here here here here here it's great to see everybody and welcome back and welcome to everyone who is here this evening in our public and for those who are not here I hope you'll be listening to the first two presentations are extremely important because they affect everybody within our community. So first is Kit Hamby and Joe Farrell talking about water and sand and what's going on with water and sanitation and all the wonderful mail we're all getting. Thank you. Come on up, Joe. I can't come on up. My name is Kit Hamby. I'm the district manager for Snowmass Water and Sanitation. Clint asked Joe and I to attend the meeting today to give you an update on where we're at with wastewater treatment plan upgrades And my name is Joe Ferrell president. So my swatter sanitation district. I do want to thank Clint for offering us an opportunity to give you guys a little Update I was going on down the district Well, thank you both of you gentlemen. you've been spending many hours working on this. So your public service is truly to be applauded. So go ahead, kid. I'm sorry this didn't make it into the packet. I talked with Clint on Friday and I believe it was just my mistake that we didn't get anything to you. It is. We all, we understand. I'm sorry to dump this on you at the last minute, but we just have a real quick PowerPoint. I wasn't going to get into too much detail on this. I just wanted to tell you a little bit about the process that we've been going through. And we got to this point. It was, I believe, in April of 2014 that I attended the town council meeting and told town council a little bit about this new upgrade that we were facing. This is one of these unfunded mandates that has passed down from the federal government then to the state governments and then all the way down to this local level here. It has to do with nitrogen and phosphorus removal in a wastewater treatment plant. The plant currently meets all of the requirements set by the state, but in the future, it won't meet these requirements. We've been working on this now for several years. Each plant in Tolerado is a little different in the way they handle it. This is all triggered by their permits. The permits for wastewater treatment plants renew every five years. Our permit just renewed March of 2015 and so we've stepped up the engineering on this to meet this 2020 deadline. The second slide here. It turns out that we are one of 44 plants in Colorado that are included in this first phase of upgrades to the wastewater treatment plants. How many did you say? The work part of the first 44, I believe that there are over 120 plants in Colorado that will need to upgrade their plants. If you process more than 1 million gallons of sewage per day, it required to meet this new effluent limit on total phosphorus and total nitrogen. As I said, our discharge permit renewed in 2015. We have five years to comply with this new limit. So by April of 2020, we need to have this plan completed and we need to be able to prove compliance. So we'd like to finish this plant upgrade by the spring of 2019 and have one full year of operation behind us. During this analysis, we asked SGM, our engineers, to look at different processes and different configurations of the plant. This was, I thought, a very exhaustive kind of review of what we couldn't do. A lot of it is dictated by the site itself. We don't have a lot of opportunity on our site to expand. We looked at 14 different processes. We considered the hydraulics of the plant, how the effluent would flow through the plant. We wanted to maintain, gravity flow through the plant to reduce energy costs. We didn't want to have to pump through the plant. We had to also consider construction sequencing. We can't take the old plant offline to build a new plant. We had to also consider construction sequencing. We can't take the old plant offline to build a new plant. We have to continue to process a fluent during this period. And we also looked at the old plant itself. The original plant was built in 1967. It was .2 million gallons per day. It was then enlarged to .8 million gallons per day. It was then enlarged to 0.8 million gallons per day, five years later. The plant was then added onto, increased current capacity is 3.2 million. Unfortunately, we still can't meet these new effluent requirements that are required by EPA and federal government. So right now we're trying to look at these 14 different processes and figure out which one fits best, making the best use of the existing structures that we have. So far, SGM has done an extraordinary job and were able to reuse about 75% of the old plant with their current plant. and it's going to take some additional effort to get this approved by the state to provide them with engineering detail in this next phase. We have to run this through a program called BioWin, which is an engineering program that will produce, prove whether this new process will work or not. What's the target? How many gallons per day are you looking? What's the maximum the new addition is going to handle? You know it'll handle about 2.4, 2.5 million, it's actually a reduction in volume. So I'm assuming with base village, eventually coming online, that we've done the calculations and the math has been done to have this in mind. We're at about 45% of the plant capacity right now. Okay. So we'd have to see. So 2.4 you're saying is your goal? Yes. Okay. Can you just bring your microphone a little bit closer to it? Sure. Thank you so much. Yes. OK. Can you just bring the microphone a little bit closer to it? Sure. Thank you so much. At the end of the SGM analysis, I asked our board to go ahead and do a peer review of the 14 different processes. We hired a gentleman, his name's Ron Skyler. Ron has worked for the state as their lead engineer for over 20 years. He's analyzed and approved over 80 plants in the state of Colorado. He looked at these 14 different processes. And this was completely independent of the SGM study and came up with the same two selections that SGM had come up with. So I was very happy with the overall peer review. But even at that point, I still wanted to get another opinion. So I contacted Jim McLaughlin from McLaughlin Engineers and McLaughlin Engineers that represented the district for over 45 years. I went down to the McLaughlin offices and met with Jim and talked with him about different configurations of the plant as well. And I think Jim's opinion was the same as Ron's and that this particular process that we had picked option number 14 was going to work for this district. We then asked SGM to go ahead and further analyze the costs. Can you tell me what that really is? UCT is a process that was developed in South Africa, University of Cape Town. You have these bio reactors, which are really just tanks, aeration tanks that promote the growth of certain bacteria. And, Mark, what we have to do is we have, currently, our plant is an aerobic plant. We rely on aerobic bacteria to decompose the solids coming up with the plant. But with this new process, we need to get rid of some of the phosphorus. So we have to change some of these basins that are currently aerobic into aerobic basins. So that's the first process that we're going to go through when the sewage enters the plant is going to a biological selector that will select certain types of bacteria that will thrive in that particular environment, environment and breakdown some of this phosphorus. We then have to sort of switch gears and turn it into an aerobic kind of process where we then send it to aerobic tanks. And then from there we'll go on to clarifiers and then through filter system, which will be a new filter system, it will be a membrane filter system and then out to ultraviolet lights, which will inactivate any remaining viruses or any bacteria that are still left in the water. Thank you. We asked SEM to do project cost analysis. We'll jump ahead here. They looked at plants in and around this area. And one thing that I wanted to bring attention to is the project description here on the second line. It gives you an idea on how large these plants are. These plants have already been upgraded. And then on the very last line you see a cost per gallon of capacity. You should give you an idea on value in our investment. You can see that some of these plants are similar in size to the snow mass plant. I talk with Clint a little bit about the process that Fruda went through. Fruda had a 2.33 million gallon per day plant. And I think they came in right around 23 or 24 million dollars. Million here and million there or something. Yes. So I think these are all within a reasonable range, although it still is an awful lot of money that we're spending to upgrade this plant. right now we're working through this process. Everything that's highlighted or in bold are steps that we've completed. We still need to submit this process design report here in the next couple months to the Department of Health. Once that's submitted, we expect that they'll get back with us on the approval sometime in January of 2017. We believe the construction of the plan is going to take a year and a half to two years. Most of the work is going to be inside a structure that will sit right where our pond is. The current wastewater treatment plant pond will go away. It will be replaced by a fairly large building. While we're going through this review with the state, I've talked with Clant. We're going to work with the town and making sure that we're meeting all the aesthetic requirements to the site. We have a buried plant. It's going to have a green roof. It's going to be burned. It'd be difficult from a high-line road to even see the plant. We'll also work with Clinton in the planning department on construction management plans as well. We'd like to start construction in the spring of 2017, finished up by the spring of 2019. And that will give us one full year prior to compliance date. Kit, what do you anticipate for traffic impacts, you know, during the construction period along that snowman's club back road there? I think they're going to be pretty significant. We have to build a plant that's probably going to be over 40,000 square feet in area. The remaining pond will have to be filled in so there's going to be a lot of fill material coming in. And it's going to be during this base village project. So yeah. Okay. I guess that'll sort of self out in a construction management plan. Yes. And if you don't move forward, what's the penalty? No, Mark, it's hard to say. I know that this state can charge us, I believe it's $20,000 per day per occurrence. And because we wouldn't be meeting a cop or nitrogen or phosphorus in two forms of phosphorus, I'm not sure if they would look at a full $80,000 per day of penalties. I doubt if they would, I think it would be considerably less than that. I think we all need to cognizant if we don't do it. There are penalties, civil monetary penalties, which will be pretty significant. Yes. The state's position, I think, is they've given you five years to comply and if you don't comply, I don't think that I'm not sure if they're going to take a reasonable stance or not. What's the plan for the present location of the plan? You mean long term? Yeah, what will happen without area? Well, we're trying to repurpose as much of the old plan as possible. And Bill, I can't remember if we walk through the old plant when you came down to the district or not, but it's a fairly large area that's being repurposed. What I'm terming as the old plant is the plant that was built back in 1967. So we also have what we call is the new plant, which is on that same site. And we think that we can repurpose all of the existing facilities that are part of the new plant in this proposed plant that we're looking at. So they'll move to the location where the pond is now. Yes, but we're still using some of those existing facilities that are in the existing plant. But we're just repurposing those tanks and those basins. We're changing them from aerobic basins to anaerobic basins. So in essence, you have to keep half the plant running and move the other half to the new location. Right. And so the new plant won't need a pond. It won't need a pond. That pond is really a leveling pond and equalization pond on the north side of our site, which is where most of the underground facilities are, is the old plant that was built in 1967. We also have our admin building that's on the east side of the property, but we also have filters in that part of the building that are used. And so the pond is an equalization pond that balances the flow between the old plant and where our admin building is. But with this new facility we won't need an equalization pond. We won't need to aerate that. The filters will be replaced in this new building jail with membrane filters. We're going to exchange some pawn space. We're going to exchange pawn space for building and then where the administration building is and the filtration stuff is is going to be possibly employee housing or another use. We don't know yet. No. Okay. Placeholder. Okay. Okay, go on. The employee housing's been contemplated for that space. No. No. Okay. Okay, good. What's next? I just follow up on what Bob said, the construction management plan, I think is going to be important whether you're going to use the black saddle road or you're going to use that little road that goes down there. You know, I mean, because it's going to be pretty interesting because the amount of failure you're bringing in there. Ideally we would come in from the east, Tom. I can't imagine making that many trips past the blocks. Down high line down Snowmass Clips Circle, which is going to be very interesting. Yes. No, you don't have to go to the store. Sure. They would have to turn a snowmess club circle and make a right and go down to the plant. Yeah, a couple hundred yards on snowmess club circle. Okay. Bob. You're going to go into the decision on the financing? Joe, can you speak? Can Joe's, sorry Bob, what was that question again? Yeah, would you, for the public, as well as for the council, could you give us some kind of background on the thinking that went into the decision to use a bond issue for the financing for this project. Well, first of all, Bob, as kid explained, we went through all the different scenarios in the most efficient way to restore, renew, and come up with a way to honor the mandate that was sent down by the Feds for this waste-water treatment handling system. With all these other options, we want to come up with the most efficient way to do it, and of course, most cost effective way to do it. And we came up with that 19.85 million dollar figure. Hopefully it will be lower than that when we go in and doesn't happen very often but that's a possibility. Still is an eight dollar per gallon rate which is very reasonable with as evidenced by the other comparisons. When we talked about rate increase to come up with this money or a bond option, it was a no-brainer. Accountants told us that if we are going to, and I can't, they weren't threatening us, but they said, you will have to at least double your wastewater treatment handling rates for every person that uses water in the village. And that number was prohibitive. And so we thought, and it is not a tax deduction, which is a nice little asterisk next to it, too. a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit Will you anticipate that water rates would stay the same? Yes. After this project is completed? Yeah. I do about it. Another thing that wasn't brought up in this presentation, but the water treatment plant in the last 10 years has actually cut use, even though the numbers and the visitor numbers and the gallons should have been going up because of leak detection procedures and conservation by the users too, our numbers that of gallons that we've been handling has actually been going down. So more water is being returned to the stream. And we've never had a better relationship with the snowmass caucus and the folks on the other side of the divide because of our stewardship on this side. Question for you, Joe, and Kit, is there any opportunity for state or federal grants to offset some of these costs? We may be able to pick up a grant, Markey, but one of the problems that we run into with grants, whether they're state revolving fund grants or USDA grants, is the timing first fall in the planning. We have to meet some of these deadlines to complete this plant. And most of these grants require environmental impact statements or EAs. This could kick us back six months to a year. They also have Davis-Bacon requirements. And we have to buy primarily American products. All of them. All American products. Yes. Raff to run into that problem with their stops. Yeah. So for property owner, Mr. Butler, what is it per 100,000? What's the rate? He did the rough math the other night. I had that on my own. Yeah, $400,000. It's $1,089 for $100,000. For $22. Name $100,000 property in Summass Village. Name more than forget. For a million dollar property of the $189. Here. It's still a good deal. Well, it's just when you do the math, yes, you get the tax benefit. But thinking about water and sand, which quite frankly, we don't have a choice. We really don't have a choice because it's a federal mandate. And you could not absorb this of a monetary penalties that would incur if you're not compliance. You know, we got the snowmass or a wildcat fair district next talking about what needs to be done there another very outdated facility. And then we have there's a lineup of people on tax issues. on tax issues. Regardless of how we bring this money and Markey, we still have to generate enough money to pay this bill. Yeah, you've got a cash flow. Yes. Well, what we'd have to take out a loan, either a state revolving fund loan or USDA loan and grant, or we'd have to form possibly a COP to finance. Okay. Understood. Okay. Any other questions? You just covered the old screen. And looking at the cost analysis, that was the best option to do a bond. It wasn't the lowest cost bill. Wasn't the lowest cost? No. I mean, we had to consider the age of that existing plant was a worthwhile for us to pump a lot of money into that 45-year-old building, the portion that is 45-year-old, or is it worthwhile to just build a new building. One of the problems with the existing building is it has a green roof. That plant is buried. It's only one of two plants in Colorado that's completely buried like that. So to retrofit that building, we would have to take the roof off. We'd have to deconstruct the walls. We'd have to go in there with excavators and deep in the basins or enlarge the basins. And then we'd have to reconstruct the building over the top of it. It didn't make any sense to try and rehab some of that old building. It's cheaper for us to go into that pond and build a new building. And hopefully repurpose some of those spaces at a later date. So you will have to go and take the roof off to move some of that equipment over? No, I think the SGM plan allows us to go ahead and repurpose some of the spaces that are already in there without having to bring heavy equipment in. It's just a matter of taking aeration equipment out and turning it into anaerobic basins. If you need to enlarge a basin or deepen a basin, then you have to take the roof off and bring heavy equipment in. But if you're making the basin actually smaller, more compact, you can accomplish that without deconstructing that building. I think Bill, you were talking about costs too. The option, some of the options that we looked at were cheaper. But it would be the analogy that I use is if we have a, our favorite 57 pick up and you have to put a water pump in this year and then you have to put the timing belt in and then you have to do this and that and the other thing. This is a 50 year old plant at the anniversary. There's a 50 year old plant and it needs a lot more that we couldn't afford to just put a water pump in this year and then a carburetor in next year. We wanted to do it right for the next 50 years. And so we were elected to fight the bullet and get it all done as long as this mandate was put before us. And we had no choice about that as long as we were in there and we were digging and we had things undone that we were going to get a new car instead of keep that old 57 going. Joe, if the ballot initiative passes, when would you expect the bonds to be available? We have a- You guys actually go out to get the money. Yeah, we're working with a company in Denver who has helped us when we first built the plant 50 years ago and some of the guys are still there. They are thrilled to be participating in this effort to help us write a new bond. It's their GK bomb. Do you have I mean do you have any idea when that issue if things go go according to plan, when would you go out and get the money for to do? We want to get the ball rolling right in 2016. Okay. We want to have the money in the bank and get going on this thing as soon as possible about the timing we're not sure about. Well, I mean, I'm just, well, we're not putting the cart before the horse. No, I understand that. I'm only thinking about, I'm only thinking about the relative stability at the moment of current rates. Right, well, that's all. Somewhere in our rate study, we anticipated a four point something interest. And actually, the current interest rates are two points something. So we were very very conservative in our estimates and hopefully those rates in the next six to eight months will hold at that low rate and when we get going then it will be well below what we anticipated in a payoff. And how will that, if that were to come to be, how would that transpire into, into the, again, back into the costing for the tax increase? For $100,000 property. Right. There you go. You'll be the first to know We won't know I'm gonna hold you to that Joe We have no idea yet. Okay, once we will have to write it first. Okay. Okay. Thank you very much. Any other questions? Okay, thank you very very. Thanks for having us. Much, thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Marky, if you understood Kitt's description about the engineering and the chemistry, would you? I'll buy you lunch if you explain it to me. You got to grow some bugs to eat the bad stuff and it goes on. Like a Pac-Man. They can say I'll go up. You can't bring Drew here. That's right. I'll tell you, I can tell you surf in the web right now. Oh, too well. But I'm going to do some homework, because it's chemistry behind this, too interesting. Well, listen, I met with the Capil Creek Caucus last week, and they were very complimentary about the kit and the water district. Snowmass villages really light years ahead of a lot of other communities. For sure. Well, that's great. That was not always the case. That's what they're concerned about. Yeah. Okay. Next is the update on the Snowmass Wildcat Fire Protection District. And who all do we have? Oh, there you are. Hi, how are you? John. I'd like to reintroduce tire chief Thompson. Yes, Thompson. I've dug Paul with me from the Bureau of Land Management Doug's been with me here for all of my wildfire presentation. So yes, he has Welcome back guys strong backbone for me so he has. Welcome back guys. Strong backbone for me. So I kind of have a double header for you tonight. I'm going to start off with a wildfire update son what we're doing and I'd like to share a few small successes that we've accomplished and lead into what we're planning for 2016. And thank you very much for your time. It's always enjoyable to be here and bring you good news rather than asking for things. So to start off in June this year, we're going to start the largest wildfire mitigation that snowmass has ever had. And it's a result of little successes that we've had. And one of them was started in 2013, the Pine Subdivision. Although this was not a Snowmass homeowners or a common area. It was a private land deal, but we learned from this one on how to deal with the division of wildlife, what kind of challenges we might get when we were doing wildfire mitigation. But this is going to be very indicative of what I'll show you later. And after this project, you could see the views 100% better. We took all of those logs down and rather than chipping and leaving them there, which really doesn't remove the fuel content. It just changes the composition. We actually, these logs actually left town. these logs actually left town. Another small success was on brush creek road and metal road. On the left you could see how thick all that scrub oak was. And to put it more into scale on the right you could see the swift crew starting to mitigate that area. And what they did here is called clumping. And they changed the composition of the fuel that way and on the left was the finished project in the fall of 2014 and on the right I took a picture of that same area in the spring of 2015 you can see how lush it's cleaned up, it really became park-like. Another project we also were a part of on Brush Creek Road. This was all funded by the Snowmass Homeowners Association. On the left, you can see the crews working and once again in the spring of 2015, I took a shot of that to show you how it's very natural looking, but all those fuels have been removed from that area. So from little successes, usually come something big. And in 2015 two things happened in snowmass village that were really neat for us. As one is we were able to bring the State Wildfire Conference to snowmass village and got a lot of input from a lot of experts from across the nation. And also Wolf Genshin introduced me to a gentleman by the name of Heinz Simon. Now the Heinz doesn't want a lot of notoriety or even to be acknowledged, but... Zero. Zero, however, the whole community knows that it is Hines Simon behind some of this. Okay, it isn't, it isn't I'm shocking the neighborhood, but, and basically how this turned out is over his dining room table, he offered me an opportunity for a challenging grant. He offered us $100,000 if I matched it. And from that afternoon, we went out and canvas the town, the fire district itself, and this Snowmass Homeowners Association. And we all came up with some funding. He also gave me two years to utilize these funds and it just so happened that we were ready to move across the street here to the Ridge Run area. So my area that we're looking at here just to orient you on this map is this is town hall up here And you could see far away road with Ridge Road with this kind of the switchbacks Excuse me Excuse me. The color dots on this do not really represent any priority, but I had to start identifying all these little chunks of land. And one way to do that for me was in colors. I've also left some of these larger maps on the back table for people to look at. But basically to bring it into a more perspective, you could see how much property we're actually going to be mitigating in this event. It's close to two thirds of that whole area. There's 205 homes approximately in this neighborhood. And I think we're going to be able to create some really interesting fuel breaks. Is this that include all the open areas? Yeah, this is actually all of the commonly owned property. Okay, one area that isn't basically shown here would be the, there's a parcel right here of property that's owned by the town. That's right across from the fire district. If I back up one, you could see this lot right here that extends across Faraway Road. That's actually owned by the town of Snowmass Village. And that property will also be included in this mitigation. Each individual property up here is unique in itself, too. It is an all dead tree. Some of it is meadow, which will require less mitigation. And there's other areas that are just dead trees. And basically, this is what we're going after right here. There's literally tons per acre of dead trees. This is actually one of the common areas that... That's one is next to the surface. Yeah, exactly. It's across the street from Bob. It didn't mean to pick on your area there. I know, is it? OK. Well, why do you see the next shot? But this is one of the areas that I'm working with the Somaski area because of a lot of the trails are in here and there's some challenges here that I'll bring up a little bit later. But I think it's going to really make an improvement. Although this is not common area, I wanted to show you it is indicative of many of the areas up on far away road. During windstorms we're getting trees that fall over onto houses. And it's also a safety concern for people walking their dogs and the like. I think it's a really good project that we could undertake. This one here is just right across from Bob's house as well. It just happened that it was just with those shots were there, I apologize. So how do I get rid of all these trees without making it look like this? This is what I was losing sleep over. I didn't want to chip and masticate and put all that fuel back. And we interviewed several companies to do this work. And we ended up hiring Western vegetation management. They have history in the area, they have the equipment to do it. And they also had the ecological mind to fit in with our community. This might be just fine in some areas of the community, but not in this area surrounded by all those homes. We wanted to make it a beautification scenario as well as a wildfire. So I have trail closures, I have mountain biking, I have hikers, we have animals, calving and of course homeowners. I'd like to somehow put signs like that one along the roadway as we're doing the work. And because of all these entities, we're working close with, we'd like to think that we haven't left a stone unturned, but we're still checking all of our lists. So June 1st is approximately the time we can start this mitigation. I believe it'll be on a six to eight week timeframe before this work to be done. I'm also getting with John Baker and Anne. I don't think that there will be any road closures, but there may be traffic management that we can help with. So as we get a little bit farther down the road, I think that we're going to be on track and I look forward to doing this. This is a long time coming for our community. Could you put that map back up there with the blue and red dots for two seconds? You bet. Let's see. So I'm looking at that area off a stellar. No, the blue dot over here. Over here? Yeah. Okay. So that's actually the worst section there. Yes, that's pretty nasty. This is really bad and it's also very steep. Yep. That one there will, and we can access part of that, I believe, from the lower neighbors. I've been talking to them. This is something else that Heinz kind of brought up with this. This isn't just a money challenge. This is a challenge to his community. Where he wants to challenge his neighbors to also take some self responsibility and start doing some work on their own property. This is one of the benefits that we're going to have here is we're going to have a wildfire mitigation company that's already mobilized. They're going to be in the area and we're going to offer all of these homeowners an opportunity to get rid of some dead trees. We'd like to schedule them a little bit out if we could. That's why in the last slide I have my name and phone number. But we'll actually be reaching out personally to these people. And instead of paying maybe $2,000 per tree to have it removed, it'll be more like on an hourly basis, a lot less. I guess I should have waited. Maybe. But actually your property came out very good. And it's extremely well-known. Did you enjoy it from the spring? OK. That's beautiful. Glad to hear that. Well, we look forward to a successful wildfire mitigation as well. So anyway, if you want a free home wildfire inspection, please call us. We offer that all the time time not just for this event And I'm open for any questions if you have Great job. I'll tell you John that's terrific Good and Heinz flew back to Dallas yesterday, so No, he's not I Don't want to take up too much more time. Just want to give you some perspective of how this fits in with the bigger world in the firefighting community. This is very important for us. And on the federal agency side, it is also. One of the things that you may not know is that what John and the rest of the fire district is doing is pretty unusual in Colorado. Maybe some front-range departments do this kind of thing but this is really above and beyond what happens elsewhere. And another part of this is Pitkin County is beginning to look at the wildfire problem a little bit more. We started a wildfire council. We've had two meetings and there'll be some other things coming up. But as a council, we look at snowmasses really a leader in this area. And what's exciting about it is we've got this project, we can show people the importance of doing the work and that it doesn't have to look like a clear cut. There's some other benefits involved and so forth. So I just wanted to give kudos to John and Fire District. And let's keep up the work. All right. So John, on of these ski back open space, you know, where tons of dead trees going down through there. Do you have to get special permits to get into those or no? Well, I don't plan on taking anything down that isn't on Snowmass Homeowner's property. Okay. So we'll stay clear of that. Now, for access, anything I do, I'll definitely be getting with Steve Soule. And actually the one property that's over by Bob's house there, that's actually owned by the Crown Family. It's used as ski area, but I had to get permission through Steve and he's working with me. And that's gonna be one of the tougher ones because of the bike trails and the usage that's heavy back there. But no, we're not taking anything down that's on the ski area. Well, this is what I'm going to reference is over on I can't I don't know each side west side of my house on the right hand side. That's a whole area. Oh, yeah, that whole That's a big fan really sure, but you can't do anything with that whole area Not if it isn't on common area now. I thought there's part of it that's common area over there. And it took a lot of homework just to get all that information. Well, because another surveys are correct. I'm using Pick and County mapping and ours isn't totally developed yet. Our own mapping system will help us out in the future. But you can actually click on those properties. It'll give me the full assessors report. isn't totally developed yet. Our own mapping system will help us out in the future, but you can actually click on those properties. It'll give me the full assessors report. So I feel pretty confident about the areas that we've marked out, but we're going to be careful. Okay. And it's wonderful to have somebody that it's willing to help pay for this. Unbelievable. Yeah, you bet. You bet. I was such a challenge and I mean I say it's been a few years that I've been kind of hounding the Snowmass Homeowners Association to try to get over to Ridge Road and I'm really glad that we figured out away with a very generous gift to make that happen. Well it took a of years as well, and I can't thank Joe Farrell and Don Aiken, and actually there's a lot of people to really thank for this project. So thanks very much. Okay, thank you very, very nice to have you all. So we'll move on. We've got one more show I give you a double header tonight. Sorry. I forgot about that. All right, baseball season stuff today. That's going to be a few days out. I want to stand up first. OK. Good. Got Thompson, your fire chief. Thank you for having us. I want to introduce a couple of people. Of course you know, Bill Boyano, our fourth president. Yay. Renee Thomas. She's one of our chiefs and she's our HR director. Kevin Isle, he's our new transplant chief from Illinois that we luckily got and we're really happy to have him. Well, we're from Illinois. We're about. Yeah, about an hour north of Chicago, Lake Forest Illinois. Oh. And then Tom Nulan, many of you may know Tom. Yeah, Tom. He's going to work with the fire district through the planning process with the town and our neighbors and the chapel and Anderson ranch. So kind of blow into this with Tom has another job too. What's that? Tom has another job too. Yeah. Yeah. We don't know how we got it. Got him to brand to have a new bridge. Help us. Yeah. We'll be able to talk to him up here about what's happening. We have a lot of our board members here as well. Wolfkinch Irene Griser. Don is there as well. A lot of support tonight. Thank you. So now for another important topic here. So in 1971, we were blessed with a Fritz Benedict III Bay Fire Station. It served the community well. At the time, we were a volunteer fire department, and snowmast village was relatively small. But as the community grew, the fire district as well had to grow. And in 87 we did an expansion and we added a third floor that was entirely employee housing because at the time we were going through a transition it was what they call a combination department where part of them were paid like two or three people, and the rest were volunteers. Well, the makeup of the community wasn't lending itself to be able to just get volunteers out of the community. So what we had to do is we came up with a firefighter resident program and fire young firemen from across the country would apply and we would train them and it would be kind of an internship and many of them moved on and went on to full-time career departments. We did some major structural work on the station in 2013 as the building was starting to slide down and it's held but it's a failing structure that needs some work. So as we started to meet, we didn't know whether to remodel again, are we going to relocate, what should we do? Well, in order to do this, we really wanted to take a look at where the station was and where our calls are. And it's no secret the most of our calls are EMS calls. Last year we did a 1076 calls and about 70 close to 70% of those are EMS. Not all of them to the clinic but a lot of them are whether it's summer, mountain biking or whether it's wintertime sports. It's a great thing to have as a clinic. So we started to think out of the box and you'll have to realize that this is back when related was in receivership and this property may have been available. So we thought, well, why not bring, why not go to where the calls are? So we thought perhaps we might be able to do this, put the clinic underneath, fire station on top, and instead of getting an ambulance to go get our patients, we'd get an elevator and go down and get them taken to the hospital. Well that didn't fare out so well, but still we sought out all these different options. Hey, I laughed now, but really we looked at maybe, do we buy building it, put a fire station in the bottom, it's going to be where the new clinic is, and build housing above. Of course, that wasn't very viable. Two creeks, over by Al Creek Town Homes, that brought us actually farther away from our calls though. And it's not a very easy site to get as well. There's some legal things going on with that area. School site. As soon as you mentioned School site, I think telephone start ringing at attorney's offices. So we kind of shyed away from looking at and the realistic part of that also is the fact that it brought us a little bit farther away from our call volume. Okay, entrance to horse ranch. Even the redevelopment of the rodeo lot area we looked at. Holy cross, the cemetery area, kind of hidden. We'd like to be a part of the community. We don't want to really stuff a station somewhere that's hidden. We even took a look over here. We looked at the point site and some property above Town Hall. And we worked very hard at maybe trying to make this a campus like atmosphere with the fire department. But the costs were just a little bit too much for the amount of space that we could use. We need to kind of grow a little bit from where we're at. So best option, we're going to stay here. This is a nice site for us. It's paid for. We think it's big enough for us to do our new building. big enough for us to do our new building. And with that I'd like to kind of turn it over to Scott to talk a little bit about some considerations that we have with this site. Well, first of all I think we did our due diligence trying to find a better location for the fire station. And that's important for a couple of reasons. Our response time is huge for our insurance and for ability to take care of the public, especially in the village where we're densely populated and a lot of people sleeping in beds at night. We want to be able to have a quick response to that. The other side of this is we did a needs analysis, we did engineering of our building a lot of different things and one of the things that came out, the first proposal that was the cheapest was to find a location flat building site, build a fire station, tears down, either sell the property to Anderson Ranch or the town. the station, tears down, either sell the property to Anderson Ranch or the town. We looked at all that and unfortunately there's not a lot of buildable areas in the village. I loved the draw side and working with Joe Coffee and trying to figure out a way we could do both, but ultimately it put us on a smaller footprint and it costs more and I think as we move in and see with the Sanitation district and now the fire district we need to do our due diligence of keeping our costs down And so that that's where we're at now with Tom. We've hired Oz architecture As our firm we went through a public process with them. I think they have a lot of familiarity with town, the process. I think we're going to get into it later, but we plan on doing a planning effort with the town. We've talked to the town manager, we've talked to Julianne, we were moving forward with that with an IGA. Very similar to what the school district did, but not on a rampant forward, do it fast process and progress. We've got more time. The one thing that I think is most important right now that we meet with our neighbors and find out what our neighbors want. I understand ranch and the chapel were very important to that campus and we can do some things for them and they of course continually give us parking and places to store vehicles and do different things. So they've been good neighbors so we want to continue to be good neighbors. Clean anything else on the IGA that you guys want to bring up or John? I think the IGA is just a proposal that we talked about last week because the last time we discussed it, it's just an opportunity for them for us to work closely and kind of lay some ground rules out. So I think over the next couple of weeks we'll button some things up and bring a draft for you all for consideration to make sure we all understand how to move something forward and what our role as a town would be and what they can do. And I would just put in there like quick that this is something the fire district doesn't need to do. This is something they're willing to do. It's a good neighbor to the town. And they're authorized to go and construct as they wish. And I think they really want to make sure that what the construction has got by in. You know, this will be a process for them to get that feedback from the community. But thank you for having us. I think that's going to be really important as far as the site design. And we wanted to make it fit in the village. The way I look at it, this one served us for 45 years. We need to get another 45 years out of the next fire station. So Tom will be leading that effort and working hopefully we'll be coming to you guys and you're gonna be going to Rura and we'll have it figured out the big grill in the room is how we're going to fund this. We have an option of maybe doing a COP. Originally when we were looking at the draw site, the station came in at $20 million. I don't know if it's possible, but the first thing that I threw out to the architects is we got to cut that in half and start from there. John brought up that we have a residence program. That's still successful. So we have seven people that come live in a small little studio apartment, give us services 24 hours of free help per week. That's still important to us. So we have to have seven resident rooms. I'd like to make those big enough that, you know, if we moved down the road and we don't do residents 10 years from now, we could actually rent those out as our employee housing. So there's going to be a little separation from the fire station. At least they have to go outside before they get come back in for many reasons. But this the station now I think is 12 14,000 square feet. The first needs analysis came in at 33,000 square feet. It sounds big but we've got a lot of stuff that's set outside. Well that's true. Parking fire trucks. We have a fire truck in Besalt right now because we don't have room for it. We'll bring it back for the summer. Our command vehicle's set outside, our plows its outside. So there's gonna be a significant increase in our floor space for apparatus. But then small things are breathing apparatus, our turn-up gear, how we clean things right now. You know, don't want to be gross, but if we have a bloody backboard, the guys put it in the middle of the the bays and wash it off and it goes down the drain. That's not acceptable. We have to have cleaner, better facility, and we don't have that. So part of we're not part of, we're not adding employees, we're not planning on, you know, right now we have five to seven people that are on duty all the time. And we're not planning to, you know, have 14 people. We're not planning to hire more people. I think if we do anything in part of my goal in this consolidation things, what can we do as two districts and limit our office space? So we have less administrative people and less space for that but more room for the operations and to be able to service the village. So you think 30,000 feet is about right? I think it's gonna come in a little under that. Little under that, okay. And you don't have that all size, yet in terms of number of square feet or anything. You've just retained us just recently, right? Yes, okay. And there's still a lot more work yet to go. We're trying to figure out if we can keep the three original Benedict bays. If we can incorporate those into our square footage to make that work or if the program just can't do it, that's one of the challenges for the architects. What is your timing? What do you guys think? So if I looked at that work plan, moving forward, what's that timeline look like? Critical past. If we have to go to a bond issue in November The airless we'd start as next spring Just just for you know what you have to do We we have a timetable right now of July 1st And but that just tells us bond or not. That's the only. Oh, well, thanks for letting me come back in the room. Bill Boyd was speaking here. I haven't made it back here since I left, but that's a good reason to come back. Your picture's not up there yet. I know. I'm working on that. I'm trying to get a nice colorful shirt, you know, to match up. You've got one on. I got one now. Anyway, change my hat back to this. Most all you know that the fire district has been working very hard for many years from the calendar days to the soul, Steve's old days to Chief Thompson, who the district decided to look at talking about a consolidation effort. Is there something that would make sense for our community basalt to have one fire district that would help defraise from costs and have some regional benefits we can do together. So we've been doing a number of things trying to be proactive and helping in ourselves as citizens, not spending as much. But as we've seen the firehouse falling apart down around our years over the years and people have said we need to build and I think the majority of the board has said, let's hold off a little bit, let's not build right now, let's take it easy. We don't know what snowmass is gonna get. We have an idea of course with all that insight information, right, and you see what's happened. But the big thing I think is that the district is one still undecided how we're going to move forward. One of my thoughts with the board is, is there an opportunity that we can ask the council to have the financial advisory board help us a little bit think about COPs or a bond and what it may do if there can help us a little bit answer those questions and really get them understanding in a number of areas, specifically though finance. And if we can ask you to assign the financial advisory board at some point in the near future, it'll help us all. At one point I was saying, I'll just go ask them. I know how that works, but then some of them might have been no, it has to be a council directive to do that before Mr. Griffin and those folks would take it on, but of course Rick's not here, so I can't lean on him anymore. So that's one question we have today is, is that something that the town would be willing to lend us some of the expertise to help us understand the difference in moving forward? I guess I would ask Clantant or Marianne in terms of the expertise on FAB if we have the skill set. I'm sure we can help and we'd be happy to help. Okay. I don't think it'll be a long drawn out market but I do believe it's something that would help the community. We don't need to go out and get more consultants if we have the infrastructure to help. That's where I am on that. So that's what we'd like to ask Council to help. We've got a very good chair that kind of knows this stuff. Yeah. And so we're going that direction, but these men and women who make up the fire district and the fire board, we all are working hard to keep our costs down. Not to just go out and build something because we want to build a kingdom, but just you know we're looking at how to maybe use a consolidation to reduce some needs we have in the snow mass and this is we felt a very good point in time to look at some of these and to see if there are ways that we can reduce the needs and share the resources that we all have together. And Mr. Thompson really suggested it. I was trying to steal him personally and took a bring with his nomass, but it worked out better this way, I think. So I'll sit down, but if anybody has any questions, you have a good number of the board here. You know who your board members are. The one that's not here today is Brian Olson. But the rest of the board is sitting here and please, whether it's you or the community, please ask us for our information and we'll be glad to share it. What's an impressive board? So I have a question. So I would assume the three bays that are existing, the part of the footprint that would be needed would go into your parking lot since you would need more space for those vehicles to come out besides the more need for housing, of course, or larger housing to keep what you have in the attractiveness of the apprentices or the trainees coming, John, is that sound right? Where you want to access out Creek Road immediately? Or would you go in a direction to get out in the road to the corner? Right, right now the where we are at and looking at footprints, we kind of moved more toward the community gardens area. And the end of those, the, the bays would be the end of the station with the exception of behind it and above it. You have your fuel bay right there, the fuel tank. Yeah, that's going to have to move. Right. And who knows? The architects will come up with something else. We want, I think, the practicality and what we're hearing from the firefighters is move. The fire trucks coming out of the station closer to Anderson Ranch because of the corner there. Yeah. So they have a better view. I would also encourage a nice snow melt driveway in front of the fire department because it's, I see you guys plowing it and I think it's, I think it's something that there's a lot of the community I know somebody pretty cost of the problem help and so lay that snow melt down as long as you supply the boiler is the town gonna supply the gas for the boiler well I mean you may only need to put it on occasion and we've talked about a lot of things and in all seriousness we've talked about a lot of things. And in all seriousness, we've talked about geothermal and some of those things that we could use. It's going to be very cost-prohibitive. And we're not going to be able to build a $20 million station with those type of improvements. But the other thing that we've put in is to submit and figure out how it's going to be paid for later. No, that's absolutely something we're talking about. And solar. And solar. We could do something with solar. That's good governance. Well, the fire station in Bissol can get the rent fees. We need to be very careful. Yeah, we got to be careful here. The fire station in Bissalt, which was also a bennibut dick building that we're remodeling this summer. While we started on, we've already got the bond for it. We put a simple solar system that preheats the water before it goes into the heat system. So there's those types of advantages that we plan on using, for sure. Hey, what's up? I think my dream of geothermal is out the door though. So the idea would be similar to water and sand to keep your existing facility operational while you build in the back. That might not be possible. We may need to find a temporary spot to put up, you know, a bubble, tennis bubble, something, man camp, couple of trailers for our people. We don't know yet. We're too preliminary. That adds costs. But it also could save us money because the longer the construction goes on, the more it's going to cost us. So, you know, that may hasten the building as far as tearing it down and rebuilding if we're gone. But we can't we can't not give 100% of our services. So we've got to figure out how to do that. So you'll come up with that plan a little bit later as you find out what the phasing might be. Yeah and I think that'll all come up. Part of the planning process. Yeah, that will. Everybody will have be able to give their comments and tell us what color the fire station is. And. Yeah. Good. OK. Thanks. Appreciate it. Appreciate it. Red the trucks should be. It's a donation dog. OK. Thank you very, very much. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you both. Thanks everybody that came represent the fire. Thank you. Madam Mayor. Yes. We as staff would just ask you to direct us to begin the process of doing the IGA with the fire district so that we can get that in front of you and they'll understand where you want to be. And it will be modeled somewhat on what we did with the school district prior So if you do that staff can get started on that and bring it back at an opportunity We get this RGA done. Yes. Okay. We will so directly staff to get the IGA complete. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much Scott. Take care Thank you to everyone that's the team Thank you very much Scott. Take care. Thank you to everyone that's the team. We're going to take a five minute while the ring clears. I mean, it's very with public. Good enough. We're going to do a five minute break. Hi, Pat. How are you? I'm fine. How are you doing? Good. Good. Well, I do have a frog with me to make. So, yeah. You have a frog. Okay. I have a frog. It's right here. You do have a frog. Hi, I'm Pat Keifer, bass village capital peak with the encouragement of Clint Van Miller, Kenny, Coach Dresser, the Patens, Mel Blumenthal, and the local residents that introduced themselves to me in Clarks. Produced area, the Sue Bile, the bread aisle, at the checkout, we were continuing to share base village owner input with Council and staff. In the future it would be great to be able to Skype public comments from Texas. It's my frog talking. Parking is item number six in the Joint Hayden Capital P, January 4th letter which offers solutions to the issues that we've raised. The new joke in our family is that I have a bachelor's in physics, a master's in business, and a PhD in parking. I follow in Dave Peckler's footsteps. I'd really rather be known for my air racing, but that's not on the agenda. Recall that the normal land use code requires one parking space per bedroom. The base village developer negotiated three quarters of a parking space per unit. That's a 62% reduction in parking for us and 75% reduction in parking for three bedroom units. There are no overnight guest parking provisions in base village in the PUD, just none. So where do we park our guests? none. So where do we park our guests? If we'd built a home in in horse ranch we'd pay $30 and for a week-long guest pass and we'd be done with that. The net answer is that we park them outside of Snowmass Village which leads to tourism dollar leakage and there are more details about that in the public email. The second parking point is the developer maintains that based on their Aspen Limelight experience, only half a space is needed per room. Well, duh. There's a 96% financial incentive not to park in the limelight garage and Aspen. It costs $126 to park for a week in the garage. Or the option is $5 to park on the streets around the limelight. Which would you choose? Since the same options are not available in Snowmass, perhaps the town should consider questioning the parking plan for that development. Third parking point, rather than take building six as a community benefit, please consider taking the cash and going vertical with the numbered parking lots. Use the same footprint and one lot at a time, construct a two to three story, many parking structure with the same terms as the numbered parking lots have today. This would be a real boon for the mall merchants. Fourth parking point, the Bayes Village garage is often full and turns away patrons. This limits revenues to the town as well as to ski co. One of the questions I got at Clark's market from a local resident was, why isn't the Metro District running the garage as a business? There are more parking spaces in the garage existing today behind the curtains. Why aren't they being used to gain more revenues? Metro District is part of issue number one in the joint letter. Composition of the Metro District Board is 100% related in ski co-employees. The board does not pay Metro District taxes. We keep asking questions of the Metro District Board and keep getting no answers on things like, where's the money going for the proposed parking garage sale to ski coat? What fund is it going to go to? The base bill donors are paying for bond money that funded garage construction. Will that bond be paid off with a ski co-money in taxes reduced? I don't know. Sort of a pipe dream, but something fun to think about. Which brings me to the roundabout. The 2008 $50 million bonds issued by the Metro District included funding to construct the roundabout. There is some question as to whether the bond money is or was used for the purposes that it was designated for, or if any of those money is remained. In contrast to the Water and Sanitation District, the Metro District Tax Pairs did not have a chance to vote on the bond issuance or the projects that is funding. This is a current example of why Base Fuller donors are so adamantly opposed to letting related to assign their obligations to Phase 2 to Metro District and Base Village Company Master Association. With respect to the joint Hayden Capital Peak letter on the Posit 2 issue, Capital Peaks overhead walkway is about to be painted. It goes between buildings B and C. It has been and is being damaged by vehicles that go to and from Plaza One. One observer said, a truck hit it so hard once I thought the whole thing was going to come down. Now there is no overhead impediment if the trucks come in via wood road. This is yet another example why capital peak needs to be a part of any agreement involving plaza too. Finally, a local realtor told me that only related has the right to use the vice-roy name so that when an existing owner goes to resell the property, they are prohibited from using the vice-roy name. You may have seen the for sale ads lately that reference the assay hill condominiums. That is the Pitkin County legal name for the vice-roy. So if this is true and it needs to be verified then that would diminish the value of the purchased asset as well as base village and the value of that building to the town. We're looking forward to hearing how ordinance 9 agreement comes out. What those 10 agreements mean to us in terms of whether the six issues that we've raised in our January 4th joint letter are in fact addressed. And whether the commitments made by related sitting in this room will be honored. Thank you again for your time. Thank you. Thanks, Pat. Yep. Just... I'll give this to miss. Well, you know, it's just more of the same. Well, I didn't know where we are with those agreements. I know town staff are looking at them and they have until the 21st. We got them two weeks ago. You got them two weeks ago? Two weeks ago and we're reviewing them very thoroughly. 30 days. These are the final. There's no timeline. There's no timeline. There's no timeline. No timeline. Okay. Oh, Kidoke. We're ready to move on. A consent agenda. Do I have a motion for approval? The consent agenda. So moved. I have a second. Second. Any discussion? On support say aye. Second. Any discussion? On supports AI. I think I. Both seem signed. We are going to move on now to opening of the public hearing. And this is Quasaje judicial in nature. And what we will do is Jim will make some comments, staff presentation. And then Don representing Fannie Hill townhomes and the limelight and ski co. Well then do his presentation. I will then be asking for public comment and public input to what they hear. And then we'll be moving back into applicant rebuttal. And then we'll be moving back into applicant rebuttal and then we'll close hopefully and then talk amongst this council people. It's been a while since we've had a public hearing so I have to go back through this so everybody is educated and how we make them happen. Okay Jim. Okay thanks mayor this is the continued public hearing for the Fannieult Cabin's minor pudy. That's for continuation of the public hearing. I'm sorry. And the initial one occurred back on January 1st or January 19th, and that's when the first reading was acted upon for this particular warden's two. Then it was scheduled. The second reading was scheduled March, no no February 1st, and the applicant requested continuance. They have allowance for one continuance. That was made to March 21st with the assumption that a full council be present. That then the current on the 21st, so it was continued again to this day. There was only minor updates to ordinance two and just as a summary staff recommends that the limelight hotel which is building five and base fillage be issued a building permit prior to a building permit issuance for the Fannieult cabins for this phasing text change. And then planning commission added a recommendation that a CO not be issued for the Fannie Hill cabins until at least a temporary CO is issued for buildings for AB and five on lot two within base village. And staff concur with that recommendation. Although there is a development agreement in place that all the buildings on lot two would be completed by 2018 which is only two and a half years from now There was also an additional change to the ordinance council recommended that a Condition be added that all these ten agreements related to base village be completed Prior to wish on civil building from, the applicant said that a subsequent amendment pudy amendment might be coming in but that's down the road. So overall staff is approval. And it should be mentioned for the record that they were public comments received and they were provided in time for the January 19th meeting. There have been no new public comments received but all six comments received were basically opposed to this particular facing text change. So I think with that I'd like to turn it over to Don Schuster who's representing the ski co for this particular project. Thanks Jim. I don't have much else to offer from that perspective and there's no PowerPoint presentation here in reference to this. You know as the first reading of the ordinance was approved back in January and trying to look forward to this. As I indicated at that time, you know, this ordinance only allows us to move forward based upon the milestones that Jim talked about to develop what was approved in 2004. And that's one of the milestone thresholds we need to understand that we can move forward with this building. And, you know, we still intend to come back to the town for a land juice process and go through a minor PUD amendment to change the design of the building, to something a little bit more contemporary than the log cabins that were approved in 2004. I think as I mentioned previously, you know, we've got that input from several of the realtors in the community that products probably not going to sell. I've recently met also with the president of the Woodrun Place Homeowners Association and walked him through some of our ideas and what we were looking at there as part of that. And he agreed number one, don't build those downhomes. That looked like a log cabin, any like sort of the conceptual direction that we were going to head with that. We have not proceeded yet at risk to redesign those buildings until such time as we get the approval process for this amendment and then come back to the town at a later time for that. Obviously one of the key components of this is also the approval of those agreements for the base village, the from the December 21st approval of base village, which I understand have all been submitted to the town and that's one of the conditions of this. So until all of those things are hard done, we probably won't come forward with a redesign of this project until that point. As I mentioned previously, this project is a key financial driver for the line line and base village and it's critical from our perspective to have the ability to know that we can at least build this building. We'll take our risk coming back with the redesign that it's going to be something that the community likes and looking at it from that perspective. In reference to that and obviously tied to the commencement of construction We have, we still are under contract with related. That's been revised a couple of times since the last time we've been here. To keep moving forward to purchase lot two and base village. We have gone at risk from the design perspective of the limelight hotel. We've engaged both architect again as well as interior design. We've engaged in the design perspective of the line light hotel. We've engaged both architect again, as well as interior design functions to move forward on that at risk with the intention that we're going to move forward with that. As we mentioned previously for, I need to do that now and not wait for all the documents to get finished for base village in order for us to commence construction in April of 2017 in order to move that forward. Additionally, something is probably not well known under our agreements. We, Asmiss Keane Company, have the responsibility to complete the design for the lot to plaza, ice gaining rink and the fountains and so forth. And we've also engaged design consultants to complete that portion of that so it can also be commenced at the same time. So that design process is also underway. And again, you know, part of our contractual requirements, that was with our related agreement that we complete that design, our contract also calls, the Dasmus-Key Company is actually paying half of that, half of the construction cost for that whole plaza. So we are engaged in that process to be able to bring that forward as called out to get that approved as part of this thing moving forward. So we're moving forward in all that direction to make this happen. Again, as I suggested or asked in the past, this is one of the milestone hurdles that we need to get through to close on a lot too for us to move forward and be a catalyst to keep the line light moving forward as well. So let's be very very clear. What is in front of us this evening and this is for the second reading? Is it's a timing and a phasing? It's a change in phasing and timing for the Fannie Hill townhomes. It's a change of phasing specifically to allow this to occur with the commencement of the line light hotel building four and five is what it's called out there. And to move forward. And obviously right now that is tied to the limelight completion which has to be done by November of 2018. I think what took up some of us last time was the thought that we needed architectural plans in order to and that's not what this is. Go here is not to spend money if you don't can't get it approved because it makes no sense to spend money. We don't, can't get it approved because it makes no sense to spend money for it's own. We can't get that approved. We didn't want to go at risk and spend money until such time. We knew we had the ability to continue to move forward with this. Okay. I would ask my fellow council members to consider an additional condition. And, John, this comes back to you know, you're providing us with a number of hurdles and each one needs to get checked off in order for ski code to have whatever needs confidence or who knows what to go ahead with the limelight. So although I voted against this on the first reading, I would consider, I would consider voting for this with an additional condition that says something to the effect that the condition removing the restriction expires on December 31st of 2017 unless construction on Building 5 has substantially begun. There is a tempting to use the language that's in there but putting a limit on this, putting a limit on this through the end of 2017 if in fact The limelight has not begun or has not substantially begun its construction and John I'm not sure Jim. I'm not sure where to put this. I guess I look for your Suggestions recommendations on where it should go. The middle of line 114 after PUD comma by December 31st, 2017. What page was this, John? Line 114 of the page 14. Page 41 of 70 line 114 What did you say buy By the date December by December How may understand why that would be necessary if because it says you're the commencement has already started for the limelight so how would this how would that be helpful to this agreement? Well it's it's the action that you're talking about I guess I don't know. Other than it makes Bob feel more comfortable to me. The way I read this. You can terminate this if in fact there isn't a substantial commensment of construction by the end of next year. Wouldn't this already, wouldn't that immediate per this agreement? No. Under the development agreement in the base village PUD, there's only completion, the only start to, substantial completion, I mean substantial construction items, they wouldn't apply to building five. Okay, then I'm comfortable putting it in. Yeah, the way, I mean, the way I read it was that, Yeah, the way I read it was that the date year as we're trying to get it to start. Well, and actually in the conditions the conditions already haven't it's even more restrictive because it says July 1 2017 It's not in the development agreement, but it is a condition in here, but it doesn't expire that this agreement then doesn't expire It just says this isn't an agreement. Well, or this or this No building permit shall issue for the Fannie Hill if the ski company hasn't substantially commenced construction is defined in the proposed development agreement by July 1. So you're actually six months ahead of what you were proposing. If they haven't fulfilled that condition, this ordinance is null and void. Okay. That's correct. Or you can add just a post clause at the end of condition. One, just basically say comma, otherwise it expires. Otherwise this ordinance expires. Rather than worse myths and I think if I want to understand what you're trying to get to, you want to make sure there's an incentive to get the project up the ground. I think what John's trying to say is that condition number one that's already in the ordinance is an incentive that's six months earlier than one year proposing. Is it my first? Well, that's one part of it. But another part is that if ski companies company doesn't perform and doesn't start the then I don't want there. I would like the Fannie Hill Cabins restriction, i.e. that whatever 2AB. I would like the phasing then to go back to what the original phasing was for Fannie Hill, on cabins or townhomes. Well, that's a separate land use action because base village approved the phasing change and lots two and three and one phase, phase two. That was acted on by separate ordinance. This is a separate case. So how do we tie the two together so that if the limelight doesn't begin by July of 2017, that the phasing for Fannie Hill townhomes goes back to something close to what it was originally intended for. Well, you could probably add a clause at the end of condition one, the state otherwise lots two and three buildings in base fill shall be completed prior to a chance of a permit for Fannie Hill cabins. If they don't meet that condition. Just to understand your goal, you're trying to make sure that the cabins aren't built or occupied prior to the hotel being built or occupied. No, that's not my goal, because I think this ordinance does that. And then, but you want to make sure in case the hotel is in build. That it goes back to the original or something near the original restriction. Which was along those lines. Yeah, which was basically- Which was the phase? Well, phase 2B originally was lots 2 and 3 on the base field of site. All those buildings, buildings 4AB5678 had to be completed prior to a permit issues for Fannie O'Kemens. That was everything west of the ski back to right. So if, so Jim, your suggestion would be at the end of that first condition to put in. Otherwise, yeah, otherwise, otherwise those, those lots and buildings had to be completed west of the ski back trail prior to issuance of a permit for fanning of cabins So is that a reference to a previous ordinance is what you're trying to do? Yeah, the ordinance 21. Yeah, that's what we're so that's what we need to reference the ordinance 21. Yeah, that's what we need to reference. Does that make sense? Sure. If you want, if that's Bob's suggestion, if it's the will of council, we will. Well, my question is that necessary. I'm questioning whether it's necessary. I mean, you can't get a building permit on this thing. Unless limelight is commenced by July of 2017. No building permit can be issued unless that condition is met. Period. I mean, this is actually more restrictive than what you're proposing. Well, well, they, not exactly, though, Don, because there was a building permit that was ready to be issued for 13b that sat there for a long time. So a building permit can be issued for the limelight, but maybe not necessarily- But this is a population- This is a population- Doesn't talk about this. This says the Fannie Hill townhome building permit cannot be issued. It says specifically that we have started our substantially commenced construction as defined in the development agreement. So we've had to, we have to substantially start construction by July 1st in order for us to even get this building permit so Substantially start on the hotel that's correct permit the town and then did went the planning commission added was If one got ahead of the other there would not be a CO until there's a CO for the hotel right so they I mean if they got ahead of it they would have the could not to could not keep up. Okay, well my point is list. My point is that there's nothing that that specifically says if this doesn't happen and building five isn't substantially under construction by July 1st, there's nothing that says when, ski cook can come back and ask for the building permit for the Fannie Hill town. Well, it says there's no building permit that will be issued, but it doesn't say, so it leaves- Well, when you fall back to the previous ordinance, I don't know. All I'm trying to do is get it to fall back to the previous ordinance Well, the ordinance was changed. I think you'd have to describe that well, you know, those buildings and lots had to be That's all that's all I'm trying to do is is provide is provide the direction back to where The back to something okay So you want to reference a previous ordinance? I want to reference the previous restriction, the previous ordinance, whatever the appropriate terminology is. It would be the lawyer. Is this the will of council? I've heard Bob loud and clear. Is this something that council wants to proceed on? So can we clarify ordinance 21, which would be the previous ordinance? Is that correct? No. What would be the previous ordinance? It's ordinance 23 or 2014, which was, it's a wood run to you, D. It's not a base village, BUD. And if you want to go back to line 15 on page 39, that is the condition that they are That is the condition that they are amending. And if you wanted to clarify that language, because there is no longer a phase 2b, I would suggest that you would replace that word with the buildings on lots two and three of the base village are substantially complete. That would be the identical language to what the original phasing is to the current phasing. My mind is well be clear and have the same reference. Yeah. And it's two and three. And it's lots two and three. I'm fine with that. It actually gives me more leeway than the way it's currently written in my mind. Well, that's the language I'll be changed on in the condition. It would re- it would re in the event that condition one herein remains unsatisfied on July 2, 2017. Condition one of ordinance 23 of 2004 shall be amended as follows. And then the entirety of line 15 that I just read with the substitution of lots two and three of the base village PUD. I'm fine with that. We just gave him more time. No, because the other condition is still there. You can give him him more time. No, because the other condition is still there. You can give him any more time. Well, then now it's confusing. If they don't perform, then at least they know in order to perform in the future, the lots two and three have to be built. I mean, it's rather than assuming that to be true, it's now written down that line. In essence, what you've done is you've tied the ski company who is striving to inject some life into this, and you've put them in the position of being subjugated to whoever and whomever may or may not own Lot 3 and the fact that they've substantially completed it to get to the Fannie Hill Cabin's project. You know, I mean, I don't know that you have any guarantees whatsoever other than, and it's not a guarantee, it's a consequence, which would be the loss of vesting to the owner, a future owner of Lot 3, who doesn't comply with the development agreement timelines. And I don't want to make any comment on the lawsuit that's pending between sunrise and snowmass acquisition, but it could certainly, if it drags on, put the jeopardy, the completion of law three by 2018. And by adding this condition, you are then restricting them to follow someone of which they have no control, which throughout the conversations with ski company as a contract purchaser from Snowmass acquisition, it has been very clear that they do not want to have impediments that they cannot control to their future investment in a portion of base village. So that raises a question, I think, for you, Don. And that question is, is the status of this lawsuit another hurdle for the ski company to overcome in order to begin construction or close the deal and begin construction on the limelight. Yes. Okay. I'm not comfortable with that modification because this whole issue of lots two and three and three is way up in the question in this clouds. We don't know let's say it was settled. Lost it was settled. And you know you can hypothesize whether or not the current developer is going to build it. Well, another scenario could be that it does get resolved, but when does it get resolved? I don't want to tie the limelight and the Fanny Hill townhomes to what's happening on the board three. Well, I don't think it's going to make a difference because this key company has indicated that they want to know who the developer of the other parts of the base village is. And as long as this is hanging out there, I don't think they'll know. I don't see the writing that was a previous statement. We obviously want to see Lot 3 in the vested rights happen at this time, but our agreement is still for Lot 2 only and for us to move forward with Lot 2 in this moving forward. We have protected ourselves in the agreement in reference to this lawsuit. So that's all I can say at this time in reference to that. So we're fine with the condition number one as far as starting construction. By July 1st, 2017. by July 1st, 2017. So technically we don't need to modify what you're saying is the where as number two. Which is the whole issue around 2B because the previous reference was buildings on lot two and three. Understand, I was not suggesting the where as number two will not be amended. Okay. That is the old condition and I was showing you how it would be amended as a condition at the bottom so you could see that language that won't change here. Okay. It's a recitation of the current language. I'm not in support of the modification. So the ski company is willing to go forward with lot two without lot three. Without a total definitive answer on lot three of what's going to happen. We were hopeful that it'll be resolved by the time we close on line two. But like I said, we've protected ourselves in this situation. And like I said, we have a valid contract to move forward and anticipate that that closing will happen. And we move forward. That's why we're doing this at risk. And we're spending about $200 to $250,000 a month to get this design going so that we can start this construction next year. And hopefully that lot three will happen at the same time in order to be finished by before we're betting on. Mel. Public comment. Mel Blumethal, I don't have any comment. I've got a question for clarity because I know I'm confused. I sense there's some confusion here. I know in the community they really don't understand this. So let me just kind of preface a bit here. You know we're hung up right now because the subject is Fannie Hill Townhomes. My sense is we in the community really don't have much interest in Fannie Hill Townhomes except as a financing mechanism for the line-right hotel. That's, I think, when they originally started off, they told us they needed to have Fannie Hill townhomes approved so they could finance the limelight, which I think most of us think is a good idea. We want the limelight. There were a list of conditions that my Kaplan gave several months ago, some specific, and he said there were some that he couldn't tell us about. So one of the questions I have is, Don, I think, did it, I don't know if it was a total update on where the conditions are, but I think it would be valuable, I know to me, I think to the community, maybe to you, to thoroughly understand and have a list of what the conditions are that still need to be resolved before they can make a commitment. Because they have not even said that if the conditions that Mike Kaplan outlined were met and satisfied, they still haven't made a commitment to my knowledge to build the line might hotel. And I don't know if anything has changed on that, or if you can even made a commitment to my knowledge to build the limelight hotel. And I don't know if anything has changed on that, or if you can even in a position to answer that today. But I don't think any of us know what the end goal here, what has to be done to get you to the point where you can make you this key company, can make a commitment to actually build the limelight hotel. One of the conditions we know is for any hotel homes because that's the financing mechanism. There's others that you've listed. There's ones that Mike didn't want to list. And I think, you know, we're just kind of floating around here, not knowing what the end game is. Thank you. You want to give us an update on that list that you gave to us. Um, um, was a condensation of the parking garage? Yeah, um, the agreements that are into the town, um, for that, the recreation of the garage condominium map and declarations for that, which I think have also been submitted to the town for the review and approval. Um, to, uh to get that done. And then as Mike had said, there were other conditions specifically that are, you know, recovered for a confidentiality agreement that I can't talk about. Mike couldn't talk about it at that time. So what is left on the ticking list? This is the 10 agreements are and the garage condominium are the ones that we are public that are still ticking. You all have that list. I left mine sitting at home. I don't think I have it in this book. I mean the question tonight though is really, I mean there's a request to make this a amendment for the second reading. And really the fundamental question is is how close do you want the projects linked, the Fannie Home Town Hill Project linked to the Bates Village Project. We came through with one idea, planning commission made a more strict and really in my mind, the question before you guys is, does it need to be even more tied to a more strict? There's a building permit clause, there's a CO clause, and then I think what Councillor Circus has said is, hey, let's make sure that if that agreement, I think you indicated that this was okay as long as there's even one more clause saying this whole agreement goes away if they don't move dirt by such and such a date. And so it's really kind of up to you guys to say, is this connection close enough and then do you want to add Councillor Circus's additional clause in there or not before we kind of go into the whole wine light discussion or I guess I'm trying to steer away from that. I'm not sure that the same. Yes. Oh, I just this was another thing that I had noticed when I was going through it. But in Jim when he said it, he said it this way but it's not how it's written. It says, Acompancy shall not be issued, line 115 for the FHC project until a temporary certificate of Acompancy is issued. And when Jim said, he said, at least a temporary certificate of Acompancy. So I just thought at least should be put in there. What line are you talking about? Line 115. It's not a huge deal. It's just... Well, okay, let's put that on the parking lot and note it because we'll go wind by line through the ordinance here in a minute. Well, a temporary certificate of occupancy usually the first step if they have some loose ends. Prior to a final COB issue, this is kind of the terminology that she used. It might have been a slip of my verbal We'll have her you're gonna say it, but that's I had noted that before you had said that okay Let's talk about what mr. Circus is proposing any comments on that Alyssa I Mean I I mean, I see both sides of it. I mean, I could go either way. I mean, I don't know if it's better to leave it in or out. I mean, I don't get a sense that for me you guys that it's a negative bill. I feel like the planning commission's verbiage is acceptable. I think there's both the carrot and the stick and the ordinance, and I'll come up over there. OK. Tom, any? No. You know, after I first thought Bob's point was very valid and now it's been explained clearer that I think what's in place now from what has been written is probably more than proper. Okay. Okay. Is that just to clarify, is that both for the action statement and condition number one to the action statement? Isn't it gonna be amended? I think they're saying the majority. The majority saying keep it as is for consideration. Okay. Oh, do I have any other questions or comments? If not, I'm gonna start through the ordinance. Before you start, you might want to see there's any other questions or comments? If not, I'm going to start through the ordinance. Before you start, you might want to see if there's any other public comments. I'm just going to have to do that. I have anybody else out there? Moving on. Come on after the here. Okay. Ordinance number two, series of 2016. We're going to go, I will do pages, page by page, if you have an issue that you found during your review that you want to put forth, do it by page. So page number 39, any comments? page 40. Page 41. Just what I said before. And I think we seeing the shake of the head. Yes. 42. Comets. Okay. Do I have a motion for approval? A ordinance number two. Motion to approve. Thank you, Bill. This is a row call. Is it second reading correct? Yes. Second. You need a second. Oh, I'm sorry. I thought I did. Okay. You need a second. Oh, I'm sorry. I thought I did that. Can I have a second? I'll make it. I'll second that motion. Okay, thank you. Rhonda Rokow. Butler? Yes. Focus. Yes. Madison? Yes. Jane? Yes. Good? Yes. Good. Yes. Thank you, Anonymous. Thank you. Thank you, Don. Go spend your money. Hopefully we'll be back with a new design. You'll get to see this one again. Let's hope, well, we better just start building. That's the plan. Yep. Okay. We can close the public hearing. I don't think anyone. Okay. Yes. I will close the public hearing. Moving on to administrative reports. Ann. Are you busy these days? I'm busy these days? I have busy these days, yes. Ann Martin's Public Works Director. Let me pull this up and I'll be a second. Let me see if I can do this. That's a pretty picture. Is that big enough? Can you see that? Do you have like a blow up? I do. In the next image. So. But I'll just have one of those in our mailboxes. A larger. Did I get one and I lost it? No, okay, because I went back before it. A smaller version. We can put 11 by 17s. Yeah, because I really wanted to go to it. So I'm back this evening to talk about the community connectivity plan. I think everyone was here. It's for maybe Bill, you weren't the last meeting we talked about this. Last meeting we did a summary of where we were in the project, talked about the steering communities, the goals of the project, and then mainly we focused on the brush creek crossings. And then we started to touch upon the trails and walkways section of the plan. So the goal tonight was we just kind of cursory discussed those and I thought it'd be good to bring those back and talk into a little bit more in depth. And then on the 21st, the consultant from Charlie Alexander from Fair Impires will be here to talk about the plan as a whole. So the goal was just to do these check-ins with Council make sure we're going the right direction as well as then come in and summarize the plan and then get some time to digest bounce back to the steering committee and then look forward to adopting the plan in may time frame. So on the trails and walkways section the the goal of the plane, as you recall, is to connect the community, whether it be pedestrian, whether it be transit systems, parking, and then also specifically was that goal item of the brush creek crossings. So the sections that have been recommended by the consultant, and this is kind of the map and we'll kind of toggle through these. Is they came up with 10 recommended trail connections and I call them trail, but they're a call them trail slash walkways. Some are trails, most of them are walkway connections and basically it's those gap sections that they identified. Not only through the public meetings, but also their professional opinion on that need improvement, whether it be through safety, whether it be ease of access or connecting the nodes. And the third was, sorry, was a reach of impact. So whether it was tourism, residence, and or both. So on, I'll go back to these diagrams. If I can get to the next page. How do you talk? Here we go. Maybe. Do it that way. So of those 10 sections, I'm going to have to blow this up for you. So of those 10 sections, I have to blow this up for you. There's only actually nine listed here. Section one, or segment one, and segment seven were already being programmed. So one of them was the section that rose in the trails committee. I've been working on basically connecting the mall and on up. And the other section was the sidewalk section from the round about two snowmess center along upper currents. So it comes down to these sections and we looked at the different types of materials that were being proposed and then also even the side of the road would be proposed. I'm going to come back to this. I probably should have put these in different order. So when they went through these sections, they talked about, blow them up for you. Like I said, safety, access to key destinations or ease of use. And I thought it'd be good to go through each of these segments individually. Is that all right with you guys? So section number two, or segment number two, is going across from basically the mall to connect the Tom Blake trail. It's not a high recommendation and let's let them jump ahead of it. The two recommended sections that they came out that were the highest priority as you can see the highs here. Was the segment that went along a brush creek road from far away road to upper currents, and then the next section was along Alcric Road from a brush creek road and also the segment from the fire station to far away road, so that quarter there. So those are the two highest sections that they're recommending that meet the needs of the safety, connection of nodes, and the ease of use has actually been changed to reach of impact, so whether it's residents or visitors. So it's the highest pedestrian traffic. I was going to ask you that one number eight, along Brush Creek from far away to Upper Cards, there is a, there are paths to get there without getting out on brush creek. There is, there's a trail section up above. And so that's one of the other, we're gonna talk about is maintenance levels. But what they've been looking at is the sections that they're seeing the pedestrian activity between the transit center. Transit nodes and then trying to get to those. So people are not crossing far away to go up to the timbers and come across the bridge? It's not intuitive to your visitors. They don't know that that trail is up there. Well, there's no signage for it. Right. Well, there is the trail signage, but there's not a signage at far away. No, there's not. Right. And so we're looking, if you also look at it like a far away there's the bus stop but there's no sidewalk to the north to get to upper Woodbridge Drive in that area so there's just a lot of concentration in there there's not easy connection method to get pedestrians around safely. And will that section tie into the crosswalk at far away in Fresh Creek? So those are a little bit separate but the elements, the recommendations that are going forward have the same type of structure. Is that is that crosswalk still opposed to be on the uphill side of that of far away road? Yes. I continue to think that it should be on the downslope for the reason that when you're making a right turn out of far away onto brush creek, you can see who's coming if there's any pedestrian in the crosswalk. You only have to look in one direction. If you're making a left turn, you've got the traffic in two directions to deal with and you have the pedestrian to deal with. So I think that from a safety perspective, you've got more potential issues making a left turn looking with the pedestrian uphill than if it were the other way around. I can have a look at one of the key things that we're struggling with that intersection is the bus stop location. Yeah. Because of that pedestrian crossing behind the back of the bus, which is causing that location, that caused that bus stop to further move downhill as opposed to its current alignment and the proposal go uphill. But duly noted, we can all ask, you know, we'll look at that further. Thanks. One of the key things with those, there is islands that are being recommended so that I'm not doing that. I'm not doing that. I'm not doing that. I'm not doing that. I'm not doing that. I'm not doing that. I'm not doing that. I'm not doing that. I'm not doing that. I'm not doing that. I'm not doing that. I'm not doing that. I'm not doing that. I'm not doing that. I'm not doing that. I'm not doing that. The two sections that recommended the highest was two and eight and then followed by that were section three which is a long brush Creek road from The mall to the divide which you're all familiar with that's heading up brush Creek Road The next one and these aren't in any priority, but the second tier I'd call it is from I'd call it is from Fresh Creek road from Mountain View to Snomass Village and on the exhibits. We're working through that a little bit more Let me go to that image for you Is there even surface to do some of these? There's just gonna cost a fortune Well, I'll be above I think you the thing, yeah, there's expense to it, but also there's also the need and a goal what we're trying to do is establish a goal so that we can program these in the capital projects. Well, the other part of this, that we do accounts of number of people doing this or is this just, we don't know what the count was. We do need to do further pedestrian counts. But a lot of it is from public comment, from one. And then secondary is from staff experience. I mean, David has experience from the transit, pick up, and drop off locations and what we see out there. So that section that I was talking about is going right here from Mountain View on down. There is an existing trail here that's kind of not represented the best that we're working on the details on that one. But right now this section of that is through the parking lot. So the recommendation is to separate the parking from the trail section there. And then also there's no sidewalk along here. And then there's that old stairwell that's not maintained in no sidewalk here. It's through the road. So that's what that project is. Oops. I'm going the wrong direction here. Oh! That is you. That is you. That is you. Okay. So... Oh, that's you. That's you. OK. So that was section 4, which is in the second tier. Number 6 is also in that second tier recommendation. And that's a long brush creek road from upper currents to mountain view. So that's that steep shell slope as we go up. That one's going to, you know, as we further in design, if you're giving an estimate of what that section looks like, that one's still on discussion on whether it's hillside or whether it is streamside. There's drainage we'd need to deal with as well as the steep slopes in that area. And then the next tier two would be a long, high line road between Alcreek Road and Brecht Creek, and that would be on the stream side, is what we're looking at. That's what I'm saying. So the other ones that I haven't discussed is, I mentioned this number two, that's the last tier of recommendation. Number five is basically underneath the Sky Cab that's a footpath, type of connection is not a sidewalk, and number 11, which is- Can we even do that? Isn't the land owned by somebody else? Well, the plan is to cooperate with property owners to try to get the connectivity between the two and One of the things they're gonna talk about when they come in on the 21st is that conversation on the Skittles on what's a preferred recommendation and where it's sounding to land out is not to change You know do further analysis on the the Skittles side of it, but also to do that pedestrian so we can handle their analysis on the skittles side of it, but also to do that pedestrian so we can handle three seasons of the year, whether it be a fixed guideway or whether it be a trail section, but they're leading to more of an at-grade type of improvement lock way. So I guess my answer is no, it's not our property, that's Schiko property, and that's private property, and we would work and partner in trying to improve these connectivity things but they're just identifying that there's gaps in these connections and we need to work to try to improve these sections. So the last one is a connection between town part station. I'm not done with, sorry, I'm thinking about that. What do we go, you know, there is this walkway that's over by the interlude that goes on up. Vanity trail. Vanity trail. Vanity trail. Vanity trail. Why are we not using that as a consideration for credit activity? They did look at that section. So they, when they looked at the public comment, they looked at whether it be on the Fannie Hill side and improvement to this, and it was really more of a question on the Skittles conversation on how to improve that. Going through the corridor of the Bennett Trail section or whether doing something on the parking lot side of things and where it landed was the preferred option. It was more towards those direct connections between base village and the mall. And I mean, so here's where we are. We're developing a draft and we're getting these ideas in front of you now. This is going to eventually be a plan that you will adopt. And if you say, hey, I don't buy that for XYZ reason, that's fine. That's why we're trying to get these in front of these concepts that are we're seeing come back from the public comments through the engineers, through the folks that are kind of putting this draft analysis together. And when you guys get this, I'm going to call it a preliminary draft in two weeks from tonight, you'll see it all in there. And it's their stuff that just doesn't make sense. That's what we're trying to make sure is we want you guys to end up adopting a plan that you can buy off on. So then when we're developing the CIP, we can say, you know, trails, I can't read that far, but seven or eight, where the highest priority, that's what we're working towards first. And one and two, while they're seeing like fine options, they were priorities, you know, nine and ten, and they're going to be down the list on that prioritization. And to that, to your point, Madam Mayor, about, you know, Benedict versus the Fanny Hill connection, if we don't agree on what that connection ought to be, if there's not a consensus, we might go to a different priority, or you might say, hey, let's really go do look at this and say, if Accraded Solution is it, is it a mess-coloners, or a simple staircase? We don't know that yet. Yeah, I know the whole issue around the private property owner of the Skittles has been very unerous at best for our team. Yeah, and really, we have identified this is not going to be a secret to anybody. I mean, one of the biggest drawbacks to this gittles is the capacity. I mean, it's 800 and sometimes people an hour. And if you've got a big event, that's the entire hour. You can't get somebody to and from in an immediacy that needs to happen. And escalator is, you know, that's the thing that would do it the quickest, but that's also considerable costs and whatnot. And those are some of those things that we're hoping to have you guys look at and say this makes sense or doesn't. We're not saying we're spending money on it next year, but it's helping set up a plan forward on how to make this connection. These connections happen. on Water and Sands PowerPoint tonight and number 10 here from Al Creek Road to Brush Creek Road. It's always been a tough place when you're people are jogging and everything else anyway to begin with. Then if we're going to have that kind of sanitation construction going on with heavy trucks coming and going it's going to be a really challenged. So number It's going to be a really challenged. So number 10's going to be a challenge. It is, but it's not going to be, depends on the timing on this. So that goes back to Madam Mayor's question on financing of these things. And so looking at what their estimates are coming in, it's going to be a phase approach. And the whole reason for this goal is to set out some plans and prioritization when we go through the capital improvement plan to say, okay, we're going to tackle this because it will need to be further engineered. Some of them love to do right away easements. We need to look at drainage and then we can start to tick off these recommendations, but we have a prioritization of how we move forward. Right. And this was sponsored by the town council's goals. Right. Top five, top six safety and move and improve kind of to do within the community right. Yep. So as you recall we have the $75,000 for this year and that's towards the crossings on brush creek road it will not do all the crossing recommendations so we're trying to figure out how to implement some of those elements and then how to further put those in the plans of doing the design and then further construct those. The same goes for that we don't have these programmed in our capital improvement plan, but we'll put that into our planning process to look at what's going on development wise. Okay. So, and that one is, yeah, second tier. So, you know, we would obviously eight nine. I mean, they're like $300,000 estimates each. So, you know, that's just give you a sense of what we're looking at is trying to do these improvements. It's going to take a while. But we're trying to have a document that gives us those guiding elements, as well as when there's developments that come in. And if they're in the core area, we have a design standard that then we're going to move forward on and say this is what you need to build to. So that's kind of the next conversation. I just wanted to talk about how we got to the recommendations on safety, access to key destinations and reach of impact, which says right now ease of use. Let me step back to this one here. So talking about these locations, as you drive by these, you know, this is why we want to talk about it. So you kind of think about it when they come up next meeting that if we're totally off the mark, we need to know. But as you recall, when we talked about the brush creek crossings, they were design elements that had hard surface. They had crosswalk walks ever colored. They had the rapid flash beacon sign crossings to help awareness for the pedestrians in those areas. And it had curb and gutter in sidewalks. And we talked about that at the public meetings to see, are we on board with changing some of these design elements and having more pedestrian type of feel? And the comments came back that they were supportive of that. But we want to make sure we talk about this many times to make sure we hear whether people are in support of these types of elements. And that's our goal of trying to improve connectivity. And by reaching those connectivity is providing safer infrastructure. And so when we talk about these sections, section two is obviously just a trail section connecting over to the mall. Number 3 is it's a detached, sorry, it's hatch sidewalk adjacent to the roadway. So it's on the outside of the curve coming down from the mall and connecting to divide roads. So if you visualize that, we would have to widen out some areas. In some areas where it's real tight going over that culvert area, we'd have to have some kind of separation where it may be attached to it and not have the curb and gutter, but then we vary in the sections. And on this whole issue of sidewalks, refresh my memory. Did we ask that question on the community survey we did last August about sidewalks? I don't think so. I think it was in the open house for the community. Yeah, but I don't think it was on the survey. So if we did stoplights, we didn't talk about sidewalks. But the feedback that Ann was talking about and David just mentioned was. Yeah, I knew that the feedback was good there, but as we all know, those people. Well, again, this is another one that we, like Andrew said, we're constantly trying to make sure is there a level of comfort with these kind of issues. And you don't have to decide tonight. We're just saying, you know, in two weeks, you're going to see some proposals to say, in order to prove connectivity where we have high congestion, congestion loosely, but on brush creek where there's a lot of vehicle traffic. Sidewalks make sense for safety reasons. It's going to have a visual impact that we want to make sure that people are comfortable with. And that's the kind of balance that we really are going to rely on you guys as the elected officials to say here's the right balance. Maybe not sidewalks, because it doesn't fit our aesthetic as a mountain town, mountain resort community, but we're on brush creek where it's carrying 9,000 cars a day, something like that. Sidewalks might make sense. And those are the kind of those really community value-laden opinions that we're gonna look to you guys to say does it make sense or not here and there. And that's the consultant's going to bring a number of these with them next week. And again, you're not adopting next week but we want to get these ideas in front of you so that when the adoption does get before you in San Munt there's no, you know, over my dead body kind of issues or whatnot, that there's at least a level of understanding what we're trying to get to, at least a level of consensus on your guys' part on what we're trying to achieve. So. So what you're finding is that the existing bike paths we have one on either side of the road, they're not being utilized in the way that this might be. Correct. What they're saying is they're not, you know, they're not, the awareness of them is not available to the visitors and the resident, well, residents know they're there, but the visitors particularly, they're not intuitive, and also they're not the shortest path. Unfortunately, people want the shortest path to get to someplace and those aren't always the shortest path. They're not always cleared. And the maintenance level, and that's another thing that they're addressing is so we're taking a look at the maintenance map of paved trail sections what it is currently and then what is the recommendation of snow maintenance and what we're hearing from our consultants on our side is that it is to plow those trail sections that are in that key corridor and those key connectivity areas not maybe all the way out you, the whole section along Al Creek Road may not be the preferred to keep that as a Nordic type of trail, but on the key sections that it should be. And it may be a phase program in the sense that if this section of trail is not constructed along, let's say, from the upper currents to mountain view, that then we'd look at maintaining the path as the alternative section is to be used until that sidewalk section is built. So those are the types of countries. How will this sidewalk section is going to be maintained? So we were looking at as they would be a mountain curve, so we'd be able to put the truck up on top of those, we can come by and plow on top of those with the light duty truck, but that's those conversations on whether it's on the uphill side or the downhill side and how we maintain those sections. The other thing is we do have additional sidewalk coming on with the roundabout construction, and so we maintain those with skidsters or we contract out some of the work right now and we're looking at how we do our staffing on those types of things. Maybe I wasn't understanding those drawings that were coming after this. Yeah. But those drawings look like there was a significant height difference between the sidewalk and the road bed and the road. So here, yeah, so how would you get a plow in that? So this is, and this is where working on these still, but this is a brush creek road and it's actually labeled incorrectly. This should be flipped on this side. But so as you head up brush creek road, far from far away to upper currents, one typical section. So imagine this is when you would go under wood bridge. This is kind of what it would look like because we're challenged in there with the width as well as with the steepness of the slope. So what it would be is a wall retaining well, or a guard rail retaining wall path, and then retaining wall. But there were sections there that it could pop back up and be attached sidewalk. So right when you get two upper curns, you know, it's kind of wide and shoulder there, you could pop back up and there. So the key is that we make sure that we have a nut width in here and this is why they're recommending six foot so that we can get a skidster into those locations. So it's a kind of a combo on some of these and trust me we had a lot of conversations on this because I'm like I can't see it and I need you know. And we're only a conceptual plan this is a policy plan it's not to the design level but we're trying to make sure that everybody understands what those policies are that we're trying to identify. Okay. So this would tie in directly with the roundabout sidewalks? Yes. So this one doesn't have the only thing is right now there is not a sidewalk section from lower currents to upper currents. And so we need to look at that but there is carbon gutter in that section. So, the other, I'll just step through these cross sections so you can understand these and if I need to go back and explain any. So the same thing was looking at, I lost section, this is, section 9. So this is similar thing. This is going from Aulakirg Road up to Farway or adjacent, sorry, this is Bresch Creek Road from Aulakirg Road to Farway or along Aulakirg Road from the fire station. That one I would say that you can do a touch sidewalk with a carbon gutter from the fire station to that intersection. But the other one we would look at, and you know, you've got the Mayfly trail right there, it's real close, but we don't maintain it in the wintertime. So we're looking at that element of a sidewalk section with the carbon gutter in there. And then the last section, and these are the top two, you know, priorities, what they're looking at. you know, priorities, but they're looking at. This is the discussion on coming down from, so this is upper-currence to Mountain View. And this is the conversation on, are we okay with not having curb and gutter and it's just a wide and shoulder and that's one of those conversations we want to talk about Or the other option is like I said on the stream side as you head up the hill that this is detached area. This is beyond that side of it So I guess I'm looking for some kind of feedback on what your feeling is on the sidewalk section and what your feeling is on the sidewalk section and being the recommendations coming forward is curb and gutter a six foot sidewalk and then in sections it has a separated grade when there's a challenging slopes. Separated grade like this this separate grade. Yeah I'm think it's a blinding snow storm and I've got the pavement and right next to it, it's kind of a sidewalk, but you don't really know and it's hard to see. And if someone was out there, I think it's unsafe now being just as unsafe. I mean, the roll off the edge of the sidewalk. And hit, yep. Over, if you had a sidewalk, the sidewalk section or the lower one. I like option one better than option two. Okay, so the preferred one. I like option one better than option two. Okay, so the preferred person protected. I'm not. But the issue you're trying to get to when we're considering this is safety. I mean is that kind of what I'm already talking about? That's what I'm going what's safe. That's and that's the kind of stuff. What is what's the safest solution? Okay. Yeah, well theoretically I think the safest solution is to separate the pedestrian from the car as best you can. Right. Right. And that's why the curb and gutter provides that buffer section, you know, it's still mountable but it is a detached section. It's, you know, it's not the same surface as the driving public. So unfortunately this is some very tight corridors that we're trying to. That's the reason why we haven't done so. Steve did you have a question? Come on. If you don't mind. It kind of curious when we have trails on both sides of the road, but they're not on the road, they're away from the road, but they're not being maintained properly or whatever. Why don't we dress that in terms of maintaining them? Instead of going to the expense, which I measure is huge, to do something like this. For instance, if you want to go from the town hall to the green side, there's a nice trail there, next to the creek, Right next to the road. Now the problem maybe is not being maintained enough. Maybe needs to be improved in terms of the going through the parking lot a little bit by the creek side. You know, it just seems like there are solutions that might be considered. Another one is you go from a woodbridge and you want to go up to the post office, there's an existing trail that's already paved. It goes there that's not next to the road. So you wouldn't have the expense of doing this if maybe with some better signage, with some better maintenance, that trail that's already existing from Woodbridge to the post office would be used. That's also true on the other side by the vice-royd. There's a trail that goes there. You know, when Russell Forrest was here, he built and installed a bridge there. So you can go quite a long distance on their existing trails. So why consider spending money? The other thing that concerns me and talks about safety and so on. And it's not just for people coming down farway Road, to our brush creek road, who are trying to turn either left, go to the town hall, or turn right, and go down valley. There's a bus stop there. Well, before the bus stop, right next to the intersection of Farway and Brush Creek, there's a concrete ditch with rocks in it. And there's another big boulder there. So what happens is a raft of bus comes in to the bus stop. And I see this happen a lot. There's none of them for a second raft of bus. So the first raft of bus is at the bus stop trading their passengers. The second raft of bus comes in, it's not the bus driver's fault. The bus driver's doing the best he can. But there's none of space for the second raft to bus to get there. So the second raft to bus has got his butt out into first creek road. We were asking for an accident because if it's icy, you know, you're tourists, you know, with a rental car, they're going to come down first creek road and they're going to hit the second raft to bus. So when I get rid of the pile of rocks and make it so there's enough room for a second raft of bus to safely, easily get in there, it seems like a relatively inexpensive solution to a potential future problem. And the issue is also going to be not that people coming down far away road. It's all the young people coming from Woodbridge and Snowmass Mountain that are trying to access the bus stop, whether it's in the morning to go to Highlands of Skie or at night to go to Aspen to Party. It just seems that that situation would be solved real easily. And the other issue that I'm concerned there is that they build an island uphill on Berspreet Road. So when it comes in on a far away, we're going to have to do a big maneuver to get around this concrete and steel piece of furniture. So hopefully if they're going to do this, they build it high enough up Berspreet Road. So you can make sensible turnings there. And so I haven't seen the final designs. So we haven't seen it. And but this is, I think as a concern as we're going forward, that's real. So I have a bunch of other comments, but I don't want to take up your time because it's late and so forth. And I've been to several of these meetings and they've been good people there. They've been listening, but I hope that these ideas get fully considered and not just ignored out of hand. Well, and I'll just say, I mean, the operations issue that Ann already mentioned, that's absolutely critical. We understand that can simply plow in existing path, be a more appropriate solution than building a new path. That's what we're evaluating now. And then as far as I think the specific design issues that Mr. Parley brings up, we agree. But that's why we're putting concepts forward. Here's how we think we might address it. And there's a tenant design to come. So I think we are trying to best to listen to a lot of these, so we agree with a lot of the students. And I'm going to be critical and just here to be. Yeah, no. And I think that's the kind of feedback we've been getting. We're looking through, and I think Ann's statement a few minutes ago is right on. This is really that policy document that we're going to need you guys to buy off on policy wise. If the policies are close, then when the specifics come in, you'll see those as well. Of course, when we're hearing from this consultant is, you know, in order to improve connectivity, you need to improve people feeling safe. And it's got to be kind of a straighter shot. And that connectivity for people to get to and from is a lot different than connectivity for, say, like a parks open space and trails plan. Those paths can be meandering and get you to cool things where this connectivity plan is really trying to get that transit oriented person from A to B quickly and safely. And a lot of the times those different outcomes are different. And that's why we're going to be looking to you guys to say where does it make sense, where it doesn't it. Here's some approaches we're going to have and that's what we'll be talking to you guys about in a couple of weeks. My final point is about road bikers who are serious road bikers, they do not want to be on the bike trails because it's gravel on them and it's all the kinds of issues. So whenever possible, and you can't do it everywhere, but wherever possible, it would be nice to have a four feet of shoulder so that when your father or grandfather is riding their road bike, where he got John Wilkerson writing his road bike you know on the road because they want to go 80 miles an hour they don't want to they don't want to be and so wherever possible try to do that I mean I know there's a bunch of places so that would be helpful and that is one of the recommendations there as we repay paved roads to restrape them to the 11 foot lanes which you've seen some of those adjustments we've been making to get that four-foot shoulder in there. Why not? If we have the possibility when we repay those is to wind the platform so that we have that four-foot shoulder. So, okay. So, I just wanted, we just wanted to check to see if any other questions or comments and to continue to plant the seeds seeds so you look at them and then when we come back in two weeks Do you have an evaluative criteria you're using on each one of these options? So that was I lost my mouse here This is that criteria right there, that prioritization criteria. And in the document, it expands what low medium. Okay, because that's where I was going to go. Because to me, that's. Yeah. So just to talk about the low medium. We're high. Just to really talk it through quickly is that the safety is using their professional judgment and talking about it's got the highest impact of safety. Medium or low impact to safety. And you can kind of look at these as, you know, yeah, the trail going across, there's a low impact on safety. But it's adjacent to the road when there's a lot more pedestrian activity. That's why these are higher. Access to key destinations. The half a mile distance is the kind of the criteria they work on. And so it's a half mile between two nodes, or between one node is the medium, or not within a half mile is the low. And then the ease of use, or as I'll call it now, reach of impact, is- In English, paying for the buck. Paying for the buck. Pedestrians and visitors or residents, as high, medium is just one of those sectors, but still connected to transit. And then low is only one of those sectors, but not connected to transit. So that's where those are coming off of. It's also public comment, right? Yes. That plays into it, but you know, public open houses, we get people who are interested in, so they have to use their professional judgment of also what we're hearing. And you know, a lot of the comments we have, are very positive, they're supporting these types of activities. So I think you got the mark on trying to improve these types of things. And what was the purpose of having this real estate transfer tax certificate attached to this? It wasn't a stake date by the town clerk. Oh, sorry. Because I was going to ask it. Whoops. Never mind. Never mind. I mean, it just seems to me that putting a sidewalk under wood bridge. to me that putting a sidewalk under Woodbridge. I mean, we shouldn't have pedestrians there anyway. I mean, I'd much rather see a staircase to give people up to the Woodbridge and onto that. They're not going to use it. I won't tell you the number of people that are staying either at the timbers who they don't use the trail. They walk up and down the roadway or the trail. Which one are you saying, Mark? Sometimes I just think people leave their brains at home when they come and visit because there may be a... Something that liver do it too. When I see the young people at night walking along brush creek and underneath woodbridge to get to another point, it's like what are you guys thinking? It's so unsafe. If you have black coats on, black pants. Yeah. And your comment bill is the upper section would be preferred to try to get them. Right. I agree with Bill. Would they be preferred to try to get him right to the right agree with bill Would they do it trying to get him there? Yeah, I mean I can go back to Peckler's comment Yeah, we're talking about the roundabout me. You got to put sidewalks where people actually walk But I think we really have to discourage people from walking there in a better way because that's not where we want in a better way because that's not where we want. We don't want people on the road there. You're talking on brush creek under the bridge. Under the wood bridge. In the section. That's one of those things that I mean that's one of the discussions that I mean that's going to be a good one to have at some point is it makes sense because that's where people are and they're there because it's the shortest distance to get from lower currents to the bus or wherever they're trying to get to. And you know, can we provide a better way to get to them? And that's what we're trying to identify. That's what we're struggling with right now. Right. Well, there's no easy answer. There's a. So we'll have a good draft for you in a couple weeks. And then hopefully, with any luck, if we were pretty close we could adopt it you know hopefully maybe whoever sometime shortly after you guys see it if we've been identifying the projects correctly. We need to keep our minds not what we know as residents who use past but what is the guest? Yeah we've got 400 and something comment and we've gotten a lot of public comments that are driving some of these issues as well. So I think it's important to recognize those and that's that we're trying to incorporate all those comments, you know, inside expertise and whatnot and see that's how these things are getting prioritized that way. All that input. Thank you. Thank you, Anne. Thanks, Anne. Good job. Dave, welcome. Welcome. Thank you. Council for taking the time to review this a little bit. I'll try to be brief. It's been a long night. As you may recall from the last couple of EOTC meetings, there's been a voice greater concern about the entrance to Aspen situation and the possibility of looking at remote parking places, particularly the intercept lot at Brush Creek in Highway 82. And also the county has interest in the buttermilk parking lot that's at Al Creek Road in Highway 82. Basically go over what are some of the observations that we're currently seeing for the entrance to Aspen. The Mendoza line that's been drawn in the sand for Highway 82 is 1993 traffic volume levels, even with a four lane and all that and the great work of Raffta. You have been successful at holding that Mendoza line and staying beneath it, but last year you saw that the traffic volume was in essence at that 23,000 vehicle trips a day. So it's time to begin to make some more aggressive improvements and other modes to help ease that situation. When we look at the resources that we have available that are in the Upper Valley, the Buttermoak parking lot, it was purchased by C.Dot and Pickin County at one point to be used for mass transit purposes and recreational purposes, providing access to buttermoak's ski area. That's its main purpose. It's very underutilized in the spring, summer, and fall. It is at a major intersection and access point from Snowmass Village in the distant future. There was a park and ride facility there. There is the BRT station there that is looked at as a possible location for intercepting some of the traffic volume going into Aspen. And then obviously the intercept lot is like the main sort of now becoming this concept of here is a key park and ride facility that would serve both snowmasses as well as Aspen and ties to BRT pretty effectively and makes that interface between snowmass up valley and down valley. What the other two pieces that we're seeing is that there's low utilization of both lots in the off seasons. I will say with the caveat the paved spaces in the intercept lot now for this winter have been pretty much full on a consistent basis that's 200 parking spaces. So when they say low utilization they're looking at that entire parcel 27 acres of potential parking and you only have 200 that are being utilized out of 1400. Do they know why people are parking that or they catch in the down valley, raft or they catch in the up valley? Do we know? I think what you're seeing is in the bus business frequency is the key to get successful use of the alternative mode. Once BRT service went in place and you hit a service frequency or a headway of every seven to ten minutes, that's when you tip the scales and made the intercept lot a more successful parking location for predominantly up valley bound passengers going to City of Aspen. And we do get some utilization out of it. We hear anecdotal points that some workers or some skiers are using it to come to snowmasses well. In the winter you do have frequency every 15 minutes, but the rest of the year you only have service intervals of every half hour. So it does have some potential in the winter for us, not quite as much as a seven to 10 minute service frequency for Aspen. So that's what I think you're seeing is, Aspen boosted the amount of service going into town, became more attractive, some workers are willing to use that or skiers are willing to use that as a parking ride. Is there what's the solution for the roundabout? The entrance to Aspen. I mean this is all about getting people to park out and hop on a bus. But eventually I'm not sure that's going to work. We still don't know what we're doing in Aspen as we do the connectivity into Aspen. It's a great question. Well, Dave, what are the suggestions that was in the packet? I think is a perfect suggestion, regardless of the entrance to Aspen issue. And that is having variable messaging signs which tell drivers that the time delay from the intercept lot into Aspen. I think that I would I would like to think I mean if I were the driver I would use that immediately to try to get my travel time to be reduced and maybe in conjunction with you know more paving more spaces I don't know if if having spaces paved is detrimental and people don't park because there's not a pavement space and they don't think they don't necessarily think they are allowed to or should. But I think that variable messaging sign should go up tomorrow. I mean that's how much in impact I think it would have. Well that leads to the fourth sort of shortcoming is that these are pretty Spartan facilities at best. Particularly the intercept lot there's very little there as far as a customer amenity if you were trying to do a park in Nouride and urban environment, you know, you would have coffee shops and you would have... Yeah, your phase one is right on. Yeah, that is my sense. That's right on. Okay. Well, and for the sake of brevity, we can just jump to. These are staff general concepts that we're trying to present to you. And what we're really trying to feel out is we don't want to make investments of time and energy and money into analysis of, say, revenue fairs if some of these concepts aren't going to fly. And so basically looking at page 66 and where we start talking about what could these plans be and what could these phasing elements be one of the big ones is Do you have any reservations about changing the utilization of these lots both of them are sort of described as day use only targeting Scare activity or worker activity and all the jurisdictions do have this need for commercial construction staging storage of commercial materials that don't fit on job sites Small enterprises like say high mountain taxi as a service fleet that they don't have any place to put them Those kind of things that's a big that's a game changer for these things, and a bit of a concern for those that live next door to them, but it is something that we see as a need within our communities, and that's a question to you, all that's acceptable or not acceptable. I'm fine with the intercept, but looking at that very carefully or extended use but it's you know bathrooms and I don't know if you need a coffee shop maybe a vending machine I guess the question I had was why extended why have Wi-Fi in the parking lot I mean if the buses will have Wi-Fi, why do you need Wi-Fi in the parking? Well I think it's more for the bus facility itself. It wouldn't be the lot per se so you can park there and do your job work but it would be if you're waiting for the bus you would have... Seven minutes. Yeah. I'm just... I'm just... Yeah, I mean what about... Look at my son. He is going to withdrawal by that. And the other question is. The other question that I had was this concept of relocating the Aspen Airport Kiosk to provide, what are carpool passes? Maybe I'm just if you have three or more in your car you can park for free in Aspen when they give you a pass that gives you that alternative or in the carpool area section carpool area section how does anyone know that you had three or more people when you park the car. You're getting the pass at the kiosk and driving into with three people. The kiosk exists today at the airport. I never suddenly went in that kiosk. Yeah, a lot of people probably have the same opinion, but that is what it where it is. There is supposedly manpower there. So instead of the relocating that from the airport, because the airport expansion will have some impacts on that part of the facility and relocating it here to now create this as more, this is the entrance to both communities. Well, again, from my perspective, the only purpose to relocate it to the intercept plot would be if the bus lane was also a high occupancy vehicle lane. But if three people in a car can't have to drive in the same lane as the one person in a car, I don't see the point of the car pool pass. We're parking. Parking privilege in Aspen, which is $3. So that's the incentive. It's difficult to talk about the bus lanes going into town because they are part of the very small starts grant that Rath to receive to develop and implement BRT service throughout the Valley quarter. And so that's touching on jeopardizing federal funding by doing a game change after the fact. And so it's in the record of decision for the entrance to Aspen. There's a lot of things that say that desire to make that an HOV lane as opposed to a dedicated bus lane doesn't quite fit into federal highway administration documents that govern the utilization of that as fault. Again, I guess from my you know from my perspective if if it's not possible to make the bus lane into a high occupancy lane I would just soon leave the leave the Carpool thing in the airport or even get rid of it all together. Well I think part of the goal here is to get some human vite, human presence so that there's, if I have questions or something, most of us don't even know where this kiosk is. We live here, let alone the tourists is never going to find it. And it's now trying to put that sort of place where you either get passes or you get information and put it in a more viable place where it is more obvious to the tourists or the travel of places. Well, realistically there are two ways to come to ask, but you either fly in, but you drive up 82. Realistically. So if there is a, you know, information desk, which there is in the airport, maybe the information, maybe there should be a second information desk at the intercept lot. That's where you're going. That's what we're talking about. Yes. That's what the kiosk is to try. Well, yeah, but it looks to me like it's coming out of the airport and going into the intercept plot. You have to remember where it is. It's not in the airport per se. It's in that. I'm never out. Beyond the short cut that everybody beats the traffic. Oh, is that where it is? That's where Beyond the short cut that everybody beats the traffic Okay, so to me it makes me to quarter mile if you're gonna bump if you're gonna do the intercept lot with these improvements You might as well put out information Have an eye and everybody and tourist information, but I mean I kind of look at the intercept lot like the rodeo a lot I mean, you know You went as far as to make it a nicer spot and you have the information person and you have the nice bathrooms. I mean, it's kind of the same concept. I mean, people should be able to see a sign, stop. Just like when you're on the highway and it'll say, you know, next exit information on, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, and you get off. I mean I like that idea and you know if it's gonna get more people to perhaps ride the bus because they know okay I'll go sit at the intercept lot I'll check my email I'll drink a cup of coffee and it seems more sort of safe. I mean I'm not saying where we live is unsafe but it kind of you know having something a little more well with where there's people that are working there where there's you know more of a Environment I feel like is more inviting to be and use a real bathroom not the port of johns that exactly I think that's a really nice Necessity to have a real building that has the facilities needed for this type of facility that we're dreaming That means there's no water there Utilities will be a big issue. That'll be a big cost to get in there because there's even the electricity is very low voltage by the time the service that's pulled to that location as it is. In the expansion of that 200 to 400 pay parking spaces as an example we're not sure we have the capacity for security lighting for, you know, just even basic safety for the parking areas to make that feel more inviting to commuters. So we don't have a cost on any of this yet? No, this is a very preliminary conceptual thing that staff wanted to bring to you. So again, to find fatal flaws, fatal flaws will take out, we'll move forward with what the group. This has already been to Pick and County in City of Aspen, you're the third one on the list. And we're just again trying to get your feedback because this is going to come back in a more refined form to the EOTC because that's probably where the dollars to fund all this is going. So just to play devil's advocate, let's go a little bit further. In the past, when we talked about employee housing, didn't the intercept bot we heard, well, you can't do the advocates, there's no utilities. Well, if you run the utilities in, why are we not sizing this also for employee housing? As a couple of elements to that, any major structure here obviously needs the utilities. Second thing is this is outside of the urban growth boundary is established by both Pick and County and the city of Aspen. So to develop residential housing in this location is going to take some bit of tweaking to what they see as allowable use in this area. I don't necessarily disagree with you personally that given that the level of transit service that you've already built in this location, it's attractive to maybe consider putting some here. How far away where and how it integrates on the site then becomes kind of a significant question. Also know, I mean there's some other given takes here. When you have X games, you fill this area, everything. You know, 1,400 cars. When you have tough mudder, you fill this. You everything, 1,400 cars. Labor Day events. If you want to grow big events in the upper valley jurisdiction, this is where that happens. Now, you trade the square footprint for the cars for employee housing and which one do you want, which one do you want to serve and that's something to be ferrited out as well. Much like relocating long-term parking for the airport, that then begins what does that mean to commuter parking? If you have, let's say we only have 400 paved spaces, I don't think you're gonna park your car in the dirt to go fly away for a week to Chicago, so you're gonna be competing for these 400 spaces as well. And how do you define who pays and who doesn't, hope, et cetera? I mean, personally, that's one that I think And how do you define who pays and who doesn't, etc.? Personally, that's one that I think that I don't particularly care for. I think that it's, I think the intercept lot, frankly, is too far from the airport for long-term parking. Well, you ever park it, Blake's peak at the IH? Yeah, we've all done that. We've all done that. We've all done that stuff. But those are airports that have spread out for miles beyond the, this is an airport that spreads out for feet beyond, and at this point, very expensive square footage we're talking about though just very expensive I don't disagree Dave where does the cozy point open space and across the road is that is that just totally across the highway yeah totally across the high okay so that doesn't even point plain effort is incorporating some of this process I mean. I mean, there's some thought process, how these two work together, if you will. But another example is recreational parking to access, sky mountain park, and cozy point are going to be. Well, cozy point has its own lot, but I mean, the space is so nice. You know, the issue of employee housing down there, I mean, I know that it's a global issue for everybody in the valley, but that open space is so valuable for the entrance and to Aspen to see that. And that's the other concern is that this is a very rural ambiance to this parcel when there's a lot of hesitance to throw up a 7-11 and an employee housing. Well, I'm of the mind that it should be bathrooms there. I wouldn't mind seeing a coffee shop. I think you really need to create an environment that really does encourage people to get out of their cars. I think we should eliminate the stoplight and put it around about it. I think it really should become a place where people say, okay, this is how we get in the town, you get out of your car. If you have 78-minute bus rides and it's clear, clearly communicated, you know, an amber sign or the apps that the mayor of Aspen was talking about. If we can do alerts telling people, providing that type of information, it totally makes sense to me. I mean, we're not going to, we cannot get past the issue of the S curves in Aspen. I mean, this has been going on since the 70s and we can't get there. So we better start accommodating the situation that we're in and I think we've got to get people out of their cars. Well then the funding should come from the entrance staff but I mean if we're not going to do anything there then let's free up the money beginning to use those dollars To address this this is to be a solution for the interest aspect Your counterparts are looking at it as a three the three jurisdictions. Oh, I'm sure they are Just so you know, well, you can report the back to them Just me and tonight's discussion is really kind of a heads up for upcoming EOTC discussion. And that's what we're trying. Do we have the new date? It's June. June, something. 16th, 16th. I think. Yeah. What was it? Yes, June 16th. And everybody knows April's been canceled, I hope. Yes. Yes. We really kind of touched on me when I was in New York and I pulled off and it was a rest stop and it was like two-story parking. There was a shopping mall. I was like, this is a rest stop and I couldn't believe it. A lot of the through way here. Yeah. And the place was packed. They've been that's been there a long time ago. Those places are so I was so blown away. But hey, that's what people are looking for and that's what they need and they take advantage of it. I think you hit it on the nut there that the roundabout idea is an entrance into both communities. I mean, and that's where the digital sign could be parking 45 minute wait task and snowmast this way. I think it's 45 minutes task and three minutes to snowmast. Three minutes to snowmast. Dave, do I recall that there's some issue with the traffic signaling at the UNICEF lot that if there was something that was going to... There is a trigger that requires intersection improvements. And... Yeah, I don't remember what the trigger was. Or I would have paid spaces maybe that, or yet to go and approach CIDOT. And remember, CIDOT is technically still the property owner. There is some interest to approach them to have it transferred to the jurisdictions for continued transportation purposes. But that still won't change the access requirements that if we build the parking lot to a certain point, we will then be required to make improvements so that the intersection functions appropriately. Well, I think that everybody's on their right track for number one, the interim. Okay. Well, thank you very much, Councilor. I just love phase one. The management changes, you know, that can come and go, but the core issues that you hit on the top of capital improvements are right on Dave. Good job. Thank you. I think Mitch Ozer from Aspen deserves a lot of credit. He and Brian have been kind of spearheading this Brian Pettit with picking up. Are you hoping to guys meet? Staff meets periodically or we talk over the phone and we did have input into this plan here. Yeah, it just doesn't seem to utilize buttermilk, it just doesn't seem to make sense. It's just too crowded and congested during the winter. I think everything should be centralized at the intercept block. I think some of those are those management changes we're talking about well maybe I could I. If Berlin game is short and parking and we're going to store some vehicles or maybe this is where we can do that and it's just sort of looking for that blessing to say yeah take a look at how this works and what can you do and what can't you do. Buttermilk's tough in that, you know, it's viewed as an intercept lot for Alcreek road traffic and I don't know you're so close, I don't know at that point you're gonna abandon your warm car and jump into a bus. I'm not picking a side in that one, but you know that's the downside. I just don't see buttermilk because one thing you have to be as consistent. That's it's an inconsistent use. So you just can't say I'm just going to go to it. It's only part of the year. It's only part of the year and then the X games come and then the gates go up and blah blah blah. You never know. Dave, one thing I don't think I'm in favor of is spending money on an underpass. As long as there's a traffic light and I will creak in 82. We don't need an underpass there. Oh, and I presume that's what that. Yes, that's what that is. That's been talked about. That is your counterparts view that as a very significant I'm sure they do I'm sure they do another five million six million dollar underpass ten six and a half is kind of a ten a pair I mean there's a point where enough said not I understand I will pass that along He's just might have an accident Ladies several years ago. Well, that was at the airport I'm sure there's been accidents Thank you. Thanks Dave. Thank you Dave. Have a good evening. Okay, you too town council reports and actions Excuse me. Can you hold on a second to I lead to we look? I have something I want to ask you about. Okay Tom, you're up first. Okay, thank you. Anything on the cards? Just I've been continuing my backstage report. I admit with marketing this week I had just a great time. I'm sure you did. For about two hours. I had no idea we had that many people working in the marketing department. Let alone. I bought a box of donuts up, a dozen donuts, and I don't think they were enough. And they went quick and good thing everybody was looking at something healthy, but it was a very interesting and a lot of information. And I think I spent two hours with Rose and her crew. And it was not enough time. Again, I'll just be brief and say that another great department. Thanks, Cliff. I don't have anything. Several things. DAV is in town. I want to thank Ann Martin for taking care of that plywood. Thank you very much. You saved a lot of men's backs. I just bought a new one. So thank you. I enjoyed it. Thank you very much. And then I did the champagne toast for the 30 years. And did they welcome last evening from our town. And everybody was just overwhelmed with a generosity of all the people here in Snowman's Village. So thanks a shout out to everyone in the community. Number two, oh geez, this is really important. I can forget. I'll see if I remember and come back. I'll see if I remember and come back. You're up. I don't have anything. Oh, darn. I have something. I had a Northwest Cog meeting, phone meeting. One of the things that they told us about, which some people in the community may find interesting, is on June 14th, will be the 8th annual caregiver conference and it will be in Glenwood Springs at the community center and the theme will be financial and legal implications of aging and caregiving. So that's one of the things that they brought up under the Alpine Area Agency on aging AAA. And that was it. I know what I was going to bring up another shout out to our marketing department. Last week I had dinner with the marketing director from Garmish. And Garmish, as you all know, the sister city. So what they asked me to do was coordinate a meeting with Rose and Fred. Fred was able to accommodate the schedule because they were skiing here in Snowmass that particular day. And I think we're going to see some interesting traction perhaps in the future. What's really interesting. Over in the Alps, they have 12 resorts that have come together called the best of the Alps, all the way from Cortina to Garmish to Kitsbuhl on and on. And then the question is what's the corollary here? Oh, was Kiko and yes we've got the mountain collective but there's nothing in Europe on that mountain collective. So anyway the point is it was really great to see our town and our marketing staff already starting to spin their wheels about what could be versus we can't. So I really love the mindset, so it may be a dead end run, but it is begins to connect us across the world to the upskier age. And I think Fred was hooking up with him. I think they're down in Denver for the ski conference or somewhere that the two guys are gonna get together and introduction, so. Thanks again to the marketing staff. Anything else? Go Nova. Go Nova. Go Nova. Basketball game. Oh, that's your ball game. Five minutes to go. I'd like to make a motion for a German. Yeah, you want to go watch the game. Second. Second. Yep. Oh, it's a poor CI. Hi, hi. See y'all in a few. Yeah, you want to go watch the game. Second? Second. Yep. Oh, it's a poor C.I. Hi. Hi. See y'all in a few. See you next week. See you next week. Second. All right. Just the record. I think Alyssa, what did you say? Did you second the motion to adjourn? I did. I second it. I can't second I jumped right to do it. I'm going to do it. I'm going to do it. I'm going to do it. I'm going to do it. I'm going to do it. I'm going to do it. I'm going to do it. I'm going to do it. I'm going to do it. I'm going to do it. I'm going to do it. I'm going to do it. I'm going to do it. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm sorry.