Longmont Planning & Zoning – November 20, 2024

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UOlvxG3xeGM
Video Description:
Longmont Planning & Zoning – November 20, 2024

4:20
I

4:28
approved in Boulder County, many years before this annexation for gravel mining, the site itself, the properties that were included both north of the river which the river on this screenshot, which is a little hard to see, here’s the black line that kind of cuts across on a diagonal. We have the Burlington Northern rail line. We have Ken Pratt that splits the properties as well. Main Street is to the left side of the screen, approximately a half.

5:00
Half to three quarters of a mile away. The harvest junction development is directly to the to the west. So this property had an existing approved plan for mining out in the county. There were existing leases and agreements with the gravel mining companies to have this area mind, but the property was brought into the city of Longmont. The city council agreed to annex the property. It also included a portion of land that the city owns, which is directly south of the saint marine River and was purchased as open space. We purchased that property knowing that the property was to be mined for its gravel, but the city felt that that was an investment that we wanted to make in that parcel at the time, and so we own that and that portion was brought in along with the parcels then that were owned by Diamond G, and which again includes those properties north of the parcel that we owned, and then everything south of 119 here in this yellowish green

6:12
the application to the city,

6:16
because of it having the existing mining already in place and bringing that in so that it could continue to be mined in the city of Longmont, the only way that we could allow that is to do it through a PUD. So the property itself was owned PUD planned unit development. And the planned unit development basically was the guidelines and the mining regulations for this entire property that’s going to be mined. And so we zoned it as PUD the council approved the mining plan, which you see here, and in a second, I’m going to show you the reclamation plan that was also approved at that time

6:57
when it was brought in the

7:01
at the time, we were just adopting the Envision Longmont comprehensive plan. And as a part of the

7:11
annexation, there was some confusion amongst the property owner and staff that were working on the Envision Longmont at the time. So there was a land use amendment that came in at that with the annexation, because the Envision Longmont document did not reflect the discussions that had happened. And so there was a bust in the consultant showing those land uses on the property. So we had to process with this annexation, a amendment to the Comprehensive Plan, the land use map. And I’ll show you that in just a second.

7:44
So what we have up on the screen right now, then is a blow up of the area that includes where Costco currently sits today, the location where the property is that we’re looking at tonight for the in and out,

7:59
the house pad property that you guys have seen recently for the affordable, attainable project that the city’s been working on down here, directly in this location, and then the remainder of the property, and including the city’s parcel to the north, because of the amount of gravel that is going to be pulled out, and because of the way the gravel mining process works, we know that there’s not going to be enough

8:24
dirt left after the mining to fill these parcels all the way up for development without bringing in additional fill dirt. So the original plan that was approved by the State mining group that then we included in our plan identified locations for possible ponds in the interim, until those areas were able to be filled in, but the ultimate goal was that these areas would be filled in and development would be able to occur. There was some confusion with the public on the documents that were put out on the website back in around the 2019

9:02
people assumed that, because they saw lakes and ponds and green, they assumed that was going to be open space, but it was never shown on the comprehensive plan as open space, at least nothing south of Highway 119

9:16
so the LA CP amendment that we worked on and brought forward to council that reflected what the discussions had been that were not reflected in envision, showed again our parcel, north of 119 as being parks, Greenway, open space. We then had some

9:34
it is

9:36
employment. So this would have been like our mixed use employment designation, we would have had a medium density residential and then a low density residential land uses for these properties. And so this is what council approved at that time and again. This all was approved in 2019 with the annexation of the property. So.

10:01
Yeah. Now we fast forward a year during after the annexation and before December of 2020,

10:11
the Costco folks were starting to look around Longmont, trying to find a site. Originally, they were looking over around Hoover. The areas on Hoover were not going to work for them. They identified this location as a potential spot. We worked with them, going through pre application meetings and discussions with utilities to confirm the location would work. But the thing that jumped out to everyone was that we had existing leases on the property related to the mining that there was a cell that was shown directly in this location, the gray area. So the property owners had to work with wholesome and aggregate industries. Wholesome is now the person who owns this lease and is doing the work they were able to come to an agreement on how to handle the loss of gravel in this location, and so then they applied. They came in to the city. They requested a PUD amendment, which modified the original PUD to remove the mining cells from the Costco site, and also the site where the in and out is going to go. It also then modified the berming and buffering that was required to make sure that it was located closer to the areas that were going to be mined, also as part of the application, because the use was a different use than what was originally shown on the LACP amendment that we processed in 2019

11:47
they came in with another amendment, and we also then had to rezone from PUD to the applicable zoning classification for the properties. And then they also, at that time, processed a preliminary plat. So all of this started in December of 2020, okay,

12:09
up on the screen now is the

12:14
think?

12:16
There we go. Yes, this is the

12:19
conceptual drawing that shows the rezoning map that was approved. It’s just a color rendering versus the actual meets and bounds, almost plat like document that we would typically show. But this, I think, represents a little bit better. Again, we have Highway 119 just to the north of the regional commercial center, which was zoned for the Costco parcel, as well as covering the gas station that is in the center of the site near Highway 119 we have an in line commercial building on a portion of this site, and then we have the in an Alberta that will be between both the gas station And the in line. We also zoned the property multi family, which is where the house pad property was. You saw a rezoning. Ultimately, we rezone that to mixed neighborhood because of the density reduction that was needed. And I take that back. We rezoned it to PUD apologize, not

13:18
a mixed neighborhood, but we did do a land use amendment for that. And then the parcel to the south, that is adjacent to quail road was shown as mixed neighborhood.

13:31
So the next slide that we’re looking at here is the Envision Longmont

13:38
comprehensive plan amendment that was also processed then with the Costco. So as you may recall, we had the mixed neighborhood. We had some Indus, some industrial economic development kind of land uses up here, and we had single family. They left the single family modified the mixed neighborhood, the medium density added in some multi family added in regional commercial and also added in some mixed use corridor zoning as well. So the comprehensive plan, if you look at the most updated version, would reflect these land uses on this or these future land uses on these properties. Our zoning map would reflect the regional commercial for the site that we’re looking at tonight, along with Costco. It would reflect the multi family neighborhood, or I’m sorry PUD, for the house pad project, and then mixed neighborhood for the apartment buildings that are being worked on to the south of the site that we’re working on, the rest of the property that is undermining right now is still all zoned PUD to allow for the mining to continue, and that mining has been going on now for almost two years.

14:57
The last document here that I’ve got on the.

15:00
Screen to show you is the preliminary plat that the Planning Commission approved with that application that came in in December of 2020.

15:10
You approved the lot that was for the Costco, as well as the lot that it has the in line on it, and then the future in and out. This is one of our recommended a not a condition of approval, but approval with a condition that it be met, is that this lot is going through a replat right now to split it, and that needs to happen before we can approve any site plan for this property. So that’s one of the items that you’ll see in the staff report. We have a few applications in for these parcels directly out in front of Costco right now. We have a lazy boy furniture and we have a bank that are currently going in. And I think Phil mentioned those in the staff report in some of the background. Again, house pad is in this location, and then the multi family that’s going in is down here on this lot to the to the south, next to Martin Street and quail road.

16:16
All right. So as everybody knows. I think, I hope everybody read their packet.

16:25
The Commission tonight is in a different role than normally would happen.

16:30
You are actually a recommending body on this application, which is a conditional use. And this came about in 2021

16:41
there was actually discussions prior to COVID about creating this regulation, but it was not able to be actually adopted by the council until and go into effect until April of 21 but the council was approached by concerned citizens that had some concerns With the amount of development that they felt was occurring near parks, greenways and open space, and they felt that that should go through a more rigorous public

17:12
process that would entail a recommendation by the planning commission and a decision by the city council. The city council considered that regulation change, and they adopted it with ordinance 2021, 16. So the way that, without getting into all the minutia which we can if you, if you’d like, but in general, what it requires is that any major development application preliminary plat,

17:43
a conditionally site plan, that those applications if they are directly adjacent to a park, Greenway or open space, and adjacency within the regulation is defined as including anything separated by a right of way, including Highway 119

18:03
that that has to go up to the city council for review, and they’re the decision making body. So tonight, you are acting as a recommending body, similar to if we were doing a Comp Plan Amendment, a land use amendment and annexation. So just think of it in that respect.

18:25
So again, just for the public and everybody to understand this, had to go through a major development application. So we had pre application conference with our staff. Neighborhood meeting was required. They had to go through our DRC review process. I think Phil noted that we did four reviews on this project to make sure that the regulations were met, and then tonight, we’re looking at pz as the recommending body, and ultimately, council will make the final determination of whether or not to approve or not this application.

19:00
So with that, I’ll start to get into the nitty gritty here a little bit, and we can always go back if you have more questions. So the orange dot represents the approximate location of the in and out. This is going to be a drive through restaurant, along with outdoor seating and indoor seating for the use it is next to Ken Pratt Boulevard on the north. We have Harvest Moon that comes down to the east side. We have the harvest junction, residential development and apartments to the southwest. And then harvest junction, commercial area, which includes the Best Buy lows, some other restaurants and retail opportunities to the west,

19:52
as I noted again before property is zoned Regional Center, again, the location, the reason that.

20:00
This is recommending, again, is because of the open space property to the north.

20:06
Again, we have the zoning district showing what everything is zoned. Again, the pink is the PUD again, because of the mining. That is the way that that is allowed to occur, to follow that PUD plan. So the parcel to the north is currently zoned as PUD, where typically our open space properties are either zoned public or they are zoned AG, so in the future, I would expect that that zoning will change.

20:34
So then and out again with the drive through restaurant, we’re looking at a little over, right around 3800 square feet. The elevation shown on the screen is an example out of your packet. In your packet, you have all the elevation drawings for you to take a look at,

20:54
and the applicant will definitely who is here tonight, has their consultants, has a presentation to walk you through more detail about their operation and what they’re proposing. So I’m not going to spend a lot of time on that. I do want to show really quick with this slide. There were some questions from Commissioner Popkin that staff went and provided some answers to Jane Ford did the emails to you. Hopefully today you’re able to hopefully take a chance and look at those. But again, just for the public, I want to make sure that they’re aware of what was discussed and some of the responses, so that they have an understanding of what was presented to the Commission in full. I

21:40
uh,

21:43
out in the open. I can’t my my mind’s not working the best tonight. Full disclosure, transparency. There we go. We’re on. We’re going.

21:51
It’s getting past my bedtime already. So the first question was asked was related to the minimum EV charging

22:00
parking requirements and bicycle parking for this application

22:06
tonight, we do have a number of staff in the room tonight from various departments, including public safety, public works, public were planning and transportation planning, so hopefully, if you have any additional questions, we can have them come up and talk about our regulations.

22:24
According to Zach, who is here tonight, the applicant was required to provide the four spaces based on the regulations that we adopted that match the state requirements for EV parking based on the proposal, by in and out, they have exceeded the requirements. So they’re, as I understand, providing for EV site chargers on site, where they would not have been required to have four, they would have had a different ratio of EV ready and EV chargers on the site, so they actually exceeded that regulation. And then Ben Ortiz, the transportation planner who’s here tonight, who reviewed also explained the requirements based on percentage of parking spaces, that is the correlation to the number of bicycle parking spaces that are required. And Ben explained that

23:27
the six bicycle parking spaces, which are the three inverted U racks,

23:33
would need to be provided to meet the minimum amount of parking required in the above scenario. And he states that with 39 the minimum 39 parking spaces, the minimum bicycle parking requirements is two spaces, so they exceeded that requirement for bicycle parking.

23:54
There was some concern with some parking spaces of whether or not there was a way to get out of the development. And I don’t have a larger site plan view, I apologize, but there is another entrance into the development and circulation around the in line building directly to the east of this property, and the applicant can answer any of those questions for you about that.

24:20
The next question was asking about the siting of the bicycle parking and what staff’s role was in that. And Ben explained that, based on the applicant’s proposal, he believed that that was the best, all right, maybe I shouldn’t say best, that it was a

24:42
let’s see, was one that we would recommend for a location for those bicycle parking spaces, so we did not ask them to make any changes to what they had originally submitted. And then there were some questions about whether any estimate was done as to how many customers may come by.

25:00
Talking from the adjacent uses. We spoke with the in and out representatives. They did not have a number, but again, they are assuming that based on just proximity to the adjacent uses, that there will be some that will come by, both ped and bike, and that in going through our site planning process, we have tied into the existing multi modal corridor and multi modal opportunities that we have with the bike trails along 119

25:33
the sidewalks and bike

25:36
lanes that are in Harvest Moon, as well as the other connections that are on the site for Costco and other connections that will be built with the other buildings that I spoke about, the bank and lazy boy and any of the future development, they are building an internal north south spine between their buildings and the Costco, so There will be a pedestrian connection that actually ties in to the house pad development to the south. So we tied in with the house pad development to provide that walkable connection through instead of having only one opportunity, which would be walk along Harvest Moon. So they have multiple options to get from House pad,

26:21
and that was the extent of the questions that were presented in the email.

26:29
Oh, just a elevation that shows kind of the evening view of this as it’s lit up. And then finally, to end my extremely long presentation again, the planning Zoning Commission is being asked to make a recommendation to the city council. You obviously have three options tonight. You can recommend approval, you can recommend denial, you can recommend approval with conditions. And as Phil noted in the staff report, and as I mentioned earlier, we are recommending that you the commission recommend to the city council approval. And we are noting that a condition prior to recording any approval for the site plan, that the plot itself has to be approved by staff. So with that, I apologize again for the length of time, but hopefully that gives you a little bit of background understanding of how we got to this point. Do you have any questions for me? And

27:32
I’m more than happy to come back after The applicant. Yeah, let’s go to the applicant first.

28:06
Good evening. Commissioner, Chairman, Poland commissioners, appreciate you guys taking the time to be here tonight.

28:14
Staff between Don and grant and Phil, who’s not here.

28:19
My compliments to them. You guys have a really good staff working for you, and we appreciate the quick responsiveness and their willingness to hop on the call anytime we need something. And that’s not something that we find too often.

28:33
Everybody’s so busy these days, these guys always find time for us, and we’re appreciative of that. And so your time this evening,

28:42
tonight, I’m gonna go more into introducing who in and out is Don did a fantastic job going over the history of the site, and what I felt might be helpful for you guys is to introduce ourselves to you. Many of you might have already been familiar with our company, our burgers, and hopefully you’re as excited as I am to be here tonight. We see this as an opportunity that we’re very excited this will be our first store in Boulder County, and we have some of the North, we have some of the South, but I think our site here is going to really focus and help out and really

29:19
get to the point of your comprehensive plan, the Envision Longmont, which one of the things I noticed in reading that several times, in preparing for tonight and our site plan proposal, is the interest in bringing in outside, or, you know, outside from the city residents, travelers, visitors, and when People see an in and out.

29:41
It’s humbling to hear, you know, it’s instant, you know, they recognize that they want to stop. And you will have visitors from out of town and travelers going through that’ll want to stop here, maybe go to Costco, and everybody gets to benefit from that. So

29:57
with that, I’m going to hop into here and then.

30:00
At the end, I’ll be able to answer any questions for you, guys and gals. So moving forward, our story In N Out burger was founded in 1948 by Harry and Esther Snyder. Over 76 later, the company remains family owned and is now led by Lindsay Snyder, their granddaughter, who continues the legacy of quality service and community. We take pride in being a truly American company that reflects values of hard work and integrity. Our focus has always been on building strong connections with every community we enter.

30:36
Our mission statement, seen on the screen here is more than just words. It’s a guiding principle that shapes everything we do. It’s why we remain dedicated to serving the highest quality food, creating a supportive work environment, and contributing to the well being of the communities which we serve.

30:54
It’s a statement that is so deeply embedded in our culture, we make sure it’s present on every business card and paycheck that we all see every two weeks and to remind us constantly, we’re here to support the community and do what we can

31:11
commitment to our associates. I can speak on this one myself in and out is, yes, I’m biased. I work there.

31:22
It’s a job. I’ve had three jobs as an adult. My last job was 22 years. I’m on the newer end at in and out. Most of the tenure is 10 years. Plus I’m not there, so I’m pretty, pretty low on the totem pole, but from an individual that hasn’t enjoyed the the perks of a company appreciating and that the valuing its associates, I can give you my testament tonight that it is something that I don’t take for granted, nor would we take for granted the opportunity to have a store in your town.

32:00
We understand that our associates are the cornerstone of our success. We foster a team oriented atmosphere that encourages growth, provides extensive training and ensures that every associate feels valued and supported, which is a reason in 2024 as you can see how your screen there, in and out, was rated as one of the top six companies in the nation on Glassdoor with an over 89% recommendation.

32:25
This commitment translates into a positive environment that benefits not only our team but the communities that we serve.

32:39
Our project is designed to align with the Envision Longmont comprehensive plan. As I mentioned earlier, we paid a lot of attention to that to make sure that we are kind of fulfilling the future goals that the vision that the city has, as well as the land development code, we support the city’s aim to create sustainable, connected spaces that promote multi mode, multi modal access and community interaction. One of the most emphasized goals in the plan, from my interpretation, is the fostering a vibrant, livable areas that bring people together, which we support through our site design with the pedestrian pathways. Commitment to sustainability, and which is evidenced by us exceeding, as Don touched on the EV chargers, we are required to do one. We’re, you know, we were doing four, level three. If you’re familiar with the EV chargers, they are the high speed, and you can get up to 80% some as short as an hour or so, I believe, so grab a burger and charge your car at same time.

33:50
Our strategic location at the corner of Ken Pratt Boulevard and Harvest Moon drive integrates well with the existing retail and residential infrastructure. This not only facilitates easy access for local residents, but also enhances economic activity by attracting visitors, making Longmont an even more vibrant regional hub.

34:13
The proposed project spans 1.64 acres, featuring a 3887

34:19
square foot building and an 1100 square foot covered patio. We’ve planned for 39 parking spaces, including Ada and EV charging spots, and a 490 foot drive through Lane accommodating up to 29 vehicles to ensure traffic efficiency and customer convenience.

34:42
On our site is thoughtfully designed to integrate with the surrounding infrastructure, including existing pedestrian walkways, bike lanes and roads. This helps ensure seamless access and promote safety for all visitors, aligning with the multi multi modal transportation plan we’ve.

35:00
Designed our project to adapt well to the existing and planned infrastructure, ensuring it fits naturally into the area.

35:10
Our design incorporates expansive architectural features that align well with the esthetic of neighboring properties. The flat roof design integrates seamlessly with the surrounding structures ensuring visual harmony. We’ve included metal awnings full brick wanes coats multiple pillars and arches to add depth and character to our building. Additionally, the design features multiple windows, enhancing both the building’s functionality and its welcoming appearance. These thoughtful elements reflect a commitment to quality and community integration.

35:48
This, excuse me, this rendering highlights some of the standout features of our site design, our drive through lane, which is longer than average, spanning 490 feet to accommodate those 29 vehicles, ensuring efficient traffic flow. Additionally, our 1100 square foot all weather patio, it is is designed for year round use, equipped with ceiling mounted heaters for comfort on colder days, this space creates an inviting atmosphere where families and friends can enjoy their meals together in a comfortable setting, enhancing the overall dining experience.

36:27
What sets us apart as an employer?

36:31
We are proud to offer starting pay significantly higher above the state minimum wage. Currently, we’re offering starting pay at 1950 an hour our full time associates also benefit from comprehensive perks, including paid vacations, flexible schedules and health coverage. This commitment reflects our belief that a supported team leads to a better guest experience and stronger community ties. I

37:03
investing in our communities where we serve. We actively contribute to the communities we serve through donations, partnerships with local charities, and participation in community events. Our goal is to be more than a restaurant. We aim to be a trusted and supportive community partner.

37:26
This slide highlights our commitment to giving back to the communities which we serve. Over the years, we’ve supported numerous organizations throughout Northern Colorado, many of which have likely benefited Longmont, directly or indirectly. Our contributions have helped bolster programs that support children, families and individuals in need.

37:49
Organizations such as Ralston house, Casa of Larimer County, Hope House Colorado and others showcase the types of impactful partnerships that in and out. Burger fosters to uplift and support local communities.

38:07
In and out, burger is proud to contribute to the economic vitality of the communities where we operate. Our new location in Longmont, will create numerous local job opportunities, providing competitive wages and comprehensive benefits that support career growth and stability beyond employment, our operations stimulate local economic activity, encouraging spending and supporting nearby businesses. The economic benefits extend further as revenue generated by our business help support public services, infrastructure improvements and community programs, this positive ripple effect reinforces our dedication to not just being a place where people can come to dine, but a business that plays an active role in bolstering the economic health of Longmont. Our investment in the city translates to sustained growth and prosperity for its residents and the wider community.

39:02
Thank you for your time this evening. I’m happy to address any questions and look forward to further discussion on how we can be a positive addition to Longmont community. Thank you. Thank you very much.

39:15
This is a public hearing item I would like to, at this point, go to the public hearing. Nobody signed up for public invited to be heard. I would invite anybody in the public who would like to come forward and speak, to come speak,

39:28
seeing nobody come forward. I’ll go ahead and close out public invited to be heard, and we’ll move to questions, comments, motions from the Commission.

39:42
Commissioner. Height,

39:45
staying close to his microphone. That’s too close. I only have three questions. I think

39:53
first, there’s a reference.

39:57
This is a secondary user. There are primary.

40:00
Uses the primary use, I think, being big box retail or big box

40:06
employment based activities, this is secondary. I don’t know why it’s secondary, but in any event, this is a 25 acre lot Costco takes up how much of it,

40:16
over 50% of it.

40:22
I 16 Costco, 16%

40:27
you? 16 acres. Sorry, 16 acres of the 25 so it’s over 50% yes, thank you. That answers that question for me. Related,

40:41
Don I don’t know what you call the housing to the South that we recently approved. Is it within 250 feet of this structure?

40:51
House had itself. Let me double check

40:57
it is not.

41:02
And didn’t catch your name. Daniel paucius in an Alberta thanks. I apologize for that commission. Good to meet you. Likewise,

41:16
give me just a second to measure if you want to go to your next question. One, yeah, I was going to suggest that question number two is

41:24
your North elevation,

41:27
which is where your patio seating is,

41:31
also faces Chem prat Boulevard, which I think our land use code requires that any part of a drive through Restaurant facing a roadway has to be 50%

41:41
glass or or transparent door. Do you meet that I didn’t see that, or it doesn’t look as such? In my view of your

41:52
I have those percentages on here I could share with you.

42:00
I got bad eyes, so sorry are for the windows, doorway percentage calculations on our North elevation, we are at 50.99%

42:13
Oh, interesting how that number came out just like that. Yes, but thank you. I appreciate that. Yes, sir. And then from a practical standpoint, as I look at

42:24
the overall plan to subdivide this lot too, into your your property, and then what’s next door, what’s going in there, multi use, commercial, okay, but your

42:37
access point in The multi modal plan, I think was exhibit maybe eight. Exhibit eight to the materials that we received. It might not be your exhibit eight, but it’s your multi modal plan identifying transportation issues.

42:53
It looks like

42:55
you’re kind of proposing or using, or at least relying upon access through

43:01
the subdivided side of this lot. How’s that going to work? Um, are you going to have a we have, I’m sorry, you’re up from Ken Pratt. I’m assuming, going south, coming in off of harvest drive. There’s a, it looks like an entryway. There’s a blue arrow, at least, coming in off of harvest through the south side of if it’s lot two, I’m gonna call you lot to A, and they are to be yes, and you are coming through to be to get to two A.

43:34
Is that correct for pedestrian? We have cars for for vehicles. We have vehicles that are can be accessed to our site from the entrance off to the lot to the east. You’re correct. And we also have our own three lane entrance and exit on our parcel. I can see that, and I can well

43:58
anticipate that your kind of vehicle heavy. There’s, there’s a lot of vehicles that come to your In and Out Burger I think that drive through it. I mean, the public has raised that as an issue, and I think my experience with your dining facilities, yeah, you, you’re a very attractive restaurant that brings in a lot of vehicular traffic, as I look at

44:24
the way I would want to come into your facility, would be through that South entryway on lot to be to queue in line to get through your drive through. My question is,

44:36
you obviously, somebody is subdividing this property. Is there going to be the right for you to use, probably fairly intensively that access way it is, we do have a cross access agreement that will allow that although we we pride ourselves on how we handle our traffic, because it.

45:01
It’s has the potential not to, not to just be an issue with the city. It’s a customer service issue for us, right? So, although we were only required to do 180 feet in our drive through, we far exceeded that at 490 feet stacking for you know, up to 29 vehicles. Plus, it’s important to note that our operations are such that

45:25
as soon as a car gets to the menu board and beyond, we activate, you know, mobile ordering. We send out four or five associates, depending on how many people are out there with their walkie talkies, and this is all being monitored above our grills in the manager’s office, so that we are constantly monitoring what’s what’s happening out in our parking lot. And that will include from the menu board beyond we’ll have people out there that will be taking mobile orders, processing payments and directing traffic if need be. So what we’ve learned over the years some of our early stores, stores zero to 200 we just celebrated our 400 and 15th store opening today. What we’ve learned, especially over the last couple years, is this isn’t just an issue we want to wait for planning commission or somebody to ask about because customer service is everything to us. I’m sincere when I tell you that we want to make sure that our partners with the city, the residents that we serve and visitors from all over have nothing but the greatest experience. So we feel that based off of

46:36
what I described as our normal policies and procedures, along with this extensive drive through, as well as, to your point, the cross access agreement, we feel confident in our plan. Okay, the

46:49
flip side of the entryway is the exit way. And

46:54
I’ll admit, I buy my gasoline from Costco, the cheapest gas that I’ve been able to find. But that junction, or that intersection you’re going to be next to the gas station and the entryway, the in and out to the parking lot of Costco, that’s kind of the main area. It’s it’s very congested. And how many more vehicles are you going to bring into that? And do you have a are you confident that the traffic management is going to work there? Well, yes, I’m confident, and I can’t wait to see you in our store. We have traffic reports that not only that we had to do for our entitlement here, but when the original project went through, the numbers support that with the way the studies were done, it could handle the traffic, but I’m pleased to tell you that our our report and the daily counts are even less than what was proposed for this area. So based off of the studies and mind you, these aren’t just numbers that come out of the normal handbook for a restaurant.

47:59
Again, we acknowledge we are a, you know, different sort of drive through. And although we, you know, in some cases, some jurisdictions, we could just use the numbers out of the traffic manual and the handbook, but that doesn’t do anybody any favors. What we’ve done on our specific traffic letter is we’ve taken locations that have similar stores in the area and similar, you know, the demographics, and we use those numbers in our traffic study just to be extra hard on ourselves to make sure that even with those higher traffic counts, we’re still below what was originally studied years ago. And I’m pleased to tell you that we are. And do you have that answer? Don

48:43
it’s over 700 feet from the house pad development. Thank you. The follow up on the

48:49
the egress from your facility onto, I think it’s called North Costco road. I’m assuming that road to own by Costco. Have you conferred with Costco on your plans and how it might impact

49:04
their customer trafficking. Yes, we’re all part of reciprocal easements and agreements that they’ll have to look at and review and approve, as well as our neighbors, so none of this would be a surprise to them. You know, obviously before we open,

49:20
okay,

49:22
you have conferred with him, or you would confer with him. I didn’t. Oh, right now we’re working with the developer who’s been reviewing our plans and approving all of them. Ultimately, Costco will have a review and approval, and I’m sure they’ve already seen it.

49:35
I guess I’m suggesting that there is a more formal review and approval that we get prior to being able to open, and that’s when I consider it completely done. But the developer is here, he can answer and provide a little bit more insight on that, if you’d like, Yeah, I think so. Okay,

49:57
hi, Drew golden. So we have a.

50:00
Critical easement agreement with Costco

50:03
that covers the entire development. And as part of that, Costco gets to review

50:11
all the other users and their site plans, and they have already done that.

50:16
We are in the process of getting that recorded as is required in the R, E, A, but they have approved it. They have approved it. They have Yes, Mr. Golden, I apologize too. I think I thought you were somebody else when I first met you. No worries. Thank you for that. But Costco has looked at this and approved it. Yes, sir, thank you so we have just because I’m gonna own the commercial building next door. So they’ve seen it both as just in and out, and as the olive lot too. Yes, sir, thank you.

50:49
I’m done. Thanks.

50:51
Okay? Thank you Commissioner Popkin,

50:56
thank you Chair.

50:58
Commissioner height asked one or two of my questions so I will not re ask those. Thank you, sir,

51:04
Daniel, let’s start with you. Thank you for the the thoughtful and detailed presentation. Thank you.

51:11
We appreciate the overall, very thoughtful and seemingly well aligned proposal for Envision, along with our comprehensive plan for that site, for that region, just a couple initial questions. Then I want to clarify a couple things with Don and then I’ll come back to you on three topics. So I’ll give you a chance to, like, get your head in the right, the right, sure, the right mindset there. First, you seem fairly enthusiastic about the site, about the project, about the company overall. That’s fantastic to hear.

51:40
Drive throughs, obviously,

51:43
maybe, I don’t know if it’s first and foremost or one of the primary goals of them is to attract vehicular traffic flows and bring folks through the area. This

51:52
This location is in an interesting spot, because you have Costco and you have some other retail and housing that’s coming in nearby. You know, this doesn’t have to be an exact science, but how much is in and out expecting customers to come via vehicular traffic directly or from like adjacent retail, just to frequent your store, specific to vehicular, vehicular, and then, sorry, and then by pedestrian. So I did see your question. Dawn was kind enough to forward it to me to see if I might be able to provide some insight. And I did, and that insight is,

52:27
we don’t do studies on pedestrian traffic. I wish I had a better answer for you, right? It’s an honest answer. You know? What I can tell you, though, is, obviously we do expect some especially from the residential pad.

52:41
Our thought was perhaps Costco folks might not want to have $1 hot dog, although I don’t think they’re $1 anymore, they might want to come over for a burger. So yeah, which is why it was important that we tied in. We took into account the multi modal plan

52:57
as far as vehicular from that surrounding area and outside of the area.

53:03
Real technical questions. I have a tendency to, you know, misspeak. So we did bring our traffic engineer that, you know, did the original memo. He’d be happy to, you know, maybe answer some of these questions for you. As it comes to local specifics, I’m not sure if there is, if we do have anything, you know, specific to the Costco shopping center, but I’d give him the opportunity to answer that if you’d like, once we’re done here. Okay, thank you. I don’t think that’s necessary at this time. I was just curious if you’ve done kind of pedestrian customer studies as well, just to understand, given the proximity and the opportunity that that presents one other question for you for a moment.

53:41
Don mentioned in his presentation that the development review committee did four different reviews of this proposal. From your perspective, just why did it go through four reviews?

53:52
So I took this plan on as it was coming out a second and so this is a new baby for me, and I’m so thrilled about it, as you can tell, as you mentioned, I can’t really speak to the first two. I know

54:06
the there weren’t significant changes over the entire process. I know the EV was something when I jumped into it, it was right. When you guys had passed one of the building codes, which required you guys to adapt, adopt the new state mandate. I studied that, you know, really close because, you know, as as a company, that’s not real familiar with Evie, nor is anybody I wanted to learn up and read as much as it, as there is to learn about it when it comes to Colorado and Longmont, and that’s what I learned. Was, at the time of our first plan, check that it went through, it wasn’t required, but as soon as you guys pass, I believe, is the electoral electrical code from 2023

54:46
that kind of mandated you guys to adopt that state code. So that’s one example that I can speak up personally, that I was involved with history before that in looking over the plan checks and nothing was significant that you know.

55:00
There was a lot of back and forth on but sometimes it takes four. And I could tell you, the last site plan was a pretty lightning when it came to comments. So it was, it was probably could have got done in three but,

55:12
you know, just pushed through that fourth one. Appreciate it. You have the misfortune of coming before this commission after we have seen multiple drive through proposals over the last, let’s say four to five months. So for lack of, for lack of a better phrase here, you’re gonna, unfortunately face a little bit of grilling on a similar topic there. But know that that’s really not intended on my end. I assume that in and out, it’s gonna do most of the grilling here. Yes, very good. You can take a brief you can take a brief pause there. I will come back to you on three topics of kind of the exact location and thought behind the outdoor seating, the safety of the site flow, and then the multi modal transportation. So I’ll come back to you. No, I appreciate that cool, Don. Thank you for your presentation and for the advance responses on some of the questions you have satisfied many of those. So I appreciate it up front

56:00
you had mentioned in your presentation to the Commission tonight, you were describing the overall site plan and the kind of pedestrian corridor spine from House pad to this retail area. Can you just walk us through that and maybe just show a map there so I can understand what that exact flow looks like? Give my presentation back up. Yeah. No problem. Thank

56:28
you. While you’re pulling that up, just share the intent of like, where I want to go with this.

56:33
This is a as Commissioner height was alluding to, there’s a lot of traffic,

56:38
people, vehicles that are going to come through this site for the retail. I guess you would get to the housing through this site, per se, but more as a as a little bit of an attraction to this space. And so when we’re thinking about pedestrian crossing, parking lots crossing, then is it called North Costco road, or whatever? North Costco entrance? Is that the name of the street itself? So it’s a it’s a private drive. It’s not actually city right of way, got it. So when we’re talking about that spur that goes into the Costco parking lot and splits into the gas station that goes in front of this site to access in and out there sidewalks, there are bike lanes, but there’s still just a lot of vehicular traffic and potentially pedestrian traffic that’s going through so I want to just understand truly what the connections are here, certainly. So the What’s up on the screen right here is the preliminary plat.

57:28
And again, house pad is down here to the south. And then harvest junction residential, which is the single family. And then we have the apartments to the north up here, when we were designing and laying out the Costco we have the requirements within the parking lot that we have to have direct connections from the parking lots to the entrance of the building. Again, the Costco building itself sits down in probably this Southwestern quarter of the of the lot. And so what you’ll see is that we’ve provided on the Costco property a number of connections that go through the parking lots to the building. And then we also have provided, for example, access points out to the highway 119 bike corridor to the bike path. And then, as we’ve been working on the development itself, we obviously we talked about before, have the bike lanes that are on Harvest Moon, we have the sidewalks as well. What we looked at was that we knew that there would be an opportunity to try to have folks that are at the bank, maybe working there, or at the furniture store, or any of these other locations that they may have interest in going over to Costco, either to do shopping before they leave, or to purchase lunch or do other things. Maybe even they went to Costco. And now your bank is this bank down right here, and you want to walk over and make withdrawal without having to get in your car and drive over there, maybe you’re parked in the eastern portion of the parking lot. So really it’s not that far to walk. So what we anticipated, and what we are requiring as each of these pad sites come in, is that they are building a north south sidewalk along this property line all the way up that ties in to all of the other on site connections that exist that come in off of Harvest Moon and come in from 119

59:29
and that connect to those locations that go to Costco. So this is the connection. And then in the house pad development, we provided an access point that comes off of this connection and goes through an open space area between residential units to the internal sidewalk within the development. Got it and so, just from my understanding, anyone who’s watching the the lot that is Costco is here lot one, that whole, that whole rectangle.

1:00:00
There includes the parking lots and the structure and the physical building, right? That’s correct. So the gas station and the gas Yes, the gas station is on the northern North side. Yeah, right. So then lot three and four are between Harvest Moon and the Costco parking lot. Specifically, that is right. Yes. Okay, so then the pathway that you’re describing is the border of the parking lot and the retail that would go in there correct and on those we have buffer areas, 10 foot wide, buffer landscape areas at a minimum, that the parking that this transport, or that the sidewalk goes through that location, so that it’s buffered from being right next to the parking lot or the drive lanes. Because, as I recall, there is a major drive lane, if you turn in, that accesses all these parking bays in front of Costco that runs that’s correct right up the side. And then, since we just saw house pattern earlier this year, is that, is there a through connection? No, not, not for vehicles, for pedestrian, yes, for pedestrians, we tied into that location with a sidewalk that wraps down and towards the east, a little bit to an open space, because, as you may recall, we have an alley that wraps around almost like a phone receiver, yep, in the back. So we didn’t want to run them through the alley. We wanted them to go through more of an open space area. The nearest open space area that was available was an out lot between homes that’s roughly right in this location. So the path comes north, heads West, a little ways, ties into the path that they’re constructing on the bank site, the Lazy Boy, and then we’re waiting for this next user to come in. So there is going to be a little bit of a gap, but that’s just kind of the way it’s progressed. Got it? Thank you. That’s super helpful. And it’s also just sounds like a very thoughtful site design overall. So thank you to staff who’ve been working on that with a variety of different applicants here.

1:02:06
If we go over to the multimodal plan,

1:02:10
do you have that on yours? We

1:02:13
can have an assist from Daniel here. That’s fine. This one right here.

1:02:19
This is more of the Yeah, this is the one that I have on my screen. Go back.

1:02:27
Perfect, excellent.

1:02:30
This also has transportation for vehicles. Okay, thank you. So what’s slightly unclear to me is where pedestrians cross. So what we just don what you just showed us all is how kind of this connected spine that you described for pedestrians coming from House pad and maybe other residential all the way through to other uses, what other retail customers could take and hop on? Where would someone, if they’re coming to the applicant’s restaurant here, where would someone cross by foot to get to the main restaurant. So the anticipated location, then, if you’re looking at this, is that this dash line right here, is that property line that we were talking about? And so what we would then be looking at when this lot develops, is providing a pedestrian connection up at that intersection, directly there, okay, right? Is that in any plans that are here because I didn’t, I didn’t. So the in the plans here, I my recollection. Okay, I Brian worked on it. I did. I did not work on the Costco to the extent that he did. My recollection was that we showed, again, the pedestrian connections in this location with the anticipation that there would be a cross connection here, a crosswalk for folks to go to the north to get up to this pad site.

1:03:51
That’s my recollection from the Costco site plan that we approved. Got it. I would love to we can, you can sit down in a moment, but I’d love to confirm that before we take a vote on this, because I think that’s a really important piece of the site connectivity here for the rest of the development and ensuring safe pedestrian Of course. Yep, I’ll take a look. Yeah. Thank you. And Daniel, if you know the answer to that, and if it’s in some map that I just No, it wouldn’t be. It’s not in ours, but for the purposes of our site, as you can see on the screen, there is current pedestrian action at the roundabout. There’s two areas that I saw, and that gave me a little bit of

1:04:30
a little heartburn there, because I was afraid that people would see that goes out of their way and they’re just gonna cross where they think that should be anyway. So in the zoomed out version of it, because in your scenario, until we have development to our south, really the only pedestrians that we need to be careful for people coming from Costco, right, right. So Costco is multimodal. The area, the bigger area, which I can share a map with you, does show coming up from Costco. They have a walkway.

1:05:00
All the way up to Ken Pratt, through their parking lot. So if you’re if they’re already in Costco, dropping their goods off in the vehicle, and then if they continue to walk up, there’s part of that multimodal. Is a connection to that. I think it’s a 15 foot dawn or 12 foot pathway that runs adjacent to Ken Pratt. Yeah, I’m going to stop you for a sec, so I see that, and I’m looking at Google Earth too,

1:05:24
so I see that. And generally understanding human behavior, the shortest distance between two points is a straight line, and that’s going to be the diagonal through the Costco parking lot, or at longest, kind of like wrapping over to where this pedestrian corridor that Don just eloquently described for us is going to be, I think, if I’m understanding the site connectivity here from what your proposal is, if people followed the route you were just suggesting that kind of goes around the Costco gas station, I think they’d have to walk past, because of how the drive through is set up. They’d have to then walk around the drive through lanes and kind of back around and kind of complete, almost what seems like a Tetris piece to get back into the property, in between your restaurant, the drive through, and the other retail to your east. So there’s two, the one that you just mentioned, and then to the west, there is actually another walkway down from Ken Pratt on the west edge of our property, okay? And so then, oh, so is that the red? Yes, that’s the red dashed line that takes them around the drive through the other way and a little bit shorter route. Okay, yes, all right, that that reduces some of my Harper in there. I would still love to confirm. I presume you wouldn’t have any objection to a crosswalk that’s directly north of that pedestrian spine that Don was describing. If, yeah, if it’s already planned we, you know, pedestrian safety is always a number one. Safety in general is a number one concern. But yeah, pedestrian we would have no objection to one getting put there. Yeah. I mean, if anything, it facilitates easier access to your site, right? And I my concern, along with it sounds like Commissioner heights on the traffic flows in general, just making this as smooth and directly connected as possible. Yes, great.

1:07:07
Let me see if that’s everything for Don at the moment,

1:07:13
I don’t see any other mics lit right now. Is that correct Chair? Thank you. I will continue then. Um,

1:07:23
lovely. Okay, let’s start with my kind of next area of questioning here, which is on understand the location and strategy behind your thought on the outdoor seating location. So if we could pull up, I think

1:07:36
if you have a map by the outdoor seating or like that area, or, I guess we, if we had that, even the multiple on the screen, that’s perfect. It’s not real zoomed in. Sorry, no, that’s that’s great for Okay, so I’m reading directly from your review criteria analysis, that was analysis, that was attachment 10, and then we’ll get to the map in a second. And I quote the location of the proposed In and Out Burger near the existing Costco to the west, and the proposed multi tenant commercial building to the east creates a commercial area that will provide a variety of uses for the community that have been designed in a way that supports activity in the area. And separate, quote, The In N Out Burger building includes a covered patio area on the north side, which you said, includes heaters and

1:08:21
a bunch of other nice amenities there to make it a nice space on the north side of the building, this location of the patio will allow for customers to enjoy the significant views.

1:08:32
To me when I’m reading this, it suggests, and from your presentation, it suggests that, like encouraging outdoor seating is one of the many goals that you have with this project and design, you probably wouldn’t build that space if you didn’t want customers to be able to enjoy it well. So I’m going to just, I’m

1:08:47
going to ask you a few questions, and they will feel challenging, but the goal is just to understand your logic and how you’re setting this up.

1:08:57
So we have a heated patio. We have an inviting setting for intended for year round dining. When I look at that map, to the north of that patio, directly to the north, you have the drive through and right the MO and it’s not like the end of the drive through. It’s, let’s say, the middle of the drive through. So on an average busy evening, cars would easily back up to that point. Is that a fair assumption, yeah, yeah, assuming your business is doing well, yeah. So, so cars are going to back up, at least to that patio, so you’ll have cars basically idling right there, then at the same time, just north of the drive through, you also will have and an end before we go to North of the drive through. You also have two lanes of the drive through merging into one, so you have traffic condensing there, then just due north of the path, north of the of the drive thru lanes, you have Highway 119, and I think is that four? Sorry, is that four or six lanes of traffic at that point? It’s four to the best. I’ve only been on it today, sorry. Well, today.

1:10:00
Rest of my recollection. Welcome to town.

1:10:03
So let’s say at least four lanes of a highway traffic. There. Right to the west,

1:10:09
we have the Costco gas station, like directly in line of sight. And then to the south, we have the Costco parking lot, and well, really, at the south of the Eden area, you have your establishment, and then to the east, we have a mining area

1:10:25
with some retail and other stuff. I guess I’m curious, what are the significant views that people are enjoying from that space?

1:10:34
You know? I guess I use that term in the fact that I am

1:10:40
maybe bias in that I’d rather sit outside on a patio with what you described as busy areas than I’d rather be, you know, in between four walls inside Colorado’s a beautiful state, Longmont. My visit here today allowed me to not just do a site visit, but I’d use the opportunity to drive all around Longmont, and especially downtown, shout out to half a Mexican restaurant. That place is great, that it’s just it’s such a wonderful area, and that although, yes, you’re gonna have a drive through, yes, you’re gonna have Costco, yes, you but we do have a 50 foot buffer before you get to that four lane the distance between the highway and R and R drive throughs is 50 feet. So it’s good views to my opinion, as far as being outdoors, and yes, you’re gonna have the occasional car going by now and then, but in an effort to get as many cars as we did in that drive through in order to hit one of our bigger concerns, which is being a good neighbor, being, you know, customer service oriented, we would have our preference to put to that patio. There is what allowed us also to have 490 foot of drive through space, as well as having, you know, the Eat room for the extra EV chargers and the parking stalls. So

1:12:07
am I overselling the the significant views, maybe. But to my point, I’d always rather be outside than, you know, inside, you know, the four walls of a building. So I guess I was speaking from that vision, got it.

1:12:23
Thank you. Did in any of the design review processes or conversations with staff, were there other layouts in terms of where the outdoor seating might go and like to the south or to the in the front, or, I guess to that would be the east of your of your structure itself on the roof. I mean, you have a really elaborate kind of rooftop design, or just roof, General, with the different like towers and parapets or whatever the term is, yeah,

1:12:51
as I previously mentioned, obviously I had the, you know,

1:12:56
well, I like to look at as I was fortunate to take this over at between second and third plan check. I can’t speak of what happened before that. To the best of my recollection, maybe Don can speak of it. This is the only layout that has ever been presented. I believe there are some changes in regards to

1:13:16
where we’re putting the EV chargers. But for the most part what you see here, there have, have not been significant changes or revisions requested, where it comes to the patio location,

1:13:29
okay, look at the end of the day, that’s that’s a business decision for you all, and where you put it. And I recognize that, but it

1:13:37
when I’m looking at the layout there, it strained a little credibility to say significant views, and then kind of assume that, frankly, that you that a lot of people are going to want to sit around a drive through, but maybe you have other experiences in other establishments that you guys run in the company so well we I just want to take a moment I appreciate your feedback. I can tell you you are very upfront, and I appreciate that an intern, sometimes I come off a little harsh. So sorry about that. But yes, our experience is where you see this patio is 99% of the time near the drive through. And our customer service experience, we strive to always improve, if where it’s required or suggested. And our experience has been that this is does lend itself to an enjoyable customer service experience. Fair enough. Then I hope you get a lot of EVs coming through that do not idle too much gasoline and fuel emissions. Fantastic.

1:14:31
All right,

1:14:35
let’s, let’s talk site safety here. So in your review, criteria analysis, again, staying with attachment 10,

1:14:44
the design includes features to promote the safe and efficient traffic flow. And

1:14:50
that’s a direct quote. And I think you said you in your presentation, you take pride in

1:14:57
how you guys manage traffic in general and the cost.

1:15:00
Them are flowing overall, yes, so that’s great, and hopefully these are just clarifying questions at best. Part

1:15:07
of the reason I was asking about the bicycle parking to staff earlier was to try to understand how cyclists are going to get to that part of the parking area. And so let me describe what I am seeing on the site, and maybe we can throw up the slightly larger multi modal plan again. That would be wonderful.

1:15:27
Great. So we have the bike parking in that little green box right next to that little outdoor patio we were just talking about.

1:15:37
Understand the justification for the number of parking. I’m wondering how cyclists, if they’re if they’re coming here, or if people are coming here by bike, are going to get to that space to park. So I guess there are a couple routes. One, if they’re coming on the Greenway, they would come to that sidewalk and likely come down that red dotted line and around yes, correct on the sidewalk. If they’re coming from other parts of the neighborhood, they may very well be coming on some of the very established and well marked bike lanes that that area has. So when people are come, when when cyclists are coming to this exact part of the entrance to your property on North Costco entrance, for lack of a better road description, if they’re coming in the road bike lanes, they are behaving like vehicular traffic. And maybe I’ll turn to our bike specialist in a second too to help me clarify this. But I’m trying to understand the site flow of how vehicles are going to use the parking lot, going to the drive through and coming out, and where there are potential conflicts for cyclists coming in,

1:16:38
especially if it’s at dusk when dinner time is and that’s probably the highest volume of traffic flow, right? So

1:16:47
hopefully we don’t want cyclists, if they’re following the law, to be cutting across the entrance to your property for vehicles and hopping on that sidewalk to then get on to that little red dashed line, turn right and go north up to the bike parking, then that suggests to me that they are ideally coming turning right into your parking lot with vehicular traffic flow, and then somehow navigating either to the left or right, unless it’s a one way to get to that bike parking. And I envision a lot of situations in a fairly busy, high turnover customer environment where you’re going to have

1:17:22
cars, maybe even some trucks and cyclists all navigating that fairly tight parking area. So how do we make sure that people get to the bike parking area in that far northwest corner without running a foul or running into literally or being hit by other cars and trucks? Sure I appreciate the question. So there’s a couple things that I can respond, and then maybe we have a bike expert that can come up right. What I can tell you is, from an in and out standpoint, one of the things we struggle with, and admittedly so with working with cities and meeting their code, is staying below the maximum foot candles for light, because light is safety. We this parking lot. We are below the threshold. So I’m pleased to say we’re below the threshold there, but we have lights spread out throughout this area. So in your scenario, if it’s a bicyclist, who’s you know, using the rules of the road as a another vehicle would tells me they’re an experienced bicyclist. And from a you know, retailer standpoint, all we can do is provide

1:18:34
well lit parking lot for a nighttime scenario, for nighttime and daytime. We do have a crosswalk that goes from Costco entrance North Costco entrance into the sidewalk, which will lead right to the bike racks beyond that on those busy scenarios that you met. Sorry, where is that? What’s it

1:18:55
all? Is that coming from a side the path that goes along 119 where the mouse is right there. Oh, you’re talking about that one? Yes. Oh, yeah, I see that. Okay, yeah. So to the extent of your questions, we would hope that with you know experienced bicyclist who are using the roads as vehicles between the well lit parking lot and on the busier nights when we do have associates deployed, which is most of the time, if we have cars at the drive through and beyond, we’ll have also associates out there that are also directing traffic. And also keep in mind pedestrian safety, bike safety, to the best of our ability, got it so then, if I’m understanding correctly, and I haven’t heard from Don or you, but maybe either of you or other staff can clarify this. Is there any guidance or signage on traffic flow that’s happening in the parking lot where, like, if I turn in here to enter from the Costco side, here am I directed one way or another, or is it? Does it become a free for all? Once you get into the parking lot, we go, it’s not a free for all, because the width of the street, the width of the parking areas are wide enough for two way Park.

1:20:00
Just as they are in other parking lots. So the drive lanes are wide enough to accommodate cars in either direction. So it’s not a free for all, okay, but you that you that does clarify that traffic can turn when once you enter the site, you can turn lock and turn left, you can turn right, and so then, if you’re entering towards the if you’re if your goal is to get to the drive through lanes. You can turn right following a counterclockwise rotation here of the site. You could also turn left and go around that way because there’s parking spaces then. But you could also enter those conceivably, you could also enter the drive through that way. Yes, and you could be coming up from the other adjacent retail to the east and

1:20:40
then entering there. So you potentially have three different ways for cars and trucks to be entering the drive through or navigating the parking lot. And then you also have the vehicles that are coming out from that counterclockwise rotation of the drive through that are going to be then turning out of the site right, or going to the in line building to the east, or going to park and recharge their vehicle if I’m able again, if you’re a if you’re a bicyclist who’s using the road, you’re used to following the rules of the road. You understand how traffic works, what your obligation is and responsibility is. You’re going to function as a car. So you’re gonna have multiple ways to get to those pikes parking spots. If I’m got my kids younger, and I’m on a sidewalk or a bike path, then I’m going to use the sidewalks to get them safely up to the front, which is using the dash line that runs north, south through on the front of the building. So it looks like there’s multiple ways to get to this site safely, depending on your expertise as a bicyclist.

1:21:49
When we have other

1:21:53
I would like to assume that people are always going to cycle and drive to the best of their ability, but when we have other drive through properties is there, is there directional flow, or guidance that’s given to vehicles that are turning in to basically navigate that in a consistent cycle? I’m just it varies by the way that the either

1:22:14
the

1:22:16
operator wants to lay out their site. So for example, if you’re laying out one way lanes, then we’re going to make sure that you have directional arrows on the ground with signage that directs people in the appropriate way through that parking lot. But the majority of the projects that we see

1:22:36
have two way traffic in both ways to give everybody the ability to make an appropriate choice on how they either get in or out of that development. The McDonald’s had an angled parking with one way only that you saw out at the sandstone range because of the depth of the lot, they were restricted on that so they could not do that. They had to make sure, though, that the area up at the front of the building was wide enough because we had to have the ability to set up the fire truck out front, in front of that building to provide adequate fire protection. So that area had two way traffic, but the other area with the angled parking that they had would only have been one, so that would have directional arrows. Got it. Thank you. I like the outdoor the bike parking area for a couple reasons. It’s visible from the outdoor patio. It’s visible from probably some windows from the restaurant itself. I

1:23:32
hesitate slightly, because it feels like everything has to funnel towards it if you’re going to be using that mode of transportation. Do we have? Ben? Ben, are you here? Ben. Ortiz,

1:23:48
wonderful. Thank you. Just one, one final question here.

1:24:00
Sure.

1:24:01
Oh, no worries. Thank you.

1:24:04
Better Ortiz, transportation planner, I didn’t quite catch the question. I didn’t ask one yet. Oh, I was asking if you were present before I thank you. I’m sort of present. Welcome.

1:24:15
When, when we were talking about the when, when Don was briefly giving an overview of the response to my question, I sent via email, he was mentioning that generally, that seemed like a plausible and I think there was even stronger language used

1:24:32
where I think it was more than plausible of a location for the bicycle parking. I see merits to it. As I just said,

1:24:39
Were there other when you’re looking at a site in terms of optimal location for bicycle parking, I’m sure you’re weighing in a lot of different factors when you think about that. Sure. Can you just walk us through the decision making or the thought process on that? Yeah, of course. So the land development code is, is, it doesn’t provide precise language in terms of where.

1:25:00
Where bike parking should go. It says 100 feet within from the primary entrance of a facility, and then also highly visible location. And so I did like that location, because it is proximate to the outdoor seating air, the seating area, the patio there, and there’d be a lot of eyes on the on the bike parking, and so that would deter theft. And then it’s not a terribly short, not a terribly long walk to the building entrance. So,

1:25:30
you know, we have seen some

1:25:34
some retail facilities, for example, some restaurants where they’ll put the bike parking and then run it parallel to the to the to the front facade of the building near the entrance, you could do that, but then it also constrains the walking area. So we felt this was a good, good compromise.

1:25:57
Got it. Were there other locations that were considered for the bike parking on this site. I don’t know the history of the Yeah. Well, that location was, was what they proposed in the first review. Okay, I looked at it, I thought, this makes sense, so I didn’t provide any further comment.

1:26:13
Understood we were talking before Don Daniel and I about some of the potential traffic flows of cyclists. One is coming from the west via the Greenway, through the sidewalk, and would follow the sidewalk to the bike parking, logical, safe direct

1:26:29
with a U. The second was through the bike lanes that are created in the whole region that would involve on road bicycle rules. So they would follow, in theory, the flow of traffic, vehicle traffic as well, which would be turning into the parking lot itself. And the third would be, maybe the

1:26:46
irregular or illegal approach, which is you follow the bike lanes and then you cut across the crosswalk there between the sidewalks to hop on the sidewalk that puts you directly on the sidewalk toward the bike parking those seem like the three most plausible behavioral routes, and not endorsing the illegal one technically. So do you? Are you at all concerned about any of the flows or potential conflicts from the vehicle circulation on the site with the parking lot and the drive through, plus the route that bicyclists would take if they’re following the bike lanes to get there? We’re always concerned about bicycle safety. But I think Don alluded to this earlier, is that bicycles according to the model traffic code, which the city adopts by reference,

1:27:33
states that bicycles are considered vehicles and subject to the same rights, rules, responsibilities as a motor vehicle, which means you have to, you know, merge into traffic when you can do it safely, ride on the right hand side of the road. Obviously, there are some exceptions, because the bicyclist doesn’t have the ability to, you know, accelerate the way an automobile does, and they can go up on sidewalks. But there’s an expectation that they follow the rules as best they can and but we also recognize that some people are going to take shortcuts just because it’s quicker and easier.

1:28:16
Unfortunately, there’s really no way to prevent all of those types of behaviors from happening. So then yeah, and I agree with that, and that is just an unfortunate reality in from your standpoint, on the planning side, though, do to what extent is that factored in to the decision of setting bike parking or the directional flows that you’d expect if that is going to create those windows of opportunity to go the easier and more direct routes, whether it’s legal or not, yeah, I mean, I would. So I’m a cyclist, but I’m experienced, but I don’t ride a lot all year long. And

1:28:55
I was thinking, from my own personal experiences,

1:28:59
I would have no issues personally riding through the parking lot and getting to the bike parking and

1:29:06
again, you know those particular drive aisles

1:29:11
would facilitate two way movement. So you’re riding on the right hand side of the road, you’re being cautious, looking for those rear light, rear light, camera lights and just, you know, being careful

1:29:27
in minding, you know, the area around you to make sure that there’s not going to be any conflicts with backing up cars and that sort of thing. But

1:29:36
I wasn’t terribly concerned about it. Okay? I appreciate it. Thank you sure,

1:29:45
one two last clarifying questions, then I’ll yield to my fellow Commissioners,

1:29:51
Don or Daniel or both, at any point in the development review process, was it ever considered that this site seems somewhat conducive to a county?

1:30:00
Clockwise flow for all traffic, if you’re accessing the drive through, that is inherent in the design, and then potentially for just making everyone who enters to go on a clockwise around the parking area, if you were just looking to park, and if you were coming in from the adjacent retail to come in and stay follow that counterclockwise flow, either through the drive through or around the parking lot. Just curious if that was considered at any point. From a traffic management you have more experience navigating drive through properties than I do. Don and the planning team have been looking at this for a while, so I I trust folks who have been working in the space for a while, but I want to just know what, what the considerations were. Yeah, there was, I don’t think

1:30:42
ever i I’m sorry

1:30:44
we never looked at it as a counterclockwise or a clockwise. We pride ourselves on, you know, minimum width of our tri vials to allow for double traffic, to give people the opportunity and allow us the ability, if we are backed up on the drive through, and we have associates out there, we enjoy the flexibility of being able to make changes on the go if needed, to help facilitate traffic movements, and that’s kind of what we’ll rely on with those wider drive aisles.

1:31:14
The only thing that I would add is that, from a fire standpoint, having the widths that are required for them to be able to set up their trucks and have access to provide public safety on the site, they need a minimum of 26

1:31:33
so

1:31:35
part of that is also in place. And when we look at restricting the lane widths to be in one way, if they are narrower than our fire vehicles trying to get in there to set up, don’t have the room Absolutely. I’m actually not concerned about the width at all. I’m just concerned about the traffic flow. And I’m just, I’m wondering if

1:31:56
there are too many points of conflict with how this so I’m going to sit with that for a minute and decide if I’m overthinking this and hear what my fellow Commissioners have to say here. I appreciate the direct responses and the clarifications before I pass it over. Don I was just curious if there was any map that showed the crosswalk before in the packet here. So there is not the overall development plan for Costco does not show a crosswalk to this lot, so right now, we are building a path to Nowhere. So if the commission would like to consider a condition to make that a requirement of this development, you could do that if you so choose. Or we could try to ask for that from the other developer of the parcel to the south when they come in. So I would just say that at this point, it does not appear that in and out is willing to provide that access in our discussions.

1:32:53
Got it. Thank you for clarifying. So Daniel, just to confirm what Don is saying, Sure, just in adding the crosswalk access to the property, from that North spine to your property, that’s not something you would be amenable to. At this moment earlier, when it was discussed, when, when you had asked, I was under the impression if we would have, if we would oppose it, when the developer to the South was going to connect, because right now,

1:33:20
the way, the way I see it, is it would be a crosswalk

1:33:24
to an undeveloped pad. When you had asked I was, I was saying we would not oppose that future developer that develops there to add that crosswalk

1:33:35
the way our sites laid out, I do see an access to our site using the current layout of the plan. So my desire would to be asked the developer to that South when he comes in to add the crosswalk, because as it sits now, there is access, safe access to our site

1:33:55
noted. Thank you. Jeremy, a quick legal question, is there any

1:34:00
I mean, the crosswalk technically goes on private roadway that is not the applicants. From what I understand is there any legal constraint that we would have of proposing a condition for a crosswalk that’s not on their property, per se, but connects to

1:34:14
it, and any staff can answer this if that has been discussed. Good

1:34:21
evening, commissioners. Jeremy Trell, Assistant City Attorney, Commissioner Popkin, great question. I don’t know if anything in our code specifically, but I would have concerns about in and outs ability to meet that condition when it’s subject to the like someone else’s constraint. I think the condition is better imposed upon the developer coming into the South who would do that crosswalk and has control of the property, versus in and out who doesn’t have control of that property. I know it’s a little bit weird right now, because we have the developer in the room. They’re all working closely together. They have the easements and access agreements, but I don’t think we could require in and out to have that as a condition for their approval. I.

1:35:00
And if I might just add on to that, we don’t have control of that property, right? So would, I don’t want we’re talking about the roadway, right? We’re talking about the property of the South that it would connect to, yeah, but the crosswalk is just in the roadway with maybe the like, sidewalk and wheelchair accessible ADA ramp, yeah, right. That private roadway, the private like the Costco drive, but it’s all,

1:35:25
it’s all private, Costco owned. It’s all. We don’t control it. We don’t have the right to go in there. We would have to get

1:35:32
agreements from Costco and any other developer that is in that area that owns the property that Costco doesn’t directly to our south.

1:35:42
Okay, thank you. I will yield to my fellow Commissioners for now. Appreciate all the clarifications. Thank you. Thank you Commissioner Boone,

1:35:52
thank you Chair. I have two really quick questions the development directly to the east, which is under construction right now. So maybe this is a question for Drew, or maybe to you, I don’t know what are those businesses intended to be, or do you have tenants yet? I have a few. It’s a mix of quick serve restaurant, a dental nail, nail salon. So it’s going to be some some food, some medical, and then I don’t know for the rest. Okay,

1:36:30
so my second question is related to that actually, because

1:36:35
do you feel comfortable? Well, right now, the site for the in and out project is

1:36:45
part of the construction site for the other

1:36:50
building, and it’s being used for staging or whatnot. So and the other building is way ahead of the in and out, the in and out site. So what happens when the other building is finished and it’s got its parking lot? Will the construction traffic come from that east entrance and go through? And do you have enough staging area

1:37:15
in the on the in and out site to not interfere with the traffic on the Costco road or the parking lot of the building that’s under construction. Presumably, it’s going to have tenants in it before this one’s even under construction, yeah, and my understanding is in and out. Can stage and build just on their property. But I’ll let Daniel confirm that

1:37:43
we do. We are, I

1:37:45
don’t know if it’s official, likely to use the same builder. So there’s a lot of

1:37:50
pre work that we’re doing for in and out,

1:37:54
the the parking, obviously the drive through or the drive in we’re constructing because we’re first there. So a lot of what they are going to own at the end of the day, we are constructing because we’re first in so at the end of the day, they’ll have to do their building, most of their parking lot, their drive through, that kind of stuff. But

1:38:19
a lot of it will be done before you Okay, thank you. In general, I think it’s a it’s a good project. I like the project. We’ve seen several other drive through projects in the recent past, and I think this is probably the best one. So I appreciate your efforts. Thank you, Commissioner. Appreciate that comment. Thank you.

1:38:41
Thank you. Don

1:38:44
in a case like this, where we are talking about a crosswalk in general. Is it for the first person to make in general? Is it for the first person to build, or is it for the second person to build?

1:38:58
What makes the most sense?

1:39:02
You know the I think it’s going to depend on the way that the site is owned and or located. Their argument is that they don’t own the road. So technically, then I guess we could argue that we’d have to go to Costco to get them to do it.

1:39:18
But,

1:39:20
you know, it’s unfortunate, you know, that the original goal was that all of these will be connected, and that we’re not going to have that connection. In general, what goes into making a crosswalk, they would have to put in handicap ramp down to the just the private cut, the private drive, and then they would strike that okay?

1:39:43
So the curb cuts would be the responsibility of the road or the

1:39:50
it. I guess it would depend on where the property lines sit in relationship to that road. If they are at the back of the curb, then we’re dealing with Costco.

1:40:00
Within,

1:40:01
if it’s inside the gutter, then we’re dealing with the property owner. So what would you suggest as a way that we if we want to make sure that this gets done, but we don’t really feel at this point to put it on, In and Out Burger. What could be done to facilitate getting this cross walk implemented. So my recommendation at this point would be that another condition be added to the plat, that we get a public access easement from their sidewalk out to the Costco road, so that we can have the ability for somebody to be able to construct that handicap ramp and to receive and then we’d have to do that when the when we do the site plan for this South Side correct, and then, based on what I think I’ve heard from the developer who’s sitting here as well as the applicant, is that

1:40:56
we’re still gonna have to deal with Costco, because it’s their road. Okay?

1:41:02
So,

1:41:04
so we can put in a condition, but we can’t condition Costco to finish off the work, correct? Okay,

1:41:13
thank you, Commissioner Popkin,

1:41:17
yeah, thanks chair for clarifying a few things there. I just want to, like, stay, for the record, look, I know that that through corridor is not there, but there’s an existing sidewalk already that goes to that space where we’re talking that the only thing missing would be the curb cut and a crosswalk. There is already a crosswalk and curb cuts

1:41:36
directly west of there by about, like, I don’t know, 15 feet to get across, like towards the rest of the Costco parking lot. This is, this seems very fitting with the layout of the rest of the site. And so I guess I and it would seem like a missed opportunity, and perhaps just a vast inconvenience from a flow standpoint, to not have that direct connection from the Costco area. So I’m very much in favor of the overall plan that the that the applicant has brought forward. I think this is a missing piece to just make it really fit within the goals of a regional center that is walkable, that is for multimodal transportation uses, that should attract customers to the advantage of, frankly, everyone who’s running a business in this whole regional center. So I would welcome maybe some of my fellow Commissioners have a suggestion on how we can resolve this. Really, the only thing is left are curb cut. It’s not like we’re building a whole extensive sidewalk pipeline. And I don’t even know if waiting for the next businesses to come into the south right? Would solve this problem, either? So I don’t know if waiting for that actually is is prudent to do the concept. Commissioner Popkin, we don’t disagree with I agree with everything you guys are saying, but we only control what we control. Yeah, what what you’re asking of in and out to do is to make improvements on somebody else’s land. That is a condition you might put on us that we may not ever be able to meet, which means we may not never be able to build our store. So although we don’t disagree with the concept, you know, pedestrian safety, safety is a number one concern of ours, but legally speaking, and the way the these, you know, approvals will need to get had, I can’t sit here today all the effort and time, the four rounds that we’ve gone with our plan checks for what appears to be a small condition you’d be placing on us could be a fatal blow. So we just, we like to control our own destiny. And although, depending on the position, as Don suggested on the plant, I don’t believe we’ll have any opposition to that. We’ll have to see where the property lines are happy to look into that.

1:43:52
Was it a missed opportunity? Perhaps it was. But to the extent where we find ourselves right now, it’s a condition that as much as I want to comply, trust me, I want to comply. You’re what you’re asking of us is something that we can’t do. I respect that I appreciate Daniel, I and I’ll just state where my intention is coming from, just from my side. We’re not trying to be difficult. Genuinely. It’s it’s Costco road. I agree with you. I agree with Daniel 100% it’s a missed opportunity. I’d love an opportunity to make up for it. We can build the curb cuts absolutely and then go to Costco and say, pretty please. Can we put a

1:44:29
crosswalk here? But unless they say yes, we don’t have control over it. But I’m all for putting the curb cuts in. I agree with you 100% it makes sense,

1:44:39
but it is Costco road. Yeah, no, I respect that. Look. My intention here is to clarify a safe, walkable area. I don’t have any intention of creating putting a condition on this that is impossible for the applicant to meet, which is hence why I involved our attorney in my previous line of inquiry. So I fully respect that you don’t have to.

1:45:00
Sweat on this. Thank you. I guess this is, this is just trying to, like, problem solve in real time. So, so don’t take it personally on this, right? If I sorry I missed your name in the back before true. Thank you. So if I was hearing you correctly, it sound like, are you in control of the curb cut piece of that

1:45:19
on the I guess we’re looking at that would just be on the in and outside, right? I think technically at this point, yes, I right, I

1:45:35
It depends on if it’s right of way or not. But it’s not right away, because it’s Costco is access route, right? Questions where the property lines.

1:45:45
So while you’re figuring that out here, here’s the here’s the problem I don’t want us to run into, which is we get through this. This is built. There’s a great regional center that is activated, and people want to walk across and because in and out didn’t build a curb cut on their side, and then we were waiting. It’s like a chicken and egg problem, times like four on. Who’s going to do what? At what point? Nothing gets hap nothing happens here. And you just have this kind of disconnect in the flow. So if there is a reasonable condition we can add to set this up for success that doesn’t prohibit the applicant from moving forward, that’s where my interest lies here, and I just want to involve staff, because this is not my expertise. But I want to try to get ahead of this and in a way that does not create legal problems and does not create any headaches for the applicant.

1:46:35
Yeah, to Don’s point. I think it depends on where the property line is, and off the top of my head, I don’t know exactly where that is, so I can tell you, if you look at this right here, this is built.

1:46:52
This curb is built. This we built

1:46:57
when we built Costco,

1:46:59
just to make sure that this would always be a straight shoot across.

1:47:05
So this is in so it would require some demo and rebuilding

1:47:11
to make that happen. But I don’t, and there’s like one, there’s like one block of cement that would require demo, like, it’s pretty trivial. So is that within your control that side, it

1:47:21
depends on where the property line is. It depends on if the property line sits behind the sidewalk or at the road. So if it sits at the road and I own right the sidewalk to the south, I see what you’re saying, then I can do it. If the property line is Costco owns to the back of the existing sidewalk, then

1:47:41
Costco is a minimal, right? They don’t want anybody to be hurt on their drive aisle. So they’ve, you know, they’re likely to be amenable to this. But we just, I drew their utilities also. We have to take

1:47:57
consideration, cable, gas. This is, this is bigger than, yeah, you know, unfortunately, there’s, I don’t want to open a can of worms. This is bigger than just Addison stripe, and I wish it was so again, for the applicants reinsurance and developer like, I don’t want to open a can of worms that can’t be closed either. But given the integral nature of this connection between the retail, Costco and other retail and housing that is going to be coming up the south I think it’s prudent for us to spend a little bit of time seeing if we can get this right, of course. So again, that’s that’s my goal here. I think you had something you want to add. Oh, no. Okay, to finish up any other questions. So it sounds like, if I’m understanding, maybe Don Jeremy Grant on this, we’re trying to clarify the property lines on both the north side of that entrance road and the South side to figure out, I guess, first and foremost,

1:48:50
who’s in control of the curb cuts

1:48:53
and the ADA accessibility. Secondly, then, I think we’ve already established that the crosswalk itself, which is really just paint, if I’m understanding correctly, unless it’s like a raised crosswalk of some kind, but if it’s just a traditional crosswalk, it’s paint. That’s Costco decision, and requiring that would not be legal for the applicant to act on.

1:49:14
Okay, good. I will pause my question. Let me know while you’re up. I’ll ask one more question, and I’ll let Commissioner, height take it over. It’s

1:49:25
this pedestrian axis that’s like one of the core things I want to just clarify and figure see if we can figure out the other piece that still doesn’t sit fully with me, and I appreciated staff member Ortiz’s expertise on this. I appreciated the planning department’s expertise is the Confluence and possible conflicts of the site, flow of vehicles around the parking lot.

1:49:50
Conceivably, if we’re looking at this diagram here, it’s a one way.

1:49:56
Let me clarify one thing.

1:49:59
Am I missing?

1:50:00
Interpreting the entire flow of the drive through. Is it going clockwise, or is it going counterclockwise, counterclockwise? So people are so the arrow turning at the double Okay, so the arrows are facing the wrong direction.

1:50:13
No, they’re facing the right way. It’s just it’s hard to see. Yeah, I think those are like cars and then, oh, okay, yes, okay, so got it so the Okay, so folks enter at the counterclockwise in the northeast side of the Yeah, the double entrance. Okay, that’s what I thought originally. So inconceivably, you could have vehicles coming from the southeast retail area coming through that like the seven parking spaces up there. You could have folks entering through the main entrance, part of the site, going right, going left, and all coming to try to get to that drive through. Yes,

1:50:47
that feels like three too many ways to get to one drive through, which is why we love the flexibility of having our associates. I can’t oversell them enough, Commissioner, they’re professionals of what they do. We have associate walkways out there within the two drive through lanes at times? We’ll use delineators. We’ll use signage. You know, they are all with headsets, communicating really clearly. Our goal is to not have this turn into

1:51:17
scenarios which you’re imagining. It could be, and it very well could be without proper training and efforts and personnel on the ground. This is what we do. This is what we thrive in. This is what we’ll excel at.

1:51:30
Noted, thank you,

1:51:33
Commissioner height,

1:51:37
my question with the curb cut is only Well, it’s to deal with the practicality of it all.

1:51:44
First of all, Drew golden, you own the property to the south. Okay? Don the the

1:51:53
the walkway to nowhere is directly south, kind of on the property boundary of Mr. Golden’s property to the south, and it comes up, and it’s this on this map, on the west side, the dotted line next to the hard line,

1:52:10
gray one. Yeah, yes. I’m assuming the hard lines, Mr. Golden’s property line, the dotted lines the edge of the sidewalk,

1:52:19
roughly, I would say that’s and it comes up to

1:52:24
Costco Road,

1:52:26
which is directly south of your Daniel red, pedestrian access way, yes, sir. And

1:52:34
then there’s a driveway. It looks like it’s already cut to get into the parking lot.

1:52:39
Why couldn’t you just go straight across right there. Why couldn’t we make you put a curb cut in directly opposite the sidewalk to nowhere, so that the sidewalk goes somewhere, and then you make it connect to your red line. You could do that. I’m sorry. I don’t. I’m I’m sorry, Commissioner, if you go straight north of the lines, I was just talking about the gray ones. Yep,

1:53:03
if you went straight north and put a handicap access curb cut

1:53:09
on your property

1:53:11
that went to nowhere until the sidewalk gets built,

1:53:16
then we could impose upon Mr. Golden, or whomever develops this property with the sidewalk to make a similar curb cut,

1:53:27
and Costco could put in striped lines. And there’s your there’s the point. Could you live with that point if we made that a condition on you? Respectfully, no, but allow me opportunity to explain absolutely I think by adding that Ada camp ramp right now, you’re almost encouraging these pedestrians to walk out into the street, right? I want to come somewhere to your property right now, through some place, right? But

1:53:56
wouldn’t it also suggest giving people and until that crosswalk is in and the ADA ramps on both sides, I don’t want I would, I would prefer not to have a a handicap ramp there, which is encouraging people until the proper safety of striping is installed on Costco property, on that private drive. I would prefer not to have that handicap ramp there. Does that make sense? True? I have the authority. I have we have the authority, 15, oh 2060, see to put a timed requirement upon you. Would you accept the requirement in the future, as soon as that sidewalk from somewhere gets to somewhere,

1:54:41
would you then accept the responsibility to put the curb cut in then? I mean, you could probably more easily do it now, if you want to come back and do it later, because it needs to be there, you’re hearing that No. And I’ll go as far as to say is I agree with you guys. I.

1:55:00
Right? Don’s gonna throw something back in my head here, because, you know, I think it was a missed opportunity. But we’re doing it. We’re doing what we can to try to fix it. So to the extent that if I were to say, Yeah, I’ll just go in and throw it in right now, it takes away from my whole point I just made, which is still comes down to primarily pedestrian safety, so that the timing,

1:55:21
I would be fine with no later than,

1:55:25
say, 12 months after the completed entitlement for the property to our south. Would that be fair?

1:55:36
Don Go ahead.

1:55:39
No, if you you want to apply.

1:55:43
Come on, Josh,

1:55:56
Daniel, I don’t, I don’t

1:55:58
want to put a time limit on that might be ephemeral. I just want it to happen Sure, effectively, to allow you to go forward and and I your points well taken that if you build it now, maybe it becomes an attractive nuisance, and somebody goes, there shouldn’t be there, and that’s an appropriate concern. But it needs to go in at some point in time, and it needs to go in kinda across the street from where the sidewalk is planned to go.

1:56:25
So I would like to impose it as a timed requirement. I don’t know how to set the timing exactly. Don Do you have a opinion?

1:56:37
So if I understood what Daniel offered was that after the entitlements are done on the property to the south, they would have a year to be able to tie in to complete the curb cut on our property. Okay,

1:56:52
is that rational? Which seems reasonable, right? Because then we would know that we have a curb cut going in, and then they could build their receiving side. But what if Drew gets his entitlements, and then, as he’s trying to sell it, the market goes to poop and he it’s 18 months before he can flip it then, then Dan’s off.

1:57:15
We’re going to a lot of theoretical guys, which is why I don’t want to play on a time limit. I want to play on a hard requirement. I don’t want to 12 months. It doesn’t mean anything. What means anything to you? What if it’s 12 months after the

1:57:32
C of O is issued on the property to the south?

1:57:36
Because then doesn’t matter how to build the sidewalk. So I’m fine with even the shorter the period that guys just so, I mean, it’s on it’s on record. It’s a concern for to do it, to not to do it. But if we’re, if we’re going to be held to a timeline, it as a gesture of how we want to be contribute to the city of Longmont, I’ll fall on the sword. We will. We’ll commit to doing it at whatever time period you guys want, want to give me, but I do think there’s a certain amount of exposure that’s going to be had if we do, if we’re asked to put this curb cut on behalf of the city, and God forbid something happens because there is a curb cut there and no sidewalk, I appreciate that. And to the extent I ever suggested that we do it that way. But I do think that

1:58:28
I would impose it as a future requirement that when the sidewalks built for you to match up to made up to it with a handicap, sidewalks are built, not this, not this sidewalk that I’m talking about, I don’t believe that’s what I understood. No, we’re still the sidewalk. Oh, okay, sorry at the edge of Mr. Golden’s property that exists on the south side, not, not the ones north, south, east, west, on the

1:58:56
other South, that one exists.

1:59:01
Yeah, but well, does it drew the house

1:59:06
Correct? Right? Yes. The connection down between that one that splits that, that gray line you were talking about Commissioner height, it would not be rich nowhere. It’d be great. A bridge to it would be a crosswalk, literally to a an east, west sidewalk on the south side of that road that already does exist, that just doesn’t have a curb cut or a cross,

1:59:27
irrespective of whether there’s a

1:59:32
sidewalk built from the house pad north, there’s still a sidewalk there. And to that extent, Commissioner Popkin, that’s and I’m saying all will agree to go in and put it in at whatever timeline that the the ADA, you know, the curb cut, will agree to do that.

1:59:49
But just so we’re all aware of what, what certain exposure may exist out there to do the crosswalk or even the curb cut prior to

1:59:59
i.

2:00:00
Clean crosswalk.

2:00:02
Don Yeah,

2:00:04
are the provisions with the city? I would assume there has to be where a city can go at some point and tell people, we need a crosswalk here,

2:00:15
typically, not within a in a site, not not within a site, not unless they were to come back one time when you’re approving the the only other thing, I guess I would point out is that if we,

2:00:28
if we show the location of where that sidewalk would be constructed in the future, and hopefully we could have Drew, I’m assuming that is going to have to go back to Costco for approval part of the agreement. They would at least see where this curb cuts gonna get, or this handicap ramp is gonna go.

2:00:51
If they have concerns with it, then they don’t approve it, or they let them know that there’s an issue.

2:00:59
Because he drew said that Costco has to sign off on the site plan, right? Costco

2:01:04
already signed off on the site plan, but if we require a condition, I’m assuming you have to take it back to him. Let

2:01:13
me rephrase. Costco has to sign off on, I don’t know

2:01:20
how the R is written. Costco has approved the

2:01:23
general site plan as long as there’s not material changes.

2:01:30
But there’d be material changes. Yes,

2:01:34
we would prefer to not have any condition that has to do with us doing the crosswalk. It’s land that we don’t own. It’s going to open cans of worms that we don’t know what’s going to be inside to, to the extent that we’re considering the Overlook from, you know, the previous, you know, site designs. Happy we’ll do the condition us for the ADA ramp. Happy to do that timed or not timed. We would prefer, you know, some time limit so it’s not going in right now, but to the extent the city’s okay with that exposure and putting it now, we’ll go ahead and put it now, just it. You know, just wanting to be amenable to what what you guys want, and safety is always first. But

2:02:18
Commissioner Popkin,

2:02:20
thanks chair, and thanks to my fellow Commissioners for trying to help get to a solution here. And frankly, to Drew to Daniel and the applicant team and to Don and staff too. I think we’re getting close, and I wonder if, by sheer circumstance of this slight exception to the normal process

2:02:41
of what our role normally would be, if that’s actually an asset here. So we’re recommending body on this Correct,

2:02:48
correct. So is there a way we can have a condition as a recommending body that before City Council approves the of this? This can be, I mean, this is fundamentally about a little bit of commitment from Costco for some paint, like, as that, as that, you know, Brit, to literally create the bridge between two sides of this. It’s that, like, that’s, that’s what we’re talking about here. And so, you know, I don’t have language yet off the top my tip of my tongue here, but I’m wondering if, as a recommending body in this role, we can maybe leverage that so that the project can move forward to the next phase, and then before City Council signs off, that conversation with Costco can be solved longer. I’m sorry to interrupt, and I don’t know exactly what the timeline would be from when we approve of this today as a recommending body and it goes to see Council. And so I’d look to staff on what that process would be. But does that set us up to basically have a few weeks at a minimum, if not, maybe a couple months, I don’t know how long this takes to get to City Council for approval, where that conversation can happen, and perhaps alleviate

2:03:54
this, this can of worms that I somewhat unintentionally, well, didn’t intend for it to be this big of a deal, and to the extent of bringing anything that’s involves Costco, all due respect to them, they are the 800 pound gorilla. This is a much more in depth conversation that will take longer than our 1217, city council date. This. You already have a date when this is scheduled, if we presume, well, I guess we are recommending bodies. So either way, it would go, yes, city council, yes, and city council could always override our condition.

2:04:31
I don’t have a clear answer. Jeremy, do you have a thought on your tongue? Can I pass the baton?

2:04:38
You may pass the baton. Of course. Commissioner pumpkin?

2:04:43
I normally don’t like fluffy conditions, but perhaps a condition such as

2:04:52
the applicant working with staff and the surrounding property owners the maximum extent feasible.

2:05:00
To install a north, south pedestrian crossway

2:05:05
pedestrian access.

2:05:07
It doesn’t necessarily mandate that it will happen. It’s just the kind of a commitment that they will work with the maximum extent feasible with the surrounding property owners, if I may.

2:05:22
I appreciate that we got, you know, developer drew right next to me. Costco is the 800 pound gorilla. I want everybody to work together and be really nice and get this done quickly. However, I am here on behalf of in and out.

2:05:37
I have one goal here tonight, which is to hopefully get a recommended approval from you guys, considering what has come up with this crosswalk.

2:05:48
We’re willing to do the ADA ramp on our property, anything to the extent. And I’m with you, fluffy language scares the heck out of me, and that’s that’s pretty fluffy for you. Don’t like it. You nailed it.

2:06:01
But I will say that

2:06:05
my request is simple, please, if we’re going to add a condition, make it something that’s within my control. What’s within my control is adding that ADA ramp, and to that extent, what’s on our property? Happy to do it everybody, but anything that involves third parties or outside parties, what seems like, and I agree with you, this should be a, you know, with maybe another company, a two week conversation and three days worth of work, you know, stripe it, Stripe the other half, and you’re done. What? What’s being suggested here could very well turn into a six to eight month ordeal with getting permissions. So

2:06:47
in in closing, I just, I can’t stress enough, I respectfully request your guys’s recommendation to city council with the condition of adding an ADA ramp, with or without a timeline that you guys prefer, as well as the plat with that, anything short of, you know, request requiring third party approvals,

2:07:07
it would not be considered a success in my own mind, from tonight as for what I hold myself to,

2:07:14
Thank you Don

2:07:16
so A suggestion might be

2:07:20
that, in and out agree

2:07:25
to construct a handicap ramp on their South property line.

2:07:32
If

2:07:34
a handicap ramp is built on the property to the south lot, whatever that lot is,

2:07:41
so there’s no time.

2:07:44
They just need to agree that they’ll build their side commitment. If we get it on the other side, if we don’t get it on the other side, then they don’t ever have to build. And if I might,

2:07:55
to Daniel’s Point, you know, waiting on Costco commits me to a specific end use for that sidewalk. So if you’ll look up here, I’m not 100% sure where it is in here, but eventually there will be

2:08:09
an easement carved out. There’s a groundwater monitoring well in this general area. So while the sidewalk may end up going straight up, there’s a chance that we kind of curve it away and put some turf or something in around this groundwater monitoring well. And our Sidewalk Ends up coming out over here. So if our site plan, you know, if you’re going to force us to do it here right now and condition it on on Costco, you know, we may get a couple years down the road and develop this piece and realize, well, you know, the easement we need around this groundwater monitoring well doesn’t allow for the sidewalk to go right here, and we have to curve that sidewalk to this crosswalk area here, where the more to the East Street is, yeah. So if to Don’s point, if we can make it conditional on a time of this lot so we know where in and out is best positioned to put theirs on the other side within a time period

2:09:07
and then, and like I said earlier, you know, Costco is amenable for the most part. They’re not quick, but they are amenable, and they recognize public safety being very, very important as well, right? If you look at their site plan and all the access sidewalks they have through their site to make it available to the in and out lot, to the Lazy Boy lot, to the bank lot,

2:09:30
and what connects to house pad.

2:09:33
You know, they don’t want anybody hurt on their property. So I have no doubt,

2:09:39
i i I think they would be amenable to this, because this is what’s in the best interest of Costco in and out US public safety the city.

2:09:49
But I greatly request with Daniel that it be a timed thing for the future.

2:09:57
Thank you, Commissioner height. I.

2:10:01
Drew, are you diamond? G, yes, good.

2:10:04
If we can go, if there’s any way shape or form that we could pull up attachment six, which is the actual site plan,

2:10:11
attachment six to the materials in

2:10:17
the packet submitted account or to the commission,

2:10:22
it’s the site plan,

2:10:32
because what Daniel had was, I

2:10:35
don’t want to say a crayon drawing, but it’s kind of a crayon drawing. This is a CAD drawing. I

2:11:09
city. Scroll down

2:11:11
a little bit and go to the agenda management all of the

2:11:15
attachment six on our back.

2:11:18
So if you hit the HTML

2:11:21
agenda to see

2:11:29
and click on my classes

2:11:32
six.

2:11:38
It’s like page three. I

2:11:46
boom.

2:11:50
So down the sidewalk looks like it comes up Jags West and then goes on the edge of this property in the gas station. Is that correct?

2:11:59
The dotted line? Sorry. Okay.

2:12:03
Could you repeat that? I’m sorry, this the sidewalk, the north south sidewalk, is that

2:12:11
a condition of approval that’s already existing against

2:12:15
this PUD or this

2:12:19
modified site plan

2:12:23
for the Costco project, for this and for this, where does this sidewalk? You said it’s established how so my recollection was that it was shown in the multimodal transportation plan for the overall Costco development to be able to give people the required direct access from the Costco through the parking lots out to harvest moon. And the only way that we could do that is to have a north south sidewalk along all of those lots that then tied into the access points on the north Costco lot or driveway and the South Costco driveway. So we don’t know for sure if this sidewalk is on Costco lot.

2:13:06
So the the sidewalks are on the undeveloped lots. We are requiring the sidewalk north, south sidewalk on every lot that’s been going through the development process to provide that access. So this site plan. The property to the south is Erwin Thomas first, following lot three current by Drew golden or David G

2:13:31
and we think, or you know, that that sidewalk is going to be required as part of the development of that lot. We are, we are going to have it the Lazy Boy, which is on the south half of this lot three, is actually going to be required of lazy boy. They’re going to have to build it to their new property line. Yes. So subdivision of Lot three, or is it going to go all the way up to this corner? I didn’t think it was

2:13:57
going to the it’s not yet, because they subdivided the lot for lazy boy to be able to purchase the south house. Going to build it close, but not to the end, correct? And Drew was just explaining that when it gets to the end, it might deviate east, it might deviate West, it might whatever. And to his point, which was

2:14:18
what I was suggesting to be straight across this, straight across, straight north of where this depiction is, might not make sense. And what I think I would like to propose as an additional condition of approval, and I’ll get to it all, and I’m throwing it out here for people to think about. Which is that

2:14:38
an additional condition to the first one, which was to get approval of this site plan, I think, is that on the site well, that that the condition be that once this sidewalk is completed on lot three, or what is depicted as lot three, that in and out match it on the opposite side with a.

2:15:00
ADA compliant curb cut

2:15:04
that Costco may or may not approve a handicap or a cross ramp across its driveway. But we would also, I don’t know if we can do this either Jeremy, which is imposed upon

2:15:18
drew right now the obligation to make a curb cut on his side,

2:15:24
it’s not even in front of us.

2:15:27
Do we just make it, which is why the condition that, if that is done, then in and out, is required

2:15:33
to map a

2:15:35
condition.

2:15:41
Well, it’s going to be required at some point, because it’s it’s

2:15:46
in the original site plan development, the cost code development, as every one of these lots keeps coming in. We have been requiring the sidewalk and extending it to the north. This last piece on the north side of Lot three, we would work with Drew, or whoever is doing the site plan to extend it to tie into the east, west sidewalk, then we would look to see where it makes sense to do the curb cut. And then we just need in and out to agree to construct it. If we get that done, if we don’t get it done, then there’s no connection, right? And I think it’s probably also fair to say to in and out, because, as it’s depicted on this site plan, it goes north, it jogs West, and then goes north again. It doesn’t even

2:16:30
come close to the in and out lot. I mean, it goes to the one side of it, but

2:16:36
they can’t make a curb cut in the Costco

2:16:39
gas station, right?

2:16:43
So I think the condition would be

2:16:46
when the sidewalk is completed, and if it is across

2:16:53
north course, North Costco, entrance to the in and out lot, whatever that line is going to be called,

2:17:02
that in and out. Then be required,

2:17:05
again, maybe you put a time limit on that, but, but it’d be required to

2:17:11
create a curb cut that matches and allows for a pedestrian X ray, a pedestrian access way across North Costco entrance. Does that make sense? Yeah. Jeremy, r sorry, Matthew wants to take a swing at this.

2:17:27
Matthew,

2:17:29
thanks, Chair. I think, I think I have, I’m building off of Commissioner heights intent here, and I think I have some language that makes it a little bit more straightforward. I don’t think we need to wait until that north south sidewalk is complete. There is already an existing east west sidewalk. Jeremy, is it? Is it kosher for us to pull up Google Earth right now? It’s a public tool and resource that the public, the applicant and the Commission, all have access to. Can we pull that up for a second? Because this will make this really easy to see. Sure.

2:18:02
Thank you, Daniel. Oh, were you not? Oh, no, is that okay? You can pull it up. Yeah. I thought Jeremy was doing it for real, and then I realized was just happening. Or steal your thunder, okay? No, you can, you know, you’re a dress. You can pull it up. But I just want to get to the site and and show the visual, because I think that will help everyone in the room. In the meantime, Jeremy, I sent you draft language if you want to take a look of what I’m about to propose. In case you have want time to think

2:18:25
you want satellite view, yes please. And actually, I want street view

2:18:31
at the

2:18:35
so ideally that’s, that’s Google Earth, not Google

2:18:38
satellite view is fine, Bing. Who’s being

2:18:45
okay, I’m not scoring any points. You’re fine. Google Earth here will make this

2:18:54
well, let me get Google first, because it’s stuff on the beam. Google Earth specifically,

2:18:58
this is that will make it the visual that we need. Yeah, maybe we can have the lawyer. Sorry, this one.

2:19:07
So again, for the anyone who’s watching this fun little debate, like problem resolution situation here, we’re on Google we’re going to Google Earth. You can access it on your computer or on your phone, or however you like to access Google Earth. It’s a public resource.

2:19:21
Great. Okay, we’re super close. Let’s just zoom in a little bit more. So So Eric, pause here. So this is what’s already built. We have an East West sidewalk with a crosswalk already across the parking lot of Costco. So there’s an east west corridor connection that already exists regardless of what happens to the south. I guess that’s lot three. Does that? Consider lot three there on the proper on the parcel, regardless of what happens there, even if that never happens. My intent here is that we still have some crossing be built, and so that the because that’s that regardless of whether there’s a bank, whether there’s anything that comes in there, there’s still going to be a pedestrian flow that’s going to go across the.

2:20:00
Area. So I think we can solve this

2:20:04
by doing this conditional condition such that it doesn’t put the onus on the applicant to do something that potentially creates a code compliant ramp to nowhere, and it doesn’t commit the applicant or the developer here to do something without the crosswalk also being in there.

2:20:24
So the language that I would like to propose, I’ll toss it out casually before I make a motion on this, and then welcome Jeremy’s feedback, if he has any suggestions. And the applicant and any staff is that the applicant agrees to as so this is really a condition added on the applicant agrees to construct a code compliant curb cut on the applicant southwest property line within 12 months, if a code compliant curb cut is constructed on the north side of the lot of lot three, connecting into the existing east west sidewalk

2:20:57
before the applicant responds, I would like to consult with the Assistant City Attorney,

2:21:04
Commissioner popping. I think my concerns more practicality. I believe that landscaping. So the crusher we see kind of like the bottom the left hand side, right there, is probably Costco property. So I’d be concerned about making it a Southwest property line condition, because it if we put the onerous back on Diamond G lot three isn’t touching that spot right there, and so you’ll still have the crosswalk, you’ll have the curb cut to nowhere.

2:21:34
So I think sorry to achieve your point, I would say this, the southern property line keep going the other way, this way, nope, nope. The other way. Keep going. Keep going. See where the parking lot. Oh, yeah, that comes right,

2:21:48
yep, yep.

2:21:51
So yeah, I guess my intent would say, so maybe we can clarify this. My intent was saying southwest property line was not the corner, per se, but was sent giving the the applicant, actually flexibility to do what Drew was suggesting, of, hey, if we need to shift the exact access points or the curb cuts, there is flexibility within language to do that. Daniel, so I love everything you just said. I would only request one change, sure is that I’ve actually,

2:22:20
I’ve got a great boss. I really do. She’s been texting me this whole time,

2:22:24
but she, she’s, she’s had a she had a great idea

2:22:28
where, and I’m trying to pull up. Hey, Dawn, would you mind driving here for a sec? Get me to my slides. I would like to show you guys something real quick. Please. You.

2:22:40
Okay.

2:22:51
So what I would like to do is propose that the condition,

2:22:57
let’s be specific, specific on the location right, okay, we have diamond G who’s here, although, technically we don’t want to involve them on any because they can, right? This is, this is about it’s about me, right now,

2:23:09
right? So what I would like to do is coming out of our property here,

2:23:18
yes, so it lines up right with my walkway, and it’ll connect to Drew’s property. So the condition to be within everything you said, Commissioner pumpkin, but let’s be specific on the location. So it’s a in my control. B, it makes the most sense. And see you’ve got diamond. G owns the property at the south right? DREW.

2:23:41
Oh, wait, it’s not. It’s yeah, I mean,

2:23:45
Drew, I don’t think it matters to you. We’re about along that sidewalk. You have the curb cut, then I

2:24:00
don’t what. Scares me is that Costco owns to the back of the existing side,

2:24:09
which would allow us to make our best efforts look. We’re all trying to do the same thing here, right? I think what, what’s, what’s been proposed, everybody’s on board that it’s a good idea after 12 months, if it, you know, if there isn’t a developer that’s done it, that that’s done the worker has plans, meaning they needed Costcos approved, approval. There’s nothing more that can be done. I mean, we’ve beat this dead horse, and it’s an important dead or, I mean, it’s, I’m glad that we’ve addressed it to the extent that we have. But

2:24:37
there’s the 800 pound gorilla, which is Costco, and there’s no telling how they’re going to react to this, as the project in front of you right now.

2:24:48
This is pretty specific. This meets to the extent this is a bigger problem. I hate to say, you know, it’s not my problem, but I want to help the problem by saying, let’s do the curb cut in.

2:25:00
This exact location, if and when that project to the south is ready to be developed, condition be placed on them to put it there. And I mean,

2:25:09
other than that, I don’t know if any one of us can do more than we have. Yeah, I appreciate that. And I’m I would actually think that would be the optimal location to put it. I agree with you on that, so I’d be happy to amend what I was suggesting there to include that specificity, if that’s helpful, if you would appreciate having a little flexibility, 12 feet plus or minus in either direction, or 10 meters, like whatever range of flexibility, just to have that from a construction design standpoint, in case something comes up, happy to do that, I don’t want to make it overly onerous in case you run into something, or needs to shift it by 10 feet?

2:25:46
Yeah, I don’t, I don’t see that being a problem. I think the intent, everybody agrees, that’s the, that’s the ideal location. But if it helps Drew and the future develop, you know, owner of that pad, develop his site, and maybe Costco has a say, we would be amenable to that.

2:26:06
Okay, thank you.

2:26:15
Jeremy, thank you for sending me some updated language there. It doesn’t address what Daniel was suggesting specifically, of like, demarcating, like exactly the location. I don’t particularly, I don’t personally object. If we just say southern property line,

2:26:32
the applicant can do what they deem appropriate where they want it, if it is not restrictive, yes, if it’s not restrictive for me, yes, 100% as long as it’s within my control, I’m okay with that too. The last thing I would want is for the developer to the south to suggest it to be in a location that interferes with my gas, water, drive through anything like that. So if it’s in my control, which is how this whole thing started, I’m good with that for Yeah, great. I will read then the slightly tweaked language that the city, assistant city attorney and I were working on, and then I’ll pause to see if Commissioner height wants to add anything or adjust anything from there. I do not want this. I would not be supportive of this, and I don’t think it would solve the problem if this is conditioned upon that north, south walkway being built, because I don’t think that is fundamentally necessary for the site flow. And my hope is that the applicant, the developer, who’s present and that Costco can work together in good faith, stemming from this discussion to make this as seamless and frankly, economical as possible, to do when it makes sense for each of the respective parties.

2:27:35
So the language that I intend to propose, unless there are friendly amendments to this, the applicant agrees to construct a code compliant pedestrian walk on. Do we need to specify a curb cut? No, do we

2:27:50
need to specify curb cut to get that ring ADA or code compliance should about ADA ran,

2:27:59
okay,

2:28:01
yeah, it’s just the just the curb cut itself, yeah, the app. What should

2:28:14
we call?

2:28:16
It? Access, what they want to call, okay, the applicant agrees to construct an ADA compliant ramp on the applicant’s southern property line within 12 months, if a code, if an ADA compliant ramp is constructed on the north side of Lot three with an identified pedestrian crossing on the north Costco entrance private drive. Can we just clarify that is that 12 months from R, C of L or 12 months upon. Just clarify the 12 months within 12 months. It’s like if and of

2:28:52
let me work on that specificity. I agree with you on clarifying that I will yield some Commissioner height.

2:29:00
Commissioner height,

2:29:03
whose question was, why 12 months? Just when it goes in, it goes in, why put a time limit on it? That might have been my fault. I initially suggested that. But to your point, Commissioner, I’m fine with matching

2:29:15
it when it gets matched within reason, right? I mean, if they’re, if they’re getting it built, and they already have a bid out, and now I’m under the gun to, you know, find somebody do it really quick. Yeah.

2:29:36
Okay, let’s, let’s. We’re changing the word if to of, and I think it solves it. So the applicant agrees to construct an ADA compliant ramp on the applicant’s southern property line within 12 months of

2:29:50
an ADA compliant ramp constructed on the north side of Lot three, with an identified pedestrian crossing on the north Costco entrance private drive.

2:29:59
So.

2:30:00
So this conditional condition, do we want to add the Costco part or not? No, please leave Costco out of it. Leave Costco out of it.

2:30:09
The only thing that references Costco is the North. Is that describing the street. It’s the Costco entry north. Costco enters private drive. That’s why Costco is referenced there. That’s just a specificity of what the roadway is, yep. So I’ll read it one more time. The applicant, the applicant agrees to construct an ADA compliant ramp on the applicant southern property line, within 12 months of an ADA compliant ramp constructed on the north side of Lot three, with an identified pedestrian crossing on the north Costco entrance private drive. That

2:30:42
means yes, so, so just in practice, what that means is once, if and when

2:30:49
a code compliant ramp is built on the north side of Lot three, then that’s the 12 months. But then that obligates me to putting it directly across from him. And I thought the spirit of this was that the location is going to be within in and outs control so it doesn’t interfere with any of my was,

2:31:08
yeah, I was giving you the latitude on the southern property line. However, I see what you’re saying. Yeah, let’s sorry, no, ideally that would be like, it’s just right, because there’s one step removed between applicant, which is you and the developer here. Here’s what you guys do have control of right now, in and out, right? And not just that. You’ve got a compliant applicant in front of you who wants to for the spirit of what we’re trying to accomplish, also wants to accomplish it.

2:31:34
Let’s be specific. Let’s specifically say that that 88 ramp, if and when it ever goes in, in and out, can do it on day one, or in and out, has to get it done within 365 if we do the 12 months of when the southern parcel starts or gets entitlement on their land. All I’m suggesting is, let’s just be specific. It’s going in that area to the south of that walkway. You’ve said it yourself. I said it that’s where it makes the most sense. So to the extent that we’re catering to somebody who, and if may or may not ever come in and get approval from another third party who’s not here,

2:32:10
and we want it to be there when it goes there, we might do it on day one. We may do it. We may wait to the 12 months until somebody else comes in. But what you do have control of is in and out and unwilling to, let’s just say, let’s get it done in that location, south of the walkway. And this way it, it clears up a lot of the confusion.

2:32:29
Commissioner teta,

2:32:32
can we just use the word concurrently instead of the for all of the temporal

2:32:40
instead of 12 months concurrent,

2:32:47
or sooner concurrent, or sooner in and off, can do it as soon, but no later than concurrently.

2:32:57
Mr. Popkin, I don’t I appreciate Commissioner Ted’s edition there. I have no problem with putting it concurrently or as long as there’s, yeah, as long as there’s nothing that prevents me from doing it sooner than that. I want this to happen. I don’t like I want this to happen responsibly. I want this to happen for the site flow. And I want this to happen in a way that the applicant and the developer and ideally Costco overall, makes it makes sense for them. I think it will enhance the regional center intention of this area. So

2:33:27
Commissioner,

2:33:32
read again the language regarding lot three, because

2:33:36
this sidewalk might not

2:33:39
it might be stay on Costco property.

2:33:42
You if it goes on Costco property. If as designed or as written in or as depicted on exhibit six, it’s not really on

2:33:54
lot three,

2:33:56
it might stay on Costco and and so I just want to make sure that you the way I think you read it. It’s as if and when it’s built on lot three. If it’s not built on lot three, then we’ve built we put ourselves in a trick box that we don’t need to be in. So

2:34:14
just when the road, when the sidewalk, gets built,

2:34:18
which is back to what you didn’t want to do? Well, it’s where we are. Commissioner

2:34:27
Popkin, yeah, it’s not that this, this should be concurrent with just a parallel or, like, adjacent,

2:34:37
uh, curb cut being put on the other side, right? And whether it’s, frankly, like, whether it’s the north of Lot three or like, maybe, maybe we need broader language here, because we can’t require anything from the other developer or Costco at this point. Just that’s my point, right? This, this, in some ways, should just be concurrently, or sooner of A.

2:35:01
Of an ADA compliant ramp constructed on

2:35:06
just the it’s not even locked because, in all honesty, what we

2:35:12
saw on Google Earth was a curb cut. That’s where that’s going to be. That’s where it will be, yeah, but it’s not a curb cut currently.

2:35:21
It’s a sidewalk with a curve. It’s just not an 80 accessible ramp. Yes, we just don’t have that.

2:35:27
Well, we don’t know, because I’m

2:35:31
just

2:35:35
saying that’s

2:35:37
not, yeah, so Okay, Jeremy or staff, how do we refer to the the sidewalk that is north of Lot three and or the Costco parking lot, depending on the exact place that you were standing, like, what is that sidewalk called? Is that? Is there a is there a number or a numerical reference to that sidewalk line?

2:35:56
I mean, it’s this. It’s the sidewalk on the south side of the North Costco access road, or whatever the term is that’s on the site plan. I

2:36:20
The

2:36:24
intersection the north south sidewalk, east west as it

2:36:29
connects to the east west isn’t the sidewalk

2:36:36
that we’re worried about. The

2:36:39
North South sidewalk that attaches to the multifamily homes. No about where the curb cuts going to be on the east, west sidewalk.

2:36:47
If people need to walk five feet from that long thing like that doesn’t matter to me, from from the house pad to through the past the bank. If they’re getting to the the North Costco entrance and they need to walk five feet to the east to cross safely here. I don’t think that’s asking too much. That is fine. People will respect that. That is within the realm of human expectation here, and I think that would result in a very safe pedestrian flow for the site. So we just need to define so it’s the south to Don’s point. It’s the south side of North Costco entrance,

2:37:21
private drive.

2:37:28
South side of the East West sidewalk,

2:37:35
sidewalk on North Costco drive. I think I have this. I will read it one more time for everyone’s sanity or not.

2:37:55
And again, I appreciate the applicant and staff’s sincere patience here and willingness to try to find a solution south side of the East West sidewalk on,

2:38:16
okay,

2:38:18
you are all going to hate me for this, But it but pay attention to the geography here,

2:38:23
the applicant agrees to construct an ADA compliant ramp on the applicant southern property line, concurrently or sooner, of an ADA compliant ramp constructed on the south side.

2:38:39
South Side redundant? No, no, you’re gonna say South side of North Costco Avenue, constructed on the East West sidewalk on the south side

2:38:51
of North Costco entrance, private drive

2:38:55
with an I, with an I provided there is an identified pedestrian crossing On the north Costco entrance, private drive in an agreeable location to applicant,

2:39:05
because everything I’m fine with that, yeah,

2:39:11
I think, I think I’m okay with that agreeable location.

2:39:16
And Jeremy, I just want to check

2:39:19
if they do put in an ADA walk there before, not concurrent, but before. So basically, ADA

2:39:30
ramp to nowhere. Is that okay? Do we add? Does the city have any concerns that they would be putting and encouraging somebody to walk across the street, whether there is something not on the other side. I just want to make sure that there’s no legal issues for the city on that

2:39:48
it’s private property, so wouldn’t impact the city. I can’t speak to the applicants legal liability or Well, yeah, but we’re putting we’re putting you’re we’re putting the responsibility to the.

2:40:00
Build that at any time we’re allowing that, I just want to make sure the city isn’t liable at some point. Because, Nope, okay, liable for the private property, okay?

2:40:10
And just for the record. The only reason we’re even agreeing to this because we’re being asked to do it so we wouldn’t accept any liability for what’s being asked of us, either. So,

2:40:22
all right,

2:40:25
I did stay at a Holiday Inn. Jane Jeremy, I sent you the draft language. I think I’m going to motion now for

2:40:33
so to try to bring this to an end, I would like to motion. Oh, should I have to get the number of the

2:40:41
resolution, just looking around the commission. Are there any other conditions that we commissioners were thinking of that they’d want to

2:40:50
add

2:40:54
to this? No, I’d work off of existing. Okay.

2:41:00
Condition two, yes,

2:41:02
okay,

2:41:05
yeah, okay, so I would like to motion

2:41:10
for

2:41:12
conditional approval of pz, r2, 024, 9b, A, resolution of the Planning and Zoning Commission recommending conditional approval of the in and out conditional secondary use plan

2:41:24
with the condition proposed by staff as well as the following language and Jane, this is exactly what I sent you. The applicant agrees to construct an ADA compliant ramp on the applicant southern property line, concurrently or sooner of an ADA compliant ramp constructed on the east, west sidewalk on the south side of North, Costco drive of North. Costco entrance, private drive, provided there is an identified pedestrian crossing on the north Costco entrance, private drive in an agreeable location to the applicant,

2:41:58
I see a nod and a thumbs up from the applicant. I appreciate their willingness to work through this with us. Of course, that is my motion. We have a motion. Do we have a second?

2:42:08
I’ll second it.

2:42:10
We have a second by Commissioner Boone. Any other comments? I just want to say I do like this plan.

2:42:17
I do in looking over the especially the mobility part of it. There were plenty of cross, of pedestrian and a bike routes to it. When you get into something like this, and you have cars and you have the drive through, there is no way to have a perfect plan for that. The plan they came up with is a very good plan. The City agrees with the plan. So I am for this.

2:42:45
Any other comments from the Commission?

2:42:48
If not, let’s take our vote. Jane, Commissioner height,

2:42:53
yes. Commissioner tetta, yes. Commissioner Boone, yes. Chair Poland, yes. Commissioner Popkin, yes, thank you, Chair That passes unanimously, five to zero. Thank you, Jane. This item will now be forwarded to the Longmont City Council for action. If you are unfamiliar with council procedures and intent to appear before city council, please contact the Planning Division for further information. At 30365183, 36518330,

2:43:24
want to say thank you to Don thank you to the applicant, and thank you to everybody who participated in this point

2:43:33
of personal privilege. Sure.

2:43:35
Oh, sure. Commissioner Popkin, yeah. Just a quick point of personal privilege before the applicant most likely leaves, I just want to say thank you very much the applicant and development team for working through that. I know it’s a very small piece of a very large thing, but as part of the regional center, I appreciate your willingness to try to troubleshoot that, as well as staff for helping lean in there, and assistant city attorney Jeremy as well. So thank you all for getting to a solution that we are all comfortable with,

2:44:03
okay, and that is it for the

2:44:07
public hearing. Items next is item number seven,

2:44:14
other business, the 2025 Planning and Zoning Commission, applicant, recommendations, discussion and action item grant. Are you going to run with this?

2:44:28
I’ll be happy to try to run. I might walk instead, but

2:44:32
given the time, so just an overview of kind of the history and what brought us here. And I think we have distributed some information. But as I think the commission knows, there was a subcommittee put together that did put together recommendations that, again, I believe the commission has for appointments for the upcoming 2025

2:44:56
commission. So I think the next step.

2:45:00
Is to get consensus and a specific recommendation from the Commission to forward on to city council for their review.

2:45:11
Thank you. Yeah, and Commissioner height and I were the two who did the

2:45:17
interviews. Grant was also present for them, there were eight applicants,

2:45:25
I think I can safely say,

2:45:28
in our view, between me and Commissioner height, that three that we felt kind of stood out from the others that we would recommend for the

2:45:39
permanent spots. There were three people that we really liked that we think would make good alternates, the other two people, we just didn’t feel quite measured up to what we heard from the other six the as being prepared. So that’s kind of how we came about it. Commissioner hike, do you have any input? No other good to thank all the applicants for their interest. The

2:46:07
people in the back don’t need to hear me now

2:46:10
they’re gone. The

2:46:13
it was a it was a robust panel of applicants. Appreciate all of them showing interest. And it was kind of tough to discern who we wanted, but I think we made pretty good recommendations on whom we thought were the three most qualified to serve as full commissioners, and was it three and 333? And three, and the three alternates of that panel of eight, you know, the other two that we didn’t pick.

2:46:44
I encourage them to learn more and come back.

2:46:51
Are there any comments, any questions from the other Commissioners?

2:47:00
If not, would somebody like to make a motion that we move forward the slate as noted,

2:47:08
okay, I will go ahead. I move that we go ahead and forward to the city council, the slate of three

2:47:17
permanent members and not permanent members, three full time members and three alternates, as noted in the

2:47:27
in the

2:47:29
What did you put forward grant? What do we call that? I

2:47:36
can pull up the actual memo, but essentially it’s the Commission’s recommendation to city council. Yeah, recommendation letter. I move forward that we move that letter of recommendation to the city council. Do we have a second?

2:47:53
Commissioner, Popkin, Second?

2:47:58
Any other comments, any questions? If not Jane, let’s go ahead and call for a vote. Commissioner height, Commissioner tetta Aye, Commissioner Boone. Chair Poland, Commissioner Popkin

2:48:11
chair, That passes unanimously, five to zero. Thank you very much. We’ll go ahead and move to final call. Public invited to be heard. Nobody had signed up for it. If anybody in the audience would like to come forward,

2:48:24
seeing nobody come forward, I’ll go ahead and close out public invited to be heard final call. Next is items from the Commission.

2:48:36
Commissioner Popkin, Thank you, Chair. Hopefully this, this will not be as long of a discussion as what we just had

2:48:44
for the last couple meetings. I know I wasn’t at the most recent one in October, but I think in August, I suggested to the commission that it might be behoove us to have a study session in the new year on a few different topics that we have run into and that we might foresee coming up as potential trends or issues related to proposals we might face. So

2:49:07
I think it would be wise and prudent for us to not only have a study session, but to have that with the intention of potentially making recommendations on some of the topics that I’ll outline in a moment. And I’m open to additional topics and discussion as well, if those are of interest, I have not received any since August from my fellow Commissioners, but I think it would be of us to consider not only those trends and those potential issues, but if there are recommendations that we should offer as a recommending body to city council in that way,

2:49:37
The four topics that

2:49:41
come to my mind here

2:49:43
specifically relate to and I can go into more detail on each of them as helpful. The first is on kind of current bike parking amounts were determined, or how those were determined, and what options exist to optimize location and amount of bike parking,

2:49:58
including understanding.

2:50:00
Trends in bicycle and E bicycle, electric bicycle use over the past five years, and what that demand might look like going forward. Number two, the alignment of drive throughs with different zoning areas in envision Longmont. Number three, the potential impediments to infill development or redevelopment in the land use code and Longmont development standards more generally and understanding the role of Planning and Zoning Commission in the urban renewal planning process.

2:50:28
So those are the four topics.

2:50:31
I would very much welcome input from the Commission on how many of those you’re interested I think we could probably I think some of those are most some, some might be clarifications and just helping us understand what our role is in certain situations. I think some might involve a little bit of staff time and research, especially on the bicycle question and the kind of the future trends there. What

2:50:51
was number three? Number three was potential impediments to infill redevelopment in the land use code and Longmont development standards.

2:51:01
Again, we do not, I do not have an agenda of what like the recommendations should be here. I think it would. The intention here is that we understand some of these topics more thoroughly and how they might relate to some of our decision making, and whether we want to make recommendations to city council on any or all of those.

2:51:21
Okay, I would also like to throw it over to either, well, I’m just going to say to planning development services, either grant or Don if you have any feedback, if any of these topics, you say, yeah, that’s something definitely we can do, or

2:51:36
something that may not be in our bailiwick. Oh. Wick,

2:51:43
Chairman, members of commission. I guess one of the questions I would

2:51:47
have, I think a couple topics, were probably more, I’ll say,

2:51:53
educational,

2:51:54
exploratory.

2:51:56
It sounded like there was also a desire to explore options, to potentially make recommendations in terms of policy, etc. And

2:52:05
I guess, just for clarification, if you could provide at least your intent, so we could weigh in. And I guess secondarily, I would add, I agree, there’s a couple that probably would be a pretty big lift for staff to provide, I guess, a significant amount of research, unless it’s just, I guess dialog amongst the commission. I think we would probably need some time to prepare

2:52:30
again. Definitely looking forward into next year, I would be reticent to commit to specific dates for those again. I think they’re all good topics for discussion, but yeah, maybe you can shed a little more light on what the long term intent

2:52:44
Sure, I think you’re right that all are at least exploratory, and some might be recommendations. I think understanding the role of the planning Zoning Commission in the urban renewal process, if any, is something that wouldn’t necessarily involve us making a recommendation on for instance, it’s just what is our role, and if that’s easier, just answer via email. Also fine by me. We don’t have to necessarily all gather together

2:53:08
to hear that, but that would be appreciated in some way, shape or form.

2:53:14
The other three potential impediments to info redevelopment, I realized that might be the most open ended one.

2:53:23
And so

2:53:26
I think we’re with the intention of Envision Longmont and some of the planning that was done in the last few years around the steam corridor and the sugar mill area.

2:53:39
Those areas, if I’m understanding terminology and planning correctly, would be considered all infill development, and

2:53:49
maybe specifically infill redevelopment, if we’re talking about brownfield sites, and you know, sites that had previously been developed.

2:53:56
So if redevelop, I guess I would ask you, if specifying redevelopment narrows what you focus on.

2:54:03
I would be fine with making sure that that is clear, because I do want to keep this more focused on what those types of situations might be.

2:54:14
So that’s on that one

2:54:18
we’ve dealt with three drive through issues this year, and maybe that’s just sheer circumstance of when, when applicants came through. And that’s probably not the norm in a year. Certainly wasn’t in my first year. So if that is truly an exception to the to the the norm from your experience, respect, respectively, in different to different levels, maybe that’s unnecessary. And so I’d welcome your comments on that. I think the one I think hopefully is both focused and hopefully staff has a fairly good awareness of generally it might take a little bit of work is the bicycle question.

2:54:53
I am curious to know when the I think it’s, what is it? 5% of parking spaces, when that was determined?

2:55:00
And

2:55:03
what options like we actually learned from Ben a little bit tonight about how like location is thought of. So maybe that’s less important here than the amount of bike parking

2:55:15
and the trends that we expect to see as a city in bicycle parking and E bike use, especially with some state incentives that have gone into place recently.

2:55:28
And so how that demand would impact how we might think about some of those land uses? Hopefully that’s a fairly focused one, and would involve a little bit of research to do, right? But hopefully that’s not super expansive.

2:55:39
And welcome your thoughts on the other two, on the drive throughs and whether that’s necessary and the potential impediments to infill redevelopment. Yeah, and I’ll, Don I’ll, yeah, if you want to weigh in on any of these topics, feel free. So my initial thought is, you know, looking at all, say, one, two and four,

2:55:58
my suggestion would be to, I I guess, look at kind of an educational session with the Commission, talk history, code, kind of where we, you know, got to where we are, or how we got to where we are, as just a jumping off point. I think that probably does make sense if you’re interested in that. To your point, you know, the role of planning, Zoning Commission, you know, in terms of, yeah, I’ll say urban renewal, etc.

2:56:28
It could be a short conversation. It could be, if you’re interested, we could probably have Tony Chacon and or Laura just join, just for an educational session as well, to kind of speak through, which I think may just be helpful for broader context. So again, those would probably be the low hanging fruit. At least as a jumping off point,

2:56:52
when I heard the description of potential impediments to me, I automatically jumped to getting into real code analysis of what those impediments are, which I’m reticent to say, staff could commit to a significant lift in time

2:57:12
to do that exercise without direction from Council,

2:57:19
just because that isn’t something that we have been directed to do.

2:57:24
I would say if we were in a code update cycle, that’s something that we undoubtedly would do. And to your point, and or if we were going through envision Longmont update, that would probably be just a natural assessment.

2:57:40
So again, hearing these topics for the first time, that would be kind of my initial reaction. I would suggest, again, at least starting off with kind of the educational components, and then maybe we could, from a staff perspective, look to see if,

2:57:58
again, even at a high level, what we may have just, I’ll say, in the last five years, at least again, just at a review level, identified as potential impediments, or maybe what we’ve heard, what I don’t know, and maybe Don can weigh in. I don’t know if we’ve been keeping track, so to speak, of impediments,

2:58:19
enough so that we could have a fruitful discussion of, yeah, these are the things. You know, typically what I would want to do is, you know, do the outreach, you know, get all that input, kind of do the check of, where are we today, and then, you know, hear from the development community and get their perspective, before staff did a deep dive of, again, potential solutions, so on and so forth. So Don I don’t know if you have any thoughts as well, feel free.

2:58:48
I never pass up a chance to talk. So a

2:58:53
couple of things. First, on the urban renewal, I would say that I think that’d be a great idea to have Tony and Laura come give you guys kind of some background information. One of the things that I would make sure that you’re aware of is related to the steam process that the city went through a number of years ago when council member waters made a motion and directed staff to work on a plan for the area that started basically at South Main Street and then worked all the way out to the sugar mill area. My recollection was that there was a liaison from Planning Commission involved in some of those meetings. They ended up with a plan that the council approved, but the council drove that, just so you know that that was they made the motions, they told staff what they expected, and we worked with a consultant to come up with a general plan for redevelopment of that area.

2:59:57
Oftentimes, Council can make a decision.

3:00:00
As the elected officials to choose to do it themselves and not depend on the expertise of the planning commission, who really deals with a lot of the land use issues. And I think that’s unfortunate, but it does happen. So I think at a minimum, though, as grant described, getting Laura and Tony here for the urban renewal education understanding like, where are our areas at? What plans do we have in place? Maybe some what we can share about what’s going on as far as projects or interest in the area? That could be a very interesting session.

3:00:36
From the standpoint of impediments to infill. I think that could be,

3:00:41
as grant noted a really

3:00:45
very wide

3:00:48
range of topics, but one thing that I would note from the land development code side is that in 2018 when we did the update to land development code, we specifically added a number of staff level variances for infill and redevelopment that the council approved that allows grant to be able to approve variances greater than 20%

3:01:16
or 25 now, with the minor mod up to 100%

3:01:20
for infill and redevelopment. Can you just repeat that one more time? So in a normal situation like, let’s talk about, say, the project we just looked at tonight, let’s say that they couldn’t. They didn’t have to come to the planning commission. Okay? They are supposed to provide a 10 foot setback, but they’re only providing nine.

3:01:44
Okay, we have the ability, under the admin mod provisions in the land development code to grant up to a 25% relief,

3:01:54
as long as we believe the criteria are met for that relief. It’s a staff level variance. We’ve had that for since about 2003

3:02:05
in our land development code. Okay,

3:02:09
what we put forward because of the uniqueness of properties that are infill and redevelopment and council agreed to it was that they can request on an infill and redevelopment parcel project relief of that 10 foot setback up to 100%

3:02:30
and it’s If staff agrees, if staff agrees, and if we believe that it’s justified, we have criteria we have to evaluate it against, but that was some of the ways that we looked at trying to overcome some of the hurdles that we were seeing, because we were seeing folks coming in who would have proposals, but once they knew it had to go into the public process, through through a hearing, notifying all the neighbors, and they would bail, they would leave, and they would say, We’re done. We’re not going to do that. We don’t want to have to deal with the, not in my backyard, kind of concerns and and that that I think we hear quite a bit,

3:03:11
that’s an 88 compliant ramp to nowhere. 88 compliant ramp to nowhere.

3:03:18
So all I would say is that one understand, we did try to build in some things, some tools, into the land development code for infill redevelopment. But again, this infill redevelopment, what is hindering could be related to the cost of the raw water. It could be related to the cost of our affordable housing requirement. It could be related to that we are in a flood plain and we’re still waiting for FEMA to approve maps or to construct improvements that takes property out of it. There’s a number of things that we could talk about. That’s why I believe the scope is huge here. So just be good to understand maybe a little bit more of what you’re thinking we would talk about, so we could have the right people here to get into those topics.

3:04:07
From the drive through standpoint, we haven’t had any for a number of years, okay, but I expect that we’re going to get a few more, not because we’ve done any pre ops, but just looking at the developments themselves, that lot across from

3:04:23
from in and out

3:04:26
potential right there for another drive through, just because of the zoning and the location. And there’s still less than 50% of the property left right that’s not with a secondary use. So I could see somebody coming in and requesting that the lots out by the McDonald’s, those are set up as one acre lots. If you look at the McDonald’s or the Walmart up north, I could see us getting, again, some kind of drive through either restaurant bank, other kinds of opportunities for drive throughs and.

3:05:00
That’s just a relationship to the subdivisions that we’ve recently approved in the way those are lotted.

3:05:08
And then from the bike ratio, I would say that Ben and Phil looked at the bicycle parking ratios in 2018 when we did the land development code update. But I think things have changed as you point out, whether it be the use of the E bikes now, whether it be just in general, I would say folks who, especially in Longmont, you know, we’re trying to encourage it, so I think we have a higher rate maybe than other locations in the United States. So maybe it is worth talking to them and seeing if they have any additional

3:05:42
background or information or anything in the literature talking about percentage of use. Great. I just very quickly, I appreciate, and I want to hear from my fellow Commissioners. I appreciate grant don the very thoughtful responses there.

3:05:56
I think I am taking away from that. At a minimum, I’m going to remove my suggestion for the impediments to info redevelopment right now. I agree that it was broad, and I have heard both of you in terms of just how potentially broad and labor intensive it could be to try to cover that. And I will, I will sit with that and think about maybe how more specific I can get before coming back to the commission on that one. So I’ll keep the bike parking and maybe related comment like related issues to bike density or something like that in there. I’m sure Phil and Ben can both speak to the alignment of drive throughs if Don I think you made a really interesting point there, that if, even if we haven’t had a lot for a while, if there are potential lots where we could see more. I mean, it would be a very interesting I mean, it’d be a very interesting situation if someone did try to propose a second drive through in a in an existing regional center, where we’ve already approved one.

3:06:55
And if I’m reading, maybe slightly liberally, the Envision Longmont description of what a regional center is that starts to stretch the bounds, from my perspective. So I think that would be a very productive discussion to have to hear from both, to hear from staff on and maybe determine whether we want to make some kind of recommendation to council on what’s truly appropriate for an effective regional center.

3:07:21
And then sounds like understanding the role of pnz in the urban renewal process

3:07:26
is fairly straightforward. Having Tony and Laura present or one of them to discuss could be really valuable for us. Don, you had made an interesting you were delineating a couple things when you were talking about the kind of past work that’s been done. It was like the current status. I liked the specificity of what you said. It was the current status of plans or proposals, or just remind me what that language is, so I can be a little bit helpful in guiding staff. I was kind of winging it, so I’m not probably going to remember, but we have existing we

3:07:57
have the existing steam plan, for example, that covers the urban renewal area that is from Main Street to the east out towards the sugar mill that goes all the way through the sugar mill area. So that would be, you know, like an update on that would probably be beneficial for you to understand what Tony has worked on with the council in the past, and what where that stands

3:08:23
and and he has any others that were work that we’ve worked on that are in areas that he could share that would be probably to your benefit as well. Yeah, is it appropriate to ask about, like, the current pipeline of projects in those areas? Or is that not respectful for applicants at this point?

3:08:42
I may lean on Jeremy a little bit if he has knowledge. I don’t know. I mean, unless there’s a, I guess a specific NDA equivalent that Tony has been working with, you know, prospective applicants. I don’t see a reason why they couldn’t share that type of information. There may be, I’ll say informal conversations that he may not be comfortable sharing, but I would assume once you know there, there is a real project that he’s coordinating, no reason not to. Again, I’m sure there’s some, you know, sensitive information

3:09:17
contracts, etc, that he couldn’t share. But at least any, again, any any perspective, real projects. I don’t see why that couldn’t happen.

3:09:29
Okay,

3:09:30
thank you. I will. I would very much welcome comments from my fellow Commissioners on this. Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner Boone,

3:09:38
Thank you chair

3:09:40
so we have six new commissioners coming on board. That’s a lot, and it seems to me like this would be an appropriate time in the new year

3:09:55
to do a little bit of education,

3:09:59
although all of the.

3:10:00
People have an interest in planning and development, as do we? None of us are professional planners and have not had that education. You maybe have had a little No,

3:10:14
well, I know, but Okay,

3:10:17
and so we don’t know as much as you guys about planning. Before I was ever even an alternate Commissioner, I attended a it was a citizen education program that Jennifer did

3:10:32
as many years ago, which was that was the thing that really got me excited about planning and development in our city. And although that went over several weeks, I want to say it was four weeks. Maybe it was more than that. Maybe it was six.

3:10:51
There was a lot of information put forth, and almost in, you know, in layman’s terms, that

3:11:00
clarified a lot of things and showed the big picture and the overall plan. And I think it’s really important that we as commissioners realize that we’re not trying to do your job. You guys are the experts, and we are a citizen advisory board.

3:11:22
But having all of that, some of that knowledge, would be very useful, especially for having six new people coming on board that scare. That whole

3:11:33
concept scares me a little bit. So these are some really specific things that the commissioner Popkin has asked for, but I’m thinking that a more overall

3:11:48
educational session or two might be really valuable for everybody.

3:11:58
Commissioner height,

3:12:00
yeah, yeah. I don’t want to take too much more of our time on this, but

3:12:05
Commissioner poppin talked to me about this matter, and in the context of interviewing the new applicants, it

3:12:13
it became apparent that that this commission is somewhat reactionary in the fact that we sit here and review plans, as opposed to being more visionary, which I think our role contemplates, insofar as we review and recommend to city council changes or

3:12:36
thoughts legislation, I guess is really What we’re supposed to be proposing at one level.

3:12:44
And we do have meetings scheduled twice a month, and we generally only meet once, if at all. And the opportunity to you know, Matthew Commissioner Popkin brings forward a whole bunch of interesting ideas that

3:13:01
would be interesting to know more about, to the extent that we could impose upon staff to learn that would be great if we if it’s too much of a burden, then it’s not so great. And the opportunity for us to vent, I mean, some of us are leading, are the experiences that we have that might be shared

3:13:23
to make the process better. It’s an opportunity that we don’t seem to take advantage of, and meeting two of of the months that we don’t meet if we left that open as an option in certain circumstances to address specific agenda items that that might be brought forward by commission members I think would be a worthwhile endeavor, and I applauded

3:13:49
Commissioner Popkin for for taking the lead on this. So thank you,

3:13:56
Commissioner Popkin.

3:13:59
I appreciate both Commissioner Boone and Commissioner heights comments on that,

3:14:05
and I appreciate staff’s interest and willingness to support some of this. Hopefully, this also makes your jobs easier, such that more often than not, we’re running into fewer questions more often when we get proposals before us, and maybe we couldn’t anticipate that we’d have a two hour discussion on ADA compliant curb cuts and exact proximity to a certain area today. But more generally speaking,

3:14:31
again, I don’t come into this with any specific agenda as to what the recommendation outcome might be, or if there is even one, but I do agree with Commissioner Boone. I think she made a fantastic point that we’re going to have even even we have a couple alternates who would be are recommended at this point now by the Commission to join us as full time members. It’s just four that are brand new. Yeah, and ideally, I would love to include in a study. Is it possible in the study session to include alternates as well? Yes.

3:14:59
Then.

3:15:00
Then I would love to make sure that that is as inclusive as possible for all of the members, new and returning and

3:15:06
upgraded, whatever the term might be for alternates coming to the regular commission. So

3:15:12
I respect staffs feedback on the infill redevelopment. I will continue to sit with exactly what that might look like going forward. I’m going to go ahead and propose, then my motion for a study session

3:15:25
on the three topics that we focused on. I’ll read the updated language and Jane, I’ll send that to you as well via email for your ease insanity.

3:15:34
And I actually would like this to come pretty early in the year and take advantage of that kind of fourth meeting that we don’t generally have scheduled. And so unless there’s a serious objection, I was going to propose it for january 22 which would be the fourth January of the fourth, the fourth Wednesday of January.

3:15:53
My hope is that by whittling down the topic slightly,

3:15:57
it sounds like Ben and Phil unless, like staff are unavailable, like pending, pending, complete unavailability. I’d like to start off early. I think that would be helpful for the new members, speaking as a relatively recent new member two years ago, like the very steep learning curve, and even just starting to talk about some of these topics in an environment, divorce trauma proposal would be valuable.

3:16:20
I would also, I would actually be open to it any point in January, on either meeting in January, if that’s slightly more broad motion, especially if we don’t have a proposal for the first meeting scheduled. We usually go through bylaws. I don’t have recommendations for the bylaws this year, which I did

3:16:37
this past year. So hopefully that’s a fairly straightforward meeting of just kind of welcoming. So I’ll keep it open ended on January 2025 but I’d like it to kind of start off in a year, unless there’s significant reservation or conflict from staff. So I would like to motion to hold that the Planning and Zoning Commission hold a study session in January 2025

3:16:56
to discuss the following three topics, how current bike parking amounts were determined, and what options may be reasonable to update the amount of bike parking, including, but not limited to that doesn’t work.

3:17:08
I’ll tweak this language, OK, how current bike parking amounts were determined, what options might be reasonable to update the amount of bike parking, and what trends in

3:17:17
cycling and E biking

3:17:21
might merit our consideration. Secondly, the extent to which drive throughs align with different zoning areas in vision long lot and understanding the role of the Planning and Zoning Commission in the urban renewal planning process, including an update of the current status of the steam plan and any redevelopment in the steam area, I think that’s narrowly enough tailored that it doesn’t impose a huge burden on staff.

3:17:45
I would also like to add one more thought on this, which is, we spend most of our interactions as a commission and with staff in a in this room, in a stand at a podium and present to us situation. And I’d actually love for this to be in a more lateral fashion, in a study room or some other room where, to the extent that it meets all the legal requirements that we have to have as a convening body, being open to the public and all that, that we can actually have more of a discussion study room type environment, I would like to include that in my motion, unless there’s significant reservation from staff. I don’t think you to me. I don’t think we need to specify that it’s understood by staff. And back about, wow, it’s been a while ago, but we had the presentation from planning, planning development services, about

3:18:34
demographic changes in Longmont that was like eight years ago.

3:18:42
And we had this study session across the street, so I don’t think we need to, if we don’t need to include in the motion, that’s fine on that would be my intention. If that’s if it’s doable and not a burden on anyone,

3:18:57
if I may energy, yeah.

3:18:59
Well, I’ll start with one question, is your intent to have all three topics on one evening?

3:19:06
Yes. And so my reaction to that would be that might be a lot for one evening.

3:19:13
And I guess second part of that is, since it involves, I guess, a variety of staff, I would hate to make a commitment on their behalf,

3:19:22
maybe if you could allow us some flexibility so we could aim for a January meeting on one of those topics, and if there’s a preference, we can coordinate with staff. Since we are reconvening in December, I can probably give you a better indication in December, if that is feasible for January,

3:19:42
as much as I’d like to commit people outside of my

3:19:47
fair point, I appreciate that thoughtfulness grant.

3:19:57
I’m thinking for a second, do.

3:20:00
Do you have a comment

3:20:01
your bike was on, but I don’t know if you had it? Oh, no. I

3:20:05
was just going to agree with Grant. That was my thought too. Is, first of all, having all three in one one night is probably not

3:20:15
wouldn’t give us enough ability to go into the depth that some of those topics may incur Second of all

3:20:24
the time frame specifying that date, while maybe having one on that date, I would like to give planning development services time to be able to put forward appropriate presentations to us and not have a rush presentation. So I would rather not be as specific on the time frames. I think they understand the time frames and our concerns.

3:20:52
That’s why I would be not as interested in putting a time frame saying as

3:21:00
soon as soon as soon as Development Service can in the first quarter, something more to that’s,

3:21:09
I’m thinking more like that openness to give them the benefit, to be able to look at it. Because we are coming up on the holidays, there’s probably not going to be a lot of work done between now and New Year’s. On this.

3:21:23
So I would like to give them some flexibility in coming up with the topics and when they are presented.

3:21:31
I could see it being like two different present, two different days.

3:21:36
Yeah, that would be my suggestion through the chair Commission member, pumpkin, you know, as much flexibility as we can have, I think, would be appreciated, just because, again, it’ll be multiple staff.

3:21:50
I guess one option is we could try to bring a schedule back to the commission, looking at advance. You know, first three meetings, first three, second meetings in the new year,

3:22:06
and again, with coordination through the multiple parties, see if that works for the Commission as well. That would be at least my recommendation, kind of off the cuff past my bedtime.

3:22:19
Commissioner Boone,

3:22:22
thank you. I was just going to say it doesn’t seem like this is something that needs a motion and a vote. I think we all understand that we would like to get some more education, and it could just be a suggestion. You’ve heard us, and I think if you came back to

3:22:40
next month, or even via email or something with after you’ve thought about it, that that would be sufficient in my that would definitely, that would definitely give us the most flexibility, and I would appreciate that, right? I don’t. I just don’t think we need the formality of demanding that you do that for us.

3:23:01
Mr. Popkin, yeah, I had already blocked a time and date specifically my calendar. So I was really hoping, no, um, that’s, that’s fine by me. I think my sincere preference,

3:23:14
my preference would be not have us all have to come, like,

3:23:18
multiple

3:23:21
second meetings of the month. So the leanest calendar that you think is feasible would be, I guess, my encouragement, and hopefully that also respects staff time too. So like by doing 111, might actually stretch things out a little bit excessively. So I’ll give you flexibility on that. If we don’t need to make a motion, and you’ve heard us fine

3:23:40
by me, I thought from a topic standpoint, that might be, I didn’t know if that was necessary for staff direction, but if that’s not the case, then

3:23:51
I would just say, if send you email, really have concurrence that those are the topics you’d like to hear about. I think we can start to work on that. Work on a schedule, yeah, and just coordinate the timing. We can also look again, once we get the right people,

3:24:08
they can at least estimate how much time they’d like to take to actually, you know, give a presentation and then gage kind of, you know, do two topics make sense on one meeting?

3:24:21
Okay, I think, and I think we have a concurrence on that

3:24:25
great I would just add my preference would be like as early in the year as is feasible, understood.

3:24:31
Thank you. Appreciate the Commission’s thoughtfulness and

3:24:35
interest. Thank you. One thing, Jeremy, we used to we haven’t done this for a few years, but the first meeting, as long as there wasn’t, well, we might have had a pre meeting about it, actually, where we had the city attorney come in and go over some of the legal responsibilities that we have as a commission, some of the gotchas, some of the things we have to be careful of. So.

3:25:00
Yes. And once again, considering the fact that there will be six new members, it might not and for even all of us, it may not be a bad idea just to have a refresher the Open Meetings, etc. So maybe we can put that on the January meeting.

3:25:21
Yes chair poem, we can certainly look into that. We did do an individual training with

3:25:28
Commissioner Lang when he came on for the Open Meeting. So we still been doing it just outside of the full meetings, because you guys already had it. I think in 2023

3:25:38
would have been when it happened last.

3:25:42
But yeah, now that we have more than a single Commissioner, it’s coming on. They’ll be new. We can look into that. Okay, thank you.

3:25:52
Any other items from the Commission? Seeing none? We’ll move over. Council representative Rodriguez is not here. Items from planning, development service, Director grant Penland, I

3:26:05
think we already indicated, but we will have an item public hearing for December and, yeah, looking forward into January, we will likely have a couple lined up. So again, just speaking overall number of meetings, yeah, we definitely have some coming forward December and January. Okay, thank you.

3:26:33
Don wants to be on Christmas

3:26:36
18th?

3:26:37
Oh, maybe we could do a study session on Christmas, if you’re willing,

3:26:45
okay, That’s it, and so we are now in adjournment. You

Transcribed by https://otter.ai