Some of you may be. What's not really that. Or on your computer welcome this is a work session of town council. We have several items for discussion today. Please note. We will be done by six work sessions are four to six. So. I know we've all done our homework and read all the great stuff that was sent out. And we do want to leave about 15, 20 minutes for EOTC. Right? I think you all are a little longer than that. It's next. Half hour, 40 minutes. Of all the discussions, that's the one we want to make sure that time. We, then you'll get to pace us. We will. Okay, be noted that council members are here, the only person that not with us today is Billy Matson, who has an excused absence. Okay, let's go ahead and get started. And your first up. I am. So first of all, I apologize because I do know the drawings that you had in your packet are really small and hard to read. But I can step through and go through any questions you have. But the Tom Park Station pedestrian project, as you recall, was identified as a priority project last budget season and I've been working with SGM as the civil designer taking basically conceptual design to a project that would go to bid and we've also included on that project team Alpenglow which is the lighting designer for the roundabout project so we have consistency. So basically is what we've done is taken the drawing that was conceptual didn't have all the dimensions to it and put more of the required dimensions to the project and that's what's on our screen here. So just to give you an orientation of the layout, here's the rec center parking lot, Tom Park station, Snowmass Club Drive and here's the bus area that our transit system utilizes right now. The current bus stop for Raffta is right where my hand is. All right, I've had to do the pointer. That's better. There and the other down valley bus stop is here. And the current crosswalk is at this location and I think we've all realized that one, lighting is a challenge in this area and two that's not the desired location for a large amount of people using this area so we get that sheet flow effect which is not a safe design. So what we've done is looked at the geometry of the bus stops and used the criteria of the desired line of having pedestrians cross behind the back of the buses and basically are looking at keeping the existing bus shelter on the south side of the road and then putting in the Raffta design guideline bus stop here putting in the crosswalk here that would come to the center landscaped area and then it would continue to line up straight with Tom Park station basically right underneath the information signs. On this side would be the new raft of bus stop. We have chosen to not put a ball boat here to protect that and to deal with it as concrete. And then take out this existing bus stop. And right now, here is the bus stop as well as there's a turning lane here. And so this would get reduced to take out that bus stop. But we would still propose to keep a short 15 minute parking area here. Because we've incorporated some 15-minute information parking here and have done some signage at the entrance to the rec center, but it's confusing. I mean, people aren't looking at that right away and they don't read it. Right, and they're past it. So in order to not mix buses with people that would like to get information, we're proposing this as the location for that short term come in and extending that sidewalk to connect to the existing sidewalk to be able to come and use guest services. So, and then the other part of it in here that we've included, which is just generally needs a little fine tweaking, and it would probably be an alternate on the bid project to see where things come in is the sidewalk connection from town park station along back of curb here and then coming through we'd probably need to let we might have to lose a tree here to kind of do a little bit more like not straight-arrowed engineering for concrete, that's what I call it. So that's one of those recommendations that had come out to make that connection to still be able to use the tunnel in there. So David Peckler and other staff members, PD, have reviewed this. We still need to go through the final designer approval with Raffta on that. And then the other part of the design project would be to do the lighting. And that's what those next images were. And before you go into the lighting. The parking spots that are going to fill in where the current bus stop into town bus stop is. Are they going to be, are they parallel or they head in? They are parallel with the road. So the car is going to be parallel parked. Right. Along the edge of the road there. Okay. Yep. Okay. So I believe I have to look at the dimensions, but I think it's two stalls in there. And that's generally what we do. So the current lane that's generally what the current lane that's there. Right. This lane. Yeah. That turn lane. It really isn't utilized. Majority of our, and I can let David you can talk about this, but majority of our transit movements are coming here and using this center turn pocket right here. Yeah. And turning into our location here. Right. Raffta doesn't turn right to go into there. They stop here. So there's a really low amount of traffic on. Is there something I'm missing on that right turn? This one right here. Yeah, it's actually just a bus stop pull out. So it wasn't really a right term per se. But it is sign for right term, but it's not utilized. So we're trying to use some of those concepts of narrowing the width so that it has that more safe feeling of pedestrian crossing. Does the right path come up any further than the existing? I didn't see that on there. Bike path is right here. Well that I mean from the other side of the road. Where does it cross the road? It doesn't. It stops down at the recreation center. Yeah, but that's passing. It's still up across the road. Down there. Yeah. So so we're focusing this project on this location. The other thing to talk about is, you know, we sit here and watch kind of the social engineering where people are going. Two things is we will make sure that this is designed correct so that when special events or weather conditions require rafted to come here and turn around to go, that we have the right amount of turning radiuses for the buses. And then secondly, as we've continued to watch this location, it may lend itself in the future to be a whole pedestrian area. But at right now, we're recommending that just be this pedestrian crossing with the enhancements of the location. So we occasionally see people coming in this sidewalk and crossing here, and that would be a further enhancement. We would have to do sidewalk here. But at this point, we would like to just recommend this is the improvement project. And that because right now, they're usually they're crossing in a diagonal. They're starting there and they're going to. To you? Yeah. No, like further and they're going to... Just... No, like further. They're going to wear that bus inlet as the old bus inlet. This here? No, on the other side. Yeah. And they're going to be crossing a huge amount of street on a diagonal. Oh, a question for you on the raft, or the new raft to stop is. So, is that rock? Concrete. Concrete. So is that rock concrete concrete and so where is the raft of bus going to pull into they're gonna be right here So you're through Lane will be Stripe and with arrows on it that that is continue to go that that'll be Strangle Lane coming through you got it, which it is right now Well the point is so you got the bus to stop. You're gonna have a crosswalk. The pedestrian going in front of the bus, or behind the bus? Behind the bus. Behind the bus. Yeah. But it is stage size wise for two buses in that scenario. But they come to the first stop first, and then they scooch the next one up. And is there enough space or, I guess, calculated, not for the two buses, but when the buses start to pull out, they've got to pull into the through lane. Correct, right. They still have the merge lane. They still have this. They. They still have this. They can still go up here. That's the same merge lane that there is now. Yes. So they have their distance to continue and then get over. So let's talk about this information area. You're saying three cars can get in two. Two. How often does the 15 minute use now? You have to ask marketing, but we realize that this is a potential to add a little better some more access to that building for people that missed the sign. And don't really wanna go into the parking lot. Turn around. And they go into the parking lot. And they go through the bus area. I mean, I see it happen all the time. They miss it, so they go through the bus area to turn around. Or they park in. They come right here. They come right there. They get out of their car and then go in. I see it all the time during the season. And then we have heavy visitors. So we're still continuing. That will still continue. It will still continue. Because that could be inconvenient. Oh, it's snowy, it's icy. I'm not going to pull in here. Yeah. Was there any way that we can incorporate those two spaces in there to make it more convenient for people to park in there. David answer that. David? I'll just ask. Oh, and hell no. That's how the David answer. The friendliest thing is to pull in to that problem. I'm sorry. I used the 215 and there's more than two. There's one, two, three. About four. Well, but the problem is when you know, you miss up, when they hit the roundabout, they've come to still mass for the first time. They're totally confused at the roundabout and then they've gone a little further. And then the pull-ins of the parking lot, they've already passed the parking lot. Well, there was a creepy eye sign if they don't, they'd only read about 20 things, so they'll go inside. They don't. I wouldn't need it, would you? So they didn't see the information center. Oh, there's the information center. At that point, they probably already passed the two parallel parking spots. They see the big old white open lane, and they have no idea that the shuttles are going to be following. Well, the curbing is, we can paint the curbing red in the bus depot and we can do yellow for pickup drop off parking to kind of help with that. There's no perfect solution. So on the signage for that, what do we have proposed for the signage for those two parallel spots? I mean, can we- It'd be the information signage, and we'd do some pre-warning signs on that. So, it would make some... To the best we can... Try to, we're trying to use... It's right over there, it is, but it ain't perfect. Right, and we're trying to use a universal symbol so that it's multi-lingual. What would be the universal symbol for? Put it here. X next marks the spot. There you go. So, okay. You want me to move? Okay, we want. Next one. You have it. Okay. So, this drawing, let me blow this up, is to show the existing lights versus the proposed lights and the next drawing, which is the photo metrics, it gets into a lot of detail here. But existing right now, we have a light here. ERs are existing. Okay. There's another ER. If you can read it. I know. Here, need a bomb. Follow me. Here's another one at this. And this is where that crosswalk is right now. And then, and one light here. So what's being proposed is to add the lights at the crosswalk. Pre the crosswalk so that you, sorry, that needs to be on that side. I need to talk to them about that. I just realized that. So you illuminate the pedestrian and all those. And so S2 is a double head and S1 is a single head light. We are not proposing to do these additional lights at this location. Right now we just when I initially talked about it I said what would be the master plan and then we can phase as we go. So that's just we can go back and forth on this one. I'm sorry, Ian. I was writing which what are you not what's not being proposed at this point? The S round about here. Round the round about? Yeah. So we have some existing here and here, and at the crosswalk here and here. But we're not proposing to supplement those. I those ones around the round about, I know you're not proposing them right now, but are they similar to like what you see at the other roundabout? They are, but so we have, they're all the standard detail, and I can show you the light. I've got Google Weengo look at it too. They're the same light poles that we have because we're trying to be consistent in our design standards, but we have already converted these to LEDs. However, they are a different LED than was put in at the roundabout. The ones we were putting around about are manufacturer. These were a retrofit. And so we were like to propose that we go with the manufacturer retrofit so we have consistency. So that is one of the project details we're looking at doing. And that's not a large change out, but I think would be consistent to have consistent parts and pieces. And one of the, I guess issues for me right now currently is that coming out of the club drive. Yep, right here. That road, that corner is very dark. It is, and it has no lights right there. So we're proposing one there, right at that time. You are proposing one there in addition to one at the crosswalk. At the crosswalk. And one for the bus shelter. So we'll actually have three in there. And let me go to this next drawing. I did not bring you, and I probably should, I apologize. The drawing that shows existing photometrics versus proposed, but basically this is a plan that shows, and it's a little bit of an art, so you don't get too dialed in on it. But basically it shows the lighting patterns. So this is what would be proposed with the new lights in this location. So the summary of it is basically there's a consistently lit area that accentuates that it's high activity, there's pedestrians, there's a lot of things going on beware. That level of brightness compared to the breast creek and wood road around about is similar. Because we're trying to have this point one foot candles, or one point all came out which way it is. But that's the lighting measurement. And I should have brought that out of the drawing, but this is existing conditions. If we were to put the rest of these in here that showed on that plan, it would basically connect this lighting in here so we wouldn't have hot spot, low spot, hot spot. We can consider that, but I'm looking right now at the budget that we've approved to just focus on this area. And then continue to do these checks on it. Is it what we all intended? Does all of this lighting meet the night sky? Yes, they under, okay. So it's all downcast, it meets all the design standards there. So the other thing that we're proposing and Bob, I think you would ask this question about smart technology that we would propose to put in this location is, I'm gonna go back to this, drawing here. Is basically they have a feature that you can, it's an add-on to the existing lights. It's like a puck on top of it. It won't be visible unless you really are aware of it. And basically it has a Wi-Fi connection that allows us to have smart technology on the lights and that we can do programmable settings on these lights. Whether it be we're monitoring it for damages or lights going out, we dial into the program and then able to monitor what's going on. The other part of it though is we can also control those and even set some more smart technology to it as taking it from the level that it's at, say, at five o'clock in the winter time to a lower level at 2am after the bar is closed and have it still lit up, consistent lighting, but maybe a little lower level. So we could play with that. So we're proposing to do that because we would like to go to that science with all of the lights in the village at some point. So you put it on each light? Yeah, it's a $400 add on to the lights and then there is a controller program that we log in through the internet to control the lights and it's a monitor as well. So it was, and I thank you for that, because I learned a lot studying that, but they've done it at Willits, they've done it. Carbon Del is done it. We can also monitor a little bit of the energy use a little bit better, so it's got good features to it. So we would propose to put that in as part of this project. Are we doing the blinking thing? We are, proposing to do this. Is it sound similar to the issues they've got with the chirping over an answer? No, no. We're not going to audible. Thank you. Detection. Thank you. That would not work. So just a reminder on- You're not far away, though. What are- We're getting the complaints, buddy. This is our standard light detail that we have. At the height that we can do banners on them, these would not have banners, but we would propose that you have these punched so that you could put that light bar there and there's a push button here and then there would be pedestrian sign, the standard pedestrian sign on there. And that would be those two locations that are at the crosswalk right here, those two. The other feature that we're looking at adding on the electrical side of things is the light inside of the bus shelter. And what they're going to as far as raft and we'd like to move towards that as well is its motion-sensored so that when it's occupied, and I don't know the answer if you can push button it to, but if it's occupied, it illuminates the bus shelter. It helps with sensing that someone's in the bus shelter instead of doing the old reflector waiver thing going on. So we've proposed that since we're doing all this work in this area, that's good. So. This looks great. So timeline is we've got the design to this point. We are trying to determine with this it would take out this crosswalk. It would have basically we're looking at the asphalt treatments on is it milling this whole area? Cutting this in. So we're looking at those different options as far as budget. Just so you know, this road is in our five-year plan to get milled in the overlay. You can see some of the rutting taking place down here when you're driving through the roundabout. So I'm kind of taking a couple perspectives on phasing on the asphalt side. But we'd like to get it out to bid as soon as we get the okay from Raffta on the making sure that they're meet their design on the bus stops and still go is obviously, which the way it is constructed looks, you know, looks different than the rest of the road, right? Yeah. Um, are you suggesting that you might not take that red stone out at this point? No, I would take the red stone out because you don't want to confuse it. Right. Yeah, so this would be removal of this. What I'm trying to determine is what's my limits on asphalt. So I know I'd have a patch here no matter what. And do I go from here and patch it all the way to this other crosswalk? It's just my limits of asphalt. Is that red material? Is that reusable for the new crosswalk? No. It's actually getting pitted pretty bad because of some removal and chemicals and things like that coming in the village. So it needs treatment. It needs to get removed. And then we would do the same differentiation and color here and probably band it with the white as well white concrete so you have a better product than that that would hold up. It's just a monotropic. Okay. Yeah. It's correct me if I'm wrong but that's you're going to make that decision when you see the bids come in. Yeah. And you know if they come in great you can probably get a lot more asphalt down if they come in super tight, probably do it less asphalt. Right. Right. Yeah. And the other thing is when we're going to bid this just so you know, is because I'm very cognizant of construction schedules and the lessons we're learning is don't have big restrictions on your construction. I probably will have an alternate to complete by June 30th of next year just to see if my price to price inferential from this fall to next spring is you know major. So you're putting that fence back in? This opening? Yes. Oh we'll close that off because this will no longer be a crossing so we'll eliminate this and reach and get rid of that. And then there'll be, there's a fence opening down there. You know what I mean, move down. I know. So like, what about like I know when they do jazz, that's the stuff they cross people there. Is that going to impact that? They will just incorporate this into their project. We've talked about that and it just will just, they've been talking about changing some of the operations anyways and just work with what is in place. And how much of a distance is it from the new crossing to the only other place you can cross by the rec center. Like you know what I'm talking about? Oh, so you're talking down here? Yeah. Let me. Oh. Because those are really the only two places they can cross, right? That's right. Travis? Yeah, I'm by the back band. I'm on the center of your cross. Where did I go? Oh, there we go. So the other tab. Okay. Go here. Aren't you looking here for the measuring? Oh, yeah. There we go. Oh, no. Uh, we don't want that. And go here. Can I go here? Not that much. It's... I think there. There we go. Hmm. What is that, man? So you're talking about this crossing here? Yeah. I mean, theoretically, someone could cross at the where the rec center drive is, but then they'd hit the fence, right? There's an opening right there. There is an opening, but it's not a sanctioned crosswalk. No. Yeah. I mean I think we should continue to look at all these. We've improved some and discontinued a monitor but. Okay. So. All clear? All clear. Yeah. Thank you so much. Okay. Sounds good. Thank you. Anything else Ann? You guys busy? Oh, sounds good. Thank you. Anything else, Ann? You guys busy? Oh, all good. All good. Oh, good. I don't know. I think you probably saw a cleanse update. The, uh, I'll do the 10-second construction updates if you want. Okay. Why don't you go? Um, the all-crete trail is finished. Yeah, you did a beautiful job, by the way. We added a little bit extra on that, changed it from another project just because I was looking at constructability on that one. So that's open and we awarded the Brush Creek Trail on Friday. So I'm waiting for that construction schedule to come out. That will go from the underpass at the Recreation Center to up at Sinclair Road. Yeah, right where it comes up. And we may have a little bit further, there's a patch there. So we're trying to use the dollars to repair sections but also get maintenance and some other things. So that will be either the end of this month or at least by the end of July, beginning August. Who's 40,000 hour radar is on brush peak? Is that the county or is that ours? There. And it looked. That's kind of the county. Who's the county? The county. That's not the limit. Yeah. Right now, what I see happening on Highline Road is when the dump trucks start on Highline Road, they nail it, and they're flying. So I think we need a little bit more control on high line road of some of the dump trucks because they're coming up empty, headed for the firehouse or wherever they're going to and they're trying to get there in a hurry. And what I've been almost cut off and I know this guy wasn't going 30 miles an hour, he had to be going 45 miles an hour and he wasn't wasting any time. He almost turned on Al Creek Road on two wheels. He was going so fast. We can talk to PD and we've got our own speed trailer on that. Okay. The highlight in road needs to be a little bit more monitored. Sure. The other thing is just to follow up on that. The Fire Station Project has been great to work with on a staff perspective. Very, as you can see, they put a patch back, temporary patch. Sometimes we have to beg to get those things back. There have been timely. There will be a one-day closure in July, and we're working on that messaging and that coordination, and it's due to the sewer line crossing, but it shouldn't be a problem. Road improvements start on Wednesday, they've been, our crew has been working, their butts off to get the tie-ins to work and so that should be done fairly quickly next week. We should wrap up with that project. And then, as you can see, the lightscapers for the roundabout project are here and they should be done by July 1, maybe a little bit late, just because we've been coordinating the art installation project and that is looking like June 27th. Right. So everything's gone smooth. So that's it. Yeah sorry, knock on one. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you very, very much. Next item is EOTC David here Thank you council for taking the time to chat over things You should have received your EOTC packets on Thursday and The through I'd let just like this reason why it's not here. Yeah, okay the I look at it through I'd just like this reason why it's not here. Okay. The sequence that I listed in my memo were a little bit out of what's going on in the actual agenda item. However, most of the main topics are covered there. It's going to be a pretty long meeting. It's got a lot on there. John Krueger is adding a meeting date in September. So that's to facilitate the final report on the Upper Valley Mobility Study. So hopefully everyone can make that date. Tom Oaken will give you a quick snapshot of the actuals for 2016 and what they see as the current budget for the EOTC. Major item that you might want to discuss is the battery electric bus program. And I'm sorry to hand out something at the Eleventh Hour, but okay. We just got this today. We got a request from Rhafta to gray to write a letter of support for this low-no grant that they're applying for to finance the electric bus purchases that are contemplated both in the upper valley mobility study, the I-Inert Grated Transportation System Plan and INUREOTC packet. So if you were to look on page, oops, he doesn't have page numbers. The second, that's one, two, three. It's the fifth item on your EOTC packet behind the budget. This is the request from Raffta to support this electric vehicle purchase. 9 of 32. There you go. That issue for us, which is a little bit is they're asking for a half million dollar contribution from EOTC. half million dollar contribution from EOTC. And you can see the budget for the low, low grant, at present, flipping too many pages. At present in the budget update from Tom Oaken, in 2017 you have a $267,000 surplus revenues over expenditures, if you will. You do have a robust fund balance of almost $8 million in the UTC budget, but expenditures or revenues over expenditures you only have about $267,000 to play with. So I think you should talk a little bit about whether you want to support this. This says, as I said before, it's mentioned within the Upper Valley Mobility Study, the Integrated Transportation System Plan, and it's been talked about on occasion. So, Mark, yeah, I know you discussed it at the reading before. The RAF report meeting last week and I did not vote for it. Okay. It did pass, but I did not vote for it. I mean, I favor it. Because I felt that we needed to, let me finish. We basically stated that to bring this through ELTC and assume it will pass through ELOTC which was contemplated. As it did right now, Snowmass Village, we talked about it the prior Monday night at town council and it did not sit positively. A, what does it do for Snowmass? And we did the ITSP and we're talking to half million there. We don't have that report and all of a sudden now we're doing electric buses. And how are we going to use for an aspirin? And then, other four, go into the stock. What does that do for our town? I thought that it said in something and they read that two of them were for the snowmass route. That was not really that well discussed last week. Oh, because where did I read it? It is in there that too will be. Yeah, but it doesn't say that in that email that Clint got. It says regional aspen, well city of aspen and regional words. I mean, I guess if that is snowmast, but, I mean, if we're giving the money, then I think that it. And that's to the broader, I think the point that the mayor's making, you know, down a couple five items, some jumping around on the EOTC agenda second, but we want to bring back up again, increased levels of service to the regional service to the village. Right, wait, let's talk about that. And Raffta's got their number, we've got our number and I'm going to blow it, but it's $3998. Close to $300,000 a year, say, for easy math. And if it can all be done, then it's great. But at some point, it's electric buses for Aspen or increased service for the village or some combination thereof. And I think as a board as the EOTC, we've got to kind of spark that discussion. And if you want to be supportive of electric buses for all the right reasons, great, but that shouldn't be in lieu of the opportunity for improved service to the village, because we could all benefit from these things. And that's not a discussion that's been had. And you will see eyes roll when we have that discussion. Oh, yeah, that brings me back many years ago. And they've knows this discussion real well when we wanted to do free bus service during the office season, and Snowmass had to pay for it. David, this $250,000 projected revenue over expense. Is that after the after monies go into the snowmass fun whatever it's whatever that the fun balances are Allocated it is part of what is repaying the fun balance, so The fun balance has the the repayment has to come out of that 250 So essentially if unless we're looking to extend the time that it takes to repay the fund, there's no reason to really... No money. There's no money for this. Oh, I mean, there's money because there's reserves. Yeah, if you want to jump... You don't have a project lined up in the house, so we've got a project lined up, and I'm not arguing for it, but what would be articulated is we've got a project lined up. And I'm not arguing for it, but what would be articulated is we've got a project you don't. Let's go ahead and do it and what's in matter to get bumped back a year. And that's something to be discussed for sure. But I think the broader issue is if the levels of service are going to increase for someone else in the OTC with electric buses, it's not a capacity increase, but it's a level of service with the quiet and all that kind of thing. We think that the village level of service needs to be remembered as well. And if we play ball going forward, good regional partnerships, please remember that when we get to these other questions, because there's a $300,000 expense coming down here just to get us up to, not even on par with the rest of the regional service, but to get us beyond 30 minutes service that we have now. It gets us closer to not necessarily where everybody else is at. I think in kind of answering your question a little bit, it's going to muddy it more than help you, but you're looking at the 20, it's a 2017 revenues over expenditures that get you to the 267. The rafter service no one's contemplating instituting it in 2017, but we are looking to do that beginning in 2018. Now in 2018 two items on there that have already been discussed. Let me back up for a moment. So given that you have almost $8 million in reserve balance, you could look at the Lono Electric Bus Purchase as a capital investment and go into your reserves to make that happen. Unlike usually the way you view an operating expense. When you move into 2018, you have the Park and Ride improvements tied to a flap grant, which is a Federal Land Access Grant to make improvements at a brush creek in 82 of 3.9 million and then you also have 800,000 to begin design work and study of the buttermilk underpass, pedestrian underpass. So in 2018 you actually have a negative fund balance of 1.3 million. So when you're talking about adding the operational expense that would push that to over 1.3 million. So when you're talking about adding the operational expense, that would push that over one and a half. Yeah, further. Yeah. It sounds like it's time to re-prioritize all these projects over the next couple of years. The 1.3 does I have the increased service for snowmass in it? I didn't think so. No, not at this time, no. It was discussed last week briefly at the right after meeting. And so the last EOTC was the first time we introduced it, like Washington said, the first time. But in recent history, it was introduced. What we promised last time was we bring back numbers. So the numbers are here this time. And so that could be part of the, hopefully, the budget discussion that's coming whenever the next meeting sets. So we need to focus on, let's look at all the projects and the data that we're going to put on. So we're not saying, hey, don't say no to anything, but I think the discussion needs to be brought up this service level is a legitimate request from us to get us closer to service levels that other folks get to enjoy. Well, it gets into that argument. Nice to do versus need to do. Well, I'd be remiss if I didn't point out that there's also the no fair service subsidy that's about 600,000. But if you went back to regional service being paid, aspen to snowmast being whatever it was, four bucks, five bucks, then you had to create some flexibility possibly. But that'd be a big game change because it's a very well-received public program. But I mention it because somebody's going to bring it up. And some of your counterparts will perceive that that was your wish to the betterment of all, but it was, you know, they'll somehow look at that as that's why you paid for off-season service. I just bring it up, but... Well, we know it's there. You know it's there. Yeah, it'll be there. So I think, why did'd really kind of do, you could support this letter. It could go after the grant funding. In one of Dan's memos, it also talked about, well, if he is EOTC, wasn't a participant, they would boost the grant request ask, which still got them to like a 50-50 grant request, which in the federal world, that's pretty good. Most times people are looking for 80-20, 80 federal-20 local. So if you're willing to pony up half the money, you might be able to ride through there, but on the other side of the coin, it looks very good on a grant application when you have multiple jurisdictions willing to contribute to the program. Now you are all three part of Raffta and so you know it's that's there but the... You're kind of coming back to the call for twice. Yeah, a little bit. Yeah. But the vehicles are targeting ASPEN and the ASPEN ski company services and snowmess because the range on the batteries are, it's a technology that's still evolving and you probably get about 250 miles. So if you're running a service program between Aspen and Snowmass, you might stay within the range of the battery's capacity. If you go all the way down to Glenwood Springs, you probably are going to be beyond that capacity. So that's why it fits sort of in the Upper Valley. Well, tell me about the charging station. There's something about a charging station and the bus has to sit at a charging station. There's a number of possibilities that, when I bust dwells at, has its its dwell time whether it's at Ruby Park It's destination. Let's say the mall Raptor transit facility you could Recharge the vehicle while it sits there and in a half an hour you might get a you know a couple more miles And if you do this on every end then you're gonna Extend the range of that vehicle. So it might not be 250, it might be now 300 miles. That could be what they call a cantonary system which is an overhead. There's a device on the top of the bus that makes contact with a live wire and that charges the vehicle or there's what they now have our inductive chargers. A plate is put into the ground literally. You can walk across it. You can do a lot of stuff but when a bus pulls over on top of it through magnetic. Through science. Through science. It can charge the bus from underneath. So you don't have the visual impact of cat and hairy systems, you don't have all of those aspects going on. It's literally charging the bus from below. It's expensive, but it's doable. I don't know if those charging stations were included in this grant. There were certain, again, when you look on, I wish I had your, can you see where this is at the end of dance? It's page four of dance, remember? Because you have the budget there, so you gotta go down. Yeah, it's a very last page. Very last page. There is charging stations to each charging stations to each, Unicost 80,000 for 320, and then the infrastructure and the relation for them. What page is it for them? I got it said the same way you do that. Oh, okay. Sorry, again. Direct use specifically. Only three charging stations with eight process. Now four charging four. They're probably looking at, directly specifically. The only three charging stations with eight doses. Now four charging four. They're probably looking at, like I said, maybe two would be at Ruby Park, maybe two would be, one would be at Snowmass, one would be at Buttermilk, so when the bus is going to or from a location, if it sits there a while, it's going to get charged up a little bit, so it extends's ability to be in service. Yeah, but that also puts them in a position where, if you're gonna charge something overnight, because you've gotta be at one of these three places. No, no, overnight charging would be done at, probably the Aspen Maintenance Facility. And in the 900,000 per vehicle, they come with their overnight charging equipment. All right. So yeah, that would be a bit different. Thank you. You want to touch on the traffic travel pattern analysis and the abilities to you? OK. I had one more question relative to this. on the traffic travel pattern analysis and the ability study. Okay. I had one more question relative to this. The budget that we're just talking about and everything on the list. The cost to do the marult if we go that way, the straight shot or whatever they're talking about in the upper mobility study. Yeah. That's going to be, that's a recommendation. And I think the price, Yeah, the price on that was 103. Yeah. That's not on this list of priorities. So is that already reserved for in the entrance to Aspen fund? I guess it could be. It is the entrance to Aspen project. Okay. Okay. Thank you. But they would have to approve, they have to approve using the open space for a bus BRT lane. It has the approval for LRT, the light rail, but it doesn't have it for, and that's a change in circumstance. I did want to say one thing again about the letter of support. You could sign it. You could let that move forward and then see how other things play play. I'm going to wait till Friday and it's all right. I'll see what happens Thursday night and I'll just get a hold of the mayor on Friday and see all stuff rules. Okay. The Upper Valley Mobility Study, well actually you're talking about the Valley Travel Patterns Analysis. Yeah. I'm going to switch them around. The Upper Valley Mobility Study will be an update on where that study is to date. It's completing its first phase. Ralph Toprani you've had a number of presentations by him. This is a continuation of that. The Upper Valley Travel Pattern Analysis, Brian Petit of Pickin County is interested in moving forward with the detail that this is like a travel pattern study. The Upper Valley Mobility Study, the Air Sage data that we gathered, we were just using it and looking at it and studying it for transit purposes only. You can take that data and you can look and see like where are pedestrians, where are cars, where are broken out by user type, which would be guest resident or employee. So it would be a robust amount of data, but the initial price tag for that is somewhere in the $ 180,000. We approached C.DOT and discussed with them their interest and possibly helping with that data collection. C.DOT has ponied up 50,000 for that to help. And what Brian has done is approach the Aspen Institute who has been conducting the community form on this whole study of the entrance to Aspen, if you will. They are making it sound like they would support half of that study at 67,000. So the request EOTC would be for the balance of that study. And why are we going to do with the results? The results are going to tell you a lot about how people move around in the upper valley. Not only it would be so. As much like what Glenwood Springs found out, Grand Avenue Bridge, you know, it's really all those people going to Aspen that are really involved. They found out that wasn't true. They found out that wasn't true and there are many who believe that the problem at the entrance to Aspen are all those employees coming into town and that may not be true. It could be snowmast people going to Aspen. It could be Aspen people going to ABC. It could be What difference would make it to traffic is still the traffic? Because it would help you target more effectively what your transit or alternative solutions are going to be. Say, for example, where do I put a we cycle location that is more effective to get people not to drive their car? Where would I put a circulator route for Aspen so that it would capture the most people trying to get their kids to the school and ask them school. Or those are the kind of things you could glean from the data that you make guesses at now. I know you want to make sure there's a return on investment paying for your buck. I'm not sure how to answer that question for you. I think it's a fair question. And it is what are we going to do with it? I'm going to really let it do. What's the outcome? I mean, we've spent a tremendous amount of money, not just EOTC, but lots of entities in the valley spend a tremendous amount of money on this question of entrance to Aspen and have yet to do anything about it. At some point, one has to just say, I'm going to make a decision given the best information I've got and do your best. I don't think it, as I tried to explain, I don't think it's entirely confined to understanding something about the entrance to Aspen. I think it helps you with the alternatives that you're programming. I think to effectively apply them. I think David, I'm not necessarily expressing a dislike for this particular ask, but a frustration that the end of the tunnel never seems to lighten up. I could agree with that. You know, I voted on an entrance to ask me a question once a long time ago. This discussion has gone. And you and I both had hair back then. And I had hair back then. I'm not even going to go there, but I know. But you know, at one point point the vote was up to the people and asked at that time and they turned it down, correct? That's a confusing complicated question. Yes, it is. So I would say there's been support for different parts of the record decision and it depends on how you want to look at that to answer it. Well, the way I would like to see it answered is that going along with Bob, this has been such a long decision and nothing's been done about it and who actually has the power to say we're going to go forward with this. Is it a county vote now? Is it a vote at all? It's probably not. It's just the EOTC decision to go forward with this. Now we've got the okay for light rail. I don't think you're going to ever get to vote on it. I'm the new guy, so it's going to be the city of Aspen that's going to be in that decision largely. The county might go back to the same thing. So why are we wasting all this money on studies? Why not just put it towards the people and Aspen now and find out if we should go even any further with it? I think it's a waste. And I'm not gonna argue with you. I mean, I think my guts right there with yours, but just what you're gonna hear back is, you know, this is the most partnership you're gonna see in a study like this, getting two other organizations to pay for two thirds of it, there's a value in that, and then David's answer of, and it's going to give you that much more information, that if it doesn't get solved, at least we could be able to figure out how to maybe make it less worse than it is right now. And those are the pitches you're going to hear. And I don't buy into any of that. I'm sorry. I mean, because we all know that if there's a school day happening and you happen to have a dentist appointment in town, 815, 830, you know you've got to leave early enough because you have a school traffic. You know, if you're going in on a Saturday morning, no problem, right? So if you're smart enough to know what the habits are and how to go around, you all you have to do is hang out on McLean Flats Road during the week and see how many people already know those traffic patterns and they turn there by cozy point and off they go and most of the PickICC and County Sheriff's up there monitoring everybody's speed. And people on the claim flats are, you know, highway 82B, are living on it. So I don't know what the answer is. I don't think there is an answer. And I don't buy into it. I'm not a fan of it until somebody and Aspen will say, you know, yeah, let's all do this for everybody in the valley. They're not gonna do this for everybody in the valley. I think we're wasting our money. And what I hear you saying is, more information is not gonna help you solve a political problem. This is not an issue of, we don't have enough facts. You got to make this. I don't think we need any more information. I don't think we need to waste any more money. I think you hit it right on the head. It's a political problem. It's not a transit problem. It's a political problem at this point. And I think we could have as many EOTC meetings, and as many studies done as everybody wants to spend the money on, and hire more experts, and figure out where everybody's cell phones are, and if they're in a car, if they're in a bus, where they are, but I don't think it makes a difference. It's not going to change until the people in that town decide we need to make this better for everybody that's coming here. But I'm not going to do that. I don't believe they're going to do that. Well, you know, you look at the upper mobility study that we spent, not quite half million, but close to. And one of the solutions was white rail. So we could have spared that entire expense by having someone to project what it would cost per mile for that For light rail Well, we all know when the answer came back it was thicker shock So It was a It was a Just couldn't we did the muzzle blow everybody out of the chair. Couldn't we have Googled that to find out? And you know, for some of this, I'm sorry. This is a relatively new information for the askets. Maybe a couple weeks old. I don't know the we're 100% to speed. This might be another chance to say, Hey, tell us more and figure it out. But I'm not sitting and advocating because I don't know that I knew about it before I read the packet. I heard it talked about, David heard about it maybe the community forum 10 days ago or I don't know what it was. Meaning I couldn't get to. But I mean, so I don't think it's unreasonable to say we'd like to get some more information and figure out if it's really worth it and if it's if you're trying to solve a political issue with more facts and it's not going to be. But if it can help us internally, perhaps I could come back and say, you know, it really would help us because this would focus when you read through their thing, how traffic goes in and out of snow mass versus what we have now. So there could be something, but I'm not going to sit here and tell you it's totally worth the dollar, Jim. Okay. Oh, Joy. Oh, Joy. David, thank you. I mean, is there what else is on here? More wealth of information on it. And I look, you know, always look forward to your input on it. But I, of course, have my own feelings on it. There's a lot here. We all live, we both live here a long time. We know what we, we know what we're dealing with here. Well, you know, so when we look at agenda number nine, increased cost of increased service for Bush Creek, we've got to fold that into the budget update and all these projects. Okay, got it. I mean, I think that's the thing. We just want to make sure it's going forward. Now the information's known. We think it's reasonable. You won't be there. We think it's reasonable. You want to think it's a good value Won't be here where oh says March 23rd you were at that meeting You see is they put me down in that meeting I was They confused me absent for every ee I don't know why even bother going I have a missed one I haven't missed one and I sent that out Yeah, I kind of saw that just I said I'd like why bother going they marked me absent for every one anyway I'm going to be here I'm patting clap or sent me an email too It's the meeting Thursday's here in this room Mm-hmm, and I guess in order to get more asking people who need to do that wine and cheese thing again I think that we did that was fun, but nothing happened Nothing happened Well, thank you so much you're welcome. I wish I saw a lot. I'm Thursday. Would you be so kind? We've all taken notes. Would you be so kind to send out five or six bullets of what you've just talked about relative to revenue expenses, what's available, what's not, what are the, you guys need to ask what the projects are blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. Okay. A quick summary. I mean, just bullets. Yeah. So we all, can we incorporate that with Ronda's going to put this in like an R, I legislate packet. Whatever she's going to do for Thursday. Now we can apply to make notes if that would be very helpful just a I mean real brief. Yeah, okay. Thank you Okay But that's gonna be out there for everyone to see it. Yeah, let me get it to me. I'll do you okay Okay, that would be perfect Okay, now we're gonna go back to our regular agenda. Oh boy. Housing. Boy, David. And Travis. Madam Mayor, can we put broadband next? It'll take us six minutes and then we can spend our remaining time on housing. Otherwise, we'll spend the whole time on housing and I'm guessing and not get the brother. Okay, brother. Okay, brother. Carol from the county here for so we're gonna she made this promise me six minutes. Hey, Carol, come on up. Don't worry we got you a timer. Welcome. That's so good to see you again, Carol. Thank you for having me. All of you guys showed that one. So yeah, Picking County last year asked us to opt out of Senate Bill 152, which you may know is the bill that restricts local governments from participating in cable and telecommunications infrastructure, which also includes broadband internet service. And we just kind of wanted to introduce this topic to you tonight to see if we could kind of get the ball rolling on opting out of that legislation this coming election. Kara has been our main point of contact with the county on this project. And she is here to answer any tough questions you might have. Take the easy ones. I mean, the real simple version, and she can answer the hard ones again. There's a lot of municipalities and counties in the state have done this. There's no reason we don't, and all it does is increase our ability for local control over the issue. Shoulder an opportunity come up. There's not necessarily one identified for the village right now, but if the county starts working through another options to sort of other parts of the county's old snowmess, wherever we want to be able to help them out in their efforts. And so while it's not, you know, no exactly how to be used, we don't see any drawback to asking voters for permission to free us from this regulation. I don't think it's batten a thousand statewide, isn't it? I don't think anybody's failed in this one. The one that did fail Longmont actually did pass it then by a crazy amount two years later. So yeah. So it's almost a perfunctory request to the citizens that you assume is on him. So it's not really the comples I hear. If it's okay with you guys, we'd like to go forward with it. We want to make sure you're aware that you'd be putting the question on the ballot. We'd be stealing probably a ballot from the county and doing something very similar. I think you guys spent about $12 promoting it last time. And it passed with about 80%. Yeah. So as long as there's no big wax, we're going to continue down that path. Does anybody have any concerns about it? Or a question? No, I mean, I know at Northwest Cog, you know, they have the people that have been working on broadband. And you know, the biggest thing I hear from the people there at those meetings are that there's a lot of areas where there's no service. And it's a real issue for these people for variety of reasons. I mean not just to like be able to use broadband but you know lots of things down the road and if you looked at what they said in there you know it makes sense. I mean it's there's gonna be things that come up that maybe you're not gonna be able to do because you don't have the appropriate broadband service. So I think it's, I don't think is it downside to it frankly. No. Yeah, I mean, if they were going to like, you know, put some weird regulation on you because you opted to do it, then it would be different. Right. I don't see any issue. Okay. No hard questions. I don't have any. Mark, you do any questions about the opting out of the broadband? You know, I have this whole thing about about what? I have to say that you're a part of, you mean? I think we need to keep our options open as a tale. I'm just all about keeping our playing field where we can best use our playing field for the advantage. These are players on the playing field. On our field, the whole field. Yeah. We want to have a little bit more control. Thank you. You'll see it coming back. Thank you guys. Thank you. Thank you. So I guess what's the next step is to prepare the language. Yeah, I think there's a couple of deadlines for clerks, but We'll notice it. We'll get John on it. We'll still work together and but you guys will eventually have to approve the language to go on the Valley. And all the ballot language across the state has been almost verbatim. Everyone's kind of stealing the same stuff. So there's not a lot of work, which is nice. Just silly that we all have to go through and that they can't pass it at a larger level. But that's it. Hey, thank you so much. Thanks for coming. I'm so glad to be here. Thank you so much for coming forward and do good work and that only took four minutes. Next. The last one is the housing discussion. Obviously the council, when you guys passed the last two sets of goal sets, a goal setting, talked about the need for more workforce slash affordable housing in the community. And we have had a couple of initiatives going forward because of that goal. The council set this last year, the council put a significant amount of dollars in the budget for a project. And one of the things we wanted to do is part of that effort and as part of the comp plan effort was undertake a housing demand study. Travis is going to walk us through that in a couple of seconds. So we updated a housing demand study from 20 2008. We'll walk you through that. And then at the end of that, because of the numbers we've got, we were simultaneously working on an idea for a project I wanted to introduce tonight. It's in its infancy, but I wanted to make sure the council was aware of it and lock you through some of the processes we expect to go through to get that project up and go in and make sure that again no red flags and that everyone's aware of what we're thinking about getting done. So now I'll hand it off to Travis. Okay, so we will start with the housing demand update. Then we recently completed the original is done by RRC and 2007. It was finished in 2008 using data through 2007 looks like this. I don't think we included that in your packet. I apologize, but I think everyone's familiar with it. I've seen it before. And basically, the main story kind of stays the same. There's still a high demand for additional housing units. However, we have revised that down based on employment data that we have available, current employment data. So our update shows the demand for an additional 383 units. That's down from 474, which was the number in the 2010 Comprehensive Plan. So just first question now the bat. And so as I was going through this, Travis, and thank you so very much for spending a lot of time putting this together. So we know base village has to deal with their own employee housing or there is a mitigation factor. Where is that housing going? Is that included in this or is that minus? So we included both their estimates for how many employees they will be generating and how many additional affordable housing units they are being required to build. Okay, and is that a full build out of base village? Yes. Okay, and that's part of the 243. That is not part of our inventory, no. That is part of the total. I think there's 798 total units. Well, the 243 you're talking about are rental stock? No, the, the, oh, I'm sorry. That's my number. I'll get to that later. Okay. But your number of how many more units you need to build? Yes. Is whatever was? It's net what the Stixen bricks that Base Village did. It's net of what is coming out of base village in the mid for the mitigation. Yes. Future and past. I mean, Sinclair, I mean, the John knows the history way better than I view. But there was some mitigation already built and those numbers are all incorporated into this. A lot of it. There's not much left. It's like the retail. They frontloaded the employee housing with commercial okay air goes sink sink their metals yeah units that are already built in in the base village I think the numbers like 14 left 14 left okay So that was front loaded. Make sure we got it. Okay. So our total employment and base village are kind of the two main factors that have been updated since 2007. In addition to that, it was the next section of the memo, current employee housing demand. We also did some crunching there to show you how many current qualified employees are on our rental wait list, which is 143 as of May 17th. And we also have a little graph there showing how many qualified applicants are bidding on deed restricted units since 2010. That's gone up from 2.4 to 14.7 and Quadra 4 to 14.7 correct and that 143 numbers you'll hear different numbers on our wait lists Right and what Travis and the housing department Joe and Terry all worked together on is to get actual people That on the list and one person might be willing to go on a studio or a one bedroom or a two or a three This was going through calling the list to actual people on the list. Okay. Correct. And then I just want to point out the qualified applicants for deed restricted units. Those are folks that have gone through met the minimum requirements of initially qualified and to have the financial qualifications. And that does not, none of this is picking county employees. That just are snowman's relief. OK, so they may be in. They win, but they can apply. OK, but those are included in here. Those are included. They are qualified applicants. OK, got it. Just so you can dig down a little deeper on this chart, you don't know the sizes of the units by the qualified applicants per library. So we found that the smaller units usually have more because they are more affordable. So it could be that there's a rash, there's a factor in there I can't tell you what it is. We can't tell you. I know I'm just giving them the background so don't pound on the table and say there are 15 applicants and they're only used to be two because it could be we had a rash of studios in 17 or. I think it's safe to say that the demand is climbing. And if you stay with it, you know, this demonstrates that, but it's not like a hard and fast number because it's apples and oranges in the lottery. And that brings up a good point that we kind of stopped at units, we haven't kind of dove down another layer where we talk about bedrooms, beds, et cetera, we're pretty high level. And then so we presented this information, just so you all know, to the Planning Commission last Wednesday, I believe. As a last meeting. Made sure they're aware of it and then this data will be rolled into the comp plan. We haven't seen the first draft yet but this is the kind of stuff that when we're doing all the plan of blues and the community input. One of the top issues we continued to know was need for, but we didn't have updated numbers to apply to that qualitative input. And so this would help us at least define some of that qualitative input received the process. You know, in terms of looking at that list with Terry and Joe. Yeah, Joe. That's something else on my mind right now. Are we seeing a difference in the applicants who are applying? Is it young families or is it single people that are just moving here for the season? Or in the observations at a 30,000 foot level. I don't know. And we definitely don't do seasonal. It's definitely year round leases. That's one of the bigger differences between our program and what SkiCo does at Club Commons is we require a 12 month lease. And SkiCo of course tries to hit their seasonal employment and offset it with other demands when they're not, when they don't have their employees. But my understanding is some people choose to leave for a few months and somebody else may move into their, that you, never mind. Okay. It has supposed to happen. They're, I mean, John don't know the guidelines better than me, but. That's not supposed to happen, but if it's occupied and someone gives up a lease, Joe tries to fill that. And then they usually only get the balance of the year because they redo all the leases. And the rental property is that way, everyone gets re-qualified. Okay. And that's January, correct, I think? Yeah. They started earlier than that, but that's kind of their goal to finish January 1. They usually start setting up the newsletzes right around Thanksgiving. Okay. So, Madeline put an article in the paper today, which I take it was a review of the Planning Commission meeting? Is that fair to say? I would say subjective review. Yeah, subjective. She was in the audience at the meeting. Right, subjective review. I haven't seen me already, go see what I could read it. But I wouldn't waste my time. Well, you can. She's probably a little loose. One of the things, though, that I did take away was, or at least created a question in my mind, was a part of the article that talks about people who at the time they lease work in snowmass. And then at some subsequent time, they work in snowmass and they work in picking county or they're working they work in Aspen and that in some respects they still qualify okay if we have 140 people waiting for rental properties. Why do we allow someone to maintain a qualification if they no longer work in snowmess? If our goal is to get snowmess, the snowmass workforce housed in our affordable housing, why would we allow that? Because if they work for PIC in County, some place in PIC in County they still are qualified. But you're still. But maybe I misunderstood but what I thought I understood was in order to get a lease You had to work in snowmass not necessarily Not necessarily there's a priority priority at that time and if you are renewing yeah Let's see. Yeah, you you you don't get boo you're not you don't go back into the priority pool So that's for you know, you're not that are vacated. Okay, so I guess might I guess might okay I understand and then deeter stricted sales if someone changes their job They were not we had we don't force a sale at this point. Okay And just kind of get in the weeds for one second on that issue. In this analysis that we updated, I think there's a 20, I was just trying to find it, but I think there's a 28% factor that we put in there for retirement and folks that don't work in the village. Yeah, I saw that. So there is a factor in there to kind of offset it. I did see that. So my thought is this. Let's re-determine what our goal is for our workforce housing. If it's to house the SNOMES workforce, then perhaps we should consider rewriting some of the regulations so that we in fact give priority and maintain priority to the SNOMES village workforce. And those are two very different concepts, give and maintain the priority. Okay, understand this. And I understand what you're saying. different concepts, give and maintain the priority. Okay? Understand this. And I understand what you're saying. And we have been, we, the town has been rounding round on this issue. And what you have to realize is that APSHA does not give a priority for any of their stuff. So, there are a lot of people that work in snowmass that are housed through the city and county housing authority. And I don't, I think that came around about a long time ago because it's been that way as long as I've been here that you didn't lose your housing if your job went to the county, if you switched jobs. So long as we're still in the county. Okay. And you wouldn't want to spark a reciprocal action on their part. True. So I think- To be considered. If you, I don't know this for a fact, but I think if you took the factor that Clint was talking about and compared it to the county's factor, that might be the informative statistic that you want to get to where you really make that decision about maintaining your priority. Because if it's anywhere near to equal, you know. Yeah, I understand. But that's the other kind of detail of throwing this too, is if an employee is, let's just say, in a studio and works in the village someplace, and then switches jobs to somewhere else, and all of a sudden wants to upgrade to a one bedroom for whatever reason. Right. At priority is reset with their new job. So they're in, they don't get kicked out, but they lose that ability to get the priority because of the job at the time of. And to move up into a big pipeline, right? We call it in complex, but yeah. OK. But yeah, it might be worthwhile to compare the- You might compare, yeah. It might be informative. It might be informative, but the council is in the past trying to refrain from having your housing be controlled by your job. Right. OK. Now, had this sector of housing been addressed by private organizations, the businesses as many think it should, you generate employees, you need to house them not the government. But that's philosophical. Yeah. It's way down the river at this point. I'll leave it there. Where do we stand in the town now with credits, housing mitigation credits? There's still a lot? The ski co had a bunch. The ski co has a ton. The ski co had a ton. They still have. They still have a ton. Yeah. And were they using them forward of the base village? Well, the base village, understand, when it was conceived, the base village could have been constructed without a single employee housing unit by the use of their credits. They used their credits, yeah. And the council of the day said, yeah, that's not going to happen. But they're also hamstrung by saying, you have to mitigate 100% with six and bricks because that's a taking of this right that they have to credits. So it came down to two thirds, one third,rd, 2-3rd, 6-1-3rd, which I think the total, and I haven't looked at that chart for a long time, was close to 100,000 square in there was sticks and bricks and the rest was credits. Ski companies used a few more like 7,000 square feet. I think that was to do the out camp restaurant actually. And they did some more that they actually haven't done use some credits for some of the snow mass club expiation. Yeah, but it was a small one. So they still have a lot left. They have a lot, but understand that it's only in the council's discretion whether they're going to let them use, but I mean credits are not. And credits are there too. The credits are to be used to develop land that they were attached to. So like the base village credits were part of the, they were inherited by the, not inherited. They purchased them, but they were garnered by Snowmass land company giving away land for housing projects. Okay, so they were connected that way. But that's all subject to review and approval by the council in the land use the PUD process. But they're out there. One other, one thing that I picked up from this analysis that you've presented is that you're appearing to me. I think you're looking at full time and seasonal employment together. Now my understanding of the comp plan as it exists is that the mitigation is to provide for 60% of only full-time employment. You're on it, right? You're on it. So that qualifies for the number of hours that are required okay so Your analysis really would create the need for a policy change If we are now going to look for Housing work our work, our seasonal workforce to- I think we adjusted for that. To some level. But I don't see where you readjusted for it. If you look at, I'm looking at this page that says snowmage village jobs. Right. Right. So where did you readjust for it? We didn't. And the reason being is because I think the goal from the 2010 Compland is actually 70% of full-time year-round employees and 60% of all employees So what we did is average our total employees seasonal Winter, summer and average them out through the year So we have an average employment count for the entire year. And then we divided that by 1.35, which is how many jobs one employee has in summer's village. The reason being is because you could have multiple jobs, but you could also have a seasonal summer job, you could have a seasonal winter job, and just kind of go back and forth, which I know plenty of people do. I don't remember that 70%. Because what I do remember is when the initial RRC was done, it wasn 70 and 60 depending on you know who made that decision. Well, again, that's it was a council. I don't know. That was another scope. I mean, neither here nor there, but that again, those are the assumptions. That's what this analysis you're looking at. Based on the assumptions that you had. Okay. I mean, I mean, so we're we tried to keep it as consistency. So there's an apples to apples. So we all know we need more. That's kind of there you go. It's the main takeaway. It's the main takeaway. The question is, the question in my mind is do we need more deed restricted or do we need more rental? And if we had, if we have a number, I don't care what number it is, what's the percentage that should be de-restricted and what's the percentage that should be rental? We don't know right now. Well, how do we find that out? I mean, I think personally, I think we should find that out before we start constructing. Whoa. What about the people that are on the list? What are they, are those just rentals? Yes, it's the rental list. And then because different size units comes up, it's hard to say we've got X number waiting. But we don't have a list of people that like to put themselves in the lottery for like units that they can purchase. We don't take away lists. Well, because I was just saying we could, you could send out a survey to them or ask them questions. Or is there any way to like survey people that would be interested in employee housing? We do have the results from the 2015 community survey, which did ask if you would be interested in employee housing. And if so, would you rent or would you like to own? Oh, that's helpful. That's very helpful. Let me ask you this. We're about to do that survey again this summer. Let me ask you this. Should we have our RC to rework, to go back, and we did a huge questionnaire? Well, and I'm shaking my head. That same question came up on Wednesday. And it's almost like the entrance to Aspen question. We know there's a problem. Whether it's 400 or 300 or 500, we could argue that some of the assumptions, but if you cut this to a 383 number at half, there's still 180. I mean, so I don't know where to that order of magma, okay, where we need to restudy it yet. I mean, at some point, I'd love to get that. But that's as to demand classification, which is Bob, you know, single-family deed restricted, multi-family deed restricted versus rental. We might need information on that, but that goes to the question of how do you want to pay for it? Because as Clint will tell you, those of us that live in deed restrictive will tell you what you buy, to pay for it? Because as Clint will tell you, those of us that live in deed restrictive will tell you, what do you buy? We pay for it. And it's not a town asset anymore. When you rent it, you have to pay it off over time like Mountain View. But at a certain point, then it becomes a revenue producer. And how do you know? That's one of the things we discussed has how much de-districted aspen has what they don't have municipal funds tied up in those long and you'll see that we've had no problem selling any bonds to do housing because they're paid by rental and with a, quote, Quince, Clinton's number, 99.8% occupancy rate. That's very attractive to investors on a tax rate municipal bond. They're not worried about default and it's not based on a sales tax that can go like this. It's a revenue pack. You know, John, you know as well as I do when Crossings came about. There was, was there an interest? There were so many people in the lottery that they held it up at the silvertry. And literally it was a true lottery. It was a community party. And there was a big basket and they pulled your name out and so on. And that was obviously a big interest indeed restricted. And people wanted to buy into the community more so. I mean, we have some between crossings and rodeo down there. And I think what you're going to suggest coming up in front of us now. There's a big interest in buying into this community, not necessarily just renting. I mean, it's affordable housing. And you know what I'm talking about. But Tom, we don't know whatever the number of units is. Whatever that number is, we don't know what percentage ought to be rental, what percentage ought to be deed restricted. We have in town, we have somewhat limited amount of space with which to build. So we really should put together some idea of what it's ultimately going to look like. You know, what will it ultimately look like? Where would we ultimately be able to build it? And then prioritize what we got to build. Well, here's another question. I'm tired of harping on the issue because Picking County's done nothing on it. And that is aging in place. Yeah, that's another issue. That's, you've got more and more and more people in our town who want to stay here. They're in the retirement age. And if we don't put that into a considerate... Well, that is in there. That is in the devised. The devised is numbers. Yeah, but did you look at what those units, you gotta have flat wheelchair accessible units. Oh, I see what you mean. Yeah. You're talking design. You're talking demand. Yes. And I don't know. Speaking of the demand, I mean, now if you, and to answer your question, Bob, is that the people who are living in rodeo and crossings in the district that housing, I really believe that 80% of them that's just thrown out there don't really want rental units next to theirs because they take pride in their deed restricted homes. So I think if we're talking about, we need to separate and segregate the rentals and the deed restriction. I don't think we could have fourplex down there in rodeo when you're right in the middle where we have all these individual homeowners who bought into the business. I'm not even suggesting that we do that. Okay. That's not really what I'm trying to suggest. I'm trying to... Well, we were talking about limited space available. So I don't have to... If Joe coffee were here, he would agree with you 100%. I mean, he's a big advocate for... Sort of mind the demarcation just like that, for learning, for lessons, for the past, and whatnot. But... I'm just referring to our limited space thinking that we want to mix it up. But we have town managers that once we start down that path, give you in there. Well, country club town. That's right. That's the thing. Prime example. But those are the things we need to learn. What do we have to learn from? And I understand from our management point that you need to have housing for, director level people, are you're not gonna get them? But I would start with that first and get out of mixed use mixed governance of units because We've already been hit for a million dollars and it's a circular thing that's going to happen again. Yeah, it's coming back. Travel. You open that door so I can jump on it. You're green with Tom. We're all saying the same thing. Can Joe provide information on these 142 people who are on the rental list. You know, how many are, how many there are for each type of unit? Does that help us to understand what the workforce is looking for if we go to try to build something? I mean, just listening to two bedrooms, the most popular, for sure. I mean, that's three's or harder. Studios are more actually more than a one. Because I think so. I think you also need to do an analysis of your workforce because the units that were crossings were a direct response to a kind of up and out mentality that, you know, professionals and mid-level managers weren't going to have a family and live in a small rental unit. That was the thinking behind the crossings and it was a need that was expanded with rodeo place. And it's even been expanded because Fairway 3, with the three bedrooms in there, they couldn't sell the three bedrooms. Now that market has changed immensely and the three bedrooms are starting to be built again, Sinclair Meadows, as well as club comments. And some of the club comments are de-restricted. So my personal opinion is you can build anything and you'll fill it at this point. And you need to decide what is the most efficient to address the workforce issue. Well, to take the pressure off the workforce issue. Well, to in order to do that, I can come back to what you just said. You need to understand what your workforce is looking for. It goes back to your workforce changing. It's what I'm hearing. If they want a two bedroom or a three bedroom, we couldn't sell them before. It's because your the workforce changing. What I'm hearing, if they want a two-bedroom or a three-bedroom, we couldn't sell them before. It's because your workforce is changing. Democratic of your workforce is changing. Well, I can tell you, the crossing zones that go on, the market don't have 14.7 better zone. And we've had ones up there that have had to go to secondary lotteries because there's six people in it and for one reason or another they can't get a deal or they can't qualify because those houses are over 20 years old now with the appreciation even with the caps they've gone up substantially. We have to change our caps. Our asset cap? No well you know it's 3% or the lower of the CPI and it's been the CPI we have a near 3% for the qualification. qualification though. Oh, that's what I'm asking. Well, I don't think you can lower that asset qualification because you have to, well, you can raise it, but then you get, they're based on what a mortgage costs. It's not really, I mean, that's what the caps are, the net worth and the income caps are based on. So, okay, if you're making $100,000 a year, you can afford this much in the mortgage. So that means that's how those are backed into. They're not, we're not trying to reduce the, or increase the perspective owners because if you lower it, then they get upside down on a house like that, then you have the issue of they buy more house than they can, they put renters in it, and they change the character of the neighborhood, which is a problem as well. So, but I think there's two discussions. There's the regulatory discussion which, I mean, looking at the regulations, whether it be asset caps, all those kinds of things, is probably a worthwhile endeavor at some point in the near future. But then it's also just the endeavor of hitting that demand. And kind of to your point, Councillor Circus, I mean, I hear you and I agree with you, I think, in my core that we need to understand at some point rental versus de-restricted, but we're so far behind on both. I don't think you can go wrong to get a ball roll. That's my thing, Heather. That's a discussion for another day when you, when you, I don't want to say saturated, but you've gotten closer to saturated in both concepts. That's a decision of how you finish it out. So I'm almost looking at the clock and I know big picture, 30,000 feet up, we know we need more, we know we need probably a combination of what have you. You're looking at a location and I wonder if we should focus on that then come back to the other questions on detail. Before you do that, before you get down into this level, you need to be thinking about, we don't have to discuss it tonight, what about that mitigation number in the future? Because that's that's where we are as the comp plan at this point and We had that discussion with the planning commission as well and you know, we explained to them how history started at 60 went to 45 went to 100 Back to 60 and then even though the last comp plan targeted 70 the code didn't get changed so and remember also when it went to 100% mitigation the investment and development community said too expensive to build here nothing happened so nothing happened. So that was a short-lived period of 100%. That was someone to win election. Just, I'm not saying to answer that question tonight, but that's one of the things it's gonna be coming at you sooner than later. John, I wanted to ask a question on funding. On the rental properties, you can float housing bonds. What do you do on a deed restricted property because you're only getting a portion of the cost? Typically for crossings and will rodeo place the town bought the whole rodeo. The other ones have been property that has been donated and then we've assigned a relatively small land value to the property so that that's that gap on what it really would be as a subsidy and then we built, I don't want to say standardized, but common designed homes. So there's like six one model, seven of another model in there. So, and that's how we've made it affordable in other places. There's ways you can do it. But event, you take out alone. What are the analysis? And you paid off from a cell. So the town takes event you take out a loan. And what are the analysis that you paid off? And you paid off from a sell it. So the town takes out a short-term loan or the developer. And one of the, I mean, if this is where it will move forward, one of the analysis we need to undertake still, which we haven't done, is the existing values of the homes. And you don't want to make sure that the new homes are similar and fairly price compared to the existing homes so that we don't offset somebody else's Assets or We don't flow to market with something No, that's true. So there's there'd be a lot of math and setting that price but but By by showing a fairly low price for the land because the town owns it That gets you only so far in terms of the construction cost versus the selling price. Well, so you know that the, let's see, fairway three, stick bill, crossing stick bill, and I think everything since then has been modular. Right. And there's a savings there building a manufacturing truck in a man. So that's another way that we try and get to affordable housing, but it's still difficult. And there still could be subsidy to answer your question. If we got you it and we said, you you know it's the stick built or the any the actual construction cost is more than what would be considered affordable there still could be subsidy applied to that and that's those budgeted dollars we'd look we'd look to use those dollars to and there's essentially offset that there's two clear sources for that one's your floor your excise tax and the other one is rental income. Right now we're probably, you are part of advertising that rental income to renovations to those older property. But those are two sources of funds to generate subsidies. So yeah, just, the idea of using rental income from a rental property to subsidize a deed restricted property is I don't think you should be trying to like paying for you. How to deed restricted a new rental property. Oh, no, no, no. A deed restricted. You're going to try and do construction that offsets the selling price. Okay. Can we move into this part of it? Please. But I mean, but just to mean on that note, if we leave it, the rental income we have is not restricted. There are no legal restrictions. Yeah, no, I understand that. Philosophy all day long. Philosophy. Yeah. And you have Florida excise tax fund too that is only for housing. Okay. So it is restricted. That's why I brought them both up. And you could all add to your houses and do a donation to the town. I know that one quite well. So I just come on, sir, because that on. No, even alone. Well, and understand it's it is a tax of diminishing returns because you can only do it once per property. We need to make sure he's well maxed and over. We need to listen. We got to wait for the assistant to jack up the values. That's when he needs the remodel. OK, come on, all humor aside and all the music. He's assistant doesn't need any help. No, that's for sure. OK. So this project was conceived for a couple different ways. But one of the ideas was, honestly, E's, town owns majority of this property. And it would be, we know we're confident that the demand for ownership is there. And so the idea was to continue at least in concept with going forward and finishing out the subdivision. It is just conceptual. This is Charles' kind of architects helped us do some initial design, just to determine feasibility. What could fit, what may be appropriate. But there's 24 units designed here. The town owns all the property except for right here. These four units, one, two, three, four are not on town property. So this would take a conversation with that property owner to see if that's even a fee- Does that horse ranch? Yes. Yes. Hmm. Might take another condemnation action. Eminent domain. And what our thought was, we wanted to show this thinking so that neighborhood can know what would build out, you know, potentially look like. We didn't want to say, well, this, and then this, you know, this section, and then this section, then this section. So we said, let's, what would build out potentially look like? The, it was very important in the architects to start putting some things together that if it exists in architecture, that the buildings look like they belonged, there's always opportunity for more density back this way. But again, we were trying to make sure that some of these houses were all lower in heights so that they wouldn't be affecting some of the existing houses. A lot of those considerations were put into this draft analysis for us to start thinking about as a project to move forward. If it does get some legs and there's some support behind it, we'd have a lot of steps to go. We need to talk to neighborhoods, we need to talk to proper new owners, we need to do the financial analysis to your point Bob about, you know, what kind of subsidy would it be, what could these potentially sell for? A lot of that would need to go on before we made any, you know, any dirt would have to move. There would be a lot of analysis still. And feedback, you know, we also want to make sure that this is understood to be a benefit and make sure it's in the right spot and meet the need. One of the plans that we saw for I thought it was poster was where the wetlands are is putting kind of a beach type environment. Yeah that's that's. That's further down here. Okay, is in or any of those in wetlands? I mean our initial analysis is no. It's all mapping exercises we haven't gone out in dug holes. We don't know groundwater. It's all a mapping exercise at this point. So these were these are designed to be on fill. And this is out of the wetlands. If you go down there, there's a bunch of fill there today. And so we think these are all feasible. There's still analysis to go though. Just roughly, these are all single family, single family, single family, and duplexes. single family, single family, single family, and do plexes. Way back when we did the rodeo place before it was being conceptualized. There was community concern about what people see when they drive into snowmass. It's the first impression you want to see employee housing. So I'm not I'm just saying that was an issue that we really had to work on. I didn't make it in, bring it up here. But I believe in that second picture, because we understood that concern. We tried to do a little, no, artistry addition. It's not even, it's a cut and paste of what it could look like. In frankness, there could be considerably more density put on this property. And we took that consideration that they're making In to heart knowing that that would be a discussion and we wanted to do what we thought was the best fit and Address that issue of appearance coming into the village right there And just from since we're deep into the history When rodeo place came in, it was the console decisions on color and architecture that raised the biggest stink with that development. And after four houses were constructed, the direction was to put this into the snowmass homeowner so that there would be design review. And I don't believe you were on that council. No, I was not on that council. Letting you off the other. Wanna go check the dates. I was probably planning to come back to the council. You're planning, but council made the decision on the color scheme down there. Unfortunately, you can't force people to change it once they buy it But repainting they will have to comply with that homeowner's Color palette. So that was one of the big things that was made That concerned and jumped up out of that subdivision I mean I hear what you're saying about seeing play housing but most people I know that have never been here have no idea that's employee housing. Well I can tell you that when the crossings was originally built I don't want to say it stuck out because the colors it was it was immediately in the homeowners and now that the trees have gone up and you know that it's hard to know that that is for lack of a better term really track housing in there that's common designs, common exteriors and window stuff so window tree not treatments but size windows and style windows. You really have to pull in and go in and look closely to know. Rodio looks more like the point. The way the discussion was described to me, this was not so much employee housing, but just housing. You know, it's, it's kind of openness versus, you know, well, I mean, it looks better than the Rodio lot. And it was a comparison was was steamboat springs when you drive into steamboat springs. Do we want to look like that? Well, I think it was also, you know, I mean horse ranches. It's a good example. I used to be the most beautiful meadow right when you came in the town. I mean, in the spring time it was yellow and bright and empty. And there was quite a battle on whether that should be developed and now it's there but as the foliage fills it in as it is. You just don't know how it says much. I mean I feel like when you drive on brush creek and you get there, I mean most people are in such awe at like what they're looking at and in front of them they're not like looking at the house, they're looking at them out. I think the really only. I think you're right. The only own crossings was a very well thought through project. The colors, yeah. But on the other hand, it's great. I think it's well done. Both work well. You should also know that the town has been approached by the horse ranch homeowners for more landscaper on the corner so that they don't have to look at rodeo place when they go by. That doesn't include me. Are you your part of horse? Yeah, but I would never say that. Those are those are concessions when we get down. I mean, yeah, they can work through those times of issues. Really, what I want to make sure is that you were aware that you made this a policy goal when you adopted the goal statement. You put some dollars in the budget between the demand and ours. It's recumbent to the demands there. And we were working simultaneously to kind of get this initial feasibility study underway. And we plan on continuing forward with making sure to figure out how best to get this done from here. So let me walk through it. So I'm driving in on horse ranch and I'm turning on whatever street that is. Go straight on to Staya. Okay. And to go into rodeo. Okay. Horse ranch does a heart. No, that's right. It's a hard one. Yeah, that's horse ranch. So we're looking at duplexes. Are those? Yes. That's right. It's a hard one. Yeah, that's horse man. So we're looking at duplexes are those Some there's already some there. Yeah, well, there's three. There's high be high believe live down there right there Yeah, and that's a pretty nice Pretty nice the other ones what what are we talking about? They're different configs duplexes duplexes single family and there are two bedrooms There's a there's just mix of two and three bedrooms. OK, got it. There's a mix of two story and one and a half story. These are conceptually designed for walk out basements in one story. These are one and a half story. And these are two story. The other thing down here we have the duplexes. We're talking pretty steep grade. Yep, and that's what, yeah. And we understand that. And there's some of the designs that they, you know, again, very conceptually was to actually have them built differently so that we wouldn't have to dig so much and save some money and constructability. Which we did do on those ones, the ones that we're actually. The ones that hide, please, in. Yeah, they are right at the toe of the school. Yeah, they are. We actually talked about condemning the whole, where the four on the left are. You can see the property line that goes right there by the sea. Yeah. Okay, to the left of that is horse ranch homeowners. And to get the road into rodeo place, we had a condemning. And it's not extremely valuable land because it's zoned open space and the uses are low. But it was a very complicated valuation. But I mean in the grand scheme of things it wasn't that bad. It was like $115,000 to gain the road access. But what's the, can they park on the street in that section where those little lexes are? So when we get into the design, one of the things we wanna talk about is road width here, and do we do some kind of bullbouts and have parking so that it could slow traffic going in and out? We hear those complaints about speeding traffic. Right. It gets into the snow removal. We haven't got that far yet. Well, I'm just saying, I feel like if there was road parking that close to where you turned the horse ranch, I don't think that would look so great. Because I mean, now the duplexes are back far enough that you can't really, it's not really in your face, but that's pretty close to the turn. I mean, they're all designed with garages, but those are the design issues. But I'm talking about visitors. Right. We don't have that level of detail but the idea honestly when we heard through through a number of different input sources but speeding here. Right. The easiest way to slow down speeding is in the narrow of the street. The easiest way to narrow the street is a lot of parking but to your point it affects appearance and snow removal so there'd be a lot of discussion to go still. So I don't know what's my short answer. What have we done for these great design, great ideas for the restricted and I'd like to see the same thing happen for us going forward with another rental building or whatever direction so we can accommodate both sides of the coin here. So we haven't done anything with rental. Honestly, this is our first project. We thought it would be to get the ball rolling, build some momentum, show some success. We've still got a long way to go with this thing. And then, but then the next one, if you guys said, hey, we've done these 24 units. Let's focus on the other side. I mean, that'd be great direction for not kind of the next project that we can get going. Well, that's, I mean, you're spending some time and some money on this. But understand, there are only studying land that we own at this point. I understand. And before, just in my mind, it's easier that way. And then the next step is, okay, now we've got the financing done on this one. We need to switch over to find the place and the financing for a rental project. This is just, it's 1A only because there's land available right now and with a lot of the infrastructure already there. Right. Almost all of it. I think that's what we envisioned when we did, when we purchased seven stars, was that would become employee of the corner back here. Way back when we waited a long time. Yep. And it was a 6400 square foot house there with a corral on a barn and couldn't do anything else with lot B there. And that's in the equation too. So where the checkpoint Charlie is more to back this with John's talking over here. Down there in that lower right-hand corner. I have my own vision for that but I'll save it. Is the rest of Lot B is that is the rest of Lot B. Developable land or is that where is that where all the wetlands are? There's a lot of wetlands that the creek really meanders down there to the bridge that where it goes into the county and we had trouble when seven star wanted to be annexed into the town even getting a viable site on the upper side and what you're not seeing here is that there's this tail that wraps around the mound that parcels 67 acres So it but it's all subject to Deed restriction in the county so that's there's Seven star that's usable the triangle shape and the town as part of the annexation got the front lot We're checkpointing in other parking areas and then the owner got the other side and it really came down to one large That's what he wanted was one large home side and so I was gonna show we've got all that mapping. We could this is not the map to show what one's not right. Okay. Okay. Any other points for just. So we're going to keep moving forward and we'll keep you up. Data's a question. Just when you're going back to talking about demand and all those things. I mean, I, you know, I did, I had a discussion with Susan Dwayne from the school district. I don't know if they ended up talking to you. John Maloy, I went to the superintendent's office. I wasn't that bad of a kid with that principal joke. But yeah, no. And so when I informed him of how things work, I mean, they were under the impression that nobody was eligible. I'm gonna say no, they were talking about prioritization and how prioritization works. And yeah, it is more difficult if you don't work in the village. But- Well, I still think that we should consider people that are providing essential services like schools, hospital workers, whatever. I mean, to me, they serve so much village. I mean, they're not just some person that lives in Pitch. That's already working. And so, here's the pitch that I made, and I don't know if it's stuck with anybody yet, is that the 240 units that we've got now have been under the same rules for a long time. Right. If we were gonna do something different going forward, let's build more housing. And so my pitch to John when I met with him was, if we want to do something different, let's do a project together. Let's do a rental project together. And if you want to give 50, 50 on the prioritization grade, but rather than trying to continue to divide a pie, it's too small differently that would be very difficult. Let's build another pie or some more, another pie. Well, then you've got to put the hospital employees in there and you've got to put the fact that I think my idea to be, unless the hospital wants to partner on a project great. If Anderson Ranch wants to partner on a project, let's partner on new stuff and then maybe have some rules for that new project rather than trying to. I like that idea because it helps. I agree. I agree. I'd be able to build more because we've got other financing sources. And that's what I talked with them when I met with them. I just think that it's really important to pursue those things because it is an opportunity for us to create more housing without making it all on us. Well, I wish Pitkin County would step up to the plate and we could get out senior housing. I wish Pitkin County would step up to the plate and we could get out senior housing. I understand where we are and I think this is a great project and I thank you for putting that mitigation in. But we're not going to ease. There's only so much plan. Yeah, we're not going to ease the pressure. We're not going to ease the pressure. Over time, we're not going to ease the pressure. 20 years from now, we'll be sitting here having the same conversation. More demand. Yeah. That's how it's going to be better. Lean on your buddy, John. He's been lean on. You know, the entire valley is being strangled with a, you know, work for affordable work for his housing. Yeah. Rental and ownership. with a you know work for affordable workforce housing rental and and ownership You know that's in my that's one of the reasons there are 143 people on a list Because they're on a list in 15 different places up and down the valley. Yes, because there's there aren't there aren't any There isn't enough available housing everywhere in the valley. So again, over time, depending on what happens elsewhere in the valley, it's going to have an effect on how much of that 385 units we really will really need. I mean, I do think that's a movable number. Well, if that roaring fork housing authority ever happens. Yeah. That might be an option, but just even looking at glimps with springs and carbon Dale and then you've got the will it's thing going on. Even if the tree development in Elgebell happens, there's a lot of on paper. There are a lot of workplace workforce housing units. Now people are saying it's not affordable. Yeah, that's another part. Yeah, so, you know, I don't know the answer. We just don't know the answer. We just don't know the answer. Give them land and they'll put something on it. The loan terms. You're all things that have to be kind of kept as moving parts in this whole process. And the great thing is it's not like we're asking to build 383 units today. I mean, that's the number today. We built a third of it, if we built a hundred, we'll do another assessment, and we'll have better ideas. We'll have the right mixes, but we'll start making progress towards that. I think you should proceed. That's me. I didn't think everyone's interested. Well, as much as you guys say, hell no, we're gonna keep rolling down this path and get some things going. I think it's great. No, I think it's a pass. We need to push and we need to push picking county. I make a motion to adjourn. No, just walk out. See you. It's that way every night. It's that way every night. Every meeting. You can walk out anytime you want. I know how