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. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Everything is happening. It's going to work. It's coming to go. It's coming to go. It's coming to go. It's coming to go. That's it. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the 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 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 you you I'm going to do it. you you I'm going to have his roll call. This is the first time we have his roll call. Please, Ronda. Here. What? Here. Cookers. Here. Here. And Jacob said. Item number two is for public non-agent items. If there's any there not on the agenda, please raise your hand. State your name for the record. Step forward to the microphone. My name is William D. Job. I lived at 152 Antler Ridge Lane here in Stomach Village. Been a resident for many years. Have just a small specific request. And that we, the request is that we amend the lease laws here in Snowmass Village to exempt the ditch trail, such that it can be officially an off-leash trail. The signage then should be changed to read expectifying or see dogs off leash. This would accomplish several things. One, if a person was going hiking and just happened to be afraid of dogs, they'd solve it, see the sign. They'd say, well, maybe this is not the trail for me. Second thing, if a person had a small dog or dog that was afraid of other dogs, they could see the sign and say, well, guys, this is an off-leash trail. So it would eliminate any potential conflicts. And I was just on the trail last Friday with my two golden retrievers. Some of you have seen my golden retrievers, I'm sure. And I, you know, two ladies approached me and one of them said, sure as a long leash you got on those dogs. Well, I stopped, actually, was very nice to explain to us. Well, this is a fail that normally is all fleesh. But, and it has been that way for some time, and I really appreciate the attitude and the friendliness of Tina and Laurie who were in our animal control here in Snowmites Village. But we need to change the law such that this one trail is designated as an off-leash trail, the same way Smuggler is in the city of Aspen. So I would appreciate that consideration. Thank you, Bill. Something we talked about, I'll just mention earlier today, but at the same time, it is a rule in the law and town and to make that change bill is correct. I guess we'd have to potentially be a change. If you've been gotten a call today, and somebody that wasn't gonna support it for that. But is this something that Council would like to have further discussion on? That's for me. Yes, Jason? Yes. Works for me and I'm thinking perhaps some other trails as well, Bill, that we might want to consider. Into the future. I think most of us. Okay, I have to fess up. My, my dog Nina is not always on a leash. Can't hear you, Markie. I said, my dog Nina is not always on a leash. She's extremely well. Oh, cheers. She's not, she is a voice command and Bill knows Nina very well since your wonderful golden retrievers are her boyfriend. So we really enjoy having our dogs and having them off leash. Yes, we do need to get worried about certain trails and with Lee Shalaws, but I think there are a few that should be considered in terms of some point in the future to have a discussion and a agenda item to talk about this I think that would be appropriate any other thoughts on the favorite. Okay so Bill will get back at you in the community and let you know we'll try to let you know when kind of timing we're looking up to have this discussion and if there are appropriate places it was also something in the budget session today we're you know brought up to see is there an appropriate place for a dog park that maybe you know could have something of that nature where dogs could be in an enclosed area but I think those are all the parts of different conversations and maybe even part of the same one. Okay, thanks very much. Okay. Any other is non-agenda? Seeing none, let's move on to Council updates. Mr. Jake. No, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Cooker, anything you? Nothing. Mr. Haer. You. Nothing. Mr. Hayber. No thank you. This is Butler. The only council update is I sit on the Community Health Services Board that does Pit and County Community Health Services Board. And one of the areas that we've talked about, and they have had some major work done by our airport as well as our medical directories, the issue around Ebola virus. And in terms of the work of our security, airport security, et cetera, we do not consider a major exposure. In fact, almost zero, zero, zero, zero, zero percentage. If you do want any information always feel free to call the community health services and they can give you some updates on Ebola so that was a big big issue from a few weeks ago meaning so very good and I have nothing near the boards moving on then to item number four. This is a Rush Creek Road roundabout update and we've got a couple engineers and Merriant and Martin's Public Works Director. It's like a room full of folks interested in this so. Good evening. I'm Anne Martin, the Public Works Director for the town. I have here Dean Gordon, the town engineer. I have Lee Barger behind me from SGM. He's a traffic engineer for the town. Also, we have Yancey Nichols from SOPS Engineering. He's the engineer for the developer for base village. And we have Jack Donovan, who is the developer for base village and we have Jack Donovan who is the developer representative for construction. So this item tonight is an update item on where we are with the roundabout. As you recall, as part of the base village approvals, the developers to construct a roundabout at Wood Road and Brush Creek Road and the intersection of upper currents. And staff and the engineers and the developer have been working on this design basically refining the designs from 2008 for the last year we've been working on refinement of that design. As my memo stated, they've been working on looking at the level of service that's outlined in the funding agreement, how that design is laid out with those criteria are. Taking into consideration the traffic volumes, turning movements, radioses, pedestrian, access points, transit elements, and other standards. So I'm going to turn this over to the other experts and kind of go through this design at the time today is to talk about what this design looks like so everyone understands where the plans are today. And the plan is to have the developers intending to turn in their construction drawings on October 1st. And so we've been working on the communications with associate properties and I know the Jeffs are here from the conico and they may have some comments later on as well. But first we'd like to go through and talk about the actual design and what those design elements are. So I'm going to turn it over to Dean first. Okay, I think the one of the first questions I get hit with all the time is why are we building around about in first place? So I thought I'd just really get back into the old history back in the late 70s early 80s the community is part of their comprehensive planning basically through two items at those of us who are involved with traffic and transportation and streets and that is is we don't want to see a four lane Brush Creek Road in the community and we don't want to see any stoplights in the community That mantra has been kind of carried forward and and sort of is always in the background So I would say in the pre-base village era say back in the late 80 80s, 90s, maybe even in the early 2000s, we looked at, back then, it was identified that this is the key intersection in town and it's clearly the most stressed intersection in town, especially during the Sceese. And I don't think anybody would disagree with that. And so at that time, we basically, while we still had the idea of a stop light intersection in the background, we looked at what are the alternatives for that intersection and generally they are a four-way stop. Some sort of offset geometry, which tries to break up some of the conflicts, we actually looked at what I would call a, I don't know if I call them mega roundabout, but actually an oval that went across brush creek and actually had a one-way circle more than a roundabout. And obviously around about. Then we got into what I would call in the base village era. And that resulted in a proceeding with the roundabout design. And as Anne mentioned, 2008, 2009, we did have a round by design on the books. Then everything obviously settled back and nothing happened until this last year and we've picked that old design back up again. While it looks the same on paper, there's considerable change in geometry and thinking that's gone into the current layout and that's basically been in response, I think, to constraints or restraints on the site. So again, if I can just stay in the general arena right now, if if you look at that design up there, I think when you when you put yourself back in our shoes and we first started, we had basically the following constraints. If you go to the North West quadrant, which is the conoco site, obviously the constraint there is conoco and their access needs and the fact that they're running a commercial business directly adjacent to this intersection. If you jump over the Northwest quadrant, that is what is usually referred to as the point site. Constraint there basically is some pretty significant topography. So as we go into the point site, we've got some issues with trying to basically keep our rendezvous in relationship to the elevations there, in perspective, in the southwest quadrant, really not much impact, either from the constraints to the roundabout or the roundabout to what's out there. The southeast quadrant, our major constraint there is a wetlands boundary and basically our commitments to the wetlands process, whether it's Army Corps of Engineers or the other regulatory people are, is we sort of have a driven, kind of drawn a line in this, well not in the sand, but in the alongside the road, if you will, it says we can't go over that line. So we've got a definite constraint there. I think our job then going forward is to kind of identify the conflicts that are occurring at this location. And I think our goals basically are to eliminate as many conflicts as we can, recognizing that obviously it's an intersection, so there are inherent conflicts. Second is to mitigate those that are still remain. And then I think to the extent that we can't mitigate, then obviously we have to minimize those conflicts and basically the fact remains that we have a very defined site, it's got a lot of competing uses, a lot of competing needs and no matter what we end up there, we're going to be in a compromised mode where basically we kind of take this big site and keep stuffing stuff in until stuff kind of pokes out here and there and we all shove them back in until we get it all back in the bag again and that's what our design is. So again if I can again stay in the general reading the generalization area I think the not the one thing that jumps out at you right now is the fact that it's a point of confusion. And the confusion is obviously compound in the wintertime when we get it covered with snow. For two reasons, one is it becomes this huge white mass out there where nobody knows where they're supposed to go. And secondly, our grades coming in and out of there are obviously pretty significant on brush creek roads. And secondly, our grades coming in and out of there are obviously pretty significant against the Breast Creek Road. So we end up with people down here, especially in those snowy days, that once they get stopped, they can't get going again, especially the transportation folks. Coming down Breast Creek Road, people trying to stop and can't stop. So it's a real message there is it's not a flat site. If you go to the roundabout going into Aspen and you compare that site to this site, our challenges are quite a bit more significant. So I think we'd all agree that it's a confusing place. So that's the first, you know, that's an overriding concern. So what have we got for competing interest? Well, we certainly got the conical needing to continue to function as a business. I think we've got pedestrian movements. We literally have no direction out there for pedestrians. Today, even when there's no snow in the road, very, very challenging for pedestrians. And we got pedestrians that are moving through the intersection. But the other big pedestrian impact, they're people getting on and off buses. And if anybody has ever actually sat out there during a peak hour and you look at people getting off the buses, and then they just sort of like run across the road. Just it's really not obviously a very adequate situation. Obviously, the overriding thing we got going on is traffic movements. And I think a couple of thoughts there, one is we've got all of us who live here who understand where I want to go and how I want to go there and where can I go turn left right through wherever that is. But we've also got those folks that have never been here before or aren't here very often. And so one thing we probably, one of the things we want to address is the idea of, okay, this is the decision point, major decision point for people. So you got, can we somehow improve people's ability to make a decision? Some people call that wayfinding, but generally try to basically make this again, getting back to that word confusion. We also have our transit needs. This is a major transportation. I know hub is the right word, but the transportation point, you've got folks getting off buses and on buses here. Most of them turn out to be probably employees and our folks rather than tourists or skiers riding the bus, but nonetheless, just the nature of where it is at across roads, we've got, got again the bus folks to concern herself with. So from a design standpoint, you see a design like this and you think, well, that's, so, doesn't seem to be a lot going on there, but I can rest assured that we've spent hours and days and whatever trying to massage this and come up with a design that again tries to recognize everybody and everybody's probably not a good word, but everything that needs to go on there, throw that into the hopper and come out with a design that hopefully addresses everybody's needs and tries to come up with a compromised position. So if I think from a generalized standpoint that's kind of where we are and of course the devil's in the details and what I'd probably like to do and is turn it over to either detail layout design questions or respond to questions or comments that sort of thing. Okay. We'll see. Mark, you've got a clarification. Yeah, clarification. Dean, and when you looked at your design, and then clearly I understand not to the degree you do in those working on the design. This is a pretty complex situation. Was there any notion of moving upper currents rode over into the point site at all to give this some relief? Well actually, Mark, we've really done that. What we did is, and I guess I could have probably used that as another constraint line, but we use the edge of oil next to the conical as a constraint line. So everything that's going on in Kern's road is coming on to the point side. So the point side is about 100% of the improvements to Kern's road as it is other than even moving it further if we wanted to do that. And actually, Markey, that's one of the conversations we'll talk about the end of just a recommendation and I just wanted to gut check from council on those impacts to the point site. So I think I'll let Yancy talk a little bit about what this plan looks like because not everyone can look at a plan and say what does that thing mean? It looks like a hurricane. So let's let Yancey go through and talk about each of the elements and he's got a pointer and he can point out some of the things and we've highlighted some of the elements to make it a little bit easier to see. Okay thanks Ann and I think like Dean said there's a lot of pushing restrictions and is trying to balance and then design so I'll probably just start with pedestrians because it's a darker purple That's where and then the crossings are the light cyan color So these are all the pedestrian corridors that are implemented into design You've got sidewalk and then we're also proposing another pedestrian crossing. So that will be the it's green yeah there. The pedestrian improvements to control where that access and hopefully they understand where they need to be in the vehicles also know that there's potential pedestrians crossings. Then we've got a bus stop here for the local and the Raffta and a bus stop down here which is a balancing trying to get it far enough from the roundabout so it doesn't influence cars coming in out but not too far down brush creek where it starts getting steep and we've created a platform that's more gradual grade around the roundabout. The other thing that's been this is generally the roundabout. If you notice it's more like an egg shape or oval it's not completely round and that's just because of the approaches we took a lot of time and effort really trying to shrink that as much as possible with the idea that we have a 25 or 30 year plus roundabout minimum for traffic level service because of the impacts the bigger it gets obviously it's going to be hard to stuff in that bag as Dean said with the other parcels and the wetlands and the brush creek and then coming across the bridge had it down to brush creek we have a free right as you probably all living here most of the peak traffic coming out of the ski area it is on this leg head down valley so that well really gives us a lot more level service for this roundabout as Ann said one of the challenges is the access into conico. And so to maintain two accesses so they can utilize their site and get the same type of vehicles and access, we felt the only way to do that is on upper curves. And to do that, the existing upper curves is about right here. And so we have pushed into that town lot by quite a ways and actually lowered this road about five, six feet and proposing relocating utilities. So this access here will be generally about half the grade of the existing access if you're familiar with the one coming into conico. And this, the access here to conical will be almost a flat grade where it's almost 12% now. And so we've been trying to balance that in trying to maintain the same access for the vehicles, but just in a different route. It's a challenge. Access is as close to any kind of major intersection like a signal light or a roundabout. But we try to balance all those needs. And that's where we're at today. And if you don't mind going to the plan on profile, make it a grading plan. I can describe a little bit. Actually, I didn't put that on. I just have the landscape plan. Okay, well it shows a contour. I can probably use this. Or I can go to the other sheet. Okay, if you don't mind because it has a little more detail. Very quick. Like easier to follow. Okay, I'll put the mouse. It's good. Is it working? It is, but it's like not sticking. Okay. What I want to point out is Dean mentioned earlier down here along Brush Creek, wetlands, riparian, etc. There's a wall here that allows us to push in there for a distance, that allows us to get the bus stop. And then over here on this corner we've got a wall generally here that allows us to get the roundabout and the roads in. And we're still refining this a little bit with the town staff. We're looking at trying to do a combination of lay back and walls and try to impact it because of visual and take those balances. But if you look at Brust Creek road these lines are the contours. It gives you the kind of general steepness of a road. This will be in a 10%, which is a maximum. And then you can see they get further apart so the grades flattening to create a 2% to 3% grade so that roundabout a function and drive fairly well in all kinds of adverse conditions. And then it does the same thing with contours that are 3% or 4% then it gets up to 10% to match back at this daylight point. So that's another restraining piece. What are current grades coming through that area? Right in here it's 10% now. If I remember right you have about 7.98% in this area. The other key component of that is trying to get the grades reasonable for the buses to stop and start. Here to get going up brush creek without spinning out so we try to keep like a 4% grade and then slowing down before they have to stop. So I think with that, that's just kind of a general design criteria we've taken into trying to balance all the things. And I'll just let you guys ask any other questions that I might be able to answer. Where might you see an intersection similar to this that is in function today in the area? Where might you see another intersection like this in use with the similar type of topography that we're thinking about? Well that's a tough answer because each has different legs of traffic that go into roundabouts and so if they're equal legs similar location, diameter, access to different parcels, but in western Colorado, you know, there's some in Vale, Edwards, Silt has one, the one that's recently done down in basalt near the whole foods, those are all kind of the similar type of design, but you know roundabouts are kind of unique. They're specifically to each site and their massage a little bit with speed limits. But I don't know if any that would fit exactly this. Billy, I've mentioned that. I thought about that as well. And the only one that I came up with that's reasonably close is in Glenwood on the end of the sunlight bridge. The 27th Street there. That's 27th Street. Now that is a three-legged roundabout. It's not a four-legged, but the road coming from the north into there is fairly steep. I think that's about a 7% grade. And the grades going out, I think, are in the 6% to 7% range. So you've got a three-legged that's got similar, but not quite frankly, not as quite as severe as we've got here. And you think the topography allows the raft of buses to continue up the road and the talent buses and David are you here? David chime in on that first. Well obviously you know a 10% grade is a bit of a challenge. We are starting to look at alternative texture surfaces for the roadway to boost friction so that the vehicles can get the best start that they can to build up enough momentum and inertia to get them up over this 10% grade. Rafft obviously has trouble today. We all know that. That's not nothing new. Trying to compare this intersection to intersections everywhere else where a unique community. We were built on the side of a hill. We've got these excessive grades throughout our community. Far away road is another example of where you have a very significant grade approaching intersection. And so there are gonna be some challenges, but remember that's maybe 40 days a year out of 365 days. We've got some serious issues here on a day-to-day basis that are trying to be addressed in this design both for pedestrians and vehicles. And, quite frankly, you're sort of in a Rob Peter Pay Paul situation when you're trying to weigh making this thing be all things to all people. Perfect world. I'd say go ahead and heat those 10 percent sections. Perfect world. But you don't have a boiler side on the property. And again, if you want to be sustainable, that's another consideration. We have always told RAF to ever since we moved them to the uphill side of the Upper Currents Road intersection that on terrible days do not stop, keep going because we're already doing that today to mitigate their dealing with those adverse road conditions. Does that answer the question? Mark, yes. Related to the buses and what have you, another question, the tanker trucks coming in and out of the conical. What's the notion there in terms of ability. Our understanding of the way the conical is, is those tanker trucks come in and then they have to have help with the police to back out. And we don't know of anywhere else to do that because I don't believe they can turn around on the site. So we can't allow them out or get them out the other exit. So I believe the approach right now is they still have to back out on the brush creek. The same as they do today whenever a tanker comes in fuels that gas. So uphill here on currents. Is interest exit here? Yeah. Is that a proposed exit only for cars? No, it's primary a right in. So people coming from the village can come into the gas station as a primary. But we also are going to let right out. So it would be right in, right out. OK, so if I come in the upper here, then I, well, let's come in the lower. Let's just do this a walk through as a car comes in. So I pull into the conical, get my gas. And so the expectation is that I go up on the exit uncurbs. And then I've got to do what? Circle all the way back through the center. Yes. Yes. If you don't come in and go back out this direction. I can't turn left if I come out that other. I can only come out left on the lower entry on brush creek. You could come out of the lower entrance and use the roundabout. So the key with roundabout design is to have used the roundabout as much as possible for those turning movements. Okay. The other thing with roundabouts and is with any intersection, whether it's stop control or light control, is to have entrances as far away from the activity. So you reduce those conflicts like Dean was talking about. So that is why that entrance is, that Northern entrance on currents is located where it is. And then why the entrance is still on Brecht Creek Road. Do we have a sense of the impact coming through the center back and exiting on current's lower currents at all do we think that's going to be another cluster? I think it's going to be your same impact that you're going to have coming out of that entrance that's existing right now. I'll tell you that I prefer and what normal standards are for entrances and exits is to have as far away from the intersections as possible. That means that an entrance would be coming off the backside. So, if you look at typical construction on any type of roadway and there's a frontage way option, that would be your preferred option. Now working with the juffs on this, it's not an option for them. So this was the compromise of a location of an entrance and exit leaving their site. The other thing is, you know, they've had great conversations, talking about what their concerns and what their operations are and it truly is a compromise for all of us to try to get this situation to work. One of the things they had concerns with is one, as you mentioned, Markey was the turning movements for tanker trucks. And that's, if that's not allowed to be a straight through on the back, then it's as is condition as it is right now, meaning PDs assisting with that turning movement. How many times a week can you answer that? I'm sorry. What was the question, both sorry. How many times a week or do we deal with you guys going out there to help them get up dual truck in our out of the? It seems once every two weeks. Once a week as much? It's pretty infrequent and when it shows up they just give us a call we run out there I think the operation is gonna be identical to what we do now We'll back it out over that rolled curb out into the street and it'll probably be safer with the roundabout with Slow traffic We'll be able to manage it Bring it right out and head it down the road like we do now. So it won't go through the round about then at all? No. I think we'll back it straight out into the downhill lane. So it'll go ahead inside and come in there, head in, and then it'll just back its butt here or something like that. That center curb area is going to be rolled. We'll be able to back right over the top of it and send them downhill on way we go. Is there a particular time of day that the Jeffs, you guys have said, you can only come in after 10 or, you know, it never seems to be complicated or summer anytime. It's manageable all the time. Okay. So then the other point that you mentioned is turning movements, leaving that site. So a couple of options is to use the round butt so exiting and entering from that lower site on brush creek to use the round butt to get whatever direction you want to go as you leave the site as well as you could use the current's exit and we've gone through some turning movements with typical type of trailers and what that would entail to go out of that exit. If I may add, I mean you're gonna generally have two major type of users, ones that are local, hotels and etc. that will be coming here frequently if not weekly or whatever and then you've got people from out of town that will probably go the quickest exit or entrance, get in and then you got people from out of town that will probably go the quickest exit or entrance get in and then try to figure out how to get back out. But you know if you're a local and you're coming into to town on your way home I think you're going to quickly learn the best way is to go up here take the right and fuel come here and then you go right on out or go wherever you want around the roundabout instead of taking the first ride and then doing this. So it's going to be, you're going to learn that very quickly that this is an easy movement into the conico. You come back out and then you, you can go around the roundabout and go any direction, one in town as a local or if you're coming from this part, you come in and then you can just go like this if you're on going up. And so it makes a pretty easy right turns. That's what roundabouts are about is eliminating the left turn conflicts that Dean was talking about before. And then, you know, if you're a tourist, hopefully you can see you come here to the conical that this is the preferred. If they come here and try to take a left and there's oncoming, that's not going to work. It's kind of restricted. They need to have to learn how to come down here. They're going to miss it. So you're saying there's not going to be a left turn movement coming down, brush creek. If they've sort of come this way, there's not really a good way of getting into that, making that movement. Well, trying to balance all of the needs, traffic design that with the peaking traffic projecting 25 or 30 years without opposing, these cars are gonna be set now are queued, and so eventually you back the cars in the roundabout that backs into the cars that you're trying to. So it's not a really desirable design approach, but not saying it possibly couldn't work. It's just trying to balance all the different needs. Okay. So the curb ends right there at the end of the yellow. Is it right? I see it. This is a raised median. Raised median. And so is it feasible that somebody would come out and make a left out of here? This, the sight lines here are really bad. I know they really creep up on you quick. I'm just worried that not carrying that further down creates the possibility that you know people trying to make the... The left? Downhill left down there. Yeah, and the approaches, you know, have it sign no left. And people find very quickly that this is quite easy. In fact, you're probably able to do that twice as fast as trying to take a left and get a gap and shoot out across there. There's nothing that says somebody couldn't cheat and try to set there and do that left, but it's going to get pretty evident very quickly that if you come out right and go around this roundabout, you're cute ahead of these cars, so you're going to come out right and go around this round about your cue to head of these cars so you're gonna get out and down the brush creek much quicker than try and take that left. I just think people are wired to take the quickest and easiest right? That might be wishful thinking that they're gonna go the opposite direction to get where they want to go. And that could be extended you know the exact location that isn't 100% detailed. Right now. That's the curb we've got to roll back out over with the fuel truck. Correct. Correct. And just so you're all aware, all of these components are defined to help the vehicles know where they're going to make the roundabout as efficient as possible. But they're all designed if you need a large construction equipment or anything that you'd bring a truck right over all of these and it would damage them. Fred, I'll just try to understand. If I go out normally, I come in the conco from the bottom, if you will, and then drive out the top. If I drive out the top, am I able to go around the roundabouter? Do I have to go away? So that's a curve there that will inhibit me from getting to the roundabout? Yes. The distance from here to there is so short to allow some laughs to create some more conflicts and risk. And in an ideal world, we try to move this entrance north, but then that creates problems, getting in and out of the fuel and impacts. I believe their operation more. So then what I would have to do is just go out the lower entrance and make the right and go around. Correct. You could come in, back out, come around like this, or like I said, come in this direction and or come up here or around this way. So it's kind of a reverse in your pattern. It will get you through a lot less conflicts with the brush creek traffic. Are the grades such that access out this way is invisible or what's the story there? I and not necessarily saying for the tanker deliveries but for vehicle traffic to come through and get it away from that intersection and a lot easier access back to the road about is that an option? Well it's my understanding the Grazer challenge there I believe it could be managed to get vehicles and trucks, but I believe the conning go operation with their maintenance, park cars and tow trucks and all kinds of things. There's just not room that would really have a huge impact on them that would, I guess the balance is that would be challenged for their operation. I guess the balance is that would be challenged for their operation. Mark, did you have a question? Yeah, I did. The pedestrian issue. Boy, to me, that is an accident waiting to happen. Has there been any conversations about creating overpasses or tunnels for walkway purposes? Not really since I've been involved in the last year or so. Those create some pretty good challenges themselves with ADA and elevators and ramps and slopes. They get a lot of other issues that from other projects is if you do an overpass for instance and you do ADA then people cheat it with bicycles and don't use it. So that's all I get add. I haven't really been involved with that discussion. Well I'm just thinking about the tunnel that we just spent considerable money over at the Aspen Airport as an example that focused on public safety. What I see here is a significant potential for pedestrian conflict, particularly, that we're going to keep that bus stop where it is. And we all know there's a lot of ski instructors that get off there and head across Fresh Creek, which is very difficult at best, particularly when it's wintry and it's a blizzard outside we only need one such incident and we did have an incident this last year. So the point of the matter is we either do something with that raft to stop there, perhaps eliminate it and make people go through the transit center, the buses, and I don't think that that's a possibility because Raffa goes the other way on up the hill, or we find a solution for the pedestrian. I just see so many safety and so many conflicts between traffic and pedestrians here and all around about designs, talk about the importance that I've read, have all talked about the importance of not having pedestrians crossing through roundabouts. Well, I'm glad you brought that up and I just have a little bit of information to give you a couple of things. First of all, these stops are oriented towards the snowmass center, which if you recall at the time of the base village application, we had a major application with significant expansion being contemplated for the snowmass center. Now maybe that's on hold. Maybe we will never see that in our lifetime, but that is an inevitable development project that will probably be coming to you. So these bus stops play an important role in the future mass transit movement of people that are not so associated with Bayes Village, but more associated with what's going to happen on this side of the street, which we've already built town hall in this side of street. Impulling the raft of bus stop from in front of the Conoco station to the uphill side above Kerns Road has been a big improvement for the pedestrian movement through that intersection. If you remember how the pedestrians behaved when it was down below. It was basically they got out of the bus, many other ones that were going to tree house and base village proper were sheet flowing across the intersection in a diagonal and vice-roy people, you know, we're trying to cut straight across. The traffic volume on that downhill side of that intersection is somewhere in nine to 13,000 vehicle trips a day. If you move to the uphill side of that intersection is somewhere in nine to 13,000 vehicle trips a day. If you move to the uphill side of that intersection, that goes to four to six thousand vehicle trips today. So just the math of the potential conflict flick between a pedestrian and a vehicle by relocating it to the uphill side reduced it considerably. Now the perception that aroundabout is not user-friendly for a pedestrian is exactly that. It's a perception. It does not hold in all the studies that have been done pretty much throughout by numerous academic areas, looking at modern roundabouts as well as the Federal Highway Administration. For example, this study, this is an intersection in Florida, clear water, Florida, if you know it. This intersection carries 56,000 vehicle trips a day and 6,000 pedestrian trips. And after the roundabout was built in this location, There have been no pedestrian crashes in the roundabout. So there are pedestrian crossings that happen above and below the intersection, but they're outside of the scope of that study. Another study in Great Britain, the conclusion pedestrian crashes within 50 meters, which is 165 feet of the intersection where the intersection where included in the study, these dropped by 46.2% after conversion to roundabouts with fatal and serious pedestrian crashes down 70%. So that's a British study. The conclusion of the report, and this was Australia, Scandinavia, Britain, France, and USA. About 300 modern roundabouts have been built in the United States. Almost all have been unqualified success. That's kind of in a nutshell on that study. Another study by HWA, obviously. In particular for typical pedestrian reaction times and walking speeds, a single lane roundabout can handle more pedestrians, more safely than a four lane signalized intersection. So those are just a not anecdotes. Those are studies being conducted about modern brownabouts. The burgers here, he can... I miss the burgers. Thank burgers here, he can... I miss the burgers. Thank you, Dave. I've been so informed. What a guy. Yeah, the studies are great. Just one way to kind of portray it, as far as a pedestrian safety issue, is right now people are crossing 50 to 60 feet of pavement in its two directions of traffic. In this case these islands they're mountable yes but they're also protective for those pedestrians so they only need to cross one direction at a time and get to where they want to be. Stop, wait, look the other direction, make sure that's okay. So, from the standpoint of where we are today versus this, I would say this is much safer from the standpoint of crossing just one direction of flow at a time and also only crossing about 12 to 15 feet of traffic versus 50 to 60 feet of pavement. One of the traffic speeds getting into these, this size roundabout? What do we think the, you know, approaches are at 30 miles per hour right now? What do you predict that the traffic speeds are gonna be when they get into this? Going into this roundabout is hopefully at the 25 mile an hour speed. And, you know, today out there for vehicles coming straight through the intersection going up the hill there are 35 mile an hour in excess and so pretty much that's another reason for pedestrian safety being that much better at these type of intersections vehicle speeds are lower much lower all around. Lee what about a around around about what you see there Circulating you're gonna be in the 20 mile an hour 15 25 if somebody's Take it and this is only a single turning lane in other words I've been in a couple of them like it asked been to go on in and someone cuts in behind me in the right And I can't make my turn. I got to continue around. That's right. This is just one lane except for this right turn bypass coming out of the village. So it's a single lane and it's sized such for all vehicles. Emergency vehicles, the big WB 67s, which are the big moving semi's. Let's talk a little bit about this wall. And I guess I just asked one more question about pedestrian. Sure. I see this crosswalk here, and then there's no crosswalk on this leg of around about necessarily. But most of the pedestrian traffic, I think, comes, you know, and crosses here and would come down this side. So anybody trying to go to the bus stop here, I guess sprinting across a couple lanes at least without yeah you're right and that's that's something that we we observed and it's again that wood road leg is probably the busiest leg of this roundabout especially during those peak hours and and we don't want pedestrians there that being a constraining 40-foot width that we have to deal with, we don't have the room for adequate pedestrian protection in the middle. If we had room there, we'd put a median that would connect those two intersections. The pedestrians could then jump across, but we don't. And again, that's one of the compromises and balances we had to make. So the point is, is we would have pedestrians cross if they wanted to get to the uphill bus stop they'd stay on that side that you mentioned and go across up there. If they wanted to get to the downhill side hopefully some better way finding you know at the intersection of lower carriage coming out of the village in the transit center gives you a crosswalk right there on that lower side and that brings them onto that lower side of brush creek so they can reach that bus stop. So the you I hear what you're saying and we talked about this for a long time trust us. There's a large amount of traffic pedestrian traffic comes down from the vice-roy and uses this stop so obviously this is catching this by extending this sidewalk right now it's a no-man's land. This part is relieving the amount of reducing the amount of traffic that you have conflicts with and so that's why we were proposing this as opposed to going across at this location. What about even just on the other side of that carriageway intersection? You have a large amount of turning left turning movements here coming off a carriageway and so we're trying to really reduce that amount of conflict. Okay. Okay, so retaining walls. So the only item that I need some conversation with the council on this is there has been basically three options that have been laid out as far as retaining walls. And this option here, I know it's busy at work, but it's the tallest of the options. And basically it's a soil nailing retaining wall along the point parcel which is in here and what the Impact to that would be is that It would be basically the highest point here is about a 20 foot wall This soil nailing goes back and goes into the ground so that also has an impact of you know not in buildable area here And then we'll talk about this one. This is a block while they're proposing and would be matching in aesthetics to similar to what's on the bridge there. So they're trying to mess aesthetically both these walls as well. The second option for this area here would be to do a terrace basically to lay back and then a six to 12 foot wall and it would be six foot around here and max would be 12 and here and this is what I would recommend is the option we go. It still has an impact that's similar to this footprint as impact in there because basically you have to lay back your slope and then build the wall so it's still is cutting into the town parcel and then the last option would be do no retaining wall and that's a bigger impact and we'd cut back into the slope of the usable area for the town parcel and I don't recommend that. I think we want to try to preserve as much as we can. And as you know, we've been talking about parking improvements for this and that would be for the town hall and that would be utilizing this space as either temporary or permanent infrastructure. So I just wanted to make sure there was concurrence that minimal impact of using the smaller wall, but having some lay back to it with re-vegetation was what the direction the council wanted to look at. I think that was where I was heading. The no wall at all would lay back. Even worse, more impact to the site. It would go back a lot further than, okay. Yeah, I mean, however you preserve some usable construction in the future because I don't know what the intentions are for this parcel in the future. You know, who knows when that could be, and you could revise that wall at that point too. So, I guess my staff recommendation is to do the smaller of the wall, not to have a massive structure there, but still have reserved the rights for the parcel as much as possible. And the wall that will be there, what kind of material will that wall be? It's still maybe a shotcrete. We have to work out the details on that. It's still maybe a shotcrete with a façade on it. Very similar to the walls that public works did in the parking lots, just below a lot seven. That's the type of aesthetics that it would look like, or it may be a block if they can do it as a structural block. When you talk about laid back walls, so this is terracing is what you're talking about? Let's be real quick. Actually, sorry, laid back is the ground is gonna be laid back. So they're gonna slope it, and then build the wall, and then slope again. One could landscape landscaping. You could re-vege in there. You have to remember also that's a very shale site so vegetation doesn't grow too great but you could do some native grasses and try to reestablish that as best possible. So those are the fine details that we'll work on. What percentage of the point site do you think that's compromising? I mean that seems pretty significant from a town asset that you know at one point was pretty highly valued to really compromise that opportunity seems significant. Well, I'll tell you it's not just the wall that's is taking the site up. It's also the realignment of the road of currents as well. And so by building the wall it reduces the amount of that impact in the site. I don't have I have a square footage. I guess you can answer this question, but I have a square footage of the the recommendation that I made to you on the walls was about a 7,000 square foot but I'm not sure if that's the whole area. That's the area impacted on that lot not the right away. Okay so it's from that parcel line into the lot is about a 7,000 square foot area. I don't have an image to show you on this they get to get more complicated. And I forget is the parcel line Come here. This all the public right away If you go back to the other drawing and go back Whoops on way That one No, the first one there we go It's coming. So this is your parcel line. It comes over here, comes down and runs out like this. This in here is brush creek right away and there's a parcel in here for upper cones. Then there's an odd L-shaped piece in here that's another piece to town owns and then brush creek. So the number that Anne gave you that was a little over 7,000 is the impact on that actual parcel that was created. And you can see that's kind of generally where the wall was laid out. And to give you a perspective, you can't see it very well, but that structure that's out there right that old crib, I guess, I'm what it's what it was. It's right here. Oh, right there. That's it on the drawing. We're really pushing that road. How far over are we pushing the road? That's well 30 feet. Well the existing edge of pavement on the west side is right in here. It's about down the median. So all the roads probably moving into that parcel about 25 or 30 feet really to allow this to happen. Does the conical site lose any space for their needs at this point with this deal? Well by understanding they use this area where the new access would be for parking. So they'll definitely have some impact on some vehicle parking at this location. We're still trying to work through some details. There's been discussion about trying to put some parking in here. I don't know how well if it can work or not. But we're still trying to work on maybe some creative solutions to some of that parking impact. And you can't see that parking for that driving at driveway entrance is what three to four spaces? Yeah, I think we figured this would impact three from what I could tell from Google and kind of using some dimensions. And then we think maybe if they Parked down here right the interns the way we've got this The vehicle on the end if it's a very big large vehicle would be challenged So for four spaces of what I'm seeing impacted from what I could tell their operation today Okay other questions council has Okay. Other questions, Council has. So the plans are that they, like I said before, that the developer would submit their engineers would submit the plans to town staff, to the town engineer, to on October 1st, and then that would be furred out to the referral agencies for the final review, because it would be submitting like a 90% plan set. So those fine details you know we can go through. I'll tell you right now the landscape plan I haven't gone through and commented on you know we're working on just geometry and details. Okay I think I'd like to go to the public give an opportunity for folks to make comment and let us know please step forward to the public. Do you have an opportunity for folks to make comment and let us know. Please step forward to the microphone, we'll Jeff. Give us your name for the record. I'm Jeff Head. I'm with the conico. I'm also a resident of the village. Our thoughts on this round about this thing, if it's to be done, it's got to be done right the first time it can't be like what the roundabout was at the rodeo lot, that there's no failure here, because if there's a failure, we're out of it. I wonder if I keep in mind that when the roundabout was first proposed back when base village and everything was brought in, the station was to be relocated. We weren't supposed to be there, but we are. And we're doing everything we can to possibly stay. In order for this drawing here to work force, we'd really like to have the left hand turn into the lower driveway there, where the median is, the fuel trucks got it back over. I think that that could be worked into the scenario and still be a safe access. The entrances and everything need to be built into a manner as to where one of these Ferrari clubs and the Porsche clubs and everything are in account. These vehicles need to be able to get in and out of these entrances. That's a major part of our business during the summertime. I don't feel that the bus stop is located in the best area. I am concerned about that. The loss of parking. I figure we're losing a minimum of vehicle parking spots. Eight? Yeah, because there's four work where that entrance is. You're not going to be able to put a car on either side of that and we are losing parking spot down in the lower section of the lot. If the witness project does go through, would like the impact on the station be kept to a minimum. It's going to be a major project. It's going to be an impact on everybody in the village. I do realize that, but we do have to try to stay in business and operate while this is going on. If the impact is anything like it was from the sewer lines and everything they did last summer, it's not tolerable. The dust, the problems that we were having with some of the construction that was going on just would not be acceptable. We want to be here in the future. This project could make it or break us. Just from lack of access. I'm very concerned about lack of access to the station. If the people are coming down brush creek and they don't know to turn through the round about two yet to us and they get down the hill, they're not going to turn around and come back up. That cell is gone. That don't come back. Once it's down the hill it's lost so Remember some of my concerns and really like council to take that into consideration This is a project. I think that needs more thought before it's ever Considered to be done. Thank you. Thank you. I'm Jeff Chandigan. I'm the owner of the Khanico gas station along with Jeff. I've been here for 32 years. And we have some concerns we've we've had a rough go trying to be a Khanico gas station for 32 years and everybody's aware of it. We've had a rough go trying to be a conical gas station for 32 years. Everybody's aware of it. We've been through hell and we're still here. And we hope we can last longer, but we'll see. There's some flaws in this design that just won't work for us. When you come out of this roundabout and go downhill, you don't really go into the roundabout much to go downhill when you leave because they're running two lanes like they have now kind of yielding and going straight down. And these are the customers that when they're leaving town stop and get fuel from us, etc. And then they go to the airport and go home. If we're going to send all that business to the airport or so they pay even more for gas or to the airport business center, we cannot survive. So they have got to be able to get in. That left turn is like if we don't have the left turn, I don't think there's any possibility of us being around because Jeff and I don't want to run it. Just two of us there. Right now we take care of people. We do just about anything for anybody, and we have for 32 years. We're the public restrooms for the town of Snowmass Village. We're the information center for the town of Snowmass Village. It's like these are important things too. Do you think about when we're designing this? As far as safety goes, we're hearing about safety in other countries and all this. I called to find out some stuff around about so that I'd be a little bit knowledgeable. And when I called Denver and talked to engineers in Denver. They told me that basically that this road is a county road and that Pink and County will be able to give me more information. So I contacted Pink and County and some other counties in Colorado. And I asked on these designs, which obviously, which we all have heard here today, there's all kinds of things you can do on them. There's no real set, whatever. You do it kind of fits into the process of building one. And I said, oh, is there anything that Pinkin County, talking to their engineering department, that you feel is safe or unsafe about them so that when I'm coming up with ideas for this that I know. And she said the only thing I can tell you is that we do not like crosswalks in round about period. They're dangerous. So you can have reports about other parts of the world and Florida and all this stuff but be careful because that there is concern and obviously now we're saying well there's one spot there where maybe they better run across. So I don't know. A couple more things I'll try to keep this short as I can, but it is our livelihood. One thing I don't understand when we talk about this thing and the idea of making our taking our parking spots and when you take our parking spots and you take this and you take that and Everything else and maybe we can't survive any of us very small volume gas station obviously, but But I don't understand is When you make a right turn and maybe Jason you could point where we make the right turn out of the gas station there. I think it's down right there, right? And you're going under Kerns Road. If you're going up Kerns, it's right here. If you're coming out of the gas station and you're going up Valley, I mean you're going into Kerns from the gas station. They want you to exit there, basically. Right here. Right. When you exit exit there that driveway is about two car links from your right turn out of the roundabout before the coat one car making a right turn and this guy coming straight meet not exactly the greatest thing in the whole world and you know if they're not supposed to stop, but if they don't stop, I don't know how that guy's going to make the right turn out of there. We've already said that the coke trucks and all these big trucks are going to go out that way, and they're going to take go over the divider to make the right turn, and then they're going to the grocery store. I'm not sure why we want to send all that traffic. I don't think anybody in the grocery store area, they want these customers because they're not buying anything. All they're doing is going through traffic to get down to the bottom or, during Christmas, trying to make a left turn at the post office and come back through there to get back up to the top. Now, this is just, I mean, I'm not educated in all this stuff, but why would you not bring them out of the roundabout on the topside, bring them into the roundabout. I don't care if you have to take a little bit of my land and bring it down a little farther to get them into the roundabout or right before the round about. Then when they're in the roundabout which they're going the same direction as traffic in everything, they can either go to the grocery store, they can go uphill, they can go to wood road and go to their condos, or they can go back downhill. And they're not impacting traffic going to the center and everything. And the flow is good for us and it's good for everybody. And it's just, to me, I don't understand why we're going and where we're going, where we're going. And I think I've said enough for today. I'll keep the rest and whatever for another time. But thank you for your time, and I appreciate it. Thank you, Joe. Gary? I'm just an old man. Can you hear me anyway? Yes we can. I'm 93 years old and I'm just gym every morning at 5 o'clock and I'm doing great. And what I don't have anything to do with the conical except that I hang out there. But there's one thing that they have that in my opinion is extremely important to the community and that's the new toe there are two toe trucks. Never mind I don't sell gas and I use some of their gas once in a while if I can't get it any cheap with somewhere else. But those tow trucks, ever since, I incorporated the town in the first place. Not everybody knows that because they never announced it. But did that when I got to actually us to run for mayor? And that's, well, anyway, I get off that subject. But those tow trucks, people, I see happen, it happens. They're coming here as visitors and they're going off the road all the time. People are going off the road all the time. And my wife went off one time and had to be rescued. And without the gas station or without the service station, we don't have the two tow trucks, which are critically important, I think, to the community. And I think to the community. And you've got people coming here, visitors, in rental cars. They don't know how to drive these roads in the first place sometimes. They don't come from this commute from snow and ice all the time. And they can't, they wind up in the hotels or condos or whatever it is. And they wake up in the morning, they can't get their cars started. So they call up the conico. And this little Jeff goes up there and and he gets her car started and he I don't think they ever even charged them and and they they go up and rescue people all the time and they don't they don't ask anybody to to thank them for it or anything else but that's what they do and I think I think that kind of thing is extremely important to a little town like this. And not only that, but some of the people have two-wheel drive cars that come in here, and they're not four-wheel drive, and they don't know how to drive up here anyway in the winter time. So they have to be helped. When I first moved in, well there was no snowmast when I first started to live here because I lived down in Aspen and snowmast didn't even exist. It was called West Village and it was under the county. So I had some kind of a big... I wonder what name of the car was it? I had a big yellow car. Huh? The Scout. The great big thing, a four-wheel drive and I had a 3,000 tonne. What do you call that thing on the front? I had a winch on the front and I used to have boats all the time before I moved here so I brought an anchor with me because if I got stuck and I couldn't find a treat to tie the winch to I threw the anchor out. And I was so busy rescuing people that I didn't have any time to myself I finally had to get rid of the car. Very good. Gary, let's get back focus on this. What are your thoughts about what's going on here and how should it be looked at? Well, my thoughts are that big and little Jeff look out, look out of their place all the time and they see, they've seen this for how many 30-some years. And they see a lot of things that nobody else can see as well as they do, because they're looking at it all the time. And I think, and I just think that any advice that they can give to the engineers or the people who are doing the roundabout can be very well helped by getting information from the conico if there are any like for instance when one of the speakers tonight said something about the studies in Florida and the studies here and the studies there. I don't think any studies out that are not in this area where you have ice and snow all the time are studies that really mean anything because driving an ice and snow is certainly very different from driving in Miami. Well, I don't think I can add anything more to this, but I just think that there's a lot of help you can get from the guys with a knowledge because they're looking at it all day long all the time for all this time and they're not trying to do anything for themselves. I'd like to stay in business and I'd like to see him stay in business too because once in a while I have to pay the extra money for gas. Thank you Gary. Anybody else would like to step forward. Okay? So Ann, you know, in your observation, and we talked about this a little bit, it sounds like there's maybe a little discreement as to a number of spaces or, you know, what were your understanding of spaces that are going to be taken out of use when we do this project. I guess I'm driving it. Are there, is there anything the town needs to do it can do to make these business whole? So that would go through the process of the title search and appraisals if there is lost parking and then we'll go through that process. So, like I said, today is just an update what's going on to also explain to the community what's the plans to date and then move forward on those fine details as we move through the process. Okay. Good. That's good. So, I'm not a huge fan of the big wall which seems really significant on the town parcel. And it does seem like we are giving up a significant portion of that parcel. But that said, have we, I'm just curious, does it provide any relief if we actually took up more of that parcel and pushed farther up into that corner of the plan? I mean, would that provide relief from the conoco and would that still be workable from a great standpoint? That's not gonna provide anymore relief than what the design is today. One of the things you need to talk about, we talked about pedestrian activity and one of the things that Big Jeff mentioned was this entrance here, the point that this doesn't work is that we're trying to provide pedestrian activities. It goes back to Dean's comment of trying to get all these elements to work in together. So if you had an entrance that was closer to that intersection of conflicts with the pedestrian activity. So it's trying to make all these things work. So back to your question, was you're asking if we can move further into the point parcel? Is that what you were asking, Jason? You moved it for the, I guess I was thinking, you know, partially in terms of, you know, providing some relief for movements into this entry. If you move the main activity a little further up, or the round back. Well, it goes back to all this. There's so many elements involved in this. And one of the key things that we have mentioned is there's two very fixed points. One's right here and one's right here. And we're trying to make these roads aligned and have the geometry work to provide the safe turning movements to see if speeds, all those elements. So looking at this, I don't think there is any other refinement that we could do other than the fine detail on the grading and the retaining wall. Yeah, I was going to just add what Anne said. I have studied that from here to there, it's challenged to lower that to get this entrance to work. If we move the roundabout north, then it starts really making this entrance into the conico really warped and potentially really steep. And so again, it was a balance. In fact, we pushed this as far north already, the kind of created the wall to help with matching the bridge for this free right. So I mean, we've already pushed and pushed and pulled and stretched. And I don't think going into here, if the town was OK, would really benefit. In fact, I think it would aggravate this interim story of the challenge. Jason, one other element, just so you have an idea that existing edge of asphalt right now of the roadways, basically where I'm following, you know, drawing right here, that's the edge of the asphalt. So that shows you kind of the impact that's going on to that Tom Parson already is from here up. We've already been pushing that quite substantially. So was that, I mean Dean might know better, was that contemplated from the initial planning or envisioning that the town would be contributing a portion of the point site towards this project or is that a new development that and how is that being considered in terms of a town contribution to a project, or what is the fact? It was always an element that, of impact it was gonna be there, Jason. And I think that, a lot of the impact is due to the bus stop, along the bus street road. And then, if you will, the secondary impact is the fact that bus stop on the bus street road. And if you will, the secondary impact is the fact that we did not want to try to move any road plato in to or towards the conical at all along Kern's road. So, there are the decisions that we made if you will and we looked at all the pluses and minuses of those impacts. David explained why, you know, in 2008 that bus stop, little Jeff mentioned that one, the conical site was contemplated not to be there. And secondly, the bus stop was located really where that lower interest of conical was on the 2008 thinking. So we, we, you know, transitioned into today where the conical now is under separate ownership and wants to say and the bus stop has moved above the road intersection. Those have been two huge impacts on the point site. And so the point site is, you point site is taken to blunt of that impact on the north side of the, of the rush we grow to the north side of the round bottom. That seems to be the lesser of the evil's, the well-leathered, trying to satisfy. Dr. Shuster from Assamist's Game Company. A common and reference to this wall. The wall, if you look at the original civil drawings that were approved as part of the PUD, was contemplated in that location originally. The other complicating factor at the time is when this was all happening that parcel was not owned by the town and it was only during the base village process that that parcel was acquired by the town in turn for a transfer of land that's in part of base village right now so at the time was originally proposed it was actually owned by the applicant and then it was transferred to the town and it was but that wall was originally a proposed it was actually owned by the applicant and then it was transferred to the town And it was and but that wall was always included in it We knew that there always had to be a wall in there to take up that grade in order for this round about to happen And it was in the original civil drawings as well Okay Okay. Um, um, um, I guess like Anne said, you know, she was looking for some feedback on the wall and how, uh, we all were looking at it. Um, I guess I'm following personally along with staff recommendations for tiered wall, uh, versus a big 20 foot wall. Is there other, are there other opinions that we need to go for? For me. This? That's same. I think it'd be interesting to understand what the impact is on usability of the point site. We don't really have a plan for what we want to do with that. We've talked about some surface parking. We haven't seen that laid out at all. I don't know. It seems like taking up 7,000 square feet of that parcel is significant in terms of impact. So I agree with that. I'm just saying that a little better. Necessary feature. What would Council, would Council like me to come back with some details on that? I think we would like to see that. You guys, I know you're trying to put a design group together so that they can submit something here by October, year short order. I think that's something that they can come back with what that impact would look like at the next Meeting you agree, Nancy Yeah, I think if it if it work is is I'd like to move my Because the first isn't very far away is is move forward with the Recommendation by Ann and then supplement it with some sheets that show the other option impact for the October first and then I can get to those before the next meeting and then you know we can always after the first if you liked one or the other implement of the end before we go to contract and construction. Okay. It's not reasonable. Yes. Okay. Let's see if we can do that. I think I would take Jeff's comment about making this right out of here so close to the right turn coming through the roundabout. That seems like a potential conflict to me as well. And so I don't know what the alternatives are necessarily. It'd be interesting to hear what Jeff's thoughts are on it. A preferred alternative. Could I speak one more time in the United States? Sure. I'll let you. One thing I bring up is, and I think this is important for everybody here to try to make this work, is these suggestions like I gave of going into the roundabout and everybody going where they should go and the flow being nice and smooth and there's conflict on whether you can have enough room in this and that. Well I wanted to mention that if you go to basalt and you go into town and you come out and you go through the post office, by the post office, there are any of you that have been there. When you come around and you get into the roundabout to leave the salt to come up valley, you better be pretty quick to get into the left lane or you ain't going to make it. You only got about two car links and you've got to be into the left lane because there's a right turn there's a turn to the school and then there's the left turn so obviously there it can be done as far as like our left turn they're saying you don't have enough room to make a left turn going downhill well you've got about 40 yards or 60 yards compared to two car links so it can be done. And then you've got, well you don't want to go a right turn into a roundabout right off of the road on private land. Well it just turns out that we have one of those in snow mass village where you come up snow mass village and you can make a right turn from the roundabout into the parking area that they use during ski season for a lot of cars to come in and out of it. So there it is when it's not supposed to be there. As far as amount of entrances from four to six to seven if you want to go all over the place. Veils got one with six entrances into it. They're saying, well, it's not a private road going into it. Well, I'm not too interested in whether it's private or not private. If it's not private and it's if it is private, then there's less cars going into it than there isn't. If it's all main thoroughs going into it then there isn't if it's all main thoroughs going into it. So there's a lot of areas where roundabouts are not the way we want them but we've got to make some changes to try to make it work for everybody. Now I'm done. I'm going home. Jeff, thank you for your time. See you in the evening. I think for this discussion right now we that's, give you some information and directions to move forward on. Okay. Let's close this discussion tonight. Thank you very much. Get your information and let you guys work hard at getting some great satisfactory thing. Hopefully in the future you can show us a little profile, what's gonna look like, and, you know, because I didn't see the, you know, you say, so 1%, 2%, 3% grade, if you can show us a little profile what's going to look like and you know because I didn't see the you say so 1% 2% 3% grade if you can show that a little bit. Yeah, because I think some of those things will help us understand what we're looking at. Okay, we can do that. Thank you for your time. Take five minutes and we'll start back you up again at 543. you I'm going to do it. 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 you 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 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 you you you you you you you you you . I'm Tom Cartamone, Executive Director of Snowmass Discovery. And first thing I just wanted to mention, that was a fascinating earlier discussion. I sorry I ate that it was a really important community matter and community and community characters were on display and that's wonderful. So I just wanted to thank the people that are here for this presentation for being patient and I hope they were as engaged in the previous one as I was. Quick timeline we're going to be presenting for about 15 minutes and then take questions and answers a few comments before that and and then to back up the quick timeline of snowmess discovery after the discovery of the fossils that I think most people know this story, but in case there are a few in the audience that don't, the finest alpine ice age fossil discovery in North America. Discovered just next door to snowmess on the ridge between brush creek and snowmess creek. As a result of that, the ICH Discovery Committee recommended after some time that there'd be a nonprofit organization that carried that forward into something tangible and a value to the community and to society. Snowmass Discovery was formed as a result of that. We hired John McCarter, who produced the McArthur Report, which was a wonderful detailed report with big ideas. And the last admonition was do a feasibility study to make sure that what you actually do on the ground is going to work. We engaged amazed design, the founder of the Mages Design is here with us this afternoon, Andrew Annway, to make the presentation. And he put together a team that I would say just in brief was commensurate with the worldwide national importance of this. And that team includes emeritus members Kirk Johnson, who's gladly advising and following our progress. He's the director of the National Museum of Natural History at the Smithsonian. It includes his boss, John McArthur, who's the chairman of the Board of Regents of the Smithsonian. And on the ground, doing the work, Andrew Anway, founder of the Mates Design, who will be making the presentation, he has been instrumental in the design of the National Children's Museum, National Museum of Australia, the Perot Museum of Nature and Science. And there's a long list, but I'll leave it at that for now. And the team he pulled together includes Mike Devine, who along with Mr. Barry worked together on the Spy Museum and the Mob Museum, two very successful for-profit enterprises that and the three of them, now are working together on the National Writers Museum. So this is a top-flight team that we're really pleased to have engaged last May with the help of the town of Stomass. And I think without any further ado, I'm very pleased to introduce, once again, Andrew Anway. All right, thanks, for that great introduction and thanks for having us. I just want to start by saying that this presentation will be short about 15 minutes. It's going to give you kind of a high level summary of the longer report, which I think you have or will have copies of shortly. And I also want to say that to echo what Tom just said, this report comes out of a lot of people's work including Tom and Mr. Rigny and many others on the board. So it's a compilation report and lots of credit goes to a lot of people. So what is this report? The first thing I want to do is just set the stage for what to expect. This is first of all a high level report. It's not a detail design report, but it does take the work that was done previously, particularly the two Tusk Forces and John McCartor's work and takes it to another level of detail. The thing that was really missing from those earlier reports was any kind of context from a market perspective. There was no financial analysis, no thinking about who might come, what the audience might be, that sort of thing. So our goal really with this report was to do that kind of testing to make sure that while the ideas were terrific in those early reports, where those ideas actually something that the market could support. The other thing I just want to say as an introductory comment is that the excitement about this project has not diminished from what I can tell one bit since you first have the discovery. Everyone I've spoken to about the project and the team has spoken to about the project really has a visceral response to it and it's always a positive visceral response, real close connection. There may be some frustration that's been echoed at times about the speed with which things have been moving, but I think you'll see where this feasibility report is. There may be some frustration that's been echoed at times about the speed with which things have been moving, but I think you'll see where this feasibility report is. That really is a function of needing to start slow, be careful, and make sure the right decisions are made. This document will give us all of the foundation work for the next step, send to accelerate the process a bit. So one of the things we looked at when we first started on the project was asking ourselves what is it. We heard a lot of different things about this project. Could it be identified as simply a single event? That's the discovery of the bones in 2010. Is it a place to go? Is it some kind of a facility inside somewhere? Is it a program? Is it an educational facility? Is it just an idea a facility inside somewhere? Is it a program? Is it an educational facility? Is it just an idea that is really virtual? So we really set up a set of questions like these. You see on the screen to try to address those in the course of doing the report. One of the other big ones is if it is a place where should it go? And obviously that's a very challenging thing here since there is no town center per se. So trying to figure out what the right place to put it is a huge decision. And then sort of larger which we want to speak to at the end of this presentation is the question of rebranding the town, or really thinking about whether snowmass discovery is more than just an institution that stands by itself, but is it the catalyst for something that really moves the town in a new direction that complements the existing direction or existing identity as a family ski resort, which it does so well? But is there a legitimate rationale for really leveraging the discovery into something that really changes the identity of town. So those are the things we looked at in the report. Here's what we did. This was kind of our methodology. Lots of stakeholder interviews. Some of the interviews are in this room. I can't tell you how beneficial those interviews were. They were all confidential, but they helped to give us insight into the thinking of the town. Lots of different perspectives. We spoke to academic people, public officials, interested parties. We got a really quite a range of feedback and many, many, many good insights from those interviews. Lots of comparable museum reviews. This is stuff we do as standard practice, but at least kind of can place the snowmess discovery in the context of what's going on nationally. We looked at the four primary site options, which I'll talk about further, and then most importantly, really put together a capital and operating budget based on attendance projections. So here's our top level recommendations that came out of the work of the past four months. The first is answering the question of, you know, what is this? And we're recommending that we establish an indoor facility located in base village and this facility would be a year-round facility that would have primarily a major orientation film in it, interactive exhibits and educational programs. The second thing we've recommended is outdoor observation platforms or outdoor experiences on the mountain and I'll show you a map of those in a second but really the aim of those is to go up on Daughter and Sam's knob and look towards Ziegler Reservoir and have a great view from there and be able to talk about the discovery from that perspective and also about other environmental topics relating to discovery. And last but not least, creating an interpretive trail to the reservoir, and this would be a naturalist led trail. And I have to say that this is of course subject to the frequency and quantity of visitors to be approved by this surrounding landowner. So the Ziegler family has initially offered a great generous offer to allow some visitors there now and we'll see how, how more frequent that can be eventually. Um, but obviously respecting those landholders' wishes is key. Uh, here's a, uh, simple diagram just showing what we, uh, have proposed in terms of the size of the facility. Size is definitely a function of the economic model and, um, we, we basically looked for what's the minimum size facility that we think could work and what's the optimum size. So minimum is a 2750 foot facility. Optimum is a 7500 square foot facility. Now those numbers you shouldn't get too locked into, their, you know, plus or minus kind of top level. But the idea here is could this facility function at a small scale, 2750 square feet, and we think it could, would it would lack from the larger facilities, both larger exhibit areas, which would be obviously increased state times and longer attraction for visitors, but also flex space for educational and classroom programs, which we think are important. They're not critical to the economic model, but they're critical to the impact on the community. And then you'll see a lower section there. We just list the outdoor experiences as well. The South Rim observation at the Ziegler reservoir and then three locations, but it could be four potentially on the mountain as well. three locations but it could be four potentially on the mountain as well. Just to get an idea what we had in mind so just you all I'm sure recognize where you are across the road over here but what we're suggesting is that we have on the on the mountain itself possibly three locations where we can look down on the reservoir, the Berlin game cabin and retention pond is a place where we could do potentially with permission, a recreation of the dig, perhaps an annual event or something along those lines, and then of course getting up to the top of Sam's knob. And less so from the very top, but just if you move a little bit south, you can see down to the reservoir. These still locations, you get pretty good views. And then this is indicating the interpretive trail heading to the reservoir itself. So I want to talk about the location recommendation. So we looked at this question of where should a facility be once we determine there should be an indoor facility. And we made the top five criteria. And a lot of that had to do with proximity to both the reservoir and the mountain and also existing building stock with available space I might add. So we listed those five things that you can read through room for expansion especially if we start out smaller and access to complementary partners is important because we think partnerships here are going to be critical to the success of the project. An example would be an F&B partner to provide concessions at the facility, for example, so we don't compete with someone locally. So simple matrix here, you get the idea. It's our view that the base village is really unquestionably the right choice. I recognize and we've heard from many people about some concerns about obviously the pace at which base village has been built out but I think the argument for base village stands regardless of how fast things are moving. Base village will be built out eventually and when it does that's going to be the episode for the town. It's the place where we currently have existing stock and it's's the place where we currently have existing stock and it's also the place where we have good expansions so I feel like there's really a pretty conclusive recommendation for that location. We've spoken with the developer on the site related and while they have not given us any promise of location of space anywhere, we have at least talked about a possible location and I'm just going to show that a rendering building to see. And really this is a test for us. It's just to really talk about what's possible. This is certainly not a design. Related has not offered the space. We have no deal on space. But it's to say this could work. One thing it tells us is the location is really pretty good. The plaza there is free of a fire lane. We've got space to move out in front of that building. If we were to have a large object down in front, a mastodon, for example, there's room for it. So, you know, just kind of testing the idea here, we feel pretty confident that it can work in a space like this. So, I'm just gonna close with some of the big picture numbers. We're expecting about 35,000 tourists. This is looking at both, sorry, 35,000 visitors. This is looking at both, sorry, 35,000 visitors. This is looking at both resident population and tourist population. It's a fairly conservative number. The existing facility gets this plus a little more. Of course, that facility is not charging, so we're going to be charging money to get in. On the smaller facility, we are projecting $6 charge to get in and $9 on the larger facility. Pretty conservative numbers. I think our approach overall on all the numbers is to be conservative. That's been the admonition of lots of the folks that we've spoken with. The components I've already spoken about, but you can see sort of the differences in area calculations for the two different sizes. These are our development costs. So a little over 3 million for the smaller facility, 5.5 million for the larger facility. Again, these are all based on industry standards. And then this is our revenue assumptions based on a 35,000 person annual attendance. Again, you can go non-looking at these numbers. The details are in the report and certainly would welcome questions and encourage you to look at it. Operating expenses, all this gets us to what you really probably care about is what's sort of the net net. And the net net is that the earned revenue will be just a little bit less is what's sort of the net net. And the net net is that the earned revenue will be just a little bit less than what's needed to break even. And that's very typical of a small nonprofit like this. We see it on most of the projects that we work on. And therefore, it's always recommended that an endowment be in place to support an organization. That endowment serves the purpose of making up any shortfall in revenue, but it also acts as a buffer to any economic forecasting that is somehow off. So you have a little bit of time to adjust. Let's say our revenue projections are a little low for reasons, you know, that we can't predict right now. An endowment, if we raise it in the initial capital campaign, will allow us to make adjustments to that, to the operating expenses so we can match the revenue that we get. So we have a little bit of a loss in either scenario, the large one or the small one. We team would ever suggest to you that we should plan for that. And that's why we'd maintain the endowment. The endowment income we've kept at 4%, $3 million endowment on the smaller facility and five on the larger. So, our team has the benefit of having looked at lots of different projects. So that's the benefit to you also to us to come in from the outside. So we didn't come in with any prejudice really about whether we thought anything here would work or not. We heard the enthusiasm and that's huge. So we wanted to list sort of carefully the strengths and considerations and also the next steps. So the strengths, you obviously have a niche here with this discovery. It's a unique discovery, not everybody knows about it, but when people hear about it, they're intrigued. We think because of the fact that it's unique, it will have a, it will become a pilgrimage site. You're going to get visitors that will come, who wouldn't come here otherwise. They're going to come only because there's a place to view and learn about this discovery. We know already that we've got the backing of key community members after talking to lots of folks here. And what's really important is we think that this can anchor the community, sort of help anchor a new identity for the community. Concerns we have. We've said, we've, or told the board basically in our report that we believe that snowmass discovery as an entity all by itself can be successful. It can be more successful if the entire town adopts and supports the idea of snowmast discovery as an identity. So if that means though that there's lots of strong coordinated leadership needed, lots of strong coordinated leadership needed, I can't emphasize it enough, because you can't do it unless you've really got lots of community involvement. So I think that's gonna be one of the things to talk about in terms of next steps is how to expand the folks that are involved in the project. And I'm not by the way talking about money, I'm talking about leadership. We will be talking about money also, but it's really leadership. It's getting more of the community involved and deciding whether or not you want to go after this as a real opportunity to help create a new identity for the town. And then some of the other things very obvious. We've got to have successful negotiations for the real state and the land. I should mention, because it's not a small thing, that we have presumed a free or discounted rent in whatever location we go in. That's not a completely uncommon thing for startups and small nonprofits. But if that, of course, couldn't be worked out, that would increase the operating costs and we'd have to adjust the endowment or look at some other sources of revenue. So the next steps, key, expand the working group, as I mentioned, the bullet number two, and I think the top one is also next on the list, and that's looking for fundraising strategy. So we know that there's fundraising capacity here. It's a question of what's the strategy to get folks to feel comfortable making contributions. And then at the end of the item I mentioned at the end of looking at negotiating the real estate. I think with that we were ready for questions. Chris? Yeah, thank you for your presentation. I'll just provide some feedback and maybe they can be questions or you can turn them into questions. First, I'll just say I was disappointed that I didn't get interviewed because I had one of the most wonderful times. I've had in my life speaking with John MacArthur, and I thought it was really fruitful. I am probably wrong because you guys are the professionals, but I'll just share my thoughts for whatever the worst. Worth. It seems counterintuitive in some ways to put a project that's gonna help read going to help potentially redefine and rebrand the community sequestered in an area that most people consider our most complicated and troubled area, which is the base village development, especially since I think everybody who's done it, I actually have gotten used to it at this point. I think it's one of the easier places to get to, but the parking garage is kind of troubled. And getting up there from a lot of people's first impression on it. Similarly, to have to be engaged in a private property negotiation for a project like this seems to be something I guess I've concerned as opposed to necessarily a public location a public piece of property that might be simpler and in my mind in terms of branding I guess I'm just sharing thoughts I'm not a specialist in making dinosaur museums. The notion that we now have, you are? Yeah. It's a master. Oh, yeah. Sorry. Yeah. Excuse me. See? As I have a case in point. But we have some pretty incredible opportunities, I think, especially down. And I assume you explored it because you had on your list in the area on the entry way where we have a pond that maybe serves as sort of an analog to the zeagler area, a place that's connected to the sports field and activities and municipal life that's there. And especially with the addition of the new property that is as I recall and you know staff can correct me around seven acres of buildable area with another I think 70 acres of open space connected to it that then looks back on all of snowmats village so when you come into this immediate entryway in terms of branding. If that somehow brought people into the location, both as the facility that welcomes people, organizes people, I often think of the national parks. When you come to the national parks, that first, second, you hit the entry booth, you get your newspaper, whatever your map, you know everything is going on. And I can see it in a commercial building, but I like it a little bit to veil. I like that spot where you go and you go to their welcoming facility. You learn a lot about veil. To think that you have to somehow find that and maybe the most sequestered part of the town could work, but at the same time to bring those people that are in base village out into the rest of the community, I think it's a lot of benefit to it. The fact that parking there is probably not going to be utilized to its maximum with school groups, with tours, with visiting science groups, seems like a great benefit. And, you know, so I'm just sharing that with you because I know you guys are still working on it, but it just seems that that location that's already becoming kind of the center of community life and looking at our summer business, a real central location for our visitors that are coming in the summer. I have a little bit of a tough time. And then looking at your budgets for building and construction, to have those budgets, and I'm not saying I'm not questioning them at all, to have those, they're fairly substantial, even to exist in an existing building to produce an existing building. And I don't know if you've been to the Walking Mountain Center, a science center, an Avan. That was a very tricked-out building, lead, platinum, 11 million bucks, incredible, not suggesting that we need to do something like that, but the pristine, incredible location of that entry way, in Avan, not only do they have an amazing building, not only is the piece of property not that large, I think they have about five acres. They are booked, as I recall, talking with them almost continually, not only with kids and science and educational groups, but for boards, for committees, because they took a little extra time to put in the AV equipment and things that are needed. So if you haven't walked around the lake down there, you probably have. I highly suggest it. You look at that view. You basically have the ability to have a building that looks back on all of snowmass and says, here's the mass sedans and they are part of our brand, right, is when you come in the door. It's just my thoughts. Thank you, Chris. Marky. Just a few thoughts and comments. Firstly, I do like the location being in base village. I find that's where many of our guests go. Thank you, John. So I think you've done a great job in terms of landing on a potential site. Not that we may not want to look at the entryway, but we know that project is going to get crowded with some of the wants of the community into another potentially tight space. Andy, one of the thoughts, and I think we talked about this, was we haven't done anything on astronomy in terms of this, as a center, there's so much science in the skies, and the night skies, and beautiful here in Snowmass, was your notion in terms of future partners or future projects to include astronomy or was this clearly focused on the mastodon find? So I might just comment on that quickly that the ice ages are the result of, I don't want to go into detail here, but the malank of it cycles, which has to do with the tilt of the earth, the elliptical orbit of the earth, and the wobble of that ellipse. It's all about an astronomical phenomenon. That has to be part. So by its very nature, for interpreting ice ages ages we've got to have that element involved. So having said that Tom and appreciate your comment back. It would appear to me that 272750 might be too small. How do you get the right size to accommodate what you're talking about, telescopes and educational program, et cetera. I'm leaning more towards that 7,500 in order to accomplish with the potential for additional space somewhere, somehow. I know it's a stretch from fundraising and for endowments, but I always have found that if the program is solid, the recommendations are solid, people are enthused about a project that does have sustainability. It's amazing. People and organizations and foundations will commit to making something happen. This is an incredible discovery. I do like the report. I think it's extremely well done. But I'm leaning more towards that 7,500 with an increasing the goal for the building as well as the endowment. And I think Andy portrayed that as the optimum size. So that and that was a reason. Somewhere in there is a right size. Working with us. Thank you. Just I'm curious do you have any initial thoughts on timeline? We kind of mentioned that as the first next step. What are we looking at in terms of timeline for fundraising and maybe seeing some of the realization of some of these. Next step. If that could be my, John, you may have a thought about that, but just an opening for a pitch. We're at a watershed point where next move is to engage the community because that leads to the connections that allow you to do the fundraising. And once you have basic, you know, broad-based community support, you can go to the foundations and it just builds from there. And tag in Francine Leibal have very generously opened their doors tomorrow night. Well, tomorrow afternoon, 430 to 630, simply for a community gathering, anybody that's here at the meeting or listening or otherwise aware, welcome to come and I'll be there to engage with the community regarding the presentation tonight and the future. As for where is that? Oh, thank you for asking. It's at 19 spur Ridge Lane which is the second left up horse ranch drive. Tomorrow 430 to 630 19 spur-age lane. Does it mean the name please? Tag and Francine Lebel. Very good. And then just... Oh, sorry, go ahead, Jack. No, go ahead. I was going under another thing. So... I just think, you know, it's reference here that we need a professional, you know, look at a fundraising strategy that will work here, right? Tom's been looking under every visible rock that we can find just so we can keep the lights on and keep progressing in this vetting of what the vision should be. The next step, according to Annie and his partners, really is engaging the services of one more consultant to kind of go through this process. of one more consultant to kind of go through this process. And frankly, for us to get to the point where, okay, are we looking for $8 million to do X, or are we looking for $10.5 million to do Y? And getting to that point requires one more step. Us getting, frankly, to the end of the year as an organization, and checking that box probably requires us to secure more support. Having said that, having just gone through a capital campaign feasibility study, it is a roadmap to the future. I mean, just having gone through one, what we thought might be plausible was short-sighted. So I applaud the vision of the board to retain a capital campaign feasibility consultant. So we know what the number is or the range of number. Are we talking 4 million to 7 million or are we talking 6 to 12? And what size should the endowment be? And a lot of people are very interested in endowment, not just bricks and mortar. So I'm really excited that you're already there as a board. And people aren't excited about studies in general, right? It's very hard to get to these little small but very significant milestones. They're invaluable. What do you think the cost might be to take that next step? I think for us to get to the end of the year, we're going to need $45,000. And what we've done is we approached, you know, two of the three who we believe, usual suspects that have supported this each step of the way to get there to see if they would all wait into this equally. And one would be the folks that related, one would be the folks at Aspen's Scheme Company, and the third leg of the stool, if you will, would be the town. And this isn't, we didn't have it set up at this point, and we didn't have it on the agenda, but at some point soon, we'd like to, extremely soon, would like to at least explore the possibility of getting that support for you so we can finish this and take us to this next step. Very good. Yeah, the timing on that is critical at this point. We're just getting into budget process. And so most likely you're looking at marketing dollars. I'm assuming that, A, help support that effort, but that also, I'm assuming to, A, you know, help support that effort, but that also, I'm assuming goes to your second bullet point about expanding your working group and maybe getting more involvement and more committed involvement from the town at the staff level, or I'm not sure how you're looking at that, but certainly something to engage now maybe as well as you're getting into the funding requests. You know, as you know, we have evolution going on in our marketing department I'm a little disappointed to see that we don't have anybody here representing that group tonight. I think it's a important relationship to build and strengthen so hopefully that comes together Just that, I mean, staff is here and we will make sure that works're all us. So we'll make sure that communication's happening. That's why we're doing something great. And you know, we have a, we have an idea of how we'd like to see, you know, board 2.0 evolve. And we spent a lot of time in the last month talking about that. So rest assured that that entity on the tourism side is right at the top of the list. Any other questions, a couple questions on programming of this? You say something to the effect of a film. Is there any opportunity that you could have things like a large enough screen to do on iMacs thing, or is that really your too large of an area? Because sometimes I think there are two areas. Traveling iMacs things, not only in the mastodon thing, but other scientific or studies that go through that could be a loaner for a three-week period that could happen. Same type of thing, aren't there Smithsonian or a field museum or other exhibits that travel around the country for a period of time that you could put something in here to be in conjunction with or a whole separate, you know, learning about the Indians or some other kind of traveling troop that goes through that would really help possibly go beyond what we, you know, can't put that all that stuff in on this bag, but those things have. The answer is Yes and no to the first one and yes to the second one. So the yes and no part of the first one. Absolutely you can have guest films, you know our ideas to have a high end, you know, HD or what might be 4K by the, you know, which is a higher resolution theater. Not IMAX though. The infrastructure cost is ridiculously high. It doesn't, to our mind it just can't be justified for this kind of a project. And isn't necessary, I guess. It's really what we would say, the HD film quality is so phenomenal. What size room would you need with how many people seated were standing? Or really depends on the size of the facility. But it would be somewhere between a small theater and a small version, probably about a 50 seat theater. You could double that size in the larger one. Okay. And then for the traveling troop, I mean, is that even something? Very common, yeah. There's lots of good opportunities for that. And one of the things we like about the base village recommendation actually is the potential to have spill over space. Maybe there's space that's empty where you could put something like that without having to have the infrastructure in place in your own facility. So you know that's a possibility to explore as well. But yeah there are plenty of good traveling exhibitions that can complement and provide change. I mean right down to the Ice Age exhibit that came through the Denver Museum recently. At the last moment they added a nodule dedicated to Snowmastodon, that's traveling the globe and that will come available come 2016 and at that point we could take down small parts of that and have that either have a permanent fixture or rotate through whatever facility we land on. Just one other quick thing I'll say about the opportunity with that, you know the partnership with DMNAS with the Denver Museum is obviously critical and a really, really important relationship. The thing to realize is that it's not just a subordinate relationship. Snowmass Discovery has a lot of intellectual leverage in terms of working with the MNS on code-developed programs and programs and code developed possibly traveling exhibitions. So that's something that they're open to, that this organization here would certainly want to do. But it's just important to remember that that's a two way street. And that could be a really powerful, they obviously have a network that's huge. But you want to own this intellectual property. You want to own snowmess discovery. know, you want to own Snowmass Discovery. You want it to be the identity of it to be here and in Denver. And that's where everyone goes to learn about it, to get traveling exhibitions associated with it, marketing materials, you know, etc. Very good. So next steps for, I'll go, Jason. Go ahead. Just two things one that I wanted to mention. I was at the Grand Canyon Visitor Center this summer. And if you haven't seen their film, they project on this spinning globe kind of thing. It's a relatively compact space. But they handle however many visitors they need to come through the Grand Canyon. I thought it was a pretty engaging presentation that they had there. Something to look at possibly. And then also, I didn't hear you talk too much other than, you know, the four sites on the mountain and the ethylate, the notions from the first couple of tusk forces and maybe other places that were this idea of dispersed sites that we talked about engaging with the, you know, creating that identity throughout the community at different places. So even though maybe the main facility isn't at the entryway, have some reference to this discovery at the entryway. And then as you move through the community, there are constant reminders that are kind of carrying you through and creating that identity. I really like that idea, I think, from the first couple of studies and just curious about whether that is still part of the equation or how that's being like. Yeah, I think what, you know, there's a few ways to answer it. What Andy's doing is saving us from ourselves. There's a million ideas of what we could do. He's refocusing on what we need to be focusing on from the start, right? It's just a function of time and dollars. There's a lot of things we can do, but an undercurrent of this entire program is having it play an active role in the brand that is Snowmass Village. And that will manifest itself in a lot of different ways, including some of the things you talked about, some of the more extraordinary dispersed programming that we talked about in Tusk 1 and Tusk 2, they're extraordinary expensive as well. So let's start with the center and build out concentrically from there. That's is that fair to say? Yeah, we didn't reject any of the ideas in the Carter report in particular because all those are really good ideas. I think you might think of them as phased. So maybe some of that distributed depending on the support from the town and the rest of the community can be, you know, it can be Phase I A. I mean, it can come right on the heels of Phase I as, you know, as soon as the fundraising gains some momentum and you have a better feel for really what the commitment is. Because that distributed idea is a great idea to reinforce a brand. It would be a perfect thing for town park in lieu of having the facility there. You know, some kind of a satellite introduction would be fantastic. Thanks. And Clint, you, in Fruta, that museum is part of the town. Was that just a private group or how did that work? Town owned the facility and partners are nonprofit operators. Okay. Town owned the facility, but the nonprofit actually operated it. That's it. That was in there once and it got nice exhibition, but kind of buy tickets to make it work. Very good. Any other thoughts, Council, needs to send it their way, but I think it is sounding like something we should be supporting. Move in the next direction, Tom. If you guys are coming to a close, I just wanted to make a quick comment, which is I totally enjoyed being off-stuffed on the mall since March and getting to know a lot of people in the community with heart. And I totally behind and been part of this process of finding a heart for this organization. And a piece of that, again, starting tomorrow night at the labels, is getting my finger on the pulse of what I would call the philanthropic heartbeat of Snowmass. That's our next challenge. Is tomorrow night a friend, razor, a fundraiser? Just a community gathering to. I hope you have envelopes there. I bet we will. I bet you will, too. I bet we will. I bet you will too. But next, 430. 430. Very good. Anything else we need to incline? I mean, just to mean for you all's discussion, there was kind of a polite ask. And I'm assuming that the ask is going to come in a little firmer, manner sooner and later. And when I saw some heads now, I think what think what will work for some way to make this happen to the marketing budget or some other way assuming that's the will of the council but I saw that so I'm gonna work with staff Yes, yes, yes, yes Very good. Thank you again for your time. Thank you for helping us Bringing Andy and the partners. This was a it's was a very informative Journey and I think we're all better for it. So thanks for the support that we've got this going six months ago. Andrew, I don't have that. I need a copy of that PowerPoint. Please. Very easy. Very good. Thank you. We've got a resolution 31, a resolution of the town to the Intergovernmental Agreement before we take off. So should we move on that next? Mr. Olson, welcome. This is resolution 31, series 2014, a resolution of the town council, the townest-most village, authorized in the execution of an intergovernmental agreement for the financial support of the Colorado West Regional Mental Health Center, doing businesses minesprings, health detox center, operating in Pithton County. Mr. Olson. Hi, Brian Olson, chief of police. If you read that, you were read in on the fact that over the last couple years we've lost and regained some detox facilities throughout the valley. We currently have one operating at Health and Human Services next to the hospital. So this IGA was developed last fall. It's kind of a housekeeping item for us. I think we're probably the last to sign it. But it's a funding source for that detox facility. Kind of created a new model on how we fund that source. If you notice on the last page, it kind of outlines our participation with that funding to the degree of about $25,000, which is different from in years past. But I think the model in which they came to that number seems to work. And this was the first year it was funded in this way. And we'll continue to monitor here from our level in snowmast to make sure it's equitable for us and it's a nice facility to have. It definitely it provides a great resource for my officers when we come in contact with those people in need within our community. Mark you and Jason. Having served served for a number of years on the board of Colorado West. Now known as mindsbrings. Would you no longer serve? No, I'm no longer serving. I finished my term as chair and chose not to seek reappointment afterwards. But detox was a huge issue for that organization. Basically in the state of Colorado, the funding for mental health is one of the worst of the United States. I think we now rank about 48th on the list of funding for mental health. As we looked at detox, detox basically is not reimbursable service. It's basically cost-base. And we've tried many options for detox, losing hundreds of thousands of years at Colorado West. And I do not have the latest information on those, on how much we lost, but I can remember as Chair of the Board, we had to make some very, very tough decisions about the future of detox. The challenges with these programs are what I call the frequent flyers. We see within the document that there are four individuals within Snowmass Village that show some of the history of how the numbers were calculated. And as we also look at detox, there was a trial of a program down in Garfield County with a day program housed at the facility, going down 82 Colorado West. the facility going down 82 Colorado West. And the program was outpatient, was jail first. It was open during the day. We had to close the night operations. That's where people used to stay the night. In the God to the point, we ran day operations, went to the jail. Then if it was pretty significant it was over to the hospital then turned back out on the street the next morning next night you pick up the same individuals or within a few period of time what we found is we don't really have a solution on a detox the question for you in terms of the program that will be housed at, that is housed at the, at the shouts building now. So when you pick up the individuals and it's nine o'clock at night or ten o'clock at night, what's their entry point? Is it into our facility or into the hospital? It's based on their perceived or known alcohol level. So they may start out with that Aspen Valley hospital where they'd be cleared and then they're brought over to the Schultz building to detox. We try not to spend any time here in snowmass if that's what you were inquiring. If we can just pass go and go straight to either AVH or detox, it's better than stopping off here. Really, those people in need the less time they're hanging out with a cop, the better. You know, they need either medical staff or the staff of detox and not a bagged influence. So the quicker we get them into that facility, the better and mind springs does have some follow-up. They have the ability to try to schedule that person. Obviously that doesn't work with those known frequent flyers, but we still have to deal with those guys anyway. So what are the hours of the program at the Shultz? It's around the clock. So it is an on call basis. So yeah, yeah, and so the quicker we can Connect with them get somebody to staff the facility That's usually inside an hour. So our time with the subject is pretty short Right now it's it's actually working better than I've seen it in years past. It's much better than the old drive down to Glenwood. Yeah, because that was awful. And we realized that when I served on the board, there was an impossible situation. Second part of the question though is we continue to have the problem. We continue to have some form of solution, but the question becomes one, I don't expect you to answer this. The question is a community in in partnership and collaborative relationships with our other public entities and towns and et cetera. It'd be wonderful if we could try to find some solution to this ongoing recurring and persistent issue in our state and try to find some form of reimbursement through Medicaid to programming for detox. It's a travesty in the state of Colorado, what we do. So I applaud the program as it is. I support the IGA. We could spend hours talking about mental health issues and detox, et cetera. But this is a solution that if it works for our police, then I'm very, very comfortable with where we are right now. Thank you. Jason? First of all, I don't know where you are in amending this, but in the notices it has given notice to Gary Seter, we should change that to her. Yeah, he's a manager of possible. It went to him just weeks before he was the one that put it on the agenda here today. So that happened. And then I'm just looking at the cost sharing formula. And this is going off 2013 numbers where we had four admits from within our jurisdiction. And I'm curious if we're tracking towards the same kind of numbers or we see that as a historic trend. Over time, if you look at that, just based on the admissions, we're looking at over $6,000 per individual that's being served from within our community. You look at kind of how the formula works out for other communities. It's closer to the 1,000, just over $1,000 to $2,000 range per mission. Yeah, we're probably trending up, but I don't think it's realistic to look at it per admit. I don't know, there's times, you know, our Thursday night concert, for instance, you know, probably a lot of candidates make their way down to the intercept lot. So we help feed the county's share of that. And so it comes and goes throughout the communities. And it's really just a great resource to have when we need it. So that we're able to bring people there. And if we follow those admits, you know, I'll need to do that over the next couple years to make sure the formula is working. We, I don't want to drive the admits, so we're getting the bang for our buck. I prefer to keep those low if possible. You know, so it's just a valuable resource and we'll watch those numbers to make sure it's equitable. I'm going to make sure it is. Absolutely. Thank you. Bread? Loving. Chris? I did. Motion for approval. Second. It's a motion to approve. A second. I have to say that I think it is important for the town to be involved in this. You know, we, it is sometimes a problem with society and overtaking their hurting themselves. And I think we need to support some of that stuff. Mr. Dresser has his hand up. I'm not sure if you're hurting themselves and I think we need to support some of that stuff. Mr. Dresser has his hand up. I just wanted to make sure that under the terms of this you'll be bound for this for 2014, which is a budget amendment. Correct. And I think we're going to have that one in there. Yes, it was a meeting to your 2015 budget, which you reviewed today. So it's because we're late on this, it's kind of a double-am. Okay. And the numbers for next year probably came out today. There was a meeting at three o'clock in conflict with this. So we'll have those numbers for next year. I would expect them to be close to similar. So we got a motion to approve, seconded. Further discussion? Anything from the public? All of them favor please. Signify, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Pass a unanimous. Thank you, Brian. Thank you. OK. Next. OK, fine. Should we take five? Yes. OK, let's take five and people few minutes said take a few minutes. Let the applicant set up. So, at, oh right. So, at what? Five minutes. So, it'll be. Twenty-two. We'll go on. 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 I'm going to do it. you you you you you you you the Okay, I'd like to get back into the meeting and I don't want that. So the next item we have is item number seven. This is a public hearing for the second reading of ordinance number three, series 2014, in ordinance regarding a minor PD amendment to the base village involving requested waiver rights, abstentions, and completion of a certain public improvements and time frame for completion of certain private improvements. Julian and, um, get you an, uh, an applicant team here. I guess Duane's still getting on, like to make sure I open the public hearing. If there's anybody like to make a comment for the public at this moment, please raise your hand, come to the podium, state your name for the record. Otherwise, we will maintain this public meeting. Seeing nobody. The council is very concerned of the timing of the application amendments that have come in and is concerned enough that we haven't given staff enough time to review this. There is a number of amendments that appears that we still don't have some information on and we are very nervous about continuing today without having more information that I think the applicant and the staff are continually working on. I think you guys, as the applicant, got together with us on Friday and worked a number of things, but it still feels that there are a few things. And I was even told by the attorney there was something that came in last night late, another application amendment. So it's troubling for the council to move forward today while I think it would be beneficial in my own thinking to have some discussions. I think that there is some cause for pause until staff can look at everything and work this out so that we can have a much better discussion and hopefully a second reading on October 6th. I'll let staff start, I mean a council to anyone. This was supposed to be the second reading of the First Amendment to the Development Agreement and what we were presented with was a revised initial development agreement, the 2004 development agreement, where it looked like most of what we had talked about in the amended Second Amendment, the first amended development agreement was somehow incorporated. The problem is that I found in Alcander, is that there was so much red lighting and so much insertions, and I had never seen that agreement before that I absolutely didn't feel competent to review it and to comment on it. And when Seth is telling us that they haven't had time to review it, and there are still some serious open issues that they have, although they guess you guys met on Friday and they're getting closer, what I want to review is something that staff has thoroughly reviewed, says we either will endorse all of this, we will endorse 90% of it. Here is the 10% that we have issues with, but those issues ought to be resolved by council. And hopefully over the course of the next two weeks, that's what you related and you stomach acquisition and our staff can come to terms with. As I have announced publicly a billion times, there's nobody wants to see base foolish get built more than I do. But it's got to be done right and the eyes have to be dotted, the teeth have to be crossed, and that's not what you gave us to look at for this meeting. Anyone else? I concur with Fred's viewpoint. I think there's got, there's a lot more work that needs to be done between the town and the snowman's acquisition. Personally, I think that we've come a long way. I truly appreciate everyone's hard work during last week. Friday I understand was a very successful meeting and to turn around this large of a document with all the changes that needed to be made and to incorporate all of those documents into one comprehensive document was a Yomans task at best. And I know everyone from snowmass acquisition related work very, very hard. Probably we are as of the morning. And I know our town worked pretty darn late trying to work through the issues. But sitting here as a council person, I wanna be assured that when it comes back to council, we don't get into a situation where council takes a position. We don't have all the backstory. Town has it. I'd prefer the town really continue to work forward with our legal staff and planning staff working in concert and in partnership with related to get all of these te cross-nice about it just as Fred has indicated. Therefore it's I'll have to say that I hate council's desire is to table this conversation today until a until October 6th starting at 4 o'clock continue the public hearing at that time, but hopefully everybody Gets all the concerns addressed staff has the appropriate ability to Understand this and Mr Primero is just walking in just the wrong time. No and Mr. Romero is just walking in just the wrong time. No. Do I even know what's going on here as you're just walking in? I'll let you get seated. We have been talking the last couple of minutes. We started only about four, five minutes ago that the council is not comfortable moving forward today. We have a number of items that are still a concern. Specifically, staff hasn't had the opportunity to do their due diligence and reviews and uncomfortable. And we'd like to push this meeting off table until the 10th into the 6th of October at 4 o'clock so that hopefully you and us can you know incandor get this all straightened out so that we can feel comfortable moving forward without rushing us at the last moment. We haven't made a motion to table that's sort of the direction that council was feeling when we met today after the budget process and talked about all this stuff and it was a concern. Are there any things that you might want to let us know or talk to us about, I would say, before we make that motion to table and I would give you the opportunity to respond. Great. Okay. Thanks. That Dwayne Romero, my related Colorado for the record, understand and agree that the documents, although we've worked through a series of turns from where we were two weeks ago tonight. And just the sequence even the last week by submitting into the development department having that submitted early in the week, but then having, obviously, precious little time for staff to actually absorb, respond, and then have to compose their memos. I think even the town attorney had foreshadowed this two weeks ago, there was gonna be a hurtly in effort to get all the way there. So I just wanna reflect the fact that there's been a great deal of coordination and clarification. Clearly it's a work in progress. I think it serves all of our interests to get that all reviewed and stabilized and buttoned down so that on October 6th we can have a quality discussion. We have perhaps staff has gained greater appreciation and understanding and hopefully we have achieved the consensus that has been reflective of this entire process, frankly, dating back to the pre-sketch plans of a middle of May. That's where, obviously, this is initially commenced. So I just want to make sure the record shows that we appreciate the staff's continued coordination and clarification. It is reflective of the turn, so it's appropriate for the extension of time. And I will finish with saying we clearly would desire some action, you know, perhaps at the October 6th. And I think this puts us up all of us, the collective community in a better position to have a better discussion and hopefully a more successful result on October 6th. Okay. What should the table? Can I just make one suggestion or a question? I understand there was revised documents that were submitted in preparation for this meeting and then maybe another revised version of that as late as last night. Yeah, right. Does the staff have the documents that you want them to review over the next two weeks? They do. And in fact, it's a good point. And it's not as if it was just, you know, a grenade just pitched over the wall back and forth and we get to throw it back at one another. There actually has been some constructive work sessions for clarity and additional discovery most recently the Friday. I mean we spent some good period of time hours together in a what I what we believe to be a constructive work effort. And so the the turn of documents is reflective of those. And that's, you know, with the new town managers as leadership as well as planning director Julianne Woods. Just don't want to be in the same place two weeks from now where we can see. No, I agree. No, I agree. I'm going to massage the doctor and we still have an end time to review it. And it's fair to say we obviously need to continue to work with the town attorney, but that's a collective town team with their complete body of feedback. So we look forward to that, that complete unified voice. Do I have one thing, and I'll go up to Fred here and then I see a hand up of the audience. In my reading this weekend, one of the areas that personally I would find more comfortable for us is if there's some language, you know, I hate to add more stuff to your thing or thinking But is there a an opportunity such that if the development stalls for a extended period of time a year 18 months six months I don't know the right number but for for some reason, you as the development group or anybody as the development group finds, they can't continue, is there a way out that we could talk about that would say, look, you're not willing to move forward for whatever the reason, or economy, instead of holding that, that PUD is still open. Let's say we get to three, four years down the road and you're working hard and all of a sudden something happens and you stop. Is there an opportunity to have something that the town could say look yet we haven't done anything for two years. Let's cut this off now so we sort of don't have the same sort of similar problem we had this last couple years that you know we're all wanting something to happen but it doesn't and is there a stick I can hit you with to say, you know, you got to take the risk, you know, some of that acquisition. Think about that next couple days. You don't need to, of course, answer that now, but I, you know, that might gain a few positive feeling from folks. I'll go to Fred and then Arnie. You know, discussion we had this afternoon, there were several exhibits that were referenced in the documents that weren't there. There was supposed to be a map of a trail map, two or three others that the Council, Council mentioned. Again, I think it's imperative that you have before us two weeks from now an absolutely complete, fully exhibited set of documents that we can understand and review and get staff's comments on. I appreciate that, Fred. In fact, that was one of the topics reviewed on Friday when we were sitting with staff and through our work sessions. When working through the work session and providing greater clarity and allowing a bit of discovery to occur, those documents and those exhibits exist, the mobility map that you refer to, the trails map that you refer to. Those are exhibits that exist and are a component of the existing SIA and they're part of the they will be carried forward. So I think that's that same discovery, that same kind of work effort together for clarification. You will see the the work product and the benefit from in the next week or two and so you too will see a cleaner by the way you'll see a cleaner set of documents. And I would also like to the extent you can and to the extent staff can get the final documents to us as soon as you can. So that we, I mean, this is now a big deal. I mean, this is a lot of paper. This is a lot of changes. Way different than what we looked at two weeks ago. So that all of us have the opportunity to spend the time that I think we will all need to review these documents. And to the extent there are issues that staff has, time for us to discuss it with staff and see how if any of these issues can be resolved. It's just that the more complete and the sooner sooner we get to look at it, the better it will be for everybody. Understood. And again, the document set that was referred to earlier is reflective of the most comprehensive set of work sessions and clarifications efforts that we've had in some time. We're confident that it is going to be ready for prime time. There is a topic that you may have noticed, and if I may, Mr. Mayor, there is a topic that is material, and it is a change, or if you will, as an added provision that you may have noticed through the course of your readings in your review. It has to do with that sequence of events associated with one, an action that results in a denial of a PUD application, then two, the automatic termination of vesting at that hypothetical set of events, and then we've added a statement number or a step number three. It's added, so we clearly, maybe it's constructive to get a little bit of feedback from it. Step number three would be the opportunity to buy back the vesting by accelerating all of the public improvements that at that point in time think about it as if it were this time next year. You've reviewed the PUD application for whatever reason you gave it denial. It's this time next year. And we automatically terminate the vesting at that moment. That's what I conceded two weeks ago. What I didn't think about and what I think is worthy of a conversation with the community is at that moment, that hypothetical moment, you have an application that's denied, which means nothing's going forward at that moment, right? There's no private improvements, no building six, no building seven, no building eight, no building five, no limelight, no private residence club, nothing's moving forward. And you have a vestig that's terminated and kind of the impetus to move forward is, I think, is lost. We're trying to, no different than how we handle the provision for liquid dated damages tied to 13B, which was, I remember, council's comment of, buying back your vestig by paying the liquidated damages on a daily basis in order to get yourself complete as a stick. So under that same construct, we buy back the vesting by accelerating the public improvements, the roundabout, the wood road overlay and associated improvements, which are many, and also the entry into the parking garage, that snow melt assembly and that set of improvements. And we would accelerate, which would give us two things. One, the opportunity to reorganize and resubmit a land use application, which just as you guys witness, now firsthand, that just doesn't happen overnight. And then secondly, it allows us to plan and perhaps give a set of public improvements, which I think is a community benefit. Faster, quicker, better than having to sit and wait for the security to be called, in some sort of future date. You follow? So it's not just a 100% you know, beg, but it is a step, that third step would be predicated to accelerating the public improvements. That's in there, so that's material, you know, an ad. Everything else has been clarification and coordination amongst the between the documents, as well as understanding. Here's another statement or a step that happened two weeks ago. Recall this was going to result, this work effort might have resulted in a series of amendments to the pre-existing documents, the development agreement, subdivision improvements agreement, the funding agreement. It was collectively agreed to by counsel by staff in the applicant. Let's go ahead and do an amend and restate. Sounds pretty nifty. It's a proper step but it requires a great deal of stepping all the way back to the original document. Sweeping forward and picking up all the previous amendments to the extent that they are out there. Burning them into a new red line document which creates a, when you look at it at first blush, it being the, it scares the crap out of you. And it's got stickers shot exactly. You see all this red line and it's exploded. And you really take kind of an apprehensive kind of negative tone in your, in your review, but settling back down and understanding what it is and how it is. And again, town attorney did put this out on the record. That's going to be a tough and tall order. Okay, so that's why the extra two weeks. And we're going to shake that out when we get these things buttoned down internally coordinated and at a level of understanding and hopefully support so that the council can focus on the outstanding issues if any on October 6. Makes sense? So my recollection is that we've had this feedback from staff at our last meeting as well as this one that they didn't have time to adequately review the submittal because things came in so late. So I guess I would ask staff what is the time that you need to adequately review and get the referral and the feedback in order that for the next meeting we have a fully reviewed fully vetted analysis of what's in front of us. I mean, when do you need them to drop the last, you know, bit of paper on you guys? I'm going to defer to these guys, but I'm going to answer it in general statement. We received a pack at this morning. I understand it is reflective of our hard work on Friday with the applicant. I'm hoping it's, I'm sure we're in a much better position today than we were last Thursday. So what I would ask is that this is the application that we review and that with the difficult part is the continually add information. Right. It's good information or clarify, but it's still additions. So if we accept this, then we have something to review and then I mean, I would refer to this town attorney also, it makes it easiest for him. But I think if we can take this, we can, we can, I know we can be in a much better position two weeks from today. I'm not going to sit here and guarantee you it's going to be ready. I can guarantee you we're going to work our best. I guarantee you it's going to be very, very close. I mean, at this point, we've received an amendment this morning, or whenever you said it was last night. We haven't even accepted that amendment in terms of being allowed in. I thought those would have been special. Aren't they are by code those typically submitted during the public hearing or during the hearing. That's what the code is. Yeah. So as far as ongoing revisions to the application, where are we in terms of the acceptance of this morning's seminal? I mean, I can't speak to the legals because I don't know the code yet, but I can say, fundamentally, we have the ability to review, but I got to defer to Mr. Dresser as to the legal process on the code requirements. You can accept the apple. You've got the amendments, but how are we to get them to you between 9.30 this morning and now? I mean, you were in a budget meeting all day long. Let's talk about practicalities. You can accept them the way they are. You haven't seen them. We haven't seen them. I submit some of staff given the obligations of today haven't seen them. But they can be submitted at the continuation of the public hearing and you can make a decision on whether to accept them, accept them and refer them or not accept them. But we would basically be acting to accept them and approve or deny them on the same meeting. No, you would proceed. You would proceed, you would review them at that point. Right. Where you are in this process is that you are ready for second meeting on the ordinance. So if you can get comfortable with them and it's coming on staff to understand them completely and report on them to you, there's no reason you can't act on the sixth. And except it's, does it be an approval? Simply, it means it's the allow it to come in and refer it to staff for their review and comments. Well, you don't even have to refer it to staff. I mean, we've got them, we've already done this once, we've gotten them and reviewed them and given you our review before you accepted it. You can proceed from right there according to the code. Okay. Okay. So is there Mr. Morton and anyone else please raise your hand before I quote. Continue. For the motion, Mr. Mayor. Thank you. I'm already mortgaining a citizen of the community. I think what you can do is part of your motion to continue you can make a deadline that all matters that are to be reviewed by staff prior to you getting them be proposed or submitted by, you could say Thursday night, you could say Tuesday morning, whatever you want. And anything else, of course, the applicant could submit, as was suggested at the time of the meeting, but the applicant should, or should be made to understand, that if those have to be reviewed by staff and counsel's opinion, it's going to continue to get. Because this has happened before. And I would hope, Mr. Mayor, that you'd have the material in time. So the rest of us in the community can review it and rely on it and speak intelligently or accept intelligently or whatever what's going on. Do you have any other material that are going to be added to our. The work product and the submission that you received here in the last 24 hours is directly reflective of the work that we've done thus far with staff. We were asked to provide, we wanted to provide. I think if staff were to comment, they'd also apply, but they haven't had a chance to review. They need that chance, but this is completely consistent with the work that's in the travel. So this amendment isn't trying to roll upside down? And no, it's clarification. In fact, it's, in my view, it is more balanced. It's frankly, it's a strength and set of draft documents. Strength and for all of our perspectives. Greater clarity, greater internal coordination. Mr. Schuster. Mr. Schuster, ask my skin company. After reviewing the documents and so forth, and staff might disagree with me, but other than the change that Dwayne brought to you requesting a potential extension of vested rights in the effect of a denial and that the rest of this that I looked at it, the changes to those documents reflected what you provided as direction to staff in the applicant last time to modify the documents. I'm not necessarily thinking that those are an amendment and that staff can disagree with me, but it's not an amendment to what the application was. It was further clarification based upon the direction that staff and council provided last time. Okay. Chris. I know we weren't gonna get discussion, but now we're in it. So I just wanted to clarify, Mr. Schuster, are you here speaking as a member of the public? Are you speaking as the applicant? I am not an applicant. I just wondered. I wanted to clarify. And I have to do a little bit more research. And obviously we will defer to the staff. But you know, there's been a, there are a couple of comments in last meeting when I went back and watched a tape that are a little troubling that seemed to imply that there was a clear line of communication between different individuals and I like I said, I'm going to do a little bit more research on that and that's why I wanted to clarify what your role was because you've been vociferous here and I appreciate that. But when we started talking, for example, maybe you want to answer this because you've reviewed the documents. Have we defined yet how commencement is going to be established? Because in the last meeting we talked about we had a direction or a suggestion from Mr. Souter that we would use the International Building Code's definition. That doesn't exist. So that would be something else I'd be interested in, because that's really triggers the document. I didn't know if you wanted to comment on that. From what I remember reading, there was a definition of commencement of construction that required three different things to happen. And I think that's what was actually discussed by staff, your staff. Right, and she building officer was going to utilize a definition as provided by what. I'm not familiar with exactly that without having the document in front of me. I'm just checking to see how well we know it. I move to continue. Continue the public hearing until October 6th. And four p.m. Sometime after. Second, Mr. Cooker. All those in favor? Aye. Those opposed? Second second my mr. Cooker all those in favor aye aye those opposed We will continue this meeting till the 6th of October. Thank you. Right. Thank you Okay, now we've got managers report. Okay, yes you are right. Agenda is the next council meeting. Thank you. Oh, for the next, I'm sorry. Now? I'm being prompted pardon me. On October 16th we've got this part of the upcoming schedules. There's a conflict between a Canada forum and the EOTC meetings and I understand all the other members of the EOTC could make October 16th work if we move with the snow mass and we move the time up from two to five. If that's acceptable to you all all two to five on October 16th through the EOTC, then the candidate form can stay at the National snowmass. It be here in snow mass. I'm able to make that happen. How was the rest of the council? I'm sorry. I apologize. I didn't really hear what you said. We're shooting to reschedule the EOTC meeting to, in order to accommodate the candidate forums. The candidate forums time is kind of stuck for a number of reasons. The EOTC members have said they can make October 16th the same day, two to five work. So it'd be shifting the meeting to here, which would be a convenience for us and but pumping the time up earlier in the day so that it started two hours earlier instead of four o'clock starting at two o'clock, right? How'd you support it with that? I like to do that. Do we have a three-hour agenda for that EOTK need? Almost likely we do. Almost likely we do. Right, if I'm reading the T-Leaves, right? It's, uh, yeah. I guess you could finish it pretty quick, but you know So if that's acceptable. Yes, let's let them know that that's acceptable. We'll move that forward very good. Thank you David Krueger and everybody else making that work for us Okay, so then on October 6th we've got the regular meeting any concerns thoughts agenda changes. We're still working October 6th. But so we're adding this so we're adding that to this agenda. Right. That's in on item seven. I think it's already there. Oh yeah. Oh yeah. I don't think so. Doesn't matter. I might be. The public. Do we have a draft just going back on AOTC? Do we have a draft agenda yet other than the budget? I don't know that answer. Do you have a draft? I don't think we do yet. Do you have a draft agenda? I don't think we do yet. Do you have a draft agenda? Do you have a draft agenda? Do you have a You'll have the budget for next year. We'll be the first thing. You'll have a funding request from Raffta to subsidize more of the no fair service because that has been growing and impacting them. You have an update on a couple of studies and issues relative to that and that's off the top of my hand that's what you've got. Glenwood Springs? Are we going to have Glenwood Springs conversation as well? Probably that will be part of a budget discussion as well yes. I'm not sure three hours is adequate. We can make it adequate. I mean, when it springs. The bridge. The bridge. The bridge. And the funding request by the upper jurisdictions to support $110 million, $150 million project. OK. Five bucks. No, but there was was you know there was really interesting and I can't remember I think I heard it. I think I heard it on the radio. Maybe I read it somewhere. It was a really interesting day. Bring it with you to that meeting. How about that? Well I'm just going to mention out staff wants to leave it. This notion of asking the local municipalities to start funding these C.DOT operations, and it was a very, I mean, there's a lot of interesting interconnections between how it all works. And I don't remember all the details, but I just mentioned that I did. It was a very good article. If you could forward that to us, that might help. I'm going to see if I can find it. It's Nick Ireland and find the papers. Oh, it was, okay. Yeah. Yeah, so that's the agenda for the sixth. Adding the information for the night. It really doesn't appear to be that long. Yep, there you go. Number seven. Okay, looking at October 20th. And then November 17th. Now we are not having a meeting on the 3rd of November. Monday before the election. Correct. As I understand that's correct. Unless you had something you wanted to discuss for an hour, otherwise we need the room between five and five thirty. That's great. Okay, I can understand that. And I apologize November 17th, agenda still shows the joint meeting with Pick and County and that's not happening. Okay. Okay. agenda still shows the joint meeting with Picking County and that's not happening. Okay. We'll have all business and new business on that agenda as well. Okay. Moving on then. We have the managed report. This is just my opportunity. I think what I would like to do with Council of Permission of course is to change the format the way the managed report's been working. Hopefully last Friday you received a written report. If you have any questions of course, I can answer those types of things. But maybe I'll just be heating up. What I'm hoping to do is to hit specific items so we don't have to go through a litany or a long list at least. The nice, just a quick discussion is, I know we've discussed it at least informally and a number of different occasions, the opportunity to potentially change the way we do our agendas. Hopefully, I'll have a little efficiency, maybe a little of effectiveness to it. Primarily, the big addition we like to add is a consent agenda. For those of you that haven't used one, it's an opportunity, all the paperwork's there, but everything on that consent agenda would be approved with one motion without discussion. A good example tonight was Chief Olson's discussion. So unanimous, unanimous, there was not a lot of a dissension or concern with that, I don't think. Those are issues we could put on the agenda early and get through. There seems to be a number of those, and hopefully we could get those through and get people in and out. I mean, they can know what that is. That's one idea. We're gonna pull through a couple of other ideas, I think we'd like to discuss internally. But we'll bring back some formats to you all for discussion. Make sure you're comfortable. It is your meeting. So the idea is that you can better utilize your time on issues that are most important to you and not have to get in the details of 70s issues that legally have to come before you for official action. Very good. I can appreciate you looking at things all differently and proposing a change. That's hopefully we can support some of those things. Okay. Anything else? Is there anything else on the managers report? Sure. Okay. So then the next item is, is there a motion to adjourn or go into executive session? Comments, comments, comments, comments. Yeah, calendars? Yeah, yeah, yeah. Gotta get these two different things thinking up. Council comments, committee reports, calendars. Jason. I'll just take an opportunity to welcome Clint to Snowmass Village for a day of meetings officially with us and hopefully you and your family are settling in and just wanted to officially say welcome to the community. Sure. It's been fantastic. Likewise. Marky. No, I have no comments. I'm none myself. Mr. Jacobs have no comments. I'm none myself. Mr. Jacobson? Can't think of anything. Mr. Cooker. Motion to adjourn. Is there a second? Second. That's Chris Jacobson. All those in favor. Aye. Any opposed? We are adjourned. Thank you, counsel. It's been a long day. you you Thank you.