 And it is up. Okay, thank you. Welcome everybody to the Longmont Planning and Zoning Commission meeting for January 19th, 2022. The first thing is I'm calling this meeting to order and the next item is the roll call. Vice Chairman Pollan. Here. Commissioner Flage. Here. Commissioner Pollan. Oh, sorry, Commissioner Goldberg. Here. Commissioner Height. Present. Commissioner Nukocz. Here. Commissioner Teta. Here. Commissioner Boone. Commissioner Boone. Here. Thank you. Council Member Rodriguez. Here. And I'm not sure. Did I miss Commissioner Flage? No, I should hear. Awesome, thank you. Vice Chairman, you have a quorum. Thank you. Anyone wishing to speak during public invited to be heard which are items four and 10 or during any public hearing item will need to watch live stream of the meeting for instructions about how to call in to provide public comment at the appropriate times. Instructions will be given during the meeting and displayed on the screen when it is time to call in to provide comments. Comments are limited to five minutes per person and each speaker will be asked to state their name and address for the record prior to proceeding with their comments. Please remember to mute the live stream when you're called upon to speak and remember that items four and 10 are for items that are not before the commission today. The next item is communications from Planning Director. Yeah. Planning Director, where are you? Glenn. And new, new vision. Very good. Thank you Vice Chairman Pullin. The only thing I wanted to remind the commission of before you start your formal agenda is I think it was back in August. We decided to stay virtual but we would address it in the new year and we're in the midst of another spike in the pandemic. So what I would suggest is we're gonna talk about the electronic participation policy under nine. And then if the commission chooses maybe you want to make a motion and act on whether we'll continue in a virtual mode. That's the only reminder I have. Okay, thank you. The next item is the public comment to be heard. The information is being displayed on the screen for those viewing from home. You can have that displayed. Give me just a moment. Please dial 1-888-788-0099 topherunitestates. When prompted enter the meeting ID 820-03-8309. Five, six, two, one, zero, zero. When we are ready to hear public comment we'll call you to speak based on the last three digits of your phone number. Each speaker must state their name and address for the record and we'll be allowed five minutes to speak. Please remember to mute the live stream when you're called upon to speak and remember this is for not items before the commission today. We will take a five minute break to allow people to call in. Chair, we are approaching the five minute mark. I am currently seeing no callers in the chat. Thank you. Excellent, once I see everyone's back I will lower the slide. All right, and you're good. Okay, thank you. There were no callers, so we will close the public comment. The next item on the agenda is the 2022 new business, new year business items. This is some housekeeping we do at our first meeting and the first item 5A is the election of chairperson and vice chairperson. So at this time we will take nominations for chairperson. Mr. Hyte, our commissioner Hyte. Thank you. I haven't inquired as to whether that'd be willing to serve but I'd like to nominate Josh Goldberg for the chairmanship position. I'd also like to nominate you, vice chair Pullin to continue in your position as vice chair if you're so interested. Thanks. Commissioner Goldberg. Yeah, thanks chairman, vice chairman. I'm flattered at the offer and the faith by commissioner Hyte. I'm happy to accept being considered. And at the same time I'd like to nominate vice chairman Pullin for the position of chairman. Thank you and I'll accept that nomination. Are there any other nominations? Okay, so we will hold a roll call vote for this. When a call upon you can indicate either commissioner Goldberg or commissioner Pullin. Or? For chairperson. Would you like me to do the roll call vote? Yes, please. Awesome. Vice chairman Pullin. Michael Pullin for chairperson. Commissioner Flagg. Michael Pullin for chairperson. Commissioner Goldberg. Pullin for chairperson. Commissioner Hyte. You're muted, commissioner Hyte. If commissioner Goldberg's gonna vote for vice chair Pullin, so will I. Commissioner Locatsch. Vice chairman of Pullin for chairman. Commissioner Tadda. Michael Pullin for chairman. Commissioner Boone. Michael Pullin, vice chairman Pullin. It is unanimous that you are the chairman for 2022 for the Planning and Zoning Commission. Thank you for the honor and for the confidence. The next item will be then to elect a vice chairperson. Are there nominations? Commissioner Goldberg. I'd like to nominate commissioner Hyte for vice chair. So noted. I would like to nominate, oh, commissioner Hyte. I would decline, sorry. Thanks. I would like to nominate commissioner Goldberg for vice chair. Are there any other nominations? If not, let's go ahead and do a roll call vote, Jane. Sorry, I was muted. Chairman Pullin. I'll vote for commissioner Goldberg. Commissioner Flagg. Joshua Goldberg. Commissioner Goldberg. Joshua Goldberg. Commissioner Hyte. Fisher Goldberg. Commissioner Locatsch. Joshua Goldberg. Commissioner Tadda. Josh Goldberg. Commissioner Boone. Josh Goldberg. Chairman Pullin, that is unanimous that commissioner Goldberg is the vice chairman for 2022 for the Planning and Zoning Commission. Thank you very much. The next item is approval of the bylaws, item 5B. At this time, is there any discussion, any questions, any comments? Commissioner Goldberg. Yes, chairman Pullin. Are the bylaws in any way impacted by the electronic meeting discussion that we're currently reviewing or is that separate? I believe that is separate, but we will check with city attorney Eugene May. Commissioner is Eugene May, city attorney. They would be supplemental to the bylaws and separate. Great, thanks Eugene. Then with that, I move to approve the existing bylaws. We have a motion to approve the 2022 bylaws for Planning and Zoning Commission. Are there any seconds? Commissioner Hyte. I would second. We have a motion and a second. Do we need to take a roll call vote for this too, Jane? Will you do that please? Sure. Chairman Pullin. I approve. Commissioner Flake. Aye. Commissioner Goldberg. Aye. Commissioner Hyte. Aye. Commissioner Dukach. Aye. Commissioner Teta. Aye. Commissioner Boone. Aye. That passes unanimously, Chairman Pullin. Thank you. The motion is 5C, approval of the 2022 meeting schedule. Are there any questions, comments, or discussion for this? Are there any motions? Commissioner Hyte. I would move to approve the Planning and Zoning Commission 2002 meeting schedule. We have a motion to approve. Do we have a second? Commissioner Flake. I will second that. We have a motion and a second. Jane, can we take a roll call vote? Chairman Pullin. Approve. Commissioner Flake. Approve. Commissioner Goldberg. Approve. Commissioner Hyte. Aye. Commissioner Dukach. Aye. Commissioner Teta. Aye. Commissioner Boone. Aye. That passes unanimously. Thank you. The next item is item 5D, approval of the 2022 posting locations. Once again, are there any comments, questions, or discussion? Commissioner Goldberg. Yeah, Chairman, I move to approve the existing posting locations. There's been motion to approve. Commissioner Dukach. I second the motion. We have the motion to approve and a second. Jane, roll call vote. Chairman Pullin. Yes. Commissioner Flake. Aye. Commissioner Goldberg. Aye. Commissioner Hyte. Aye. Commissioner Dukach. Aye. Commissioner Teta. Aye. Commissioner Boone. Aye. Chairman, that passes unanimously. Thank you. Next item is item 6, which is the approval of the minutes of our December 15, 2021 meeting. Any questions? Commissioner Flake. I move to approve those minutes. We have a motion to approve. Any comments? Any seconds? I will go ahead and I will, Commissioner Hyte. I just had a small disclaimer. On page, when the graph minutes originally came out a week ago, there were some corrections noted that I noted, I believe on page five of the minutes. I spoke with our executive recording secretary, Jane Madrid, and she made those corrections that are reflected in this version. Just wanted to make sure that everybody understood that. Okay. Thank you. I will go ahead and second the motion. Chairman Pullin. Approve. Commissioner Flake. Aye. Commissioner Goldberg. Jane, I need to abstain. Commissioner Hyte. Aye. Commissioner Dukach. Abstain. Commissioner Teta. Aye. Commissioner Boone. Abstain. Chairman, that passes for the minutes and three abstentions. Thank you. The next item is a public hearing item. It is item 7A. It is modern West Preliminary Subdivision Plan, PZR 2022-1. Principal Planner Brian Schumacher presenting. Well, thank you, commissioners. Dallas, would you mind starting the staff presentation on this? Right, well, good evening commissioners. I'm Brian Schumacher with Planning and Development Services and tonight is the public hearing for the modern West Preliminary Subdivision Plan. So I'm hoping to be fairly succinct with my comments. I'm expecting probably about 10 minutes or less if I can. And the applicant representatives and guests will provide a bit more detail regarding the proposal as part of their presentation. So expect that presentation to last maybe about 15 to 20 minutes. Next slide, please. So this slide notes staff that are available for questions this evening in addition to the applicant representatives. So that's me for planning related and process questions. Hannah is available for any environmental or sustainability questions. Caroline is here for traffic related questions. Doug is available for street, utility, drainage design questions. Rocco with Long Mount Power Communications is available for electric infrastructure design questions. Susan also with LPC is available for questions regarding energy efficiency and or the energy grid pilot program staff has been discussing with the applicant. And that was referenced in the applicant's cover letter. And then after the presentations and public hearing comments, the applicant representatives and guests and staff are available to respond to questions. Next slide, please. So this slide just shows a few notes regarding zoning on this property and the surrounding area. So the modern West property is in Southwest Long Mount. It's showing it with the red star on this map. The Vance brand airport is the parcel in blue to the Northwest to the West of Airport Road. There's also the airport influence overlay district which is the area encompassed by the oval on the zoning map. It's a little bit faint and hard to see but you kind of see an oval on this diagram. And then the modern West properties I mentioned is zoned mixed use employment. And there's also surrounding properties as noted on this map that are currently annexed and zoned as mixed use employment or there's a few parcels to the South that have not yet been annexed generally in this area but those also have a mixed use employment land use category. So basically the modern West property is surrounded by properties that will be zoned mixed use employment when they are all annexed to the city. So they have to provide more details regarding zoning and land uses as part of their presentation. Next slide, please. So this is just a brief summary of some of the prior planning and actions by the city. So the property has been part of the Longmont area conference of plan and that dates back to, I think the original St. Brain Valley plan was adopted in the 70s but this neighborhood was part of a planned urban development since the 1980s. The modern West property was annexed into the city in 2019. At the time it was annexed the concept plan that was approved with the annexation included only light industrial uses. So when we were approached by the applicant to do more of a mixed use project, they submitted a concept plan amendment and that went through our DRC and public hearing process. That was reviewed by many of the same commissioners who are here this evening. That was actually reviewed by the Plains Zoning Commission in December, 2020 and was approved by city council in January of 21. Next slide, please. So the next few slides to outline topics that were reviewed during the DRC review prior to the tonight's hearing. The land use mix and layout of the preliminary subdivision plan is generally consistent with the approved concept plan amendment from 2021. The mixed use employment zoning allows for secondary use of high density residential and live work uses. And then the introduction of residential uses in this project will help create more of a diversified walkable and sustainable project. And as noted on this slide, you can kind of see the land use mix by percent of land area covered by light industrial, commercial and residential uses. Next slide, please. So this project will be required to comply with airport related regulations. I know as part of the concept plan amendment that was one of the main focuses of the discussion by both the Plains Zoning Commission and city council was to take a look at the proposed mix of uses particularly related to residential uses just to make sure that the Plains Zoning Commission and city council felt comfortable with the proposed residential uses in proximity to the airport. And based on the approvals by Plains Zoning Commission and city council of the concept plan amendment last year that the commission and the council felt that residential uses in proximity to the airport in relationship to this particular proposal were appropriate. So as I mentioned, this project will need to comply with airport related regulations, both including city related regulations in the airport influence overlays district as well as the FAA regulations. And there's a variety of different aspects to those regulations, including restrictions on things such as electrical interference, impairing visibility and otherwise creating a hazard or endangering aircraft as well as height restrictions as part of the airport airspace plan. And then as also noted in the communication we also discussed this as part of the concept plan amendment process as well. The property owner will grant an abrogation easement over the entire property that's acceptable to the city and the abrogation easement will run with the land and it will acknowledge activities and noise associated with airport operations, the right of passage over the property and also restrictions regarding the height of structures and other objects on the property. And we also have been discussing with the applicant regarding potential noise mitigation techniques such as building construction design that could be incorporated into the project to help address potential noise issues associated with aircraft flying over the property. And we plan to continue to have that discussion as part of the final subdivision plan and site plan review process. Next slide please. So in terms of environmental protections and habitat and species conservation plan was submitted with the application and it did not identify any threatened or endangered species or habitat or wetlands or waters of the US subject to federal regulation. In summary, staff agreed with the plan recommendations and additional details and notes will be provided with the final plans including bird nest mitigation procedures that would be followed prior to construction. Next slide please. The environmental site assessment included with the application indicated that there was no evidence of environmental conditions on the property that would require additional investigation. Next slide please. So in terms of traffic and roadway improvements the development of the property is not expected to have an adverse impact on mobile service and expected to meet the transportation benchmark. Roadway improvements will include connections of the Mountain Brook Collector Street that's on the north side of the property. That'll connect Mountain Brook Drive to Anderson Street to the east as well as Rogers Road to the west. And then Mountain Brook Drive will eventually extend which is partially under construction right now to a traffic signal at Hover. And then there's also a north-south local street called Imagine Street on the west side of this property that'll eventually connect to Nelson Road with future development of properties to the south. The modern west property will also participate in a future traffic signal improvements at the intersection of Rogers Road and Airport Road. And I also just want to note that there is a note added to the plan that the property owner will dedicate right away or an access easement across Allahbee which is that narrow parcel on the south end of the property that connects down to Nelson Road. And so the intent of that is to provide access for those two other parcels to the south that are currently are not annexed into the city. And then when they come in for future development having the ability to have additional right-of-wear and access easement across Allahbee will allow those properties to facilitate development of those properties in the future. And then any additional improvement requirements will be addressed at the time of final plat and site plan review. Next slide please. And then for other infrastructure and services future development will be required to comply with municipal code requirements including multimodal and pedestrian connections utility improvements, including water sewer electric gas communications and storm drainage and water quality design. In general, utility capacity is intended and anticipated to be adequate for this development. Emergency response times will comply with the city's benchmark. Fire station five is nearby at airport in Nelson. And then there are more details in the communication on each of these topics. Next slide please. So this slide outlines instances where there have been opportunities for public input on this preliminary subdivision plat process. And this is in addition to the public review as part of the annexation process in 2018, 2019 and the more recent concept plan amendments that were approved last year. There will also be additional opportunities with notice through the final subdivision plat and site plan reviews as well. Next slide please. So throughout the public process on this preliminary plat, we've only received one public comment. And that was during the neighborhood meeting that was held back in June. And that was from a property owner that participated in the neighborhood meeting and that neighbor lived, I believe on the south side of Nelson Road. And they had some general questions about kind of land use and infrastructure improvements, potential impacts to the rural character of the area, how the project is unique and fulfills the need for long months and just some general logistic and scheduling questions as well. Aside from that comment received as part of the neighborhood meeting, staff has not received any additional public comments in response to the notices that have been sent either as part of the notice of application that was sent out in June and or the notice of the public hearing for tonight that was sent out a few weeks ago. Next slide please. So it was part of the review process a number of outside agencies were contacted to see if they had any concerns or comments on the proposal. The school district did confirm that none of the schools at this time that would serve this development are near the school capacity benchmark. US Fish and Wildlife Service indicated no concerns with preliminary plans but did request a separate review during the final applications. Next slide please. The Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District indicated that the subdivision and design will meet to follow the IGA between the city and the district and the district easement over the impacted area. So there is a fairly large transmission line just to the west of this property that would include the right-of-way area or part of the right-of-way area for the Imagine Street alignment. And so that'll be reviewed. Those final construction plans will need to be reviewed and approved by the district as part of the final subdivision plan and site plan review. So the FAA provided an initial determination of no hazard to air navigation based on the applicant's preliminary airspace analysis. And that was submitted as part of the concept plan amendment that the commission and the council reviewed back in 2020 and 2021. And that determination is subject to additional reviews and confirmations during the site plan review process. Next slide please. Excel Energy indicated that the applicant will need to coordinate regarding placement of easements and dry utilities during the final applications that will want to coordinate that. Also with our Long Mount Power and Communications staff in terms of placement of electrical facilities. The applicant will also need to coordinate and reach agreement with ditch lateral owners prior to final approval. And in Boulder County also provided some comments recommending compatible land uses on site and with the airport. And with, and also recommended that a multimodal transportation system be incorporated in the surrounding area. Next slide please. So this slide includes a few procedural notes. The applicant is responsible for demonstrating that the application meets the app or review criteria and municipal code standards. And as part of the applicant's presentation they will address the criteria in more detail. Plan zoning commission is the decision making body on the preliminary subdivision plan and the commission's decision is appealable to city council. Next slide please. So based on staff's analysis of the review criteria as noted in the staff communication staff found the application to meet the criteria and as recommended approval as noted in PZ resolution 2022-1A. Next slide please. So the next steps tonight include an applicant presentation. There'll be a public hearing after the applicant presentation there'll be an opportunity for questions by the commission of the applicant or staff based on the public hearing comments and or general questions from the commission. There'll be a commission deliberation and discussion and then a commission motion and vote. Next slide please. So thank you commissioners and Dallas and Jane that concludes my presentation comments and the next step would be for the applicant presentation and I believe Barb Brunk will start that presentation for the applicant. Thank you very much. Alice, could you show the our applicant PowerPoint presentation please? Here we are. Good evening. Thank you, Brian. Good evening chairman, Poland and commissioners. I'm Barb Brunk with resource conservation partners LLC PO box 1522 in Longmont. I am excited to be here again to help to tell modern rest story this evening. Derek Grasio has assembled a team of professionals to develop and implement his vision for a unique, sustainable, energy efficient integrated mixed use community. Here with us this evening are Derek Grasio who is the landowner of the applicant and the holder of the vision for the project and key members of the design team including Frank Romero, our architect with our RDW architecture, Anish Talak from who's a carbon-free building expert at RMI Shanti Pless with the national renewable energy lab Leslie Huey PE, the Senita's group Leslie is working on all things drainage on our project Todd Borgher PE with TJB consulting Todd did the utility design and preliminary plot as part of the process Peter Vitale with who is a development director with modern West and Chris McGrannahan with LLC who is our transportation engineer. This talented team of design professionals is working together to implement Derek's vision. Next slide please. So you've seen this, you saw this picture before I think the one that Brian put up showed the zoning. So again, we're here to do a preliminary subdivision plot and we're located in the middle of this mixed use neighborhood at the intersection between airport and Nelson Road. The vision is to create a new high quality and energy efficient mixed use development that will provide a transformative space for community benefit within the city of Longmont. Next slide please. We are located within walking and biking distance to major and minor centers with access to transit an ideal location for mixed use community based on sustainability. Next slide please. Brian kind of talked about this integrated network of existing and proposed streets. You can see the modern West property there in the colors and the other things that are going on in this neighborhood lots of activity in this part of Longmont. So the site will have that connection over to Mountain Brook so there'll be a connection across from Hover to Rogers Road and then North-South on Imagination Street consistent with the development of the South. And then that dotted line down the middle that's where the cross will happen for that future land use connection so that I know the last time we were here we talked about a concern about cutting off those properties. So we plan to make sure that those side properties could get across this piece of property. Next slide please. This is the approved concept plan. Some of you were here in 2020 to look at this. Same mix of uses, same areas. Commissioners approved it in December of 2020 and the city council approved it in January of 2021. Next slide. So the uses as proposed this evening are consistent with the concept plan amendment and they include MUE land use designation uses including employment, office, flex space and commercial use and secondary offices, secondary uses of retail, cultural facilities, the high density residential and live work. And this mix of uses is consistent with both the Envision Longmont land use designation and the MUE zoning on the property. Next slide please. We've talked about lots of discussion at the commission about primary and secondary uses and how they fit into the mixed use employment district. So this shows our land use allocation on site. And so on the site, 62% of the site is committed to light industrial and commercial and 38% is committed to residential. We also looked at the gross square footage of allocation on the site. So the site also meets the secondary criteria from a gross square footage. 51% is other and 49% will be residential. Next slide please. So these images were also included in your packet. I think that this is really about the soul and the vision for the project. And in Longmont, we are very, I think blessed to have something for everyone. We have the best of everything here. It's beautiful. We have wonderful people and we're committed to diversity and inclusion. Next slide. Again, the gift of living in Longmont is we have our community and access to the more urban services of Denver and Boulder. And modern West is located, again, in the heart of that area of Longmont. Next slide. Modern West will be connected and close to city of Longmont amenities and the trail system and a broader trail system within the community. So when we have bikes and feet, we have a good way to get people around and use bikes and feet and transit. And then all of the wonderful amenities in this part of Northern Colorado. Next slide. Sustainability has been at the heart of this project since the very beginning. Derek enlisted NREL and RMI at the very start of the process. So it's not an afterthought. It's integral to the design. NREL actually used this project as a case study in their guide to energy master planning of high performance districts and communities. And the link is here and in your packet. And I would encourage you to go look at the study. It's wonderful information. Shanti Pless and Anish will be here this evening to talk about RMI's role in the project and NREL's role in the project. They'll speak a little later. Next slide, please. The heart of the vision for any project is really about placemaking. And placemaking is a very elusive quality in order to make a special place. The design team has to keep the vision in the lens of our eye so that every decision supports that place. So that as we move forward, we have the energy components. We have the architecture. We have the landscape architecture. We have the mix of uses. All of those things come together to support a beautiful place where people want to live and work and thrive. Next slide, please. Again, this really is the poster child for mixed use, integrated mixed use. So the goal is to create maker space, creative space, and a wonderful place to live. And for those things to be woven together so that people want to live here and work here and recreate here and they will thrive. Next slide. Again, culture, connection and community, a place for artists, a place for musicians, a place for entrepreneurs and small businesses, a place for all different age groups and incomes as far as housing. Next slide. A place to build community. We believe that the way this site is designed will bring people together who want to participate and belong. And that gift will feather out into Longmont. So a place for people who live outside the community and the inside community to come together and thrive. Next slide. Again, a place for everyone, families. We have some urban food. We have greenhouses on the site. So it'll be a place to grow things, a place for families, a place for individuals, a place for old people and a place for young people just starting out. Next slide, please. Again, I think dwellers include both the people who dwell in the units and those who spend time in the businesses and in the community facilities and the cultural facilities on this site. We're gonna have big places to gather and small places to gather, indoor spaces and outdoor spaces so that as people come together and dwell on this site, they are again contributing to that place-making and spirit of community. Next slide. And then we're back to creators and makers. And I think this is really about art and music and entrepreneurs. We are going to have the ability for small businesses to start and small businesses around the rest of Longmont to grow and thrive. And so that piece will bring those creators and makers into a place where they can thrive and grow. Next slide. I'm gonna ask Frank Romero, our architect, to talk through the components of the site and where they're located within the project. Frank? Hey, Barb, great job. I think you've visioned the goals are there, right? So thank you, Barb. Good evening, commissioners. I'm Frank Romero, the master plan architect and principal at RDW architecture. I've been working on this project with this incredible team since 2018. Today, I'll quickly review the land use framework for the project and provide you with the intent and goals for the community as the project evolves to final plat. The site and uses are designed as a sustainable mixed use community, which Barb talked about. Because we have MU zoning, it allows for a variety of uses. We have line industrial, office, multifamily dwellings, urban agriculture and arts and entertainment facilities. Next slide, please. Light industrial. You see, we've located the line industrial buildings in purple on the plan. These are located to the east and the south. They're to keep the truck traffic away from the residential blocks. It was important for us to keep the truck traffic around the perimeter. And so that the light industrial buildings which have storefronts on the west and north sides that face the residential blocks were protected. These storefronts will have bioswales, community gardens and public art. There's also a street that runs north and south. It's located in red on the plan here. We're gonna call this our green street. It's green because that's where our innovative water quality design creates a natural buffer and gathering spaces for the community. Our intention is to call this the soul street at some point because it really connects all the uses within the site and the community. Next slide, please. Business and office. The buildings are located to the east and south and we have one large gateway office building that's planned for the northwest corner. These buildings are intended to highlight the views, provide adequate daylight for the tenants and to be a modern contemporary style to attract today's innovative creative office companies. Next slide, please. The multifamily dwellings, we have two residential lots that are located on the west side of the site. These are to capture the views to the west. These buildings are stepped from the street to allow for a better residential experience allowing daylight and views to be accessed throughout the whole site. We've worked closely with our talented sustainability team at RMI and NREL to position the buildings and create building massing which allows for optimum daylight and also as much rooftop and facade space available for solar panel energy. Next slide, please. Amenities. It's really important for us to provide community amenities. These amenities would be located for easy access within the site and these possible amenities might be rooftop pool fitness facility, cafe, coffee shop, art venues, galleries, projection art dome or an anchor restaurant and tenant. Next slide, please. Research nursery and greenhouse. So it's always been very important to Derek that we are conscious about health and wellness in this community. We wanna provide the opportunity for the community to have gardens, learning gardens, greenhouses and local agricultural partnerships. It's really what's gonna make the modern west neighborhood a real community. So this quickly sums up the general land use framework for this project. You'll see this variety of building types create a dynamic neighborhood within the city of Longmont. We're very excited about it. We've been working really hard for a while now since 2018. So we're really happy to be here in front of you. And with that, I'll give it back to Bar. Thank you. Thank you, Frank. Now we're gonna have Anish talk about RMI's part of the process and talk us through the collaboration that's happening with LPC as we go forward for, again, a more sustainable neighborhood. Next slide, please. Thanks, Barb. Hi, everyone. My name is Anish Talak. I'm a manager in the carbon-free buildings program at RMI. We've been involved with this project for two plus years now. And I really wanna emphasize that we've been engaged in the project from its conception, which is really exciting because sustainability can be seen throughout the project. So upfront, we had a number of goal setting and energy visioning workshops to develop what ambitious goals we wanted to achieve with the development. The diagram on the bottom right of this slide also shows that it's not a one-dimensional sustainability concept here. We're looking at a holistic vision. So it addresses not just energy and carbon, but aspects of travel and transport, land use, sustainable water, and et cetera. So we're really excited to be involved with this project and I'll speak in more detail about the energy and carbon vision, which is an area that NREL and RMI have been working in detail on and collaborating with LPC as well. Let's go to the next slide. So our energy and carbon vision is organized into four overarching themes. We're really striving for a low-carbon community to achieve a really low-carbon community. And to achieve this, we will push an ambitious energy efficiency approach. We will aim to electrify as many end uses on the site as possible, as we know that electrification will enable the use of clean renewable energy instead of fossil fuels. So we're looking at electrifying space heating, hot water, and residential cooking. Building on the efficiency and electrification piece of the project concept, we also want to achieve site net zero energy, which will require on-site renewable energy. And finally, which is a really innovative aspect of this project is looking at opportunities relating to demand flexibility. So when we have a net zero energy site, what does that mean in terms of pushing and pulling from the utility grid and how can we achieve a carbon-free outcome, not just for ourselves, but contributing to the overall goals of Longmont and the region in general. And so we've been in close coordination with LPC to develop a feasible path to achieving this ambitious energy strategy and have had some really exciting conversations along the way. Let's go to the next slide. So we've been focused in our conversations with LPC on aspects of the on-site renewable energy concept and demand flexibility. So we've been discussing topics like how can solar installations be implemented successfully at a community scale? We've had some really good conversations around virtual net energy metering, which will allow shared solar installations across multi-family property. How can grid interactivity support LPC's decarbonization goals? So looking at that 10 to 20% of load that we can flex on-site to use more of our on-site solar energy and also use energy from the grid when it's the cleanest, which we think is a really important aspect of decarbonization. And finally, looking at what aspects of our on-site solar EV charging and electric heating loads can be shaped and shifted and managed so that we are working in coordination with Longmont Power and the electric grid rather than sort of an isolated project sitting on its own. So I'll pass it to Shanti to speak a little bit more about NREL's work on the project as well. Next slide, please. And next slide. Thanks all. Yeah, thanks for having us. My name is Shanti Pless. I'm a zero energy and zero carbon buildings researcher down in Goldenclaw right out the National Renewable Energy Laboratory. Focused a lot of my research on innovative business models and energy systems planning and approaches as well as the tools necessary for other developers to do something similar. I mean, there's over 180 cities now in the United States to have 100% renewable goals. And our role at NREL on a national scale is to partner up with leading projects to really understand how to get there so that we can then write about it, we can publish about it and do case studies and publish it in our documents here like this that are national examples of how other developments, how other cities can reach their 100% renewable energy goals. And so the example here you see was early engagements and really getting the site to respond to the sun on the south side to enhance solar access across the multi-family in this case in particular to really early on, right? And so I wrote a case study about that and on page nine, you have to leave up the guide so that all the other districts out there that are trying to learn from a leadership project like this that have good examples of those that are doing it. So I definitely bring the national scale perspective on how to move our country and our cities with 100% renewable goals closer to their goals using developments like this. So thanks for having me. Next slide, please. As Brian said, two things, NREL and RMI will continue to be involved with the project. So as we go forward into final site design and start figuring out how we get the utilities to work on side of the renewable energy, they will still be part of the project team as we move forward. As Brian said, it's our job to show that we meet the review criteria. So I want to do things. I want to make sure that the staff communication which outlines compliance with the review criteria and cover letter from the applicant which outlines the review criteria are included in the public record for this hearing. So those pieces have a lot of detail about how we meet the criteria. I would like to go through at like a higher level and we'll be here to answer questions about it as we move forward. So again, here we are in the middle of a mixed use employment neighborhood consistent with the comp plan and the zone as we move forward. The site will comply with all the city standards for utilities, transportation and services. Next slide. Again, this poster child for mixed use employment meets many of the Envision Longmont goals that we kind of talked about when we did both Envision Longmont and updated the code about higher density, more compact urban form and integrated mix of uses. This site is located in an area of change meets the standard for primary and secondary uses. And if you look at the rest of Longmont it seems like it's a middle of the farm field but it is an infill project surrounded by other development in the community. Next slide. Some more of those goals that we meet. This is our multimodal transportation plan. So this site is in a really good location for connectivity, for transit, for bikes, for feet and also for vehicles. So, again, integrated transportation, integrated land use, looking at the natural resources. Leslie is here and can talk about a really innovative way to use that green street that Frank talked about as a low impact development way to help treat water quality on the site and create a real natural sustainable landscape that doesn't take a lot of water but is still beautiful. Next slide. Next slide, please. Again, we believe the site is designed, back one, meets the criteria for compatibility with the surrounding neighborhood. We have the transportation network that's connected. We have, again, the site is surrounded and will be buffered and meet the standard as we go forward with site to plan. Because this is all surrounded by mixed use employment that level of intensity is contemplated. And we believe that the connections, both along the edges of the site and the internal connections, will meet that standard for compatibility and interaction with the adjacent properties. Again, transportation, multimodal, connectivity, all of those things are included in the preliminary plot documents. Next slide. So preliminary subdivision plots also have their own set of criteria. So, and one of those is not limiting the adjacent properties from being integrated into the system. So the site has been designed to connect the streets, the utilities, the drainage, and be integrated into the northern piece, the western piece and the southern pieces. And again, Brian talked a little earlier about that access easement across that, our pole for our flag on our piece of property. I know last time we were here, we talked about that connectivity to make sure that as this property develops, those properties are not left out as they come in in annex in the future. Next slide, please. There's also a consideration of phasing. And you can see by this diagram that the lion's share of the improvements are going to happen in phase one. And I think that the kind of the key element about a phasing plan is not to leave behind a piece of property that's undevelopable because there are too much infrastructure to build to get it up and running. And so you can see from this diagram that again, the lion's share of the infrastructure will be at front and we're not leaving behind pieces that won't be integrated and developed as the site is completed. Next slide, please. We also have that criteria for secondary uses. So we kind of talked about the land use area and that less than half kind of designation for both land area and gross square footage. I think the other thing that those secondary uses are very pointed about is integrating the uses. And Frank kind of talked about that as we move through his discussion on the property. But the goal here is to have people be able to live and work and play integrated onto this site. And as all of you know, when we have plain BLI sites, the sidewalk rolls up and it gets quiet in the evening. By bringing residential uses into a mixed use neighborhood, it enlivens the site and makes sure that we're making good use of shared parking, shared amenities and all those things that make mixed use important in our community. Next slide. The other piece is the airport and the airport overlay zone. And those of you who were here before, we talked a lot about this in the last meeting. We have had ongoing discussion with the FAA and staff about making sure that as we move forward to develop the site, we will be compatible and meet the criteria. What Shanti didn't tell you is that part of his task will be to help us design buildings that are quiet so that people who live inside will have some extra protection from any perceived noise issues. We also believe that because this site, these residential units are integrated into an active site. The ambient noise level is a little different than being in a residential neighborhood out in the middle of nowhere. Mixed use generates activity and generates a level of activity that is different from a simple quiet residential neighborhood. So we will comply with the standards for the airport overlay zone and FAA. Each structure will get an FAA review as we move forward through the site design process. So we know we're in compliance with those height restrictions and those areas that make sure it's safe to take off and land from the airport. Next slide, please. That's our story. Our discussion this evening and the application materials in your packet demonstrate that the application is presented, complies with the applicable criteria for approval as outlined in 1502055 common review criteria, 1502060D preliminary plat, 1504030A1 secondary uses, and 1503050A5 overlay districts. We wanna thank the commission and the staff for their time and attention this evening, and we respectfully request that you approve the modern West preliminary plat. Our team is here to answer your questions. Thank you, Barbara. At this time, this is a public hearing item. We are going to open this up for public comment on this item. Dallas, can you go ahead and display that? Thank you. The information is being displayed on the screen for those viewing from home. Please dial 1-888-788-0099. When prompted, enter the meeting ID, 820-03562100. When we are ready to hear public comment, we will call on you to speak based on the last three digits of your phone number. Each speaker must state their name and address for the record, and they will be allowed five minutes to speak. Please remember to meet the live stream when you're called upon to speak. We will now take a five minute break to allow people to call in. Chair, we are about 15 seconds out from the five minute mark. There are currently no callers in the chat. Thank you. All right, I see we're at the five minute mark. I am going to drop the slide once I see you guys here and you're good. Thank you. There are no callers. So at this point, we'll go ahead and close the public invited to be heard for this item. The next part is for the commission to discuss question comment. So we'll open it up for discussion. Are there any questions for the Brian or for the applicant? Commissioner Lukacz. Thank you Chairman Pollan. I do have two questions for the applicant. You know, as a public health professional, I definitely appreciate the, not only the environmentally friendly plaid, but it's environmentally sustainable. So I appreciate that. So speaking of solar energy and carbon-free site, have you considered, and I don't know, maybe I missed it in all the pages from the applicant bike repair stations probably since it's so close to the Greenway. And since you have solar energy and it's clean energy, have you considered EV charging stations? And I know these are minor details that may not be included in here, but I just wanted to know if you have been looking into this. Well, we have definitely, Derek, sorry. Yes, no, that's okay. Derek Grasio, 6185 Brigadoon Court in Longmont. Thank you for hearing our spiel again, everyone, and we're excited to take it to the next step. Yeah, we have considered on the, a bunch of different uses potentially on the flagpole, I guess we'll call it, bike repair stations. That's one of them actually, because that is going to be a main connector to Nelson Road for all the people that are living and working there and potentially community gardens in that space as well. What was the first part of the question? EV charging. Oh yeah, oh yeah. I think, I remember us talking about that recently. There's actually a consultant that we're going to engage to help design the infrastructure for that whole system. And Shanti is, you can maybe speak to it in more detail, but it's definitely a priority as vehicles are all becoming electric. So yeah. Yeah, and this is Shanti here then, and I'll add to that. It's definitely any new parking for sure as I'm, well, I think I include a minimum amount whether it's a couple of spaces per, and on the industrial side or for the multifamily parking as well. It'll be a range of charging opportunities, I imagine. And those are site plan details. So yeah, but the intent, that's part of the intent. And that's the first thing I've heard about a bike repair place. That's a good idea. Yeah, and they're not very big, you know, it's, yeah. I think there's some right on the greenway, not too far from there, but you will have, you know, a big community there. So I'm sure they will appreciate that. Yeah, and the Lightning's Gulch Trail is just so, it's just north of us, and we anticipate a lot of e-bikes and, you know, that's such a growth sector as well. And I would say most of the multifamily apartment buildings we're doing these days, they're included as part of the infrastructure for the tenants. So there's gonna be bike repair amenities in those apartment buildings. And bike racks. Lots of bike racks, yes. Great, and my second question was regarding with the pedestrian path or multi-use path to link with the trail on the north side. Is that already there coming from Rogers Road or are you going to build it? I know it's not part of your land. So is that a done deal or is it already existing? So the Nywat Ditch corridor is designated as a greenway on the comprehensive plan. So the piece to the north, when that piece develops, they'll put in that greenway. In the short term, there'll be bike lanes and on the Mountain Brook Road that will get us over to the Likenskaltz Trail. So that it'll be an on-street connection until the property till the north develops and then it will have both. Okay, great. So the property to the north will do that. Ryan? Yeah, I mean, I'll just add, you know, it kind of depends on the timeframe. We've been having discussions with the property owner to the west as well development plans on their site. And so in terms of the timeframe of who installs the infrastructure first, it kind of depends on actually who starts construction first. So we'll have those discussions as we kind of continue through the final application process. Okay. Well, but it sounds like it's going to go through. So I appreciate that. Thank you. That's all I have for now. Thank you. Commissioner Flague? My question is in regards to energy used on the site, does it, it appears that you're going to have solar energy and passive solar energy. And so then your heating is through electricity and with all of your appliances and everything, what is the load on the site per apartments, for example, what does that do to the affordability of those units? And then, and I know that's a site plan detailed to a certain extent, but what happens if the source of energy electricity somehow isn't enough? What will you do this supplement and have you a provision for that somewhere on the site as far as an area in the subdivision for that? Shanti? Sure, I think I'll get it started here. I think the idea of net zero emissions or net zero energy is that with the generation when it's sunny that we would produce electricity that could be used in all those loads, heating and appliances and such. And when we don't produce enough, then the utility that is there will be there for providing that electrical load. And so it works in concert with the way that it's connected to the utility. And so that's how it's envisioned to work. I believe that there are a range of surfaces roof top and covered parking and such that there are all options for where that solar might go. So that's definitely part of the planning. The design as the design is for. And may I follow up? So then if for some reason the grid doesn't function what do you use for backup? I know that batteries are not huge at this point and there is a storage issue. Gotcha. We are definitely looking to others that are figuring out how to integrate backup batteries for exactly that purpose. And so it's an emerging technology that's quickly becoming cost-effective for a lot of solar systems. And so it's on the list. It's been discussed with the LPC as well in terms of how that might work, I think. But it's from a backup power perspective as well as a grid services perspective. Don't believe Anisha or the folks from LPC if we have anything for sure yet on backup power or our battery integration, but it's on the list for sure of technologies that are being evaluated. But we'll have both. We'll have our alternative energy and the LPC interact. So they will interact. So on a cloudy day, it'll come out as a Longmont power grid. I believe what she was asking about was more for backup power. If the Longmont power goes down, what will the community use for backup power purpose? I've lived in Longmont for 40 years and I've been without power for probably two hours in 40 years. Yeah, and I guess it's a good time to kind of emphasize the energy efficiency aspects of the project. The thermal envelope that these buildings will be designed to achieve will also enable passive survivability, which is really the concept of if you don't have electricity and it's a cold day, you can stay comfortable in your home, until the power is back up. So it's a combination of sort of the buildings themselves working as a thermal battery and then actual electric batteries working with our onsite solar and the grid to provide that resilience. And how will that affect the affordability of the various units? That's a good question. We're working through that right now as part of the project design. I think it's sort of very early on to really understand the full implications, but I think the onsite renewable energy and the also efficient design of the buildings will reduce the electric load that consumers will be demanding. So this isn't sort of an inefficient building that's just using a ton of electricity. So we anticipate that the efficiency aspects of the project will reduce the utility bills for great payers. Thank you. Thank you. Are there more comments, questions? Commissioner Haidt, you're on mute. I'm gonna get off with it. Am I off of it now? Yes. My cursor disappeared, which is unfortunate for me. Of course I have a bunch of questions. First of all, are you still on the property? Are you leasing it out? No, I'm still on it. Okay, in the environmental site assessment, the ESA, which I think is attachment 15 of our materials, there were some photographs, one was hilarious, a picture of a phone booth, Superman's closet ended up next to the ditch, but there was reference to two shipping containers that were locked, do you know what was in them or is in them? Just, we actually farmed the land, so we've got a tractor out there and we farm hay and just tools for that, yeah. Great, yeah, appreciate it. The FAA's assessment rated you at 55 feet or you were gonna be below 55 feet. Is that kind of like how high you think the residential structures might get or any of the other structures? I think that's, yeah, I think we're four stories and 55 max, is that correct, Frank? That's correct. Okay, I think the zone allows for five stories. You can do five stories, but we're for 20 feet below that threshold line. That's kind of what I was getting at, you're at that threshold, you're not gonna go higher. As well too, you're gonna be in that navigation aviation mode with an navigation easement and you're gonna put solar panels on. We've talked about this before. I don't know anything about solar energy and the materials that are used, but I'm assuming that you have a glare-proof, non-airplane distracting type of material that you're thinking about. That really my issue to raise here, but I thought of it, thought I'd say it anyhow. One issue I do have here though is the configuration of your lot. It's interesting to me. I think it's page 12 of your materials, the applicants materials, which show how the, no, I'm gonna get lost. You got one commercial, five and six are gonna be residential. Why do you break five and six the way you do? Is that just the way your buildings are gonna be? In terms of instead of having one large lot or? Yeah, well, kind of like that, isn't it? I think it would be too big of a building if we had just one large residential lot. We're also concerned about fire access around the building. So we're gonna work with fire department and access around the entire WALTA family building. The same question for, I guess it's laps two, three and four, which I think are all gonna be light industrial and the way I looked at them. You look like the sketch for a building crossed both three and four. Why would you break three and four in the middle of that building? If you were gonna sell one of those buildings and have a zero lot line, you might wanna be able to have the opportunity to have distinct spots under the buildings, as opposed to a condo kind of a situation would be one reason. I think also it's so you can build them in pieces so that even though it's phase one, it won't be like they come up out of the ground together, it'll be a sequence in phase one, where you build one and you add one and you add one and you add one. And at some point, separate lots help with that process as well. Outlaw A, and maybe Bob, this is the question for you and lap two look like they might be entryways off of Brook Drive, is that correct? I don't know why lap two is configured the way it is. Could we look at slide 33 in the applicant's presentation so we can be looking at the preliminary plot together? That'd be nice. Sure thing, give me just a moment. Dallas, will that help Commissioner Height? I think so. Yeah. It's hard to talk about it without a map, I'm just, you know. I'm looking at it from page 12. It's the hands, you know, I can't talk without my hands or something to write on. So in this virtual situation, if we could at least have a map to look at together, this helps. Okay, so. Ooh, I can't see it. Did that help? Can you see it? Not worth a darn, but I think it's gonna be the same thing that I'm looking at, so that's fine with me. So it's these, the outlots here that you're asking about? It's a two on the north, outlaw A and then. That one, outlaw A and then, which looks like it has road going through the middle but then lot two, what is lot two? I saw a picture of a geodome. Is that where that's gonna go? Yes. Short answer, yes. And so Frank or Leslie, do you wanna talk about those outlots and the functions they're gonna have? Yes, sure. I think that's a Leslie star with the reason why they're there for water quality. And then I'll describe the functionality of them. So Leslie, you're there. Good evening, Leslie Uie, Thesenitis Group, civil engineer for the project. The two outlaw A, it looks like it's divided in two. That's actually our storm water detention pond. The pond is designed in such a way that it's two parcels or two pieces on either side of the entry drive to the subdivision. The pond is set up to be more of a drive pond with water quality occurring upstream so that that area can be used for gathering space and events and et cetera. The curvature that you're seeing for lot two is the dome. And I don't know if it would be appropriate, Frank, for you to speak to that or Derek to speak to the dome. Well, I'll just pick it back when you said about the two outlots. Thank you. Yeah, thank you, Leslie. The two outlots, you gotta think about this as a gateway entry sequence. As you come in, these aren't your traditional the tension water quality areas. These are nicely landscaped. They're more natural landscapes. You enter in this community and you have this really lush natural landscaping and these places for people to gather. I think Derek, maybe you should talk a little bit about the function of the dome and the vision here. But that entry sequence is a buffer. Yeah, it's kind of hard to tell on this engineering plan, the vision, but really this whole area, lot two, out lot A, out lot A, both of them are, it's kind of a community plaza area. So there's boardwalks and it connects the community dome which is really an art dome for various uses for the site and for the larger community. And we're just starting to do some sketches on how all this connects. It actually connects to lot one as well on the east side of lot one. It's activated to connect to this whole plaza area. So that's the intent. And then the, it's kind of like a hashed kind of line that's going north and south there below the outlots. I see that, yep. Yeah, that's water quality rain gardens that are also planted in an organic natural way. So we're trying to really bring in, soften this architecture in this site with kind of native organic landscape that the water quality actually feeds the landscape. And there's some projects in Denver that pulled it off really successfully. And we hired a firm out of Denver to do our green infrastructure. And it's pretty unique and it's, I think the city staff has reviewed it quite extensively and just to make sure that the site drains and it's just a different, more urban approach that looks really beautiful when it's done. I appreciate that. Thanks for the explanation. Next question I have, I think it's for you, Derek. What kind of housing mix are you contemplating? One, two and three bedroom units. We don't know about lease or sale yet. A lot is kind of hinging on getting through this. Culinary plot phase and then we know kind of where we are with things and we can move toward what the market's demanding. Okay, Barb, my next question is for you. I was looking at the uses primary and secondary and was following along with the math where the residential was 38% and the rest of the was something like 62%. But then you, looked at a square footage number that showed residential, I think it bumped up to 49%. I didn't follow that math. So we used, there's two ways we looked at it. We looked at the land area on the property. The acreage and the land area under the buildings. And then because those are four-story residential buildings, we also looked at the square footage. So we were trying to make sure that the developed site will meet that secondary intent, both in the area of land area and developed square feet. Those were the two numbers. I appreciate that. That's a different perspective. Thank you. We're trying to cover all the bases. I listened to the conversation you guys had a few months ago about secondary and primary uses and we're just trying to make sure we were looking at it holistically. Some folks have pet peeves. I appreciate you paying attention. And then finally, again, Commissioner McCosh raised it out loud. B, it's 80 feet wide. What's its purpose now? I mean, Derek, did you buy this property with the straw? Yeah. Yeah. I think when I think it's there because the original farmer who actually deceased who I bought it from kind of, you know, plan on it somewhat needing access to the site off of Nelson. I don't think that they ever envisioned Mountain Brook being there. So yeah, that's how it's a second parcel too. And we probably- I see that. Yeah. And do you need it now for access to Nelson as a secondary access point until Meadowbrook is done? I mean, that's our access to the site right now. So that's how we use it, you know, and historically it's been used that way. So until, you know, we will develop it as an emergency access for the fire department. So when we build out phase one, we'll actually have an all-weather surface tying to Nelson as a secondary access. But the long-term plan is for that to be a pedestrian connection, a combination of community gardens and other uses that would complement the neighborhood. So, you know, we've talked about all kinds of different uses that would have to happen as part of any site design process as we move forward in the property. I've looked at plat notes 11 and 17 and 11 really interests me insofar as it anticipates possibly giving it or donating it or I would anticipate possibly selling it to whoever develops the properties to the south. And you commit at final plan to make that. You lost you. Did you really? I lost you. Is everyone else hear me? Yep, you're good. Here we go. Yep. Sorry, Barb. That was me. My speakers went out. Okay. So again, I appreciate that possibly you could get rid of this site, then put note or note 15 identifies that you would provide necessary easements, be it across the easements or whatever out of the laundry list and easement for utilities appears to be missing from 15. So I suggest possibly you think about allowing whomever might need it the ability to put a utility easement across that be as well. That would go with the access. And again, staff asked us to include that as an option. It wouldn't be our first choice. I mean, crazily enough, that skinny little piece fits into the overall mix of uses. And so it surely wouldn't be gifted. It might be sold at some time in the future to the people on the south. But right now it's integrated into the mixed uses. And I think it's Derek's intent to keep it and function and use it. That's why I wanted to make sure they could get across. Somehow it was subdivided that way, I guess, by the county. And showing in all's house have an 80 foot separation between the two of them. It is what it is, but it... And I appreciate that you are being sensitive to the fact that now that you're part of Longmont and this becomes where the property of the south becomes part of Longmont, we need it to be able to be incorporated and developed appropriately. That's all I have. Thank you. Thank you. Commissioner Flake. I am. It occurs to me that in lieu of superior and Louisville's fires that having another access for firefighting is not a bad thing. Even if it's not paid, it's some kind of an access in there. I just bring that up because it seems that it's ready made and one must get to all areas of a site. Just saying. Yep. And yeah, we'll need that with the initial phase of construction until, you know, that Imagine Street on the west side connects down Nelson Road. We're going to need another means of secondary access for emergency vehicles. And, you know, every trail in Longmont can pretty much function for emergency access in a pinch. So, you know, it's not ideal to send a fire truck down a bike path. But if there's an ambulance that has to get someplace, they do it all the time. Yep. Any other questions? Vice Chair Goldberg. Thanks, Chairman Pollan. Yeah, first I want to thank Chairman Highton, Chairman LaCache for their line of questioning. That was really helpful. Chairman Flegg as well. But suspect my fellow commissioners will guess where I'm headed with this, which is that I just think this is a really neat project and a really neat use of the land that we're, you know, I think we're fortunate as a city to have this kind of innovative project put before us. We see a lot of applications, a lot of projects, and they're not all this well thought out. They're not all tying in partnerships with NREL or RMI. They're not all as focused on sustainability. And so there's a lot of really strong attributes to this application that are really desirable. You know, I don't think we need to look at the review criteria too deep, but Brian Schumacher did a fine job on his presentation reviewing, you know, each of the review criteria. So I feel confident that they've met the burden there. And there's a few remaining, you know, situations where they need to comply or cooperate with, you know, partners, whether it's Excel or Peckditch or FAA or, you know, comply to the, what is it? The airport influence overlay, efficient wildlife, things like that. Yeah, they have some boxes they need to check. But big picture, I think, given the way that it serves our needs, you know, mixed portfolio of housing, live workspace, you know, use of solar and innovative use around electricity. You know, there's just so many desirable components of this that I find it hard to object. I think Commissioner Hyde does a good job, you know, of checking, making sure that we're meeting the burden, you know, as far as like, are we actually, you know, are we approving projects that make, you know, that we're allowed to approve, you know, to make sure we're not, you know, missing the mark. But my two cents is that this is really neat and well presented and I'm favorable to, I'm curious to hear about the rest of the commissioners. Thank you. Any other comments? I'd like to comment at this time. I think the first go around, I did have a concern about the building heights in closeness to the proximity of the airport in rereading the FAA notes regarding this and the fact that they have currently found that there is no hazard to air navigation, even though I still question putting up four story buildings so close to the airport, I do trust the FAA's discretion on this. And so, and given what the other commissioners have already said it is a very good project, I like the use for it. I like the fact that they have partnered with the NREL and with the Rocky Mountain Group on this. So I am also in favor of this. Are there any commissioners or vice chair Goldberg? Yeah, thanks. I did want to leave in for Barb. We definitely have spent a considerable amount of time about secondary uses and whether the square footage or footprint meets the birth. So I appreciate you staying tuned and tracking. But yeah, I guess with that feedback from the chairman and the rest of the commission, I'd be inclined to recommend approval of PZR 2022-1A, the first project of the year. Do we have a motion to approve PZR 2022-1A? Do we have a second? Commissioner Lupach. Thank you, Chairman Poland. I agree with the vice chair Goldberg and this looks like a really neat project. And I think with the city's goal of renewable energy and being carbon free by, I don't know, 2030, 2040 and the sustainability plan that we reviewed just months ago, well, last year sometime. I second the motion to approve this project. We have a motion, we have a second. Or is there any other further discussion? Further comments? If not, Jane, can we go ahead and do a real call vote on this then? Absolutely. Chairman Poland. Yes. Commissioner Flag. Aye. Commissioner Goldberg. Aye. Commissioner Haidt. Aye. Commissioner Lukocz. Aye. Commissioner Teta. Aye. Commissioner Boone. Aye. Chairman, that vote is seven to zero. Thank you very much. That has been approved. I will now read the appeal process announcement. This item now enters a seven day appeal period. During this time, any agreeing party may appeal the commission's decision by submitting a written appeal letter stating why the planning and zoning commission's decision should be amended or reversed by city council. All appeals must be in writing and must be received in the city clerk's office and the planning office within the seven day appeal period. The appeal period begins Thursday, January 20th at 8 a.m. And it ends Wednesday, January 26th at 5 p.m. Thank you, Barb, and thank you, Derek, for the presentation. Thank you, Brian, and the rest of the group with the city for your part of the presentation. Thank you all. Thank you, everyone. Thanks, everybody. Thank you. Okay, that was our public hearing item. We do have two other items of business. They are listed under other business. Item number eight is the steam and sugar mill presentation. Erin Fosdick, principal planner. Oh, I should ask, do we want to keep going or does anybody need a break at this point? Looks like everybody's okay. We'll keep going, Erin. Go ahead with your presentation. Thank you, Chairman Pollan, members of the commission. My name's Erin Fosdick and I'm a principal planner with the City of Longmont. Really nice to see some of you for the first time in a while. Happy New Year. I'm joined tonight by Glenvend and Wigan, planning director, Tony Chacon, redevelopment manager, and Hannah Mulroy. I think may or may not be on the call. Looks like she's still on the call. These folks are working closely with me on the sugar mill and steam project that we wanted to give you an update tonight on. Dallas, if I could have you pull up our presentation. I have the presentation pulled up on my other screen, but then realized you guys aren't actually looking at said screen. So give me just a second while we start that. Great, and if you could just go right to the next slide, Dallas. I'll mention as we're switching slides, we're working with a really great consultant team led by Stan Tech. They're obviously not here. You're stuck with us tonight, but rest assured, they've helped us put together this presentation. We gave council a version of this back in December, but felt it was really important to share some information with the commission. So we just wanted to show you their faces. They will likely be joining us at a future meeting to talk with you. And we have some more substantive discussion, alternatives to talk through, but our project manager is Rhonda Nancy is our principal urban designer. And then we have a great team with Trestle strategy led by Danica Powell, who's helping us with our engagement and David Starnes, which many of you know, who's helping with our market strategy and he's with Sivastruct. So we were working closely with these folks. And again, as I mentioned, have a number of staff people that I'll be drawing on if you have hard questions for me tonight. And with that, we'll go to the next slide, please Dallas. So we started this sub area plan late last year. And we are really excited to do a detailed sub area plan for about 250 acres in Southeast Longmont. And you can see our project area outlined here in pink. It's a unique sub area in that it's really comprised of kind of two distinct areas, but I do want to take a minute to note that we think it's important to plan for both of these areas cohesively, although that it's likely the resulting sub area plan will have, you know, special character districts or different nodes that may have different treatments. But there are some opportunities which we'll talk about tonight, which do span the study area. And so that's why we've chosen to look at it as one. This study will really focus on a number of things. Obviously we're gonna be looking at opportunities and challenges within the sub area. And there's a number of different things that we'll be building on which we'll talk about here in just a second. We'll be looking at urban design for this area. It's a tremendous opportunity, you know, to look at areas south of downtown, to look at areas around the sugar mill, which we've talked about with this group. We're gonna be focused on multimodal connections. So how do we connect not only within this site, but to the rest of Longmont and frankly to the broader region? We'll also be looking at phasing public and private infrastructure, utilities and investment. There's a lot of development interests which you'll see here in just a second. And we really think it's important to understand what the role of the public and private sectors are to support that development and really help us achieve our community vision. If you go to the next slide, please Dallas. We've developed a number of high level goals. Again, based on some of the existing planning guidance and early conversations with council in the community and you can see those five goals here. This is sort of a highlight. We think housing is really important. We know that this continues to be an ongoing conversation in Longmont. So we're really interested in how can we encourage meaningful housing options with a range of types and price points. And this would include affordable and attainable housing, ownership housing, rental housing. So we really want to look at all options. Again, transportation comes up here. I mentioned we want to look at both regional and local connections. And again for all modes of transportation. There's a lot of development interests. And so we want to make sure that there's kind of a cohesive development strategy and connectivity between parcels within the study area but also to the broader community. There's a real opportunity here to build community in a place and so we want to think about how can we incentivize and encourage arts facilities, community hubs, creativity, innovation. And then finally, sustainability. There's an opportunity to really weave sustainability and resilience throughout this sub area plan. Building on the work that we've done with Envision Longmont and the sustainability plan but really thinking about what should our long-term efforts be in this sub area around sustainable buildings, sustainable development practices, green infrastructure. And so that's a focus of this plan. Next slide, please. As I mentioned, we're not starting from scratch and this is not news to any of you. You've worked with us, many of you for a lot of years and are familiar with a lot of these documents. These are really the documents that we've provided to our consultant team to help establish that foundation for this planning effort. Many of you may be aware that the city has engaged in some feasibility studies for arts and cultural centers. This goes along with the building steam visioning process that was really initiated by council a couple years ago. And that study is ongoing. If you have questions about that, Tony and Glenn can certainly elaborate. Many of you also know that we conducted an Urban Land Institute Technical Advisory Panel or TAP in 2020. We obviously did this virtually, but we had a panel of diverse real estate professionals that gave us some great feedback on the sugar mill site itself. And so one of their recommendations was to conduct more detailed sub area planning. And that's why we're here tonight. Obviously, many of you were involved in the main street corridor plan. You participated in the Envision Longmont multimodal and comprehensive planning process. And some of you may even remember back in 2012 when we did the first in main revitalization plan that really created that strategy for our TOD site at first in main. So these are sort of the main documents that we're building on. We're trying to take high level guidance here, listen to what we heard from the community, kind of vet that and build on these previous efforts. Next slide, please. Just to kind of go into a little more detail on the ULI TAP and the STEAM visioning process to refresh your memory. This document is available online and I believe I provided a link to you. Again, some really great recommendations from regional development and kind of economic development professionals centered on really five high level recommendations around site remediation, master planning the site. Using this as an opportunity to create an agarhub, so recognizing Longmont's agricultural history and how we might be able to capitalize on that. Thinking about developing this as a pioneering example of a sustainable community. And I think that fits in really well with the presentation that we just heard. And then obviously really important thinking about financial strategies that we might use to not only redevelop the site but also to assist with some of the cleanup. And so you can see the key takeaway here, that the panel came up with. I'm not going to go through those. You can certainly read the report. But this is sort of a basis for us as we start thinking about the sugar mill. There's a few developers that are interested in this area and we've been able to pick their brains and work closely with them. And so I think this was a really great document to start getting people thinking a little bit more seriously about the sugar mill, which we've all been talking about in Longmont for a long time. Next slide, please. In addition to the TAP that was conducted around the sugar mill, so kind of on the east end of the study area, we also engaged with the community and this was really led by city council and the city manager's office initially on high level visioning for what was termed the steam area. And so this is really the western side of the study area. Some of you may have participated in that. Certainly I know council member Rodriguez is highly aware of this. There was some massing and building plans that were developed sort of to test what could be along that portion of the steam area, which again runs sort of east of Main Street, north of Boston, south of First Avenue. And so seven narratives were developed by a number of community members and city council around transportation, kind of building and design, businesses, land use, arts and culture, the natural environment and education. And so we're really taking a look, a deep dive into those notes and what was created as part of that vision to sort of build on that and think about how can we move that to the next level. So that's been incredibly helpful work for us as well. And those documents reside on engaged long months. So if you're interested in what that advice, there was three advisory panel meetings. If you're interested in more detail, I would encourage you to take a look at the link in your packet or we can also provide some more information tonight. Next slide, please. So we're going to go through a couple maps and I do want to note these are still in draft form, meaning staff hasn't gone through these with a fine tooth comb that we will go through them with prior to putting them into a final report, but it's just illustrative of sort of the existing conditions that exist in the study area. And so this is obviously a parcel map and you can see there's over 60 different property owners here and certainly in the steam area in the downtown area south of Third Avenue, lots of small properties, lots of different ownerships as you move further west, fewer owners, but still a pretty diverse set of ownership. And so we've been reaching out to property owners. We did a mailing, we've been meeting, we did a couple of virtual meetings with property owners and interested developers in this area to sort of ask them what their vision was, what their plans for their property are. And so really trying to engage folks that own property in this area and you can see there are a number of them. Next slide. As we think a little bit about zoning, the western portion of the study area is largely zoned mixed use downtown. There's a little bit of public as well. As you move further east on the east side of Martin, it's important to note that there's a fair amount of the study area that's not actually annexed to the city. So it is in the LPA in the Longmont planning area, meaning again, we fully intend that at some point it would annex to the city, but it hasn't happened yet. And so that's why it doesn't have zoning obviously. If you look at the Envision Longmont future land use map, you will see that the majority of this area is designated for mixed use employment with a small area around the historic sugar mill itself designated as neighborhood center. We would anticipate that as a result of the subarea plan, we will want to have a conversation about what appropriate land use and zoning looks like, especially following up on the discussion we've been having with the commission about secondary uses. I mentioned, for example, that housing is a goal. We know that there's some desire to do different types of cultural and innovative facilities. Those may be secondary uses today. And so we want to make sure that we have a plan that as developers come in, we're able to support, we're able to move them forward in an appropriate process. So that'll likely be something we look at through this subarea planning process. So sort of stay tuned for those discussions. Next slide, please. I think you'll see when we talk about opportunities that access to open space is a real opportunity. There's also some challenges based on location of the rail, of the river and crossings. But you can see here that there's a really great spine of parks and open spaces, nature areas along the southern area of this project area. And so we're really excited about that. It provides an amazing amenity for the project area. Many of us already know that this is an amenity because we spend time there today, but you can see there's some more passive open space. We have the relatively new Dickens Farm Nature area that's a real community jewel, as well as an extensive trail system right in proximity to this project area. Next slide, please. Our street network, you'll see a theme as I go through the next set of transportation slides. The western area has a little bit more connectivity and porosity of streets. As we move east, it's a little bit more limited. So that's obviously something we'll be looking at. You can see here the signalized intersections, how the project area is accessed, and then really what the types of streets that serve this study area are all the way from arterial roadways down to our local network. And again, pretty robust in the western portion, although there are some areas that we know we need to improve connectivity. And so that's obviously one of our big goals. But that's even more true as we move east. Next slide, please, Dallas. If we shift a little bit and look at pedestrian access, not super different from what we just saw with streets. There's a pretty good network of sidewalks, side paths and trails in proximity to the western portion of the study area. It's quite a bit more limited as we move to the eastern section. And so in terms of place making and providing opportunities for folks, this is something we're really going to need to take a look at. And so we're working closely with our transportation planning and public works engineering folks. And we will be working with the community extensively to make sure we get a network that serves not only vehicles. You saw on that previous map, there's vehicular access, but we also want to make sure that we're providing access for pedestrians and bikes. And so that'll be something that we really spend a lot of time when we're doing our connectivity analysis. And if you go to the next slide, Dallas, you'll see that there's similar opportunities for increasing connections with bike infrastructure. Obviously we've got a pretty good connection down Martin, but there's not a lot of east-west connectivity, if any, really through the site. And so this is something that we've heard is going to be important for the study area, but there's also some real opportunities to connect the established neighborhoods to the north, to connect to the existing core of downtown. And then also to connect to the Mill Village neighborhood to the southeast. And we know there's a real need and a real opportunity to better integrate that neighborhood into the fabric of Longmont. So we think from a bike and ped standpoint, that'll be a real focus of this project. Next slide. Transit access, similar story. Obviously on the western side of the project area, we have quite a few local routes that serve the study area. Third Avenue does have some local routes as well. And then obviously as the first in main transit station gets developed, we'll have even more robust transit access, but figuring out what that access looks like into the eastern portion of the study area will be something we take a look at. And so that's again something that's going to be important, particularly if residential uses and employment uses are included in this portion of the study area. We want to make sure that it's served by all modes. Next slide, please. Another item that we're looking at related to transportation is railroads. Obviously there are a number of railroads here. The city has been doing some projects to improve crossings. You've probably seen the one at Emory and 1st Avenue. They did a great job with that first stage of a quiet zone, but there's a number of other crossings in and adjacent to the study area that we're studying. And our consultant team has some questions on what does it really mean to relocate a crossing? Can they be reconfigured to maybe be a little bit more easily crossable? The railroad is sometimes can be a challenge to work with in terms of new crossings. And so obviously our transportation folks are working closely with our consultant team to figure out what options are because it is going to influence how we connect other modes into and throughout the study area. Next slide, please. So I just want to take a minute to sort of orient you, and this is not news to you because you've seen some of these projects, but there is an incredible amount of development interest in and around the project area. And so we've had a couple of pre-apps within the study area itself in the last year or two. We have more scheduled. There's certainly some challenges from a timing standpoint in terms of properties that aren't annexed to the city, properties that still have some cleanup issues or floodplain issues. And we'll talk a little bit more about that. But certainly there are some developments underway again in an adjacent to the study area. And so you can see there's a number of multifamily and mixed use developments, particularly in the more western area. And then there's obviously development that's occurring out around the hospital with the residential that's being constructed, residential to the southeast near Mill Village, as well as the Costco and associated Erwin Thomas applications to the south. And so we're taking a look at, you know, how that's going to change the climate in and around the study area and trying to make sure, again, that we're making sure the development is integrated and planned well so that it serves the overall vision for the subarea plan. Next slide, please. So talking a little bit about the opportunities for the site, some of this I've mentioned, I'll just highlight quickly. We're in a great position because we're not starting from scratch. We've had a lot of community conversations. We've had direction from the community and from council and planning commission has weighed in on a number of these. And so we're able to really mine that existing work and use that as a basis and figure out how we build on that. And so again, these are the things that we'll be really taking a look at. There's also incredible opportunities from a location standpoint. The site sits in the middle of Longmont. It's an amazing opportunity to connect portions of Longmont that might not be well connected now. There's, you know, really if you come into Longmont from the east, this is the site that you see, right? It's got incredible views. It's got incredible gateway potential from a historic standpoint. You know, the sugar mill is something that people really identify as Longmont. So there's a lot of visual cues there. And I honestly think there's some real opportunities for including diverse housing in the center of Longmont. I've mentioned the open space access, access to the greenway and the river, access to open space amenities. This is also going to potentially increase as some of that mining and reclamation work goes on south of the site. So additional opportunities for open space connections. And then we also think there's some opportunities to pilot concepts and show best management practices on the site in particular with complete streets. One of the things that the consultant team has, has posed and we haven't really done a lot of analysis yet, but looking at Third Avenue as a complete street and could, could the nature of third change to really create more connectivity to the neighborhoods to the north. One of the items that we'll be looking closely at is green infrastructure and how can we really come up with regional drainage, drainage solutions that will allow us to do more of an urban infill redevelopment project that isn't sort of held hostage by individual drainage requirements. And so we're, we're excited to take a look at green infrastructure, low impact development. And then again, you know, there's a lot of amenities in and adjacent to the site. So how can we build on those assets? Next slide, please. There are also some challenges and we've talked about a few of these access obviously continues to be a challenge. There's limited signalization and certainly the site is surrounded by arterials, which have, you know, their own access and signal requirements. As you may recall, Pace Avenue is there's an extension currently shown on our comprehensive plan, but because of the grade changes in the, you know, nature of, of that roadway, we don't actually think that's probably the best option. And so thinking about what, what might be a better option. There's also some safety challenges, you know, there have been crashes on certainly on East Kimpratt Boulevard, serious injury crashes. And so we really want to take a look at that, you know, people, people do need to cross that street. And so how can we do that safely there and in other locations? And then of course I've mentioned how do we connect these two sites, both within themselves and to broader Longmont. I've mentioned the railroad crossings, that's something we're going to need to continue to look at open spaces and amenity, but there's also rail that's prohibiting access to much of the river. And so how can we work around that? And then certainly there's some environmental constraints. Phase two sampling has been complete. The phase two is not entirely complete yet, but Tony has been working closely with the stand tech team and has submitted a grant application to help plan for some of that brownfields cleanup. And then there's some significant floodplain issues. Obviously the city continues to work on the resilient St. Rain project. And ultimately much of this area will not be encumbered by floodplain, but there are still some floodplain issues that are impacting development in this area. And so as we continue to work through the FEMA process and through that rebuilding process all the way upstream, that is a potential challenge with the study area. Next slide please. I'm going to take just a second to go through some of the market observations and this is work that Sivastruct did for us. And it's really informing what the possibilities are for the study area and what those highest and best uses could be. Obviously this isn't going to be real news to you because we've talked about this with the commission quite a bit, but there's demographic shifts that are underway, not only in Longmont and across Colorado, but frankly in the nation as a whole. We're aging as a society and our household composition is really changing. And so this is having a significant impact on our housing demand going forward. Preferences are changing. And so that's why we really see opportunities for more diverse and missing middle housing. The share of households without children are really gaining in terms of their overall share. And that is certainly true in along the front range. You can see some of these statistics here that more than half of all household growth will be headed by older adults. A lot of that housing growth is happening in more non-traditional households, so to speak. And this is really helping us figure out what we have in terms of our existing stock and then what we need to have in order to balance that. There's also decelerating growth again nationwide. Fewer births overall. The birth rate is declining. And then there's also slower migration. And so we are watching this to see what impacts that has for Longmont. I know it doesn't seem probably to a lot of people like we're having slowing growth, but if you look at our growth rates over the past several years, this is a trend we're watching. Next slide, please. In terms of the economy, you know, COVID has disrupted many, many things in the nation and in the world, frankly. And the economy is no different. David did find that there is recovery obviously going on, but there's still some challenges that are threatening sort of that recovery. Not the least of which are labor shortages, supply chain issues, inflation. And so as we look forward and look at this study area, we think that there's still some possibilities for major growth. And Longmont is well positioned because we do have concentration in some of these target industries that have been doing well, such as manufacturing data by a pharmaceuticals warehouse storage. And so, you know, Longmont is well positioned to continue to capture growth. It is interesting as we look at that growth, Longmont seems to be growing households faster than we're growing housing units. And so that means we don't necessarily have enough housing units to accommodate the people that are coming out of those. So, you know, households are people that live in houses. And you can see here that we have a ratio is a little bit different. And it's off from what it was historically. So this is not a problem unique to Longmont. You can see the Colorado average is what our average is now, which is about 1.1. So that to me says, you know, we need to add households to accommodate the folks that are here already. Next slide, please. I think this is the final market slide. And this is really, again, thinking more about housing and how we mix housing types, 10 year options need to figure out what those opportunities are going to be in this study area. I think David has indicated the study area is positioned to be able to capture somewhere in the range of like 500 to 2,500 households over its build out period. And those would really not probably not be single family detached home. Obviously the land use that's designated now wouldn't support that. And again, based on what we just heard, probably not the highest and best use there, really focused on more missing middle and thinking about diversified housing stock. So that could be single family attached housing, triplexes, fourplexes, multifamily, maybe some smaller lot, you know, cottage type housing, not really sure we'll continue. Obviously to look at that. Affordability continues to be on everyone's mind. And we know that's important to city council. So thinking about big A affordable housing as well as attainable housing and how can the study area help Longmont meet some of our community wide goals. And then obviously one thing that council brought up that we think is incredibly important as well as trying to find that right balance between housing ownership and rental housing. So thinking about the growing demand for different types of housing based on the demographic shifts we're seeing and and trying to ensure that our market is in the right balance between housing ownership and rental housing. So that's what we're seeing and trying to ensure that our market is responding adequately. Again, with those, with those demographic shifts. Next slide, please. Oh, sorry, you did, you did change the slide. I'm not paying attention. Sorry, Dallas. This is the last market observation slide. So when David looks at our real estate market, I think other uses that are not residential. There's a lot of demand for industrial. We're seeing a lot of demand for industrial and industrial shareholder markets and other markets that we're seeing a lot of demand for. But in terms of the vacancy and there's some opportunities that Longmont is well positioned to capture in turn, in terms of e-commerce, flex space, research and development. Modern tech oriented space. Again, I think some of this, we saw in our last presentation. We tend to be continued to be a destination from spillover from Boulder, which is even higher cost than from anywhere that the pandemic has showed us. Longmont is really well positioned for this. A lot of people talk about the rise of the small and mid-sized city. We have a lot of amenities and the study area, frankly has a lot of amenities with a great downtown, good multimodal transportation. And so Longmont is well positioned to continue to attract folks. Retail, I think there's still a lot, a changing environment, some opportunities for Longmont in terms of micro-fulfillment, experiential retail. We've talked a little bit in the TAP report about agri-hub and food and beverage type businesses that this study area could be really well positioned to capture. Next slide, please, Dallas. And so I'll sort of close out here, just talking a little bit about community and stakeholder outreach. Obviously, as you know, getting input from the community is critical to any good planning process. And so we really wanna work with our consultant team to develop a good understanding of what the community's needs and desires are and build on the efforts that are already underway. So we have a lot of great information, but we really wanna check that, make sure it's still valid and then make sure that we bring new voices to the table. So we wanna engage all stakeholders, and that would be residents, property owners, interested developers, businesses, folks throughout the community that we work with to incorporate all those community voices. And so we'll be continuing to collect input and utilizing that to shape our final plan. We'll be doing that in a number of ways. And if you could go to the next slide, Dallas. Obviously, you know, November and December aren't ideal months to do engagement, particularly when we're in a pandemic. So we had a few challenges. We really focused in the latter part of the year on raising project awareness and getting the word out. So we did some publications. We had some information at Longmont Lights, set up our website and engaged Longmont. And now we're really starting to get out into the community. So I would encourage you to visit our site on Engaged Longmont. We're trying to do some surveying, some polling, provide information to folks. We're right now visiting with city boards and commissions. Obviously I'm here talking to you tonight. We've met with the Transportation Advisory Board and the Sustainability Advisory Board. We'll be meeting with a number of other folks. We do plan to continue to engage council in this work to make sure we're meeting their needs as well. We do plan on doing some more general outreach. We've had some interest from specific groups focused around environmental and sustainability issues and housing. And so we're trying to figure out how we can engage them probably virtually, frankly, at this point still. But we do hope to do some in-person outreach potentially in the classroom, working with Growing Up Boulder and young students to think about what are their ideas, for example, for adaptive reuse and community space. We may be able to partner with the Downtown Development Authority at a Main Street event that's outdoors. And so we're trying to kind of figure out how we adapt in this strange time to make sure we're getting all community voices heard. Next slide. We do have, as I mentioned, a website. We do have a page on Envision Longmont. So please check that out. We have a survey out right now that's just asking how people might prioritize ways to meet the project goals. And so we've been getting some great responses there. We'll be out in the community doing virtual presentations. And so if you have folks that you think we ought to talk to, please let us know. We would anticipate likely coming back to Planning Commission when we have some alternatives, a preferred alternative. And certainly we anticipate coming to this group for a recommendation prior to taking a final draft to City Council, which would likely be sometime late spring early summer. Next slide, please, Dallas. And with that, I would be happy to take questions or comments. And likely what I'll do with any commentary you have is provide that to the consultant team and then get feedback that way from them. So I'm here to answer questions. As I mentioned, Glenn, Tony, and Hannah are also here. And we will do our best to answer whatever it is that you'd like to throw at us. I appreciate your time. Thank you very much, Erin. So do we have any questions from the commission? Any questions, comments? Vice Chair Goldberg. Thanks, Chairman. Hey, Erin, good to see you again. It's been a hot minute. Thank you for that presentation, as always, whenever you're presenting to us, my mind explodes. It's comforting to know that we're in good hands and scary to see what's coming down the pipeline. But it's all good for sure. I have a very simple question that you may not need to flip to the consulting agency. I wonder if you know it off the top of your head. There was our last project that we were discussing, our last agenda item, laid out, for example, a mixture of uses. 50% light industrial, 12% commercial, and 38% residential. I wonder, do we have a sweet spot? You're one of your slides highlighted, and you recurrent theme about the need for housing, need for housing, need for housing, affordable and attainable. So there's this prioritization for housing. And you mentioned some of the demographics around the aging community and what have you. But also there is an increased demand for industrial and commercial space in town as we become a cooler place to live. Thanks to everyone's hard work here. So is there a sweet spot? Like should we be rezoning or reprioritizing space that's currently zone for industrial or commercial and make that allow greater emphasis for residential? Or like where's your head at when you think about where we should be prioritizing these uses? Thanks for your question, Commissioner Goldberg. I think there probably is a sweet spot. But I think that that's also probably constantly changing. And so those of you who have been on the commission know that it does sort of seem like at points in time we're chasing the market. I recall many, many years ago there was a lot of trying to change multifamily to single family because that was really what was the hot thing at that moment. I think that's one of the things that we try to do when we're going through our comp plan update is try to take a look at our existing community profile, take a look at what some of those trends are. And we work closely with the Denver Regional Council of Governments as well as the State Demographers Office to project out what will Longmont look like in 20, 50 years? And how might that help shape what our land use needs are? And so we can do some different scenario planning. I think we've actually taken a pretty good approach in that we've tried not to be totally prescriptive in that. And I think with our last comp plan update and certainly with our code update, moving towards allowing for more mixing of uses, allowing for secondary uses helps us adapt to those changing needs. And so I guess it's obvious that our population would age because we all are going to get older. But I don't know that anyone would have necessarily been able to predict what's going on with birth rates or what's going on with immigration. And so there's different things that occur that shape what a population looks like. Certainly technology, obviously the pandemic has upended our need for retail and office space in the way that we've historically had it. And so yes, there probably is a sweet spot. Will any community ever get that 100% right? Probably not, but I think that's why we try to have some flexibility both in our plans and in our code to accommodate that for that. And then we sort of can do those double checks when we do scenario planning, for example with a comp plan update. I think with this plan, we'll take a look at some different scenarios and say, so say for example, we could have an alternative that maybe is more focused on housing and a greater percentage is dedicated to housing or maybe there's an alternative that's more focused on flex office and industrial space with lesser housing and kind of test those scenarios and see maybe what seems more correct based on what we're seeing in the market study. So that's kind of what I would say it's not, it's probably not black and white. It's probably gray, right? It's, you know, try to make our best educated guests but we always are gonna get it wrong. And right. And right. I think you get it right more often than wrong. I think you appreciate the thoughtful response here. Any other questions, comments? Erin, I have one. Have you worked with any like state entities? Have they given any feedback, any suggestions? So we're actually meeting with History Colorado tomorrow. There's a lot of interest as you can imagine, not new interests. They've had interest in the sugar mill for a long time. So we'll be meeting with them. We're certainly taking a look again at the cleanup and Tony's been working closely with our consultant as well as the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment on sort of some of that Brownfields cleanup piece. And then certainly any recommendations around changes to the transportation system that would involve state highways, which I'm not saying there would be, but certainly we would work with CDOT. Well, as I mentioned, be working probably with the railroad. So there's, we'll be working with folks kind of in those more limited capacities. But certainly if you have suggestions on other folks, we've also worked with the state demographers office on sort of the regional projections for the North Front range and what Longmont and this sub area might be positioned to capture in terms of future growth. But if you have other suggestions on entities we should be working with, definitely would love to hear those. Any other questions, comments, like ones going, ah, Commissioner Lukacz. Thank you, Chairman Polin. Well, you just made me ask a question. Now, Erin, you were mentioning of other entities to ask or work with. And just to the east of the sugar mill across third, there's UC Health. It's a private entity. So I wonder if they would be interested in participating in any way into this redevelopment. Of course, they might need housing for their employees or they might participate in the Agri Hub, sponsoring or anything, doing health classes or anything. So I wonder if a private entity like UC Health would be interested or if you wanna ask them that. Yeah, that's a good suggestion. Yeah. Yeah. And I was like Costco will be across the street. So I don't know if they would have any interest. But I assume, you know, a hospital system that's focused on health might be interested in being more proactive for the community. Yeah, that's a really good suggestion. I'll think about that and then potentially reach out. I know we do have some presentations scheduled with the Longman Economic Development Partnership. And I think there's some folks that are from the hospital that are engaged there. So that might be a good in rows to sort of ask how they might wanna participate. So that's a great suggestion. Thanks for that. And of course, you know, my pet peeve is bike and pet access. And I know you guys are looking into it. So maybe down the road, if I can provide any suggestion, but it will need access, whatever we create there. Yeah, and I think you obviously have a lot of expertise in that area. You know, interestingly, there's, you know, I don't think a lot of people spend a lot of time within this site right now, but there's really some incredible spaces here. And so, you know, if you have specific ideas, if you ever wanna go out and walk the site and kind of talk about some of those ideas, I'd be happy to set something up because I think there is a lot of opportunity for better connections here. Yeah, yeah, let me know. You know, I'm available for you. And you mentioned growing up Boulder and I do know some people over there that work with students to create spaces and the built environment or recreate the environment around them. So I think that's a great idea. You can engage local students as well and see how this can be a hub for them or what would they want to see in the future? Cause they will be the adults in a couple of years. So that's a great idea. I love it. Yeah, and certainly just to clarify for other folks that may not be familiar with their work, the intent would be to engage Longmont students in the work, although the, you know, the group is called Growing Up Boulder and they did start there. They do work, you know, rarely, I think maybe internationally, but certainly in a lot of locations. And so we're really excited about that potential partnership because to your point, getting youth voices to the table is incredibly important in long range projects. Absolutely. Okay, any other questions? Looks like not. Erin, thank you and your team for the presentation. It's very exciting to see what's happening there. Looks like it's finally getting some momentum. So look forward to future announcements from you on this. Yeah, thank you so much for your time. Good to see you all. Thanks. We'll move on to the next item of business, which is item number nine, which is the electronic participation policy discussion at our last meeting. We had asked the city to come back with a red line version. I do believe there are some questions regarding that. And Glenn, who's going to be handling this from the city side? That would be me and certainly Eugene will weigh in as well. But Dallas, could you bring up the exhibit I gave you that is dated January 19th, 2022? Sure thing, just a moment. And chairman Polin and commissioners, what we've done is we provided in the packet the red line version that you reviewed on December 15th, that was the red line was improvements that commissioner height had made. And you gave us direction to basically clean it up and bring it back. So that is what this version is that was in your packet. And I tried to eliminate all the red lines so you can read it, but I wanted to highlight the areas that were changed. And at this point, the biggest addition was kind of defining what the timely notice would be. If you remember, we talked about in some cases we'll know what the delay, what the reason would be why we're meeting virtually, but then we could have acts of God or whether that might mean immediately we have to go to a virtual meeting. So I've kind of defined that. I think the commission said, if we know well ahead of time, like a pandemic should be like two weeks, we should give a notice of two weeks. So that's the first paragraph where I state that when we can, when we know, we'll provide a two week notice that we're gonna be meeting virtually. And then in other exigent cases where we don't know until the last minute, we'll provide a regular notice should be no less than 24 hours, but there are cases where we could have some flexibility there. And I think at this point there still might be some changes that we'd like to suggest and talk to the planning commission about. One of them is this 2C. And it's something that our city attorney has raised a question of all parties with a legal interest and members of the public who are testifying in a public hearing are allowed to speak. And I think we'd like to add a little bit more clarification to members of the public who are testifying in a public hearing where the planning commission is the final decision makers. So our code actually defines a difference between a public hearing where you're making a recommendation and a public hearing where you're actually the final word such as, I think the preliminary plat that you heard earlier tonight. So that's kind of the change. I think commissioner height might have some additional improvements as well and any of the commissioners might. But for the most part, from there on, it was pretty much easily just clarifying some of the ideas that was in the original policy and the additional improvements that were suggested by commissioner height. So at that, I'd be happy to answer any questions or if any of the commissioners wanna weigh in at this point and I think it's a pretty solid policy at this point, but we'll certainly listen to improvements. Thank you. So for the commission, anybody have comments, questions? I guess I did have a question on item 2G. It looks like you added and this is for the public and you added and seen to be heard and seen. Are we looking at people being able to come into this zoom meeting and actually where we would see them and rather than them calling in on their phone? I think we were really the intent was they can see us. I don't know if we ever, we thought about it as being two way. That's a good point. That might need some clarification. And I guess commissioner height, I think this was something that you were recommending is was that the intent or? It was the intent that the commission be seeing and as well in section to see all parties with legal interests members of the public who are testifying and public hearing are allowed to speak. Obviously the flip side of speaking is being heard. And so I would suggest that C include that we actually be able to or that the rest of the monitoring public can hear what these people speak to as well. But with respect to commissioner chair Poland's comment about the public being seen, that's not what we do. Nor do I believe we have the technical wherewithal or desire to allow that to happen. Okay. Yeah. Just when I read it, that's kind of how I'd read that sentence. And I think you read it correctly, but that's not the intent. Okay. Good. Any other comments, questions? So is it looking like if we maybe clean up that one, 2G and make it 2G and 2C? Yeah. Okay. We can do that and bring it back. And you can give the final okey-dokey. City Attorney Eugene May, did you have something to chime in on? Just on this point, I think getting rid of scene is the way that the city has been conducting these public hearings, I think early in the pandemic, there was concerned with video in appropriate material being shown via video. And it's a little more secure, I think if people just call in without having access to the video portion of the meetings. So I would concur with taking out the scene part for the public. I have one more comment too with respect to reasonable accommodations for part four, that will make reasonable accommodation to allow people to participate to the maximum extent. All of us on the commission, luckily are blessed with our own technology that allows us to speak and be seen. But there might come a time when there's a member that doesn't. And I don't know if the city has a policy of providing computers to anyone, just a thought. Don't know if Glenn, you have a position on that. If Eugene does, if any other staff member has any insight to that, has it ever come up? Or am I just tilting it when most? I don't know if it has come up where somebody didn't have access to the technology to participate. It's a good question. I kind of think, do we need like a kiosk or something at some point? Hopefully this is temporary and we can get back to more of a public meeting, but I don't know Eugene, has it ever come up? Has anybody asked to have access for a city provided computer? It has not come up at city council. I think there are challenges if the city is being asked to provide computers for access. I think at least for the open meetings portion, it's just to be able to be observed. And I think our live stream does that and would satisfy reasonable accommodation for the testimony, it is by telephone and we could make arrangements for reasonable accommodation like give them a call for the timing of that public hearing. And so I think we're in pretty good shape for satisfying our obligations to provide reasonable access. I will say this, Glen, when you mentioned kiosk and I know there are probably health concerns with it and maintenance concerns, but when you mentioned that, it's one of the things that I think we all have been, we have been, I know the city council have been kind of fighting with in the fact that it appears that our public participation is down from what it used to be. And I guess that's probably just because it's easy to show up, be there for the meeting and then be able to step up and talk rather than going online, having to watch, then you have to call in, then you have to figure out the technology of how you're gonna, what do you have to do to be able to be heard. I do think there, though we don't need it immediately, maybe if this keeps going for a longer period, maybe it's somehow to work out a kiosk that people can go to be able to talk to us at meetings. Something to consider. Yeah. Any other questions? Vice Chair Goldberg. Yeah, thanks, Chair. This is a matter of like protocol or process. I heard Glen suggest that he would clean it up and come back next month for final okey-dokey. I wonder if there's any way we can expedite that by saying, approving the minutes, pending final edits, negotiated by staff and commissioner Hyde or something like that. Is that feasible or is that a little nice? I think, yeah, I mean, I would be certainly comfortable. We've got it down to two points really. And I think we're all in agreement. It's just what the final words say. So, I mean, if the commission wants to direct us to make those changes and send you all a copy, then we would be certainly happy to do that versus spending more time at another meeting on it. Yeah, I think I'm happy to have helped participate in this process. The level of my involvement has been a little, has been broad and probably broader than should be. That said, I think we're down to the last two issues that director Van Nimwegen can take care of and present to us as part of our minutes package for next month and we can just approve that as opposed to me working with Glenn or others to rehash this thing, which becomes possibly a violation of open meetings issues, which we don't wanna go down that rabbit hole. So I think we just make this final minor edit and call it good and not have to have me for anybody else from the commission get involved in it further. Does that make sense? That makes sense. Do we need a motion for this? I think Janelle might have a question. I don't have a question. I agree with what you're saying, Commissioner Hyte, because yeah, let's not spend lots more time. We're there. We're there. And let's add it into the minutes. I think that's a good suggestion. So to have to say so moved. Eugene, do we need a motion for this or is it okay for the, based on a conversation here? I think an emotion would be appropriate specifying the changes to be made and that the commission would approve it subject to those changes. Mr. Hyte, would you care to go ahead and do that language for us? Certainly. I don't feel like I can. Fine. Confirming what Glenn had discussed in, so this draft January 19th, 2022 staff revisions of the electronic participation policy is approved subject to subsection two C, reading that all parties with a legal interest and members in the public were testifying in a public hearing are allowed to speak and to be heard that in subpart two G, the last sentence there of shall read at any hearing involving testimony from the public, the city shall use best efforts to provide the public a reasonable opportunity to be heard and strike and seen electronically. So in those two edits, we approve this January 19th revision version version of the electronic policy. Mr. Flagg. I would second that. Good. Okay, we have a motion and a second. Any other discussion? I guess Jane, we need to do a roll call vote on this. Absolutely. Chairman Pollan. Yes. Commissioner Flagg. Yes. Commissioner Goldberg. Aye. Commissioner Hyte. Aye. Commissioner Nucotch. Aye. Commissioner Teta. Aye. Commissioner Boone. Aye. Motion passes unanimously. Chairman Boland. Thank you very much. That closes item number nine. We move on to item number 10, which is the public final call to be heard. Can you, Dylan, can you go ahead and display the message? The information is coming. The information is being displayed on the screen for those viewing from home. Please dial 1-888-788-0099. When prompted, enter the meeting ID 820-0356-2100. When we are ready to hear public comment, we will come on, we will call on you to speak based on the last three digits of your phone number. Each speaker must state their name and address for the record. And they will be allowed five minutes to speak. Please remember to mute the live stream when you're called upon to speak. We'll now take a five minute break to allow people to call in and queue up to make comments. Chair, we're about 20 seconds out from the five minute mark. I am currently not seeing anybody in the chat right now. Thank you, Dallas. All right, that is the five minute mark. I'm going to drop the slide and still no callers. Okay, thank you. We'll then go ahead and close the public final call to be heard. We'll move on to item number 11, which is items from the commission. Anybody have anything here? Commissioner Hyde. Welcome, commissioners Lukasia Boone. Looking forward to working with you. Congratulations, Chair Pullman and Vice Chair Goldberg. I hope we have a great year. Thank you staff too for your invaluable help. I will second that. And it was a very good presentation stay from the staff and it looks like we have an exciting year coming up. So, and do we, the next item then is item number 12, which is items from Council representative, Aaron Rodriguez. Great to see you back again. Thank you all so much for your service. And congratulations to Commissioner Lukash and Commissioner Boone, as well as the new chair and vice chairs. Good work tonight. And I'll see you next time around. Thank you. And then we'll go on to item number 13. Items from planning director Glenn Vanden-Wiggin. Oh, very good. Oh, I think if you don't mind, Commissioner Boone has something to say. Just to be clear, I'm sitting still as an alternate tonight. So I don't think the regular other seat has been filled. That's correct. Maybe I can give you a quick update. So we will go back out. And I think in April, I think the council does interviews for the open position. So per the bylaws, we will just fill the open seat with the alternates as they come up, as it's described in the bylaws. The only thing I want to do is thank the commission, but I did want to mention, Susan Wolich helps us get these meetings going. I think this is her last planning commission meeting. So she's done a stellar job and not only every planning commission and city council meeting, but really helped the city pivot when we hit the pandemic and move online. So I did want to recognize what she's done to get us into the 21st century. And that's all I have, Mr. Chair. And I will second that a very big thank you to Susan for pulling all this together and guiding us through this. And with nothing else, we will stand in adjournment. Thanks Dallas for learning me too. See ya. Awesome.