 First 2020 planning and zoning commission meeting first item on our agenda is our roll call Chairman Schoenig here Commissioner height Commissioner height You know I said present but I was muted Thank you Commissioner Teta here Commissioner Poland Commissioner Goldberg Okay, that's everybody. Oh, sorry commissioner flag here commissioner honor on here Councilmember Rodriguez Okay, thank you. Um, so we had a change in our agenda Which is allowed by our bylaws in order to make the meeting more efficient We moved the left-hand brewing company your garden extension PZR 2020-4 Up to the next item. I believe one of our commissioners may need to recuse himself if you Commissioner Goldberg Thanks chairman. Oh, yeah, just due to Financial interest I have a conflict with this agenda items, so I'll need to recuse myself from this discussion and vote Okay, thank you very much for letting us know that Jane did Commissioner Lukach make it into the meeting yet No, she did not. Okay, so we'll proceed without seating another commissioner We still have a quorum with six commissioners present So I'll turn it over to principal planner Brian Schumacher to explain what's going on. Thank you commissioners I'm Brian Schumacher with city planning staff So just to give you some background regarding this item for the left hand Brewing company beer garden expansion We discovered this week that some of the information that was included in the noise impact assessment Needs to be corrected and updated to assess potential noise impacts associated with this project that said From the time that we discovered The need to make some corrections. There wasn't sufficient time to update the information allow staff Time to review and evaluate this information prior to tonight's meeting Since this is an important part of this project's evaluation the request has been made to continue this agenda item to the July meeting we did receive a letter from Left hand brewing companies representative Mary Taylor who's also at the meeting this evening if you if the commission has questions To request that this item be continued to the July meeting Okay Miss Taylor, would you mind just verbally confirming that that your your client does want to Want the continuance Yes, thank you, and I apologize if I have some background noise Yes, left hand brewing company would like to request that our item be tabled until the July hearing as Brian explained we We just had some data and I want to thank everyone that's reviewed the information so far and brought it to our attention So we really really appreciate that Okay. All right. Thank you. So just to be clear our next meeting is July 15 according to our schedule We always have an alternate date available if necessary and that would be July 22 but I don't Until we get to that point. We assume July 15. So To make this official to continue something we need a motion mission vice chair Poland Yes, I move that we move item PZR 2024 to the July 15th meeting Okay, so we have a motion to continue this item PZR 2020-4 to the July 15 meeting commissioner height I mute himself in seconds Okay, so that's a second from commissioner height Any any discussion about this from the commission seeing none. Let's take a vote Those in favor say I and raise your hand. I Okay, any opposed Okay, so Jane that is six in favor zero opposed no abstentions so this item is being continued to the July 15 meeting and Be back to my agenda here Thank you very much miss Taylor. We'll see you in July. Great. Thank you so much everybody Let me know if you have any questions in the meantime. Okay. Thanks. Thank you. Thank you commissioners Thank you, Brian. Thanks for explaining that and See you in July as well Next on our agenda is communications from planning manager Don Burchett. Good evening commissioners Thank you everybody for joining us through the virtual meeting. I just wanted to cover a few things for those people that are watching at home Hopefully this will allow them to participate from the comfort of their homes instead of here at the Civic Center anyone that wishes to speak during public invited to be heard which is items five and eight on our agenda or During any public hearing items Agenda item number seven tonight We'll need to watch the live stream of the meeting for instructions about how to call in to provide public comment at the appropriate times Instructions will be given during the meeting and displayed on the screen and I think you see an example of that right now on the screen When it's time to call in and provide your 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 are on the call When you speak and that is all that I have German Thank You Don So next item on our agenda is the public invited to be heard This is for anything that is not on the agenda tonight So if you want to speak about the Betcher annexation, which is a public hearing item You will have a public hearing section for that item on the agenda So right now we're asking people to call in if they want to be heard on anything that's not on the agenda tonight and If you do please dial 1-669-9-00-6-8-3-3 and when you're prompted enter the meeting ID of 873-4889-621-0 When we're ready to hear public comment We'll 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 we'll be allowed five minutes to speak I'll gently cut you off at the end of your five minutes Please remember to mute the live stream you're called upon to speak. We're going to take a five minute break so that our technicians Susan and Heather have a chance to bring y'all in anybody who wants to speak we'll be back in five minutes All the commissioners can mute their video and their and their mics Sheriff stop the slide however, it's still being streamed So give me just a minute and I'll let you know when it stops being displayed We have no one that is called in at this time Okay, thank you Susan. Okay Looks like no one's going to join us. So I'm gonna go ahead and lock the meeting and you can continue Okay, so we had nobody join us for the public invited to be heard We'll move to agenda item six, which is approval of our minutes from February 19 2020 Commissioner height sorry just continue to mute myself Just trolling and then I would move to approve the minutes from the February 8 12th meeting Commissioner Poland Okay, seconded to approve by Commissioner Poland all those in favor say I raise your hand Right all those opposed say no Raise your hand any abstentions Commissioner honor on okay, so Jane that is one two three four five six in Six yeses zero no's and one of tension from Commissioner owner on on the approval of our of our minutes By the way, just for the record. I want to note that Commissioner Goldberg is Basically receded Again after his recusal on the one item The next item on our agenda is the Betcher annexation zoning and concept plan Pzr 2020-3 with principal planner Eva Pehachewski Chair shernick and commissioners Eva Pehachewski planning and development services Tonight this first item is the better annexation and if It's wallet can pull up my PowerPoint slide Thank you Next slide, please So I'll start with giving you some background on the property again This is about a 10-acre property on the west side of hover It's south of 3rd Avenue and immediately south of the st. Rain Creek It's just west of Rogers Grove Park and it is east of Golden Ponds Park and lichens Gulch and At the bottom there. You'll see Rogers Road. I'm sorry. I don't have the screen so I can't Use my arrow. So at the bottom is at the south of it is Rogers Road as you can see there Those are Golden Ponds there this parcel in the red rectangle Oh, there we go This parcel is in the red rectangle is zoned agricultural and Boulder County currently and these properties just south of it are also in the county in Envision Longmont We designate this parcel as mixed-use employment in this general area Now to the property to properties again to the south and west of this property are also Unincorporated properties in Boulder County. We're all zoned agricultural But all of these properties are designated as mixed-use employment or mixed-use neighborhood Just to the west on the Envision Longmont plan And then just to the north of this red rectangle It by the st. Rain Creek that is annexed. That is city property in his own Next slide please So this is the applicants concept plan. I was very generalized at this point They do not have a site specific development in mind currently and so they're asking for Use employment zoning which is consistent with a Envision Longmont plan And you allow there's many allowable uses, but generally it's for sort of manufacturing office Flex office. You can have some commercial You can't have some live work secondary Apartments as a secondary use or hotels as a secondary use and at this time there is no specific Site development plan if if the property were annexed it that would have to come back through our system But as you can see on the very on the left side, which is the west side of the property where I have the circle there with the arrow The concept plan does show that at time of development They'll provide a pedestrian access to the st. Rain Green Greenway where that Red circle is with the arrow And then if you look down to the south You'll see two red circles. These would be future via vehicular access points again, we We don't recommend we don't we don't allow vehicular access from an arterial road and hover street is an arterial road now granted These are old properties in the county. So they do have driveways there right now As you can see on the south The very bottom there's a road that runs east west That's a platted road to Boulder County with a previous plat in the county and that's platted right of way So we anticipate if they were ever to develop in the future They would have to lose all their driveways from hover and come into this road here And then that's where they would take they would actually have to improve it into a public street and then take their access there Um So the concept plan does have the access points the pedestrian access and then in the general notes And they're at the bottom left with the red arrow. I apologize But I know you do have it in your packet where you could blow it up on your screen But in the general notes, it does talk about how any future development would need to meet City standards including any utility design. And so they put that in there Uh next slide, please Um, and so I'm just gonna put in a couple slides about the background of the property and then barb brunk from resource conservation partners Is representing the property owner and she will Discuss more detail about the review criteria. I'm just sort of giving you the background The one big thing about this property is it is located within the 100 year floodplain Um, the city has the resilient st. Rain project as you know Along the st. Rain Creek But it's only funded up to isaac walton pond, which is off sunset street Which is if you're looking at this aerial map It's way to the right because this is over here on the right side And so we do have plans prepared up to airport road, but right now we're only funded To suns to isaac walton pond essentially and so if this property were annexed The property owner would be responsible to take care of this floodplain situation and Build the site to get it above the 100 year elevation um And so I do have with us tonight if you do have questions about the floodplain issues We have monica bordellini. She's our floodplain manager from public works She's here with us tonight. Uh, we also have chris huffer from public works. He's the engineering administrator Also can answer questions about utilities and roads And so, you know, this property does have some development challenges and that's why they don't have a site specific plan Um, but again, you know in terms of the review criteria, it's in our municipal service area It's surrounded by other areas that have been annexed up and downstream Part of a larger area along the creek corridor That has not been annexed but somewhat kind of in the middle of a bigger area of properties It have been And so it's sort of in our interest to be able to responsibly regulate development in the floodplain along the creek It's critical to the goal of the city's floodplain management regulations next slide And so a couple other background notes. Um, again, this because of the adjacency to st Rain Creek as you can see here in this slide You know, if they were to develop and this, uh, yellow rectangle sort of delineates the property line boundaries The property owner would be required to provide 100 foot building and parking setback from the edge of the riparian area This area in green here sort of denotes where that 150 foot setback would lie. We did a GIS map there And so that's something they're going to have to work through and consider if they do decide to develop the property Um Species and habitat they did submit a species and habitat report It was stated that there was no federal or state protected habitat or plants there The creek might provide habitat for the prepples jumping mouse There are some eagles I think to the west, but they have no habitat at this location There's no nests here that the report could find um, and our natural resources staff noted Wasn't in that report, but um, they identified an active red tailed hawk nest here And so, you know at time of development and again, we didn't add this as a recommended condition To council because this is all something that would be required anyway If a development application were to come in we would ask them to do a fully fresh Species and habitat report And so at that time, um, they they would have to coordinate with fish and wildlife service Colorado parks and wildlife and those agencies And and address the red tailed hawk nest, but again that appears to be probably a few years down the line Next slide, please Um on the environmental background, it's in your packet. There was a phase one environmental site assessment Um, they found no evidence of recognized environmental conditions. Um, this property has historically been used for agricultural Um, they did note in the report um, because I know that we did get a public comment in yesterday about it They said that there was a vehicle maintenance garage in there And if you look in the report, it was essentially full of tractors So when they say that it doesn't mean it was a commercial garage It just meant it was, you know for the occasional use of fixing tractors The report did say that there were some I don't think they were empty. They were there were some drums of oil things of that nature But it's um, it said that they were empty in the report Um, and so the only other items that were of note were, you know, gas cans and oil cans that you would use when you're changing oil for the tractors Uh, in terms of traffic, um, a traffic study was done for this Uh, just at, you know, just imagining the worst-case scenario They put out a potential of a hundred thousand square feet of warehouse light industrial and flex office on this property And then uh, that, uh, led them to feel that there was be approximately 664 weekday trips if it were fully built out Uh, the report said that the traffic would not change traffic from this property wouldn't change the level of service At the intersection of hoover and rogers rogers slash boston It's currently at a b in the am and c in the pm level of service Um, and at hoover and third it's currently at b in the morning and e in the evening Uh, and level of service that is and so, um, the report says traffic at hoover and third is expected to be level of service F in the in the pm peak hours by 2040 But it said it was with or without this development. So regardless of whether this went through or not That that was going to be the level of service Um, traffic mitigation if this property were to be developed may include a northbound left turn lane from hoover into the property And then if you're coming out of the site on that road on the south Installation of a stop sign as you're approaching hoover But again, we would we would require a detailed traffic study When there's a specific development application so that they can evaluate a specific project and then we can Look at what traffic mitigation alternatives They'll need to do Next slide, please And so in terms of community input, uh, we did a neighborhood meeting in october 2018 There were questions about the size and the location of the future utility connections Uh, there was some discussion about the lichens gulch capital improvement project. That's just west of this property And the related platted road west of this property. There is a I apologize on the concept plan There's a platted north south road on the western boundary of this property in addition to the east west road Um, and then there were questions regarding the status of the resilient st Brain project and how that has improved impacts from the 2013 flood Um in your packet, um, I provided I only received one letter during the review process Uh, and that was from a adjacent property owner Who stated they were opposed to the sanic station because there was a lack of a detailed site development plan I know we uh, I and the applicant's representative had some conversations with that individual about Why they weren't doing a site project right now and the the floodplain challenges And then we got a letter last night from a concerned member. Um, and I believe jane forwarded that to you And I think she essentially also was opposed It also because of a lack of the detailed site plan and some concerns about the phase one and and Thought maybe there needed to be soils samples I'm not sure if they fully understood that this wasn't a commercial garage and a question about whether um, you could Prohibit them from getting a variance to the 150 foot riparian setback And I would defer that to the city attorney staff next slide And so as far as recommendation staffs recommending pz resolution 2023 a There were no conditions that we could Think of to recommend to you that would mitigate anything here Other than you know, it's in a floodplain and that did need to be conditioned That's just something that needs to be dealt with And so our next steps will we're working through an annexation agreement draft among our staff And we'll have it to the city attorney's office soon and then it would go to the property owner And once we work through the agreement, uh, we'll schedule some city council dates. Those are still to be determined And with that, um, I will turn it over to barb brunk from resource conservation partners Uh, who's a representative for the property owner? And then if you have questions for myself or for monica bordellini our floodplain manager or for chris huffer and engineering Uh, we're welcome. You're welcome to ask any questions. Thank you Thank you ava. So let's go to the applicant's presentation Good morning. Good afternoon chair barb brunk resource conservation partners Uh, p.l. Box 15 22 longmont colorado. I'm here on behalf of the applicant Um, I also have a presentation if susan could put up the slides Sure, just wanted to make sure we saw your camera first Yeah, I'm here. Thank you and thank you for being here everybody and thank you for Facilitating this kind of a conversation. It's appreciated So, you know, a kind of talked about this. This is a annexation of about 10 acres it's Right there on the concept plan you can see where it's located in in the context of hoover and rogers rhod and third avenue adjacent to the creek The property owners are bill betcher Doug indonna staver corky rally and 201 south hoover llc, which is a Group of the betcher family and same as the applicant And the applicant's goal for this property is to annex the property and petition it for future development within the city Um, there's been a couple of kind of questions about why isn't there any detail? These guys are not land developers Someone else is going to be the land developer and they think it's in the best interest of both them and the city This property is within the city's jurisdiction And that it gets developed some other time Inside the city limits Next slide Okay, again Our requested zoning is mixed use employment That red line on the map shows the continuity to the existing city limits. We meet the standard The total perimeter is 32 85.62 feet 16 required is 57 Sorry, 54 7.6 And the perimeter contiguous is 1633.56 About nine of these acres belong to the applicants and there's a 1.5 acres of platted right-of-way And really the concept plan is to make a basic framework As a mixed use employment in compliance with all the city standards Including floodplain and riparian protection next slide This property is kind of an enclave and ava kind of talked about that on this is the city's annexation map And you can see pretty much all around it is annexed And this is really one of the last pieces along the creek through this reach That is not inside the city's jurisdiction. So Annexation of this property will give the city control of this piece of the river corridor As they move forward with resilient st. Brain and allow the applicants to develop someday in the future Next slide This is just an aerial of what's happening on the property and you can kind of see the farm buildings and the there's one existing house and then there's a bunch of Loafing sheds that shop that they work contractors in a little bit of farm storage stuff And it's it's currently used as a house and agricultural There are cattle out there. There's sometimes there are beehives out there. It's that kind of a Almost craft kind of agriculture that the applicants do on the property And they would continue that use until it develops in the future Next slide This is how it fits into envision longmont and you can see that little red rectangle is the Property it's designated as mixed-use employment And the requested zoning is mixed-use employment, which is consistent with the comp plan Next slide Okay, again, this is kind of why it's a vague concept plan If you look at where this property is in context of that part of the city It's in a great location for some kind of mixed use It is close to parks It is on the greenway It is close to shopping and entertainment and the employment base in that part of the city And designating this as kind of a Bubble diagram for future mixed-use employment Let's it meet that standard and it lets the next person design it But we believe that it will provide Opportunities for light a mix of uses including office light industrial retail and services strengthen long months economic base and expand employment Design to minimize the impacts on the non-residential uses on the adjacent or nearby residential districts and allow and encourage the development of workforce or affordable housing Again, until the floodplain is fixed We really don't know what's going to happen to this property and and how to design it creatively to take advantage of That riparian setback and the context that it is so the goal is to make it flexible for the next person and to pigeonhole it and Make sure all the notes and the annexation agreement and all those things require Any future development of the property to meet the standards in place at that time because as you know Code changes standards change By the time this develops there could be another code update And so the goal is to have it inside the city and ready to develop when a user comes along and it's time next slide Okay ava in your staff recommendation ava listed all of the review criteria It's our job to demonstrate that we meet the criteria so we believe that the application that's submitted is consistent with the comp plan and envision longmont and the mixed-use employment zoning Annexation will further the following goals as outlined in the plan next slide so Goal 1.1 policies 1.1 a and 1.1 b are really about compact and efficient growth This site is located within the municipal service area Is surrounded by existing and future development and in close proximity to significant existing and future city improvements and amenities Existing city services including water sanitary and sewer and electricity are adjacent to the property And it's readily accessed by pedestrians vehicles and transit It's essentially an infill kind of site located adjacent to a major arterial Goal 1.2 policy 1.2 a is really about creating a sustainable mix of liand uses within the city And mixed-use employment is the poster child for that It has an opportunity for a mix of higher density And office and live work. These residents have really good access to longmont and the region Hover street is a principal arterial Future improvements provide pedestrian and bicycle connections. You know, this piece will build some of those connections along the Eastern property boundary. There's existing transit on hover And gets them to local services. They've also be A way for people who live in the city to come to this property to participate in whatever happens here It's a great link to the future trail system And at the time the property is developed It'll be evaluated in the context of the city sustainability plan in effect at the time the property develops Goals 1.8 policy 1.8c is about connectivity greenways habitat corridors and community services again annexation of this property and make sure that the city has goals and Has control over preservation of sacred and creek corridor Enhanced pedestrian and bicycle connectivity along hover street And future streets and pedestrian connections will provide future employees and residents. So It's an integrated system And it gets connected to the rest of the city and within the site next slide, please Goal 6.1 is about attracting and retaining businesses This will be a site that's ready for some to come and put in a business at the time they It's ready to be developed and it's got good access and good visibility policy 6.3 6.3 b Is about prioritizing employment uses and diversity of secondary uses again the mixed use employment Is a poster child for that it allows for a really interesting mix of businesses and some secondary uses for residential and commercial uses So it'll need to be creative and someone will have to do a really good site design to make this work in this location But I think there's an opportunity to make a really cool project here In addition to the goals and policies outlined in the staff report The we think it Further is the integrated land use and transportation planning about the multimodal connections And this is just a piece out of the city long months page Next slide This shows the key multimodal transportation elements associated with this property. So The existing greenway is along the north side of the site We'll have internal circulation both on the road and on the trails that connected that greenway Trail system on hoover. There's transit. There's rtd transit in hoover road and There'll be future access on a platted street Those cross sections are typical cross sections. So it really is connected and It'll provide a really good opportunity for people to use alternative transportation when they come and go from this site next slide The other pieces to maintain a quality water supply and I think that the kushman ditch, which is the water rights associated with this property is number two on the river And so the applicants give their shares of water to the river is a very senior right and that contributes to the overall water portfolio for the city The application as proposed complies with the purpose and the code of the zoning district And will comply with all applicable statute codes and ordinance and regulations at the time it's developed Provisions in the application assure that that happens at the time it's developed There's no previously approved concept plan preliminary plat PUD or overall development plan for the property The application is consistent with the utility standards Concept plan is presented shows flexibility for a spite specific user, but it does show how the property will be served And how it will be accessed And the staff has determined that there's capacity in the system to serve the property for future development next slide application provides development compatible with the surrounding properties Again, the concept plan is consistent with the comp plan and that looked at that surrounding property Most of the property around here has been annexed and is positioned for future development Just that little bit that wasn't included when we were looking at that blue map and it's also designated for compatible land uses so When when this applicant paves the street access will be provided So it'll make those pieces Also come into the system and any compatibility between the property and the creek Will be taken care of at the time the property is developed That kind of goes to the next one about not adversely surrounding Affecting surrounding properties and natural environment city transportation or utilities Again, this site is in the hundred years like plain It is unlikely that it will develop until Zillion st. Brain improvements for this reach of the corridor are completed It is told you that it's not funded and the applicant understands that Annexation of the property will assure that the city has land use authority for the property As the planned improvements are implemented Any future development will be reviewed in the context of the flood plain The riparian corridor and the rest of the natural environment. And if you look at that habitat Assessment two things It recommended consult with us in wildlife and Colorado parks and wildlife because of the eagle roost and the potential for previls meadow jumping mouse Also, you'll see in the staff report the staff or fire and updated habitat study at the time the property is developed same thing with transportation a transportation impact study was provided And it will also have to be updated to make sure that anything that needs to be done Is consistent with the uses at the time the property comes through the system The other thing about the red tail hawk This is the first summer that the red tail hawk has been or the applicants know that it's there It used to be on a neighboring property and the tree that it was nested in got cut down So it relocated onto this piece of property. So it's happily here And um, they'll have to comply with anything that's there at the time they develop Next slide This is a resilient same brain piece. I'm sure you guys have seen this many times But this is reach three and it's the unfunded reach of the creek and you can see the site is that red rectangle and the green is Where the floodplain would be if that those improvements are made and there are two different alternatives For that reach of the creek one is upsizing the bridge at hover road And the other is a bypass channel. So those two maps are there last I talked to somebody and um Staff can confirm this the preferred alternative was the bypass channel. But again, this is unfunded and so um until it would be funded the burden of Bringing the property out of the floodplain would be on the applicant as it moves forward And they would have to comply with any regulations both in the city and the federal level level for the FEMA next slide okay, this is um about compliance with the sustainability evaluation system and We don't know yet what's going to be on this property and so that Evaluation is going to change at the time the property developed We do know that it's next to the creek and there'll be a setback And that setback could be different at the time it developed because as everyone knows the river moves around so That wiggly line is about the distance Um, but at the time it developed we'll look at that again sustainability practices are changing by the minute updates in electricity water conservation all kinds of things are moving are moving targets and so As this property develops there's an opportunity to meet Innovative integrated sustainability ability goals and that would be evaluated Come back to you guys with a preliminary plaque at the time it develops next slide We already looked at this so i'm going to skip over this this is this actually says that it includes an appropriate transportation plan And so this is really about adjacent streets internal streets connections to the greenway And it's the same slide we looked at before so it's about a multi Integrated multimodal approach to connection and I think we meet that standard even with the basic framework as shown next slide This is the annexation review criteria The big picture is it does meet the Municipal Act of 1965 the key components of that are that it meets the continuity requirements total perimeter 32 85.62 16 required 547.60 and 1633.56 are contiguous The right is surrounded by annex undeveloped and developed land and adjacent to existing transportation utility infrastructure The entire width the adjacent plated right-of-way is included with the annexation The property is within the municipal service area and the Longmont planning area next slide The proposed zoning is consistent with the mixed-use employment and the designation on the envision Longmont as a mixed-use employment The annexation will not limit the ability to integrate the surrounding land into the city I think that if anything this will help integrate the surrounding land into the city because we have that plated right-of-way And at the time this develops they'll have access through that way Um and unless otherwise agreed to by the city the landowner has waived any pre-existing invested property rights The only thing that applicants want there are no vested property rights But they just plan to continue to use the property as it is until it's developed at some time in the future next slide one up This is about the phase one and um next slide This is Sorry about that give me one minute My mouse slipped and we went too far Yes, we did I can talk while Susan is looking for the slide The phase one environmental site assessment was prepared for this property and the staff reviewed it and agreed with The findings that there were no significant environmental concerns on this property the we had a question from a landowner about The stuff inside the shop, which Ava kind of spoke to I mean it's a tractor maintenance place and um empty barrels and um That shop has a concrete floor and no drain so there's no even if somebody spills oil when they're changing the oil on a tractor they have pity litter and um Hardboard there to pick it up and then they throw that stuff away off site You can help me get to okay Next slide This is where we want to be thank you so um I would just like to In the big picture goes through those comments and those questions that uh, julie submitted to the board Again, her first one was really about why the concept land doesn't have detail and I think we've talked that through already um Her concern was about the a car maintenance and as Ava said this is a Place where they come and work on the tractor. So it's not a car maintenance shop and that's um The finding of the report was that there are no environmental conditions um The other piece is about the wildlife habitat study having been done in the winter I think that The the professional that did this analysis looked at the site for habitat and things and actually brought up the fact of adjacent habitat Didn't find any wetlands didn't find any endangered species, but recommended that we consult with us vision wildlife and cpw at the time property is developed And also the staff has indicated that we'll have to do an updated habitat conservation plan at the time the property develops so I think those things um I think answer the questions of the of the person who wrote the letter I won't speak for her, but that would be the way I would answer those questions We believe this request meets the criteria for approval as outlined in the code and respectfully request that you Forge to city council with a recommendation for approval as outlined in pzr 2022 a and i'm here to answer your questions Thank you miss bronc. Um, do we have any questions from the commission right now before we go to the public hearing part of this item? seeing none let's um Let's get to the public Let me find my right script here Okay For any public wishing to speak on this public hearing item, please call in now the information I'm about to read as a displayed on your screen Dial 1 669 900 6833 And when you're prompted enter the meeting id 873 4889 621 0 When we are ready to hear the public comment on this item, we will 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 We're going to take a five minute break to allow this process to occur We can mute our sound and video until then Chairman we're at about four minutes Okay We'll give it just a few more until it clears the screen, which it is just done. You may continue We have no one So no one joined us for the public hearing part of this item. So we will go to discussion amongst the commission in questions Let me get to my gallery view so I can see you all raising your hands with questions And discussion commissure bullet questions, um I don't know if this is going to be for the city for the applicant, but Is the current building that is on the property is that actually within the repairing setback? Yes And is that going to we don't know if that's going to stay there or they're going to remove it We don't know that yet, correct. It's going to stay there for the foreseeable future Anything that happened at the time it would develop would have to comply with the regulations and time at the time development But it's been they've been farming that ground. It's been like that for a long time. So it's not New to the corridor Um, what is the zoning to the property to the west? Eva boulder county agriculture Should be into it for uh long time. Sorry. No, it's uh, it's in boulder county It is but what's it in the uh long line in vision? What's it? Oh, what's its envision longmont designation? Yeah Um, it looked orange without lines Pardon, I'm sorry. It looked orange without lines Yes, so the orange is um mix neighborhood believe mix neighborhood um Do we have any time limits? For the public meetings for these because I noticed that the public meeting was approximate like two years ago Do we have any kind of time limits for that? There are no stated time limits in the in the code. Um Yeah, I think the uh application came in in 2019 Uh and barb can speak to that more The way our process works is after the neighborhood meeting you turn in the formal application Our development review team reviews what submitted and they send back comments Um, these things are vetted several times before they ever approach you all and um, there may be so I think there was some lag time On the applicants end once we turned comments back to them in terms of resubmitting uh Resubmitting a revised plan if you will and uh barb Why annex now? Why do they want to annex it now and sit on the property? I mean, what's what's what's the benefit for them? I I think I understand the benefits of the city and being able to control Of some of the work being done along the creek But what's the benefit for the applicant getting it uh annexed now? I think there's a couple benefits one is they they have a um Affirm future so they know that if something is going to happen to the property, it's going to happen inside the city limits I also think that they are you know, they're local people and they're local business people and In the context of the resilient sane brain, it just makes sense for to be inside the city as that moves forward I again, these guys are not developers There it's probably their kids or their grandkids that are going to be the person who's going to be you know The beneficiary of a development project on this, but they're local people and corporate citizens They've been here a long time and they feel like it's better for them and for the city if they're inside the city and um We went to council and they referred us through the process and we've been chipping away at it ever since so I don't think it's an urgency, but they believe they are better off inside the city limits than in bolder county Okay, thank you That's all I have Anybody else commissioner height apologies for my inappness Ms. Brown guys, I have a question for you too and looking at the Yes Thanks And looking at the environmental site assessment. I think it's page 11. There's a picture of a former chicken coop and three barrels of I guess lubricant and oil As well as apparently a water drum um, and mr. Betcher when asked Said hey those drums were never used on our site begging the question So somebody dumped them there. How did those drums get there? I hear the owners wrap, you know, I don't know for sure, but I do know that um It's a foreign piece of property And Sometimes something that somebody who is also farming another piece of property uses someplace else It ends up in the storage on the farm on the other farm that they own um, they were empty barrels and so the When they did the phase one there was no issue that no concern that they were a contamination issue And they'll be disposed of properly Whatever that is determined to be So I don't think somebody I don't think somebody just took them and dumped them there I think they appeared as part of Someone else's Someone in the groups agricultural Cummings and goings on the property Fair enough commissioner Goldberg Thank you chairman. I think thank you miss brunk for a thorough presentation I think my question will be for ava. Although miss brunk may be able to chime in as well and maybe even monica um It's really simple and it just speaks to my naivete in the in this topic Is it common place to fill? uh To fill a site to what I take to raise it up above the 100 year floodplain. Is this practical Does this happen all the time or You know, do we have any examples of places where that's been done? I do recognize that a thorough concept plan has been um required at this time But just curious about the logistics of doing that I'll defer that question to our floodplain manager monica bordellini if monica you want to Uh start your video and unmute yourself Can you see me here I am? There we go. Hello Um Yes, this is uh We have tried we are trying to fill some sites. Um And remove them from the floodplain that way. Um Let's see the project that is in review right now to the south that's called. Um, what is that called? Um Help me guys What is the project to the south? We don't have a project to the south you were talking about the adjacent neighbor With a fema appeal, but that's not a project. No, no, no, no, not that Oh fairgrounds marketplace. Sorry fairgrounds marketplace. I'm sorry. I couldn't think of it there for a second. Um they are trying to fill their site to remove it from the floodplain and um, You know, there's complications because you can fill a site And longmont allows that But you can't impact anybody any other property owner Um, or any other building that's in the floodplain Um with what you do with filling your site so you couldn't raise sending water elsewhere Right, so you fill up a site the water has to go somewhere else And if it goes somewhere else onto someone else's property and puts them in the floodplain or raises The floodplain on their property even higher than it already is that's not allowed So that's been a little hard for them. But this particular site Doesn't have anything around it really and um, if the if the um If there is an increase let's say on that house that's there already. Well, that's going to be gone So that's allowable if it's on your own property So I and it's an a o zone which means that um It's not a Convenient zone which means the water isn't really going through there. It's kind of a shallow flooding area And um, it's only about a foot deep. So I think that actually with some of the projects we've looked at recently for filling the entire site this seems more Applicable than some of the other ones that we've looked at to be perfectly honest Okay, thanks Monica. I appreciate that perspective Good But quite a bit Any other questions comments? Motions Uh commissioner teta I think uh, I think Commissioner pollin brought up a really good point about the existing structure being in the riparian setback As it stands, I I think if we're considering annexation Not to require That those riparian setbacks be respected would be Remiss at best. What do you think? Is that I I don't know. I guess I'm I'm posing that to the commission Actually before we get to you, let's go to uh commissioner flake. I realize I have to mute it at the bottom. Sorry Um Ava I have a question regarding um The process for putting together a site plan When and if the annexation would be approved and how then the riparian setback is addressed um, it my reasoning for posing the question is because If they're not submitting a site plan to change anything Then they can still use the structure in place and for the time being Uh chair sharnett commissioner flake, um, we would uh, so the mixed use employment um It only allows residential type or ag. I don't even know if it allows ag But it only allows residential uses as a secondary use um, so we would have to Examine that and see if we need to incorporate A grandfather right if you will um for a certain period of time in the annexation agreement Hmm Ms. Brunk I mean, I have you make a comment here. Yeah, I just There are existing structures in the 150 foot riparian setback All over our city And I have not seen And I might have missed it an effort To require people who own those properties To remove them from the riparian setback when they have historically been located there and been In that context I completely understand That when you develop the property you have to meet those standards But this property has looked like this for a long time and I can tell you that the applicants I don't have them in the room with me, but requiring them to remove existing structures on the property um seems a little over That would just be my request that that you know there if you go down the go down the corridor toward um I mean look through boston and and through where where the old golden site is Lots of buildings in the riparian setback that have coexisted with the setback for A long time. So I get that you might have to take it away later But the applicants really want to be able to continue to use the property as they have historically used it until a site plan would go through the process and for development That would be my two cents Thank you commissioner flake so If the property is not an extent to the city Then it's the way that it is and we and the city has no control over enforcement Enforcement of the riparian setback should there be some development proposed? Whereas if we do annex Property into the city when the property is redeveloped Then we would have the tools Of course the riparian setback Is that a correct statement? That's a question for staff that would be correct Okay, so Commissioner teta to to your question In the discussion here I think we have further bites of the apple In terms of the riparian setback and enforcing it I see ava nodding her head that that is probably factually correct But We also with the variance process we are never obligated to approve a variance um and Does it make sense to lock ourselves? In right now to saying absolutely no no variance ever Or should we let future decision makers Decide once a site plan review or a plat comes along To determine what happens in relation to the riparian setback um I don't know it's I'm a little mixed on myself, but um, but those are some things to consider commissioner on around I believe The answer to your question depends on the specificities of the proposal that is going to be on the table I don't think we should make a Blanket decision right now without really seeing what the proposal is going to be Uh Again, you know, like I said in the past uh I question the riparian setback In special conditions To me, it shouldn't be a blanket rule that should be applied all the waterways No matter what the proposal is going to be that's my personal opinion So here's here's another idea. Um Just popped in my head given what commissioner on said And we saw the one drawing where where you see that the riparian setback is basically halfway across this property along its length So you're really only going to be able to build along this this bottom half But what if somebody came up with with Some idea where they could put little jetties out over, you know with minimal footprint like just just you know with with concrete posts into uh Into the ground to hold up like viewing platforms And it would still allow water still allow wildlife to flow through still allow Everything to be as natural as possible except for like a dozen concrete posts Is that cool enough to For the city to allow a variance for I mean, you know, I'm just thinking out loud here. This is a lot of what is but Maybe it does say that that that we should allow this decision to be made in the future rather than now Other thoughts Yeah, I'm I'm all for leaving it for the future commission Uh to haggle over uh has been stated here We don't know really what the floodplain's going to look like When this is developed. We don't know exactly what's going to be developed there You know, there's also the thing this could be a historical building And we don't know what that may do with whatever happens with that part of the property. So I'm all for Letting this go the way it is Don't put any kind of conditions on it for you know preventing future variances or anything But just let it ride and then the future commission Can handle it when it comes to them Okay Commissioner Goldberg Thanks chairman. Yeah, I like those similar sentiments. Uh, it's commissioner honoran and yourself chairman and commissioner pollin and if you don't mind Slide the topic a different direction Either this question is for you jamey seamo, excuse me while I read and set the doll Uh, two of the folks who turned in Um concerns about the project both echoed similar sentiments about reflecting the lack of detail on the project Uh, you know, and who can't You know relate to that and and wanting to know more what when you when you see a neighbor moving in Can you clarify? if and when Perhaps closer to the time of development when the neighbors might be brought into Um have opportunities to provide feedback on the project Um, is it Do they definitely have an opportunity to do that? Do they only have an opportunity? It's if the future project requires a conditional approval or a variance. Did you just touch on? Maybe to help give them comfort as to when they might be able to provide more feedback as it comes to life Certainly a chair sharnet commissioner goldberg. Um, so in terms of public process Um, and again, you know, they'll have a another opportunity at city council But you know as far as development Uh, when and if this develops again down the line after the floodplain issues are resolved um It depends on what type of development they're asking for but Um, like for example, if it's a preliminary subdivision plan Uh, that would require a neighborhood meeting Um, so certain what we call major development applications would require a neighborhood meeting prior to So, um, if it's something administrative and small it wouldn't but um in the absence of knowing we just don't know but there is opportunity for input whether or not there is a neighborhood meeting because um, even if it's an administrative review we send out notices to A certain radius of property ownership 1,000 feet 300 feet We signpost the property Things of that nature. So there are opportunities In the future if development were to present itself for the public to engage with us and give us input Thanks, eva. Yeah, I think that's really helpful to just to recognize not only on council, but perhaps down the line Any major development you are definitely going to have plenty of notice to come to a neighborhood meeting and provide feedback if it's only a you know, a minor change or a minor development will then It's you know, probably not a very unusual project anyways But even then there might be opportunity to provide their feedback. So that gives me comfort Thanks Okay, any other thoughts or comments? I'm going to go ahead and make a motion to approve PZR 2020-3a to Okay, to approve the annexation of of this property without conditions Commissioner pollin I will second that motion. So it's seconded by commissioner pollin. Um, any further discussion? Let's go ahead and oh commissioner robert Thanks chairman. Yeah I'll be supporting the the motion as well Um, but just wanted to lay out why the I just wanted to thank the city again the staff again for providing The material in the packet which identified and summarized why This application met the review criteria And the additional criteria requirements tied to the annexation and then also The applicant did a thorough job on her presentation highlighting how this project is meeting all the criteria and then given the Feedback from the public There's opportunity to offer your feed offer their feedback in the future And Any concerns about the habitat The riparian setback Um Any concerns about when studies were taken or handled? We'll all be Revisited again in the future as the project develops. So with that I'll be supported Okay, and let me just add to that that and I think commissioner flag referred to this that Bringing this under the control of the city is Better than leaving it under the control of the county Commissioner height. You had a comment I did I was gonna add in my two or three cents as well too as we had discussed back in february with a different annexation As commissioner pollin had pointed out the public meetings for this particular annexation were held some time ago And we discussed back in in february that there is no time limitation When the public meetings are first out to win the the project actually gets in front of us That might be something we want to address it sometime in the future But nonetheless starry decisis it comports with our past practices Secondly I've been looking at the city's code In the brazilian st. Rain project and development in the flood plain all is prospective looking So to answer I think uh commissioner tedd is questioned about Whether or not we should be addressing the fact that one building right now is located in this riparian setback zone Um, I think as miss brown points out There's a lot of other buildings along the corridor that's sitting that same position And I don't think that the city is regulating those structures out of existence yet If any future development takes place then it That property has to be brought into compliance And then lastly Also is discussed in february the lack of The specificity in the annexation plan Is just the nature of the beast the public's concerned that They'd like to see more of what the the neighbor is bringing to the table Is something that just isn't addressed at this issue with that I'm going to be in support of this project as well. Thanks Okay, and commissioner heights last comment reminds me to remind all of our Viewers all of the members of the public be neighborly with each other talk to each other. Uh, find out what's going on. Um, you know Communicating with with your neighbors is a really good thing. Um Any further comments? Let's take a vote those in favor of passing 2020-3a say aye. Hi. Hi Hi That passes unanimously. Oh any any not in favor any knows Any abstentions? Okay, jane that passes in unanimously seven to zero Miss brunk. Thank you for your time and presenting the project and walking us through that Thank you to monica bordellini and Uh Chris huffer for being here uh to help us out with any issues that might have come up with that. Um, Appreciate all your help with that. We have more of an agenda Oh, wait, I have a process notice. I need to read hang on. I gotta find that I'm a little thrown off my game because I don't have things laid out on my desk Okay, you couldn't tell chairman. You couldn't tell Uh This item will now be forwarded to the lawnmont city council for action If you are unfamiliar with council procedures and intend to appear appear before council Please contact the planning division for further information at 303 6518330 Alrighty, um Next up on our agenda is the final call for the public invited to be heard. Um And so you'll see this information on your screen I'll read it again If you want to talk about anything that was not on tonight's agenda, we'd love to hear from you So please call us at 1-669-900-6833 And when you're prompted enter our meeting ID, which is 8734889 6210 When we're ready to hear public comment on this item, uh Or just hear your public comment We'll call on you to speak based on the last three digits of your phone number Each speaker must state their name and that 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 It takes us about five minutes to allow everybody to call in so we'll take a five minute break Share read it just about four minutes And i'm going to stop the screen share There are no callers at this moment Okay, thank you, susan We'll let it Stop displaying here in a second Okay I think there are small members of the public behind commissioner goldberg Occasionally running back and forth I'd take myself off mute, but then you'd hear the bedtime routine at the goldberg household Chair you're ready to begin there are no callers Okay, thank you very much susan um, okay, so uh, we had nobody join us for the public invited to be heard So we move on to item nine which is items from the commission. I actually have something I wanted to Mention to you all having gone to The rmlui conference in the past Due to the generosity of the city Um down at the university of denver I'm on their mailing list and some of you probably got an email from them. They're holding a um hour and a half Ideas roundup is what they call it. Um, and it is about Let me find The email here. I thought I had it Here it is It's conversations on urban planning and land use pandemic and race um So it's race equity and land use. Um, I wanted to bring that to your attention. It's an hour and a half It's free. It's open to the public. You do need their email in order to have the the registration button Um, so I'm going to forward this to jane and she can send it out to everybody In case you're interested. Um anything from anybody else When is it chairman? When is that meeting? Oh, I'm sorry. Um Yeah, it's on tuesday june 30th from 10 a.m. To 11 30 a.m. And it's uh, it's being held On zoom and they'll they'll send you the link So great. Thanks for sharing sure. Um, okay Any items from council representative uh, erron rodriguez It's good to see you guys all all look pretty well in your home offices or whichever room of the house Um, and thanks for all that you guys do Thank you appreciate it. Um any items from our planning and development services Director now dawn manager just manager. Okay. All right Well, first I just wanted to thank everybody for the great work you did tonight Really appreciate all the help from susan and um also from heather Everybody, you know made this happen and we appreciate that everyone was willing to help work with us to make this a reality So again, thank you so much um Just a reminder thin as everybody's aware of we are looking thin at a july 15th planning commission meeting for the item that was continued Right now. We do not expect any other items to be on that agenda Um, we expect it to be virtual as well again And so we will uh work with you to make sure that everyone's able to participate and provide comment on the application So that is all that I have for tonight. Thank you Great. Thank you don and also, um, want to reiterate thanks to um To susan wallach and heather mackentire for their technical help and also to jane our executive Secretary on this and recording secretary for everything she does for us and jane just so you know, I will Um, I will get you a scan of the signed pzr Not tomorrow going to the art museum, but on friday um, so, um I move that we adjourn if unless there's anybody opposed Have a good time see you see in a month. Thanks everybody