Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

[Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music]

[Music] [Music]

They're all religious. You should do Oh, now it's All right, good news everybody. It seems like the live stream is so I'm going to call the meeting back into order and ask the applicant to come up and begin his presentation or their presentation.

Okay. Uh thank you all for having us tonight. We appreciate planning commission, the staff, and all the community for their input. My name is Sarah Daringer. I'm the division president for Cardell Homes. Oop, sorry. Thank you. Uh so this is the agenda for the evening. Um the team that we have with us tonight here uh many of whom will be speaking is Travis Frasier with he's a civil engineer with Redland, Jeff Keley, the development consultant with JMC Consulting, Julie Gamick from THK Associates, our landscape architect, and then Cassie Slade, a traffic engineer, is here as well from Fox Tuttle. This is the vicinity map, um which you've already you've already seen. Um the map just shows the general location. It is directly it's located in the Kings Mill PUD north of West 88th Avenue and is directly adjacent to Kings Mill Park to our south. Uh just as a project overview, um a little background information and a reminder to everybody, the Jefferson's County School District decided they needed to sell some of their assets. So they um identified Zurg Elementary School as one of those schools that was needing to be sold. The district began a public process of accepting requests for proposals and then they asked an advisory committee to vet those proposals and we were selected ultimately as the best partner for the school district and the community. After being selected, we held a community meeting and attended a pre-application meeting and concept plan review where we uh received a lot of feedback. Uh staff indicated to to the public that no funds were available to acquire sites for open space or parkland within Westminster as that was one of the primary concerns. Um after the meetings, we incorporated comments and feedback from the community

and the city council in our land plan. This is a three-step process and we're here today asking to amend the comprehensive master plan from public uh quas public to residential low density. Uh Cardell Homes. Um we're a family-owned business operating here locally in Colorado. We've been building homes since 1973 um across four regions in North America. In Denver, we've been here for 20 years. Um below is a list of examples of communities we've been building in in the Denver metro area for the last 20 years to include um Westminster Station, Lions Ridge, Sulttera, Roxboro Park to name a few. At Cardell, we have a charitable division um called the Cardell Foundations, which allows us at Cardell to um interact with the neighbors to enrich their lives and their communities through um charitable donations and support. Some past initiatives that we've participated in recently would be um we included we built an outdoor classroom for the Rooney Ranch Elementary School when we were building at Sulttera and we donated to the Westminster Station Park and nature playground while we were building in Westminster Station community. At Cardell we have in-house architects that design a wide range of floor plans to include duplexes, town homes and single family homes and they range in size and price points. This ensures that each home complements its surroundings and meets the needs of a wide range of homeowners from first-time buyers to growing families to empty nesters. Uh these are just a few samples of the homes that we're building in similar communities, but of course, we'll be working with the city and the surrounding neighborhood to refine the plans and tailor the exteriors to complement the area. And I will now turn it over to Julie, our planner.

Thank you so much. Um, thank you again for having us tonight. So, I wanted to talk briefly about the preliminary development plan for Kingsmill PDP. So, the PDP originally allowed for a mix of housing types and densities ranging from 4.1 to 20.1 dwelling units per acre. This project is proposing single family detached within the Kings Mill PUB with a land use type of residential low density that allows for up to 5DU per acre per coat. We are proposing 4.95 as our mix. The comprehensive plan defines the density and intensity of the differing land use types. The proposed project meets the residential low density land use type by being single family detached, being in a suburban area, being informed by the surrounding density, providing one to twostory homes, providing accessibility to the parks, and within the allowed density of 5DU per acre. As Sarah mentioned, we per and within the allowed density of 5D break mentioned we original land plan when we originally came to the city which is shown here. This showed 44 lots. There was no connection to Kings Mill Park but with community and staff input we made some revisions which I'll show you in a moment that included a reduction of 10% of the lots compared to this original plan. That reduction in lots allowed us to protect some of the existing trees on the north part of the site, provide better access to the park and highline canal trail, and maintain a connection from the east side of our property into the existing neighborhood, which was a condition of approval that staff mentioned. So shown here is our revised land plan.

Some of the things that we are wanted to point out was this exceeds the required public land dedication and supports the comprehensive plan goal LU7.3 by integrating parks and encouraging walkable neighborhoods with access to parks. It also touches on LU 9.2 two that the design promotes access to amenities in LU9.3 by maintaining and enhancing the public realm. Maintaining an existing access to Kingsmill Park from the east off of West 90th Place and maintaining the large trees along West 91st Avenue are some of the improvements that we made to this plan. We also provide a connection to the Farmers Highline Canal on the southeast corner of the site which will be in place for existing and future residents. We believe that this plan meets the comprehensive plan vision and the four cornerstones to provide a balanced mix of housing opportunities and to foster a range of highquality living options that support the city's active lifestyle. Further, the proposal aligns with the neighborhood unit concept to address changing demographics and housing needs in the area. We believe that this plan meets the city structure of the suburban fabric goal HN3.3.1 through 3.2 by providing a diversity of housing choices, blending the housing types to ensure resilience to demographic changes and providing a diverse housing opportunities to serve a range of households compositions. This also aids in goal HN-4.2 two by providing housing products for downsizing. I apologize. Um, so we wanted to speak briefly about the entitlement and development process. As it's been noted already, we are at the comprehensive

master plan amendment stage. That's the only thing we're asking for review on tonight. Um this as noted before changes the high level use from public quasi public to low density residential. The steps we are anticipating moving forward to into the future include the PDP ODP. This is where our detailed site plan engineering and landscape design will be developed. Utility drainage and storm water management plans will be completed. Our traffic study will be completed. Geotech reports and investigations will be completed. construction documents will be completed. This is also where the referral process to get input from other departments and service providers is anticipated. Following the PDP ODP um and public comment planning commission and city council approval, we would move into permitting, development, land demo and land development and then the home building. We expect that from the permitting stage to the completion of the home building process that it will be approximately one to three years. So drainage is an item on site that we are looking at. So we will be capturing the storm water in the detention pond in the northeast corner. This is not only the natural low point of the site but also allows us to integrate some of the existing mature trees on the site to provide a more natural setting. Um we will treat, detain and not impact downstream infrastructure by this development. The internal road cross-section will meet the city of Westminster local road section per 2025 engineering standards and all roads will be public with sidewalks. Part of the the plan and our discussions with staff is that a water mane

improvement will be required replacing the water man from West 90th Place to North Everett Street. This will be integrated with our looped internal system. This meets the comprehensive plan theme resilience that projects assist with resiliency by replacing aging infrastructure. We will analyze and model the system during the PDP ODP process and confirm that improvements will not negatively impact the existing system. We'll also work closely with city staff and the utility provider during this design. And with that, I'm going to turn it over to Jeff. Commissioners, thank you. Uh Jeff Gilly with JMC. Um, so throughout our neighborhood meetings, we heard a couple uh issues, things that we wanted to discuss and do some more research. And one of the questions that was asked is where is our students going to go to school? Um, obviously, no one likes to see a school close. So, we uh reached out to the school district and um used their numbers to calculate how many students are in 40 homes would generate. It's about 16. and then what the current enrollment and what the capacity is of the new schools that they would go into. Uh so Weber, as you can see, Weber Elementary would be school that our students would go into. Uh they have a capacity of 501 and their current enrollment is 261. And the same same issue with uh Poma Poma Junior and Senior School. Um, but to take a step back, we we met with the school district and we kind of wanted to really understand why these schools were closing. Obviously, you guys are probably all aware, 16 of them have closed in the Jeep School District. And really, the overall decline of enrollment led to these closures. And it and they the way that they explained it to us is, you know, if they kept the school open, it would really be a

disservice to the students that go to that school. Um, the low enrollment schools can't afford the specialties that other elementary schools provide. So like uh music, arts, the STEM program. So it's really a benefit for these students that were in Zurg Elementary to go to a different school so they can experience all those additional um programs that they offer there. Um we also learned that the school district is spending uh roughly $150,000 per year to maintain these schools. um you know if we can close on this property and move forward with it that is funds that can go to other programs within the school district. So reinvest back into the students and into programs and you know and additionally the proceeds from our sale will go into their capital reserve fund which would be reinvested back into the students and school programs. Uh there there was another comment in our neighborhood meeting that uh some residents were worried that their home values would go up too much, some would their home values would go down. Uh so we commissioned a study with THK to kind of look at similar projects across the Front Range of Colorado, similar demographics. Um and in every case, uh home values did go up, right? They're they're not dropping. Um and really the incremental, you know, tax increase is pretty outweighed by the value that's created. Um homes are going for around $565 to $735,000 in this area. Uh the example I put up here is just an example. uh it's not pulling a specific um home within the area. But as you can see, the value of this, you know, pretend house went up

$50,000 and the property tax was increased $128 a year. Uh other um potential uses were brought up in our neighborhood meeting. Uh we we all know traffic's always an issue uh of new development. Um we wanted to show what the full cap at at a full capacity elementary school what that traffic count would be. Uh as you can see at at a full capacity Zerg elementary 661 trips per day was generated from that school. Uh we looked at similar recreation centers and libraries similar size libraries and recreation centers across Westminster. Uh and they're generating much more than our 40 proposed homes would generate. Uh in our neighborhood meeting um we did discuss the Rocky Flats and plutonium um across you know all of Westminster. Uh back in 2014 a study was commissioned by the city of Westminster. Um this study was conducted by Hydros Consulting out of Boulder. They did extensive sampling of the soil, the sediment, the water and the air. And uh through that report they you know they determined that development you know it's suitable for all uses to be developed within Westminster. Um we asked them to look at our site specifically and they came up with those same conclusions. Uh we did commit to testing the soil uh at our neighborhood meeting. So we did go out there, we pulled five samples um on site in two of the five samples and both plutonium and Americanum uh levels were of the background samples. Um but please note that these

background samples weren't pulled directly from our site. They were taken from other uh testing areas around our site and that that's how they derive the back background background level. Um, but it's important to note that all results that we pulled from our five samples are well below the Department of Energy's risk screening levels and our uh expert CTL uh determined that there is no recognized environmental condition for our property. So definitely it's safe to safe to build. So obviously uh Carson um brought up the criteria that we need to follow. So I'm going to dive into that. I'm not going to read that all for you guys. So uh the criteria number one, the proposed amendment is consistent with the vision, intent and applicable policies of the comprehensive plan and other adopted plans, policies and guidelines. Uh so we are uh maintaining our residential low density designation compared to the surrounding uses of our site. It's residential low density on all three sites. And then the Kingsville um parkland to our south. Um we will be uh um sorry, lost my word. Uh we will be giving uh one and a half acres to the Kingsville Pike to expand that park into our site. And we're really advancing our neighborhood unit strategy by integrating the housing with open space and proximity to parks and connectivity. As Julie alluded to, single uh residential low density allows for single family detach access to parks and allows up to five joy units per acre. Uh and we are at 4.95. Uh the proposed amendment serves a

substantial public purpose and will not substantially detrimental to the surrounding allowance. Uh we will be generating new tax revenue for uh the city, Jefferson County, the school district um and all other services. Uh we will be you know repurposing a vacant under utilized site uh using existing infrastructure and minimizing our urban sprawl. And as we talked about earlier, um we will be assisting with replacing aging infrastructure with a replacement of the water man. Number three, the proposed amendment shall consider the nature and degree of impacts on neighboring lands, individual parcels or groups, and parcels shall not be subject to change in land use in such a way that the new designation is substantially inconsistent with the uses of the surrounding area. Uh, I understand this is a it's a big change for the area, but what we're asking for is not different from what is surrounding us. It's residential low density on all three sides, and that's what we're asking for tonight. And then we the additional park dedication to Kingsville Park. Number four, uh the proposed amendment is necessary in order to address substantially changed conditions in the immediate area of the subject track since the adoption of the land use plan or an air contained in that document. Uh unfortunately, this is a change condition. Uh the school was is going to is closed and they're not going to open it up again. Um if we are not successful through this process, the school district will put this back on the market and they will try to sell it. uh they have no intention of reopening the school and it's something they need to get rid of to reinvest back into their school district. Uh I will note we were one of three

applications at the RFP uh level. Um all three were residential uses and as uh Sarah alluded to, we were selected to move forward. Number five, the proposed amendment provides for the orderly physical growth of the city. Uh this is an infill project. Um it supports orderly growth by facilitating redevelopment for existing parcels. Um we're reclassifies residential low density. Uh ensuring compatibility with our neighbors and we're optimiz optimizing the existing infrastructure and services that are already to the site. Um this is this creates new homes for infill uh infill setting. Um a lot of the newer homes are on the outskirts of of town and so we're taking this opportunity to create new new new homes in the infill setting. Number six, the proposed amendment furthers an important public policy including but not limited to a need for affordable housing, protection of historical resources, preservation of open space, reduction in water demand by virtue of a different land use category. Um this is thoughtful inflow development. It contributes to the regional housing problem. Um it we're trying to eliminate urban sprawl. So from a a uh from a preservation of open space, we're we're kind of focusing on the redevelopment of our infill site utilizing infrastructure that we don't have to extend. Number seven, the proposed amendment is appropriate in order to address a uniqueness in the size, shape, and character of the parcel in the relation to the neighborhood lands neighboring lands. Proof that a small parcel is unsuitable for use as presently designated or that there have been substantial changes in the media area

may justify amendment subject to evidence furnished by the applicant. It was a district decision school district decision to you know permanently close the site due to persistent underenrollment. Um there is adequate capacity in the schools nearby and really I I can't really picture this site being anything other than residential low density. Um I think it fits well with the neighborhood. Uh the infrastructure is there and um you know it it's not suitable for high high density apartments. So I think this is a very suitable use for this area. Number eight, the proposed amendment would not negatively impact transportation system, drainage, water, sewer infrastructure, water supply, fire and police services, the parks and open space system, and the city general fund revenue. Uh the utilities and services are already to the site. Uh we will be improving the aging water main on Field Street. Um our on-site detention will capture the storm water and release at 90% of the historical flows. Uh there's new property tax revenue generated for the city and there's dedication of new land to extend to the Kings Mall Park. Um we we believe this is you know sustainable growth and not urban sprawl which we're trying to get rid of. Number nine, the proposed amendment will not negatively impact referral agencies such as CD dot local school districts, the Rocky Mountain Metro Metropolitan Airport, and other agencies pertinent to the location and nature of the amendment. Uh said it before, there's no no airport conflicts. We're outside the Rocky Mountain Metro Metropolitan Airports high impact zones. Um utilities again there. We did talk to the dry utilities uh uh excel and they do have the capacity to to service our site. Um you

know manageable school impact they have the capacity to to take our students. Lastly, the proposed amendment established min minimal environmental impacts or has sufficiently mitigated any identified impacts. Um I think I'll just talk about the the plutonium. Um we tested that we we were heard that we need to test the site. Um we tested the site and it came back to a suitable place to develop. Um I want to thank you guys for your time um and ask for approval of our comp amendment. Thank you.

Thank you. Commissioners, do you have any questions of either staff or the applicant? Okay. Well, I have a couple here before we we start here. Uh there was there seems to be some concern uh at least in the correspondence in our agenda memo packet and our dendum that we received today about the skate park, the park, the connections and the connections along the east side of the sidewalk along the east side of the current Zurg Elementary School property. Are you planning to get get rid of any of those? And I guess this is for the applicant. Is your uh is are you planning to get get rid of any anything in the existing parkland area and or uh and are you planning to keep those existing pedestrian connections?

Uh as for the um parkland that's already existing, we will not be removing anything from that parkland. We're actually adding an acre and a half to that park plan that will eventually be taken over by the city of Westminster. Um, and then the access I think there was an access right there was an access to the east side that we uh did not include in our first or original land plans that um in our newer land plan. We did create that access or keep that access there. And then we have access down to the south to the Highline Canal uh trail that you can access through our walkways through our site and then into our open space down to that.

So instead of having the existing sidewalk along the along the east side of the parcel, you're going to have it connect through the public street on uh what looks like Everett, if I can squint and read that name. Yeah, that yeah, North Everett Street. Um, this is not final. We'll still go through our technical review. If that's something the city wants to see, I'm sure we can fit it into our plan. Um, I'm not sure if Westminster maintains that walkway through the school site, but um, in this plan that we're presenting, it would replace that one on the east side and through the neighborhood through our walkway system.

Okay. Uh and then uh and then on the storm water we said we're going to detain to 90% of the pre-development rates. I just want to confirm that that's 90% is that 90% of predevelopment meaning Zur what what the Zur elementary school site is doing now pre-development as in raw land. I'll pass you off to Great. Thank you. It's it's 90% of pre-development. So in raw landed detention fund would reduce the flows um basically if it was all native open space to 90% of that release.

Okay, great. Uh thank you. Uh and then it's Yep. I think those were my questions for now. Uh commissioners, do you have anything else before Oh, go ahead, Commissioner Colling.

Thank you very much. Um I have a question about a comment that was made about the water man improvements. I don't know if this is for for the applicant or for the staff. Um, can you tell me a little bit about what improvements um you're talking about there? I heard something about aging water main on Field Street. I think it came up in our pre-application meeting uh our first submitt um comments back from the engineering department that uh this section of West 90th place to Everett on Field Street into I guess West 91st Avenue was I don't know if it's failing but it's getting old. Um so the request to us was that part of our development we would have to replace that section of the water man. So, this is an improvement that the city is asking the developer to pay,

correct? And this is an improvement that um will benefit the new development and it would benefit all the other residents around the area. Got it. Okay. Thank you very much. Yes, ma'am. Commissioner Peg, um you mentioned that uh your internal water improvements will be looped. I'm just not familiar with that term. I can touch on it, but basically we'll have water uh water lines all throughout our uh comm through our neighborhood and we'll connect to the water manes. So it'll go down, you know, west 90th place to North Everett and through this little loop which creates it creates a loop.

It creates it creates Yeah, it creates a loop, but the pressure remains there to service the Sorry. And does it reconnect up at 91st Avenue? Yes, it will connect at 91st Avenue all the way down to And you mentioned that is uh uh better for resiliency. Can you just briefly explain that? So we create multiple points of connection so that water can be served multiple directions. So it helps maintain flows and pressures especially in like emergency situation if there's a fire. So water can pull from not just one point in the system and if you have a long dead end if you loop it water can come from multiple directions. So between these two intersections there's two parallel paths. So have multiple points of connection to the existing.

Gotcha. Okay. Okay. I appreciate that. Thank you. And then um um uh I lost track of which slide it was on, but you mentioned uh you were tying this to um uh standard number six about furthering an important public policy and you mentioned um reducing urban sprawl and reducing the loss of open space. Um could you talk me through how how you picture that working? Yeah. So, I I define urban sprawl as going out to the um a land owner's home outside the city limits, right? Annexing into Westminster to get their services and then you're you're developing that, you know, open parcel of land. Um this is that that's the way I define urban sprawl. It's, you know, creating new housing from non-existent services um in the area. Does that make sense? And we're taking this infill site that already has services to the site. Um it's already serviced by, you know, the fire, the the police. Um it's already existing and we're just repurposing the use on the site.

Okay. And uh um just at an eighth grade level, how is that reducing open space loss? Um that's a fair point. I I don't think it's reducing open space loss, but it's reducing the urban sprawl. Um, this is not considered open space per se, right? I I follow how it reduces urban sprawl. I just wanted to You also mentioned reducing open space and I Okay, I appreciate it. Thank you. Commissioner Mayo,

I heard early on that this was originally zoned at 20 dwelling units per acre. Uh, I think in the original Kings Mill PUD, they allowed 20 for the school. It was part of the overall PUB, so it was a bigger piece of property.

So on the screen is the the Kings Mill PDP that was original. Um and the school site is is if I can make mouse work is here and it was designated as a school site in the original PDP. The surrounding area has a mix of housing types. So single family cluster and garden apartments with a mix of densities from 4.1 to 20.1. So the the broader site was all planned and zoned together. It wasn't the school site was done and then the next block was done and then the next block was done. It was envisioned as a larger community. Okay. Thank you. Yes.

All right. Seeing no more questions at this time, I will here I open the public testimony for item 3A. Um, Madame Secretary, have we received any testimony in the forms of emails or voicemails? Uh, no voicemails. There were emails that were received and those were sent out to you in the packet addendum. Uh, this afternoon we do have a list of speakers. I'm going to call the first three speakers. If you all will come up to this empty row here. Speaker number one can come to the podium and two and three can be um queued up here in the front. When these three have gone, I'll call the next three and we can queue up and kind of keep things going in that orderly fashion. Please.

First one is Laura Cruz. Go ahead. Karina Tang Walder and Rich Chamberlain.

Okay. And while you're coming up to the front, uh just want to state that first public testimony is going to be limited to five minutes per speaker. So be ready to have your comments prepared. And also when possible if you're if some a previous speaker has already um given something similar as your comments have been stated just approach the podium and say you agree with the previous speaker rather than restating the same comments or concerns. Also please refrain from applauding groaning cheering or any anything else in there. All right. So and with that let's that's our first speaker. Thank you.

Hello. Good evening. I really love my neighborhood. I really love the Zer area. You can't hear me?

Oh, I really love the Zurg area. I love my home. I'm right across the street from the school and um with this coming in, well, I wonder um how is the snow removal going to be handled? We do get a lot of snow for these outlets here. this area. And um I just wonder why was the difference between Sheridan Green Elementary School, that area being allowed to be torn down and turned into a park versus Zer was um the school was leased temporarily and with no chance of renewal. and then closed and um sold and it I read that it was stated that it was for the improvement of the community in Sheridan Green. Why are we not allowed that improvement in our community? And I also want to state that uh this open space, you know, we have a lot of people that come bike riding through in our neighborhood a lot on the weekends and their main goal is like to go ride around Stanley Lake. There's a lot of people that do that and that's going to all change. It kind of sounds like our wildlife is going to change. And just having that openness of being able to walk over to Stan Lake to have that big park. There's a lot of people that use that park and

we love our park and you're taking that away from our neighborhood. you're taking that away from us. And people need some outlet. They need to not have to be looking at houses around us all the time. You know, that that's how we survive. You know, we a lot of us there are families in th in this community that may be working two jobs and maybe their um peace of mind is to be able to go to to the park to run their dogs to be able to walk over to Stanley Lake, ride their bike. I do, you know, there are three new babies at the end of my street that have just moved in within the past six months. And when the with the announcement of possible rates going down on interest rates, I've seen six houses go up for sale in the area. Are you going to guarantee that those aren't going to be new families coming in with with little children that are going to need a place to go to school? You know, I I guess I'm just I don't want I don't want this change. I really don't. I love the peace in the neighborhood. And as a hardworking person contributing to the community, I like my mental break, you know? I like that peace of mind for a few minutes every day and not having cars rushing up. You know, it's like Field Street turning into whatever. What does it turn into? 92nd that kind of goes around. Um

that sometimes becomes a raceway. you know, and there's a lot there's a lot of racing that goes on now and then. And so, you know, I I guess I just I'm I'm really not for this. And you're said, how big are these lots? Each lot for these houses, you know, nobody said that. My lot is 9,000 square feet. I want to know what are the sizes of the lots of each of these homes. So, I guess I'm running out of time, but I've pretty much spoken and said what I'd like to say and thank you for hearing me tonight. I appreciate it.

Great. Thank you. Uh, next speaker and uh please state your name uh for the record uh when you start your testimony. Okay. Um, my name is Karina Ta Walder. Um, thank you uh to the planning committee for hearing for hearing me tonight. Um, I I am a longtime West M West Westminster resident who lives near the former uh Surer Elementary School. And I would like to keep that that school building. And I will explain a little bit later. um how we can preserve that building. Um also I'm not for this uh development of the of the housing um because Westminster's um Westminster city already has a old um water and waste water infrastru infrastructure um due to the old age. It's nearly 50 years old and having a lot of these um new houses developed um will put a strain on uh this infrastructure. Also there will be a lot of cost involved with this. Um my uh biggest concern is uh in the past um the mortgage rates were lower um and now they're higher and recent trends revealed that that the uh listing um the listings of houses rise but not the closings. The inventory is increasing but the homes are sitting on sold. Um and um at the same time there is this national trade issue such as the recently imposed higher tariffs which have affected now the local development

areas um especially in construction. The construction materials have become very um high in cost to build new homes. So my fear is that um the construction will start and then um we we going to be left with uh a lot of homes or unfinished homes and um the park is going to be uh all the stock uh not there anymore. Um and that would not add to our community um where we enjoy the park, the the nature and also um I the area of these um new homes are um that are wanting to be planned are very the the the area is very small and it would further decrease the parks place and the playground for kids. Um, so going back to why I want to keep this the building of the old elementary school um is to why not rethink this area instead of having new um housing development? Why not turn this into um this building, the Zer building into uh for example a library? Um and um I submitted testimony in writing uh to you all in an email uh yesterday, but I also attached a a case study of why a library is uh beneficial. Um and uh so it could be also turned into um not only a library but it can be a tutoring place for teens um the elderly

uh the the kids in the neighborhood. this is would be all in a walking uh distance from the neighborhoods. Um and uh so traffic would also um not increase. Um so with this um being said um I would like the planning committee to not consider this housing development and rethink this area to be um to keep the Zer elementary building, turn it into something more viable so that neighbors can connect with one another and uh not have more housing that increases more traffic, air pollution, and a strain on our current water and wastewater infrastructure. Thank you so much. I still have some time left, but that's what I wanted to say, and I appreciate it.

Great. Thank you.

Good evening. U Thank you for allowing uh uh residents to to comment on on this development. Um my name is Rich Chamberlain. Um, I've uh uh lived in uh Kings Mill for more than well for about 40 years, give or take. I can never remember. My wife will tell me. Um, but uh we've raised uh three children. Uh and Zurgger is virtually in my backyard. They all three went to Zurgger. They are now raising families of their own. uh and each one of them uh has had uh uh some kind of issue in finding housing in Westminster. Uh luckily one of them is able to live in Westminster and they all wanted to be close. Um we also had uh some friends, a young growing family uh who had outgrown the apartment that they were in. Uh they wanted to live in Westminster. They could not find a place to live. They're now in Deer Trail. Uh we need housing. We need homes for people. And uh my suggestion uh is to make the zoning flexible enough to add the the missing middle uh to the uh uh to to the potential market uh for this uh for this project. Um and by that uh you know some uh in addition to single family homes uh some some smaller town homes uh some uh uh duplexes that are consistent with the design of the the single family homes as well. Um, so my my suggestion uh and some of some of my neighbors who don't like this uh project probably will disagree with me uh is is to uh uh allow a little more flexibility in how we zone

the this project. Thank you. Thank you. All right, who are our next speakers? Next up is Laura Mino, Phil Flynn, and John Fry. My name is Lauren Mino. I wasn't planning on speaking, and just because I got an A in that class doesn't mean I like to do it. So, I'm going to keep this quick. Um, my heart is pounding. Bear with me. Just breathe. It's good.

I have lived in this area for most of my life. My family moved in I think in 1980 or 81. Um my mom still lives in the same house on Garrison Street and um I live closer to the Yaketti so I'm still in the neighborhood. um just love it. And I'm just I don't know. They've presented some good ideas, some things I hadn't considered, but I'm also not really for this. I mean, it I went to Zurgger. Um I went to their closing ceremonies. That was a huge bummer, but it was really cool to walk through there and go, "Boy, the gym was way bigger when I was eight years old." Um overall, I'm just not for this. I I don't like it. I just feel like it's such a small space. That seems like a lot of houses. Are they going to be super tiny? That's That's kind of what I'm Somebody actually posed that question. Are they going to be very small? Um I'm bummed that we're going to lose that sidewalk on the east side of the property. I run on that sidewalk all the time up and down. Um nice that they're expanding Kingsmill Park though. I did like that. I didn't know that was a thing. But um overall I agree with everybody what everybody else has said. I've enjoyed my time in this neighborhood. I plan on staying in this neighborhood for a very long time. I love it. Um it's very well established and this new neighborhood going in and all the construction traffic and it's just right in the center of the neighborhood and it's just it's going to be disturbing to the community. That's it's going to get loud. it's going to get more traffic and uh my mom and myself are both against it. So that's all I've got. Thank you.

Thank you. Next speaker, please.

Yeah. Hi, my name's Phil Flynn. Uh I live on 93rd Avenue just uh just west of Stanley Lake. We've been there 40 years and the traffic on 93rd is at least 10 times what it was when I moved in in 1990. It's a shortcut coming from the west coming through that the traffic is just up insane. When I moved in, the majority of the houses I live in a 1700 square foot home. The majority of the houses had had grass. They don't have any grass anymore. We're constantly be being told we need to cut back on water, but we're going to build more homes. At least 10 to 20% of the homes that are on 93rd Avenue. You know, the last one of the last speakers just said there aren't homes available. There's homes available, but the uh the rental companies come in, buy up the property. There's quite a few, at least four within my block that are for rent. Those people next to us, they stay a year, they stay two years, they pay $3,000 a month rent. Um they move through constantly. They don't bother watering. They don't bother that trees die, that grass dies, but we need more homes. I think the homes are there. I think they're available. One of the questions I would have for all of you is um I'm not I'm not trying to be mean here, but do you guys take the money from campaign donations from the developers? Did anybody here raise their hand if they take money from the

developers? You don't. That's good. Yeah. Uh the the other thing um I spend a lot of time on the walkway next to the drainage ditch as well and I see a lot of animals on on that site. I see fox, coyotes at times. I worked up at Rocky Flats and one of my jobs was to uh put areas in for prebble mouse. I have seen prebble mouse in that area along the drainage ditch. I'm wondering how much of an environmental statement has really been. I mean, you've checked the soil, you've checked the area. What about the wildlife in the area? I've seen prebble mouse in the area. Now, specifically on that one, and I understand that's an endangered species because I worked at Rocky Flats in order to to try to uh try to get a habitat for that. I'm not sure jumping putting more homes in when there's plenty of homes if we could keep the developers out.

Thank you all. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Good evening. Uh thank you for the opportunity to speak tonight. Um is is it okay if I back these slides up to the aerial view slide that we had earlier? Uh uh Mr. uh Barov, can you uh

Thank you. I think it's helpful for just visualization purposes for my point. There we go. Um well, first and foremost, I I do agree with um the point earlier that was made that this would take away a resource from the existing community members. Um I live at 91st Place, so just across the street from this school here. I see young children using the playground equipment that uh was next to the school. I see dog owners in the area using this wide open space that uh for their dogs. So, it's a disservice to the dog owners if we take this away. I also see families using this for large event gatherings. So, that's a disservice to those families that use this for that that purpose there. So, that's just three groups that it would be a disservice to. Now, let's look at this red circle here. If we just, you know, imagine that this is that dark gray, all these houses all right there. If we take that all away, um, we've got much more density here. I came from Chicago in 2018 and moved out here to Westminster for more space for more openness and I love this area because of it. I've seen what happens to communities when you take away immediate park access. Now, I know there is a park over here just south and probably a little more east, but that adds about double the walk for me to get there. And I can tell you when people don't have access immediately outside of their door, uh it tends to degrade the neighborhood, not only just the social fabric of that neighborhood, but it also degrades the pricing. The gentleman earlier claims that um new developments increase housing prices. Um I didn't hear a whole lot of backup behind that statistic, but I went ahead and looked at some some research. Um the University of Washington did a research study on this. when you take away open

space immediately adjacent to homes um they say out values declined up to 20%. So that's a real monetary impact to all of us and that's not me saying that that's the University of Washington that conducted a study. Okay. Um there's also additional studies that were peer-reviewed by John Crompton and Sarah Nichols. They peer reviewed 33 studies and they also agreed that um homes next to a park could command a premium of up to about 8 to 10%. So I know that number is different but it does show that homes that have access to these exact areas that we're talking about tonight um that's a benefit to us. We want that. So um those are two points that I wanted to make. Um I really like this open space. I see it being used a lot by a lot of different groups of people. I talked to my neighbors. Um, I see a lot of them here tonight. I see a lot of them opposed to it. I have had one positive conversation about this with my neighbors. So, I know that that sentiment runs strong um throughout the neighborhood. I know you received a lot of emails. Um, I'm asking you not as a citizen of Westminster and Jefferson County to you as a vice chair to you as part of the planning commission. I'm asking you as a human being to a human being to not take this resource away from us. Thank you.

Thank you. Uh, next last two speakers are Gary Bland and Jennifer Yanner. I'm so sorry. Okay. Okay. Sure. Uh, Gary, if you want to come on up and the other three would like to speak, if you want to just go ahead and queue up here, that'd be great. Go ahead. Start it up. I'm sorry. Just one second. Uh Gary. Yes.

All right. Sorry about that. Uh go ahead, Mr. Bland. Okay. Can we reset that? I mean, you took away at least 20 seconds away from me. Oh. Oh, yeah. Yeah. Uh we'll we'll give you the we'll give you the we'll just carry on because I want to go ahead and get started here. Yeah, go ahead, please.

Um first off, um I've lived in across the street from Zurgger. My kids went there, but I actually have the maps here. I want to sit there and go over um how they pulled that up to five uh ADUs. It's not true. What they did is they went ahead and added across the Highline Canal. They actually added some uh town homes. That's how they got this number to come up. My calculations based on these. I'm going to go over them real quick. There's block A, one, A, B, C, and D. There's four divisions here. So, what I'm coming up with is if I use just these four that actually apply to the city code and a 2040 comp plan, I come up with a 4.31. Just so you know, I want to get that clear. They're saying five. It's not possible. Not with what I see in the zoning and what's been approved on the 2040 comp plan. So, what I want to do is I want to go back to we've had a number of meetings. Actually, uh Jeff mentioned that Jeff knows me very well. I've sent certified letters. I sent out a survey to I've got 490 people that took my survey in the city of Westminster in this particular neighborhood. I have and I sent it to him. he could ask him that I have ex actually about 90% of these people in the opposition of no just so you know I've had some requests what do we need to do at the building we have time to do that if you deny this property I've talked to the police I've talked to the SWAT team they want the place we had Durell in there they actually moved over to Church Ranch they put up a new building over there that cost them$ 13 million I've talked to people in Dorell they made a mistake Hey, they wish they would have never left Zurgger. Okay, they had a problem there. They're in financial problems, too. So, now what I want to do is go to the presentation. He talked about we

went there. This all he he's worried about the plutonium. I could tell you I've been there. I was there and I actually got a settlement. So, I know there's plutonium. He cares about me and I appreciate that. These low numbers, I still got rocky flats there, just so you know. So, what I want to do is go over this meeting that he had, this presentation. The same thing if we go with those 40 homes are expecting. I have a copy of the contract that actually came through um with the Jefferson County. They're offering $1.8 million for $43,000 square feet and 8 acres of land. That's ludicrous. If they decrease that number down to 28, I've read their contract. That comes out to about a million260. I could almost sell my house and move there. And then I'd put my motor home in the driveway over there, but I just couldn't dump it. This is a ludicrous number. Now, I want to get into I actually met with the assistant CEO of Jefferson County. I went into that building. I saw it. It's in perfect working order. There is some asbesus sitting there. I looked at it. They're sitting there saying Jefferson County mentioned to me I still got time.

Jefferson County mentioned to me that if you guys decline this and if it goes back out on the resale market since everybody knows about that low price, they're going to get a lower offer. So, let's just put it this way because if we decline this in the first off, you're going to hear a lot more people talking about why we don't need this. I've been there 45 years. So, what I'm getting at is that school, my kids went there. That that building is in good shape. I want time to find the SWAT the SWAT team wants to to have it. I could find the library. We can find use for that building. Just so you know, that cost the city of Westminster needs to look at the acquisition. If that's the case, they already gave Sheridan Greens. I think this is something that the city needs to look at. I know that Jefferson County, they don't stop taking my tax dollars. They still get money for those schools and I don't get a school. That's not fair to me. And if we sit there and look at, and I'm going to tell you how many homes are going to go in this lot, they're talking about 40. They are at that $800,000. Okay, that's a high number. The missing middle misses it by a mile. Just so you know, that's what was in their presentation. I have, if you want, I'll send you the YouTube video. I've been there. I've been to this meeting. I sit there and I work with Bill Christopher. All this development, there's 53 developments active in the city right now. He can sit there and this dep the development process. They're going to sit there and we say we have water. We got the uplands. We got all these 50 53 developments. There's 6,500 people being added to this water system. That's what I want you to pay attention to. This development is outrageous. So, what? We haven't even got to ups yet.

I still get some more time. You took They reset it to five minutes. Okay, sorry about that. That's okay. Thank you. Thank you. Sorry.

Hi, my name is Sally Buyers. Um, I am originally from the south side of Chicago. I moved to Colorado in 1980 when things were open and clear. My husband has grown up in Boulder. His daughters went to Zurgger Elementary. He has lived in this neighborhood for more than 40 years. We have an older community. I know Westminster is growing. Um I know there's houses to the north, to the east. Um, but one of my questions about this development is how are you going to mitigate the asbestous in this building? This building is old. I worked at Rocky Flats. I don't want that building destroyed and all those pardons going out to the community. I don't want to die from cancer. I live on 92nd Avenue and I don't want my neighbors dying of cancer. How are you going to mitigate that? Also, the noise. I have a relative that has seizures and she lives just a few houses away from me. Noise like that triggers her headaches and makes her have a seizure. She has grandma seizures. The noise in this community will be destructive to this poor person's health. Um there's so much about this area. Yes, we're an older area. The Prices are going to go up. Our taxes are going up. And to be honest with you, where's Jefferson County today? Why aren't they here? They're the ones selling this property. Why aren't they here? And these are mostly elderly people. I'm 68 years old. I'm going on retirement. Taxes are going up. How do I afford that on a on a fixed

income? You know, there's so many things that we can do with this area. And really, I agree with the gentleman who said there's a lot of renters. We have a rental house down the street from us that just had two dead bodies in it because the person running that had construction guys in there and they don't they didn't keep up the property and they were doing drugs. We just had a they just moved out a month ago. Really? When we call the city and ask for help on these things, nothing happens. We get a voice recording. We need to pay attention to the older community as much as we pay attention to these newer homes and newer communities going in here. Our older people deserve the right to be in their homes until they die. You know, I mean, I grew up in a city that the houses I could have touched the house next door to me. How are you going to mitigate if a fire starts in there? What happened with Marshall? How fast do fires travel through our neighborhood? I mean, these are things we have to think about. Yes, we need by, you know, people moving into our neighborhood. There are so many houses up for sale in our neighborhood, it isn't even funny. But the rundown houses are the ones that bring down our community. And how many rentals are these houses going to be? who's going to move in there? That's what we have to look at. We have to look at our entire city, not just certain sections. Water, wastewater, everything is important to our vital being. Thank you for your time.

Thank you.

Hello. Thanks for allowing us to speak on this. My name is Janna Phillips. I and my family live in the home directly behind uh Zurgger Elementary along the fences. There's the corner house and then ours on the um the culdesac there. And um I want to state that we and everybody in that whole cod culde-sac are opposed to this um specifically the removal of that uh sidewalk from uh 91st up to the trail. Um, my main concern is that access for my son. He is an autistic boy and he loves that access. He doesn't have to have any supervision going all the way around to the top portion of the entrance of the park. He can go directly um by the fence. And then our neighbors to the right are very elderly, 78, 80, and 102. One of them uses that sidewalk every single day, sometimes multiple times a day to get his exercise and he's um that's part of his his routine. Um and this will significantly disrupt not only our community but my direct neighbors. Um so I wanted to say how veheminently opposed the majority of the Thank you.

Thank you. One, not very good at public speaking. Want to bring up? No problem.

Hi everyone. Um, I live just a couple hundred feet away from Zer Elementary School. I moved here three years ago. I have a three-year-old daughter. I would love to be able to walk my daughter to school or for my wife to walk her daughter to school. Um the next nearest school is like 30 minutes away walk. That's not very feasible for a walkable city and neighborhood. Um especially if I want my daughter to have any independence as she grows older. Walking to school would be really lovely. the luxury that I had afforded to me and I think it's something that the the residents of this neighborhood can afford as well or even deserve especially given that we already have this school here. Um I have concerns with how this affects the character of our neighborhoods. I do think that reducing the size of the this yard that sits adjacent to the park will affect how we interact with the park and how we view the park. it'll be a lot more condensed and crowded feeling. Um, and I also have concerns for I do I do really appreciate the addition of the park dedication. I think that's really nice. And uh but um like missing that east sidewalk that goes for to to the park will be a great loss in my opinion. I think it's going to be a very different character walking up to the park. I walk from um what is that street? Is it Field Street north of 91st A? Right north of Zer Elementary and uh just walk right along that walkway into the park. And I just think it's going to be a very different character to walk through this neighborhood that's rather dense. Um walk through their their public road. It's it's just going to feel so sequestered off from the rest of the neighborhood. I think maybe that'll go

away with time. Maybe it won't, but trying to access the park through their different density housing is just going to feel a little invasive, I think. And uh reducing that yard that we can all just play in and throw a Frisbee and play with our dogs and let my little girl run like crazy is uh is a great loss. So, um, and then furthermore with the park, I do worry how having homes so close to the skate park and tennis court is going to affect the long-term viability of the park. Like, are we going to get complaints about, you know, that the skate park and and tennis courts available there? Are we next going to be looking at, you know, the eradication of those elements of the park? I know that the developers don't have any say in that. that is with I don't know if it's with the planning commission or who it's with, but I just worry that's going to be the next step. So, um I'll check my notes for a second. Oh, yeah. And, uh earlier someone was commenting about other, you know, other uses for this area. I would I would also really appreciate for something besides just more housing. I kind of fear that more housing, this more density actually increases risk to safety of our neighborhood. And um I'd like to propose something that has more public use, not private use. I don't know, a shared marketplace, um, a library, um, some sort of other public facility, even if it's not applicable to me, is just going to have a different feel than having this rather dense collection of houses. Um, so I'd like for the planning commission to consider that and consider rejecting this development. I think that's all that I have.

Thank you.

Thank you. Um, my name is Kenneth McBride. I live uh in the culdeac on Estus 964 Estus. And I agree with the previous speaker who said there's nobody on our block that wants that. And we don't back up to the the school. I can see the school from my front porch. We are we're at the top of the culde-sac. But like the neighbors two houses over who are 102 98 whatever and has Parkinson's. They use that area all the time. My wife has Alzheimer's. So that's the school is a is a landmark for her to go be able to walk. I have two bad knees so I'm not walking a lot right now. But to me I'd like you to consider this is this doesn't fit in the neighborhood for me and I know the school district has to do something with it. Uh, but I don't think this is the right thing. And if it turns out that this is the best we can do, uh, and you've heard a ton of reasons why, and I don't know anybody who in our neighborhood who agrees we should do this, then I think we should do something different. Now, I have a unique proposal. I was sitting in the back going, Cardell Holmes, you have this wonderful charity foundation. Why don't you buy the property and turn it into a park? the Kings Mill Cardell Homes Park, you would do a lot of good PR stuff. Just a thought, but I don't know. Never read the the planning commission rules. Wrote one down. I thought it was pretty good. It says um rule number or uh objective number one to advance accessibility to opportunity and prosperity for all in Westminster. So my question is how does this affect my prosperity? Looks to me like the only

people that make money and become more prosperous from developing this is the developer. I don't see anybody else in the neighborhood going to make money. I think if you're on that fence, I think that's a be you got some view there looking out over Zurgger to the mountains. I don't see how the price of that house is going to keep increasing because you have less of a mountain view. Just something to consider. But I can tell you from everyone I've talked to answer is no. We can do better than this. I don't know what that is except suggesting it turns into a park and Cardell becomes a hero. But other than that, I think we can do better. Thank you. Thank you. Jim Fenomore. Uh good evening board staff. Glad to be here again tonight. visit with you guys. Um, I've got some concerns. I was sitting here, didn't really have an agenda before I got here, uh, took notes of what's been said so far as far as the presentation, uh, from the city and from the, uh, potential property buyers that want to develop this and the community. I was keeping record here for everybody that's been up here. Uh there was one community person that was against it and looks like there was 10 or 11 in favor of keeping it as is not uh building it out. So it sounds like it's a pretty strong community input as far as the neighbors are against this development. Now then uh I personally have been in

construction all my life. My grandfather was a mason contractor. My dad and my uncle. I know what I made money. I stand here because of construction and farming. So I know that this part of the c county and the city has been built out for 40 plus years. I used to ride my motorcycle there when I was 11 years old. Trust me, hurt my feelings when I couldn't ride my dirt bike down there. They start building houses. So, this has been a established neighborhood for, like I say, over 40 years. So, we're trying to change the comp plan and make it more dense. that area. When I do drive over there, I do have a friend that lives in that community. And I go by there, I see the kids out there, the moms, the dads, the grandparents, uh walking, riding their bicycles, playing bicycles or uh playing basketball, uh in the skate park, uh walking their dogs. It this is a wellutilized property within this community. So, uh, it's not just sitting there dormant and not being used. It's a very high valued piece of property. As far as the students that was mentioned by the developer that are saying that uh having less students there, they get less education. Uh, I I call hogwash on that. When you have more teachers and lower students, the students get better education. They are able to get the time of the teacher. The teacher can focus on them. So, uh, less students per teacher, better education.

That's a fact. Um, the city is pushing affordable housing. uh 800 plus thousand dollars on these homes is not affordable housing. I know that uh councils pushes that. I hear it. I I come to council meetings constantly and uh try to represent the community. Uh I've got nothing to lose, nothing to gain on a lot of this stuff. Not getting that 10 cents. It actually cost me money and my time to come to these meetings. Now then, uh, urban sprawl was brought up. The city only has 2% left in the in the city to develop. Last night, uh, council voted to go ahead and change the zoning on for the uh, 74 acres or the senior citizen over on Westminster Boulevard. take that 74 acres out, you're going to have less than 2% of developable land in the in the city of Westminster. There's going to be a higher impact on the sewer, higher impact on the water. So, with all these things that have been brought up tonight, u I would recommend that the board not approve this project. And also I met with Jefferson County School District and toured that property and seen the condition of it. And uh I asked this the city of or school official, I'd like to make an offer on the property because I do have an investor that's interested in keep buying that property and leaving the zoning as is and leaving the open area as is. and they said that we couldn't

make an offer on it because there was a contract on it. So, there are other options. I do have someone that is interested in purchasing that property as is and it's we're not going to hurt the feelings of the community. We're going to benefit the community. Thank you very much for your time. Great. Thank you. All right. All right. Uh we are going to take a five minute break here. Uh there needs to be a technical reset and then we will continue with the hearing. Just a second please. Five minutes. Is that okay? If you all need a we don't need a technical reset. If if you all need one.

Oh, you're good. Oh, I thought Oh, okay. I was told that. No, never mind. were I guess as you were then I apologize all any right the information has changed uh anyone okay before I close the public testimony anyone else uh wanting to speak all right uh all right you three please come down down front and uh and then we'll uh state your name and we'll go from there

hi I'm Joyce Um, I have lived over there for 30 plus years. My kids went to Zer. I worked at Zer, so I little know a little bit more about the building and the reason why it was closed. And it wasn't just lower enrollment, but that was a big part of it. Some of it had to do with the building needed to be upgraded and it needed fixing. And those things cannot happen with the way the building is built now. Would I like it to stay as a park? Yes. My granddaughters go over there with me now. I would love for it to still be a park. I know the ship has sailed. The school is selling it. It is not going to become a school. It's been closed for 12 years. That's not going to happen. It needs to become something other than an empty building sitting on a lap. I like the idea of keeping the walkway on the east side. I think that's very important. Would I like it to be reduced from houses of 40 down to say 25, 30? Yes. I'd like it to be smaller. I'd like the lots to be bigger. That would make me a whole lot happier than what's going in because I know no matter what, there's going to be more traffic. there's going to be more pull on our electrical system, water system, fire department, and everything else. It just cannot be that. I mean, it's going to happen no matter what by this happening. And I think we need to be very thoughtful on how we do this. I know that it cannot become Sheridan Greens because I know that was on a whole different thing where the land was leased by the school. So, it automatically reverted back to you guys. It was not that was purchased by Jefferson County School System. So, there's a difference. I also know that

there was other charter schools that looked into moving in there and there's a reason that they chose not to go there. So, it still has to become something, but it's not going to be another school. Thank you for your time. Thank you.

Hi there. My name is Jim Tyler. I live over 92nd place. So probably about halfway between Zurgger and Woodro Wilson. So I'm not as directly connected to some of the previous speakers. Um and while I'm not initially for the recommendation to uh have Cardell build, I'm not against eventual reuse of that land. I think uh the city council should consider a couple of things as we go through this process rather than simply dotting the uh eyes and crossing the tees related to your u memorandum and the six points or seven points. Uh first of all, the as we've heard a couple times, the expected price at the time of selling of the completed homes is going to be somewhere around $800,000. Maybe it's less, maybe it's more. Um, as of 2023, the average price around Denver was 649,000 and the average uh income during that same period of time was only 96,000 98,000 within Westminster. And in order to be able to purchase a $650,000 home, you need to have around an income of 160,000 to 215,000. So unless you have a dual-income household, it's unlikely that your average citizen or family is going to be able to purchase this home. You're going to have to have or uh bring in people who have higher income. And while some people would consider that a good thing, I don't necessarily believe that is true. Um, one of the things that we, my wife and I have been very um, privileged was that our um, one of the things that we, my wife and I have been very um,

privileged was that our son had special needs and we were because I was a single uh, earner, she was able to take that child, my my son to various um, schools uh, including up uh, um, at WIT uh at is it the the academy that's over on SIMS um in order to be able to get those special needs met and also in Arvvada even though we lived in Westminster at the time. So I'm special parents who have two incomes who have to work. We don't have a consistent busing within the Jefferson County School District now around some of these schools. uh and therefore you know opportunities for those students are limited as well. Uh so and I don't bring this up because I think we should just make the school again. I understand that um those logistics are probably uh unable to be met at this time but I think that more time and more forward planning should be used with regards to how we're zoning. Um, in addition to that, we didn't talk about the size of these homes. It sounds like, um, we're looking at about 8,000 square feet for a plot um, based on average of 40 units in these eight uh, acres. That's not uh a huge amount, but if you look at the map, and that's the the other map that actually showed the streets, it doesn't look like there's a lot of street parking. So, uh, I I haven't been able to find the statistic for the number of cars in Colorado for a single family home, but I can guarantee you that within Kings Mill, it's more than two, right? So, unless the particular floor plan is one that includes twocar garages, you're going to have additional parking issues as well.

And and that really hasn't been brought up. So, I I would like you all to consider these things. I would also like to put on the table that that walkway, if this um motion moves forward, that that walkway between 91st and the Highline Canal be a requirement to stay in place. And all that would require is essentially about uh 8 foot additional easement, right, to move left. Um so those are just the points I wanted to make. Um I hope you consider that really in the moving forward. So I again I can't say that I disagree with saying no right now but I don't think that that means you know Cardell's out of the the running for the future. I think they have to come and address all these points has been made by everybody. Okay. Thank you.

Thank you.

All right. Anyone else wish to speak? If so, come on down and and we will take your testimony. My name is Ken Meyer. I really like what number speaker number one had to say about the playing area. Uh the uh picture I see there's nowhere to play fly a kite. I see that happening. I see the kids out there playing soccer and football and all these other. I don't see that available. What are we going to do with these kids that need to get their energy out if you build all these homes? I'm not against building a few homes maybe, but don't take away the football field or the soccer field or the walkway that the previous person talked about. If cartel doesn't like to have only 20 houses, goodbye. Forget it. Let's cut the house number down from 40 to no more than 30 so that the I my home would not fit on one of those 40 by 100 lots. What kind of a home are they going to build? Mine is the smallest home in the area. Does anybody here have a perfect uh home that they're I saw some pictures up here? I don't see them fitting on the house without be the houses are only two feet apart. That's no way to build homes.

I my home I've see most of them have 10 feet between the houses. Is that what they are going to have here? If not, they may not. I don't want them here. I want land for the build a home on and have some exercise out there mowing my lawn. I I like the idea about a cartel Westminster Park. I think that was a great idea because you're not going to take away our play area. I I use that walkway all the time between uh uh where they are. I can't find it. Oh, between the homes at uh 8750 and 8780 West 90th and then it continues up the hill to the south. I use that all the time to go up to the uh Highland Canal Walkway and I used to ride my bicycle through that way. Are you going to take that away from me? The idea with having to go through a residential area to get to the Highline Canal, I don't like that idea. I don't know about anybody else. I think every one of you over there should come over there and rent a home and see what we have. I don't know where you guys live, but if it's not near where if it's not near this development, I don't think you have a right to uh say anything about it and but except listen to those who are here living here.

I think it's part of your duty to uh live in the whole area that you are having redeveloped so that you get a taste of what is now in existence. Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you. My name is Mike Lloyd. I live at 90th and Dudley. listening to uh everything tonight, it occurs to me that uh what's developing here is that we're going to have a little tiny uh space of million almost million dollar homes and set in the mi in the midst of uh our community uh which would be I mean it does not blend in with the community. Will the new owners uh be uh will they establish a homeowners association uh to protect the value of their investments? Will they uh really actually allow uh the rest of the community access through their property to get to the uh park and all that? So that's that's one of my concern I think that you should think about. Thank you.

Thank you. Oh, no problem. Take your time.

Hi, my name is Sharon Cade and I've lived in my house for 47 years and I have seen so much change. We have two kids that live on either side of us and believe me, I love them to death, but their yards look like crap because they don't take care of them. Sorry. they don't take care of them. So, these smaller houses are probably ideal for these people. Not that I want them there, and I don't think you should have that many, but the smaller yards because these kids just don't take care of their yards. And if you go in our neighborhood now, I'm sorry, it is not a beautiful neighborhood anymore all the way around. You said last time at the meeting that West Minister takes care of all that easement and all the garbage and the trees. They don't. We've had to call on it four or five times. The weeds are over a foot tall and they come into our yards. Not that the kids on either side care, but I care because I take care of my yard. So, I don't care if these houses are close because these kids don't want to take care of their yards. They want a big enough backyard to put their dogs in and just sit out front. But I just don't think we should have that many. But I also think that we need to start taking care of Westminister. You go up and down these neighborhoods, nobody can afford the water. Nobody takes care of their yard anymore. Everything's wild. And you try to talk to them, oh, I have my rights. which they do, but you look in the neighborhoods anymore and they're not beautiful anymore. These people say that these kids won't have any place to play. Our kids didn't have any place to play. They played in the street. We played in the street. Didn't hurt us. You know, we have kids riding around on electric little bikes all the time, you

know. So, they don't have a yard to play in. Play in the street. We all did. We played kick the can. We played hideand go seek. We rode our bikes. We were outside. Right now, I have three great grandkids living with me right now. What do you think they're doing? That's all they do. I can't get them to go outside. So, these houses, the size to me is fine. I don't want them two and three stories. I'm sure we can't anything about that. The yards are no big deal. I just don't want a ton of them. I don't want the traffic in the area. You know, our kids when they close Zer, we had to go to Weber and we had to go to Lucas. Okay, big deal. People take their kids, drive their kids everywhere. They don't walk to school anymore. Not like we used to. We had to walk to school in the snow. You know, you heard that your whole life. You know, these kids can't walk across the street. It's not a big deal what size yard they have. If you made less houses in this area, they would have a bigger yard to play in the backyard. Kids are different nowadays. They don't play outside, they play inside. But that's all I wanted to say. I just don't think there should be that many houses. And you know, if if these people don't take care of the houses anymore than the people in our neighborhood do anymore, it's a shame because like I said, when I moved into that neighborhood, I love it. I don't like it anymore. And I've lived there 47 years. And like I said, I love the kids on either side of us. I think they're great kids, but they have no

idea what a lawn mower, what a weed whacker is, what anything is. Their yards are nothing but weeds, and I'm the one who has to take care of because I will not let my lawn go. So, thank you.

Thank you. Good evening. My name is Amanda McFersonson and I live on Dudley um Street. Sorry, I'm very nervous all of a sudden. Um and I'm one of the eight people who would whose homes back to the open space park school right now. Um, and looking at the map is very concerning to me because I would suddenly have three new neighbors backing up against my backyard fence that I don't have right now. Also, looking at the size of these plots is very disturbing to me. Um, as you can see from the map, the the size 40 by 100, 4,000 square feet when all the homes in the neighborhood are what 7 8 9,000 square feet or more even in some cases. Um, I'm very concerned about the size of these homes. Um, as another person mentioned, you can't pick up a home off of this map and stick it in one of those lots. So, all I can think is these are going to be tall. And that disturbs me a lot because I've looked out my back window today into the park and saw a soccer team out there in uniform practicing. I've looked out and seen families having baseball games. Um, there's all kinds of things happening in that park all day long. Sometimes, I'll be honest, as someone who backs to a park, it can be a bit much with the noise and the activity. But I wouldn't trade it for the world. I think taking away this green space, a place for people to have soccer games and baseball games, there are other parks, but they don't have that kind of space.

They just don't. This is a very unique park in this neighborhood. Oakhurst cannot replace this. The park over on I think it's Field. I don't know. Anyway, that little park there can't replace it. This is a unique space and taking this away from the community to build I don't even know what what you're envisioning for these homes, but to take away that space to build all these homes, so many of them in such tiny lots, it really concerns me. It concerns me a lot. Um, not just for me and my family, but for our community where kids play. It's not just kids, though. And yes, kids do play outside. Um, I hear them day and night. Um, but yeah, I'm really concerned about what that's going to do to our community to lose that green space, so much of it, and then pack in so many probably very tall homes in that area. So, thank you for your time.

Thank you.

You don't even have to start the timer. Don't worry. Uh my name is Justin Vilski. I am actually uh school principal of the not public school located directly south on Field Street. I would just I thought I would never get this opportunity, but here I am. I would like to publicly apologize to anyone who lives in this area. I am that soccer coach who yells out and so I'm very sorry. I have a loud voice. this would take away our free soccer field that we use. Granted, we'll live and you know, we'll be okay, but it was more of a community apology, so I'm sorry. Thank you.

Thank you.

Hey, my name's Quinn Nerrison. Um, I've I've watched you uh outside of my uh back door because I back up right next to the park. I'm uh on 9065 Esta Street. Uh and in this new plan, there's going to be I think five houses, four or five houses that are going to back up to my house, which is quite a lot. Five houses to one house. So, I I don't really understand how this development fits within the plan of the community. I don't think it makes sense. Um, I also bought my house in 2022, so I'm a fairly new resident to this uh community, but I've been diligently trying to save money to um, you know, eventually move into a larger house. We, my family and I, we just had a new, uh, baby. Uh, he's, uh, 13 months old. Um, and I I use that back gate all the time to access this park, but we've been trying to save up money to, uh, you know, move into a larger house. Um, and I'm real concerned because I'm not going to be able to sell this house um that I'm currently living in. Um, you know, because there's going to be construction for, you know, the next three or four years. And so, if I can't uh take out that equity that I've already put in, I can't, you know, use that towards a new home. So, um, that's really concerning for me. Um yeah, just wanted to make that note to the commission that this plan directly impacts me in a very large way.

Thank you.

Uh would anyone else who has not testified on this please come up? My name is Helen Contreres and I live in the neighborhood also and I've been listening to a lot of these people and I also oppose the building of the homes here. On one of the slides that he mentioned um that slideshow number eight, he said that resources were not going to increase with the water or the sewage down there. But when I look at the pictures, it indicates that there's going to be trees that's going to be planted on each one of the homes in front of the homes. Where's that water going to come from? Water pre also the one of the other issues that was going to that he mentioned was the parking. I think they said that there was going to be parking on the side streets. So that's going to take away our parking on our own street in front of our own home. And it sounds like it doesn't seem like they're going to have any kind of um underground parking, any kind of parking for their own occupants if they do sell these homes at this ridiculous price that they're saying is going to be affordable housing for these persons that are going to be coming into the area. It is a quiet area. It is a quiet neighborhood. It is mostly it is occupied by kids and a lot by older adults as well, myself included. But I do include this into my unit that I also enjoy the park. I also enjoy the walkway. We like to walk around the Highline Canal as well. And it is getting to be a little quiet and sometimes it is noisy. It is occupied a lot by some of the bikers that go through, but the times that we do enjoy it, when the new occupants are going to be coming in with a new building, what do you think that's going to happen?

It's just going to be overwhelming to a lot of us that'll be there. Um, what I don't like about this with the new homes coming in, it is going to impact our waterways. It is going to impact our parking. It is going to impact our quietness. and it is going to impact our neighborhood just being Westminster. Thank you very much.

Thank you. All right. Anyone else? Going once. Going twice. All right. All right. I hereby close the public testimony and will allow staff and the applicant some time to respond.

Uh vice chair um could could we have about five minutes to collect our thoughts? I think there's a lot of um comments made from the audience if you would like to kind Yeah, let's take let's let's take let's take five minutes everybody to have a bio break and we'll be back here uh if I can see my time at 9:07. Thank you very much.

You're welcome. [Music]

Oh yeah. It appears the applicants team has returned. So in a moment we will reconvene. All right. Uh, all right. Looks like staff will start with uh their comments. So, uh, Mr. Bhoff, go ahead.

All right. Thank you, Vice Chair. Um, so uh, thank you for everyone and for the comments and, uh, concerns that were brought up today. I know that I have and other staff members have spoken to a lot of, uh, questions and concerns that have come in from the community. Um some quick highle things to speak to. Uh starting with the clarification of a reszone versus is a comprehensive plan amendment. Um there is oftentimes a little bit of confusion here. And just to say it on the record that the the zoning is going to stay PUD. This is a change of a land use character area which is a much more highlevel look. Um and it would be changing that from public to uh residential low density. More of a nuance thing or anything at this level. So, I just wanted to state that for the record. Um, and then for uh the overall project requirements that that will come from this proposal, we're tonight we're just looking at the comprehensive planned land use uh character area designation. A lot of the concerns and comments are something that are going to be re reviewed with the uh PDP amendment and the ODP amendment. As we get those submitts, it'll include things like specific studies, uh specific amenity spaces that will be offered, the actual design of house, etc., etc. This is a much more higher level looking at the context of everything in the area and how it relates to the comprehensive plan goals and strategies. for uh comments on the utilities. I did want to state at the at uh this point that identifying opportunities for replacing aging infrastructure is something that is identified by our comprehensive plan and by our sustainability plan. And this is a viable way to get private development to pay for something that would be a city cost. uh that will be a a responsible and more resilient way to go about uh paying for infrastructure replacement as they're needed. Uh next I

would wanted to speak to you real quick about some comments on sprawl. So with any sort of new development that goes in in kind of more green field areas, if you will, it also uh triggers other other things like increased roads and re increased sidewalks, increased utilities needing to go in as well as also the need for increased businesses, increased uh facilities such as schools, hospitals, uh fire stations, what have you. the the sprawl element is really more addressed here. And the fact that it's going in into an area where yes, it's going to put strain on existing infrastructure facilities, but not to a level that it's going to require brand new services that would be at a much more of an impact when you go into more sprawling areas. Um, last thing, a a difference between uh this site and another school site that was brought up with the other school. There was a reverter clause that was built into that development that required that school to come back to the city. I think that it is important to note that that requirement did push the city to have to pay for the demolition, the rebatement, the environmental analysis and city resources are currently a bit strapped for providing um opportunities for our parks as is. So having a new park in the area could create a little bit more concern on the city budget. Um I think that's all I had to speak to unless there was anybody else from staff, but otherwise I'll turn it over to the applicant. Thanks, Carson. Uh, I I want to go back and touch upon the RFP process that the school district went through. I think this occurred about two to three years ago. Um, there was public outreach. There was a public uh um board that helped the school district made make

this decision. Um they've reviewed all the applications at the RFQ uh process. Um and this also opened up other uses, other developers to use different uses. Um I'll touch back on what I said previously. There were three um finalists in RFP process. They were all residential. um you know, the city had the opportunity to turn it into a park or a library or uh any other use that they see fit, but um it was a public process and so you know, we're here because you know, Jeff Jefferson County thought we were the best option for them. Um and then the another question about the uh status of the school. Um we were told by uh two high level uh Jeff Jefferson County um school district members or uh employees um that the school is in such disrepair that it wouldn't be worth going back in there and rehabbing the school. It would just cost way too much money. Um there is asbestous in there. We'll remove that asbestous as per the state regulations of how to get rid of asbesus. So, it would be contained in in bags and hauled off off the site. And then I think we're going to follow up with a couple other um Thank you. I just wanted to take a moment and make some clarifying comments about um the existing Kings Mill Park. So, the existing Kings Mill Park site will not be touched. It won't be encroached upon. There will be no impacts from this development on the existing Kings Mill Park. We will provide an additional land dedication to expand the size of the existing Kings Mill Park by that one and a half acres. Um the five foot trail currently running

east west from the culac to Kings Mill and I'm going to flip the is shown here and that will remain in place. So that east west access that is currently in place will remain. Um we are providing multiple connections north south through the site in addition to the street network. Um the the I one thing I do want to point out is the existing path from the east west connection to the culde-sac south to where it meets farmers highline canal is not actually a trail. It's a 5 foot wide drainage ditch. It is concrete, so I'm sure people do use it as a walking surface. I'm sure for a lot of folks that's really great, but that isn't the technical intent of that concrete. So, we would be providing a public sidewalk that was ADA accessible, meeting public standards on the street between the East West Connection and the existing Kings Mill Park. Um, one of the comments we heard tonight was, well, how do we make sure that we're still allowed access there as neighboring residents? Again, this would be a public park with public street connections, so the development would have no ability to prevent surrounding community members from using those facilities. Um, a couple of things I wanted to speak to specifically on the physical home sites and the physical homes themselves. Um, this site plan proposes a 40 by 100 foot lot, so approximately a 4,000 square foot lot size. The houses will be twostory houses with approximately 2200 square feet each. We will provide, we're looking to provide a two-car garage with two parking spaces in the driveway. So, while yes, there may be on street

parking for some, we are providing up to four off- streetet parking spaces per home. Um, we will meet the setback standards from the city, which I believe are 5 foot side setbacks, which would provide 10 feet total between homes. And we will be putting an HOA in place which will maintain the whatever it is determined is the umbrella that the HOA needs to take care of. Um and we heard a comment about fire. Um and so all of these homes will be sprinklered because it's part of the Westminster code. It's my understanding. So I think that that's I'm going to let Travis talk about some of the utilities.

Thank you. I think the other thing I want to touch base on is we heard a lot of comments about utilities and impacts to the sanitary sewer and water networks. Um, as part of this application process, we did prepare a utility memo and we compared the water and sewer demands um from the school to what the water and sewer demands would be for this residential development. Um, sewer demands went down, water demands went up primarily due to irrigation. We presented that to city staff and the engineering department and they no concerns about the ability of the infrastructure to handle the changes in those demands. As part of the next step in this process, we will be doing further analysis um some flow monitoring on the sanitary system water model to ensure that you know any of the changes we make do not negatively impact any of the existing Apologies I ran off so quickly. There are a couple items I forgot on the second page. Um, wanted to clarify real quick how the density is calculated with the comprehensive plan analysis. So, we take a look at the overall acreage. In this case, that is the uh 0.08 that uh was originally uh relayed to us. And I believe that as we get the uh actual land area hashed out with ODP and PDP that the the specifics of that acreage might change but it is that total uh over the amount of homes that are in the area. So the up to 5.0 uh dwelling units per acre is what they're requesting and that does match the surrounding um density for the character areas and the residential load density character area requirement. And lastly, just a clarification that when it comes to the school deciding to remain open or switch to another user, that is not something

that is within the city's perview to be able to regulate. Thank you. All right. Thank you for that rebuttal. Does the commission have any additional questions for the applicant or staff at this time? Commissioner Peg,

I do have one clarifying question. I think it would be an applicant question regarding um sidewalks and I I appreciate I think you already tried to answer this question but um so what I heard but not in these exact words was that there will be a sidewalk on Everett Street from the PLLD area up to 91st Avenue. Is that area up to 91st Avenue? is that so these green lines are those sidewalks.

So I want to touch base what you're seeing here is the local street section that shows a 5ft sidewalk on side of the road. That's where we're proposing for all the streets within the Okay, that answers my question. Thank you. Great. Commissioner Colin.

Gosh, so many great comments. Um, I just want to say that I appreciate you guys all coming out tonight making a lot of comments. You don't usually see this many people um so passionate about their community. So, I I wanted to actually clarify a few things that I didn't think were answered and I think they're pretty obvious answers, but someone asked about snow removal. City will do snow removal on streets, right? So, that was one of the questions that came up. Um gosh there's just so much you know the schools out there for Oh yes Mr. Klein would you like to answer that?

So Heath Klein assistant city engineer develop mobility and stormwater. So to answer the question since these will be public rights of way and roads they all they're classified as local. So it meets the standard for removal when we have in excess of 8 inches of snow. But this the snow removal would be done by the city on the roads. So it's similar to the rush of the community. Correct. Thank you.

Perfect. Thank you for clarifying. Um you know that school sat there for 10 or 12 years empty. And um I would think that if the school would have had something they could do with it, they would have. I would have loved to see them do something with it because this community, it feels like that's kind of the heart of this community. So I understand you're passionate about it. Um, it's really hard because they own the property and if I heard some of the comments from the applicant, um, at the beginning they talked about $150 million. Is that the number you gave? $150 million that the school district pays to take care of old schools that are vacant. It's uh roughly $150,000 per school. Oh, 150,000 per school.

Per year. Per year. Yes, sir. Yes, ma'am. Sorry. It's okay. Um, that's a lot of money and they've been doing it for 10 10 12 12 years. 12 years. That's a long time. And they still have 14 others that they're taking care of.

Sure. And we all would like to have smaller classrooms with more attention for the students. Um, all of these things just don't add up. Something's got to give. They've got to get rid of the school. Um, they've got to sell the property and they've got to use that money to to to help the district. And I kind of see that. I understand that. Um, I would love for the school to become a library, but you guys have a great Stanley Lake library really close. Um, I'd love for it to be a community center. We've got awesome community centers in Westminster. Um, and and you know, if you look at this community on an aerial map, I would encourage you guys to do that when you get home. Um, this neighborhood has so many benefits. You've got the Nyiver Creek Trail. You've got the Highland Hills or Highland um, Canal Trail. You've got I mean, you'll still have Kings Mill Park. It may not be as big, but it'll still be a park. You got Somerset Park, Dover Park, and you got Stanley Lake.

Sorry, just to make the point of correction, Kings Mill Park will expand, not be reduced in size.

Okay, thank you for correcting me on that. So, and again, so there's a lot of stuff going on here. Um, I I I understand your passion and your concern. Um I I just I'm struggling with this one because um um one one of the things I want to clarify too is um it's nice to have affordable homes, but if you want the lot sizes to be the same size as your lot sizes, um these homes are going to go way up in price. So either you have a smaller lot um or you have to have a a larger lot or else go with a multifamily or a higher density um to get affordable. It just the math just doesn't work. And so a developer comes along and they have to do this construction. They've got to work through those numbers and they have to work for them. Um I would love it if they donated land. I would love it if the developer said, "Hey, we'll just donate all this." They're not going to do that. They're in the business to make money. They've got shareholders and employees. They have to pay for insurance, all that kind of stuff. Um, I guess I'm not really asking questions. I'm just This is a tough one because I I don't know what to say. That's all I got. Thanks,

Commissioner Tomichek. This is uh for the city. Um, has there been any indication that the city was interested in this property during its during the 12 years of vacancy?

Thank you for the question. No, there has not been that has not been built into any of like the budget analysis for uh this area being considered for city acquisition. Well, I'm going to take an opportunity to ask a few questions here. So, let me get my stuff in order. All right, I think we answered that one. Uh, I what I'd really like to know. Uh, and maybe we can go back to the slide that has the the new site plan. I'm just curious. Uh, yeah, thank you. Uh, Yep. You were you were there a second ago. There there.

Stop. Thank you, Alexa. Stop. Anyhow, the the

Yeah, I'm sure she did. Anyhow, uh I was trying I'm trying to figure out based on this overlay. I know we're I know Kingsmill Park proper is is not shrinking and it'll actually expand to some degree from what is legally that. Uh that said, it seems like the boundary between Kings Mill Park and the rest of the lawn of Zurker Elementary is fairly nebulous. uh on the ground. You can I don't know that you can really tell this is city park versus there. So, can you can you estimate how much of that lawn area south of the parking lots that they're talking about um will be converted from uh what is a quasi public use right now to private property. So, uh, the the total acreage of the site is roughly eight acres, correct?

We're going to dedicate an acre and a roughly an acre and a half um to the park land. So, that's um six and a half acres would be uh the development and then within that six and a half acres there'll be right away streets. Um and then we will uh I don't know what the actual acres of I see your engineer is doing math. I'm gonna try to convey this. I have an aerial of the park up. So, um right now the the green we're just talking about the green field, not the parking lots and the players in correct. Yeah.

Yeah. So, the the cursor so it's just south of 90th place here. comes in and it kind of comes probably across maybe a little bit further south like right through here is kind of where that green space is. Um so okay I would say you know it's hard to estimate maybe we're preserving 60% of it. Okay that um I would also like to point out we are preserving you know all the trees also on the north side that was something that came from our comments um with the community. That's the trees that are that are on on the lot or the trees that are along uh field 911st. They're on the school property.

Okay. Yeah. So, there's some mature uh stand of trees kind of and that's what you can see if you look on this plan, these kind of bubbles here. Those would be the tree stands that we would plant.

Got it. Okay, great. And as as far as lot sizes go, I know we're that's probably a little too much in the weeds for this, but it I don't know. I Are the lot sizes proposed truly that much smaller than the adjoining ones? I've heard I've heard lots of different numbers as far as what the lot sizes are. Uh can I do we do you know roughly they're they're roughly the same size? They're 10% smaller. or they're 10% bigger.

I'm going to not answer your question specifically because I don't have an actual number to give you. I I do want to mention that because of the way that the existing neighborhood borders the site specifically along Culacax. So, I'm going to point out this east side specifically along Culisacs, right? Because you are going around a curve, more often than not, you end up with a wedge shape. So, definitely hear the neighbors saying, "Well, all of a sudden I'm going to have three houses behind me." And that's absolutely accurate. But the truth of it is is if the lot was a regularly shaped rectangle, that distinction of having one to two or one to three or one would be slightly different. I realize that the reality of it is is they have a wedge and we do not. So they have that 3:1 visual. Um, so I do believe that the existing lots are larger. I don't know off the top of my head what that range is.

Okay. Just spot checking a few around that I'm finding some are 5,000 to like 7,500 foot existing. Existing. Yeah. And and that kind of rhymes up. I I don't live in this neighborhood, but uh my house is looks very similar to many of of these houses, and I'm about 68. Mhm.

So, yeah, 100 square for the lot. I mean, uh so that's that that that kind of track. So, we're really not shrinking those too much. Um there was a talk of I don't know where this $800,000 number came from. Is that something you all were throwing out or is that something that is just out in the community as

um I think at the neighborhood meeting we quoted a price. Um I don't think it was $800,000. I think we it's really going to be what the markets at the time. You know, ocean construction costs come down, right? They've been pretty high for a long period of time. We're seeing some relief there. Um and again, we're we're not we're not breaking ground for another 12 months. So hopefully we see see some more decrease in those construction costs. Um I think it was a number that we said in our neighborhood meeting probably six months ago.

Okay. Yeah. And just clarifying I I know it's a design guideline. So this may be for you or for staff, but it's two I believe you're allowed one or twotory buildings in the low residential low density. Uh that's and that's what you're planning. Uh yes, sir. Okay. We're going to offer ranch style and twotory homes. And I think our max height limit um per the code or the code's higher, but I think our max height is roughly 28 feet, which is below the allowed height.

Yeah. So, so roughly what the what a twotory up or split level would be over in the adjacent neighborhood. Okay. Um, I hear a lot of comments about that uh sidewalk along the east side of the property uh that's currently there and its use uh north south. Uh, you know, one, the staff has recommended that we approve this with a condition that we're holding certain sidewalk connections uh to the to the uh Highland Canal to the Culdeac to the east. Would would preserving that north south a a north south corridor along that east property line of be some something you would be willing to consider as a as an additional exception or not

and uh excuse I just want to clarify like I know exactly what north south I think uh yeah but we referenced yeah right along east side you know if yeah if you go back to the exist existing map. Uh go to the Yeah, maybe do we have a better aerial than that somewhere?

So, as we're as we're flipping, I just want to make a couple comments on a high level um planning planning methodology. Um, oftentimes we try to intentionally avoid putting in narrow corridors where lots back to back because what you end up with is you end up with a five or six or eight foot corridor with six foot privacy fences on each side. There's no visibility. Often there's no lighting. Uh, there's a perception of safety question that comes into play. Um, so while we recognize that there is a strong desire both from us and for the community to preserve that north south access from a highle planning standpoint, putting that connection in the front of the houses on the street on an ADA accessible sidewalk is a a better end condition than having a narrow sidewalk in a non-visible non-lit location.

Go ahead. And yeah, I read and just confirmed with Carson, the condition that the way I read it was that we would keep a walkway accessible through our community from the north to the south to the Highland Canal. And I don't it didn't say specifically we had to keep that eastern um walkway which I think is a drainage,

right? But it's not all it's not used as drainage from the testimony we heard. And it's and from uh reading the letters of some of the residents, they have lower chain link fences. Some of them don't have necessarily the privacy fence and they and and many of the residents testify that they even have back doors from their gates to that. So it is kind of a traveled way is what I'm saying. So got I think it's definitely something we can look into. So I I I would have to defer to like the actual drainage study that we will do to see if that is needed. Um but yeah,

just to clarify the conditional approval. So we would be looking at a preservation of that pedestrian connection from the north all the way through to the south. The specific location though would be something that would be reviewed at the PDP and the ODP. So, we don't have enough information at this time to really determine exactly where it would go, but echoing kind of off of some of what the applicant was saying, having that trail corridor effect is not something that's quite as so desirable right now. Um, it has problems with uh the actual activation of the site, the the visibility, crime, etc. Okay. Um, yep. While while I'm looking, Mr. Commissioner Peg,

uh, sure. So, if there were a sidewalk connecting Everett Street to 91st Street along that path, would would staff agree to that as uh um oh my gosh, satisfying the uh recommended uh the recommended public access connection?

Yes, keeping an action would be we just have to look at the specifics with the submitts that are come with the PDP and OD. Could you without a PDP it's hard to elaborate on that and it's hard for me to picture all the ways this could be interpreted. Um could you could you elaborate on what some of the things you'd consider are? So, the replacement of what is currently being used as a walkway, that is the the drainage ditch, that would be um one such way that a public access could be maintained. If we were looking at doing something like that, that would mean that we'd have to be looking at still upgrading it to make it meet ADA requirements um and so that it actually functions as a sidewalk. The other option would be to uh require that that there is that sidewalk that cuts to the community and that it is very clearly a public access that would cut through to the trail. Um the specifics on how that would look legally could could be differently, but most likely it would be with a public access easement which would require that that the entirety of the public streets are um remain open to the public and they can't be closed off privately. Uh, sorry. My understanding was that that these would be public streets. They're certainly publicly maintained, right?

Correct. So, I'm I'm confirming that. So, if there if it's a public street, then that would meet the requirement and that would be one of the ways that we would be uh verifying that this stays as a north south pedestrian connection point. Okay, I think I understand. Is there any other comments or questions from the commission? Uh, Commissioner Mayo.

Um, first just a comment that it's refreshing that the developer is not trying to put 200 apartments on this little lot. So, that's kind of the good news. um on this sidewalk. I mean, it it seems to me that it makes more sense for that connection to come down Ever Street. You got you're going to have 5 foot sidewalks on both sides of that street. It's going to go from 91st all the way down to the park. I mean, that's it. That that would make more sense than having a sidewalk in the back of all of those backyards. That's kind of a a tunnel between two rows of fences for 20 houses. I mean, that to me that doesn't even make sense. Um, we have something similar where I am. We've got a lake and people love to walk around the lake, but people's yards back up to the lake. So, you can't walk through people's backyards. We walk down 68th Avenue on one side of the lake and we walk down 70th Avenue on the other side of the lake. They're both nice improved sidewalks that kind of gets you out of around the lake without trying to go through people's backyards. Um, the comment came up earlier about the number of people behind the house on a pilot on a culde-sac. I live on a culde-sac and I have that pie lot and I have four

people behind me plus the two beside me. So, I got a single family lot that I have six neighbors, you know, so I I get it. But I mean it it works. Um a couple comments that I heard kind of were conflicting is I've heard multiple comments that people are concerned that doing this is going to lower the property values. other people were concerned that it was going to increase the property values, you know. So, I guess that's just a matter of opinion. I'm not sure anybody knows one way or the other which way it's going to go, but it just it's just odd that there's that disparity that people are strong that it's going to lower property values and people are strong that it's going to increase property values and they don't want their property values increased. Um, we heard the comment earlier that they want to keep it open space. Obviously, it's not open space. It's private property that the school owns. Um kind of lucky all this time that the school didn't fence it to keep neighbors out. We live next to Westminster High School and if our kids went over there on a weekend to play soccer, they'd get arrested for trespassing. So, you know, it's a good thing that you've had that opportunity.

I guess that's that's all I have. Commissioner Peg, um, so I'm in partial agreement with city staff about this uh um uh uh uh oh my gosh, words right now. Um, and the additional condition.

Yes, the additional condition. Um, and I I think I'd like to refine the language and I think I'd like to consult with the city attorney. Can I Can I motion? I'm I'm going to motion for an executive session here. I move to go into an executive session for the purpose of receiving legal advice on um the question of exactly how to word this additional condition um um uh recommended by staff. Um, and I'm I I mean Okay. Yeah. So, we have a motion for executive session. Do we have a second?

I'll second that. Uh, it's been moved and seconded. Uh uh we need a roll call vote here and five of seven commissioners must vote yes for a u executive session. So um madam secretary, would you please call the role? Yes. Commissioner Conir. Yes. Commissioner Jeang. Yes. Vice Chair Carpenter. Yes. Commissioner Mayo, yes. Commissioner Calling, yes. Commissioner Tomichek, yes.

All right, the motion has passed unanimously. Uh, we will be in executive session. And Mr. Chair, yes. Um, can I actually pull each of the planning commission members um and ask them to state on the record that they will keep the contents of the executive session confidential. Uh after we enter the executive session, I'd like to start with Commissioner Peg. Yes. And can we go down the line? Uh for Conir, yes. For Jeang, yes. Carpenter, yes. Mayo, yes. Calling, yes.

Tomachek, yes. Thank you.

All right. Uh we'll be back. [Music]

to say um to to everyone who showed up, I I do appreciate your comments. I actually read uh the entire packet with the new emails. Uh I heard comments earlier before we got started that, well, they don't read those anyway. Uh we do, or at least I do, and I know others that I've spoken with do. Um, and the the fact of the matter is right now from 30,000 ft as a planning commission, uh, the city doesn't have control over that parcel, doesn't own it, uh, has not, uh, been able to or been interested in purchasing it for the last 12 years. Planning commission can't force that. We don't control the purse strings. So, uh, the big picture is the school district made a decision to go down this path with this particular developer. Our question that we're tasked with is is the proposal that they've put before us, does it satisfy our the provisions of our municipal code? And after review with the various departments of the city and the planning staff, the staff has determined that it does. After listening to the staff and the applicants plan, it appears to me that it does. That doesn't mean that your concerns aren't legitimate and valid. And in fact, you'll have an opportunity to raise many of those concerns again at the appropriate time. It's probably premature right now. Um there will be an ODP and PDP process um that the applicants will have to go for. A lot of the concerns that were expressed uh are are legitimate concerns to bring up then. Um but when the school districts make a decision that it's going to sell the property, it's no longer going to be a school with a schoolyard. It's not open space. It's not a park. It's going to be something. This is the path they chose. So then when the applicant comes to us and says, "Here's what we want." I assume they have a condition in their agreement with the

I hope uh with the school district that if this doesn't work, the deal's the deal's off. And then maybe another investment group or someone else can come in and make an offer for it. But but this is this is the set of cards we're dealt and that we're faced with right now. And I think in my mind there's no question that coming to us with the proposal that they did pursuant to the code that we have to review and the the work that the dedicated staff has done convinces me that they qualify for approval at this stage of just the comprehensive plan amendment with the condition. Uh and again I I don't want to understate the importance of the public comments. We don't ignore them. Um but but we have to review what's before us and many of the concerns that we heard are really addressed to the school district. Um so that's that's my comment.

Thank you, Commissioner Thomas.

Uh I'd like to expand upon uh what Commissioner Conir put forward. Um there were several alternate proposed uses for the the site. I I some of those were um should be directed to the the school district. Um some should be directed to city council. Um I I have a piece of property that's quite a bit smaller than this, but right adjacent to my house, been open space for the 30 odd years I've lived in Westminster. And when it came up for development, a lot of the same arguments were made for that property as are being made tonight. Um the city council listened in in some respects. Um so I I do encourage everybody to return for the the other portions of the development process and to talk to your city council members that they are amendable to listen to what the the citizens have to say. Thank you. Uh, I'll just say I I agree with uh Commissioner Kamir and Commissioner Tomichek on this. Uh, for sure it's I, you know, this is just the first step and it's just the comprehensive plan use. Nothing on that site plan is set in stone or even it's still set in jelly at this point. Um, yeah. I, you know, I think, uh, the applicants heard a lot of good comments and they're probably going to, uh, you know, when, when they, this gets to city council, they'll probably have a have a discussion with them as well and come back with some modifications and we'll see what and then when the PDP and ODP come to us at that point. Uh I did just want to and and thank you by the way uh

both for the public to coming out and for the applicant for answering all these questions because I think it was very helpful and illustrative there. Uh I did want to address one thing. Uh one of the public uh uh commenters today u asked us if we took if we had campaign donations from developers. I just want to uh state for the record that the planning commission is not an elected body, we are an appointed body, we are appointed by our city councilors. Um and we not only do we not take donations from developers, we get donations from nobody and we get no no fee, no pay for this other than than maybe a dinner uh before our meeting and uh and a soda or a pop. uh that's pretty much uh what we get paid. So there's there's no donations here. We're not we are just here reviewing the land use and it seems like we are changing the land use to be exactly what is next door to it on on three sides really four sides once you jump over uh the park. So, uh, I'm in support. And is there any other comment? If not, I call the question. Can we have a roll call vote, please?

Commissioner Peg, yes. Commissioner Conir, yes. Commissioner Jeang, yes. Commissioner Mayo, yes. Vice Chair Carpenter, yes. Commissioner Calling, yes. Commissioner Tomichek, yes. The motion passes on a seven to zero vote. Uh uh thank you. Thank you everybody uh for that and we will take and do we still need a uh we Okay, we're we're going to take a short break for to set up the next presentation and let the next applicant uh get ready and then we will come back and complete the hearing. So thank you everybody.

Okay. Uh, thank you for your patience everybody. Uh, we will now move to our next public hearing. We'll open the public hearing for item 3B, public hearing in consideration of an appeal for an official development plan amendment for Sheridan Park filing number 6A, block 3, lot 3. And before staff begins their presentation uh we need to disclose on the record that at least a few commissioners were contacted by the applicant in this matter. And any commissioner who was contacted by the applicant, please raise your hand and I'll call you on you individually so you can make your disclosure on the record. Uh we'll start with Commissioner Peg. Sure. Let's see here. Good. Got Okay. Um so the applicant for the item on public hearing tonight contacted me and wanted to discuss their application. Um the applicant uh um did not reach me directly but reached my dad. Uh my dad not knowing the rules about this texted me saying that someone was trying to reach me about this. Um and uh uh I then informed my dad that uh uh folks with business before the planning commission are not supposed to discuss their business outside of the hearing with me. Um and uh so despite the exparte contact from the applicant, I can and will remain um impartial and I will base my decision tonight solely on the evidence and testimony presented in this hearing.

Thank you, Commissioner Peg. Commissioner Kamir. Yeah. So, the applicant for the item on public hearing tonight attempted to contact me um uh and spoke with the uh uh conference administrator in my office at work uh and left a voicemail uh did not I did not call them back. Um and uh despite the expert contact from the applicant, I can and will remain impartial and I will base my decision tonight solely on the evidence and testimony presented at this meeting. Thank you, Commissioner Conir. Good. All right, Commissioner Mayo.

Um, the applicant called me. I answered the phone. I allowed the applicant to speak, but when they finished, we did not discuss the application. We wished each other a good day and ended the call. Um, despite the sex partake contact from the applicant, I can and will remain impartial and will base my decision tonight solely on the evidence and testimony presented at this hearing.

Thank you, Commissioner Mayo. Uh, were either you had your hand raised before I Are you guys good? All right. Okay. All right. All right. I will say that I was contacted by somebody. I didn't catch their name and I said I was busy and they said okay. So I don't know if this counts for expartite communication. Thank you. Perfect. Thank you. Thank you everybody for your disclosures. All right. So uh Mr. Harlo, please begin your presentation.

Good evening commissioners. My name is Trevor Harlo, senior planner with the city's planning division. As part of bringing this project before you, a staff agenda memo has been created and tonight's public hearing has been properly noticed. The agenda memo, its associated attachments, tonight's PowerPoint presentation, the public notice published in Westminster window, the mailed notices, and the posted notices are hereby entered into the public record at this time. The notices of the public hearing were mailed to 425 property owners and tenants within 1,000 ft of the site under consideration tonight. Two public notification signs, one being in English and one being in Spanish, so two total, were posted on the subject property. The city has also posted the hearing date and time on its website. The project site is in the Sheridan Business Park directly east of the intersection of Yates Drive and Wolf Court as pictured here. Also just south from City Hall, you can see the public safety center right here. The applicant is requesting to have an official development plan amendment or ODPA approved to allow them to erect a wooden fence placed interior to the property line. The applicant is not proposing any development of the site currently with this application. Fencing of a vacant parcel is typically not an allowed practice unless in conjunction with a full development plan, but the city offered a compromise in this in instance to address the applicant's issues. The city agreed to allow a perimeter fence if it was a commercial-grade metal fence that would that would fit the character of the non-residential office environment in the area. It is important to note that this allowance does not permit the current agricultural use of the property which is not allowable without a PDP amendment.

The neighborhood office land use designation of which this property is located sets a standard for commercial office park development that would routinely see commercial-grade metal fences utilized when placing perimeter fencing where fences are proposed. Additionally, city standards typically require fence placement along the property line when acting has a perimeter fence for commercial development such as one that we'd see in this area. Next, the applicant has provided this site plan exhibit with their ODPA. The site plan shows the proposed fence location right here. uh the two doors, a gate, and the outside storage box right here. Section 11515 of the Westminster Municipal Code contains 17 criteria that are be are to be considered when reviewing official development plan amendments. Some of the more prominent criteria include that the ODP conforms with the preliminary development plan, all city codes, ordinances, and policies. ODP exhibits uh ODP exhibits sound planning with any exceptions being warranted. ODP is compatible with the surrounding area and future development. And ODP site design conforms with city code and is compatible with the character of the area. staff finds that the OD the ODPA does not meet eight of these 17 criteria. The criteria they do not meet and the reasonings why are highlighted on the next slides and were outlined in greater detail with the agenda within the agenda memo. Criteria one is not met since this plan does not conform to city codes and policies both for the material of the fence and its configuration.

Additionally, as mentioned, fencing of a commercial property is not typically allowed unless the fence design and location are approved in conjunction with an ODP for a full site development plan. Further, the applicant's intended use of the property will not included in the ODP amendment is not a permitted use, that being an agricultural type use. Criteria 2 is not met since this plan does not conform to the existing PDP. The existing PDP designates only office land uses for the area this parcel is within and lays out clear design guidelines for buildings to be developed. The PDP does not provide explicit guidelines for fence placement and material type, but the Westminster municipal code and the land use character type provides guidance for the office land use which predominantly features commercial grade metal fencing. Criteria three is not met since this plan does not exhibit sound or efficient design due to the placement and design of the fence interior to the property on otherwise vacant land. As a compromise, as mentioned previously, the city was willing to approve the fencing of an undeveloped property, but will require it to be done in a manner that reflects the character of the surrounding area and exhibits proper placement to ensure it blends with the surrounding uses. Even if the lot is fenced, the use of the lot is still limited to commercial office development, not other uses such as agriculture in this case. Criteria 4 is not met since this plan has no special amenities or innovative design that warrants exceptions. Additionally, the fencing of a vacant lot while being considered on this lot to provide a path forward to the property owner is typically not allowed. An exception can be granted in this case, but the type of fence and

placement anywhere but the perimeter of the parcel are exceptions without any virtue for special considerations to establish to established uh code requirements and design guidelines. Criteria five is not met since this plan is not compatible or harmonious to the existing area due to the reasons stated before on the type and the placement of the fence. Criteria six is not met given that this addition is not compatible with the surrounding area. The proposed plan does not provide for the protection of either the surrounding areas or the development from potentially adverse influences. The proposal may result in a negative visual impact to surrounding developed properties. Uh and these properties were developed of course in accordance with city code standards and guidelines and represent significant investment on those properties by their owners. It is critical that the city apply the same regulatory standards to this vacant lot as we impose on all the adjacent properties. The addition of an interiorplaced fence that is not compatible with these this character in this area does present some degree of adverse influence by reducing the likelihood and ability for this property to develop in a manner that fits the character of that surrounding area. Criteria n criteria nine is not met since this plan does not exhibit sound design principles again notable from the placement and type of fencing in this proposal. And lastly of these criterias criteria 10 is not met since this plan presents a design that is not compatible with the surrounding area. Once again, I I want to emphasize the contrast between this proposed wooden fence and the commercial environment of the surrounding area. Uh perimeter fences in general are not used in this office park and the existing wooden fence is all used in a limited

degree primarily as screening for trash equipment and patios. U more photos are included in attachment three that you all provided with. But you can see this fence location map uh here showing the limited uses of wooden fencing in the office park. So subject property here and then a couple quick excerpts showing where there is some fencing all of it being wooden aside from down here. We do have the closest you would see to perimeter fencing being largely gated and that is more of a commercial metal uh type uh type structure and not wooden. And then lastly, just to note, criteria seven, eight, and 11 through 17 have been met by this applicant. There we go. Staff recommends that the planning commission hold a public hearing and deny the requested appeal and official development plan amendment. The applicant is with us tonight and has a presentation to share with you as well. Thank you for your attention. There are several staff members with us this evening. We would be happy to answer any questions that you might have. For now, I turn it over to the applicant for his presentation.

Hi there. Charles Margolas, CJ Margolus. Um, uh, excuse me. Can you uh walk up and speak into the mic if you don't mind?

Actually, I'm still distancing and with all of the extra germs, I'm not going to be breathing in on that microphone. I'll try to speak loudly and port microphone if you would like me to. Um, one thing I would like to point out is nowhere have I ever mentioned that I want to use the property for agriculture at all. That is a a lie. Um, I called the county. The county said that a vacant lot could have a fence. They said you have to call city planning. I called city planning. The next day I called again and finally was transferred through to a planner. I explained that this lot was completely covered in 50 years or more of trash and also in dog excrement, human excrement, toilet paper, undergarments. Just yesterday when I was checking the sign, I picked up a 40-year-old soup can. There were needles. Um the neighbor had told me that she was concerned about vagrancy. Um, and uh I have had my uh lawn equipment box broken into six times with the locks cut. The uh entrance to the business park has discriminatory graffiti. And it does concern me because having had my thousands of lawn equipment stolen, a lawn mower, two wheelbarls, like 12 bags of dirt, everything from this little lawn um equipment box, I spent three months cleaning this property up. It was so terrible. Just layers and layers and layers of mostly dog excrement over every square foot of the property. I rented a hotel room next door to the property for three months to clean the property up. Um, and I wanted to do that for to clean up the neighborhood is what I told Mr. Muso who's the uh works in the assessor's office when he had written me. Now, I would like to quickly

explain I did this property by as a uh simultaneous swap um right after that planner told me she did not see a problem with a fence there. Jennifer Ben. And when I inputed this all into artificial intelligence, artificial intelligence told me that is a bait and switch scam. Like Google, search artificial intelligence. Now, whereas in the past used to be you type in Google, it gives you the results. Now, you know, if you've seen Google and other ones, it gives you a little we're thinking and now typing out a paragraph. It's when I inputed my experience into artificial intelligence search, artificial intelligence search said it's a bait and sit switch scam. I called the planner told me she did not see a problem with the fence there. And then I was dragged on for over eight months by Dave Gur and John McConnell. They wouldn't answer basic questions. Um, the fence two doors up is 4.5 foot horizontal wood, not on the perimeter of the property. I pulled up on Zillow a couple vacant lots. The only two that I pulled up, I included those in the letter that I added to this. Um, they both have fences. I didn't pull up a third, fourth, fifth vacant lot. I just pulled up Zilla. I toggled to vacant lots. The first two I pulled up, the one has a big wood fence on it. The other one is in an otherwise complete completed business area, and it's a four-sided fence. And right next to it, there's another little four-sided fence. I'd like a four-sided fence here because I want to protect the core of the property from getting covered in dog excrement. My family built a small hospital. I used to live and work there. We then built a cancer research institute and it funded $200 million worth of cancer research. and I read the

research. Unfortunately, um the gain of function virus's uh main binding receptor is found in all cells but mostly in the small intestines of both humans and animals. So the feces, as the Westminster City Code points out, is a health hazard. When Dave German got my um email, he emailed me back and he said that um dog walking is allowed anywhere. But then I pulled up the Westminster City Code and it specifically says you're not supposed to have dog extrement littered everywhere. You're not allowed to do that. Even though I spent three months cleaning the property up over the past week plus of maintaining the signs, piles of dog excrement. I have the photos. I just haven't emailed them over. I actually did take some photos of it. It's just disgusting. I cleaned up a little bit of it, but was unable to get all of it um just recently. And that it's just a complete lie. I never said that I'm using my vacant lot for agriculture. I mean and there uh you know uh I I uh feel like it goes along with this scam that I perceived and also some discrimination that I perceived because this graffiti in the front of the business park says don't be a Jew. I had my law equipment stolen $1,000 plus law equipment locks cut six times and all my equipment stolen. People be carrying weapons. Now, less than a mile from this property is where that terrible road rage incident happened in 2018 where a mom, her three children, and a bystander were all shot. The 13-year-old son just tragically terribly being killed in a very similar office park to this. I want full-time security on my fence, uh, such as a 3G motion detector camera, um, on

each of the doors and the gate. Um, and I feel like that will enhance the security, but the sort of invisible factor is this fact that human excrement and on the property. Yes, human excrement unfortunately from homeless uh um in the area is what it appears because like I said, uh toilet paper I found undergarments and then every square foot dog extrement. What you have there is the potential for air pollution that can cause severe infections. And unfortunately, this other side fact that I've tried to explain and you may have picked up on it, the demand to have metal only, I sent pictures over to the council, the metal fences in the area nearby where I live, because I live less than two miles up the road from the vacant lot. They're all rusted over, not holding up as well as the wood fences do. There's no other raw iron metal metal fences in the park that I have seen. There is the horizontal wood fence two doors up. I have one like that across from where I live, less than 2 milesi up the road, and I just think it looks really nice and it secures my neighbor's yard really well. And um the side fact that a lot of people will never have heard of is metal becomes a secondary source of radiation. You may have heard that before, but radiation increases this thing no one's ever heard of. I've never heard of it. And I read a lot of medical research every year. My family's charity donates around $57 million plus to fight cancer every year. The motto of eliminate cancer as a cause of suffering and death. My grandma died at funerals on my fourth birthday and my family sold half of our hospital and built a big not for-p profofit charity with a motto of eliminate cancer as a cause of suffering death. Well, I read and absorb a lot of the medical research even even though I'm not a doctor, a scientist. I come from a family of people who fund medical research. And

what I've read is that radiation increases furine expression and furine is what makes COVID so bad according to a lot of research. I I've never heard of furine. A lot of people never have. It's very very important. If the furine system gets disabled, people can get blood cancers. They can get some severe conditions. And so a metal requirement means that that material can become a secondary source of radiation and can increase furine expression, which that might not be so terrible. There's metal all around us, you know, but a field a lot like mine that was covered in dog extrement and excrement and then even though I cleaned it up, it's still getting piles of it um has that residue all over it still. So, it's not a good idea to mix something where the main binding receptor is it um in the small intestines and is littered with that dog extrement next to something that increases furine expression such as metal. Um I just think the wood looks nicer. I think it would I I strongly disagree with um you know this multitude of points them saying they don't think the design is right. I went to the Rhode Island School of Design. It's a very uh competitive school to get into. I spent several um a couple months and several weeks working on the design for the fence. I think it blends in and it improves the air quality, improves the public health. And I was very very uh surprised to see that that city planning office, John McConnell and Dave Dorman in particular, disregarded my basic questions about the fence for over eight months. Um it started with John born in

January to May but started with Dave German in late September and then brought John in. So I don't want to like falsely say that you know it's eight eight more months for both of them. But I had brought this to the attention of Dave German. Um and never once did he or anyone in planning ever reply one time about any of the health factors. Um, in fact, the reply was dog walking is allowed anywhere. Well, there's like bile and all this other gross stuff that goes along with that that it harms my health being there tending to the property. This whole thing with I mean the miscommunication and trying to convince the plant commission that somehow I'm trying to use the lot for agriculture. I I don't understand where that's coming from other than the fact that my one design um just the term I use for this lot on the perimeter of my lot is garden. I just mean I want to make it nicer, not grow agriculture stuff, but I use that term and it's getting falsely translated into I want agriculture. This is a vacant lot. I would like to hold on to it like if I ever uh you know get to the point where I have the resources to develop it further then I do have a future plan for that. But for now like it's just so gross. I mean it's a health hazard. It is a health hazard. and explaining that to John McConnell and Dave Garmin for over eight months and then like I said with John it was like more like five and a half months and it was like the eight more months with Dave just to clarify that. Uh I I mean I I just have a strongly worded comment that I've posted. I I will continue fighting for my fence and any city um employee

who appears to be favoring for-profit scams over health considerations. I I would be calling for anyone who's working for Westminster who favors for-profit scams over public health to be fired. And so I don't want anybody to take that like that's a real strong statement. But I am calling for John McConnell and Dave Gurman to be fired. Um, I if you hear there's a public health hazard and you drag that thing on for over eight months, then I mean that is a a sign that that office does not care at all about anybody's health. And I have also said, and I think it's important to point out, I did further research on it. I think that it's a little worsened with the particular type of pollution that we have here. Um, the plutonium pollution can cause things like memory disorders. You were struggling to find the word satisfactory. Um, you said that I left a message like a voicemail, but what it sounded like I didn't leave a voicemail for you. And I'm not trying to say that I think that plutonium pollution is like causitive of all that, but the fact that John McConnell wrote up the secondary denial and said that my fence was solely to secure landscaping equipment when never once did I say that there is a 3 and 1/2t x 4t lawn equipment box that's had $1,000 worth of stuff stolen out of it. the fence is not to secure the little lawnscaping uh land lawn equipment box. You see, and that uh secondary denial that I mailed to the 440 neighbors caused one neighbor to come up to me and say, "She doesn't want storage." I then went and looked at the letter I had mailed to the 440 neighbors and I saw

that it said that my fence was to secure landscaping equipment. when for over eight months I explain my fence is to secure and safety that property and prevent it from being a health hazard.

So that you know you you get it with these you know this can you switch to the next slide. Let me just quickly because I'm so sorry I feel like I've gone on a little long with that. I'm sorry. Um I you see on this slide I have my vacant lot and see the term garden. I just mean nicer, you know, like uh uh, you know, lawn covering. I don't mean like we're growing vegetables. No, no, no. Um, I use that term cuz where, you know, where I'm from, you use that term, it means like, yeah, it's going to look a little nicer. There's no like growing vegetables or food or anything like that. I will also explain that I originally did call to say I'm interested in the potential of a marijuana business or medical marijuana business. I'm not in a place where I'm like snap my fingers and making that happen, but I wouldn't mind gearing this property up for something like that or medical technology, something else. I explained to the council that whether it's permitted to do a marijuana business or not, I would still be interested in this property because there's all sorts of other um good permitted uses. So, I'm not sure somehow that gets in there with this whole agricultural use uh thing, but you know, uh I I'm not growing anything in this lot. And it is just completely false what Trevor was made to say. Um, and the fact that John McConnell uh wrote that denial and gave the false impression that my fence is to secure landscaping equipment makes me think that he has a lot of work to do and potentially there is some sort of uh plutonium pollution type uh you know effect that is um there causing conditions that such as like a memory disorder, early onset dementia is what I said and looked up and

specifically found that there is an overlap with plutonium pollution. Um, and so this whole thing where for over eight months I explained the property's covered in dog excrement. It it's disgusting. And for the secondary denial letter to say this is offense to secure landscaping equipment.

It's just flatout wrong. It it's it's mean and horrible what I have gone through for over eight months when I would have expected if the planning had heard there's a health hazard there would have been some professionalism especially after when I called a planner told me she did not see a problem with a fence there I made the simultaneous swap for this property after Jennifer Jennifer Ben said that only to then have what when I put it into AI you know The result says that sounds like a bait and switch dam. I was told she didn't see a problem feds there. That does not mean that it's guaranteed. I knew I would have to apply. But then it was a mean and horrible circus routine that they put me through. So quickly as I could tell, but just less than a minute, could you please get to the slide that shows the red and pink map? And by the way, I do apologize Mr. German and Mr. become because you know what my thoughts are. But I do want to clarify it is only because I am sensing that a for-profit scam is being prioritized over public health because the fence is not to secure landscaping equipment and you know that

the fence is to improve public health and make it so that I don't get sick and neighbors don't get sick. get to the one with the plutonium pollution map. And then lastly, the screenshot. You've seen that. It's fine. The the red and pink. Uh what is it? All right. Are you not finding it? This one? No. Go back to the first slide. Okay. You You have put the wrong slideshow up. This is what I was. No, I sent you the second slideshow and explained I've never done the slideshow before

and you put the wrong slideshow up. It's okay. The the the picture that I'm talking He he has a surprise. I don't know how I sabotaged your fence that we are running a big scam on.

That's exactly what he's doing. Mr. Carpenter, I sent a second PowerPoint slide and you don't have it on, which is fine, but let me just cite the two things that are not on this original one. The one is just an interview with a Rocky Flats neighbor, and she says that her neighbor had a baby born missing parts of its brain. So, my concerns about the radiation pollution in our area, I think, are well founded. And um I'm very disappointed in what I just saw from the council, from the commission, excuse me, um with uh the fact that like 40 plus neighbors gave their concerns and then there was this little theatrical situation where you were like, I want to talk to the lawyer. And then you came back and then you were like, we approved it against all of your comments. that seems to me like going along with this we favor for profit over public health. Um and so I think that the people of Westminster obviously and like most common sense people hopefully many of you uh you know would recognize the public health the medical intelligence stuff is obviously more important than anything we could do to prevent the severe health. So lastly, let me just wrap up with saying that the fact that Westminster is doing all this big digging right now, the 50 foot um uh hills of dirt being dug for new homes, that means that pretty much probably all of you are interacting with those sites and those construction workers. And it's just a known fact that the plutonium pollution settles in the soil. Um so please And lastly, let me say that I was not told about exparte.

They were supposed to tell me according to what I then Googled. Google says that if you're entering into some, you know, hearing that has those rules, you're supposed to be informed of that. I actually called planning, asked to leave a message for Bosert's office. They had me speak to somebody in engineering who had never heard Bosard for for near like six weeks. Even though I had called to leave a message for Bosard and called Peg Ter's office, did not leave any sort of voicemail. I'm sorry about the confusion. I did speak to your assistant, very nice lady. Uh, you know, and I I had a very wonderful conversation, Mr. Mayo. I appreciate your time. And I and I realize, you know, uh um you know, we didn't get a chance to to speak at all, but they were they are supposed to let us know about exparte and they did not. And from what I have read, that is grounds to reverse the denial. And then lastly, by the way, I know I said it two or three times. There are four easements on the property. What I read is the fence is not supposed to enclose the easements. what they sent me encloses the US postal box on the corner. It can't do that. And then also last last le last le last le last le last le last le last le last le last le last le last. There are trees planted over the sewer easement. I want the fence the way it is to give space from the sewer easement with the improperly planted trees and the core of the property. Um and so you know thank you all very much. I did see a lot of professionalism. I know how Mr. Peg might take that. That is exactly what I saw. It was unacceptable. 40 plus neighbors. You did a little, you know, antic thing after I can't remember the word satisfactory, sir. I talked to my lawyer. I screw all of you all. That's what you did, Mr. P. Sir,

and I don't appreciate I don't think the people s and I think you should be a little more professional. All right. I speaking of being professional, please uh let's let's stick to your property and not talk about previous cases or I wrote the letter. And by the way, I'm not trying to be overly harsh, but I will I'm just going to tell you what I've seen and observed. And that is what I observed. And it was pretty unusual what I saw there. Um and you know, I I side more with those 40 plus neighbors who don't want their children born with severe birth defects. uh you know so thank you all appreciate your time and have a nice day.

All right. Well then uh any any questions from the commission at this point? Oh what's that? Oh yeah. Well yes. Let's uh thank you. Uh all right. All right. So, I hereby open the public testimony. Uh, Madam Secretary, do we have any voicemails or emails? No voicemails. All the emails were included with the packet that went out this afternoon. Okay. Did anyone uh sign up to speak?

There are names on the the signup sheet, but I think it was for item 3A. I did check with the uh person in the back and she has declined to speak. All right. For shared business. Oh, okay. All right.

Great. Awesome. All right. So, that standpoint, I will I will close the public testimony portion portion and ask if All right. Well, so do we have any questions for staff or for or I would kind I guess I'm going to ask a question. Um I mean I would uh I guess I would probably address that to Mr. McConnell. Uh just there's some accusations made there. Can you just kind of give a rundown of what happened kind if that if that because it sounds like did did we just not get back with them or what or how did or how did this happen?

So we we do have populated uh staff has put together a timeline of communications with the applicant. Uh we're happy to share that with you either verbally or in writing. Uh Mr. German does have a timeline of our communication. Okay. Yeah. If you don't mind doing it just a verbal just so just for the public record since I I'll ask Dave to Yeah, Mr. German please provide the communication with you if that's helpful. No, thank you. Just uh Mr. Chairman, would you like me to just read the timeline? Yeah, just Yeah. And yeah, Cliff's notes is fine, but

um I I will uh shorten this, but we can add detail as you request. Uh I believe our initial uh contact with Mr. Margolius was in uh September of last year, uh September 26th. His initial contact was with um our building permit supervisor, Nita Carrasco. uh she after listening to his uh interests uh believed that his uh call was better addressed for planning staff. Um on the same day he did make contact therefore with Miss Ben. Um on the following day, September 27th, I spoke with him at length. I provided him with the um subdivision plat, the PDP of record, the ODP of record. Um and I advised him that any development of the property would have to be compliant with both the BDP and ODP of record or an amended version thereof and also with the comprehensive plan. Um uh at that time it was my understanding from uh visuals that he had shared and and emails that he had sent that uh the uses that were of interest regarding storage warehousing with long-term plans being undefined medical technology. Um, I I responded to that by telling him that I I believe that this might be an ill-advised um property to obtain simply because it didn't match uh the allowed uses did not match what he was talking about. Um I did not hear from him again. Um but I I did discover that uh October

11th uh he had made purchase of the property of the same year 2024 last year.

Last year on uh December 30th um the planning or excuse me the building division received a fence permit application to put a fence on the property. Um the applicant was Bigfoot Fence Company. The permit number BLG24-5673. Um we debated uh the situation, did the research, and on January 8th, 2025, we review we uh denied the fence permit on the grounds that it needed to be preceded by an approved ODP amendment. Um on February 10th, uh myself and John McConnell met with the applicant on a virtual Microsoft Teams meeting. Um we at length agreed uh even though it was um not usual practice that we would allow the placement of a fence on the property and a and a tool storage box. Um but that we would need an approved ODP amendment prior to that installation. And um you know at that time uh John made the point that um you know the what we'd be seeking would be a commercial grade uh metal fence suitable for the um the office park environment. Um Mr. Marggo did also state during the meeting that he was more partial toward fence. Um excuse me. But we uh we did uh conclude that meeting with the understanding that ODP amendment would be forthcoming. On February 24th, uh which would have been 14 days later, we did receive an ODP amendment um application from Mr. Margolus. Um we found that the document was

insufficient for processing. Uh we I worked with them at length um to create a uh an alternative um ODP amendment um that would meet all of our formatting requirements. I presented that back to Mr. Margolies on May 19th of 2025. Um he uh there are some things he liked about it, some things he didn't. Um we discussed and eventually it was uh denied. Um he he didn't he didn't want to have the perimeter fence as he mentioned. Uh he did not want to have the metal fence as he mentioned. Um, and so he said, "Well, I I don't want to change anything. I don't I don't want to accept this." And so, um, we had to deny ultimately his initial ODP application. Uh, and that was done on June 18th. And then the final uh, part of the process was uh, you know, Mr. Margolus came forward and said, "Yes, okay, I would like to appeal the decision." Uh, he's since then worked with um, Mr. Harlo, um, Mr. Kaza, and Mr. McConnell um with me helping uh as much as I could along the way um to bring him forward to this meeting tonight.

Okay. Thank you for that. Um I guess another question. Um I mean I kind of know that office park a little bit. There's Aren't those buildings out there wood? because my uh I I had a friend who you well I think he's passed now but he used to have an office there and I just remember those being wood all around there and uh everything why I guess that's I guess my question is where uh why is wood forboten but uh but steel is what what we want. Uh that would uh probably come from um uh the reading of our commercial retail commercial design guidelines. Okay.

John, if you have any more to add on that. Yes, that's correct. Uh uh it's not typical to have fences at all in commercial or non-residential developments. If you look around town, you don't see too many, right?

Uh we have occasionally permitted them or entitled them through the ODP process. Uh that's in conjunction with a full de development entitlement, not on a vacant lot. We understood Mr. Margolus's concerns about the dog excrement and the trash and the security. And so it was our understanding that he would like to secure the property as a whole. Um when we discussed the interior fence that didn't seem to align in our opinion uh with his concerns and we thought it'd be better to do a you know a traditional commercialrade fence around the uh exterior of the property line to secure the entire property and keep trash and dog excrement away. Um if you look around this particular office development and everyone has a different character. Uh, this one was probably built in the 1970s. It's it's it's pretty dated. There are some wood screening elements around uh trash enclosures, um, utilities. Uh, our current design standards would not allow wood to be used to screen dumpsters to screen utilities. We require masonry. Uh, we require um, you know, materials that match the the building. Um I Trevor could probably speak to uh his analysis and a little more detail of the building construction uh which may vary from building to building but I would encourage him to advise you of that.

Okay, great. Carlo.

Yeah, for sure. So, uh one thing I just wanted to point back to is that locationational map I was sharing uh earlier. I know it's very hard to see anything there. Um but this was included with some more uh you know larger photos and I think attachment three. Uh so I'd advise you to look at that if you want to see those more closely, but you can see throughout there has uh as John was was mentioning all that wood is largely done for screening. Um the only other exceptions are patios uh but also in pretty minor states and not used and not used for security, not used for uh perimeter fencing, nothing of that that degree. The only site that has a what would be a newer fence and be for security is to the south. I don't want to set the cursor off again.

Yeah, south there. Yeah, to the south. And once again, apologize. I you can't really see that, but you should be able to see it in your attachment. Yeah, I've got it open. Yeah. So, you can see Yeah, that's not a wooden fence. That is more more closer in line with a commercial type fence. And that's really the only instance of a fencing in that that's more in line with what this proposal is, which still not quite being the same. But yeah, everything else throughout there, there is some wood that complements uh some of the buildings, but they're only on patios. There's screening there, things of that nature. What about the fence that's adjacent? That's Shaw Heights to the east there, isn't it? Uh what about the fence there? Isn't that wood that goes along there? Yeah,

that is that is a common residential rear privacy fence for the homes. Okay, that is correct. And the uh the fence that Trevor mentioned last that was approved with an ODP amendment for that business. Um I want to say a couple of years ago. It's been a couple of years. They were having similar security issues. Sure. As a matter of fact. Yeah. I just have one clarification if I can, Mr. Carpenter, whenever if it's possible to have one clarification. Uh I I'll give you uh I'll I'll give you a minute for your rebuttal.

It's it's Well, I mean, I could rebut, but the only thing is is I don't understand. I I've never said I want to do warehousing on the property. I I've never said I want to do agriculture on the property, and they put the wrong slideshow up. had I spent 12 hours stuffing the 440 mail envelopes and then I found it's completely wrong. Um and so I but the main point of clarification is just for theth time I hope you know I mean like it's been like oh five or six times or something I've said to Mr. German, I don't know what you're talking about. You keep saying warehousing. I not asking for warehousing at all.

And he keeps on coming up and say there was warehousing and like then I'm hearing there's agriculture. And then I made it very clear when I resent my PowerPoint that this is the new PowerPoint. Never done PowerPoint. This is it. And they put the wrong one up. So again, like I said, there may be some extra factors involved. I think um the whole process should be optimized and streamlined. Um and if you this thing was covered every square foot dog spent three months cleaning up and then when I was doing the signs

dog piles everywhere and just lastly let me just say my sign fell. I spent almost two hours putting it back up. It had dog on it. I finally got them both to stay up for the whole of remainder nine days. I was amazed that they stayed up with the wind and everything. However, I got sick for 12 hours after I got there, saw the sign fell and put it back up and noticed it had the dog extramen on it. And I for approximately 12 hours when I got back home that day, I was sickened uh you know with the diarrhea basically. Really gross. I mean, this is a a lot that was completely covered every square foot and dog extra. And I just find it very surprising because here Mr. McConnell just said something about that. He never replied one time to me. And then the other thing they sent me the map with the perimeter with enclosing the post box having my fence overlap the pre-existing having it enclose the easements three times and every single time I said what do you mean it can't enclose like I you know some of these things like the post post office box and uh they never replied at all and then the only other thing to clarify is the fact that I did a simultaneous swap that's not their burden That's my mind. But I trusted them after. And it was not on the same day. I talked to somebody the day before. Then I talked to the next day I was put through to a plan. She said she did not see a problem fence there. Um keeping it a vacant lot. And like I said, just and it's a little reminder. Pulled up two vacant lots. I didn't search through any other ones. They both had fences. And that's included on my actual PowerPoint on the QR code that you all are not getting because even though I wrote and said this is the one I need you to use, they didn't use it and they've been trying to sabotage my fence project. I I believe there's some discrimination involved. Um, and I think that the whole thing can be worsened, like I said, by plutonium pollution. That if if you have some people who get something like early onset dementia from plutonium pollution, they're not only

going to be forgetting stuff, they may be lashing out and stuff. Uh, and that's what I experienced. Thank you, Mr. Mr. Marggo. But did you have another question? I I do for you. Yeah, Mr. Would would you help the planning commissioners understand what you do want to do with the property and also why fence off a small smaller interior portion

just to leave room for dog walking on all four sides and also since there's those easements I read you're not supposed to enclose the easements there's a long easement on the east side and a long easement on the south side and my fence proposal um leaves those accessible but it's also to allow dog walking and allow it to be a common um area. And like I said, I hope you all don't it's if if I don't feel like someone is prioritizing a scam over public health, I will not be calling for that person to have their employment relation. And obviously me saying that doesn't mean it's going to happen. But I I've I've worked extensively with Senator McConnell, as a matter of fact, at his office. My family built one of the oldest continually inhabited towns in Kentucky County, Virginia. And I always get a kick out of calling back to Kentucky. My family built a fort that the British called Fort Liberty, Rutles Fort, and it got taken by the made by the British army in the year 17 uh 70 1780 in June of 1780. So when I I looked up and read Mr. McConnell was in charge of fences. I knew I was being forwarded to Mr. German. I was as nice and respectful and professional to them as possibly I could be because I wanted this thing. And I do feel that that office is leaning on this. There's more money over here. So we do that thing and it really should be for the future for the commission for the council for the planning offices the public health should be the priority that's what's important that's what people want like I said my family built charity the motto is eliminate cancer is the cause of suffering death that is the bigger picture and and I will just lastly quickly say I took a picture with my phone of the Zer elementary plutonium chart and I would I didn't get up to speak even though Gary had asked me but there's this line underneath that chart where it says this is is the plutonium that we found. This is the plutonium we found. This is the plutonium that we found. But then uncertainty uncertainty uncertainty. Obviously any cops person

does what does not want any uncertainty about their family having something like birth defects which can be neurological or cardiac birth defects. We don't want any uncertainty. So the thing is when you look it up, wood shields from that type of pollution. metal becomes a secondary source of radiation. So in general, let's look at materials and find like that medium so that owners have the option and you know to work with what is healthier and if they want metal okay great but a lot of people might have reasons like mine and let I had a two-year long co vacc [Music]

and so I want the fence because it provides a little shade. I want it open so it's accessible for easements, but also for the dog walking. My family has a ton of dogs. It's totally fine to have dogs. I don't mind picking up outside the fence, but I don't want it inside the fence. It makes it easier for me to keep up the outside of the fence without having to

smaller area. Yeah. So, thank you again. You all are doing a good job with, you know, you heard what I said, so I appreciate it. If you know, you you do the best that you could do, which I see there's a lot of that going on. I mean, I like Westminster. I own a million dollars of property in Westminster. I invested in Westminster. I wanted to clean this up especially for the neighbors because it kind of breaks my heart to think of them breathing that, you know, uh dog pollution when it's just it can cause severe infections. And the one neighbor I spoke to her and her husband and she's the one who came out and said, "I don't want storage." I had said, "Hey, I'm from Indiana like you." She she kind of seemed like she didn't recall ever talking to me in the past. I said, "I talked to you and your husband." And she said, "Uh, you didn't talk to my husband." I said, "Well, I was talking to you and your husband. You were right there." And she gave me the impression that perhaps her husband, you know, um, doesn't communicate. And I think that conditions like that can be because they live next door to this terrible health hazard that I think should be, you know, fix since I bought it. It's, you know, it's a standard of of public health that you can't expect everybody to specialize in, but it is an important part of planning and urban design. So, I hope you all don't think I'm overly harsh. I don't mean to be, but come on. I was dragged on for over eight months after the planner said she didn't see a problem with a fence there. That didn't mean it was guaranteed, but for it to get dragged on for eight months. And if you haven't heard of simultaneous swap, that's what I did. After Miss Baden said what she said, I approved the simultaneous swap. That's a type of real estate transaction. By the way, I did not do a 1031. They're commonly associated with that. But that Mr. German is right. He did get back to me. We did not speak at late. He sent me the one email. Um, and I was just surprised that he got back to me about me explaining how dog and he said the only thing he said was dog walk is not anywhere. I then went looked at the West

Westminster city code, forwarded that to him that says that dog litter is not allowed and he never replied to that. Obviously, you all are very busy, but just the whole point of my efforts are just like, you know, I what I just said, you know, it's hard. I know how cities and towns and councils and businesses are. you've got the money, you got the deals, but in there, do make sure you you try to use your power um to uh you know, stand up for the public health stuff. We would all appreciate that. And all all that pollution is obviously has nothing to do with you all, but we just haven't had it. I lived next door to the new Freedom Tower at the World Trade Center for two years. My aunt had had a condo six blocks up the road,

and you know, pollution there. I worked on the September 11 memorial for 10 years. these twin girls in the film school, right? One grade underneath me, their mom was on one of the planes. I mean, it just hit my school because I went to the Rhode Island School of Design and the place to get a flight back to California was the Boston airport. And so, I just say I've seen the big city. I've seen the smaller city where my family's hospital is and I really like Westminster. But we are getting a lot more of these big digging projects which does seem to indicate there's some arm wrestling for favor the more money on this side when it should be let's have prosperous business. Let's try to improve prosperity and eliminate homelessness. Um but also recognize that the one true like top priority should be the health stuff because it's invisible, you know. um you can't you can't see you know the you cannot see the plutonium pollution type of stuff but it causes some pretty severe reactions that a lot of people are not going to be up to date on. I happen to read a lot of medical research as my family does medical research. So when I saw those and tried to explain those over I was a little surprised that that was all disregarded when I would have hoped in the future that if someone says they just bought a property and it has it's a health hazard condition there should be some priority on that. um and there wasn't on this. So hopefully for the future you all consider working that in there because it's it's not not too much to ask. Okay.

Um so thank you. I appreciate your time. All right, Commissioner Mayo. Um one comment. I mean you can fence in an easement.

I mean probably every house in Westminster that has a fence is fenced in an easement. So that you just have to give whoever owns that easement access. Um after all your, you know, your explanation of how concerned you are with the dog excrement, the human excrement, it's surprising that you would allow it around the out the perimeter of your property. you just don't want it on the inside of your property, which that kind of confuses me.

It was a reply here. It was a reply to the fact that Mr. German's response was that dog walking is allowed anywhere. And then also, I just noticed that makes the neighbors happy to have, you know, dog walking. And I I like dogs also. My my family has many many dogs. And so, you know, I don't mind that. I want it to be a nice property. it was not before. And in my opinion, definition of nice includes happy neighbors, happy dogs, you know, and something that's just uh you know, um uh nice is what I'm going for, you know, with with my design and with all that. I I want it to be nice. It was not nice. And I was just surprised. I hope the office can be improved. You know, I I have the harsh like I'm saying, I think the person should be fired, but I do want to emphasize what I had said. It's only because in my book the public health needs to be the priority and if I ever see stuff like that you know it's common but I I do want to emphasize that a lot of people stand for that of course you know the public health should just be pri priority even though it is so complicated and like I don't not saying I'm an expert you know and I couldn't expect even some Nobel Prize winning scientist to understand the whole of medicine you know but there are these complex things you never would have heard of like metal with radiation increases furine but then there's something with the main binding receptor in the small intestines that won't make sense to a lot of people but when I see that put all that together like you know I'm trying

yeah you're repeating yourself you got it we heard all that um and I hear where you're coming from I'm I'm HOA president of an HOA obviously and we have a 4 acre park where people walk their dogs and it's very irritating when people don't pick up after their dogs. I like watching dogs get walked and we have cameras and we have people trying to catch the people that aren't picking up after their dogs. But it still bugs me that you would allow the dog walking on the perimeter of your fence.

One of the first experiences I had was speaking to one of the dog walking neighbors and they're just so nice, you know, and so I just I wouldn't They explained how important it was to me because their dogs afraid of traffic and so you know uh it just it makes sense to me. I I I and also I read that Mr. Bos shirt likes open spaces

and so I was thinking this I I I based my design on all the resources I read and then I found even though the says maximum amount of we we we got it. We got it. Um, I think their compromise of letting you put a fence around the perimeter of your property is a fair one. So, that's kind of where I am. Um, all right. Are you all right, Commissioner Peg? I'm sorry. Sorry, Commissioner Jawing. You okay? Was first.

So, in order for us to approve this PDP, let's see. ODP ODP and it's an ODP amendment. Um the plan is compatible and harmonious with existing public and private development in the surrounding area. And we heard that there is a a shed for storing agricultural equipment and there is a plan to put a garden with a path through it. Right. No, no, no. To be kept a vacant lot.

Yeah. So, I just want to give a clarity for that because there was some confusion. What you're seeing on your screen right now, this is the site plan from the ODP. This is what's being proposed. This um from this presentation, this that was talked about um that you see on the screen. Now, this is not what we're considering. This is not what's being proposed. That's how I would consider gearing the property up. But that's not what we're considering here. Okay. Yeah. I would be happy to mail out new letters also if you wanted to do a new

sir that's I need more time to review the standards here. I hope that other folks uh have more discussion.

Yeah. Uh Commissioner Jean are Yeah. So this is a Trevor. So I I want to know um I live in the area and yes there are a ton of transient individuals who probably walk in your property and such forth and so I completely get it. Um and so like I feel you and I get that. Um also like growing up in the area I mean I know this is a dedicated industrial park but there's not I mean the area is kind of like dead. I know there's businesses there, but it's kind of dead. Um, and the his the the neighbors, I mean, there's wooden fence to the back. Um, and I know that the city Trevor Trevor, you guys have like compromised with them, but is there a path forward where we could where the city could compromise with the applicant on his wooden tents?

Yes. Uh, Mr. Margolus is uh exercising his due process rights to appeal the denial. His path would be your approval of this. Okay. Um, has any of the surrounding property members on this this industrial park like or obviously they haven't done the public commenting, but have they reached out to you and expressed any concerns about a wooden fence?

Yes. So, one of them um I I have spoken to a few property owners. Uh some of them did submit comments. Uh it probably just didn't reference that specifically and some didn't. Uh but there has been, you know, expressed opposition for activities that outside of the the typical commercial development. I was told there was two or three anti-fense letters by the way. Oh, total. That's I asked Trevor and that's what he told me. So just everybody make for the record sir for the record sir we only have one public comment in email and that's in support of you constructing the fence. I don't see any I think the other ones came after your packet. So they're in

but were they in they're the I didn't see them in the addendum. Were they you I don't think they're in the addendum if they if they do exist. I mean I'm not Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. Nope. That was my question. 110 pages. Yeah. I mean, yeah, maybe they didn't get uh All right. So, if there's that,

I think uh the staff's looking as well on the other side of the table. Yeah, I see the applicants wrote an email. That's certainly that the packet addendum was 210 pages. We have it printed here. You just give me a minute. I'm going Sure. I I see a Page 203. 203 actually starts on page 202. Uh that's also from the applicant.

Uh that's correspondence from the applicant. Yeah, that's the applicant.

Yeah. Yeah, neighbor or industrial park partners who own existing buildings. It's the same there. This is Yeah, I in the addendum I'm only at least searching just for the word fence. I only I only see a bunch of correspondence from the applicant to uh city staff. And then in the original uh agenda memo, we had the one email in support. Yeah. And so, um, as I, as I had said, there was three total received. It is more than likely the other two. I know they came very late. I think both actually came today. It might have just not gotten added.

Okay. Um, but if I could clarify, our posted um, participation guidelines have a 12 noon cuto off time the day of the meeting. Yes. Oh. So, anything received after that 12:00 noon may not have made it or did not make it into this packet.

Clear. Okay. Okay, Trevor, this is for you. What a wooden fence harm the residents in any manner who are on on the back end of his lot. By the back end, I assume you mean to the east. To the east.

Yeah. I mean, that's the that's a residential neighborhood that So, it's one it's residential and that's not what this lot is for. So it's a little bit different and also that uh that part is uh within the county that's not within the city. Okay. So it's kind of a little bit different there. But I would say our bigger concerns are you know within the business park itself which just is part of a continuous development within especially it's you know the two properties right next to it.

I'd just like to add also quickly. I'm sorry. Um, I I have let everybody on Wagner Drive know it's the nine homes that are on the side of our fence with my neighbors that if they don't want solar lights, I'll take them off, but I let them know I do want the fence, but I just would like to explain that I I want to make the neighbors happy in both the office park and the neighborhood. And I'm happy to have cleaned it up and improved it somewhat, but to prevent it from turning back into that. That's the basic improvement. And lastly, the original paperwork from 1982 specifically says improvements quote unquote ventes. And so again, thank you.

Thank you. Um Oh, thank you, uh, Commissioner Tomichek.

Uh, this is actually for the the city folks. It's uh it's pretty common for compromises to be made on materials uh in existing neighborhoods. Uh looking at most of the buildings on the west side of Wolf Street uh or Wolf Court rather, um most of them have wood roofs. Uh they have exposed wood elements, uh wood siding. There's quite a lot of wood in there. I other than the fact that the commercial standards just say metal fence and uh we quote unquote would not allow such buildings to be built today. It seems we're applying different um different leniencies for residential versus commercial. Am I reading that incorrectly?

We do have different standards for residential versus commercial and uh and that's what we're applying here. Is that what you're It's not that we did we've got different requirements. It's that we tend to give more in residential than we do in industrial or commercial. I'm wondering why that is.

That's a it's a good question. It's a completely different character type. the residential neighborhood is a completely different architectural vernacular, completely different use. Um, in this case, our main concern with any use or improvement of this vacant lot or any other vacant lot in a existing development is you have other property owners who have invested significantly in their buildings, their buildings, their site, their landscaping, their maintenance and upkeep. And we want to make sure that we follow the rules and uh apply the same rules that we apply to those uh heavily invested properties to any other property. And we don't want any improvement. And that's kind of what zoning and land use regulation does is it's an insurance policy for people who have invested in their property significantly. And so it's as tough as these conversations can be and decisions can be, we're required to uphold the standards of the city. Uh and that's why there is this relief mechanism. So if the planning commission disagrees, there's never any hard feelings from the staff. We understand this is your position to take and if you see it differently, then it's it's your decision to make.

Thank you. Commissioner Calling.

So, I have a question. Um, if this is fenced, um, it has a very different character than the rest of the office development. Um, and if we're concerned or there's concerns about, you know, people that are homeless or whatnot, I I don't know what's going on up there. I'm not that familiar with that area right there. I know it's close by, but I'm just not that familiar. If you have a solid fence um along that east side and there's a space between that fence and and the wooden fence of the neighbors, doesn't that kind of create a space for people to be where you can't see them? And and it just it just feels like it's an odd I'm just not sure what the purpose of the fence is. Is it just a fence for It doesn't seem like an office park use. I'm just struggling with understanding what the purpose of it is. The dog experiment, just to remind you, is one of the big factors.

Well, I guess I'm kind of in that same boat, but I don't know what this prevents in the future. I mean, it can I mean, if we're going to if it gets developed into something other than a vacant lot, it's still going to have to, you know, the fence would have to go and something else would get built.

Well, that that's the whole point. I believe that it can be developed inside of the fence. I've I've uh planned the fence so that any of the permitted uses could be built inside the fence. And then just to say, I leave the room for the setback to the fence. The neighboring property has a thinner area and it's gonna have people living back there. I want mine to be secured with uh 3G or 5G motion to do. Mr. Mr. Chairman, we have certain order rules of our commission and we're not being followed. So, the applicant had an opportunity. I know. I'm sorry. So, we need to control this because we could be here all night. So,

no, I'm I know you're doing your best. I just Is that I think we need to All right. Well, well, we need we well we commission uh do you have anything else to say? Yes. No. Commissioner Peg.

Okay. My my question is we say that fences are generally not uh sorry perimeter fences on commercial development are generally not allowed and I see that that is important in my daily life for walking between different things I do. I prefer to walk to the grocery store and I cross through a commercial lot on the way there. And so the lack of fence there, in my opinion, is a good thing. It's also not covered in dog poop. Um, and that's what makes this hard for me is that if we allow this fence, we then allow every commercial property owner to put up a fence potentially. And that is extremely damaging for pedestrian circulation in particular. And I know that when I have trouble walking somewhere, I then choose to drive somewhere and that makes traffic worse. And so I can see reasons for this rule. I am also loathed to deny someone their right to use their property in a way that it isn't otherwise like, you know, poisoning their neighbors or something. to use a dramatic case or even like uh you know if you there are less dramatic instances of certain land uses imposing external costs and so what I would like from staff here is help understanding where we can draw that line. It is important that as a commission one thing we do is try

to make decisions consistently otherwise it creates a different kind of chaos. Um can you help me with that? I I understand why that may be difficult but uh so uh I'll make a suggestion and it's something that we have uh seen rarely but occasionally in the past where an ODP approval is has a time limit in other words the improvement uh is removed after a certain period of time uh to ensure that whatever is improve approved is temporary. Uh for example, we've done this for uh temporary medical offices in a trailer where a a medical office needs a little extra space for x-rays or whatever they need to do for a temporary period of time. We do an ODP amendment to allow them to position that trailer on the property. We have an expiration date and it's enforced uh as a zoning regulation. So, um I'm not sure if that's what you're asking or or what you're thinking in concept. Uh but that's the only thing that comes to mind is a is an ODP amendment that is temporary and has an end date or has to be reviewed at the end date or extended. And that way uh you you might get feedback from the community, from the adjacent property owners during that time period that may uh uh cause you to when you revisit it to make a different decision or keep the same position.

I am also loathed to inflict more work on staff and this commission. Um uh uh but I that's all I have. Um sir, you've had your chance. Just let him uh let let let's let us let let's the deliberation happen, please.

What do you see happening? I I don't see a a temporary allowance of the fence being helpful in three years or whatever. just to throw a number out there. Um, are we back at this hearing again? That's generally the way it would work. If it's, you know, not an administrative approval, uh, again, it would be an expiration and then to extend the amount of time, there would have to be another hearing, okay, to extend that.

Let me let me come up with another I I think I have another question here. the the the fence is to abate dog poop and possibly people wandering onto the property and misusing it. Is there an objective way to tell when there's no more danger of that occurring? I don't know that I would have an answer. That would be so nice if there was an answer for that.

No. No. Uh, Commissioner Peg, I I'll ask Mr. Graham to speak up if he has any sort of legal advice on this because I don't want to misstate anything or lead you in the wrong direction in terms of um a temporary official development plan amendment. I would just say, excuse me, sir, please. Sir, sir, sir, please. You're I'm here. If I'm not here, I can't explain. So, please don't make a gesture at me. I'm not making a gesture at you, sir. Please sit down,

sir down, sir. Now, please. That I am okay with temporary. Okay. I I the thing is it would allow the land to filter all of that. Okay. And then I would reapply. Um and I am surprised at the gesture from Mr. Pett because I was trying to sir. Okay. I I got it. Sit down, please. No, I I'm going to go. I'm gonna go. No. All right, Mr. Graham.

Yes, you can you can make it a temporary situation. Um, but while you're doing that and while I have the mic, I would encourage the planning commission to keep in mind that um, you do need to follow the code. Um, this is what Mr. Peg wanted when he did this, that's what he wanted. Out. Yeah.

So, this is page 88. Did you find it? the addendum is the person that doesn't want Thank you to just quickly tie a bow on my comment. Um you cannot you cannot recommend or approve something that is not allowed by the code. you can approve. I think a temporary ODP amendment that expires at a certain time might be appropriate, but otherwise I would just caution you not to um try to fashion a remedy that actually violates the code.

I definitely am not trying to violate uh city law here. You know, there are oh, what is it? 17 conditions and uh some of it is some of these I do not agree with staff's um um finding that the fence is non-compliant. Um and I yeah that so I'm I'm I'm trying to work to an answer here. I'm also well

and that is and that is fair. You can you can disagree with staff's finding. we can. Yeah, it's I think it's our job to determine if it meets these criteria. Um yeah, and then and then go from there. So the part that there's 17 of these. Yeah, that's I think that's ultimately what's gonna gonna make this rough. Well, don't think about it. Let's Mr. Conir, do you have Commissioner Caner, do you have you've been had your light on for a while. What do you have to say?

Yeah, a few comments. First, um, our code is handed to us by city council. So, if we have 17 conditions, we have 17 conditions. Y, we deal with that. Second, if the primary concern of the applicant and we're on the record is to abate dog excrement and human excrement and trash and then he wants to build a fence that doesn't accomplish that, but in fact undercuts that by not surrounding the entire property, I will never vote in favor of that if that's the basis for his fence.

Now, is there a way to do this? As a mediator, I'm always looking for ways to do this. Uh and maybe his His only concern expressed about the perimeter fence is that a it's cutting off easements, which is something that can be dealt with, and that metal causes medical problems that he's concerned about that I don't know anything about. Well, there are other materials that can be used for fencing. Then this is not a duality. It's it's it's it's other materials. In fact, some were mentioned in the context of commercial development. I I suppose they're concrete or other other materials like but I don't know. Um so I think that if the proposal of the applicant is to fence a part because he wants to keep dog and human excrement out of a part because it's a health hazard but doesn't want to fence the whole thing because he wants to be kind to dogs and let them dump their excrement on the other parts of his that's nonsensical to me. um and and and self-defeating. So to to me that's a hard no. It's it's all or nothing. And second, if if he's concerned about medical issues with metal fencing, we have other materials that can be used for fencing in commercial context. Let's propose that he come back with an idea like that. That those are my thoughts. So

thank you, Commissioner. Uh Commissioner Tomichek. I know it's late. I as much as we've been debating back and forth about the the size of the fence, what it covers, and so on and so forth, let's not forget that the applicant reduced the size of the fence based on perhaps some misunderstandings of easements, where he's allowed to put the fence, so on and so forth. His original plan, it seems, based on the conversation that's been had, was that he did in fact want to do the entire property. So, let's not hold Let's be a little bit kind in our evaluation of why he's at where he's at with the fence size. That said, a wooden fence around a commercial property seems to be an oddity. And I will point out that it was permitted at one point or at least I I assume it was. Um there's a uh auto dealership right near my house that has a wooden fence along the uh southeast side. basically runs from um Elliot Street down along a park over to um Federal and to the detriment of the the applicant, they've just had to rouse about 20 homeless people living behind that fence in much the same thing he's trying to prevent. So, take that for what it's worth.

Great. Thank you. Um Before I take your comment, uh, uh, Trevor, could you do me a favor? Uh, you in your presentation, you went through the standards that were not met. Could you just give the numbers of the 17 that that were or that by your analysis so that that shows the burden to overcome if for us to if if we were to recommend an overturning of your denial?

Yeah. Absolutely. Uh so criteria 1 through six we identified as not being met and then criteria 9 through 10 we also identified not being met. Great. Thank you uh Commissioner Peg.

All right. I think Dave in a roundabout way your comment clarified things for me. You said let's be nice, right? Uh something like that. Those were not your exact words, but those were the vibes. Um, and he's clearly not experienced dealing with land use. And I think we have a tiny bit of obligation to try and hear him out. And I think we have done that. Ultimately, what this boils down to is land use law is complicated and the poor guy needs a lawyer to help him through this process. staff uh did their best I think to um um uh uh explain why this was be why they are recommending denial. Um and um I so for example uh uh did you say that it is not compatible and harmonious with number which is condition number five? I believe you you said that was Yep. I don't agree with that. I think offense is compatible in this specific case, but there's 17 more of the these criteria and the applicant did not overcome them with his presentation. And that's despite all of us trying to be nice. And I I think he needs an attorney to help him through the process. And I hate to waste more time. Um, but my grandpa got into trouble with his county in Arizona over a land use thing and he talked himself into ever more and more trouble. And then he finally hired a lawyer. And after one hearing, it was done with no fines or penalties of any kind. And that's what this guy needs to do.

That's where I'm at. So, may I make a motion? You certainly may make a motion. I move that the planning commission deny the appeal for an official development plan amendment for Sheridan Park filing number 6A, block 3, lot 3. This recommendation is based on the finding that the official development plan amendment does not comply with the criteria in section 11-5-15 of the Westminster Municipal Code. Second.

It's been moved and seconded. Are there any other uh Commissioner Caner? No. No. Any other discussion? Discussion. Discussion. All right. Vote, please. Commissioner Peg, yes. Commissioner Conir, yes. Commissioner Jeang, no. Commissioner Mayo, yes. Commissioner Carpenter, no. Commissioner calling. I'm confused between the yeses and nos. That's late. Oh, a vote for a yes vote is a denial. A no vote is not a denial. Yes. Commissioner Tomichek. No.

I think the motion passed in a 4-3 vote if my math works. All right. So, it is denied. Does does the applicant have recourse to city council after this or are we the final decider? Uh you are the final decider but there is a provision for the for him to appeal this to the city council. We'll immediately advise him of this in writing tomorrow because there is a short window of time for which he would need to do this.

Wonderful. Okay. Thank thank you and thank you for your patience as we work through that. Thank you. Uh okay. All right. any old business, any miscellaneous business. I just want to note and thank staff for your diligence and your patience, particularly Trevor. So, great job. Yep. Yep. Ditto.

All right. And with that, I adjourn this meeting of the planning commission at 11:48 p.m. [Music]