Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

[Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music]

[Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music]

[Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] What do you do? [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music]

[Music] [Music] [Music] The time is 6:59. We will call our meeting to order in one minute. Good evening. Welcome to the August 12th, 2025 meeting of the Westminster Planning Commission. I'd like to call the meeting to order.

With the absence of our chair and vice chair this evening, our five planning commission board members that are in attendance will be voting on an acting chair for this evening. At this time, I'd like to ask the commission for a motion and a nominee on an acting chair for the evening. Sorry. Let me call roll, please. Thank you, Greg. Commissioner Peg, here. Commissioner Conir, here. Commissioner Mayo, here. Commissioner Jeang here. Commissioner Dunn here. Commissioner Calling excused. Absent. Uh, Chair Bosert excuse. Vice Chair Carpenter.

Excuse. Commissioner Tomichek. Excuse. Thank you. May I have a nomination, please? Um, I move that the planning commission uh nominate Richard Mayor Mayo to serve as the acting chair for this um hearing. Do we have a second? I second the motion. Any discussion? Any other nominations? With no other nominations, I'll call the question commission. You can just Okay. All those in favor of Commissioner Mayo acting chair this evening say I.

I. All those not in favor? Motion passes. Commissioner Mayo, would you please join us in the middle as acting chair?

You got it. Commissioner Mayo on your script. We're on number five. If that helps you. Okay. Anyone who would like to speak who hasn't signed the list in the back, please do so. Um number six, you've already called the role. Yes, please move on.

Okay, we have a quorum present at this time with consideration of the minutes for the last meeting. So move second. All in favor say I. I. I. I.

All oppose say nay. Passed unanimously. At this time I'd like to open the public hearing. We have one item on the agenda tonight. 3A public hearing and recommendation of the three comprehensive plan amendments, a resoning and a preliminary development plan for a 75.5 acre parcel located east of US 36 and Westminster Boulevard south of 104th Avenue and west of Waverly Acres Planned Unit development. I hereby open the public hearing. Um, Mr. Lawrence, you ready? Turn this on. Okay. Thank you. Good evening, commissioners. My name is Nathan Lawrence, senior planner with the city's planning division. As part of as part of bringing you this project, this project before you, a staff agenda memo has been created. Um, tonight's public hearing has been properly noticed. the agenda memo, its associated attachments, tonight's PowerPoint presentation, the public notices published in the Westminster window. The mailed notices and the posted notices are hereby entered into the public record at this time. The notices of the hearing were mailed

to 994 property owners, tenants, and HOAs within 1,000 ft of the parcel under consideration tonight. Five public notification signs were posted on the property in both English and Spanish. The city has also posted the hearing date and time on its website. The 75 12 acres uh subject property is located on the 74 acre northern portion of the Han Hewitt property that's located east of Westminster Boulevard, south of West 104th Avenue, west of Waverly Acres PUD and north of the city's future water treatment facility. Um it's outlined in red. Just to the north of the larger parcel is the 1 and a half acre um uh tract of open space that's that's going to be referred to going forward as track A. It's low it's located directly adjacent to the north side of the Honu property and south of West 104th Avenue. On the left side on the left side of this slide, you will see that a majority of the Honua property is currently designated as employment flex with a small portion in the northwest quadrant across Big Drag Creek along Westminster Boulevard designated commercial and it's shown in red. Track day to the to the north of the Han property is currently designated uh uh in the color uh green as open space. On the right side, you'll see that the that um a majority of this subject property is proposed by the the applicant to be redesated as urban multif family to to facilitate the construction development of a continuing care retirement community or a CCRC. If approved, track day A would be

ultimately incorporated into the development parcel and re designated as urban multif family. You can see that on the right. Uh the portion of private property along either side of Big Dry Creek, including the former commercial designated parcel, is proposed to be donated as PLLD and would be redd designated as open space. Uh the dashed black line represents basically the ultimate condition that of of the the the the new property line around this the CCRC site. Section 11521 of the Westminster Municipal Code contains 10 criteria that are to be considered when reviewing land use plan amendments. that these cover compliance with city regulations and policies, analysis of planning and and impacts on surrounding communities, site constraints and impacts on existing infrastructure. Staff has analyzed the applicant's proposal and has grouped their findings into three um points of analysis. The first is a consideration of housing versus employment. the existing employment flex land use designation would encourage growth um of employment in line with the comp plan's managed growth plan cornerstone. However, the the comprehensive plan also encourages a mix of housing opportunities to accommodate a wide range of age groups and lifestyle choices and the provision of housing options that allow seniors to age in place. the the proposed CCRC at completion would increase the number of independent senior uh units in the city by by more than 140%. However, at the same time, the the result would be a loss of um the largest remaining employment site that that has high v visibility access to the

the US 36 corridor. Um while while the recent housing needs assessment identifies the need for a continuum of care ranging from independent senior living to assisted living to senior housing, it specifically calls out affordable senior housing as one of the city's largest needs. The the proposed CCRC would not be considered affordable, though it could be argued that housing in other parts of the city may become available as residents choose to move to the CCRC. Number two, the the city's comprehensive plan lays out a vision for the church focus area that that the subject property lies directly in side of the map on this slide shows the framework plan for the focus area. This is one of five areas of the city anticipated to have the most potential for growth and change over the next two decades. The plan specifically calls out, and I quote, "Employment generating land uses at the Han property with with a degree of local serving retail would further support the the vision of the the focus area." End quote. Um, with multif family, the designation to be located um along US 36 north of Church Ranch Boulevard in an anticipation of future commuter rail service. The proposed CCRC location is not close enough for residents to walk to the existing Flat Iron Flyer station or future commuter rail station, but is relatively close to neighborhood retail and services around the pro the prominade commercial district to the northwest of the site. Under the urban multif family land use the designation development characteristics included include a a grided street system, engaged street orientation, access to

community parks, trails and o open spaces and and predominantly structured parking. The proposed CCRC site is not gritted in a traditional sense and buildings do not engage the street as envisioned by the comp plan. However, there is a high degree of internal pedestrian connectivity and connectivity for the CCRC residents to surrounding open space and to city park to the north. The public roadway should um is shown here. You can see it in blue with a couple arrows pointing to it. um as as envisioned by the comp plan um is proposed to be constructed by the project developer and and it would connect basically as shown um in in the comp plan from Westminster Boulevard to West 104th Avenue. Um and and the project is proposed to feature a combination of structured and surface parking. Impacts from proposed development has been have been analyzed by staff at a high level based on general assumptions surrounding the applicant's proposed land use changes. Traffic and drainage impacts can be mitigated effectively with the installation of required infrastructure. Water and sewer infrastructure um have been analyzed and and are deemed to be adequate to serve the the proposed project. Um but there will be an increase in water demand from the proposed change in designation. Um and that's based on early analysis um somewhere ranging between 117 and 370% of what was was estimated with the current flex um employment um designation. Both fire and and police service is

expected to be impacted compared um to an uh a comparably sized employment use with an additional 800 to 900 calls for service for fire service and anticipated impacts on police service including operations response, community engagement and investigation resources. Under the applicant's senior housing proposal, the city would receive both physical PLLD or public land dedication and a PLLD fee in LOW. The city would would also collect park development fees in that scenario. In contrast, an employment flex designation does not require any PLLD. However, the land currently designated as flood plane uh through this site would remain undeveloped and preserved in its natural state and additional stream buffers would be requested to facilitate future stream bank restoration. The proposed change would also result in an increase in demand on parks, recreation, and libraries um particularly for senior focused programs and accessible facilities. Uh from an economic development perspective, staff worked with the University of Colorado to analyze the economic impact from the proposed land use change. The CCRC was analyzed versus compare comparable size office and flex commercial development uh scenarios and and concluded that the highest and best use of this land would be for for office employment followed by a flex commercial scenario um and then the Ericson senior living uh CCRC proposal. However, however, the the um the comparable large-scale office developments in envisioned and used in the analysis are un unlikely to materialize in the near term due to to

market conditions. Preliminary analysis of the city's general fund general revenue revealed that the CCRC pro project is expected to represent around $850 million in private investment and is currently proposed would have a minor positive impact on Westminster sales use and property tax. a senior a senior living facility would contribute um essentially no sales tax as there are no there are currently no plans for retail activity on the on the site. A comparably sized employment flex development would be expected to generate approximately 30% more in general fund revenue. Um here's a slide showing the resoning uh scenario before and after. A majority of of the property is proposed uh to be reszoned from 01 to PUD. Um it's currently zoned 01 as you can see on on the left and would transition to to to PUB if um if approved. Um, a majority of the the portions of land along the Big Dry Creek are called out here um with a green hatch would be donated to the city as physical public land dedication. Oops. A majority of the I'm sorry section 11514 of the Westminster Munipal code contains 10 criteria that are to be considered when reviewing resonings and preliminary development plans. These include compliance with the comprehensive plan, sound planning, compatibility with surrounding context, circulation and access and performance centers related to site design and architecture.

the the the PDPM amendment generally conforms to the density, height, and allowable land uses of of the proposed urban multif family comprehensive plan land use designation. However, the the proposed CCRC has more of a campus-like layout with curve linear streets. Given that the site is surrounded by open space corridors, um a drinking a future drinking water facility and major arterials, consideration may be given for alternative site configurations during the future ODP review. The applicant is is requesting the ability to um for partial waiverss to permitting fees and partial rebates of construction use tax through um the amen the mechanisms that are outlined in the PDP. Any such reductions would would require city council approval. The PDP exhibits sound planning principles as it concentrates dense residential development along arterial corridors and near commercial uses, existing parks and open space. The applicant is requesting one exception from the design standards and that's to reduce the minimum building setback from private streets and drives from 25 ft to 15 ft to accommodate fire access. And staff is supportive of this one exception. A prairie style um expression is proposed for the CCRC buildings to tie the project into the surrounding architectural styles. Um the only directly impacted residential property is the Waverly Acres Subdivision to the east of the site. views of of the mountains from the homes homes um will be partially blocked or completely blocked depending on on on the site given the proposed 65 ft maximum building height outlined in the PDP. It should be noted that views from private property are not protected by the the

city's municipal code or the comprehensive plan. The Waverly Waverly Acres Park provides um a horizontal buffer from the project site and the PDP establishes a 130 foot building setback along the eastern property line. The applicant has also established um a height sensitivity zone uh spanning 400 ft from the eastern property line where no buildings will be allowed to exceed four stories. The property will be accessed from two points off of a new public street that spans from Westminster Boulevard to West 104th Avenue. This new street was required in order to improve access from emergency services and to improve access to city park and the local street network. In addition to the rightway that will be dedicated for the new for the new street, the city is requiring also requiring dedication of rightaway along uh the property's Westminster Boulevard frontage to add additional lanes in line with the city's improvement plans for that corridor. Connection points for bicycles and pedestrians have been located on the northeast and west sides to provide direct connections to Big Dry Creek, Waverly Acres, uh park, and city park. A neighborhood meeting was held at the Butterfly Pavilion on August 20th of last year. Um, at that meeting, questions were raised by community attendees related to impacts of the development on their mountain views, uh, property values, uh, concerns over price of of the proposed rents, impacts on emergency services and first responders, concerns over impacts to the existing eagle populations, and how development might push existing prairie dog populations into adjacent uh, uh, properties. impacts and also impacts um to Waverly Acres neighborhood from

construction activity. Um and just a general comment of how the how Westminster and Denver region um are in need of low to middle income housing rather than the type of housing that that's being proposed with this CCRC project. Staff recommends that the planning commission hold a public hearing and recommend the city council approve the comprehensive plan amendments, resoning, and PDP. Steph finds that a recommendation of approval of the applications would meet the city's strategic plan priorities of access to opportunity and economic vitality, but by facilitating the construction of new and and diverse housing opportunities. Um the applicant is here with us tonight and we'll share their presentation with you next. Uh thank you very much for your attention. There's a a lot of staff here so when you have questions after their presentation um please feel free to ask. Thank you.

Thank you. Looks like the applicant's ready to go. Good evening, Mr. Chair, commissioners. Thank you very much for this opportunity. My name is Marcus Pochner. I'm a land use and community outreach consultant to Ericson Senior Living. Um I will start by saying we have additional letters of support that we wanted to be sure and add to the record. So with your permission, I'm just going to turn them to the clerk to pass out for the Thank you.

Are those in addition to the ones that we received a few hours ago? They are. Yes, I believe they are. In addition, I'm going to just uh point out maybe to all of you that this screen is not showing. So, we're not seeing the screen. I don't know if I've done something wrong, but Marcus, this one here. Yeah, this one. Okay. The one on the other side of the room number four is Oh, we got it. Thank you, Curtis.

Perfect. Thank you very much. Ladies and gentlemen, I want to thank Nathan uh for that great staff report. I want to start today by saying that we are giving a comprehensive introduction to Ericson to the full plan to the background of what brought us to Westminster and then really focus on the comprehensive plan and the PDP resoning. Uh we believe this is a transformational opportunity for Westminster for both the city and from a regional perspective. This immediately provides and addresses not only senior housing but senior care and economic development. We actually think this is a remarkable economic development tool and we will talk in great detail about that. Before we transition and actually introduce Ericson, I just want to note that the full team is here. Norris design our planning firm, Smith Group Architecture, Harris Coker Smith engineering, traffic as well, Aquasan water consultants, our firm and CRL have been focused on stakeholder and community integration. We have done 2 and 1/2 years of community outreach and have integrated those comments into our plan. Uh this site which is described earlier is probably a site that almost all of us know by driving by, by walking by, going to the city center or on Big Dry Creek. It is one of the most pivotal sites remaining in Westminster and has been available for development for 25 plus years. Um it is an important site that is surrounded by multimodal open space and really anchors the opportunity triangles of downtown the prominade and really all the growth that's around it. It is an incredibly important site for infrastructure multimodal importance and also bringing together really community-based infrastructure here. So we look forward to describing and talking about how we have looked at this site and brought all of those elements to the to the plan. We are going to actually have Maryanne uh Navaro say a few words about Ericson and then we are going to play a video to basically try

to capture a little bit of the overall introduction and what is Ericson, how it works, how the community works and an overall snapshot of the community. Maryanne,

good evening. Thank you chairperson, members of the planning commission and staff. I am Maryann Navaro, director of entitlements representing Ericson Senior Living. This evening I'm also joined by Steve Montgomery, vice president of development at Ericson Senior Living and Kathy Diller who is our associate executive director at Win our Windrest community. It is good to be here again tonight at city hall. Ericson is excited to have reached this important stage of the public process. We have been working with staff and community stakeholders in pursuit of becoming a permanent member of the Westminster community over the last few years. Ericson was founded in 1983 and we are headquartered on the campus of our very first community, Charles Town, just outside of Baltimore, Maryland. Since then, we have become the fourth largest senior living provider in the country and now number 25 communities in 11 states. We have grown to over 30,000 residents and 15,000 employees, including over 2100 residents and over 900 employees at our Windrest community to the south in Douglas County. It is important to note that Ericson is a long-term owner, manager, and operator of our communities, and we become a permanent part of the fabric of the larger neighborhoods where we reside. We look forward to bringing our continuing care retirement community lifestyle to even more seniors here in Westminster. As Marcus mentioned, we're going to take a minute to watch a video uh to share more information about Ericson and our proposed community here in Westminster. Um and then we'll continue on with the presentation. Please play the video. Ericson Senior Living is proud to

propose a new continuing care retirement community or CCRC in the city of Westminster. This thoughtfully designed campus will offer a full continuum of lifestyle and healthc care services in one campus setting. Unlike traditional senior housing, this Ericson community will include independent living as well as higher levels of care, including assisted living, memory care, and skilled nursing. all available on site to support residents as their needs evolve. These levels of care as well as additional inhome support are available as the residents needs change. 247 access to health care is a key component of the Ericson model. The community will feature a medical center staffed by full-time Ericson Health Medical Group providers, an on-site pharmacy, and a dedicated care team focused on integrated health and well-being. Ericson's Westminster community will be more than a place to live. It will be a vibrant mixeduse community. Amenities will include contemporary dining venues, a state-of-the-art indoor fitness center and pool, transportation shuttle services to local and regional destinations, life enrichment and media spaces, educational opportunities, and more than 100 residentled clubs and groups, all closely connected with the greater Westminster community. The community will also serve as a major local employer, generating hundreds of full-time and part-time jobs across health care, hospitality, administration, and operations, creating meaningful career paths for Westminster residents. The impact extends well beyond the campus. Ericson partners with local workforce development providers, including local nursing schools like at Front Range Community College, and offers employment for high school students along with resident funded scholarships to support employee education. Residents are also active volunteers in local libraries, schools, parks, and nonprofits throughout the region. By serving local seniors within the community with new housing options,

their existing single family homes become available for younger families to occupy. A timely benefit for Westminster as housing demand continues to grow. CCRC's lower impact on local places by design. Ericson communities generate less traffic than typical residential developments. And with robust on-site safety and security protocols, more than 85% of emergency medical calls are managed internally across Ericson communities, reducing strain on Westminster Municipal Emergency Medical and Public Safety Services. The proposed site sits along US 36 and West 104th Avenue adjacent to the butterfly pavilion with direct access to city park, the Westminster Prominade and surrounding trails. Preliminary design concepts show highquality architecture, natural buffers from surrounding neighborhoods, and beautifully landscaped outdoor spaces that blend into the local environment. Residential options will include modern residences designed for comfort and convenience. Shared spaces and outdoor amenities will promote connection, wellness, and an active lifestyle. Environmental stewardship is a component to the Ericson campus style approach. Each community incorporates sustainable development practices and thoughtful land use principles to minimize environmental impact. Ericson's Westminster community will be far more than senior housing. It will be a fully integrated continuing care retirement community deeply connected to the broader Westminster area and contributing long-term economic, social, and health benefits to the region. I um I just want to take a second just to talk a little bit about what is a continuing care retirement community because we have um used that term a lot

in the video and in our our remarks um so far um and how how we distinguish a CCRC from other senior living options uh you may be familiar with. I I think the most important thing to know is that a CCRC provides or continuing care retirement community provides a continuum of care to residents including independent living, memory care, assisted living and skilled nursing, as well as a range of health, housing, and security and other services to meet any changing needs of the residents. And that's all under a single contract agreement for the remainder of our resident's life in exchange for a fee. While it varies by state, in Colorado, CCRC's are licensed as a life care institution under the Life Care Institutions Act and regulated by the Colorado Division of Financial Services. In addition, each care setting within the CCRC is also subject to its own set of regulatory standards. I'm going to turn it over to the rest of the team and um look forward to answering any questions. Thanks, Maryann. I think we've provided kind of a larger overview, a viewpoint framework for the proposal. Just want to focus on a few key components of the plan. Uh first of all, why Westminster? We think this is a remarkable opportunity to allow our aging population to stay home in Westminster. I would draw you to the fourth uh bullet, a central location, but this really is a full housing opportunity, a spectrum. We allow as seniors move out of their existing households, we free up housing stock and allow younger families, younger members of the community to buy that housing stock. It is a remarkable supplier and turnover in the housing market and we think really impacts the overall housing market, not

just senior housing. We started planning this site, this was our concept review presentation to city council back in December of 2023. We have spent the last 20 months taking those comments and stakeholder comments and integrating them into this plan. There was incredible support for the muchneeded senior housing that is before you. There was focus on and protection of really uh proper view corridors from Waverly Creek, our neighbors to the east, that secondary access point. This plan that you're seeing is what was presented. It is completely changed because of that access point now providing uh a very important roadway connection along our boundary that really helps the overall city structure and infrastructure on this area. We have very low utility impact and we have evaluated the service impact from the other agencies in the city. The other part that we did is really work on a full community framework. We use a community or a concentric outreach philosophy where we work with the most adjacent neighbors. We did three full neighborhood meetings that were noticed to everyone who received notice tonight. Three different open house meetings working with Waverly Acres, Seer Gardens, now Wilder Ranch and the planners there, the plan that was developed and also working with other stakeholders in the area. then transitioning chamber of commerce, business organizations, housing organizations, and then certainly both Jeffco and Adams County EDC's to really understand the regional impact and how to help provide housing and housing senior care. This is a snapshot of really the lifestyle that we are trying to bring and provide for Westminster residents. It really captures the life and the integration, the continued evolution for the seniors that live in this facility. I would just say one thing I want to be sure and point out is the on-site health services that are provided here. That means an integrated

health care. There was a site a survey or a number that was shared about calls for service from our facility. 87% of those calls are handled on site. That is the importance of the continuum of care and the protocols that we have in place to provide health services and skilled nursing, memory care, and assisted living. um in a day and age where we struggle with health care and understand that very much all of us. This is a very planned uh system and a way that we work with all of our residents to provide that service. I want to address dramatically the economic and community impact. Uh there were comments made about the change from employment flex to urban multifamily. Uh this is an immediate economic impact engine. This is some of the uh material what manifests right away. This is no enrollment in the school district, but a annually generates almost $700,000. We driven scholarships, all of the things, these 1,500 potential residents that would be here, their uh $187 million in disposable income leads to a remarkable sales tax increase at the prominade and area businesses. We have full support of the butterfly pavilion. probably the best thing we are going to do is provide remarkable volunteers and support and really try to keep that facility that civic icon here in Westminster. Just to show the second part of that, the workforce development when we are fully built out, we will be the fifth largest employer in Westminster. That is economic impact. That is immediate and bringing that there. 700 jobs to be created at full buildout. In addition to that, that's not construction jobs. nearly 1,500 construction jobs. This is a remarkable economic engine and not a theoretical employment flex that may develop over time. Staff was very fair. We don't think that emerges in the near term in the employment flex. This

transition actually brings forward that economic footprint and economic investment uh as soon as the plan is allowed to move forward. Local housing demand. I'll probably wrap up here. I just want to give the reality that in by 2040 in Westminster, one in four residents will be 65 plus. Uh both Jeffco and Adams are seeing remarkable growth in the senior population. More people growing over 65 than to age 18. The state demographer has said this is the number one housing typology we need in Colorado is senior housing. Without question, not even a comparable. more than affordable housing is senior housing because we don't have the way to age in place and keep seniors in our own community. Folks, this is a little bit of the snapshot of supporters, um, partners, economic and community impact because these agencies understand how important it is to grow workforce, to grow community, and provide for our seniors from a housing and a care standpoint. Uh, I'm going to turn it over to Norris to Jared. He's going to talk a little bit with all of those elements. How does this come to rest on the land? What does our plan look like? Uh Jared will walk through our plan and then we'll transition to the approval criteria. Jared.

Thank you, Marcus. Good evening, commissioners. Um thank you for your time this morning. I'll try to move quickly through this stuff. Um I know there's a lot to this. I'm Jared with Norris Design. Um and uh I'm going to cover some of the land planning and amenity pieces of the of the community. Um to jump right in, our site's right there. It's outlined in black. Um it's not open space today. It's never intended to be open space. It's a wonderful property, the Han property. And we're excited about all the opportunities. And at this zoomed out level, you can see a lot of those a lot of the great um trail connections that are in the area um and all the um open space and park amenities within the city. And it's ideal for a senior housing continuing care retirement campus like this. Um, and we're excited to integrate into all of that. Um, there's also going to be additional open space that we're going to integrate as Nathan walked through. Um, that we'll show you here on this next slide. This is kind of our our bubble plan for lack of a better term. Um, and that starts to show um, you know, kind of the how and why the site could be arranged the way that it is. Overall, it's a little over 75 acres as Nathan walked through. Over 10 acres of public land dedication there on the west side in the dark green. Um, and that's being dedicated because it's being because because of the urban multifamily comp plan designation um that wouldn't be required and under other comp plan designations. Um, the creek side um drive rightway would will be dedicated along Big Dry Creek there. Um, so that kind of is on the on the northwest side. There's an 11 acre um view shed in the light green that is protected without buildings um to pro preserve those views of the mountains and Longs Peak. Um there's another 11 acres or so height sensitivity zone that that's limiting that four stories. That's that kind of blue grayish on the east side of the site. Limiting to four stories um where the rest of the site is at 65 ft. Um and then the rest of it is, you know, there's a view quarter through it, but the rest of it is an unrestricted buildable area, but it's not really

unrestricted at all. It's restricted by all of the things. um in the PDP. The stuff like building height, parking, architectural standards, all those things that are in the design standards in the PDP. Um here's a little bit more zoomed in of the site and the current conceptual site plan that we have um kind of right now that's you know um in flux um and how we might be able to accommodate the continuing care campus. The site um is in part organized by those two access points, one on 104th um and one on Westminster Boulevard. and jumping right into traffic. You know, this is a lower impact use um than multifamily, generating less trips per um than other more intense multif family uses. There's generally a lower traffic demand from the residents that are going to live here as they don't drive as much. They use the Ericson provided shuttles extensively, and there's an opportunity for employees to take public transportation along US 36 about a 10-minute walk there. Um there's going to be about 13 um 150 independent living units ranging in price with a maximum of about two people per household um as a max. There's also 135 proposed assisted memory um care and u me assisted living, memory care, and skilled nursing um beds. Um there the future ODPS that we're going to be in front of you will bring forward a lot of these details. But in summary of those, there's going to be all kinds of opportunities for different types of dining, medical services that we've gone over, including exam rooms,armacies, etc. All kinds of amenities like a library, a day spa, salon, theater are also part of the campus. Um outdoor um activity spaces will include um our other indoor activity spaces will include wellness care, art rooms, class other classrooms, game rooms, clubs, meeting areas, social gather gatherings,

etc., etc. It's extensive and impressive as you walk through the other campuses. Um, active recreation amenities include a fitness center, a swimming pool, botchi ball, pickle ball ports, courts that are so popular like and and that book up really quickly. Passive recreation spaces include walking pass all through the site all over the place, gardens, tons of outdoor seating, lounge areas with fire pits, rooftop decks, an amphitheater, dog park, etc. Really is a fun place to live. Um, finally, you can see on on this the large natural buffer between Ericson um community and the Waverly Acres neighbor neighborhood to the east. It's actually more than 500 ft um at its closest point building to building. So very very good natural buffer and you get a better idea of the view corridor here. Um um as you can see on in green um the view shed also the height sensitivity areas on this graphic and that was all really planned really specifically with input from the neighborhood and working with the city of Westminster planning staff. Next, here's a graphic showing the wonderful existing trail network um and the surrounding network of the site and the the ways that Ericson's going to work closely with the city to tie into those networks and those amenities. We'll also be providing a 10-foot wide multimotal trail that's shown in that green kind of loop around the around the graphic there on the site. Um that'll consist of a bike lane and and a pedestrian walking area um around the perimeter with multiple access points to all the wonderful Westminster trails. Um, this is a really great example of outside in planning. Um, and then just real quickly, you know, we're here for the comprehensive plan amendments this evening and then also the reasonzoning and the preliminary plan development plan, but we'll be here in front of you a lot to talk about the ODPs and the very specific design of the CCRC. Just a couple more for me and I'll turn it back over. Um some of the other

benefits from from the Ericson community include um 25 acres of PLLD um which of we're providing over 10 acres um of physical land dedication to the city um to sort of complete that big dry creek area plus cash in loo um and if you do the math with some of the stuff that's in the flood plane that's about um almost 20 acres of cash and loo totaling over $15 million. is such a good thing for the city of Westminster. In addition, we're going to build Creek Side Drive, dedicate the land for Creekide Drive, build Creekide Creek Side Drive, and also build install the traffic signal on 104th, all part of the comp plan, but another $4.5 million plus benefit to the city. And then the the graphic on the right is actually well under um what the actual impact fees are, but the total impact fees are much higher than that. Um, if you include all the development fees, tap fees, public land education, um, improvements and extraordinary costs, we're about $58 million in fees to the city of Westminster, which is a a great benefit to the city at about $43,000 per independent living unit. So, um, we think it's just a good thing for everybody involved. And finally on this last uh going to close with water usage um and then we'll turn it back over and we're close to the end of the presentation in general. But Ericson historically has done everything they can um to reduce water use um internally to the buildings and also with Zerich landscape design and they will do this with this community as well. This is a lower impact of use when it comes to water, less people per unit um than multif family generally and also incorporating that at Zurich landscaping and this is in line with the values that we feel like that we've heard really clearly from the city. In fact, we're about 271 acre feet of water savings when compared to the 2013 comprehensive plan. That's more than a 50% reduction of what was previously designated um and exceeds the median water reduction goal for the property. So with that, I'm going to hand it over to Andy Peters

with Auten Johnson to cover some of the approval criteria. Good evening, chair, members of the commission. I'm Andy Peters. I'm land use council for Ericson. Um just wanted to speak briefly about approval criteria. We had a great presentation from Nathan before, but um I wanted to speak to both where we are, why we're here with a comp plan amendment, and then just touch on a couple highlights with respect to that comp plan amendment. Um, you might be wondering why after going through the comp plan process recently that the city is looking at a comp plan amendment for this property. And I'll let you know that Ericson had been involved in that earlier comp plan process. Um, and we had received direction from the city that it would be better if instead of changing the site at that time if we proposed that in connection with an actual development or a development proposal that the city could take a look at. So that's why we're here now looking at a comp plan amendment for this property as opposed to you know back when the city was going through the comp plan process a couple years ago. Um with respect to the comp plan amendment in particular too I just wanted to highlight a couple things about this. So in connection with the city's vision, the goals and the comp plan. Um so the comp plan is very clear um about uh and goal HN4 for instance about creating a continuum of care, creating opportunities for people to age in place in senior living. Um additionally, even though we're changing from the employment flex designation to the urban multif family designation, there's still that employment goal, that ER5 goal in the comp plan to create employment. And as you heard from uh the team earlier, this is going to be a real job generator at the site too. So just because it's not employment flex doesn't mean that the city is losing employment in terms of its goal. It's actually growing employment as a result of of this change. And then you heard too in terms of the substantial need for uh comp plan amendments at this site. That need as

identified in the housing needs assessment for assisted living, for memory care, for senior housing options. this delivers on that in a way that employment flex really isn't going to allow the site to do. So, this is we think meeting those goals at a high level. Um, and you have in your packet, I don't want to give a short trip to this, but you have in your agenda packet our thorough analysis of every single one of the approval criterion. I don't want to take up, you know, half an hour of your time on that tonight, but we did go through each one of those with respect to both the comp plan amendments and with respect to the PUD and the PDP criteria. So you have those in your packets and we're happy to answer questions about them too. Um the other thing we did is we worked really closely with staff because this is a big project. Um and it's a project that can unfold over a number of years. So there's a vested rights section in the PDP where we worked with staff and we worked with the city attorney's office to say let's just make sure that we in the city are clear on the rules that are going to govern this project going forward. So we worked collaborative or collaboratively on this. we came up with some language that works together and assures that both the city and Ericson know how this is going to play out over the years. So there's a piece about the comp plan and then just a piece about the uh the PDP ultimately governing on this and we really appreciated the city's willingness to work and just sort of create that clarity around expectations. So when you see that just know that that's what that part is doing too and I'll turn it back over to Marcus about benefits.

Great. We will close with our last three slides here. I do want to just say when we say Westminster benefits here, I want to be very clear that means the community, this great community, the neighborhood benefits, all of the things that we believe this proposal brings. I think again talking about the impact on the local housing market, the turnover, the cycle of housing, uh the fifth largest employer, thinking about that, the workforce development, we will focus later on that and have some of our speakers. We will have fully working with students, doctors, health care, culinary, the job creation and includement uh and partnerships with like Front Range Community College, the nursing programs. We are going to be growing our own employees here as well. We think it's a remarkable workforce development tool. Lastly, I'll just talk about that additional trails. This is such a remarkable open space area, but we're going to be adding over 5,000 linear feet of additional trails and working with the butterfly pavilion on what they call their pollinator power rangers. We're going to work with them on their gardens, their side, and really not only from volunteers, but as we plan the site to really be important partners in that development and really adding to those significant um open space around their site. Uh Andy did a great job of talking about this project plant timeline. I just want to regground. We came at the end of this process when you were updating the comp plan and this planning commission and city council said both said we think it's actually appropriate go through the full cycle. That is the cycle we have been on for the last two plus years. Full integration of community outreach leading to the applications that are here before you tonight. Uh we respectfully uh believe that our stakeholders, the community, they have made this plan so much better, so much more beneficial to Westminster, to the community, to the open space. Uh we are honored to present this transformational project and we would respectfully request your support for this

application. Uh we very much have our full team here and look forward to any questions you have. Thank you very much. Thank you. I've got a couple questions for you. I mean, you went through a list of different types of facilities and care levels and whatnot. Is hospice care one of them? I didn't see it listed.

I'm going to turn to our team. U Mr. Chair, I certainly will try to facilitate questions and look to the appropriate team. That's fine. So, go ahead. Thank you, Mr. Chair. As part of the continuum of care, we do not offer hospice care, so to speak, but residents can have different inhome health care services brought into their living unit, and that can include hospice services. So, you're not going to throw them out when they reach that point?

No, we uh we never ask a resident to to leave as part of our our commitment and the life care contract. Okay, thank you. Um, another question I had is I seem to go back and forth whether these are all for sale units or if they're rental units or if there's a mix.

You bet, Mary. And I will just say that you'll probably stay close here. Uh we'll call it the Ericson model. I'm just going to say and then they'll give you a more specific answer. They are neither for rent or for sale because it's a full CCRC. There's a model that you use in this type of living. So we could talk a little bit more about that, but sir, it's kind of a mix of all of those things, right? So we'll describe that.

Thank you. And yes, I think Marcus, I mean, he's he summed it up in the sense that we enter into a a contract with with our residents. Um, sometimes referred to as a resident and care agreement, sometimes referred to um as a life care contract. Again, um it it varies across different states, but it it is not a for sale or a rental product. a resident uh will pay an entrance fee to to the to the operator to Ericson and they will also pay a monthly service fee and in exchange for the lifetime care.

Okay, which makes sense cuz to do otherwise you lose the cohesiveness. And that's kind of where my head was going both ways cuz one of the other comments was that when somebody moves out, they could sell it to a younger family, which brought up the for sale light.

No. Um, so residents in order to live at a CCRC, the minimum age is 62 years and older. Um, in Colorado and and across most states, it's 62 years old. However, most of our residents are about 80. They'll move in perhaps into independent living um in their late 70s or early 80s. Um so they're much older than that, but we could never they could never leave and and anyone below the age of 62 could move in. But I think what we were trying to demonstrate is that often times seniors will sell their single family home or if they're if they've already moved into say a 55 and older community, then they would sell that that residence and move into a life care community, a CCRC. So that's how it opens up more housing for younger um younger families and residents. But again, we have a

So you're So when you talk about opening up residence for younger families, you're talking about the home they vacated. Yes. The home. Yep. And um typically residents I think the average time that residents will live at an Ericson community is about 11 years. So they're there for, you know, for a significant amount of time. Okay. Um, another question I had was the one slide had the payroll and it had the number of jobs and some quick math put the salaries at about 28,000. If you just averaged it out, if you figure some of those are doctors,

then that would mean the other salaries were all less than 28,000. If this is a big employment center, that doesn't seem like Yeah, a range of a range of those positions are full-time and part-time. Um the 20 million payroll figure is actually very conservative and low. Typically um it is a range of of careers again from

the doctors, social workers, um nurse practitioners, a resident life providers. I mean it is a general services it is a range but um the data that we've used typically when we we do a workforce plan whenever we enter a a market and are looking to um to open a new community. So, we look at the wages for the various positions in the marketplace so that we are very competitive. I think um we would of course update that information as we got closer to opening the community, but I think um I think the average salary when we open the community is about $95,000 for a full-time employee. Again, that will vary for for part-time positions and and depending on the role, but that is the average salary and that probably does reflect, you know, doctors and the higher health care positions, but it it's quite a range.

Okay. Thank you. Anyone else have any questions? Commissioner Dunn.

Yes. Uh thank you, Mr. Chairman. This is for uh the first couple questions I have are for staff. Um I noticed that in uh uh in the proposal um in the economic development section there were um employment flex um uh developments considered uh but they just weren't timely. Is that is that the Hello, Commissioner Stepher with the economic development uh department division, excuse me. So what we did, we commission we commissioned a study with CU School of Leads Business to look at the change of land use. So the full economic impact with the jobs really wasn't taken into consideration. And what the study really showed is if we took an applestoapple uh uh office employment with the same square footage as the Ericson property, what would that economic impact be? Clearly the best and highest and best use for the land would be the primary use office employment flex. However, with the current market right now, office is uh nationwide is the vacancy rates are incredibly high in Denver. They're incredibly high. Thankfully, in Westminster, they're they're below the average even within the region. However, realizing an office development of that size and magnitude is highly unlikely for the foreseeable near future. So, it really came down to it really is this is at the best the best use at this time knowing that the market is going to take a while to recover from the off from office.

I see. was would have there been a possibility to use part of the uh development, part of the the land in question as uh uh uh for this purpose and part for uh one that would admittedly have higher economic impact. Was there was the timing there? Um, as I said, you know, we we really just took the exact same square footage. Um, the with that I we didn't take it like a portion of the land use and compare it like slice it up, if you will. We really just tried to look at it as as as clear as we could, apples to apples.

Okay? So, we didn't consider other hybrid models. Okay. Thank you. Mhm. Any other questions, comments, Commissioner Conir? Yeah. Oh, do you have another one?

Just one? Yeah. Uh, this is for um the the applicant. I noticed that uh that there are no elevation drawings in the PDP. Um I don't know if that's, you know, required at this stage. Uh, but I just wondered um can you give us an idea of the heights of some of these buildings and uh and the the the view issues that that that might entail?

Sure. Thank you, Commissioner. I'll be happy to. We do have in the video those are actually based on conceptual elevations. Again, none of these buildings are designed. I think staff did a great job of saying as we bring the ODB forward, it'll be separate ODPs going through that and laying out the community. Um I would frame something first uh for you as a comparison. Existing employment flex to what we're proposing has the same height parameters. So one to four stories except adjacent to certain types of roadways and then you can add additional height. So, not only are we the same height that is on the land use designation today in the comp plan, we also have added a very significant perimeter sensitivity zone on the east side of our site. So, sir, we are looking at fourstory then to across I'll have um Jared address that then to some higher buildings as you move west on the site, but being thoughtful about that. We also have some um kind of sketch uh images. We're happy to show those maybe after public comments just as the way we've looked at that particularly from view corridors thinking about that. But we have such an opportunity when we design the ODP to go through those dynamics.

Thank you sir. [Music]

Commissioner. Yeah, just to um add on a little bit to what Marcus says, the the height sensitivity zone there is in the blue kind of grayish area on the on the east side and that's limited to four stories. And then um there is no building allowed in the green area in the Buchet area um to the north. And then

um except for low-level um pedestrian crossings, there isn't um any building allowed in the view corridor going through the site. And then the rest of the site is limited to 65 ft. Um and so all those buildings will will come in under that and the architecture is defined in the PDP from a design standards standpoint and we've worked really closely with the um city staff to make sure that the right architecture standards are there that will drive the the ODPS that you all will see at some point in the future. Thank you Commissioner Kamir Caner.

Thank you. Uh for the applicant, I have a few questions about first about economic uh issues. Um one of the elements of the comprehensive plan is to look for affordable uh senior housing. Uh the staff determined that this does not satisfy the affordable element of that. Um I also heard you say that the likelihood of this uh being fully subscribed, for lack of a better word,

is high because there's a high need. So that would indicate that there's not likely to be a downward economic impact on the surrounding senior uh living facilities. So how do you how do you address that lack of affordability in such a large um development?

Yeah, I appreciate the question. I I think one thing I just want to clarify and it goes back to the chair's original question. One of the challenges of not having a for sale or a for rent product where it's an entry free fe free fee model is to have what you and I would discuss in a traditional like area median income or something like that to attach an affordable covenant to right it's very challenging in this type of housing typology actually for example in Denver there's an exception for senior housing or this type of care facility so I want to be sure and say that what we're trying to do we believe is provide uh senior housing housing and senior care. It is market rates or I'm going to address that direct directly. We do believe though that it frees up existing housing stock as people move into this and that does generate that housing as well. I also want to say we are looking at the significant impact that we are providing. We are talking about other ways. I want to say something the employment flex uh land use designation does not have PLLD dedication requirements. Here we are generating an initial $15 million to PL because of that land use designation change. So again we think it's more of a comprehensive picture the jobs the impact but we cannot address directly that affordable housing component.

Okay. On the on the point of the PLLD and the cashing l you have cashing l for the PL. Yes sir. Cashing l for art. Uh I think there are a few other items where there's a cashing l obviously water rights which I'll get to in a minute. Um, there's also an indication on I believe it's sheets two and three that there will be uh uh that Ericson will be seeking rebates uh of future fees uh and uh uh other types of rebates and and um um I'm losing my words, but essentially rebates and refunds. Uh, so are we essentially just um going to be paying Ericson back for the public lands and the other cashing lues that they're making now through these uh rebates and refunds?

Yeah. Uh, Commissioner, I think it's a a great way that you've stated the question. The first thing I'll say is you understand the code very well about PLLD dedications. Westminster is uh one of the clearest codes there is in the metro area about you make this dedication and you actually make it upfront. So that is a calculation. and it's based on number of units and it's a calculation on the senior housing. So that is paid. It is actually one of the initial fees. I've never seen a project pay $15 million upfront that is that we allowed as the staff said in the report and the note that we may pursue separate from the entitlements some other type of rebates on other things. There is as you saw as an example the creek side drive we are a very low impact use. We do not generate significant traffic. We do not generate or necessitate that entire roadway. That roadway is really helping uh emergency response times, connections from Westminster Boulevard and to 104th and really dealing with that challenging intersection at Church Ranch. So, that is an example, sir, of something that we're going to build up front because we know it needs to be provided for existing challenges, but we may seek to try to get some of those shared costs. So, I want to be sure it's not PLLD at all. It may be on some of those other shared costs that were not resulting or aren't the exact result of our project.

Okay. And then on the water rights issue, um your slides uh purport to suggest that the water demand will be going down. Uh that you're using um a lot of conservation measures. um the staff uh uh report. And as a former water attorney, I'm aware of the uh impacts of uh a 24-hour, 7-day a week residence versus uh commercial uh use, water impacts. Staff suggested it could be up to 317% increase. We're talking about apples to apples again. uh the delta compared to what's uh uh capable under current zoning and what you're seeking to do. Right? So there's actually a 300% increase potentially up to uh in terms of water demand compared to what would be uh modeled under existing zoning. Right.

So I I would just want to explain and I'll turn it to our water consultant who's modeled that sir to answer it. I just wanted to explain this slide. when we think of uh all the remarkable work that the city of Westminster did and water usages on remaining sites that was really based on the 2013 comp plan. So that is why we are showing that to be fair. I just want to be sure. Then your point the second column is then that analysis of what we believe our actual water usage will be in real model understanding how it works and based on all other communities compared to the employment flex. So ours is actually a specific model and Caleb can address your question on that.

Hi, good evening commissioners and chair. My name is Caleb Denette. I'm with Aquaand Network. We're the water consultant for Ericson. So, um, Commissioner, you do bring up a great question for this, and I do want to kind of look back to the 2040 comp plan, um, in that it did have a stated, you know, specific goal for the Han property in total. And the water supply plan had, it was a really great tool developed by staff to show what the minimum, maximum, and kind of median targets for those water savings. And so this is what this slide is showing here is that under the Han property going from the mixeduse activity center to the CCRC uh coupled with the quasi public and then public water treatment facility is that we are meeting that median target reduction of the 252 acre feet and that was specified in that attachment 9 of the water supply plan. Um we actually even exceed it um slightly with with a savings of 271 acre feet per year. And really where that comes in from is is as we noted previously is that the occupancy rates at continuing care uh retirement facilities are significantly lower than your mixeduse activity centers or or your multif family types. Um you know ranging in 1.3 persons per unit or the average city of Westminster is around 2.45 that includes single family and multif family homes as well. And then addition to that is all of the water efficiency measures that we're going to be in place at this project. Um that's going to be coupled with indoor efficiencies. Um the use the minimal use of evaporative cooling more turning towards geothermal cooling. And then obviously Norse Design has come up with a great water-wise landscaping plant to to reduce that usage. So, Commissioner, you are correct in that on your standard typical employment flex, we are a larger water user considering the CCRC, but we're still meeting those target goals um that were set out in the 2040 comp plan.

Yeah. So, I I I think you were answering an adjacent question. the the real question was I want people to be aware and us to be aware of what would be the water demand and these other impacts based on what currently is possible today um and compare that to what would be possible or modeled under what's being proposed the answer to that question sounds like yes it's about a three time increase in water demand I would say that

if you were to look at correct if you were to look get the complete, you know, bare minimum water use for this site. Yes, we could be up to a three times water use impact. However, your average users and considering your primary and secondary uses of employment flex, which could include hotels um as well as R&D and manufacturing facilities, you know, those would actually be more of a onetoone comparison or or or or less. Okay. Thanks. Before [Music] you go too far,

one of the things you mentioned in your statement there was the impact of the water treatment facility. What does that have to do with the water usage? If you were to consider the complete Han property as employment flex, um employment flex does have that higher water usage per acre as a land use designation. Um and then when you separate out the water treatment facility, that goes to the quasi public uh quasi public land use designation which does have a lower water use category or per land use designation.

Okay. Thank you. Any other questions, comments? [Music] Okay, seeing none, um we'll we'll open the public testimony. Um Jennifer, you have the list. We actually have some voicemails that we'd like to play during the live meeting. There's five of those. Curtis, if you could get those going, please. Mr. Chairman,

before we be before we open the public hearing, I request uh a brief bio break before we get get started.

Sounds good. It's 8:13 now. So 8:20 [Music] [Music] [Music] I don't think it's [Music] question. I just had a question. President [Music]

[Music] So we train That's right. Happy. Yeah. How are you?

Okay. [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music]

[Music] [Music] Okay, it's 8:20. If we can start getting back together here. Yeah. Okay, I think we're ready for the phone mails. Hello, my name is Lisa Hoth and I'm the president and CEO of the Adams County Regional Economic Partnership or ACREP. We're located at 1870 West 122nd A in Westminster, Colorado 80234. I'm calling to leave a message in support of the Ericson Senior Living Retirement Campus Proposal that is coming before the planning commission on August 12th. There are three main reasons that we support this project. First, we believe that it will bring more employment opportunities to our greater Adams County region. Starting with the construction phases of development, there will be many opportunities for our local firms to get involved and also for our local students to have additional opportunities to learn the trades. Once operational, Ericson offers many different pathways for students in our region. Healthcare,

culinary, facilities operations, just to name a few. We know that Front Range Community College has many students looking for ways to enter the healthcare industry and this would be a great location right down the road from the main campus. The second reason is that we believe a senior living campus with a variety of living arrangements would be a great option for seniors in our region. Seniors often want to stay nearby with their circle of friends and family in areas that they know. The Ericson campus would allow them to do so by having an option to move. It would also open up inventory for other new firsttime home buyers. Finally, we believe this project would contribute to the economic vitality of our region. Ericson has shown that they are great community partner in Highlands Ranch. They engage with local nonprofits and other organizations and often allow them to have programming on site at their facilities. The residents also look to stay involved in the community and we believe that it would add to the economic vitality here to have a vibrant neighbor. So for all of these reasons, we strongly support your approval of the Ericson Senior Living Retirement Campus in Westminster. Thank you for your opportunity to share our views. Hello, my name is Chris Maloney. I drive across the street where all the uh the work is being done on the 200 or 191 homes going in across the street. I'm concerned about uh if the land that is proposed for the 1,700 person uh senior living situation is going to uh impact the open space. I don't want to see any more open space leave. I don't

know that that is true. I'm also very worried about the impact on traffic right now. It's already getting rough getting home. So, uh yeah, that's my concern. I just want to know, do not take over open space and I hope this doesn't go through. Thank you. Byebye.

Good evening. My name is Lee Seager and I am vice president of economic development for Jeffco EDC located at 1667 Cole Boulevard. On behalf of Jeffco, I am expressing our support for the Ericson Senior Living Project. As the economic development organization for JECO, our mission is to attract, expand, and retain primary employers, an effort that is directly tied to the availability of diverse housing options for our region. A healthy, balanced economy requires a full spectrum of housing to meet the needs of its population. This includes ensuring our aging residents have quality options to remain in the communities where they have lived, worked, and contributed for decades. According to the state demography office, the county's senior population ages 65 and higher is projected to exceed 136,000 residents by 2040, representing over 22% of the county's population. The need to plan for this demographic shift is important. Additionally, the project will have a substantial economic and fiscal benefit for the region. Based on an economic impact analysis conducted by Jesus, development of the project is estimated to support 1,400 construction jobs annually. And at full buildout, operations are projected to create 700 jobs with an economic output of over 100 million annually. This project represents an opportunity to align housing, workforce, and economic priorities. It addresses a growing housing need, supports job creation, stimulates local investment, and enhances overall community vitality. Thank you for the opportunity to support this project.

Good evening. My name is Dr. Ryan McCoy and I serve as the chief of advancement and strategic partnerships for Westminster public schools. I am here presenting on the voicemail on behalf of the school district to share our strong support for the Ericson senior living project in Westminster. For WPS, this is more than a development. It's a workforce pipeline for our students. Ericson will bring approximately 700 jobs to Westminster and create direct partnership with our schools including the new Ivercy Random Innovation Campus. This project will provide internships, job shadowing and training in pathways like nursing, other health science pathways, culinary arts, HVAC and plumbing, IT and hospitality. Our students will gain handson paid experience and high demand careers while building lasting professional uh connections right here in their community and in their homes. This project also addresses a critical need for senior housing, allowing longtime residents to remain in Westminster while opening family housing for the next generation. This is a rare opportunity that benefits our students, our workforce, and our local economy. and Westminster Public Schools is proud to stand in full support. Thank you. This is Marvin Lindsay. I currently live in the Windrest community in Littleton. The address is 2929 Summerwind Lane in Littleton or Highlands Ranch uh 80129. I wish to provide some comments to the um planning commission of city of uh Winrest uh Westminster regarding the application that Ericson senior living has u made to um to build

a senior living community or CCRC better known as um in North Denver uh in the city of Westminster before moving to Windrest About four years ago, I lived in North Denver in the Thornton area and I was as I was approaching the time when I needed to consider something like this. I looked at a number a wide number of senior living facilities throughout the North Denver area as that's where I would have liked to have stayed. But I could find nothing in that area anywhere near the value and the benefits that I eventually found at Windrest. Um Winrest has a home for life. It has a medical unit. It has a physical therapy unit on site. It has memory care. It has assisted living. It has nursing care. It has a pharmacy on site. It has multiple restaurants. Um the community is large enough to support all of these things. It's financially sound. Uh we have a high occupancy rate higher you know plus 96% or so one of the highest in the industry. Uh the value is exceptional uh lower than industry average and our community is quite happy. In addition, the community is very very active. The 50 plus clubs of all kinds and activities, anything anyone could want. Members are um active in throughout the community in nonprofits uh on boards. Um these people are come from all walks of life both uh from Denver area as well as

uh seniors uh coming from other areas to be near children. Uh the community is a beautiful well-kept facility consisting of three neighborhoods and 12 or 15 buildings. Uh the community is quiet. It has a good impact upon the community. Everything uh that I asked for and wanted in a community I found here at Windrest. My family is well pleased and and I am satisfied. I would strongly recommend that you approve the Ericson Senior Living uh application for such a facility in North Denver. It will be a great advantage to your citizens and the whole of the north side of Denver. Uh we have more than a thousand people on our waiting list which means that u there is a big demand within the community. So, thank you very much. I appreciate your uh attention to this matter. Thank you. Bye-bye. Okay, that's the end of the phone bills. Okay, we'll open it up for public testimony, you know, for people to come down and speak. um limited to five minutes if the person ahead of you has kind of said what your thoughts are and it's much quicker if you just say that they said what your thoughts are instead of repeating everything will be here all night so do you have the list

I do the first three are Herb Aches Natalie I'm so sorry

Bendelle Bendel Lee, excuse me, and Bob and Maria Canannada. So, if the other two could just come up and queue in the front once Mr. Aerson is gone. Um, the next two could go and then I'll call three more and we'll kind of move in that fashion to kind of keep things at a at a swift pace. Ready? Thanks, gentlemen. My name is Herbson. I'm at 10705 Gates Drive. Uh, I am a Westminster resident. I have been involved with the city for over 41 years until my final time on the city council. But what I will tell you is the history of what we've been looking for in the past. Sunrise the facility on Sheridan San Marino also on Sheridan Legacy on S and Federal in 112. We also have the Highlands Village at 96 in Sharon. All of these are senior living facilities. All full, all with waiting list, but none have offered the amenities that Ericson is bringing to the community. The Hanwitt property has been a part of Westminster for over 100 years. The representative of the family has worked with Westminster and myself personally looking at that 100 acre area over there about potential for commercial development. And as city staff has said, it's not real. The commercial development is just not there to put that type of house the facilities in that location. But what we do have is a need for people like myself and others that are reaching my age. I'm not 80 today, but I'm not too darn far from it. But I expect to break their mold. I'm going to be there a heck of a lot longer in 10 years.

Now, buying in that is a an effort that I paid to have that amenity to me. And as with Ericson offers, I have to be able to be able to shop for what I want as amenities. I don't have to take everything. It's just like you're going to the grocery store. You buy what you want. So those will then determine how much I will pay on a monthly fee. But Mr. Canar, you ask about affordable. Affordable is to whatever you can pay. But I think one of the things that we confuse with affordable, we talk about housing that people are trying to buy. And in this case, you're not buying a house. You're not really renting it. But you could say you're something similar to a lease program and I can stay here and use it for what I want for that period of time. But I also have a piece that is going to be left to my heirs that when I'm done and I leave that property, 80% of what I invest in that unit goes back to my family or to however I leave. That's a pretty high percentage of what I invest. And the the value of that is going to continue to go up. So what we're looking at is what do we need for there? Now that property has been marketed on and off for many, many years. City staff, past city councils have looked at it and there just hasn't been the right mix of demand to come into that area. But what we have with the city's water treatment facility coming in with another housing development that came from the same property owner at 104th in Sheridan along with the host called property that was there and with the other developments that we have at the Uplands project a 19 unit single family home development at 104th and Perry

we're going to continue to see some growth but one of the things that we've lked looked at in the past when I was here with the city was what would the demand be on something like this for city services? You're going to provide water and sewer. You know, staff would not be recommending this today if there was not sufficient facilities and capacity in our systems to treat the water and the sewer for this kind of a development. We would not put that strain on the city where we are dependent upon those life services. In my experience with the city, one of the things that we have looked at is what's is going to be a drive for our police and fire. Very few calls go to our retirement centers. If they are, they're mostly medical assistance. Not fire, not theft, not burglaries, but mostly medical. Ericson is the only one that has come in the city in the last 20 years that brings a fullsize medical staff with it 24/7. Our other facilities are a big part of having reduced staff at night, especially when they need medical assistance. So they immediately call the fire department to supplement the staff of those facilities. We should not see that kind of demand from Ericson because of how they plan their communities. I am aware of a number of residents who are at the Littleton facility that they were the gentleman mentioned a few minutes ago that are ready to get on the wait list because they want to come back to this part of Westminster and the north end of the city. waiting list of two years or more is not uncommon. So, one of the things that we ask you to consider on this is what can it do for the city?

Times up to wrap it up. I would tell you that from my past experience of living here. This is a facility that we direly need and we are going to see more demand for this type of facility in the near future because some of us are getting a little older. Thank you, gentlemen.

Thank you. Thank you. Uh my name is Natalie Bendley. Um I'm a Westminster resident. I'm actually Waverly Acres um 100091 Eaton Street. So I back up directly to this proposed development. and um uh Ericson had a lovely presentation about their um comp plan, how how their facility would meet the comp plans, but I'm I've got a few concerns with that because while I definitely agree that Westminster needs senior housing, I think the stronger need is for affordable senior housing as affordable housing period in this area is really we don't have an availability ility crisis. We have more of an affordability crisis and the h because I've got three houses in Waverly Acres that have been for sale now and they have been for sale for about a month. They're not moving very quickly versus about 10 years ago when I looked at that neighborhood when I was fortunate enough to buy in and the one house that was for sale went very quickly. Um I also do I I have concerns that this facility is does not allow us to actually age in place as um they are suggesting because even selling my house which will now go down significantly in value as there is a significant portion of the value of my property currently um associated with the view. um when I sell my house, that will barely give me enough money to buy in to um the Ericson

community, let alone the monthly uh fees that I will have to continue to pay. Um honestly, I really feel that the Ericson model resembles more of a time share than anything else with a one-time buyin and then a lifetime of maintenance fees. But I get to go on vacation whenever I want, excluding black dates. So, um, as far as, uh, meeting our employment targets, I'm also concerned that yes, they are saying that there are some jobs that are going to be in the 95k plus, but I'm not convinced that that will be the vast majority of the jobs. I feel that the majority of the jobs that will be there are going to be part-time no benefit uh type jobs such as uh cleaning day spa even most of the nursing uh salon activities directors. A lot of these people are part-time um hourly and it's a relatively low hourly rate that is not given benefits. This also means that the majority of the people working there will not be able to afford to live here because again it's an affordability crisis and they can't afford the homes that are out there. Um, I'm also concerned that the water usage, um, I understand, you know, that they modeled this, but I'm fearful that they used a very favorable model and given that Wilder Ranch and there are other nearby developments such as what's going on on 92nd, um, these are not completely built yet. So there are a lot of assumptions that would have had to gone into this model

and so I don't think they fully understand how their facility will impact the water usage for Westminster which is already suffering uh water usage concerns. And also um the gentleman before me stated that 80% of what I invest in here goes to my heirs. If that was really a big part of this, I would like to know why it was not part of this presentation because that seems like that would be something that would help me, the target demographic for this because by the time it's built, I'll be old enough to get in and have fun. Unfortunately, trying not to think about that, but I'm that seems like that should have been a a selling point to me. And I the fact that it was not touted makes me question its validity. Um and I'm just concerned overall that we are relying on many uh unclear assumptions. Things are not fully understood. There is a lot of development going on in this area. So um I would like for us to understand that before we Okay. Additional development especially of this size. Thank you. Bob or Maria?

Okay.

Okay. Great. Thank you. Next three is Jim Fenomore, Gary Bland, and Joe Mackandry. [Music] Uh, good evening, commission, staff, residents. Uh, just not real sure I know all I need to know about this project, so I've got a few questions. Um, Marcus, ready? And one is Westminster is concerned about water and this is a sizable development. Uh the plan is to raise Stanley Lake by 4T from what I'm hearing. What I would like to know is in a 100red-year flood, is this any part of this going to be in the flood plane when Stanley Lake breaks and floods out the valley and brings all the all the plutonium down with it? And then uh next question is who maintains the the green belt that's on site? Is that uh maintenance by the C West Minister or is that by the uh community? Third question is um who maintains the streets? Is is this a private community to where they're taking care of their own street? They develop it and they put their own you know maintain their own streets. Fourth question, who maintains the infrastructure? Is this a private community where the city maintains the

infrastructure or is it going to be the community itself? Fifth question, where's the parking for the visitors that are coming to visit the residents especially on holidays like Christmas and u birthdays and things like um things like that. Uh sixth question is how many buildings will be on the property? These are all questions that uh I have and uh probably a few others do. So like to get these answers. Thank you very much for your time. Appreciate it. Planning Commission. Good morning or good afternoon. I'm sorry it's been a long day. Uh Gary Bland at 9240 West 91st Avenue. Uh I hate to say this, but this seems like a scene from one who flew over the cuckoo's nest. I've listened to this presentation and I'm just absurd actually to be treated as an old person that I got to live in this old retirement place and watch people die. So we might as well just put some handles on my house, bury me now. Okay, that's the way I feel. Obviously, there's a lot of things. When you sit there and talk about the aging, that's discrimination in my opinion. Who cares how old I am? I'm a person. I want to be treated as such. So, now let's go to the 2040 comp plan. I've been here 45 years. And you sit there and I've got to look at you and explain myself why I want to live in the city of Westminster when I've been here. I pay taxes. I do private. I do any everything I can to benefit this this society here. I I pay my taxes. I love my yard. I love my

neighbors and stuff like that. I'm not ready to be put in a box and put away like a box of cereal. Seriously, think about this. I don't understand this 80%. It seems like just the lady said was a time share. I just can't see no reality in this thing at all. If if we're going to sit there and adjust our comp plans over and over again, we go to the highlands or the the uh the uplands and we watch these comp plan amendments pop up daily. Daily. There's no true answer. You guys put this forward and then we as we get older and I want to live in my house, I've got to deal with this when I sit there and pay my taxes and just want to be happy in the city of Westminster. When's that going to happen? That's all I'm asking for. Honestly, I meet with a lot of people. I that the dam came up. I go out there and I talk to the park rangers. It's a done deal. But yet, you look at the state regulations, California and Colorado, the only two that need to go with with the public announcement and the approvals of Here we go again. He brought it up. We found out it about this talking to this the Rangers. It's a done deal. I didn't hear nothing of it. But the the uplins is one. The affordable components. I'm not going to play no games. I want my grandson to have my house. Can I have that right one more time? I pass my son. He's upset with me. But he's making a lot of money. Is he a developer? Yes, he is. Do I like a development? No, I don't. So, let's get this straight. I'm a real person. And if you can't look at me that way and understand what I mean, just because I want to be not a old person in the aging community, I want to be a person of Westminster, a resident that's devoted to the quality of life in this place. When I sit there and I I challenge any one of you, and if you haven't done this, read the 2040 comp plan. These comp plans are dangerous.

Now, I love your question about the water. Now, if they raise the water, okay, so we go acre feet, three billion, you know, it it's it's sickening because I live over by Stanley Lake. I'm doing the research right now at this point. You know, there's a rail system that was put in there when they built that dam. I'm working with people in the historical. There is some rail tracks in there. So, that we had a leak there, but a lot of you guys don't even know that, unless you do, shake your head. But there's there's danger. If we raise that water level, we got an eagle out there. All of our We got plutonium in that water. I just I just want to live. Let me once I'm gone. The 2040 will put me probably in that ground that I'm talking about. Do it then. Leave me alone. I want to be happy here. You're taking it away. And if you listen to this stuff and and all the houses, the traffic, I can't even drive down the road safely. I go I I'm going to be honest. I drive 10 miles over because back in my day when I was a a welltuned driver, I'd go five over cuz the police give me a ticket. I do 10 over and people are passing me 20 m an hour faster. I'm not ready for any more traffic, any more people in the city. The 2040 comp plan has been built in. Let's honor that. I am a strong strong supporter of Westminster. I love it. Don't make me move because if this this alone may push me. I've noticed all the houses I got some more time. I see a lot of houses hitting the market now. We've got tax increases coming. There's so many things that that we need to realize. And I hope I hit your heart with this because I've been here a long time. And like I say, I need your friendship. I need your honor and honesty to me and and respect what I have to say. Thank you very much.

Sorry I'm yelling at you. Well, good evening uh commissioners and chair. Uh thank you for the opportunity to speak tonight. My name is Joe Mckendry. I am a Westminster resident uh at Waverly Acres, 1067 Chase Street. Um I'm here to express some serious concerns about the proposed Ericson Senior Living development. Firstly, viewshed impact. Um, I mean that is what almost everyone in the Waverly Acres um edition is going to have an an issue with just right off the bat. Of course, we want to maintain and protect our front range views and that will be obliterated, but um yeah, the Ericson project would sign significantly disrupt the current viewshed enjoyed by the surrounding community and open space users. Instead of the scenic views of the front range, we'd be looking at a largecale senior living complex. While the current employment flex zoning could allow for development, it's unlikely to create the same visual obstruction or permanent change to the landscape. Secondly, I haven't heard this talked about yet, but the nonprofit status. So, Ericson Senior Living Centers, they have many of them around the country. Most of them are nonprofits. ran by a for-profit Ericson senior uh living company. I'm not sure the actual terminology, but um the uh Ericson is a forprofit company that often structures its communities as nonprofits. This raises serious questions about potential tax advantages. Erikson has faced past scrutiny over whether these arrangements primarily benefit the company and not

the residents or the local communities. As a Westminster and Jefferson County taxpayer, I do not support a for-profit enterprise that may receive nonprofit tax treatment while imposing significant impacts on our city. Lack of affordable housing. We're at it again. So, this development does not address Westminster's need for affordable senior housing. down uh in Highlands Ranch at the Ericson's Windrest location. Um the entrance fees for a one-bedroom apartment or space with a den is that entrance fee is $367,000. Um 10% of that according to the Ericson's uh website, 10% of that is non-refundable. And then the monthly service fee is starting at $2,978 upwards to $5,825. That's per month per person. One person. That's not like an apartment you get you get to go in there, but that's per person. Um the high end of that uh entrance fee actually goes up to $1.37 million. So that doesn't sound very affordable. I believe we've already addressed that it's actually not affordable. This seems like it's actually creating housing for non Westminster residents. And I have heard keep our aging population at home. I don't think that's our aging population that they're talking about. I think they're talking about other communities that have a little bit

deeper pockets. So yeah, Westminster, we have a median household income of $96,000. It's just not going to get there with the math for us Westminster residents to stay there. Limited public access. Erikson has proposed connecting their campus to adjacent open space with their own representative at a May 1st outreach meeting. Uh whenever I asked what kind of access we as the public would have going onto their campus, he said we would have access during business hours, but then they would close the gates whenever business is done and we would not have that access. Employment Flex would offer residents uh typically unrestricted access to the grounds. That's they they they have gates there. They are keeping us out. They are not being neighbors. lack of community input. I've heard a lot of support from businesses and I feel like there is very little support from residents. Um I have not seen public engagement from the city asking for a survey on our input of whether or not we the residents want Ericson Senior Living to develop there. And I see that my time is up. Thank you for your time and consideration.

Thank you. Okay, next three. Carolyn McAendry, Michael Beckl, and Ed Moss. Okay, thank you. Uh Brian Davis, you'll be third if you're still here. Am I next?

Hello, my name is Michael Beckl and I'm a concerned citizen who lives in Waverly Acres. My wife and I have lived in Westminster for several years and we hope to be able to call Westminster home for several decades to come. I'm urging the planning commission to recommend a denial of the requested comprehensive plan amendments, resoning, and PDP in the matter involving Ericson Senior Living. First, I think it's important to acknowledge who will benefit from this project. If the proposed Ericson development goes through, only the affluent will be able to afford to live in these facilities. City staff have rightly highlighted that this development is not quote the affordable senior housing that is most critically needed end quote in Westminster. Based on community presentations by Ericson, it's possible that units may cost as much as $1 million plus an additional $6,200 per month fee. In practice, the senior living complex will likely serve as a magnet for wealthy Californians, Texans, and others seeking to relocate to Colorado. How much will other senior housing stock in the city truly be reduced if most current residents of Westminster are unable to move into Ericson's new buildings? Additionally, city staff have rightly noted that there will be several expected negative impacts to the community if this project is improved approved uh including increased water use, increased demand for emergency services, the loss of potential future employment opportunities, and decreased general fund revenue. In that vein, I was struck by two particular facts compiled by city staff. First, if this project is approved, city staff estimates that it will generate approximately 800 to 900 additional calls per year to the fire department for services, about 10 times as many calls per year than if the zoning is not

changed from its current employment flex status. Second, the city estimates that the total expected tax revenue if this project is approved is just $170,000 per year, while a comparably sized employment flex development would be expected to generate nearly 50% more, a difference of roughly $800,000 in tax revenue each decade. Notably, city staff worked with the University of Colorado to analyze the economic impact of potentially changing the current zoning from employment flex to urban multifamily for the proposed Ericson project. The Ericson proposal was compared to office and flex commercial development scenarios. The Ericson proposal generated less economic impact than the other two hypothetical scenarios. The analysis concluded that the highest and best use of this land would be employment uh office employment followed by flex commercial. City staff have recommended that the commission overlook these concerns. I fear that that approach is shortsighted. Lastly, this project feels like an exclusive high-end resort that is being dropped into the city, not a development that is integrated into our community. The Ericson proposal calls for this area to be access restricted, not just with housing units, but with on-site restaurants, salon, and pharmacy, all of which neighbors in the area will be prohibited from accessing. In the 2040 comprehensive plan, Westminster stressed its commitment to strive for equity and inclusion. an access restricted development like Ericson's proposal at this location feels anathema to those values. Thank you for your consideration and for the opportunity to speak tonight. Thank you. It's nice to be back in this

room. For those of you that don't know me, I'm Ed Moss. I was on the special use and permit board for five years on city council and then between 2000 and 2004 I was mayor. I'm here also not as a representative of Dr. Cog but I am a member of the area agency on aging advisory board to Dr. Cog and I want to share with you some information developed by Dr. Cog and other sources. Uh we passed out a a packet to you. On the second page is just the cover page from the Dr. Cog report and I ask your attention to the uh third page which is the uh projection by Dr. Cog of the population increases and distributions uh between 30 years between 2020 and 2050 and you will see those people age 65 plus are going to increase by 99%. If you think we have a housing senior housing shortage now, just wait. And in the same time period, amazingly, the growth of children 0 to 17 is only 2%. The next sheet is just the cover page from a report by the US surgeon general on the epidemic of loneliness and isolation. And on the following page, I've highlighted some information from the surgeon general. It talks about isolation resulting from uh uh uh from lack of social connections. And the key data data down on the bottom left indicates that isolation is the equivalent social isolation is the equivalent of smoking 15 cigarettes per day. Uh in the text it says social isolation includes a 29 increased risk of heart disease, a 32% increased risk of stroke. It's also associated with anxiety,

depression, and dementia. On the next page, uh I should tell you that my mother-in-law had lived in a Ericson community outside of Philadelphia called Maris Grove for 18 years. She died in April at the age of well a few weeks short of 102. Um she loved it. We went back two or three times a year and in May of uh 2024 for Mother's Day I went back and I just happened to pick up this brochure, this flyer, this calendar of events. This calendar of events is only the events for the first six days of May. The remaining 31 days aren't in there. And you can see the type of activities and socialization uh that a facility the size of Ericson provides. There is nothing else like this facility. With regard to pricing, the last page is the US Census report quicks for the city of Westminster. And the top half is for uh uh houses that don't have a mortgage. And typically those are going to be people I'm 77 years old. It's going to be people my age. Their kids are out of college. They've been in their peak earning years after they get out of college. And they're living in houses without a mortgage is paid off. I lived there for over 30 years. If you look down at the median of a Westminster house without a mortgage, it's $531,000. And if I stay in that house and the and I'm on fixed income and the roof goes and I need to replace the roof or the irrigation system or the sewer line collapses or I need a a hot water heater, I may not be able to afford on my social security and retirement and my my IRA, I may not be able to afford to pay for that. But if I sell my house and buy into a buyin like Ericson or like

the only other buyin in Westminster and frankly in the north area which is Covenant Village now called Covenant Living and buy in using the proceeds from my house and maybe having some proceeds left over. I can afford the 2,000 or $3,000 a month left. And I will tell you, I have gone to Covenant Living because I was interested in a buyin situation. And I do have their price schedule with the same kind of plan of a return upon death of in their case 50% or 90% of the buyin price. In every instance, the price is significantly higher at Covenant Living, Covenant Village, than it is currently at Windrest. Now, I don't know what the prices are going to be at this new development, but I'm just telling trying to explain to you and other people that this is not a place for the rich. My mother-in-law was a clerk at a woman's clothing store and her husband, when he was alive, worked for General Electric. This is a a place for people who have mediumbriced houses in Westminster that they need to sell so it's not a burden on them as they age. Thanks very much.

Brian Davis, you out there?

Okay. Thank you, sir. Uh, next up will be Jamie Chavez, Gary Brightenberg, and George Hosfield. Good evening, commissioners. My name is Jamie Chavez, and I'm the president and CEO of the Westminster Chamber of Commerce. I am here tonight to express the chamber's strong support for the Ericson Senior Living Project. This development is aligned with the chamber's mission to foster a thriving, connected, and econ economically vibrant Westminster. The Ericson campus addresses several urgent needs in our city, particularly around senior housing, workforce development, and economic activity, all of which are critical to a healthy business ecosystem. From a housing perspective, Westminster's current senior housing availability availability is severely limited. This project brings muchneeded independent living, assisted living, and memory care options to help our aging residents stay in the community that they've long called home. That not only benefits our seniors, it also opens up existing housing stock for younger families and contributes to a more balanced and sustainable local housing market. In terms of workforce development, Ericson will become one of Westminster's largest employers with an estimated 1500 jobs during construction and 700 jobs at full buildout and a $20 million payroll. The partnerships planned with Front Range Community College, Westminster Public Schools, and other partners uh will help train the next generation of nurses, healthcare workers uh and other skilled employees as well, all while all while keeping talent here in our region. And finally, the economic ripple effect on this project is significant. Ericson residents are expected to generate over 178 million in disposable income, bringing new customers to nearby businesses and more than 22 million in anticipated tax revenue. This is the kind of economic vibrancy that benefits

our entire community. The land use economic impact analysis in attachment 4 does compare the Ericson proposal to other proposals under current land use. However, the study compares building 2.3 million square ft of senior living to building 2.3 million square ft of office and flex park. With the proposed Ericson buildings being multi-story, it is unlikely that you can construct that amount of flex park space or office space on this property as flex is often singlestory. If this did happen, it would be uh larger than any other single office park or flex park in Westminster. and the market for more office spa space right now is pretty low. In reality, the economic choice is between Ericson's development and economic generation and the current zero revenue we have today. We agree with staffs and the applicant's findings on the approval criteria and believe that the intent of the criteria has been met. On behalf of the Westminster Chamber of Commerce and our business community, we urge you to support uh we urge your support for this important uh and strategic project. Thank you. Mr. Brightenberg.

Okay. Thank you. Uh George Hosfield. And then last we have Lee Oberg. Thank you.

Hello everyone. My name is George Hosfield. Thanks for giving me the opportunity to speak. I don't do anything prepared. Um, I just wanted to say I've been in the community in Westminster, Waverly Acres for eight years now and um, I've been disappointed with the uh, what I've heard here today. Um, mainly I've been reminded of the 20 months or two years that this outofstate company has been working with the community and for me I do not feel very involved with that. Um, I just wanted to point out they started the presentation with five bullet points of what they heard from our community and they did not address all five of those. I thought that was pretty telling um that with 15 million cash on hand, all of these resources, they cannot uh cover the five main points that they identified within our community. So, I'm just disappointed in that. Uh, I feel it was a very one-sided presentation um in a good debate. if I were to come in, I'd love to share a little bit more of that community or of those negative effects of what the uh proposal would be. And I felt uh the question was really good with the water table uh the graph um that was presented and as a whole many things that I heard tonight felt um and and I'm sure they could be factually um kind of shown that they were one-sided. So I just wanted to say that's how I felt as a member of the community. Thanks for hearing me out. Is there anybody else that would like to speak that did not sign up on the sheet? Okay, seeing none, I'll close the public hearing and the staff want to respond to any of those points.

Um, yes, Commissioner Commission Chair Mayo. Um, we do have a couple of just clarification items to address. Um so first on the applicant slide um they had quoted a a number a linear foot for trails they'll be constructing. I just did just want to clarify this is a campus that would be generally closed to the public. So these wouldn't be public trails. They would be um trails for their residents. And then on Westminster public schools I saw that um I believe we received a voicemail from somebody from Westminster public schools and then it's in their presentation as well. This site is located in Jefferson County. that would be part of the Jefferson County Public Schools um school district. Um I do understand though that Westminster public schools students may travel over to this campus for work or for uh vocational training. Um then on the road that the city is requiring the developer to build, Creekide Drive as we're kind of calling it. Um this that road is only caused because of this development. We would not install that road without this development going forward or or any another development on this parcel. Um that road is specifically needed to serve this development. Um previously the site had been platted with streets uh when they did the original Simper Gardens plat in 18 the late 1800s. Um we vacated those streets approximately 15 years ago, 13 years ago with the intention that we would always need future public rightway on the site to serve um any development on site. Um on the uh water demand, just a clarification there. So I think we heard the applicant clarify on their graphic that they're including the property that has already been purchased by the city for the city's water treatment facility in their calculations. Um we we are basing our calculations solely off of the 70 approximately 74 acres of their site

that they retain ownership of currently. And our analysis is um not of the 2013 comp plan. It's from the 2040 comp plan specifically employment flex to uh urban multifamily. And that's where we find that there would be an increase in demand. um we can further refine that with their ODP and present that how that would be presented but as it is right now we do we do find an increased water demand with just that land use change. Um to clarify the service calls um so we are stating that we find that they this campus will generate 800 to 900 service calls to the fire department every single year um year month. Yeah. Um and so we and that would be more than just medical calls too. That could be things like uh broken elevators, um educational training. So it's not necessarily just all medical calls. And so we do understand they have medical staff on site who address a lot of calls, but that's what we have uh estimated based off of our uh contacts with the fire department that serves the Windrest facility and then our data on other assisted assisted living facilities. And then finally, um, one thing too is on this site, uh, so we have not seen this site advertised for, uh, or marketed for development at all. In my 10 years of tenure here, I've never, uh, received an inquiry for development of the site and we've never seen any signs be posted on this or seen it be marketed. So, just a clarification on on how this has been marketed to the public there. Um, John, did I address all of them? Now, I'll just close the uh staff comments unless you have any other questions for us. Again, we are recommending approval or recommending that you recommend approval to the city council uh for the reasons that are stated in the agenda memo, but we are we do want to take a moment and clarify

some discrepancies in this in what the applicant uh stated in their presentation and the facts that we know. So, and there's more detail in the attachments. Okay. Thank you.

Any comments, questions from the commission. I do I am I just want some clarification from staff. Um so the applicant requests partial waiverss and permanent fee waivers. Um but that request is separate and not a part of this official process. Correct. They have to go through a different process. Yes. So this preliminary development plan does not authorize any sort of waiverss or rebates of fees. Um regardless of that note, any developer always has the opportunity to approach the city to ask for any sort of waiver or rebate. We evaluate any of those requests based off the merit of each request. And so I I don't know that the note is super um necessary to clarify that.

Nope. That that was my question. [Music] Okay. I commissioner D.

Um a question about the cost and this is not so much a question. Uh it seems to me that the the connection between the the connection to affordability is is tenuous uh could be quite tenuous for some Westminster residents. um the that affordability connection being well, you know, you can sell your house and to a younger family and then you'll have the money to move in. But, you know, that that depends on a lot. Depends on what your house is worth, uh how much you can uh how much you can possibly afford in this uh in the new development. Um, it just seems to me that it that this could very well end up being um a lot of rich outer state outofsters and a few Westminster residents who who had a house that's worth, you know, that was worth enough to uh buy in to the uh to the development. So, I'm I'm thinking about this. That's all. Thank you. [Music]

Yep. Go ahead. Uh yeah. Um I have a question for the developer if uh we still have an opportunity for that. A while back we uh um early in the presentation you mentioned people moving here from Westminster. Sure. Um do you have any any facts or data to back that?

Yeah, absolutely. I'd actually like to refocus the presentation here. We have 25 existing communities and they are based on focus groups in each respective community. We have done a comprehensive analysis and focus group with Westminster residents focused on how to retain Westminster residents. When we gave our initial presentation, we had eight mayors call us from this area begging us to come to their city. We said Westminster was the right site because we realized and studied the market and the integration that people wanted to see here. So, we think that's a very important part and how we're doing that. I want to be sure there was a great comment made by the community about equity and inclusivity. When all of us share or decide to sell our property at our own free will at any age, 70 or 80, we all move into our own respective property, all shapes and sizes at the next home that reflects the same value that we have in Westminster of different types of homes. So, I just want to be sure and look at that today affordability is not one of your approval criteria. I want to state that again. There's a housing needs assessment unequivocally that we need more affordable housing uh particularly for senior housing state demography. We need senior housing more than any other type. So we're trying to address that. So sir, what we are trying to provide here is focused and based on that focus group of Westminster residents and how they want those services. You heard from two gentlemen who have gone through that research and want those type of amenities as examples of Westminster residents on the site. I mean, I guess my question is, do you have an idea of like um

Sure. How far away would the median resident move from or something like that? We'll give a general percentage of how that works in a local community. Sure.

Hi, thank you. Um, our experience across our our 25 communities has been typically about 60 to 70% of the residents will come from about a 25 to 30 minute radius of the community. And then about 30% will come either move because their adult children and grandchildren live near the community and they will come or maybe just a few are looking for the lifestyle in that particular part of the of the country. But yes, it's really the the vast majority. These are people that have lived, worked their entire lives or their adult lives in in the area and they want to stay within about a half an hour of that of the places that they're familiar with.

Okay, cool. Thank you,

Commissioner Caner. I had a follow-up question on your comment about uh shopping this around to other cities. Has has any other neighboring city rejected this proposal?

Absolutely not. And I want to be sure be careful. We did not shop that around. That was reach out from existing mayors or other municipalities. I think it reflects uh how strongly that is when the two trade organizations for economic development for both Jefferson County and Adams County identify those need in all those municipalities. And Dr. COG as you know sir the regional council of governments is really focused on this aging population and how to provide that so sir I just want to be sure absolutely no to your question and we didn't shop it to other sites there was outreach to us I also do want to offer one clarification the linear feat that we provided by number is actually protected with an access easement and fully available to the surrounding public so there is usually uh differences and I would always defer to Jacob on all technical matters, but that was a number that we specifically calculated in the 10-ft trail that has an access easement over it for access from the surrounding community.

Okay, [Music] Jake, could you pull that up? Sure, I'll I'll pull that up. Access easements have to be dedicated on the plat, too. So, I'll just make sure the language uh clarifies that. is that the slide that you wanted to see? Sorry. The other thing I would note in furtherance of this discussion about the employment flex as compared to the uh category that we are requesting in the employment flex there is no PLLD dedication and no trail requirements in that. So this is an incredibly additive situation that encompasses in this comprehensive plan. Any other questions, comments? Uh, yeah. I have a question for city staff about uh water. [Music]

Good evening, commission. Heath Klein, assistant city engineer. Thanks. Um I guess my question ultimately is uh do we have water to supply this? Yes, we would. Uh we see the numbers are a little bit different from what they are presenting from our analysis but yes we would have the water to serve this. Okay. And um I was a little confused during the water discussion. So this is currently zoned employment flex. Correct. That is correct. Okay. And we expect that to use some water. Is that correct? That is correct.

And how does our the amount of water we want to use for this compares how how does that actually compare? I don't have sorry the anticipated water use for this resoning. How does that compare to the anticipated water use for the current zoning? We anticipate that this would use more than the employment flex by how much? We did it because it we don't have all of the data and exactly what we're seeing yet, but we did anticipate that it it is a marginal uh increase from what that is. By marginal, you mean

5%. Jacob, do you recall if we put that in our report? Yes, we did. It's uh spec Let me just look up the spec very specific number. So I don't want to misquote. So we we quote that changing 65 acres of employment flex to urban multif family will increase the water demand in a range from 78 to 240 acre feet depending on the final design and density of this project. Okay. But that that's an increase that uh that's the absolute increase. What's the fractional increase you anticipate

as a I believe Nathan has a percentage of it. Sorry,

let me just find those numbers. It was in my presentation. So compared to the employment flex designation that's current for for the site um the range of increase would be somewhere between um you know if that's considered 100% then this be7 to 370% depending on the final the density and that's on the urban multif family category would allow up to 36 units per

and have we uh do you have an estimate for what we would charge for a tap fee for that?

I don't have the the tap fees right now. So what u Mr. Lawrence just mentioned and the crowd reacted to the way that we had to evaluate that number was going to the urban multifamily. So this project is not going to hit the same density as what can happen with the urban multifamily. So that is why it goes from 17 to 300% okay increase. So that what we're seeing right now it's marginal for this application. But if it were to be fully developed at the most dense of urban multif family, that is where we would see 300%.

Gotcha. Okay. But the this development will pay a tap fee. Is that true? Absolutely. Yes. And do we have a rough idea of what that would cost? Uh or we're going to have to properly size and it'll happen at the time of building permit. So this is a planned phase approach. So it will be for most likely each building and they'll have to pay for the size of meter that they need for that building. Okay. And um can you remind me all the things the tap fees get used for?

So the tap fees help uh secure the water for the new use. But it also helps contribute to the ongoing maintenance of our system and it also uh contributes to the sanit there's a sanitary sewer feed that is incorporated in that as well. Gotcha. And when you say secure the water for the new use, what do you mean by that? That is uh it goes into what we can purchase for additional water and guarantees that the water is used on that site. Gotcha. Okay. Thank you.

Thank you. Um, Commissioner, I've looked through the PDP and I can't find any notes regarding a trail access easement on the property. If the applicant can show us which page that might be detailed on, happy to look at it there. Um, and if it's not detailed in their plans, we're happy to work with them on adding a note to their PDP if that's their intent. It's not a requirement of the city to do that.

Am I allowed to Kaylee Gillespie with Norris Design? Jacob, you are correct. There is not language within the um PDP at this time. Um we are happy to make an addendum to the PDP to include that language as a access easement for the proposed 10-ft wide concrete multimodal trail. [Music]

Um this is a minor note but it it did resurface on my mind. Um with this development site, the city noted that um the police department may be strained in resources and their capacity to respond. Um is the city prepared to uh address this with uh potential staffing shortages from the police department? And then in in this process, if if they don't um meet um get additional staffing, where would the city shift um officers to this particular area?

That's a that's a good question, Commissioner Juan. Um I'm sorry, I said your name wrong. I apologize. Um, one of the main issues we have from the police department, as as they've kind of stated it to us, um, and this is, this is detailed in the memo, is we only have one detective who works on senior crimes, um, and fraud being one of the main ones they experience. Um, uh, so that's I think where we'd probably see the the largest, um, increase in demand for service. Um, I believe they have they could have other officers or detectives uh, assist with cases. it'd be something that they'd have to analyze and then potentially would have to go back to um city council and ask for additional staffing.

Okay. So there's there's no real perceived negative effects on other area communities within Westminster of staffing shortages just given the nature of the potential crimes. They didn't identify like patrol officer shortages. Um they identified it, I believe in the memo details it as um education and outreach. Um additional calls at call volume just having additional calls to the 911 center that we operate and then particularly uh that senior crimes detective. Okay. Thank you,

Commissioner Caner. On a similar note, um the we are suffering from um a um lack of firefighting um facilities and manpower. believe the city has gone to the voters twice now uh seeking um tax relief to build additional uh uh firefighting facilities and and increase the budget for firefighting. I didn't see that specifically addressed here other than it didn't the the conclusion was it didn't negatively impact that. That's a curious circumstance that I um would like to know if that's been considered.

Um sure, Commissioner Caner, we do have the fire marshall here. I believe he can speak to um his department as well. I believe we characterize in the memo as an impact to the fire department. Um we don't always like to categorize everything as negative or positive depending on the the the level of impact. And that is one thing we purposely highlighted in the memo is this development does come with impacts to the city and the city services. Um, it also comes with benefits of bringing housing and this is a real developer and they have money here and they're ready to build this community. So, that's one thing we have to put in the balance is that that public good versus impacts. But, I'd like to ask the fire marshall to ask to address your question specifically, Commissioner Caner.

Good evening, commissioners. I'm Jim Gagliano. I'm the fire marshal with the Westminster Fire Department. Uh to answer your question, the area of this proposed project is in a service gap area um that is longer on delayed response time. It's not that it can't be serviced, just has a longer response time in that area. And it has been identified uh it's gone to the voters, I believe, once last year um and looking at other revenue streams to try to have a station in that area.

Thank you. I would just add in and I full deference to police and fire and the analysis the completeness the city has done staff looking at all the referral comments. I will share from a uh developer proposal uh perspective that what we heard from fire and police and response times which was just articulated perfectly is the key to that is Creekide Drive. And so response times for all the surrounding businesses and areas and neighborhoods is greatly enhanced with that connection. So we not only are we believe we're bringing a very low impact to those services because we are actually delivering infrastructure that will provide and alleviate and lower those response times for the existing community around us. So again, there is a there's a a a theory here that we're kind of going against a theoretical project that has not developed for 30 years on this site. And what we're trying to show is the cumulative impact of economic development, full spectrum of housing and immediate impact in such a positive way for workforce development, economic and community life. So just trying to show that as we request the comp plan change. Okay, if there's no more comments from the commission, I'll add a few of my own on the question on the fire response time. I'm not sure I see a difference between this project or if it was flex. It's still the same response time. It's the same distance, same roads. So I don't think that this project would create additional response time. Um,

one thing that I heard a lot of in the comments is choice. I mean, one gentleman said he didn't want to be forced into here. Well, nobody I haven't heard anything that people are going to be forced into anything. It would be a choice. And my mom would before she passed lived in a really nice house in the area alone. She would have loved this place. She sat there alone. You could have visiting angels go over. You could have me go over. You could have my sister go over. But the reality is she wanted to interact with people. And what a better place to interact with people than a place full of like-minded people. I mean, that's why a lot of people move down to Florida to the villages. I mean, I almost visualize this as a little miniature version of the villages. People go because they want to be with people. Nobody's forcing them to go there. It seems like a better option than you know if someone's being forced somewhere I feel for the people that are forced in nursing homes. I mean it seems to me a much better option than a nursing home and it seems like a much better option than having our elderly loved ones live by themselves. So, I'm going to be supporting this because I, you know, I personally live through I mean, three weeks ago, I was in Ohio trying to find a place for my mother-in-law and there's nothing except nursing homes, you know. So, the options to put her in a nursing home or to bring her here and

have her live with us and she doesn't want to come here and live with us. this would be the perfect place for her. I could we could bring her here and she could live with a place where she could play cards all day. She could play shuffle board all day. Whatever she wanted to do. So I guess that's all I have. You got one more.

Yeah. So I I think in terms we've had a long discussion on aging population and uh the US for the first time I think in American history is going to experience a massive demographic shift where most of these uh the folks here my parents included are going to outnumber my generation. Um, ironically too, um, the baby boomer generation also holds, um, the most assets, um, in American history. I I believe, uh, it was, uh, the national realtors noted that 43% of the home housing stock is owned by the baby boomer generation. Um, and I think Harvard noted in 2023, um, that roughly 90% of seniors do reside in their own homes, whether it's rented or personally owned through them. But there is going to be a demographic shift um, in terms of how we as a market, how the market can adjust to that and meet the the needs of this particular community. um that might mean they live in their own homes or there's options like this where they can go to. Um with that being said, um I know that uh this is not a part of the docket. Um and I know that it was know that this would be at market rate and I think that's fine. You people should have a choice to pick whatever they want and I think that it's a great option for the city of Westminster. I do want to note though u that I am concerned where the developer can seek um potential rebates um when they're when this is at market rate um they're pricing this at market rate. Now granted, this um doesn't affect um what we're discussing today, but that is a concern of the mine that I want to note. Um that um if you're going to be selling this at

market rate, um why is the city giving you rebates in that process? And that is a concern of mine. Um, I I'm like debating back and forth um on what I um how I'm going to approach this, but I do think there is a critical need for seniors who who choose to live in this environment. Um and um I'll leave it at that. Commissioner, Commissioner Caner.

Thank Thank you. I've I've said before that um I think we have an excellent uh staff in the planning division and their recommendation to me creates a presumption that has to be overcome. um a recommendation to uh approve or re a recommendation that we recommend approval to city council as a result is is for me a the the starting place that that I have to be convinced that that's not the right decision and this actually is closer uh than I thought it would be uh coming in just reading the packet. Um, and there there are a few I I hear loud and clear the residents who will be impacted most directly, the next door neighbors. But this this is not open space. It's developable land. It's private property. what's currently zoned would probably or likely or could result in buildings that are also four stories or or more. Uh so I try to focus on what is the change that's being sought and what is the impact of the change that's being sought and obviously uh one of the changes is to be able to use this for this particular purpose. That's a change to the to the comprehensive plan. And one of the elements of that is afford one of the elements that we're looking for and the staff pointed out was a affordable um uh uh senior housing. And as someone who would qualify as a senior for this particular development, I had somebody said something I was like, "Wait a minute. I'm just I am a senior under that definition." But um so so there's a a bit of a disconnect

there. There's a there's the increased consumption in water. If our utilities department says we have it, we have it. Um you know there's there's a lot of u uh concern about future impacts of well it doesn't matter. Um ultimately I come back to does it satisfy the standards that are set out for doing this and and our staff was careful about going through all the elements that that is necessary to to satisfy the requirements to get here. Some of them are judgment calls. It's not math or science necessarily and in a very strict uh a you know 1 plus 2 equals three. So, it's a difficult call. Uh, I actually in my role as a mediator often will get to a point in a dispute where I believe that the parties need more time and time is often a really great tool uh in a dispute because it allows people to get um levelheaded or off the emotion and start to think rationally. And there's a part of me that really thinks I I I've been exposed to this project for less than a week. I read the packet, heard a lot of comments. I don't know that I'm comfortable making a decision at this point without some more time, but I don't know what to do with that. So, that's those are my thoughts, my comments. to my co-commissioners.

Um, I'm inclined to agree with staff that overall this meets the requirements um of the approval. Uh, I heard some concerns that this was not uh that this development uh is is unaffordable to most seniors. Um, and as we saw from the home prices, I mean, that's just not that's just not strictly true. But let's even consider, you know, if it were true, the fact of the matter is today that what's before us is not a choice between an affordable senior living situation and what's proposed here. It is a choice between um a probably untenable commercial development or zoning for that which is currently in place and a change in zoning for more senior housing. Um, and ultimately, uh, you know, I think that, yeah, even in the senior housing market, supply and demand is likely a thing. Um, and so that helps with senior housing affordability overall. So, uh, I will be in support of this today. Any other comments? Okay. Call for a motion. [Music] Nope. Commissioner Pig. Sure. Uh, I move that the planning commission recommend city council approve the three comp plan amendments for the approximately 77.5

acre subject property. This recommendation is based on the finding that the three comprehensive plan amendments comply with the criteria in section 11-5-21 of the Westminster Municipal Code. Second. [Music] I'll second it. Roll call vote. Discussion, please. What's that? Discussion about the motion. If anyone

discussion about the motion [Music] I guess. Oh, there Commissioner D. Um, I am not in support of this motion at this time. um like uh Commissioner Conir mentioned could use more time but in lie of that um I feel that and this is based on what information and and and uh testimony that I've I've gathered here tonight. Uh, I feel that it's possible it's it's entirely possible that this development could end up with a minority of Westminster residents here. And I take it it's put here or it's proposed to be put here for the benefit of Westminster residents. Um, and if affordability doesn't come into play, then uh I believe that's that represents a greater chance in in uh in the in in in a development like that being full of rich outer out ofsters and um and a minority of Westminster residents. And I'm not saying that's going to happen, but

um at this time I would not be willing to take that chance. So I will I will be voting against Go ahead, Commissioner Peg.

Um, respectfully, that worry is not backed by evidence. We just heard that roughly 60 to 70% of folks who live in comparable communities around here come from roughly a half hour away. We are not within a half hour of the state border. And so, the majority of people living here are going to be from the metro area. I agree with that comment because that's what I heard during the testimony as well. Um, and as far as, you know, something that's just attract attracting rich people, I mean, we're talking about people that probably own a home. I think we've talked about that. And if they sold their home, came up with the, you know, had got the money to buy into this. I mean, that's not a heck of a lot different than someone chipping me off to a nursing home and the nursing home taking my house and all my assets. One, I'm kind of in a nursing home and the other one I'm in a place that has all these amenities and it would be nice to have something that's affordable, but affordable doesn't come with a bunch of amenities. that comes up that comes with the bunch of rowouses to to warehouse people. You know, people should have an option to not be warehoused. They should have an option to continue life in their golden years. So, I'll be supporting it. Any other comments? Call for a vote.

Commissioner Peg Yes, Commissioner Caner because I would like more time. U right now my vote is no. Commissioner Jeang. [Music]

Yes. Commissioner Mayo. Yes. Commissioner Dunn.

No. Vote passes 302. Next motion. [Music] Sure. Go ahead, Commissioner Peg. I move that the planning commission recommend city council approve the resoning for the approximately 7 75.5 acre subject property. This recommendation is based on the finding that the reasonzoning complies with the criteria in section 11-5-14 of the Westminster Municipal Code. [Music] I'll second it. Any any discussion? Colleagues,

call for a vote. Commissioner Peg, yes. Commissioner Conir, for the same reason. No. Commissioner Zong, [Music] yes. Commissioner Dunn, no. Commissioner Bale,

yes. Vote passes 32. Third motion. Sure. I move that the planning commission recommend city council approve the preliminary development plan for the approximately 75.5 acre subject property. This recommendation is based on the finding that the preliminary development plan complies with the criteria in section 11-5-14 of the Westminster Municipal Code. [Music] I'll second that.

Any discussion? Call for vote. Commissioner Peg. Yes. Commissioner Conir. Again, no Commissioner Jeang. Yes. Commissioner Dunn. No. Commissioner Mayo.

Yes. This passes 32. [Music] Okay. Okay, I guess that's it. Any discussion of old business, miscellaneous business? [Music] Guess we'll adjourn the meeting at 9:54.