stress enough component of this is community engagement and not only making sure that we're reading out but that we're accountable and we're also getting input all along the way. So, that kind of brings me back to um I think it's kind of page three where we're talking about during the upcoming session. There's some questions that we want to talk about decision-making guard rails. Um we also again want to get input from this group and the community in terms of what do we think is the in instate kind, you know, where what are we headed toward and also more on timelines and on milestones. And so I don't I can before I turn it over to councelor Barnes, one of the things um I think we may want to talk about is whether we want to I think we absolutely want to have this discussion on April 21st and I'm not whether the form of that is during council reports or whether we want to make it a community report or or how we want to do that. But we will absolutely need to have a conversation to and would encourage all of council to kind of take a look at these minutes and come prepared to provide input.

Now, I think you summed it up well. Um, some of the feedback I'm getting is it seems like people are thinking we're jumping ahead and that we're making decisions already on what the next iteration of uh Creek Neighborhood or Brown Ranch might be. And it's we're so far from that. We're we're in the very very beginning steps of just figuring out how this group is going to interact and how we're going to uh provide feedback to our own bodies and to the community. So just urge people to be patient because we're being patient um with the process and and it is a process. Yeah. Thanks for making that that comment. Okay. Any Yeah.

Thank you. and we'll come. Any questions based on that comment? I know we've talked about doing a city council um letter to the editor um on emerging issues. I wonder if that might be something that you all would want, no pressure, but that we'd want to put out there if you're hearing from folks that maybe we're need to do more communicating out. Just a thought. I I think that makes sense.

Okay. We also have city council and housing subcommittee report. Um Brad sent that out. You all sort of received that on March 30th. And I don't think we really want to just read through it all. It's really FYI for all of you. Um, and if you have any specific questions or councelor Swintech, if you want to highlight anything, um, I think it's pretty um, self-explanatory. I think one of the things the the one question on there is at the beginning um, city council direction needed around um, move forward with an appraisal of Shield Drive. Um, so that's something that we might want to touch base on

and talk side. Is that what you mean? That's um Streamside property um which is an entitled property, but we don't have a a feel for uh the value of that property and we were thinking about getting an appraisal um to better inform us as to direction. Um but we want to bring it to all of you um in terms of uh yes or no. Uh the cost on it Tom would probably be appraisal is typically I don't know 7 to 10,000 something like that we would need to appropriate funds. Yeah.

Um for this and if we and if council makes a decision to start moving forward with looking at this property I mean that's what an appraisal would do. we would need to sort of identify sort of from an internal standpoint how we're managing that a little bit. Um, you know, because I I getting an appraisal is the first step of obviously a desire to take some further steps and so we just need to make sure that we um are clear on what our goals are and where we're headed with that. So, I think that's a conversation that council and we don't need to make that decision tonight obviously, but just want to put it out there for everyone. Um, and we'll bring it up again, I'm sure. What's the timeline?

There really isn't a timeline associated with it. It's a It's basically a 9 acre parcel of or close to 9 acre parcel of entitled land. And so, um, you know, uh, it's owned by someone or an organization and, um, um, we just don't have a good feel for, uh, what the value of it is because if we did have interest in it, obviously the most we could pay for something would be the appraised value, if we had interest. Is this is this a 1605 Shields Drive project years? I'm not familiar with that project. Maybe that came in. Well, maybe what we could do is give you some information on it and then we can have a further discussion about it.

I think that would be helpful because again, it's a prime opportunity for infill. Yeah. So, I think it is and uh but I think we need more information or all of you need more information on this. So, we'll we'll set up some time to do that. Make sense? And maybe you can kind of do a backhand on terms of what you you know kind of the questions that need to be asked. I mean and what from a staff capacity things that we would need to think about. Yeah, we we developed a new decision-m framework that we will run this through and share with council. Okay. Um

back to a couple other things that that came up on here. Um councelor Swintech, you asked about could we do something similar that we did with OPG and Mission Rock. Um where what we did was we had people able to zoom in, but there was no public comment. there was no, you know, chatting going on or anything like that, but it opened it up for people to at least see the process and what was going on. And um I guess one of the questions surrounding that is just um you know, talking to the other party, Ski Core, and um throwing that out there to them and see where they would be on something like that. I don't have I don't have an issue with it personally at all. I don't think I think it would be prudent to do especially considering the contentious nature of this subject and it's it's going to take on a life of its own especially if things are kept in private

and and the thing about not having public comment at something like that is it's very hard to accomplish anything if we spend the entire time uh having public comment. So it's it's more about having the public understand where the discussion went and that this is this is probably a first step in a process. So, it's just I don't know who's going to reach out to them, but just reassure them like the point of this is not a public scourging or like it's not that it really is just a community conversation. There isn't any goal there to make them look bad like So, I think that would be a natural worry, right? Like,

yeah. Does anybody have any strong feelings against that or is is that a thumbs up from everybody to explore that or what? Where are you all at? I'm a strong thumbs up. Everybody okay? Michael Council Pacino I don't know maybe um the other thing uh Amy you brought up this thing about why did we move the SSR meeting? Yes. Yeah. Oh, you forgot about it. Well, we'll move on then. Uh

we move that. Well, I will tell you that uh Tom sent out a note, I think late last week, said that the change was based on several things. With the recent announcement of the decision to implement paid parking, we felt that that entire meeting may turn into a paid parking meeting and not really be able to focus on anything else. And then the second reason is that if we can have this other April 13th meeting first, it might give us some input uh to how that SR SSR meeting might go. And I actually have a third reason and we'd like to meet again with the GTC steering committee prior to the meeting. Um, just to get an update on that. So, kind of like three reasons why we'd like to wait. Okay. And what else was on here that we wanted to follow up with? Um, Brown Ranch April 21st conversation on the minutes. How do you want to do that?

I'll defer to Tom. I mean I kind of we don't have a community report. So I mean how I I'll just I would defer to Tom in terms of how you think we should hand handle that from an agenda. Whether or not we should add it as a community report. Yeah. Whether we just Yeah. Whether we should I thought we don't have a community report. So we could have it as a community report. Right. In terms of I think that would be the appropriate place to put it. Quick update and then with a list of all the questions that facilitate council discussion and allows for public comment. That would work. Okay. Okay. Good. Is that everything from council?

Um, no. I want to go back. I wasn't done on housing subcommittee. So, I had a question on the housing subcommittee. Um, with the recent purchase of Base Camp, a changing ownership, is that does that change anything in terms of um our partnership with Base Camp for um for uh the units we Yeah. the subsidy. Yeah. Yeah. I I think I might refer to Dan on that because I do think Dan, did you look at that the change in ownership at base camp and uh our agreement with them? You know, we should have conversation with the new owners.

Oh, yeah. We should probably have a discussion with the new owners um to see what their intentions are. Okay. Okay. That that is someone's going to follow up. I think it's Kelly, I guess, or Yeah. Yes. Yes, we will follow up. Thank you.

Okay, it's uh 6:00, so we're going to turn to public comment. And uh this is public comment on topics that are not on the agenda for tonight. Uh city council will not make any decisions nor take action except to direct the city manager. And those addressing city council are requested to identify themselves by name and address, and all comments shall not exceed 3 minutes. So, do we have anybody in the audience who'd like to come down and make public comment? Okay, Tim,

come on down. Thank you for the opportunity that I'm Tim Wogenot, the CEO of the Yampa Valley Community Foundation, and I just want to use my time to provide you with a brief update on the Community Foundation's 2025 year, and share some highlights on how we're advancing our core strategies, which are building nonprofit capacity, engaging people in meaningful philanthropy, showing up in times of crisis, and strengthening community through collaborative leadership. To build nonprofit capacity, we added a new tool to our toolbox in 2025. Below market loans to low local nonprofits using a small portion of our investment portfolio. Sometimes nonprofits, like any business, don't need a handout. They just sometimes need some financial help. Last year, we made three bridge loans totaling $1.1 million, helping uh Western Resilience Center and the Yampa Valley Autism Program purchase new headquarters and enabling the Oak Creek Fire Protection District to buy a new ambulance. The program has proved popular. We've already issued two additional nonprofit loans this year. Meaningful philanthropy is another priority. By investing in strong donor relationships, we can match tailored opportunities to community needs. For example, when the federal government shut down SNAP benefits during last fall's government shutdown, we quickly raised $120,000 for grocery cards for Moffett County SNAP holders. These relationships with our philanthropists also fuel our grant making and enabled us to make over $16 million in grants across Route and Mafet counties last year. We also stepped up during times of crisis. The Lee and Elk wildfires in Rio Blanco County, Colorado's fifth largest wildfire in history, prompted us to partner with United Way to create a single relief fund. Since August 2025, we've made 12 grants totaling about $150,000 to support impacted individuals, small businesses in MER and agricultural land owners. Now, in coordination with United Way, the Ralph County Emergency Management Department, and the Wildlife

Mitigation Council, we are working to organize the nonprofits that play critical roles in immediate uh response and long-term recovery of disasters so we are more prepared for the next one, which could be this summer. Finally, we're leading leaning into collaborative leadership to help address big regional challenges with two formal initiatives, affordable housing and mental health. Affordable housing has become a meaningful part of our work. In partnership with donors, in 2024, we launched the Yampa Valley Housing Accelerator Fund, a revolving fund that provides capital to build new affordable housing and preserve affordability in mobile home communities. To date, the fund has issued $15.5 million in loans for projects including the 8th Street uh development in Craig, the Prairie Run Apartments in Hayden, and the Milner home mobile home park acquisition, securing homes for 186 households. Um, since time is short, I'm going to invite my colleague Tracy Hyatt to come to a future council meeting to share the very exciting things the local mental health coalition is working on. That's it for me. Thanks for the opportunity to pro provide comment.

Thank you, Tim. You're welcome. If there's anybody else in the audience who would like to come on down and make public comment, and if there's anybody online who would like to make public comment on anything we're not that is not on the agenda tonight, please raise your hand.

Good evening, city manager, city attorney, and fellow council members. My name is Michael. My wife and I are here together tonight. We first came to Steamboat 42 years ago. Bought land here in 2003. It's 23 years ago and built our dream here, dream home here. We are not visitors of this community, but we are a part of it. And tonight, I understand that you'll be putting something to a vote for our dear friends Colin and Emily Kelly for the project they've poured two years of their lives into, the Latiggo and the Lumbre. Colin and Ellen, Colin and Emily, excuse me, are the real deal. Excuse me. Excuse me one minute, sir. Are you here to talk about the item on the agenda, which is um item number um which item is it now? I've lost it.

Eight. Eight. Eight. I don't know. I don't have a copy of the agenda. If it is, then I can come regarding regarding 12 street. Yes. Okay. Um I need you to save your comment until we get to that, which will it won't be that long at all. This is just for public comment for

topics that are not on the agenda. So don't don't go anywhere. Okay. Okay. Um is there anybody else who has public comment on a subject not on the agenda tonight? Is there anybody online? I don't see anybody. Do you? Nope. Okay. We will close public comment for this point and we will move on in the agenda and we're going to move on to agenda review. And we're going to start with our meeting on April 14th. So if you look at that meeting on the 14th, you will see that we have two things going on in that meeting. We have a work session and we also have a marijuana license authority meeting that night and the marijuana licensing meeting. We will be focused on the vertical integration requirements. So we will be having a discussion about that on that night. And in addition to that, we will be also having our work session on that night. And if I can get back to the page that I was on, I will tell you what that was all about. And that was the two topics were that we were going to talk about fiscal sustainability, the fire district consolidation, and the city of Steamboat Springs emergency operations plan. Okay, any questions on that? Then our regular meeting on the 21st, you can scan down there and you will see that uh we have several um readings going on there around the Hilltop Resort PUB and another development plan um Eddie Line. Um and we also have um a first reading of an ordinance around um a snow e storage easement that night. You can see also that it's pretty empty at this point in time. There isn't much else on that agenda on the 21st

and that's where we did just add our Slate Creek. Yes. Neighborhood

discuss the community report on Slate Creek on that night. So that'll add a little something to that. So that's that. If we look at the May 5th, we're going to have um the regular meeting on that night and we will have a a report from Kim on physical fiscal sustainability that night. And you can see we have a number of other readings that night um and some second readings as well. And then we also have on that agenda the SSR meeting that night. Okay. And then on May 12th, we have another work session planned on May 12th. We're going to talk about the winter service options. Jonathan will give us some update um what that looks like because they have to start staffing for that pretty soon. And so if we want to provide any direction there, the marijuana local production requirement is another thing we'll be talking about. And the third piece is the local marketing district expansion where we want to talk about expanding the district of the local marketing. So that is it for um that. And then you have also the tenative work sessions which um have been filling up. I don't know if anybody has any questions on those. So, I'm not going to walk through that entire that entire list. Any questions on upcoming agendas at this time?

So, I just have a quick question on um May 5th May 5th. Kim's update on the fiscal sustainability. Is this a followup from our meeting with the consultant which I'm forgetting with Mellin strategies? Was that is this what what is this? Well, Kim, this is a followup um to your discussion. It was the same night as that night when we had a discussion of fiscal sustainability. Yeah.

And uh identifying the problem statement, right? And the question that was raised was what are those things that uh the city is not able to do because of fiscal constraints. So we're bringing back a discussion again of sort of a continued discussion of the problem statement. Is that still the accurate problem statement? And then giving you a report on those things where we feel um constrained so you get a better idea to help sort of identify um next steps. Okay. That's the intent. Perfect. Okay. So it's not with the consultant. He's not coming back. Okay. No, there is there is nothing in the plan right now on that. Okay, if there's no other questions, we will go on to the city manager report.

Great. Thank you, President Montine. And a reminder uh for the community that the city manager report can be found uh on our website, steamboatsprings.net. Um go to the government tab and scroll down and tonight's report as well as all the previous reports are on there. Um and a reminder for the community that the format of the city manager report has been um updated, reformatted um to better reflect um the strategic plan strategic plans outcome areas. So uh the report is um organized by the outcome areas so the community can see directly those efforts uh we are making to uh achieve those outcomes. So starting off with the thriving community um outcome area, there's a lot of information on uh the activity of procurement as well as information on all the letters of support um we have um provided to our local agencies for funding requests. Um so we try to support um our local agencies particularly when they're asking for money and um that certainly is something that we ask of them. So, um it's common courtesy to do that and we know that all of our local agencies are um needing those those grants as much as we are. Um in connected and engaged community um outcome area, there's information on all the social media activity that the city has been um engaged in. A reminder that the new city connection newsletter has launched. The new city newsletter is an outcome of the new city manager report. Is it a digital newsletter that the community can subscribe to? Um, we're already seeing a 51% open rate with a 5% click rate. So, um, establishes a strong new channel for direct community uh, communication. And so, you get on our website and take a look at that. Um, and there's directions on how if you want to subscribe uh to a to a basically a bi-weekly newsletter to understand all the efforts that the city are taking. It's all in there and it's

uh comes out of the city manager's report. Um, in facilities, the facilities department completed a new exterior repainting of the historic Legacy Ranch buildings. This nice warm spring temperatures uh have allowed them to sort of get ahead of schedule and uh enable them to finish that project before the busy operational season for their community partner which is Yampampa uh which leases and programs the legacy ranch property. So, it's nice to get in there and be able to help them and continue the historic preservation efforts of that important project and that important pro uh property. Uh there's some great efforts highlighted by the police department in their outreach programs including events at the elementary and high schools as well as integrated communities. Um staff is also launching or is yeah launching an education program for all local waste diversion opportunities over the spring season in addition to surveying the community to better understand methods and modes that community members are using to manage their waist streams. And that feedback garnered um throughout this outreach effort will be presented along with a volume based pricing ordinance uh in July of 26. So we're combining those two efforts. Um, continuing on to our healthy environment outcome area. Um, again, the facilities department completed planning for four major HVAC modernization projects in this building, the transit operations center, the public workshop, and the community center. These upgrades will transition the primary heating systems in each of these buildings to high efficiency electric heat pump technology, significantly reducing municipal greenhouse gas emissions and improving long-term building performance. and that construction is planned to begin in the early season with the goal of completing all four upgrades before winter. So, good to see those projects moving forward. Additionally, staff assisted with coordination of the Apex the shift, which is the steamboat hard to recycle items facility and transfer center. Um that was launched uh on March 16th of

this year providing expanded recycling access to the community for hard to recycle materials such as electronics, light bulbs, batteries with Shift opening the AA Valley recycling um depot closed on March 11th, just a reminder to the community. And additionally, Apex and Western Resilience Center developed an agreement that will provide a voucher program to help reduce the cost of recycling these materials as needed for residents. So, Shift is open Monday through Friday from 9 until 1. So, a great new facility uh to enhance our recycling efforts. Some good data and information on um all the recycling efforts both in the residential and commercial sectors uh in the report. If you're interested in that, take a look at those. um paragraphs in high performing government. There's a lot of information on all the grants that we have requested and applied for. Um so our grants division continues to remain busy. Uh the workday administration team continues to strengthen organizational efficiency and workforce engagement through targeted training, simplified processes, and improved access to actionable data. Um they've been refining business process approvals across all of the departments to approve improve efficiency, remove redundant steps and ensure approval flows better match operational needs. Um the team continues to develop and enhance systembased reports reducing the need for manual workarounds and supporting timelier datadriven decision-m. So we're continuing to um learn about workday and its functionality and improve our systems internally and it continues to be a really really important and robust tool for the city. Um, let's see. I want to highlight a couple things here. Steamboat Springs Police Department Sergeant Sam Silva um attended the DC Metro Leadership Academy where he worked with and learned from national leaders in law enforcement. Uh, that Metro Leadership Academy is one of the premier law enforcement leadership programs in the country. So, well done.

Congratulations, Sergeant Samsovo. We appreciate your commitment. Um also wanted to highlight Heather Os of the um certified municipal clerk of has earned her designation as a CMC which is awarded by the international institute of municipal clerks. Um that organization grants the CMC designation only to municipal clerks who have completed demanding educational requirements and have demonstrated involvement in their local government, community and state. So congratulations Heather Heather and thank you for your dedication and commitment to continuous improvement. Um, Deputy Fire Chief Joe Oakland successfully completed his fire officer 3 certification. The certification is intended for chief fire officers and is a testimony to Joe's commitment to the fire service. So again, uh, Joe, thank you for your commitment and well done on that certification. Um the city leadership team is continuing to train on what is called the incident command system which is the ICS in the national incident management system also known as NIMS in preparation for the rollout of our emergency operations plan which we will be presenting to you uh next week at our work session. Um starting with basics of ICS online courses and combining online training the team is learning a systematic approach to handling a large-scale event that may occur in Steamboat Springs. We hope not. The training will culminate in a fall exercise with Route County Office of Emergency Management, partly aimed at valid validating the city's uh emergency operations plans. So, um that is uh something that all of the um leadership team is engaged in and learning about that entire new system. We feel like that's a really really important function of us as city officials to understand what to do, who to report to, and how communication occurs during any of those um unfortunate system or um um events that might take place. So, better

to be prepared ahead of time. Um, in our outcome area of safe community, um, the fire department posted, interviewed, and extended job offers to four individuals for our seasonal fuel specialist and wildland firefighter positions. They received a large pool of applicants and are excited to have them start at the beginning of May, and we hope that they spend most of their time on our seasonal fuels reduction and not the wildland fire. Um, so congratulations and glad to see them come on board. Uh Steamboat Springs Police Department and public works met with SE dot engineers to discuss next steps for traffic safety in Steamboat Springs. Uh next steps include traffic light timing and engineering evaluation. And eventually we may move towards technology such as red light cameras, but we are working with our partners to take a look at that um and see if that makes sense for the city. And finally, in our uh reliable and resilient infrastructure outcome, uh procurement continues to work with all of our departments, airport, transit, streets division to accelerate key contracts. Um those include our runway lighting upgrades at Bob's Adams airport, asphalt ceiling at the regional transit center, HVAC design and oversight at the community center, transit and public workshop, as well as street um striping. So, um, continue to make sure that our infrastructure, um, is top-notch and resilient and moving towards contracting for all of those projects this summer. And facilities has launched a structured building inspection program to identify preventive maintenance needs and document existing deferred maintenance ahead of the upcoming budget cycle. So again, um kudos to facilities for being proactive um and identify um those uh conditions that need to be improved ahead of time and supporting long-term capital planning. And then finally, there is a list of all the upcoming meetings and events. Um and I'm that concludes my report and I'm happy to answer any questions.

All right. Thank you, Tom. Anyone have any questions or comments for Tom? Okay. With that, we will move on on our agenda and we will go through our consent calendar. Motions, resolutions, and ordinances. Items on the consent calendar may be reviewed and commented upon in the same manner as other agenda items. Any member of the council or the public may request withdrawal of any item from the consent calendar for further discussion at any time prior to approval. If items are not removed, they may be approved with a single motion. We have a total of five items on the consent calendar tonight. I'm going to read the five items and then we'll go back and see if anyone from council as well as anyone from the public would like to pull those items. So with that, item number seven is a resolution denying a development plan conditional use and major variance PL 202530 Eddyine town homes. And I will say this that that is being postponed until April 21st. And if we leave it on the consent calendar, it will be postponed till April 21st. So we don't need to do anything with that. Number eight, a resolution approving a development plan and major variance PL20250330 12th and Yampa residences. Item number nine, first reading of an ordinance, third supplemental budget appropriation ordinance of 2026. Item number 10, a resolution accepting the terms of a state of Colorado aviation system grant for funding of the airport lighting project at the Steamboat Springs airport, assuring local matching funds, and designating Josh Sharter as the project manager. And item number 11 is a resolution acknowledging appointments to the board of adjustment, historic preservation commission, planning commission, and parks and recreation commission. So, with that in mind, is there anyone from

council first who would like to pull any of those items? I like to pull number eight, uh, the 12th and Yampa residents.

Okay, number eight is pulled. Is there anybody who wants to pull any of the other items? Hearing none, I'll turn it over to the public. Is there anybody in the audience who would like to pull any of those other items? And is there anyone online? If there is, would you raise your hand if you'd like to pull any of those items? Seeing none, I would ask for a motion then to approve um items number 7, 9, 10, and 11 and leave them on the consent calendar. So move. Second.

Okay. We have a motion from councelor Augusta, second by councelor Gary. All those in favor say I. I. opposed. Okay, Michael. Okay, motion passes.

Okay, motion passes 70. So, we'll go back to item number eight. And let me just say this as we move into this for everybody in the audience here as kind of how this how this will work is we will have our our planner will give us a presentation on this and from there we will ask if the applicant well after she makes a presentation we'll ask if there are any questions that council has. We will then ask if the applicant would like to make a presentation and then we will again be able to question the applicant. We will then go to public comment. Any of you in the room or online who would like to make a public comment associated with this particular item. And after all those things have happened, we'll bring it back to council here for deliberations and a decision. So with that in mind, Toby, why don't you come on down?

Michael's video has to be on. Yes, Michael, your video needs to be on. Quasi judicial. Michael, I think he Thank you. Okay, Toby.

Toby Safer, senior planner. So, this is the 12th and Yampa project. Um, it's at the corner of 12th and Nampa Street. It's in the CY2 zone district. Um, and the STR green zone. The site is generally flat and within the FEMA designated 100redyear and 500year flood plane. The project is a three-story mixeduse building with eight residential units, a restaurant, enclosed parking, and streetscape improvements along 12th and Nepa Streets with variances to overall height, average plate height, setbacks, glazing, floor area ratio, building massing, and lot coverage. There have been some public comments provided both in support and opposition of this project. We identified some areas of discussion in our planning commission report. However, we find that the project does meet the development plan criteria for approval and it does have characteristics that are similar to other downtown urban development. Regarding the variances, um the height variances provide an acceptable alternative to the standard. The development addresses flood prevention standards to elevate the new building out of the flood plane. the F and lot coverage variances. The purpose of those standards is to reduce mass and scale and allow space for some pedestrian interaction and interest at the street level. The proposed design includes articulation interest and activity for on both streets that mitigate the impacts of scale and mass. So we find that this project does meet th those variances. Regarding the other variances, we found that each of the variances were met um met criteria for approval because they provided acceptable alternatives to the standards. Um regarding

Sorry to interrupt. I have to disclose. I totally forgot to do this. I got a phone call from Colin that was wanted to discuss the project. He had mentioned he had spoken to other council members as well. I told him I couldn't speak directly to him about this project. He had mentioned that it wasn't speaking about the project, but it was about related policies that hadn't been adopted. I still told him I couldn't talk to him about it. And then we generally spoke about his experience through planning, which was not related to this. I feel like I can still be impartial. Sorry, I forgot to mention this before you began. Councelor Swede, I think I forgot to mention that too. I want to highlight

and I appreciate you bringing that up. Just hold one second if you would Toby because I I also received a phone call and I said, "Well, if this is about um 12 Street and I was told it was not, but then all of a sudden we were talking about gravel and I said, "Uh, I think this is in the same location. So, you need to talk to planning department, not to me on this." So, I too uh did receive a communication

as did I. Um I also had a call um and again we said talked I think kind of the same line about not being able to talk about if this is the conversation about 12th and yampa we can't talk about that. Um we then did talk a about the relationship to of um downtown plan community canvas community plans and codes and um talked about the fact that the we the city has a lot of different plans but that the code prevails. So again, if anyone thinks I need to recuse myself, please let me know.

I did talk to Colin a couple months ago. Um, very similar conversation. We just talked about the cotification of the downtown area stebo plan and the CDC and how they may be in conflict with each other. We did not talk about the project or specifics. Um, I don't feel like I need to recuse myself either. Other comments?

Yeah, that I fall into that same vein. uh couple days ago or probably last week I did talk to him about a develop a demo permit regarding gravel and revitation and at the time it wasn't related to this project because the demo permit has already been um sub already been given uh so it was more of a question about using the gravel for parking in the short term and I when I realized it was part of this 12th street Um then we stopped the conversation and left it at that. Okay. So

I would like to ask so I I did not speak to the developer. Um did not receive an outreach. Um which is great. Um I would not have had that conversation. I just want to make sure that no one who has spoken to the applicant talked about the project or indicated any type of support opposed position.

No. And specifically for me, Amy, thank you for bringing that up. It was really um I hadn't read the packet yet, so it is not related to any of the variances or the application that Toby's about to speak on. For my part of the conversation that we had, it was about a demo permit and um reveitation of the land. That's all it was.

Yes. For me, no, it didn't. But it makes me I've never been in a position where five people have been spoken to. My big concern is this either means one of two things. one, none of the counselors before the I had been spoken to told the applicant that we can't talk or if the applicant was informed, they've continued to call counselors and five of us and that makes me nervous. And so I would look to staff of like I have never been in this position. I don't this doesn't feel particularly right or fair. Like what is

Sure. Um so the issue that we're talking about is an exparte conversation which is any contact or information given to you when you are sitting in a quasi judicial role which is to say you're applying the existing law to an application or a license or something like that. Um when you act in this role you're basically acting as judges. And so that means you have to come into this hearing being impartial. Uh not having um been influenced one way or another as to how you're going to decide the um decide the application. And part of that impartiality is not having communications with um anybody outside of the hearing process. This is a a public process and the decision needs to be made on the basis of the information that is presented to you publicly. So, um, you know, that means you you shouldn't be talking to developers, uh, outside of the the hearing process and receiving information that might influence you without other people being able to also hear that information and having an opportunity to rebut it if, uh, if they want to. So, I think it is um, you know, not unlawful uh, for someone to contact you. We don't expect people to know these rules. Um but but you do need to, you know, decline to have these conversations um if and when it becomes apparent that they relate to quasi judicial matters. It sounds like you've done that tonight. Um I I don't hear anything that makes me think that anybody should not participate um in this hearing tonight. However, it is a bit unusual for a developer to contact this many council members with respect to a quasi judicial item. I think most people understand that you're not allowed to talk about these things outside of the hearing process.

I and I should say he, you know, I was not contacted. Um, probably went to SAM.

Well, I think the other piece, at least from the public here, is that uh, yes, we have to make sure that we do tell people that we can't talk about these things. And um I think the community out there needs to know, the developers especially, that they should understand that they shouldn't call us either. They probably still might, but we have to be disciplined about it. And I understand sometimes if somebody calls and you don't know what they're talking what they're talking about, but you know, as soon as it even gives a hint of it's something that is going we're going to talk about, we just got to get off the phone. Okay. So, any other thoughts on this? Thank you, Brian, for bringing counselor SW because I totally I totally

forgot about it myself. Okay, Toby. Thank you,

Toby. I only have a few more comments, but if you have questions from what I said earlier, uh, let me know. Um, regarding how the community plan and the downtown plan were used in evaluation of this um, project, we relied on the plans where appropriate to address the criteria for approval and to support the project. Um, our recommendation is based on the development meeting standards and acceptable alternatives to the standards um, which allow this project to meet criteria for approval. The consistency with our plans is only one criteria for approval that we use to evaluate this project. Um the plans are still guidance until those specific code amendments are adopted by council to achieve that vision. Um there are some statements in the applicants materials that misrepresent what the plan documents say. So that could cause some confusion. If you have any concerns or questions about those that plan language, we can clarify as needed during the rest of your discussion. Um and the my last point is that the staff report indicates that we were working with the applicant towards a additional condition related to the demolition permit and the reveation of the site. So we've met with the applicant and we are in agreement on that 14th condition um as it's written in your staff report there. So um if council decides to approve this project, it can be added to the resolution. So

okay, thank you Toby. What questions do we have, Toby? So, I I have a I have a few. Um, and we can forego this until we have pictures up on on the screen if if that's u more appropriate. Um, so, first of all, you you I believe some of the justifications you highlighted were because of based upon the downtown plan that that was accepted. So is that that true that some of the you know things that you've identified is basically you know downtown plan hasn't been codified but you based upon the downtown plan you did uh find justification

right so one of the variances the f variance in particular um so floor area is calculated and it needs to include uh parking especially when it's enclosed and there is a very specific recommendation in the downtown plan that says we should eliminate parking from floor area ratio calculations in the downtown area to allow projects to be able to park themselves and to encourage development in the downtown. So, we did use that very specific plan guidance from the downtown plan um in supporting the F recommendation regarding the variances and the project in general. there is a general criteria that says is the project consistent with the plans and we do find that this project is consistent with the vision in both both of our plans. So it is one piece of the criteria but again we do find that the variances and the project meet the standards or acceptable alternatives to the standards.

Okay. Um question about height of of structures. Um, in the middle of this, in the middle of the um, uh, the development plan, there's like almost a whole another floor. I forgot the name what you you what you called that. Um, but there but essentially it increases the height by a whole another floor, but it's in the middle of the of the structure. What's what's that called first of all? What's it?

Yeah. So, the things that exceed can exceed maximum height are called a pertinances. So we have an exemption in our code that allows certain structures to be excluded from overall height. They have to meet some criteria. So they have to be less than 10% of the roof area and they have to generally be unoccupied spaces. So the um structures that are in the middle of the building um screen they're they provide some mechanical screening of HVAC units and then they also um are elev elevator towers and stair towers. Um the applicant can probably describe that better but the overall area of those pertinances that exceed the overall height um meet those standards to be exempt from the overall height requirement. So the height of the building is kind of measured at the highest point on the building. So there is an overall height variance for that. But the the stuff above it is exempt by our code.

When I know this is theoretical question, but I'm going to ask you a theoretical question. Um anyways, and um and that is when we go to codify the uh downtown plan, is it possible that we could put some height limitations on the on the um on those structures, anything's possible, I'm sure. Anything's possible. Okay. Whatever the community wants to do. Yeah. Okay. So, once we codify, you know, things Yeah. things can change. um on the southwest. I have one more question from you if we could, councelor Augusta, so we could get other people to ask questions, too. Okay. Yeah, go ahead. But I' I'd like to get everybody involved if we can.

Um I can come back. No, but go one more and then we'll come back to you. Sure. The so the southwest corner um of of Yampa and 12th um the second floor seems to be at a max of 30 ft because you have the drop because it it drops down four feet. They had to add four feet uh for the uh flight. So it ends so it seems like the second floor at that point is at 30 ft and we need and it's required to have a setback at 28 ft. So is that another var variance or is it not another variance?

It is. So it's included as an upper story setback. So from 0 to 28 ft um the required setback for C Y2 is 10 ft and from 28 ft and above which is typically above a second story um is 25 ft back. So that section that corner that you're talking about the second floor is included in one of those variances to be at zero feet. So that particular corner is at zero feet. Um I think up to a certain level which the applicant could tell you better or the plans could show you. But it's not set back. So it's it's basically setback zero. Correct. It's so it's a variance request. Yes. Okay. All right. So I have other questions but we'll come back to you. Yeah.

Let's hear from a couple others questions. May I go go for it?

Okay. I will um I have a few questions but I will I'll start with one and I'll pass it off. Um, so I'm really just going to focus in on the variances that are presented before us tonight. Um, there are nine. Um, the first two that I want to talk about are the variance request one, overall height, variance request two, average plate height. Um, applicant states um that the flood plane requirements are pushing um for these variances. Um, if that truly is the case, could the developer not have gone for an unnecessary hardship case? That is probably possible. We um we have a hard time supporting hardship as from a staff. Um that that can open us up for some legal complications. Dan can can speak to um but I think the hardship argument again this is probably better for Dan to say is um has to really eliminate all possibility of development on that property and so that's not the case here. So we typically um move towards those acceptable alternatives as a better method. We do we do look at that if the development could occur if there was no flood plane there could the same development occur and does it have you know excessive height or something like that. So it's a good comparison point but um we do we did find that for this particular um both of those variances that the flood plane standards are improved by that um variance request and that's how we um can recommend support of those variances. And one followup question to that to those specific variances is that um those variances so unnecessary hardship um would possibly be a hard case to make and I think it'd

be a hard case to make because these varian are variances are not required um for this development. I think I read in the minutes that um the developer has chosen ceiling heights. there are probably alternate ways that a building could be built on that property to come closer to the standards. So, um they are they are meeting the flood plane standards, but there are probably options for how they could develop that building. Thanks, Toby. Councelor Schwintech.

Um, from my experience, we are always uh discouraged from comparing to similar buildings, but there's a lot of discussion here from staff about similar buildings, buildings nearby, this being in line with similar buildings. Why is that appropriate in this scenario and not in the majority of other scenarios that come to us?

Right. So when we compared um so there is some criteria for approval in the variances that indicate is this building consistent with the character around it. Is it going to cause impacts or be different from what is nearby? So that's one criteria for approval that we have to consider. We have to look at the character of the area but is not it is not the only thing that we considered when supporting these variances or this project. So we did mention in our staff report that there is a variable character of um front setback along Yampa Street. Some buildings are at zero, some buildings are at 10. And what that represents to us is that there is a variety of ways to meet that standard. So given the context um of Yampa Street and this building, we find that the building is in character in that regard. But to support the the variances in particular, we found that each of those variances met a very specific alternative and they were not supported just because of the character of the surrounding area. So we did consider it in our evaluation. Some of the statements in the staff report also are excerpts from the applicants materials. So if just skimming you might you might see some of those statements but our our analysis is based on the standards and for the variances in particular um typically we we well for each of them we had to find an acceptable alternative to the standard that those variances met. But again that character piece is the first criteria for approval for each variance. So,

other questions for Toby? Councelor Pacino, do you have anything online there?

Yeah, it was kind of an interesting thing, Toby. It's it's not as much about this project and whole, it was more when you're working with this many variances with the developer. um how what I'm work we're looking at is that in most of your application you you saw that it was consistent consistent consistent with staff and everything else. So I really appreciate your report is very lengthy at 28 pages on this one. So I think it went into some detail but what I'm also concerned on is just uh not concerned but wanting to clarify and understand when you're working with the uh developer on all these different variances um how was this in compared to other uh applications that had variances like this? Was this a positive experience? Uh did you work side by side with this developer or was it really giving them their own instruction like this does not pass, you need to solve it

when trying to understand your process.

Yeah. When we look at um any project uh it it really just sort of means more analysis for us and there's probably not as much um working together as you might envision. So they provide some information, we provide some comments back. So we provide our perspective, how it's meeting the standards. We typically have a couple rounds of review. I think we had two rounds of review on this project before we came to here. So um we're trying to describe to the applicant the intent and the purpose of those standards and really trying to meet those and maybe where their project or their information is not meeting that purpose or intent. Um, everyone's goal is typically to get to a recommendation of approval. So, we're trying to provide some information to them as to why we can or cannot recommend their project um to you for for decision. So, um we do kind of consider the project as a whole. Um and on occasion, including sometimes recently, we've said this is just maybe too many variances. It just doesn't quite fit. Um and we give that information to the applicant and they can choose their project or they can choose to move forward and you know present their their case and their information. So um we give them some feedback. They can respond to it or they can they can say thanks but no thanks. We're going to move forward with you know a recommendation of denial if we can't get there.

So okay. Councelor Barnes or Councelor Gary, do you have anything? Go ahead. I just like to say thank you for all the in-depth analysis and the staff has put forward in it and I don't have any questions. Okay, councel Gary.

Uh thank you Toby. During your kind of comments you mentioned something right about the downtown plan and the community plan and to the extent that there were places perhaps in the applicants language that wasn't necessarily accurate. Could you point those out? Yeah, I I remember reading through um the table that was provided as uh some supplemental material for your council packet. It wasn't in the planning commission packet to sort of summarize those variances. Some of the statements in that table indicate that a plan supports maybe a 45 foot height or a zero foot setback. And the canvas plan in that case for the 45 foot height and the zero foot setback, the canvas plan really isn't that specific on those standards. So well um so the canvas plan in particular in particular that's the community plan um defines land use districts that include a character of a district to give us some guidance when we are looking at development plans and variances and these subjective decisions um to create that character of that district. this is language that's in the plan but so you can find it but to create the character of that district they look at what's existing and then also think about the future like what the goals this community is trying to achieve and so to achieve our goals we might want to think about some additional density requirements in our downtown to maybe meet some of our other economic goals or you know infill goals or any number of other goals. So those character districts provide us some guidance and some structure for where we would want to go, but they are definitely not specific standards. We could maybe achieve the vision of those plans in a different way. So to say that the plan supports a 45- ft um overall height isn't isn't quite accurate. We

haven't determined that. While we had some community discussions certainly to to get those recommendations, we would need to to turn those into standards. We need to have a full discussion with our community and here to make sure that's what we want to what we want to do. Sometimes those visions change or don't get implemented or we choose to get there a different way. So yeah. Okay. One other question. um on the dimensional standard overview tables um the issue of the average plate and just you want to there's a a little bit of a discrepancy between the applicant and the staff. Let's dive into that.

The way that we measure average plate height um um when they're asking for a variance is we look at the the highest average plate height which is supposed to come from the highest elevation. So there is a little bit of grade on this um on this site. So each of the sides has a slightly different average plate height and we typically choose the largest one to just indicate the most impact that's there. And the other in this case the other four sides of that building also are above the average plate height. But our point in showing that in the staff report there was to really just kind of demonstrate the variability and demon just make sure that we all know what we're talking about. It's a little bit taller. Like parts of the building are a little bit taller than our standard. So, um, they they did choose one average plate height. Uh, and we chose a different one. So,

all right. Thank you. Okay. Uh, before we go back to you, counselor Gusta, I just have one one question. And I don't even know if it's a question as much as maybe just an observation, but when I walk down Yampa Street, it seems to me that uh buildings like this are on every basically from 6th to 7th, from 7th to 8th, 8th to 9th, 9th to 10th. You know, there's one or two on all of them that have a lot of variances similar to this particular building. Mhm.

Um, so whether that's a, you know, self-fulfilling prophecy or not, I I don't know. But when you talk about the character, it seems like we've already established the character on Yampa. And the character on Yampa is much more consistent with um with these types of buildings that are going up, it appears. Is that would you say that's a

Yeah, I think I think the character on Yampampa is a bit challenging. Um there are I I looked at all of the buildings on Yepa. I've done two projects on Yepa recently. So had chance to look at all of the buildings and there's a number of buildings that were approved with variances. Number of buildings or two buildings at least that were approved by PUD. So um we have not quite met our dimensional standards for Yampa. So and it's just that side of the street. CY2 is the front the side that we're looking at. and see why one is the other side of the river. So of that of that street of that character, we're not really at those dimensional standards. So perhaps our dimensional standards never quite worked. Um and we may have already chosen our vision here, but those are the standards that we have to apply and we haven't changed them yet. So it's a tricky sort of spot to be in which is why we've had so much discussion about it. tried to present this information not ex exactly black and white. Um our standards say one thing, the existing development says another. Our plans say a third thing. So um we're trying our best to just get all the information out there and make a make an informed decision.

So council Augusta, um are they required to have sidewalks? They are. Um and there are sidewalks existing and they are um keeping some existing sidewalks and adding to sidewalks. So is there a code of how wide those sidewalks need to be or do you know what the you know the width of the sidewalks are? I think they are there is a code. I think um that the sidewalk on Yampa when it's complete is going to be about 16 ft wide. I think that is standard um based on what we want on Yampa. Uh, and then on 12th Street, I believe it's going to be 10 feet wide. And I think that's existing and I think that also meets the standard.

Okay, thank you. That's it. Sorry, I'm not I don't want to like beat a point, but this just rings bells to me about that nightmare garage in that neighborhood where when we were talking about other ne other similar houses and we were encouraged by staff, we shouldn't be looking at the neighbors and we shouldn't be looking at the other buildings near it. And I am having the hardest time sitting here now having staff tell us that other buildings on Yampa look like this and therefore it's okay. like that just isn't adding up to me. Toby, do you mind? Yeah, go ahead. I can I can address that. Um, so the uh I think you were talking about the building on buckskin. Yeah.

Okay. So that one was a hardship variance and the hardship variance criteria requires that there be a special circumstance. Okay. That causes the subject lot to need the variance. And so if it is something that is shared with all the other lots, then that is a criteria that would militate against granting a variance. And so in in a hardship situation, if you if if it's the same situation everywhere, then that's not grounds for a variance. It's got to be special to or specific to the law that's asking for the variance. The variance that you're as being asked to look at today is an acceptable alternative variance, which is there are different criteria from a hardship variance. So, it's a hardship. You can't look at anything near it if it's

I wouldn't say can't, but it has that special circumstance criteria that it does not apply in an acceptable alternative. And so, that special circumstance criteria I do think requires you to focus more on that lot and not the whole neighborhood. Okay.

And I'll just also say um what we always say and I what holds to for this project is each project does need to stand on its own and the v each variance needs to meet criteria on its own. So each of these variances does meet an acceptable standard. That's that third criteria is either an unnecessary hardship or an acceptable alternative. The other criteria that a variance needs to meet, one of them is sort of a character impact standard, but the acceptable alternative is why this standard on this project and so that is specific for each variance and specific for this project. So again, the context of the area gives us information about our future land use and about what how this building may or may not impact our future land use or the existing buildings around it. So looking at the impacts of this building is how we apply the character. But our support for this project does not come specifically from it looks like everything else. It just has to meet I mean it has to meet the standards which again we find that it does.

Okay. Sorry. You can continue. Okay. Any other questions for Toby? Of course. I got one. Cal. Yes. Um Toby is there a how does someone apply for and get a a license to have an outside seating area for your your business? This is on a zero lot line. So everything of that sidewalk is city rightway. Correct.

Yeah. So this if they wanted to have outdoor seating on the sidewalk within the city right ofway um they need to get um a limited use permit I believe from the planning department which is an administrative approval and they need to get a revocable license. Um there are a couple of different types. There's an administrative type if the seating is going to be removable. Um and those revocable licenses are administered by public works. Um they need to make sure that uh the ride ofway is safe, has enough access provided. So um however, if they put their outdoor seating on their own property, then they don't need to apply for any of those licenses. Okay, thank you. That's my last question.

Okay, one more I think. Mhm.

Um so Toby, I want to uh talk about variance request number nine lot coverage. Um so um right now the their proposed lot coverage is 95%. Um maximum in CY2 is 85%. So maybe just talk about I know what it means but I would love for you to just share because I have a follow-up question on that. Yeah, again we so we looked at the the lot coverage and um the F and we feel that they're a little bit connected in this case. Um again, the purpose of those standards is sort of to reduce mass and scale. So when you reduce the lot coverage, um it allows some space for pedestrian activity. you know, it allows for different things to happen at the street level for that building to have a good scale at the pedestrian level and still sort of be an equivalent scale um with the buildings next to it. So that's sort of what it's trying to achieve. Um our direction here is so there's a couple things. So the F um calculation and I'm going to come back to lot coverage but the F calculation does include parking as part of that. So one way to meet the F calculation and another way and the same way to meet the lot coverage is to not not enclose that parking not cover that parking and then they might meet the lot coverage standards uh but they would need some other design standards. So, one of our evaluations is, you know, do we want to see an open parking lot and meet our lot coverage standards or do we want to have kind of an F and a lot coverage variance and have an enclosed parking lot or even a a further example have a building that doesn't park itself

and have a parking variance. So, um, in our evaluation of that, we found that most of the standards in our code are sort of leading us to an enclosed parking that looks nice and a building that parks itself. Um, and then with there is some other standards that sort of indicate a difference between CO and CY and that's also another reason for a different lot coverage. There's I think no max lot coverage and CO which is right across the alley. So that is some some codified language from some old visions and some old plans. So we're sort of in a tough spot applying some standards that are not necessarily consistent with our vision. So all of those things combined um in addition to the articulation on the front of the building along Yampa Street and some articulation on the 12th street side which though they are included in lot coverage those areas because they cover the lot they do provide the intent of that standard. So that's through those application of other standards that's how we're able to support the lot coverage variance. y'all could find something different that it doesn't um meet those standards in the same way that you find, but that's how we were able to get there on the lot coverage. Okay. So, my followup to I I get the whole parking um and I I Yeah, I get that. um and why that's pushing um the F. Um but when we talk about lot coverage, um can you talk about how that is impacting the setbacks, specifically variance number three and variance number four?

Well, I think if um if the building met setbacks, then that would probably reduce their lot coverage. So, they're probably connected. So by you know supporting those setbacks um and building to those zero foot setbacks it does increase the lot coverage. So um again we've we've found the same justification there that the that the design of this building um does provide some articulation some pedestrian interest um some reduction of the scale and some interaction with the street to meet the intent of those standards. So there's again there's probably different ways to meet the intent of those standards. Um one way would be to provide a 10-ft setback. One thing I'll mention, so the um the CY standards, if you built a building to meet those, you would have the building set back at 10T and then it has a deck um coming out at 5T. So that sort of speaks to some articulation coming something coming towards the building. you'd still have 5 ft between the property line sidewalk, but that's where we're sort of coming from with articulation and interest. So, um there are some other buildings, I know it's not great to compare, but there are some other buildings that do provide some similar types of methods that we've found that work. Um again, we don't have to look at those. we can just look at this one. But again, we find that it provides some articulation and um meets the intent of those standards.

I'm going to do one followup and then I'm same same uh train of thought here. So then going back to the variance request number three um the setbacks proposed zero um setback on Yampa Street and zero setback on 12th Street. talk about for folks what that what that means and what that looks like and why we actually um have setbacks um in our CDC.

Yeah, I I think um the purpose of those setbacks I believe we believe they're not they're not super clear. So we haven't written very specific purpose and intent statements for setbacks. So we have to interpret a bit what those mean. So, we believe that those setback requirements for the CY2 zone district or in the CDC in general, um, well, I'm just going to talk about CY2. We don't need to talk about anything else. Um, on Gamp Street is to encourage pedestrian activity. We've always envisioned that as an entertainment area, restaurants, bars, um places to go, not even necessarily retail, though we have some down there, but so a place to have tables outside like many of the uses down on Yampa Street do. So, um there are some different ways to provide that interaction with the street. Um on Yampa Street in particular, there's a large patio that's going to be associated with the restaurant space that will be a commercial space with that big patio. So hopefully it works for a restaurant now and in the future. Um but it is designed with some interactivity rather than kind of a straight wall um and providing no interaction with the street. So that's what we believe the setback standards are for is on Yampa Street is to provide some space for there to be some activity. So

thank you. Thanks Toby. Thanks. Okay. Any other questions? Thank you Toby. I have one question before we move on here. Typically we take a break around 7 o'clock and uh we have a ways to go here with this particular discussion. So what is your preference council? Do you want to keep moving forward with this? We got a lot of people in the room. Or do you want to take a 10-minute break? Got a respect. We should continue. Continue. Everybody okay with that? Mhm. Yes. Okay. Is the applicant here? Would you like to come up and

Yeah, you have 15 minutes. Yeah. Whoops. Do you need to do you need to tie your computer in? Uh, I'm ready to do that. One second. If you would just give us your name and address, please, that would be great.

Uh, Chandler Diamond, Vertical Arts Architecture, uh, representing the developer, 690 Marketplace Plaza, Sweet One. Thank you council members for allowing us to present our project today and thank you staff for uh all the hard work that they put together working with us on trying to get this project to an approvable state. Um we understand all the confusion with everything going on. One of the things that we're all a little confused on is some of these um accessory documents or supplemental documents that are out there. And one of the things Toby talked about uh that I wanted to share with you is that in the community canvas, it does specifically speak to uh density downtown. And it says the most appropriate developments in this zone are mixeduse buildings with commercial ground floors and offices or housing above with general height limit of 45 ft. Secondly, the second point of the density is building in this district shall have zero or very small setbacks from the lot line to maximize the lot coverage and facilitate a more walkable built environment. So, one of the criteria for approval, the second criteria, your first one is how does it fit into the neighborhood? The second one is does it comply with the community plan? And then the third one is the points that um Toby brought up earlier. So in going back to that community canvas plan, we were trying to be in support and in compliance with that with these general requests understanding it is not codified but that specifically in the CDC does speak to that particular element. Uh the other thing I wanted to present was uh let me share my screen here. Um I wanted to talk about building height a little bit. Um so building height in general um going back to what we talked about building height is usually

calculated in this area from um the uh sorry uh the existing grade. So existing grade here our lowest point of existing grade is at that southwest corner uh that was discussed. But because of the flood plane there, if we built to that point, we would actually be in the flood plane. What I want to bring to everybody's attention that if you come from our base flood elevation, um, which is our finished floor, um, on the first level, we actually are 38 ft maximum in height. Um, what is pushing us over that height is that varying grade that goes from the north side of the site to the south side of the site and the fact once again that we're in a flood plane. There are ways to build within a flood plane and not be fully floodproofed. Um, but that requires active elements. It requires people to come in and put in floodgates. It requires active uses and um people to do that. So, if there were a flash flood type scenario, you can be in a predicament to where you couldn't get all the flood proofing in place. So in this instance, as Toby as Toby stated, um, for that approval, we were trying to actively floodproof this to meet that standard, not cause a life safety issue with it. And once again, in doing that, we actually are at the 38T building height, but when you measure it from existing grade or the standards, we end up going over that uh building height. Um, one of the other discussions is as they talked about was the F and Toby did a great job of explaining that. Um, one of the big discrepancies in the codes and the plans currently are in relation to that parking garage. Um, we thought it was very important in this development because as we talked you

guys talked about earlier paid parking at ski, you know, parking issues downtown, etc. that it was important to fully park this site and not have any variances within that. And part of that also feeds into the setback requirements. In order to fully park the site without being able to expand into that setback, we would have lost at least one row of parking and and six to seven spaces, which then would have reduced our overall parking count and we would have been in here asking for a variance on parking. So when you look at the overall project um and and this is what staff has also helped us look at is that yes there are variances within here but those variances are also in support of alternative methods to make the project compliant with other areas and it's a tough part because in order to meet all of the black and white pages sometimes it's not possible to do that and to still not request variances. um you can meet all of those and still have variances. You can request more and still have variances. So, it's a as as you guys are kind of seeing that that CO or CY area is has some challenges with that. So, thank you. And if there's any questions, we're more than happy to answer those as well.

Okay. Thank you. Anyone have any questions for the applicant? Okay. Seeing none, then what we will do is open it up to public comment. This is Oh, you want to come up? Oh, okay. I'm sorry. Come on up. You do have some time left. I think there was like 10 minutes. We'll give you 10 minutes.

More brief than that. So over the last three decades, when you look back, you know, through kind of the history of how this stuff has gone, um the city of Steamboat has um uh through countless elected city councils, uh and our planning commissions and city staff consistently evolved the community codified policies. Um our envisioning documents, our envisioning guidance has changed, the framework that directs downtown development. Um, different city managers have driven different priorities. There's been an inevitably evolving uh vision for how downtown should be activated and that's led us to where we're at today. Uh, back in 1999, the uh there was a pedestrianoriented mixeduse commercial zone district in the area community plan that was created. uh that was programmatic guidance uh that kind of evolved in 2006 into the main street program. Then there was the eventual historic preservation overlay that was adopted in 2014. Uh then comprehensive downtown plan, a lot of people call it the master plan in 2019. Then you know we had the big taxpayer funded communitydirected community canvas plan that was unanimously adopted u by this council. um the evolution of towns and communities and people, societies, our needs, our technology, the systems that we create to formulate and bring those ideas into reality are inevitable. They're always going to evolve. Uh but the thing that strikes me in a community that's funded almost exclusively by sales tax and lodging taxes is that if you're not growing and evolving your town, you're dying. Sadly, I think that we all see that at some level that's true. Um, we as a community and you as our elected leaders have risen time and again to meet the challenge of balancing the continued growth of our thriving community on one

hand, while on the other you have to honor the past and the heritage that's made this place special, why we all moved here. So, our community has demonstrated time and time again a preference for an approach that's more of ongoing refinement tweaks than it is to a static regulatory sort of event that just massively codifies a whole plan as comprehensive as canvas. But it you have to understand as a developer or anybody whether you want to build a ADU on the back of your house or a mixeduse building in downtown, it puts you in a conflict where you're you're always looking at one page and then looking back at another. And variances have become kind of a four-letter word in our town, but they exist for a reason. Uh, and I think it's precisely because of this conflict that we get lasting projects that really stand the test of time in our community. I think the CDC does a lot of things well, but I think that the envisioning and guidance documents like the master plan and the canvas plan are there for a reason and and we should listen to them. Um, the downtown plan, the downtown policy has never been static or singular. that's always been continuously refined over time from broad comprehensive plans and guidance in the '90s to framework that you just passed this year. Um, and so, you know, I'm not a I'm not a lifelong developer. I didn't go to school for this. I've never done this before. I'm a chef. I'm a restaurant tour. I'm doing this to build another restaurant. Um, I'm a working guy. Uh, so for me reading all these plans and hiring all these experts and working with the city's experts, sometimes I'm like just plain English. Could you give me this in plain English? And the plain English thing that I want to make sure that's conveyed to you is that if both of these plans were codified, we wouldn't be here asking for variances. We'd be fully parked creating parking for the

community to use. Our height would be contemplated. all of the different things that are for public benefit because time and time again the one thing you always hear is we don't want cake boxes, we don't want wedding cake stacks, we want vibrant buildings that create vitality to our downtown corridor. Um but because these conflicts exist um between the CDC and these envisioning documents uh through five councils over the last uh three decades that have have passed these things were being required to ask for variances. I know nine or seven or whatever the number is seems like a big number but when you realize that you have to get a variance to not put windows in a brick wall that faces another brick wall that you shouldn't have to ask for that. um you know when you have to ask to not put 40% window in a building um so that you don't you know look like a modern building but you have some refinement and kind of match the downtown oldtown vibe that's a variance when you want to cover your parking garage from from the view and the sidewalk um that's a variance you know and either way you either have to get a variance to not cover it or we got to get a variance to make it pretty either way we're here for a variance the type windows and screening that we're uh proposing to put to cover the parking garage. It's never been done. So, that's a variance. I think if you looked at it, it's beautiful. Like there there's there's no reason we shouldn't be able to use artistic, you know, steel louvers that are fabricated and welded by a local welder, you know? I mean, these are this is this is uh I just I I think that some of these things sort of miss the forest through the trees when you focus on Yeah. There's all these ones, but taken case by case, we're really only here for two or three. Um, the majority of these are sort of technicalities. Um, you know, not

dividing. It says that it shall be divided in 25 ft. You know, you should have this massing of 25 ft. Well, when your lot is 115 ft wide, you're either getting a variance to divide 115 by 4 or you're getting a variance to go 25 251 15. Either way, you're you're here at a variance. um you know so you're told on one document over here cover the entire lot because we want downtown lots to be full and then over here you're told yeah don't do that that's too much density but you can't ask for parking so you know there's all of that stuff but I just I just in plain English I think it's important to consider each one of those and what it's really asking for the one with the windows on a brick wall is is bananas to me but um the Lato project I believe and I think the city staff report shows is consistent with the city's adopted long-term vision. It's compatible with its built surroundings and is responsive to the unique constraints of the building site with the flood plane. And while it does recover or require some code variances, it's been thoughtfully and thoroughly evaluated and found to meet your approval criteria with no adverse impacts identified. I'm taking that language right out of the all the 300 pages of stuff that you've got. The city staff recommends your approal approval based on the project's alignment with your adopted envisioning plans and its thoughtful design and contribution to the vitality of Oldtown. That's important. So, you know, the last thing I just want to say is as a developer, like I said, I'm not I'm not I don't do this for a living. I hope I'm never back here again. Uh we uh we're locals. My wife and I are raising our family here. got four daughters here. We employ over a hundred people here. We're trying to employ more. We're committed and we're invested in this town. We're on boards

left and right. We're invested in its viability, its vibrancy. If we're forced to sell the land, who's going to buy it? We could end up with some out of state developer who comes in from Chicago and puts a soulless sort of wedding cake stack building on there, sells it for millions of dollars and leaves, having never really invested in the fabric of our community. We don't know. Um, but approval of this project tonight, I think represents an opportunity for you as our council to advance the adopted city planning goals, setting a precedent in a manner that is responsible, intentional, and forward-looking. Thank you for your time and your dedication in support of our uh community. The service that you provide is not an enviable chair to be sitting in over there. Much respect um for the job that all of you do cuz you never make everybody happy and we know that and I know it's a ton of hours. So really appreciate you and respect you and I just hope that we'll uh get in your vote and have confidence for the vision of 12th in Yampa. Thanks.

Thank you Colin. Okay, we are going. Boy, everybody's ready. On your mark. Um, we will open it up to public comment. Um, and we'll have some people online, I think, who have their hands up as well. So, we'll alternate kind of. You have three minutes. Please state your name and address and come on down. Chris

uh Chris Polley, 55 Missouri Avenue and uh Colin is right. He is not a developer and uh no developer would do this project like this. So, sorry Colin. Um this is the second time I've been up here and advocating for a local business owner. The last time was Scott Mah when he was doing his hotel and I'm pounding on the table. But we've got local people that are in the community that are trying to do good projects that are not totally financially driven. I could tell you I know the math behind it. If you if this was a a financially dri driven project, you would see Hardy board siding. You'd see a you know garages that are private and no structured parking. You'd see the smallest possible commercial spaces in the building. You could go down the street and see exactly what you would end up with, which does nothing for our community. Colin is trying to build a 5,000 foot restaurant space. No developer would put that much commercial space in a project in Steamboat. We have restricted where we could do economically viable development to this really finite area. I mean, Yampa Kitchen had to go get a a waiver to be able to do outside seating. So you can see where it stops and it basically runs into the river. We this is the only place we have to develop commercially viable things that generate tax revenue and create the experience that we are offering as a community. And our variance our variance is and I will say like I don't think anybody on this council was was on the council when they were putting these codes in place but you sit up here and you're like this is a flaw in the code. You can't adopt the code with this. And then everybody chatters around and they say, "Well, we have a variance process." Yet, we use the variance process as an extortion method for developers because we we hold them as like we hold this code as like these really finite things. You walk down the street and we've got how some place that happens to be over 50 feet on on Yampa Street. You know,

you got all these varied things out there, but whenever we decide we're going to hang our hat on one of these uh, you know, code items like Scott Mar was in here for a hotel and our code says that the top floor has to be residential units if you're going to do a fourth floor. Why would we not want a guy to do, you know, fourth floor hotel rooms? Same thing with Colin. Colin's building a very nice building. This is a, you know, we could all debate the architecture, but I walk down the street and I see Hardy board siding. I see materials that are far less quality. He looks like he's building a building that's going to last the test of time. He's on a really good corner with a park across the street and river access for people to engage with his restaurant. Um, you know, I couldn't I can't advocate enough that uh, you know, we cannot get stuck in the code process in this like code that's got, you know, ample flaws because what you're going to end up with is people who just figure out how to make the most money on a project and give you garbage and uh, you know, not caring about our community. No one would build a 5,000 foot restaurant. That's like a gift, you know? It's like somebody wanting to do a hotel downtown. So anyway,

okay. Thank you. Come on down.

Sorry, I have to go home and get my kids to sleep. Uh, my name is Chris Dylan, 331 Apple Drive. My wife and I own FM and Sons. You know, the town has changed a lot over the years. It continues to change. Um, Colin is an asset to our town. He's created several thriving businesses and he's been a big support of our community and I think this is our chance to to show our support back. Yampa Street I think does have a pretty significant issue with parking. Um even now it seems like even in April and May when the tourists are gone, you still can't find parking down there. I think any kind of opportunity where we can support a project that is actually making parking spaces for that area of town uh trumps any of the other variances he may be asking for to help support that. So, thank you very much and I hope you support his project.

Okay. Thanks, Chris.

Thank you. Um go ahead. Come on down. I'm not I'm not going to send you away twice. Coming in on the tail end of everything here. Most everything I was going to read, council members and city council manager and city attorney was all to support Colin and Emily. I don't need to read all this. You've been hearing about it. There's a lot of mixed messages between the master plan and the canvas plan. And my understanding is is that that's what they were directed to build this on. and they're doing the best they possibly can. And I think you said it best, Chris. This is the city's opportunity and the young man who just walked out from FM Light and Suns. This is the best opportunity you guys can have to thank Colin and his family for investing everything into this town for as long as they've been here. My vote and my encouragement to the council is to take this to heart and just try to look at what will happen if they end up selling the dirt. What's going to happen? You'll be back in this plate. This it'll it'll remain an ugly corner for potentially I don't know 12 months, 24 months, 36 months, 48 months, who knows? And you'll be back in here again arguing variances with somebody else. you know what you got with with Colin and his wife and his family. Thank you.

Thank you. Come on down and then um when you're done, we'll go online and see if we can pick off someone there.

Haven't done this in a while, but my name is Lori Windler. My husband Carl and I own the Windler Ranch on um 23625 County Road 13 in Yampa. Uh, I want to speak to Colin's community involvement and his support of our youth. He is he and his family attend the route county fair every year and support the youth that work so hard on those animals there. I want to commend the city for the first time last year. I saw a banner in Steamboat that promoted the route county fair and our youth works very hard there and doesn't get a lot of support from the businesses from Steamboat. But Colin runs some businesses that totally support that. They put pictures up of the of the animals and the people that they support, the kids that they support in each restaurant. and they really do bring that that love of the youth to the route county fair from the business owners in Steamboat. So, I hope that tonight he will be successful in what he's put his heart so much into. Thank you.

Thank you. All right. Thank you. Okay. Um, is that Bill? Yeah. Okay. Bill, can you want to unmute? I think I'm unmuted. Yeah, we can hear you, Bill.

Mike, Bill Jameson. Um, not to be uh against uh a project, but there's only one thing wrong with this project. It's too big for the site that it's being put on. The variances are driven by the size of the project. Rather than build to the size of the the allowed site, they've asked to go to zero uh setback instead of meeting the setbacks required. Your job is to look at the code. The plan is a is until the plan is codified. It's nothing but a plan and a wish. If he wants to come, if you want to adopt the plan and codify it or parts of it and the developer wants any developer wants to come back after it's been codified, go for it. But tonight, you're looking at a code that requires certain things and you ought to put blinders on to that plan and review this project based on the code. And the variances that are being requested that are driven by the size of the and mass of the building on this site just can't be supported by the code. You you can uh pull at the heartstrings of a local developer, a local entrepreneur, but that's not grounds to approve these variances that go to mass in size. So I urge you to look at your code and you know I've talked for 20 years variances are given out in this community like uh jelly beans and this is where you've ended up nine variances I agree a lot of them can probably be justified but you can't justify the mass

and zero setback on this site or this size building. Thank you. Thank you, Bill. Okay, we have um Melissa. Melissa, can you unmute? Hello, everybody. Um I've never spoke at a city council meeting before. My name is We're having trouble seeing you. Can um I don't know what we're looking at actually, but uh Can you hear me though? I think we need

Can you give us your name and address too, please?

Yes, my name is Melissa Montana. 1463 Knosogga Circle. Um, I've been with Colin and Emily for a long time. I'm a local housekeeper in town. I started at Resort Group as a housekeeping supervisor. I got pulled over to House and Place by Green Core Corporation. Sherry and Mark Skully. I was the original property manager at House and Place in Alpen Glow. And I just want to be here and support. You know, Colin and Emily, they are literally the epito. They are the locals people. you know, they've done everything in their power to try to provide local housing for their work staff. They've done everything in their power to keep me employed as well as a number of other people in in town, you know. And while I don't really understand the variances, what is the general public really going to notice about a deck being 5 foot wide or 4t wide or, you know, the roof being above the county building or any of that, you know? I just think that I want to and I want to say that um okay Melissa, are you there? I think we lost Melissa. Well, we'll see if if we get her back or not. Is is there anyone else in the audience who would like to come down and make a public comment? Yes, sir.

Well, one, two, three. My name's Jim Hoffus. I live on 1146 Long View Circle right here in town. Um, I just I've been in construction for 50 years. I'm retired now. But all these variances and all these um all the laws that he's trying to build as to, what's the reason for them? The reason they were made in the first place was to keep things from getting way out of hand. And so there's the letter of the law. And then there's also a principle. If you look at the principle, all these variances, he's trying to meet that principle. Maybe not the letter of the law, but are we trying to go by the letter of the law? That's why there is so many variances here in town because we go by the principle, try and make something that looks good and that the people can use and it benefits the town. And I think that's what we have here. Something that really benefits the town. That's all I have.

Okay. Thank you. Come on down. And Joella will take you next.

Good evening. Nice to see everyone tonight. Thank you for all your late Tuesday nights. Uh I'm Doug Starky. Uh Steamboat Springs resident since 2003 and a local business owner. I live at 740 Dearfoot Arts Park Drive. I'm here to lend my support to the city planning staff's recommendation for approval of the 12 and Yampa residents residences. Uh I've read the entire uh report and agree with the recommendations to city council and thanks for all their hard work on this project. I it's a big report and clearly there's a lot of thought put into it. I believe this project would be a great asset to downtown Seamote Springs. Uh as are the developers Emily and Colin Kelly. I'm regularly amazed by the amount of hard work these two individuals put into their multiple businesses, their schools, and their family. I'm sure with these two at the helm, the Lato will be another success for Steabboat Springs. I recommend you all approve the resolution before you. Thanks for your time.

Thank you, Doug. Joela

Joela West 75 Copper Rose Court. Always a pleasure to be on this side. Uh this is going to be peculiar. There was there was a period of time not that long ago when uh the phrase steamboat is losing its soul became the theme of the year. It was a surprising throughine in responses to the community plan survey. It became a question that was asked at city council candidate forums. You remember that? I recall at one point responding in one of those forums that if council was to address this, we would need to have a definition of what is considered steamboat soul so that moving forward we could measure our actions against that. Well, fast forward to now. We never got that definition and I'm no longer on council. I spent some considerable time over the past weekend reading the agenda packet for this item. And when it came to the drawings, I had an unexpected aha moment to borrow from an old and very famous Supreme Court decision regarding a completely different subject. I don't know all the elements of Steamboat Soul, but apparently I know it when I see it. Because when I looked at those drawings, I could see Steamboat losing its soul. I'm currently a member of the board of historic route county, but I understand that we can't save the sto soul of Steamboat by preserving it in amber. We have two very beloved but nonproductive buildings and no one has come forward to a plan for with a plan to save and reuse either one of them.

The soul of Steamboat can't possibly be preserved by surrounding orange peel and the double Z with yellow caution tape and leaving them to fall down or be destroyed by vandals as what happened to the chief. The proposed development is a beautiful building, but it's totally in the wrong location in scale, in height, and especially in setback or lack thereof. simply doesn't belong on this block of Yampa. And the fact as referenced in the packet that other buildings in the CY zone have been granted some similar but not identical variances does not, as far as I'm aware, create a binding precedent. And while I am absolutely sure that Colin has created a sound business plan, I don't think that the city's neverending search for additional revenue should be allowed to destroy the soul of Steamboat on this beloved block of Yampa. So what's my ask? either approve one or more of the decline to approve one or more of these variances or send this back to the planning commission because they did not send it to you with a recommendation. Thank you.

Thank you, Joella. Thank you, Joe. Come on down.

Hi, thank you. Um, my name is Michelle Caribble. I live at 429 Yampampa. Sorry, 429 Laurel Street in downtown Steamboat. And uh I am the former developer of Wateride Village, which is the building directly next to uh the project that's being considered. I also have owned many businesses myself and Steamboat and used to own Moxy Home Consign and Design, ran the Linta Inn. We built employee housing for them, participated in a lot of other things as well in the community, and raised my two wonderful children here. So, it's hard to get up here and speak against somebody that has done something that I have that's a, you know, done really great things in the community. But I do think that this project is not appropriate for this particular corner. If you have ever spent any time in Steamboat, which I'm sure most of you have, you will realize that that particular corner is really what defines us as a community. It is where we have events, people uh gather, they congregate, they, you know, everything happens there. It's it's beautiful next to the park, views of the library, views of Hison Hill. And so I think that that particular location deserves to be respected um in both the size of the building that's going there and and matching up with other buildings such as Wateride Village next to it. Um I'm not against all of these variances. I understand that variances are necessary often to grow your community and enhance your community. And I have requested variances myself in the past and some of them I have not been granted.

Requesting a variance and building a building thinking that you should just have all your variances I think is against the intent of the code against the intent of what we want to do in this town. You shouldn't design your building, as Bill said, to the lot and just try to get as much as you possibly can out of it. There are things I think that can be done to limit the impact, particularly the height and the fact that there are limited setbacks on the second floor. I think if you looked at any of your looked at your packet, you'll see that the height of some of the sections that border Wateride Village, actually come up to the middle of the of the windows on the third floor of Wateride Village. And I also think that yes, you can take 38 feet here and say yes, the building's 38 feet here, but it's also over 41 feet on the corner where everybody's interacting with a square corner with no access on the corner windows. I mean, I looked at it, it's beautiful building, but I thought that's like an ivory tower and doesn't make the community feel welcome and invited. So, I just think you need to look at the code and go with that because that's what it's there for and each project should be evaluated individually.

Hey, thanks Michelle. Thank you. Come on down.

I guess I'd be remiss if I didn't say something around here. Um, I'm Cookie Lockart. I grew up at 11th in Tampa, one block away. And let me tell you, it uh for some time now the building at 12th we're talking about looked like a wild cap operation making moonshine in the hills of Kentucky. That was what I thought. But anyway, we rented saddle horses when I was a kid. Brought in the horses every day all summer and that was in our on our property for 80 years. And uh I was sort of face forced to sell because I couldn't develop it. and I sold it right before the boom came back. I've known Colin Kelly since he came to town. He's done nothing but improve everything he's done in my opinion. And uh my opinion might not mean anything, but I've been here longer than most of you were born. And uh I'm just really glad to see such a great improvement. And I just can't say anything bad about it. It's certainly an improvement from what it has been and their family has done a lot for this community. And that's the end of my speech.

Thank you, Cookie. Okay. Is there any anyone else in the audience who would like to come down? Come on down.

Smith, I live in Oak Creek. I don't know if that makes a difference, but my address is 502 Moffett Avenue. Um, this is the first time I've ever been to a city council meeting. I moved here four and a half years ago from Vale, Colorado. So, you can only imagine how I've seen things changed. I've lived there for 19 years before my husband and I moved here. He's now part owner of Skitown Wine and Spirits, and they have a little wine club called The Collective, which is why we came here. I'm going to slightly pull at your heartstrings because Colin hired me without like literally almost ever meeting me. and um it's been a pleasure to work for him. Coming from Vale and I worked in the industry the I I am a somalier so I worked in many restaurants in Vale. Have never seen anybody so dedicated to a restaurant. Colin literally is there. I mean until he opened Cypress. He was at Primrose five nights maybe six. When he finally actually started taking Mondays and Tuesdays off we were thrilled because he needs days off. But he's a great man and he's a, you know, like I think kind of what Melissa was saying before she got cut off is he's sort of like family to all of his employees. He would do anything for any of his employees if they needed anything. And you know, going back to kind of what he said about who knows what's going to happen to that lot if he can't keep it, if you guys don't approve it. Um, I just don't see anybody else being as Steamboat local and having the heart of Steamboat in a place other than Colin. And from what Toby said, again, I don't know anything about variances. It's like a different language to me. If you want to talk about nebio or cab from Napa, let's go. But she's approving it and it see or the city seems to be approving it from her perspective and it seems like there are a lot of gray areas but from

what she said from what I could understand it seems like it will work and if it will work for somebody like Colin that is such a great person I feel like you guys should definitely take that into consideration. So thank you for your time.

Thank you. Okay. Is there anyone else who would like to come down? Come on down. Um, Noah Zedetic, uh, 33 800 Catamount Drive. I'm just here to offer my support as well, um, for the project. Um, when it comes to variances and the purpose of certain building codes, the purpose of any code is really just to enhance the community. I also disagree with the comment earlier that this requires you to put blinders on. actually the variance process um necessarily serves the o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o opposite effect that um and we happen to have a local developer here who has already proven his ability and um intent to enhance the community through his multiple business and restaurant ventures that serve as gathering places for locals and visitors alike. So, um, I grew up here in Steamboat. I've seen the kind of evolution of where this proposed development is going and I definitely think it's in need of improvement and I trust the Colin and the developer to accomplish that vision. So, thank you.

Thank you.

Okay. Do we have someone else back there? Hi, my name is Michelle Gansy and I live at 1580 Mark Twain Court and I'm speaking in favor of the project that Colin's doing um to pass. I guess the I wasn't really going to speak, but um I've been here for about two years and um we've had a lot of growth and has anyone ever tried to get a reservation for dinner in town. I make them ahead of time about a month ahead at a lot of restaurants. And so we talk about growth. We're improving the airport. We're talking about um you know the influx of visitors. It's part of what, you know, we're doing, the draw to the ski area and all the things that we do. Um, and so I guess it's about accommodating, you know, all of the visitors that we're encouraging to come here. And I feel like a lot of times we can't do that with what we have. We're from kind of a bigger city, and I'm sure a lot of you have lived in one. Um we're from Columbus, Ohio and um just to be able to have a nice dinner um you know at a a nice place is a big deal. I think that the um uh building is beautiful. Um I think it fits on that block. I like that we're adding more parking. Um one thing also um Jim Lockheart spoke and I wanted to um correct something that he said. He's been in um construction for 50 years. He used to build rocket launching pads. So in terms

of the variances and why those are about, I think it's important to take those into consideration because they're for progress, right? It's for the road map to making things better. So in summary, I'm speaking in favor of Collins project and I appreciate um you listening to all the things that were said tonight. Thank you. Okay. Thank you very much. All right. Is there anyone else in the audience who would like to make a public comment? Okay. Seeing none. There is one more person online which I think is Trace. Trace if you could unmute.

How you doing? Can you hear me? Yeah. Give us your name and address please. Trace Adams 29455 Flying Diamond Trail. Okay. Go ahead.

Bear with me on the background noise. I'm at the airport traveling right now. But, uh, I just wanted to call in and and show my support for calling on this project. I know it's got a lot of attention, but uh, you know, being a local for a long time and seeing the evolution of Primrose and and Cyprus and and Carl's and as everything's moved forward, it's they've all been lively pieces of our community that we need to continue to grow upon. And I think that uh there's probably very few people in this room that can remember, you know, getting a flat tire and fixing it at orange peel or who even knows what a spicy chick a spicy chicken lick sandwich is anymore with extra ranch and barbecue sauce from the double Z. Uh these are things that have been dormant for a very long time and this corner has been essentially an eyesore to the community. So I, you know, I plead with the council to look at the variances and assess what you can work with, but to know that this is headed in the right direction with the right person behind it and we very much need these vacant spaces to be a part of our community again. Thank you.

Thank you, Trace. Okay, I see no one else online and no one else in the audience who wants to make public comment. So, I will close public comment and bring it back to council for discussion and deliberations. Have a follow-up question for the applicant. Okay. Is there a reason why the ceilings couldn't be lowered to comply with the standard? Would you ask again why the ceilings couldn't be lowered to comply with the standard?

Yes. Once again, the reason for the height increase is not necessarily ceiling height, but it's due to the flood plane. Could you lower the ceiling height to comply with the standard?

We we could still lower ceiling height. You would have to lower the ceiling height well below a standard for projects today. Most projects expect at least a 9- foot ceiling height. And in order to get even to a 9- foot, we still wouldn't comply with the current building height. The building would be shorter, but it would still wouldn't comply with 38 ft. Also, keeping in mind that there's a requirement in the CDC for the first floor. Uh it has a height of 12 to 16 ft. also um and we lowered that to allow for us to comply with the the ceiling or the building height from the existing flood plane.

You say you could couldn't lower it for this product or whatever. What does that mean? Meaning today once upon a time when we all grew up my house had all 8ft ceilings in it and that was perfectly acceptable at that time even for track homes. Nowadays, we're doing track homes and other homes that have a minimum of 9 foot ceiling and then other projects have higher than that based upon the project that it is. So, even when I'm looking at some of the affordable housing projects in town, we did sunlight um the affordable housing out the project out there with Gorman etc. We were trying to get above 8 feet uh even for the products today even in affordable housing. So, the buyers wouldn't want lower ceilings.

Buyers would not want lower ceilings. Correct. Thanks. May I do a follow-up question on that? Go for it. So, you're talking about you're you're throwing out 9 ft and 8t, but I'm looking at your design and your first floor is 14 ft and your second and third floor are 12 feet. Far from the 8t. So, so help me understand. So, in a building and 12 feet.

Sure. So in a building of this type and construction type uh you have certain structure required for floors right so you have to put in there either steel concrete wood etc that takes up a distance within that space secondly on a building of this size we have to provide fire protection we're going to have plumbing we're going to have mechanical systems so within that space usually what happens is is that you lose about 2 ft between structure and the supported mechanical electrical plumbing that also has to go in there. So in this case, yes, we do have a 10ft ceiling in there, but once again, the building height right now is mainly being driven by the flood plane and being over the height, not necessarily ceiling height.

Okay, may I ask a question? Um, so going back to parking, sorry. Um I read the packet to um imply that um the parking was specific to the residents of the eight units and the restaurant, but now I'm hearing from other public comment that it could be public parking. Are you able to clarify that?

So we parked the site based upon what is required in the CDC. So meaning we had to meet that minimum requirement and that's what we did. We actually have one more space than that minimum requirement. Um, people coming to the restaurant, people being there uh can use that when they do come to the restaurant if there are spaces open. We're not necessar we've dedicated seven spaces along the uh the 12th Street for restaurant use uh the commercial use. Um but anybody who's coming to there if there is a space available in there they can park in that spot. Correct. Thanks.

I guess I'll follow up on that. Do you want to clarify? No, go ahead. Yeah, it is it is public parking. Yes. Okay. So, there won't and more just to understand, right? I mean, I think there were 23 spot or 23 required and there's 25 spots. There's 25. There were 24 required and we're at 25. Okay. And then and so there won't be like specific reserve spots for unit A, unit B, or whatever you're going to call them. As of right now, there is no we have made no requirements for that. Correct. So we haven't we haven't assigned specific spots to specific condo units. That is correct.

So it'll all be open to the public. I once again if the if the restaurant is not used at all and the homeowners are not using all just clarify what does that mean? I mean is any of it reserved? I mean we just need to understand you don't buy one of these condos and not have a parking spot or or is that real? I understand the question. Sorry. Uh so thanks.

So the public the restaurants parking space we're making public parking as available. So, you want to bring your kids down to Little Tud's Park and go push them on the swings, you can park there. But yes, you buy unit 2011, you're getting two parking spots or three, whatever the thing is, but you're you're getting spots and those are deed to you. Those are your reserve spots. But on the 12th Street side, we're creating that parking for the public to use. That's our public benefit for the park, for the restaurants, for the vibrancy of downtown. That's within the obviously our hope that people will use them to go to our restaurant at night, but we're only going to be, you know, it's I I expect they'll be full all day with people going to the park. Okay. And that's within the enclosed, correct? And there's an ADA in there as well. So, that's for the public as well.

Okay. And there is not nearly enough downtown handicap parking. So, thank you. Is that a part of the strip that you just purchased from the city? Is it a part of the land that you just purchased from the city? Correct. Exactly. Correct. all of that that we just purchased from. You paid how much for that? 413,000 and change. Okay. Any more questions?

Well, I'm going to I'm going to go back. Um and and again, we'll just get it on the table. No disputing that Colin is a great member of our community and we absolutely appreciate everything that he has, you know, has done. And you know again um then we certainly I mean I certainly understand the frustration right in ter in terms of what we've got from a code and we've got you know the community canvas we've got the downtown plan that was 2019 you know a lot of different things have changed so certainly absolutely I think we all acknowledge that um my struggle I mean it's it's an absolutely nice looking building. I think that there's great benefit um in terms of what it brings. I'm I am struggling a little bit with the size um and so really want to push on this envelope that I think councelor Swintech askked is what is what is the opportunity to reduce kind of the size and the scale. So are we talking in height or overall f etc?

Just I mean it's just a I would say overall height height. Okay. Well Oh no. Yes. I mean it just again

can any project be reduced in size? Absolutely can be reduced. Oh go ahead. I just I I gotta say sorry I I I'd be remissed if I didn't say that if it was a conditional approval to lower the ceiling height three inches out of each this was brought up at planning commission. So the question but they had they were already passed their vote but they asked the question or they were in deliberations and we couldn't respond. The one of the commissioners asked could you lower your ceiling heights 3 in to make 6 in to get you and if had given the opportunity to say yes that night we would have but I think it's important to note and if you pull up the right slide we're the exact same height as Wateride Village. So yes, from the park it looks one way, but if you're coming from 11th Street, we're the exact same height as Wateride. So to me, the the plate height, it's getting missed that we're coming up. There's 4 ft of slope from 11th down to 12th. We have to come up off of that flood plane and then go up, but we still achieve the same height as the the building we're literally building wallto-all with. So in terms of that and then I think it's also important to note to your your point Gail we are within the mass of of F the 200% we're within 200% without the parking garage. So, if the parking garage was open air, we're golden. But then you have an isore, you know, the code and I don't know which plan code, whichever something somewhere says you need to cover it in active uses and you need to have an active streetscape and it needs to maintain the facade and maintain an interest with pedestrians. These are all in all of our approved documents. That's what we did. We didn't want it would have effectively looked like the garage in Howlson Place on the alley. If you can place your mind's eye driving down the alley, the open air garage in the A

building behind Cypress and Brass and Emerald Coffee. That garage is effectively what it would have looked like. Probably taller, but the same the same garage. Do you want to look at that from the park or do you want to look at a nice pretty wall? The direction that we were given was make it a pretty wall. But if you just take the nuts and bolts of the building, forget the parking, just the restaurant and the residential piece, we are at the approvable code directed 200%. We're we're 199.5. Don't quote me, but I think that's what it is. So, we're in the 200. It's only the parking that's putting us over. Mhm. That's my

actually before if you will, C President. I mean just just again maybe I think because it is continuing on that conversation you probably had with um the planning commission in terms of you know um Commissioner Adams right in terms of I think you know his comment was really that it's it's basically just about 5% too big. So I don't know if this conversation about kind of the conditional

I think that was an arbitrary number I don't because once again without the parking as soon as that wall is not there and it's an open air parking garage this is a different conversation. So, I think the 5% was completely arbitrary. Uh, you know, and like I said when I was talking the first time, you've got a lot width and one one envisioning document says build to your entire lot width and then the next thing says don't do that. Mhm. You know, I we're trying to create parking, not take it away. Every other building on Yampa has a parking variance. We don't trying to create public parking for the going to the park. You know. Yeah. Thought somebody had that.

It looks like Rebecca, are you not? You're not leaning forward. Don't go here anywhere. How How wide is the sidewalk on 12th Street? Yeah. It's 10 ft. It's 10 ft. Yeah, correct. Is that about normal on these side streets? 10 ft. That's the code requirement on the side streets is 10 ft. And as Toby stated earlier, 16 on Yampa. Okay. Okay. So I was I Colin if if you wouldn't mind come come here's I want I don't just want to go through and have that have a conversation please

and you know about the concerns I have and I I'll say up front I I feel like it is too big. I I feel like it's massive and I feel like when you look at it from water from from the water uh what was it waterfront or wateride? Wateride.

Yeah, wateride that even when you have your pictures together with it that it it's it's it looks like this massive structure compared to the wateride village. But let me let me just go through the the the um the variances and just let's let's talk through them like you know number one is the overall height and the 38 ft and you talked about um that the wateride village um but if I look at your drawings it looks like it's not the exact same height. It seems like it's it's like 6 or 12 feet higher and and so I look I look at that go well that's with the rooftop of pertinance but our plate No no no not not the pertinance just just the overall level exactly the same height

it seemed like it was a little bit higher but so can I uh have permission to share screen on Chandler Diamond I want to caution us by going back to what councelor Swintech I believe brought up earlier um about comparing to other properties. I think what we have in front of us is what we're looking at from the CDC. And so I just want to caution us by going down that rabbit hole. Bear with me. Bear I And have you gotten access yet?

Yeah, I just got it. Thank you. So, I'm going to zoom in on that specific corner. Um, so the parapits at that height right there are at the same height. In actuality, uh, part of wateride, there's parapits that actually go up above the height of our building. Okay. So, um, the deck, that's a parapit on the third floor, right? That's a front of a deck, right? So, I think Miss Caragal said earlier that, oh, well, our floor goes right to the middle of the next floor, but that's not accurate. Our floors are the same.

Yeah, it's that that's a parapit that's covering the deck. Um, you know, so we have a pretty significant setback right there. Pretty generous uh deck, outdoor living space. And then we're bringing that wall all the way forward to create a a privacy and a boundary.

I'm not going to I'm not going to challenge you on the articul articulation because actually I think you have I think the overall principle overall purpose of those is to have some articulation have some some interest in the building and and I think you've done a good job of having that interest. So I can I can set that aside and say yep that one that one's cool. And I also will will, you know, say, you know, you talk about the east side glazing. Yeah. There absolutely. I mean, you don't want glazing there. I think no one, you know, that's an easy one because you're looking into a building. Um, and the the the floor plan ratio of 200, you know, of 240% versus 200%. I I get it. I think most people get it that it's, you know, also say it's a hardship case. I mean, it's like we want parking and you you're providing parking. Awesome. you know, so I'm, you know, we're I think we're we're cool with that. So it's but there is this other other mass piece and that is that if you if you do stand at Little Tootses Park and you look at this this building, it it you know it does have this massive wall there um that's articulated because it's actually essentially four feet higher than code and people do care about height, overall height. I mean, we get complaints about the new apartments at, you know, even at Cottonwood and we get complaints about um at the apartments on on fourth on third and fourth street um that you know it's overshadowing. So people care about height and and and the mass and so the um so when it comes down to overall height or or or or the um the plate levels, it it comes down to can we reduce it a little bit. And so I am on that ca I am on that canvas of you know when I talk to a lot of builders we're we're get we're trying to get them to increase the height of their building. They're saying no no no we can't increase it for whatever reasons. Um, here we're asking you, you know, if you took a, you know, instead of having 14

feet, 12 feet, 12 feet, if you, you know, if you did 13, 11, 11, that gets you down 3 ft. You're pretty darn close to the point that the glazing one on the on the west side, the glazing issues on the west side may even just go away because you've dropped the the height and of of that building. So some of these, you know, if you drop the height a little bit, a lot of these variances just go away.

I think there's also I I met with Toby yesterday when we were resolving the item 14 issue um which was the gravel thing that I called some of you guys about about doing a parking lot there uh over the summer. Um the Toby informed us that recently the code had changed such that you can actually remove the square footage or square inches you know that your um structural components uh and correct me if I'm wrong Toby but that the structural component so like the second floor and the third floor can actually be removed from the calculus on the glazing standard and that that could actually change our math. on some of those walls as well already without changing anything. Um, and I think it's also important to note to your point about height and from the park, the JSM uh building is is still going to be taller than this because of where it starts on uh the slope. And that's before a redevelopment. If they ever come back, which they likely will, to redevelop that 12th and Lincoln parcel, it's going to sit even higher. it's going to sit higher than our than our their whole third floor would end up being above ours just based on the slope. Um, but you know, I hear you. I I uh I think we did a lot to undulate the sidewalk and do the the steel louvers to make the open air that breaks it up where the decks fall on the par like the parapits for the decks. I I don't think it's actually as big and imposing from the park as it seems. I know the number seems well that's that's a big tall wall

and I took an example of you have a little per you know people walking by in that corner and and they are you know the the windows are above their heads um on on the first first level because because you have lost four feet there um but that means that you have that wall that we don't want is additional is just fairly large

can I ask can pardon me I just want to see where we are here on this because I'm concerned that we're trying to talk about changes that we can make that might be accept acceptable uh to some of us and I think it would be nice to understand if we have a majority of this group who feel one way or the other here uh which will lead us into further discussion. I I just and if you don't think if you're not ready to do that, I understand that too. But I I kind of think a gut check as to how um each member of this council feels at this point in time, whether they're more supportive of this or in opposition to this is the way it is. And I just throw that out there to say, does that make any sense?

Yes. I just like to say that I think planning did an exceptional job going through this very complex project and coming forward with all these variances and the acceptable alternatives. I I to relitigate this project and try to get Colin to change things at this point. I don't think it is feasible for many reasons. I would like to make a motion to approve. We haven't had discussion yet. I have we haven't had any discussion. We're asking questions still. Okay. Yeah. So, no. Steve said he wanted to take a Well, I wanted to take a gut check as to how this group felt about um getting the pulse of this council versus continuing this line of questioning.

I could say I'm trying to Yeah. Yeah, you are right. I am trying to negotiate with Colin and and and the applicant to see if there's something that can make me feel more comfortable with this this project. and you and and and I'm hoping to make you know, you know, can we make it tweaks to make it better? I mean, and make it, you know, to fit into the community. So, that's what I'm trying to do here. Why would a council remand it back to planning commission? Uh the code authorizes council to remand a project to planning commission if there is uh if they uh the council can provide additional guidance to planning commission relating to code issues um that council wants uh more information on.

So I was going to actually bring that up because I don't think we should be negotiating with Colin. Um that's not our role. Um for me what's unfortunate is that planning commission was a two two vote. So we don't actually even have a recommendation from planning commission and we all sit up here and talk about how important that is to us to hear their voices and we don't have a recommendation. So if we want to negotiate or or look really look at these different variances then we make make a recommendation to send it back to planning commission

and based on that I don't is that rationale for sending it back just because they only had four people vote on it. No you'd have to make a case as to Well that's what I'm saying. I don't I haven't heard the case. I mean, we could take a vote here as to how many people would like to send it back and how many people would like to approve it as is and and we could do that.

So, I trust planning commission on these things. I I don't know spec the specific thing I'd like them to look at is the average the plate height, but also the general massing of the building. Building on what Commissioner Cruz and Commissioner um Adams had spoken about in general concerns about the size of the building. We got a skeleton crew on planning commission. It would be nice just for more discussion on that. That would be helpful for me to make this decision. I would second I mean I that's where I'm landing as well

because I agree like a lot of these variances like I don't and I that was the sense reading through their minutes as well that like I don't think any of us are disagreeing on the majority of these variances. I think there's a handful here that there's just general concern. If we have the ability to send it back to plan I would support that. Do we have any rationale at this point Dan that we've articulated that supports that? I think that what Brian just articulated is adequate to support a remand under the code provision relating to remands. Can you just repeat what that is?

There are concerns about the the the mass of this building. So I can specifically point to the plate height, but I we want more robust discussion about what is the visual impact of this building the way that it is. Can can I add something on plate height? Um, this is actually up on the screen right now is pulled from the CDC. In the, uh, CY2 zone district, the plate height and the overbuilding height are the same. Um, there are, um, zone districts that have a difference in that. Usually, they're required to be sloped roofs uh, in the down in in this particular

and it's a few inches. It's more so the big thing is is there's a lot of discussion about this is a visible corner, what's the impact on wateride, what's the impact from the park? It It's beyond. Okay. If if Dan says we have rationale to send it back to the planning commission, we can take a motion and vote on that now and move in that direction. If it passes, that's the direction. If it doesn't pass, then we're take a vote on uh approving. Okay. Is that fair?

I would like to identify specifically which variances we would like them to look at if that's okay. I'm open to your opinion. Mine I would say is the plate height would be one which is what variant that is in

me it's plate height is it's what variance though is it in it is you know the variance is um number two and number for me and also number nine which is just lot coverage. Okay number two. So yes, so um sending back um to have planning commission re-review variance request number two which is average plate height variance number nine which is lot coverage. I agree on those both.

So I'm confused as what are you thinking they're they're going to ask they're going to ask them to change change the plans? No, we're looking for a recommendation. We're looking for They gave you a recommendation. Staff gave a recommendation. Staff staff came forward with all these planning commission came back with a 22, which is a basically rejection decline, you know, you know, or or nothing, right? And sent it up here for us to make a decision. These folks have put so much time and effort into this. It's I mean, it's it's crazy that we're relitigating these codes that and the interpretation. I'm not smart enough to know it. So, I'm relying on the staff. Well, then again,

you can't rely on your planning commission, right? And well, I mean, I am too like I I get it. I understand that this is difficult, but life's tough. Like, we need more information. And it's not the code because there these are the n these are variances from the code. Let's be realistic. sending it back to planning commission and two people who were not involved before are not just going to look at two variances. They are going to look at the entire project again as well. They should if they're going to get involved. I don't see them just looking at two things. Changing two things more things in are we is that what is that what we're trying to tell them?

Let me just clarify because we keep saying the word change none of or at least I should say I am not saying change everything. I'm saying we need more discussion on this. Like I I need there needs to be more. I mean, Colin even said there was discussion of something and it got passed before I could even have it. Like I need more. If planning commission has a robust discussion, they come back and they say we now are more comfortable with this and it's a 43 vote or or like whatever. That's helpful for me. That's my point. I'm not saying come back with something completely different. I want more from planning commission. Okay. So you you don't want a two two vote. Hey, Steve. Yes, sir.

I had a question. Can I Can I have a minute?

I I'm a little confused as well. Um because I understand if if we're sitting you both Brian and and uh John you were both in planning commission before you and as was I before we got on the board of the council. You guys are are trying to redesign this guys building right now requesting some variance changes. I I I have to be surprised a little bit with as critical as I am of our staff sometimes when they went through this nine variances and we keep saying yes there it's a lot of variances that's part of the process and they come back with the approval and we're now nitpicking this for personal agendas or is it really something that we're trying to keep recreating? I'm just confused on what we're asking them to go back to our planning commission which you both have been on planning commission to do and those are not as any expert than you are sitting here in this chair. Our planning commission, planning department has given us the report and based upon the report, they have consistently reviewed this for approval. And so I know we're trying to go through this, but this last hour we're keep litigating whether we're going to force them to drop it down 6 in of floor.

And I'm just a little confused. Why are we sending this back if that's what we're going to do? Are we telling them to redesign their building? I'm confused. So when I was on planning condition a number of times we added conditions of approval and there's been cases where a couple cases I remember that we added cases of of approval where they've add you know increased the um first floor height because it was a commercial space um and so we've we've added you know so yes the answer is we have made modifications to make it more acceptable and and negotiated that with with the applicant. Okay. Okay. So, yes, Dan,

I was going to add I I've heard a number of council members tonight articulate a sort of an impression that the building is too large. And it it sounds like or what I'm hearing when I hear that is that um maybe what is desired by a remand is for planning commission to assess the cumulative effect of the height and floor area ratio and lot coverage variances. Yes. That is something you can that's a fair

yeah I think that's that's that's fair again in in terms of the accumulative effect of all of the variances and not including the wall without the you know requiring the windows on the wall where it doesn't make sense but the as it as it pertains to massing. But are we asking for specifically a vote from planning commission on this project with full attendance or are we just asking them for some comments about Yeah, I guess mass cuz I'm chime in on that one. Yeah.

Uh yeah, to be super blunt, I don't want another fourperson planning commission. If we could make it more robust and full to be really honest, I didn't think like I want more conversation. I didn't feel like it was sufficiently dug into. I want more. So yeah, I would like more. If we have another fourperson planning commission, then there's no point in sending it back. So if it comes back with a 43 vote from planning, if there's a full commission with no changes, are we going to litigate it again or are we going to say the planning department made the right decision this time? Yeah. Go with much of a what what if. Yeah, we'll cross that bridge when we get there. Yeah.

Well, I really think that's fair to the applicant. You know, if you're going to make him go back and go through the process again, you either are going to believe in the planning board this time. You'd be like, "Ah, they got it wrong this time, so we're going to send it back again." They didn't get it wrong. They they split, right? More productive conversation. Okay. I think we're going around in circles here. So,

so I think um you know, somebody can make a motion here and we'll see if we got a majority of people who want to go along with it. And it seems to me there's two motions here. You could approve the project as is, which is the recommendation from the city staff or we can send it back to the planning commission based on these couple things for further discussion and uh perspective from them. So Dan, how would we word this mo how do we need to word this motion? Well, it depends which motion you're going to make. So, it's either a motion to approve or a motion to remand for further review pursuant to the guidance. Um, which, you know, could be anything, but it sounds like you've settled on guidance.

So, I would make that motion to move it back to remand it back to the planning commission to look at all of kind of the cumulative effect of the variances as it pertains to massing and size. I just don't What is the question you're trying to answer? I second. Okay. Okay. Make your motion again. Okay. Um I made a motion to remand this back to the planning commission to look at the cumulative effect of the variances as it relates to kind of mass and size. Okay. Is that

is there any further discussion? Is there anything else that I missed in terms of from the conversation? And Dan, is that adequate? I I think that satisfies the code requirement for a remand. Yes. Then I second. Okay. So, we have a motion from councelor Gary. We have a second from councelor Augusta. Is there any more discussion?

Um just one comment. I want to be really clear from councelor Barn's comment that if it comes back um that yes, we will have a discussion around it. Um because if it comes back exactly the same, I have concerns on um specific variances. The glazing great, could care less. I mean those we get those. Um I do have concerns on some of these variances. So full transparency, I will expect to discuss it when it comes back. Well, and and it's not my intent to deny the project. My hope is that

it certainly feels like it's our intent to deny the project if we're going to put them in double jeopardy and not ask for a specific outcome from the planning department. We're asking them to reassess the mass and size. I don't know what that means. It's not the planning department. It's the planning commission and we're asking for them to review it and come back with a vote on their decision to move it forward. If you don't know what it means, I would recommend you take this time between now and then to speak to staff and others to learn what that means. Thank you.

Okay, we have a motion from councelor Gary. We have a second from councelor Augusta. All those in favor of recommending this back to the planning commission say I. I. I. Oppose say nay. Nay. Nay. Nay. Okay. Motion passes four to three. Thank you. Thank you.

Can we take a break now? Think we need a break? Probably.

All right. So, we Yeah. So, we'll take we'll get back together at um 8:35 and we only have one item left on the agenda. So, who's ever here for that? Be back here in 10 minutes. There's a lot of people

Amy, Amy. Okay, we are now we're missing councelor Augusta too. Yeah. All right, we're going to get we'll get started.

All right, we're back here and we're on to public hearing motions, resolutions, and ordinances. We're on uh one item here and that's item 12, which is the resolution upholding the planning director's decision of legal non-conforming use abandonment related to PL 202 20278 and LCSTR 2024728 and denying the associate appeal PL 2026036. Rebecca, good evening. Rebecca Bessie, planning director. Before I share my screen, um I think we need Councelor Buchino's video on. Yes. Correct.

Councelor Pacino. There you are.

Yep. Right here. Okay. Um, I'll just walk through a short presentation and then I'm happy to answer any questions. Um, as I'm pretty certain council is well aware, the STR overlay zone was adopted in 2022 and took effect June 15 of 2022. To be eligible for an STR license in overlay zone C, which is the prohibited or what's commonly referred to as the red zone, a property must have been lawfully used as a vacation rental prior to that June 152 date. We um in addition, legal non-conforming status must not be abandoned and I'll talk about that on the next slide. Um we use our STR license application and renewal process to um obtain information from applicants to um ensure that that any prior legal non-conforming status has not been abandoned be as we're issuing a new license or renewing an existing license. So there's a little bit of overlap there in process. The relevant code section for tonight's appeal is CDC section 103D. Um this is the language on the screen that's in the code that states that um legal non-conforming status of a use shall terminate immediately upon discontinuence or abandonment of the use for a period of 12 consecutive months. And then I'll draw your attention to that last line that says regardless of any intent to resume operation of the use. And I think that's really important in this particular circumstance. Um, I've tried to highlight some of the

key dates on this slide. There is more much more detail in your packet in that planning commission packet. It walks you through all of these dates. Um, but um, in short, in August of 22, the ST this property was registered by the previous owner as a legal non-conforming STR use. On August 7th of 23, we issued an STR license to the prior owner. Um, we do have documentation of the last lawful or licensed stay having um ended on April 6 of 2024. On July 12th of 24, the current property owner and the appellant in this case purchased the property. Because STR licenses do not transfer with the sale of property, that prior STR license effectively expired on July 12th of 2024. I will note though, there was only one more like one additional month left on that existing license. It was set to expire um I think on August 7th um of that year. On December 17th, over 5 months later, the appellant initiated a license application for an STR license. Um, we did send multiple reminder notices to the applicant stating that their application was incomplete and what additional information we needed from them to complete that is that that application in order to issue the license. Um, it took 98 days for us to get a complete application. Once we received all of the information that was required, we were able to issue that STR license on the same day. That was March 25th of 2025. In the transmitt of that license, we made it very clear that there was a very short time frame in order um to conduct a short-term rental

um to avoid abandonment of that legal non-conforming use. That was made very clear that um correspondence is included as an attachment to the planning commission packet. Um while that license application was pending, the property owner has reported that there were two they conducted two unlicensed stays. One occurring in January and one occurring in February of 2025. Um April 6, 2025 is the date that staff has determined that the legal non-conforming STR use was abandoned. Um, and then there was an additional stay that has been reported on February 18th of 2026. Those reported unlicensed stays that occurred in January and February of 2025 in staff's opinion does not constitute lawful STR use of the property. Those stays do not avoid abandonment of the legal non-conforming use. And when we exclude these unlawful stays, there is a period of discontinuence of the legal use for 12 plus consecutive months. Um, I do want to note um that in addition to staff's determination that those unlicensed days do not avoid abandonment um even if we were to look at that last February 2025 stay and compare that to um the next reported stay of in February of 2026 um that is greater than that 12 month abandonment period as well. So, I just wanted to point that out because that was not um clear in your packet. Um staff's opinion is that the legal non-conforming status terminated on April 6th of 2025, so that February 2026 stay was also not

lawful. um planning commission heard this appeal on March 26 and unanimously recommended upholding the denial upholding the initial decision of legal non-conforming abandonment and denial of the appeal. I believe we have received one public comment since the planning commission hearing that should be in your packet. We also received an additional letter from the appellant Miss Dis Fitz um Patrick. She did indicate to me that she was not going to be in attendance tonight, but that letter was sent after your packet was published. So, you'll find it in your the rainbow attachment for this item. I did just want to make a couple of other notes um in response to the appellants statement in both the appeal narrative as well as her additional letter. Um, per the appeal narrative, the basis for the appeal is that the record demonstrates continuous good faith use and she offers what she calls a cure for what's being described as a procedural gap. So, I want to address some of those statements. Um, it is in staff's opinion that both the statements and materials that have been provided by the appellant do not demonstrate good faith. They do um indicate that the property owner knowingly violated the city code. The appellant states that she worked promptly to complete her license application. Um you'll see in your packet that emails show communication regarding the license requirements, the continuation of legal non-conforming status of a use in the red zone. um that there was communication between city staff and the realer um and the property owner that date back to April of 2024, well before the property was purchased. Um they then per purchased the property in July of 2024, but did not reach out to city staff or initiate a license

application until December 17th of that year. As I already indicated, we did send three detailed incomplete application notices. Those are dated December 19th and December 19th of 2024, January 21, and February 25 of uh 2025. Um that application was not completed until March 25th of 2025. As I already stated, that was 98 days it took to complete that application. Um, and those missing submitt requirements up until that um, approval date included basic ownership documentation as well as contact information for the required 247 local uh, property contact. Meanwhile, the property owner has indicated that they conducted two short-term rentals prior to being issued an STR license. The first of which ended on the same day that the property owner stated in an email that they had not yet even hired a local 247 contact. So they were not operating they were operating without a license and they were also operating in violation of the basic and minimum operational requirements for a short-term rental. The property owner acknowledges that the city communicated the 12-day window to avoid legal non-conforming abandonment. um that was clear in the communication um but describes this as res resulting um from an administrative processing timeline. Again, I just want to reiterate that the timing for the license staff does not um dispute that that was a very short window. There were 12 days, I think, to conduct a short-term rental, which is why we tried to make that very clear when we issued the license so that there would be no confusion or misunderstanding later on down the road. Um, and the timing of that was not the

result of administrative processing, but rather the repeated delays in applying for the license as well as completing the application requirements. The appellent also suggests that the reported February 2026 stay was licensed and presents a cure to the abandonment issue. Um that um February 2026 stay we do not consider to be licensed. If you review the communication of city staff when we sent their license in 2025, we made it very clear that if a stay didn't occur before that April 6th date that the use would be considered abandoned and the license would automatically expire. Um we think that was clearly comm communicated. Yet, even after their license renewal was denied this February, um the property owner went ahead and conducted an additional stay on February 18th. That stay was over 22 months from the last documented lawful and licensed stay. It does not present a cure. And as I also indicated, even if we were to look at those unlicensed stays as counting towards the abandonment period, the February 20 26 day still exceeds the 12 consecutive months. um for legal non-conforming use abandonment. Lastly, I'll just note that the appellent suggests the code is intended to avoid dormant STR uses. Um our code is actually, as we found from the last item, pretty unclear in some areas. In this case, it's pretty clear. There is a very direct purpose and intent statement in that section of the code. Um and legal non-conforming um the purpose and intent of the legal non-conforming use section includes statements such as preventing reestablishment of abandoned legal non-conforming uses and also eliminating legal non-conforming uses as speedily as possible. Um that concludes my presentation. As I

mentioned, I don't believe that the appellant is in attendance um tonight, but I am happy to answer any questions to the best of my ability. Okay, Rebecca. Thank you. Does anyone have any questions for Rebecca?

Okay, hearing none, I'll open it up.

No. Yeah, let me let me ask a question here, Rebecca. Um, and I I'm just going to try to be in layman's terms as of what I think I understand happened here, uh, reading the information, but we have someone who bought a property who then lost or did not know or wasn't aware that the renewal was shortly after they had purchased the property in July. and then they, you know, went through applied for it that December or whatever and on March 25th you got them um an STR license. What I'm failing to understand is between that when the license expired to where they got a new one, were were are people expected to rent it during that time? because you're holding them accountable to a 12 month prior when common sense for me says if I lost that license I don't want to do anything to lose that and yet the requirement is they have to within 12 months have a couple of stays and yet they didn't get the license until 12 days before April. Is this does that seem inconsistent or or am I missing something in the policy?

Um, so I think what you've recapped is mostly accurate. I to clarify this particular property owner was never licensed. So it's not a matter of renewal. It's not that they missed a renewal. Um they did contact the the city staff was in contact with their realtor. There was um questions prior to purchasing the property about how to maintain um the ability for short-term rentals. We communicated how to maintain legal non-conforming status. communicated that the best avenue is to apply for a license right upon closing. Um, so this property owner was not there. It's not a matter of a missed renewal. Um, because licenses do not transfer. So this property owner was never licensed. Their first application came in the door over 5 months after they purchased the property. um and it took them 98 days to provide us with a complete application to allow the city to grant them a license to operate lawfully. So I don't believe it is a reasonable expectation that you should that um that I don't think there's a reasonable uh expectation that you should be allowed to conduct short-term rentals without a license.

Yeah. No. And that and that makes complete sense, right? The the statement you just stated makes complete sense, but it also doesn't have much common sense in the fact that they're held to this. If they would have had two legitimate stays within this period to satisfy a 12-month requirement to get the license and not have it abandoned, they would also be in non-compliance because they rented it and they don't even have a license. So, I'm confused on how we can hold them to two different standards. Am I seeing this wrong? Apologize.

I mean, the standard is to in in our community to operate a short-term rental, you must be licensed, right? Got that. To maintain legal non-conforming status, you have to have at least one stay within every 12-month period. That's a rolling 12-month period. Absolutely. So, um, so that could have been achieved. There was plenty of time to achieve that from the date of purchase of the property in July of 2024. Did they have a license then though or was it expired? They did not have a license. Where I'm missing the license doesn't transfer, Mike. The license doesn't transfer. They apply when the house was purchased.

Okay. though they had the history of the rental the last rental from the previous owner that would would started the 12-month clock. So the only I mean so it just and I apologize. Let's go into some discussion. I'm sorry guys. Oh, you're good. Michael, anything else? Michael?

Well, no. I I was just going to say that it's just interesting how um the that if that means that every property in the yellow zone, some realators think that the because there's a short-term rental on the current property that it increases the value of the property. But that's completely wrong because there is no value because anytime the property change ownership, there's no short-term rental license unless you're in the green zone.

No, that's is that correct? No, let me that's not exactly correct. So, licenses don't transfer in any zone. In the red and yellow zone, if you have either a if the property was either granted a vacation home rental permit prior to 2022, um, or if they were registered as a legal non-conforming use, those two sort of underlying eligibility factors transfer with the property. They run with the land. So, a new buyer is eligible to apply for an STR license based on that legal non-conforming status. They have to maintain it, though. They can't allow for the 12-month gap in use. They are eligible to apply even though they're in the red zone, even though they didn't have a previous license.

And the real we get, we we talk to realtors every day about that situation. So, I think that's when they're when they're advertising a property as being eligible for STR use, they're typically they're often correct in state stating that. I mean, I'm not going to say they're always correct, but okay, I think so. This specific property had a non-conforming um status and they didn't rent it within 12 consecutive months. That's what makes it unabandoned. Correct. Got it.

Okay. Keep going, Steve. Sorry. The use goes with the property, not the clock. Correct. No, I'm good. President Montene. Okay. Sorry, my mic wasn't on, Mike, while I was talking, but only the room heard me. Okay. And I got my answer question, my question. All right. Um, any other questions for Rebecca?

Actually, I want to say, you know, thank you, Rebecca, because usually when I have these cases in front of me, I'm I'm complaining that we have not documented things and we're not communicating to to the um uh to the owners. In this case, before they purchased this property, they had communications and FAQs and discussions with their realtor. And so this case, they had all the information upfront and and and well documented. So, um, so thank you.

Okay. Any other questions for Rebecca? If not, we'll open it up to All right. The applicant is not here, right, Rebecca? Or online? No, I don't see any. Okay, we'll open it up to public comment. Come on down, sir. And that's you. Um, state your name and address, please.

Michael, excuse me. Michael Fitzpatrick, 3603 Lincoln. Uh, I'm the father of the, uh, applicant and, um, uh, I was asked, you know, by her to help. So, I'm the father asked by the daughter to help. I'm here. Uh, I guess, you know, my head is spinning. I I don't quite follow all that dates and stuff. I'm almost 75 years old and I'm starting to lose it. But uh I can I can add a few things here. I guess uh I'm going to ask you that uh we can throw ourselves on the mercy of the court uh so to speak. Uh I know I followed this quite closely with my daughter. She didn't ask me to get involved, but I know that she was not well informed by her broker who's left town, so we can't speak with her. Um, and uh, my son-in-law, who's a pretty bright guy, uh, said that he just the other day that he was confused through the whole thing. Uh, and I guess what I'm here to to say is, uh, my daughter who's a medical doctor, she's a a path research pathologist. She she's not a rule breaker. Uh, she's a stickler. Uh, you know, she wants to keep her medical license. She wants to keep her reputation. So, I don't think that anything that happened here was intentional on her part. uh you know you know I I know the old adage durex said lex but you know notwithstanding that uh there is another aspect here and this probably falls into the category of a hardship request and that is when they bought that property uh the value component of the STR license was significant and they knew it

and they bought in a three unit townhouse. the other two have STRs and they're actively pursuing their use. Uh, and I advised them to consider whether they wanted to live in a building that had this, you know, restriction on it. They said, "Well, we can, we've been told by the broker we can keep it, you know, going, you know, by uh, you know, doing a couple rentals a year." So, that's all they knew. Uh I'm a former uh MAI appraiser. After I left the service, uh I was became an appraiser like my grandfather. And uh I can tell you that they could possibly have uh almost uh a third less in value when they resold this property. Uh and they just tried to get on the property ladder. They they put their life savings as the down payment. And if they aren't able to retain this license when they go to sell it, which they could very well do pretty quickly because they're being driven crazy by the other short-term uses, uh they could end up, you know, losing their life savings. So, this is a hardship thing and hopefully you'll see your way clear to allowing them to redeem themselves. Under Colorado law, even if this had been a taking uh for non-payment of taxes, they would have three years to redeem. You know, if it had gone to a tax sale and this about a third of the value could be taken away by the uh the failure to give them a chance to renew this license. So, I thank you for your time.

Okay. Thank you. Okay.

I see no other public comment online and I don't see anyone else in the room. So, we will close public comment and bring it back to council for deliberation or a motion. I would say that this is pretty clear and I feel bad for your daughter that the real estate agent um was not helpful or forthcomming in the process. Um I think we've worked really hard to have a consistent um process for short-term rentals. And so I think um what our um planning department director presented um unfortunately for your daughter makes the case um to deny the appeal. Any other comments?

Okay, I will take a motion. I'll make a motion to uphold the planning commission recoming commission director's recommendation. Hang on. To up the pling the recommendation to uphold the director's decision and deny the appeal. Okay. Is that clear? Yes. We have a motion from councel Gary. Do we have a second? I I'll second. Second from councelor Dixon. Any other comments, discussion? If not, I'll ask the question. All those in favor say I. I I opposed. No.

Okay. Motion passes six to one. Thank you. I say this is the part of the job I hate. Yes. Yeah. Okay. City attorney's report. Dan, do we have one? No report tonight. Okay. Okay, then that just leaves approval of the minutes from the March 3rd and March 10th regular meetings and as well as the March 10th work session. So, do we have uh any questions, comments or I'll take a motion to approve those three. President, did you There's March 17th as well. March 17th. Oh, yeah. I missed that. Sorry. To approve those.

All right. I'll make a motion, if there's no discussion, to approve the regular meeting March 3rd, March 10th, work session March 10th, and the regular meeting March 17th, um, 2026 meeting minutes. We have a motion from councelor Gary. Do we have a second? Second. Second from councelor Dixon. All those in favor say I. I. I. Opposed? Motion passes 70. Is there any other business for tonight? If not, thank you all for being here and have a good rest of your week. Move to adjourn. See you tomorrow morning. Right. Yes. Motion to adjourn. Okay. To adjourn. Yep. All those in favor say I. I. We're adjourned.

Bye, Michael. Good night, everybody. Good night, Michael. We got you in bed before midnight there. Happy grim. Pointing the wrong direction. I'll see you tomorrow.