Okay, can you hear me out there now? Yeah. Okay. It's October 2nd, out of wintery evening, and snow is flying. And I guess all of us should say we're eager for snow. I didn't expect this when I came back from Hawaii, but here I am. You know, this is a day that was marked with pretty significant sadness with the shootings in Las Vegas. And I hope all of us this evening or tomorrow will take a few moments to pray for all the families, all of those who were injured and keep them in your prayers. It's pretty, pretty sad. With that, I'll call the meeting to order. Roe call. Alyssa? Here. Bill Manson? Here. Markey? Here. Bob? Here. Tom. Here. Markie. Here. Bob. Here. Tom. Here. The very first thing on our agenda this evening is a joint meeting with town council and planning commission. And this is in regard to the Sonnenbluck condominiums. It's resolution number 39 series of 2017 and this is a resolution of town council providing direction identifying specific components areas of the code or core issues for the amendment preliminary plan application for Sonnenblik condominiums. So, Julianne, before I get started I'm going to call on Jamie to call the Planning Commission into session and take attendance. Okay. With that direction, I'd like Mark to take roll call from the Planning Commission, please. Okay. Terry, yep. Patrick Kelti. Here. Jim Gaskerson. Here. Jamie Nolton. Here. Doug Fauer. Here. Tom Bernstein. here. Here. Excellent. Everyone on the planning commission is here this evening. It's pretty significant. So with that, Julie Ann, let's go ahead and get started. And JD, do you want to find a seat so you can advise us if necessary answer any legal questions. I have a nice seat right here. I may be calling you up to the mic okay. Can I sit back there too? That's not the way it works. Okay. Mayor and City Council, Brian McNeil is our planner is going to present on the case today and then you can ask questions or begin the presentation by the applicant. Well, welcome Brian. Thank you. You want to introduce us to the topic, then we'll move into a presentation and then discussion if you will between the Planning Commission and or town council. And I'll be focused on issues we would like for the Planning Commission to discuss as we move forward. Okay, Brian. Well, do okay. Well, thank you. As you mentioned, this is the Son and Blake Minor PUD and preliminary plan application. And I want to start off by saying, pursuant to the town of Snowmass village land use code, section 16A5-340. Plymentary plan is initiated with a joint meeting between the planning commission and the town council. So that's the reason you're here this evening. Planning commission and town council may be familiar with this application or at least this proposal from previous iterations may have sat through some reviews previously. Just as a reminder, tonight's application is a plan unit development review with a zoning change request to multifamily and a request to build garages on falling and galling lane associated with the Son of Blitcon of Miniums. So similar to the Snowmass Center Joint Meeting that occurred a couple weeks ago, this is the applicant's opportunity to summarize the proposal for the Planning Commission and the Town Council. Staff has not provided any recommendations this evening, and this meeting is not the time for the Planning Commission of the Town Council to offer opinions regarding the proposal. This is something that will happen down the road with subsequent meetings. This is however the appropriate time for questions to be asked of either the staff or the applicant if planning commission or town council has any. If you take a look in your packet, staff has crafted a town council resolution that includes potential core issues for the planning commission to focus on during the review. So this is direction that's given from town council to the planning commission for any follow-up meetings that we have after this evening. Town council has the option if they wish to determine that the proposal has negligible impacts and does not require planning commission review. But with that said, it's probably important for staff also to point out that there is a scheduled planning commission meeting on October 18th, and we've already received numerous objections to this proposal from adjacent property owners, mainly from the Aspenwood condominiums next door to the Salon and Blick. That said there's also been a number of letters in support of it. And all these recommendations are all these objections and support letters will be included in the planning commission packet for the October 18th meeting. So with that and less there's any other questions I'll turn it back over to town council. Okay, but you want to proceed? Yes, please. For the record, my name is Patrick Raleigh, Stan Clausen Associates. I'm joined by Barnett Davis, a president of the HOA. And before we begin, Barnett would like to say just a few words to lead us on. Thank you. So I think we met before on this. We went in front of the planning commission. We discussed the proposed parking garages. One of the things that the planning commission recommended was that we lower the height of the garages. We did that. The main thing that for the garages for us was that we have a parking crunch throughout the area here that everybody is aware of. We wanted to add some additional parking for us and we wanted to add some storage to allow us to get our skis, bikes and things off of the decks that everybody runs into here. We went to the Plain Commission approved our proposal unanimously subject to some things. We tried to address those things. We came up against again to the town council for final approval and then it was delayed because of procedural defects in the initial effort to get these done. We went through, we heard a lot of comments from our neighbors, which are still coming back. The, I think it's really important for town council or a planning commission to come up and take, we encourage you to take a look at the area in order to assess whether objections are reasonable or not, whether we have mitigated the impact as much as possible for this project. I think the positives of adding parking, getting, making the area more beautiful, and it's entirely consistent with what the town plan is of all the plans that I've been aware of. So hopefully I'll leave it on to him for future style. Hey Patrick. Thank you. So as Brian and Barnett has just told us this is a proposal to add six two car garage parking spaces. These would be groges that were enclosed. We've had issues with people parking in the spots. And so the enclosed nature of the garage is an important aspect. The other important aspect is the storage that these provide. So a certain height has to be attained to have some storage space up above beyond where the car will be located. So it's for parking and storage primarily. Currently our parking is met utilizing seven onsite surface parking spaces and then we also utilize the numbered parking lots and parking passes or permits up there. So in a sense, we are taking some of the parking away from the public at this current juncture, and that's a situation we'd like to correct. As Brian pointed out, the property is currently zoned SPA1, which as I understand it, is kind of was a blanket zoning district that was assigned to many of the properties in the West Village. And as such, we really don't have an appropriate zone district. So we propose to go to a multi-family zone district with a PUD overlay. The dimensional limitations of the MF zone district fully meet our needs for the existing development. There is no new residential development being proposed. It's only the development of the garages. The context map you can see the Sonoblic is right smack dab in the middle and we are bordered on the east by the Weston and on the west by the Aspenwood. And then the, this is the Laurelwood apartments right there. You can see that most of the development pattern in this area is directly to your property line. You know, he's in pretty much all of the open space that you have. That's kind of the existing condition. Sonoblic is a bit of it anomaly and that we are set back from our property lines quite significantly. There is a west fork of brush creek that goes to the west that divides the west in and the Sonoblic and then some steep slopes that are located in here. So the garages, here's an existing condition of the units as they sit. That's kind of looking, the picture on the left is looking to the east from above on Fall Lane. Or I'm sorry, excuse me, on Galen Lane. And then the picture on the right is of that channelized, very heavily altered channel of the west work of Brush Creek. In many places that is actually still cold-rooted and is not visible, and it's unusual that we actually have it as an amenity on our property. This is fall lane where the bulk of the garages will be located, garages 1 through 5. You can kind of see the character of this lane. It's a lane is maybe not the best name for it. It's more of an alleyway. It's characterized by backs of buildings and service entrances and parking is how it's currently used. So, not exactly the most scenic location. This is Galen Lane up above. Barnett is there holding a survey poll. That's how we created some of our view simulations that you'll see later. And he's actually standing on a corner of the one garage that would be located up there, that's garage number six. So again, you can see a lot of tuck under parking immediately off of this picture to the right hand side as a trash enclosure. So that's kind of the nature of the lanes. There's our site plan. The condominiums, which will remain unchanged, the footprint will remain unchanged, that first picture of fall lane, I was standing roughly right here, and that second picture I was standing right there looking at the one garage. So there are the garage units, one through five on the lower half and garage six on the top that kind of can't leavevers over the edge of the topography. We have gone to great lengths to try to fit the garages in there, two car garages for the six, six garages for the six units, with some considerable site constraints. The sidewalk of the Aspenwood condos actually slightly encroaches upon our property at this location, so that is a bit of a pinch point. We've really taken great care to not disturb the sidewalk in any manner and then also to have the roof pitches designed in such a way so that the water and the snow falls off and it won't be falling on top of that sidewalk. The stream easement there is a 20 foot wide stream easement that is located to the west between us and the weston that is completely unaltered. We're staying out of it. Essentially our eastern side yard setback is that 20 foot easement. And from the earlier review we had talked about keeping the garages somewhat in line with the existing development on the eastern side. The garages will add about approximately 3,000 square feet, but that our open space requirement is easily met. The requirement is 25%, and we're providing 58% of the site remains open. What we talked about at and the planning commission will remember, we have several site constraints that kind of have dictated how the footprint is, or how the garages are laid out. So as I mentioned, here is this 20 foot wide water sanitary sewer easement. It's really for the creek. Then we have this close, the improvements of the neighboring property at the Aspen Wood. Again, some of those improvements encroach, but we want to stay away from them and we don't want to impact them. And then you have a central walkway for people exiting or from the parking up into the site. And that would also be utilized for gas line. So you have to keep that space there. And then you have a blue, the blue indicates the sanitary sewer easement that is in fall lane. So all of those site constraints taken into account, we have a pretty limited area to fit the garages in. That being said, we feel that this is a configuration that will work. We've staffs suggestion look that tandem situations or something like that. It just none of it really would work and you're always going to run into a situation where somebody is parking in front of your garage space. This is kind of the unusual shaped one, but we think it will work. Part of what came out of the first process, review process that we had, was to look at the drainage plan and staff was concerned what would occur with water at snow melt. So we hired high country engineering to take a look at it and they have come up with these bio retention ponds that are designed per staff, a tennis and a sports staff, to the Aspen Urban Run-Off Management Plan. So water is collected off of these roofs. Again, these are shed roofs coming back. These happen to be flat roof down here, but you'd have a shed roof that would be directing the water to the back, getting piped into these bio retention ponds, the water receives some pre-treatment before getting piped back into brush creek, so maintaining kind of a historic pattern and preventing to the best of our capabilities offsite impacts from storm water. The general configuration of these garages, you can see they're around 450 square feet plus or minus. These are garage units one and two, so these are the units closest to the Weston. The request that was made by the unit owners that would utilize these garages was they'd like to have a flat roof garage. They weren't as interested in the storage capabilities. And so you can see a 10 foot high flat roof, simply a garage. Previously, staff had allowed us, had given us some indication that a condition of approval could be that the final configurations of the roof could be left to a later date. But currently right now, those two garages are flat-roofed. Then this is the kind of the standard conditions 3, 4, and 5. I point out the oddly shaped one here has kind of a double garage door condition. Those with are 16 feet tall, which you'll notice that this area is utilized for storage, and that you can see in a section right here. So meaningful storage, and we think that we can probably get some storage here at the head end of the garage. The garages are, feature kind of a bit of an eyebrow. They have a shed roof up top, and then kind of an eyebrow over the garage to shield the front door from water and snow and to create some type of architectural interest. But again, their garage is their rather utility design. Deciding, of course, would be consistent with the existing sighting on the Sonomblek right now. T111 I think with a compatible color. And then this is the garage unit one, the standalone up on the upper gallon lane, very similar condition against sloped roof. This one would canna lever out over our property over the topography that lies on our property to try to pull it back as much as we can. I'm sorry, I can't see what's the height of that one. That's also 16 feet. Thank you. So 10 feet for flat roof 16 standard. And that was actually a height that we brought it down. Initially, when we first saw this at Planning Commission, they were, I believe, 18 feet. So we've tried to pull it down as much. But again, it's important for us to have that storage, that a little bit of height there. One of the major concerns that we had initially, and John Mele with the Fire Protection District, has also, we've been in contact with them, is to ensure that the adequate emergency access on both lanes is preserved. And that is a 24 foot requirement, both on the ground and also up above for the apparatus to get through. We have met it on both instances. We've gone out on site and pulled tapes having the proposed location of the garage corners located. And I feel very confident that the 24 feet clearance can be met. There's an image of that Barnett and I are functioning as goal posts right there, as we are down here. There are some other pinch points actually that exist up there that is the basis of their concern. Actually the Laurelwood apartment trash enclosure actually kind of sticks out there and has been hit several times by the trash truck. But it lies farther down the lane from us so we shouldn't have a problem. That's just kind of basically reviews what we talked about. John and the fire protection district had a couple of conditions that I would assume would get carried forward and that would be no storage. A vehicle's additional parking flower planters stored on the exterior that would extend into the 24 foot emergency access. And that signage would be provided, the new parking is permitted in front of the garages with the fire lane sign. Those are completely fine, we'll be glad to comply with those. If and be, those are brought forward as conditions of approval. I had earlier talked about the sanitary sewer easement and this was an earlier concern that we've met with Chris Laramon, who is your contracted engineer with the sanitary sewer, the sand district. And the issue being is that this far western garage would be hanging somewhat into. So the center line is the actual sewer line. There's a manhole cover here and a manhole cover down here. And this corner of this garage would be lined within the easement. So we reached out to the sand district and said, what can we do? Let's take a look at it. And Chris Larman and I went out and we took a look at it and taking a measurement from here to here and the slope of the sewer. Chris was able to determine that at this location the sewer line is sufficiently deep enough that our foundation wouldn't have to take a special foundational design. That a standard foundation would work. So that was good to find out and we will be glad and happy to work with the Sand District moving forward. A couple of the conditions that they have is that they would like to remove structural drawings, not a problem. When the time is right, when we go for a building permit, we'll be glad to review that with them. And that some type of an agreement be an easement agreement, be drafted, memorializing our encroachment into their easement. Again, we have no problems with complying with those conditions. we have no problems with complying with those conditions. And earlier, also discussed previously was the, we have, there's a standard 25 foot setback from the West fork of the brush creek. We would have to request a waiver of that because as I said, the condominiums have been located next to this channelized portion of the creek, which is in many instances covered over, but the construction of this property predated that. So existing conditions simply can't meet the 25 foot requirement. We are located, all of all development, all proposed development, and existing development is outside the 20 foot easement that is in place, and that we really have no plans on making any modifications to the channelization of the creek. We will with the West End's cooperation plant some additional trees, which is something that both parties would like, but no changes will be made to the water course itself. As I pointed out earlier to this is, Sunblik existed prior to the incorporation of the town. We have this funny situation with an SPA overlay, specially planned area one, which is my understanding, all properties up there carried that similar zoning. So we're just simply going to rectify that by rezoning to multifamily with a PUD overlay. So part of the PUD overlay, well, that, you know, what are the benefits to the community? Well, the grudges will free up the public parking spaces. Currently, some of those public spaces are utilized by residents, so we would like to open those up for use by visitors. The design of the granges will be compatible, again, of a very utilitarian design, but they're compatible with neighboring properties and compatible with the Sonanblick design. The multifamily rezoning is completely appropriate because that's what the property is being used for. And moreover, all of the dimensional limitations of the multifamily zone district will be met. Again, open space requirement of 58 percent is existing, our requirement is 25. And the-family for our size of property allows a little over 15,000 square feet. So with the new garages we are only bumping up to 13,000 eight so we're well below our maximum floor area as well. Part of the PUD overlay is we would like to request some zero setbacks on three sides, south, west, and north. The eastern setback is effectively a zero lot line condition from the easement, which is a 20 foot easement. But because of the site constraints, as I pointed out, the existing conditions, the facilities there in the ground, the zero lot line condition is appropriate for a garage. The garage is another, you know, supporting the existing comprehensive plan, the use of the garage will support the long term viability of the property. We feel that it will greatly enhance the visual characteristics of the surrounding areas by getting cars off the street, getting people's skis and snow shovels and what have you that find their way to a balcony out of sight. And we think that we also have maximized the very limited amount of space that we have for this very important use. So it would be a very meaningful thing for us. And again, I point out that we've had some issues with the security of these parking spaces, other people using them. And when I'm up there on site, I see it quite frequently. Everybody runs in, oh, I'm just going to be dropping something off. Well, they're utilizing somebody's parking spot. And it becomes an issue and a bone of contention with the neighbors. So on December 21st, we did have a recommendation, a unanimous recommendation for approval by the Planning Commission. And there were six points that the Planning Commission came up with that town council would have seen at this scene following. And I'll go through these one at a time. So one recommendation was the eastern side yard set back for the property be along the drainage easement and along the edge of the existing condominium improvements where they encroach into the easement. We have attempted to do that again with the need for an easement for the gas line and the closeness of neighboring properties. This is about as much as we can kind of push over to the east. However, it's really going to be a same condition as it is right now, and we'll try to enhance it with some additional plantings that will work with the West Inn. I should point out that previously the West Inn did support our proposal. That the proposed height of the garage is a recommendation was that the proposed height of the garage is along falling, be lowered or set back. We can't really set them back because of the close proximity of the existing development right there. You can't really push it back too much without having other issues. However, it is a varied facade front, so in that way we try to break up the massing, so it doesn't look like this monolithic wall that as you go down the lane. And as I provided, we did lower a couple of feet to try to minimize their intrusion of people's views. But that additional height, as I've said, is important for us because we need this storage. Another recommendation was that the proposed footprint of the easternmost garage of Fall Lane be set back a greater distance from West Creek, with the West Fork of Brush Creek Waterway. As I've explained, we can't do that. Site constraints prevent us from doing that and still providing a garage for everybody in the condo. That the, the next recommendation was that the proposed roof on the westernmost garage next to the Aspenwood would be adjusted so that it wouldn't shed water or snow onto the neighboring property and also not impact view. What we have done is where you have a shed roof on these garages, this end unit will be a flat roof so you're pulling it down to that 10 feet and we've put in a periput wall so there would be some slight amount of drainage going back into the site but you'd have a periput wall that would prevent any snow shedding off onto the neighboring parcel off of the sidewalk what what have you and then channeling it as I as I discussed earlier into these buyer retention ponds that would receive the water pre-treated and then release it at a historic rate into the West Fork brush creek. So I think with those we've addressed those earlier recommendations and concerns. Then they the planning commission has previously asked us to provide some view simulations with this is a view simulation from the front door of a unit of the Aspenwood condos. Certainly the building is there. It's right next to a parking. These are very close-in properties. What we've done is tried to break up that roof line so that it's not all one height. And I'd like to point out that really what this is, if I could pull away our view simulation, what you're looking at is the back of the conference center garages. And you're also looking at some vent fans and some communication in Canada. So what this garage is really blocking out is not that great and what's kept is the Ridge Line. So they'll still be able to see the Ridge Line and just block out the negative stuff. Patrick, do you have a view of the existing? That's the view of the... You know, I do. I can easily bring that. I know I've provided one to Brian. So I can provide that. That is the image that I have. I can provide you the existing. The snow removal plan was requested. So part of this kind of ramped up level of scrutiny that we had with the procedural changes is we have prepared provided a snow management plan of where snow storage can go and where we'll be pushing in. Again, we're going to keep it off of the town lanes, we'll keep it off of the central walkways and store it all within our site. Those blue circles indicate the areas of snow storage. There we go. I knew I had one. So there is your before view. This is the back of the conference center, garages. This tree is actually, I should have, you see a bunch of events. It's hard to see in this, but there's some, you know, in ten of some sort, there's the event that you have at the grill and whatnot. So you're basically looking at the backside of the conference center. And what, so there's your before and after. Then we did a view simulation looking down, lane. This is looking towards the west end. Again, I'm sorry it's hard to see. You can see a bit of how we did it by standing on the surveyed point of the corner of the garage. That is a surveyer's staff at 16 feet. And then you can come in with a sketch up model and show what it would look like. Again, you can see the kind of the push and the pull of the facades of the garages to try to break up that mass and you have less of a monolithic effect. Can you back up one for one second? I just want to point out that the view that the view is blocked from this one perspective on one unit out of 60 at the at the at the last week. It's in amber. I'm sorry. It's in amber alert. Story of interest. Okay. Yeah. But so this is one unit. I think it's J6, J8, but this is one unit out of 60 units at the Aspenwood. And what we're doing is we're eliminating and we're changing their view of the back of the conference center as he said and their view of the top of the Weston on one unit. So we're changing their view of a parking space and a road which is almost always semi-trailer servicing the West and going in and out of there all day long to provide goods and things to the West and we're replacing their view of the street and our park cars with a garage. And that's one thing. If you go above that, you can understand that the aspirin would have sloped uphill. If you go above that, they could see above the garage and they're seeing the exact same thing they did before, except for the tops of our cars. And I'd also like to add that with the revised Land Use application that larger spruce trees have been proposed to be located in there to be creating a visual barrier. If I drop those trees in, you wouldn't see what we were trying to look at. So the proposed landscape plan does provide for some enhanced larger than standard size spruce trees. We went over that view. Then this would be the view of the one garage at the top. Again, the garage is located in this vicinity, canally wearing slightly over the edge of the property, meeting the 24 foot wide fire access, and then it's a standalone garage that's located. And the views from the Laurelwood, what they're essentially lacking then, it becomes the side of the Sonan Blut with various, you know, pettios and decks that are located off of that. Yeah, so that's similar to what we're talking about with the Aspen. On the Aspen, we had one unit where blocking their view of the parking lot and maybe a little bit of the west end. With the laurel wood, we have two units on the end that are blocking where their view is almost identical if you look at this except where we're blocking their view of the son of Lecker. It's not exactly this key slope. So with that, I will conclude the presentation and be happy to answer any questions that I can. Patrick, a clarification for me, you talked about storage. How much storage space will be associated with each one of the garages? That is a number that I can get you. Though the storage is probably best indicated in Elevational View, this is kind of a storage unit that goes above that will be accessed interior. Let's see if I can get one with that. I was going to say the second was was access into that storage space So that that storage space runs across two-thirds of the Okay, or you know maybe not quite maybe half of of the property and it would be accessed by a pull down ladder or some other means. And then also we think we can probably get some built in storage units at the front end. You still need to have the ability to walk around, but probably add a little bit more in there or have stuff, ability to hang storage system on the wall. Patrick, what are the inside dimensions of those? Or centers, center? I see the widths, but I don't see the depths. Yeah, they're in there. I can't, I don't think it's 40 by 20 deep. I'm sorry? I think it's 40 feet wide by 20 foot deep. Probably a little bit deeper, probably 22. Standard parking spaces are eight 8.5 by 18. So yeah, probably a little bit deeper than 22. I don't know. I don't know. The numbers are in there. I've got the project top according to this drawing, this 25 feet deep. So yeah, looking at these, and this one for the lower garages, it says 23d, at least on number two and three, I believe, the units two and three. So there's 23, 24. 23 on one, 24 on the next. 23, 24, so somewhere in that, you know, ball ball. Yeah, so this, this dimension right here is 23. This is 20. There's about 21. They, they do vary a little bit. But that is, yeah, I would say 24 by 20. Thank you. No windows built into the garage. No windows. Exterior lighting. We haven't gotten to that point to detail that, but we can easily have some type of exterior lighting. One last question. That middle garage. The left car, that backs out onto the public walkway. This, the left? It just, it just got out of the public walkway. The public walkway is, I'm against the public walkway. Let me get to a, well, this is actually the Sonanblik walkway. The property line is right there. Property line, we had so many lines here, I believe is right like that. It's within our property. The orange section is your walkway down to your... Yeah, that's our walkway, central walkway. What's the easement? The walkway would be narrower than the... Yeah, that's the easement that we're required to have. The walkway would be... Yeah, the black hill's energy wants a certain easement. But if you can see underneath there, there's a corner of the walkway going up. So that car would have the ability to back out. I have a question. Yes. You have the new storage ponds for water and the snow melt or where you're going to park your snow. They were in different places. Is that, I thought they would be more together? Right, well, the snow melt plan is kind of dependent on the winter where we can shove it. Let's see if I can go to that. So the ponds are roughly right there and right there. So that snow melt would probably correspond with, these are not really ponds. I should really say they're grasped in depressions, you know, that have a layer of sand and so it will receive the water but the majority of the time will be dry and look to be grassed depressions. And that water just comes from the roofs? Yeah, primarily the water in the ponds will be channeled off of the back of the roofs piped into this area and similar over here to capture this one. This one will just be able to sheet flow over into the creek. And like if it snowed like it did today, you had to move snow to those blue areas. Where would that water melt into? Well, I think it would infiltrate in the ground. I mean, snow melt primarily with the ground. I mean snow melt primarily with the bio retention pond is doing is capturing a You know tenure event of cloud burst or something like that that is inundating the area Okay, so I think snow storage would be able to sit there or infiltrate into the ground just like how. How do you get the snow off the flat roofs? I'm sorry. How are you going to get the snow off the flat roofs? Well, it would be part of the management plan of shoveling. If necessary, they will have a slight pitch to them, but I don't think it would run. And it's also just a structural consideration that it would carry the snow load through the season. I have a question about the what we used to call the Benedict Trail, the Creek easement through there on the east side of the Sonoma Blac Property. Is that currently an active sidewalk through there? Is that maintained? Is that walk? They used to be a walk through there. There actually is no trail. That's been pulled out of it no trail. It's just native grass. There's a little sidewalk that goes up next to the western that I rarely see used. The western has a door there you can see it right there. But there is no and actually you get a rail or tie stairs and a trail that ran up through there. I'm just curious whether that was still there. It gets very steep up here and it's rather densely planted up there. And then it's lost up above. And that's pretty much kids taking little boats and floating them down the creek. It's the most action that area gets. Patrick, you have two grages that are proposed with flat roofs, correct? Did you contemplate swapping that with the pitched roof that's closest to the Aspenwood? Well, I will point out that the Aspenwood does have a flat roof over the first bay, would be a flat roof over that. The first bill, the first bay would be a flat roof. Really the function of the flat roof was that somebody who lives in this unit said I prefer a flat roof. I don't necessarily need the storage and that was a preference. Whether or not, as I said, staff had provided that we could change those conditions at a later date. So as I said, staff had provided that we could change those conditions at a later date. But it was primarily driven by the desires of the unit who would be using that garage. And we tried to give them the same consideration that we're trying to give the Aspenwood and the Laurel with people is that they didn't want it to be built so high as to cut off their view. They said, we don't care if it cuts off our view of the buildings, but we don't want it to cut off our view of the horizon and things like that. So what we did is we designed it for them so that they would not cut off their view of the horizon. And it's the exact same way that the ones with the slope roofs do not cut off the view of the street, the park cars, the back of the conference center, but it doesn't cut off the view of the street, the park cars, the back of the conference center, but it doesn't cut off their view of the horizon. So that's what we tried to do, and we lowered it down to 16 feet. So you have assigned those particular buildings to particular units, there's no option to switch those with the people that say they don't need the storage. Oh, yeah, that's an internal thing, but yeah, we would sit there and we have a discussion internally with that about if somebody didn't want the storage. The, that hasn't been the case yet. The people that we had one, HOAs are extremely difficult. We had one that didn't want the view. I mean, one of the view didn't want the storage. Then we had to get one next door to them where we get somebody to agree to take less storage in order to accommodate their neighbor and say, okay, I'll do it for you so that you can get your view and it won't interrupt that. I'm not there that often, so it's not a big deal. The people who have the storage are people like me and my neighbor with a bunch of kids and other people who live there year round and we need a place for our bikes and our skis and our kayaks and all the other stuff that we have. So we've come to an accommodation based upon, based upon the Switzerland technique of negotiating, which HOAs are not easy. But we did do that. We took into account that some people wanted storage, some people were willing to make a compromise to take less storage to accommodate their neighbor. Yeah, but I guess the question is, could that unit be switched with someone who didn't need the storage? So that unit in the Aspenwood is less impacted by a 16-foot roof line? I think the issue that Burnett was trying to get at is, you know, you have, if you have a flat roof, then it was a negotiations to get somebody to accept a flat roof next to them that are not constantly there. People that are permanent residents want the storage, need the storage, and so that's why you had the flat roof. Barnett, I think in the last iteration of the salt two talks, was that this was going to be his unit with the flat roof. So it's a compromise of people needing storage, wanting storage, or wanting different things. And to your point, the permanent residents who need the storage, we're going to be in those garages and they need the storage. They want the storage. Other questions? We do have a resolution in front of us. They will ask Brian. There were eight considerations suggested from the Planning Commission. Do you feel that the issue around the sanitary sewer line requiring the easement is adequately addressed in those conditions or what we want our planning commission to look at? Yeah, I mean we can certainly add something a little more specific if the town council would like to see that. I know we have an easement there, but just make sure that we're inclusive of all this water and sand issues. What do you mean we like to suggest some language or? Mayor, just, yeah. We will require proof that the sanitation district is satisfied as part of that, and we can just add that specifically here if you prefer. That'd be fine. Thank you. Okay. Multi-family, I was noted by Patrick. The 15,000 were well within the multi-family FAR issue. Correct. So I don't see that as an issue right now. Let's make sure that that's included. It's own district. Okay. We'll find there. Okay. Do I have a motion for approval for resolution number 39 series of 2017? So move. Thank you Bob. Do I have second? I'll second it. Thank you Bob. Do I have second? I'll second it. Thank you. Alyssa. All in support. Say aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed same sign. One opposed. One opposed. Okay, we have one opposed and four in support. So having said that we will look forward to the Planning Commission's work. And do you want to adjourn the Planning Commission? I'll be glad to. Thank you. We'll adjourn. Planning Commission. Second. Second. All in favor. Hi. Hi. Thank you. Thank you very much, guys. We'll take a short break. So, Sayonara, you want to stay for this full meeting? It's going to be probably a little long. you I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. There's a public comment. Don't. Hey, MC, come on up. Thank you, your honor. Well, convinced Jim to come back to the gym sooner. Hey, MC, come on up. Oh, thank you, your honor. Convince Jim to come back to the gym sooner. He's been best. How many of you are guilty, man? Anyway, my nomically to Zemsy Vee said a third. Soren the paper and all that. Yes, the financial advisory board. Yeah, the guys are in there. Don't worry, I've been at the meetings too. Clint's been there. Mays and Clint even knows what the dollar amount for maintenance of this building has just overheard him. I mean, how incredible he should be at a accountant. But anyway, you know, I would like to see the snowmass village and the snowmass village, not snowmass. Financial advisory boy, you know, look at financial information. And probably even marketing information concerning jazz, ass, and snowmass. Now, I've been thinking about, well, you know, let me say it another way. I've been thinking about that little group. I said, look, something like this, she had made like $9 million, right? Sales or whatever it may be. However, there was a advertisement that was an ask from times that was there several times that said, I think it was 10 years and more, they had doled out to organizations, $6 million. So my brain says if they generate it like $9 million million this year and they only have six employees You know they only have six employees, but over ten year period they had doled out six million I say mm-hmm All right now the other thing too is I'm looking at the towns free summer concerts Also to be looked at. Now, and if there are other music venues that are around, they could be in restaurants, et cetera, et cetera. Also look at them in terms of finances. It doesn't have to be perfect, right? Because we have ratios of whatever else to deal with. Now, what I'm saying is, so the town can have a better understanding because you're looking at vitality. And a better understanding of beneficial monetary aggregates. So all the words, also the figures who come out, and we deal some kind of correlations with tax revenues accrued to the town. All right, lodging industry occupancy and revenues. And of course you get the taxes too. I remember that from Beverly Hills all the time you have notes of figures. And then the food eateries. All right, we don't worry about the gas station for now, but you would also include the supermarket, all right? And the various restaurants also the eateries within the hotels. So in other words, you would have a sub of lodging industry, too. Now, what happens, all right, remember, that's their sales, but we're also looking at estimated crowds in terms of numbers, all right, estimated audiences. Now, and then when you're looking at the restaurants, still it would be estimated crowds, how many people are eating in those places. So then you have numbers correlated over the lawyer. It's behind me. That's what you change in the calendar. Oh, but remember, you would have these aggregates and terms and numbers and sales et cetera that would give you a better idea of possible vitality, what's actually coming in, what isn't, and you're excluding like Aesmer, you're looking at your town. See, that's the important thing. Now, what happens is that also you would look in terms of, especially, you know, special music events, right? The cost of the town's services related to these events, or I would say, are items. See, so you would have that monetary figure, and if you wanted to also numbers, numbers of employees that are devoted to them. See, because I want you to have a much clearer picture of like what's going on. So as you work things out in the future, see I'm not looking at conferences and all that. See, we're looking at in terms of the music stuff so you can bring in more and you can have, in other words, what happens? You'll know the money dynamics much better. You'll know somewhat of the people's dynamics. And also if you can, is to have the guys and gals upstairs to better marketing survey of the crowds themselves. Well, look, thank you. Oh, and it will help out in terms of base of village So look thank you very much for your time as Ben Franklin said time is money and Clint is a great leader in Jim You got to come back to the gym I just wanted to recognize MZ for his fine choice in universities. Oh, that's true. That's true. John knows the bills quite well to pour them. Oh, too. That's funny. That's on record. That is on record that is on record Okay, anyone else for public comment Let's move on to consent agenda. Do I have a motion for approval? Madam Mayor there in the underneath the winter parking plan council shenk called me today and pointed out two typos that will correct. One has to do with the word LOS should have been removed in a certain spot. There made no sense. We got that out. And one has to do with referring to a lot C and should have referred to a lot E. So we'll make those corrections. Thank you. Oh, and. Yeah, I was going to go into the weather parking plan, but what I might question is just minimal. Sorry. Not going to. I have a, well, it's confusing to me on the minutes lines 181 and 182. There appears to be a double negative, and I'm not sure if that is what was intended. Double negative? Yeah, so it reads, Aces is here to respond that they do not believe they cannot accept the generous offer provided by the town. Report, not respond. The ACES is here to report. Of course it should be that they can. That they do not believe they cannot accept. It should be can. Can. Yes. Yes, that's a double negative. So there's a double negative. Yeah. There's also a lot of misspellings. Well, I just- But that's a I've just asked. I just worry about things that don't make sense. Okay, we'll get that corrected. Any other questions on our comments on the minutes? And, Alyssa, would you give your corrections to plant? I did. Okay, yeah, he has. On page five. One second, Madam Mayor. Okay. I'm waiting. Yeah. Well. Okay. Winter Parking Plan. Two, three, four, five, six, seven. Page five is 164 to 200 something. I did have a question over on the Metro Improvement District charge of $5 for every hour up to $30 a day. That has to be improved by the Metro improvement district does it not and if so when might that happen? Their rates? That's the rate in the parking management plan that was amended with the 2015 CUD amendment. This is go back though does every year the improvement district have the opportunity to yay or nay on these parking rates in the garage? They can set the rates they want they own those We try and we being the town try and get a Winter parking plan together so that everyone knows in the community and beyond What the rates are for all the different this is This is really more of a compendium. Okay. What the different parking ownerships are going to charge. Okay, just want to make sure that not going to come back and want to change that right before the season. Well, they would have to file a minor period amendment to amend that parking management plan. And in the email of the Community Development Director in the town attorney this morning, there was an email from the President of the base village metropolitan district number two, requesting such a PUD amendment. And they had not submitted an application, but they are formally requesting it and they will be coming to you soon. To your neighborhood soon? To your neighborhood soon, yeah, I guess. You know, if they can garner the consent of the property owner, which is base village metropolitan district number one, and the goals and objectives of the base village district number one and base village district number two may not be completely aligned. Okay. Okay. Thank you. But that will not be applying this season to be the time frame due with notice deadline or requirements and the process for a minor PUD plan amendment. If it was submitted today, there might be an outside chance that by the end of this case, and it could happen. So. But we're all set for next year is what you're saying. It's upcoming season. This upcoming season. This upcoming, yeah. And this parking plan, is there any difference between this parking plan and the one we saw three or four weeks ago? Just the typos and some formatting change. Okay. Okay. Thank you. Any other questions? Okay. Do we have an option for people who choose not to, if they don't want to pay to park? The rodeo. They don't want to pay to park. Radio. Radio or the intersection? But they can't park for multiple days in the rodeo lot. So we don't have a non-paid parking option for multiple days. No. Not without, I mean the Chief of Police could always allow for extended, say a charter coach bus could park in the rodeo lot under his direction for an extended period. And I know we had some conversations about having some sort of information sign on Highway 82 if for the 15 or 20 days of the year when our lots are full There's a there's a sign that's right before buttermilk now that's encouraging people to park and commute to town Is that a C dot sign? I? Believe so yes as much like the one that's down by Jérôres talks about different highway impacts. So to have a sign like that to inform people that our lots are full, what would the process be? That would be get the blessing of C.Dodd as well as Picking County to make sure that it was consistent and and and demnify the people that were associated. It comes up in the UOTC a little bit. We've talked about it a couple of times there to look at talking about Park at the intercept lot before you go into town because the bus is going to be faster. They talk about that as well. So it would be kind of my hope that we would kind of not have a series of signs that are talking about different things but have some coordination so that the signs are saying sending message were inappropriate. As you said, our problem is 15 or 30 days a year, not a daily occurrence. On page 22, number 12, it does contemplate Assigned the agreement puts the obligation on the husband's king company, okay, okay Because it is it is really skier driven, okay, I mean David will explain to you It can either be a big powder day the New Year's week or an avia seed day Those are the days that the town slots become highly impacted. And that's when turning those people left into the intercept plot at Bruce Creek in 82 would be advantageous. But the obligation is put on to ski company to arrange that. Do we want to direct staff to pursue that with the ski company? We discussed this the last time I brought it up and you said they put something on the way finding science. Didn't you say that? They tried to. I mean, John just pointed out, I mean, this is a ski company obligation. How well they execute on it, I guess, John just pointed out, this is a ski company obligation. How well they execute on it, I guess could be discussed. But the way this agreement is set up is it's their obligation to make that happen. We can certainly assist, we can certainly walk them through the question that Councillor Mattinast, how do they get the approval process? The one minute history that I got was this has been an obligation for a long time. It's been difficult to execute on because of a lot of concerns about sign pollution with C.DOT and the county. And so we can certainly ask them to make sure that they are active trying to make this happen, but the obligation is on them and we can certainly encourage them and work with them to make it happen. And that's I think most we could do with this agreement right now. We know it's an issue. We know it's something we need to continue to work towards. It's just, unfortunately, one of those examples that's more difficult than it ought to be to get the solution developed. And I'll refer to these guys that have been doing it longer than I have, but I think that's the short version of where we're at. I think it'd be helpful if you could nudge him a little bit. We actually have a ski ski company update in two weeks only and only a gin. Sometimes soon I can't remember when it is so is it? Would it would it be wise to say something to them before that update? I'll sure yeah to say something to them before that update? I'll, sure. Yeah. We've talked about this several weeks ago when the parking plan came around about possibly having to sign down on Brush Creek Road and David you said it's up to the county was a big problem. And now if we obviously don't have the parking that we used to have and we were still full when we had the parking that we used to have. And we were still full when we had the parking on those certain dates. And to have everybody drive up brush creek road to turn around and go back to the intercept lot, to me, doesn't sound very green. If we could give them some kind of warning, that seems like it's a smart thing to do. And that doesn't sound like sign pollution to me. So that's a smart sign. do. And that doesn't sound like sign pollution to me. So that's a smart sign. We have smart phones. We need a smart sign. And everybody needs to get on pick and county alert as well. But when people are driving, you shouldn't be looking at pick and county alert anyway. You should be able to see something and oh, there's no more parking it, but still mess on that park over here at the intercept lot. We shouldn't rely on our phones to be, we're just gonna contribute to the hazard of the driving and texting and all that stuff. I would just point out that ski companies authority and the matter pretty much corresponds with the town's authority and the matter, which is no We don't like you say we what's that mean nothing nothing right? I mean David has been talking since he had hair well and Stay in the county have been unreceptive. I'm sure this key company would absolutely love You can pound on them. They've signed this agreement. They understand they have the obligation. Okay, thank you very much. Right. I mean, if there's a sign on 82 now encouraging people to park and buttermilk and commute, there's got to be a way to make that happen. Did we have a motion? We do not have a motion yet. I have a motion for approval of the consent agenda with the modifications as discussed. Yeah so moved. Thank you. Do I have a second? I'll second it. All in support. Oppose. Same sign. Okay we're moving into public hearings. This is a continuation of a public hearing regarding the major PUD amendment from the preliminary plan application for enclave. And Jim, you're sitting in the hot seat if you will for presentation this evening. And I'll be calling upon you and then our I see Mr. Hoffman here and Z group is here and we'll go ahead and get started. But as we move into this presentation, I will move forward and continue the public hearing. Open the public hearing. I thought this was a continuation. You're opening the continued public hearing. Okay. Plus and. Okay. Okay. Okay, having said that, Jim Julianne. Thanks mayor. As you mentioned, this is a preliminary plan PUD and the applicant initially proposed six free market units in this particular complex that has 39 existing units. Can you speak up just a little bit, Chip? Move your mic up a little. Yeah, the applicant was proposing six new free market units in this complex that has 39 existing units right now. One was a conversion of an existing managers unit and the east wing of the enclave complex. And then five brand new units were proposed in a three pod addition with underground parking on the west side of the site. Among other improvements such as replacement retaining walls converting the existing rival center to three employee units. Adding a new arrival building, expanding a car port structure to expand tandem parking provisions together with a setback reduction. The applicant is also proposing variations from the build at unit equivalency cap. In this case they're exceeding the 100 percent build out cap for the comp plan together with the setback variant. So community purposes are needed to justify those variations. So this whole process began with a joint planning commission town council presentation back on April 3rd. The applicant then followed up with the planning commission reviews at four meetings this past spring and summer. And during that process the applicant has submitted four supplemental addendums to their application, which mainly are in response to a number of the staff comments, referral agency comments, and planning commission concerns. And two of those supplemental addendums related to the civil engineering plan and the drainage plan. The drainage plan is still outstanding. The town engineer still wants some data to support the offsite drainage impacts upon the adjacent base village development, so that still needs to be addressed. And then at the last spinning at the planning commission meeting on August 16th, the applicant presented a formal amendment in their presentation, which was a new restricted RO unit. The town doesn't have any standards for this unit, but they proposed what the reference is an affordable restricted resident occupied unit, which would be did restricted for that purpose. So standards would need to be established in a restricted housing agreement during the final PUD process. The applicant only proposed, showed the change for this RO unit on the lower level of the building addition on the west side, but did not show the holistic effects of this unit on the rest of the free market levels above that first level, such as the unit equivalency floor, area mass and scale parking, parking ratios, things of that nature. So we feel that based on that particular amendment, the applicant should submit a more formalized holistic amendment that addresses the associated impacts regarding this new unit that's being added to the next now. So the applicant's gonna be presenting their project and we recommend that they just go forward with the presentation at this time. But during their review, we think the focus on this particular proposal should be based on basically the view impacts up and down the hill. Secondly, the variations being proposed and the adequacy of the community purposes. The sufficiency of the landscape buffering design being proposed. Fourth is are the public improvements, including sidewalks. And then lastly are the civil drainage plan outstanding issues that need to be addressed. So those five things we think are the, that's the scope or the five key topical areas that need to be focused on with this review. So also the zoning is that not one? That's part of the proposal is the proposal to MF zoning in for the most part they meet. And then we have the issue around the RO. Yeah, the associated or a domino effects of the RO unit being carved into the into the building addition floor plan. And then just for the public record, there are public comments being received. Most of them are, they have several reasons for objecting to this particular plan. And then just for the public record there are public comments being received. Most of them are, they have several reasons for objecting to this particular proposal. And I should mention just for the public record that Peter and Joy do or these previously submitted some public comments that that didn't make it into the packet. So those have been passed out to the council again for your review. Just wanted to make a note of that. So I think that concludes my introductory comments, and I'll just turn it back to the council. The applicants representatives are here, Randy Henry, Jim Gustasson, and the Mike Hoffman. Yeah, for the RO unit, we thank the next step after you hear the presentation and receive public comments, is that the applicant should formally submit an amendment to staff so we can refer it at review. I get to adequately review it and present it back to council. And following the code procedures for an acceptance or denial or remand of the formal amendment application. Okay. Thank you. A very extensive staff analysis report that many of us probably have some notes on that as well as the issues came forward. But do that as it may? Thus you want to go ahead and get started? I would. And yes, as Jim pointed out, Randy Henry and I are from Z Group Architects. My co-opman is the Association Attorney here. And Mel Blumenthal is also here. He's the president of the Homeowners Association for Non nonclay. We're going to run through this presentation, if nothing else, these are prompts for me to remember what to say. So using this, onclay is of course located here surrounded by base village and press wood primarily. It's because of the center of gravity shifting in with base village and press wood primarily. It's because of the center of gravity shifting in with base village, enclave has become more centrally located in the overall core of the village. This is primarily a renovation project. The focus of a lot of discussion is gonna be about the proposed new units, which help pay for some of the renovation work. But this project started out as a renovation effort and you can see some of the original deterioration. It's an old 40 year old complex that has weathered like I do over time. One of the principle things that has triggered urgent renovation is this retaining wall. This runs the length of the property and it's behind the car ports. It's been failing for a number of years now. It's hard to assess exactly when it will totally fail, but it's in the process of seriously failing imminently and it needs to be replaced. In order to replace this, we need to remove the car ports to get the equipment in there to put in soils, nail, type, connection back to the existing uphill slopes. And so it becomes a major project, which then in turn triggers a major effort to do other renovation things that are related. In addition to that, these retaining walls run across the back side of these uphill car ports, which you see it's sticking out here, but they run the full length to the east and then to the west. In addition to replacing those car ports once they're removed to fix the retaining wall. There's a concern and an attempt to address the curbside appeal. This is the view from Wood Road. You can see it's a very utilitarian at best curbside appeal. Arrival experience. This is the car port area, which again is very utilitarian in its appearance. I wanted to point out, now some improvements were made during this past summer. And this was the view before those improvements began. So this was the one piece of the project that really is most visible from Wood Road and you can see again it was very plain 40 year old type style of lodging design. Something else that's occurred in this recent round of renovation is these roof overhangs were very low on the upper floor, this roof overhang here, which precluded uphill views to the mountain. So we've added some of these dormers. The project urgently needed to be re-roofed. So the dormers were added as part of the re-roofing project. And because all these roofs interfaced with various walls, this upper floor of siding was also replaced, but this is part of a general master planned for overall renovation. In addition to that, this is part of the roofing project. Some other gables were added for functional anesthetic value. And then finally, as a demonstration project on the downhill side, stonework has been added over the less sightly brick, old brickney's that existed. So to point out what the, again, what the thrust of this project is, is renovation. These are the categories of renovation that's being proposed. The roofing had to be done, so it's been done in this first phase. Other pieces are reciting the entire ski slope exterior of the building. Replace those retaining walls that I mentioned, that retaining wall runs all the way across the length of the property here. The car ports then in turn have to be replaced. There's a suggestion to repay the car port area and add this new car court area. Currently, there's just a T intersection, so no car, let alone a emergency vehicle or a delivery truck can negotiate a turn without going to a three point or five point turn just to get up into the property and then turn around and go back. So this car court area will allow for a full radius turn and we've met with John Mellie at the fire department. This also enhances and he's happy with the with this aspect of the fire of improved emergency protection. There's also some sidewalks that are at it, landscaping these stair towers that are being proposed to be improved. This new arrival building, the employee units which are the old arrival building is being proposed to convert to some employee housing units which I'll talk about in a minute in more detail. The free market units are being proposed in this location for the purpose of helping to absorb some of the costs. Now, I just want to point out that the association has already spent in excess of $2 million during the last year and a half to do renovation work starting into this master plan. It's estimated that to do all these improvements, retaining, paving, arrival building, re-skinning, new stair towers, conversion of units, et cetera. All of that's going to cost in the $5 to $7 million range. So these new units are anticipated to pay for approximately 50% of the renovation improvements. And that's on the optimistic side, 50 to 60%. So they're not certainly not intended or expected to be able to pay for all of these improvements, which are quite substantial. Now one of the things that's unique about this property and you may recall from having seen this at the joint session is that the old lift 11, the old triple chair lift, the wood run lift was eliminated and the easement was vacated, that red area, which in turn cut off this whole triangle of the enclave's property. So once that easement is removed, then this area becomes accessible as part of the enclave potential improvements. improvements. This is an overview showing, I know that although the reason for doing this project is to renovate everything and add some of these new features like the arrival building and so forth, is in over one of the things that will be the subject of much of the discussion is this proposed new building which has five new units and this RO unit which we'll talk about and it was added at the last minute and I might add that it was added at the request of the planning commission. They suggested that an additional affordable unit, yes Tom? Jim, once before you go too far, can you go back to the previous slide? You bet. And now, the property line, is that the whole property line in the ground? Yeah, the green, right below the easement? The green is the property line, right? What about the brown to the right of the easement? That's the area that's part of the property as well. We just shaded that a different color to indicate that that was kind of inaccessible as a result of the. Okay, so that is the property line. Yeah, the property is all the shaded area. Okay, thank you. So this again, as an attempt to try to show that this new building rather fits in, that it follows the same design character, the same rhythm of module size, the roof height, angles, and so forth. And there's three levels, like the existing building, like the crestwood across the street, much less than the base village buildings, which are sketched in here. This to be sure that you're oriented. This is Wood Road going up the hill. The bridge is right in here. This is the new arrival building and the car port area is here. We're proposing a green roof over the new car ports which does not exist now, so it'll add to the visual openness of the site. And what else do we want to say on that, Randy? So from a plan view, this is the car port level. There's some parking added at the lowest level, which is at the same level as the existing parking area, then the next level up is the first floor of residential units and then come the second and third floor. I want to go back for a second and I'll show you this in more detail later, but this particular unit when the planning commission suggested that a RO unit might be added, and that was their specific request, a resident occupied type unit as opposed to other kinds of affordable units. We were able to figure out a way to carve out part of this space on the ground floor of the new building to create that additional RO unit. And then the other half of this space remained part of the unit up above. There was access from the unit up above. This actually will look at it in a little more detail in a bit, but this is actually quite a nice location for an RO unit because it's got its own kind of private entry, it's got down valley views, and it's got open patio that's very private from the rest of the complex. So these are somewhat technical drawings that show the elevations of that proposed new building. And I'll describe those in a little more detail. Some of the other features of the renovation project, this is the proposed new arrival building and some of the aspects of that is there's an elevator in this arrival building that takes one up to the, what's the pool level here. Right now, if you want to access the bottom of the elevator in this west wing, you have to go up two and a half flights of stairs to get to the bottom of the elevator. So this elevator will really facilitate use of the property, movement, handicap, accessibility, and so forth. The other functions in this arrival building are pretty similar to what's in the current arrival building with the exception that there's some space that is flexible on the second level. And then that backs up against a fitness center, which is currently located in a basement space that's very subterranean. Access is very poor. So by putting a fitness center up, moving that fitness center up to the pool level, it'll have windows and will be much more functional and used. Jim, are there elevators that then allow people to get up to the upper? Yes. That's what I thought. There's one on each side. There's one on each side. So that's not changing. Those aren't changing. Those are not changing. But we're adding this elevator to get you up to the starting point. This is a little bit more of an aerial view showing that arrival building. It can picture how the fitness center can fit on the backside of it at the level of the pool. See these existing stairs. There's actually another wing of those stairs that we would have to take out in order to accommodate this 70 foot diameter car court radius. And we lose some parking on each end end but we replace it in other ways. So that begs the next question then where would visitors park? Visitors will there's there well we'll get to the parking there's going to be a net addition of it goes from 47 existing spaces to 72 spaces. I saw that. We'll do the math on showing how that works. The certain number of those spaces will be dedicated for the units, the existing units and the new units. The remainder of those spaces will then be managed by the property manager and that will part of that will be visitor parking. Now in addition to that there's Kiss and Ride parking around the perimeter of the of the car court area. Okay. And that will also then accommodate shuttle vans and even the big buses that come for tour groups that are coming in. So this just shows a floor plan of that arrival building. All these functions are the functions that are currently in the existing arrival building a lobby area, front desk, a board room meeting room, and some office space. This is the elevator that we'll be able to be, the door to the lobby will be able to lock off at night and the elevator then will be accessible 24 hours a day. This area over here will accommodate the new boilers for the new snow-mounted system. There's an existing snow melted system. We're going to not add any additional square feet, but we're going to replace the boilers with much more high efficiency boilers, and they'll be located in that area. This is a view of the, if you remember that view from Wood Road, that kind of was the very plain looking facade. This is that facade as it envisioned fully with the new gables, the new stonework, but the significance of this facade, this image is this is the area where there's currently a manager's unit that was built with the original complex. We're proposing to convert that to a free market unit and then add additional employee units or affordable units in other ways. This is a floor plan of that proposed renovation of that affordable or that free market unit that's going in the old manager's unit space. And what this consists of, this is all below grade space here. What this, there's windows out in these directions. What this consists of is two bedrooms and then living dining kitchen area here. This, the manager's unit was a one bedroom unit that existed about in here. And this area is the fitness room. So if you imagine this is all below grade you had to go down these stairs here and then you were in totally in a basement type space for that old fitness room so we're proposing the new one that's up at the pool level. These are some of the kinds of other improvements that are being proposed. We're looking at doing new stairways that will have, they're currently just wood frame. We're proposing to add stone siding and windows to open them up and light up those stairways for guests that are coming and going up the stairs. This is an example. This is actually the entry to that, to the bottom of the elevator in the West Wing. So one would have to currently walk up to and a half flights of stairs to get to the bottom of the elevator, which then goes up in this stair and elevator tower. The proposal just from an aesthetic standpoint is this is that same doorway into the elevator. The elevator shaft is in this stair tower, and the stairs and elevator occupy that new space. So those are some of the visual improvements that occur around the property. The car ports then, as I said before, will be replaced with a new structure, green roof structure, and what do we see in this view? I guess we're still seeing that just to put it in context. This is that same stairway, the west elevator tower here, the arrival building, the here, the elevator in the fitness room, anything else, Randy? So these were the town's primary concerns. The planning department gave us these concerns to respond to and so just to highlight the ones as we go through them we'll talk come back to the build out chart in just a second but as part of the build out chart to adjust it, there's a requirement for exceptional circumstances. And we would sort of contend that the exceptional circumstances is that this major retaining wall that runs the full length of the property is currently failing and needs to be replaced. And the other exceptional circumstance is that this easement was in place for the early the second aspect of an adjustment to community or to the build out chart. These are the community purposes that are the categories for PUD. So provisionally, the community purposes are the categories for PUD. So the community purposes that are the categories for PUD. So provision of restricted housing, encouraging sustainable design, provide open space, wildlife is less of an issue for us here, encourage better design, develop necessary public facilities. We think we've addressed some improvements in each of these five categories for the town and we'll just describe how those work. So under item one, provision of restricted housing, the current mitigation requirement for what we're proposing with this new building and the adjustment of the old managers unit into a free market unit. The mitigation requirement per the town's standards is 114 square feet. This application proposal has 1828 square feet, which was in excess of 814 square feet. And in addition to that, when we added the RO unit, we added another 820 square feet on top of the excess that we already were providing. So we're actually, on total on the site, we're providing 2,648 square feet. If you do the math on that sort of in your head, the requirement is 1,014. And what we're in excess of the requirement is 800 and another 800. So we're 1,600 and change in excess of the 2014 So that's a you know substantial. This is this number here is 260% of the of the actual So does how many units does that represent it represents? Is it two four it represents four separate units four separate three okay let's take let's take the arrow out of the mix right now okay because that's a whole discussion it's three additional units you know plus the arrow okay three what we'll look at that in a second marquee and more yeah because I want to get to at the square footage of each one of those three severed units, okay? Yeah, and so, and then just in terms of existing restricted bedrooms, we have one proposed bedrooms. If you count the RO into the mix, we'll have five. Or actually, we have six right now. We're showing a two bedroom, which might want to be converted down to a one bedroom. We're flexible on how that might work. This is where those units are located. This is the old arrival building that's proposed to be renovated to two studios and a two bedroom unit on the top floor. This is the proposed location of the RO unit which is in the ground floor of the new proposed building. This is a sketch-up model of the old arrival building somewhat renovated. arrival building, somewhat renovated. And these are the floor plans. There's two studio units and then a two bedroom unit showing on the top floor. And this is the proposed RO unit. I know you want to keep this separate. I'll just do a quick description of this, though, to set that off to the side in your mind. But so on the ground floor of the, this is just a vignette of that, but on the ground floor of the three pod new building, this is proposed to be the RO unit. And again, I, Heyesenter, remind us that this was done at the request of the planning commission. So, you know, if this rates complications in the overall submission flow, the movement through the process, this is it falls in the category of no good deed goes unpunished because we did this, not because we thought about it, but because the planning commission thought it would be a good idea. So this is a very nice unit. There's a patio out here that opens to a direct view to the outside privacy with landscaping all around, and then two bedrooms, a dining area, kitchen. What else do we have in there? And you know, the standard things. We do have two bedrooms and one of the town requirements is if you have two bedrooms, you need to have two bathrooms. So we do indeed have that. The second category of community purposes is to encourage sustainable development. What we're proposing here is solar considerations, which I'll mention it, which I'll describe in a second. Reduction of high energy uses, which is reduced by virtue of replacing all of our low efficiency boilers with high efficiency. Photovoltaic roofing on these solar-oriented buildings and earth sheltering on various buildings. So Randy, if you wanna just touch on that. And real quick, both the new units here and their arrival building up on the south side, those are completely earth sheltered there. Solar orientation photovoltaics on the south facing roofs of these buildings here. Snow melt, we're not increasing the snow melt at all, but we are putting high efficiency boilers in here. We're not adding any new high energy usage features such as pools or hot tubged or spas or anything like that. Full glazing where we can get it on the south side, the fitness center here, and tall windows on these south facades here as well. And then let's see, I got that bout covers it. We're proposing to replace the snow melt with a new system, but no additional square footage just replaced with. A new system with the energy-coded sensors in slab? Yes. Okay. But you're going from 46 to 72 parking spaces. Yeah, but the spaces are all covered. So they're not in the snow melt area. Gotcha. So that explains why you might have that question. So these are, and just to augment what Randy said, these are the south facing roofs. These plains here on the proposed new building. So we're proposing photovoltaics on those nicely oriented south facing new roofs. And this by the way, this might be the first slide that shows these base village buildings blocked in. So you know what you're looking at there, those are modeled in building space village. This is building five is over here. So this is 10 a and 10 b over here. The third category of community purpose improvements are open space. We're explaining is that open space in our proposal exceeds the multifamily zone requirements. The requirement is 25%. You heard this on the last presentation. On Sonneblik, requirements 25%. We actually have proposed. We'll have 54 percent. And by the way, that MF zone, that's something that the town asks these old, these old PUDs and old SPA projects to do is to rezone the property so that it fits into the town's current system and standards for zone districts. So we actually proposed a slightly different zone district, the town like this one, the multifamily zone better. So that's what we're now proposing is the MF zone requirements for open space 25%. We actually have 54% and the green roofs, interestingly, we also add about 66,500 square feet of green roof, which almost offsets the 7,000 square foot footprint that we're adding with the new building. So in one respect, we're almost replacing the visually at least replacing the open space that we're losing. This is a drawing that shows the overall site and the green shaded areas, open space and the building, the existing building, the proposed new building and the paving areas are all indicated in the white tone. Anything on that round? No. The greeners. And this just as an additional point here, this is where the green roofs occur here and here. So these green roofs become contiguous with landscape planted areas adjacent and it will be a fairly seamless feeling open space. More to the benefit of the association, but any uphill views that happen to leak through here will also see more green space. The next community purpose category is encourage better design. We feel like we're addressing that in a number of ways. We're adding some new signature elements, the enclave, to take away that very pedestrian plane look, improve the elements such as the stone, stair towers, an entry icon that's being added to highlight the entrance to the complex. We're pointing out that it has substantial compatibility with the existing buildings. We've kept the same horizontal modules, the same vertical modules, the same roof slopes and so forth. And then extra dense landscaping, which was actually a request and call it a requirement of the planning staff. So this is a view again of the entry area. This is a little bit of an iconic element that introduces the, if you remember that poor curbside appeal drawing that we showed before, this really opens it up, puts the new arrival building at the focal point, creates a functional car court area and puts some iconic structures at the entry. Stair towers, there's five stair towers that are all being approved that become focal points around the interior of the property. This view again, I think we saw this slide before, but this shows how the underground parking is a continuation of the existing parking structure or parking driveways here. This is the parking driveway, the green covered parking structure on the uphill side, the structured car court or car port areas on the downhill side, and then the below grade parking that just is a continuation of the paving that goes on underneath this new building. a bus stop and I don't see it there now. We haven't modeled it into this particular model that we built but you'll see it on a slide. Okay, thank you. Okay, thank you. But you're absolutely right, Mark. In fact, that bus stop fits right in here and that's the proposed town bus stop and there's another bus stop on the opposite side of the road. So for uphill and downhill and this really, this bus stop area directly accesses into base village. So this will likely be a very principal arrival and departure point from base village. This shows the areas. Yeah actually even this isn't quite accurate. This is an old drawing that we had from the town. We'll show you one that's a little more accurate where this leg of the bus stop up here on the other side of the road moves this way a little bit so that the two are aligned. Purpose of this slide is just point out that we've added landscaping at the town's request. More dense landscaping on the downhill side adjacent to the existing building as well as replacing landscaping and adding landscaping on the downhill side of the car court areas. And then we've also added landscaping along the ski slope side. This is the ski back trail here. And you'll hear some concerns about crestwood owners that are across the slope over here so we've helped us often up that facade with some additional landscaping. This just shows a view of how that additional landscaping, this is actually reflects exactly the landscaping that's shown on the plans. The next category of community purposes is to develop a necessary public facilities. We're providing some easements or proposing to provide easements so that the bus stop can actually be constructed. In order to get it constructed, it will need to lap over, at least during construction, probably foundations, probably soils and nails. It'll need to go into the inflow of property. And we're adding an ADA accessibility to the bus stop. And then we're also adding an e-bike check out and charging station with the idea that the association will own e-bikes and check them out to their guests. So that's not a community benefit for the community. That's specifically for the owners of the enclave. You can make that argument. I could argue that it's a benefit if people use the e-bikes instead of driving their cars. It's going to say why not a wee cycle program there. Why not? But with regards, and this shows the better alignment of the bus stop area. And how we, by taking a couple of jogs down here, we can get a handicap accessible access to this. This crosswalk is proposed and goes directly into base village. So this we imagine that for base village folks that want to take the bus or in this part of base village this is a pretty logical way to both arrive and depart using this bus stop configuration. The other aspects of the transportation are the, we have bicycle storage in a couple of places as well as the e-bike checkout and charging station. And we have a three shuttle vans that serve this property, including we're adding a little shuttle van, layover space immediately adjacent to the arrival building. And now to the continuing on with the town with the planning department's primary concerns, the rest of the goal I fasted by the way. Going back now we talked about these two categories. Under Build Out Chart, we talked about the exceptional circumstances and the community purpose categories and how we've touched on each of them. It's up to the town to determine how much credit, so to speak, is given for those various improvements. But the Build Out Chart itself, to talk about the density of the area. You can see how enclave is now kind of surrounded by the green base village and the area of Crestwood. The density of those areas, base village, you see down at the bottom of that slide. Base village has 32 units per acre and they have in the range of 85 feet of height. Crestwood, which is also Jason Tonclayve, has 29 units per acre and they have up to 40 feet in height. And then enclave itself with the proposed addition that we're suggesting has 11 units per acre. So 32, 29, 11 per acre and the heights for the new building here are in the 33 foot range. Next category, getting finally out of that build out chart is the view and impacts and height. This is a ladder from Crestwood which is most, that complex is the most adjacent and impacted. This is the overall association in, it's in the file, but it's basically saying that they have no objection to this. There are individual unit owners, however, that some have some objections that you'll hear. We also have a letter from base village that they do not object to this project. So the two main properties. But isn't that a letter from I'm confused? That's from Mel to Robert. You said it was from the Greenland. Well, it's an agreement between Robert Sinko representing the Crestwood Association and Mel representing the Enclave Association. And there's not an updated letter associated with the revised PUD. This is April and this is now we're looking we're in October. Yes well sadly it's taken that long to get this far through the process. We started the process in April. There's been a couple of things that have caused this to move slower, for example. There was the planning commission is currently meeting, every other meeting addressing the comp plan. So there's only one meeting per month that's available for other subjects. And just briefly, I think the answer is this. Who are you? Who are you? I'm Michael. Who are you? I'm Michael Hoffman, representing the applicant. Just a quick answer to your question. My recollection, correct me if I'm wrong here, Gus, is that we actually reduced the height of the new building since this letter was drafted. Yeah, in terms of height, but in terms of what, in terms of the actual submittal, I would say, and Jim and Julianne can reckon if I'm wrong, but the only real substantive change other than reducing some things in height in response to the concerns of adjacent neighbors is the addition of the RO unit. Is that fair? Is there other substantive changes? Yeah, but the amendment only proposed the RO unit on the lower level and we don't know the effective multifimilitary floor area. No, no, I'm just trying to say that we haven't really changed the application subsequently since April other than we did propose adding the arrow unit at the request of the planning commission and we lowered the height of the enrollment sum at the request of the adjacent makers. And as it relates to architecture, you know. Right. So the fact that that letter, Marky, was written in April, is more a result of just how long it's taken to get through the process. We only, the planning commission only meets every other, only meets once a month to consider things like this. One time during the summer months, the planning commission failed to reach in a quorum So we had so we had a two month delay between hearings and then we were also scheduled this meeting was scheduled originally for September 5th Got continued to today. Okay. Yeah, so hey without explains why it started in April and here we are in October. There was only one other question relative to the legal. There was a letter on the letter that came to us from Balkan and Green Letterhead. Is that not an attorney for the Crestwood? Yes. So we have one letter. Not for the Cresswood Association for individual owners. And this is Mr. Van Arsdale, he represents from BELCAMING GREEN. Yeah, if we can go through our presentation, then you could. Then let's put, okay, I'll be fine with that. If you're fine. I was just going to explain the difference. Okay, happy to allow Mr. that. If you're fine. I was just going to explain the difference. Okay, happy to allow, Mr. Go ahead, go ahead, you're up. Okay, I'm Luke Van Arzail from Balcoming Green. Okay. We represent a handful of the affected crestwood owners. Okay. Not the crestwood association. Okay. The reality is the majority of the crestwood association is not affected by this. They have units that look directions away from the enclave. And so the overwhelming majority of the Creswood HOA being not impacted by this would not vote to oppose it as an HOA. However, there are a number of affected owners and we represent some of them. So we're here on their behalf. That letter was written for that purpose, and I'm prepared to present an objection after the applicant is finished putting on their presentation. Thank you so very much for that clarification. That's exactly correct. Okay. And we do have also the letter from the base village. So if you look at this little diagram here, base village folks are over here. Crestwood is here wrapping up from here on around here. Base village folks are over here. Crestwood is here wrapping up from here on around here. So we've done, I was going to say dozens, I think we've done scores maybe over a hundred different view simulations to look at this from every possible viewpoint. And this is we're not going to bore you with all the many, but Mr. Van Arsdale's client is in one of these units here and some of the other owners that have sent some objection letters are in this area in here. So these this what I'm going to show you here quickly is just this little diagram and some of the views that you see. We've got many more that we'd be happy to get into if you want, but these are the view angles that we've taken. These are the three pods of the proposed new unit are here. And to address that a little bit more in detail. The first thing to think about is this red line here represents the height of the ski back trail. So when viewed from Crestwood, most of these buildings are below this ski back trail ridge line. So what you see from that other side is, you know, maybe the top two thirds or 75% of the top floor, the roofs that you see. There's other things here. I think that the some of these upper lines represent the 38-foot MF zone height limits. We've brought it down to 33 feet, partly in deference to the concern of the folks across the ski slope there. This is this looking at this one particular view is what you see looking from that area and that's the down valley view. The next slide shows what happens when base village is built. And you may remember the last presentation you saw there was some concern about whether you occluded the backside of the open center and what the Ridge line view and so forth. So this is the this this is what's there now This is what will happen when the base fill already approved base fillage buildings are built This now what we've done here is we've added this yellow line So that we can see because it gets a little muddy in here But so you can see what the top of the base village is. And then this is the building that we're proposing here, as seen from across the slope at the ground level of the of the crestwood. And then finally, this green line might be a little hard to see, but the green line is where we were proposed, what we had proposed back in April. We lowered it, and we had many meetings, by the way, or at least several meetings with the representatives of some of these owners here, as well as with the association at large and talked about what we could do to minimize the impacts. And then if you remember one of the earlier slides showed that we also added a fair amount of landscaping in here. So it's been our feeling that this compared to other strong view impacts, this is relatively small, it's low. It's less than one floor in height. It's not, it doesn't occlude any of the down valley, long distance views. It occludes only the base village buildings which are in the background. At least as viewed from this angle. Like I said, we've got dozens of things. Yes, where were you, where were you guys standing when this was taken outside of that little Where were you guys standing when this was taken outside of that little What you call work out room? No, this is out. This is right outside the this is the lowest building of Crestwood That's that Mr Van Rstale's clients right and this yellow this yellow circle is right outside of Mr. Van Eyre's Dale's Clients Unit looking across the slope. Okay. Because you go back to that for a second. So the roof lines of I guess 45678, right? That's because those are the approved buildings in base village. of I guess 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8, right? That's because those are the approved buildings in base village. This, well, yeah. I'm gonna bet. Are we looking at them? And are we looking at them in their current position? We're looking at them in their approved position. And just to be clear again, this is building 5 here. This is 10A and 10B here. I think you even see a piece of building 12 over there in the corner. So five is the one on the left. 10A, 10B. The assumption here is that these are approved and they'll be built in some form similar to this. At some point, if not higher. Well, five is a given. Five is a given. Five is a given. Right, right. So again, this is showing the proposed enclave new units in front of the base village building from that viewpoint. It's actually that's one of the worst view impacts in the complex. And then this is a section, if you sort of visualize this, we're cutting a slice right through the site here, and we cut right through the end of this proposed new building so you can just see the new building in proximity to the Crestwood complex and the base village buildings and here's the bridge going over the wood road. These right in here is where the units are that are the most affected view wise and I'm sure Mr. Renar's day will give you a good story about that. So this again is another view section view cut through in elevation format. So you can see the crestwood, the base village, and the proposed enclave building. And this was interesting. I just threw this slide in because you can never see this view again. These reviews taken from the Capitol Peak building, looking across as the towers were going up. And you can see the scale. It just gives you a sense of the scale of these new buildings relative to the fairly small enclave buildings in the background there. Never see that view again because that building will block it. So the setbacks is the next category, number three there. And frankly, this is not much of an issue for the enclave association. However, we just wanted to make it clean and understandable and we're proposing that the setback, there's no requirement under the MF building or how the setbacks work. So we're proposing the most substantial setback back from the right of way for wood road here that we can. And then I guess the town staff would like this setback line to jog right on top of the edge of the building roof overhangs. We thought that it made sense just to pick the point that's a couple feet out from the corners of the building and then just run a straight line. And we know that there's irregularities in these buildings just from 40 years ago. So there could be already some decks that are two feet wider than what the original plans were and so forth. They've been modified bits and pieces over the years. So we thought that it made sense just to pull it out a little bit. So that in case there's some irregularities or something that needs to happen, it won't, we won't be back here asking for another foot or two sometime in the future. Goose. Sorry. What is the setback on the ski backside? Do you remember Randy what that setback is? The ski backside. I think it's about five feet off of the building corners. We've tried to strike a straight line that's approximately five feet off of the building corners. And where the general easement is, it defines that Gondola and the ski back easement. That setback is at least 10 feet away from that line. This is the center line of the you know I'm sorry I'm well I called the ski back I guess where the the where the gondola is on the upper the upper edge of that. I'm not sure Bob I understand your question. Well really what I'm thinking about is from the three new pods back to the peak. No I can't. Yeah that that direction. Yep. Well it's the full width of the there's better slide to show that actually. I think that's a I think it's 120 feet from building to building if that helps you answer your questions. Okay. I'm not sure we can easily calculate it. I'm not sure what that exact dimension is from this proposed set back line to the property line. Yeah, as you mentioned it, I think that's what I remember from the packs. It's 80 or 90 feet or something like that. Yeah, and I think that if you're, it's substantial on that side for sure. To try to move, keep moving along, I'm sorry to make this drag out. But the civil engineering issues was another item that was a town planning department referral agency concern area. So the two categories under civil engineering were drainage and fire truck access. Under the drainage, I'll give you a little report on this, but this is, we have 24 sheets of civil engineering drawings and we're going to go through all of them tonight. No, I'm just kidding. And we're only going to look at this one. But the point is there's a lot of civil engineering work has been done. There's one issue that we think the town engineer, Dean Gordon's office, express concern about. This is our understanding that it may get explained better by the planning staff. But as we read their concern, there was one issue, and we believe we've addressed that issue, but let me give you the background and what that issue is. There's a certain amount of drainage runoff, and they, in the 100-year rainstorm for a two-hour event, on-clave would contribute six 100s of 1% of the drainage, which is basically a rounding error. Now I think what the town engineer was asking was to show the calculations that reached that conclusion, that number. And our civil engineer, or Royne Fork engineers that did the civil engineering work for this project had all those calculations. They communicated with the town engineer's office and we now have a report Which yeah, which we're ready to turn over to the town for review I know that we're going slightly out of sequence here In fact, we got our handslapped we're going having our engineer go directly to the town engineer, but gosh this is civil engineering stuff. I don't understand it. You know, the engineers can talk engineer language, civil engineering language to each other and get what I think is a very small issue result. The proper flow of communication, as I've been reminded, is that our civil engineer should send it to us. We should send it to my coughman. My coughman should send it to us. We should send it to Mike Hoffman. Mike Hoffman should send it to Jim. Jim should then send it to the town public works department who in turn should send it to the civil engineer, which is being gored at the town engineer. And then the communication goes back around the horn. It's in English that's making a complete application. So we need to complete application upfront so we can process it. Absolutely. That's what it comes down to. But we kind of went out of sequence to get to the bottom of the problem. But we can't know there's a complete application if it doesn't come through us. I am. Well, we're going to give you the report today, but yes. So it will be completely received that yes It should come in with their formal amendment to whatever else We shouldn't be starting this until the application is complete Well, it was good. I must compliment Gus on speaking engineering very well for a non-engineer It's you know, it's complicated especially when he got down to the to the .06 of 1% is only margin of error. That's on the very engineering. It's around the engineering. Yes, 600 of 1% is so small that you can hardly lose it in the, but anyway. That's by the way what the civil, our civil engineer, Roy and fork engineers said in their report. Let's see, Gus, your civil engineers need to submit that as part of their application and then they come and they testify, you don't. That's the point here. Okay, moving on. That's why your hands were slapped as you so you've domestically put it. Well, we do have a look at that. And the problem that it brings is that it gives rise to rule 106 actions when the code isn't following. And that's not good for the town. And it's really not good for the applicant. Well, again, to respond to that is the code was attempted to be followed. There was a full civil engineering plan that was one piece was questioned, and so our civil engineer wrote a response to that. That, in my opinion, should not rise to the level of a resubmission of the whole application. It's one question that can be answered, civil engineer to civil engineer and satisfy the issue. You know, one thing my dad used to always say to me was it's always good to keep a good sense of humor. And we're trying to do that. We'll submit the necessary documents to make sure that all of everything is nice and tidy before the next time you see this. Okay. Thank you very, very much. I want to make sure that all of everything is nice and tidy. Before the next time you see this. Okay, thank you very, very much. This is the revised drainage report. I don't want it. I know you don't want it. But it's, I mean, this just happened. We just found out about this issue last week. So we responded to it quickly. The engineers talked to the engineers. We did a revised report, which we think responds to everything. I understand that it's got to follow the technical procedure, but it's one of dozens, hundreds of little issues. So then moving along on the civil engineering front, another issue that's part of that category is the fire access, the fire emergency vehicle and a Fire Marshal John Mellie was pleased with this turnaround radius, the concern, and this is how that works. I mean, there's wheel turning radius calculations to be sure that all of these turning movements can be made. The one concern that the plan E, that the Fire Marshal had was the vertical curve where the wood road meets the driveway. Now, that's an existing configuration now, and the fire truck can just barely make it without their bumper dragging as they go up the slope. They can make it, but their concern was that would we make that worse? And the answer is no, we're going to make that vertical curve where the two interface, we're going to make that better and we're working with the fire department and fire marshal to ensure that. Because, isn't there work on Wood Road that SkiCo or that Bayesville Joner has to do when we want that impact, potentially impact. Yes. That joint. Yes, and that's why I think we have the latest, greatest Wood Road construction drawings. Am I right? The one stated may that you received evidence, received any since then. Our engineer has responded to the latest wood road improvement drawings that we have, which may or may or may not be the final if there's adjustments. We'll adjust our interface with Wood Road accordingly. But that's a bit, it has been at least prior to May that was a bit of a moving target, but we're, you know, we will adapt and adjust to whatever the final Wood Road configuration is. And that's where we agreed with the fire marshal that we will improve that vertical curve if as a minimum I will not make it any worse and we will improve it and we'll continue to coordinate with them. So that's the fire issue. Parking and transportation, item five, parking management plan, transportation access, Wood Road sidewalk. So this is the parking consideration. We have currently 47 spaces. We're going to increase to 72 spaces. The, just do the math with you a little bit and I'm sorry that we got this RO unit mixing in with the equation here, but The math is that the way the Association proposes to manage the parking is to assign one parking space to each and every unit which are the 45 existing units plus the five new units I get one off there. It'll be 45 and three plus three. Well, not the arrow units. The new three. No, not the arrow. Not the affordable units. The new additional free market units are 45 plus five or 45 plus six. 45 plus 5 or 45 plus 6. 45 plus 6. Well, anyway, that 45, that, there'll be 45 assigned to the existing 45 units and there'll be one assigned to each of the new units, which I think is 5 plus the one that's part of the 45. That makes sense. Oh, I'm sorry. I am saying it wrong. that's part of the 45. That makes sense. Oh, I'm sorry. I am saying it wrong. I should have, we should have had a separate slide on that. I am saying it wrong, I apologize. It is the 45 units. That's the total count of free market units. And Randy is correcting me and I wasn't believing him, but he's right. 45 free market units, one parking space per the three restricted housing units, they actually require 1.5 parking spaces to be dedicated per unit. So we'll have five parking spaces dedicated for those restricted units and 45 assigned to the 45 free market units. That's 50. We've got 72 spaces total, so we will manage the balance of the spaces. I think I did the math on that right. But anyway, there's a big chunk of new spaces that will be managed by the association. And there are some people that come and want to leave cars others that can move cars around that's where the tandem parking works into this. The association property managers can move vehicles around if they need to but every unit will have at least one parking space assigned to it plus the RRR, plus the restricted housing units. How many tandem spaces are being proposed? I think it's 28. Well, 28 is 14 and 14, 14 front and 14 back. Yeah, but that's 28 out of the 72. Right. That's 20 out of the 72. So there's 45 free market, one for each unit. And then you say there are 20 additional spaces, but most of those additional spaces become tandem, don't they? Well, if you want to get into the weeds a little bit deeper on that bob, there are some units that own some owners own more than one unit. So those particular owners would be assigned a front and back tandem space. So as we, I mean, I think we're happy to go into the full operational management there, but the bottom line is that they will have about 20 spaces that they can manage. A good number of them, maybe even all of them, are tandem spaces. Although if there's an owner, for example, that wants to leave their car year round and they have a back of a tandem space, the front of the tandem space can be a signed space or a guest parking space because there are, you know, there's rental guests that are coming and going all the time that need parking as well. So that additional 20 spaces or so will be managed by the association to the best operation of the complex, which is a big- It's the association anticipating additional employees to do all this handling of vehicles? No, they currently do it now, but it'll be much easier for them to do it when there's more than zero extra spaces. When they have a few empty spaces that they can shuffle cars around and it'll be easier. So take them off site for example. Since there's no longer a manager unit on site. So the management is off site and what happens after hours if you need to have your car moved. Well a couple of things there. I'm getting into the weeds with operation. That's OK. I'm assuming myself getting into that situation. Well, first of all, the managers unit, the so-called managers unit that was designed in the original complex 40 years ago, for most part, has never been used as a managers unit. It's used as a affordable unit. Sometimes it's an employee of the association. Sometimes it's been other people have lived in that unit. But it's rarely been an actual manager's unit for maybe never over that whole course of time. Oh, years and years and years ago. Yeah, maybe when it was first, the complex was first open. Oh, you owned a unit there at one point. So you might know. But for the most part, it's not been used as a manager's unit. Number one, number two is we now have four units, if we use the count the RO unit, we now have four proposed affordable units and the association will manage those units to their best advantage. They'll still have to follow the town's housing guidelines. But if it makes sense for them to have a manager on site, or even a more junior submanager that's on site, then they'll have that flexibility to be able to do that with those four units. Okay. What else on the... Oh, and yeah yeah the bicycle program the I think we touched those issues This again going back to this diagram bus area Bicycles I think we already saw that diagram before yep This this one's just we're retaken. Yeah, it may. Before they go on off of that topic, this is one of the areas that we have not gotten enough information with the addition of that RO, we wanted to be able to recalculate the parking requirements. So that's just an example of some of the information that we don't have available. Thank you. That's a good point Julian and we thought about that so we can accommodate the additional parking required by the arrow unit but yes Well, it should be clarified too that the parking required for employee housing is 1.5 per bedroom not per unit Okay, 1.5 staff was Recommending that the applicant reserve one space per bedroom and the plan to reserve it for the employees And then the other Parkland requirements could be on a first kind first come first services. Yeah, yeah, I mean that's a good correction I think that it's I think it's five spaces that we will have dedicated for employee units, but Randy, do you know? I'm sorry. See that again. We'll have five places five spaces dedicated to employee units, but Randy, do you know? I'm sorry, Senator. We'll have five spaces dedicated to employee units. Yes. And we think that meets the code. But we've got extra spaces. If you need to say you've got to assign one extra one, then the association's happy to do that. There's the good news again, is there's more spaces than they've ever had before. All the points of clarification again. I mean the parking ratios per bedroom and per unit might improve but with the RO like Julie mentioned that parking ratio count may go down possibly within a memo but we don't know that yet. We've taken a look at what that math turns out to be when we start playing with the chart and we'll get that to you. In fact again that's to the staff's broader point. Our recommendation still stands that we get to the presentation. We take the public comment and then we would ask the council to direct the applicant to put the full application in so that we can give you a full review so we can don't have to debate these things back and forth. We can say yes, it meets it or no, it doesn't and provide you guys that clear direction. Thank you, Clint. Moving on. So, the other reason we put this slide in is to point out that with the addition, this is the, this is a section, cross section cut through where the tandem parking would occur. And actually to get this enough space for the parking to occur from here to here, tandem parking, we only have to add nine additional feet to the extent of the current parking. So we'll encroach into this area by nine feet. And we'll re-vegetate this as the town staff has requested and as we've shown. And then the one point that I wanted to make interestingly is even though we're pulling this out a little bit closer to the road. When you're down here at eye level on the road, even this short wall creates a visual cutoff line to where you actually don't see those cars back up in there. Now this comes to the issue of the sidewalk. The town is proposing that we add a sidewalk along the wood road side of the property. And we think that that's unnecessary expenditure. It's unattractive. It's going to create additional maintenance problems. And it doesn't serve a good function. The one thing that we wanted to point out here is that this yellow line, the piece that's across the front of the enclave property would end here. So the rest of this yellow line would need to be constructed at some time in the future. Building 12 is not very closely on the radar screen here now. So this for many years to come will be a sidewalk kind of to nowhere. Number one, number two is that yellow path which is that outside sidewalk is 685 feet, the blue path, which is already going to be a sidewalk on the inside of the road, is 650 feet, a little shorter walk. But if you didn't want to walk right adjacent to the cars, splashing the ice and snow up on you, the more logical way would be to walk through base village, which of course has the added benefit of creating some additional vitality and vibrancy in base village. So I'm sure the base village people would be happy about that. It's a more attractive walk and it's about 150 feet shorter to go that route. If one were to want to go from vice-roy up to on clay. Now we've heard the concern that you have to cross the road here and here in order to do that. As opposed to on this outside curve, you don't cross any road. But these are both main intersections or pedestrian crossings. This one is going to be highly used because there's a bus stop on both sides of the road. So regardless of whether a few more enclave folks cross there or not, it's still going to be a well-signed, well-protected, safe intersection. So we think again that it's going to be expensive because this is kind of a steep slope here. We've got to build a retaining wall. There's drainage along this road, sidewalk cost money, and it doesn't really serve a highly valuable function. We know the Public Works Department would like to see this. We just think that it's probably not so necessary. This shows a view of where that sidewalk would want to go along this side and a couple other views here. This is a look upward road so that sidewalk would want to nestle back into the slope here and here's some other views so you can imagine how this road is going to be reconstructed and this is not showing what the reconstruction is going to look like. I know you're going to try it. It's going to be reconstructed and this is not showing what the reconstruction's going to look like. I know. I'm going to try it. It's going to be approximately this. But yes, it's going to be the first shot. It's not approximately. It's four feet off. Well, so you're taking not to get into the weeds again. I think this. I'm sorry I interrupted keep going. It's just. If there's a four foot adjustment coming down the pike we better know about it now If you've got the plans you do Pardon me. She's got the plans you do well. We are yeah, I'm sorry for okay. Let's let's move on Anyway, the point is all along the face to not talk about the parts that are off site all along the face here This is a fairly steep slope in order to cut a retaining wall in and a sidewalk and get drainage in here. It significantly cuts into that slope. That's looking uphill. This is looking downhill. I'm not sure, Clint, what you're referring to, I guess there's a dress picture of the height back up in there. First picture you showed. Where the bridge is. Oh, big okay. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm not wasting time. Yeah. Okay. Sorry to get off on that tangent. So this is our model that shows the very crudely and this just to make a point is this is wood road going up here. This is that landscaping that was added below the building here, which by the way that little nice little patio from the RO unit proposed is tucked back right in there. This is what would happen if there were a sidewalk approximately, something like this, a sidewalk on both sides of the visual pavement there is a very substantial visual impact. Number one, number two is it instead of having grass and landscaping coming down to near the road plus some drainage, You now have pavement which also is going to require maintenance because that pavement is either going to need to be snow melted or plowed or somehow that's going to have to be dealt with or the snow is going to splash up from the road onto the sidewalk. It's just not a pleasant way to walk. It's going back a couple of slides here. We just want to contend that it's just not a pleasant way to walk right along the road. This, by the way, does not meet handicap requirements because, so even a wheelchair couldn't make that route. It's too steep. Now I'm going the wrong way, sorry. There's no one. Sidewalk, any further crash? What's the one just down there? Yeah, right. Anyway, that's trying to make the point. This is an expensive proposition too, by the way, adding that, retaining all along the face of the property and building a sidewalk. And then we don't even know how the drainage might be dealt with the drainage currently works, but how it happens with a new sidewalk we don't know. So it's an expensive proposition, whoever pays for it, whether the enclave pays for it or the town, or the base village pays for it or the town or the base village developers, it's expensive and we think unnecessary and it's visually unattractive. Solid waste disposal was their next category. This is just a real simple diagram that shows how the trash truck would maneuver in, pull in, back into the trash removal, and pull out pretty simple maneuver. And this is the actual area we've worked with David Ogrond, and he's satisfied with this configuration. Happy with it, I guess I would say. For the amount of, we calculated the dumpsters based on his requirement. This is a flat level surface so that they don't have any trouble rolling the dumpsters in on his requirement. This is a flat level surface so that they don't have any trouble rolling the dumpsters in and out. This is a totally bare, it's a solid wall construction so it's bare protected, solid doors. So it should be safe and sturdy and meet their trash removal, solid waste removal requirements. And this is Dave's letter basically. Eastments number seven. Randy, you want to say a little bit about these easements? Yeah, easements on the Enclave property are a real hodgepodge. We have a lot of easements with nothing in them and we have utilities where there are no easements. So as part of all of this, we've been working with, say, the water and sand district, for example, to clean that up. And that's what the orange, various orange boxes up there represent. Either an easement that we feel can be abandoned or an easement that needs to be added. We continue to work with those departments and we'll have all of those finalized prior to building permit. And the association's attorney, my coffman has been meeting with the Water and Sands attorney to work out these easement configurations. Landscaping, we showed that before but we've added quite a bit of landscaping. We showed that before, but we've added quite a bit of landscaping per the town's request. And we think that that satisfies that. More landscaping views. This is landscaping as seen from the, from the Crestwood side. That's all landscaping that was added before or since our original submission. This is landscaping along the wood road side. Yeah, the wood road side of the parking structures. Shadow studies. Oops, I'm not... It'll come up there. So for shadow studies, we have, again, dozens and dozens of these and we can show them at full scale, but this is just a little quick view. We took the shortest day of the year, December 21st, at 9 o'clock in the morning noon and 3 o'clock. We took March 21st. The equinox took the same 9 o'clock noon and 3 o'clock, we took March 21st, the Equinox, took the same nine o'clock, noon, and three o'clock, and then we took a, which is, you know, as we all know around the end of the ski season, and then we took a date halfway between those two, which is February 5th, and looked at the shadows. Couple of interesting observations here. First of all, no impacts from anything in March. As we get into February, you can see there's some impacts here. But one of the things that we would point out is there's a lot of shadowing along wood road at different times of the day, different times of the year. But for example, Crestwood here casts a shadow all the way across wood road at different times of the day, different times of the year. But for example, Crestwood here casts a shadow all the way across wood road. There's always shadows at the bridge and even the new base village buildings that will eventually happen will cast significant shadows on the lower part. So we've contend that yes, there are some small shadows that are added from the enclave improvements, but it's a road that already has shaded and shadowed areas up and down the length. And if you want to study these more, you'll see that. Here's where our new building is. It casts, for example, at noon on February 5th. It doesn't really even cast a shadow on Wood Road, but yeah, at noon on December 21st, shortest day of the year, it does cast a shadow there. But there's also shadows down here and shadows there. So anyway, for what it's worth, that's the shadow impact. We think it doesn't change the basic function and flow of wood road. There's a few more little areas that are shaded at certain times of the year. Construction management plan. This has actually been postponed or waived. What it was deferred, deferred. The town deferred this to the final stage. So we have a preliminary construction management plan, but there still are a number of variables that we need to understand better. For example, how long does it take to get through this approval process? Or do we even get something approved? Number one, number two is when we go to the next stage, when we get a contractor, a specific contractor in the mix, and create the development team, there could be some phasing issues that will affect out the construction management plan works. So anyway, we're relying on that deferment for now and we'll have the construction management plan at the time of building permit or final approval. Once we better understand things. And this is a- Yeah, hand in hand with the construction management plan. There are some environmental quality issues. What is your air quality? What is your dewatering of the site? And so we crafted some of that language request of the referral agency, Tom Dumla, the environmental quality consultant. And this is basically his email saying, yeah, what you've done satisfies me at this point, but I look forward to more at final. Okay. So as painful and long as that was to get through that CM, and sorry that we get into the weeds on some of these things, there's dozens and dozens of issues that we could get into that level of detail. Okay. Do we have other questions coming from council members? I don't see any questions right now. I'll open for what we already have the public hearing open. Do I have any comments or questions from the public? Why not, Mr. Van R. Stale? We have our... Thank you, Rebuttal. Please. I don't know what he's going to say. I don't know, but do we have... I don't know if you can swap with you guys. Oh, yeah, sure. We have the other... We have the same stuff for you. Let's see. Where's our? I've got it. My pocket. Well, Erica's getting situated. I've already introduced myself, but I would like to introduce my colleague, Erica Gibson. She was chiefly responsible for the letter we submitted to you, and I think it's more than fair to say that she's the brain spine this project. colleague, Erica Gibson, she was chiefly responsible for the letter we submitted to you. And I think it's more than fair to say that she's the brains behind this project. I also want to give credit where credits do, especially to Randy. Before we submitted our initial opposition letter, we really endeavored, mightily, to see what we could do with the enclave to try to work out a mutually agreeable solution to my clients' objections to the project. Randy really went above and beyond and putting together views for us and working to try to meet our objections. Don Clay, the applicant talked at some length about a height reduction that they have made from the original proposal to the existing iteration. While there are still some issues with that, I do want to give credit to work credits to you and say that they have events to very high degree of professionalism in working with us in a collaborative way to see if there was a mutually acceptable solution that we could work out. Turns out there's not, and that's the reason I'm here today. I represent several owners in the Crestwood condominiums, all of whom's units are affected negatively by this proposal. And there's a key point that underlies all of this. This really isn't about the enclave's capital improvements. Nobody disputes that the enclaveaves infrastructure is significantly eroded. Nobody disputes that the proposed upgrades the on-claves has presented everyone are significant improvements over the existing infrastructure. Nobody also disputes that the on-claves could make those capital improvements without needing to come to the town for approval. This isn't about the enclave's capital improvements. This is about the enclave's fundraising effort to try to offset the cost of those capital improvements. This is about the enclave's proposed new development. That's what we object to. And the key issue, what this really is all about is that the proposed new development does not provide any significant community benefits. It detracts from the neighborhood by imposing additional burdens on the neighboring views. It adds inventory to an already saturated condominium market in snowmass village. And it's not necessary to build a building that large. The enclave could offset its capital improvement cost with a two-story structure that provides all the same community benefits as the proposed three-story structure, but doesn't impose any of the detriments. Another issue is the real reason that this fund raising effort is necessary, that the enclave has consistently, as Mr. Blumenthal has put it in the past, failed to reach consensus on funding its own capital improvements projects. The need to fix the retaining wall to replace roofs, to replace siding, that these things are going to fail and need upgrading has been apparent for literally decades. Everyone knows roofs last only about 30 years. A railroad tie retaining wall has a known, useful life. railroad tie retaining wall has a known useful life. The Onclave HOA's inability to reach consensus on funding these projects on their own doesn't constitute good cause for a maximum build out variance to allow Onclave to fund those improvements partially at the cost of their neighbors. Because the application detracts from neighboring properties without providing any offsetting community benefits, the enclave cannot meet the code criteria for buildout variances. And thus, town council should deny the enclave's application. Before I really get into parsing up the code, with respect to build out variances, there are a couple of brief comments regarding the viability of this alternative two-story structure that I'm discussing that I want to make. Let's look at the next slide. The enclave lobbied successfully to circumvent sketch review on this application. Had it gone through sketch planning, it might have more thoroughly vetted the feasibility of a two story versus a three story structure, but it elected not to. It decided instead to swing for the rafters, so to speak, and see approval of the biggest, most lucrative structure for which it could make a straight-face argument. And you really can't blame them for wanting to make as much money off of this project as they can and offset their capital improvement cost to the absolute maximum degree that they can argue for. They want to make as much money and spend as little as possible on their investments in their units at the enclave. But well, you can't really blame them for wanting to do this. We also shouldn't feel bad for them when it turns out that their application suffers from a series of key flaws that might have been addressed much earlier in the process, had they not lobbied to circumvent sketch review. Looking at the next slide, the key thing is in sketch review, they would have had the opportunity to go through this with town staff, amend their application, provide additional information and response to staff comments. They could have gone into a lot more detail with the feasibility of a two story structure, with what the finances of two story versus three story looks like, with what the impacts would be, they circumvented that. They circumvented that because they want to maximize the profit that they can make on this project. But profitability is not a factor to consider in granting a build out variance under the town code. The code criteria is set forth on my next slide. This is the greater build out criteria. The ONCLAVE is currently at 100% of its permitted maximum buildout under its PUD. To get approval for greater buildout, they have to do three things. First, looking at the next slide, they have to demonstrate their unique and exceptional circumstances. I'll grant them this one for the sake of argument here today. The vacation of the Woodrunski easement, the opening up of that parcel for development, that's a unique circumstance. It's arguable what the degree to which it's exceptional, but I don't begrudge the enclave of their windfall in having some additional, developable land. Where they run into trouble is, to some trouble is in, the second factor they have to demonstrate, which is a showing of good cause. This is more problematic for the enclave because their claim of good cause is that enclave HOA can census to fund capital improvements is difficult to obtain. The Onclave's own owners will never vote to fund the own capital improvements that their buildings need. The Onclave hasn't presented financial statements to demonstrate the extent to which this would require special assessments. Here now today they've stated that the proposed new development they expect might fund 50 or 60% of their capital improvements costs. Some of you may recall at the joint session on April 3rd when asked what percentage of the project it was offset. Mr. Blumenthal, I heard the state that they expected that it would offset the whole project. Mr. Govson said that it would be at least 50% as much as they could squeeze out of it. But they haven't gone through any showing of need with the town to demonstrate that this is not something that could feasibly be funded with a combination of assessments and loans just like all of their neighbors have funded their needed capital improvement projects over the last couple of decades. There's no good reason the enclave has to conscript its neighbors down valley views in order to make its capital improvement projects happen. In some, there is no showing of good cause based on a and the real reason that it can't meet the term code. For them to get greater build out approved, they have to show that their proposed development will exceed the PUD review criteria standards. This isn't showing that their capital improvement projects will exceed the PUD review criteria standards. This is showing that their new three story building they want to build exceeds, not meets, exceed the review criteria standards. And the reality is it doesn't. Looking at those standards, they're set forth in section 16A5, 310 of the code. And it's really the first two that the enclave can't meet. Consistency with the comprehensive plan and preservation of community character. And I'm going to take up the second one first. Preservation of community character means first, consistency with the building design guidelines and of most important consistency with the building design guidelines at section 16A4343 involves impact of views. Looking at the next slide, compatibility with, with respect to the or a preserving community character, the proposed development has to be compatible with or an enhancement of the character of existing land uses in the area. And remember, they don't need to meet that standard. They have to exceed the standard of being compatible with or enhancing existing uses. Now the applicant put on one angle showing what the impact on the views are. This is another one and these are views that the applicant has provided me. This shows another angle of the proposed base village as approved and then looking at the next slide. This is the enclave's new building with the present iteration of the height superimposed in front of it. Flipping back and forth between those a couple of times, the enclave's proposed new unit really does meaningfully impair the views. And it's not just an issue of the total view corridor taken up, it's also an issue of proximity. Base village buildings being 400-some feet away because of their distance, even though they're tall, they give the impression of falling away when viewed from the affected crestwood units. The enclave units, being only 120 feet away, propose a significant additional view impact on those crestwood units. Even though the height isn't too much greater, it's still somewhat greater, and the perception, the difference in perception from those crestwood balconies is very significant. It's meaningful enough that all of the Crestwood owners have seen all of the same slides that the young slave is presenting to you here today, and they find it material enough that they are opposing this application and investing in doing so. I also want to speak for a moment to the reduction in height that the applicant has touted. The application has originally proposed, had 42-inch higher chimneys and almost 20-inch higher roof lines. The chief thing that the applicant did to lower these roof lines is simply bring the roof lines and chimneys into conformity with the design of the existing buildings. In other words, they initially proposed a different outline for the roofs and chinnies. And just taking the measure of bringing it into alignment, lowered it significantly so that they could then say, look, we lowered at a bunch look how reasonable we're being. I submit to you that although this is better than their original proposal, it still is not good enough to ensure that they enhance the character of the existing land uses. On this point, the proposed new development arguably does not even meet the review criteria standard of compatibility with existing uses. It certainly does not exceed that standard. And for that reason alone, Council should deny the application. But in addition, the proposed new development does not exceed the first review criteria standard of consistency with the comprehensive plan. Looking at the next slide, consistency with the comprehensive plan in this instance is all about community benefits. It needs to result in benefits to the community. It's evaluated to the extent that it presents a net positive result for the community. Looking at the next slide, particularly the highlighted language, shows the extent to which. shows the extent to which this matters for consistency with the comprehensive plan. The reality is the enclave has not done a full evaluation of mitigation of impacts for among other reasons because they have not evaluated the extent to which they could build a two-story development, sell it to a developer, offset their capital improvements costs, and not impose any additional burdens on their neighbors. The staff has actually found in its report to town council that Don Clayves project does not meet community benefits. If you look at the top of page 11 of the staff analysis report, which is page 54 of 341 in your packets and which I apologize I did not make into a slide before my presentation here, but I'll quote from it. Staff says, while the offered community purposes might be beneficial for the enclave, staff finds that the community purposes offered minimal, staff finds that the community purposes offered are minimal in contrast to the proposed project expansion. A peer minimal, sorry, I have trouble reading my own handwriting sometimes. I'll start over. While the offered community purposes might be beneficial for the enclave, staff finds that the community purposes offered appear minimal in contrast to the proposed project expansion, including the build out variation beyond 100%. That's really the crux of the issue here. There's no benefit to the community, but there are negative impacts on the community. The reality is that the Onclave's proposed new development chiefly benefits the Onclave, not the town of Snowmass Village. And by conscripting the crestwoods down valley views, the Onclave makes its own units more desirable at its neighbor's expense. And this is a marketing opportunity, so obvious that savvy local brokers have jumped on it. This is a mailer that Douglas Elliman has sent to affected crestwood owners, touting the desirability of the enclave's lovely down valley views. These are the very owners who would have a new enclave building builtlave's lovely down valley views. These are the very owners who would have a new enclave building built right in their down valley view. The enclave's presentation focused mostly not on this new building they want to build. It focused mostly on their proposed capital improvements, which we all agree are both necessary and desirable. But this isn't about the enclave's capital improvements. This is about the enclairs proposed new development. And what they're requesting is to shoehorn in the largest building with the most new units that they can argue for with history of face. One might wonder what the old guard of Snowmass Village would think of this sort of Max Density Urbanization Philosophy. I found an interesting op-ed article on this topic, which perhaps not coincidentally was published the day after the Planning Commission voted to recommend approval of the enclave's proposed new development. And I'd like to read some excerpts from this op-ed piece. Looking at the next slide, I think I have it blown up a little bit. For much of its 50-year history, Snowmass Village has been able to hold on to its distinctive and discernible, non-urbanized character, and happily it's played a complimentary and symbiotic role under the Aspen snowmass brand. However, it now appears the village's longstanding character is under pressure to change. These pressures began to emerge suddenly with the building of base village. Ever stronger internal and external forces for change have taken root, perhaps due to a no small part to the village's magnificent mountain and the temptation of developers and the town staff to mine its full profit potential. Skipping past the discussion of the Almighty Dollar, there was no interest in growing the village to be as big as it could be, but just big enough to bring in the requisite dollars needed to ensure the community's health and vibrancy well into the future. Through the years, the town's elected officials and staff, who've mostly been long-term residents, well-steaped in the village's history and rhythms, have been firmly committed to maintaining its essential and desired character and lifestyle. With the relatively recent influx of new blood in the upper echelons of the town's bureaucracy, lots of the community's long-held beliefs and desires are being challenged and, if left, changes that were never contemplated or desired will likely become reality. Significant elements of urbanization have already started to creep into the village landscape and likely will continue to do so at an ever-increasing pace. Elements contributing to greater levels of urbanization are the staff's proposed connectivity plan, roundabouts, pedestrian crossings with flashing lights, cement sidewalks connecting all parts of the village, and lots of new subsidized housing, the demand for which is not yet clearly understood in light of the need for an appropriate rational nexus to the number of people actually working in the village and those desiring to live there. It's appropriate that Mr. Blumenthal's opinion focuses in discussing community benefits on a lack of demonstrated need. There's no demonstrated need for the pedestrian crosswalks and interconnected walkways that the Planning Commission discussed having the enclave help fund in order to help shore up the community benefits associated with the application. And with respect for Mr. Blumenthal's opinion, I submit that there is another affected area for which there is no demonstrated need. And that's additional condominium inventory. I obtained a market study from Sotheby's from 2016 of condominium markets in the Roingfort Valley. This is condominiums between two and five bedrooms, which are the size of the new units proposed by the enclave, and the five biggest Roing fork valley markets. In 2016, the average time on the market for a condominium unit of that size and snowmass village was 386 days. Over a year, condos sit on the market and snowmass village at present. And what the Enclave wants to do is add new units to this glutted market. There's no need. The length of time on market exceeds any other market in the valley by a substantial portion over half a year to the next worst market, which is Aspen. to the next worst market, which is Aspen. And over 25% of those units that have been on the market for that long are right in the enclave's neighborhood of the Crestwood, Woodrun Place, Assey Hill, and the enclave. When I looked into it in April, there were 27 two to 5 better remunets on the market within those developments. In conclusion, this is not about the enclave's proposed capital improvements. This is about the enclave's proposed new development. Because the proposed new development provides scant community benefits and imposes additional burdens on neighboring properties. It does not meet much less exceed the review criteria standards requiring a net positive result to the community and enhancement of neighboring land uses. Nor does the Onclave H.O.A.'s persistent refusal to upgrade its own infrastructure via more traditional funding measures like assessments or loans constitute a showing of good cause for a maximum build-out variance. Allowing the Onclave to give itself a facelift of its neighbor's expense is not only inconsistent with the town code, it's fundamentally unfair. For those reasons, Town Council should deny the application and invite the enclave to reapply with a proposal to build a two-story structure. This would allow the enclave to utilize the vacated land, to offset its capital improvements costs to provide all the previously discussed community benefits and all without undermining its neighboring property values. Because the two story structure would allow to do that, it would meet the build out variance criteria. Thank you. Thank you, Michael. I have to tell you, Luke is good. He is really good. I have opposed projects in the past, and I have never been given that kind of time. And it happened twice before, and I'm just squirming and going crazy every single time. You know, one of the things that I learned as a younger lawyer is in a land use context. It's really a bad idea to look to the supposed motivations of the applicant. Mr. Van Arstale has no idea to what extent this project could have been maximized to maximize profit. It's, you know, those kinds of allegations are inappropriate. And, you know, the extent to which the internal workings of the board of the enclave association are really immaterial. What, let me tell you what is material and what's relevant. What's relevant are your standards and your code. Eric, did you still have your picture that you showed that back and forth? Can you get that up there? That's the mouse. Here we go. I have to tell you while they're doing that, I once made the mistake of ascribing motives to a particular applicant and one of the commissioners that I was dealing with said how dare you do that? And she was right. It's not appropriate. What is appropriate is to look at your code, look at the standards and look at what is before you. And I want to look at the picture that Mr. Van Arsdale and his able assistant, Erica, showed you. Can you get it up? I'm not sure why it's because it's on my screen here, but not on that screen up there. Let's try something there. I agree with Mr. Van Arsdale that what makes this exceptional is a key element. And what makes it exceptional was the vacation of the easement. We essentially created new land, something that the crestwood didn't have, something that would run, placed it and have none of the other projects that have come before town council in the last ten years for this kind of project have had the opportunity that the enclave has had. And that's what makes it exceptional. That's the reason that we're here asking for the right to develop this land. Nobody else had that new land available to it. But I think the essence, and I love his language. He does an excellent job. According to Mr. Van Arsdale, the enclave is conscripting the down valley views of the Crestwood owners. And this is what he shows you as being the unreasonable conscription. And I would put to you that this is reasonable and that this is a diminimous diminution of the value or the quantum of scenic view available to the neighbor. If I can just jump into supplement something you probably don't realize this is the view before the height reductions were made. This was a slide that Mr. Renard's Dale had from previous. So the building was lowered. He said 20 inches. It was actually lowered by five feet, which shows on that green line, yellow line diagram that we showed before. The building was lowered by five feet. It was not just lowered as a result of changing the roof pitch. It was also we changed the plate height, so each floor, and we lowered the, pushed the building deeper into the ground. So the result was a total of a five foot reduction. The, this slide is before the, the total reduction. So it's significant, we less than this, and in fact, it does, it doesn't include any additional down value view, other than what's seen on the, seen on our previous slide. So it's, it's reviews a lot better than what's up on the screen right now is the point. Okay, we need to conclude. Right, let me just, let me say one more thing. I think what was really important to that discussion for the planning commission and anyone here is welcome to provide their alternative view. But the comprehensive plan, the one that's currently in existence, emphasis on the planning commission and the one that's currently in existence, emphasizes and encourages redevelopment and improving the physical plant of projects near West Village. What do we call this area? This is the multi-family, what do we call this area, Jim? I think it's the West Village Corps. Well, it's a little bit, it's a little bit this, you know, on the other side. There are only two elements of the comprehensive plan that deal with this area. One of them is encouraging redevelopment and improvement of the physical plan. I can tell you that the planning commission members found that very heartening that we brought this application and they looked for a similar opportunity for their own projects. So, you know, that was a key element. Anyway, thank you. Thank you very much, Michael. Yes, good. Just a couple of minutes for rebuttal. Yes. It was so murky. A couple of things that Mr. Van Arsdale said are I think incorrect. First of all, Chris, can you bring the mic a little bit closer? Thanks. First of all, I preface this by saying that the planning commission heard all of this same presentation from Mr. Van Aresdale representing those units and they unanimously recommended approval by the council with conditions, of course. And there's always conditions in these things. Secondly, the discussion about two story versus three story, that was an arbitrary thought on the neighbor's part, saying if you cut a floor off this building, we wouldn't be able to see it at all, because it would be totally behind the ski back trail. The reality is, first of all, all the rest of the on-clave buildings as well as all the Crestwood buildings are three stories. And the infrastructure that it requires for this building with the underground parking, the utility relocations and so forth are such that it just does not make, it doesn't pay for itself if you only put two floors on. It's that third floor that allows for enough revenue generation that helps offset the costs of some of the, if you can go to that one slide. Well, I'll look at that slide for one second as well. This project, as proposed, has major improvements associated with it. It's not just face lifting the existing building. It's changing the arrival experience with a much larger car court area, a brand new arrival building, other features, fitness center, and so forth, that will upgrade the property substantially. Now, you could take all those pieces out, keep the same parking configuration, the same inefficient snow melt system that's there, the same unworkable fire access and so forth. You can take all those features out and reduce the cost to the association. But this is the once in a lifetime opportunity for this association to upgrade its inventory to match up with what's going on right across the street in base village. And yes, we do subscribe to the just enough theory, but some of even Mel's article was more discussing the overall comprehensive plan and 5060, whatever X number of units in Snowmass Center, possibly many more units up at the old mall to offset for the very same reason we're looking at here to offset some of the costs of making those needed in infrastructure improvements and upgrading the inventory of snowmass accommodations. So in this instance we're just looking at six additional units. And those units, a couple of other things that are important, valuable to point out. Narendic, can we go to one of our slides in here? Well, I'm your stuck. I'm stuck, yeah. Okay. The, a couple of more things, in addition to the two story versus three story, does not work. Mr. Van Arsdale is correct in pointing out that it's not just money, it's also consensus. And should the association be able to build a consensus to do a major renovation? That would be nice, but there's 30 some unit owners there, and they all have to come to some kind of an agreement to move forward with some scope of a project. We think this is the right scope to make a substantial upgrade of the enclave property. These new units are unique. They don't just water down the inventory of real estate that's already available. They're unique in a couple of ways. They're brand new units. They're ski and ski out, much more so than base village. They're immediately adjacent to base village, so they actually add to the critical mass, but they benefit from that. And then equally importantly, they become a part of the Onclave Association operation. So they do make the Onclave work better by having, by expanding its variety of inventory. So a more successful complex is a good thing for the village. These are all resort accommodations. And again, we think this is a relatively small compared to the base village. 600 units, this is six units and so forth. And then as far as community benefits go, we also disagree with the notion that these are not significant community benefits. The town can't build the bus stop the way it's envisioned without some cooperation and the easement access from enclave, for example, that works hand in hand. Yes, that makes on-clave access to bus better, but it makes the town be able to do the bus configuration that it's proposing. We're reducing the energy consumption overall. We're adding more parking on-site instead of having to shuttle cars off-site, emergency access is much better. All of those things are, yes, they do benefit the on-clave, but they're good for the overall community as well. I have a number of other notes, but it's getting late. Thank you, Gus. Do I have any other public comments? I do not. Any questions for council? I would. No, no. I would. No. We do know that we have some additional information that is necessary to address the acceptance of the PUD. This whole issue on RO that's not even contemplated in our town code. That creates another challenge for us. I'm delighted to have you in our town code. That creates another challenge for us. So I would suggest that we allow you to amend the application. Get that in and continue our public hearing. Perhaps to November 20th. We've been in the process for a long, long time. We'd like to ask if it's possible to extend the or continue to November 6th. We can all of these issues, we can address very quickly and get them in. As I said, the revised range report which addresses that one relatively small piece of 24 civil engineering drawings is ready to hand over. And we can reconfigure the application, which is back to the no good deed goes unpunished category, which is the planning commission asked to add an RO unit. We added it. I understand that it does rejigger the parking issue. It rejiggers a lot of stuff. It's pretty. It's not even contemplated. Well, we didn't suggest that that came from the plan. Maybe we respond. Say bye-bye to an arrow and figure out some other usage. We don't even have a, have a, that's even, that's going to create some major work. And maybe the solution is to offer up another employee unit and then have a discussion about RO as a separate. That might be wise. So you may want to contemplate that, Mike, an applicant. So November 6th, is it possible? Well, regarding the response to the town engineer comments, I could probably be submitted as a supplemental addendum and response to staff or refer or refer agency comments. I think their formal amendment should address the associated impacts just with this RO unit but it should come out within a week because we need to refer it out. Get it reviewed or report and present a resolution for the amendment to council by the six which is a short amount of time actually. And kind of following up with Jim's point, what I would suggest is if staff's recommendation still stands that a formal amendment needs to be submitted. And what I would ask is at least three weeks after that semiddle for review and to get a staff report written back for you. So we were guessing it would take several weeks for them to put their amendment together and take us those three or four weeks to get the staff report, get it out for review and back. If they can get it done by guessing by the eighth, then that would give us a minimum of three weeks. That's still pushing us really tight. But I'd say if the full amendment's not in by the eighth and there's no way, that's why we were pushing for the 20th but Sorry the day I guess council would need to accept him. I'm up first before it's referred out reviewed as a Well Well, can I ask one more question, Clint? Mark, you may ask, Clint, a question. Which is, if we were to withdraw the suggestion by the planning commission to put in an RO unit and change it as Mike just suggested to a regular employee type affordable unit, does that change the equation in some fashion? I mean again it's just responding to the desire by the town to have more employee employees accommodated on site. We're willing to do that but don't feel like we want to be heavily penalized for doing what the town's asking us to do. It probably have less effects on the impacts, but it would change the parking, your parking. Oh yeah, I know we understand. Yeah, we've already calculated all that stuff out. We just need to redo it if this makes sense. The applicant should decide how they want to submit their application. And then once that's complete, staff will refer it out and we'll bring it to council and they'll review it. And we did. It's not. If we do this, will you do that? It's not. That's not how it works. If we do this, I know you don't want to. We did it in response to the planning commissions. So we didn't. But you didn't do it completely. So they can't review it. You didn't show the effects of that amendment. It wasn't, you know, I think it did, but I understand there's more. The code says you must amend it in a public hearing, and then the council conducts an inquiry as to where it goes from there. So. Well, my question is still stands as will it make a simpler process for the town if we change it? That's not how it works. We don't answer those questions. You submit an application, staff reviews it, presents the review to the council and they review the application. Okay. I'll let you know. If you want to put it on for November 6th, in hopes that all this can happen, I have no objection to that. I think we agree that it can't happen by the 16th of October. Yes. But if your application is deemed complete by staff, the referrals are done. It can come back to Council on the 6th, so that they can determine here's where it goes from here. If it's not, we can continue that to the next date or whatever it is. But we're not going to sit here and tell you, well, if you do this, yeah, it's okay. You have to submit. I'm just, we're just trying to respond to the request that the town made of the applicant, which is to add this extra unit. Whatever's the easiest way to add it, we're happy to do that. Madam Mayor. Yes, Mike. We will resolve this outside of the presence of council. That's where I was going to go. No, that's not true, Michael. Well, I want to. Because the code only provides one way to amend your application during a public hearing to the council. So to say we're going to resolve this outside of the presence of council, isn't accurate. Let me be more precise. What I meant by this is the submission of the material that has been requested by staff. And we will submit the information requested by staff to staff as it has requested, Mr. Dresser. I don't understand what else we can do. I think you said about the Dundam Supplement response to the town engineer comments, which is fine. And we typically ask them, they up against the email to us, we have a record that when it was accepted or submitted, and we we have a record that when it was accepted or submitted? And we also have a digital version of their submission. But the amendment really should be based on the RO and all its effects, all its domino effects on the project as a whole. If that's what they want to present. Right. So having said that, I'll continue the public hearing to the earliest being November 6th with an option for continuation and direct both the applicant to discuss that the amendment and or the submittals of staff and we will then see you back here on November 6th at the earliest. And Madam Mayor, we'll work with Mr. Dresser if there's some communication issue, some code interpretation question. We'll work it out with him. Thank you very much. Okay. I will continue the public session or continue the public session until November 6th for the enclave consideration. Okay. Thank you for your patience. At four o'clock. At four o'clock. I keep forgetting the time of that meeting. We'll take this off. Okay. Mayor, could we take a quick break? Yeah, we're going to take a quick break. That's for sure. Okay. Okay. Next item on the agenda is the budget for 2017, Clint. So we- By 2018 I guess. I will, we've presented a budget for you. You've got all the documents before you. Tonight what we were hoping to do was kind of review some of the big picture issues that we're talking about in the budget. On the 8th, a week from tonight we've got a part of a work session. We've got some more presentation planned. The chairman of the FAB will start the meeting off, kind of go over the FAB's recommendations. And then, because I'm assuming we'll be shutting this, or cutting tonight's presentation short, we'll be going into some more detail on the 8th. And then on the 13th, we've got a five hour session scheduled, I believe from 9 to 1 for a lot of detail. So if you guys are comfortable with me not jumping in the detail tonight, I'll hit a few highlights. We'll hit a little bit more detail a week from tonight, and then get all the detail you need on the 13th. And then there's another meeting scheduled after that in case there's follow-up issues we need to hit. I think the big message I want to present to you is we We need to be able to do that. We need to be able to do that. We need to be able to do that. We need to be able to do that. We need to be able to do that. We need to be able to do that. We need to be able to do that. We need to be able to do that. We need to be able to do that. We need to be able to do that. We need to be able to And I always say that the budget is probably the best policy document that counts the produces every year. That's where you're able to spend the dollars to make sure the projects and the policies that you want to promote can happen. And so I just want to make sure that you're not feeling rushed. I think we've got adequate time to do that. And if we need to get more, all you need to do is tell Mary and and I and we will be happy to show up, set another meeting just to make sure that you guys are comfortable. Our end goal is to get the budget, have the public caring on the 6th, November 6th, was hopefully adoption that night. But again, we don't want to rush anything, we want to make sure your questions are answered as we move forward. Okay, before we go into that on the 13th, that 9 to 1 session, I'm going to ask my fellow colleagues if we can move that meeting to 930 because the night before I will be in veil. I'm driving from veil. That would benefit. That means going later than when? 930 to 130? Can we make that happen? I know we can. I'm just worried about the road coming back. No, I know we can't. I'm just worried about the road coming back. No, I know we can do it. You need to your colleagues right behind. 30 to 130. I'm okay. I'm okay. You're okay. How about you Bill? Yeah, that's fine. I appreciate it. For that, I'll bring you something good back from bail. Extra back of gummy bears. I'll bring you some. No, no, nothing infused. They don't allow them in their door. Okay, so quickly speaking, this budget authorizes $31 million in expenditures. We've identified $30 million in revenues and before anybody gets an investor thinks this is deficit spending, $4 million of those of that expenditures are capital projects from which we're drawing down purposefully created reserves. And so we are confident, and I think the, I don't want to speak to the FAB, but I think when we went over this budget with them, they're also confident that we are doing meeting the long-term goal of making sure one time or ongoing revenues are meeting ongoing expenses. We think in that vein, it is a balanced budget and we think we're making investments in the right spots. As we develop the budget, we definitely use the council's identified goals that you adopted earlier this year regarding projects with affordable housing, community engagement, community building, safety, resiliency, and regionalism. Regionalism maybe not, because that's the tough issue to budget for, but definitely we did our best to make sure that the council's goals that you have identified and set were met or at least attempted to be met through this budgeting process. We did take, I mean, as the FAB's letter says and as we say in our cover letter, we continue to do what's been done for over 30 years, just take a very conservative approach to this. We wanted to make sure that although we are in strong financial position now that we stay that way and that with I'll call them windfall revenues from base village that you're one time revenues that we're not going to be reliant on those going forward. Some things like plan check fees and building fees which are significant revenues this year or 17 and 18. We wanted to make sure that we didn't build those into our base as revenues going forward because we understood that they're one time. We've taken a number of other conservative steps. When I say conservative, I mean, fiscally conservative. We've increased emergency reserves in the marketing fund and group sales fund from 15% to 25%. We've made sure that we can continue to fully fund our commitment to the reserves for all our building and maintenance funds. And we increased what we contribute annually to our vehicle replacement fund. All those contributions end up going into reserve to make sure that we're well funded going into the future. Some significant things that I might just touch on right quick for you all to make sure you're considering before next Tuesday or at least starting to think about personnel is our top expenditure. We've identified a number of performance increases next year. We're identifying a 3% pool for performance increases next year. And in response to employee surveys, we are proposing that we increase the town's contribution to the retirement plan by 1%. That 4% overall increases consistent with what we've been the last couple of years. And we think it falls within what the town can continue to forward going forward. We did, as you all are aware, I'll just, I'll give you a backup. We did include in the 2018 budget a million dollars for building six enhancements. That million dollars, that dollar amount is not tied to anything, other than that's what we identified before. And we thought it would be prudent to go ahead and include it in the 2018 budget. 700,000 of that is from the community purpose reserve which are funds that we've received from the developers so those can be spent widely. The $350,000 we've identified are from Holy Cross Dollars. Those do have more restrictions on them so that would be dependent on what the end use is. But in the short, we budgeted that million dollars or that million 50 in the budget for building enhancements. I'm going to just kind of skip one of the, next week I think we should, we'll talk about the Cougar Canyon and how that operates, but essentially we've built up a reserve account to help pay for the COP that pays for this building, the certificate of participation, the debt that built this building. We built up a reserve over a number of years to help offset that cost going forward and we intend to start using that reserve going forward, all part of the financial plan that was in place from the beginning. Property tax issues going forward. Actually the overall tax rate is proposed to go down, which we're proud of. But that also means that we have less dollars going into the general fund and the road fund. But again, we've accounted for that decrease and we think we're in a well positioned to deal with that going forward. And then making sure that I'm not skipping anything gigantic. One issue that we continue to talk about with hotels is increasing the daily rate for guests that for hotel passes from $7 a day to $10 a day. If you remember last year, this past season, it was the first time we actually went to a daily rate. Before that, we only sold weeklies and with the new, we did our best guest estimate what that rate should be to keep us whole. $7 is pretty close. We think 10 is going to do a better job in making sure that the town is whole and the revenues we received in the past. Keep continuing to go forward. We've got some dollar. We were bragging mostly about the recreation center. We think that there, we've got 10% increase in revenues for them. They've done a great job of making sure that the revenues materialize it and we want to recognize that in the budget. We've included a membership to the Rotary Club and for the town in the budget. We've added $50,000 to the budget next year to study and the public and the public and the public and the public and the public and the public and the public and the public and the public and the public and the public and the public and the public and the public and the public and the public and the public and the public and the public and the public and the public and the public and the public and the public and the public and the public and the public and the public and the public and the public and the public and the public and the public and the public and the public and the public and the public and the public and the public and the public and the public and the public and the updated in some time or to consider updating I should say to study that and then also to make sure that we continue forward with enforcement of existing regulations. We've made sure all the revenues and expenses are identified in the budget for the expected BRT service increase with RAPDA. That would take us about 15 or 20 minute headways. So those dollars are incorporated into our budget. That's we won't know that answer until the EOTC acts on their budget next month. But we've incorporated that as if it's going to happen in our budget at this point. And then finally, we did this last week, but we quickly went over a number of capital improvement projects. Those are identified. We touched on them last week. The one thing I don't know that we touched on is we did add a position that we repurposed a position we currently have. Right now in the last couple of years, we've had a mechanics position that's been vacant. And this budget sees or would like to repurpose that position into a project manager to help us get our capital programs off the ground in a more timely manner. We've been aggressive in identifying them, some of them have proven more difficult than others to get done. And we think getting this position to help with some GIS technology and getting the overall projects underway would be positioned well, that's invested. I think I might stop there just knowing that it's late knowing that we've got five more meetings but I think the big thing is that this budget has had a lot of effort over the last several months from staff. We're comfortable saying that it's budget or balanced. We're comfortable saying that it's sustainable. We're comfortable saying that it's resilient the way that we know we've been directed by the council to make sure it's there. I'm sure there's a number of way that we know we've been directed by the council to make sure it's there I'm sure there's a number of details that we need to touch on But I think overall 31 million dollar expenditure. It's gonna be pretty close and we expect it We expect that it's we hope that it's meet the needs and it goals the council said Just Clint, this page that shows the operational reserves and the unassigned funds, could you just review that a little bit? I don't know, because I had it printed out. It's in the presentation. It's in the PowerPoint. It's in the PowerPoint. Let me get it for another. It's like five or six pages in. It's called 20% operational reserve and unassigned funds. Is it 150? Page 150? Yes. Yes. Yeah. Let me point you into a different one. Well, let me start here. 8 slash 9. So operational reserve is the, that I think I understand, right? That's the 25% that we put away every year. That's by policy. By policy. We keep as a savings account for lack of a better term and case of an emergency. And that's a combination, though, of what's required by table and other things. That's in addition. Or is the table in addition? In addition. Yeah, table is 3%. Oh, this is an addition. In addition, yes. Okay. And so that is, I mean, it's three months operating, 25%, that's not exactly right but on you know, it's 25% of the budget and we, that helps with cash flow and that really helps for that major emergency. Get asked all the time. When would we spend that? The examples I would use are a no-snow year. I mean, it has to be significant like that when we would tap into it. Otherwise, we budget to ensure that we maintain a 25% operating reserve. Okay. Well, economic crisis. And then maybe. Would you explain what the unassigned funds are? Are you looking at the unassigned, just the funds available? Is that what you're talking about? Well, yeah, well, sorry. Funds available are just that. Those are dollars that are not otherwise reserved for any purpose and are dollars that are there for the council to identify use for. So is the total of those two in any given year what the total fund balance is at the start of the year? Is that what that means? It would be the next page would be the total fund balance because there's another portion of the amount of funds that are appropriated or assigned for other purposes like the Holy Cross, enhancement fund, the SGM funds, all of those are appropriated or designated funds. Okay. So this is plus and plus equals the. And I know we don't want to get into a lot of detail tonight, but the FAB talked about this, those tables a lot. They're in their review. And I can't put my finger on it, but we developed a new chart that shows and we'll have it for you. I just can't flip to it. It's not in this packet because we did it after the packet was done. So we need to get that. You will present to you a new chart. Okay. The question the FAB brought up is that, you know, we keep showing this fund balance going down. And what we did is, we, you know, Mary Ann did, is a chart showing how we performed in the past. And while this chart that you just referred to, Councillor Circus kind of shows that fund balance going down, that is a worst case scenario. We did a little bit of history in saying, here's how we performed in the past, and here's how that fund, those funds available, continues to grow going forward. And so it's a comparison of what we budget and how we actually perform. I'm happy to tell you, we perform better than the budget generally. Okay, thanks. So, Clint, I mean, this chart would look a lot different if we didn't have that 20% included in there. So we're not going to be going negative if we the 20% out, probably for another five years maybe. Right? I mean, one of the points I tried to make in the letter to you all is when we presented the 2017 budget to you, we said, oh my gosh, we showed 2018 might be a trouble year. But then we went ahead and made all the necessary adjustments to say this year were actually $56,000 to the good. Our commitment to you is to always make sure that going forward that we will balance that budget. And so I know that the mayor has, I think, used the term in the past sandbagging. You know, we might be sandbagging some of this. And that's a fair way to look at it. I'm a little more optimistic and I think we take that conservative approach and we will always ensure the budget we present is balanced. And this year we made those adjustments. We were benefited by the sales tax being higher than we projected and we benefited and we'll show this to you as we go through it, that the departments have been very frugal with their budgets and spend less than we actually budget. And so by revenues being higher and expenses being lower, there's no magic there to be able to grow that savings account more than we actually budget. And so by revenues being higher and expenses being lower, there's no magic there that we're able to grow that savings account more than we otherwise anticipate. This chart, this chart that Councillor Circus shows shows that if we spend every dime and our revenues never came in above what we projected, this is what this could look like. So maybe we should call it gold bagging instead of sandbagging. I mean I think it's all fair and then you talk to a guy that I throw terms around all the time. I don't take it as a negative comment, and it'll be, he's like, yeah, we are conservative in that approach on purpose. Because I'm always happy to say when the budget comes around, or the auto comes around, we spent less than we said we would, and we brought in more than we said we would. It's a much easier presentation to make to you than whoops we screwed one up and spent more than we thought and then ringing as well as I. So is that partially why when we budget for capital improvements but we don't finish or we don't start certain capital improvements. So that money really comes back into the funds available accounts because we budget it, right, but we don't use it. So it kind of fought if kind of, we anticipated it at the time we budget it that it wasn't going to be there But we didn't use it so so it is there so like in the surf fund like we make all those transfers over to the surf funds and the CIP funds Yeah, and in the CIP fund if those monies aren't spent then we come back to you and we say okay It's in fund balance. We've already budgeted for it it it's sitting there and we want to reallocate it for the following year yeah but we don't I don't know if we I don't know where we see that though because I mean we last week when we talked about this or less meeting when we talked about this we had the chart that showed what we're being re-elected. And that's in this, the, uh, weapon improvements. Is that what we do in January? We, it's closer to March. It's more like March beginning March. Yeah. We re-alloc, we close out the first. We recognize it and we re-allocate it. Correct. Okay. Other questions? What I would ask in the meantime, if there's something red flags, something that you guys are thinking about that we're missing something that's dead wrong, that would be great to get a little bit of a heads up. Otherwise, we'll hit a little bit more detail next Tuesday. Phil Cereani from the chairman of the FAB will be here next Tuesday and then we'll really get the weeds on the 13th One other request and looking at the human resources the compensation side of our town and staff Could we get a comparison of what other towns are doing in terms of benefits? Yes, I have. And health insurance. So we know you got 20, 80s going. Sure. Yeah, it's a. Michael Yang with RAPTA. Yes. He puts together that information. So I called him and asked him for that information. But a lot of the information he received is from August. And so they're starting to go through their boards and some of that may be. Do you mean increases for next year or do you mean how we compare? Well, health insurance for one. What their plan is? To increase their health insurance budget by. Well, health insurance for one, we have an assumption in here what those increases are going to be. I don't know what other municipalities are doing for health insurance just as one example. And if they've got a hundred percent coverage or they have co-pays. We've got some of that I'm sure you do. We've got that it might be that's going to be six months old But to go in for we've got a mother that would be helpful Okay Other questions I don't have any red flags. I've got questions. I'll say I have questions, but it's getting light. Okay Ready to move on. Yes, mm- Yes. Thank you very much. Thanks, Mary. Thank you for waiting so long, too. Thank you. Okay. I know you came in. Well, we're only. Mary and I just, I do have one question for you. I meant to ask it when we were talking about the officer training program because you're going to be tasked with managing that budget as well. Do you anticipate that taking up too much of your time? Not really because one of the things that Todd and the board put together, which was different than Garfield County, they had an employee within the police department, or the sheriff's department that did everything. And what Todd did and the board was the higher contract person. So Robert Glass-Mire is going to really be doing all of the footwork on it and then once it's submitted then we make sure that we get reimbursed before we send out the money. So it technically shouldn't, but the state, their website has gone down for post because of security issues that they discovered. So right now we're having to do a little bit more footwork than we thought we would have to do. But I assume they're going to fix those security issues at some point and we'll be back to the website which will make it that much easier. Okay. Thanks for asking. Okay. Next item on the agenda is future agenda items? This is an item that's normally on the consent agenda but going forward I know there is some discussion about some potential discussion about how you wanted to meet back up. There's some potential to have some discussion on how you would like to discuss building six going forward. And rather than put it on a consent agenda, which I just suggested that this be a discussion amongst council about how you might want to schedule meetings in the future. So Madam Mayor, if you want to go. Oh yeah, okay. Okay, so I asked Clint to do to put this on as a separate item. We received additional information from East West last week relative to the construction timeline for building six. And I think the most significant piece of information was that, well, I guess there was a number of pieces of significant information. First of all, that the concrete is going to be poured, I think, next week, is due to be poured next week, that the difficulty in postponing construction or delaying construction until we have a better idea of who or what is plaza side of building six. And that being one issue, of course, in order to build the plaza, that wall will have to be built. Then the other serious potential problem in doing anything along the lines of delaying that construction would be that building seven or eight when they begin would create a problem for getting construction material into building six. So it is not likely that we will be able to delay the construction of building six. So knowing that we have to go forward with it, the second piece of information was that any changes to the exterior, which you might recall we had talked about possibly adding more windows to the plaza, not to the plaza side to the exterior need to be determined roughly within six weeks from now. So that puts us in the month of October to solicit ideas and suggestions for what can be done inside the building and to potentially look for partners to do these ideas. However, it certainly isn't a given that we're going to have, we're going to get responses that will work, or that we even think will work. And as a result, I would like to discuss getting the building on the market for sale as a second option. And at least until the time that we know what we want to do with that building, because at this moment we don't know. And we're going to get committed to an architectural design, and a construction design that's pretty dedicated to, it's pretty dedicated to a programming operation that doesn't require exposure from the outside because there really aren't, isn't going to be any. So I'm putting that out on the table. We had, it kind of came and went at our last meeting when Madam Mayor wasn't with us, but I do want to bring it up again because I feel it would be important to discuss and I personally feel that it would be valuable to put it on the market and as soon as we can. Since we don't really know what we don't have another option. Well, we don't know if we have another option. Here's a quick question for you. How many of the ROIs are, I mean, yellow eyes, have we sent out or who has responded or who's even called with questions? We haven't received anything formal back. We've had at least two meetings with people asking questions and I bet we sent out 30, 40 so far. And then I think I received a request from you today To make sure all the businesses get that so we've got a business email. We'll send it out to all the stakeholders We've got addresses through the marketing department. So we'll there'll be a lot's going out But it's far more we haven't to my knowledge we haven't received any responses yet But again the deadline's not for three weeks, two weeks. I tell you, it's a hurry up and turn around big time for a nonprofit in the situation. The two nonprofits we've met so far and we've talked to East West so call it three. I mean the direction we're giving them is give us, you don't give us your most basic proposal we're not asking for a fully vetted idea what we're asking for is trying to find partners with decent ideas that we can then merge and get something to happen. And so if someone's got a half baked concept well but it's a concept we like then let's you guys this will be the decision you all get to make but let's get that concept out there to make sure that we're recognizing that I might be there. And so that you guys can say, well, someone's got an idea for an A and a B and a C, and you don't like C, great. But you're like A and B, even though that's a fully baked, we'll get the direction of that point to go start working with those organizations and put something together. Do we have any, I think you've made previous comments that East West has some ideas? Yeah, I know that I fully expect them to put in a L.O.I.S. The concept they're working through, I mean, they're looking for the family activities, they're looking for things that are gonna create vitality that are gonna really fit their business model for sure. But they have told me they fully expect to put in a response to the L.O.I. They have told me they fully expect to put in a response to the L.O.I. Okay So Mr. Circus is requesting that we discuss this evening whether or not to put the bill in the middle. What doesn't I mean? I would prefer to discuss it now, but in my suggestion was so everybody was So everybody have a chance to know about it schedule the discussion if you you want to, but then set that, you know, if you wanted to do that. When I was afraid as if this discussion came up tonight without it being scheduled, it wouldn't be, you would never staff report, you wouldn't have adequate notice, you wouldn't have all those types of things. And so my suggestion was, if you want to have that discussion, please schedule it in that way everything can be prepared for it. I would request that we do schedule it. How about the rest of you? I agree. I mean, I don't know what four weeks ago, five weeks ago, I said the same thing. Before we even sent the letters out, when it wasn't looking good for ACEs to come forward. But anyway, let's schedule it. And as we all know, it's getting late. I don't think we have much choice. We've got to, if we don't know who's coming to the table yet, to talk with us about what can happen, we're going to, if you will, have a building that is provided to the town as a community benefit. And way back in January we chose not to move forward with an RFP. We chose only to focus on snowmastiscovary and that really became a cooperative agreement or approach with ACES. We know that that is no longer on the table, perhaps in programming. So we don't know if yet whether or not they're going to come forward again with some proposal or some ideas. But as far as I'm concerned, they become one of the mix. Not so exclusive for their property. And until that changes, do we see a proposal? I think we've got to look at all options. So therefore, I'd like to schedule a discussion. Tom wants to, I want to bill, Alyssa. Yeah, I think we should have the discussion. Next scheduled meeting. And so the discussion, I mean, so help me understand. I think what I'd like to see is an update on where we stand with the L.O.I. You know, in terms of potential inquiries. Whether or not those are solid, but those conversations. Number two would be a discussion on whether to put the property or seek inquiries for sale. Is that? You're referring to October 16th our next schedule meeting. That's our next schedule regular meeting. To me the answer is yes. Yeah. So do you want to put the well in my only fear. I'll use the word fear. Is your you've got this. You've got the yellow eye out now. We're not going to responses back to the word fear. You've got this, you've got the L.O.I. out now. We're not going to get responses back to the 30th. I mean, I think after you see them, that, I mean, then you can make the evaluation. And we need to have this conversation on the 16th about sale. But if people are interested, they're going to have called you by the 16th. And I hope to God there's a million people going to respond. But I think we've got to have a conversation sooner than later. But we're going to talk about selling the building on 16th before we know who may be involved. I think we have an update on who has made inquiries or interest. That's two weeks before final submittal. So I really think you're going to know by the 16th. Well, you know, our November 6th meeting shows the review of building six from the 16th. You know, I know what Billy's saying in regards to letting the time span go to what we agreed upon several weeks ago. If we wait till November 6th, we have this discussion. How will we be able to evaluate whether or not we need to make changes in the exterior of the building within 10 days of that meeting? Exactly. Because that is what- I don't think we have to rush into making changes. Let the building be built. I mean, just let it get built. I wouldn't worry about changing a window here and changing a window there. It's going to pay for that. Well, let's build if there's somebody wants to buy the building. You build it as is. They're buying it as is. They buy it as is. I mean, I think we're in the 11th hour in regards to making changes. But, but, but that's the whole point. Buying it as is, it's a special purpose building. It is a special purpose. So buying it as is reduces the value of that building. I don't agree with that. I don't agree with that. I don't agree with that. I think it's you know you're buying into the plazzy, you're buying into the vitality of the village. I think having the discussion on the 16th about selling the building could potentially scare off anybody who might want to get involved. It'll be in the newspaper tomorrow that we're having this conversation. I mean, I think no matter what we do to the building, anyone who wants it, whatever purpose they want it for, they're going to make changes. I mean, it's like you could think, oh, doing the kitchen in your house is going to be great for selling your house. And then the person comes in and rips out the whole kitchen anyway. But that's the interior. We're not talking about the interior. I know, but if they want to play more windows, they're just making an example. I'm just making an example. I just feel like I don't know that there's anything we can really do. It'll get into the structural steel that's going into it relative to those windows. And if I were the nonprofit coming in to ask for a piece of space. I'm gonna ask you to fix it for me. I don't know. So I would suggest the 16th. Tom, you wanna hold till the 6th? I wanna hold till the 6th. I agree with Billion, regards to we've got these letters out there. Let that run its course. I don't see the point of Russian two more weeks. Okay, I can see if there seems to be. And the way we'll set it up for the sixth, I mean if it's all right with you all, is we'll have the proposals by that point. We'll say, you know, sale can be an option, you know, evaluating, you know, whatever, having any applications we got will be an option, but we can make sale an option, we can go through and say, you know, what might that look like? You know, another thought that I had while I was in Hawaii and I discussed it briefly with Bob versus Seo is looking at having some of our local or various organizations. Look at condominiumizing that particular building. Well, I think that's, I mean, honestly, I think that's what this LLI is. I mean, if I'm going to guess, I think you're going to get 10 proposals, eight of which needs some space in there and it's going to be up to us to kind of coordinate an effort to say all right, how do we get these eight entities to work together to really make a great product to the end. Well, it wouldn't be for rent, that they would be purchasing their space. And that's, that would be an offshoot of one of those ideas. I mean, I think that's, that's why I think what I understood to be the council's direction is let's see what kind of ideas out there Let's get that community input get that buy-in see what shows up and the people say hey, I want to have my own Thousand-foot square space and I want to own it you guys can consider that as someone says, you know what? I just need I need 3000 square feet two days a week and somebody else does I think that's that kind of coordination exploration we can do. Okay, just so, you know, that's just another strategy. Yeah, and you'd have to own it to kind of minimize it obviously, but. Okay, we'll have the conversation on the six. And it'll be, is it okay if we have it as part of that evaluation of all the allowis that come in and say this is another option that is available? Is that the right way to do that? is another option that is available? Is that the right way to do that? Well, it just becomes an option just like an LL, you have a response to the LLY. OK, any other future agenda items that you would like to address? OK. I'd like to get a trails on the agenda for some points so we can talk about future trails and maybe get a trails report from the summer contemplate hiking trails separate from biking trails. I think we directed the poster plan to look at the issue of the conflict show points on the town and the ski co trails and they were going to work together and if you could include that along with Bill E. Cree Quests it would be great. Yeah, and all what I would like to do is make sure we get the poster committee up to speed on it and then Make sure that they know what's going on, but we can give that update. I know Annie and I hike the The equestrian trail last week or two weeks ago to kind of the point of all right How does this work and what's the better way to do it and we can update you on some ideas with signage to make sure that people know that. Shorty, if it's okay with you, we'd like to make sure the posters up can you mean is that the speed? It might be appropriate to have them do some presentation with their thoughts are but. That's fine. There's no rush. It's just I think it's good to get it on the agenda. I have an item that could possibly, I was going to wait, but for updates. But I'd like to talk somehow or another, have a time for a court to come in, talk about the high five program, okay? Right now, I don't know if anybody even knows what the high five program is, and it's five municipalities, right, there's only two municipalities involved, Aspen and Basalt. Okay, we're not involved in high-fifth. They can come in, they can come in and set up, they have what they call a confession, confessional booth, okay? Where you make the pledge, and you can, you know, you talk to the confessional booth, and you'll come up with the pledges, the five pledges that you're going to come up with for energy efficiency. For instance, town snowmass has pledged to be energy efficiency by 2020 and whatever the date is I don't have. But I'd like to have that have core come forward somewhere along the line on, in the consent agenda. It could be, I know we're really pretty staffed. About the work session on November 13th. Well, let us ask them when they can show up but we can get them scheduled. I don't want to schedule something if they can't make it. Yeah, yeah. Let us ask them, people we can call in and get some. Yeah, I think maybe if you have the conversation with Mona and along with that part of that, might mean the town might have to contribute a little bit more to CORE for this high five involvement. I don't know anything about it. Okay, so that's why I wanted you to make the call. And again, I didn't want to to the meeting is going long and I thought I'd bring it up right now for the consent agenda. Hey, any good idea? Good idea. Okay. Okay. Let's move on to our next agenda item which is an executive session. I'm gonna ask the group are y'all prepared to stay for another hour? 45 minutes to an hour. I'm here. I appreciate it. Yeah, I'm here. Okay. Let's do it. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Town Council will now meet an executive session pursuant to CRS 2464024 in Snowmass Village, specifically discuss one item. Personnel matters except if the employee who is a subject of the session has requested an open meeting for some to see RS 246, 402 for FL, the Snowmass Village Municipal Code 245C6. Provided there is an affirmative vote of two thirds of the core and present at this meeting to hold the second session and for the sole purpose of considering item A of a provided further that no adoption of any proposed policy, position, resolution, regulation, or formal action shall occur at this executive session. Do I have a motion to move in to executive session? The move. Second. Thank you, Bill. Thank you, Bob. All in support? Aye. Aye. Opp. All in support. I oppose same side. We're going to be meeting over Yonder as you all know. I have an open electronic. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Yeah, yeah, yeah. And we're going to meet. Thank you. What's it? Oh, we're going to try to understand. I'm going to put that in place. Oh, OK. We just need to go to executive session. I'll find it on the call of organization. OK.