Longmont City Council – Regular Session – April 23, 2024

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TSrJ4mr9wtM
Video Description:
Longmont City Council – Regular Session – April 23, 2024

6:34
Good evening, everyone and welcome to the April 23 2024. Regular city council meeting. I would wait till everybody is ready. I just kind of started without asking. So you can watch the city council media meeting on the city’s YouTube channel or unlock public media.org forward slash watch on Comcast channels eight or eight at can we have a roll call please done?

7:09
Absolutely. Mayor Peck present councilmember Crist

7:12
present.

7:13
Councilmember Duggal Ferring. Here, Councilmember Martin, Councilmember McCoy, Councilmember Rodriguez, Councilmember Yarborough stand for the pledge.

7:31
United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

7:46
As a reminder to the public, only all residents and employees of the city council may be may speak during the first call public invited to be heard, and you must provide your address on the signup sheet before the meeting. Each speaker is limited to three minutes. Anyone may speak on the second reading or public hearing item and you are asked to add your name to the speaker list for that specific item before the meeting. Anyone may speak during final call public invited to be heard. Members of the audience shall refrain from disruptive, vulgar or abusive language applause, heckling or other actions that interfere with the orderly function of this council. Now we have to approve minutes can we have May I have a motion for the April 9 minutes?

8:37
For yourself session minutes as presented. Second.

8:41
Moved by Councillor McCoy seconded by Councillor Hidalgo. fairing. Let’s vote.

8:52
Thank you That passes unanimously. Do we have any agenda revisions tonight done?

8:58
We don’t have an agenda revision. Mayor we have well, we have a substitute ordinance for the ethics ordinance on second reading. It’s in hardcopy at your desk. Formatting was fixed, there are no substantive wording changes is just the formatting was a little off. Okay. And just a reminder that the presentation TVs are broken as your feed at your desk so you have paper presentations this evening.

9:26
Okay. So I guess the audience wouldn’t be able to see the presentations when they’re being presented. Is that correct?

9:36
It would appear that it is that is not going to work? Yes. Okay. One working TV is not showing presentation. We’ll see. Okay.

9:47
Are there any motions from city council to direct the city manager to add agenda items to future agendas? Seeing none Can we have the city manager’s report?

10:04
No report Mayor Council.

10:07
We do have a special presentation it is a proclamation designating the month of April as Parkinson’s Awareness Month in Longmont. I have so many papers up here because I’m just trying to find them all. So, a proclamation designating the month of April 2024 as part of Parkinson’s Awareness Month in Longmont, Colorado, whereas Parkinson’s disease is a chronic progressive neurological disease, and is the second most common neuro neuro degenerative disease in the US, affecting almost a million people with one person being not being diagnosed every nine minutes. And whereas Parkinson’s disease and related health issues are the 14th leading cause of death in the US, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. And whereas it is estimated that the total national economic burden of Parkinson’s is approximately $52 billion each year. And whereas research suggests the cause of Parkinson’s Disease is a combination of genetic and environmental factors. But the exact cause and progression of the disease is still unknown. There is no objective test or biomarker for Parkinson’s disease, and there is no cure or medication to slow or halt the progression of the disease. And whereas the symptoms vary from person to person, and include tremors slowness of movement and rigidity, difficulty with balance swallowing, chewing and speaking, cognitive impairments and dementia, mood disorders, skin problems and sleep difficulties. Whereas researchers, caregivers and medical professionals are working to improve the quality of the life of persons living with Parkinson’s disease. Now therefore, Joan Peck Mayor by virtue of the authority vested in me in the City Council of the City of Longmont do hereby proclaim the month of April 2024 as Parkinson’s Awareness Month in Longmont, Colorado who is receiving this come on up

12:36
this is a horrible disease I’ve had friends that have had this disease and it is debilitating.

12:54
Ranking Derby just like to continue on common symptoms of Parkinson’s and I think you’ll be able to relate to some of them. Number one is touching or shaking your hands limbs face or Muslim faith or nameless small handwriting usually getting usually happening sudden we may I used to start out with big and I’m down to the tip of a pencil sudden loss of smell, difficulty sleeping, crashing and kicking or other sudden movements. stiffness of the extremities it will not go away and causing difficulty moving, walking or standing straight. Constipation can be one of the earliest signs of Parkinson’s, weight loss due to loss of appetite. Changes to voice and speaking can sound monotone be very quiet and hard to understand. Patient masking and reduce plaguing lack of emotion in the face

14:23
usually starts out slowly and progresses with the illness. And lastly, declining balance and instability which can cause straws, a sudden illness and for increasing involved. It’s it’s an add fun hitting for you guys. You don’t have the muscle or the balance. And you don’t want to wish it on anybody because it’s just you said it’s degenerative and high man had 16 years no I’m sorry I have my memory very fortunate. She’s lived for 34 years as long as I’ve ever heard anybody with Parkinson’s

15:14
Would you like a picture while we present this to you

15:16
of course

15:17
okay

15:44
yeah

15:46
come on in squeeze in a little bit here yeah

16:00
do you want

16:08
to look at the camera

16:13
No, you’re wild. All right 123123

16:22
I can see everybody’s faces thank you so much

17:01
we have another resolution, I’m going to read it to you and then have well is staff going to introduce this item? Do you want to read it? Or would you like me to read it? The compost sustainability advisory board here to talk to you Oh, this chain okay. But he wasn’t planning to read it. If you want to read it. I will read it then. Okay, I didn’t want to take that away from him if he wanted to read it. Alright, the next one is a resolution supporting the increasing the ability for long mount residents and businesses to compost all reasonably compostable materials. Whereas the city of Longmont desires to reduce and divert solid and organic waste as a core tenant of this is still sustainability plan, which calls for generating less waste, divert diverting as much waste as possible from landfills responsibly planning for managing waste and adopting new technologies and practices to save money and reduce impacts on the natural environment and community. And whereas composting organic materials is an efficient and effective way to reduce solid waste, and highlighted as the first item in the waste section of the Longmont sustainability plan. And whereas effective industrial composting can compost materials, such as food containers and soil paper waste, thereby providing a sustainable alternative to and phasing out of plastic and polystyrene foam materials from the waste stream. And whereas the compost dream must be kept free of glass, non compostable plastics and other containments contaminants to ensure a safe and economically viable composting system. And whereas recent policy changes by the city’s compost partner, a one organics significantly limits the types of materials that Longmont residents and businesses can compose due to problems with both both contamination and limitations of the existing technology. And whereas this change in composting opportunities will significantly impact the city’s ability to read reduce solid waste, a core tenet of the adopted sustainability plan. Now therefore, the Council of the City of Longmont, Colorado resolves to explore with haste options to explore with haste options to once again allow Longmont residents and businesses to compost a wide range of compostable materials through the curbside compostable organic collection system, including but not limited to food and yard waste, industrially compostable food and drink containers and soil paper products. Options for achieving this could include but are not limited to partnering with a one organics and other compost experts to eliminate contamination. You know the compost dream with non compostable plastics, glass and other materials. Through and on here I have different websites that you can be used through a through a educational I’m sorry, I’m messing this up through educational campaigns and or Longmont city policy changes, which support the goals outlined in sections wa to NWA four of the Longmont sustainability plan and are or partnering with a one organics and or other compost experts to develop strategies and realistic timelines for reestablishing the ability for Longmont residents to compost a wide range of materials and or partnering with neighboring communities, potentially including cities, towns and other large entities to ensure and support the viability of regional large scale industrial composting facilities and are helping either a one organics or a new composting partner acquire the capability and technology to sufficiently handle the realistic and reasonable composting needs of the city including the composting of a wide range of industrially compostable materials. That was a wonderful, but very long resolution. So do we have anybody from the sustainability group that would? I want to thank you for this resolution too, because it pairs very nicely with the motion we made last a couple of weeks ago.

21:42
Yes, that’s actually my first order of business is to thank you for already doing this. So my name is James Metcalf. I’ve been a member of the city’s sustainability advisory board since 2018. And I’m here today just to present and support this resolution that we on the board passed in October of 2023. I’d first like to thank the mayor for presenting and the Council for voting to support the exploration of creating a region wide composting facility. This is as you heard directly in line with one of the recommendations that we had as an advisory board on how to move forward with helping the city get back to full composting. Just a little bit of background. In April of 2023. The city of Walmart’s composting partner in one organics rather abruptly changed their policies regarding the what materials Longmont city residents could compost. Using the residential compost system, specifically, the types of material residents could compost was reduced to include only food scraps and yard trimmings. Previously, the complex containers could contain a variety of industrial industrially compostable materials including paper products sold with food, and other compostable plastics and containers. Well, we understand that the ability to compost food in yard waste has provided a significant environmental benefit to the city. The goals of the city sustainability plan, which includes solid waste reduction would still benefit greatly from increasing the capacity and ability of residents and businesses to compost. The resolution as you heard, acknowledges the difficulties and challenges faced by a one organics primarily the abundance of contamination in the compost stream. Colorado public radio did a wonderful report on this amongst other news outlets, and the levels of contamination were shocking and really just unacceptable. We believe that addressing this problem through some of the actions that we outlined and the ones the one that you supported at the April 9 meeting would would fulfill multiple goals of the Longmont sustainability plan, including developing support for curbside composting, which is gol W A one. Providing waste diversion opportunities for the st Vrain school district which is goal wa to developing a strategic waste management plan with regional partners which is called wa three and increasing public education and awareness about waste reduction and diversion opportunities, which is gold wa for I won’t repeat the the actions that we outlined as possibilities. Just highlight that that are option number three, which is what was supported the April 9 meeting which is to partner with local communities to help create and support and ensure the viability of a regional large scale industrial composting facility seems like a wonderful way to move forward with this. The sustainability board board would therefore just like to present this resolution and offer our help as an advisory board in any capacity that could be useful to help implement this plan and to solve any problems that might come up along the way and move the city and region forward on on waste reduction and efficient composting. Thank you very much.

24:59
Thank you So now we are first call public invited to be heard. The first one on the list is Sharon O’Leary. Remember that we need your name and address and you have three minutes Sharon, only three, only three.

25:22
Channel Larry 534 Emory Street. Good evening, Mayor Peck and city council members. I’m here tonight regarding item 12. B, establishing a conservation overlay district for the historic east side. As somebody who might not be aware, in the mid 80s, the historic Eastside was established as a neighborhood. This was several years prior to there ever being an Oregon, a neighborhood group organization within our city. Our neighborhood organized as a result of the our three zoning, which allowed demolition of older homes that were replaced with multifamily units. The historic Eastside neighborhood developed and most recent Aurelia zoning, which limited the number of multifamily units and created architectural guidelines. The result of the RL zoning has preserved the original historic look of long runs oldest neighborhood. In 2018, the city changed the neighborhood zoning to reduce the number of zoning districts and as a result, we lost our architectural protections we feel those protections were the key difference between the consistent historic appearance of the east side versus the west side of Longmont. Because the city changed our zoning, we feel it’s the city’s responsibility to fix it. We’ve been pursuing a conservation overlay district for the past year. We have grant funding for multiple mailings and labels ready to print. We’re prepared to hold multiple meetings, create and deliver newsletters, and send multiple meanings to educate and meet the city’s two requirements. We agree with the city’s conservation overlay requirements with two exceptions. First, we asked the planning director to use their authority to waive the requirement that we notify property owners outside the proposed district. Second, we request the waiver of the application fee of $750 plus $10 per acre fee. We’re not trying to limit additions or ad use within our neighborhood. We’re only wanting architecturally to have them blend with the homes around them. We’re proud of long runs humble beginnings and we want to preserve that legacy. We ask that you assist in support the conservation overlay request, and we thank you for your time and consideration. Thank you Sharon. Sherry Malloy.

27:59
Good evening Mayor Peck Mayor Pro Tem Hidalgo firing and city council members. Shane Malloy. 1632 Sherman way. Happy Earth Week. The SRL Earth Day Festival at Timberline school was super fun, and so rich in content. There were baby goats and food trucks with delicious food too. It was all pretty fabulous. I hope you all will be able to watch the four minute video clip I emailed you today with gorgeous scenes of our amazing planet’s biodiversity narrated by Harrison Ford. It’s really worthwhile. As a retired Special Ed teacher, I’m all about positive reinforcement for good decisions and behaviors. That’s why I’m here tonight to say thank you for the Win Win solution concerning the Fourth of July festival and fireworks. I will read my letter to the editor for public record now. There was recently published, quote, kudos to city council members our city manager and city staff who responded to concerns expressed by residents apprehensive about the unintentional negative impacts of the Fourth of July events and Dickens farm nature area. The original proposal was for the festival to be held at Dickens with the fireworks launched across the street on Boston Avenue from the Fire Training Center. After hearing from anxious community members staff explored other locations. At the April 9 meeting the city manager presented some options to city council to consider. Council voted for the festival to happen by webbings were these and second between Maine and Kimbark. The fireworks will be launched from the Fire Training Center where festival goers by rubies will be able to see them. The Dickens nature area will be closed to spectators. Closing off this protected area honors the commitment to taxpayers who voted to tax ourselves because we value conservation and protection of our open space and nature areas. Kudos to to the Kiwanis for their patients through this process. Our community benefits from Aquinas is generous funding, generously funding the fireworks and for the many volunteer hours planning, organizing and executing for a fabulous firework show. That’s the end of that letter. As you know, I’m a member of stand with our st. Frank Creek. I wanted to invite you and all to a bird walk with scopes this Sunday at 6pm at Rogers Grove, our very special bank swallow colony should be returning any day now. So that will be a treat. We’ll see other good stuff too. And we’ll give an update to the city’s efforts to save our Bank Swallows when the RSVP gets going for that stretch of flood mitigation. As you might recall, Bank Swallows are identified species of special concern and I think ours is one of three colonies in Boulder County. Finally another Kudo for tonight’s compost resolution, advocating for regional large scale organics, processing infrastructure, hopefully all involved in site location and so forth. We’ll get this on the fast track. Special thanks to county commissioner Ashley Saltzman for her leadership in jumpstarting and helping direct this whole process. Thank you.

31:14
Thank you, Sherry. Thanks for the kudos. We’ll take them

31:23
lands Whitaker.

31:41
My name is Lance worker Lutz 1750 Collier Street, Longmont, Colorado been resident 43 years. Like to tell you today is National talk like Shakespeare day which well, I don’t have any idea how to talk like Shakespeare so you love their national Picnic Day. National cheesecake day. I know some of you are waiting for that one. National lost dog Awareness Day. And national school bus driver appreciation day. And Sue take a chance stay. And on that note. I hate Kim custom humor today. President a lawyer and a man named pecker walk into a bar Yeah, it sounds like a joke but it really is not. You guys have a good day.

32:50
You too. Thank you Lancelot. For Ross. gerar I couldn’t read it. I didn’t want to mispronounce it because I’ve done it twice. Right.

33:11
So it Thank you, Mayor. My name is froster I live off of North 75th Street out in western Longmont, Colorado. So this speech tonight is I’d like to take this opportunity to address the folks that were against the fireworks. I listen to their concerns. Regarding noise pets, little kids, no parking and wildlife among other items. as worried as you may be. At least you don’t have to seek refuge in a bomb shelter, or anticipate your entire apartment complex will be leveled by bombs. If you may feel insulted by what I said very well. Honestly, I felt like I was slapped in the face. twofold. One. I’m an American citizen immigrant, nonetheless. An American. Let’s be in high spirits on America’s birthday. Loosen have a beer three hotdogs, play ball dance, make love. Read the greatest grievance ever filed the Declaration of Independence and let some fireworks while we’re on it. Then, as a reminder, please don’t forget how fortunate you have you are to live in America. How good you got it. Ask yourself, will I have enough food and water to last the day? Will my home remain intact? Will I have shrapnel lodged in my body? Will I have long lasting health problems? Will I be drafted or conscripted into a war I didn’t ask to fight? Is my neighborhood at the brink of starvation and disease due to occupation or civil war? Will they be hoping to die? If you don’t have to answer any of these questions, perhaps you may tell yourself this Maybe just just maybe a live tomorrow to continue expressing my concerns. However, there may be someone out there not just globally here in our community that may not live to tomorrow simply to breathe. And that’s all I got. Thank you.

35:17
Thank you, Steve Archer

35:27
and heading Steve archery 1555 to the Mountain Drive. The first thing I like to do is thank all of you for a couple of weeks ago when it was 11 o’clock, and you voted to let the last two or three people speak. That was very nice. I appreciate that. And I was one of those people. So thank you. The things I want to talk about because I know that especially being a city council, your primary interest is for the city of Longmont. And one of the things he has come to my attention. And I spoke about this a little bit last year, but only 31% of the jobs in Walmart, go to people living in Walmart, the other 69% of the jobs for people that living on my dad’s to drive out of town. And something like in the same 69% basically come from Boulder and Erie and Lewisville Lafayette to come work in one month. And one of the goals are it seems that one of the goals along that city council and Boulder County in general, is to generate 15 minute cities. So cars won’t be driven anymore. Ultimately, it would seem to me that the City Council could do things to encourage the businesses in one month to hire one map people. The success of that will be that each person living in one month would spend less time less money, less gas, driving to other cities to get their job. So they have no money for rent, or food or anything else. Plus have more time in their life than out driving an hour or two every day to other cities. And in your city. I believe I’m sorry that because this could be old news used to do something for eating in long mind that the city would sell coupons that make people go to restaurants in Longmont and generate business more business for the long white restaurants. And my thought was maybe there’s something like that that could be done for businesses in general, find some kind of an incentive for the local businesses that hire landmark people, rather than people driving your hearing in other cities. They have what I was talking about is the debacle in California with a minimum wage going up to $20 an hour. Anybody with half a brain knew that that was generate 1000s and 1000s of unemployed people, hundreds of businesses would go out of business, a big neck specialty, or whatever they call it at McDonald’s now is $25. You can’t just arbitrarily raise minimum wage able to ripple through the rest of the community. The only way people can really get ahead financially is by working more hours and putting some of that extra income in the bank or by taking classes and increasing education. Thank you.

38:39
Seeing no one else on the list, I’m going to close first call public invited to be heard and we’re going to move on to the consent agenda. Don, would you please read the bills on the consent agenda?

38:51
Absolutely. Mayor the second reading and public hearing for ordinances introduced tonight on this agenda will be held on May 14 2024. Item nine A is ordinance 2024 Dash 29. A bill for an ordinance conditionally approving the vacation of a seven foot wide LPC utility easement generally located south of the intersection of Rogers road and South flat circle. Nine B is resolution 2024 Dash 21 a resolution of the Longmont City Council accepting the findings of Boulder County’s us 287 Vision Zero safety and mobility study. Nine C is resolution 2024 Dash 22 a resolution of the Longmont City Council authorizing the agreements between the city of Longmont and Stanley R and Margaret Walker for the purchase of real property at 617 First Avenue for the first and main transit station facilities project and nine D is resolution 2024 Dash 23 a resolution of Longmont City Council approving the revocable permit and agreement between the city and the union sailing club to provide sailing opportunities at Union reservoir

39:58
Council Council remembering?

40:01
Yes. Are we going to have a discussion with the staff? About item B? Because it seems like a good opportunity for a presentation, but our will do you

40:17
want to? Do you want to pull it? I do. Can we? Can we wait until we bring that back as two items that were pulled from the agenda?

40:30
Yeah, we either have to have to take it all the way off, or not have a presentation.

40:37
But it is a resolution. Yeah, it’s only a resolution do if you want a presentation. I think the item needs to be removed from the consent agenda. So do you want to do that?

40:51
Yes. Okay. Now I’m confused. You mean in the usual way? Yeah. So that all right. Yes, I would like to pull Item B resolution of a long left City Council accepting the fine things of Boulder County’s us 287 Vision Zero safety and mobility study from the consent agenda.

41:12
Okay. And I’m gonna move I’m sorry, I’m gonna pull item C. So with that, I’m going to move the consent agenda minus Item B and item C. Moved by myself seconded by Councillor Martin. All those in favor.

41:35
That passes six to one with Councilwoman Crist in opposition.

41:47
So, we are going to go immediately then to ordinance on second reading and public hearing on any matter. This is 2024 Dash 28. It’s a bill for an ordinance adding chapter 2.18 to the Longmont municipal code for code of ethics. I am going to open this up for discussion. Do we have any discussion from city council members? Seeing no one I am going to now my computer does, there it goes. I’m going to make a couple of motions. I these are just housekeeping changes on this code of ethics. And I moved to direct staff to admin line 18 on the very first page to read quasi judicial commission members. That would be light 18. First page if you want to check just to add the word quasi judicial to commission members. And on the second page, line 21. Remove the word board member and insert quasi judicial commission member. And the reason for that is the only reason that in our drop down and you will have at your seat a document showing what the ethics complaint form looks like the drop down menu that is going to have the types of complaints that could be made. They don’t refer to regular board members. They refer to quasi judicial commission members. Because the the board members unregular boards that we are liaisons for outside of commissioners really don’t they don’t pertain to just regular board members. They’re quasi judicial governmental board members. Oh, second. Okay.

43:55
Come counselor Roderick is negative. I think just maybe clarify some of your comments. The idea being that our advisory board members are not making necessarily decisions, whereas our commission members make decisions.

44:11
Correct. You stated that much better than I did. Clarify. So is there any other discussion? Councillor Martin? Yes. Mr. Peck?

44:22
Thank you. I wonder whether this is enough of a change because our Commission’s sometimes do business that is not quasi judicial. And what does that do with this change? I’m not sure.

44:39
I’m not sure either. But if it is a complaint against a quasi judicial commission member, and it goes to the hearing officer, I would think that the hearing officer at that point would say that it is it doesn’t follow. It doesn’t come to the level of a complaint that we need to look at Okay. And to be honest, this is more or less the first draft or first look at the code of ethics. And as we go through it, we’ll find things that we need to amend or tweak. Okay, does that make sense? Oh, Eugene,

45:23
Mayor Eugene may city attorney, I didn’t catch the second. Were those the you had sort of two amendments?

45:30
It’s like 21 On the second page. And it’s section 11. Yeah. We crossed out board and just put quasi judicial in front of commission members.

45:55
Eliminating we eliminated the word board member, and just put quasi judicial Gotcha.

46:03
So I’m thinking page one line 18 board or commission members a defined term, shall mean any member of a charter, Article Seven quasi judicial board or commission? Is that what we’re

46:24
that would that one is? Well, do you really need to take out the board on that one as well?

46:30
No, I think if you put quasi judicial review for the border commission on line 19, right, then the defined term becomes charter, Article Seven, quasi judicial board commission. So then when that term is used, again, in line

46:49
2121, it

46:50
will have already been defined to be quasi judicial boards, and commission.

46:57
So I don’t need to take up the you

46:59
don’t learn a second one. You just need the first one. Okay. I think for

47:07
this, but it’s defined.

47:11
We have both boards and commissions. Right.

47:14
And so once you’ve moved past the definitions, then it just carries

47:17
over, because we certainly have a master Board of Appeals, which is a board and then we had Planning Commission, which is a commission. So I think you want to keep both boards and commissions. And I think the change that I suggested to the definition to board and commission member to define it as charter charter, Article Seven, quasi judicial board or commission will accomplish what you’re trying to do. Okay, I see you nodding heads over there, too, just in case you don’t believe me, or Oh, I totally believe.

47:57
So. So just to clarify, I just need to put quasi judicial on page one line 1819 I’m sorry. And the rest of it will take care of itself. Right. All right. I’m going to withdraw my motion and make a new one. I moved to direct staff to add the word on page one of our Code of Ethics line 19. quasi judicial, before border commission. After charter charter, article, nine, no seven. Add the word quasi quasi judicial. Second, and it’s still seconded by Councillor Duggal fairing. Let’s vote.

48:57
Don, and I discussed this before. And that carries unanimously Thank you. And with that, I am going to move Oh, that’s right. We do need to have a public hearing on this. It’s on second reading. Is there anybody in the public that would like to address the code of ethics? ordinance 2024 Dash 28. Seeing no one I will close the public hearing and ask for a motion which we just had. Let’s vote.

49:35
I believe we need a new motion to pass the substituted and amended ordinance

49:40
on move ordinance 2024 Dash 28 As amended.

49:45
Second. All right. Do you want them to say substitute as well Eugene was substituted, substituted and amended. substituted and ended.

50:00
All those in favor? McCoy

50:10
That passes unanimously thank you

50:24
we’re at general business. Now are we? Oh, I’m sorry. I’m removed from the from the consent agenda. So Councillor Martin, you removed the item B?

50:42
On your mind, yes, thank you. This is going to be difficult to discuss because I was hoping for slides. I guess, from reading the executive summary, which was the only thing that we had in front of us at the time, and I didn’t get here early enough to read the paper that we have in front of us now. There’s no paper. Okay. So the executive summary says that most of the accidents most of the accidents occur in Longmont. And yet the the executive summary mentions physical chip barrier changes at the top and the bottom of 287 only. Can you explain what else happens inside of one model? No 287 corridor? Because or explain that all the accidents are at the top of the bottom? I know we have a lot on on 66. What’s the rationale for that particular organization of modifications?

51:56
Well, good evening, my name is Phil Greenwald, transportation planning manager with the city of Longmont. And we were hoping to have blue county staff here tonight to help walk you through anything that was pulled from the consent item or a consent agenda. So I apologize for them not being able to make this meeting tonight and do a better job of presenting than I will. But this is a this is a study that was presented or the was going through the last couple of years of work. After we did phase one, which was really the bus rapid transit feasibility study. The idea was to take this into a Vision Zero aspect. And also look at other alternative modes. So there is an aspect of this study that is talking about how we connect all the core all of jurisdictions along the corridor, especially between Longmont and in Broomfield with a off street bicycle facility. So that’s part of the study as well. And then the idea that you brought up councilmember Martin about the the idea of the medium barricades that would help really cut down the number of crashes we’ve seen over the last couple of years, ever since this facility was increased to the five Lane capacity concrete facility that it is both north and south of Longmont in the rural sections considered by this study. So there’s been a lot of head on crashes with that. And so the idea is to install rumble strips on the inside, on those inside lines, as well as the median or barricade in the median to keep those crossovers from happening on the on the highway. So those were the big things coming from the study. But the study also looked at each individual section in Longmont. And the idea was and also the other cities but Longmont was one of the critical factors that you brought up as well. One of the critical locations of crashes and most most of those crashes are with vulnerable road users. So bicycles and pedestrians were a lot of those crashes. What we’re working on right now is our Vision Zero policy, our Vision Zero piece of this to take care of those or not take care but address those crashes that happened at those intersections within the city of Longmont working with the Colorado Department of Transportation. So this study did some recommendations on what kind of treatments could happen at each one of those intersections within Longmont. So there is we did put that into the council communication, the long form. And so there are those various intersections and it shows specific improvements and I can go through those probably at a later time. Or we could have Boulder County come and do that as well. But I think the the story there is that we’re going to pick that up and run with it as far as Vision Zero for the city goes and so the aspects that Boulder County is focusing as on as the rural sections within unincorporated Boulder County and working with CDOT on that we support that obviously because that’s a lot of Walmart residents traveling those corridors. But the next phase of this is The Vision Zero aspect that we’ll take on as a city with Kenny Edson, our New Vision Zero coordinator who’s working tirelessly to put together a task force and get that ball rolling with action plan that’s part of that.

55:17
Do you expect? Do you need this resolution to be accepted by council in order to start any capital improvements that are related to it that would be done by the city?

55:30
It would be helpful, yes.

55:33
Okay.

55:35
I don’t know if we technically needed councilmember Martin, but it would be very helpful to move into the next phase and show that partnership with both Boulder County, the other jurisdictions along the corridor and the Colorado Department of Transportation.

55:48
Yes, I was contemplating the idea of sometime when we have slides, invite inviting the Boulder County engineers to come and present. And maybe at the at the same time, you can have your intersections presentation, and we could accept both proposals at the same time. But if there’s a problem with deferring them, I won’t do that. And I’ll just trust them.

56:19
I think that was supposed to be a question I have

56:21
no, I will respond by saying thank you. That would be wonderful. If you could put out the resolution now. And show that commitment to that partnership and to this plan, and then or the study, and then we can bring folks in and and show you more of the detail of this study and what’s going to happen in the next phase.

56:44
I would appreciate that because I think that it’s important. We’re gonna have to start educating the public and this is an opportunity to do that. So I don’t think we should skip it. But I’m willing to, you know, do a little advance acceptance, so I move acceptance of ordinance 2024 28.

57:06
It’s been removed.

57:10
Did I say it wrong? Yeah. Oh, sorry. 21. Yes.

57:16
It’s been moved. Resolution 2024 Dash 21 was Moved by Councillor Martin seconded by Councillor Crist. Is there any more discussion on this? Seeing none, let’s vote. And that passes unanimously. The next one on the Consent Agenda is see and I am the one that that pulled that. And I pulled it just to make a statement that I heard from the public. And I just want to say that these these parcels that are being purchased by the city are conversations that are being held with the property owners, there is no eminent domain and it is fair market value and or relocation of the business. So it is a partnership that we are doing in acquiring these parcels for our bus terminal. So with that I am going to move. Which one was it? 2024 Dash 2022 I’m sorry, I move 2024 Dash 22. Second, it’s been moved by who else? There was? So as moved by seconded by Councillor Martin. Is there any discussion? Seeing none? Let’s vote.

58:50
That carries unanimously. We are now at general business. The first thing on the general business agenda is an appeal of denial of a variance application by the planning commission acting as the board of adjustment and appeals regarding a fence at 530 Alpine Street and consideration of our 2024 Dash 24 a resolution of the Longmont City Council upholding the decisions of the Planning and Zoning Commission acting as the board of adjustment appeal and appeals denying the 530 Alpine street variance request.

59:27
Let’s see where it is this good evening. Thank you Mayor pack and council members. I’m Kristen Cody, a senior planner with planning and development services. You should have received a hard copy of my PowerPoint presentation so that you can follow along with it as I as I discussed this application. This evening for your consideration I’m here to present the appeal of a decision for a variance application focusing specifically on the property situated at 530 Alpine slurry Street. Second slide the property in question income This is roughly point one five acres and resides within a residential mixed neighborhood zone is located east of alpine Street, west of Cameron court and north of east Fifth Avenue, falling under the city’s Dericks jurisdiction following the Sunnyvale annexation in 1970. As per the Envision Longmont comprehensive plan the property holds the designation of mixed neighborhood. Third slide. The applicant seeks and appeal of the denial of three variances to permit for the continued placement of an eight foot fence within the Sony district. These variances include a request for a two foot increase beyond the prescribed maximum height limit of six feet and a rear side and rear yard. Permission to erect a fence in the front yard that lacks a mandated 50% transparency and a variance of four feet six inches to exceed the established maximum height restriction of 42 inches in the front yard. For slide this slide showcases a vicious visual representation of the fence. The first image provides a perspective from the applicants property facing northward while the second image captures the fence from the neighboring property to the north, the scene southward. Both photographs were taken February 8 2024. Slide This slide outlines the journey that has led us to this point tonight. The fence was constructed in May of 2023. In response to Moses nuisance situation involving an adjacent property owner, code enforcement was notified of the construction on July 26 2023. The applicant opted to pursue a variance and submitted their application on November 14 2023. The Planning Commission acting as the board of adjustment then conducted a public hearing on February 8 28th 2024. Six slide. During the aforementioned public hearings, several motions were proposed and seconded yet none of them obtained the required four four vote concurrence. Consequently, the absence of the necessary for vote concurrence led to the denial of the variance request.

1:02:07
Seven slide. This slide illustrates the appeal hearing procedure. Both staff and the applicant are allotted time to make presentations to counsel subsequently, the counsel has the chance to supplement the record if additional relevant evidence is submitted regarding the appeal issue. In such cases, both staff and the applicant are granted 15 minutes for rebuttal. Following this, the council will engage in questions discussions and clarifications regarding the appeal. Finally council members will cast their votes thereby reaching a final decision on the appeal request. A slide here provide an explanation of the appeal hearing procedures focusing specifically on the property at 530 Alpine Street. The questions before Council tonight are one was the planning and zoning decision to deny the variance plain, plainly in error because it lacks support from any competent evidence in the record. Two was the Peasy decision to deny the variance plainly an error because it was inconsistent with a review criteria which is found in Longmont Municipal Code 15 Oh 2.55 and 15 Oh 2.060 dot i dot five, as evidenced by clear and convincing evidence or three was the Peasy decision to deny the variance plainly an error because Peasy exceeded its authority or jurisdiction, as defined by code or charter. Based on the answers to those questions, you will render your decision on this appeal hearing slides nine through 11. The next three slides detail components of the review criteria crucial for assessing the approval or denial of any variance by the board of adjustment. Specifically highlighted are sections 15 Oh 2.0552 which pertains to compliance with applicable city standards. 15 Oh 2.05 5.3 concerning compatibility with surrounding properties, and 15 Oh 2.060 dot i dot five dot A dot Roman numeral two of the land development code which addresses the degree of practical difficulty regarding the properties use the 1212 slide. Here you will see information regarding the public notice procedures, which were executed in compliance with municipal code regen regulations. Initially, public notice was distributed to the newspaper, posting at the site and mailing a public hearing notices to the property owners residing within a 300 foot residence of the property boundary. Additionally, as mandated mandated by section 15 Oh 2.040k dot 11. signage for the appeal hearing was posted on the site and the applicant received mail notification of the meeting along with the city staff report and attachments on April 8 2024. Slide 13 staff analysis based on a record and the materials submitted with the application Staff recommends that council pass resin Lucien upholding the denial of the variance. Slap. Slide 14. That concludes my presentation. Our code enforcement staff is here to field any questions you may have for them. Furthermore, the applicant is also available. Thank you.

1:05:16
Thank you for the presentation. Do I see any discussion from Council? Councillor Rodriguez?

1:05:24
Thank you. I just want to point out, and please correct me if I’m wrong from the legal but the planning Zoning Commission acting as the board of adjustment appeals is impaneled slightly differently. The Planning and Zoning Commission is impaneled as ascendant seven member body versus a five member body. And so a four vote consensus to pass a variance is basically a supermajority for the board of adjustment, appeals, adjustment and appeals. So, you know, only two members can derail that a majority cannot pass it. So I just want to point out that specific nuance between how a vote is taken at planning and zoning, versus planning and zoning, acting as board of adjustment and appeals. And therefore, as you heard in the presentation, there were a number of variances are variants motions made that were seconded that failed on a three to two vote. So just to make that specific specificity known as far as how that works, as compared to Planning and Zoning traditionally works.

1:06:27
Thank you. That’s very helpful. I have some questions. First of all, page two, section two, line 14 of the staff notes. Let’s see what is the staff report. It says that this was this is a review criteria for various variances, line five states that special circumstances exist, that strict application of the standards adopted in this development code would result in undue hardship, or practical difficulties for the owner of such property. So there are there are several things that have to comply to make this work. And the only thing that I really saw was a self imposed hardship. Now we saw all of the reasons the wife being peed, PTSD and other health issues. What I would like to know from coding, and I don’t know if it would be code enforcement or who would decide this? Do we think that this fence was erected for a self imposed hardship? Or was there any documentation from doctors that

1:07:48
there is no documentation submitted that I am aware of or that I have seen? That was a good question that the planning commission acting as the board of adjustment disquiet discussed in depth during their meeting on February 28? And the issue that they had in regards to that? Criteria, if I remember correctly, was that variances are based on land use and should a non property specific situation warrant the granting of variances? And perhaps legal counsel could further expand upon that?

1:08:30
Well, then this is this can be interpreted any way you want it because an undue hardship, could be a physical or mental issue.

1:08:41
And that was what the board of adjustment struggled with, is that a hardship that relates to land use, which is what variances are relating to? So that was a part of their conversation, and that was the gist of what what they discussed.

1:08:57
So if this is denied, do they have to take down the fence? Yes. Has the fence resolved the issues with the neighbors?

1:09:11
That may be a better question asked of the applicant. Okay.

1:09:15
Mr. Johnson?

1:09:23
Yes, the answer in this case would be the most emphatic yes. The there are two factors involved here. Much of the documentation is trying to address the noise component, which certainly does create this suffering from my wife with her PTSD or her autism situation and her recovery from cancer. We had I known that medical records would be helpful in this case, I certainly would have provided this. We have medical records available at the first hearing. Those were not asked for Nobody seemed to be understood in them. So I did not bring them to this hearing. But the component above and beyond the noise component being reduced, is the visual component. Out of sight out of mind, the neighbors can no longer see us. And let me backtrack a little bit. We have lived in this house for 25 years. This time, we have gotten along with our neighbors great, up until the last three years. The neighbor in question, remarried, his first wife left and took all their children gone, he has remarried into a second family. And they’re in addition to the second family, there are tenants in the dwelling. The problem primarily comes from these tenants, not so much the first family with a second family so much, though the younger child does seem to enjoy threatening us as well. As long as they cannot see us. They don’t want to threaten us, you know, the visual component of our being eliminated from their sight lines, has, they no longer play the music? Obviously, they can’t make sweat new gestures. So that is because they can’t see us. They don’t know, we’re in our yards. Therefore, they cannot scream obscenities or throw fireworks to us as they have in the past. Or they cannot threaten my wife with sexual assault, as they have numerous occasions in the past, because they can’t saw her and they can’t see us. So ABS Absolutely, emphatically Yes. That the fact of this fence being in place has just made the problem nosedive. We have not had any trouble with them, since nothing is going up. Maybe one instance of wildness that they turned it off themselves. We don’t even need to call anybody about it. So that is my answer to that question. Thank

1:12:03
you. Yes. So it also from all of the all of the documents that were in our packet, it sounds like the Johnsons have done mediation? Yes, man have called the police several times

1:12:19
more than several times, yes. With

1:12:22
no fun, I don’t know what else they could have done. I personally would grant the variance based upon all the documentation that we thank

1:12:32
you very much for your consideration.

1:12:36
So it’s up to the rest of the council to weigh in.

1:12:45
Well

1:12:50
I moved that we we grant the variance to the Johnsons in our 224 What was it? Let me get rid of this are 2024 Dash 24. In that resolution, I grant the variance second,

1:13:12
based upon the fact that I think that that the Planning and Zoning Commission did not have to go back to that. Hold on. I want to make sure I say this right. That they their decision was plainly inconsistent with a review criteria. They didn’t show that discussion. Okay. I’m sorry. Yes, there was it was

1:13:49
a member. So I made the motion to grant the variance on 2024 days 24. And it was seconded by Councillor Chris let’s have discussion. Councillor Crist.

1:14:06
just learned to do this. So something that stood out for me is that despite having a variance hearing, no one from the public came to speak at the variance hearing and no comments were received from the public hearing mailing, which tells me there isn’t a lot of uproar from the neighborhood about this fence. I’m going to disclose this as a connector Street for me. It’s one of the easiest ways. Well, it’s one easy way to get from the north to the south end of town from my neighborhood as Alpine goes all the way from third out to highway 66. Now, okay, but and so I took some photographs while I was traveling there and sent them to Kristen because I had questions. And I have to say I want to say no Knowledge, the excellence of our staff. Because I’ve continually had great experience in terms of getting my questions answered and directing me and and helping me learn the machinations about. Yeah, this is our second appeal. So it was new. Okay. So the home is in a mixed neighborhood. Like I say it runs from Third Avenue all the way to Alpine. I mean, Alpine and runs all the way does highway 66. To my knowledge, there’s a church Clark Centennial Park has one border with it. Skyline High School is on that street. And so it’s becoming there’s a lot of there’s a lot of foot traffic, and also road traffic vehicle traffic. So it’s becoming less Suburban. And so I think it’s reasonable that we would see stronger boundaries on personal property, which addresses the 15.0 2.05 5.3. So I think it’s likely we’ll see more variances requested for front yard fencing as a compatibility, layout and design for that neighborhood. The Johnsons, who had a neighborhood situation for three years a neighbor situation, and they have the right to enjoy their home. And if they have put up a fence to improve the relationship with their neighbors, and to avoid calling the police. This, I feel meets the practical difficulty requirements of 15.0 2.060. Point I point a point I Item a, okay, I don’t know how lawyers do it. And which addresses whether the property can have beneficial use without the variance and I think they need the variance in order to have beneficial use. I did notice I’m just gonna throw us in with the neighbors and the photos presented here that the neighbors have a circular drive. Look at the North one. So I’m a fence is set back so that they have visibility to get out on Alpine. Just for me, I think I would like to see a little step down on the end of that fence in height, just to make it less boxy for the neighborhood. So I concur with a motion to allow the variance all of them. Maybe with the modification of a step down in height, I’ll address the mayor and see if she would accept that as a as adjustment to her motion.

1:17:49
Now starting from eight and going stair stepping down each board a little lower until going towards this towards the sidewalk. It’s eight feet off the side. No, no, I think it only has to be set back a foot from the sidewalk. Oh, yeah, it’s further back.

1:18:14
It’s already set back. The good four feet from the mailbox. Yeah, I’m

1:18:18
not suggesting any further setback. I’m just suggesting that that last panel, maybe each board lower the height a little bit. Just to make it a little more visually attractive. Yeah. And it would improve visibility also, when pulling out of that drive for both of you. How do you feel about that?

1:18:50
modification.

1:18:53
So is that a friendly amendment to my motion?

1:18:55
It is meant to be a friendly amendment to your motion.

1:18:58
Okay. So we need code enforcement, if that’s going to be an amendment is does that make any difference if they step it down? Or isn’t really I don’t understand.

1:19:13
I don’t see how if we look at the pictures on the last page, I mean, that’s I mean, visibility is already there. I mean, that’s right. I mean, you can see

1:19:22
everywhere. Mayor, Members of Council, Dane Hermsen code enforcement manager, I think that’s really just an aesthetic thing that that she’s requesting it wouldn’t have anything to do with the code defenses so far. out of the bounds of the code. I don’t think it makes much of a difference there. But it might make it look better.

1:19:40
So then, since this is just just aesthetic, and we are here actually for the code. I don’t think I’m going to accept that amendment. But it’s a good idea. You can talk to him about it. And you might agree. Councillor Martin?

1:19:56
Oh, yes. I was going to ask a related question about that. which is recommending those step downs be something that the original master Board of Appeals would be able to do. And I’m thinking maybe not.

1:20:13
I don’t know. I don’t think that has anything to do with the code. And that’s, yeah, that’s the issue. The question

1:20:19
is, is it in the power of the master board of payables to make changes like that? And it’s somebody from the staff should know that answer.

1:20:33
Just one moment, Councilmember Martin, Jeremy Terrell, assistant city attorney, I advise Planning and Zoning Commission on land use issues.

1:20:54
So councilmember Martin, to answer your question. One option before Council is to remand the variance request back to the Planning and Zoning Commission acting as the Board of Appeals and our Board of adjustment and appeals. Among the authority or powers of the board or commission, our we’re calling at this point, is to approve an application with reasonable conditions. So that’d be a matter of whether or not the condition of stepping down the fence to some degree be reasonable or not. That’d be it for the commission to decide.

1:21:25
But council member Chris was willing to withdraw that, I think, yeah, so it’s not really relevant.

1:21:35
Seeing no other comments, let’s vote on this motion.

1:21:52
That passes unanimously. Now, Eugene, do we need a motion to remand this back with? Or will it automatically go back to the Planning and Zoning Board of Appeals

1:22:04
man council that that was it

1:22:06
wasn’t go back. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, everyone. Thank you very much. Good evening. So our next one is be information on process for establishing your conservation overlay zoning district for the historic Eastside neighborhood. And Jennifer Hewitt Apperson will be addressing this for us

1:22:43
Oh, Ashok, there was only there

1:22:54
they made multiple variants motions. Didn’t tell us based on technicality, I know that load is not supported by any competent evidence. I know.

1:23:08
Yes. Oh, sweet. We can actually see it up here sweet.

1:23:22
Perfect. All right. Good evening, members of the council Jennifer Hewitt, Apperson, principal planner with the planning development services department. Looks like we almost have our technology working today. So I can refer to this particular screen. So tonight, I just want to give you an update on the process for establishing a conservation overlay zoning district. First, I’m going to discuss the overlay district generally. And then I’ll I will go into a little more detail about the request from the historic Eastside neighborhood association. So conservation overlay or CO is I will refer to it hence forth. These are districts that are intended to conserve residential neighborhoods and areas in the city that retain the character of certain periods of development, stabilized and improved property values in these areas and promote new construction that is compatible with the character of such areas. These requirements are an overlay and they supplement the applicable standards found in the underlying zoning districts so they don’t affect permitted uses. One thing to note is the sound a lot like historic districts, they’re similar but they are different in that there are a zoning solution that addresses lot and building standards versus specific design, but aside from the historic district is really going to get more into a specific design approach in terms of what it regular lates they tend to be a little less on the bulk and massing and lot standards. One thing to note is that the CEO may include detailed architectural standards that are more detailed than our general standards that are required. In all SEO districts. I’d also like to point out that the architectural compatibility standards that are detailed in the SEO district are pretty similar to the architectural standards that were adopted for all residential construction as part of the 2018 zoning code update. One thing to note also is the CEO district does, in fact, predate the most recent code update in 2018. There were some amendments as part of that particular update relating to minimum criteria for establishing such a district. So in addition to compliance with review criteria for rezonings in general, the city council may zone an area as a co district, only if the area meets minimum criteria stated in subsection A of this particular section of the code. And these findings are as follows. If the district retains the general character of its original period, if they are showing that they’ve had ongoing maintenance, where there’s potential for rehabilitation of existing buildings, there is potential or there are existing pressures for redevelopment and new infill development in the district. And the district exhibits a significant degree of continuity in terms of the built environment. All four of those findings have to be met. It’s not a either or situation. So as I noted before, conservation overlays are a they supplement your underlying zoning the permitted uses don’t change. They are however, responsive to the neighborhood context with special development standards that supplement the standard zoning requirements in in a district. So in terms of what the CEO district allows, I mentioned its content and its contextual. So in terms of setbacks, it looks really at at block averages in terms of setbacks and lock coverage. So you wouldn’t have a single standard that applies across the district, it’s really a block by block standard. So in terms of setbacks, you would take the average of the existing setbacks on the block height really is anywhere between the maximum height of buildings on a given block and what the maximum building height limit would be in the underlying zoning district. And lock coverage is a little tricky. It’s basically it’s 50 to 125% of the average lot coverage on a block. So taking as a mathematical example, if you have a 40% average lot coverage on a block, a new infill construction could be 25%, or I’m sorry, it could be 20% to 50% lot coverage. So there’s a range. So in terms of the required special standards for architectural compatibility, these are like I said, very similar to the general zoning code requirements that we have within section chapter 15 for architectural compatibility. Again, specific neighborhood standards are optional, they can get more specific, but those more specific standards would need to be adopted at the same time as the CO district itself for an area. So in terms of architectural compatibility, it’s a little broad, but it’s basically looking at is the roof slope and overhang consistent are the exterior buildings materials similar? Are there similar? Is there similar articulation, placement and size of windows and doors? Are their front porches or porticoes? So if there’s a block that primarily that has is dominated by homes with front porches, we would expect that there will probably be a front porch on on a new home that was built on an infill lot. So in terms of the process, there’s two ways an applicant can seek a co district, and I’ll give you a little bit into more detail momentarily about the specific process. The process for establishing a conservation overlay district is exactly the same as any other rezoning. So follow the exact same process. In terms of the applicant. The applicant must either be essentially a registered name We’re had groups requesting co district for all properties within kind of their coverage area. Or if there’s an area without a registered group, there needs to be written evidence that more than 50% of property owners in the proposed district support this particular zoning.

1:30:25
So, again, as noted, this is basically the standard rezoning process that we will be following pre application meeting with staff. There will be a neighborhood meeting, which signs we posted at various locations mailed notices, typically for a rezoning. We’re mailing notices to all property owners within a 1000 foot radius of the subject property for the rezoning once the neighborhood meeting is held. So one thing to note, we require this neighborhood meeting before we we accept an application for, for review, so the neighborhood meeting would be held, after which an application any necessary fees would be submitted. At that point, we would be providing notice to affected property owners, again, signs, letters, that this was undergoing DRC development review committee review. So in terms of timeline, it really depends on the number of submittals by the DRC, required by the DRC. But typically, that DRC review is going to take a few months, depending on workloads, etc. And how complete the submittal is determined how much work needs to be done on it, etc. And so once the DRC review is complete, it would be then referred to Planning and Zoning Commission for a public hearing, who would then make a recommendation to city council. So ultimately, we’re looking at four different times in a process such as this that the public would be notified of this proposed district and the applicant is required to do the mailings and make and post the signs as well. So we will be looking at doing those mailed and posted sign notices at the neighborhood meeting upon finding a complete some application upon the Planning and Zoning Commission public hearing, and at that second reading of the ordinance public hearing before city council. So with regard to the historic east side, they have requested a conservation overlay district for property zoned residential single family in the area in pretty much in yellow up on the screen. It is the residential Single Family Zone area from little more of a Third Avenue up to Ninth Avenue between Martin Street and Emory Street and it would cover the Single Family Zone properties on the west side of Emory Street as well wouldn’t include the park it only includes the properties in yellow. This area consists of approximately 150 acres and includes more than 750 properties. The first check it was 777 total. So for right now I’m comfortable saying more than 750.

1:33:32
So in terms of process, they submitted this request last year. As as Mr. Leary indicated at the public invited to be heard, they’re seeking protections that they assert were lost. After the 2018 land development code updates, we did hold a pre application meeting back in May.

1:33:57
So

1:34:00
at that meeting, we talked through the requirements, what they would need to do, you know, the notice issue, the fee issue, the code does allow the director of planning development services to reduce the area for notices, if appropriate, and that’s something that the previous director indicated was appropriate or thought was appropriate at the time. So that’s not as much of an issue. I’ll talk a little bit momentarily about the fee question. So in terms of staff feedback, you know, we can ask for supplemental materials, they’re part of part of the rezoning application or things that will help us make our decision as far as our recommendation and and really help us understand the issues and also help help us communicate and help the applicant communicates the ultimate decision making bodies about why they’re making this request. So we requested a few items I that needs to be submitted one is a written narrative which actually would be part of any zoning application describing the proposed district. And including a rationale for the district that includes an analysis of differences between the previous RL li residential low density established zone and the current residential Single Family Zone. And also provide specific examples of development activity between the time of the most recent code amendment in late 2018. And the present that would be inconsistent with the neighborhood character and might not have been allowed under that RLS zone. We also requested documentation, such as you know, meeting minutes from a neighborhood group meeting, that the proposed district had been discussed at one or more open meetings, and that the majority of people in attendance, thought it was a good idea and agreed that is something that should be pursued. We ask that this be done prior to the city facilitated neighborhood meeting because they do have slightly different purposes. And we wanted as a staff, we want to understand that, you know, there was pretty broad support for this. One thing to note is, when the code was updated in 2018, it was required to have this written document written consent from all prop from 50% Plus One of property owner owners within the district. The amendments basically allowed it to be an either or to have either that or a registered neighborhood group. Staff, we thought it was important that, you know, we could understand that there was broad community support so that no one was blindsided at the public hearing stage. So we also asked you, the other thing is, as mentioned, if there are any architectural development standards specific to the historic east side that the community wish to pursue, the code requires that those be adopted at the time of the CEO district. So a couple of other things. They did, he did initially requested a lot coverage be limited to a global 35%. Throughout the proposed district, however, we explained, and they understood and agreed that the the way the conservation overlay section of the code is written it requires this contextual coverage and doesn’t allow for a district wide standard. So to do that would require a code amendment to that section of the code. We also were concerned that applying such a blanket standard could result in some non conforming, a not insignificant number of non conforming lots, which is just generally bad policy to do so. So really, we gave him next steps, we identified some things that we needed to do. And the big question is, is the issue of the fees, frankly. So in terms of the next steps, you know, we are asking that they give us some meeting minutes, something that shows that they’ve discussed this at an open meeting, and that it has community support. At that point, we would facilitate a pre application neighborhood meeting working with the group to put together a notice and figure out you know, where the neighborhood would be appropriate to post notice signs, since it’s not realistic that it’d be posted on all 777 properties in the district. So we just need to identify some key areas at which to post signs. Once that neighborhood meeting, that city facilitated meeting is held, then we would accept the formal application for this conservation overlay. So Council direction really is what we’re asking for has to do with a fee waiver. Hina indicated that really the few fee question is a big part of why they haven’t moved forward. rezonings are assessed at $750 for a rezoning application plus $10 An acre so far in approximately 150 acre area we would be looking at around $2,250. So which is a significant amount for for a neighborhood group we acknowledge. So, section 15.0203 A three does give Council authority to approve the schedule of fees under Title 15. The city attorney’s office has indicated that counsel would need to decide to waive fees, it would be more appropriate for them to take a blanket approach as it relates to the SEO District versus doing a one off waiver. The code allows provides fees may be waived for it In part typically for affordable housing projects for for projects or for projects are initiated by public agencies or 501 C three nonprofits. So that is not something that this particular applicant meets this would not fall into one of those criteria. So waiving those fees would require pretty much a wholesale code amendment. And with that, I’ll stand by for any questions. And if Jeremy would like to pipe in about the code amendment if I mucked anything up. Otherwise, I’ll stand by for questions.

1:40:36
Councillor McCoy, Thank

1:40:37
you, Mayor Peck. So if I’m understanding correctly from the applicant, when they have talked and I’ve spoken with Bob McLaughlin, and, and Sharon, earlier in the past, this had been this area had been had this kind of overlay on it before and then in a process done by the city. It had been kind of taken away and now they’re asking for it to be redone kind of reinstated. In effect, am I understanding it generally?

1:41:10
That’s the assertion I have done some analysis of what the previous RL says RL Lee it was residential low density established which applied to historic Eastside it may have I think it may have applied to another district. But I know specifically in this case, it applied to the historic east side. So I did take a look at that versus what was adopted in the current code when the various zoning districts were consolidated and the residential Single Family Zone was applied. my professional opinion is that there’s not a lot of difference. The RSF district is actually more restrictive in terms of what uses it allows the previous RLA zoning permitted single family by right it also did permit at us, but it did allow the option for duplexes triplexes, and some multifamily to be used to be considered approved as conditional uses. So the RSF district doesn’t allow it doesn’t even provide that option. It’s you can do single family, you can do accessory dwelling units, and some other you know, supportive, non residential type uses like in home, daycares, and public assembly type spots like churches and the nature. There are architectural standards, architectural compatibility standards for infill residential as part of the land development code that were that were adopted as part of the updates. And it does these do require address things? Such as, you know, roof pitch? We’ll see I’m looking at what prebook

1:42:48
but I guess my question is, is that you don’t have to go into depth. But my question is, is that at one point, they had something like this, and then it was kind of stripped away? They

1:42:59
had something similar, but not exactly like this. So it wasn’t this I wouldn’t I wouldn’t necessarily say it was stripped away, but it was it was consolidated as part of a larger city wide rezoning. And

1:43:13
and so now they’re asking for part of some aspects of that back. It seems like to me that it’s a bit of a one off situation, because of the fact that it had once had a similar sort of zoning overlay in the in the area, it doesn’t seem like it’s it’s a universal sort of situation where that it would it would apply to all the other issues that you were talking about trying to put them into that same category. I mean, I’m not against having those other things in those categories. Don’t get me wrong. I think, you know, when we do do city projects, and there are certain criteria that are met, that we should be able to not charge ourselves for those types of things that makes perfect sense. But I don’t know that it needs to be if it’s not relevant for right now. To do that, across the board, that it’s necessary to do that, that we can look at this from a one off point of view. But maybe our legal counsel can give me better advice.

1:44:21
Thank you, Councilmember McCoy, Jeremy Terrell assistant city attorney again. Councilmember McCoy, I think the issue comes down to is there’s not really discretion for city council to waive that fee. City council has the discretion to set the schedule of fees. There is no provision or current code that will allow council to waive the development fee for Athena. I did note this to Jennifer, I think earlier today. Just to the point of reference, Jennifer noted historic districts are very similar to conservation overlays. We don’t currently have a fee for historic districts, while we do have a fee for conservation overlay, so if council was so inclined to get rid of the fee for conservation overlay districts that would bring some parity with historic districts, and would also achieve the interest of Hina to remove that impediment of the $2,200 fee.

1:45:13
Okay. Thank you,

1:45:18
Councillor Rodriguez?

1:45:21
Thank you Medpac. Correct me if I’m wrong, but let’s say hypothetically, the council moves and is passed, that we direct staff to institute, the zoning change. Does that not now put the onus on to the city, it’s a city directed zoning change, and therefore, not applicable to the fees?

1:45:51
That’s an excellent question. Because member Rodriguez, I would, I would still say that they would, I don’t think they would have qualified because this is an overlay district. I think if we were rezoning the area, away from residential single family to a different zone, they’d be different. But I think with the conservation overlay being an overlay district, I think that makes the distinction is that there’s no authority in the conservation overlay zoning district for council to initiate it. Under our code, it can only be initiated by the registered neighborhood group. And if there’s no registered neighborhood group that you present, the owners, there’s no option for city council to initiate a conservation overlay districts

1:46:31
I thought you mentioned or it was mentioned earlier that public entities 501, C, threes, and yada, yada, do not qualify as municipality as a public entity, we

1:46:43
would qualify as a specific rezoning of a specific property, but not for the district. There’s there’s no provision. There’s no provision within the overlay zoning district for city councils to initiate a conservation overlay district. However, if council was rezoning particular property, or a couple of properties, separate from overlay zoning districts, just generally speaking, so what

1:47:07
if we enumerate each parcel?

1:47:11
That would be an option that would create I would think that a crit is usually notice, along with due process for the property owners, personally, but

1:47:24
that is some some questions for thought.

1:47:30
Counselor McCoy,

1:47:31
I’ll be brief. Is there any limitations to how they go about getting there? You know, if if we can’t change the fee structure, and maybe we’re not in a position right now to make that broad decision? Are there any limitations of how they would obtain the money to pay for that? Is there anything that has to be cleared in regards to how they obtain those fees?

1:48:02
Councilmember coy, without giving Hina legal advice, it’s a matter of just the city obtain the fee, whether it’s a briefcase of cash or a cheque finding their way. That’s what I think they could collect from neighborhood property owners. Yeah. Okay. I

1:48:20
didn’t know if maybe there’d be some sort of something that would have to be identified, like we do when we have political campaigns that had to be cleared in a timeframe or some sort of thing like that. That’s kind of what I’m asking in the sense that I don’t want them to get, you know, sideways, legally. They’re trying to establish something and do they have a time limit or anything like that? I

1:48:47
do want to clarify something that Jeremy said, counsel does have the ability to change the fee schedule. And so what counsel would have to do is direct staff to bring back the fee schedule, excluding and make the adjustment to include the conservation overlay district, in the same manner, historic preservation districts and then council would then have to vote on it. Then once council votes on that, and it’s an acted, then it creates a situation where there would not be a fee. In that case, it’s just that the ordinance aren’t. They’re not written to allow it. But counsel can change the ordinance. Would

1:49:35
that hold up anything in regards to moving this forward?

1:49:40
It’s two readings and then 10 days after the second reading, and

1:49:44
there are if I may, there are items that the applicant could could, you know, get moving, get working work on prior to when we would require a fee as well. So

1:49:59
it And I guess my next question is to city manager is Is it a situation where we have multiple applicants in these categories that you’d be concerned if we if we eliminated that fee?

1:50:21
It’s it’s a hard question. I mean, I think there’s always the concern that if you started having a the amount of work, and if you have multiple applicants, then that over time could create an operational issue. Based on that. You know, I’m not the attorney here.

1:50:44
But,

1:50:46
you know, counsel could say, I think we looked at this on a completely different issue when I first got here, but you could, in any gene, I’m going to need you on this one. Eugene, OR Jeremy, you could give counsel the ability to do it in an ordinance change, and then the request would have to come before council to make the decision to to waive the fees. I mean, Jeremy is at a gentleman.

1:51:19
I think it’d be fine. But to the question about the number of potential applications, the only way a conservation overlay district income is from an neighborhood group, or 50%, the property owners within the district, the 50% number, I think we’re

1:51:32
fairly rational lines of people shot up for this, and we have

1:51:36
good now the registered neighborhood

1:51:37
groups, I don’t have the number of registered neighborhood groups, but I do know that we’ve had a provision for the conservation overlay zone and our code since at least 2002. When we have never had one come forward. So.

1:51:50
Okay, so now right, thank you.

1:51:55
So I have a question. When you first started the presentation, Jennifer, you said that the CEO was a supplement? Can you clarify that for me?

1:52:06
Sure. So it’s a supplement in that additional development standards can be applied, they can come up with, in addition to the, you know, broader contextual required new standards for setback height and lock coverage that I described, there are a couple other things in there as well, as far as materials, they could come up with their own supplemental materials or supplemental standards, that would add additional, you know, additional development restrictions, but not as it relates to use. So the way the overlay works is, it explicitly states that any use it’s allowed in the underlying zoning district, in this case, RSF would be allowed under the CEO district, there would just be additional standards.

1:52:52
Okay. My concern was the height standard. I don’t want the district to just say no apartment building here at all, but they can then have standards for the architectural look of that building, rather than okay, that makes sense. The other thing I wanted to know, is henna a 5013, C, C, three,

1:53:17
no, there are registered neighborhood group, I don’t know that any of our neighborhood groups would be would meet that that threshold, it’s a pretty high bar. Okay. And

1:53:24
the other thing that I wanted to say is that, given the number of homes, and given the way developments go, and people say I had no idea this was happening, I would suggest that every single home be made and be mailed. That this is happening, and that they need to otherwise we’re just going to have tons of people coming to council saying what happened. So I do think it is up to the hitter group to to absolutely contact to everybody in that district. And as far as I’m concerned, The notice should you know, just within the district boundary, the notices would be fine. There’s no reason to go outside that from my perspective. So Councilman Rodriguez,

1:54:20
thank you, Mara Peck one. One thing just occurred to me, based on some state legislation, that’s I don’t know where it’s at now in this year, but it’s been proposed last year proposed again this year, if it doesn’t pass the year, this year, I’m sure it’ll be proposed, again, talking about kind of subordinating some of our zoning laws. As far as that’s concerned, this would not protect that neighborhood either. I don’t believe as far as the primacy of the state’s laws, or has there been consideration of that? Because if it takes precedent over HOAs it seems to me that this would take it would take precedent over there. It says, well,

1:55:00
Councilmember Rodriguez so that is correct. We have another 18 days or think or so before the session ends. But for example, one bill going through right now is a adu is a right or accessory dwelling unit and a right, which may or may not be consistent with the conservation overlay requirements if there’s specific character and architectural guidelines. But if adu is, is a writer allowed statewide that would trump any architectural or character guidelines for the district? Right.

1:55:30
And I know that there has been conversations also about allowing for paired homes and then things along those lines in single family zoning districts. And so I was just curious, this wouldn’t have no additional protections that anybody else would have. Correct. Sorry. Thank you.

1:55:52
Seeing no other questions, or discussion, thank you very much for this presentation. And good luck. We don’t we don’t have any. We don’t take any action on this. Do we? It was just discussion.

1:56:09
And most council wanted to give staff direction. On the ordinance piece, changing the ordinates on the fee structure.

1:56:22
Councillor McCoy? No. Can you turn your bike on please?

1:56:29
I was just trying to think about, you know, they’ve kind of kept this going for a while here. And I think they’d liked some sort of response on this. I don’t know if they, you know, they’d like to have have some sort of answer in regards to the cost. And everything. I guess I wonder if their representative would be able to give us any shed any light on that

1:57:08
that was a major obstacle.

1:57:12
It is a major obstacle. It’s it’s kind of why we’re at a standstill, because then we’d hit we looked into coming to becoming a nonprofit. And then that was too much work and really wasn’t applicable. So we would have to look at fundraising, which is an option and or grant writing. But I don’t we’re just trying to preserve along that. That’s all

1:57:43
alright. I just don’t want this to just keep sitting here kind of spinning its wheels. I’m wondering if we couldn’t at least explore what that waiver implications would have on our on this if there’s any way of forecasting and we get a report in regards to some sort of forecast in regards to what we might might, what problems we might create for ourselves. So

1:58:27
So, so councilmember McCoy, again, Jeremy Terrell assistant city attorney. Perhaps you might want to perhaps a motion to direct staff to investigate the impact the financial impact on waiving the fee for conservation overlay districts.

1:58:44
I will make that motion

1:58:48
I’ll second counselor McCoy made the motion to direct staff to bring back

1:58:58
reports Yes.

1:59:02
On the on the financial implications of a fee waiver request. And I seconded that seeing no discussion was about

1:59:22
can you bring that because they are waiting? They’ve been working on this for quite a while can that be done fairly quickly. Another thing that we’re loading your plate with.

1:59:34
That’s something we can we can prioritize and bring forward. Okay.

1:59:37
Thank you and that is all you needed from us. Okay. Now we are at the staff, presentation of the legislation, legislative bills. Do we need a break or she Should we just move on? No.

2:00:13
Don’t worry, Mayor, I’ll be quick.

2:00:18
You’re always quick Sandy, Mayor

2:00:21
Peck and members of council Sandy cedar assistant city manager, I have one goal for your consideration today. And this is Senate Bill 24 195 Concerning the protection of vulnerable road users. So earlier, there was a similar bill that did not make it through its committee. But this one is a new one that amends the statute that governs the use of automatic vehicle identification systems or Avi s, not the rental car company, but the systems that would actually be automatically automatically identify vehicles.

2:00:54
This bill actually would kind of govern how state patrol can use that how CDOT can use that to be able to have that data create

2:01:04
some more information for better decision making when they are designing roadway systems. And so any kind of fee that gets collected on that actually will go back to those kinds of designs in order to make our streets safer. There may be some ticketing that happens for folks that are not particularly safe drivers and that money would also go back towards making the road systems themselves safer. So since this is compatible with our Vision Zero goals, Staff recommends that city council support Senate Bill 195.

2:01:38
Council meeting notice I move to support. Second,

2:01:45
it’s been Moved by Councillor Martin seconded by Councillor McCoy that we support SB 24 195. Councillor Crist?

2:01:59
I’d like to see how Vision Zero affects our fatalities in and traffic patterns. Also, I think this bill goes a little too far in terms of limiting personal property and you know, having too much too much control over personal property. And I completely agree. I see cars misbehaving all the time would be really nice if somebody just could click a button and know who was doing it. But I think it goes too far against personal property rights. So I’m against it.

2:02:34
So we’ve discussed this bill for a long time in Dr. cog, and have reviewed it, amended it worked on it. And I think it’s a good bill. So let’s vote.

2:02:55
And that passes six to one with Councillor Kristen opposition. Thank you, Mayor.

2:03:05
I don’t know speeding on Mondays or Tuesdays.

2:03:09
We’re gonna be looking for you now.

2:03:10
Especially the troopers.

2:03:13
Exactly. We’re now at final call public invited to be heard. Is there anybody in the public that would like to take this opportunity to address us again? You’re not going to read the newspaper to us, are you? Thank you. Steve offshore. Hi,

2:03:32
Steve Archer 1555 Taylor drive. First of all, I want to wish everyone a happy Passover starts this evening. And I might, it could be the barn doors closed and the horses already out. But just a couple of facts that I had an event that happened earlier with the gentleman with the eight foot fence. You know, one of the thoughts and I’m sure you are aware of this. Obviously, when you make an exception like that, it makes it so much easier for a lot of other people to want exceptions. So you do kind of open the barn door when when you make an exception like that. One of my thoughts was, and again, since you voted, it’s probably too late to incorporate this. But if you’re going to give that person an exemption, it might have been useful to say, well, this last as long as you live in the house. Or if your wife passes away or something like that and you move or if you move and sell the house or rent a house your children then at that point, the fence should go back down to regular zoning situations. And that could help prevent opening that can have rooms where a lot of other neighbors or people five miles away might see the fence and say hey, I want to do that too. You know, so just Just something a year might be too late. You might not be able to Do it now, which is the thought that I had that might have been a good option to put in that decision also. And I have one question with the bandwidth, you talked about the cancel contingency. And you have 46,500 and a carry over over from last year at 86,000. In change. Is there any limit to how much that contingency account can grow to? So for instance, if you hit $100,000, then next year, could that be removed from the budget? Or would it keep growing towards 500? Or 700,000? Or million is only a limit on that kind of world that contingency fund can grow to? And if you can answer me in the house, just a couple of thoughts I had looking at this,

2:05:49
I was looking to see if Eugene was still here. No, I’m sorry, not Eugene. Jim. There he is. Jim, can you answer those? No.

2:05:58
No. So if counsel counsel remember, when we come into the next year, we asked you if you want to roll the funds over, and you decide at that point how you want to deal with that.

2:06:08
So in 10 years, I could give a million dollars if nobody said we’d never be great. Let’s not we’re over anymore. We

2:06:15
didn’t get that kit, your idea for the year, we could have paid for the dome.

2:06:25
Yeah, I was just curious if there’s any limit on how large a contingency fund can grow to.

2:06:30
I just want to make the statement. I know we’re not supposed to do this a public invited to be heard. But I had heard I have read the TC line comments. And the council contingency fund is almost always used to go back to the residents in some form or fashion. It is not money that the counselors get it’s all in our money. Okay. I just wanted to make that very clear from some of the comments I’ve seen.

2:06:57
Always remind you right? Well, they are anonymous.

2:07:00
Steve, I don’t know.

2:07:03
Thank you. Is there anybody else in the public? Seeing none, we’re gonna go to Mayor and council comments. Councillor Yarborough?

2:07:14
Thank you, Mayor. I just want to say I want to give a quick shout out to Dr. Don her dad for contributing savoring Valley School District contributing in pay for the life skills. The entire life skills event, he paid the school disabling school district pay for that for all those kids. So our I just had to make sure I said thank you in that everyone know that he did that. And also, I just want to confirm with people what this partnership with the school district is growing. And now for our community events St. Blaine, we will have the kids from St. Brown School District to come and volunteer for June to maybe take pictures those are in photography. I’m planning to interview some for Cole MC. So integrating our youth in our community and teaching them and providing those opportunities for them to have that on their college applications. To say they were a part of and helped to coordinate a community event is amazing. So I just want to say thank you for the Partnership for st. Green Valley School District.

2:08:34
That’s fantastic. It on a very lighter note if anyone has the opportunity to walk on the st brain pathway just north of the Boulder County Fairgrounds. If you go about six o’clock at night or early in the morning, the frogs are amazing. There’s there must have been two or 300 fonts. It was just an amazing beautiful sound. So I’ve never heard frogs on that before. It’s just a nice quiet walk and reach back to nature immediately. Councillor McClay

2:09:13
Thank you Mayor Peck. I just wanted to let people know about Silver Creek Leadership Academy. Evening of excellence is Wednesday, May 6. The students worked very hard and it’s an important milestone showing off their capstone projects for their senior projects for the Leadership Academy. They’re

2:09:38
seeing no other counselors they want to speak up. City Manager remarks. No comments, Mayor, council, city attorney.

2:09:45
No comments, Mayor.

2:09:47
Thank you. Can I have a motion to adjourn? Second. All those in favor say aye. We are adjourned

Transcribed by https://otter.ai