Community Meeting Re: Rezoning Request for St Malo Catholic Center, Pine

Our apologies, the video of last night's Community Meeting is taking longer to process than we'd anticipated (it's nearly 2 hours long). Below is last week's Elk Creek Fire Protection District Board of Directors Meeting during which Chief McLaughlin did review a meeting he had with representatives of the Archdiocese of Denver about the Camp St Malo Retreat Center development. His comments about that topic begin at about minute 11:50.



We'll get last nights meeting uploaded as soon as possible.

Camp St Malo Community Meeting video is now uploaded. The questions asked by the audience are a little hard to hear, so they are all written below. We'll try to get time stamps added to them later so you know for certain when the answer is given to any of them that you might be interested in particularly.

If you would like to ask additional questions of the Archdiocese representatives, Michael Six, who is now the Director of this Camp St Malo Retreat Center project, will be at DW's 285 Diner every Wednesday morning at 7am and he would love to meet with you.



Camp St Malo Rezoning Request Community Meeting
August 20, 2015
89 in attendance

Introduction - Allison , Jeffco Planning & Zoning

Agenda
1. Pre-Application Meeting
2. Community Meeting
3. Rezoning
4. Site Development Plan
5. Building Permit

@15:53 Keith Parson, CFO of Archdiocese
@ Michael Six

• Question about parking lot construction
• Question about existing house use?
• Question about hiking trails (red lines)
• Question about lighting at intersection - traffic study required, not conducted yet
• Question about evacuations due to past fires, will campfires be allowed for campers
• Question about how many people they anticipate - 120 in single camping cabins,
• 160 in chapel, 100 in youth retreat, 60 campers in yurts, 1-2 in hermitages
• How many wells do you intend to drill?
• Do you anticipate having a generator or backup power to run wells in case of power outage
• Question about traffic count on Elk Creek vs on Hwy 285 at Shaffer's Crossing
• Question about what the developers' plan is for water downstream with multiple wells planned
• Statement about land use of retreat
• Question about water rights - does the Lewis family still have the rest of those?
• Question about previous facility, what was the cause of the fire?
• Question about wastewater treatment
• Question about staff & overnight guests
• Statement about difference between this development & previous plans for multiple homes
• Question about fire issue: where there will be fire hydrants, buildings with sprinkler systems, fire breaks with school nearby
• Question about testing of well water for quality/use-ability
• Question about water transportation to buildings in case of fire.
• Question about what they are doing with previous property (are they abandoning it)
• Question about pond - open to public to fish?
• Question about elk migration through that area. What will they do to prevent any changes
• Question about traffic/turn lanes/bus stop, ugly look of water tanks
• Question about future plans for site, will it grow bigger?
• Does the county have any requirements to work with natural wildlife to ensure minimal disruption?
• Question about where are guests coming from?
• Question about children coming? Public or private Catholic schools
• Question about what the buildings will look like. Why do you need campsites?
• Question about noxious weeds & herbicide used
• Will CDOT be brought in to consult on access
• What's the possibility of the property being subdivided in the future?
• Question about real estate clause that Archdiocese can't sell if this is not approved?
• Will smoking be allowed on the property?
• Question about weddings/receptions, alcohol use permitted
• Question about possible secondary egress
• Would the church be willing to provide an easement at Sunset where there's a blind curve in order to help improve the sight line?
• Statement in support of project
• @1:29:06 Question about using gray water for fire use, lighting dimming at night
• Question about renovating white octagon building
• Statement in support of project
• Question about half-built road already in existence - it's off of their property
• Question about existing road access
• What's the time frame on this project?
• Question about phasing of project
• Do you plan to build more if this project is approved?
• What does the county require for parking based on projected occupancy
• Ideas about fencing
• Statement about being prevented from building garages on their own properties
• Question about proximity of camping to Douglas Ranch residential area
• Question about camping area

Thank you Sir! Wednesday's from 8-10: I'll add it to our Community Calendar too.

Thank you for your time and well-researched information, it was a very good community meeting.

Totally fine to bump this thread Ashley, as it does contain the history and is good to review.

One thing that the rep from Planning & Zoning said during the presentation at Our Lady of the Pines is that even if the zoning is changed, the plans that the church has submitted for development are approved as is. If they try to make changes, it has to be put back through the building approval process so they can't just add something like a wind turbine. If it goes against what is approved in the county's master plan then it won't be approved.

Some developments on this case: September 13th was the Jeffco Board of County Commissioner's Hearing to approve the Re-Zoning application . I have some concerns, the most important of which is that Elk Creek Fire Protection District adamantly opposes this project as it is submitted. The initial plans for a 45,000 sq ft retreat center have been expanded; it is now a 100,000 sq ft, 55' tall, 5 story building. Not only is the fire department not equipped to handle such a structure (they have no ladder truck which would cost district taxpayers $1.5M, per Chief McLaughlin), but the addition of this size structure will change the ISO rating for the district and everyone's insurance rates would go up, per Chief McLaughlin's testimony.

The Planning Commission had voted 6-1 to approve the plans as submitted, making an exception to the 285 Corridor Master Plan guidelines and allowing the 55' high building. After the 3 hour hearing, Casey Tighe made a motion to delay approval until October 25th and Libby Szabo voted in favor so that the Archdiocese and ECFPD have time to meet and work out the fire mitigation, protection, and fire egress issues. I urge you all to watch the 3 hour BOCC Hearing video with the P&Z presentation, public testimony, Chief McLaughlin's testimony (at 1:14:00 minute mark), and the Archdiocese representatives' testimonies. jeffersonco.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=5&clip_id=2238

I agree with Libby Szabo that this development project has good potential and that the obstacles aren't insurmountable; it bothers me that a building has been proposed that exceeds our mountain development guidelines and wasn't brought to the attention of the fire department or the public so I'm hoping we can continue a dialog and find a compromise. The Archdiocese's plans for fire mitigation of the property seem very thorough and carefully considered by two well-qualified individuals; however, I take exception to their implication that if ECFPD can't adequately protect their retreat center, then how could they protect 43 homes that would go in instead?

1. Homes are smaller
2. homes won't require the purchase of a ladder truck that isn't in the budget for which the taxpayers would have to assume financial burden of after just passing a mill levy for new equipment
3. additional homes wouldn't raise everyone else's insurance rates
4. additional homes would add to the district's tax base/funding (see minute mark 2:28:00).

Their plans to create a 300,000 gallon water tank in addition to having a building that has sprinklers seems that it will help firefighting capability. They mentioned creating a second egress out of Douglas Ranch, but I'm not sure if that has been pursued in earnest. Having one owner of 247 acres makes it more likely that an egress can be created rather than trying to coordinate between 43 different land owners, so that is a plus, but I'd like to know that they are serious about planning that construction. The arguments that Staunton will eventually have camping with fire pits (thus raising fire risk) I don't believe compares since 1.) Staunton has full-time law enforcement on property 24/7 to keep an eye on things and enforce proper fire safety whereas Krogh Ranch will not, and 2.) as Chief McLaughlin mentioned, Staunton has had 35 years to plan and prepare for it.

I didn't hear of a wildlife study but it doesn't seem that they will be building so much that it would disrupt wildlife migration or habitat, though more information would be appreciated.

While this retreat will add to traffic congestion on our worst days/hours in the summer, and I had to shake my head a little at the gentleman who was citing traffic studies that call Friday and Sunday afternoons as "off-peak" (certainly must be based on city driving and not mountain traffic - even Casey Tighe disputed his argument there), the amount of traffic they will create is minimal compared to what comes through Staunton State Park each year. These guests coming up will be unfamiliar with the Shaffer's Crossing exit and it remains a dangerous intersection.

Some times of note in the hearing:
@7:25 One are of plan not in compliance - building higher than 35'
@10:42 Community concerns review
@13:05 Planning commission recommendation is to approve, 6-1 vote, approve 55' building, affected agencies must approve plan before STP can be approved
@13:45 Applicant and public comment/testimony period. Applicant mentioned they haven't met with Elk Creek Fire since August 11, 2015
@1:14:00 Chief McLaughlin
questions regarding Fire Marshall Shelly Hunter's letter contradicting Fire Chief's testimony
@1:56:00 Traffic
@2:05:00 Addressing fire mitigation concerns and impact on wildlife
@2:24:00 Addressed previous retreat that burned in Allenspark, looking at egress, studying landowner plots with possible road access
@2:28:00 retreat vs 43 homes (initial zoning allows for development of up to 43 homes on this land)
@2:40:00 Next step if re-zoning is approved. Site development must go through public hearing, agencies involved would get re-contacted, homeowners in area notified of public meetings, etc.
@2:25:00 camping and fire pits at camp vs at Staunton, proposed mitigation of property.

What do all of you think?