[14:24] up for new and uh new will be on the agenda. It'll be an agenda item, so

[14:28] there will be no need to have it under public comment. Before I call the

[14:31] meeting to order, um when we do have public comment, if you could just keep

[14:35] your comments to three minutes or less, state your name and address up here at

[14:38] the front of the podium. Even though you have it signed in here, we need it uh

[14:42] verbally for the record. And um just know the public won't be able to respond

[14:46] to you especially uh if there's some topics on here uh particularly we won't

[14:51] be able to respond. Um any item on the agenda here I will open up for public

[14:55] comment and I think that that should cover

[14:58] everything. Okay. So let's uh start out and I'll

[15:02] call the meeting to order. Will you please stand and join me in the

[15:06] pledge of allegiance? I pledge allegiance to the flag of the

[15:11] United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation

[15:17] under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

[15:21] » Thank you. Click call the role, please.

[15:27] » Mayor Carsp >> here.

[15:29] » Mayor Prom Murphy >> here.

[15:31] » Trusty Hardy, >> yes.

[15:33] » Trusty Alrech >> here.

[15:34] » Trusty Wing >> here. Trusty Ays

[15:37] » here. >> Trusty Brody will be absent this

[15:40] evening. >> Thank you, Clerk. All right. Next on the

[15:43] agenda is citizen participation. I'm looking for anything. This all looks to

[15:47] be for new except one and the one is for Richardson which we can put under the

[15:52] parks master plan update. >> That sure. Okay. So, um we'll just move

[15:58] on now to consent. Do trustes like anything removed from consent?

[16:02] Otherwise, is there a motion to approve? >> Motion to approve. consent items.

[16:06] » All right. Uh, Trusty Hardy's move. Trusty Wing has seconded. Clicker, can

[16:09] we have a roll call vote, please? >> Trusty Wing,

[16:12] » yes. >> Trusty Hardy,

[16:13] » yes. >> Trusty Ays,

[16:15] » yes. >> Mayor Prom Murphy,

[16:16] » yes. >> Trusty Alrech,

[16:18] » yes. >> Mayor Carsback,

[16:20] » yes. Thank you. >> Is Trish Werner in the uh audience

[16:23] tonight? Welcome, Trish. If you could come to the front here. Trish is from

[16:26] the League of Women Voters, and uh we have a proclamation for you tonight,

[16:31] and this is for Women's Equality Day. I can uh would you like for me to read it

[16:35] and then if you'd like to add anything or

[16:37] » Sure. >> Okay. Great.

[16:39] » Whereas on August 26th, 1920, the 19th amendment to the United States

[16:44] Constitution was certified, securing women's right to vote and marking a

[16:47] historic victory in the long struggle for women's equality. And whereas

[16:51] women's equality day serves as a tribute to the generations of women who fought

[16:55] tirelessly, courageously, and relentlessly for the fundamental right

[16:59] to participate in our democracy. And whereas the League of Women Voters,

[17:03] founded in 1920, just months before the ratification of the 19th Amendment, has

[17:07] stood at the forefront of the movement to protect and expand voting rights,

[17:11] promote civic engagement, and empower voters for over a century. And whereas

[17:16] despite the progress made, barriers to equality and equitable representation

[17:22] persist in many areas of society, including pay, equity, reproductive

[17:27] justice, representation in leadership roles, and full access to the ballot.

[17:31] And whereas we honor and continue the work of trailblazers like Sojourer

[17:34] Truth, Susan B. Anthony, IdB Wells, Alice Paul, and countless unnamed women,

[17:40] especially women of color, whose voices and leadership have shaped the course of

[17:44] history. And whereas the League of Women Voters remains committed to advancing

[17:48] inclusive democracy, defending the right to vote, and ensuring that every voice

[17:52] is heard in the dem democratic process. Now, therefore, we commemorate women's

[17:57] equality day, August 26, as a day to celebrate the importance of the women's

[18:01] suffrage movement and the work to secure and expand equal rights today. Further,

[18:06] let it be resolved that I, William Karpc, mayor of the town of Berth, do

[18:10] hereby proclaim two Tuesday, August 26, 2025 as Women's Equality Day in the town

[18:16] of Berth. And I'll go ahead and sign this

[18:20] 12th day of August 2025. Would you like to, you don't have to.

[18:26] Would you like to add anything by chance? Okay. Well, thank you for

[18:29] bringing this before us. Let's give a round of applause.

[18:33] [Applause]

[18:41] Excellent.

[18:45] Okay. Um, let's move on. Now, I'd like to bump up new, but um, we can do this

[18:50] Excel Energy update and presentation by Hans Rodick.

[18:54] Is Mr. Rodick in the room tonight? Welcome. We have a full crowd.

[18:58] » Thanks for being here. >> Picked quite the day to come and

[19:01] present. Everybody gets to learn about Excel.

[19:03] » That's right. >> Let's see here. Do I use the clicker?

[19:06] Okay. Thank you, uh, Mayor Carspec and town board. Chris, thanks for having me

[19:10] and coordinating. Uh, we're just going to do a quick presentation here today to

[19:14] give you guys an update about who XL Energy is. Uh, it's kind of unique

[19:18] timing for us as we're in conversations with uh, reestablishing our franchise

[19:23] agreement with the town of Berthood. Uh, we've been serving the community for

[19:27] many decades now. Um, but we're looking forward to getting that done. So, Excel

[19:33] Energy, we're a uh a nationwide utility. We're a dual fuel company where we have

[19:38] electric and natural gas service. Um, our our corporate headquarters is in

[19:42] Minnesota with our largest secondary base here in Colorado.

[19:49] Um, basically this slide kind of shows what we're This one has the right

[19:55] figures on it on the left hand side there. is supposed to show what our 2005

[19:59] emission levels were and what they are today in 2024. Um, we're at about a 57%

[20:05] reduction so far and on track to hit that 80% reduction by 2030. And you can

[20:11] see our our energy mix here in the state of Colorado. So, we've got a pretty

[20:16] unique uh blend. Actually, this is companywide. We have we have no nuclear

[20:21] here in this in Colorado. So, our long range vision, we kind of

[20:26] have four main pillars. We want to be safe, we want to be clean, we want to be

[20:30] reliable, and we want to be affordable. So, trying to plan uh today's work to

[20:34] ensure that those goals are met uh takes a lot of hard work, and we've got about

[20:39] 4,000 employees here that are working every day to achieve these goals.

[20:45] But kind of diving in a little bit deeper, we've got our short-term goal of

[20:48] 2030 where we're on we're on track to hit that uh state mandate of an 80%

[20:53] reduction in the CO2 emissions. Uh we've got our goals related to our natural gas

[20:58] service. Uh by 2035, we're going to have taken a step internally as a company to

[21:04] have converted uh roughly 20% of our fleet to EVs. Actually drove here from

[21:09] Gley in an EV. It's pretty sweet. Folks want to check it out in the parking lot.

[21:12] You can see the wrap on it. Uh and then by 2050, looking ahead, we've got some

[21:17] pretty intense uh and aggressive goals to be fully carbon-f free when it comes

[21:21] to our electric generation. Uh we're going to be a net zero natural gas

[21:25] service and have a lot of options for that EV infrastructure.

[21:31] Turning here to the state, uh you can see this is our service territory. So

[21:35] obviously we're here in Berth uh but we go basically all the way to the southern

[21:39] border out west to Grand Junction and then up north to Wyoming. Uh I'm the

[21:44] area manager for northern Colorado. So I cover Lammer County, Well County, Logan

[21:49] and Morgan counties and then additional uh three eastern plains counties where

[21:53] we have some of our large renewable wind assets. Uh so our our mix of customers

[21:58] is pretty even there on electric and natural gas.

[22:03] This is our our energy mix in Colorado. Uh we're going to be out of the coal

[22:08] business roughly by 2030. That is the target if all goes well. We're uh

[22:13] converting a couple of plants to natural gas. Our pawn plant in Morgan County is

[22:18] in the process of converting. And then you can see the wind and solar. Uh those

[22:23] numbers are going to tick up here as we get closer to 2030. You can see uh very

[22:29] substantial jumps in our wind and solar generation and we expect to be 88 8%

[22:35] carbon-f free uh by 2030.

[22:39] So and again this is in back in 2018 we came out as the first company nationwide

[22:45] to establish uh those production those emissions reduction targets by 2030. And

[22:52] we've been leading on that effort uh really over the last decade.

[22:57] In 2019, uh, we got started with the Colorado

[23:01] Clean Energy Plan and that portfolio was fully approved this last year by the

[23:07] Colorado Public Utilities Commission, which were fully regulated by. So any

[23:11] sort of our big plans to build a new power plant or build very large

[23:15] transmission lines has to go through the PUC. And you can see the diverse mix of

[23:20] energy resources. Uh just to your east in uh Well County, we're going to be

[23:26] adding a couple new uh gas combustion turbines to our fleet. So to have that

[23:30] firm and dispatchable generation on the system for super hot days like we're

[23:35] experiencing right now. Uh we're going to be able to do all this

[23:40] over the next uh five years. We're talk a little bit more about our um

[23:44] substantial investment plan, but the the goal and our projections are to continue

[23:49] to keep our bills uh below that national average and to keep any sort of

[23:54] increases below this standard historical rate of inflation, that that 2 to 3% uh

[23:59] range, not co inflation. So, like I mentioned, over the next uh

[24:06] five years as a company, we're going to be raising and deploying about 45

[24:10] billion dollars of investment of of investment across our eight states. The

[24:16] bulk of that is going to come here to Colorado. We're looking at roughly $22

[24:19] billion. So, um, that's going to include everything from the new generation, you

[24:25] know, new wind farms, new solar farms, new gas plants, uh, maybe nuclear one

[24:31] day, depending on how the state uh, looks at that. And then we're going to

[24:35] be doing a lot of transmission, which is kind of the backbone of the electricity

[24:39] network, our grid, the big tall transmission lines that take that

[24:43] generation uh, from the power plants, bring it to a substation. We're going to

[24:47] be building a lot more substations over the course of the next five years

[24:51] because we're seeing more demand on our system than we ever have basically since

[24:55] the 1950s and60s when AC became a thing. Um, and so it's going to be a very

[25:01] aggressive plan. We have a lot of high hopes that it's going to go well. We got

[25:05] to work with communities like yourselves to make sure that we can build our

[25:08] infrastructure to serve, you know, end users like everybody here in the in the

[25:13] room. So this kind of the breakdown of that

[25:16] $22 billion uh generation is actually not as large as you would think it would

[25:21] be. We're really going to be working a lot a lot on our distribution system. So

[25:26] that's customer impact that increases reliability and that that increases

[25:30] capacity for towns like yourselves to continue to grow and attract businesses.

[25:35] You'll see a lot of transmission. Um and here in a second here we'll talk a

[25:39] little bit about our wildfire mitigation. Uh, as I was driving in on

[25:44] 56th, I looked at the foothills over here and saw some smoke. And so, it just

[25:49] reminds us how important it is to uh for us as a utility to ensure that we're

[25:54] doing everything we can to make sure our system is safe and does not cause any

[25:58] sort of catastrophic wildfires. Um, our Colorado Pathways, it's a five

[26:04] roughly 500 miles of new transmission, uh, starting at Fort St. rain and doing

[26:09] basically a giant horseshoe back up to Denver. Um, it's our it was our largest

[26:14] infrastructure project to date as a company and we're still continuing

[26:17] progress on it. This just touches on our our EV 2050

[26:23] vision. I don't want to dive too much into that. I want to be respectful

[26:26] everybody's time. Uh, we do have these plans before the PUC to enhance that EV

[26:31] infrastructure which is really the critical uh kind of first step to making

[26:35] sure that more EVs can get on the road. a little bit of the fun stuff. We uh we

[26:41] have a lot of programs to make sure that our customers have, you know, the most

[26:45] efficient homes and businesses as possible and we really try to do a lot

[26:49] of outreach on those on those programs and uh looking forward to bringing some

[26:55] more of those resources to the community as we move forward.

[26:59] just a little bit of uh our impact here in the state in terms of supporting

[27:04] local jobs, supporting local communities and what we do to give back to the to

[27:08] the places that we live in. Uh we got a lot of great, you know,

[27:13] stats on here, but I think it's just a great thing. Every year we do what's

[27:17] called our day of service in midepptember where companywide. We get

[27:21] hundreds of projects and you'll probably see a ton of people out wearing their XL

[27:25] red shirts uh you know working at various projects in their communities.

[27:31] We're a big military support uh company. We we love our veterans. Got a lot of

[27:36] veterans actually within our various teams. So we we're highly supportive of

[27:41] them and what they do for us. Real quick on the wildfire mitigation. Uh Berth is

[27:46] on that on our tier two risk zone. And so tier one is our lowest, tier two is

[27:52] our mid, and tier three is our our highest risk zone. The further west you

[27:57] go towards the foothills, the more of a of a high risk we're going to see. We

[28:01] don't have as many electric assets over there. Uh so that that's kind of a good

[28:05] thing for us, but further south in Boulder County and some of those other

[28:08] southern counties, very high risk. We have uh done a substantial amount of

[28:15] work over the last couple of years. Uh a lot of that work is at the distribution

[28:20] system level. So replacing high-risisk poles, visually inspecting lines, using

[28:25] drones to inspect our our transmission lines and those real mountainous areas

[28:30] and making sure that, you know, we're replacing any sort of equipment that is

[28:34] potentially on its way out ahead of schedule.

[28:39] And we've got a whole a whole plan that was actually approved by the PUC uh just

[28:44] in the last couple of months to execute this work and happy to come back at any

[28:49] time to give you guys more of an update on that. But I obviously want to make

[28:52] sure you can get to the uh the hot topic here in the room. So I appreciate

[28:56] everybody's time. I left everybody uh except Trusty Alrech with my card. So

[29:01] I'll make sure you have that. If you guys ever have any questions about what

[29:05] we do, what we have going on, and any other services we provide, just give me

[29:09] a shout. >> Thank you.

[29:11] You are it. We're all here for you.

[29:16] » There you guys go. >> Thank you.

[29:20] » Any questions? >> I have one.

[29:23] So, I I um I don't know if I got it in an email or or in the US mail, but I

[29:27] think I received a letter from Excel saying asking for us to cut our usage

[29:30] during peak times because there was a risk that we may use our power. Can you

[29:35] speak to that quickly and kind of what's being done to mitigate that?

[29:38] » Yeah, it's a great question. So last week um with very high temperatures and

[29:45] you know very high demand on the system and some of our generation capacity uh

[29:51] we were we were at risk of having to do some

[29:55] controlled outages to preserve the integrity of the grid. Uh and so we made

[29:59] it what's called a call for conservation across the state. Reached out to our

[30:04] local communities and our customers. Um, we used a lot of tools in our toolbox. I

[30:09] can't go into all of them because it's some guidelines and things that we're

[30:13] not really allowed to discuss in a public setting, but we due to those that

[30:17] call to conservation and the inner workings of our team, we were able to

[30:21] avoid having to do any of those. Um, it's actually pretty unique timing. The

[30:27] public utilities commission this week, last week, and this week has been

[30:31] debating uh our plan, one of our plans to build more generation

[30:36] And um so it was a pretty unique uh I think factoid for them to consider is

[30:42] that we need that firm dispatchable generation when the wind's not blowing

[30:46] and the sun isn't shining and so things can happen. We have really high

[30:50] reliability ratings. Uh but nobody is perfect. So we're continuing to you know

[30:55] move forward with that plan to build that generation of enhanced capacity.

[30:59] So, with the hot weather, the increased population, I don't know how many data

[31:03] centers Colorado is getting, but obviously that'll be a draw. Yeah. Do

[31:06] you think this mitigation you just discussed uh will be in effect, possibly

[31:11] when so that we can avoid outages? >> Yeah, it's a good question. So, we're in

[31:16] the process of building out a variety of new generation out east. Couple of new

[31:22] wind farms that are going to be coming online. The uh the new combustion

[31:26] turbines in Well County at Fort St. brain are expected to come on in 2028.

[31:32] And it's, you know, to be honest, it's not soon enough. You get a big data

[31:36] center, you know, a hyperscaler that's 300 to 800 megawws. For comparison, our

[31:42] Pawn plant in Morton County is 500 megawws. And so trying to figure out how

[31:47] to make that all work and mesh is something that we're in conversations

[31:52] with the PUC right now. So, uh, yeah, it's it's a very exciting time in the

[31:57] the energy business and, uh, we will continue to move forward as best as we

[32:02] can. >> Thank you,

[32:05] » um, if I could, um, I've been following the sustainability actions Excel has

[32:09] been taking for a long time, so I'd like to commend you on your work on that

[32:13] ambitious goal. Um, but I did have a follow-up question on conservation

[32:18] notices. Uh, we received the email, I believe it was from you, maybe like two

[32:24] hours ahead of time. Is there any way we can get that expedated so we can inform

[32:28] the community? >> That's a very good point. Uh, Trusty

[32:32] Murphy's, um, we were scrambling to be honest on that Thursday. Uh, we had some

[32:37] internal things happen and pop up and the the information was coming to us as

[32:43] fast as we could get it. Um, I wish that we could have, you know, advanced notice

[32:48] of it. Uh but sometimes things happen at a generation facility that then tips the

[32:52] scale in the opposite direction of where we need it to be.

[32:56] » Um we're the state's largest utility and we're also basically the balancing

[33:01] authority on the the grid. And so when when some of our assets maybe go down or

[33:08] aren't producing as as much, uh we have a real heightened level of

[33:12] responsibility to make sure we do what we can. Uh, but I I'll take that back to

[33:16] the team to see if there's any way we can, you know, 24 hours in advance or

[33:22] anything of that nature. But, you know, sometimes things really all the dominoes

[33:26] fall in the wrong direction was really what happened on Thursday.

[33:30] » No, much appreciated. And I think we're willing to forward that information onto

[33:35] the community >> and we do greatly appreciate everybody's

[33:38] assistance. I know a lot of folks uh from around the region, counties and

[33:41] town owns were forwarding and putting on social media. So, thank you guys because

[33:46] every every little bit helped. >> Just a quick question. Um, the wildfire

[33:53] mitigation, I appreciate all those efforts, but I was curious if you have a

[33:56] what the procedure is for reinforcing infrastructure that gets taken down with

[34:00] a wildfire, how we get everyone back online with utilities after an incident

[34:05] occurs. >> Yeah. So, we It's a good question. We're

[34:09] a um I'll take a step back. We're really in that a nationally recognized leader

[34:15] in storm restoration. U Minnesota gets a lot of very intense uh storms during the

[34:22] summertime. I've seen way more outages uh coming out of our Minnesota service

[34:26] territory than than we have thankfully experienced this summer. Um when a big

[34:32] event does happen, we are able to rely on what's called mutual aid. So you get

[34:36] a bunch of other utilities nationwide who will come in and support us. So it

[34:41] won't just be XL crews trying to carry that burden and getting everybody back

[34:44] online. Um so recently we sent probably hundreds of guys from Colorado to

[34:50] Minnesota to help with some of those outages. And when some of the big

[34:53] hurricanes take place, we'll send crews all down there. So in the event where

[34:58] you know major wildfire happens and facilities get taken out, power gets

[35:03] lost, it'll be an all hands-on deck effort to get drowned back out as fast

[35:07] as possible. >> That's awesome. I know that's how the

[35:09] fire department responds too is sharing resources, but I didn't know Excel did

[35:14] that. So, that's really neat. >> Yeah, it's a pretty cool A lot of the

[35:17] major utilities are part of uh trade associations and we all have these these

[35:21] agreements with each other to assist. So, a line we can pull linemen from

[35:25] anywhere in the country to come and help.

[35:28] » Thank you. >> Appreciate you guys. Thanks for

[35:33] appreciate that.

[35:37] Okay, next I will bump up new farm concept park concept update. We'll have

[35:41] uh Keith Null to present on this and I'm going to move it up just given the

[35:45] amount of people in the audience that are here for this tonight.

[35:50] Welcome Keith.

[36:21] All right. Thank you. We can get started. Um so this is just a quick

[36:25] update from the new farm um park concept update. After the last board meeting in

[36:31] July, um it was brought to our attention to look into doing a conceptual design

[36:36] for the new farm property. The dual farm property is a 13acre property on the

[36:42] east side of uh County Line Road. And so

[36:49] for the planning process, we typically have a handful of uh park properties.

[36:55] And eventually those park properties if we decide to move f further with them,

[37:00] they usually go first into a conceptual design. Um before the conceptual design,

[37:05] port committee has been talking about them. Um, as an example, the Juskowski

[37:08] property we've had as it in our inventory since 2012. Um, every year

[37:13] I've been on the port committee for about five, six years. We talk about

[37:15] that property still and just um, you'll see later on that we are trying to get

[37:20] further along with that property into a conceptual design. So, that would be the

[37:24] next step for the the dual farm property is to move it forward into a conceptual

[37:28] design. Uh, this can take anywhere from, you know, six to 12 months depending on

[37:33] how uh, thorough we want to get with this concept design. Uh following that,

[37:37] we go down to usually another year, year and a half to do construction documents

[37:42] and then there's property construction. So, we're still just uh with this

[37:46] property, we're just learning uh what's possible out there, what would the

[37:49] community like out there, which is the port and the board uh possibly like to

[37:53] see out there in the future. And so just to follow up, the port

[37:58] committee met about this property last Wednesday. Um following a presentation

[38:03] from staff Sarah and Butch and public comment, the port committee recommended

[38:08] moving forward with a conceptual design. Um there was then a brief discussion

[38:14] following that. Uh we looked at some examples of some amphitheaters because

[38:19] uh with this property there is a yearly uh concert event that takes place up

[38:25] there. Um and so some ideas for the property having an amphitheater or

[38:29] possibly community arts center and and those will be uh the ideas we take in

[38:34] these early discussions uh with consultants as we go out for bid. So the

[38:39] port committee and uh kind of talk about bike and trail access maybe golf cart

[38:44] parking out there and then briefly discussed

[38:50] looking at like the list of amenities that could actually fit on the property.

[38:54] Um, so it wasn't a a real deep dive and and we're not going into a real deep

[38:58] dive with it tonight. Um, because we still those will be the first steps with

[39:02] the consultants. So that is the update >> addresses questions.

[39:10] » Pretty straightforward here. >> All right. I'll open it up now for uh

[39:15] quite a bit of people signed up. Um, says again reminder, I'll call your

[39:19] name. If you could state come to the podium here to the left of the room,

[39:23] state your name and address and please keep your comments to three minutes or

[39:26] less. We'll start off with Sarah Lincoln.

[39:42] My name is Sarah Lincoln and I live at 236 East Highway 56, home of No Farm

[39:48] Park. Um, good evening trustees. When you bought the farm from us in

[39:54] January 2023 and five of you took part in that purchase. Um, we all understood

[40:00] that the establishment of New Farm as a town park would preserve a cherished

[40:05] farmstead while the town built a music and arts park around the protected

[40:10] structures. For a couple of years since then, New

[40:14] Farm Park was put on the back burner to make headway on other important parks

[40:18] projects. Recently though, it's become apparent that New Farm Park needs to be

[40:23] moved from the back burner to the front burner and kept there. And here's why.

[40:28] First, developments are now occurring around the park. The town needs drawings

[40:33] and words to reference when they communicate the original vision and

[40:37] intended use of Noah Farm Park to others. To make my second point, I just

[40:42] want to ask how many people are here for no for no park?

[40:48] We hear for the past decade so many people who talk to us at the farm

[40:54] concert and in between like these folks that they want an amphitheater and they

[40:58] would like it there because they know it works. Um their words are we need a

[41:04] larger amphitheater and we need more concerts.

[41:08] So to underline this point, I'd like to read from the 2024 parks and recreation

[41:13] community survey where the community at large asked for this as well. And I

[41:17] quote, "Overall the top rated future amenities in terms of importance include

[41:24] bike and running trails, an outdoor pool, natural areas, and an

[41:30] amphitheater. The town is currently making good

[41:34] progress on trails, natural areas, and an outdoor pool. And that's awesome. We

[41:39] now feel we need to start on the new farm park amphitheater.

[41:44] For these reasons, the port, which is the parks and wreck committee,

[41:49] they reviewed no farm park at their August 6th meeting as Keith Null said,

[41:53] and they unanimously recommended moving forward with a concept plan for the

[41:57] park, including an amphitheater as part as part of that concept. In that review,

[42:02] it was made clear that funds exist in this year's town budget to create the

[42:06] Kata plan, and we need to take advantage of those funds before the year ends. In

[42:11] light of all this, I would like to make two requests in closing. First, please

[42:16] vote to start the concept plan now to take advantage of available funding. And

[42:21] second, please keep No Farm Park on the front burner by setting aside 2026

[42:27] funding to move the park through the planning process that Keys outlined and

[42:32] get to the next steps so that these folks here and the greater community

[42:37] know that the amphitheater they want is coming in the not too distant future.

[42:42] Thank you. >> Thank you very much.

[42:47] » Next would be Mr.

[42:53] Oh, hi. My name is Butch Haw. I live at 236 East Highway 56, New Farm Park. This

[42:59] is my wife Sarah. You just heard Sarah mention a word several times in her

[43:03] speech, and that word is community. Bertha is more than just another town

[43:08] along the road. It's a community of kind, generous people who choose to live

[43:12] here because they want to. From the fifth generation farmers to the

[43:17] hopefield newcomers, this valley provides some of the finest living that

[43:21] can be found anywhere along the front range. And when these people speak up

[43:26] and make their wants and needs known, it's only proper to listen to their

[43:30] requests and act accordingly. There's nothing more powerful in

[43:35] bringing a community together than the arts and music. It's the universal

[43:40] language that exists in all of us, whether we realize it or not, that

[43:44] transcends the challenges we face in everyday life. An independent survey

[43:49] conducted last year revealed the top priorities which Sarah mentioned. In

[43:54] January 2023, Bertha had purchased New Farm with the

[43:58] idea of eventually making it a music and arts park. Sarah and I would live in the

[44:03] historic 1879 farmhouse until our passing from this life. Now, two and a

[44:09] half years later, we find ourselves with a project nearly forgotten as developers

[44:14] prepare to move dirt and build a subdivision that will surround this park

[44:19] with no plans in place as to how the park will fit in with that neighborhood.

[44:24] So, the next key word to remember tonight is the word wait. We can no

[44:30] longer wait for New Farm Park to be planned, especially with the developers

[44:34] pushing hard to keep the park from being built for its intended purpose. And

[44:40] friends, waiting is an incurable disease. Every day that we wait takes us

[44:46] one day closer to our last sunset. We started the farm concert 22 years ago

[44:51] with a hope that the community would respond to our dream of filling the

[44:55] valley with music. 150 people showed up for the first one.

[45:00] And now we sell 500 tickets every year in less than 15 minutes.

[45:09] But that's as many folks as we can handle with our current amphitheater. On

[45:13] one hand, it's great to know that we'll fill our venue every year and we can

[45:17] plan to pay for top tier national talent. On the other hand, only a

[45:22] fraction of the people who love music and the arts are able to attend our

[45:26] yearly shows. What that proved to us, to paraphrase Kevin Cosner and Field of

[45:31] Dreams, if you build it, they will come. We know after two decades of successful

[45:38] shows, the people in this community will indeed come.

[45:43] So, we're not asking the town to drop anything that's already in progress in

[45:47] favor of New Farm Park. All we ask is for a concept plan to be initiated, paid

[45:53] for with the funds already budgeted for 25 and for additional funds to be

[45:58] allocated in 26 and beyond as the new farm park moves forward toward

[46:03] completion, taken from the back burner to the front burner, so to speak. The

[46:08] community has proven to us that they want this and they deserve to have it.

[46:12] Thank you for your time, citizens. Thank you for your support.

[46:17] » Thank you very much. >> Um Casey Grace.

[46:33] » Hi everyone. Good evening board of trustees. I am Casey Grace. This is

[46:37] Norah Grace and the reason why the farm concert isn't happening this year. So,

[46:41] very cute reason. I live at 218A Cadmin Street. Um, I'm

[46:46] speaking on behalf of New Farm as the operations manager of the annual farm

[46:50] concert, but also as a citizen of Berthood for more than 15 years. Um,

[46:54] it's really hard to follow up the public comment after Butch and Sarah um because

[46:59] they've covered this vision so well. So, this is what I can add. Uh, many of you

[47:04] have been to the farm to at least see the property and take in the views. Uh,

[47:09] most of you have been to at least one farm concert and have been able to see

[47:12] what this magic is all about. So, I'm proud to talk to my friends and extended

[47:17] family about how the town of Bertha had bought the farm in 2023 to develop it

[47:22] further to benefit the community with ideas like a bigger amphitheater, a

[47:26] performing arts center, a community center, and more. But we've reached a

[47:30] fork in the road with Farmstead third filing where in order to work with the

[47:34] developer to make decisions that are beneficial to them and for us, New Farm

[47:38] Park needs a fullyfledged concept plan. And since this filing has already been

[47:42] approved, the need for a concept plan has never been stronger.

[47:47] We've heard from the community that they want an amphitheater and and the new

[47:50] farm team is committed to providing input on that concept plan and logistics

[47:54] to make it happen. So I have come here tonight to ask two things with regard to

[47:59] New Farm. Number one, please tonight vote to approve moving forward with the

[48:04] concept plan and thereby officially declaring the start to New Farm Park.

[48:09] And two, approve funds to be allocated specifically to New Farm Park in 2026 to

[48:14] keep momentum going for the development into the future. Many of our parks have

[48:19] had great attention paid to them within the last 5 years like Wagner Farm Park

[48:23] and Town Park. I believe it's New Farm Park's turn to shine. Thank you very

[48:28] much for your time. >> Thank you very much.

[48:34] Michael Stein.

[48:42] » Good evening. My name is Michael Stein and along with my wife Carla, uh we live

[48:47] at 310 Victoria Street in uh Thickle Farm just uh about a mile as the crow

[48:54] flies from New Farm. And I I prompted to be here tonight both from a sense of

[49:01] grief and also a sense of enthusiasm. the the enthusiasm is to en echo what's

[49:07] already been said and to encourage you to move to to move the uh the project

[49:14] and the and the conceptual plan for the project uh forward with with haste. Uh

[49:21] the grief comes from the fact that there won't be a concert this year. There

[49:25] won't be a farm concert this year. We have for the last several years

[49:30] introduced people from Bertha and from around Colorado to the joy that is the

[49:35] farm concert. And now we have to tell our friends that it's not going to be

[49:40] here this year. And uh the only relief from that is I don't get to sit at my

[49:44] computer and and and try to be one of those first people to get tickets

[49:49] because it it happens fast. So you got to got to be on it.

[49:53] But the people that we have introduced to the concert have come from other

[49:57] places. Uh some of whom travel all over the world and see worldclass venues and

[50:03] worldclass acts. But they make it a point every year to want to come to

[50:07] Bertha and share this with us because of not just the the talent that comes but

[50:13] also the ambian ambiance that comes along with it and and I don't think you

[50:18] can separate those things. Uh so so the what what speaks for this particular

[50:25] design and venue. Uh a lot of the cities around here have amphitheaters. They're

[50:30] usually some kind of concrete structure. Uh but th this this concept blends

[50:37] nature and blends the outdoors along with the opportunity to hear music. Uh

[50:45] not only for adults but also for children. There's not a lot of places

[50:49] where you can go and take kids and go listen to a concert and they can kind of

[50:53] wander around and not be in people's way and and enjoy that. So, um we we need

[51:00] the amphitheater. We need expansion of the amphitheater so even more people can

[51:05] enjoy it. B people from Bertha and from around the the the rest of the state who

[51:11] will come and hear shows here. uh so expansion of of the venue itself and

[51:17] also expansion of the opportunities for other concerts and and other events to

[51:23] be there. Uh and thank you very much for your time and thank you for

[51:29] consideration. Let's let's get this done.

[51:35] Deian Mville.

[51:45] » Hello. I'm Dian Mulah Hill. I live at 1504 Chokeberry Street here in Bertha.

[51:50] Good evening, council members and neighbors. I'm here tonight to speak

[51:54] about New Farm Park, specifically the proof of concept plan that has already

[51:59] been funded uh by our town budget. The funds are there. The need is clear as

[52:04] you can see and now it's time for action. Newell Farm Park is more than

[52:09] just an idea on paper. It's an opportunity to create a multi-purpose

[52:14] space where our community can gather together, connect, and enjoy the

[52:20] outdoors in the garden spot of Colorado. This vision includes areas for children

[52:26] to play, families to picnic, walking paths for all ages, and an entertainment

[52:32] venue where we can host concerts, theater performances, festivals, and

[52:38] other events bringing people together while preserving a piece of our

[52:42] heritage. The proof of concept plan is a critical first step. It's how we take

[52:48] this vision and turn it into something tangible. designs, layouts, cost

[52:53] estimates, and timeliness. Without it, the park remains a someday dream. With

[53:00] it, we can move forward with purpose and momentum. Since the town has already

[53:05] allocated money, the question is not if we can do it, it's when we will start.

[53:13] The longer we wait, the more likely we are to lose both community enthusiasm

[53:18] and the benefit of current pricing. I'm respectfully asking the council to

[53:24] prioritize this plan and direct that it be started immediately. The residents

[53:30] who supported this budget item deserve to see the visible progress and our

[53:35] community deserves to benefit from this investment sooner than later. I've been

[53:41] asking for a concert venue since 2013. Let's take the fundraising we've already

[53:48] committed and turn it into action. Let's make the new farm project proof of

[53:54] concept plan with its community gathering spaces and entertainment venue

[53:59] a priority and let's begin the work now. Thank you so much for your time, your

[54:05] service to the community and your attention this evening.

[54:08] » Thank you. Steve Mo.

[54:13] » Uh my name is Steve Mulvahill, Deian's husband.

[54:17] Um live at 1504 Chuckberry Street in Berett

[54:22] and been there uh going on 12 years. Um

[54:29] I hadn't planned on speaking. So the first thing I'll say is what she said.

[54:39] I can't I can't duplicate that. There is one point I'd like to ask the the board

[54:45] and the mayor to consider seriously and that is as I've watched the the the

[54:51] funding grow and the projects grow for a lot of work uh worthwhile recreation

[54:57] oriented projects. It seems that the town has gotten into the either the

[55:03] habit or the the model of approving a project

[55:09] and then once the project is approved, altering the project and moving the

[55:14] priority to something else, leaving behind unfinished projects and projects

[55:20] that vary quite a bit from the original approved uh concept by by the voters.

[55:28] So, I think that most of those end up in pretty good shape, but by the same

[55:33] token, they're not exactly what people were expecting. And they do expect

[55:40] things to be done and they're and I think the things that have been done

[55:45] have been done very well. But we continually get into the same pattern

[55:50] that we're in with New Farm. And that is we we go off on a project

[55:55] and we get it approved to a certain degree and then the next thing we want

[56:00] to do is start another project and the and the project behind either gets

[56:05] partially done, done late, never done. And in some cases, things are still

[56:11] sitting there and the concept is is very different than what was originally

[56:17] approved. And I realize it's not possible for the board to come to the

[56:22] town or the the residents every single time that they want to make a change,

[56:28] but I think you should consider the fact that when you originally ask somebody to

[56:33] vote for something, they vote for the package and then the the

[56:40] option of providing input to the town when you go to make a change is is very

[56:48] short. It's not well distributed and the decision is made for the changes

[56:55] without consideration for completing the project. So all I'm asking is to

[57:00] complete the projects that are in place and stop putting things aside and re

[57:06] reassessing the whole town putting multiple projects on hold while

[57:12] something new is started. And in most cases, all these things are years down

[57:17] the road to get completed. So, let's complete some stuff while we have the

[57:21] money and that's it. And then what she said is more than I could have figured

[57:28] out. So, thank you all for your time.

[57:35] » Uh, next is Karen Simmons.

[57:43] Um, it's probably not the right format. Um, if you could send an email,

[57:49] that'd be better here. We're just doing a public comment right now. Uh, Vance

[57:53] Bunker. >> Well, I don't really have much more to

[57:58] say other than what everybody's already said. Um, excuse me, Vance Bunker.

[58:02] Jackie Nelson, that's my wife, and we live at 1110 Fourth Street here in

[58:06] Berth. Um, we're 12-year veterans of the farm concert and I think we're one of

[58:12] two couples that have been married at the farm concert or at the farm. Uh,

[58:16] that being Butch and Sarah and us. So, um, that place has a special spot in our

[58:22] heart as well as Butch and Sarah. Um um

[58:30] over the years we've seen some epic performances. Some um people like Pete

[58:37] Huntinger who on his guitar played 14 different parts all at the same time.

[58:42] I'm exaggerating, but um as we're watching him, you're you're you're

[58:48] flabbergasted. Am I really listening to this? Is this really happening? um uh

[58:54] just um different things like Baxter Black and Kevin Davis and the Haunted

[58:59] Windchimes. And one of the most magical moments that I'll probably never forget

[59:03] was when Don Edwards um finished his set with the Coyote song and it's quiet. You

[59:11] could hear a pin drop out there and there's a full moon and stars and he

[59:16] finishes up this set with that. It's a once in a-lifetime chance. He's now

[59:21] gone. Um not not going to be around anymore. Um but year after year, that's

[59:26] the acts and the performers that we got to see that Butch brought in. People

[59:30] that have so much talent, in my opinion, they're never going to be famous because

[59:34] they are too talented. Um so, somebody spoke a little while ago about how

[59:40] magical it is. It's extremely magical out there. I have I don't like to go to

[59:46] concerts. I don't like noise. I don't like being surrounded by thousands of

[59:50] people. To go to the farm concert and be sitting around with 500 of the most

[59:55] well- behaved people um you've ever been around and then to have sound that you

[1:00:01] can still have conversation with the person next to you and still not bother

[1:00:06] the people in front of you or behind you is it's incredible what they do out

[1:00:10] there. Um,

[1:00:14] that's only been done by Butch and Sarah and Casey and Mike. And this little baby

[1:00:19] right here held up this year's show. That proves that this family has put

[1:00:25] their heart and soul in this and with volunteer help, of course. Um, but it's

[1:00:30] time for the town, especially now with the funds in place, get that concept

[1:00:35] plan going. Let's move into a construction design. Let's figure that

[1:00:38] out. I agree wholeheartedly that should be being designed as the development is

[1:00:44] being designed. And the folks that get to buy houses next to that

[1:00:49] if they keep putting on the same shows and the same things that have been

[1:00:52] happening year after year, what a blessing. They'll be able to walk out

[1:00:56] their back door on their deck and watch a really fabulous show. Um

[1:01:02] it's a I think it's important. Um I don't want to see it drag on like Wagner

[1:01:07] Farm Park. And I realize that there was other circumstances that the town didn't

[1:01:10] have money back 20 years ago when that first started.

[1:01:13] » Mr. Buck, we're hitting the three minutes.

[1:01:15] » Oh, I'm sorry. Okay. >> Um, so um um I realize that was going

[1:01:19] on. Um but yeah, we got some time and some money. Let's get this done and push

[1:01:23] forward. I appreciate you guys. >> Thank you very much.

[1:01:25] » Thank you. >> Was 1110 one4 Street correct?

[1:01:29] » Yes. >> Okay, perfect. Thank you. U Mrs.

[1:01:31] Simmons, was there a question regarding the wolf farm by chance?

[1:01:39] I got you. Okay, that'll be at the end of the agenda. I'm sorry to Yeah,

[1:01:42] dismiss you on that. Thank you. >> Okay. Uh Jane Valier.

[1:01:57] » My name is Dave Valer. I live at 980 Mountain Avenue. I've lived in Bertha a

[1:02:01] long, long time. Um, and I'm pleased that Port recommended the trustees begin

[1:02:07] concept planning for New Farm Park, Muse, Music and Arts Park, I think is

[1:02:11] what they would like to call it. I feel this is a unique location that should be

[1:02:16] preserved for future use as a performing arts venue. I would like to think that

[1:02:21] our children and grandchildren will be able to enjoy the farm concerts as we

[1:02:26] have. Um, and I echo everything that everyone has said about those concerts.

[1:02:30] It's an unbelievable experience. And if you haven't had one, I hope you get to

[1:02:34] come next year because it's just really something very special. Um, I understand

[1:02:39] that you have already allocated money for the concept plan and I am here to

[1:02:44] urge you to allocate money in 2026 budget to continue that process and move

[1:02:50] on to the next step in making the music and arts park become a reality. The

[1:02:55] window of opportunity is now and I think it is critical for you to act on it

[1:03:00] immediately. so that it doesn't get lost in a lot of other parks issues and

[1:03:06] priorities that come to you. Thank you for your consideration.

[1:03:10] » Thank you very much.

[1:03:15] » Mark French. Welcome.

[1:03:21] » Yeah, I don't have a uh baby or a script, so you just have to bear with me

[1:03:24] for three minutes. Uh, my name is Mark French and I live at 2022 French Hill

[1:03:30] Drive and that's south of Berth about two miles and I'm a 70 plus year

[1:03:36] resident of Bertha and I know when everybody sees me they

[1:03:40] expect a history lesson so we'll make it real short.

[1:03:44] The first event in this town in 1884 was a dance in the flower mill. Um, they

[1:03:50] brought in the band from Longmont. They danced till sunrise. 1884. How far

[1:03:56] behind are we?

[1:04:00] Following that, for about 50 years, there was a band stand in Bertha from

[1:04:05] the mid1 1890s to 1943. And the band stand was at a variety of

[1:04:10] different locations from Third Street to the southeast corner of Fourth and

[1:04:16] Mountain uh to the school grounds which is now Fickle Park to the U area behind

[1:04:23] the United Brethren Church which is now the four square church. Uh we can do it.

[1:04:28] It's now's the time is to take to take the deep dive. Uh my idea of uh this

[1:04:34] whole project was that we would have a book end of Wagner Park on one end of

[1:04:40] the uh community and a book in on the other end of the park and that would be

[1:04:46] New Farm Park. Uh we're lacking one of those bookends right now. So now it's

[1:04:52] time to take the deep dive and move to this conceptual plan and um honor the uh

[1:04:58] wishes of all these uh people here tonight. Thank you.

[1:05:02] » Thank you. >> We have no one else signed up. I

[1:05:07] understand that the agenda item slot for this was already full. So plus I moved

[1:05:11] it up. Is there anyone here that wishes to speak to New Farm that did not sign

[1:05:14] up? All right. Well, thank you everyone for

[1:05:18] speaking. I'll close bring it back to the board for deliberation on this.

[1:05:23] Do you have any other questions for uh staff before we go into deliberation

[1:05:27] regarding this concept?

[1:05:31] Look out again. How do we all feel? I'll just go down the row. I'll start with

[1:05:34] Trusty Albert. >> Um well, I could not agree more with the

[1:05:40] sentiment that's in the room. I think there's there's a lack of words

[1:05:44] for how magical and important the space is for Berthood and the historical value

[1:05:49] is unparalleled and the time is now. And so I'm excited that there are

[1:05:53] trailblazers in this room who aren't letting this go. We're making sure that

[1:05:56] this stays top of mind. And I absolutely support us not only approving the funds

[1:06:02] to get the design work in place, but to actually have a motion in place so that

[1:06:06] we can have a set date and time that we have that plan come back before us. And

[1:06:11] then I'd also like to make sure that we discuss allocating funds in 2026. I'm

[1:06:16] not sure what those would look like and what we would need to approve for

[1:06:20] funding and that that's where staff can weigh in, but um I definitely would like

[1:06:24] to see this move forward and and I really resonated with um Mr. Mobile's

[1:06:29] comments that I think sometimes we can tend to see so many projects ahead of us

[1:06:34] and and started all on all of them and and not finish some of the more key ones

[1:06:38] that we need to complete. And so to me, this is one that was ahead of some of

[1:06:42] the ones that are on our docket and it hasn't had any traction. And so I'd like

[1:06:46] to personally see this move up in importance in our our line of events.

[1:06:51] So, and thank you so much, Mark French, for the history lesson. It it makes me

[1:06:56] it makes me positively weepy when I hear about the things that they were doing,

[1:07:00] you know, in the 1800s. So, thank you again.

[1:07:03] » Okay. Um, administrator Kirk, on that note with this to answer this question.

[1:07:09] So, uh, it's a $30,000 ask here or or Keith, I guess it um, when would this

[1:07:14] come back and forth? Do you have any idea of a timeline

[1:07:18] » of to actually see a design? I mean, sometimes it takes uh it probably take

[1:07:24] us a month to solicit some some bids right now and then typically takes four

[1:07:28] to eight weeks before they start working on the design because they do some

[1:07:32] internal research and and dive into the property a little more and then

[1:07:36] following that it's usually you don't see a design for maybe another eight

[1:07:39] weeks. Um we we have had discussions with a design earlier in the year and

[1:07:46] then that's kind of the timeline they they put on the property. Um,

[1:07:50] » okay. >> Just curious.

[1:07:53] » Um, trusty. >> Um, yeah, I'm obviously super supportive

[1:07:58] and for what it's worth for everyone, um, if it appears that we're kind of

[1:08:01] resting on our laurels, that's not um the face that we like to put out there.

[1:08:07] Um, so I'll take my own personal responsibility for that and apologize to

[1:08:11] you all if that's if that's the appearance that it that it is. Um,

[1:08:16] the community aspect of this possibility is amazing. Um, as all of

[1:08:22] the points that were made, it's a bookend. Um, it's a community event.

[1:08:26] It's a community venue. It is a legacy of not only Butch and Sarah, but also of

[1:08:33] the town itself, the community members. It's something that everyone takes part

[1:08:36] in. It's something that everyone enjoys. Um, and so I think that we can't pass up

[1:08:43] the opportunity to act as as quickly as we can in government. Um, and on top of

[1:08:50] that, if you guys agree, I would suggest that we also um make sure that Butch and

[1:08:58] Sarah's vision of the property be taken at a high level when any u

[1:09:05] designs are being made or whenever plans are being made because they have spent

[1:09:10] their lives in this business with this kind of event with this kind of um

[1:09:17] situation. and they know what they were initially looking for. And whether or

[1:09:23] not that comes to 100% fruition, I don't think that we can discount their um

[1:09:28] ideas for the design and the layouts and the uh the different amenities that that

[1:09:34] may or may not be put on this property.

[1:09:40] » Trusty Hardy, >> what Carl said. Okay. And then um

[1:09:46] because I'm in a few words usually. So, but uh yeah, I definitely like the idea

[1:09:51] of getting a concept plan on here just so that we don't have developers around

[1:09:55] the park saying they didn't know what was going on there and then having

[1:09:59] neighborhoods and houses being purchased going complain about noises,

[1:10:05] » complain about noise and and things like that. So having it uh pre-planned would

[1:10:11] definitely be helpful for preempting any developments plans.

[1:10:19] » Thank you for that reminder. We just received mics again. We for a while did

[1:10:23] not have mics. So thank you for that throughout the night. All right. Thank

[1:10:26] you. Um Trusty Wing. >> Yeah. I'm just wondering if Mr. French

[1:10:29] enjoyed himself at the 1884 dance. I hope you did. Just just just kidding.

[1:10:37] Just kidding. Hey, uh I absolutely support support getting started with the

[1:10:41] concept plan. Um I'm very excited to see the plans and uh would absolutely love

[1:10:47] to attend a concert and there are uh there are wonderful examples of venues

[1:10:52] similar to this all across the country and I have a lot of faith in the town

[1:10:55] that will come up with a great concept. >> Thank you, Mayor Pro.

[1:11:01] » Um I've been supportive of this project from the get-go. Um, I thought it was

[1:11:07] really critical that we get this in the budget last year, which I'm happy staff

[1:11:11] added. Um, going forth on this plan. I think it's time that we take this

[1:11:16] concept and provide a foundation for all of you out here in the audience involved

[1:11:22] on what this property, what this park, what this concert is going to look like

[1:11:26] in the future. I think it's important for Sarah and Butch who have made this

[1:11:30] sacrifice to have their input considered and waited on this. Um, going beyond

[1:11:37] that, obviously it's incredibly critical for an arts and music venue to have a

[1:11:43] really in-depth concept plan that includes all the program and elements

[1:11:48] that go with that. Um, so I would like to see a really detailed level of

[1:11:54] concept um, that accounts for a lot of the unique input that you would have

[1:11:59] from artists or musicians as well as the audience. Um, and then seeing this come

[1:12:05] back to review um, before us and the port I think is really critical to

[1:12:09] getting this one right. Um, so I would really love to get this thing moving.

[1:12:15] Um, and to everyone in the audience, thank you for attending. Thank you for

[1:12:19] showing up and we want your input on this going forth. Uh we want you at the

[1:12:25] port meetings to provide that niche input that a venue like this deserves.

[1:12:32] So like to thank you all for showing up and let's get it going.

[1:12:38] » I agree with everything stated and uh Sarah and Butch, thank you for your

[1:12:41] diligence. Thank you for coming before us several times uh earlier this year

[1:12:45] recently, keeping our eye on the ball of this uh the developments coming in

[1:12:50] around you. Um though it wasn't ideal how this all all turned out, I I'm

[1:12:54] really happy that you stepped up and um made some calls and we're at at the port

[1:13:00] meeting and thank you Keith for um allowing Sarah to to present. I'm very

[1:13:03] happy that port uh is recommending this going forward and very happy to see the

[1:13:08] turnout tonight though it does not surprise me. um just the amount of of

[1:13:13] community that has surrounded you Sarah and Butch and what you guys have done

[1:13:17] there is truly taken on um its own wings and now part of the town. So um I'm very

[1:13:23] happy to see this go forward and I agree with everything else the other trustees

[1:13:26] have said. Um and I also agree too that I the consultants whoever the is chosen

[1:13:32] to do this concept plan do interview Sarah and Butch and uh keep them a part

[1:13:37] of this whole process of of developing this um concept.

[1:13:42] So that's all I have to add. Um are we all supportive of

[1:13:49] who made this original suggestion? Trusty errors suggestion of having Sarah

[1:13:52] Butch be part of this concept plan update interviewed. Okay. And the other

[1:13:56] one I think you wanted was a time frame. It sounded like it would be

[1:13:59] » I think it'd be good to set something out there even six months to say in six

[1:14:04] months we'd like to see this come back before us just so that it doesn't go to

[1:14:07] the wayside. >> Okay, that's fair. Is everyone supported

[1:14:10] with that? It should be done before that. But okay, great. Okay, sounds like

[1:14:15] um in it this is level is an update. It's

[1:14:19] probably good we do a motion anyway since uh we're directing staff to put

[1:14:22] 30,000 into this. Um so let's say is there a motion? Go ahead

[1:14:28] and type >> for clarity. There's already $30,000 in

[1:14:30] the budget that we put in uh for this fiscal year.

[1:14:34] » We will receive proposals from interested design consultants we can

[1:14:40] review and um it may or may be may or may not be $30,000. So I think it's a

[1:14:45] you know you don't have to direct us to spend 30,000. We already have it

[1:14:48] budgeted. We're already planning to move forward with the concept plan. It's

[1:14:51] great to hear your feedback and the feedback of the community tonight and um

[1:14:54] understand the timeline. We'll get it done.

[1:14:56] » Um May, >> if I could ask this as well,

[1:14:59] Administrator Kirk, um when it comes to a six-month update, would it be

[1:15:04] appropriate then to consider um additional supplemental funding for the

[1:15:08] design process should we choose to go forward at that point?

[1:15:11] » Yes, that's our typical process. So, just as a reminder for everybody, the

[1:15:14] way that that we typically pursue projects is uh they're either identified

[1:15:19] in a master plan that you've approved or you've directed us to uh put a project

[1:15:23] at the top of the priority list. Sounds like you're doing that tonight. Um and

[1:15:27] so we would then solicit proposals from

[1:15:31] consultants. We either do that in one fell swoop. If we have enough money

[1:15:35] budgeted for a larger design effort all the way through construction drawings,

[1:15:38] we would go ahead and solicit proposals for that entire amount. Uh at this point

[1:15:42] we had planned to do a concept plan. Um I think before tonight there hadn't been

[1:15:47] talk of expediting construction drawings. So if that's something you

[1:15:50] want to do in the future, we can certainly do that. Um the intent was to

[1:15:54] get a concept plan prepared uh so that we had a kind of an agreed upon vision

[1:15:58] for the future of that property. >> The um after we do a concept plan, that

[1:16:02] typically gets us a pretty good idea of what we're asking a design consultant to

[1:16:06] then do from a construction drawing standpoint. That would be the next

[1:16:08] phase. That gets us a better price typically because we have a better idea

[1:16:12] of what that scope of that design work is going to be. We would bring that to

[1:16:15] you for approval at that point, budget the funds uh as needed and then move

[1:16:20] forward with that design effort. And then once the construction drawings are

[1:16:23] done, then if you want to build it, you ask us to go out to bid. We

[1:16:26] » uh go find contractors to do the work and we contract for that work. That's

[1:16:31] how we've done every park in town.

[1:16:36] » Does that answer your question? >> Yeah. Um,

[1:16:39] so would it be typical to look at like a midsummer adjustment um for this?

[1:16:44] » Uh, it it depends on how long the concept design takes. Um,

[1:16:49] » you know, I think we hear you loud and clear. We'll we'll move this to the

[1:16:52] front of the list. And um >> I would be surprised if it takes six

[1:16:56] months to do a concept plan. >> Um, but the reality is, as you know,

[1:17:01] there's a thousand things that happen every day. This will be one of them.

[1:17:04] » Uh, and we'll work expeditiously to get it done. uh would definitely be done in

[1:17:08] less than six months. So, if we can be done before the end of the year, you

[1:17:10] could budget some money to do the next phase if that was your um preference. If

[1:17:15] not, we could certainly do a meteor budget adjustment or we have um prior to

[1:17:19] our mid-year budget adjustment, which typically takes place in August, as you

[1:17:22] know, we're going to be doing that at our next meeting. Um,

[1:17:26] if you have something you want to add to the budget in March or April or some

[1:17:31] other time period prior to that, you know, kind of formal midyear adjustment,

[1:17:35] you can approve and authorize us to do that work and make the motion at the

[1:17:40] time to add funds at the midyear. So, we can kind of do that anytime and we will

[1:17:44] formally incorporate those funds at midyear if needed, but you can authorize

[1:17:48] us to do that prior to. Does that make sense?

[1:17:50] » Yeah. >> Yeah. And and I I guess from my

[1:17:52] standpoint, I think we've got enough here and enough direction from port to

[1:17:57] for sure move forward on the concept plan and then we'll meet back six months

[1:18:02] or sooner. Does that make sense? >> Yep.

[1:18:05] » Okay. >> Okay. So, we're good on the direction.

[1:18:07] » I think so. >> We're good.

[1:18:09] » Yes. >> Okay. Great. Awesome. Thank you

[1:18:11] everyone. We're here for new.

[1:18:17] » Do not feel the need to stay if you don't want to. That's for sure. We

[1:18:20] appreciate you all showing up.

[1:18:26] We'll give it a second here. Next on our agenda will be the short-term rental

[1:18:29] regulation change.

[1:18:45] Wow, quite a turn for that. It's impressive.

[1:18:49] » And folks, if um if so we can keep the meeting going, if you'd like to talk, if

[1:18:53] you could please discuss outside of the uh boardroom. Thank you.

[1:19:42] Come on in. Take a seat. All right.

[1:19:51] Okay. I'm going to call this meeting back to order. Next on our agenda is a

[1:19:54] short-term rental regulations or regulation change, excuse me. This is a

[1:19:58] public hearing and I'll have um our senior planning manager, Ton Hill and

[1:20:02] Brand discuss that in in depth here. Uh thank you all for being here tonight.

[1:20:05] I'll turn it over to Ton. Thank you.

[1:20:17] All right. Good evening, mayor, trustees, Ton Hill, Brand Town's

[1:20:20] planning manager.

[1:20:25] » Also be Thank you. This is these are all good points. I also want to shout this

[1:20:29] this room is notoriously terrible for song. Just since I started it has been

[1:20:34] generally we have uh earpieces to help out. I don't know if they're all

[1:20:37] deployed already. They are. Okay. Uh we're doing our best here, but there's

[1:20:40] more remaining. Okay, there's more remaining if folks have a tough time

[1:20:43] hearing. Thank you. Thank you. >> Excellent. Okay, so as you likely

[1:20:48] recall, the proposed short-term rental regulations code amendment was first

[1:20:54] presented to you on July 22nd, 2025. This is the second reading this evening.

[1:21:00] There have been no changes since the last hearing on the 22nd.

[1:21:05] Before the record, the code amendment proposes removal of the current 200 foot

[1:21:11] separation requirement between approved short-term rentals. Since implementing

[1:21:16] the short-term rental regulations in September of 2024, the town has received

[1:21:21] consistent feedback from one community member opposing the separation

[1:21:25] requirement and requesting its removal or requesting an exemption from the

[1:21:30] regulation. This individual was one of the four applicants that was not

[1:21:35] approved due to the separation requirement.

[1:21:38] The planning commission heard the proposed code amendment at their meeting

[1:21:42] on Jul July 10th, 2025 and voted unanimously to recommend denial of the

[1:21:48] proposed uh amendment to the short-term rental regulations to the town board.

[1:21:54] The planning commission cited their rationale for denial based on the

[1:21:58] original purpose or intent of the separation requirement to protect the

[1:22:03] sense of community and livability of the town neighborhoods. Based on the reality

[1:22:08] that the proposed amendment comes at the request of only one community member and

[1:22:12] based on the limited amount of time the separation requirement has been in

[1:22:17] place, which is not sufficient to determine if the separation requirement

[1:22:21] needs revision. So again, no other changes are proposed.

[1:22:27] So I have two additional slides this evening and then we'll wrap up rather

[1:22:30] quickly I believe. But these slides are here um to show you examples of the

[1:22:37] separation requirement. So uh they provide a visual of the existing 200

[1:22:43] foot separation and that's per the current regulation and that is shown

[1:22:46] here in blue and then they also show a 100 foot uh separation which was a

[1:22:53] number that was brought up in the p last public hearing. So um again the 100 ft

[1:22:58] is based on that previous conversation um and we have done no additional

[1:23:02] research on the 100 but since it came up we just wanted to show you what that

[1:23:06] would look like. So again, the blue is the existing 200 foot separation and

[1:23:10] this uh what you're looking at in example one is the Heron or the yeah the

[1:23:15] Heron Lakes town homes. Um and then the 100 ft would be the yellow.

[1:23:21] And of course I have one additional sign and I'm happy to go back and forth

[1:23:25] between the two. So, on this particular screen, this shows um an approved

[1:23:30] short-term rental in a separate neighborhood and this is more your

[1:23:34] standard single family detached residential lot. So, again, 200 feet is

[1:23:39] represented with blue and then the yellow would be that 100 ft. So this

[1:23:42] gives you an idea and as a reminder the separation requirement is measured from

[1:23:47] center of dwelling to center of dwelling and the purpose of that is because GIS

[1:23:52] data sets typically uh assign the address at the center of the structure

[1:23:58] and again for ease and management um and mapping purposes that tends to be the

[1:24:03] the best route. Additionally, um it should technically from be from the

[1:24:08] dwelling itself as that's where you're going to get any kind of disturbance or

[1:24:12] noise or what have you. So, it's dwelling to dwelling. So, with that,

[1:24:16] since there are no additional changes and this is the second hearing, I'm

[1:24:20] available for any questions you may have.

[1:24:22] » Thank you. Planner Hill trustes questions.

[1:24:25] » I have one trust. >> Can you go back to the previous slide,

[1:24:28] please? I'm a little confused about the

[1:24:32] separation and I apologize if you've answered this previously. Um, it says on

[1:24:36] the bottom here, for this reason, the separation of rings of color can

[1:24:39] overlap. However, they cannot touch another home

[1:24:44] that is the center location. So, I >> Yeah, that I can see. Yes, it's be kind

[1:24:52] of confusing. >> So, according to this plot, all four of

[1:24:56] And these are not real, right? These are >> these are actually four approved

[1:24:59] currently approved short-term rentals in the town in the town homes at Heron

[1:25:02] Lakes. >> Okay. So, the one that was denied its

[1:25:07] sphere of influence was actually touching one of the other ones.

[1:25:11] » So, yes. So, the as you see with the blue, there is overlap in the actual

[1:25:16] sphere. But what we don't want to see because it is center of dwelling to

[1:25:20] center dwelling. if that sphere actually touched the other residence, that's when

[1:25:25] it it's within that 200 ft. >> So the Yes, you'll find that. Um so the

[1:25:31] two that are there on Grand Market or adjacent to the rideway, um they're

[1:25:35] actually the two blue ones are further than 200 feet apart. If those spheres

[1:25:40] started to cross even more and where you see the little house symbol in the

[1:25:44] middle and if that sphere actually touched that house in the middle, that's

[1:25:48] when we would have a problem. said differently. It's a radius from dwelling

[1:25:51] to dwelling. >> Yeah. Correct. Yes.

[1:25:56] » Thank you. >> Yeah.

[1:25:58] » Other questions?

[1:26:02] » Go ahead. >> Sure.

[1:26:03] » Um, and you said because of the distance requirement, four have been denied in

[1:26:10] the past year. >> That is correct.

[1:26:12] » And how many are currently operating? >> We have eight total within the town of

[1:26:16] Bered. So, we have four just in the Heron Lake town homes and there were

[1:26:20] four four others that had applied but we had to reject their applications because

[1:26:24] they did not meet that separation requirement and then we have four others

[1:26:28] throughout the town that have been approved and we've had none no others

[1:26:32] within the town of Bertha that have been denied due to separation requirements.

[1:26:36] » And there's a max of 50. Is that correct?

[1:26:39] » Correct. >> Okay, I'm done now for real.

[1:26:43] » No, that's good. Um, >> just say that again real quick. How many

[1:26:45] were rejected due to the 200 ft? So, four total and they're all within the

[1:26:51] town homes. >> Okay, that was going to be mine. So, out

[1:26:55] of those rejected, they're all multi-unit or town homes, I should say.

[1:26:58] » Yeah, and just the Herald Lakes town homes. Okay,

[1:27:00] » correct. And then um if you could refresh me, have we talked about an

[1:27:04] exception process that if someone were to come before court and ask and

[1:27:09] demonstrate their property is within a reasonable distance from another

[1:27:13] property and that they're an exceptional STR manager that they could possibly get

[1:27:20] some type of variance for their property.

[1:27:22] » Yes. And so we did discuss this last time as well as during the hearing

[1:27:25] process. So generally the rule of thumb is that if you were wanting to make

[1:27:29] exceptions to a rule then the rule should not be adopted. So it's either as

[1:27:35] with the public hearing when this was adopted back in 2024

[1:27:39] um right getting my dates all mixed up. I think you're right. Um

[1:27:43] the idea was that either you establish a hard fact the hard rule that it's 200 or

[1:27:49] whatever whatever denomination and then if that's truly what you are comfortable

[1:27:53] with it has to be applied equitably and across the board to each and every

[1:27:59] property. It's when you start getting into exceptions, it's then looks as if

[1:28:04] that's very very arbitrary and additionally what why would one property

[1:28:10] deserve an exception over another and so it be starts to become very messy very

[1:28:14] quickly and so generally the idea is if you want exceptions then it's best to

[1:28:20] just not go with the regulation.

[1:28:26] Did we discuss in the last meeting about a 100 foot for multi-unit or town homes

[1:28:30] and 200 foot for residential or am I making this up? I thought there was some

[1:28:34] confusion over what we would do in that kind of boundary area where multif

[1:28:38] family would go up against a single family.

[1:28:40] » We did come up. Yes. Yep. We did discuss that. Um because again there are

[1:28:44] challenges and again defining why there should be one separation for a certain

[1:28:49] housing type and not for another can become problematic. And that was one of

[1:28:54] those also unique scenarios that would inevitably come up is that uh when you

[1:29:00] have town homes for instance that are adjacent to a single family residential

[1:29:04] lot. How then do you make that distinguished? How do you define that

[1:29:08] and how do you draw that line becomes very challenging. enforcing becomes

[1:29:12] challenging.

[1:29:17] » Okay. Thank you. Other questions?

[1:29:22] » Okay. Well, this being a a a public hearing, um there's no other questions,

[1:29:27] we can now move on to the actually uh public hearing portion.

[1:29:34] We have three signed up. Once I state your name, if you could

[1:29:38] come to the front to the podium here on your left, please state your name and

[1:29:41] address and keep your comments to three minutes or less. Thank you. Start out

[1:29:44] with Mindy Cruz. Welcome.

[1:29:54] » Hello. I would mention that with the um whole new farm thing, it would be great

[1:29:59] to have STRs for people to stay at when they come to those venues. Um I'm going

[1:30:04] to talk really fast. Can you say your name and address real quick?

[1:30:08] » Mickey Cruz uh 1520 airb. >> Thank you.

[1:30:10] » So I'm going to talk really fast like a New Yorker so I can get through this. Um

[1:30:14] so as you already know that we bought our town home um for STR purposes and we

[1:30:19] were operating by the metro responsible until Dante Bay happened and rather than

[1:30:25] that person being dealt with we were all suffered. So when you voted not to only

[1:30:29] limit the number of STRs but also added the distance requirement which is very

[1:30:34] unusual. Um, we hunted down, paid for, and created all the 12 documents that

[1:30:39] the planning committee uh deemed that we needed. I stood here and told you guys

[1:30:44] at that time that that was going to cause tension within our community. And

[1:30:48] our pressure to hit a button at midnight, one of our four documents

[1:30:51] failed to send somehow. And even though we had had it and it was stamped in

[1:30:57] data, we were not allowed to submit it. So Dave and I at financial losses found

[1:31:02] a renter for nine months while we pursued the STR. This renter loved our h

[1:31:08] town home but was very disappointed in the neighborhood. Then knowing that we

[1:31:12] had a month-long rental July August, we decided to let friends and family stay

[1:31:18] during the next 12 month uh two months. So Dave and I are full-time caregivers

[1:31:23] of my parents 85 89 years old, both with cancer and one with dementia. So, that

[1:31:29] does not allow us to stay in a three-level town home. It's not an

[1:31:34] option now, but we were hoping an option someday. The first um friends that we

[1:31:39] had today were approached by a woman in the neighborhood and asked what they

[1:31:42] were doing there. They were told that they told them they were on vacation.

[1:31:46] Then Dave and I received a message that night saying that we were being reported

[1:31:50] to the village for operating illegal STR. The village is what a handful of

[1:31:56] ladies call themselves. Uh we have a different name but we corrected them and

[1:32:03] um told them that they were our friends. Um see the village feels like that they

[1:32:09] are now empowered and emboldened uh to by the town to harass or question

[1:32:16] anyone that comes to stay in our place. So, I'd like to know who in this room

[1:32:22] has to tell the community before you have a family member come stay at your

[1:32:27] house if that's okay. So, next we had my brother and my family

[1:32:31] come. Two ladies approached them and asked them if they were renting from us.

[1:32:36] This harassment continued through anybody else we had staying.

[1:32:41] We manage a a year-long rental next to one of the ladies who wrote a long

[1:32:47] widely uh lying email to you guys. A young

[1:32:51] family of two children and they have been approached by these ladies and they

[1:32:55] feel like they're constantly watched. So, mayor

[1:32:59] » um mayor >> and trustees

[1:33:02] » um if the speaker could focus on the issue and not the character of

[1:33:10] » any any person that would be appreciated. Thank you.

[1:33:14] » So, next we had a corporal rental uh corporate rental in August. The first

[1:33:19] couple of days they were constantly watched and uh scoured out. One of the

[1:33:25] um ladies called the community officer, Teresa, and she came out and spoke to

[1:33:29] two of the workers. They had no clue about their accommodations as it was

[1:33:33] done through a corporation. They were told they told her that they

[1:33:38] were that we were operating a illegal STR.

[1:33:42] » Thank you. I'm sorry. We've hit the three minute limit.

[1:33:45] » Okay. Can I say one more thing really quick, please?

[1:33:48] » You can do one sentence here. >> Yeah. So, I'll take Dave's time. So, um,

[1:33:55] so our our three-month rental was, um, they sent us a message and said, "We

[1:34:00] want to break our contract because we feel like we're being harassed." So,

[1:34:04] this this has caused Dave and I a lot of not but financial problems, but also

[1:34:10] physical pain and emotional pain. We have now decided to sell our property

[1:34:15] because we've not been allowed to do the short-term rental as we bought the

[1:34:20] property for. Apparently, we can't have friends and family over without them

[1:34:24] being harassed. And now we can't have long-term rental without them being

[1:34:29] arrested. So, the decision that you guys make today is really not going to affect

[1:34:32] us, but you should know that your decisions have already affected our

[1:34:37] community. Thank you. >> Thank you.

[1:34:41] » And Mr. Cruz, I'm just assuming Well, that's just going to have to go into

[1:34:44] that time, too. Okay. Uh John Evans, welcome.

[1:34:50] Good evening, mayor and trustees. Uh, thank you for your time tonight. Uh, as

[1:34:56] I'm one of the Don Zante Bay mafia that, uh, I think was kind of referred to a

[1:35:02] year ago tomorrow. >> Mr. Evans, do you mind state your name?

[1:35:05] » Oh, sorry. John Evans, 3252, Donzante Bay Court.

[1:35:08] » Thank you. >> Um, a year ago tomorrow, this board

[1:35:12] approved the now policy for short-term rents. Um

[1:35:17] Ton Hillbrand just spoke to the distance separation which was highly debated

[1:35:24] prior to the approval which started out at 500 feet and ultimately ended up at

[1:35:29] 200 feet uh at separation and if if I were to go on the VBL website today and

[1:35:37] I can show you there are 10 operating short-term rentals in the Heron Lakes

[1:35:43] town homes. There are two and maybe three elsewhere in the town of Bertha.

[1:35:48] So per Tom's own document, you know, 12 short-term rentals were applied for,

[1:35:54] eight were approved, four were denied. Um I am wholeheartedly in favor of what

[1:36:00] the um planning commission recommended, which is to leave it at 200 ft. We

[1:36:06] haven't had the policy in place for a year yet. Having exceptions and waiverss

[1:36:11] will turn this into kind of a free-for-all. And I don't believe that

[1:36:15] there's anybody being served by that. And when we approve the town approved 50

[1:36:21] and you only have eight operating, that means that there's not that much of a

[1:36:25] demand. And I believe the ultimate solution is look for a hotel year to

[1:36:31] come into town to help strengthen the attraction tourism base. It will benefit

[1:36:38] the local businesses. It will get be an anchor property to help bring other

[1:36:44] growth into the community. So, I would highly recommend that you do not change

[1:36:49] this uh requirement right now and give it time like the planning commission

[1:36:54] said and let it play out. Thank you very much.

[1:36:56] » Thank you.

[1:37:00] » Matt Gavin, welcome. >> My name is Matthew Gavin. I live at 3270

[1:37:06] Dante Bay Court. Um trustees, Mayor Tarbach, thank you for listening this

[1:37:11] evening. Um I I just want to make two quick points. You you have heard me for

[1:37:15] the last year. I was here a lot along with a lot of my neighbors and a lot of

[1:37:19] people throughout Bertha. This was a really highly contested issue. Turns out

[1:37:24] it was kind of a tempest in a teapot given only 12 people applied and most of

[1:37:28] them were in those town homes. But I really believe and what the city has

[1:37:32] said is once you set this policy, you have to make policy and study strong.

[1:37:36] You need to stay there and you need to give it some time to work so that you

[1:37:39] can collect data and then you can analyze and see if any changes are

[1:37:43] necessary. This was a really hard fought community compromise. There were not a

[1:37:48] lot of happy people when that got done. But through this democratic process and

[1:37:52] through people neighbors listening to one another, we came to that compromise

[1:37:55] and now the city is is implementing that. I'm really hoping that one

[1:38:00] person's personal financial situation doesn't undo all the work that this body

[1:38:05] and all the other members of the community that showed up over a year of

[1:38:08] hearings um came up with this legislation. The other thing I'd like to

[1:38:12] remind you all of is having been one of the people that lived on Don Sante Bay,

[1:38:16] clearly there was a problem with the one property renting to 30 people at a time

[1:38:20] and having conventions and parties. Um but the other problem was concentration.

[1:38:25] There were seven short-term rentals in our block and now it sounds like there's

[1:38:29] four in the town homes. They want eight and maybe they want more. The

[1:38:33] concentration is a problem. While there are bad actors, even the people that do

[1:38:38] this better than the others, when there's seven of them within your local

[1:38:42] community, it's noise, it's disruption, it's loss of community, it's all those

[1:38:47] things. So again, I just urge you to take that hard thought decision. listen

[1:38:52] to your uh town employees, listen to the planning commission, and let's give this

[1:38:57] the time to work itself out and reconsider using data and analysis down

[1:39:00] the road where the entire community can participate again. Thank you for your

[1:39:04] time. >> Thank you.

[1:39:07] » That's all we have signed up. Is there anyone else that wishes to speak?

[1:39:12] » All right, I'll close the public hearing, bring it back to the board for

[1:39:14] deliberation on this.

[1:39:19] Uh trustes, do we have any uh after public hearing any questions for staff?

[1:39:24] » Um I'll have to answer question. Um, has the number,

[1:39:30] um, based on some of the comments, I I can't remember exactly who specifically

[1:39:34] said it, but um, has the number of, I guess, um,

[1:39:41] I hesitate to use the word, but it illegal rentals gone down since the

[1:39:46] policy has been enacted, or is it still as hard to identify uh, people who are

[1:39:51] renting against um, policy? >> Uh, great question. My understanding is

[1:39:57] that uh we found initially that those numbers did go down. Um but

[1:40:02] unfortunately I can't speak um completely um as I've had I haven't had

[1:40:08] this question um with or had this conversation with Teresa Morgan who is

[1:40:13] our neighborhood services officer. Um, last I knew is that through her uh,

[1:40:19] evaluation of, you know, VRBO or Airbnb that she was not finding nearly as many

[1:40:26] violations. Now, that's not to say that, um, individuals aren't finding unique

[1:40:32] ways to post their short-term rentals. Um, I know you can list them in

[1:40:38] different ways that then they aren't as noticeable, if you will, and you can use

[1:40:42] other platforms or even local property management um, companies can also

[1:40:48] advertise for them. So, that's not to say that that may be taking place. Um,

[1:40:52] but I do know that Teresa does um, take steps to as when she can regulate and

[1:41:00] um, find those if she can. And we do I on occasion receive com uh concerns and

[1:41:06] I know we have received a few just in the course of the last few weeks.

[1:41:11] » And on that note, and you may not be able to answer this because things are

[1:41:15] off the books in that regard, but um for the properties that were found to be

[1:41:21] operating outside of the policy, how many of those ballark, right? Um, how

[1:41:28] many of those could operate within the policy even

[1:41:32] with the 200 foot setback? >> Oh, that's a good question. And I I'm

[1:41:38] not sure since I don't know the specifics. Um, yeah, I'm not certain.

[1:41:43] Yeah, sorry.

[1:41:47] » Okay, that's anything else for staff. >> All right. Well, we can bring it back to

[1:41:53] the board here regarding um has been discussed before

[1:41:58] um a separation lack of separation requirement or

[1:42:01] keeping it as is with the 200 foot. Um

[1:42:08] do we want to get initial thoughts or just go for a vote? Go ahead.

[1:42:12] » I was going to say that I appreciated Ton's response about the exceptions. I

[1:42:16] think that makes perfect sense and I completely agree and so I think having

[1:42:21] the policy be delivered equitably and the same to every person makes a lot of

[1:42:26] sense and so I'd like to move forward with that. I also really appreciated was

[1:42:30] it Mr. Gavin his comments about the the democratic process we did go through. we

[1:42:35] came, you know, out of it with a lot of compromise, making everyone virtually

[1:42:39] unhappy, which is usually a good sign that you made a good compromise, right?

[1:42:44] » Same thing at home with your kids. If everyone's mad at you, then it's

[1:42:46] probably because, you know, everyone got a little bit of something they wanted.

[1:42:49] But >> I think I think for me, I still would be

[1:42:53] open to reducing the limits to 100 ft just to make it more available to town

[1:42:59] homes because I think it can be a valuable thing to our community. I think

[1:43:02] we do need people visiting to have an economic center in Bertha that's that's

[1:43:07] viable which we don't have a lot of right now and so I I I take that really

[1:43:12] seriously. Um I do not agree at all with removing the 200 the 200 or 100 foot

[1:43:18] buffer entirely. I think that could be really detrimental. Um as some people

[1:43:24] mentioned in the room too that I think having an entire street full of STRs

[1:43:27] would be would change your way of life if you lived here. So, those are just my

[1:43:32] initial comments. >> Trusty, we can get down. You don't have

[1:43:36] to say anything if you don't want to, but trust.

[1:43:38] » Um, yeah, I would I would agree with those points. Um, and I think

[1:43:43] one, the policy hasn't really been on the books for long enough for us to

[1:43:49] understand the data points across the town. I think two, they are lumped in

[1:43:56] certain specific areas, which is granted unfortunate for people who have had

[1:44:01] financial hardships for this. Um, and um, regardless,

[1:44:09] I'm still in favor of a buffer. I'm I'm okay negotiating whatever. I'm I'm I

[1:44:17] don't really 200 one foot 200 feet. Um, I'm okay with having a conversation

[1:44:22] about that. But the reason that I am more in favor of keeping a buffer at

[1:44:29] least until we find out that it's not working is one based on the question

[1:44:34] that I asked, right? How many how many might we actually have in town and is

[1:44:39] there a way to make sure that they're they're following procedure and policy?

[1:44:43] And two, I don't want

[1:44:47] the people in areas of town that don't have HOAs or are not in a metro district

[1:44:52] district to now be inundated possibly without a

[1:44:59] buffer in those neighborhoods where short-term rentals are either rare or

[1:45:03] not the sort of stereotypical place for a short-term rental. And so I'm I'm that

[1:45:09] was kind of the reason that I was for a distance buffer even though it's unusual

[1:45:15] in our in our initial meetings back a year ago was because I want to make sure

[1:45:19] that the people like I said who are who don't have the infrastructure already uh

[1:45:25] to protect them from um over overcrowding

[1:45:31] that they now become um affected by having zero buffer and having, you know,

[1:45:39] old town homes or older neighborhoods um sort of pop up neighbor to neighbor to

[1:45:44] neighbor. Not that that would happen because there's not the 50 that we

[1:45:48] allowed in the first place, but just in case um that were to possibly crop up in

[1:45:53] a specific area in the future based on developments or or whatever that might

[1:45:57] come into town that we have no idea people might want to be next to. If that

[1:46:00] makes English sense. Sorry, everybody. Yeah, Trusty Hardy.

[1:46:06] » Yeah, I completely agree with Ton on the whole thing about having variances. It's

[1:46:11] like we shouldn't have any variances. Just tells us that there's something

[1:46:14] wrong with our code. I'm I'm for either one. Either have either turn it on or

[1:46:19] turn it off. Um, but there is a demand out there for people to stay and I think

[1:46:24] that's where develop economic development really should be pushing

[1:46:27] towards getting I don't know Marriott town suites or somebody out there to

[1:46:32] build to take up this need that's out there.

[1:46:37] » Yeah. >> Okay,

[1:46:38] » that's about it. >> Trusty Wing.

[1:46:40] » Yeah. I um I support the planning commission's unanimous decision not to

[1:46:44] change anything, but I have one question. Do the shortterm rental

[1:46:49] tenants get to use the metro district amenities?

[1:46:54] » That'd be a Terry Smith, would you know the answer to that?

[1:47:01] » I don't know the answer to that. And it may vary from district to district as to

[1:47:06] how they identify in district residents. seems to me that if they were

[1:47:13] identifying >> your mic,

[1:47:14] » it seems to me I I think it may vary from special district to special

[1:47:19] district. Um, but it seems to me that it would depend on how the district is

[1:47:26] identifying in district residents and that if you have a driver's license from

[1:47:32] outside of the district, you would be an outside of the district resident. So my

[1:47:40] thought is that probably in that case you would not be allowed to use those

[1:47:45] amenities. >> Doesn't change my decision. I was just

[1:47:47] curious. Thank you, >> Mayor Pim.

[1:47:50] » Um I'll just state that I stand with planning commission's decision and the

[1:47:55] substantial outcry I've heard in retaining the setbacks that we have set.

[1:48:00] I think it would be premature to drop those setbacks. It would be much easier

[1:48:04] to go down to 100 if we've got significant public outcry for that, but

[1:48:09] I don't believe we've heard that. And it would be much harder to go up from 100

[1:48:14] to 200 if we do have problems in the future. So I am for um retaining the 200

[1:48:21] foot setback for those reasons. >> Thank you.

[1:48:28] » Can I respond to that just really quick? I just I I disagree with the assessment

[1:48:33] that we haven't had outcry against or against the setbacks because the people

[1:48:40] who disagree with it are moving on. They're not coming to town hall and

[1:48:44] raising cane. They're just moving on. And that's evidenced in the fact that we

[1:48:48] had 30 and now we have how many do we have on the books? 12. And so that those

[1:48:55] statistics tell us alone in the last year we've lost half of the STRs because

[1:48:59] the policy and I do think setbacks were probably a key component to that among

[1:49:03] other things. Um but I do think we need to understand that the people who have

[1:49:08] issue with it have just left our town or have sold that property and are no

[1:49:12] longer operating. They're not coming and telling us about it. Would it be equally

[1:49:17] accurate to say that those people maybe didn't want to take on the regulation or

[1:49:22] the duty as an SDR owner to their users to the community and moved on without

[1:49:30] making those comments? I mean, how many applications did we have?

[1:49:38] » Um, so to confirm, we had 12 total. >> Yeah.

[1:49:44] And and I would agree there's probably many components that go into why we have

[1:49:48] not seen the 30 that we're operating. Um yeah, it could very well be because of

[1:49:55] probably elements such as the separation requirement or the other slew of

[1:50:01] requirements that are within our short-term rental regulations. I don't

[1:50:04] know that there's any indication that it would be solely because of the

[1:50:07] separation. Um, I know much of our research that we did on the different

[1:50:12] types, the the 200, 500, 600 that we presented during the public hearings, we

[1:50:18] were using um maps of those short-term rentals we knew were existing and

[1:50:23] operating um, illegally as our base, and that's what we were using for those

[1:50:29] examples. Um, so I do believe some of those, from my recollection, would have

[1:50:33] very well been able to meet the separation requirement. So, I don't I

[1:50:38] think that would be only one component or element and probably a very small

[1:50:42] percentage um may have walked away for that reason, but I don't know that it

[1:50:47] would be fair to say that they solely walked away for that reason.

[1:50:51] » And I wouldn't want to make any definitive statement one way or the

[1:50:54] other. I'm just proposing the possibility

[1:50:59] » and I do agree it could it's a variety of reasons I think people are walking

[1:51:03] away. I just think this could be one of them and for us to consider that we're

[1:51:07] not hearing about it because they have just decided to move on.

[1:51:11] » Fair enough. >> Yeah, I'm um

[1:51:17] Mr. Gav um looking out the names. I used to know

[1:51:21] you guys by the back of my hand. So, thank you. This all started before what

[1:51:24] happened in Don Zante. So, um, how we leave this agenda item tonight, I just

[1:51:30] want to thank you, uh, no matter what, for all your hard work bringing this to

[1:51:34] us, and now we actually have some type of policy. Um, I know it may or may not

[1:51:39] be ideal, but it's better than how it started and what happened to you guys

[1:51:41] and Don Zante. So, thank you. Um, I I'm a fan of moving it to 100. I don't

[1:51:49] think uh it doesn't sound like anyone's a fan of of totally eliminating it right

[1:51:52] now. Um and the not having any kind of uh exception process or appeal process.

[1:51:58] I agree with that. Um but the reason I'm I think distance requirements are

[1:52:03] important. So it's not neighbor to neighbor to neighbor. Um

[1:52:08] ton your your um visual was actually kind of help kind of threw a wrench in

[1:52:13] my spokes watching that because some of these areas could be looks like a

[1:52:17] neighborto neighbor situation if it was 100 foot.

[1:52:20] Um, regardless, I'd like to give it a shot. I also want to remind people that

[1:52:24] this, if you're living in an HOA or an area with a metro, um, you are allowed

[1:52:28] to put in regulations that are more stringent than anything the town puts

[1:52:31] on. Uh, so this is really covering traditional areas of town before HOAs,

[1:52:37] uh, were in place. And not having any um,

[1:52:43] lodging to speak of, I' I'd like to encourage that. And uh I think we have

[1:52:47] other areas in our policy that um really can manage I can't ensure but really can

[1:52:54] manage uh that we have good hosts and if we have bad guests there's a way to get

[1:52:59] them out promptly and uh keep the hosts accountable. U so I'm I'm a fan of

[1:53:03] moving it to 100. Um I'll stop there. Is there anything else

[1:53:08] anyone wants to add question? >> Um

[1:53:11] » maybe if I could just add one thing. I I really feel it's detrimental. I'm always

[1:53:17] open to reopening these things, but the fact that we're less than a year out on

[1:53:22] this policy, I think is a serious concern. Um, and

[1:53:26] what does it say when we're making policy that we are making a turn this

[1:53:31] early in policy with very little data? Um, I

[1:53:38] think that's a significant concern for me.

[1:53:42] Sorry, that's all I've got. Yeah, >> if I respond to that. I think the reason

[1:53:47] I wanted to reduce it is because of the town homes. U figuring there needed to

[1:53:51] be a chance for them to be treated separate from single family. Um and

[1:53:55] that's why kind of that compromise came. Those are my thoughts.

[1:54:00] Um anything else? We want to go to a vote or I guess we have to decide how we

[1:54:04] vote. >> Well, I have a a question now on based

[1:54:07] on y'all's comments. Would it be worthwhile for us to discuss um I

[1:54:14] understand it would be difficult to um to make sure or to to sort of um police

[1:54:24] the difference between town homes or um higher density houses versus single

[1:54:31] family houses. If the pro if that is the sort of hangup that we're having,

[1:54:39] could we not address that since that is the hangup? The the separation doesn't

[1:54:45] seem to be by itself the hangup. The hang-up seems to be the difference

[1:54:51] between someone who lives in a higher density area and someone who lives in a

[1:54:54] lower density area. And yes, it is more complicated and yes, it is more

[1:54:58] difficult, >> but it seems like the spirit of the

[1:55:02] decision that we're trying to make would possibly be better served with a more

[1:55:07] specific policy as opposed to a one-sizefits-all policy that just does

[1:55:13] not work within different districts. That that's a a genuine question. I'm

[1:55:17] not making a statement one way or another. Um, if I can maybe respond,

[1:55:21] trusty ears, um, I really struggle with creating any kind of differentiation

[1:55:27] because of the wide variety of existing product that's out there that could be

[1:55:34] used for this. You have products of all types and to define town home versus

[1:55:39] single family home versus duplex or quadplex, it gets really hairy. So, um I

[1:55:46] think it's important that we stick to one consistent standard and um I believe

[1:55:52] the 200 accounts for the density across those areas. Um obviously in a denser

[1:55:59] area it's harder. Um in a less dense area um as you kind of saw in existing

[1:56:04] neighborhoods where it's homes you could have literally every other house or

[1:56:09] across the street. So obviously we have to come to a balance on this. I I just

[1:56:14] think the reality of the diversity of the product that's out there that could

[1:56:19] be used for this is hard to define and leaves us exposed in

[1:56:25] my opinion.

[1:56:29] » I have a quick question. So if if the board does not want to change the code

[1:56:36] and keep the 200, then we don't have any motion tonight. Is that correct?

[1:56:40] » That's correct. >> Okay. or if we have a tie. I think same

[1:56:44] thing, >> status quo, right?

[1:56:46] » That's correct. If if unless a motion passes to adopt an ordinance that

[1:56:53] changes the code, then we continue status quo.

[1:56:58] » Makes sense. And the motion right now would be to

[1:57:02] totally um

[1:57:06] yeah repeal and replace removing any kind of distance

[1:57:11] requirement >> and would that be the motion or because

[1:57:14] planning commission recommended denial. Would that be the motion?

[1:57:18] » Uh I think that in this case I think a lack of action is sufficient. We

[1:57:24] continue status quo. There's no need to deny uh the ordinance that was that was

[1:57:30] put in front of you. It just doesn't pass for lack of a a motion and a vote.

[1:57:38] » Okay. >> So, is there any desire to go ahead with

[1:57:45] this with a 100 foot buffer said instead of a 200?

[1:57:51] I'm actually more confident um leaving it as it was

[1:57:54] » 200. >> Okay.

[1:57:58] » Um yeah, I would based on all of the comments on the

[1:58:02] length that this policy has been in place, I would feel more comfortable

[1:58:06] waiting until we come up with a better idea.

[1:58:11] » Okay. Does anyone want Go ahead. No, I'm

[1:58:16] concur. >> Okay. Does anyone want to try to make a

[1:58:18] motion? You don't have to if you don't feel

[1:58:22] passionate about this. >> Otherwise, this thing just dies.

[1:58:26] » Kill it. >> For lack of a motion.

[1:58:29] » Okay.

[1:58:32] » Uh yes. Ordinance 1356 never moved. So, this will uh never be

[1:58:37] in existence. So, thank you all uh for the short-term rental and thank you

[1:58:41] staff for all your work on this. Good to keep going. Trustees.

[1:58:46] » Yeah. >> Okay. Okay, we'll move on now to item

[1:58:48] number five. And this is a Habitat for Humanity Oldtown Hall

[1:58:53] Town Hall concept.

[1:58:58] And we have our uh director of Habitat for Humanity, Tiffany Grody, here to

[1:59:02] present.

[1:59:06] Mayor Carb as Tiffany's coming up. Um, just as a quick bit of background, as

[1:59:10] you may recall, the town owns the Old Town Hall property uh at the corner of

[1:59:15] Massachusetts and Third Street, uh, the feed store, the Old Town Hall,

[1:59:20] and the bank building adjacent to it. A few years ago, we solicited proposals

[1:59:25] from interested developers to redevelop the site, turn it into um, you know, a

[1:59:31] mixeduse center with some new retail uses and offices and other things. Uh we

[1:59:36] got pretty far down the road on that project and unfortunately the developer

[1:59:39] and the town couldn't come to an agreement that made sense for them um uh

[1:59:44] in order to get financing to construct the project. Since that time um Habitat

[1:59:49] has reached out to us and asked about the possibility of redeveloping that

[1:59:53] site. They've prepared a concept that we've looked at um you know briefly from

[1:59:57] a staff perspective but that I think is potentially exciting and and worth

[2:00:01] looking at. And so we asked them to bring it to you so we could get your

[2:00:05] feedback uh if you want us to move forward and take some next steps and to

[2:00:08] see this thing move forward. And if not, that's okay, too. But um that that's why

[2:00:12] we're here tonight. We're excited to have Tiffany Brody, the executive

[2:00:14] director from Habitat for Humanity to present that to you.

[2:00:19] » Welcome. >> Thank you. Thank you very much. Good

[2:00:22] evening, Mayor Carbc and members of the board of trustees. Thank you for

[2:00:26] allowing us to present this concept. I will be presenting this evening as well

[2:00:31] as Davidson and Josh McCarron with Asher Architects and Engineering

[2:00:37] as uh Administrator Kirk mentioned birth at Habitat for Humanity.

[2:00:42] » Yes, >> I think she is got turned on. Okay,

[2:00:44] perfect. >> Is that better?

[2:00:45] » Yep. >> Okay. All right. Sorry about that. Uh

[2:00:49] Bertha Habitat for Humanity endeavors to partner with the town of Berth to help

[2:00:54] solve the affordable housing crisis by presenting a proposed concept plan to

[2:00:59] redevelop the old town hall property located at Third in Massachusetts. This

[2:01:05] redevelopment will revitalize historic landmark, support economic development,

[2:01:10] expand access to affordable housing, and enhance downtown vibrancy, creating a

[2:01:18] lasting community asset uh that will actually serve current and future

[2:01:23] generations. Furthermore, it will help position Birth at Habitat for Humanity

[2:01:28] to achieve our strategic goals surrounding partnership development and

[2:01:32] advocacy uh increase awareness and engagement and

[2:01:37] also focus on our comprehensive fund development so that we can build more

[2:01:42] homes uh like Troy here that just closed recently. She is so excited.

[2:01:49] All of which will provide the needed funding to build capacity to further our

[2:01:54] impact in alignment with the needs of the community.

[2:02:02] And with that, as we all know, Berett is growing, but so is the housing gap. Too

[2:02:09] many local families are struggling to find a home that they can afford. Based

[2:02:14] on the Berford housing diversity plan by heirs associates from April of this

[2:02:19] year, the housing crisis in Berford can really be summarized as a convergence of

[2:02:25] rapid population growth, limited housing diversity, and rising home price prices,

[2:02:32] which together threaten housing affordability and community inclusivity.

[2:02:38] So the next few slides I just want to walk through quickly in an effort to

[2:02:42] highlight the findings from that Berth housing diversity plan. Berth's

[2:02:47] population has more than doubled since 2010 and is on track to continue growing

[2:02:54] steadily by 139% I'm sorry to the tune of 139% by 2040. Median home prices have

[2:03:02] increased significantly pricing out many working families. And a gap exists

[2:03:08] between what the home costs and what our local workers earn, especially those in

[2:03:14] education, healthcare, service, and retail.

[2:03:18] This image here uh depicts the Can you still hear me? Sorry about that. Depicts

[2:03:23] the community engagement efforts by AIRS Associates. When discussing the housing

[2:03:28] needs assessment with community members, they attended the October Fest event. uh

[2:03:34] and they were they asked the community members to take a sticker and consider

[2:03:39] and indicate what types of housing they thought that we needed and what they

[2:03:44] would like to see in our community. Some of you may have been there and

[2:03:48] participated in that. And if you did, I really appreciate you doing so.

[2:03:52] Ultimately, the town lacks the missing middle housing, which could be duplexes,

[2:03:57] smaller single family homes, and affordable rentals. There is a very high

[2:04:01] percentage of costburden households and that means any household spending more

[2:04:06] than 30% of their gross monthly income on housing and entrylevel homeownership

[2:04:12] opportunities are scarce even for dual income households.

[2:04:18] So this slide talks more about the demand and the rise for affordable

[2:04:23] housing for families that earn the 40 to 80% of the area median income precisely

[2:04:31] the range that Beret Habitat serves. So existing and incoming residents in this

[2:04:36] income bracket can really not find housing that meets their needs even

[2:04:40] though they work locally and contribute to our economy and community. Habitat

[2:04:46] truly does serve the heart of Berthood's workforce.

[2:04:51] The colored boxes you see here on the screen, I've included various scenarios

[2:04:55] in order to depict who these individuals and families might be that we know. A

[2:05:01] Habitat homeowner might earn 40,000 annually. And with that salary, they may

[2:05:07] work at a local restaurant. They may work at Hayes Market or even be a town

[2:05:12] of birth employee or perhaps a registered nurse earning 80,000 annually

[2:05:18] that has has a child. Another likely scenario is a second grade teacher at

[2:05:22] Ivy Stockwell or any school within the district who has two children and earns

[2:05:27] 91,000 a year or perhaps a dual family uh consisting of a recently hired

[2:05:33] firefighter or EMT earning just shy of 72,000 where his spouse also works

[2:05:39] perhaps at the library on a part-time basis with three children for a combined

[2:05:45] household gross annual income of 89,000. And so these area median income levels

[2:05:52] are established by the Colorado Housing and Financing Authority on an annual

[2:05:56] basis. And you might be surprised to see that these annual income ranges, the

[2:06:01] minimum 40% and the maximum 80. Those amounts are rather high and we

[2:06:08] just don't have the housing to accommodate them. Without intervention,

[2:06:14] we risk losing these teachers, caregivers, and essential workers to

[2:06:18] more affordable communities, diminished economic diversity, and lack of civic

[2:06:23] engagement. And so in an effort to do our part to

[2:06:30] meet the growing need of increasing affordable housing stock, we are

[2:06:33] proposing a bold initiative, relocating and expanding our restore and creating a

[2:06:40] permanent home base for our operations. The strategic move will increase

[2:06:46] revenue, improve efficiency, and give us the capacity to build more homes for

[2:06:52] individuals and families in our community that need it the most. We

[2:06:56] truly think that this opportunity to partner with the town is worth

[2:07:00] considering given the vibrancy that this project is sure to yield along with the

[2:07:05] creating inclusivity and equity for all community members. Just imagine. Well,

[2:07:10] you really can't because you haven't seen it, but just wait.

[2:07:14] » Our mission is not to be a developer. Rather, we see ourselves as an anchor

[2:07:18] tenant. Much like House of Neighborly Services will be the anchor tenant for

[2:07:21] the Sonokco project. I envision a financial structure that blends multiple

[2:07:27] funding sources. A mix of public and private. Perhaps the town remains the

[2:07:32] owner of the property or perhaps the partnership is formalized with the

[2:07:36] developer to build out this concept. Before we unveil the concept, I also

[2:07:41] want to make note that in addition to considering the data from that Berke

[2:07:45] housing diversity plan, this plan also incorporates prior community

[2:07:51] um I'm sorry, prior commentary in regard to proposed downtown redevelopment

[2:07:56] projects, the needs and wishes expressed by many community members, and takeaways

[2:08:01] from the brand assessment that the town uh just invested in created by Chandler

[2:08:07] Thinks in May of is here as well. So, with that, I'm going to allow Josh to

[2:08:14] get in to the goodness.

[2:08:21] » Thank you, Tiffany. I'm Josh McCarten with Asher Architects and Engineers. And

[2:08:26] uh so, if you all are not familiar with the site we're looking at here, it's on

[2:08:32] the corner of Third in Massachusetts. Um on the uh left of this image you can

[2:08:38] see the old town hall which used to be a first national bank uh way back in 1929.

[2:08:46] Um converted the town hall. Uh they had used to store a a fire engine in there.

[2:08:52] Um there was also a jail cell and a police magistrate in there as well.

[2:08:58] uh later I believe is early 60s the addition uh was added on next door and

[2:09:06] um which is not a historic aspect. Um and then the other historic building on

[2:09:11] this site uh you can see uh right behind that little red Prius there is the old

[2:09:17] uh scale house for the grain elevator there. And currently

[2:09:24] um you know it's kind of an underutilized corner. there's not a lot

[2:09:28] happening there. Um, and we took a look at this uh with Tiffany as you know

[2:09:36] potential office space in the uh old town hall building and to see what we

[2:09:40] could do uh um as far as you know expanding uh the restore operations

[2:09:46] um to help out the community in that way. So without further ado, I'll show

[2:09:52] you what we came up with here. Uh so, you know, leading off on that historic

[2:09:59] point, um you know, Massachusetts did used to be the um original main street

[2:10:06] in town. And as you would get off the uh train depot, uh you exit the train depot

[2:10:13] and you walk off. Um you'd have a bustling downtown here, you know, um

[2:10:18] hotel down at the end of the block, shops, uh goods for sale, um you know,

[2:10:25] all sorts of war is available to you. And um now, you know, this corner is,

[2:10:32] you know, kind of underutilized, not uh not that exciting anymore. So we um in

[2:10:39] partnership with uh Habitat have uh taken a look at this site um to figure

[2:10:45] out how we can uh use it, how uh we can bring uh some vibrancy back to this uh

[2:10:51] corner of downtown Berthood and and connect with that history as well as

[2:10:57] connect with some of the uh improvements that are already slated for Bertha.

[2:11:02] So, um, what we're looking at, uh, just from a planning perspective here is, uh,

[2:11:08] old town hall, uh, old town hall, uh, would be the new habitat administration

[2:11:13] offices. Um, the, uh, habitat restore would be

[2:11:19] contained in a first floor and, uh, a basement area. And then there would also

[2:11:25] be um availability for micro retail um to help out you know small uh

[2:11:33] businesses, startups, things like that. So um you know people aren't burdened by

[2:11:39] you know huge rents and uh um of an enormous space.

[2:11:44] » Josh, if you'll do us a favor, will you just move a little closer to the mic

[2:11:47] just >> it'll pick up better if you're closer

[2:11:49] and I apologize. Yeah. Thank you. Does that better everybody?

[2:11:51] » I hate to have you lean down, but thank you.

[2:11:54] » Try and raise this thing up here. All right. Um Oh, yeah. I can hear myself

[2:11:59] now. Um All right. So, uh we also had uh space for uh restaurants and then uh to

[2:12:07] help uh you know solve some of the uh um the issues with uh you know, visitors to

[2:12:14] town not having a place to stay. Um, you know, we looked at, you know, where are

[2:12:19] people staying when they come for events in town? Where are they staying when

[2:12:24] they come for weddings? And it seemed like the perfect spot, you know,

[2:12:29] historic context and all to have a hotel introduced in this area. So, um, we're

[2:12:36] also proposing a, uh, you know, be a boutique, uh, hotel, you know, something

[2:12:41] around 15 to 20 rooms to, uh, help with that. And so we're not losing all the uh

[2:12:47] visitors uh to neighbor neighboring communities and also to kind of bring

[2:12:53] people into uh into this area over here. You know, they're staying there. They're

[2:12:57] walking by other shops. And this will just start to be a catalyst for um you

[2:13:03] know, development uh adjacent. You know, kind of incentivize other business over

[2:13:08] owners to make improvements. And the other thing we're doing here is, you

[2:13:13] know, um you all are probably aware of the third street improvements that are

[2:13:17] uh uh slated to happen. We're kind of looking at this as a uh you know,

[2:13:22] terminus to that. So, a buffer before you get to the uh the neighborhood

[2:13:28] beyond um a stopping gathering space for people. of this plaza, you know, events

[2:13:35] can uh you know, bleed right off of Third Street uh into this plaza. And all

[2:13:41] of these uh you know, micro retail, um restaurants, the hotel, Habitat, all

[2:13:48] have increased visibility as well as all the other uh businesses in the area.

[2:13:54] And uh so that kind of sums it up from our uh planning perspective. I'm going

[2:13:57] to turn it over to uh uh David from our office to uh clue you in on uh how we're

[2:14:04] looking at the architecture for this. Thank you.

[2:14:10] » Good evening. Thank you for your time. Can you guys hear me? Okay. Is that

[2:14:14] good? All right. Great. >> I want to lean in too. I think

[2:14:18] » Yeah, >> I got to lean into

[2:14:20] » there. You good? >> There we go.

[2:14:21] » All right. One goal for this was to create a building that fits in with the

[2:14:25] existing character of Berth. We all love downtown. We love the red brick

[2:14:29] buildings. So, we wanted to make sure that we we fit in with that. We also

[2:14:33] wanted to create a unique atmosphere that would draw people to this new

[2:14:36] destination. Create a space that people want to go hang out and be within. So,

[2:14:42] at the ground floor, we kept an approachable scale with features that

[2:14:46] are common within buildings that are 100 years old. While the upper level is a

[2:14:50] more contemporary feel, inviting guests to to explore the upstairs utilize one

[2:14:55] of the upper level seating areas. As Josh mentioned, this property is

[2:15:00] bookended by two historic buildings that uh will remain. And uh we've got on the

[2:15:06] right hand side the old birth at elevator mill, the scale house. We've

[2:15:11] got one thought here to turn that into a bakery as a potential adaptive reuse.

[2:15:17] We've got a structure that reaches over top of it without touching it to comply

[2:15:22] with the uh Secretary of Interior standards for historical buildings to

[2:15:26] create a a new outdoor seating area upstairs that is a part of the uh the

[2:15:31] hotel bar and restaurant. And then on the leftand side we have the

[2:15:36] old First National Bank which as mentioned would become Habitat's

[2:15:41] offices. And then next door to that to the east, we uh pulled from some older

[2:15:47] kind of stylings of of downtown, you know, what what downtown was and birthe

[2:15:52] it in early 1900s to create a a classy upscale Habitat for Humanity Restore.

[2:15:59] This would be their primary entrance right off Massachusetts. They'd have a

[2:16:03] second entrance off the pedestrian alley that's there to the right. And then just

[2:16:08] to the right of Habitat's Restore is about a thousand square foot retail

[2:16:13] space. Maybe that gets divided into two retail spaces if there's a need. Trying

[2:16:18] to look for opportunities to create a space for a small business that someone

[2:16:23] that uh can't handle the the larger rent or a larger space. A lot of the spaces

[2:16:28] that are available occasionally in Berlin are are much larger than that and

[2:16:32] it's tough to take on as a small business owner.

[2:16:36] And then on the corner, that would be the primary entrance to what we're

[2:16:39] calling the Bertha Grand Hotel. And you would enter in there to a lobby. And on

[2:16:44] the second floor, we have about 1,000 square ft of indoor seating area along

[2:16:49] with a kitchen area for a restaurant. And there's almost 1,000 square feet of

[2:16:54] outdoor seating on the lefthand side above habitat space. That's an outdoor

[2:16:58] seating area. And then on the right hand side above uh the old the old uh the

[2:17:04] weight station there is another outdoor seating area. And then on the third

[2:17:10] floor we have a small indoor space for the hotel bar. It's a just a rooftop bar

[2:17:16] with some additional outdoor seating up there. And as Josh said, we've got

[2:17:21] that's currently designed with about 20 hotel rooms. That's a mixture of of

[2:17:26] double queens, single queens, and some kings and a few suites. So, it all fits

[2:17:31] in here really nice. And then you can kind of see in the distance there

[2:17:34] underneath the bridge, we have four more micro retail. They're all about 300 to

[2:17:40] 500 ft. Again, looking at small spaces, easy to rent, and the furthest structure

[2:17:46] is a two-story restaurant space with another rooftop seating area there. So,

[2:17:52] hopefully this allows everyone to dream a little bit. It's a It's an honor to

[2:17:55] keep getting to come in front of you guys with these fun uh concepts and

[2:17:59] can't wait to see some of them come to life. So, appreciate it.

[2:18:03] » Thank you.

[2:18:11] » Just as some samples of other communities around that have done some

[2:18:15] similar things up in BV in the mountains, they've they've repurposed

[2:18:19] some areas. It's these are new structures obviously, but they've it's

[2:18:23] just some simple detailing that creates some charm, some character. That's

[2:18:28] really what we're after. So, just wanted to show some uh some real world examples

[2:18:32] of what this space could look like.

[2:18:40] » Thank you both. Uh I'm just amazed at the concept plan myself. it. I am just

[2:18:46] in awe of your creativity and taking all of the conversations we've had in

[2:18:51] presenting this. So, thank you. Um, so in addition to the benefits to the town

[2:18:58] and the economic development and filling the needs that they shared, this

[2:19:02] redevelopment project also does expand our capacity to serve. So, I just want

[2:19:06] to dive into that a little bit more. So, our local restore opened in 2001

[2:19:12] as a donation center that sells new and gently used products in which the

[2:19:16] proceeds from the sales directly support our mission of building homes and

[2:19:21] improving the community. With expanded restore operations and permanent office

[2:19:26] space located in the hub at Oldtown, Birth at Habitat will increase our

[2:19:31] revenue to fund more affordable housing while operating more efficiently and

[2:19:36] sustainably in alignment with our mission and vision, ultimately

[2:19:40] contributing to the town's long-term housing stability as well as workforce

[2:19:45] retention. Furthermore, the positions are restored

[2:19:49] to better serve the community as a result of the increase in the retail

[2:19:54] sales floor square footage. Currently, even though we have a twostory building

[2:19:59] consisting of about 10,500 square ft, our main level is only 4,500 square ft.

[2:20:06] So, we often have to turn away the community that want to donate to us. We

[2:20:11] have to send them elsewhere because we just don't have the space.

[2:20:17] So, we would be able to add the following departments. And I just want

[2:20:20] to share this with the community so you know in the future if this comes to

[2:20:24] fruition, we would be glad to take your donations so we can build more homes. We

[2:20:30] would be able to uh accommodate appliances, building materials much like

[2:20:34] a typical Habitat Restore, cabinets, doors and windows, electrical and

[2:20:39] lighting, flooring, lawn and garden, outdoor patio furniture, paint and

[2:20:44] plumbing.

[2:20:48] So all that said, in a true collaborative spirit with partnership in

[2:20:52] mind, Berth and Habitat, we respectfully request that the town board of trustees

[2:20:58] consider further exploration and due diligence in search of a

[2:21:04] potential right path forward. Accordingly, we at Berthood Habitat, we

[2:21:08] are committed, my board is supportive, several of them are here, my staff is

[2:21:12] here. We're committed to implementing a comprehensive capital campaign

[2:21:17] uh inclusive of historical preservation grants and support from Habitat for

[2:21:22] Humanity International in order to fund our portion of the project. The proposed

[2:21:28] redevelopment, let's just get back to the goodness. The proposed redevelopment

[2:21:32] at Berth's old town hall represents a unique and timely opportunity to address

[2:21:37] our community's most um pressing challenges while honoring our historic

[2:21:42] roots. We invite the town to join us in advancing this bold vision because when

[2:21:48] we do build together, we build a better future for all. Thank you very much.

[2:21:55] » Any questions for D or Tiffany? >> Yeah.

[2:22:00] Um the architecture is easy easy to comprehend. You see it great ideas,

[2:22:06] rooftops, restaurants, little buildings, your space. That that's to me that's the

[2:22:10] easy part. >> The enigma comes in on the on the money.

[2:22:14] » Sure. >> So you're talking about I think I don't

[2:22:17] know what your term exactly was, but national habitat could help with the

[2:22:20] funding. So is there a next phase for you where you say here's exactly what

[2:22:26] we're looking for from the town? Um, we're trying to get a private investor

[2:22:31] to come in for the hotel. We're going to pony up our percentage of the square

[2:22:36] footage we're going to use. I'm I'm I'm lacking sort of that glue that says how

[2:22:42] is this really going to going to come to fruition? Who's paying the bills? Who

[2:22:46] » That's a great question. Yes. And as I stated, we our mission is not to be a

[2:22:50] developer, you know, to revitalize downtown properties by any stretch of

[2:22:54] the imagination, but we want to partner. What does that look like exactly? I'm

[2:22:59] not sure. But I know that we have a board and we would form a targeted

[2:23:03] steering committee to put heads together in the community that have financial

[2:23:08] understanding and the wherewithal to create a very comprehensive capital

[2:23:13] stack again for our portion of the funding. Now that being said, uh

[2:23:17] trusting we would also leverage relationships that we currently have and

[2:23:22] use our network to see what the possibilities are. But what I'm really

[2:23:26] asking for is to collaborate with the town if to find out if you are

[2:23:31] supportive of this to take it to the next step and dive in to figure out

[2:23:36] actual cost. what is the scope and then to back into it that way. Almost like

[2:23:42] reverse engineering if you were if I were a developer and I came here with my

[2:23:45] concept planned I would obviously go through the planning commission and

[2:23:48] through the process but here it's backwards to say this is truly what we

[2:23:55] feel would be um a great opportunity for the town and birth of habitat so

[2:24:02] together we can address affordable housing. Does that kind of answer your

[2:24:06] question? I wish I had all the >> It sounds like the phase two or the next

[2:24:09] step is what you just described and um you know, I commend you on thinking

[2:24:13] outside of the box and bringing what looks like a nice addition to the town.

[2:24:17] So, thanks for all the work you've put in so far.

[2:24:19] » Sure. My pleasure. >> Questions?

[2:24:24] » Is there anything else going on Habitat like this? Is there anything else going

[2:24:28] on in Habitat International like this at all?

[2:24:30] » That's a great question. I've talked to uh the restore division at Habitat

[2:24:35] International and asked that question. They have given me contact information

[2:24:40] for somebody in Philadelphia. There may be one if if at all. So, I don't exactly

[2:24:46] have that answer, but I am completing that due diligence to find out because

[2:24:50] I'm willing to bet this is not common because typically if you go to Fort

[2:24:54] Collins, if you go to Gley, if you go to Leland, you know, these buildings, it's

[2:24:59] the low rent district for lack of a better word, right? I'm in real estate,

[2:25:02] not commercial. like on the residential side, but I know enough to know that

[2:25:07] Habitats will, you know, move towards empty spaces, maybe an empty big lots

[2:25:13] building or something like that, a strip mall, or just off the beaten path where

[2:25:17] they're really not getting that community vibrancy and engagement. Um,

[2:25:21] so this, in my opinion, and I'll get clarification from International, would

[2:25:25] truly potentially be a model of how we can be more inclusive

[2:25:30] in a community and create space I mean, think about the shopping equity there uh

[2:25:37] within the community. So, I I don't know for sure, but I'll get back to you on

[2:25:41] that. >> Thanks.

[2:25:42] » Yeah.

[2:25:45] » Go ahead, >> Mayor Carpect. Um, I search for Habitat

[2:25:53] Humanity resale stores when we travel. It's just a little hobby of mine. And I

[2:25:59] have seen some um more boutique style settings for some habitat in the state

[2:26:06] of Washington, in California um where it is set in like a downtown

[2:26:13] setting and it is more like a little shop than necessarily a restore. Now, if

[2:26:19] you want to get your tile and your sinks and things like that, there will be an

[2:26:23] area for that. However, the storefront with household goods and more, you know,

[2:26:29] antiques and things like that. Um, there's been some juicy things at this

[2:26:34] Habitat store. So, um, I just wanted to let you know that I have been to Habitat

[2:26:41] resale stores where they're more set up like an antique store for that frontage.

[2:26:46] » And if I could, can I jump in? Ann, you bring up some good points and I just

[2:26:50] want to I brought some financial information for the last five years. I

[2:26:54] have our, you know, birth at habitat financial amounts, but what I really

[2:26:58] want to focus on is our restore. So 2021, our income was 622,780.

[2:27:04] That's on donated goods, y'all. That is amazing. Uh 2122 we're at 633, 2223,

[2:27:12] 590, 23, 24, 610, 2425, 555, and then we budgeted 600,000 for this ne current

[2:27:19] fiscal year. Um, so our profit margins have been they have ranged though during

[2:27:24] that 5-year period uh 21% to 33%. Not too shabby. And we reinvest every

[2:27:32] single dollar back into our mission. >> So are those numbers are those are those

[2:27:36] net numbers after expenses? >> Those are gross are

[2:27:39] » those revenue after expenses, right? >> They're after expenses. All expenses.

[2:27:44] » Well, the the first figure I gave you is gross

[2:27:47] » gross sales >> and then I gave you the profit margin.

[2:27:49] So, I can tell you the expenses. Yeah. But I thought it'd be good to focus on

[2:27:53] that income and then give you the margin and I can do that for each year if you

[2:27:58] want. I'm also happy our financials are public information. So, if anybody wants

[2:28:02] more information, we can definitely dive into that and take a look.

[2:28:08] » Well, we just go down the line because I have trusty uh Alrech last time Trusty

[2:28:13] Wing. >> I'm not exactly sure what the question

[2:28:15] is. I like the concept. I like improving the town. I I like the artist's

[2:28:20] rendition, the architecture. So, I it all looks like a plus to me. Um I just

[2:28:24] think the devil's in the detail and there's a lot of financial questions to

[2:28:27] address. So, I don't exactly know what the question is. I like the concept. I

[2:28:32] » I think that is that is the answer to the question. I think the intent of

[2:28:35] tonight is not to make any decisions. Obviously, the intent of tonight is to

[2:28:39] present the concept, to get your initial feedback, and if this is something that

[2:28:42] the town board wants us as staff to work with Habitat on uh to refine a concept,

[2:28:48] to put together financial models, do all the things that we would typically do in

[2:28:51] a redevelopment project like this, uh then we will do that. We just don't want

[2:28:55] to spend the time and energy to do it. If you look at it and you go, "Hey, we

[2:28:57] don't want to we this this is neat, but no thanks." I mean, I don't think that

[2:29:01] was we didn't expect that to be the response, but we also want to make sure

[2:29:05] that that you guys uh feel like this is worthy of of the town's time and money

[2:29:09] to pursue this redevelopment opportunity >> based on what I've seen. I would support

[2:29:13] that. >> Great. Thanks.

[2:29:15] » Uh Trusty Hardy. >> Yeah, I think it's better than what's

[2:29:19] there now. >> I just want to see it move forward and

[2:29:23] see something happen. Be nice to get that infill completed.

[2:29:28] » 50 years. Yeah. Um, possible hotel, check. Rooftop space, check. Third

[2:29:34] street improvements, check. Parallels with Senako and the whatever happens

[2:29:38] with the skate park, check. >> Um, it's contained within a small area

[2:29:43] which doesn't add to sprawl. So, you're getting a lot of bang for for whatever

[2:29:49] buck may or may not be proposed. Um and then partnership with Habitat which puts

[2:29:56] money in different parts of the the money that is spent basically goes back

[2:30:02] into the community which is something that we're concerned with in other areas

[2:30:06] as well. So it it I mean it checks a lot of boxes and if the ask is just would

[2:30:11] you like to move forward with negotiations or with planning I I think

[2:30:15] that's an easy an easy yes. >> Dr. Albert

[2:30:19] » yeah I completely agree. I feel like the concept and um the idea is just truly

[2:30:25] inspired to put a boutique hotel in the downtown area and make it feel historic

[2:30:31] and really highlight the history of the trains and people coming into town and

[2:30:36] and that Massachusetts Avenue reactivating that with not only the

[2:30:40] historic component but the commercial component where people can come and

[2:30:44] visit and spend money. I feel like that's all very um connected. And so to

[2:30:49] have a an organization our town bring that to us and you guys, you know,

[2:30:53] fronting the money and doing these designs and bringing that to us is

[2:30:56] really amazing. And you didn't have to do that. And so in order to move

[2:31:01] forward, just please continue to let us know how we can partner and and make

[2:31:05] things, you know, continue. And I think the boutique version of the Habitat's

[2:31:10] going to be so awesome for our community and it's going to benefit so many

[2:31:14] different people in the future. And I'm excited that it's all uh it's all going

[2:31:18] to bring money to Bertha to stay in Bertha to help berth it families. So

[2:31:22] thank you so much for

[2:31:26] » um I did have one question. Um were something like this to proceed from a

[2:31:31] habit standpoint? Uh would this take priority over homes or would side by

[2:31:38] side? >> No, I I it wouldn't take priority by any

[2:31:42] means. We would that capital campaign would be separate from our budget that

[2:31:46] we have already approved and we're tracking towards. Um, also I didn't give

[2:31:50] any history but it's in the board packet. If you all take a look to see

[2:31:53] what our impact has been, we have historically only built one to one and a

[2:31:58] half a year and we're a 25-year-old organization. This year, if things go

[2:32:03] well and we're on track with Harvest 47, we will close six homes. So, we're

[2:32:08] already, you know, um, making that impact and we would not I'm I can't

[2:32:13] sleep at night if we're not doing our part to build homes for families.

[2:32:18] » Okay. >> Yeah.

[2:32:19] » And so, I would just second

[2:32:26] uh I think it's a really great concept. We've been

[2:32:30] property and I I think it really comes down to

[2:32:36] what kind of looking at

[2:32:41] other folks on board more than happy to investigate that. Thank you for bringing

[2:32:47] this to us.

[2:32:51] » I agree. I um it's just it's so novel to me. So I I'm I'm very appreciative of of

[2:32:57] this. And when you brought up that these usually go into kind of lower rent

[2:33:01] areas, it's so true. So, if you were to say this without having the concept plan

[2:33:05] or just talk about this, I would be a little more hesitant, but

[2:33:09] I'm so appreciative. And Asher, I'm appreciative that you guys are in town.

[2:33:12] You guys do fantastic work. And Tiffany decided to bring them on board to see

[2:33:16] how this could look. And it it looks fantastic. Um to have that kind of

[2:33:21] upscale front to have all the different um possibilities of a hotel, of a

[2:33:25] restaurant, different meeting areas, and then still have the Restore out back. It

[2:33:30] it I think it if this works out, it's almost better than the first the first

[2:33:34] go around at this where that fell through. I if this goes the way that

[2:33:38] this is kind of being presented right now, this is it's a win-win. It's

[2:33:42] absolutely fantastic. So, and I'd imagine I brought you're just so novel

[2:33:47] in and entrepreneurial so many different areas that this hasn't been done before

[2:33:50] anywhere. So, I I'm no habitat expert, but I imagine there's gonna be a lot of

[2:33:54] people watching you as this goes to see how this can be brought across the

[2:33:58] nation. Well, and I that leads me to share with you when we were at a

[2:34:02] conference in Vale for Habitat Colorado put it on, but Habitat Capital was

[2:34:06] there. Daniel Gura is his name with Habitat International. And he came up to

[2:34:11] me and he said, "I remember meeting you the first time, but I just want to say

[2:34:16] that I'm hearing great things are happening in Berlin." So there eyes are

[2:34:21] on us. So I just think it's we need to strike while the iron's hot and leverage

[2:34:26] that partnership. Awesome. Well, I'm completely supportive too of just this

[2:34:30] next step and I guess the steering committee is it and working with staff

[2:34:33] to figure out that next step. So, >> if I say anymore, I will start crying.

[2:34:39] » So, I really appreciate your consideration and support.

[2:34:43] » Thank you. >> Thank you, thanks so much,

[2:34:47] [Applause] >> Mayor. Can we

[2:34:55] » All right.

[2:35:00] yellow. [Laughter]

[2:35:05] » I'm so excited for you. >> Awesome. Thank you for the invite.

[2:35:11] » The yellow door. All right. >> Pink door.

[2:35:17] » Thank you very much. >> Thank you.

[2:35:20] » Excuse me. Could I speak to the issue? >> Sorry.

[2:35:24] » Could I speak to the issue? Um, sure. Mr. Lack, go ahead.

[2:35:27] » Thank you, Brian Lack. Uh, 706 7th Street and 606

[2:35:33] uh 2nd Street where my business is. This is genius.

[2:35:38] This is next level. Jimmy Carter is up there in heaven. He is looking down upon

[2:35:45] this and it will be a blessed thing that will happen. The only thing I would add,

[2:35:51] what a great place to have a little fix it repair shop.

[2:35:56] » I I hope you guys can make this happen. This would just be so awesome.

[2:36:01] » Thank you. >> Uh I did this out of order, but this

[2:36:04] brings up a very good point. Is there anyone here that was here for Habitat

[2:36:07] that wishes to speak to that? I'm sorry for not bringing that stuff up earlier.

[2:36:12] » Okay. Thank you, Mr. Lack. We want to take a five minute break. All right.

[2:36:16] Let's take a five minute break.

[2:43:30] for entertaining that break. I'm going to call the meeting back to order and we

[2:43:33] will uh move on now to the Jesuscowski update. Here we have Keith Null back to

[2:43:38] to uh present on this. Thank you. >> All right. Thank you. So, this is the

[2:43:43] Juskowski property concept update and I'll wait for it to

[2:43:49] present on the screen. Okay, here we go. Thank you.

[2:43:56] Uh, the Juskowski property is located in the northwest corner of town. It's a 78

[2:44:02] acre property north of Lone Tree Reservoir.

[2:44:08] The town acquired this property from Eileen Juskcowski in 2012.

[2:44:14] Um, it is under a conservation easement promoting the property's agricultural,

[2:44:18] natural, scenic, and open space values. Uh, historically, retriever dog training

[2:44:23] was performed on the property. And if you read through the conservation ement

[2:44:27] indeed, you'll see that it's brought up multiple times throughout it.

[2:44:32] Uh, what you're looking at in this picture, we have the 78 acre property.

[2:44:36] What's also shown in the red area is the building envelope. This is the only

[2:44:40] areas of the property where uh buildings can be de uh built on.

[2:44:49] So we've talked about this property with port the port committee probably over 10

[2:44:55] years. Um, in 2022, uh, the poor committee decided, uh, to kind of just

[2:45:03] write out some amenities and plans for the property. Uh, we were then going to

[2:45:08] take those pro uh, take those plans and share them with Colorado Openlands.

[2:45:11] Colorado Openlands oversees the deed on the property. They monitor it and and

[2:45:15] make sure uh, we're in compliance. So after the uh the port committee at

[2:45:21] that point had recommended uh disc golf course um agricultural

[2:45:29] uses of the property still um the buildings have always been something

[2:45:34] that are not well thought out yet. Um and that's going to be a recommendations

[2:45:40] from the board tonight if they have any recommendations for them.

[2:45:45] Um and then dog training was also something that was never uh the port

[2:45:49] committee never said no dog training but always just said keep exploring it. Uh

[2:45:56] in uh after they came up with their uses of the property, we shared that with

[2:46:00] Colorado Openlands in 2023. Um Colorado Openlands has a lot of questions every

[2:46:05] time you tried to describe what you'd like to do to the property. So, it

[2:46:08] became clear we need a picture we're all looking at together. Um, so we can try

[2:46:14] to determine uh a proper use. Uh, I think it would be I think the port

[2:46:20] committee also felt this could be easy. It could it be an open space to go walk

[2:46:24] trails? Yes. Uh, little development and that's that maybe was the easy way.

[2:46:29] throughout the uh port meetings, anytime this um property was brought up as an

[2:46:34] agenda item, we had uh members of the disc golf community show up and we had

[2:46:39] usually dog training uh members also show up for the property. Uh and so

[2:46:43] that's what's kind of led into the design uh where it is at now. Um so in

[2:46:49] 2024, we began working through the conceptual design with Wink, our design

[2:46:54] consultants. And in 2025, we have a uh design to share. Um this is kind of some

[2:47:01] stages of where that design went through. Uh we talked about an artist

[2:47:06] um shop in some of the buildings as maybe a possible use. We talked about

[2:47:11] having a dog park out there. We talked about having a 36hole disc golf course.

[2:47:17] And um where we left off with now is a property. And if you start on the east

[2:47:23] side, this is where the disc golf um was placed. It seemed like this area had

[2:47:28] more hills and topography to work with. Uh the center of the property has ponds

[2:47:35] that were historically used for retriever dog training and those areas

[2:47:39] are also considered the wetland areas. And then uh the west side of the

[2:47:44] property would be maintain a working farm. Uh the building areas are not

[2:47:50] really uh uses aren't really figured out for them yet. There is a large arena on

[2:47:54] the site. Uh there is a a condo apartment attached to that. Uh the port

[2:48:01] committee had recommended maybe that'd be a good place for a public restroom if

[2:48:05] that site ever was uh to be developed because the plumbing and utilities might

[2:48:09] already be there. Um, there is a garage on site that's uh what could possibly be

[2:48:15] a good storage or maintenance building uh for the future. And then there is

[2:48:19] also a house on the site.

[2:48:25] Uh throughout the property there would be trails uh working around. Now

[2:48:30] discussing this concept with Colorado open lands, it is highly unlikely that

[2:48:37] um we could try to uh for the the acreage of grass

[2:48:43] and stuff there. It'd be hard to uh you know replant native grass in there

[2:48:48] without proper irrigation installed um because they they're very hesitant to

[2:48:52] disrupt a large portion of this property at one time. Um, and that's because

[2:48:57] they've had history in the past where uh entities

[2:49:01] uh went through trying to reestablish an area and then they're just dealing with

[2:49:05] weeds. So, anytime they see any type of development, um there's a lot of

[2:49:12] questions. Uh the topography we have shown some little ridges and hills, uh

[2:49:18] probably those would be unlikely uh to be done on the property. Um, so

[2:49:22] basically how the topography sits now is probably how it have to stay. Uh, they

[2:49:27] want to see as little disturbance as possible.

[2:49:30] » Keith, if I may, um, just as you're looking at this map and and if you're

[2:49:34] accustomed to looking at contour maps, uh, it may be a little it may feel a

[2:49:38] little, um, misleading, the contour lines on the

[2:49:43] disc golf course, uh, that would normally be a little tighter. You can

[2:49:46] kind of see them up in the top corner of the screen because there is more

[2:49:49] topography on that east side. they've been removed so it's easier to kind of

[2:49:52] see the disc golf course. So you're you're seeing the you know the kind of

[2:49:56] the primary contour lines those secondary ones that would show that

[2:50:00] that's a kind of a steeper there's more terrain there those are kind of cleared

[2:50:04] out to make it easier to see the disc golf course arrangement. So while it

[2:50:08] might look like that area is flatter that is as Keith mentioned that's the

[2:50:11] kind of the hillier side and then the west side is a little bit flatter um it

[2:50:17] it still has little contours weld up. >> Could I clarify on that? We're looking

[2:50:20] at one foot for the lighter and then five foot for each larger. Is that

[2:50:25] correct? >> I believe that's true. Yeah. Okay.

[2:50:29] » But there there's some significant terrain differences out there. When

[2:50:31] you're standing up on the on the south end of the property or, you know,

[2:50:36] portions of the east end, you know, you're at least 15 or 20 feet above,

[2:50:43] you know, where the grade where the house is.

[2:50:46] » All right. Thank you.

[2:50:51] Uh these are some concepts or maybe some parking up at the north side. Uh the

[2:50:55] disc golf community had shared that I believe it was in Erie that a new course

[2:51:00] was built and there was only about 20 parking spaces or something like that

[2:51:04] and definitely not enough. So parking um was looked at a little deeper.

[2:51:12] Now how this compares to our our port survey from 2024, this process started

[2:51:17] before then. Um, disc golf is listed

[2:51:24] uh circled there. Um, it's also listed as the least important features, feature

[2:51:30] amenities as well in the survey. So, it just kind of kind of sits in the middle

[2:51:35] there. Um, for the dog training, uh, like I said, we've historically had

[2:51:42] different groups asked to use the property as it is now. Um,

[2:51:49] and we consistently decline those requests.

[2:51:53] Lawn, what's al what's brought this a little more to the forefront for maybe

[2:51:56] hunting or retriever dog training is Lawn Hag long Haggler Reservoir. Uh, to

[2:52:03] the northwest is a CPW maintained property. It used to allow some sort of

[2:52:08] dog training. Uh, I believe along the eastern portion of it. Colorado Parks

[2:52:13] and Life did a audit of all of their um state wildlife areas a couple years ago

[2:52:19] and those areas are supposed to be done or used for hunting and fishing. So, dog

[2:52:23] training didn't fit. So, they removed dog training out there. Um and that was

[2:52:28] brought to our attention during this process.

[2:52:31] Uh they uh CPW did keep a dog training area up. It's uh north of Fort Collins

[2:52:38] at the Cobb Lake State Wildlife Area. Uh so about 35 minutes from here. So, there

[2:52:42] is a dog training site. Um, there's a pond out there. It's uh very large up

[2:52:50] in, like I said, north in Fort Collins. So, for board feedback tonight, uh any

[2:52:57] comments on the conceptual design so that we can take this and the the

[2:53:00] questions you ask will always my response a lot of times will be like

[2:53:04] we'll check with Colorado Open Lens on that. Um so uh

[2:53:10] you know feedback on the amenities disc golf the ponds the agricultural reuse uh

[2:53:15] buildings and then we also have a recommendation that the port committee

[2:53:18] made. Uh this is in February. Um after after the February meeting we have

[2:53:24] met with Colorado Openlands a few times to discuss uh this concept before we

[2:53:30] felt we could bring it to the board still. So, the port recommendation was

[2:53:34] for the town board and staff to consider a trial program for dog training on the

[2:53:38] property prior to full development. Um, the staff recommendation is not to open

[2:53:42] a training. Um, just because it doesn't seem like it's a a birthed need and

[2:53:47] birthed residents highly trying to use the property. It seems like uh groups

[2:53:53] from out of town I I believe they do live in the area. A lot of them do too

[2:53:57] still. Um, with that I pass it to the board for any feedback.

[2:54:02] » Thank you, Keith. >> Yeah, any questions right there off the

[2:54:05] bat?

[2:54:08] » Are there any kind of um facts about disc golf? Is it is it

[2:54:15] growing in popularity? Is it dying? Would people really use it? I mean,

[2:54:20] people talk about our parks and our trails and they love all that. And I

[2:54:24] just wonder is this the you know get the uh best juice for the squeeze when in

[2:54:29] doing a disc golf. I I'm speaking from an area of ignorance. I just have no

[2:54:32] clue. >> Right. And I I can't speak to numbers. I

[2:54:36] know there are some members of the disc golf community here that could possibly

[2:54:39] answer that. Um I do know we've consistently heard it uh from a small

[2:54:44] group in town to have a disc golf course and this was a site that seemed like

[2:54:48] it'd work. Uh it I do think they are popular.

[2:54:53] you can go, you know, out of your way an hour into the mountains and there'd be a

[2:54:58] disc golf course randomly and the parking lot's full out there. Um, so

[2:55:04] I think it could be used. I I think it could be a decent draw pulling from

[2:55:07] Lovelin as well to use this course. >> You you illustrated the the path and

[2:55:12] trails in some of the diagrams, but I don't I don't see them listed as a

[2:55:16] number here unless it's just the port recommendation, but our intent is still

[2:55:20] to have trails all through this. Correct.

[2:55:22] » Correct. Okay. Okay. Great. >> Thank you.

[2:55:28] » Um, if I may, one thing about disc golf, um, it's it's typical that disc golf

[2:55:33] doesn't function like traditional golf and that you don't go to the clubhouse

[2:55:37] and, you know, pay for a tea time. Um, you know, it's much more informal.

[2:55:41] You're able to walk. Uh, there might be other folks out walking trails nearby

[2:55:45] while you're playing disc golf. Um, you know, there are disc golf courses like

[2:55:49] on school sites and other places. You know, it's a

[2:55:54] It's not an exclusive use of the property is I guess what I'm trying to

[2:55:56] say. >> It's frisbees with steel nets, right?

[2:55:59] » Yeah. And it's and it's a it's a very low impact um opportunity I think

[2:56:03] relative to some of the other things. And and the real issue here uh and this

[2:56:07] is one of the reasons why I'll just uh editorialize for a minute if you don't

[2:56:11] mind. One of the reasons why we've had such a hard time figuring out what to do

[2:56:14] with this property is the conservation easement is very restrictive. For

[2:56:17] example, it says no livestock is allowed on the property. And so, um, you know,

[2:56:23] when I very first started here back in 2018, uh, some of the first meetings I

[2:56:27] had were with the school district and some interested folks who really wanted

[2:56:29] to do FFA, uh, a collaborative relationship with the school district

[2:56:34] and their FFA program or 4. Um, but we couldn't have livestock on the property.

[2:56:40] And so, while it could be used as a learning center, they couldn't they

[2:56:44] couldn't bring animals out there and other things. There were some real

[2:56:46] limitations. Um, as Keith mentioned, Colorado Openlands that that owns and

[2:56:51] holds the conservation easement does not want a significant amount of disturbance

[2:56:55] on the property. And so regrading uh buildings are are very limited if if um

[2:57:01] not kind of explicitly excluded in a lot of ways. There's just there are a lot of

[2:57:06] restrictions on this property. So a low impact use that requires very little um

[2:57:11] quote unquote development like disc golf uh is a great this is a great spot to

[2:57:15] put that kind of recreational amenity. It also has some unique terrain and

[2:57:18] features and other things. So, um that that's really the reason I think why

[2:57:22] disc golf came to the forefront as a use for this site if that makes sense.

[2:57:27] » Yeah, questions.

[2:57:31] » I have a couple. Um, one question that I have is what would it take? What

[2:57:37] resources and infrastructure would it take to just make this accessible to the

[2:57:41] public for public use for park for just trails and recreation,

[2:57:48] » right? I think uh we would typically like to see some uh proper restrooms ADA

[2:57:54] um type of setup. So, you would need a whole parking area uh figured out out

[2:58:00] there. you need restrooms. Um,

[2:58:05] that's like the minimum. I There's the concern of what do you do with a house

[2:58:10] out there and some of the other, you know, buildings. What do you how do you

[2:58:15] handle that when um, you know, you do have the public showing up and there's,

[2:58:21] you know, houses and stuff that people aren't living in and and monitoring, I

[2:58:25] guess. So to follow up on that, are those structures are we able to remove

[2:58:30] any of those structures? >> Yes.

[2:58:32] » And then my third question is, can we monetize

[2:58:37] anyone using the park like for disc golf or for the retriever training? Could

[2:58:41] that be something that brings in money to help pay for those park improvements

[2:58:45] or is that does it just have to be open? >> We'd have to confirm the exact type of

[2:58:51] reservation use on the property with Colorado Openlands. commercial uses I

[2:58:54] believe is not allowed on the property. Uh agricultural

[2:58:59] using as a lease for that is allowed and that's currently uh one of the uses

[2:59:04] that's uh happening now. And I will say um you know again this this project was

[2:59:11] kind of at the top of the um burner list and it got back burned mostly because of

[2:59:16] the um challenges associated with the conservation easement trying to find

[2:59:21] some creative uses. U I will say I met with Colorado Openlands again very early

[2:59:27] on in my tenure here. Um and and I don't say this flippantly. We we said, you

[2:59:31] know, we went through this long list of things. Jeremy and I, Jeremy Olinger,

[2:59:35] our deputy town administrator, and I met with them, said, "Hey, could we do this?

[2:59:38] Could we do this? Could we do this?" Most of the answers were no. And the few

[2:59:42] things that they said yes to were kind of like, "You'll have to show us exactly

[2:59:45] how you're going to do that before before we'll say yes." Um,

[2:59:50] and and you know, we threw out things like, "Could it be rented out as a

[2:59:53] wedding venue? It' be it'd be a beautiful wedding destination." Nope.

[2:59:56] Absolutely not. That's commercial use. Um, could we have a golf course there?

[3:00:00] No, that is a commercial use because you'd be charging for um you know green

[3:00:05] fees and and things like that. So I think Keith's answer is a reasonable one

[3:00:10] which is any ideas we have are good ideas. Um we just need to run them past

[3:00:16] Colorado openlands uh to get their feedback at the end of that very first

[3:00:19] meeting. And I'll admit I was a little discouraged. Um you know we said well

[3:00:23] what what should we do with the property? and they said, "Well, your

[3:00:26] best bet is to sell it. Um, you know, sell it for residential use, um, for

[3:00:31] farming. It'll maintain its conservation easement. Somebody could live there,

[3:00:34] farm it if they want to, or just have a a great piece of property." We

[3:00:38] considered that. Um, but the but the park was added into kind of our port

[3:00:43] list as a as a future town park, and that then also prohibits us from selling

[3:00:49] it under state law without a vote of the public. So, that that complicates those

[3:00:53] things. So these are some I think having gone through um the

[3:01:00] port committee process this kind of refinement of concepts back and forth

[3:01:05] with Colorado open lands um we could remove the buildings. I think the

[3:01:09] buildings from our perspective as staff is the biggest concern. You know you've

[3:01:12] got a lot of buildings out there that are um you know that are currently

[3:01:16] monitored but that with the public being out there on a daily basis wouldn't be

[3:01:20] monitored enough where we'd feel comfortable that they were safe. um that

[3:01:24] they were, you know, if they were not occupied, if they weren't being

[3:01:26] regularly used, right? They become kind of an attractive nuisance. Today,

[3:01:31] they're behind a gate in a fence. They are monitored by staff and by the police

[3:01:34] and other things. And so, you know, we feel like they're they're okay today,

[3:01:37] but that's because there is no public out there. Um that that dynamic changes

[3:01:42] a little bit. So, I think that's an important part of the conversation um

[3:01:45] for you to consider. >> I do have one more question. When we

[3:01:50] have a a conservation easement, is there ever any documentation of what the

[3:01:54] family's original intent for the property is?

[3:01:57] » That that is exactly what the conservation easement is intended for.

[3:02:00] Um, so the the conservation easement itself is a is a long document that

[3:02:06] specifies, you know, these are the conservation values of the property,

[3:02:10] these are the allowed uses, these are the prohibited uses. uh you know it it

[3:02:14] really the deed of a conservation easement it specifies all those things

[3:02:18] and that's agreed to by the property owner that gave the conservation

[3:02:21] easement to Colorado openlands in the first place which was Miss Jesuski. So

[3:02:25] what is included in the deed of conservation easement really reflects

[3:02:28] what her intent of the property was. >> That makes sense.

[3:02:32] » All right. And uh the easement was created in 2003

[3:02:36] uh before that she had uh an idea of where the property was going to go to.

[3:02:41] And uh like I said, the town acquired it in 2012. So I think there was a period

[3:02:46] where uh other entities were being approached to

[3:02:51] take on the property and they declined. I believe Lovelin declined and a couple

[3:02:54] others. So

[3:02:59] » questions. >> I have a question that just came to my

[3:03:02] mind. Um for the I'm as far as tearing down the buildings and

[3:03:07] whatnot. I'm I'm hesitant to tear down that arena whatever happens just because

[3:03:12] it's a big giant building. Um do you guys know if there's a limitation

[3:03:19] on the possibility of use by the fire district or sheriff's department for

[3:03:24] something in that arena?

[3:03:29] » I think that's something we'd want to Yeah.

[3:03:31] » evaluate and run past Colorado. Yeah.

[3:03:36] » Good question. A few years ago, the sheriff's department lost their Toys

[3:03:40] location, but it's too late.

[3:03:46] » You know, we've we've considered moving our um some of our staff out there, uh

[3:03:50] you know, like our forestry team, forestry and open space department, but

[3:03:54] it is it's really as far from town as you can get and still be in the town

[3:03:58] limits. Um >> excluding I25. Um, but you know, it is

[3:04:02] it is kind of at the edge of town and and someday as the town grows east,

[3:04:05] which will inevitably happen uh and more development occurs out by a 25 and those

[3:04:10] kinds of things, it'll be really at the farthest part of town. And so moving

[3:04:14] staff out there, we've talked about, but um may not make sense, but using it for

[3:04:18] kind of temporary or maybe even permanent or semi-permanmanent uses that

[3:04:21] are public in nature might be possible. Um but we'll have to evaluate that.

[3:04:26] » Indoor cough um I could car

[3:04:34] » um I I just had a question for staff. What kind of security or additional

[3:04:38] funding would we need to implement? Should we go forward with some sort of

[3:04:43] pilot program for any user group out there?

[3:04:48] Has that been considered? >> Um it I think a lot of it depends on how

[3:04:53] the how the property ultimately ends up. um kind of what the uses are, when it's

[3:04:56] open, when it's not open, um whether or not the buildings stay or don't stay.

[3:05:01] The buildings actually provide a visual obstruction in a lot of ways. So like,

[3:05:05] you know, uh and the property is large enough that, you know, a a police

[3:05:09] officer can't just drive by on Canada Road 14 and see the entire property,

[3:05:13] right? So you have to drive into the property. um and and even accessing the

[3:05:18] southern end of the property, you really can't see a lot of that even from the

[3:05:22] house without walking or driving back there. So, you know, we'd want we

[3:05:26] definitely want to have cameras um in strategic locations to be able to

[3:05:29] monitor and be able to see what's going on out there. We'd want gates that lock

[3:05:33] um at at certain times uh to prohibit overnight use. I think that's probably

[3:05:38] an important consideration out there. No camping and that kind of stuff. Um, so

[3:05:42] you we talked through some of those, but I think a lot of it again depends on

[3:05:45] ultimate use and whether or not the buildings stay.

[3:05:50] Thank you.

[3:05:53] » There's other questions right now. I know there's members of the public that

[3:05:55] want to do this. >> Okay.

[3:05:59] » Um, thank you state your name.

[3:06:04] » Yep. >> Yep. Um, my name is Joe Soek with the

[3:06:07] Plat Valley Hunter Retriever Club. Uh my address is uh 564 Marcelina in Loveland.

[3:06:15] Yep. Um so I guess some of the um restrictions that uh Mr.

[3:06:22] Kirk was pointing out to the property is um it's very restrictive in its use. But

[3:06:28] one thing that it's not restrictive in is dog training. It's mentioned four

[3:06:32] times in the in the easement and it actually says um on the section 3

[3:06:39] paragraph H commercial or industry industrial activities no commercial or

[3:06:45] industrial uses are allowed on the property except for dog training and

[3:06:51] then it goes on to say also agriculture. So those are the two things that you

[3:06:56] could actually utilize it for commercially. Um, we have proposed to

[3:07:02] have a pilot program um to open up for us uh the Flatbelly Hunter Retriever

[3:07:09] Club to have access to the property um on a trial basis so that when um

[3:07:16] hopefully when it is opened up for the public that we would have a track record

[3:07:21] and a relationship with the town of Berth so that you know what our club is

[3:07:24] about, how we operate, how we take care of the property and Um

[3:07:30] so so when it did open up to the public, we would also be able to work in

[3:07:35] conjunction with the public for the areas that we'd want to use. Um the

[3:07:39] ponds is one of the biggest things. Those ponds are cut for um dog training.

[3:07:46] um specifically it has different uh types of um retriever

[3:07:53] um skills and factors to train your dogs in in those ponds. Um that's why she

[3:08:01] built them. I I think the contour to the land is also um big for dog training and

[3:08:07] that's why she's got it laid out the way that she did. And you know that it's

[3:08:12] been 13 years that Bertha has had this property and one of the biggest things

[3:08:19] that she's asked for is dog training and there hasn't been any dog training and

[3:08:25] we as a club can offer that without any cost to the town of Berthan. We have our

[3:08:33] own insurance. We would be able to list the property um on our insurance policy.

[3:08:39] Um, we monitor our members so we know who is on the property and um we can

[3:08:46] tell whether or not they are members. Um,

[3:08:52] and it's just uh something that Mrs. Janowski really wanted was to have dog

[3:08:57] training at that property and we w we can we have the solution and

[3:09:03] can offer that without any impact to the town of Berlin.

[3:09:09] Can I answer any questions? Does anybody have a question on

[3:09:13] » what we do? How we do >> that? I just want to see if there's

[3:09:15] anyone else uh that wishes to speak to this real quick.

[3:09:17] » Sure.

[3:09:21] » My name is Wes Dylan, 2343 Helena Court in Loveland. Miss Djanowski was a legacy

[3:09:28] member of our club and um you know the property that she

[3:09:33] has is very unique. Professional dog trainers utilize properties just like

[3:09:39] that for the sole purpose of developing a professional hunting retrieving dog.

[3:09:46] We're not professionals, although we interact with professionals in our

[3:09:50] national organization, the United Kennel Club hunting retriever group. We're a

[3:09:56] certified 200 member club. Uh basically front-range membership.

[3:10:03] The ability to find a property with these characteristics is virtually

[3:10:08] impossible for

[3:10:11] anyone other than a professional that's going to generate it like Miss Jascowski

[3:10:15] did, Janowski did for her own personal use. So the value may not be commercial

[3:10:22] and the value may be very

[3:10:27] very unique in a in a an urban setting or a

[3:10:33] community setting, but to a select group of people, it is absolutely invaluable.

[3:10:40] and we drive by it all the time and realize what a waste it truly is

[3:10:46] for the resource that we try to to uh develop. So whereas

[3:10:53] the ultimate solution is very complex and and we've talked to you all before

[3:10:58] about this. We do offer a very specific very unique solution that's specific to

[3:11:10] the concept or to the um document that's been drawn up without

[3:11:16] terrible cost without um anything other than a access to the property under the

[3:11:24] guidance and and regulations that you set for us. Um, it's something that it's

[3:11:31] a it's a shame to see it go to waste. And also, I think that that we would

[3:11:37] have the ability to work with the town for the development and co-use

[3:11:43] of the Frisbee golf thing is wonderful. So, you know, that would not be a

[3:11:48] conflict for us at all and would welcome, you know, to have a multi-use

[3:11:52] thing. However, you know, the the the key for us is the the beauty of the

[3:11:58] property itself and what we can do with it. So, thank

[3:12:03] you very much. I appreciate that. >> Jeeoff.

[3:12:06] » Um, mayor, I move to extend the meeting to 10:30.

[3:12:09] » Second. >> All those in favor say I.

[3:12:12] » I. All right.

[3:12:16] » Hi, my name is Jeff Miller. I live here in Bured 739th Street. Um,

[3:12:23] we are members of the club. We do look for places to train. We don't have a lot

[3:12:27] of places available to train with these unique features. We don't have a lot of

[3:12:32] places available to let the dogs run off leash. Um,

[3:12:37] the way we train, we don't get all the dogs out together and let them all run

[3:12:41] and have a good time. It's usually very specific. One, maybe two dogs out at a

[3:12:46] time. They're under control. We take care of the properties because

[3:12:50] we respect it and we don't want to lose access to it. So,

[3:12:54] I'd urge you to allow us to show you what we can do and how we would treat

[3:12:58] it. >> Thank you.

[3:13:02] » Is there anyone else?

[3:13:05] » I'm uh I'm Chris Huber. I live on 1513 Branch Street in Berth

[3:13:11] uh just uh east of this property. I'm the father of birthed resident and

[3:13:18] junior world champion disc golfer Haley Huber and now a twotime major winner. We

[3:13:26] have nowhere to practice in town. Um so here's a few numbers real quick. Uh

[3:13:33] Centennial Park in Longmont had nine almost a thousand unique players. And

[3:13:40] this is just from our scoring app that we use. Uh almost a thousand unique

[3:13:47] players and uh 4,500 rounds just last year. Um

[3:13:55] there was again almost a thousand unique players

[3:14:01] at Lou Miller Park and 4,000 rounds played last year.

[3:14:06] The West View Middle School, which is a brand new course in Longmont, had uh 355

[3:14:14] unique players. And because it's on school property and it's really

[3:14:18] restrictive of when we can play, there was uh 1,500 rounds. Uh River Ranch in

[3:14:27] uh just off the interstate in I don't know if it's Johntown or Lovelin there.

[3:14:32] Um, it's probably the least desirable course in the area. Had almost 500

[3:14:38] unique players last year as well. Um, Mahaffy Park, they put us in the the the

[3:14:46] wasteland of the property. So, there's no trees. Our our local club, I'm uh

[3:14:54] part of the leadership board for the Longmont Club and the Lovelin Club. Um,

[3:14:59] we've taken all the dead trees that the city of Lelin is cutting down and

[3:15:05] putting put them on the course so we have obstacles to play with. And um

[3:15:13] we also have a second set of baskets out there now donated from the club. So now

[3:15:20] we have multiple baskets we could play to on on each uh

[3:15:25] hole. Um so we have nowhere to go within uh you know

[3:15:32] of without driving 20 minutes to play and practice. Um

[3:15:39] the the sport I don't have any data to back it up but

[3:15:44] I heard during co it was the second fastest growing sport on the planet. So

[3:15:50] only beat by pickle ball and that was the first the first meeting I was here

[3:15:54] for and there was a lot less people. Um I just uh we we desire a course near us.

[3:16:03] Uh I I almost guarantee that we can put it to great use. Uh,

[3:16:13] you know, there's bad apples in every group, but most of us are dedicated to

[3:16:20] cleaning up after ourselves. Uh, not making a mess, not, you know, doing

[3:16:26] anything irresponsible on the course except playing. Um,

[3:16:31] the Longmont Club sold has just this year sold almost 400 tags, which is kind

[3:16:39] of the the membership uh part of the club. And Lublin, which

[3:16:46] is a couple years old now, has sold almost

[3:16:50] » Oh, sorry. >> Okay.

[3:16:52] » We want some disc golf. >> Is there anyone else?

[3:16:59] Thank you all for speaking. Yeah, thanks for coming back up. Um, if the trustes

[3:17:04] have any questions for um the uh either the count club or the disc golf course,

[3:17:09] I consider you guys subject matter experts. So, bring it back up if you

[3:17:12] guys have questions. >> And one question for the the importance

[3:17:15] of the water for the dogs. What's what feeds those ponds and do they stay at a

[3:17:21] high level all the time? Does anyone know that? There there is a little bit

[3:17:25] of ground water in the property that kind of probably seeps from loan tree.

[3:17:28] Uh but the water does have over, you know, 60 shares of CBT water and two

[3:17:33] shares of home supply water that's tied to the property and can't be moved off

[3:17:37] the property. Um so when the farmer does irrigate, that also does trickle into

[3:17:41] the ponds as well. >> Okay.

[3:17:43] » There used to be some I don't know if there still is, but there's some pretty

[3:17:46] good largemouth bass on the in those ponds.

[3:17:51] If if if it gets opened, I I suspect those ponds will be empty real fast.

[3:17:58] » I guess I'd like just clarification on whether if the training takes place,

[3:18:05] could that be co-used with public use or would that just be private use only?

[3:18:11] Meaning like the public could use it as as recreation

[3:18:15] in addition to training or would it have to be exclusive? We we got to get you in

[3:18:20] front of a mic to answer that. Um Keith, do you have any thoughts on that? I

[3:18:22] guess you can ask. >> I'll pass to Christie. Sorry.

[3:18:28] » Um yeah. Yes, we could work simultaneously. Um the way that that

[3:18:33] last plan was where the uh the farmland and then on the other side was the disc

[3:18:38] golf. Um we're primarily interested in the um ponds. So on the wetlands area,

[3:18:44] which is um kind of isolated by itself there. Um, it wouldn't be a problem to

[3:18:50] have disc golf people out there or even people walking certain trails and stuff.

[3:18:54] I mean, there might there might be a little bit of logistics depending on the

[3:18:59] trail where the trails are going, but we would be able to figure that out. Um,

[3:19:03] and then as far as um depending on the time of year, we would want to be able

[3:19:09] to use the farmland if it's possible, depending on, you know, where the crops

[3:19:13] are. if it's the off season and there, you know, it's in the winter time and

[3:19:18] the crops aren't growing that we could run the dogs on that side. Um, and then

[3:19:23] also um it uh you know maybe prior to or certain certain vegetations that um

[3:19:32] would allow the dogs to run through it without damaging the crop. Um we would

[3:19:36] like to use that also. Is that >> that's very help?

[3:19:41] Any other questions?

[3:19:48] » All right. How do we feel generally? >> I really good. I again I think um it's a

[3:19:54] it's a beautiful piece of property, beautiful views, and for it to be not be

[3:19:58] used by anybody does seem like quite a way. So I I support the uses we've

[3:20:03] talked about.

[3:20:08] seems like >> I don't think it'd be one of our lower

[3:20:13] expensive projects because we can't really do any grading or earth moving or

[3:20:19] anything like that out there. Just go plant the metal frisbee trees, tree

[3:20:24] stakes, >> parking, lighting, and security.

[3:20:28] » Parking, lighting, security are the biggest expenses.

[3:20:30] » Yeah. And then and then obviously we'll want to have restrooms out there that

[3:20:33] those >> uh being able to use an existing

[3:20:36] building if we're able to do that will help bring that cost down, but there

[3:20:38] there'll still be some expense there. Yes, it's likely to be one of our you'll

[3:20:42] see here in a moment one of our least expensive opportunities.

[3:20:45] » And what were some ideas for the large arena building um besides storage and

[3:20:50] stuff? Could would that be of interest to the dog trainers for the winter to

[3:20:54] use indoors or that's something the Frisbee golf would want to have a couple

[3:20:58] things inside for something? I don't know.

[3:21:03] » Yeah, >> there's one.

[3:21:04] » Uh, that I'm not sure exactly the answer to that one. So, we the the poor

[3:21:09] committee didn't really have an intended use. We've talked about uh, you know,

[3:21:14] opening that up for parking, I think. Yeah. Yeah. I mean,

[3:21:18] » it's a nice size arena. >> Yeah.

[3:21:20] » It's a great great space to >> you variety of those things.

[3:21:26] » The farm, the current farmer has stored equipment. um or hay in there from time

[3:21:31] to time uh with permission. So that's about all it's been used for lately.

[3:21:40] » So what would be your reason with this uh with the hound club to not

[3:21:45] a lot? I know it's not a potentially a town priority. It wasn't even in the

[3:21:49] surveys and whatnot, but um do you see any other reasons not to or can you just

[3:21:55] expound upon that? They're not being recommended here. Right.

[3:21:59] » Right. I think so. We can't I don't think we can be exclusive to just one

[3:22:02] club. So now we're, you know, opening up for possibly other clubs wanting to use

[3:22:07] the property. Um so it feels like there'd need to be some type of

[3:22:11] reservation system created for this. I don't think uh so then we're we're

[3:22:17] figuring out the form and how to do that. Um is an automatic gate? Is are we

[3:22:23] set giving a combo out? How do we handle a property? Uh I I do agree like what

[3:22:27] like like they've said the property is ready for them to use. It's um and uh it

[3:22:34] is a lot nicer than the Cobb Lake property. Um I'd say just because the

[3:22:38] way it's been maintained um and it was built for this essentially. Um but it is

[3:22:45] figuring out that reservation system and maybe not agreeing fully that it is

[3:22:48] something that you can also mix disc golf with with at the same time. Um, I

[3:22:54] don't think do loose dogs are very popular. Uh, I know we do allow that in

[3:23:00] town in certain areas, but uh, we also do receive a lot of complaints on it as

[3:23:04] well. Um, >> okay. Thank you.

[3:23:08] » Mhm. >> I'm seeing here one to three hours. I

[3:23:10] mean, they this would all have to be worked out if the board didn't want to

[3:23:12] go ahead with this, but doesn't seem like they're projecting an everyday

[3:23:17] thing, right? Seems to be pretty limited in the scope of when they want to

[3:23:22] Sorry, I'm breaking my own rule here. Um,

[3:23:26] I'm just, by the way, we we just got this, so I'm just reading this now, but

[3:23:29] it seems like they want one to three hours with additional one to two group

[3:23:32] sessions per week. So, it doesn't sound like this is a every day.

[3:23:37] » Um, >> okay. Thanks. That's a question I'm just

[3:23:40] thinking out loud here. >> Okay. I I think I think the con the

[3:23:43] issue and the concern that we've had from the beginning is one opening it up

[3:23:46] for reserved or or kind of specialized uses prior to it being open to the

[3:23:52] public we think is problematic. Um, and I think I I hope everyone understands

[3:23:57] that, um, practically speaking, this is a publicly owned piece of property and

[3:24:02] the minute you open it up to one group, then you have a lot of other groups

[3:24:06] immediately saying, well, I, you know, why can't we use it and we need to be

[3:24:09] able to have it for our time? And now we're trying to balance, we're trying to

[3:24:13] turn this into a scheduled, rentable asset, uh, for for a large list of

[3:24:19] groups. and we've been approached by others, not just this retriever training

[3:24:22] group. Um, and so I think prior to it being open to the public, that's

[3:24:26] problematic. Okay. >> After it's open to the public, um,

[3:24:29] whether that's with disc golf and walking trails, uh, farm or otherwise,

[3:24:35] um, being able to utilize the property with some kind of reservation system is

[3:24:39] something that we could work through. I don't think that that's now

[3:24:42] » that was going to be my point because like you can reserve a fickle for an

[3:24:45] event. You know, there's a process, but you're saying we could do this. It's

[3:24:48] just out of order kind of doing that. >> But again, I think, you know, part of

[3:24:51] the challenge is >> we don't have a lot of facilities with

[3:24:54] the exception of our ball fields. So, we do have some that are that are like

[3:24:58] rented on a very consistent basis, >> right? Where it's like, you know, we're

[3:25:02] going to have it every Tuesday from this time to this time. We're going to have

[3:25:05] it every, you know, once a week uh from this time to this time, and then we're

[3:25:08] also going to have it on Saturdays from this time to this time. So, that um we

[3:25:13] don't have a lot of those arrangements. Um, it's not to say that we can't. Um,

[3:25:17] but that's just something we need to work through. But my suggestion would be

[3:25:20] that we not do that until it's open to the public. Um, and part of that is

[3:25:24] because I think there's going to be some missing infrastructure. Um, this again,

[3:25:28] we're going to have concerns about how does the property accessed? How is it

[3:25:31] managed? Um, and and frankly, you know, it it kind of speeds up that process

[3:25:37] ahead of the rest of this planning and and development effort. And sometimes

[3:25:43] you get the cart before the horse and then there's things that happen that you

[3:25:45] wish hadn't happened uh because it throws the other pieces off. We've had a

[3:25:49] lot of that conversation tonight already too about other park projects. So, um

[3:25:53] you know, from our perspective, if it's not open to the public, let's

[3:25:57] not open it yet. Once it's open to the public, let's work work through the

[3:26:00] logistics of reserving the property for unique uses. And we're going to get a

[3:26:04] lot of those requests, right? >> It's going to be a popular park.

[3:26:07] » It's going to be a popular spot. It's a beautiful place

[3:26:09] » because I can see it with even with the disc golf the disc golf clubs too if

[3:26:13] you're if you want to host an event over there or if you want

[3:26:17] » events multiple clubs wanting to >> have it. So, we're going to have to try

[3:26:22] to balance all those respective users, which is a good problem to have, right?

[3:26:25] If we're going to have this asset, we're going to invest the money. We want it to

[3:26:28] be well utilized. We want it to be used for both its, you know, kind of

[3:26:32] primarily intended purpose, but also other good public uses. Balancing all

[3:26:36] those, I think, going to be the trick. >> I think I think what happens a lot is

[3:26:41] that we look at the full picture of what it can be and what it can do, and it

[3:26:46] tends to stall things out because we can't put all the pieces together quite

[3:26:50] yet. And so I like the idea of taking it in in stride. Let's open it up. Let's

[3:26:55] get it available to the public. Let's allow the public access so that it's

[3:26:59] absolutely striking out there. When we did our tour, I I was just amazed how

[3:27:04] beautiful it is. And I'm so grateful for the conservation ement and how

[3:27:08] restrictive it is because we tend to want to build on everything that we

[3:27:11] have, all of our assets. It would be really great to not do that with this

[3:27:14] one and have it be just a place where you enjoy the beauty and it's not super

[3:27:20] um active. I do respect greatly the groups that are coming forward with the

[3:27:24] retriever training because that was the heart of the owner and I I I think

[3:27:30] honoring that what that was intended to be used for is incredibly important and

[3:27:34] we think we'd all want that if we donated our property to a public use is

[3:27:38] that we would have specific things we want to be honored and so I'd love to

[3:27:42] work with those groups to create spaces where perhaps they have private access

[3:27:46] to where we where you can observe the training taking in place, but it is

[3:27:51] separate from the public. So perhaps some fencing or whatever implements you

[3:27:54] could put in where it's still happening simultaneously, but and you can have a

[3:27:58] nature and can have public use, but they're able to use at their leisure,

[3:28:03] something like that where it's happening. And when you have the

[3:28:06] argument of, well, why can't we rent the park and all those people coming

[3:28:09] forward, I think you could directly point to the conservation movement, just

[3:28:12] like you said, that the owner's intention was to have it be used for

[3:28:16] that use as well as farming. And those were the two the two laid out uses from

[3:28:20] what I understand in tonight's meeting. Any other uses are probably above and

[3:28:24] beyond. And perhaps we can find one of our other amazing parks to locate those

[3:28:29] things because those are important to disc golf would be amazing. And having

[3:28:32] locals who are just thriving at that would be amazing. But if that doesn't

[3:28:35] fit in this park, I don't want to slow this project down to make everything fit

[3:28:41] when perhaps it shouldn't. Does that make any sense? Cool.

[3:28:47] Trusty. >> Um I I agree with everyone's points. I'm

[3:28:51] all for dog training specifically because it's M. Jakowsk's um legacy um

[3:28:59] disc golf seems like a good low impact um sport to be putting on the property

[3:29:05] especially since it's so uh restricted in the conservation easement. Um, I am

[3:29:10] concerned from the town's perspective, if you if you open it up for

[3:29:14] reservations, you have to open it up equally to all reservations. Um, as far

[3:29:19] as the multi-use, I'm not as concerned about having the dogs there with other

[3:29:24] multi-uses because those dogs are voice commands and they're not running around

[3:29:29] chasing squirrels. They're they're working. They're working dogs. They're

[3:29:33] not they're not a they're out there having fun because they're dogs and

[3:29:36] that's what they like to do, but they're not just kind of willy-nilly running

[3:29:39] around the property and getting into everybody's business. Um they don't

[3:29:42] chase frisbees. They don't, you know, run up to people and and say hello

[3:29:46] because they are there to work and that's what they want to be doing at the

[3:29:49] at that point. So, I'm not I'm not concerned about having it.

[3:29:54] A dog park, I think, is mis a misnomer for what would be happening there. Um,

[3:30:00] what to your point about kind of opening up

[3:30:05] as soon as possible, is there anything keeping it from being

[3:30:12] just an open space that the ponds are reserved for dog training right now

[3:30:18] without any infrastructure, without any changes?

[3:30:22] If people just want to go to and walk in the field because it's an open space, is

[3:30:26] there anything keeping them from doing that besides possible um problems with

[3:30:31] security? >> That's our biggest concern is the

[3:30:34] security piece. >> How's that different than like Bertha

[3:30:40] Reservoir and that property and those trails? Like how because we're not

[3:30:45] necessarily monitoring closely all of our trails and and parks. So, how would

[3:30:51] this one be unique? And I know the buildings are unique, but we can almost

[3:30:54] we can almost section those off as to not be accessible in some way until

[3:30:58] they're removed or is what is what I would assume, but I think that that's a

[3:31:04] fair point. What's keeping us from just allowing people out there to use it? And

[3:31:08] then could maybe there be some disclaimer for people entering the park

[3:31:11] to say there's retriever training happening, you know, just, you know,

[3:31:15] please be respectful of the the training that's taking place.

[3:31:20] those things happen. >> Again, I think um there are illicit

[3:31:26] activities that happen at the reservoir from time to time and the police have to

[3:31:29] show up and and deal with them. Uh and that's true of public open spaces. And

[3:31:33] so I think you know from a community design perspective

[3:31:37] uh and the idea of of community policing through environmental design,

[3:31:41] the intent is to create highly visible and highly active spaces, right?

[3:31:47] Spaces that don't get used very frequently are also higher targets for

[3:31:51] um vandalism and other illicit activities. And properties that where

[3:31:56] it's very hard to monitor the entire property or to easily see. One of the

[3:32:01] benefits of the reservoir is it's highly visible. Um it's visible from the

[3:32:05] neighborhood. It's visible from the freeway. You know, it's clear and open,

[3:32:09] right? So you can see this property has some some hiding spots. Um, not to say

[3:32:15] that that's that is not uncommon with public open

[3:32:20] spaces, right? That's the reality of public open spaces. So, my biggest

[3:32:24] concern is the buildings. It's not so much the open space itself. I think that

[3:32:29] if it is open to the public and it's um and it is not adequately monitored,

[3:32:35] we're going to have problems with those buildings.

[3:32:40] That's my biggest concern. I I I don't think that that will be a

[3:32:43] regular and frequent occurrence. I'm hopeful that it wouldn't be, but you

[3:32:46] know, we have we have buildings in the middle of town that are abandoned that

[3:32:50] are regular and frequent um vandalism targets even though they're in a highly

[3:32:55] visible location. And so they're also highly accessible and this

[3:33:00] is a little bit farther from town, so maybe you know kids or other folks who

[3:33:03] are up to no good may not want to walk out there or drive out there to go

[3:33:07] damage things. But um it's just the reality is we're concerned about the

[3:33:11] buildings. >> I was just going to say I would be in

[3:33:16] support of just taking the steps to remove the buildings because we can't

[3:33:20] quickly address that issue. It'd be a lot easier to just construct the

[3:33:24] buildings that we need. Um and I'd also be in favor of constructing soft surface

[3:33:30] trails similar to like Hillsdale, which isn't I don't think there's any lighting

[3:33:35] on that trail either. um you'd have lighting in the parking,

[3:33:40] but the trail would be lit, but that would at least provide access for

[3:33:43] responders or whomever to to monitor and get around safely.

[3:33:48] » There's an existing access road. Um so, you know, police officers can drive in

[3:33:53] and drive around the property. Uh at night time, it'll be really dark, but

[3:33:56] that's true of every open space.

[3:34:02] » We do have one more question. He brought up the comments about the dogs not

[3:34:08] chasing after frisbes. What about u just the general public that are taking their

[3:34:12] dogs out there that aren't so well trained?

[3:34:14] » That's a problem in every park we have. >> Yeah,

[3:34:17] » there's lots of folks who walk their dogs off leash in areas where that's not

[3:34:20] allowed. >> Um if you have a dog and you've walked

[3:34:23] it in town, you've probably experienced somebody else who is not a responsible

[3:34:26] owner and whose dog was not on a leash and was not despite what they said was

[3:34:29] not under voice control. >> Yeah. Because you got dogs out there.

[3:34:32] » We have those we have those problems on a frequent basis. got the working dogs

[3:34:35] out there on leashes, you know, because they're highly trained. But then

[3:34:39] someone's like, "Oh, their dog's not on a leash." But anyway, that's just one

[3:34:44] thing that popped in here,

[3:34:47] » right? And I I'll just bring up I know Colorado openance has expressed um

[3:34:51] maintaining the way the property looks. So, in my head, I believe you'd have to

[3:34:56] separate dog training and disc golf and say dog training's open 3 days a week

[3:35:01] and that's all that's allowed on property and disc golf is open the other

[3:35:04] four days a week. And that way the properties have time to rehab. Um, they

[3:35:09] have concerns about the wetlands being destroyed by the dogs and um so they've

[3:35:14] already said that dog use should be limited on the property. Um, so it's

[3:35:20] I think I think there'd have had to be a balance like that that had to go

[3:35:22] through. I think it I do think it'd be tough to mix both at the same time.

[3:35:26] » And and I do think there was concern from Colorado openlands even about this

[3:35:29] golf uh folks walking kind of through the native grass or the existing grass.

[3:35:34] I don't know if it's native but whatever's been farmed out there. Um you

[3:35:38] know kind of you make your own path when you're playing disc golf, right? You

[3:35:42] know you're not staying on a improved trail. Uh, and there was even concerns

[3:35:46] about, you know, ongoing regular use of folks walking through those those areas

[3:35:51] and impacting the conservation value of the property. I think that's I think I'm

[3:35:55] accurately describing that. Yeah. So, I mean, just, you know,

[3:35:59] it's it's a unique property and it has some incredible assets and is a great

[3:36:02] destination for I'm sure for retriever training. Um,

[3:36:06] » and I think it'd be a great spot for disc golf.

[3:36:08] » I'm just glad we finally got a a yes that we could do something.

[3:36:13] » Yeah. Yeah, and I mean I think that's what we've been working towards is

[3:36:15] getting some concurrence from Colorado Openlands and um you know if if the

[3:36:20] board wants us to to work with the Retriever Training Club and um provide

[3:36:24] them some access through some lease or other permitted activity, you know, we

[3:36:28] can figure that out, too. So, I think that's kind of up to you guys.

[3:36:33] » This is a I'm sorry. Um, this this is a really difficult property and I'm

[3:36:41] kind of concerned that we have yeses, we have yeses, we have

[3:36:47] nos, we have nos, we have yeses, we have nos, and we're in this feedback loop

[3:36:53] where nothing is happening because everything that could happen could be a

[3:36:57] no. even though it's a yes now, but if it's a if it's a no now, it it's it's

[3:37:02] not going to be a yes. And we won't know unless the property is being used. And

[3:37:07] if the property can't be used, maybe the best policy is to just sell it or use it

[3:37:13] for something that is not open to the public. Um I just I I don't want to keep

[3:37:19] going back over and over and over again with this property. And thank you guys

[3:37:24] for communicating with with Oaklands and everything for the past what you say

[3:37:27] since 2013. >> I mean

[3:37:32] » that that's a long time, right? So if it's if it's not being used,

[3:37:38] it needs to be and if through using it we violate or are in danger of violating

[3:37:44] the conservation easement. Well, that answers that that answers the question

[3:37:48] right there. But if we don't use it, we're never going to know whether or not

[3:37:51] those uses are acceptable.

[3:37:58] » Okay.

[3:38:01] » Uh did we you already spoke, right? Couple times.

[3:38:06] » How do you feel? >> I was I was go

[3:38:09] » um just another thing. What supplemental

[3:38:13] clearance do we need from open lands or are we more or less good to go? Do you

[3:38:18] need the direction to take this concept further in the uses or flush those out

[3:38:24] more? >> I think uh we do need to flush out the

[3:38:27] uses of the buildings and stuff a little more. Uh I know we'll have to check, but

[3:38:31] I believe they're going to want to see a a a management plan of the property

[3:38:35] » uh for any areas we allow open for public use. And how are we going to

[3:38:39] manage that? So that would have to be put together first also probably before

[3:38:43] public can use the property. >> Um I guess from my perspective I'm

[3:38:48] supportive of both uses. Obviously we have security concerns and it revolves

[3:38:53] around the building. So I would argue the next step for us would be what are

[3:38:58] our options for the building and what are we replacing most of that. Um I

[3:39:02] think that makes the most sense to proceed in that direction. I hesitate

[3:39:06] opening a pilot program that staff is not on board just yet. Um, but I think

[3:39:12] it's worthwhile to take this to the end of the road and get to a final decision

[3:39:19] on, you know, cost and use um, and what this property is going to look like for

[3:39:27] us. >> Yeah, I'm thank you for speaking too. uh

[3:39:33] all old disc golf too and u together this is super tough. I mean going

[3:39:38] through two rounds of potentially trying to sell this property, salvaging it,

[3:39:42] bringing it back. We're here. So this is a huge uh accomplishment just to even

[3:39:45] have some kind of design in front of us. And I love it. I love the idea of disc

[3:39:49] golf. I love the idea of folks coming here and have some kind of passive

[3:39:52] recreation on this area of town. Um doesn't have anything else really other

[3:39:57] than the golf course. Um, and I really like the idea of trying to

[3:40:02] integrate in uh retriever retriever program. Um,

[3:40:06] and it might not be and it's why we have some locals here, but you know, just if

[3:40:10] it's not just locals, that's okay, too. You know, we have other things that can

[3:40:13] bring people into town and maybe others will grow to use it. Um, I would love to

[3:40:18] try and keep the retriever keep this idea alive here. I do agree with uh

[3:40:23] trustees on it's good point that um well I think several you brought up but

[3:40:30] just looking at these structures first because those always seem to get in the

[3:40:33] way is the parking and the structures and I would love to also keep that arena

[3:40:37] too. So it's deciding which ones are totally useless for a municipality and

[3:40:41] ones that we could um use for other types of recreation from there. I I

[3:40:46] agree with staff. It makes sense to not add the kennel club in until we have

[3:40:51] public access and other programs. Um but I could go the other way too and have

[3:40:57] kennel could do a permit with them. But um bottom line is I don't see a no. I

[3:41:03] think it's just a time frame of trying to wiggle in when we could do the kennel

[3:41:07] club if we wanted to do that the retriever program. So I'm not looking at

[3:41:10] tonight as a no. Just it might not be uh next on the

[3:41:16] next thing we look at to me I think yeah the next thing to get

[3:41:21] back to Sean's point would just be to look at the structures those seems to be

[3:41:24] the security concern um of tampering with and also blocking the view for

[3:41:28] emergency services um once that's figured out then it's

[3:41:32] just an implementation question of um what program we putting in first and I

[3:41:38] agree with May if if there's multiple people saying well they get to use it we

[3:41:41] do too well you can always point back to the easement that says particular

[3:41:45] particularly this is for um retriever training and this is an ideal property

[3:41:51] for that. So I'm for all this. I I think I guess if we needed specific next steps

[3:41:56] it would be to look at the structures. >> Okay.

[3:41:59] » Does that help? >> I have a couple

[3:42:02] » if I could just add one more thing. I took a look at the parking schematics

[3:42:06] and there is one point I wanted to bring up. I I think a hammerhead style

[3:42:10] turnaround is probably negative. Um, having people back up and turn around

[3:42:16] seems like trouble. Um, having some sort of circular turnaround like scheme three

[3:42:21] I think would be more desirable. That's all I've got.

[3:42:25] » Um, I was just going to come back to Trusty A's point about it would be I

[3:42:30] think it would be beneficial to ask first responders if they could utilize

[3:42:34] those buildings um before we tear them down. Perhaps it could be a type of hub.

[3:42:39] I know that the fire district was going to put in a a station hub um on 287 and

[3:42:45] now that is not going to move forward because that they're not building out

[3:42:49] there and so perhaps a hub would be beneficial of some kind. Maybe just

[3:42:53] asking the question before we move forward and then I would be in favor of

[3:42:57] moving forward with putting whatever buildings that are beneficial to public

[3:43:01] use. If that means tearing them down and putting in bathroom structures or an

[3:43:06] office building for recreation, I'm in favor of that. I think we have to put um

[3:43:10] what's beneficial to the entire community at the forefront. I do think

[3:43:14] it is I think that because like the easement says that the the dog training

[3:43:20] should continue. I I still would be open to sectioning that off so they'd have a

[3:43:24] private entrance almost or private sections of the the property if it

[3:43:27] benefited them, benefited the town. And I I would challenge us to say that this

[3:43:32] may not be the right property for disco golf because it's not in the easement

[3:43:35] and it is going to cause the other groups to come in and say, well, why

[3:43:39] can't we do our type of recreation? I would just say let's find a different

[3:43:44] property for dis golf because it is important, but perhaps this isn't it.

[3:43:48] And having that one more thing in here might convolute it for our open lands

[3:43:53] request. and you know when it's not specifically outlined and we can't

[3:43:58] really have a trajectory of how much impact it's going to have on the land I

[3:44:02] would I would recommend that we remove that as from this part of the design and

[3:44:07] um have some onus in looking for additional properties for those guys.

[3:44:13] » Interesting. Okay. Anyone else that wants to look into removing disc golf

[3:44:19] thoughts on that? I would I guess I would ask the question before we

[3:44:23] preemptively remove that. I guess what does that use look like? I mean

[3:44:30] obviously it could be I don't see it as an intense use of the property. Um I see

[3:44:36] it as compatible with retriever training which is the thrust of the property

[3:44:39] along with the agricultural. Um I would hesitate to take that option off

[3:44:45] the table just yet. I guess >> and I think

[3:44:49] Keith, correct me if I'm wrong, but for clarity, the disc golf we have run past

[3:44:54] Colorado openlands. They expressed some concerns about how it be managed. We

[3:44:58] would definitely have to deal with that in our management plan. U but they've

[3:45:01] they've kind of given us the tentative green light for disc golf.

[3:45:05] » Well, I think it's different if it's just there's disc golf amenities out for

[3:45:10] the public to use versus a club of disc golfers using it regularly. Those are

[3:45:15] those are two different things to me. I think our our clear expectation is that

[3:45:18] is a public open disc golf course. There's no there's no club use. I mean

[3:45:22] other than what might be done >> similarly to dog training through some

[3:45:26] reservation system for an event from time to time just like we do all of our

[3:45:29] parks, but it would absolutely be an open public amenity.

[3:45:32] » I see. >> Yeah.

[3:45:33] » Okay.

[3:45:36] » Okay. Sounds like we're largely supportive. Do you have any particular

[3:45:40] questions, staff, or uh clarity you need out of us? No, I I think I'll maybe

[3:45:45] bring this back to the port committee and we'll finish up this conceptual

[3:45:48] design and and try to hammer out the the buildings and the parking. Maybe there's

[3:45:53] a a phased approach where one amenities phase be in the other amenities phase

[3:45:58] and what would that look like if one started before the other. Maybe we can

[3:46:01] look into that and and bring that back. >> Excellent.

[3:46:06] » Yeah, this is great feedback. Uh I think that's really what we were hoping for.

[3:46:10] kind of take the board committee's recommendations, the concept plan, get

[3:46:12] your feedback and understanding and take it and refine it from here. This is

[3:46:17] good. Thank you. >> Okay. Yeah. Thank you.

[3:46:19] » Okay. Thank you. And thank you. And we have all your stuff. Let me get ribbons.

[3:46:24] » Someone has

[3:46:38] those buildings. There you go.

[3:46:46] » Thank you. >> Thank you.

[3:46:48] » Be great to have the fire department out there. They'd be there 24 hours.

[3:46:51] » Yeah. Really? Sure. Built in security. >> Okay. Our final agenda item tonight,

[3:46:57] regular agenda item tonight, is the uh parks update. And this is parks master

[3:47:01] plan update, excuse me. And uh I'll turn this over. Yeah, we have our deputy town

[3:47:05] administrator, Jeremy Olinger. >> Yeah. Good evening, Mr. Mayor. Thank

[3:47:09] you. And trustees. Um I before I start I just want to say

[3:47:15] yeah I am very aware it's late. Um I didn't know I didn't hear though. Do we

[3:47:20] extend the meeting? Do we need we already do that?

[3:47:22] » We already did that. >> I was in the restroom too. So I just

[3:47:24] want to make sure that >> um also I appreciate the people that you

[3:47:27] know stuck it out this late for this for this item. So I appreciate that. Um just

[3:47:31] want to give you a parks master plan update.

[3:47:34] um kind of kind of a big picture general kind of the projects we've been working

[3:47:38] on. Some of them you know you're very um um well verssed on or fond of fond of or

[3:47:44] or recently just got completed. So I'm not going to I'm going to try to get a

[3:47:47] condensed version. I had an hourong presentation tonight but seeing how you

[3:47:51] know it's later I'm going to try to get you fit it in about 10 minutes. So,

[3:47:58] um, want to start with the the 2018 MR master plan. Um, was born out of the two

[3:48:03] 2016 um, port. Um, through uh, a lot of

[3:48:08] previous boards or a couple previous boards, previous committee work, uh,

[3:48:12] consultant work, um, citizen initiative groups, um, different

[3:48:18] groups we had to put this together. And, and so we didn't have a plan before

[3:48:23] this. We had lots of properties, lots of different ideas, lots of things. The

[3:48:26] reason why I state this early and why it's important when when we developed

[3:48:30] this parks master plan, it gave staff, you know, some direction. It gave staff

[3:48:34] some a path and and so, as you'll see as I work through this, staff has been

[3:48:39] following that. It's great for staff to follow uh bring you bring you um

[3:48:43] projects um let you decide, you know, what you want or don't want, get the

[3:48:47] community involved, um get get our communities involved. Um so in 2018

[3:48:52] we um we kicked this off with we identified four properties um working

[3:48:57] left to right would be Kalval um park on the other side of 287 Richardson Park

[3:49:03] just north of Lovelin Reservoir. Wagner Park as you all know is home to our rec

[3:49:07] center and our and our Fourth of July. And then of course Town Park. Um when we

[3:49:12] started the top three except for Town Park were were just dirt. um town park

[3:49:17] was was was thrown in as a as an anchor park to to the center of town at the

[3:49:22] time and and desperately needed renovation.

[3:49:27] Um so when we started in 2018, just wanted to bring up kind of the top the

[3:49:32] the priorities that we were we were looking at um back then in 5 to 10 years

[3:49:37] is you know people wanted trails and trail connections. uh rec center was

[3:49:41] important uh priority with aquatics, gym, fitness and wellness. Um and and

[3:49:45] that program space they they really wanted they preferred it at Wagner Farm.

[3:49:50] Also the things that we talked about and and were preferred were athletic fields

[3:49:54] and then more more space for special events.

[3:49:57] Um so we identified some priorities. The priority was the rec center, Wagner Farm

[3:50:02] and and and Town Park uh renovation. Um the other two were not as shovel ready

[3:50:08] as as as the Wagner Farm Park and the rec center and and definitely not as

[3:50:12] priority. People wanted rec center. Um so we went through that process. What it

[3:50:16] does is just show you on the left that the what the concept um from the master

[3:50:21] plan was. Um the area in red is is where the rec center's at. Just just over 25

[3:50:27] acres uh developed on that northern side. um completed um just at 30 million

[3:50:34] um in and opened in 2021 and and and going strong. Um people very

[3:50:40] complimentary, very appreciative of that project. Um

[3:50:44] after that was done or during that um we went on and and we were working on plans

[3:50:49] as well for the next project is town park. We put this in two phases. Uh we

[3:50:55] identified the two phases early uh mainly because in the in the second

[3:50:59] phase on the eastern side of the park there's ball fields there that you may

[3:51:03] or may not be aware of um that we still need today. Um we didn't have any to to

[3:51:08] displace ballfield teams and softball teams and people that use that community

[3:51:12] that uses those fields um on the eastern side. We needed to wait until we built

[3:51:18] some more. So we we phased this as a kind of a at the time a lowhanging fruit

[3:51:23] at the at the time to do phase one and get get some more park amenities for for

[3:51:27] the community. So we did the left side of the hash um red line the west side um

[3:51:33] and you'll see some pictures and render uh pictures from that opening. We opened

[3:51:38] that last year as you guys are aware of um under this board 2024

[3:51:43] in September um it's open to the public um we'll come back to phase two or in at

[3:51:52] the end of the chart but phase two as you see uh is it does have design excuse

[3:51:58] me construction documents uh at 100% that's that's ready to go that's ready

[3:52:03] to be bid out um next week if if if um meaning that it's ready to go, not

[3:52:11] meaning that it's ready to to be built. Obviously, I talked about the the

[3:52:14] baseball fields, but you'll see that, you know, the plan there is um the open

[3:52:19] fields. There is a a band show or an auditorium um amphitheater type um in in

[3:52:25] the south southern part and then more veterans memorial um designed in there

[3:52:29] as well as some more open field open areas for the community and a kind of a

[3:52:34] bathroom type uh picnic area um as part of that.

[3:52:43] We moved on part of the the third third area is Richardson. We uh MVP Park uh

[3:52:48] Mountain Vista is what what that stands for. So we moved to that. We did that.

[3:52:53] We did these plans kind of in parallel. Once the rec center got done, we picked

[3:52:57] up Richardson um and Town Park. Did them in parallel. Um these are construction

[3:53:03] documents as well. Ready. This area is just north of Lovelin Reservoir. Um

[3:53:08] you'll see some renderings there or some concepts uh kind pictures on the side of

[3:53:12] what that what that is in it could could be intended to look like. Um and then

[3:53:18] Richardson um kind of the the the outlay plan. This could be phased. Uh this

[3:53:23] could be done at once just depending on on the plan moving forward. But this

[3:53:28] this is 100% um CDs are done and the aquatics are at 50%. for this project.

[3:53:36] Um while we were doing these things, you know, like we talked about and you heard

[3:53:39] earlier tonight with some projects that come in and projects that are

[3:53:42] approached, um people got really excited with the rec center getting done. Um

[3:53:47] wanted more the appetite. They were hungry. They were thirsty. They So this

[3:53:51] was a project that um is part of Richardson property, part of MVP MVP

[3:53:57] park design. Still part of the master plan. Um, but they wanted again the

[3:54:01] tournament a couple years ago that kept getting thrown out as lowhanging fruit.

[3:54:05] Is there something we can do for a couple million bucks to give a the

[3:54:08] public amenity and this was one of them chosen? Um, so that's why it got kind of

[3:54:12] accelerated as you also heard tonight. Why why things get celebrated, why

[3:54:16] things get chosen, why things get shelved. The the southern portion um as

[3:54:21] you go around the lake of the bike park um u was chosen to um be that lowhanging

[3:54:27] fruit. So, we got this project done opened um I think it's been open for 2

[3:54:31] years now uh just at 2.2 million um to do this just a little over 20 acres and

[3:54:38] there's some finished pictures of the the product. All these so far been out

[3:54:43] of that master plan uh staff just working through it. Um

[3:54:48] this is the last um last uh property to to that uh master

[3:54:55] plan. This is Canal Park. It's on the other side of 287. Um on the other side

[3:55:00] of Riches Park. Um this is the southern piece of of

[3:55:06] the shared with the developer. This has been master plan that's still in

[3:55:09] concept. That's still at the 2018 concept. Um there hasn't been any plans

[3:55:15] or any discussions of anything started on that. Um so that's still in the 2018

[3:55:20] master plan concept um stage. So we started completing things, started

[3:55:27] getting excited. Um started looking around. We going we still in the master

[3:55:31] plan. Um the arburum came about. Um we real successful with the bike park, real

[3:55:38] successful with the the rec center, real successful with the town park. Um once

[3:55:43] we moved, we felt that uh developing the southern portion of the Wagner Farm Park

[3:55:49] and completing that um and completing the master plan for for this property.

[3:55:55] That's how this came up. This this as you guys are aware um the southern part

[3:56:00] where the the red kind of the red I don't know Tetris pieces at is is the

[3:56:04] where the arburum currently we're at 90% construction drawings. We we intend to

[3:56:10] finish up um in November and bring that to you at 100% ready to you know

[3:56:16] continue if we'd like uh into construction or out to bid as they as we

[3:56:20] say. Um and and and that's going along real well. So that that'll be something

[3:56:26] we'll talk about or discuss. That's come to shortly.

[3:56:32] Then also we had some along the ways we we as staff goes through the master plan

[3:56:36] and they kind of steer that bus and continue um their their focus is on that

[3:56:41] along the way even in tonight we you get added park projects for whatever reason

[3:56:46] organizations you know citizen initiative groups people that just care

[3:56:50] a couple people multiple people um to come to you and say hey I want to do

[3:56:55] this and you heard that earlier tonight. So in the last 3 years, you know, we

[3:56:59] followed that master plan, but here's one to show also to update that kind of

[3:57:03] the challenges, right, with dollars is is is what happens and and we make those

[3:57:08] decisions and and they're, you know, good good, bad, or indifferent. But so I

[3:57:12] just want to show you some added park projects. So a low hanging fruit, which

[3:57:16] is great. uh you know the lowest probably the of the fruit um almost on

[3:57:21] the ground as far as you know when you talk about money um compared to the

[3:57:24] other projects was the Pioneer Park project. Really great project updated

[3:57:28] that community garden over there. Um you guys approved that just under you know

[3:57:33] we just I think we spent just under 100,000 with our time and our staff uh

[3:57:37] involved in that. On the right is a concept plan for Robert's Park, Roberts

[3:57:44] Lake Park. It's on the east side. It's an infield project. Um it's just at a

[3:57:49] design level right now, design concept. Um finished um probably three years ago

[3:57:54] and shelved. Um no interest yet to to revive that,

[3:57:58] but I just want to show you that that concept is done for for Robert's Lake on

[3:58:02] the north side. Um so you're aware that we finished that. another uh project

[3:58:09] that that spawned from, you know, closed in the town park and the and the kind of

[3:58:13] the used tennis courts uh transitioned into pickle ball at Town Park. You know,

[3:58:18] this is one of those examples of a group coming in and saying, "Hey, you know,

[3:58:22] sports popular. We'd like a place to go. Where can we go?" Um we had a spot at

[3:58:27] Wagner that, you know, we chose and selected and and we were able to with

[3:58:31] your guys' support and the community support and your help uh to decide the

[3:58:35] eight eight new courts over there. and that's that's going well and that's a

[3:58:38] that's a great project. Um and and there's eight courts over there

[3:58:42] with shelters and and just on the south side of the basketball courts over

[3:58:45] there. Um the next one uh just recently the outdoor pool uh at the rec center.

[3:58:53] Um again just

[3:58:58] importance of an outdoor pool. the the the the old pool or the the pool that

[3:59:02] the town park, the outdoor pool became old, I should say.

[3:59:06] Um so that was decommissioned to do the renovation at the town park. Uh we knew

[3:59:11] about that. We didn't want to duplicate amenities. We had aquatics indoor at the

[3:59:17] um rec center that we just completed. We developed a splash pad over at the town

[3:59:21] park as part of that design and that input um at the time from from our comm

[3:59:25] committees and boards and things like that. Um so what came about um through

[3:59:30] port um in the community is is is um those voices um to start and look at

[3:59:36] uh building an outdoor pool with the rec center. So this as you can see is is

[3:59:42] some designs and and you guys worked this board has worked through those

[3:59:45] currently that will come in a proposal and you'll see in the last one of the

[3:59:49] last slides here um we'll bring you a proposal um in September after this

[3:59:54] meeting and you'll have an opportunity to you know decide if you want to move

[3:59:58] forward with that that proposal just just to begin design to give you an idea

[4:00:02] was just at 650,000. So that'll get us through design, get us

[4:00:06] construction plans. That's the next step. Uh as far as our process and you

[4:00:10] saw some of that Keith explained some of that through the um

[4:00:15] just house no um no no plan um as as part of that process. So we just want to

[4:00:21] make sure we we commit to that in the next in uh next meeting possibly. So

[4:00:27] these are a couple other ones and uh that you heard tonight. Chiskowski, you

[4:00:32] just heard um new farm you heard earlier as well. And then I put this other one

[4:00:37] on here just this recently. You don't know much about it probably unless you

[4:00:40] got some emails. Hasn't been in a meeting yet. I put this up here because

[4:00:45] one it it identifies another sport that you know like a disc golf and and uh

[4:00:51] pickle ball and things like that. So you're used to those you know and and

[4:00:54] and working through those. Also it it uh suggests potentially some properties.

[4:00:59] One of them's conval which is in our master plan. So you hear about that. And

[4:01:03] then lately um I think last week I think it was last Wednesday um they the

[4:01:08] presentation was made at the the port level and I believe it's wellreceived

[4:01:12] enough that they suggested that they come to you all. So this will be coming

[4:01:16] to you just so you're aware. You don't we don't need to pick paint colors and

[4:01:20] things tonight and roof shingles. But it just let I'm just saying hey I'm going

[4:01:24] to throw it on here so you guys are aware of the full picture at this point

[4:01:27] and it'll be coming to you September. um you guys can or maybe October depending

[4:01:31] on how the meetings lay out, but it'll be coming to the soon and you guys can

[4:01:34] work through that. >> One, just one quick question. The upper

[4:01:38] right hand square, I can't tell where that is.

[4:01:40] » Upper right hand, >> that's a property we don't currently

[4:01:43] own, >> uh but that the project proponent

[4:01:46] » uh said might be a great spot. >> So,

[4:01:49] » we're not disclosing where it is right now.

[4:01:51] » Yeah. No, it's fine. It's the property south of uh Heritage Ridge. It's called

[4:01:55] the Wilson Farm. Uh we do have a portion of that farm under contract, but not the

[4:01:59] entire thing. Okay. So, um >> didn't we just buy that?

[4:02:02] » Uh we haven't closed. There's still, you know, some due diligence work. There's

[4:02:05] annexation work that has to be done. There's a lot of things that have to

[4:02:08] happened before we can close on the portion that we intend to buy. Um but we

[4:02:12] are under contract. >> Thank you.

[4:02:14] » The the board approved that. >> Uh trusty, I think, has a question.

[4:02:19] » Yeah. Just because it came out tonight. Um so that you guys are aware part of

[4:02:22] the presentation on the the conval golf um aspect was that that sort of

[4:02:30] strip below the the outlined golf holes was um 30,000 foot view of a possible

[4:02:38] disc golf course as well and I only bring that up because it it came up

[4:02:42] earlier. >> Yeah. The the project proponent met with

[4:02:45] me about this park and and I don't want to get bogged down in this one because

[4:02:48] this was a idea brought to us by a resident who's also a golf pro. Um, and

[4:02:53] I think it's a great it's a great idea I think for the canal park or for anything

[4:02:58] else. But the idea of a golf park, community facility, trails, other

[4:03:03] non-golf amenities, but also really, you know, learning focused facility, it's a

[4:03:07] it's a neat idea and the port committee did recommend uh that they present that

[4:03:12] to you. So, we are going to bring that to you in the next couple months.

[4:03:14] » Cool.

[4:03:17] So then last slide is just putting it all together. Um from the top down

[4:03:22] you'll see that the progression the the top is there's the master plans. Uh as

[4:03:27] you'll see staff has been following the master plan. The green is what's

[4:03:30] completed. Um and I what I just ran through and and

[4:03:34] and what you'll see is the projects um the current status and then the total

[4:03:38] project cost whether it's been completed or it's been estimated. As we move

[4:03:42] through the top where it's, you know, the master plan, you'll see the yellow.

[4:03:45] The next three, those are ones that we are uh finishing up on construction

[4:03:51] documents and and we spent the time and and you guys invested the money in those

[4:03:56] um to get those ready for, you know, whenever it is you decide um through

[4:04:00] this process. But I just want to say that as we work through we're you can

[4:04:04] see we're either completed or we're uh and open to the public or we have three

[4:04:10] ready to go as we you know finish out that master plan. Um so then you you

[4:04:16] drop down to the next ones and with the added park projects that come in kind of

[4:04:20] through you know the meetings and different deals for whatever reason and

[4:04:23] and we completed some of those. That's that Pioneer Park uh community uh garden

[4:04:29] um the pickle ball courts. Um, I put Farmstead play program. That's not our

[4:04:32] our playground. Excuse me. Talking a little fast. Sorry. Um, I put that in

[4:04:37] there in Talics. It's not our project, but you did invest in it and I wanted to

[4:04:41] show that um, show you that you you know the the the dollars that went out and

[4:04:45] and great investment there. But I just wanted to show that as well as that is a

[4:04:48] part um part of our your park uh update for tonight. Just just to be aware of

[4:04:53] that the big picture. Um the orange the outdoor pool rec center like I like I

[4:04:59] suggested a proposal for design and construction uh document services

[4:05:04] uh will be presented uh you know in the next meeting or so through consent. Um

[4:05:10] you guys have approved us to to get you that proposal. If we move forward

[4:05:15] that'll be your opportunity at that time. But that that proposal is coming

[4:05:18] at 6:50 and then you heard from New Park Farm tonight. I assumed we were going to

[4:05:23] move forward with the design. Um so that went orange there. So those are in

[4:05:27] design. Um different stages of of moving. Um the next three just as as as

[4:05:37] Keith showed you before, the design concept has been completed. He's you

[4:05:40] know we're going to move to next steps um and working with the open lands and

[4:05:44] and tweaking some things from that. Uh Roberts Lake Park is still shelved uh

[4:05:49] for now until further notice. And then Bertha Golf Park, like I suggested, is

[4:05:54] on here and it's presented to you sometime this in the next couple months.

[4:05:57] Then what I did at the at the bottom and under the blue was just took everything

[4:06:01] that's been completed out so you can kind of for clarity just kind of see

[4:06:05] what you're working with that we have um in the bottom if you if you don't want

[4:06:09] to move back and forth along the grid and things like that. I just kind of I

[4:06:13] don't know cleared it up in no particular order. I just kind of threw

[4:06:16] this stuff from the top to the bottom so they're not prioritized in any other

[4:06:20] way. Um, that's my uh presentation for this now

[4:06:26] and Chris Farley, he's gonna hopefully tag team on this with me and and let you

[4:06:31] know what what we kind of the direction and the expectation I guess.

[4:06:35] » Yeah. Um, you know, part of part of our intention when we originally scheduled

[4:06:39] this was just to get all these projects in front of you. We have a lot of

[4:06:42] competing priorities and you've heard that tonight. Juscowski, disc golf, dog

[4:06:46] training, uh, new farm, amphitheater, um, you know, outdoor pools. We have a

[4:06:52] lot of competing priorities and we have a limited amount of funding, right?

[4:06:55] We're fortunate. The town is is healthy financially and I've said this before.

[4:06:59] You probably, you hopefully recall me saying this lots of times. We're not

[4:07:02] broke. We just have to decide where to spend our money.

[4:07:04] » Um, we cannot build all of these things at once. And so, um, I think as as these

[4:07:11] projects come before us, some driven by the original 2018 master plan, that's

[4:07:16] where we've focused most of our time and attention as staff, others driven by,

[4:07:20] you know, motivated user groups and other other folks who who are excited to

[4:07:24] see new amenities built. Um, we need direction from you about where you want

[4:07:29] us to focus. Um, you know, when we look at the the list at the bottom of the

[4:07:35] page, um, that could be, uh, for clarity, um, Jeremy has the number 30 to

[4:07:41] 40 million for Richardson. That we don't believe that's the total cost of the

[4:07:45] project. We believe that's a portion of the project. Um, the original cost

[4:07:49] estimate we had done by a third party construction firm for that entire park

[4:07:54] uh, was was upwards of $70 million. And so, we can't afford a $70 million park.

[4:07:59] I can I can be confident of that today. Um we had proposed doing that in a

[4:08:04] phased fashion starting with ball fields at the north and then kind of working

[4:08:08] south to the aquatics uh center you know maybe in 10 years depending on kind of

[4:08:12] how funding lays out. That's actually kind of what the outdoor pool

[4:08:16] conversation I think was like hey we need an outdoor pool. This is a neat

[4:08:21] pool at Richardson but if we can't get this done you know for 10 years that's

[4:08:24] that's not going to work. We got to get something done sooner. So that's why we

[4:08:27] pivoted to this um Wagner Farm Park concept. You know, there are there are

[4:08:34] creative funding strategies. Uh there's financing. There's all kinds of things

[4:08:37] that could occur, but a lot of that is driven by what are the priorities that

[4:08:41] the town board sees. Uh we can certainly give you what we think are the best

[4:08:44] priorities as staff. Um the poor committee has weighed in on multiple

[4:08:48] occasions on a lot of of these issues. And so, um, you know,

[4:08:54] we're hoping, and it doesn't have to happen tonight, right? There's no

[4:08:58] there's no rush. You're not going to decide to spend $70 million tonight,

[4:09:01] right? Um, but we want to start this conversation because I think what's

[4:09:05] happening is we had this really defined parks master plan and we started working

[4:09:10] that and it's great. Um, the rec center is a result of that. Town park is a

[4:09:15] result of that. The bike park is a result of that.

[4:09:17] Um, we started Richardson with the intent that that was the next phase of

[4:09:21] the parks master plan. And you know, we've had a lot of these uh issues and

[4:09:25] ideas come up as over the last five years. We have a lot of awesome ideas,

[4:09:30] but we've got to zero in on what do we want to do as a community first so that

[4:09:34] we can we can get through this list, right? We can't focus on everything. If

[4:09:40] you focus on everything, you focus on nothing, right? And that's a cliche. Um,

[4:09:44] so we got to say, what are we getting done first? what what's the biggest bang

[4:09:47] for the buck? What's the highest need? Um and where do we want to focus our

[4:09:51] money first? We may be able to be we may be financially capable of doing two or

[4:09:56] three things at once. Um and again, I think from my perspective,

[4:10:02] we want to start that conversation with you. We want to start you thinking

[4:10:05] about, you know, maybe if money wasn't an object, what's the number one

[4:10:09] priority? Where do we focus there? Right? Um and and then we figure out how

[4:10:15] to get to that place. I think that's a great place to start. Um

[4:10:20] if we if we work the other direction and say, "Well, hey, we have x amount of

[4:10:24] money and and let's do what we can afford, I think we pigeon hole ourselves

[4:10:28] into um maybe doing I think we'll get some great projects. We have some

[4:10:34] awesome projects on the list and I I hope that you and the community also

[4:10:39] believes that we can deliver great parks projects like we have with the rec

[4:10:42] center, town park and others. Um but my suggestion would be let's not pigeon

[4:10:48] hole ourselves by restricting us by funding. Let's say what is the highest

[4:10:52] need? What do we want to get done first? And let's prioritize that and let's

[4:10:56] figure out how to do it and then let's work down the list from there.

[4:11:00] Again, you extend the meeting till 10:30. So, I will uh point out it's

[4:11:04] about 10:27 right now. Um I'm sure everybody's getting tired. This isn't

[4:11:08] the best decision-making time of the day. Um but I think it's important that

[4:11:12] we hear public feedback if that's okay with the board. Um and maybe you guys

[4:11:17] start think about that. >> So, I guess we put out our our our

[4:11:22] um priorities here already. We've had multiple iterations with outdoor pool

[4:11:26] with the arburitum. So, this is back in front of us and you're asking for

[4:11:30] priorities again, but we just you're you're adding Richardson in here.

[4:11:34] » No, I Richardson's been in from the beginning, right? That was in the 2018

[4:11:38] parks master plan, >> right?

[4:11:40] » Um I'm I'm concerned about New Farm Park. I'm concerned about um Richardson.

[4:11:45] I'm concerned about Conneal. I'm concerned about all of those. I think

[4:11:49] practically speaking, you know, from a town staff perspective,

[4:11:53] we don't have a dog in the fight, right? I mean that our I live here. I have my

[4:11:58] own personal views about what I'd love to see. Um from a staff perspective, I

[4:12:02] think we have an idea of of what the priority needs are.

[4:12:06] » Um you know, what do we need for our current programming? What do we need for

[4:12:10] future programming? I think we also have an idea of what the community wants are

[4:12:13] based on the surveys that we've done and the feedback that we've received in

[4:12:16] these public meetings. We have to try and balance all of that. And

[4:12:19] » yeah, and I'm sorry, I I phrase that wrong. Richardson is important. You guys

[4:12:23] are doing a great job. >> It is. I I I'm I'm concerned is the

[4:12:26] wrong word. I'm a little curious though because we've gone through pool seems to

[4:12:31] be the next and then the outer >> and and I will say I think part of my

[4:12:34] concern as the town administrator um part of what's driving this is that we

[4:12:39] have some very big ticket items in front of us and I want to confirm that we're

[4:12:43] spending the money on the things that you want and so we have talked about

[4:12:46] those things but we haven't talked about them in the context of all of the things

[4:12:49] in front of us. That's why I wanted to bring this to you because the arburedom

[4:12:53] could be $10 million. The outdoor pool could be 10 million plus. Um new farm,

[4:12:58] who knows? I mean, if we're talking about amphitheaters and music venues,

[4:13:02] that could be 10 million plus. Um these aren't like the one and two million

[4:13:06] dollar um lowhanging fruit projects. And I

[4:13:11] think what we're staring at are big ticket items. And there's several of

[4:13:15] them. We just want to make sure that as we move forward in the next two or three

[4:13:18] years and we start to spend tens of millions of dollars on parks if that's

[4:13:21] the board's desire that we're doing that all and I'm starting to have some

[4:13:25] concerns that I'm not sure I know what your priorities are and I don't mean

[4:13:28] that in a negative way. It's just we've talked about a lot of things and I think

[4:13:31] we're all excited about all these projects.

[4:13:33] » Yeah. Yeah. >> And I just want to make sure we're doing

[4:13:34] the right thing >> because this came before us with a

[4:13:37] really good job. You guys did a good presentation on Richardson with kind of

[4:13:40] the funding that could be done at the time. This is why we all kind of got a

[4:13:44] little cold feet. Yeah. >> And then that's when we decided to kind

[4:13:47] of backtrack and just focus on put the pause and stuff, focus on the arburetum

[4:13:52] and an outdoor pool or some kind of pool, right? And then that's when we

[4:13:57] decided to do a survey to see where we stand.

[4:13:59] » Yep. >> So, we did already look at Richard and

[4:14:01] stuff like that. This just is coming to us back, but you want everything.

[4:14:04] » I just want you to see it all in context. Okay.

[4:14:06] » Um so that so you know, look, we've got a long list of stuff. some things that

[4:14:11] would have been on the books for a while, some things that are more recent.

[4:14:15] Um, some things that are very challenging to pull off like Jessowski,

[4:14:19] some things that are much more lowhanging fruit, easy, and we could

[4:14:21] knock out pretty quick. You know, there's just a lot in front of us. And I

[4:14:25] think part of what came out of the discussion, at least from my

[4:14:28] perspective, part of what came out of the discussion when we talked about

[4:14:31] Richardson was we need to look at the port plan again, right? We've you could

[4:14:36] see I mean out of the out of the four parks that were in the 2018 master plan

[4:14:40] we've done two right and we've got a third one designed. So but we've also

[4:14:44] added three or four more projects to the list.

[4:14:48] So for me this is rather than go through a full new parks and open space master

[4:14:53] plan. If that's what you guys want to do we could do that but that will delay

[4:14:56] things a lot. I just wanted to put it all in context for you so that you could

[4:15:00] see it and say these are the things we think are most important. Okay. Um and

[4:15:05] and if the answer is, look, we already told you to do the outdoor pool at the

[4:15:08] Wag at Wagner and the Arbreedom and we budgeted money to construct the

[4:15:11] Arbreedom this year, by the way. >> Um that's fine with us. We just want to

[4:15:15] make sure we're on the same page. >> Okay. So, this is like a final check.

[4:15:19] » That's kind of how I feel. This is a this is a check-in and confirm that

[4:15:22] we're heading in the right direction as we're preparing to spend millions of

[4:15:26] dollars on park amenities in the next few years.

[4:15:28] » Okay, that's fair. And so we're both on the same page that the 30

[4:15:33] to 40 million didn't seem accurate. In my head, it was about 7 to 84 million.

[4:15:36] It was said. So you're saying 40 is probably

[4:15:40] » 40 is probably ball fields and an aquatics facility.

[4:15:43] » Um it's not the community lawn. It's not the uh it's not the full ball field

[4:15:48] complex. It's a portion of um it's an aquatics facility. Uh that's probably

[4:15:54] scaled down a bit. Um but still nice. Um,

[4:16:00] but I don't I think I also had this realization that the $70 million number

[4:16:05] scared a lot of folks, myself included. Um, when we started that design project,

[4:16:09] we actually told the consultant we thought our max budget was 40 and that's

[4:16:13] what we were designing to. Um, and when we got to the end of the design uh, the

[4:16:19] initial design phase and had it cost estimated and it was $70 million, we all

[4:16:22] choked. Actually, it was more than that. we actually value engineered way down uh

[4:16:27] even to that number. And so I also don't want everybody to feel like that is the

[4:16:32] only option. Hey, it's 70 million or nothing. It's not. We can phase this

[4:16:36] project in creative ways if that's something you want to do. We think we

[4:16:40] need ball fields. Um, we can walk through all those details about how our

[4:16:45] current ball fields are used, the limitations they have, how our

[4:16:49] programming is capped and limited because of the amount of time and space

[4:16:52] that we have on those fields. We think ball fields are an important amenity.

[4:16:56] They were an important amenity in the 2018 master plan. And I don't want those

[4:16:59] to get shelved either from from the town administrator perspective because we

[4:17:02] have really good recreation programs that are limited in their scope because

[4:17:07] we don't have the programming space. So that's part of my concern with

[4:17:12] Richardson, too. I'm a little I'm concerned that we've spent this time and

[4:17:15] energy and money to prepare that project and that we might put it on the shelf in

[4:17:19] favor of some other things. And if that's what the board wants, that's fine

[4:17:22] with us. But at the same time, that's going to limit what we can do from a

[4:17:26] programming standpoint moving forward. >> We're good.

[4:17:29] » Yeah. >> Okay. I'm not trying to I'm just trying

[4:17:33] to give all these. So this is an issue of budget, right? because you did put a

[4:17:37] 30 to 40 >> 100%.

[4:17:38] » If we wanted if money wasn't an issue, we'd just say do all this, right?

[4:17:42] » It is an issue of of money. >> If we had $100 million, we'd just say,

[4:17:45] "Let's get it all done." >> But we don't.

[4:17:47] » And one doesn't preclude the other, right? So an AR rating does not preclude

[4:17:51] efficiency. >> I think it we can do a couple of these

[4:17:56] projects at a time. It depends on how you want to do them. So like we don't

[4:18:00] have 30 or $40 million cash to build Richardson anyway. You would have to

[4:18:04] finance that project. Um, we could do, you know, we could do a

[4:18:10] portion of uh the arburidum and the outdoor pool. We can do um we can mix

[4:18:18] and match, I guess, is what I'm saying. But I think a lot of that depends on

[4:18:20] priorities and what you're willing to fund.

[4:18:22] » It's 10:30 and these are huge, huge dollars and huge complex issues and I

[4:18:28] don't think a lot of things are put to bed even though we think they are. I

[4:18:32] think there's people that have different opinions and would like to discuss them.

[4:18:35] I I would recommend that either we do a special session or we get together or we

[4:18:39] set aside three or four hours where we actually can delve into the details of

[4:18:44] each of these and that's not what tonight's about.

[4:18:48] » If I could to respect the public here, do we have public comment on this? How

[4:18:53] would you do that? >> We're just making our comments before

[4:18:56] » public comment and then let's let's have a study session to discuss everything

[4:19:01] that comes forward. >> Okay, no more questions from the board.

[4:19:05] We're just going to Okay, let's do that. So, we have two signed up and then I

[4:19:09] know a lot of folks didn't have an opportunity to call on So, we'll start

[4:19:13] off with the first um

[4:19:19] » Can we get a copy of this? Is Karen Shimon still in here?

[4:19:23] Yes, we'll send you a copy. >> Okay. Karen was gonna speak to that. U

[4:19:27] but we have Carolyn Hopson.

[4:19:33] » Good evening. Good night. Uh Carolyn Hobson. I live at 817 Greenwood Drive.

[4:19:40] Um, like many of you, when I checked my mail last week, uh, I found a flyer that

[4:19:47] said that we could build Richardson all at once and have a pool in the next two

[4:19:52] years. Um, that sounds great. Not quite what I had heard. Uh, but what do I

[4:19:59] know? I'm only on the port committee the last four years. Uh, been in several

[4:20:05] meetings about these projects. had hours and hours of discussions about these

[4:20:10] projects. Um so given that surprising information, I had some questions for

[4:20:15] town staff. Um number one, the financing, uh is it feasible to

[4:20:24] take out, you know, some kind of loan and finance this project all at once,

[4:20:28] build it all at once versus phasing it, which is what we were told would happen

[4:20:33] in cash taking seven to 10 years. Um my second question is uh

[4:20:41] oh uh sorry very late. Um can the aquatic center be built in phase one?

[4:20:49] Because now we're hearing ball some ballparks and the aquatic center where

[4:20:54] we were told explicitly the aquatic center had to be built last because of

[4:20:59] the dirt work and where it's located on the property. We went around and round

[4:21:04] on how could we make the aquatic center happen first so that it could be a less

[4:21:09] expensive project be done first. Um we suggested moving it to the top of the

[4:21:14] property or a different place on the property so it could be done first and

[4:21:18] we were always told that is not an option. It has to be done after

[4:21:22] everything else is completed. Um, so thirdly, uh, if if both of those

[4:21:28] things are true, then why did we ever go down the road of a pool at the rec

[4:21:33] center if we could afford to do Richardson and get a pool within a

[4:21:40] couple years, then I feel silly now that I came to you all and said, "Let's find

[4:21:46] out how to get an outdoor pool direct center." Because that's not what was

[4:21:50] communicated to port through all of these meetings. Um, so I guess just

[4:21:55] clarification on that and you did clarify the 30 million because what port

[4:21:59] was communicated was 84 um in the first meeting through all the different

[4:22:05] phases. So um I feel like the I understand wanting to move that number

[4:22:10] down but that is not the full scope of the project. Um so I appreciate the

[4:22:16] clarification on that cost difference. So thank you.

[4:22:20] » Thank you. 95.

[4:22:23] » Okay.

[4:22:27] » Hello. Uh, my name is Laura Shafeld and I live at 940 Bruce.

[4:22:31] » Thank you. >> Uh, so my house is 50 years old. It was

[4:22:35] built in the 70s and it had no water issues for the first 50 years of its

[4:22:41] existence. Um, once the rec center was built, there's been extensive flooding

[4:22:45] in the basement. There's black mold. It's causing health issues for my

[4:22:49] children that live there and for myself. So my question for all of you

[4:22:56] because you all seem to be very into doing all these projects. When you plan

[4:23:01] these projects or when you built the rec center, what type of impact study is

[4:23:06] done looking at groundwater? Um this seems to be a very marshy area and

[4:23:12] Bertha is not specifically known for strong like structural integrity and its

[4:23:17] marshiness. So proceeding forward, if these pools, these ingground pools are

[4:23:23] built and the pond and the atorium which is in the picture, what impact studies

[4:23:29] will be done to make sure that there's not additional flooding in my house, in

[4:23:34] my neighbor's houses, in any of the surrounding area. Then if there is an

[4:23:40] impact study done, ideally by a third party, does the town of Berid actually

[4:23:45] look at that impact? Does it look at the study and really use that data?

[4:23:50] Furthermore, if you use the data or don't use the

[4:23:54] data of an impact study, what are the consequences for the city of Berthid and

[4:23:58] the trustees for make going ahead with projects that cause damage to the

[4:24:04] community? So this has been an ongoing issue and I don't understand how these

[4:24:11] projects are like move forward without looking at how the environment's

[4:24:17] impacted. So that's my question. >> Thank you.

[4:24:21] » Thank you. >> Okay. Thanks. We're going to take uh

[4:24:23] questions right now. I'm writing down >> Cool.

[4:24:25] » Write it down the address. >> Um there. Yes. Thanks.

[4:24:34] [Music] Uh, so Jeff Heindman, 1024 Street.

[4:24:40] I really appreciate you guys' service. It is late. I sat for 16 years on the

[4:24:45] other side of that dis, so I kind of have a sense of how this goes. And it is

[4:24:50] really, these are really difficult um tough issues.

[4:24:55] Fortunately, we do have 1% sales tax or we wouldn't

[4:24:59] be talking about any of this um stuff. So, but anyway, you're our elected

[4:25:03] leaders. You're the representatives we charge to

[4:25:07] solve problems and prioritize and figure out these complicated things. Um, I

[4:25:12] think over the years, some of my experiences with Berth has been that

[4:25:15] it's really common to come up with the reasons why things can't get done

[4:25:20] instead of focusing on how to get them done. And I really believe that myself

[4:25:24] and my colleagues on the 2018 town board, um, if we didn't have the can do

[4:25:32] attitude that we did, the rec center and Wagner would not be there today. Um, we

[4:25:38] ultimately prevailed by two votes in a special election to stop us from

[4:25:41] borrowing money, which it could not have been built without financing. You just

[4:25:45] can't build 30 million, $40 million projects with cash in a timely fashion.

[4:25:51] But we directed staff to solve problems, overcome obstacles, and figure out how

[4:25:56] to get it built. And it's okay to get new information and change your mind and

[4:26:02] change course. You don't just I mean, as an elected official, I was always open

[4:26:07] to changing course if something came to light. And um you know, I wish I would

[4:26:12] have gotten involved in some of the outdoor pool discussions, but you know,

[4:26:15] there is no news really about Bertha or what the town board's doing. So I was

[4:26:20] not aware of the outdoor pool concept until uh pretty recently. But anyway,

[4:26:24] the survey identified new parks, trails, and an outdoor pool as a top priority.

[4:26:30] Did not identify an arboritum. And building Richardson Park in phases,

[4:26:35] checks all these boxes. Following the master plan, um makes sense. And you got

[4:26:41] to figure out how to weave in some of these other projects if they trump if

[4:26:43] you know like so maybe conval has to wait. the new and some of these other

[4:26:48] things were not on the uh list when Conval was designated in 2018. But

[4:26:54] anyway, I fully support an outdoor pool. The town really needs an outdoor pool.

[4:26:58] We had to close the old one because of safety concerns and it was very

[4:27:02] unpopular. But we also really need ball fields. My kids are 31 and 28 and we

[4:27:08] have the same number of ball fields as we did when they were playing. Right? So

[4:27:14] I've lived here 30 years. We have the exact same number of ball fields. And

[4:27:17] the ball fields on Fifth Street are totally inadequate. They're dangerous.

[4:27:20] There's people standing in the street. There's balls hitting cars. They're just

[4:27:24] they're outdated. So, we need those as much as we need an outdoor pool. Um, and

[4:27:30] my dad, 89 years old, swims twice a week at the rec center. Three lap lanes is

[4:27:34] not adequate for a town of 14,000 people. And it's not going to get

[4:27:38] better. And the lap lanes are not just used for swimmers. They're used for fire

[4:27:42] training, lifeguard training, water aerobics. So anyway, so the current plan

[4:27:47] to spend $10 million in cash on the arboritum and 10 million in cash on the

[4:27:52] pool at Wagner are just not the best long-term thinking. And financing makes

[4:27:58] a lot of sense. It spreads out your cash. We have a guaranteed revenue

[4:28:02] stream. Saving your cash will free up money to design the concept at new. And

[4:28:07] um I think the reason we got here is because of the 80 million $70 million

[4:28:11] number and talking about a pool 10 years down the road which is not acceptable.

[4:28:15] So Richardson's bid ready. It can go out to bid. The dirt work could start this

[4:28:20] year. And while the pool's designed the cost of $650,000 to design the new pool

[4:28:25] at Wagner is the same about cost to finish the design of the pool at

[4:28:30] Richardson and lap lanes could be added to that if you told staff to do that.

[4:28:34] And so if you phase and finance and value engineer Richardson

[4:28:40] um it can get started this year. The pool could start next spring and it

[4:28:43] could be open the summer of 2027. They built the 30 uh 50,000 foot rec center

[4:28:49] in the 30acre park. FCI built that in 16 months. It was amazing. So um appreciate

[4:28:55] your time. >> Thanks. Let me just do one more. Will if

[4:28:59] you don't mind. >> So a minute.

[4:29:02] » Okay. Thanks. So, the 10 million for the Wagner pool can be a 20% down payment.

[4:29:07] » Mr. Hyman, I'm sorry. I'm just trying to follow the rules here.

[4:29:10] » Okay. >> All right. Uh, anyone else? Yeah.

[4:29:22] » Lauren Roth, 1735 Exit Street. Sorry, my voice. I've been sitting for a few hours

[4:29:28] just like y'all. Um, I have been on the port committee for the last four years

[4:29:32] and we have been working on all of these projects and I was really excited about

[4:29:37] Richardson Park. I thought it was an awesome park. I still do think it's an

[4:29:40] awesome park. Um, the funding of course was a question which I don't have to

[4:29:46] answer which I was really happy about. Um but when we were going through

[4:29:50] everything last year looking at those plans which were not at the 100% mark in

[4:29:54] terms of construction documents at that point um it came to light that it was

[4:29:59] the pool at that property was going to be 8 to 10 years and that's where the

[4:30:03] survey came from last year was us saying you know we probably need to ask people

[4:30:07] what they want and the pool was as you saw from the survey results earlier

[4:30:10] tonight number two on the list. Open parks and trails are always number one.

[4:30:14] We're working on those constantly. the pool was number two. Um, and so looking

[4:30:21] at Richardson Park, looking at an 8 to10 year timeline and a $70 million price

[4:30:26] tag, we thought, what could we do differently? And so that's where we

[4:30:29] started looking at that outdoor pool. Um, looking at the outdoor pool at the

[4:30:33] rec center. There have been conversations recently saying things

[4:30:36] such as that the plumbing that was at the rec center was for an indoor pool to

[4:30:41] be put out there which I have never heard before just this recent

[4:30:46] conversation. Um I was always just told that they had plumbed it in the

[4:30:51] anticipation that something could be put there. Um the outdoor pool at the rec

[4:30:55] center was something it fit the timeline, it fit the cost. It was

[4:30:58] something that we could do that the town really wanted. And so that was my

[4:31:03] motivator. Um, and I want to remind you all that the 100% construction documents

[4:31:08] of Richardson Park and being ready to break ground on that was a conversation

[4:31:12] that we had during one of our uh, meetings that

[4:31:17] I think it was Chris Kirk asked if they could continue with working on

[4:31:21] construction documents while we did the survey with the caveat that the survey

[4:31:26] results would drive what that next project was. And so it wasn't that those

[4:31:30] construction documents were there are there and ready to go because we were

[4:31:34] going that direction. It's because there was the ask that we continue with that

[4:31:38] because that project was already working with the caveat that we would change

[4:31:42] route if those those survey results showed something different. And so I

[4:31:46] think that's where I start to get a little anxious because I feel like the

[4:31:51] town said something very clear in that survey that they wanted that outdoor

[4:31:54] pool. And I don't think that the con that the the projects are mutually

[4:31:59] exclusive either. I think like Chris said, you can work on multiple projects

[4:32:02] at one time, but I do think priorities um

[4:32:07] are there that that the town really does want the outdoor pool. And so I'm

[4:32:10] hopeful that you guys will keep that as kind of one of those top priorities.

[4:32:13] Thank you. >> Thank you.

[4:32:16] » Anyone else?

[4:32:23] » Hi. I'm Alex Hy 2033 Cuda Court in Berthood. Um I think just in listening

[4:32:30] to everything that's gone on tonight um and I've been kind of looking on from

[4:32:36] the the outside over the years um you know we want a pool or we as the

[4:32:42] community it seems want a pool. We as a community need more uh ballparks.

[4:32:47] I'm uh I'm not as uh call me not as supportive of my kid to drive across the

[4:32:54] country to go to uh to baseball games. Um and I've had to drive to Fort Collins

[4:33:01] all the way to Fort Collins every time for my my kids baseball game in a in a

[4:33:06] birthed club. And um uh granted Chris goes to across the

[4:33:13] country for these things, but he's he's more a committed dad than I am, I guess.

[4:33:17] Um but uh I guess all I'm saying is it seems clear to me that we need ballparks

[4:33:23] and we need a pool. And it seems like Richardson is the place to do both of

[4:33:28] those. And if that comes at the loss of a of the arboritum or the delay of our

[4:33:33] arboritum, I would think that would make a lot of sense for

[4:33:38] uh what the community has been reaching out wanting to see. And so taking that

[4:33:44] 650,000 and plugging it into a design that would

[4:33:49] um put that lap or put those pools over at Richardson to me makes a lot of

[4:33:54] sense. Um but uh and then also using our cash and you know maybe I finance too

[4:34:01] many things in life but using our cash towards financing to make those

[4:34:05] community needs um granted. I think that would be uh uh I don't know a wise wise

[4:34:12] approach but um that's all I have. Thank you.

[4:34:15] » Thank you. Anyone else?

[4:34:21] » All right. Thank you all for seeing in attendance tonight. I'll close the

[4:34:24] public comment portion, bring it back to the board. Uh it sounds like uh we want

[4:34:28] to push this into a study session. Is that correct?

[4:34:31] » Okay. Um Administrator Kirk, you have any final thoughts here?

[4:34:35] » You want me to answer the questions that were asked?

[4:34:36] » Oh, that would be great. Uh start out with that groundwater one because I

[4:34:39] don't know if that uh not really related to recreation, but how we do business.

[4:34:42] So >> there is

[4:34:44] » there was an extensive amount of geotechnical investigation that was done

[4:34:47] during the construction of the rec center. um we drilled um test wells and

[4:34:54] um took ground cores to do structural design and that's typical on any project

[4:34:59] of that magnitude. Um civil engineering firms reviewed all of those and made

[4:35:03] recommendations about um all the infrastructure that would get built, the

[4:35:08] underground storm water infrastructure, the above ground storm water

[4:35:10] infrastructure. um that pool, the indoor pool actually sits on 121

[4:35:15] um concrete quesons that go down to bedrock because of the high groundwater

[4:35:19] in that area. The groundwater was actually on the park in some areas, if I

[4:35:23] remember right, and I'm quoting this off the top of my head. Um but if I remember

[4:35:28] right from those test well observations, the groundwater was as high as three or

[4:35:31] four feet below the surface before we built the park. And so, um, we have, um,

[4:35:37] communicated extensively with the previous property owner who sold it in

[4:35:39] 2024 at 940 Bruce, uh, about that issue. Um, he I understand that he had flooding

[4:35:47] in his basement. He installed a sump pump to deal with it and a trench drain

[4:35:51] around the outside of the foundation or around the exterior of the foundation.

[4:35:56] So >> yeah, it's I'm sorry. It's in inside the

[4:36:00] basement adjacent to the foundation walls as I but

[4:36:04] » Okay. So we do look at groundwater. >> Yes, absolutely.

[4:36:07] » repercussions. Yeah, we verify all that. >> But you don't have any monitoring wells

[4:36:12] throughout. >> I'm not I'm not trying to downplay. I

[4:36:15] think you have very specific concerns. I just don't know. What I'm saying is I

[4:36:18] don't know how it's I see how it's related to like if you build a pool, how

[4:36:22] does that affect the groundwater? I think what needs to happen is we can

[4:36:25] just sit down as a group. I think that'd be best.

[4:36:27] » I would love to come to that meeting. >> Thank you. No, I would love to invite

[4:36:29] you. Yeah. Okay. Do you mind emailing me?

[4:36:32] » I will. >> Okay. My card is right behind you by

[4:36:34] Sergeant Williamson, but I'd love to set up a meeting with you.

[4:36:36] » Thank you. >> Phenomenal.

[4:36:37] » Um, >> do we want to go uh Miss Hobson's

[4:36:42] questions about aquatics in phase one? Uh, White Pool at Rec Center if

[4:36:45] Richardson if it was in phase one of that. Um,

[4:36:49] » I can answer those questions relatively briefly, I think. Um the the reason why

[4:36:55] we didn't believe we could build the outdoor aquatics facility initially was

[4:36:59] because of the cost. Um we didn't have the cash to fund it. Um I at the time we

[4:37:05] were under the impression that we could not finance that park. Uh so the the the

[4:37:09] financing mechanism that we used for Wagner uh requires the kind of the

[4:37:15] building serves as collateral. And so, um, it's a it's a complicated financing

[4:37:22] process. I'm not going to try to explain tonight. I'm happy to at a study

[4:37:25] session. Um, but that those certificates of participation are unique from bonds.

[4:37:30] It's not like a you you don't get a lump payment. You're actually paying a lease

[4:37:33] payment back to a trustee who holds that. You own the property, but a

[4:37:37] trustee is responsible for it, and you pay them back for the financing you

[4:37:40] receive. That's the simplest way I can explain it. U, but that building serves

[4:37:44] as collateral. We were under the impression that you could not do that.

[4:37:47] um because there wasn't enough asset value with Richardson Park. We've

[4:37:51] learned recently that may not be the case and that we could uh likely issue

[4:37:54] that kind of financing in order to construct the park and literally within

[4:37:58] the last you know six weeks or so. So it is possible I think um that that that

[4:38:04] could be done but uh and that that was just through conversations with our

[4:38:09] underwriter that helped with us with our bond issuance uh that you approved for

[4:38:13] refunding the wastewater bonds. So it is possible um potentially although that

[4:38:19] there's you know those financing deals take months to put together um and the

[4:38:25] market has to be right in order to make them work. There's a lot of things that

[4:38:29] have to be done to figure that out. I I don't want to preclude I do think what I

[4:38:34] and what I think uh Miss Hobson and Miss Roth articulated was like I think

[4:38:37] everybody was excited about Richardson Park including staff. it was the next

[4:38:41] phase of the park's master plan. Uh from a phasing and financing perspective, it

[4:38:45] it looked like it was undoable. Um and I also don't want to foreclose on the

[4:38:50] opportunity to build that park if that is the preferred construction, maybe

[4:38:56] with some tweaks um and and some value and some creative value engineering. But

[4:39:00] if that's the preferred park project, I don't want to foreclose on it because we

[4:39:06] have new information that could give us the opportunity to potentially construct

[4:39:09] it. Not saying we definitely can. That requires a lot of analysis, requires

[4:39:14] comprehensive, you know, financial work with an underwriter and and bond council

[4:39:19] and all these things to try and figure all that stuff out. Um, but I would also

[4:39:23] be remiss if we moved forward with tens of millions of dollars in cash funded

[4:39:26] park projects if that was the board's priority. And I don't know that we

[4:39:30] really had that conversation clearly at the time. It was, hey, we can't afford

[4:39:34] this park and we can't build this pool today because we don't have the cash to

[4:39:37] do that. It's going to take a lot of time for us to get there. And no, we

[4:39:40] cannot build that as phase one with with the money that we have. Um, and so we

[4:39:44] pivoted to to this outdoor pool concept. Um,

[4:39:48] with the idea that it would be a lot simpler to build. The infrastructure is

[4:39:50] already in place, generally speaking. uh there's parking, there's, you know, all

[4:39:54] these other things that you don't have to construct in order to build a pool uh

[4:39:58] that you would have to do at Richardson. And so I think that's what drove us down

[4:40:02] that road. And admittedly, this is relatively newer information that I

[4:40:05] think is relevant to the conversation. So that's why we didn't I think that's

[4:40:11] why it's new information for everyone, including um the board committee and the

[4:40:15] board. >> All right. So if there's nothing else,

[4:40:19] trustes, it sounds like we'll just schedule this for a meeting. I don't

[4:40:21] know if we can set that date tonight, but we'll have an upcoming meeting uh

[4:40:25] special study session just to focus on our parks

[4:40:29] master plan and priorities. >> And would you expect to have funding

[4:40:34] options? We have a little bit better idea of financing.

[4:40:37] » Yes. Yeah. And knowing that we would have the time, we'll give you a really

[4:40:40] comprehensive overview of how that could how that could be done if that's what

[4:40:43] you want to do. >> Okay. All right. Well, thank you

[4:40:47] everybody. Uh we will go into executive session

[4:40:50] after this. So, uh, we will do, uh, reports next

[4:40:57] » and we'll start off with, uh, Trusty Wing this time.

[4:41:00] » I'll bring my reports back next time at the, uh, time that we're looking at

[4:41:05] right now. >> Okay. Um, Trustee Alrech.

[4:41:09] » Um, I just wanted to make mention of the citizen email about having to pay to

[4:41:15] take their kids to rec center. Um, I know it was a while ago that we had

[4:41:20] brought up implementing some type of system where you don't have to pay.

[4:41:24] You're not using the facility. You're just taking your children. So, I I don't

[4:41:28] know if we have an update on when that's going to be implemented, but we'll get

[4:41:32] some news soon. >> Do you have any thoughts?

[4:41:36] » Um, I think we generally solved that problem. Um,

[4:41:40] but it's late and I don't remember the specifics. I will make sure that I get

[4:41:44] that answer back to you. U, but Amanda and I did talk about it. she reviewed it

[4:41:47] with her staff. Uh we talked about all the various kind of you know u what's

[4:41:53] the right term the unintended consequences um and how can we limit

[4:41:57] that in kind of practical ways. So you know again anytime you're there

[4:42:02] for a program like you know swim lessons or basketball we don't charge parents to

[4:42:07] get in but if you're taking your kid to the pool and they're swimming during

[4:42:10] open swimming we typically charge parents even if we you know if they tell

[4:42:14] us they're not going to swim. There are some other ways we can handle that and I

[4:42:18] think we generally dealt with that but I'll I'll I'll get a formal response. I

[4:42:21] apologize. >> Okay. Thank you.

[4:42:23] » Trusty. >> Um I have a few as well but I'll recall

[4:42:27] them until next time. There's nothing pressing.

[4:42:29] » Trusty Hardy. >> Just a quick one. Um Earth Main Street

[4:42:33] is in in talks with Downtown Business Collaborative. We're going to be merging

[4:42:39] it looks like. >> All right.

[4:42:40] » Trying to form a new board. And part of the main street thing is to get town

[4:42:44] support. So I've been speaking with Gail down at Colorado Main Street. She is

[4:42:51] free September 30th to give the town trustees a 30 minute virtual

[4:42:55] presentation if that's possible to get on the agenda for September 30th.

[4:43:02] » I was making a note about the um rec center. I didn't want to forget what was

[4:43:06] that. I was trying to ask if if we could possibly the to get main street support

[4:43:10] we have to have town town support. So Gail of the Colorado Main Street wants

[4:43:15] to do a virtual presentation takes about 30 minutes and September 30th she will

[4:43:21] be available which is Tuesday night >> September 30th.

[4:43:26] » Uh that's a fifth Tuesday. Um so we'll have to talk about do you want to

[4:43:32] have a study session to talk about park priorities on that fifth Tuesday? Do you

[4:43:35] want to do that sooner than that? Um, but September 30th, I think, is a fifth

[4:43:41] Tuesday where we would not normally have a meeting.

[4:43:44] » And you need it sooner rather than later because

[4:43:46] » we can do it later, too. But let's just >> Okay.

[4:43:50] » We're in motion.

[4:43:54] » Well, regardless of the date, are we supportive of getting this on the agenda

[4:43:57] so they can move forward? >> Yeah. I think I'd like clarification on

[4:44:00] the structure, how the town's involved, um, how businesses are going to be

[4:44:05] represented. Just a little bit more of that because I I basically I would like

[4:44:11] to make sure we're able to help get grant funding to business owners and if

[4:44:15] town staff can do that or not. I don't know if they're allowed to or if it has

[4:44:18] to be a separate entity. Um, with everything Ted's done, I'm glad he's,

[4:44:22] you know, heading this up. But I'd also like to see if we could get some other

[4:44:25] business owners to take charge and get them invested and involved and to take

[4:44:29] ownership of it. And so, you know, wanting to see if how that structure

[4:44:32] works since Tim's on the board if they would feel more involved if they could

[4:44:36] take the a leadership role in that. And so, just some of those questions I think

[4:44:40] Tim would help us know what the structure is going to be like going

[4:44:43] forward so we can get some moving parts from staff.

[4:44:46] » The structures and what the board is going to look like.

[4:44:48] » Yeah. >> The board and also how the town can

[4:44:51] support it. Can town staff work, you know, toward grant funding alongside

[4:44:56] this group since we have designated staff now

[4:44:59] » um to help and can >> I think that's where the presentation

[4:45:02] from Carl Main Street would be helpful to the board.

[4:45:05] » Okay. Yeah, that would be awesome. Thank you.

[4:45:08] » Okay. So, let's I don't know. >> Do you need that date in particular?

[4:45:14] » It's just one of the dates she gave me. I think she may have calculated the

[4:45:17] Tuesday night. So I can ask her if >> you mind sending that Gail's contact to

[4:45:22] staff to Chris and then we can reach out.

[4:45:24] » Yep. >> Awesome. Okay. Yes, sounds great. Um

[4:45:29] Mayor Pro Tim, >> um just wanted to bring up thank you for

[4:45:32] participating in the seed dot meeting yes or is it yesterday? I I've lost

[4:45:37] track. Um anyways, they're adding additional sidewalk bars at the Ninth

[4:45:42] and Mountain Crossing. Uh right now we've got engineers working on a design

[4:45:47] that features largely four ballouts at that crossing along with additional

[4:45:51] safety improvements they're considering. Uh it sounds like it's very likely that

[4:45:56] they will have internal design funding to provide us with the design and bring

[4:46:01] that forth. Um there will be confirmation on that funding in a couple

[4:46:05] of weeks hopefully. Um the biggest challenge that from my understanding was

[4:46:11] surveying the actual location which uh largely would require their internal

[4:46:17] staff's time to go out and survey the location. Although it's a possibility

[4:46:22] that consultants could be hired to go do that work. Um but that's the update I

[4:46:28] wanted to provide on that and stuff. I think we had a good meeting on safety

[4:46:32] improvements there. Um and C dot is moving. So, I'm pretty happy about that.

[4:46:38] But, um, if there's any other additional information or if you guys would like to

[4:46:42] participate in these meetings, um, I'm welcome you to join and stuff. Um,

[4:46:48] otherwise, I'll continue to provide updates.

[4:46:54] » Yep. >> Well done. Well, that was going to be

[4:46:58] one of mine. It was Thank you for that um meeting yesterday, staying on it.

[4:47:02] I mean, that's that's unbelievable. They got seat out the move. So, that's that's

[4:47:06] 100% testament for you taking on them. So,

[4:47:08] » kind of surprised myself. >> Yeah, that was that was really cool to

[4:47:11] hear. Um, sorry I couldn't be at the um transportation meeting today.

[4:47:15] Administrator Kirk, I just did email out what I thought the board was interested

[4:47:19] in as far as this initial um uh subcommittee for transportation. How

[4:47:25] you respond to that? >> You didn't miss uh the meeting today.

[4:47:27] It's next Tuesday. >> Oh, sweet. their their meeting their

[4:47:30] meeting was today which is why they were kind of pressing us to give them

[4:47:33] something. >> Oh, great. That's why I will be there uh

[4:47:36] draft RFP to them yesterday. >> You did not miss. Carl thought he missed

[4:47:40] too. So >> I told Carl he missed it. That's why.

[4:47:42] All right. Well, that's good. >> Um also great job with the first uh

[4:47:47] national night out. Wish Teresa was here for this, but

[4:47:51] » unbelievable. I know by you. >> I know you had to be gone, but it was

[4:47:55] all it was for you guys and hopefully be there next year. But Teresa did a just a

[4:47:59] fantastic job. So May showed up. Uh Brett was there. Sean was there. What?

[4:48:05] » Uh yeah, you the face you had when you were throwing baseballs at me or balls

[4:48:10] still will haunt me for a long time coming here. But I think Brett, you hit

[4:48:13] three out of three on on the targets to get me in there. So need more signups

[4:48:17] next year. But um truthfully, the sheriff and uh the chief of the EMS both

[4:48:22] and I have them talk to Teresa about this too, but they both volunteered to

[4:48:25] do the dunk next year. >> Nice.

[4:48:28] » Staff did an awesome job with that. So, thank you.

[4:48:30] » Um I was out of town, so I did miss a um mental health meeting um Monday.

[4:48:36] Unfortunately, I talked about driving. Anyway, um that's all I have for now, so

[4:48:41] I'll turn it over to staff. The only item I'd like to cover tonight, we can

[4:48:44] deal with uh any other updates in other ways. The November 11th meeting uh would

[4:48:50] be a regular town board meeting that falls on Veterans Day. Um and so

[4:48:56] question we have is town hall is closed. Our staff will not be here. Um no issue

[4:49:01] for me. and come to the meeting. But um would you prefer to move the meeting to

[4:49:05] November 10th, which would be a Monday night instead of a Tuesday or maybe the

[4:49:10] 12th uh which would be a Wednesday, or would you prefer to just have it on

[4:49:13] Veterans Day >> or cancel it? But I I do think we'll

[4:49:17] probably have items to deal with. I mean, it's uh it is uncommon for us not

[4:49:21] to have agenda items, so >> I'd prefer 10.

[4:49:26] » I would agree. Okay,

[4:49:29] » that's a Monday night.

[4:49:33] works for me. >> And we don't have to decide tonight, but

[4:49:38] uh we will prioritize the 10th. We'll confirm with you. Um but if that if that

[4:49:43] works for y'all, that would I think that would make sense.

[4:49:46] » All right. >> Move it from the 11th to the 10th. Is

[4:49:49] that what we're trying to do?

[4:49:53] » Cool. Works for me. Thank you. Set that out. Uh Attorney Smith, anything?

[4:49:57] » Nothing. >> All right. Anything from Sheriff's

[4:49:59] Office? >> Nothing.

[4:50:00] » All right. Welcome back. All right. Thank you everybody. Um let's uh have

[4:50:04] someone move us into an executive session here. Anyone like to move on?

[4:50:09] [Applause] >> Well, there's a particular

[4:50:14] revised statute.

[4:50:19] » CS24-6-42

[4:50:24] Ethereation

[4:50:29] developing strategy for negotiations and instructive negotiations and the

[4:50:34] following details are provided. Bacon Lake Interceptor East, oil and gas lease

[4:50:39] and 290 Mount. Is there a second? All right, the motion

[4:50:44] has been seconded. Clerk, can we have a roll call vote, please?

[4:50:47] » Trusty Wing, >> yes.

[4:50:48] » Trusty Hardy, >> yes.

[4:50:49] » Trusty Ays, >> yes.

[4:50:51] » Mayor Prom Murphy, >> yes.

[4:50:52] » Trustee Alrech, >> yes.

[4:50:54] » Mayor Carsbach, >> all right. Yes. Thank you. All right.

[4:50:57] So, we'll move into uh executive session in the back room there, and then we'll

[4:51:00] adjourn from

08 12 2025 Town Board of Trustees

Transcript