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 you 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 you you you you here. here is here is is this is this is this is this is this is this is this is this is this is this is this is this is this is this is this is this is this is this is this one hour one I did for my birthday I'm I just Happy to give Yeah, I do that. Yeah, I do that. That's great. It was like in my school, like my meeting got back to now. Okay, here. Let's see. Let's talk about the space. I know something must have happened. Hey, we're ready for now. Is Bill not here? No, he wasn't all crystal. I know. That's where I'm keeping my daughter calling my guide, I'll tell you that her cousins are arriving at the day of the race. I've actually got a graduation. So what am I going to do? I'm going to have to check them on. I'm going to have to check them on. I'm going to be trying to book them. Are we ready? Hotel rooms somewhere? I'm going to see them. All right, so what are we going to do? I like to be in charge of the shooting match. So what else do you want to do with any call? Yes. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. Two months and three months. Are you ready? Two months and three months. Do you guys get a new draft? Yeah. Get a draft or a live link with that. Yeah. You've got three candidates that you can have. Good afternoon. I'm going to call together. Council, this is a special meeting being held on April 13th, 2015. Ronda Rokall. Butler. Here. Jacobson. Here. Circus. Madison. Shane. Here. So to our listening public tonight, we will be hearing a presentation from the ask Sir, yes. Here. Madsen. Shrine. Here. So to our listening public tonight, we will be hearing a presentation from the Aspen Board of Education. And this is a very, very important issue that we'll be discussing this evening and having a broader discussion for our community relative to the financing at our public school system. Then we'll be moving into a consent agenda, which there are no items, and then lastly, we'll be spending time on base village and looking at a resolution. So having said that, I'm gonna turn it over to whomever is going to speak. Yes, it's it. Hi, good afternoon. My name is Robin Hamill. I'm the president of the Aspen Education Foundation, which was the sponsor of the Tax Initiative in Aspen. Three years ago, I also serve on the board of the Aspen Public Education Fund, which oversees the receipts from the sales tax initiative. And I guess we should probably introduce all of ourselves. So let me pass the mic down. I am Kate Fuentes, and I'm the chief financial officer for the Aspen School District. I'm Susan Morald and I'm a member of the Board of Education for the School District. And lives here in Snowmass Village. Yes. I'm Laura Cornicevich. I am the president of the Aspen Public Education Fund. And until last year, a 25-year resident of Snowmass Village. And I'm John Malloy. I'm Superintendent of Schools. Good afternoon. I'm Sandra Pierce. I'm the current president of the Board of Education for the Aspen School District. And thank you so much for having us here today. Thank you all. Kate? Or? Yeah, I'm going to. I'm going to just give some background. Yes Aspen School District. Thank you so much for having us here today. Thank you all, Kate. Or? Yeah, I'm gonna, I'm gonna just give some background. Yes, thank you very much. Well, thank you very, very much for having us today. And this is a very, very important topic that we're pleased that you've come to hear us out. You've received a presentation, which we'll go through in a minute, but I just thought I'd open with some opening remarks remarks about the background of how Aspen adopted the sales tax initiative a couple years ago. We were at a Aspen business lunch presenting on behalf of the Aspen Education Foundation about five years, four years ago, and we're talking about the funding deficit that's occurred in our schools and continues to occur. We're Denver just doesn't have enough funds to fund the mandated spending that the school district is required to do under law. And somebody in the back of the room said, why don't you do what steamboat did? And so I immediately asked what steamboat did. And 20 odd years ago steamboat adopted a very similar sales tax. That was to fund the school system in steamboat. That initiative was a four year measure, which has been voted on and extended every four years that it's been in place. And it's grown from a very modest sales tax receipt to quite a large one. We're in fact, it's not only helping the steamboat school district, but it's also helping neighboring, I think, Route County and one other, I can't remember the name of it. But it's been viewed as a very, very positive thing. So we did the research on that. We spoke to the lawyers that put that together. We met with the people that created the ballot question and we put it to a vote. And we got buy-in from just about every the ski company, Acra, the board of realtors. There are lots of people that had questions about it and really wondered whether increasing tax was the right thing to do. But as we described then it was an emergency measure. At the time we did approach SNOMAS Council and asked if there would be support and interest from this body in that and the overwhelming response at that particular moment was no, that the sales tax and steamboat, excuse me, and SNOMAS Village was over 10% already and there would be not enough public will to see a sales tax be increased. We've come here today because we think things have changed in a few different ways. And the main way is what we thought was an emergency measure three years ago has turned out to be kind of the new reality of how our schools are gonna get funded, or not going to get funded. And the very simple way to think about it is that we can't wait on Denver, that we have to take care of our kids here, and we need to do it with a local solution and not be dependent upon external solutions, which I have not been as forthcoming as we'd like. So we're very encouraged that you've seen us today. We hope to work with you to find some common ground that snowmast would join in in the event that we decide to extend the sales tax in Aspen. So with that, I'd like to turn it over to Kate. Okay, thank you. So I just wanted to start with you guys with just sharing a little bit on a high level about how schools are funded in the state of Colorado. It's not a simple, quick and easy description. So I wanted to start there and share with you the reason, as Robin said, for why we kind of find ourselves in this predicament. The state of Colorado has a formula for how schools are funded. You take the total number of students that any particular school district has and you both multiply at times a per pupil revenue and you come up with the number of total funding that the state says you can have for your school district. The state then says, all right school district, look first at your local property taxes and your specific ownership tax, which is a small amount of vehicle registrations. See how much you can fund there and to the extent that you can't fully fund what that formula says you should have. We'll pick up the difference and step in and fund the rest of it for you. On a statewide basis, the way that calculation works right now is the all-in cost for the state of Colorado is $6.8 billion. Local school districts are funding just under $2 billion of that and the state is supposed to pick up the balance. The problem is that the state doesn't have the funding to pick up that balance, and they're currently at an $880 million deficit. And that's just for the 2014 year. That amount in 13-14 was over $1 billion that they could not fund. And it is likely, I mean, it is going to stay that way for the foreseeable future. The way that that translates down into the Aspen School District, our funding gap, our portion of that $880 million is 2.2 million on an ongoing basis. And that number is not going to go away. We were able to pick up a portion of that through the City of Aspen Sales Tax Funding, but it's not the entire amount that we've been able to fill that gap for. And so we, when we first went to the city of Aspen. We were hopeful that within the four year time frame that we originally asked for the sales tax that things would turn around for the state and they would be able to make some serious investments back into education and bring us back to full funding. But the problem is there are limitations at the state level for how much revenue they're allowed to keep. I'm sure you guys are aware of how table funding works and the impending refunds that we're looking at. For the year to come, this current legislature is looking at reducing that negative factor of 880 million by a 25 million dollar number And they're also looking at spending 70 million dollars in table refunds So there's going to be more money going back to taxpayers than what you know, they're even gonna Give back to schools on on a negative funding side We have some options available to us as a school district for funding that comes outside of that state formula. Those options include a mill-levy override that is unrestricted and how it can be spent. It is allowed to be 25% of what we call total program or the amount that the school formula says we can have. In 2010 we increased our, we increased our millevi up to that maximum of 25%. But as you know, each year goes by, our total program number continues to increase a little bit. And so if we were to go back and ask the voters this year for that, we could generate $662,000 of additional funding through that mechanism, which would be fabulous. There are also some restricted millevi overrides that are available to us that can be used for certain things within building maintenance and ongoing kind of capital projects, transportation and technology. You're required to spend the funds only on certain types of things and you're only allowed to collect them in three year increments. And we did that in 2008 and collected it from 2008 to 2011 and used those funds to refresh our bus fleet, which was, had aged quite significantly. And we also used it to invest in our technology infrastructure. And even though we only collected the funds for three years, we stretched those dollars out over a six-year timeframe and then the other option that we have that we discovered and found out and have implemented was the the sales tax with the city of Aspen that will expire at the end of 2016 and so we'll look to go back to the city of Aspen and renew that and hope that we can also expand that and include snow mass village in that arena. We know that the state of Colorado, because the negative factor and the amount of funding that were short that funding gap being a large number of 880 million and the table restrictions that are in place there's just not a way that that is going to go away anytime in the foreseeable future it would require a statewide vote and each the last I think the last few elections that they have put forward a ballot measure to increase funding for schools. It's been voted down to one statewide. And so there doesn't seem to be any appetite on a statewide level to fix education funding. We have seen strong support from our community and trying to find a way to resolve things locally and do it ourselves rather than waiting for the rest of the state to decide that it's important to educate our kids well. And I think the participation from snowmast would be a huge step in adding to that local participation and that local decision that we value the education that our kids are getting here. We've got some significant capital needs that are going to come up starting in about 2019. Even though it feels like we've got a brand new high school and a brand new middle school. They're aging quickly. The high school we moved into the new portion in 2001. And the middle school we moved into that in 2007 or 2008, 2007. So for as much as that seems like it was just yesterday, those buildings are definitely aging. And the elementary school was completed in 1992 and had some refresh to it in the 2007 year when we did the work on the middle school. So there's quite a bit going on within those buildings, everything from roofs to boilers to just making sure that we keep things holding up the way it should take care of the buildings that we have that are going to come at us. And we also know that our costs are increasing faster than what our existing revenues sources are able to give us. And with that, you know, the first question might be, well, why don't you bring your costs down to match what your revenues are? And the hard part there is 82% of our costs are for salaries and benefits. And we want to continue to provide the education that our community values, the depth of program, the high quality teaching staff that we have, and enable them to have a reasonable standard of living here. We do continue to see that we have a high turnover in the first three to five years with newly hired staff and part of the issue is our salary schedule as compared to the cost of living here. And we're doing everything we can just to keep on top of that. And there's not grand increases out there. We're giving them about 2% per year. We were in it for there's a period of time where we did freeze wages. We had furlough days. We did everything we could to hold things off for a period of time when the economy tanked, but you can't do that forever and keep your staff. And as we all know, having to retrain your teachers and bring them into the fold, even if they've taught somewhere for 10 years, bringing them into your school district and your system takes a certain amount of dollars being spent on professional development, those kinds of things and getting them bought into your program. And if they're leaving after three years, then all that money just went out the door and you've got to start from scratch again. So we want to be able to have confidence that the teaching staff that we have is not making a mint, but able to just live here without having to live paycheck to paycheck from one year to the next. As you can see, based on our kind of estimates of where we're going to be over the next five years. You know, we've got some holes to fill and the ways in which we're looking at doing it is asking snowmast to help participate with the sales tax. We're looking to bring that mill-levy override, that unrestricted mill levy override, and bring that back up to the 25 percent to increase that. And then down the road, also looking at timing that unrestricted mill levy to help us address the needs that we're going to have with our buildings. And if we don't get the participation from Snowmass, it puts us in a bit of a bind financially. And so we're hopeful that you all will consider participating with us. Kate, how many students come from Snowmass Village to Aspen Public Schools? We have a total of, or as my notes, 299 students from Snowmass Village that come to Aspen School District. It's about 18% of our student population. The highest number of students across the schools is in the elementary school with 118 students, 90 students at the middle school, 77 at the high school, and 10 over at the community school. Okay. How does that compare to Aspen and let's say basalt is another? So Aspen has 65% of our students come from Aspen and if you look at the combined enrollment from say basalt carbon-dale, those percentages, where's my cheat sheet? How did it written down? the state's property. The state's property's property's property's property's property's property's property's property's property's property's property's property's property's property's property's property's overall district wide. Is that going down or up or going down? We were in the low 20s probably about seven or eight years ago and we have seen more and more students coming from within our school district boundaries and pretty much the only out of district students that are being enrolled in the elementary school are either children of our staff that work for the school district or they have an older sibling or siblings already in the district. But there's I can't think of anybody that's just a brand new out of district student that's being admitted into the elementary school. How about the community school. The community school has their own enrollment practices and they take Aspen School District Kids first and staff kids and siblings but they do a lottery based on their enrollment and overall their enrollment I think is about 60% out of district and 40% in district. And it depends kind of based grade to grade as to how skewed that percentage is. They have, you know, with their new campus that they're getting, they've indicated that they think they're going to get a higher percentage of Aspen Kids interested in rolling there. One of the challenges that they face, especially in the kindergarten and first grade levels is, the parents will be all excited and the kids will be excited to go to the community school and they've got the lottery and they're in. And then the kids start chatting with their friends and finding out where the other kids are going to school and then they're like, but I want to go to school with them at the elementary school. And so even though they may initially have a list of out of their 14 kids of the element in the kindergarten class of being mostly, you know, in district kids Sometimes that skews and goes the other way after you know the children start Deciding that they would prefer to go to the elementary school. So So the funding for the community school comes through The taxes. Yes. Yes. So they are included within our school district we forward on to them the per pupil revenue based on their enrollment but those funds do come to the Aspen School District first and then get forwarded on. What is that spend right now? What is the per pupil spend? So the per pupil revenue that if we were fully funded is $10,300. Let's see, there's my $10,419. Our net is a little bit over $9,000 and that's on the per pupil revenue based on the school finance formula. How's that compared to the state as a? The average across the state is at a level over $8,000. So part of the way the school finance formula works is there's a factor in there for cost of living. It's nice that they have it in there and it's nice that they have it in there, and it's great that they have it in there. And they're required to update their cost of living. They're required to look at cost of living every two years, but they're not required to implement the changes that they find every two years. And our cost of living factor right now is at 1.65 within the school finance formula. It's really based on the most recent survey just over two compared to say the front range school. So we're not getting as much funding as we could be if they were to implement the newer updated cost of living factors that they determined. Were you gonna go on in terms of funding needs and timing? Right, so from our funding needs and timing, I said we are looking at a net loss for the next couple of years until we get everything fully implemented with bringing what we hope to have both snowmass village and an unrestricted millevi coming in to help us shore up where our finance is. And the timing of when we add in, you know, the restricted middle of it, Canada depends upon how quickly we need to move forward on some of the capital items that we have. Questions? Why did you prefer or are you preferring sales tax increase to a property tax increase? I don't prefer one over the other. I know we need both. We don't have the ability to raise all the funds that we need through a property tax. There's just not enough room there within that property tax gap or that milleve override, that 25% to completely fund what we need through property tax. I'd love for it to be property tax based. You have no, there's no ability to raise property taxes. So we know this mill area. No, no. So within our base finance act school formula, there's a mill levy that we have set for the Aspen School District at 4.412 mills. And that by statute is not allowed to go up. We're not allowed to have a local vote on it, and in fact, the only way that number moves is if our assessed valuation grows to the point where it would generate more revenue than what the school finance formula says we can have. And in fact, we did actually have to lower that number in 2009 because of that very situation. So once you move it down, you can't ever put it back up. I would love to be able to have a little bit more control over that number, but by statute, we're not allowed to take that. So as you look at the crystal ball sales tax is about the only way you can get there is that correct? Yes ma'am with the other items. We're going to implement everything that we can. We need all sources of revenue to keep our programs moving forward. Any other questions? I said a question. How much does AEPF the Education Foundation contribute to the schools every year? We receive anywhere from $400,000 upwards of, you know, $700,000 a year depending upon the year that we have, how excellent the fundraising sources have been. There are a certain number of positions that AEF funds kind of consistently from one year to the next. And then on top of that there are kind of some special programs that they bring in differently based on annual funding. We were actually a little bit concerned that the sales tax we cannibalized some of our fundraising. In fact, the opposite is true. The community has turned out in support of they from the community. Our communities have placed education as one of the top priorities so we've been very gratified that our fundraising has not been heard by the presence of a sales tax. Any other questions? I have one more. Just out of curiosity, is it a given that the other communities that are sending kids to school Don't have the capacity to pay or are you playing a reach out to them as well for like carbonyl and basalt and that kind of well You have a three you know like you said a 3% you know differential between what's going on out of district Versus what's here in snowmass 18 to 15% or so right of your student body what's here in snowmass 18 to 15% or so right of your student body. So I just wondered why it wouldn't stand a reason that these other communities might not also be tapped for funds. We don't have the ability to include them within our property tax base. Our property taxes are only within our school district boundaries. And from a sales tax perspective. only within our school district boundaries. And from a sales tax perspective, that would, if we chose to, if there were an option to go that route, it would be in concert with the Roaring Forks School District to ask their communities for a similar tax where the funding, you know, would be generated. But I don't believe that they, that they would necessarily be a mandate to share a portion of any sales tax that they might derive and send it our direction based on a student count. It's an open enrollment state and we receive funding throughout that state formula for the students from down valley that do come here. So it's not like we're not getting any funding for those kids. Got it. I just wondered. And those families are also participating when the Aspen Education Foundation and other fund raising opportunities and not kind of things so they are financially contributing into our schools. It's a good question just to follow up. There's a certain percentage of residents in the salt that are in Pitkin County. So would they be part of your school district? No. Our school district boundaries basically along the bridge line here in Snowmass and drop down, Watson divide and basically there at the Stuttian-Jurbos area. So, we have a lot of water supply that we have to do. We have to do that. We have to do that. We have to do that. We have to do that. We have to do that. We have to do that. We have to do that. We have to do that. We have to do that. We have to do that. We have to do that. We have to do that. We have to do that So when do you see this coming forward? You see it in 2016, 2017, 30 plus. So I have that funding on here beginning in 2016, 2017. So we would have, we would hopefully have something on the ballot in fall of 2015 so that the collections could start in January of 2016 and then be available for use in the school district for the 16-17 school year. And ballot initiatives have to be done by August, middle-aged? Okay. Would there be any consideration that we might want to revisit our various percentages in the town in terms of looking at some allocation, reallocation. I'm going to my council. I don't have a magic bullet here. I think we best do that if we're going to consider raising the sales tax higher than it is. I think the work a good idea. I think that's a good idea. I think that's a good idea. I think that's a good idea. I think that's a good idea. I think that's a good idea. I think that's a good idea. I think that's a good idea. I think that's a good idea. I think that's a good idea. I think that's a good idea. I think that's a good idea. I think that's a good idea and maybe we're gonna have to take a look, you know, a hard look at where we're at with our total allocation. I mean, obviously we're all supportive of the school system. We wanna make sure it's right for our kids. We just have to figure out how to get there. Exactly. I would say we have this on a work session in the future. Clint? Yes. Does the do I have a consensus amongst my fellow colleagues? Yes. I think it's extremely important to work session maybe June or June I think everybody's here. I won't be here for that work session. Sorry. If you move the date I will. Okay. We may want to talk about moving the date. You're kind of important to be here for that work session, but sorry. If you move the date, I will. OK, we may want to talk about moving the date, because you're kind of important to be here. I kind of important. Yeah, that's kind of important here. You may want to. Pardon? You may want to do this as a work session in conjunction with the beginning of your budget. So you understand the big picture. When do we start the budget? Start in July, but I mean, for the allocation question, it's really, you know, currently, one thing goes to general fund. Two and a half cents goes to marketing. And then that's the three and a half cents. And then the two point four goes, or the lighting tax goes towards group sales. I'd be interested in seeing what that growth curve is year over year and those types of questions on those numbers. And we can give you a lot of history going on going forward, but obviously we're just in community demands outweigh the needs. Yeah, yeah, right. question. You got how best you pay for it. I'm assuming the reason that picking county sales taxes and what that is because the school district is not picking county. Not necessarily. There was zero political will to even consider it as a political thing. Correct. In part because it's not a single school district entity. So the combination of the two. Right. And to speak to the timing, some of the things having worked a lot on the political side and getting this initiative done, we think would be really valuable if we kind of separated the snowmast village ballot question from the Aspen ballot question for the simple purpose that I think Aspen is looking to snowmast village to see that there's going to be equity amongst the players that have kids in the school district. And so I think if there was an option to put this tax to put this ballot question on in the fall of this year and hopefully get a positive response and a passage that that would give some lift and momentum to a question on the Aspen Valley in the spring of 2016. Because if we wait until the fall of 2016, it really leaves Kate in the district in an uncomfortable position of uncertainty about funding. And the hard part, I mean I'm sure you've already looked in there, the hard part for us. Is our next regular election, next regular election is November 16. And so I mean, it would be by table, I'm referring to John on this, but you can do it any November, but it would still be a special election on our path in November 15. And so November 16 is our next election cycle, next regular election. These are things we can discuss. There's pros and cons. Right, right. But it wouldn't. It's not in our regular election cycle. Yeah, Mara, Mark, you can ask, is there anything that the council knows of right now that would be on the fall of 2015? Not special election. I think there may be something coming in 2016 in November. Another district. Community wide and John and I've sat in meetings. There's a number of tax initiatives floating around valley wide that you all need to be aware of and timing of those types. So is council comfortable putting this into the budget season or would you like to do it during the work session initially? We can have the initial data to keep the discussion going. I guess it's all right. I'll tell you we can say here's the history, here's the you know, I think that's more than a 20 minute conversation. And we won't have the Jackson's probably for 16, but we'll be close enough for government work to be. It's a big policy question, so I think we need to tackle the policy question sooner than later. Not a mayor, I just want to trek something that I said in my opening comments and that was that we had the endorsement of the Board of Realists, that is not correct. We did not ask them for their endorsements, so I just want to make sure the record's clean. Thank you very, very much. It was a great presentation. We'll be in touch if there's additional questions. Kate, are you the contact person? John, Laura? Okay, start with me. Kate, well I truly appreciate the information and it's extremely important to take care of our kids in our community, which continues to grow. Yeah, so thank you so very much. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Okay. Well, people get set up. Let's do five. Take five. Get set up. Thank you so much. Thanks for saying. Thank you. So much like the same. you 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 you you Okay. the next item on our agenda. I got the charge but it would take some time to figure out each individual municipality. The next item on our agenda is the consent agenda. There are no items under consent agenda. So I'm going to move on to the public hearing. And this evening we will be working with related. This evening we have in front of us, the sketch plan review, resolution number 17 series of 2015. And then the purpose of this resolution is to be focused on the PUD amendment sketch and the hope to get it to preliminary plan level and for directives to the applicant in the application. So with that said, I'm going to turn over to Julie Ann. Thank you, Mayor. Tonight we are hopefully winding down this PUD sketch plan step of the process. Just to give you just a quick summary, especially for the folks in the audience about what happened at the last meeting, Council had a lot of discussion with the applicant regarding vitality, particularly in the lot 2, lot 3 portion of the base village. Your concern that you expressed to the applicant was really creating an environment that it would be conducive for visitors as well as residents really creating something that's more of a community purpose. So the idea was to really try and see if there's a way for us to accomplish that in this plan. There was General Consensus at that last meeting about the Caching Lou proposal that had been put forward by the applicant. And I think that Council was comfortable with that concept that the Caching Lou would be put towards a community purpose that might be located elsewhere within the community to be determined. Generally, there was not agreement that the proposal, which was the aquatic center next to the limelight and the Discovery Center, those weren't really what were considered a good choice for community purpose. There was general consensus about that. You had directed staff to meet with the applicant and to try and work out some details. And we did do that, but we realized that each of us are kind of looking at it from a different perspective. They wanted assurances of what they might be able to get an exchange for that last million dollars that was discussed. And staff had concerns about what exactly does the project look like and what are the impacts of that project. So, you know, although I think generally we were in agreement that we were heading in the right direction. I think we were concerned about getting bogged down in the details quite honestly of what was discussed at council in trying to move it forward. So last Wednesday, the applicant came forward with another proposal, another offering, and it was their offer supersedes the April 1 letter that you had received, and they've got that as an attachment to the staff report. Again, the offer includes the $4.5 million in cash and lieu. And although they were suggesting that the first million of value above and beyond that would go towards the plaza and then a second one could be like a density for dollars for density kind of approach. Again, we kind of got concerned about, you know, exactly where was that going to land, what was that going to look like, etc. So, again, you know, the devil's in the details. And we really feel strongly that if the goal of council remains to move this project forward, that probably it makes sense for us to give some pretty broad guidance to the applicant at this stage in the game to move forward in preliminary. And not get to hung up on exactly what the unit equivalents would be for exomitose square footage, et cetera. So when it comes down to it, really the major change in that application that you saw with sketch plan really focused on that plaza. And you're pretty clear about what you wanted in terms of itality, et cetera, with that. So the applicant did here, you I think pretty loud and clear, and came back in that letter of April 8th to indicate that they're their willingness to look at a pool facility for the benefit of residents in Capitol and Hayden that would probably be in conjunction with buildings 10 AB and I know that that was a big part of your concern and there are some letters attached from some residents your concern and there are some letters attached from some residents regarding that need for that pool or the desire to have council consider that pool. So we as staff have drafted a resolution for your consideration. It's pretty broad. We essentially took the planning commission's resolution, what they had put forward to you, what you've seen. But we basically included two, the two pieces that we thought we had general consensus. And that was the cash and lieu for a future to be determined community purpose. The schedule of which would be determined at preliminary, although they did come back and suggest that they would have payment by November of 18, I believe is what was proposed in that. Then, secondarily, the plaza, having a higher level of improvements in that plaza area, that would include such things as a resort-style seasonal ice ring, a signature fountain area, a place for congregation and a vibe. I think it was the term that Alyssa had used. Something that would really get us closer to really serving as a community-wide purpose as opposed to just something specific to the residents in that area, et cetera. So those were the two items that we kept broad, but did include in your resolution. We feel that council has looked at this in quite a bit of detail over the last couple weeks. And as long as you feel comfortable with the physical layout of the design. There wasn't a whole lot of dissension on that that we heard as staff. The community purposes, you've been hammering quite a bit on, and I think you're pretty close with that. I think that the core issues are still there. You went through those, you generally gave some feedback on those. The applicant is aware of what remains as some of those core issues, including things like the traffic being an issue and trying to continue making that move forward. But we think that this really could create a satisfactory framework for the applicant to come back at preliminary and have it be consistent with the intent of the land use regulations. So that's the way that your resolution has been drafted. Consistent with the planning commission's recommendation, we're recommending that you approve resolution 17, series of 2015, with the conditions that have been set forth. And I would just reiterate that there are three letters attached to your packet. One was from Bruce Smith, who has indicated that their primary concern is with a pool facility of some sort. Mel Blumenthal is president of Bonclave, indicated their concern with mass and scale of if there was going to be an exchange of density or ues for cash, etc. The concerns about that, how it might affect views from their complex. The third one was from Jim DeFrancia, who is representing the Hayden and Capitol P. homeowners. And again, just stipulating or indicating to council, please consider that a pool is a high priority for that group. So with that, that really concludes our comments. Craig? Thank you, Madam Mayor, and thank you, fellow council members or council members for having this special meeting today to discuss this resolution. I also wanna thank staff for turning this around in a week and meeting with us again last week. It's been a great process being able to work with them and hem around these details. We've read the resolution. We are in general agreement with it. We really don't have any comments. We think that it's acceptable. We think that the Wayne which it's written lays out of framework that we're okay with and seems to be consistent with what we heard last week. So we really don't have any further comments. We think that it's in pretty good shape and we're excited to move forward to pre-limp if that's the will of council. Thank you, Craig. Well, we will go through detail within the resolution. I'm going to go ahead and continue the public hearing. So I do see a lot of people in the public coming together this evening. I'll take some comments now from the public or during our discussion we'll take additional comments. So is there anyone in the public who would like to step forward at this point? If not, okay. Tony, could you wait just one second? Okay. Could you refresh our memory in the community's memory and those watching on TV? What are the lots that we're talking about this evening? And I notice within Jillian's comments you talk about lots five and seven. I need could you refresh us all where all this stuff is? Yes and I can maybe. Okay. That's fine. There is a chart there. Okay. Steve. Well, you can be Van a White. I think most of the people are looking at the other people. Well, you can be Van a White. Yeah, Van a White. Oh, that's I'd like the community to see it in those in our public. I think most everyone on council knows so. His kind of turn it so everybody sees it. Alyssa, do you want to see the chart? It's okay, I'm okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Oh, it's good. Got it? Just note that that is the previous entitled. Thank you, enough. Just gonna say this is the previous entitled. Thank you. This is the currently entitled MATFOR base village. Lot 7 is right over here, the blinking red light. Must be running out of batteries. But this is Lot 7, which is building 12. And Lot 5 is right here, which is building 11. We have been studying those further since our last meeting. I know there was some concern with mass and scale and the request for additional density associated with the additional million dollars. We have some level of confidence, additional research needs to be done into these specific buildings, but we think that we can stay within the building envelopes and still use those additional 20 UE. We understand that there is, you know, sensitivity around, massing of these buildings, especially with the restrictions and the lots themselves. And so the goal is to stay within the confines of those specific building envelopes as currently entitled, that means height and the overall massing. That is a slight change from what we had included in our memo, but just still to be further refined, but that is our end goal is to stay within. Okay, that's very, very helpful. And there's one other thing, 10AB, with that combination of lots. When were you going, what was the plan to bring that online? I don't remember kind of that. Well, so when we talk about phasing and specific delivery dates, we have a very stringent timeline associated with milestones with the development agreement. When we get to the side of the ski back trail, development agreement. When we get to the side of the ski back trail, there is not a set, I guess delivery dates. There's a phasing schedule, so everything on the podium needs to be substantially begun before you can start breaking into the rest of this. Obviously, there's absorption is a great concern and we want to deliver too much product before we bring on the next phase. As it is stated today, Vesting Runs still 2024. So by the code, you would have to pull your building permit by that point and start construction to maintain your ability to develop those specific sites. Thank you, Craig. Is there any questions from anyone as to what's where? OK. I just, in Nell's letter, when he's talking about the enclave, and if 10a and b is combined lots, what, 4 and 6 to make 10a, b, I just want to understand what he's talking about in terms of his views being restricted or the pedestrian crossways. I just, it's a little confusing to me. And we understand that and where it's sketched and unfortunately we at this level do not really get into those specific details. We know there is a concern to preserve a trail connection through the property. The current plan is currently proposed maintains a trail connection. We will definitely show that in further detail, but we know that is important to maintain that connection from the enclave to the village street. And then there are some concerns with having a building on this site. And we understand and it's actually in the resolution that we will bring forth visual. And yeah, generated impact studies so you can get a better sense of what that will be in terms of the overall impacts to the ongoing. But he says in his letter that the proposed reconfiguration results in an arbitrary, trailly place pedestrian connection. So what's different than it was before? I can't comment on why Mel said that. I haven't sat down with Mel in reading. No, I'm just curious. Is it look different than it was before? Trail connection if you look in our If you give me just one second I can get an image. Okay. Where you? Thank you, Rhonda. Yeah, come on up. to that design book. This is what the post is the enclave right here, whereas the previous connection between four and six was here, and now you can see it's looking a little bit like the post. Hey Julian. Hey Julian. Did you do that kind of tort outfit? I'm going to get it on the screen there in one moment. So everybody can see it? Currently under the entitlements there was intended to be a direct connection from the on-call behaviors down to the village street because these are two separate lots under the entitlement with the proposal that's let six takes consumes let four the idea is to spread out the development across those two and their concern is to make sure that there's a direct path still to be able to get into the base village. So it may wind a little bit or curve. Okay, you know this goes into the preliminary. We don't know what great detail, and I'm trying to show this to you, but the intent is to preserve that connection. We understand the importance of that. We also understand, Mel has some concerns with the views. We have not been able to present any specific data on those impacts or visual aids. And so we're definitely aware of it and'll be prepared and pre-limbed to address those specifically in great detail. Okay. Thank you. I had one other question. No, I think is there any other questions from Council on the staff report, Council members? Any comments from the public? Tony, you had your hand up. Good afternoon, two. All members have the Snowmass Town Council. And I would like to say that it sounds like things are starting to move along and that this is a really wonderful opportunity for the village of Snowmass to become the world class destination resort that you want to be and also one of the finest livable communities. And I'd like to, there's three areas that I think that more thought and more sketching could be put into the proposed plans. And I know that everyone is anxious to get to the preliminary stage and that this is a sketch plan. And I think that the things that I'd like to bring forward that they can be considered as part of the preliminary plan. But first off, so far as the connections within Snowmass Village and connecting town center and the recreation center and all the way down to brush creek. I downloaded the agenda for today with all the handouts and I read through everything and a lot of the concerns that people have brought forward are the pedestrian connections. One thing that's made Aspen especially the recreation how we got that approved was we had it was called a seamless pedestrian and cycling connection from town out to the rec center to buttermilk. And now Aspen Parks and Rec is bringing a lot of that out to Berlin game to the airport. And I believe that snowmass, what I've heard from a lot of your visitors is that they love snowmass because of the village atmosphere that you are creating. For full disclosure, I work security and I've worked based village in different capacities from day one when the holes were in the ground. And what I have seen sprung out of that ground is really incredible, and you really need to be proud of it. In the afternoons when you have the music there, and you see all the little kids coming out of the Aspen ski company. As I said last week, I teach swimming, I've been a swimming instructor for 40 years. I see all these little bit of kids and my first thought is, cha-ching, cha-ching, because it is such a market that you have. And what I would like to segue into is that is the market, the demographic that I believe is what Snowmass is trying to develop. And I think that that is the demographic that has the money to come here to spend a week, two weeks, to a month. What I would love to see is, and this is going to lead into the swimming pool issue, is that I would surprise that the town council said that they thought that an ice skating rink, which is a temporary seasonal amenity, would be appropriate for the plaza in front of the limelight or on that lot that's in the middle of Bayes Village. The reason being is, as Alyssa said, that you want to create vitality by it's written in a very well written description of the process that everyone's going through by your planning department that you want to get a vibe going. So I look at all those little kids and their families and they're going for the pizza and whatnot and like what can they do next. The sun is shining out there on the plaza with all the hotels and it's a trip to go down to the rec center. I mean it really is. That's like an excursion. That's an adventure. Anytime you go swimming these days with your family at recreation centers, it's an adventure. So with that being said, is that one of the goals or dreams that I envision, and again, this is your exploratory phase or the sketch phase, when you come down from your ski mountain where someone is driving up to the rodeo grounds that those people can have a seamless transition through that whole area. I brought and I'm sighing a little bit definitely but I apologize. I brought for you tonight the Aspen Aerial Concept that was brought before to Aspen City Council and I will leave it for you so you can have at the end of the meeting so you can see what that concept is. I also gave a copy of it to the airport director. He's new to our airport, Mr. John Kinney. And I explained to him when I was at the last No Masked Town Council that you were discussing the possibility of an aerial connection. As part of that pedestrian connection, you come down from the ski mountain, you walk through the plaza, you take a dip in the pool, what not, you can get honor gondola, brings you town center down to the rodeo grounds, and then part of the family, the recreation center is very limited as to what they offer in the aquatics. And that's a different issue. And then the very last point I'd like to make is the last issue is that, as I said, I was surprised that the council thought that an ice ring would be the best amenity for that area because I doesn't meet the goal that you stated that you wanted year-round vibrancy. And when you take a look at the aspirin recreation center, take a look at their numbers, the people that use that are the aquatics, the pool. And the rate they pay money to rent the ice ice and that's how they make it run. But I would really like for you to consider and I would be happy to discuss some of my ideas further about what I think would be appropriate at that section where the limelight pool is. And then if you could tie it in with this snowmouse recreation center so that you can have the best of both worlds and it's easy enough to be done. You already have existing pools at the rec center, you've got a chunk of change from with your negotiating last the last session where you have $6.5 million. But anyway, this is a really exciting time and there's like three different concepts I brought forward to you tonight, the aerial transportation, the pedestrian connection through the whole village. Imagine tying in the recreation center, all your fields, parks and everything down there with base village and also the mall. So you have a continuous stream and all it takes is a funny hop. Not a slow one. We need to have little speed going here. But between the base village plaza, over to the town center and then the trick is connecting it to the rodeo grounds, but I think it's possible. And then if you could please reconsider this, and I know it's a resolution form tonight, but this ice rink is not the amenity that you want in front. That's your showcase piece. And you said you didn't want a hard scape there all summer long. We joke at the Assa Recreation Center because we still don't have our outsides swimming pool. So we joke and say, well, when they're outsides skating melts down that that's going to become our outsides swimming pool. Yeah, we've got a lot of fountain feature for summer. So thank you. Fountain features. Yes. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Any other public comment? With council or we prepared to move into the resolution? Okay. Julianne, we'll go section by section. If you're fine with that, do you want to lead the discussion or would you prefer that I lead it? You're more than welcome to lead it. Okay. Jim is our expert on the resolution. Okay, Jim. So I'm going to have to defer to him if you have specifics. And I might just ask, if there's any outstanding issues that the council has identified or something that needs to be looked at, it might be a little easier for us to kind of hit the big picture issues rather than go line by line or topic by topic. Because it's 23 pages long, the planning commission spent five meetings on it. The big issues that are outstanding or not outstanding, but are really addressed are community purpose transportation, which calls for a further study for preliminary for the two major intersections we've talked about, Kerns and Carriage Way commercial. They come back and said they will investigate. There's been some space added and I'm skipping one. One of the big ones I'm skipping. Which one? There's one more that you're supposed to have. Okay, well, I mean those are the big ones that, if there's something else we'd love to know with the art, make sure they're in there. I do have one question that just triggers a question for the applicant and there in the resolution it talks about building six which is part of this particular. Why is that delayed to 2019? That to me doesn't make any sense. It has to do with absorption and overall phasing for that specific development. Building eight is where the amenity set is for that specific campus for the sunrise development. Building seven obviously is an important building. It's the front door base village. So there's wanting a bit of space before delivering another building just for general absorption in the market to allow some time before delivering the third building. Okay. And we will be presenting in further detail those impacts associated with that delay in terms of the overall construction in the CMP. Do you want to get any major issues or I was just going to go page by page. Okay, we're ready to go. Page 21. Any comments? Page 22. Nothing on page 22. Page 23. Page 24. There's just a spacing issue on page 24. That's the page Clint I was telling you about. There just needs a space. 3D and 20. Bob you had. I have a couple of questions on this page. Item number two on the maximum build out. What was the originally approved maximum build out from 2004? In UEs? Back in 2004 it was approved at 367. Okay. Okay. On the floor area, item C, kind of the middle of the paragraph, there's a sentence that says for lot three, the maximum FAR of 1.29 to one appears to be met with the reprogramming of the uses and building 6.78 to include fractional units. Would you explain what you mean there? I don't think I understand the relationship between FAR and fractional units. Well, I think the fractional unit concept that was proposed on a lot three, some of the units got a little bit bigger. And I think the total square footage for a lot three was increased slightly, which required that the applicant apply for a minimum lot size standard based on the unit mix and number of veterans within those fractional units. So, and that's how minimum lot size is calculated by using some. So, you're suggesting that the FAR seems to be reasonable as it relates to fractional units which would be slightly larger than if they were wholly owned condos? No, that maximum FAR is actually being met for lot three. That's what that's what that's written says, but when you calculate the minimum lot size standard, that's a different calculation. And because the number of units and the betterment and the unit mixed for the fraction of a lot of lot three, that would calculate to a little larger lot size. So the applicant would should apply for a lot size variance. Okay. At the time I'm a preliminary and I think the latest letter I can almost out. The other question, Jim, in that same section is with the combination of lot six and four and the extension of the FAR of 207 to lot four. How many additional square feet does that allow to be built on that combined lot? Essentially, well it's 2.07 so I think it's about 60,000 square feet. How much? About 60,000. That's 60,000. Yes. So it's essentially double what the lot size is roughly. But that density, the additional square footage is not all on the floor. It's spread out over the entire lot. So I'm just saying that that 10v building is not 60,000 square feet in itself. So it's a NB combined. It's a NB the entire site increases by 60,000. Well, it's still a lot of square footage over the, over the, um, the combined lot. Still 60,000 additional square feet. But when you combine the acreage, the floor area maximum is roughly the same. Okay, it's in line with the other lots. Okay. Okay. Okay. Oh, that's all I have. Okay. That's it. Sorry. So just looking at lot six, it says the combining, originally was 58,000, 30,000 to get to about 88,000 and that the new, um, the new lot size is going to be about 183,000 allowable floor area. It looks like it's increasing by about a hundred thousand square feet. You're mixing the actual size of the lot and the size of the building. So good. Those are the lot sizes 50 and 30 to get to the 88. 183 is the actual size of the building. Gotcha. So you take the 88,000 times 2.07 and gives you the amount or the size of the building you can build. Gotcha. Any other questions on page 24? Page 25. I think I'm good. So this gets a little bit in that 6200 square feet. The reduction on retail in the restaurant. Are we going to have a good conversation during preliminary or are we stuck with what the number that you are proposing? We are looking at the overall program and understand the concern about this reduction and we are going to see what we can do. We also want to make sure that we have a sustainable level of commercial square footage in the village and we look forward to presenting that data to you. I found it interesting. I think it was Julie Ann in her staff memo. Maybe it was some of the conversation that we previously had here is how do you phase that I mean you got a deliverable here in terms of one area base village and then you've got the other whole program are you looking at some way that that can be phased or Delivery of Well, you've got you're gonna get the limelight and Well, you're going to get the limelight and the sunrise complex completed in building six. Correct. Well, then when you look at commercial and retail, you've got another whole area base village. I would assume that your plan is not to put too much retail and restaurants in the next phase. Well, I think it's wise to have it concentrated, but what's the absorption rate for a restaurant? If you have too much restaurant, which is our problem now and too much retail, we all know what happens to our owners. Yeah, I mean, we delivered 40% of the residential and 60% of the commercial in that difference between the two deliveries is obviously not enough density to support the current retail offering and that is obviously something of importance. We think that with the addition of the limelight that starts to be a game changer in terms of overall activity and vitality within base village and also the addition of the amenity set in that courtyard space will be able to provide sufficient traffic for the additional food and beverage and retail that we are bringing online as you noted in our application we do propose for additional retail in the future phase that village street between the vice-roy and the ski back trail was kind of a sleepy experience. There was no interaction between anyone walking down that street and the specific building specifically were 100% residential. Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. No, and we're trying to change that overall experience to create more of a city street experience. That's very helpful. Okay, any other questions on page 25? Okay, moving to page 26. I have some questions. Item C, Jim, it talks about the lessons. The rationale used to control parking by signs of peer week and should be further substantiated. Where is the signage that this is talking about? Where is that signage proposed, either Craig or Jim? I think the applicant and their application was proposing signs as it means to control the parking by use within the base-filled parking garage. And I think the concern, the matching directive is that the applicant provide the parking management plan, the rationalize or justify that particular request. Okay. So that's essentially in the garage itself. Yeah, I think he's specifically referencing parking within the residential zone. There is the mountain club parking, which is proposed to be relocated to that level. And so there will be signage for those specific spaces, reserved the mountain club members only. I see. As against gates or something like this. Right. And gates starts to get really messy. Yeah. I just, yeah. I just didn't understand where it referred to this. Yeah, we probably need to get a clarification in there. The concern also was related to the parking reduction for the limelight hotel from 0.75 to 0.5. The planning commission recommended that we, that the applicant addressed that further in the parking management. Okay. Does it need to be defined a little more, a little more specifically? As far as the directive? Yeah, I don't think so. I think the applicant understands they need to amend their parking management plan. There was one in the original approval. I think they just need to update it further. It has been fully updated to match this current plan. Now, to my fellow council people, item F, I would propose to remove the last sentence describing around about and just using the pedestrian crossing signs, save Haven Islands, et cetera, would likely improve pedestrian instead of using the round about, because that's just another, in my opinion, instead of using the roundabout has, because that's just another, in my opinion, is just another option. And I think the Planning Commission discussed that and they actually inserted the word viable in that second to last line, because they realize it is an option or alternative at this point. Set in stone even though it was the mitigation solution that found back in the original approval. I mean these are the findings and then the directives come later and the analysis is required. Oh I see which mean okay. These are just these are finding is where as far as the viable option are the better ones. That's the direction later on. Okay. Okay with that, Bob. Yeah. Okay. Any others on 26? 27? Yeah. Oh, I had a question on 26. I'm sorry. Yeah. Oh, I had a question on 26. I'm sorry. Jam, where we talk about $400 per square foot of revenue. Base, is that on an annual basis or is that per day? That number is on an annual basis. Okay. That doesn't really save it. It's for the conflant. Okay. Per annum. Okay. Periyanum, okay. Do you want to add that? Yeah, I want to make sure it's, because I couldn't figure out your measuring stick, $400 per square foot of revenue. Periyanum. Annually for investment and retail. Okay, moving on. 27th. On the preservation of community character, it sort of fits here and then it kind of goes also later on in the recommendations. But the planning commission and as a result the town council has a bit of a problem as it relates to architectural review. The architect who we all relate to and refer to has recused this process. So I feel that it would be valuable for the town to retain an architect, to provide us with advice on the design changes that the applicant has made, particularly as a result, as a result to the issue of mass and scale on a visual basis. Again, I mean, I think that we should have the benefit of that professional advice which we can't get because our expert had to recuse himself. So I mean I don't know from a council perspective to address staff in the desire to do that. The question is how do we get there? What you do is when you get the preliminary plan, if you decide you want it to be referred out to an outside expert, you direct staff to obtain an outside expert to give you an opinion on architectural style, whatever you wanna see. Okay, is that seem reasonable? Does it find, does it mean that you can't see? It doesn't go in here, no. No, I don't think it goes in here. Okay, very good point. Okay, moving on. And of course, any community member who has a comment that they like to make about the architectural style is welcome to do so at any of the public hearings. Okay. Moving on through 27. 28. Again, I'm not sure if it's in this section or under directives, but in the phasing area I would like to propose that the phasing of the combined lot four and six, the 10AB, be moved to phase three and lot five go to Phase 4. The reason I'm suggesting that Craig is that it gets, frankly, gets the pool built theoretically faster. And I think that the, again, I think that the Capitol Peak folks deserve that. I'm trying to find this. Well, Councillor Monser, because I think we actually put language in the directives on that. Give me one second. It might be. It just says beyond page 35, which is page 15 of the resolution, item 13 or directive number 13. The last sentence says further building 10 a b should be considered for the next phase east of the ski back trail. Yeah, it's number 11 line 603. Okay. 603. Okay. Is that? Is the deaf is the description next phase east of the ski back trail is that? And what we're trying to articulate is there buildings five 6785 would be the highest priority and after that's completed then 10 a b would be the next time Okay, yeah, so we're on 663 and it's contemplated on 603. Yes, and we understand that. And in the PUD guide itself, it discusses phasing and when you can start another phase and will include specific language in there that hopefully gets you comfortable. If you're curious, the current application shows that building number 11, that's on lots five, is phase three, and then this proposed combined lots, four and six is phase four, and then building 12, which is on lots seven, is phase five. So I think the recommendation would be essentially to reverse those phases. That's a lot the block phases for the development agreement. This is supposed to be finished by 2018. Right. That's the priority. Right? Yes. Okay. Thank you very much, Jim. Thank you, Craig, for your clarification. Anything else on page 28? 29. I underscore no comment other than underscore the issue around trails and connections. So it'll be interesting to see what comes back in preliminary on that one. Anyone else on 29 page 30? On water supply and sewage disposal. It's my understanding that there's been some issues with water that's running out of the base village currently being tested for high fecal content. Can you give us an update on that? I have heard of this. Our independent tests have not been able to verify what we have been told. I'm sure it's the same source but who is giving us this information but we have done our own third party analysis and we did not come back with those same results. Okay, page 29, page 30. I'm going to go to the office. Just get them to your comments, Bob, on 15 about building design guys. Okay. Same idea. Let's move on into section three, which is the directos page 31. Any comments? Commercials dressed there. 32. Craig, thank you for your answer earlier that was very good in terms of commercial and retail. Any other on 32? Oh, um, in one second. No, I'm good. Okay, 32 were fine, page 33. Uh, on line 555, I changed that to Will not May. Were you have a plaza area not to that may include a resort style? I did to Will. Well we left it as May purposefully just to give them, we're creating the framework for them to come back with something. I mean it's completely your choice, but we purposely put May, so they've got the flexibility in their design. I just want to see hardscape come back. And I think if they do, you're going to die. I'll say no. Thank you, Craig. Yes. 34. Line 623. I think that I have substituted that for weather. And that's kind of a long sentence, but I think that you put that versus that the three separate locations for the check in still qualify. I'm blind with that. What's changing? I'm fine with that. What's going on? What's going on? What's going on? What's going on? What's going on? What's going on? What's going on? What's going on? What's going on? What's going on? What's going on? What's going on? What's going on? What's going on You're fine with that that that that that How about the rest of council? What Jim again what what does D mean under under employee housing D? Well multi-family one had a lower generation rate for employee housing requirements. And I think we gave them the lower rate because they were proposing central check and facilities. And under the original approval, they did have central check and in building seven. But they also had a separate check and in building eight with this proposal. They're adding a third separate check and facility for building five for the line-light in the lower P3 garage level. So you have to determine in your mind whether these three check-in facilities, separate check-in facilities are still considered central check-in that they still occur within the parking garage or the central core area of the base village. So with this, this last portion, if the condominium ceases to meet the definition, are we talking about this decision taking place through prior to the PUD being finally approved? Or are we talking about it after the fact? I think council will have to make that determination to implement a plan stage. That's a preliminary plan. Okay. And I can have a little background on this point. They're currently vested with the M1 job rates for employee housing calculations. So if you determine that it's not considered central check-in enough, then that will substantially increase the employee housing. I understand. I just wasn't clear to me when that decision was gonna be made. But now you've clarified it, so the rest of it falls into place for me. Great. I was just going to mention that D came from a common from D with Rotowski with planning commission with his concern if we were to sell a future lot that was not going to meet that specific designation as MF1 and they didn't actually have to go through an amendment to the PUD but in fact whatever they were doing did not meet that requirement anymore. That is what they now need to have met is what is currently required by code. And this is already in existence in the PUD. So you just wanted to have it restated so it's unfrut and clear and everyone understands. Okay. That's 34. 35. I guess I'm going to suggest a re-wording of 14AI. 14 AI. And rather than specifically talk about a traffic control officer, consider the options for lower carriageway and explore the resources to fund. So we'd read in consideration of the base village service agreement. Consider the options for lower carriageway, wood road, intersection and explore resources to fund. Okay. Madam Mayor, if I may comment on this. We are committing to funding an additional traffic control officer. We are also proposing to bring that in-house. So the police don't have to be burdened with this. Just in case it was an emergency they had to go attend to and they had to leave their post managing traffic. By bringing in in-house, having them trained and certified by the police department will allow them to be on site and not having to be pulled away for something else or distracted and always available at any time when the need occurs. So would that limit the options that we will explore when you come back on May 4? Where is the solution? Okay. Okay. I don't want to have a solution before. It's just something we're proposing. Okay. I don't want to have a solution before. It's just something we're proposing. Okay. It's we're committing to that proposal that it's all on the table for further discussion. And what's this install sufficient traffic control devices at the easterly intersection of the transigot garage? What do we mean by that? Why are you on? Why are you on? transit garage. What do we mean by that? What line are you on? I'm on 675 install sufficient traffic control devices. That's to address the transportation concern about adequate movement of transit through the Trump base village transit garage. With traffic coming inbound to access the garage from Wood Road at full build build out, that's going to increase, the traffic's going to increase. So the applicant, we thought maybe having a traffic signal incorporated within the garage to help facilitate that traffic control and movement might be worthy of consideration down the road. That's where that conflict is with the bus is coming out and you're driving up. Yeah. When the P3 level opens up behind the building A under building five, you're going to have a lot more turning movements, left hand turning movements into that area, as well as traffic coming out. So this refers to inside the parking garage. That's extremely helpful. Because I couldn't figure out, are you talking out on the street or where it was? Okay. Okay, that's page 3536. It is the language change by Councilman Circus, acceptable and 14A1. 14A? In from whether to that No, no we're up a considerate for options for the traffic control officer I'll I'll repeat it again in consideration of the base village services agreement Consider the options for lower carriage for lower carriageway in wood Road and explore resources to fund. We did you say in consideration and consider? Say it again? I did. You can't have those same words. I can't do that twice. Welcome to my oral councilman's room. I wonder who's in your world. That's the kind of stuff that makes me crazy. You get the concept. We'll explore and consider changing the wording. At the same time, I hear related committing to a minimum or two officers out of their own pockets. So. The staff, the staff analysis says is they cutting the checks the easy part is getting the people there on time to deal with the issue is where we have difficulty. Their response to that is we'll bring it in house and I think with Councilman Circus of St. Let's, that's one option. Let's make sure we're exposed. Yeah, I just don't think that's probably. It kind of goes back to the question that you asked. Is this going to limit the options we hear about? I'm making sure that's really that was the really the whole point. Well, why don't you just say explore resources to fund an increase provision? You know, I'm including but not limited to another traffic control officer or something like that. I don't know. You guys can figure it out. Well, it sounds like a lawyer. God. This is so lawyery. I think they got the idea of how you're going to modify this because it's just don't put it into consideration in the same way. I think that's a great idea. Put it in there. So, you have a remedy. Madam Mayor, if I could just have one comment on this point. This AI is specifically dealing with traffic control officer. I think if we go to see it allows for the further exploration of impacts on that intersection. So I think it may be covered in that section. I think you are absolutely correct. I can't get a work. But you need a space between C&D. Sorry. Do we have a? Do we want to go to LOSC? And here's the other part of this. I know we have LOSB on the 10th busiest day. There's been some conversation as to how did we ever land on LOSB on the 10th busiest day. I can't remember. Guys this is when I forget. How we ever landed on that and who landed on it? I'm sure for the comp plan recommends. See. Yeah. I think for design purposes we said B, knowing that you could always go back and do less, but if you wanted to understand the difference between B and C, it seemed to make sense. They thought they could design for B, and if it did, if it design worked, I always do not aim for B instead of C. That's the calculation of Nexus. Well, could we, I mean given the fact we were looking for options to the roundabout, could we look at options that met LOSC and just considered them as against things that met LOSB? The alternatives are going to have an LOS of a C in at least one occurrence so it definitely will be something you're going to be looking at. There's really no other alternative to a roundabout that gives you a B and better. And this is assuming that base falls is completely built out. Right. OK. Yep. OK. Let's go on down. I'm pretty sick. I just want to get clarification. Did you agree that you wanted to change it to see it to give more latitude? Or do you want to keep it at B and presume that we're going to achieve that goal? I would do a minimum of LOSC or better. I don't want to do that. Chris doesn't want to do that. What do you guys want to do down here? I think we should shoot for B. Okay, I got two going for B. Will this up? I think I'm going to go B. Okay, well we're going to keep it B. It is. But you've already told us that one design is not going to hit the alternatives to roundabout is very very difficult to ever get to be or better at every single turn. And so it's just a matter of looking at where this sea is occurring and it's the left on from curves to brush creek down Valley. Is it acceptable for that specific turn movement to have a level of C? You know, the rest of the turns that are probably used on a much greater basis is all B or better. Well, since we haven't seen the various signs, so it's good. Yeah, I mean, every single turn movement is different. We'll see that in the next round. And then, we'll tell you about it. I think it's incorrect me if I'm wrong but I appreciate the detail and the time that we're spending and the time that's been spent but to keep a framework of the big picture we're really looking at moving towards the next phase of design. We are not doing a deal here today correct me if I'm wrong in terms of where we're outlining things but council is not forgiving their positions or giving up any rights. The applicant likewise is not. And so just to remind us of the big picture, we can make or manage it all the way through. And it's fine, but we're gonna get another round of doing that, whether it's we, I mean, it can be in my understanding in staff, you know, we're trying to get there, but it's still very broad. We still have a lot of room and a lot of time and a lot of play to work through the different issues. Very good point, Chris. Very good point. OK, anything else on 36? I may or I do have one comment. OK. Starting online, 723, the directive asking the applicant to provide a letter from RAPTA or coordination with RAPTA to increase service levels. I think that is very difficult thing to do in terms of striking a deal with RAPTA to improve bus service. I'm not sure if anyone has said that the current bus service is not acceptable. I think some people in the community may say they have to wait too long, but I think overall people are pretty satisfied with that. We would definitely reach out to RAPDA and get the stats on what is currently occurring rather than just people guessing and to get the ridership in their overall plan for the future. But to direct us to coordinate with them, I think, is a tough thing for us to be able to commit to. Yeah, that's a very, very good point. I sit on the raft aboard, and we should be seeing the seasonal numbers pretty darn soon. The whole notion that they're going to sign off on a letter in terms of bus service and additional plans. I think a conversation is great, but I know that we're the, I don't want to say too much. I know we're looking at the overall transit program right now at Raffa in the strategic planning session in June. Okay. I think the directive just requests the report. Yes. For you know, for the shall. So yeah. Yeah. Yeah. But shall provide a report in coordination. I mean, we'll be reasonable. Yeah. Yeah. That's. I think where it goes is we have the traffic engineers coming up with lower proposed numbers for base-fillage at Bildo, but we didn't get that confirmed by Raft and it was assumed because of the free service that we had less traffic. So that's where I think this is going. I agree with you, the shell might be a little strong. That's if we can have Raft to confirm those numbers to show that reduction then we're getting to where you have a justification for it. Out of agreement. Okay. Anything else in 36? 37. 38. Any? Yes, John. Bill brought up when we were in the finding section regarding the water and the sewage disposal. It wasn't a corresponding directive. Okay. Pardon me, I didn't understand what you said. Okay, and the finding section, Bill brought up the water supply line 383, the pair of the F7. In the directives, there wasn't a corresponding directive to, as a fine, there are a number of obligations that have yet to be fulfilled and should be addressed at preliminary plan. That's a fine I guess you want a directive to correspond with. I was talking about directive number two. Number two addresses the utility plan and that says the utility and easement plan design shall be provided with the preliminary plan application also addressing the conditional semis water intent. Do we have any comments that Bill talked about equal matter tripping out? That's. I thought the installation of the utility lines and brush creek road was meant to increase the capacity for that sewage line. If you don't want it in there, you don't, I don't care. Well, okay. Well, we want to make sure that the directive is at that study and we know what we're doing over there. So this is a finding under section or paragraph 7, 383. So we can, I mean, if it's your desire, we'd be happy to be here. Utility plan, we can, I mean if it's your desire, we'd be happy to be, the utility plan, we can increase the language to address, or at least investigate the concerns outlined by Councilman Madison. And we can, if you've said you've already done some analysis, we can look at the analysis. We can, and you know, just on this specific point, CMS Water and Sandistrict did not provide any specific comments with regards to this application as well. So we're bringing in a comment from someone outside of this application and we can't really verify it at this point, but we would be more than happy to look into any additional issues that may arise. I think we put it in. Is that a, is that a agreeable list of? Yeah, that's good with me. I mean, if we can just get to test and make sure we're on the right track, then that would be good. Well, but do we need to tie in this will serve letter and the conditions in the will serve letter with this directive in the utility plan is. Their letters are incorporated in this resolution by reference. So that's one of the attachments? Well, we'll just be incorporated by reference. We'll just list all the comments. There's so many pages to copy. They include the it's referenced by letter in the date. 0.809. Ah, okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. I see it now. Okay. Any other comments? On each 37, number 18. It just seems like there's, I don't I find it a little there's a lot of information it seems kind of confusing maybe I just don't understand the rights as the community type facilities I'm not three should be installed up front is the community facility the clinic yes the why doesn't it just say the clinic I just because I didn't know that't it just say the clinic? I just because I didn't know that it was referring to the clinic. I was then confused. What is the community facility? Well, this area right here, the lot three that was originally supposed to come first before this lot. Right. Right. And now they're proposing to combine it. So the concern was that they bring forward these buildings here. Yeah. was into combining it. So the concern was that they bring forward these buildings here. Yeah. It'll make a more, it'll appear like you have more of a complete ability with these buildings that built first. And the applicant was suggested that they could modify the phasing if they wish to at preliminary plant stage to construct these buildings first that they wanted to. But that would move the medical clinic up. We did not say that would be something we would consider. Well, it just says that the applicant could consider changing their refazie plan. I don't know that. I don't think that's the wrong town. But that would just move up the Tommy for these buildings any medical clinic if they did instead of combining these phases. I mean, at the end of the day day we're trying to deliver four five six seven and eight as soon as we possibly can Buildings four and five are a bit more designed just because they've Started in this process and stopped and they could break ground As soon as this spring if we were able to get in approval on obviously not now But I'm just saying that they're almost shovel ready. 67 and 8 is still going through a conceptual design period, and it takes quite a bit of time after we get an approval for them to progress those drawings to construction level. And at the end of the day, they all have to be delivered by 2018, which is not a lot of time. And we are coordinated with the hospital specifically with regards to the clinic. Their lease runs pretty much for the period of time until building eight is delivered. And we are working with the hospital to make sure that they are kept up to speed with what the plans are for a building eight in the clinic specifically. Thank you. Did that answer your question, Alyssa? Yeah, it did. I just still think that that is really wordy and weird, but if everyone else is fine with it, I'll just go with it. Okay. Any comments from the public? Any comments from the public? I'm going to ask for a motion. Or was it a motion number 17? Base Village Major PUD amendment? Do I have a motion to approve? So moved. Just to clarify, as amended. Yes, as amended. Is that fine with you, Bob? Yes. As that fine with you, Bob? Yes. As amended. Second. Any further discussion? All in support? Aye. Aye. All opposed? Okay. Good job. Thank you very much. You can close the public here. I will now close the public here. I do have one question. What's the timeline from preliminary to planning commission so we can all organize our brains around when we might have brain drain again? I mean, I mean, without actual numbers, these guys need to turn around a lot of information they need to provide. Once it's provided to us as staff, we've got 15 days to call it complete. And then after that, we've got a time frame that we need to do the review and have the staff report written. And that staff report is going to be significant and I would estimate 45 to 60 days after that completion review. And the code, these guys are going to defer to the code, but I'm just talking to actual management, getting the job done. It's going to be several months before the plan information sees it, because it's going to take these guys at least a month. I'm assuming they're trying it around a nest several months after that. Yeah, we're trying to commit to a submission date of May 22nd. Whoa, that's healthy. Okay. Thank you very, very much. Good job, all. Good job, staff, you've worked very, very hard and so has related. Next item is policy and legislative public hearings. There are none. Administrative reports. None. Town council reports and actions. Any updates? Alyssa. Anything for council? Anything at all you want to talk about? Sure. I'll talk about something. It's not really related to my job on the council, but I have been working really hard on this event, which is happening on Saturday. It is called Forever Love, and it is a way for people in our community to honor those that we've lost and to honor yourselves. It is a free event, and there are two, there are four different options of sessions that you can do and you can do two of those there each 45 minutes and then there's going to be a kind of gathering final ceremony with music and I'm actually speaking at it and I think it's going to be great and we ask people to register you can go on the Pathfinder's website and I'm actually speaking at it. And I think it's gonna be great. And we ask people to register. You can go on the Pathfinder's website and register. The person does not have to have passed away from cancer to participate. It really includes everyone in this valley. And lots of great organizations are working with us. Hope Center, Minds Spring, hospice. So it's gonna be, I think a really great event. center mind spring. How's this going to be? Yeah. So it's going to be I think a really great event. It's all at Peppie. And there's an event for kids that runs the whole hour and a half so adult can go to their events. And that's it. And I just hope people will come out for it. It's this Saturday. This Saturday. At three. At three o'clock. Yep, upkey. Yep. Marker calendars. Okay. Bill. Reminder that the town cleanup day is May 15th. As the snow starts to melt, there is a lot of garbage sitting around. So I'd like to encourage everybody to get out and pick up some trash. I don't have anything. Fruidae Water and Power Authority is hosting a public meeting tomorrow night, 7 o'clock at the Third Street Center in Carbondale to discuss potential releases of water from Roodie Reservoir, which could impact the flows in the frying pan and Roodie, depending on their timing and amounts. So there'll be a discussion of the issue and questions and answers as well. Tomorrow night, 7 o'clock, third street center, Carvingdale. Is anyone from the front range coming? Or is this primarily a local? I don't know. If there's someone coming from the Colorado Water Conservation. Not a front range issue. You water issue. It's going west. Well, but all in all, I wish Denver would get a little bit more active to never mind. And be apolitical. Chris? I'll just add that in this circular and contradictory nature of things here on the planet. We are having a lot of warm weather and I have to try to keep my mind maintained somewhat on the big picture issues. Not only as a ski resort but as a country in a globe in terms of climate change and that being said it also provides kind of the contradictory experience of great spring weather and time to go hiking. And in the circular nature of things, it is great gardening weather right now. My carrots and lettuce and things are already coming up. And in terms of which books you read or not, there's no better way to work on the issues of community and climate change and things like this, perhaps, than gardening, because it reduces all that transportation cost, all that extra water that we're going to send to California and then bring back in the form of a plant. So I'm just throwing that out there, but mostly I'm celebrating the fact that my little seedlings are coming up. And I welcome the right side of the road. It's true. You got to play. I got to play. You got to play. You got to play. Our next meeting is next week. Monday. Week, midday. What's on the agenda next week? Just getting like work. No rest for the weary. It's for to one. Pardon? Markey. To be one and discuss when we were going to do that. Well, I'm going to do something in June with the school. Yes. We had 10 to 10 to 10 scheduled base village, which obviously we don't need to do. And then that's, that was the major issue, which is now dealt with. We've had to potentially start the discussion of the GID and the Metro District. I don't know if that's going to happen in a week or not. Do you want it too? The kind of overview of the different between Metro Districts and GIDs, the way it was written down. So it's an educational session, basically. It's going to be an education. We're going to try and pull some reports together. Do you want that now? Or do you want to wait to get closer to your pull-in manner? I think we could wait. You can see I'm not really pushing to have a meeting. Oh. There's, there's, and I'm running unless you to have a meeting. Oh. Hmm. There's, there's, run to let you know something like, don't have to end down. I don't have anything absolutely time required on my agenda. Thank you. When are we going to be presented with the round about alternatives? Well, I wish Craig was here, but I mean, I know he'd mentioned the last meeting May 4th was what they were shooting for. Right. It's my recommendation that as staff, we get a chance to review them, prior to presented to you at a public hearing or meeting like this. And I'd like to see what they're talking about, and so we can make sure that your scene is some numbers that we would agree with, and that the analysis is agreed, you know, those types of issues. So I don't know when they're going to get them, but I know he mentioned May 4th, but I'd like to make sure that we have time to at least review and write a staff report so that not just plops at that meeting. Well, what would happen if they just plopped? And then we would tell staff. If they just plopped, it's coming. If they just came in, did the presentation of the communities here and we hear it for the first time. Has that ever been done without a staff report? Yes. Since I've been here, it's happened. And it makes for a less informed discussion as my honest answer. In the first meeting, it's not typically well-attended meeting by the community. Backed, it seems that that's been the most often canceled meeting based on council members attendance in the 10 years that I've been seeing here. So that was just confirmed by the clerk. So you're gonna have something come in and plot to be before the community. I would suggest that the first week in May is clearly not the time to have the community be in a forceful attendance to comment on it. I mean, honestly, some of the discussion, I mean, that's least floating around in my head about that to be in a forceful attendance to comment on it? Honestly, some of the discussion, I mean, that's at least floating around in my head about that, is once we get the evaluation, perhaps a presentation to you is not the way to get the best input. Maybe we need to have a meet and greet down on the corner and show those kinds of things. I think once we see the alternatives, if we're truly looking for some input and some evaluation, I think just simply having it at the hearing is might not be the best idea. Oh yeah, I was going to be a great first start. Yeah. I think in order to kind of get that discussion going, which is my sense of what we're looking for, there's going to be a lot of opportunities to get the feedback. And this is going to, and John and I talked about this last week. We need to be careful a little bit. When you're going through this process, we're now between sketch and preliminary, giving this education. I mean, we need to make sure that when the design do come back, you won't be in a decision making mode until you get the preliminary plants in middle. They're looking for input from the community, whatnot. We can certainly facilitate that, facilitate it from you all, but the final decision, if I understand correct, needs to actually happen in that preliminary process. And so at this point, it's a pinion gathering, it's all those kind of issues, but we won't actually have that final direction as to a preferred alternative until preliminary for you guys to consider. Has he indicated when you might receive a good? No, I mean, the last meeting he said the fourth, but I haven't. This last week, that was not the highest priority for this question. I clearly understand. Yeah. It might be best if you were to schedule that as a work session and have it be a sole topic work session. Get the word out to the community. We've gotten it. We've had our staff look at it, we've had our engineers look at it, we're going to present it in a public meeting where that is the only subject so people know that if they show up at four o'clock it's going to be a discussion about that subject. Not you guys do another business, why does it going to start a regular meeting type of agenda. So do we want to shoot for the it going to start a regular meeting type of agenda? So do we want to shoot for the 11th to have that discussion? I won't be here the 11th. The 11th you guys canceled, you guys moved the 11th to the third day to 7th. Yeah, it's a 7th. I mean if you guys give us a flexibility, we can give him a phone call, we can find out what their timing is. Okay, that'd be helpful. I mean, I'm assuming that our approach of getting the feedback, setting it up, so there's a full staff report and evaluation, so we know what the discussion's gonna be about as an acceptable approach to you all. And so we'll set it up that way, like the way any normal presentation, and we'll get them going. So is there no meeting next week? That's up to you. I mean, just to my brief schedule I'm looking at, there's nothing, and I'm hoping I'm not dead wrong, but I don't have anything written down that has to happen on the 20th. So shall we cancel? How about... You don't have anything different than that, you know? No, I'm just saying there's tons of things that could be done. Yeah, I mean, there's a whole list of topics that you guys have given us and we can prepare for those topics to be an informational tight meeting And be happy to get those things going But that's up to you all Well, that may not be a bad idea because once this starts coming back in we're gonna be pretty darn busy Yeah, this meeting's only been to ours. I know four hours. This meeting's only been two hours. I know. So what do we have scheduled for the seventh work session? The work session on the seventh. Hopefully the roundabout. Well, we're going to be able to do it that quickly though. I don't know. No, until May 7th we've got the discussion at least to start showing you some of the pictures of the digital message board. That's all I've got penciled in right now. And we may have the roundabout? Well, why don't we let's just put a good question until we hear from you, Clint? Yeah, we can work on some schedules and I mean, getting some items, honestly, we're always trying to keep these last next couple of meetings light in case space village was taken up a lot of time. But if you're willing to meet, I'm sure we can pull some reports together and start maybe not going off some of the list of topics you guys have said. And there might be just introductory topics, so everybody gets up to speed. They might not be the most in depth. But we can spark some of these discussions that you've all been on the list. So it's great. Thank you. And John, if you have a question for you in Clip, but I don't want to do it online. Well, I'm just going to ask it. Okay. So way back when I came on council and we were, or even when I was on planning commission, ski co seemed to have a lot of housing credits as a result of the exchange in this land. If I remember right, for I don't remember the parcels, EF or whatever it was, the point site and up for. And in exchange for the difference in value is my understanding. There were housing credits that SkiCo has. Have they used all of those or do those expire? They have not used them to my knowledge and they expire September 1, 2015. OK. OK. September 1 2015. Okay. Okay. And when you say that if they expire can there be an extension requested on those? Oh sure. Okay. Well okay I just that well. I was in credits earning discretion of the town council. Okay that's very helpful. Thank you. Okay, any other agenda items? And I entertain a motion for adjournment. What did they make an determination to adjourn? Do I have a second? I'm going to be Chris. Oh, it's a poor guy. Sorry, it was Bob and Richard. Motion again. I you you you 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 Thank you.