Planning and Zoning August 26, 2020

Commissioner teta? Here. Mr. Polin, here. Mr. shermin. Your Commissioner goldgar. Your Commissioner flag here. Commissioner owner on here. Councilmember Rodriguez.

Here. Thank you.

Okay, thank you. Next is communications. I believe we have Jenny Marsh, our assistant city manager, or sitting in as her planning director role as well, I believe.

multiple multiple hats. Good evening, commissioners. Nice to see you all this evening. And I do not have any communications to start off the meeting. Thank you very much.

Okay. Um, I’m going to go over for everybody how this will work as we have public hearing items. So anybody who wishes to speak during a public invited to be heard, which is items four and eight on the agenda for joining Any public hearing items which are agenda items six and seven, we’ll need to watch the live stream of the meeting for instructions about how to call in to provide public comment at the appropriate times. Susan just posted those onto the screen on. So comments are limited to five minutes per person and each speaker will be asked to state their name and address for the record prior to proceeding with your comments. Please remember to mute your live stream when you’re called upon to speak. So item four on our agenda is the public invited to be heard this is for anybody who wants to speak to to something that is not on the agenda tonight. We have public hearing sections of each agenda item This is for something that’s not on the agenda. Public invited to be heard on you need to call 1888788 0099 which is a new toll free number we’re using. So it’s 187880099 and then enter in the meeting id 86202957430. That meeting ID is 86202957430. It takes us about five minutes to process everybody who calls in and get you all set up correctly. So believe it or not, we’re going to take a five minute break. We’ll be right back.

chair will give the viewing audience another 30 seconds and wait for the slide to disappear on their screens. I’m going to go ahead and let the callers in.

So come to all the callers that we’ve just let in, give us just a minute. And then we will call on you one at a time by calling out your last three digits and then I will unmute you. You will need to say your name and your address before you speak. Is it three minutes chair?

It’s five minutes. For us. Yes.

Okay, great. So you get five minutes in this one.

Oh, go ahead, Susan. Sir.

I am ready to begin when you are.

Okay. Just a reminder to those who are going to make comments on that. This is for items that are not on the agenda tonight. Um, and I have my phone here. I’ll be timing your five minutes. So if we could, let’s just take them top to bottom. We’ll start with the phone number that ends in 447

Call her 447. Go ahead and unmute. Can you unmute yourself?

Let’s try that again.

Caller 447. Can you go ahead and unmute.

Just a reminder, please stop listening to the live stream because sometimes that’ll confuse you. There’s a 32nd delay. Hi caller 447.

Yeah, can you hear me now?

We sure can. You may begin.

Great. My name is john Coleman. I live at 1303 spruce Avenue. And I have some items that I’ve raised in several emails to Eva chesky regarding the proposed bond farm, housing development, is that appropriate for me to bring up those concerns?

Um, let me just clarify for everybody. If you bring this up at this point in time on then it does not become part of the record for that, that item that will be heard. If you’re to bring up your concerns when we’re actually holding our hearing on that item, then your comments become part of the record for that specific item. So if that item were to be appealed or go in front of City Council, then your comments would be included in the record that went with that appeal. But if you speak now to an item that’s on the agenda, then your comments are not part of that record that would go forward in an appeal process.

Okay, then I definitely do not want to speak now because I want my my comments to be on public record.

Okay, very good. Well, we’ll get to that once we get to that item. Thank you, sir. Um, let’s check in with color ending in 795.

Okay, and just one point of order. Once you speak, please go ahead and hang up or I will put you back in the waiting room so I can keep track of who’s spoken already. So I believe that was caller 447. So I’m going to put you back in the waiting room.

And looks like we lost 795. So


All right, caller 131

I’m going to ask you to unmute caller 131 There you go.

Hi, um, I’m a little confused. I wanted to address on farm. So should I also go to the waiting room? Yes, again. Well, what?

Yeah, sure. Give me just a minute.

Let me say rather than hanging out in the waiting room that can get confusing for us. So if you just if you just would have Hang up and wait for the live stream when we invite you to call back in that would be the best.

I see. Okay, Thanks for clarifying that. Okay.

Bye. Bye.

Okay, Susan. So we have color 350.

Color 350. I’m going to ask you to unmute.


Do I do the video?

Oh, sorry, Jean. I clicked on your name as things were moving around. Give me just a minute. I’m going to mute you again.

Caller 350

you should be able to unmute.

Do you hear us? Yes, I can hear you.

Jean we’re trying to get someone on that’s called in. So I’m going to mute you again. I’m looking for 3500

can I respond to that? That’s the those are the last three numbers of my brand new phone number that I just got today.

Oh, so we’re in the meeting twice?

I don’t know. I’m just here to speak to the bond farm proposal.

Right, but you’re one of our applicants, so.

Okay, I think I understand what’s going on Miss Jasmine.

you’re wanting to speak to the first item on our agenda, which is the CO housing proposal. Yes. Okay. If you speak now, then your comments will not be included in the public record for that item. Because this is the public invited to be heard part of the meeting. We need to open up the public hearing. That item first, and then we will have a section of that item, or the public will be invited to speak on that specific item. If you wait for that, then your comments would be carried forward in the record for that item. If anybody ever looked for that in the future, thank you want to speak now? Or would you like to wait until we open up that item?

I would like to wait, please. Okay. Very much.

All right.

So that would conclude our callers except Jean is still in as a caller. And I don’t want to remove her because then she won’t be able to call back. So we’ll just mute gene and we’ll leave her be.

Okay. Okay. All right. So I will close the public invited to be heard. Thank you, everybody, for your patience with our technology. It’s we’re all pioneering new things here. Next on our agenda is approval of our minutes. From our July 15 2020, meeting, any discussion amongst the commissioners, any motion to approve? Remember to show me your video so I can see you if you’re raising your hand. Commissioner polen.

I’d move that we approve the meeting. The approved the minutes for the July 15 2020. regular meeting.

Okay, motion to approve the minutes. Commissioner. I saw you had your hand up.

Yeah, I want to congratulate

our recording Secretary Miss Madrid this is these are very detailed minutes, but I do want a Second.

Motion. Okay. seconded. Any further discussion? Let’s just have a vote by hand. Those in favor of approving the minutes say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Any abstentions for not being present. Okay, so just


Okay. So Jane that is four in favor and commissioners flag teta and Goldberg abstain because they were not present at the meeting.

Okay. Thank you.

All right. Next on our agenda is the bond farm community cohousing, preliminary pewdie and annexation rezoning concept plan amendments, PCR 2020 dash five with principal planner Eva para chesky. I need to disclose that. I live in Old Town on grand Street. I am north of Third Street so I’m not part of the bond farm neighborhood on. I’ve had no ex parte communications about this agenda item on all of my decisions at tonight’s meeting will be based on the information that I hear tonight and that was presented in our packet. On our right, Eva,

I need to disclose as well. Sorry. Okay. In the past, I worked with Peter Spaulding in another cohousing project in Boulder and not this one. And again, regarding to this particular

project, I didn’t have any ex parte communication with Peter.

And I believe I can use my best judgment for the rest of the community. Thanks. Great.

Thank you, Commissioner honor on on any others. Okay, Eva, let’s hear your presentation.

Thank you, Chair. Sure neck and commissioners. Susan, would you mind queuing up the PowerPoint

Thank you. Good evening, commissioners Eva chef ski principal planner. This is the bonfire, cohousing preliminary beauty plan and concept plan amendment discussion. And I will try to make my remarks brief because I know we have a

lot of ground to cover tonight.

Next slide please.

So, I’m just going to give the commission the background and the, the zoning side of it, the applicant will discuss review criteria, compatibility and those type of things. So the just to give you the background, it was in your packet on this property’s at 1313 spruce Avenue. This is in the historic bond farm neighborhood that south of Third Avenue and east of sunset Street and I apologize, but I can’t you can’t see my mouse. So you just have to look through the slides. It’s just shy of six acres the total property acreage was previously, obviously a farm and there’s an old heart farmhouse a residential home. They’re constructed in 1900. It was annexed in 2006. With the zoning of single family residential. And the property to the properties to the north on the north side of spruce Avenue, are all zoned residential single family. The parcels to the east and south of this project site are zoned residential mixed neighborhood which does allow a higher density. It’s kind of a transition zone. And then the parcel immediately West, right there where it says Boko SSR that property is a residential, some residential homes and it’s in unincorporated Boulder County, it’s not in Longmont limits. It’s a budding Francis street there, and that is zoned suburban residential. And so just from my history, Oracle standpoint again after it was annexed in 2006. To single family. It sat undeveloped until 2015 Peter Spalding approached the city, talking about doing a cohousing community here and since the zoning for residential single family would not permit co housing because it requires a detached house on a single lot. They they pursued a rezoning to change that from single family residential to PDR. In our former development code, as you know, we had pewdie zones. The pod our zoning would allow for some commercial mixed use that’s tied into a residential use. And it also allowed other types of residential units beyond single family houses such as townhomes, condos, that type of thing. And so that went through the The rezoning process with planning and zoning commission and city council between 2015 and 2016. very robust public participation process. Ultimately and this did have the live work. What you see before you tonight is what was in the rezoning concept plan as well. It was with the live work commercial facing spruce Avenue and then the multifamily and the single family homes kind of on the south and then the community garden on the south. And so that was all approved by city council in March of 2016. It had to be approved within a so the rezone all rezonings in the city. When you apply for that the rezoning ordinance would have a accompanying concept plan. The concept plan is essentially what you see tonight for the for the cohousing community. The reason the applicant is we’re going to get to this in the next slide, but part of that concept plan included Proposed pedestrian trail on the west side. So again, I don’t have my mouse but it’s here on the west side, right adjacent to that Boulder County property and there was a pedestrian trail. I’ll have a slide for that next. And then with that, Council approved an annexation agreement amendment, again, because the original annexation from 2006 didn’t envision co housing here. So we amended the annexation agreement. So tonight, there’s an amendment to that concept plan, it essentially looks exactly the same as the one Council approved and the rezone, but it eliminates that pedestrian trail which I’ll get to next. So so in that rezoning, it was zoned residential pewdie. Um, our zoning our land development code switched over in September 2018 to the current code, which, as you know, we changed all the names of the zoning just strict and eliminated most PV zones. So in our current code, the property is zoned residential mixed neighborhood, which is consistent with these parcels here on the south and the West, which is again meant to be this transition zone. But this project application was submitted, right before we transitioned into the new zoning code. So this project is being reviewed under the PU D residential regulations in the old code. This project is also being used that although it’s being evaluated under the old zoning code, it is being evaluated under the current comprehensive plan the Envision Longmont plan, and that’s because in 2016, when City Council adopted the current comprehensive plan, the ordinance adopting it said that the Envision Longmont plan now replaces the old comprehensive plan So we’re evaluating evaluating this project under the current comprehensive plan, but under the old development code. Next slide, please.

So again, just some background on the comprehensive plan where you see the red arrows of property sites. It’s designated as mixed neighborhood and the surrounding land sort of on the south and the east and west. This whole area south of spruce Street, is designated mixed neighborhood. Mixed neighborhood is meant to serve as a transition area between that single family and on the north, and sort of more higher density and commercial corridors. As you can see, south of the railroad tracks there. We have the mixed use employment zone. So this is sort of that buffer between the single family and that more industrial zone south of the tracks. So within this land use category, the allowable type, it allows all types of rest potential uses. So single family townhome multifamily, the density that’s allowed in this area is between six and a minimum of six and a maximum of 18 dwelling units per acre. So for this project site, I’ll get to it on the next slide. But although it’s about six acres, they’re dedicating almost an acre to the city for a public park. So the net project site for developability is five acres. And so that would mean the allowable density is between 30 to 90 dwelling units. In the comprehensive plan, the mixed neighborhood land use category allows secondary commercial uses, such as small scale office retail and neighborhood serving uses to sort of where that mixed use component comes into play. And then obviously, as you can see the yellow on the north side of spruce Street and north of it. This is all designated single family neighborhood in our comprehensive plan. Next slide. So there’s two proposals on start with the first one on this slide. This is a preliminary pewdie plan. And the way the process goes is you go to planning and zoning commission to get approval of your preliminary p UD and then you come back and you do a final PD and that’s where we do really the the fine tuning of the details of the engineering and the landscaping. So these these are more high level review. But there’s two parts to this. The first part is a minor subdivision. As part of their annexation agreement with City Council. When they rezone they were obligated to dedicate a point eight five acre parcel to the city for a future park on the east side. So if you see this white rectangle here on the right side, that is the park dedication that’s going to the city of long line on the remain remaining five acres of the parcel again, this is proposing a cohousing community with 46 residential units total on the north side which you see at the top of the big white rectangle at the top. That’s a mixed use building. It’s about 46,000 square feet. they’re proposing 24 condo units and then six live work units in which there will be about just shy of 6000 square feet of commercial on the ground floor. That commercial again is tied to the live work units. So it’s not what you might think of is, you know, a shopping center or something like that. These are live work type of businesses. And then within that building, there’s a 67 space parking garage because it’s cohousing. They’re also proposing like a makerspace a community laundry area, and I’ll let the applicant kind of go into detail about the uses inside that Building but that’s the general gist of that building. And then on South of that building, we’ve got 12 units of townhomes, as you can see, kind of scattered around and then sort of on your bottom left, there will be for single family houses, detached single family houses, they will all have their own parking as well. In addition, there’s an underground community barn. And then there on this wall on the south and around the property in aggregate they have they’re proposing two and a half acres of common open space. And this includes a 16,000 square foot community garden. They’re kind of on the bottom right. And then 18,000 square foot detention pond for stormwater that’s on the bottom left. In addition, there will be 18 street parking spray spaces along spruce Avenue. they’ll provide a great Couple other spaces on this private driveway here that where you enter in off spruce and swing around on the

applicant, because in the interest of time, I didn’t want to pull up the elevations as well. So the applicant is going to bring up the building elevations and he’ll discuss architecture compatibility. But in reviewing this against the PU de standards, the project met all of the development standards in that in our old code, except one minor thing. The city requires a 30 foot landscape buffer on the west side, and they’re essentially providing it there’s way more than 30 feet on your west side of landscaping. However, as you can see building he that’s that single family house way on the sort of the left edge there, it encroaches 28 square feet into that landscape buffer, but we’ve kind of detailed in this staff report why this would be alright for a modification because they have provided additional landscaping and mitigation in the form of you know, providing almost double the amount of required landscaping that would be required by code. And next slide. So, the second part of this application is their concept plan amendment. And on the on your left there the graphic you will see this was the concept plan that was part of their rezoning application for the cohousing and for this annexation agreement amendment. And you’ll see there on the left where the red circle is they had proposed a pedestrian trail that would lead you from spruce Avenue and go directly south and kind of head toward Isaac Walton Park. The in working through the and this is part of the delay in This project review was on the applicant was trying to secure easements from adjacent property owners to meet city requirements for this trail, and over the course of several months of negotiations wasn’t able to get acquiescence and the applicant is gonna discuss further his justifications for why he couldn’t, he couldn’t make those negotiations work. In addition, as part of the traffic study, they did a pedestrian study, pedestrian volume study, which indicated low pedestrian volumes and it’s in the traffic study. I could also share my screen if you need it. And I believe we sent it to you by email in the document there but essentially it counted like between zero to nine pedestrians between morning peak hour and up to seven pedestrians in the afternoon peak hour. I was at various locations. Again, that’s in the traffic study, but they studied


data on spruce Avenue and all of the intersections around it on the applicant in their peu de planche, shows an alternative pedestrian route in which they use existing streets and I apologize there for the graphic so small, but as you can see, they identify like four different routes, you can go all the way over to West over to sunset, you can drop down at some of the other local streets, and that’s within the pod plan and the applicant will kind of go into that further.

Next slide, please.

And so as far as community input, this has hasn’t been a like I said a lengthy process between 2015 and 2016. We had neighborhood meetings, we had Planning Commission and we have city council to discuss this proposed rezone and this this exact project was what was considered and it was the cohousing with the mixed use with the live work. And but then obviously we have to start the process over again after the reason for this P UD plan. Preliminary pod plans require a neighborhood meeting before you kick off the application. So we had a neighborhood meeting back in 2017. This is after the year about a year after the rezone it took the applicant about a year to get the detailed plans put together. There are about nine attendees. It doesn’t include staff for the applicant. And the concerns that were raised are as you can imagine, concerns about parking traffic impacts architectural compatibility with the existing neighborhood. How would they integrate and the limits of those commercial units that were proposed? Questions about the timeline for the city park, questions about construction timing and the sort of the ownership and management of eco housing, product development, and then they came in, like I said in September Just before the the new code the new codes to place and submitted their formal application and so we, we posted signs and we sent letters out again to the neighbors. We got five letters or emails and those are in the packet, but essentially, one was in support. One was just sort of general questions, and three of them were opposed. The concerns raised were the, you know, integrating commercial uses into this residential zone. Didn’t like development in general, I think one letter said they didn’t think mixing of socioeconomic backgrounds with work. And so we went through, you know, our review process with the applicant. Ultimately, we finally got to this public hearing. So I sent notices out earlier this month, August sixth, um, before your packets went out, I got three letters and two phone calls against So since that came in before packets went out there shouldn’t be they should have been in your packet. But it was generally concerns about traffic from the commercial, the density of it and wildlife concerns. And then after your packets went out, I got seven letters I know it says six here on the slide. And that’s because I gave my slides to our IT manager before the end of the day. And so I got another letter section, I got seven letters opposed. And I believe Jane forwarded all of those to you on email, but the same general concerns about traffic and parking and the commercial compatibility concerns.

And next slide.

So again, since traffic was one of the main concerns, I just one thing I wanted to do was introduce Tyler steamie, our traffic engineering administrator, and Carolyn Michael, our traffic engineer. Both were involved in the review of this traffic study. their conclusions were and there were similar to the conclusions raised when we brought the whole cohousing project for the rezone to Council. They kind of based it on a potential of 50 units, even though this is only 46. They kind of you know, try to be more conservative and added more units with some live work, and they did identify the live work components, and they did include approximately 6000 square feet of commercial their conclusions were that this would generate 378 weekday trips, a full build out. And then of those trips approximately 35 morning peak hour trips and 39 peak hour trips would be generated during peak hours from this project. And the report noted that the current level of service at the nearby intersections and those were identified in the staff report but essentially is spruce intersections with sunset street Sherman’s Bowens treat, and then that third in Bowen intersection, all of those operate at level of service B or higher. And the conclusion of the traffic study is that with these additional 378 weekday trips, the traffic at these intersections was so kind of remain at this level until 2040. And that’s whether this development goes forward or not. And so when we get to q&a, if you have questions about the traffic study, I’m sure Tyler and Carolyn would be happy to take those questions. Next slide, please. On the ecological study, so um, as you know, in the in our code, it only requires applicants to study and look for federally protected species, birds or plants. And so that’s what this report did. And it was turned in, you know, when the application was submitted in 2018. And then since so much time had lapsed, we had asked for an update And so they gave us an update this year. So we got one in February, recommendations remained the same. on there was no habitat for any federal or state protected species, birds or plants. It did have a recommendation that the applicant get jurisdictional determination from Army Corps, because the danio tailor mill ditch is sits right on the north property border. And in case you know, this project was going to discharge to the ditch. You know, they recommended we determine if this is a water of the US that would need a 404 permit. So the applicant pursued that with the Army Corps and in your packet, we got a letter in August of 2019. Determining that no 404 permit was required for this project. So it was not jurisdictional. We do have Steve Rennes Wyler from the parks department. He’s not here to speak on the ecological study, but because a portion of this property almost an acre is being dedicated to the city of Longmont for a public park. Steve is here to answer any questions you have about the park development. Next slide, please.

And so in closing again, I just want to make it succinct because the applicant wants to do their presentation next. The recommendation from staff is resolution five beam, which is doing two things for you. It’s recommending conditional approval of this pewdie plan. on the condition that city council approves this concept plan amendment that removes the pedestrian trail trail, and it also then recommends approval of the concept plan amendment. Removing the trail with a finding that the applicant method review criteria by providing sufficient justification that they aren’t able to make the trail work and there was low pedestrian counts. On the next step after planning and zoning commission as City Council on the concept plan amendment for the pedestrian trail, that would require two readings of an ordinance. The public hearing notices would be mailed out to 1000 foot radius when that second reading of the ordinance is scheduled. Right now it’s to be determined, because we’re trying to get through this and we also have to work through the agenda with the city manager’s office. So those dates will be forthcoming. And I believe Next slide. Yeah, I believe that’s it. So I’m the applicant. Peter Spaulding. With the bond farm cohousing community would be happy to make his presentation next. And then if you have any questions for either of us to clarify anything, we’re happy to take your questions. I also wanted to know one other thing. Chris huffer. From Public Works engineering. The administrator is here. If you have any questions about the utilities and why it’s In such a challenge for the applicant to get easements. So Chris is also here to answer questions, if any engineering questions arise. Thank you.

Thank you, Eva. Let’s go ahead with Mr. sparlings. presentation.

Good evening. My name. Can you hear me? We sure can. Can we should we unmute the architect and the design team so that they can also present with me?

They all should be able to, they just

need to.

There they go.

I’m here. My name is Alex core.

And then is Brian horn here.

Susan, did Brian join the meeting? Yes, he’s here. Okay, great.

I’ll ask him. To try and unmute.

My name is Peter Spaulding, and I’m with Colorado co housing development company and the developer for this project. And I have Alex floor and Brian Horan, who will be joining us in this presentation. Susan, if you could go ahead and start the PDF file. There you go. Um, so the general layout for this is I’m going to go over some basic concepts for the cohousing community, what the product is, and then we’re going to get into the DRC comments and then I’m going to do some responses to the public comments. And then we’ll conclude the slide presentation and then we’ll be open for any questions that you might have.

If you go to the next slide, please.

So here, this is the 46 unit plan, develop It showcases the main condo building on the upper level. And then north of the private drive we have three triplexes townhomes and then south of the drive we have the four single family homes, the underground barn and another triplex to the south is the contiguous land for farming and then to the east is the future city park. Next slide. So, the vision for bond farm cohousing communities to live creatively in a peaceful relationships with one another our neighbors and our environment we want to create a multi generational multicultural community in a planned rural farm like setting respecting everyone’s need for private time and space while providing common facilities. For an active safe and caring Hoa. We are working towards affordable choices to reflect the social and economic diversity The bar membership. An objective among the existing members is to create an environment that supports healthy living practices and to live independently among one another in a supportive and thoughtful manner. Existing buyers all believe in developing a community that’s oriented around the cultivation and harvesting of agricultural systems to develop holistic systems that are sustainable and efficient and to celebrate our concepts that fit within the cohousing model are respecting the viewpoints of others sustainability and healthy living practices, energy efficiency and smart growth plans both micro and macro to participate with the bond farm Neighborhood Association and to integrate intelligent, strong and self governing protocols for the HOA. Next slide please.

For the greater community benefits, not only does the internal community community benefit from one another And shared resources knowledge so does the greater bond farm Neighborhood Association and the residents within and outside the city Longmont. by collaborating with prior and existing co presidents of the bond farm Neighborhood Association and neighboring families. We concluded that the best location for the future Park was in the northeast corner of our site which complements the existing on farm Neighborhood Association park to be the future Park. This decision making process for the park location became the basis of the bond farm cohousing community concept plan. This was completed prior to the developer seeking buyers into the cohousing development. So in other words, I worked with the community first on the Future Part prior to starting the project. So you can imagine a future block parties like Halloween hayrides community easter egg cons holidays in general educational farming and art for students that relate to urban planning far In sustainability and more, our programming is optimized for this for these events. The FCC is planning to offer associate memberships to the greater neighborhoods so that they too can take advantage of the bond farm cohousing communities, programming and amenities such as recording studios, commercial grade kitchen, wood and metal shop community events like art and cooking workshops and more. Next slide please. The original concept of this site was agribusiness. So, we want to keep that in true form. So we’ve developed a plan that’s based on a CSA and an art business model. So we’ll be an organic farm to table community. We’ll be offering access shares and on site programming to associate members of the agribusiness and this is part of the economic model that we’re presenting that agribusiness and art will help to reduce HOA dues for the residents which is a growing problem in Colorado and in housing. based off of 158,000 annual budget or an average monthly bill will be $285 per household revenue generated from the CSA and art and other services being offered we project that our dues will be reduced to on average $215 or lower. This model can help address the affordability issue for those with fixed incomes, educational opportunities for all ages, regarding our business lessons on how to raise chickens, bees, bats and how to farm for all ages. There will be no farmers market at this location. The CSA is tailored for the buyers and for the associate members. There’s plenty of our programming designed into the bond farm cohousing community and its architecture and bond farm cohousing community has several makerspaces and commercial grade kitchen that will have to launch a successful business plan. Next slide please. This is a design review criteria issue. The first action our team accomplished was to host the meeting for the bonfire Neighborhood Association for the location of desired Park. As I mentioned, the decision was to located to the east. The addition of the city park will further bond farm cohousing communities agenda of minimizing developments overall footprints, which was critical for sustainability. Neighbors will be able to visit park with their four legged friends and during off peak hours the wildlife will be able to take advantage of the site. This is a great opportunity also for bond farm and the neighborhood in the city of Longmont to collaborate on the designing and naming of the park. The city park will serve the neighborhood in many different and beneficial ways. We look forward to working with the greater community in the city of Long Mark parks. Natural resources to design the name of future Park. And to the right, you can see some of the amenities of small parks. Next slide please.

I’m going to go ahead and

turn this over to Alex.

Yes. All right. Hello, thank you everyone. Um, basically what this picture is showing is that instead of having the path to the west side, the bond farm community has agreed with a city and planning to pay for the construction and the maintenance of a new access to the east, basically off of spruce and grant. So that is a picture that’s really a blow up picture of that intersection where that light gray squiggly line will be a new path that’s Ada related, that has a DA grading. Why we can’t do the path on the other side. There’s multiple reasons but one is This The site is sloped too much concept, you know, four years ago is different from getting grading in and everything else. So it would be a very steep path where this path to the east allows to access the parks and the other, the other sidewalks in a more safe manner. Also, as Peter has pointed out, and in the site that you’ve seen before, there’s four other ways to access the parks. Besides that to the access path that is, can no longer be built is because it was it couldn’t be agreed with the the property owner to the east to so it wasn’t even on the site. So if we go to the next slide, we can see one reason why I’m in the concept plan. It initially started as a five foot, five foot nice path and because of all the everything that was needed with water with drainage with being able to access if there was it grew to be 10 feet. And that really puts a burden on on the neighbors to the south. And they’ve actually agreed to this to this section, which is very gracious of them. But to continue that through to the steep site and have a large path that goes through that isn’t in the theme of the design and the character bond farm, which has which is broken up nicely. It The scale is wrong and then also just the steepness of it won’t work either. So and then we just like to thank the homeowners that did help with this, this drainage, pardon and all the issues that we had to do there to the south because they really helped put this put this together. But that the path essentially on the site will That worked for those other reasons, if you could go to the next slide. So that was one of the main issues was the path. And then the second issue is this encroachment into the landscape buffer. It’s a very small encroachment, it’s not even a takes up a large portion. It’s just a triangle shape. The reason for this is you can see that we’re kind of sandwiched between a utility easement and this landscape buffer. So to mitigate this, not only can we provide more plants around there and throughout the sites, but on the other side of the property is a 15 foot easement. So essentially, we this is meeting that buffer. It’s just a small technicality in this little area where we’re asking the planning and zoning commission to use their good judgment and allow this to Peter, would you like to add anything to that?

Now that sums it up, I think.

And then Yep, next slide. And I think transportation We’ll pick over.

Yep. Brian horn.

Hi. Thank you. Appreciate it the, as was mentioned by staff, the site is forecasted to generate minimal traffic volumes and is consistent with the zoning. As was mentioned during the staff presentation, a max use of this land would be 90 dwelling units, and that would be 30%, approximately more traffic than what we’re proposing. Also, as mentioned, the traffic study was conservative. We didn’t take any reductions for the synergies between the the commercial and the residential, we evaluated those as that as if they would generate their own traffic, which in practice, there would be some reduction between the two of those. We had a number of discussions with staff About placement of traffic calming, which is required in the code, we were able to find an ideal location for that. Additionally the on street parking will create an element of friction, which will reduce speeds along this roadway. Also as mentioned by staff with or without the development, the build out and long range 2040 conditions are in significantly different. Again, all intersections operating at level of service C or better. For those unfamiliar levels of service are graded on an A to F scale. So C is pretty good. And then also you know, because traffic volumes that we’re generating are are relatively low. allow our contribution to the surrounding intersections are less than 3% in total future conditions. And you can see a note there that spruce has remaining capacity, and we’re contributing to about 3% of that additional capacity.

Next slide, I believe.

Okay, next slide.

So to go into public comment responses, there are six single levels story, live work units that are going to be between 890 to 955 square feet, and they’re one story. They’re tailored for small mom and pop businesses. A live work unit, just so for the public that’s listening would comprise of roughly a 400 square foot living space and approximately 500 square feet for work. face. And those configurations are a little bit variable. But these businesses essentially have to be small because their workspaces are going to be small. These single storey live work unit ceiling heights are nine foot as far as are the units above, on the second storey the residential units. The only difference is that the upper level units have sloped roofs over the dining areas. So that gives it a little bit of an elevation change, but that was an architectural aesthetic decision that we chose. So the overall building height ranges from 19 feet to 25 feet in height, which are similar to if not less than other residences along the south side of spruce Avenue. Refer to slide 28 of the PD Plan to verify these elevations. Next slide please. This is the perspective of, you know, the live workspaces and the courtyard. This shows sort of how we Broken that building apart so it’s not monolithic. And in the very background, you can see the elevator shaft that goes down from the parking level to the second storey may sort of have a sky bridge, and in the foreground, you’re seeing four of the live work units. And above those live work units, we have green terraces, and in those terraces will probably have dwarf trees, which we’re actually growing right now. So the look and feel for the architecture is going to really soften in that area, we believe it’ll be a great multifunctional use, which formally breaks the building into it’ll be a nice opportunity for future block parties and gatherings for the neighborhood and other events. Next slide, please. So the type of businesses you know, there are some concerns about what kind of businesses would be coming in here and as we identify these are essentially going to have to be small business. senses. So we’re willing to write into our declarations that we wouldn’t allow for any liquor stores dispensary, pawn stores, predatory lending services and the like. But examples of what we would promote would be arts crafts gallery yoga, it workspace hub, a mini Tinker male massage therapy, psychotherapy, physicians, boutique mom and pop businesses, floors, catering, chiropractor, dentistry, law, developer, contractor, educational, various nonprofit organizations, and many other entrepreneurial practices

that are legitimate.

Having this type of diverse talent in any given neighborhood, it benefits everyone. It also showcases the city of Long Run plannings LCP goals of housing diversity by adding this housing type to their housing inventory. There are nearly 200 cohousing communities across

100 that’s been adopted by not only Longmont, but almost every community for full cut off lighting. I, I don’t know what that is. I’m pretty sure that will be implemented and is pretty standard among all developments. As for the architecture, there’s a couple ways to kind of approach thinking about this. One of the first ways to think about this is what is cohousing community in what is bond farm trying to do, and it is something different than a single family house. So too significant to signify to signify that we use a different style of architecture. If we were doing single family houses we would probably try to blend in or have you seen in prospect, which is a great neighborhood in Longmont. contracting styles do work in a neighborhood and they do add life in a neighborhood. Obviously, not everyone is going to like this style architecture that’s there. There could be a different style of architecture and I’m sure other people wouldn’t like that too. But one of the things that we tried to think about was selling substance and substance has to do with scale and massing and form. And to give some context of this, the properties to the north on spruce, have about a 35 foot height limitation that they can have. But if you actually look at that street, right, when you get off the sidewalk, there’s a four foot retaining wall going, you know, vertical, and then it slopes up. So that slope that on parmesan continues to go up. So all those houses are actually at a higher scale than where we’re starting that the majority of the building is at 22 feet. So the majority of the houses on the north side are actually on basically the second level. And then we’d have about a 30 foot Street and then we actually widen the street, nine more feet to put the parking off to the side so that it wouldn’t be squeezed and people wouldn’t be having some of these issues. So the road is actually getting bigger and parking is moving off the street rather than continuing to be on it. And then what you didn’t see in the pictures because these were old renderings is Because that parking is now parallel, instead of perpendicular, we now have 20 foot of a Greenway that has 15 trees in there. So I know you can’t hide all architecture with trees if you don’t like it. But there are more trees and what you’re seeing in that renderings, there’s about 15 of those. And then once we get to the architecture, there’s a couple things we did with it to address the mass in the scale. First, horizontally, we broke up the building so that there was no kind of there’s no section that’s longer than 40 foot, and there’s no section that’s longer than 40 foot that doesn’t have a vertical break, too. So not only are there horizontal push poles, but there’s also vertical push poles that bring down the scale. And I think that lends it to this neighborhood a little bit more. They also think that’s kind of deceiving is when you look at the plan and you look at that building, the plan looks like it’s one huge building, but it’s actually two buildings that are broken up and it’s Hard to tell that in renderings also. But there will be this nice access way to this beautiful park and gardens that are going to be in the back and they’ll even be vegetation throughout the whole building. So to, to kind of just sum all that up there was Careful, careful separate consideration to the mass, the scale the sizing, and to the reason for the architecture. And I do believe that while it doesn’t fit in with someone would want something like what they already have. It is proven that contrast and styles can work extremely well in our background, a pot prospect neighborhood is a shining example of that.

I’d also like to add one more point. We are not designing these buildings with timber, one of the major issues in the 2000s and through 2010 Where the construction defect laws. So we’re actually building with ICF construction, which is insulated concrete forms. This allows for a very large or high STC rating, which is the sound attenuation. So our product that we’re bringing is not only going to be very sturdy product, but for the residents is going to be a very soundproof product for each of the units. So typically, in timber like the houses across the street, you might be looking at a 40 STC rating, which is really low and you get lots of audibles coming through your walls like cars going by or an ice cream chalk or kids yelling, you know, in the street. With our products, we’re starting off at 5050 to 255 STC rating so there’s going to be very little sound attenuation coming through the building and between the units themselves and that also goes for the townhomes. And for the single families, it’s also great for the passive solar design that we’re incorporating into the site. So no, none of the structures, solar shadow impacts another structure, which is another reason why we put the building on the north side. So sound attenuation for the community is a very high priority like David Coddington mentioned, in our workshops, we invited with the architect, all of our buyers to have input on the site design and we all agreed that we wanted to move forward with ICF construction. And when you build with that kind of technology, there’s certain types of you can’t really do ICF with really dynamic sort of building structures. And with what we’ve done, we’ve put in a tremendous amount of work pushing and pulling on the building and separating it into in order to maintain this ICF construction type.

Can you speak directly into your mind because whenever you turn your head, you we lose your ears, I’ll do my best. Okay.

Regarding accessibility to your site,

you have full accessibility to all your parts of your site. And then, as that relates to, I’m not clear what the trail is doing. Do you have a trail through the site, you have a trail adjacent to the site? How does that work to get down to the open space that the neighborhood is customarily been able to do?

So I think some of the neighbors are confused because I have opened up I saw people with dogs that walk along spruce Avenue I, I actually mow about two acres. have our fields so that they can walk their dogs on our field. So people who are on the north side of spruce or people who see people work walking on our property, that’s just on our property. There’s no app, there’s no current access to Isaac Walton park or to the same frame Greenway on the west side. There isn’t that that doesn’t exist. So.

So what happens then after you do a complete build out? Yep. And people want to access that.

So the way that will happen is when the city builds its park in the sidewalk is incorporated. The little bond farm neighborhood park which is on the corner of spruce in Grant’s. It consists of a crushed gravel pathway. So the city has asked us to go ahead and put a five foot wide concrete walkway that will connect to grant and then people will walk down grant across First Avenue as one of The access points. So it’s a, it’s a much better solution because it’s an ADA solution that’s Incorporated. Whereas if we were to build an ADA pathway on the west side that’s north and south because of the elevation change, it wouldn’t be Ada compatible. And if it’s concrete in the wintertime, it just wouldn’t be accessible because it isover and another reason for that is if if the with the existing utility access, so there’s a power line on the west side that’s in Boulder County, and it also has communication lines. If we were to incorporate a trail bear, they’re asking for a 10 foot wide trail, that would be concrete, and that’s where we started running into issues with the homeowners in the Boulder County portion. Who just wouldn’t buy into that because When we first came to the table back in 2000 2016 17, we were looking at a crushed gravel, five foot wide quaint type of pathway. And the neighbors at the time sort of bought into that, but when I presented what would have been code are requested by the planning department. It was a it was it was a they just rejected it outright, there was no way to get around it. So what I did was I invited the hill the brand’s who on the property on First Avenue which the new utilities that we have to build for stormwater sewer. We brought them to to play department and we met with public works. And with the homeowner there we work on a solution that would be viable for them to give us the requested easement that we’re going to need. And so it’s a it’s a They, they don’t want that kind of foot traffic or that kind of structure installed on their site. So we work for something that was still compatible for the city of Longmont but still address their needs as well. So that was the decision was for us to continue the park on the north side to go only, you know, maybe 50 feet across the bonfire neighborhood to Grand Street and then go down south to make that connection Otherwise, there are three other connections that are available for pedestrians where they can go straight down spruce and hit sunset or they can go down and judge Judson or Vivian and there’s a little section that you can cut across onto the existing trail that will cut into our land onto sunset and you just walk over the bridge into icicle Park. You

Hey Peter, see brands Wyler, Project Manager for public works from Napa resources. I’m going to help you out a little here a little bit here. We would prefer to have the public walk down the west side of grand Street, if we could, rather than having a separate sidewalk down the west side of the property that Peters trying to develop, it’s less maintenance for the city. And it does not it meets ADA accessibility and it’s not a

just a dupe duplicitous

piece of sidewalk that we need to maintain. So we’re in support of this.

Um, I have a

I have a few questions on so Mr. Gore on I think you you answered one of these, but I just want to clarify. So you said that that the parking along spruce 18 spaces along spruce is actually going to be spaces that are on your property and not on city streets. Is that

correct? Ah, sorry. And Sharon the civil can correct me if I’m wrong. I’m just a simple country architect. But they’re not on the on our property, but they’re not on the street.


you have to unmute yourself.

Hi Guys, can you hear me?

Um, so yes, the parking is connected to spruce. But there’s where the property line is in terms of is it? We have kept it within right of way. So the parking based on its location, I need to pull up the plans to really jog my memory. But I think based on I see some of the planning staff nodding their head when we revised that it was partially because of some right of way boundaries with the way the parallel parking was going to be partially on the property partially within right of way So we move to the parallel parking, which was more, provides more green space and provides better access to the spaces.

So essentially, we plan for on street parking by moving it rather than just keeping the road the same width and people parking there anyways, now you have these one way stops and people can’t get around.

Okay, so this leads me to something that I noticed on on your photometric plan, which is page 55 out of your 57 page drawing set. It looked like some of your photometric levels. Were not zero on those parking spaces, and um, and we might have to go to one of the city staff to see if that’s what I know. I had to look really closely at that to read those numbers on but I’m just curious. Is that allowable? Be Cause of the parking being in the red. I mean, usually, we need a zero cut off at the property line. And those numbers appear to be nonzero numbers beyond the property line.

Chair. Sure. Next, sorry. I’m going through the old lighting code quickly as we speak.

Oh, that’s right. We’re working on the old code.

Yes. Um,

so there is

yes, there is no light trespass allowed in certain parts. Um, if you’ll just bear with me, I’m looking through the line code quickly to find the section.


and while she’s finding that my recollection is that is actually street lighting for the purpose of that. And business, I think for street lamp lights for for that reason. But we can also double check with the engineer.

So the code

sorry, Alex. So the code says the amount of nuisance glare IE light trespass projected on to a residential use from another property shall not exceed 0.1 foot candles of the property lines so, um, I think when I plan checked it It may have been just at 0.1 nevertheless, if it’s not you can add a condition if I missed that this would if it were approved and council approves the account the concept plan amendments on this would come in for final pod and then we would do the real tight detailed plan review in which we really call through the lighting plans and the landscape plans for the detail.

Okay, um,

Mr. Gore, another another question. It’s actually page 25 of your drawing set on Can you explain how the parking works in the underground garage? It looks as though the spaces are stacked. If I’m reading that, right?

Yes, correct. You are reading that right there tandem parking spots, just like you’d have a tandem garage. Obviously, it’s more common probably in Europe than here, but in this cohousing community, it’s something that is more common than in the general public. And then a lot of times to those parking spots relate to a single unit owner. So kind of like my wife box in me and at my house, it’s, I end up moving the car anyways, but at least it’s single family. I didn’t Peter can elaborate

further if you’d like.

So I before on, let me just kind of expand my question a little bit. Mr. Gorgeous, just referred to somebody getting boxed in. And yes, they’re all within one one household but, um, Mr. Spaulding you you mentioned during your presentation that that you expect that that Traffic issues will be reduced because your residents will will not be using as many cars etc. But with tandem parking like this, would that actually potentially cause an opposite effect of if if I come home and I see that my, my spouse’s car is blocking the space that you know, is further in, in that tandem stack. And I have to get out and move that car to put my car in. Maybe I’m just more prone to just a hack. I’ll just go park on the street. I only have to be here for 20 minutes on. So do you see my point that perhaps the tandem parking actually encourages people not to park in the parking garage.

It’s it seems counterintuitive, but we had a couple of You know, of course bond farmers had some attrition, as far as buyers and sellers coming and going, and there’s


condominium on 17th.

And call, you’re over in that area, and there were sellers who are members,

they can

attend them parking. And he simply described at first as well. You know, at first we thought it was strange, but as a couple we were able to work it out. And it’s really not a big deal at all. And whenever I have buyers who are interested in buying farm and I give them a presentation, I always acknowledge to them that they’re interested in a certain unit that this is tandem parking. And I haven’t had any issues with any of my buyers. You know, saying Well, I’m going to park on the street level, that would be we They know that those spaces that are provided for them are theirs and that they can take up other spaces within the community because they’re assigned. And the way you flat out an HOA, you have common elements and limited kind of common elements. So we would actually be assigning those spaces to those homeowners and those are the spaces that they would have to use.

Okay, one more point to that on tandem parking is a problem mainly when you’re leaving, when you’re coming in and you come in or your partner comes and they will pull to the back or else an argument will happen. So coming in, you wouldn’t have that where they pulled to the front first just I mean, unless you’re in a fight and you did something wrong, but they’ll probably be rare.

Okay, while while we’re talking about parking, um, with the with the city park thing on the eastern edge of this property, and then you’ve got the 18 spaces. Going parallel across spruce. What is your estimate as to how visitors to that public park once it’s built will use the parking and what that public park will generate in terms of traffic.

I think that we have to look at this as an intent. I think that the park is a point eight five acre park. And by the time you get done doing all these deals already Zillow, very sort of infrastructural things that you do for a park and from my understanding, if Steve wants to speak to this a little bit, they’re not so interested in adding a whole bunch of amenities to the park so I think it’s going to be more of a park that is for the residents. And Brian horn had done a pedestrian study mic request Because I needed this will become an issue and with the amount of people that I currently offer our property as a part to the community, as I mentioned before, so I know that there are about a dozen families that bring their dogs to our site, and they walk around all the areas that are mode. So I don’t see I don’t see as a high use as far as traffic and coming maybe there’s a barbecue or a gathering or something of that nature out imagine maybe three or four spaces might get taken up. But currently, there’s, you know, there’s no one who drives the drives here to walk their dog on my property or anything of that nature. So I think I’d leave it to Steve Raines, Wyler to if he wants to comment on that to give you further comments.

Okay, thank you, Mr. Spaulding. That’s your answer. Any any comment on that at all?

Yeah, I agree with Peter that this is going to be a small sort of pocket Park. It’s going to fill a gap that we have in this area of town between Thompson Roosevelt, Isaac Walton and sunset parks where there’s folks in this neighborhood who don’t have a public park within a half mile of walking distance. That’s that’s always our goal. And so that’s what we’re going to be looking to provide for the residents of this area and for the city. There’s always the possibility that we’ll people will be coming from

outside the neighborhood to

to be you know, coming to us this part, but I don’t anticipate that being a large traffic generation generator as after we develop this park.

Okay, great. Thank you. Um,

this might be a question from gore now on

with the landscape buffer request, which which you have as part of this proposal. I believe it’s building he on the single family house that encroaches by like 28 square feet. Why not just change the size of the house or what precluded you from meeting the requirement by pulling two walls in and and changing the house? Yeah.

So the house is that, excuse me is actually a mirror of two other houses. So just like the triplex is a mirror of other ones, and so is a bunch of the units in the in the bigger building. So to shorten to change that building. There is a domino effect. So just moving in one wall, four feet or five feet in a house is actually a is a huge deal. Because you have to then re change that whole room and if you reach change that hole room it changes the whole relationship with the room next to it, then you have to do a completely different design. And that really messes not only with the efficiency of construction and then the prices as you can offer these nicer homes for a lower price but then also it hurts with selling because now you’re giving now there’s a house that’s a little bit less for whatever this reason, um, that that when you think about the trade offs where there is that extra 15 feet on the other side it is Boulder County Land, the purpose of the landscape buffer is being met. It’s a small trade off from the cities from what will you feel the city perspective because we’re feeding we’re, we’re filling those needs, and it would actually be a larger than than originally thought trade off for us to make those interior changes.

Okay, thank you. Um,


oh, this might actually be for you as well. Mr. Swanson in the public hearing talked about His question was for the residents that about the property. Is there any plan for a screen or a fence? And what do

you know what side he was talking about? Because I thought he said the North

I don’t know which side but what what let’s just look at your property as a whole what what plans exist for any sort of fencing or screening. Right.

So for the North side, I think I went through the road and the setbacks and landscape buffer and all that. For the other sides, I’m trying to bring it up but Jamison, actually who’s on the field is our landscape architect. I don’t think there’s an actual fence. I think the landscaping is used as a fence and then the park The park is a budding most of the neighbors to the east side. So that will be a large area and I believe that they probably already have fences. They’re

also just to add I believe we are showing a fence between the park The property

on the east side.

Correct? Correct. So there is a fence there in the views. I’m having one of my associates zoom out. On the west side there is a lot of landscape trees and buffers and also on the south side too. And I believe that those neighbors have fences down there Peter Lynch,

I can I can talk to this. So I believe the person in question it lives on the east side of the property and the park wouldn’t actually be the park extends to their property so there’d be a fence long there. And then the gap where the at the south side of the park to the south side of our boundary the residences already have fences. The the two on the south side of our property, their coldest acts, those coldest acts, we actually have to burn up the land so the burning of our land would actually be a fence for them. On the west side of our property, there’s the whole entire the existing utility easement. So there’s a 15 foot wide buffer between us and the neighbors. In general cohousing for us, you know, we’re not really into fences were really into landscaping a lot more, we want to take advantage of the land. And we think that by providing all of the green space that we’re providing that the landscape architecture that the people will be looking onto is going to be a lot nicer than an actual fence. It’s a debatable topic, but you know, if there was, if there is a property owner on the west who wanted to see a fence, we would certainly work with them to do that. We’re not opposed to it but we believe in sort of an open Say, we don’t really believe in fences. We just don’t think that they’re necessary. But there’s a lot of natural barriers that are in play

that I think address those concerns. Okay. Um,

I have a question. That’s, that’s Sorry, I’m hogging all the questions, everybody, but

it’s probably for Eva. Um,

the EVA the applicant has said in their presentation that they would be willing to formalize in their declarations, what businesses would not be allowed in the live work spaces. Um, when when would that be done? Is that something that needs to be made a condition now? What what would be the proper process to ensure that that happens?

Yeah, sure. Sure, Nick. It’s at your discretion. If you’d like to add conditions that they put restrictions on the type of businesses on the cover page of the P UD, that’s certainly at your discretion. The I kind of went through those allowable uses in the staff report, but these are live work units. So we would expect things such as off one one person offices, right, a lawyer, therapist, you know, whatever type of consultant, potentially a yoga teacher, something of that nature. That’s what we anticipate a neighborhood serving use. And so those are the would be the kind of things we’d monitor and track from a business license standpoint, but if there are certain uses that I you want to absolutely make sure are prohibited, you could certainly do that at your discretion.

Okay, thank you. I’m thrilled rest of my questions, focus on all The the traffic issues. So if another Commissioner wants to jump in with, you know, before we get into traffic Commissioner polen

Thank you. Um,

just a couple questions here since we’re still looking at the land. Peter, just quick question. Is the is it more steep on the north side? As then it gets less steep as you move to the south. Is that true?

That’s true. And I just want to address one more thing about that. And this goes to Commissioner height. One of the reasons why it took there’s a long span in our submittal process was because in our second response back to the city, the new code and this is the fire department related our first responders They we went from a 10% to a 6%. So that really lifted the the amount of infill that we now have to bring into the site, which is a significant amount in order to make that drive we once we found that out, we negotiated with the fire departments, Captain Mike Michael. And she agreed that we could do 8%. So whenever whenever with that great change, it actually elevates the land. And certain parts of our site become actually more steep and harder to access. So that’s one of the reasons why we had to delays having to re adjust all of our building footprints and high elevations. And that was a very enormous challenge. So right now, we’re working with an 8% grade for the our private drive and then it gets a little bit steeper in certain sections, which is the reason why we have All the buildings on the south of the drive, sort of acting as a barrier to the land, which is which is the reason why it exists. You can think of it as a big wall retaining wall holding back the land, so that we can have these walkout basements in the farm section. So, it’s steep in one section than an elephant. You know, it’s it’s an 8% grade neg, it’s a little bit steeper in order to access the farm and then the farm area is a little bit less sloped. I could

I could chime in. This is Aaron. So I’m I work with jva where the civil engineer one of the other pieces about this site that’s very important is we’re providing detention and water quality for the entire development. Not within the farm but separate from the farm. And based on the lay of the land. You want that detention and water quality to be at the downstream end of the site, which is the southwest corner. So moving the buildings around or shifting where certain buildings are makes the location for that drainage. detention more challenging to be able to capture all the runoff. So this staggered approach that they’ve taken with highest density of the North, and then gradually tearing allows for better water quality and low impact development designing and how we’ve laid it out.

And that’s one reason why we didn’t move. That’s one reason why the main condo building isn’t on the south side of the build site as well.

In the north side,

right, we located the north of the condo building on the north side, because on the south side, you can run into so so many issues.

Okay, and then, during the presentation, it was mentioned that there wasn’t going to be a farmers market, because it’s kind of like anti CSA. I was just wondering if you could give a quick 30,000 viewpoint of really what a CSA what that means.

So a community shared. So, all in farms A 10 acre CSA farm where you put in an order, you may pay $750 annually. And you’ll get a free training go by and pick it up and they’ll call you when to pick it up for the community. What we’re trying to do is we’re trying to create a business model for the community in order to reduce the costs of HOA dues monthly dues, which is a significant problem, I think across the nation, you know, and as we see the disparity levels between the wealthy and the middle class, I think people are starting to search for more efficient housing types. So if we can build business models into cohousing communities where they’re actually generating revenue, whether it be through associated memberships, or the residents themselves, that’s what we’re trying to do. So that we have so that we’re actually making a successful organic farm to table and then the community members as well as associate members will be able to take advantage of those food shares. So we’re looking to hire a farm intern or a wolfer. And we have a space designed for that individual to live on site. And we have an office for them in our underground barn with a root cellar and greenhouse. So that’s sort of the game plan for the bond farm cohousing community. Does that answer your question?

I guess so. would people be able to like call in orders for food to pick up instead of just going like a farmers market?

It would just be an associate membership that wouldn’t be open. Right?

So you want to if you are a neighbor in the neighborhood, and you want it to be an associate member to bond farm, maybe it’d be a 1500 annual do you’d get you’d be able to participate in a food share. And then you’d also be able to participate. We’re going to have a commercial grade kitchen. You could envision us having a chef stay for the weekend and we have cooking lessons or a cooking workshop and there might be some sort of wine pairing or taste pairing and the associate membership the associate members will be able to participate in that. Maybe there’s an art function

or music function.

So that’s the intense

Okay, thanks.

Other questions Commissioner height.

You have a sport and you raised it the underground barn calm. What is that?

So the underground barn is under the private drive. And there’s a piece that comes out of it. And it’s the wood shop, metal shop. And then we have a locking cooler root cellar


we’re going to use for the storage of all of our produce.

So I was looking

at vigorously to try to find the plants and specs for that thing in your plant set. And it’s not there is a reason it isn’t there.

It you should be able to see it in towards the end.

Without Can

you look up what page that is on the pod?

Yes. So it is on the site plan. We’re getting the page as we speak. I saw it on

one of the site plans.

In between we believe that in G. I’ve seen worse Okay, between f and g. I’ve just ever seen the plan for the build right?

And typically what’s actually different about site plan review. So we work in a bunch of different cities. Some cities will scold us for putting floor plans in there, they actually don’t need to see or floor plans aren’t required. So that’s one reason I think we you know, we put the house in there just for this one, but a lot of times floor plans in a site plan review situation like this aren’t required. And we we often get yelled at. So that’s why they’re not in there.

And I,

frankly will tell you, I actually don’t know if Walmart requires that you present that or not. My query is though, it does go underneath that road.

Right? That’s correct.

And it’s not part of the maker spaces that are in buildings and buildings, ci, correct. Yes, everything is not part of FMG. It’s

right. So g building, or building f shares the foundation for the greenhouse and that wall again, this is sort of creating that large retaining wall that sort of behind the design concept. And so we’ve inserted the, the, the woodshop in the root cellar, underneath the road, and then we have a portion there where there’s a walk down stair and then it wraps around a little space that will provide a bathroom and an office for the farmer.

And missioner height. Look at page 10 of their drawing set. And they have an indication of the barn below on the scene a

lot in the barn below. I’ve just never seen the barn below. Yeah,

and the only other on sheet seven you can see a section cut through it and the stairs. So you can see the road is above it. Below the road. Is that is the barn and then the stairs allowing you to go down to the bottom.

And if you’re on the lower drawing, not the upper drawing.

Right, and then sheet five of 57 which is the rendering. Yeah, you can see the stairs in the office. It’s right there where the underground barn is.

But then it extends North underneath the roadway. That’s correct. So Eva, my course should do is does that need to be set forth on these plans? Do we need to look at that? Do we care about that? Or is it just something that comes in later?

Commissioner high? It’s not required.


Alex is correct. We typically ask applicants to leave those level of detail for the building permit plan said after a project’s approved

to review for

plan, just the site plan.


Commissioner Goldberg.

Yeah, thanks, Chairman. Thanks to the rest of the commission for some great line of questioning that makes the job easier for the rest of us. Well, I think without further ado, I’d like to bring Tyler stabi into the discussion who’s waited patiently as we all know, we need to Make sure that the traffic isn’t adversely impacting the neighbors. And there’s been no shortage of concerns about the traffic impact. going as far back as 2017, when this was first brought to the table, and as recently as today by a few members of the public, john pillman, Megan Williams no wanna crush with, forgive me if I mispronounce any of those names. But Tyler in the packet, it says here that our city traffic team, you and your team approved the traffic study that was submitted for this project. But everyone is convinced that all the public is convinced that your that the impact to the neighborhood is going to be great. And there’s no way that we can only see 30 or 40 more routes in the morning and in the evening. During the peak times though. I wonder if for the sake of Anyone who’s still listening, if you could just walk us through how those studies are done, is doing a study in one day acceptable? Do we Is it an issue of it done in the summer versus when the schools are open? Maybe just school. So a little bit on traffic studies and why these numbers shakeout to being lower than we expect?

your chair? Sure, Commissioner Goldberg.

As we look at these traffic studies, prior to sending the applicant on their way and doing a study, we met with the applicant to make sure that we have sufficient scope to cover what needs to be covered in the traffic study.

You know, generally,

for our code, we typically don’t require studies for developments that generate less than 500 trips a day. This is one with some of the history that we’ve seen on this property being in front of this commission before we know traffic was an issue and a concern. Therefore, we didn’t require additional gonna look at the traffic on this one. You know that in terms of how we generate those trip numbers on what we’re looking at, we’re following data published in Institute of Transportation engineers, they have a manual where it’s a library of data points that have been submitted. It’s an average it’s not, obviously it’s not perfect, but it’s it has a pretty high confidence rate when we look at particularly residential generally has a pretty good


regression. When you look at the rates, the number of trips generated per unit are it’s pretty, pretty close. It’s probably the most studied trip generation that we


And I think you know, what we’re seeing in this 378 trips a day is in line with what we’d expect from this level of development. Typically, multifamily generates fewer trips per day than single family detached housing. I think There is adequate capacity, which is borne out in the capacity analysis provided in the traffic study. there’s adequate capacity on the road and intersections both on a daily basis and in the peak hours. I think that there are some changes that have been made since this was last before you I think one of the concerns that I remember I was I was talking to you guys about this before when it came through. One of the concerns was that angled parking that was proposed prior and I think that was noted as a concern. I think the applicants done a good job of addressing that concern. We’ve also asked the applicant to provide a slow point on spruce Avenue, which I think is a concern. We heard from the residents. That’s a comment staff has been consistent, consistent and asking and I think I heard the applicant say tonight that they’re going to do that.

Don’t miss any part of your question or anything else you want to know about?

No, I think that’s a pretty good summary. Excuse me. It sounds like first, your team avalue weights that the right content is provided in the study. And the traffic study met that burden. you’re utilizing formulas from manuals that are proven, you have high confidence in those formulas. This isn’t just something that the city of Longmont created. This is a these are manuals that are utilized across municipality. municipality, I would guess. Because there’s an emphasis, the multifamily properties tend to create fewer trips. There seems there’s adequate capacity in your experience. The applicant has made some changes to the to their project, removing angled parking, for example, that will help that traffic flow better. And they’ve applied the slow points, or you know, any mitigating factors that you’ve suggested or that would be required many of the applicants mentioned that it’s impossible for two vehicles to use it to pass each other without one pulling over to the side and letting another one come through. Is that a concern? Is that taken into consideration in your study? What can you tell us about that?

Sure. Sure. commission Goldberg. So one thing about that. So it looks like when I’m doing some measurements here on Google Earth, it looks like the cross section of the roads about 30 feet. So yeah, that is going to be tight when you have parking on both sides of the street for sure. One of the things that does I think we also heard concerns about speed and we also heard, we also heard several people say you have to stop and wait for someone to pass by so with that congestion with that parking, it also does mitigate some of that speeding it doesn’t really make it possible to speed if you have that condition. So probably not the preferred condition. If we were building this new the road would be wider. Reality is this is a relatively built out area and I don’t think widening is an option with out. The homes are pretty close to the street. So I really don’t think whining is an option. Any other options in terms of adding bike lanes or providing additional travel lane widths would require some removal of parking

spots and maybe there’s a little given given take their

I guess my last question I’m sorry, Chairman Did you did you need Oh,

Mr. Spaulding wanted to add on to Tyler’s comment there.

Yeah. Okay. So

a lot of the neighbors were describing the conditions that were at the end of spruce and sunset. So you don’t really get that condition where you have to pull them over if a car is passing by in front of our property because on the north side, the parallel parking is set into the row. So we’re actually changing the curb. The curb actually comes in nine FICO traverses across the north side and then comes back on 19 feet so that two cars would still be able to easily pass through even if there’s a car parked on the north side of spruce parallel.

Does that make sense? And then this is a long year. And you’re able to do that with the property that you have, you can do that. To get away from your property. We’re still stuck with the same, we have the same cross section.

Great. Okay. Yeah. Thank you for all of that. I guess my last question, Tyler, before I open it up to the rest of the commission is speak to the concern that I think john Tillman and Megan Williams raised about the study being done in the summer when kids are at a school there’s less of, you know, parents taking their kids to and from schools, school buses and that impact. Is that a factor when we’re reviewing a study? Do you have any perspective on how summer traffic flow differs from traffic flow when schools are in session?

Your huts? It’s a valid comment. I think that the magnitude we’re talking about here in terms of, are we going to see capacity? Are we going to see the system break? If we have some additional trips for school? Reality is those additional trips are not going to break the system. It is more likely that Yeah, they’re generally we see traffic volumes go up during school. You know, we’re kind of in a weird situation right now, where I think a lot of the counts had to do with timing of when the applicant needed to wanted to submit they had older counts from a previous version, which were too old to use. We wouldn’t accept the older counts from the previous time they did the traffic study. They had a submittal deadline that they were trying to meet. And any additional counts we do right now are sort of influenced everything’s kind of weird right now with with a pandemic going on. So would it be better to count during school? Yes, school is not in session right now. So we really can’t quantify that right now.

Yeah, thanks, Tyler. A quick check back at the deck at our package shows some feedback from the school district suggesting the estimated total of 10 additional students can be generated from the project and mentioned that the adjacent schools will be able to accommodate that. So maybe if the projection from St. vrain Valley School District is only 10 students. You know, I wonder if we can come for the public that’s concerned about that difference between when the when the study was done by using the evidence provided by the school district that actually we’re only looking at essentially 10 tests. So I’m added students maybe that will help.

Brian Harun looks like you had your hand up.

Yeah, I

appreciate all that Tyler. I’d like to also add you know, ideally, we would take counts. But Tyler’s correct. We were on a specific schedule. The city asked us to do. ADT counts along spruce and sunset as well, which the city has published weekday adts. So we were able to compare the ad T’s that we counted with the, you know, kind of like normal ad tees, and we found that they were consistent along spruce. And that actually, our counts were a little higher on sunset. So we wish we would have done anyway, but we included a factor of growth along sunset to account for that distance difference. So we did compare accounts that we collected against existing data, just to make sure it passed this, you know, sniff test of whether or not the data was accurate.

Okay, thanks, Mr. Chairman. I’m good.


I don’t have questions, but I have a series of comments. I’m going to just jump in. You know, we talked about the criteria of mutual support between commercial and residential. Commissioner Hite wrote that in. I’d like to add to that, that, you know, having smaller multiple businesses means you’re going to have a diverse set of services available in your community. And that’s the best support mutual support between residences and commercial, which is happening in this particular community. Not only that, the likelihood that that’s going to reduce the trips is going to Hi, I want to add to that one more item, you know, some of the one of the commenters

mentioned that

This committee gives more reason, for instance, to stay more time in place.

That means less trips out of the community.

Every endeavor you’re dealing in the community means you’re avoiding one other errand, whatever that may be. If this was a dormitory place, that is only housing, you go there to sleep. That means for every other endeavor in your life, you’re going somewhere and driving. So that gives me confidence about the, you know, reduce traffic. We talked about, you know, the big building being up on the north. I was really surprised that, you know, Mr. Gore said this is contrasting. Well, actually, when you look at the massing, there are a lot of breaks in the massing and the massing itself, not architectural. style Navy massing fits and does everything to fit in to this vertical committee in terms of the intervals you see on the facades. So, yes, it’s a big building but it’s not one of your you know, 24 plexes you see everywhere it’s a big wall, you know, this is a very different kind of an attitude trying to really break and, and that break is not very artificial. It’s because it’s coming from what’s behind the breaks. That is you know, there are very different kind of units coming together and businesses coming together. So that creates an interesting diversity. I relate to Chairman Journyx worry about, you know, what if you don’t use a tandem parking and go park on the street, but at the same time, these are covered parking, why would you go park in the snow. If you have a garage garage is an act of luxury, you know, it’s like I wish I had a garage, I’m putting my car there. So that kind of thing. So that kind of balances in. I’m not that very inconvenience, maybe, but it’s a preferred inconvenience. But I don’t think anybody’s gonna park on the street and walk all the way down and leave that space. The other part of it is that, you know, maybe there’s a possibility of some of the tandem garages would be used for storage and such and that happens everywhere. You know, it doesn’t matter if it’s tandem or not. If you have double car garage, people tend to put all the junk and then parked on the street. But in that cohousing community, there’s internal control, neighbors control each other. If you junk up your place, somebody’s gonna know you’re having dinner together, right? They’re gonna say hey, what you’re doing. So there’s that


Interesting, we’re talking about the narrow streets and such, you know, Boulder went through all sorts of arguments and adapted 30 feet curb to curb both side parking as local street standard. It’s in the books now. The reason is that it’s the best traffic control mechanism. You go slow, you don’t speed. And then you don’t need the speed bumps and all that stuff. You know, Tyler mentioned that already. I don’t want to go into too much detail of those.

At the end of the day, you know, I sympathize a lot of the worries of the neighbors. And our job is kind of tough. We need to balance that with the long term interest of the community and what is best for community at large in the future. That’s Kind of the question we asked, and we have the comp plan to help us because comp plan has the same question, what is the best thing for the community in the future? And but I usually read the comp plan and try to understand why do they say that? Well, there’s a reason behind it. And in this particular case, you know, especially encouraging the diversity of businesses and diversity of lifestyles, that is the unit types, you know, we had this discussion, a couple of other projects, you know, people come in with 50, exactly the same plan duplex, this is the exact opposite of that, that is to say, as much as diversity you can have in a committee this size. So that’s why I really respect the concept and the proposal on hand and I’ve, what I would say to the neighbors, you know, I sincerely believe that at the end of the day, you’re going to benefit out of this the most in the future. There’s going to be a time you’re going to say Good thing, this thing came to my neighbor

next door,

because I have all these benefits now.

Yes, there are summaries the traffic, you know, nobody wants a whole bunch of people move next door. But in this particular case, maybe it’s a good thing for you. That’s my message to members. And obviously, I’m supporting this project. And Oh, one more


to the buffer.

I don’t buy Mr. gore’s argument that Oh, it would be so hard to change the building. It wouldn’t be hard and building being a unique building is more value. But there’s the other side of the argument. So what is unconscious? You know, is it against the intent of the buffer? Man, I look at the site plan. Well, it’s not a big deal. It’s just tiny little area and then there’s a lot threes around it so. So that’s my attitude towards that as well because you know, I can say

we’re not here to torture people, right.


So that’s my conclusion and I support the project thanks.

I’m just one thought about about the encroachment into the buffer and and Mr gore’s explanation. I look at that as as we’re getting a lot of open space benefit way more open space than than what this project normally law requires. And, um, he’s also he mentioned the efficiency of keeping that one building that one house being a mirror of another house and that should a little bit keep the price down on so in our efforts to try To find more attainable housing and more affordable housing, anything we can do to keep the price down is probably a good thing in this day and age. So I would definitely support the modification on the on the landscape buffer. Any other comments or thoughts from other commissioners? about this? Mr. Spaulding I saw you had your hand up. Were you wanting to respond to something?

Yeah, this is it. Thank you for your comments and for yours as well. It there aren’t. So ICF construction is a relatively new model that’s coming to the market and it’s becoming. It’s being popularized because it’s such a good building product. There aren’t that many. Just this is just a bit of trivia there aren’t that many construction crews that specialize in ICF construction, and when you start altering the plans for the ground crew that’s on site to have to build all the scaffolding and to actually work with concrete. In that sense. It does add a significant amount of cost. And while this might not seem as much, it would sure be a lot more expensive than it would be for timber built structure. I just want to put that in as a bit of trivia about ICF construction versus timber. Timber. Thank you.

Commissioner height.

Yeah. sensing that there’s a motion coming through in my last two cents. I would also say to the community at large that the traffic I’m seeing problematic from what we have heard and seen it still meet standards. To which I would add it couldn’t be worse. This is approximately a gallon with a good Two thirds of what could go in to this to this site is what’s being proposed in terms of development units, or dwelling units. So it could, traffic could have been a bigger issue, the kroetsch main issue. I also feel that there have been mitigating design components have been drawn into this project that mitigate that encroachment issue. The problem I had with the Neighborhood Center requiring a transition from an established neighborhood to a more dense design. I still have a problem with the fact that you know, on the north side is where this the bigger massive building is being presented. I will note that the standard is laudatory and not mandatory. The words are should and what this desponding explained From a design architectural standpoint, dropping the massive building down lower just didn’t work, I think convinces me that they should he can’t meet. So I wouldn’t be voting in favor of this project. Thanks.

I’m Commissioner Paul on the commissioner flag then Commissioner Goldberg.

Okay, I found my mute button.

I guess as we’re starting to build towards this, there are a couple of conditions that have been once been mentioned it and going through things. I’m wondering if we need to add one, another one. So I’m wondering, it says that they are still working, looking for the legal paperwork for the path. And I’m wondering if we need to put that as a condition they said that they are Working with I think it’s the helmet brands, and that there’s legal paper work going on, but it hasn’t been acquired yet, Peter.

That’s correct. So we’ve been in negotiation with the Hildebrand family, with Mark van Wagner, who is also impacted. And then there’s another property directly to on the very southwest corner.


I’ve worked with them all, and they’re all in support of the new design that we have. But we can’t do the legal paperwork until we have the site plan review. You’re basically you’re and the city council’s approval that this is the direction that we’re going to go for, so that we can actually draft that paperwork. So I believe that for final PV approval in the entitlement process, when we do the site work and the actual construction of the buildings, there’ll be language somewhere By the city attorney that states that you’re not going to get a final co a co certificate of occupancy until you have

worked out these agreements

with your neighbors on those easements. And that we would have to have that done prior before doing our site infrastructure work. Because the new utilities that we’re bringing in are storm water and sewer. So that is at the very top of our agenda. But we need we need to know that what we’re giving to them as legal documents with the design work, which would be part of those legal design work and negotiation of what the value is that they’re giving to us for that new infrastructure that needs to happen after city council approval and in

this in the condition.

Okay, Ava,

are you still there, Ava?


can you clarify But he would Peter just said about whether or not it would be necessary for us to add language to get the to make it conditional on the legal paperwork for the path. Do you agree with Peter that at this time, that’s not necessary?

I don’t think it’s necessary because the


concept plan amendment before you is saying that they’re not providing the pedestrian path on their site and through other properties. What they’re requesting in their PD Plan is that residents use the public streets that exist currently either going down sunset street or one of the streets toward the east, to get down and then across to Isaac Walton Park and the Greenway.


I don’t know that it’s relevant

to condition I’m not really certain about what legal paperwork Work, piers working on or if this relates to utility easements, which is a completely separate matter from this trail connection, and that’s something that would be required with their public improvement plans and their final pewdie. And Chris huffer, from public works is here to talk about any or answer any utility questions.

Okay. And then I guess the other condition that’s kind of been bantered around is if we want to put any kind of limitations on the businesses

that would go there.

been kind of bantered. I don’t know if anybody has thoughts about that. So I’ll throw that out to the commission. Given the fact that these are going to be roughly 600 square foot of off I’m going to say commercial office space. I’m not really worried about too much about anything big like a liquor store or anything going around? Um I don’t know if I’d even be worried about dispensary because you know Longmont kind of monitors the number of dispensaries that we have. But I wonder if anybody has any concerns and would like to put any kind of condition on the type of businesses that would go for sure.

Regarding the dead I have a question for Peter. What’s the control mechanism Do you have within the HOA? I mean within the cohousing for the businesses, do you have a control mechanism among your neighbors among your members for the type of business that can come in?

Yeah, we’re writing into our Hoa declaration says the there would be no payday loan there. There are certain businesses that we’ve identified that will write into our Hoa declarations that will not be a part of our development and the community you know through our various workshops that you community members all agreed to that, because we want businesses to come in that complement what it is that we’re offering as amenities. So the farmer table artistry, you know, psychotherapy, massage therapy can be, you know, there’s a couple buyers within the development. David cottington, a roofer and myself that would like to possibly create an LLC so that we could purchase one of those units and put our offices in there. So there are strategies like that, that we’re deploying within the community. But as you know, the HOA declaration. We don’t formalize that until 75% of the community has moved into their units where they finally sign off on everything. So during the construction process, we’ll even get more into detail about what that Hoa declaration looks like. And then We’ll submit that and get a record with the city.

Commissioner flag, so sorry.

Thank you. Um, my question was in regard similarly to the uses, but my question was really? Can there be changes to the spaces that you’re allocating for live work? Can two of them join together to me made into a larger space? And the other part of the question was, since we don’t have a floor plan of that underground arm, you have, I think I recall woodshop and roofing or something in there. I don’t know what the square footage of that area is allotted in so my question is that, is it possible to expand that and I don’t know, maybe a bank has a bearing on can be licensed to go in to the barn area as far as roping,

wood working kinds of a business.

Do you want me to address that?

Anyone who you’ve got an answer to.

So the underground barn is I believe they’re going to be about 800 square foot total. So, the root cellar and walking cooler is one section. And then the other section would be the woodshop. So there are about 20 by 20 spaces

with 200 square feet

correct sorry.

1200 square feet for the barn.

And then for to address your question regarding the live work units whether they could be combined those units are probably gonna sell in the $400,000 range. And we’re really interested in keeping them as single units. The idea of combining them and getting close to 2000 square feet would be you’d be looking at a million dollars probably by the time you got done doing the architecture, but we are we in the PD planet states that we have 46 units and combining two of those with reduce it to 45. And I don’t believe that,

that that would work out with the city.

Mr. Goldberg?

Thanks, Chairman. Quick before my earbuds got me here. You know, I guess I think first addressing Commissioner Poland’s question about do we feel inclined to list What sort of businesses should be permitted or restricted from the neighborhood? I’m not inclined to take on that endeavor. I’m not sure. I’m not sure. I feel like that’s our job to do not harboring any concern about it. And I think if we kind of let it ride that will take care of itself. But with that said, I guess I’m inclined to put forward a motion. And I’m looking to see any hands jump up and you know, concerned about that, but I’ll just throw it out there for the following reasons. One, because in our package, the city status identified how the applicant met the review criteria of wellness them out, but our package identifies how each criteria has been met. Additionally, I always look favorably upon applicants who respond to feedback from the community. engage with the community who solicit feedback and then and then make changes as a result. So I appreciate that from Mr. Spaulding and the rest of his team. But additionally, beyond that, we did have our fair share of concerns raised by the public but there was also a lot of positive feedback from the public that really resonated with me. I can let’s just a couple of them. Jean Jasmine mentioned agriculture, animals and art. We know what a nice way to summarize your her perspective on this community and and I’m inclined to do anything that I tend to help enable that to come to her to this time that we love so much. Forgive me, Nettie, Penman mentioned wanting to be surrounded by fellow artists, community of artists and resonates with me is surely what surely Why? Again, forgive me for any mispronunciations of that she likes the idea of aging in place with a garden and the supportive for community. And she sees that in Longmont more so than our neighboring communities. And if we can nurture that and enable that here, you know, in this format, then I’m inclined to do so any said mentioned a sense of community, but also mentioned that this is forward thinking, and I’m aligned with that we we have plenty of, you know, traditional projects popping up all around, and we’re inclined to approve those as well. But there’s something special about this application. And, and so maybe I’ll finish with that. And so, given with that reasoning, I’m inclined to recommend, excuse me while I read PCR 2020 dash five B. And maybe I should just read it to get it right conditionally. Through the bond farm cohousing community preliminary pewdie contingent on city council approval of the concept plan amendments to remove that pedestrian trail and recommend approval of the bond farm annexation and rezoning plan. amendment application to city council finding that the review criteria have been met by 2020 deaths by B.

Thank you, Commissioner Goldberg, we have a motion on the floor to approve 2025 B, I would like to ask you if you’d be willing to slightly amended for a condition that I would like to see, which is to add a condition that the applicant will work with city staff to ensure that the photometric plan meets code standards. Because looking closely at the drawing, I’m not convinced that it does, but I’m also confused as to exactly what needs to be done to meet the standard. So just A caution of abondance to make sure the photometric

Are you okay with adding that to your emotion?

or short term? And yeah, happy to do that. So I think taking the motion that I mumbled out a moment ago and adding in that the applicant work with the staff to ensure that the project meets the photometric standards.

If that means if that means the burden then I’m comfortable with it.

Okay. And I’ll go ahead and second your motion on Do we have any further discussion?

Commissioner of commission polunin.

Sure, thank you. I just want to say that I am in favor for this. I do find that this meets 15 Oh, items A through E and 15. Oh, F for items a through see. It does seem like the biggest issue that we’re to that we’re gonna multiple times. One is the traffic. We went through that I am pretty confident that in the whole scheme of things that this isn’t going to add a exorbitant amount of traffic to the area. I think that the majority, these people are probably going to be the type of people who don’t make many trips. So I don’t believe that the traffic is going to be a huge concern for the surrounding area. The other one that was mentioned a couple times is architecture. I do agree, I believe it was Alex, who said that you could come up with several different designs in whatever design you’re going to come up with. At some point, somebody is going to have a problem with it. I’m not going to try to micromanage the designs. I think it’s a good design. I think when I look at it as a whole project, as it goes from spruce on down to The south and it goes into the farm area that they have. I think it’s a well, a well defined plan. I don’t see any big problems with it. Could you get a little picky about things maybe but that’s not what we’re here for. I think overall it’s a good plan architect juicing solid. So I mean favorite for this.

I just want to kind of get that out.

All right, great. Um, all I had my two cents, which is I will echo Commissioner honor on and Goldberg and Poland’s comments on, but I’ll summarize it with, I think, Miss Brooke. Her statement that this is a cohesive total concept design. That is what PhDs are supposed to be PhDs are supposed to be something that is better overall, than what we could get through the standard. Develop. And process, and I believe that this project needs that.

Any further comments, commissioners over?

Yeah, one last one. Thank you. I’d be remiss if I didn’t mention, there was one or two concerns raised by the public. neighborhood feedback. I think that identified concern that perhaps this commission has made up its mind before arriving today are and citing an example of unsigned approval documents as being included in the packet as an example of how the decision was made before we log in today. And I just want to make it abundantly clear that the reference I can only imagine the reference to the unsigned approval documents has to do with the three resolutions that are provided and In our packet, and there’s a space at the bottom for a signature. And it’s important to for the anyone who’s reading that those, because it is a little bit confusing, they all read approval of approval of approval of version A, B or C. But it just a point of clarification, a is approval as is. And that would give Chairman cernak the opportunity to sign on that line. Option B would be approval, but with a condition like we did here this evening, and Chairman chernykh will can will proceed to sign on that line if the vote passes. And then lastly, option C is approval of a denial or approval of not approving the project and a place for the chairman to sign there. So I just want to be abundantly clear that there’s no

good decision hasn’t been

accessory join here as well. The size of all combined accessory structures on the property. So I’m not going to walk through all the calculations as part of my presentation. But if the Commission has more specific questions, Zachary review the site plan waiver more detail should be able to provide more details for the condition x five please. So in terms of the review criteria analysis regarding criterion one, there’s a couple of areas that staff felt that it didn’t meet this criterion one is that the proposal does not comply with the current land use code requirements. And second, that structures on the property or illegal expanded or constructed that violate code building codes expired please. Regarding criterion two, the application is not yet in full compliance with all applicable city standards including drainage standards. Regarding criterion three, there are notable discrepancies between Boulder County property records and the application regarding the square footage of both primary structure and accessory structure what’s the ad was proposed. So there are no city planning or building permit records indicating that expansions for either structure to the floor area have been permitted. These discrepancies indicate that the structures were expanded without approvals and the expansion on each structure are illegal rather than non conforming. So structures expansions without proper approvals, creeps in compatibility and potential unsafe land use and building layout design. staff did find that revert review criteria for was met that’s not included on these slides. It’s in your packet. And also review criteria five and six are not applicable to this particular application. Next slide, please. So as mentioned earlier, the applicant has the burden to demonstrate that the application complies with the applicable review criteria. So next slide please. This slide reiterates options available to the commission as noted in the resolutions and click In the packet, again, either to uphold, reverse or modify the directors decision to deny the application as noted in resolution 686 P or succeed.

Next slide please.

The slide outlines the reasons why the application was denied including non compliance with code standards related to accessory structures and accessory guidelines and non compliance with review criteria One, two and three. As I noted before, as a result, the city requested the commission uphold the decision of the director to deny the site plan waiver application for 210 Lincoln Street. Next slide please. So that concludes my presentation. Although this slide asks for questions at this time, based on the procedural slide shown earlier, slide two, which we can go back to and reference as needed. The next step would be for the appellant slash applicant to present I believe x score are we presenting for the applicant this evening after the applicants presents The commissioner would open the public hearing if there are any members of the public that would like to speak on this item. After the public hearing, the Commission has an opportunity for questions and discussion. Before the commission entertains emotion there’s an opportunity for a bottle from the applicant and staff. So I just asked Teresa or other staff, is there anything else to note before we move to the applicant presentation?

If not, I would just say thank you commission and we can kind of move on to the next step.

I would note that it is a de novo review which means that the Commission applies the facts presented at the hearing to the criteria listed and makes an independent determination

Alright, let’s let’s move on with the appellants presentation then please.

Yes, hello everyone. This is Alex. score on I’m not able to show my video. It’s just not allowing me to.

Oh, there we go.

It’s good seeing you all. It’s been a long time since I’ve seen you. Thank you for extending this. I know that this is a smaller project than the one that you just heard. But it’s actually it’s a big deal for the person that’s living there. So I appreciate your time and your effort in understanding this and hopefully, you know, your opinion and your vote at the end. So Susan, could you bring up my presentation?

Certainly one moment.

Perfect. Everyone can see that.


they give you I just wanted to give you a visual focus of what we’re looking at. So this is the front house and behind that fence, that blue trims structure is edu. And I wanted to show you this picture to show that it is conforming to the size of and the scope of this neighborhood. If you go to the next picture, here’s a picture again, that blue trim with that yellow siding right there. There is the ad you in question. This is extremely typical

of the structures in

this area within the size and scope. But just to give you a visual idea of what what we’re we’re talking about inset structure right there. You go to the next slide, please. So the major issues is that it’s that an Edu which is allowed in the zone is too large in comparison to the front house. It was not properly permitted. We know that and the area is not accurately recorded and just to boil it down to layman’s term. So if you go to the next slide, to give some context, his house was built in 1940 and the records have it at 750 T square feet. I’m one of the first things that we did is because they didn’t have an ILC. That was acceptable by the city. We had Andy Patterson, who is a registered surveyor who does hundreds of projects. And I don’t think you could, I don’t think you could question his accuracy went out and measured it. And it is 1000 The house is 1036 square feet, half of which would be 511. So when were 518, and the ad that we’re proposing is 511. On the rear house record is 504. But then Andy Patterson verified as 903. Now the question of expanding gene brought bought the house in 1987. And the footprint has stayed the same. So and then let’s go to the next point in 1992. She converted the rear garage into an ad EU she did not expand the footprint she did not expand the footprint of the house. or anything like that. So when this was brought up in 2019, we have to go back and correct something that’s happening in 1992.

And of course,

it’s not going to fall within the guidelines that were made in 2018 when something happened in 1992. Now, we’re not disputing that she didn’t get the right permits for that at that time, but it has been in this condition and not a problem to the majority of the neighbors during during that whole time period. So then once Jean was notified of this, she did take the right steps and did start to go through the city and then did hire an architect. And the only reason why for that second violation was basically because of covid. She had no other place to live. Um, I took some steps, talking with some building officials, but also having my engineer going inspect the building. We had electrical engineers, Professional Engineers go inspect the building to make sure it was safe. And Jean Jasmine is an elderly lady that had an au that’s been up since 1992 and did reoccupy it, for the purposes of she would be living in her car, if she did be living into here, and it’s not acceptable, especially if she has a safe place to live, that’s actually safe. That’s inspected by professionals to not allow that. But now we’re here still continuing this process to try to do the right thing, right. So it’s not trying to circumvent it. Everything is is trying to do the proper thing the proper way. It’s just hard with the codes and the way that everything happened. Now between 1940 and 1987, I do not know what happened to the property if things got expanded, but not not properly permitted, or anything like that. I have no idea. I don’t know if gene has any idea, but the footprint stayed the same. Besides on the ad you I’ll show you there was a garage in the back. And then there was a three season porch. And that all got enclosed at you. But that three season porch, that whole footprint still stayed the same. She didn’t add anything on to it. And then she hired us in December. And now we’re here before you. Next slide, please. So, we have a couple of different options, as you can see in gray is the ad view that fits the records for what exists now what the survey or Andy Patterson has documented, which is half the square footage. So you as the commissioners have a couple different options of what you can do. And I’m going to go through the right review criteria and how I think we meet that too. But one is if if the denial is upheld, this is a big question. Because what happens, you know if the denials withheld, do we do you demo it does. What if the client doesn’t have enough money to demo a structure that are existing Does it stay vacant? Does it go neglected? It’s a property that’s there. So we have to face that challenge and deal with it in a humane but a responsible way. So you could allow it with modifications, also. That would be to demo a portion of the structure of the well, when we have them walled off. So obviously, you could approve it with modifications to leave it as we kind of presented, or we could demo those areas labeled storage. The problem with that is that you’re demoing something that isn’t made to be demo, so you’re causing more costs, and then aesthetically, you’re making the neighborhood actually more on pleasing to it, um, to fall within the guidelines to there’s carports and I believe that you saw those in the first two pictures, we could go back and look at those, and then those would comply to the area rules that Zack knows and are actually pretty complicated. But if you trust act numbers in our numbers, those would make everything comply with the structure being 50% less and everything else being 75% less. Um, or you could allow the same footprint that expired that existed in 1987 and have the ad you remain with or without the walls blocked off. And I’ll tell you why that’s a concern of choosing to have the walls blocked off or not having blocked off. Can we go to the next slide.

So here is that

carport in the back. The reason why I want you to consider keeping the car ports is because it snows in Colorado and this house does not have garages. So if we choose to eliminate either one of the car ports, which actually no one has a problem with your making an elderly lady or an elderly anyone that moves in or a young person I even shuffle off of my car removes what snow off of car and have it be exposed, um, and cause undue burden into a residence, a resident of Longmont that doesn’t need to have that burden on their, um, we don’t think that the car ports are really an issue with this square foot with the neighbors with fitting in context. Next slide, please. And so there there’s the front carport, again, it could be a garage, it could be bigger, but it’s a small little carport that isn’t an eyesore and well done. Next slide, please.

So the review criteria. The first one is that it’s consistent with the comprehensive plan and purpose. And actually, I actually want to quote two points of policy from Longmont that that aren’t on this slide. But there’s a pile along my policy 12 1.2 e. And it states anticipate and plan for challenging needs of the community and the diverse diversity of the city housing stock by encouraging the development of a range of housing types, size prices and densities. So that last sentence of encouraging the development of range of housing size prices and densities allowing for this at you falls in line with that everyone was at the bond farm meeting, and you might have caught me chuckled because someone said at us are what Longmont is actually trying to do for a variety of different reasons. There’s also a goal of Longmont 3.1. Ensure There’s our affordable and accessible housing options that fit the needs of the residents of all ages, abilities and income levels.


retro Fitting or destroying, or demoing or not approving this ad you increases the cost. Because if you theoretically, this ad you could be denied, we could demo it and essentially build the same square foot back up in a new more, I mean, obviously, it’s going to cost more because you have to rebuild the whole structure, labor shortages still abound. I I’m a builder here too. So it would be more expensive. So keeping this would actually fall in line within the review criteria one besides seeking structural size release. So that’s what we’re looking for is structural size relief, and then accurately recording of the existing structures, which I believe we can do by recording the plats that Andy Patterson created to update it to, to what what actually is, um, point number two complies with Sydney standards, the main point on the panel It was that it didn’t because there was a public work comment of that drainage needs to be taken care of. I called Mara. And I said, Hey, you know, I thought we addressed this. I actually did it through an email. I go, here’s where we address it. And she said, Yep, that that is acceptable. No further comments. So review criteria two is actually a checkmark that we have checked off. Um, if Can we go to the next slide. Our review criteria three is compatible with the existing surrounding properties in terms of its land use, yes, the site and building layout and design and access. So again, it’s only fixing the size, the size between the edu and the existing house. But please note that there’s a picture of this an area of view for reason, and that’s because

it would

If you if you didn’t know where the site was, and if you had to pick which one was which one of these houses were over built, which one of these lots had too much, Gene Jasmine’s would be one of the last ones that you pick. And that’s because some person with more money could buy her lot could tear it down, rebuild a bigger house, and then rebuild the same size or a bigger at you and that would be compatible with the city guidelines. So something larger than what exists right now would be considered compatible. So just because there’s a small house in front, and that’s making this back house not compatible, but I want you to keep that in mind when you’re making your decision that a larger thing could be in place. So thus, it’s compatible with the with the neighborhood in the size and its scope. Um, the city did state that partial use of the structure for the seller dressing dwelling unit may not be the most logical way And that goes with all the neighbors comments. So what we proposed doing was basically blocking it off. Um, so that she’s only using 511 square feet. The negative comments that we got the theme was that, you know, she built illegally, which we’re trying to adjust, and that she might expand into those other areas, right. So you could approve this with just approving the whole ad EU. Thus, that wouldn’t be an issue, that she wouldn’t be in compliance of expanding into those if the Edu itself is approved. I also want to note that there was three letters against it, but there was 14 letters for it. There was 14 letters, some of them long, some of them very well written in support of this verse, the verse the three that were not in support. Um, number four, that application does not add adversely affect surrounding properties and the natural environment? Um, I believe that this is a big point. And the city agrees that that we’ve met this criteria.

Could you go to the next slide, please?

And it and the next slide points out that point five and six are moved they really don’t apply with with what’s going on here.


review criteria

one, especially with the policies and the goals of what the city is trying to make and trying to have as a community I think we meet that number two was the drainage issue that that we solved. Number three was the the size, um, you know, fit within the context of the of the city and if you could build something bigger, something smaller obviously fits. Number four, what was number four? Number four, the city agreed with us. And number five and six don’t come. So we asked that planning and zoning can vote to allow the structure to be used as an ad EU which it legal which an ad EU is permitted. And then we’ll go to the building department and get the building permits for it in its existing size while allowing the other structures to remain. So I’ll leave it at that. That’s our presentation. Again, I thank you for standing up and considering this because it is a it is a at least a big, big issue to at least one person.

Thank you, Mr. Gore. Um, we will move on to the public hearing part of this on and we need to go through our process of allowing people to call in. So Susan, if we can put that up on our screen. Thank you. Um, if you want to call in and make a comment on this item, please call 1-888-788-0099 when you reach that phone number The meeting ID is 86202957430. So call 187880099. Enter in 8620 to 957430. You need about five minutes to take care of all the technicalities. With this. We’ll take a five minute break. Thank you

chair will wait for the livestream slide to

disappear. It looks like we’ve got five people waiting. I’m gonna let them in. Okay. So welcome to the callers tonight. Give us just a minute, and then we will call you one by one by the last three digits of your phone number.

Please stop listening to the live stream.

You may miss the opportunity when I try to call on you.


if you reduce the volume on the live stream that may help and looks like we’re ready. I’ll begin with the first caller. Your phone number ends in seven four. I’m going to ask you to unmute caller 744

Hello there. Hello, my name is Hi, I’m guessing I unmuted. So my name is Chris Mills. I live at 207 Lincoln Street. Also at the request of our neighbors who are essential workers and have a very early morning they’re in health care. They asked me to act as their property tonight. They live at 214. Lincoln, their names are melora and Ryan democ met. Thank you for allowing me this time to share my thoughts on this Jasmine’s appeal are going to be brief. It’s very late. We’re all a little bit tired. And I’m pretty sure we need about a nice stretch here. First, I’d like to say for the record, I am not particularly against ad use as a general rule. In fact, not that long ago, an ad you was approved. Just about a block north of here, this subject property which is right across the street from me, adhering to code and complying with all the appropriate regulations, it was approved, and then the structure was converted. It was not a retroactive request. I think this is actually great in line with long month density goals, and respectful of process and law. When I wanted to put a new roof on my house, I pulled a permit. When I wanted to upgrade my electrical service, I pulled a permanent when I wanted to put up a white picket fence, something I’ve always wanted, and not quite done with it yet, I pulled a permit. And what I wanted to enrich both the neighborhood and my own property value by removing the 40 year old dilapidated vinyl siding and replacing with a new age appropriate exterior on this incredibly cute Longmont classic home, I pulled a permit. Shouldn’t we all be held to that same standard? Shouldn’t we all have to comply with the rules and regulations set forth and ratified to the community as a standard for all of us. Acceptance of this proposal in any form was set an unwarranted precedent that permits are not truly necessary. Had this structure in question been modified and expanded responsibly and legally according to code And with the proper permits, and have Ms. Jasmine for the past 30 years, contributed appropriately to the community in line with the actual use of this structure. We would not be sitting here today, I would not be up past midnight having this discussion with this permission. There would be no question that this is not the case. As someone pointed out in one of the support letters that I read in the packet, the structure has been in place since 1987. And rented out since then. While Miss Jasmine who up until just a few years ago, was living remotely in Juneau, Alaska, had rented out both dwelling and two others Incidentally, at 211 Lincoln right across the street, which is adjacent to my property. Again, no evidence at the modifications and expansions were ever done legally no record of the fundamental changes that were made to the property anywhere. The implications are clear. In closing, Miss Jasmine should have complied with and abided by all codes and regulations, just like the rest of us must. From that day she decided to convert a garage into a dwelling. She forfeited her opportunity to go back in time when she knowingly and with clear intent disregarded this responsibility. This requirements in my four and a half years here living next door to miss Jasmine, and her many, many revolving door renters, she had never been a person you could take at her word. So please, please don’t accept her promises going forward. I want to see actions, not words. Compliance isn’t a choice. In the interest of maintaining the integrity of our neighborhood and our community, it must be compulsory. And I want to add one thing I wasn’t really I wasn’t really planned tonight, but I’m going to say just one more thing.

This notion of Miss Jasmine,

having to live in a car, and COVID and all this, I’m sorry, she just sold the house next door for more than $400,000. scot free does not owe anything. So I wonder, I just wonder where does the story start and I strongly support the directors decision in this matter, and I hope that this commission upholds that decision today. Thank you.

Thank you, Miss Mills.

Susan, who’s next?

We’re going to unmute 907907

There you are.

Hi. My name is Ron elms.

And I live at 215 Lincoln streets and I would like to thank for the opportunity to speak this evening, I do apologize for adding to the conditions already long evening. I’d like to say first that I’ve lived in Boulder County nearly all of my life and in Longmont since 1982. And prior to this, I’ve had no difficulties getting along with neighbors. Previous to my current situation. I now live across the street from to 10 link in the property with a proposed edu and for 18 years from 2002 until two days ago, I live next door to a property owned by Jean Jasmine at 211 Lincoln street which is just sold. I also purchased my house at 215 Lincoln street from Miss Jasmine, perhaps more than any other neighbor therefore I think I have plentiful and difficult experience in living next to and living with consequences from the actions of the property owner in this appeal. I will not go into great detail except to say that I’ve had no choice But to watch over the years as a fairly regular stream of workmen, and the owner herself, have engaged in in a number of projects to expand, alter and improve the properties next to and across from me without ever demonstrating evidence of a permit. All this so the back houses as she calls them could be rented without proper permission or approval from the city. Nevertheless, my objections to this proposed at you are not of a personal nature. The character gender, age and special circumstances of the applicant should have no bearing on the case, because this decision will directly affect not only her, but also her neighbors and indeed all city residents who are required to secure the proper authorizations to make changes on their homes. If an exception is made in this situation, what will prevent any future homeowner from making uncommitted changes please Ignorance after the fact and citing this case as a precedent. I would also say I am not opposed to accessory dwelling units, even those in my neighborhood, even when next door if done properly. For example, when an illegal structure is demolished and the new one built, I recognize except and even applaud the city’s 2018 change in policy to allow more ad use and appropriately zoned areas. I also applaud the efforts of the planning and development services and code enforcement to make sure that any work done on an au is both legally permitted and conforming. According to documents. Neither applies to the back structure at 210, LinkedIn. For all these reasons, I hope that this appeal will be denied so that the efforts of the director and members of code enforcement will not be undermined. Lastly, I appreciate those who would make a distinction between holdings I’m on to the letter of the law versus the spirit of law, or in this case, the letter of the code or the spirit of the code. But in this instance, are not one but two properties. The owner was for her own benefit, violating both the letter and the spirit in a way that directly and negatively impacted her immediate neighbors, including myself as a neighbor. Rewarding such long term behavior would provide a problem causing model for other homeowners and long. Of course, any compassionate person would feel sorry for Miss Jasmine. If she experiences difficult times as a result of this situation. I do. But she has brought these difficulties on herself. The neighbors who are only trying to protect the quality of their own lives have not done this to her. And the city functionaries who are tasked with upholding from clients and not personnel are not themselves persecuting anyone. They’re only looking out for and protecting greater Good. They deserve our thanks. And I also the mind, and I thank you all as well for hearing you tonight and for all your time and efforts. Good night. Mr. elms.

Will you hang up? Can you hold on for a second?

I’m sure.

Commissioner I yeah. I gotta ask you a question. Go ahead. Sorry. Ask you

Gina. We don’t normally question colors or public hearing. So

talk to Mr. May about quickly.

Okay, Eugene.

My name is not Eugene. I don’t know.

I know, Mr. Holmes. I just wanted you know, I don’t enjoy talk to me, which is Eugene. mystery. This gentleman seems to have evidence that might be directly relevant here. Am I allowed to ask more questions of this person?

I know it’s not typical, but this isn’t typical.

It’s a public hearing to present evidence these are

the public providing testimony

that that’s generally not what I’ve seen in the context of these hearings or for city council hearings.

Right. It’s it’s a different type of thing. And if we’re bringing in more evidence, and I guess there’s the opportunity of both the city and the applicant or the appellant to rebut this information, if this gentleman has potentially directly relevant information that he says he saw, which I would like to ask him more about, to supplement this record, or to make this record more full. I’d like to go down that road.

You know, ultimately, I do I think it’s a determination by the chair. I don’t think that it’s typical procedure in these land use hearings to question

members of the public who participate in the public hearing.

Right, I have in 10 years serving on planning and zoning. I have never witnessed us once going through a q&a during the public hearing. That’s, that’s why I cut you off so sharply, Commissioner height.

Now I understand. And I wasn’t going to ask questions without going through this process first. Yeah.


to stay consistent with how this commission has always worked. I think we need to stay consistent with with not doing q&a with the public during the public hearing part of our meetings. So

thanks. Thank you very much. I appreciate the opportunity to speak this evening and I appreciate all of your efforts in light.

Thank you, Mr. Holmes. Susan, let’s move on. I think it’s number 962.

That’s correct. Caller 962.

Do you hear us? I’m gonna ask you to unmute


There you are. Can you hear us?

I can’t hear you. Can you hear me? We sure can. You may begin.

This is Peter Spaulding at 113 spruce Avenue

developer for Vaughn farm.

I would just like to talk about the character of Jean Jasmine. She is one of the most giving individuals I know and she’s probably one of the very few people in our community that actually works for the bond farm Neighborhood Association and trying to bring people together to do community events for the bond farm neighborhood park, she’s been an active member in helping to clean and to organize people to come and care for the park itself. I know some of the adversity that she’s gone through with her neighbors. While some of it’s justified, I think that those neighbors need to look at their own properties as well as for as for compliance issues, too. I think Alex gore brings up a really good point regarding the fact that that property could be scraped in something much larger could be brought in. You know, it could be a five bedroom house with an 80 unit. So I think what she’s doing is very hidden, you can’t very concealed you can’t see the unit from either side of the road. And the tenant that that lives in the existing structure in front of her property or the Edu that she’s going for. They get along really well. And I think the 14 letters of support indicate how well Jean is accepted in the neighborhood. I’m just going to keep this short but I support Alex in jeans.

proposal and I

hope to see a positive outcome come from this. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Spaulding. Um, next is number 128.

Call or one to eight.

I’m asking to have you unmute yourself. Can you hear me

one to eight

Make sure you’ve stopped the live stream.

Caller one to eight.

Can you unmute?

There you are. Do you hear us?

Call her one to eight. Looks like you just unmuted


Oh, looks like she or he just muted themselves again and unmuted.

Hello, can you hear us

I can see that you’re look like you’re unmuted, but we’re not hearing you.

Can you hear me now?

Yes, we can.


My name is Brad Campbell. I live at 16270 Ocean View drive in Juneau, Alaska. I’m Jean Jasmine’s son. Now she made the mistake of turning the garage into living space without first permitting it that she has done. Would like to comment though, on, you know, where she’s what she’s done, you know, having those rental properties. She spent years down in Mexico volunteering at orphanages, and a program called Casa de esperanza allows poor kids from villages to come into the city and pursue it She’s put in numerous years in 10s, if not hundreds of thousands of dollars into volunteering and helping poor kids down in Mexico. So my mother is 76 years old, and she had some health issues, which makes her especially at risk for contracting the coronavirus gene. It’s a safe place to live. And she deserves a safe place to live. And to keep this short, and I asked the Planning Commission to please work with Jeanne and improve it to you. I appreciate your time.

Thank you, Mr. Campbell. Um, okay. Susan, do we have any other colors?

No chair.

That was it.

Okay, I’ll close the public hearing. And it looks like we go to questions and discussion on Amongst the commission, quick question for city attorney may just on on our process here


when we do questions and discussion,

commissioners can address a question to whomever they wish. On the applicant, the applicants representatives on you know, city staff. Are there any guidelines in an appeal scenarios we have tonight that you want us to adhere to?

Your muted

chair sure neck. City Attorney Eugene may hear no, those same procedures would apply here. It’s a de novo hearing. Staff and the applicant are here to clarify and expand upon the presentations, they will have a chance to rebut the evidence presented as a sort of separate section of the agenda. But for purposes of commission discussion, commissioners are free to question the parties. And just to be clear after that rebuttal period by the applicant, the Commission does no further discussion after that.

They can if there’s a motion, there can be

debate on the motion. Usually the evidentiary portion of the hearing is closed at that point. And then if there’s any additional augmentation of the record, then staff and the appellant would have an opportunity to rebut that or respond in line with due process.

Okay. All right. keep us on track.

No, you’re, you’re doing a great job. Okay.

Questions from the committee. Commissioner Hi,

Mr. Schumacher, um, is the issue the size of the principal unit and the size of the assessor unit and the size of the additional assessor units on site. Is that the main issue other than I think there’s a drainage problem that may or may not have been addressed, but as I’m looking at this, I’m looking at square footage isn’t making numbers work. Is that the problem?

Mr. High? Yes, that’s my understanding is the primary issue is related to the size of the structures and the fact that parts of the structures or some of the structures never got building permits.

So in part two, there’s a disparity between the sizes measured in the field versus sizes reported in Boulder County’s assessor records, suggesting as somebody may have witnessed or may not have witnessed this particular building had been expanded without permits. When a building is expanded without permits is that correctable?

Chairman schoeneck Commissioner Hi, I think I will step into this conversation Jenny Marsh assistant city manager. So certainly there are options to correct which is why we condemned and had the Edu removed previously because it was not built with building permits you as the commission knows, the city adopts codes to ensure life safety. We certainly want all our residents to live in dwelling units that are properly permitted. And in the case of this edu, that was not the case. And I would suggest to the council or the Planning Commission to remember that we’re talking about denial of a site plan waiver and that denial to Commissioner heights. Point is based on the language that you will see on page seven of your staff report which talks about the total floor area. And you’ll note that they use the mandatory language which is shall meet those percentages. And in in all three of those, all of the percentages are not met in that mandatory size requirement. We certainly could work with the applicant in a different format, but certainly not in a site plan waiver process to look at other options to remedy but the site plan waiver is not the remedy. And that is why it has been denied.

But that is exactly part of what my question is, how does someone solve a problem of having illegally built something? Is it fixable? Possibly not in this format. So the denial, I want to make sure I understand this, or the rejection or the upholding of the rejection of this

This waiver

doesn’t foreclose the appellant, an applicant from skin, this cat from a with a different knife. She could come in and go through full site plan review after and get her buildings fixed and qualified for an au. Is that

correct? Chairman Sri Lankan Commissioner head, so there may be a couple of other remedies via a site plan approval and proper building permits which in this case, I would suggest proper building and permitting is actually first and foremost the most important thing for anyone living in a home.

So there are a couple avenues

for the size of Miss Jasmine’s property that we could look at potentially, and certainly this is not the venue to promise that those options would work which may be things Like, would a duplex be allowed. And there be some attachment there’s two homes. And I think Mr. Gore makes a great point. We want housing in our community. But I don’t think blocking off two rooms and suggesting their storage makes for good housing, nor does it make for in long term enforcement, potential for staff. That certainly opens the doors for subsequent buyers to continue to change the format of those buildings. And get us back to really where we are here today, which all started, I think, as you read from code enforcement, so there may be an avenue via duplex. And there’s also some there were also some changes in this particular zoning district, from the old code to the new code, where you could actually have two principal dwelling units on a property so there would be some room for discussion around those options.

But make sure I understand this waiver of site plan review is be denied. Because there’s they can’t show compliance with existing code

because she,

there’s destructions or illegally built. Think I follow that, thank you.

Um, I’m gonna possibly be asking the same question. So, Johnny, please bear with me, but I’m going to put it in different terms. So I need to understand, um, somebody comes to you and says, We want a site plan waiver. So there they’re asking to not go through site plan review. If you deny the waiver, can they then turn around and do the site plan review? The reason I’m asking is because it seems like everybody in these letters is saying that if we uphold the denial of the site plan waiver. The only option is demolition.

Chairman sure neck so I can appreciate that folks writing in might think that is the case. However, I would state that is not the case.

Okay. So the appellant would have the opportunity to proceed with the city by going through a full site plan review

and not ask for a waiver of that process.

I would say there is potential to explore other avenues to get approval for an accessory dwelling unit. However, I can’t say this evening that that was for sure be approved. administratively either or be an absolute Yes. However, we are not approving the waiver simply because it can’t meet the code statements and percentage requirements right

Let me phrase the question another way on if the denial of the site plan waiver is upheld by this commission, does that force the applicant out onto the street?

Currently, the applicant does not have a certificate of occupancy to occupy the structure. We certainly empathize with Miss jasmine and understand that she currently is seeking a place to live in our building official and our code enforcement staff have been working to make sure that we aren’t turning her into the street I think is certainly where we’re at. However, there is not a certificate of occupancy at this point that would state that you could live there indefinitely. Okay.

One thing I don’t understand that all this discussion is about that at you and Miss Jasmine living in the EU, but she’s the owner of the property. Why is she not living in the primary house? Perhaps that’s best

question for the applicant. Yes.

Mr. Gore is Jasmine, can you answer my question?

Yes. Yes, I can.

The I want to say that the people that were opposed to my having an ad EU or a US said that I did it for my own benefit. And I want to just let you know that I’ve been a volunteer all my life, in my home for orphans in Mexico, in Red Cross, and in Habitat for Humanity. I have volunteered my time and my money and that’s what I’ve used the The money for always and

I have

I have a renter a tenant, very good tenant in the front house in at 210. And I need that income for just living. I have always lived very, very simply, um, and I just want a simple place for myself to live and not have to evict a very good tenant that needs that house to. So if I don’t get to live in the back house, in the what if the ad was not approved, I will have to go and find Something else


I think you can hear the anger of my neighbors who complained. It’s not a good place for me to be just health wise. And this 14 neighbors that approved or supported me were very it was very good to hear. So I would go find a place to live somewhere else where there’s more positive energy. That’s how I can answer that.

Okay, thank you for that. Um, I know another Commissioner had a question. A commission runner.

Well, I kind of

I kind of got the answers.

It’s a very

tough situation the commission is in right now.

I personally respect the city’s willingness to really apply the standards and

stick with it.

But at the same time, I asked the question, what the standard is. When I read this rule for the first time, I questioned it. And this is a perfect example why I questioned it. If you double the front house square footage today, if you put a second slot for a make it 2000 square feet or 24,000 square feet house,

you’re making the ad EU


And I asked that question, why is that? Does that make sense? It doesn’t. And that’s why I’m kind of split up now. I feel the absurdity of the rule. But also I feel like you know, we need to comply to the rules, because the rule is legal. And that’s the


we control the development.


I don’t know. I just wanted to put that out in my right to say that if you double the square footage of the front house, the back would be compliant.

let’s address that to Brian Schumacher. Question. Yeah, so that would be one option is to expand the existing principal structure to have that to be larger than one half of the square footage of the accessory dwelling unit.

So my question is that why does that make sense?

Well, I think the purpose of the standard applies more often in residential single family, neighborhoods and perhaps residential mixed neighborhood or duplexes might be allowed. And the standard applies across the board to all residential zoning districts where there’s single family detached structures, and the intent was to limit the size of the accessory dwelling unit so it wouldn’t be out of character with the single family neighborhood.

Commissioner flag

Thank you.

I don’t often say while working in Denver, but I have been This situation, I know I hate to bring that up. But sometimes if you do not have a certificate of occupancy required, people end up moving into places that are really not habitable. Really not. And that’s why it’s important to have a certificate of occupancy. It protects people. So if we’re denying that someone can go ahead and just live in a place that has not been permitted and gone through all the correct reviews, that you and I, I think I can speak that you and I think should be there to protect us, all of us, so that we all have good housing and you end up with situations that are just hard where people have nowhere to turn and then the zoning departments or inspections has to basically step in and shut down a place. Because CEOs are not issued or the dwelling places simply not appropriate for human habitation. So my tendency is to say, look for another remedy, but uphold the decision of the planning Development Services Director because we have to have certain kinds of standards so that we make sure that we have living spaces that are appropriate and that we can defend as being habitable. That’s part of our responsibility to

Mr. Goldberg.

Thanks, Chairman,

Commissioner, Omron, I echo your frustration and recognizing that we’re in a conundrum here and commission interplay I appreciate your perspective on standing by the rule of law and recognizing that they’re there for a reason they’re in place for a reason.

Two quick,

clarifying questions actually for city attorney may, if you’re available.

No, no, Eugene. Good question.

We received several

notes of support speaking to our app via the appellants character. All of the speaking to some of the good that she’s done. Her volunteerism and other qualities that are outstanding is a person’s character, something that we should be considering in this review process today.

Chairman and commission

You know, this appeal is about the

application of the code to a site plan waiver application. And I would encourage and advise the commission to apply the code criteria as they appear in our ordinance. That is that is the law for the city of Longmont and you know, character and policy considerations are not code.

Those those are decisions for policy makers.

And that isn’t really the role of the Commission in this context in this form.

Okay, thanks. We’re just one more for you. Or we have a previous violations are those something that we should take into consideration when reviewing

this project?

Again, I think I would say pretty much what I said in my first response, that this is a site plan waiver application to be measured against the code criteria. You know, I think that that part of the role of the commission is to weigh the credibility of witnesses and evidence. And that may factor in you know, that that is that is your role as a commission. But you’re looking at the evidence presented against the criteria of the code and making a determination

Did I answer your question?

100% Thanks, Mr. Master.

Yeah, I guess

you know, just to drop a seed with the rest of the Commission. Yeah, this this is sticky for sure. We can you I start inclined to and defer to our city staff as the experts most of the time, and their decision making the weighs heavy on me, and it inspires me anyways. But we’re here to evaluate that review and those decisions made. So I recognize that as a challenge and On the flip side, I’m able to turn to the public contributions today. You know, some of the feedback really resonated, that we need to make sure that we’re holding everyone to the same standard. Compliance isn’t a choice. We’re at the risk of setting a precedent. Perhaps the reason why we’re in this position, and the reason why the appellant is here today was from decisions that were self imposed. So I think I’ll stop there and turn to the rest of the commission for discussion. And before I can make any stance here,

Russian rolled around.

Sorry, I know that frustrated but my first

question comes from

this question that we’re being asked. You’re basically asking us, if it is okay. Not to get

occupancy permit.

Obviously, it’s not okay.

And if that’s the question, you’re asking us, that’s redundant. You shouldn’t ask that question. It’s not okay. But if this is an appeal coming to us, I would assume that you’re asking about the rule itself.

It is obvious that

the rule is not compliant.

But my frustration comes room.

There’s something really absurd about the room.

And what we are denying from the applicant. To me, at least in my heart is unfair, even though she doesn’t have permit for occupancy,

which is wrong.

So that’s why my dilemma is like, why are we being asked this question this way? creates my frustration. Thanks.

Mr. Gore.

Thank you for allowing me to respond because I think this is the crux of the question. And especially the crux since the people that oppose it brought it up and made a good point about permits and precedents. And we aren’t asking the question whether we should not get permits, or whether this should be a precedence because they’ll work that this has to be folded that we have to go through planning and zoning first, to then go to the building department, which we’ve already engaged with to get the permits, which the commissioner brought up will help ensure that it is a safe structure that this is a structure that someone can live in. Now, the the issue comes up

in, in, in, in two ways.

Actually. One we’ve, you know, I hate to bring up Denver too. We’ve done hundreds of houses in Denver, and it goes in the same process of going through the planning and zoning. And we’ve never had this weird denial because what it probably should have been is adjust this and

change this.

Keep modifying until we get the correct answer. But this is a denial which and and i think honestly it’s a dial because we are then ready commanded to go to this committee, because you are all human beings. And sometimes we see that there are flaws in in the code, no code can be perfect. And no code can take in every single situation.


it does

what doing if you think what’s right trumps the actual technicalities, which we know that we can’t meet, which we are trying to remedy. And to think that is, this is going to set a precedence of of allowing people to do this, I can tell you that this is the harder way to do it. And I know that because we’ve done it before where this has happened. It’s never gotten to this condition, but this is not a position that anyone wants to get in. This is not a risk anyone wants to take even in building. You know, when the inspectors come by you don’t even want to hide something even if you think you can get away with it because if you get caught, you’re screwed.


what I’m what we are essentially asking you and and what we heard from planning and zoning is to literally bring this up to you guys for your decision, because this rule does not make sense in this certain cases, this square footage thing, because then we can go after this to the building department. And it has been kind of messy and frustrating, because we’ve been asked from the city who I have to admit, are pretty great. We’ve worked with a long time, but they kept questioning us. How are you going to get your Why don’t you have your permits? We can’t. We can’t approve this. You don’t have permits.

We have to go through planning and zoning before we can get permits.

And so

I really, I don’t

know if I’m summing this up


But I think it goes to the point that was just being made that I follow. It goes to this one question is are you allowed to make the decision when things don’t make sense, and I was in the army You are supposed to follow rules. But you know, when you’re not supposed to follow certain rules, and you don’t, and you are not supposed to cross those lines, and this isn’t the equivalent to that that’s another level. But we’re dealing with a similar situation where if you had to write a code and and remedy this where it would be something like a house under so many square footage can have more than 50%. Great, that would remedy this code that isn’t here. Right? If you’re, if we’re trying to answer the question, how does a 1992 house that’s built in 1992 apply to codes made in 2018? It doesn’t. It doesn’t apply to those codes.


that doesn’t mean that we that you can’t make the decision that the square footages is allowed in is a something that doesn’t burden this community actually helps property values fits within the context and then we can move on to the building, the building permit where we address those health, safety, welfare issues.

Okay, Commissioner Hi.

I’m gonna start playing I think Miss jasmine and Mr. Gore here are under are here under the wrong procedure as requested a waiver from the director. There are certain standards that feed back to obtain that way from from the director. The director says they don’t meet the standards. If you look at the standards, you know 15 oh 2070 c three. You have to comply with 15 Oh, 2055 and 15. Oh 552 says you’re in compliance with all safety standards. They’re not ever stupid in occupancy, they don’t meet the square footage. The directors decision to deny the waiver was correct. That doesn’t mean that Miss Jasmine doesn’t have another means by which to correct are problems, which is to not seek the waiver, go through full site plan review.

Frankly, my two cents is the same thing. I don’t understand why we’re here with an appeal when there are other options. Commissioner polen?

Yeah, I agree. I agree with a commissioner heighten and new Commissioner chairperson sure that we are not here to change a code that was written. That’s we’re not to debate whether the code is right or wrong. That’s for another time. That’s for somebody else to take up another challenge or there’s another process for that. We are to apply the code to the situation. Find the code to the situation means that we, for me, it means that we uphold the planning and zonings decision to deny The certificate of waiver, applicant Jasmine does have another are several other ways that she can approach this. There are some first steps that they can take to try to rectify some things. They can maybe even approach to see if if the code can be changed at some future date. But for this date, we have our code and that’s what we have to follow.

Commercial Goldberg

Yeah, nicely put Commissioner pull and I appreciate that summary and the perspective from Commissioner height as well.

So I think with that,

and again, looking for any red flags if we’re not allowed to make a motion at this time, but I think we’re okay. I’d be inclined to move that. We have pulled decision of the Planning and Development Services Director finding that the site plan waiver application does not meet the review criteria, which doesn’t.

Let’s go to city attorney may let’s make sure we’re in proper procedure.

Chairman Sir nakki read my mind. So I’m looking at the list. It sounded like there was rebuttal by staff and the appellant. Maybe you want to just formalize it and make sure that they’ve had that opportunity?


The comment with the motion if

the commission may want to adopt one of the pcrs in the packet as their

written findings. Okay, thank you. Attorney mag on commissure teta. Let’s, let’s proceed with with your comments. We’ll get back to Commissioner Goldberg. Motion mean to unmute yourself, please.

I just like second.

Okay, good.

Okay, well, we’ll we’ll, before we get to the second, we need to figure out exactly what the motion is. Um, but um, let’s, let’s do this. We need to have a commissioner hype, please.

Are you telling me not to forget to request the rebuttal?

That’s what I was just going to do. Thank you. Um, we need to have a formal chance for rebuttal from the applicant or her PR representative. Mr. Gore is Jasmine.

Yep, I’ll only say one thing and then turn it over to miss Jasmine because I think that you guys have heard my perspective. The only thing I wanted to clarify is that we did not go in requesting site plan review wavering. This was the final The city told us to do. And the reason why I wanted to make that clarification is because I don’t want you guys to think that we came in trying to skirt some sort of rules. We went into the city sat down with them, ask them what process should we do? This was where we regret directed. We came to this as what process should we now do? And then we’re directed to this to this meeting. I just want to make that clear that we weren’t trying to waive something or try to underskirt anything it was in conversation with them and in direction with them.


This doesn’t.

Well, I totally acknowledge and totally regret that I did not get a permit when I

remodeled the garage into a dwelling

and I want to make that right. Also, I want to make it Because the square footage argument, I don’t know if everyone understands I did not increase the square footage of either the front house or the garage, remodel the inside of them. And

so, I don’t know if that makes a difference but

and last thing just for your consideration because we have spent so much time on this.

This square footages is correct.

If we block off

those other two rooms,


That’s literally what all of this work is coming down to.

But besides that, we would have to submit to the county that these are the correct square footages because by the surveyor So that’s the

heart of the issue.

And if all Am I still, if we, if I can have the square footage of the the garage conversion without those two other rooms that I’ve blocked off and will not use, and if we have to tear those off of the building

I’ll do that.

And if I have to eliminate other structures on the property, I’ll do that. It seems a shame but I did not get permits for them. I put the money in needy places and I just didn’t do it. So I regret that I asked for some kind of leniency and understanding and to help

With this situation

anything further

Mr. Gordon is Jasmine.

Not just that I do respect the city’s need to have rules and regulations and I don’t deny that they’re very important. And I’ve had a structural engineer come through the house and and approve it as being totally livable, and also a electrical engineer and a plumber. Engineer but of all said everything is up to code and standards.

It’s not a bad place to live at all. So,

okay. Thank you,


You had started to talk about emotion, um, as we’ve been advised by city attorney may more specificity with that.

Chairman and opportunity for staff will recall I’m sorry.

Oh, staff rebuttal. Yep. Okay. Thank you. Sorry. Anyway,

Chairman cerknica. members of council. Gosh, I am so backwards. I was here last night at 11 o’clock to Sorry, I’m not with it. So, commissioners, staff like the commission are obligated to follow the policy that is adopted. And in this instance, the standards and the criteria and the policies that are currently adopted were not met. And I believe the applicant has indicated that they acknowledged that those criteria are not met, in addition to building codes not being followed. And with that, I don’t have anything further. Thank you.

Thank you, Johnny. Okay, so you Now I believe we can proceed with a discussion about emotion Commissioner Goldberg.

Thanks, Chairman. Yeah, I think I’ll just

go ahead and resubmit the motion with the proper identification. I think what I’m recommending or what I’m motioning to approve PCR 2026. A, which is a resolution of the planning and zoning commission to uphold the Planning and Development service directors decision to deny a site plan waiver application for 210 Lincoln’s

Commissioner teta

and I’d like second

Okay, so motion to approve tzr 2020 dash six a has been moved and a while seconded there any further discussion about this motion?

city attorney may can the discussion be from the applicant? I believe it’s only amongst the commission.

You are correct, Chairman.

Okay. That evidentiary portion of the hearing I would consider to be over. It is amongst discussion amongst the commission and then a vote.

Okay, thank you.

Okay. Seeing no, no further discussion about the motion. Let’s take a vote those in favor, raise your hand and say aye. Aye.

Those opposed?

Any abstentions?

Okay, Jane that passes unanimously seven to zero.

Now, I do not have a

any sort of announcement to read and city attorney may. Usually I make some sort of statement about what steps would be from here. But we are the final this decided the final decision body or final deciding body on. Do you want to clarify for everybody who’s still present as to what might happen from this point? Or what what the applicant could do.

Chairman sure neck. You are correct. You’re the final decision maker here appealable only to court of competent jurisdiction.

It did sound like

assistant city manager Marsh was suggesting a conversation about proper options. And I will have to say I don’t know what all those options are. But I think we saw some of the limitation of the site plan waiver process and that there are other processes that may yield better results.

Okay, thank you. Um, we still okay, that concludes this item on we still have more to our agenda, which includes a final call for the public invited to be heard. So I’m Susan, we need to put our Oh, thank you Mr. Gore. Thank you Miss Jasmine. Appreciate your time. I know it’s late on and we’re going to proceed with our the rest of our agenda. Um, Susan, could we put the slide up that shows the the phone number for people to call in on if they want to speak about something that was not on tonight’s agenda. The phone number to call is 1888780099. Enter the meeting, Id 862 02957430 so again, call 1887880099 enter in the ID 8620 to 957430. We’ll take a five minute break to let all the magic electrons do their thing.

Susan, I don’t know if you’re still there I lost track of time. So I don’t know how close we are to five minutes.

Cuz like five minutes to me.

We’re probably close.

We’ll just wait for the slide to clear the stream. Okay.

Looks like we’ve only got six people watching now. And I know a couple of our staff are on that. So I am not seeing anybody. Chair.

Okay, great. Thank you, Susan. So we’re closing the final call public invited to be heard on any items from the commission.

Commissioner Goldberg.

Again, just wanted to say that, man, this ain’t always easy. You know, despite being late, despite having you know, so many projects before us and where we can, you know, virtually High Five at the end and know that we did a good thing. Sometimes we get projects like the one before us just that we just finished with somehow you know you did the right thing but it feels real bad. But I wanted to thank the commission for a good discussion and I think coming up with the right decision.

Anything else from the commission?

Thank you, Commissioner Goldberg. Any items from council representative Aaron Rodriguez.

Thank you Commissioner Schroeder. What a barn burner. Tell you what the Commission does not disappoint. And there’s definitely a lot of very good points brought up tonight on both topics that I think the council will have to address at one point or another. Obviously the bone farm project will be coming before Council and then also looking at our ad EU rules is definitely of great interest to the council. The email was actually already sent to city manager Domingues from the mayor asking specifically for agenda item concerning ad use. So I’ll definitely be able to hopefully relay some of the questions that the Commission has when we have that discussion. So thank you again, all so much for your service.

Thank you very much. Any items from planning manager Johnny Marsh?

Chairman? Sure. commissioners. Thank you for lady I mean, I appreciate all your hard work. We will have a meeting next month. I think right now we only have one item on the agenda. So hopefully it won’t be at 1246 or have


Alright, well, thank you very much on want to extend a special thing. Thanks to Jane Madrid and Heather McDonald and Susan Wallach for running everything behind the scenes. We really truly can’t do it. Without you, and you’re staying up just as late as us. So really appreciate it. Jane just sent me an email saying, good morning, Commissioner schoeneck. Here are the easy hours to sign on. All right, unless I hear from anybody

saying no, we are adjourned. Have a good night All night.

Transcribed by