Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Call to order the September 16th, 2026 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. Jane, would you mind please calling the roll?

Thank you very much. As we start every meeting, we'll start with the land acknowledgement statement. We acknowledge that Longmont sits on the traditional territory of the Cheyenne, Arapaho Ute and other indigenous peoples. We honor the history and the living and spiritual connection that the first people have with this land. It's our commitment to face the injustices that happened when this land was taken and to educate our communities, ourselves and our children to ensure that these injustices do not happen again. First item is communications. Grant Pendland.

I'm okay with the cooler weather. I don't know about end of summer, but thank you. We'll move on to approving the minutes. This is minutes from our August 19th, 2026 minutes. Commissioners, anyone have changes, corrections, or motions? Commissioner Boone?

Thank you, Chair. I will move to approve last month's meeting.

Thank you. Sorry to cut you off. We have a motion. Do we have a second? Second. Second by Commissioner Edgley-Wells. Any further discussion? Jane, can you call vote, please?

Thank you very much. We'll move right along. We have our first public comment, public invited to be heard. This is for items that are not on the agenda this evening for a public hearing or items that are not coming for us as a quasi-judicial matter. There is no one who signed up on the sheet, but we'll still open it up to anyone in the room if anyone would like to speak about topics not on tonight's agenda. Seeing none, we'll move right into our public hearing. This is for 545 Collier Street variance. Principal Planner Jennifer Hewitt-Apperson, take it away.

Thank you. Ms. Wolf, the floor is yours. If you can introduce yourself to start, please.

I am sure we will have questions, but because it's a public hearing item, we are going to open it up for public comment. We have the ability to call you back up for questions. So thank you. I'm going to pause just a second. Jane's getting the signup sheet. For anyone who is going to make a public comment, just the reminder that we'd like you to start with your name, your address, you will have five minutes to make your comment. Everyone's allowed to speak once, you can't give your time to anybody else, none of that kind of stuff. First on my list, I'm gonna go down my list and then anyone who'

Thank you. Next on my list is Sharon O'Leary.

I'm sorry the five minutes are up, but thank you, Ms. O'Leary.

Next on my list, and I apologize, I'm probably going to mispronounce, is it Kyle Schutzschultz? Your handwriting's better than mine, but it's still a little challenging.

Thank you, Ms. Levison. Next and last on my list, Dido Clark. I really hope I did. No. Dido. I'm so sorry.

That's the end of those who are signed up on this sheet. Would anyone else like to come forward and speak? Seeing no one, I'm going to close the public comment part of the hearing. Commissioners, who wants to start? Commissioner Wang.

Okay, thanks, Chair. I have a couple of questions for Planner Hewitt-Apperson. Thank you. Just trying to get a couple of clarifications about process. So if this variance was not granted, does the applicant need to go back to the Historic Preservation Committee or Commission to request for a new certificate of appropriateness for the setback version of the structure?

Okay. There was a couple of questions about the improvement location certificate. Can you explain to us what an ILC is and how is that different from a full-stake survey?

Okay, but now that it will be moving, because we're going to move it back within the property boundaries, a full survey is now required as part of the permitting process, is that correct?

Okay, and when does that happen in the process? Because if this was granted, the applicant would go and apply for the permit, and that's when they need to have that information ready when they apply for the permit?

Okay. Thank you. The other question I have is for Planner Hewitt-Apperson. Has there been any further efforts to access the hard copy of the Sanborn maps to determine when the structure was exactly built?

Thank you, Chair. Okay. I'm going to make a couple of comments, and then I probably have some questions. And if my comments are incorrect, please... Please correct me. So my understanding is that the garage is not really part of the historic structure. And as such, my opinion is that we should not be as lenient as we would be with a historic structure. I feel that setbacks are really important and The main reason is for fire concerns. And anyone who has watched the fire disasters in our country this year, should understand that that's a real issue. There are a number of problems with the drawi

Thank you. So as such, I will not be supporting this variance. Thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner Boone. Other commissioners? Commissioner Edgley-Wells.

Thank you. I think my only concern regarding this project is currently that the permit wasn't approved before, I guess, the building of the structure was proceeded. I did see some of the letters from the community, and there is a lot of support for this project, but one of them does indicate that they would like to see this project move forward if the fees associated with not having a permit approved were applied. So I'd kind of like to hear maybe other commissioners' thoughts on that. Anyone? Okay, well, those are my concerns. So if it is approved, I would actually like to see those applied.

Thank you, Commissioner Edgley-Wells. Anyone else here? Commissioner Lang.

Thanks. I had a few questions. What is a shear wall?

So what's standing there right now are shear walls?

What's that? OK. And then I was wondering, I don't know much about the Historical Preservation Commission, but didn't you say it was approved by them?

But was missile Leary representing the HPC when she was up here or just a neighbor?

I thought she referenced the HPC. Coach, okay. I don't know who my co-chair is of my neighborhood. Okay, and then, geez. So back to Mr. Wang's question, and I'm trying to get the timeline down. If the variance... approved they have to do another permit application which will include a detailed survey correct yes so what we're here to say yes or no is are we that's not really going to change much maybe a foot right I mean you're missing foot who knows but we're basically saying If we grant the variance, we're saying the walls of this garage, the west and the south walls, will be essentially on

So I'm so sorry. We can't have the interaction, and I know that the commission is somewhat encouraging that, and so I'm going to shut that down. No, we're all to blame right now for this, but I would appreciate it.

Sorry. I was kind of loving the give and take, but yeah, you made a good point.

The give and take is wonderful, but it's just not allowed in our rules.

So noted. All right. That's all I got for now. Thank you, Commissioner Lang. I've got a couple. I know there's a few in the queue that we'll come back to, but I'm going to at least do a first round really quick. One, I really want to give a shout out to the Historic Preservation Commission. Their packet was phenomenal, so both kudos to staff for that, their minutes, the discussion they had. I found that extremely enlightening, and I really appreciate the work that they did. And I hope that you'll pass that back to them, because it was really helpful to kind of frame the issue for me. So I appr

Could you repeat the question? So we know that a detailed survey, not the ILC, has to be done as part of the building permit. Is it appropriate for us to have it as a condition on the variance that a survey has to be completed?

fine if it doesn't it's still going to happen so well jeremy well you're answering questions then on the variance itself um we have you know an application to reduce the side yard setbacks we have the packet does this variance only apply to the garage in question here or is this a variance for anything that happens on this lot

I'll move on to another question in a second, but do you mind looking at that? Yeah, I'll take a look. Okay. Because I think that would be really helpful and potentially address some of the comments around what this means as a future. future precedent for this lot as well.

theoretically theoretically well theoretically that this garage the variance is approved the garage is built it's permitted everything else at some point in the future the garage is demolished and someone wants to rebuild do they need to set a new variance for that

Thank you. Sorry to dive over a hole, but I appreciate that. And I will appreciate future comments on the PCR. And then I want to explore the building code for a second. And it's really commissioner Boone's comments that I am, I defer to her expertise on that. And I believe there was acknowledgement that her interpretation was correct. And I'm concerned about basically the design we're seeing for, I think you said specifically, the door and the windows. Does that mean that there's a different design that is part of the building permit? Or how should we try to reconcile that for us if we're ask

you know miss boone had spoke of okay so to interpret if i can the design that we see is not what can be built because it you you wouldn't issue a permit for this as is no not right now okay and so you would have a much more detailed set of plans you would you know some of this would change we are we are talking about the variants i recognize that i recognize hpc is you know approve the kind of overall design that's not the design you're approving no And nothing we're doing in any way touches not following the code, doing anything that's outside the building code. There's nothing about histori

Last, and I'll reserve this for a little bit later, we heard comments about notice and signage. I know this is a topic that's come up in the past. I will bring it up at the end because I just want to talk about it because I think we've had it as a future agenda item as well, but want to acknowledge that I did hear that. I will go on to others for right now. Commissioner Jordan, you're next up.

Thank you. Commissioner Wang. Thanks. There was a question mentioned earlier this evening from the public invited to be heard about the waiver of the neighborhood notification. Can you explain why that happened?

Okay, thank you. Okay. No, one more thing. So I just want to give my thoughts on this. So Commissioner Boone did mention that the design and the design narrative that we've seen is very rudimentary, I guess. But it sounds like that this will not be what is built because when you go through the building permitting process, you need to have actual plans with the foundation and everything up to code. Is that correct?

Okay. Okay. And given that this has the support of the neighbors directly to the east, sorry, to the west, to the south, to the north, and a couple of other folks on the same block on Collier and 6th, and the fact that this is trying to rebuild to the historic designation or the feel of a historic neighborhood of what it was like, Because I feel like if you put the variance back in, then it's not going to be the same feeling as a historic neighborhood anymore. So I am for this approval.

Thank you, Commissioner Wang. Commissioner Edgley-Wells.

Thank you. I just have a follow up question regarding sign postage and permitting. So and this is just a question because I'm a new commissioner and I'm trying to learn the ropes here. There seems to be a correlation between approval of a permit and posting of signage, which Is that correct? I guess I should ask that in a question. Is that correct?

All right. I have a question for you, Lizzie, the owner. Okay, so definitely going through what you've talked about so far and then reading through the packet and everything, it sounds like you've had a lot of bad luck throughout this entire process. Let's throw some more bad luck in the mix. Let's say that you go through this whole process and then we go through the... um like that we go through the platting and then it finds out that the the actual property line is a foot further in how would that affect um like how how would that affect this

Then my other question would be, how would that compare to if you actually had to move like what would the hardship be in comparison of like of that versus like having to actually move it the whole garage to be within to not have the variance yeah so

I see no other commissioners with comments. Does anyone have anything? Oh, Commissioner Lange. Follow-up for you.

I'm still not clear. So let's say the variance gets approved. They have to apply for a permit with some pretty detailed plans and a survey, not cheap. What are the odds that they can keep up those studs right now that they have and those footers? I mean, those footers, what if they're like a foot deep? I mean, is part of the process, do you go out there and actually measure how deep they go and say whether they're going to work or not and know they're only one foot deep, they need to be forward, get rid of them and pour some new ones? Or how does that look?

Okay. And so... you're kind of almost getting a talking about just general home improvements. You're almost, you'd be issuing a permit kind of, you know, the other way around where it's, you know, after the fact where you're going out and looking at it and saying, okay, but it, but it sounded like they could salvage what they have up already. Could you say, yeah, that, If the variance is granted, I think we can go with this and move on from this. You're not going to make them start from scratch, right?

Okay. All right. Well, I appreciate the route you're taking with, you know, getting the variants first. I think putting something there, you definitely have to flesh out those plans. Looks a little AI generated to me, but... If we can get at some actual construction plans and get some good thorough specs on that thing and hopefully salvage what we have there already, I'm in favor of the variance.

Thank you, Chair. Well, it looks like I'm going to be outvoted. So with that in mind, I think we should have a condition that this accessory building cannot have an ADU built on it in the future.

That's all I got. Before you turn off, basically you can't convert this existing structure.

You cannot convert, you cannot make this non-compliant accessory structure into an ADU.

And I just want to make sure I unpack that briefly. So effectively, if the applicant wanted to at some point put an ADU on the property in this location or not, well, in this location, it would need a separate variance to do so.

And another location compliant with the code is compliant with the code.

And a habitable space I don't think would ever get that variance.

Thank you. Jeremy, can I come back to you? The wording on the PZRs, please.

So I'm just making sure the sentence that's being proposed has to be a side yard, rear yard, from five feet to zero feet. Is that what you're suggesting? If we want to adopt A or B, you'd suggest that be included in the VCR? Correct. Any commissioner want to make a motion or have further comments? But I see no one right now. Commissioner Jordan.

Hold on one second. We have a motion. Is there a second?

Okay. Seconded by Commissioner Forbes. Jeremy, go ahead and we can tweak the wording and then re-motion in second.

Noted. There is a motion in a second. Is there any discussion of that motion or amendments to it to possibly include the extra sentence that we talked about previously as well?

I just have a comment based on what Jeremy just said. Maybe it would be best to adhere to fire code instead of talking about keeping an ADU from being built in the future. That's just my suggestion is we can comment on the code at hand in the variance, but not necessarily designate future plan for the property or the garage. Sorry.

Commissioner Edgeley-Wells or somebody else, do you want to amend the motion that's given?

Commissioner Forbes, you were the original second, correct? Do you second the amendment? Okay. Commissioner Jordan, can I suggest a friendly amendment as well? Of course. And that would just be to add the sentence in there that we are... The variance that we're talking about is a side yard and rear yard reduction from five feet to zero feet.

Okay. We have an amended motion. We have multiple seconds on the amended motion. Any other commissioners wish to comment, discuss the motion that's on the floor right now before we go to a vote? Do you have anything? Jane, can you please call a vote?

Thank you very much. This item now enters a seven-day appeal period. During this time, any aggrieved party may appeal the commission's decision by submitting a written appeal letter stating why the Planning and Zoning Commission's decision should be amended or reversed by City Council. All appeals must be in writing and must be received in the City Clerk's Office and the Planning Office within the seven-day appeal period. The appeal period begins Thursday, September 17th at 8 a.m. and ends Wednesday, September 23rd at 5 p.m. Thank you all. That will close the public hearing portion. We are on

Thank you. Would anybody else like to? Of course.

Thank you. Anybody else like to comment? then I will go ahead and close our final call public invited to be heard. Um, we're onto item nine on our agenda items from the commission commissioners. I teased it before. Um, Grant, we have talked about notice. We've talked about the ways that the public find out. We've talked about specifically in terms of signage, mailings, that kind of thing. We had talked about trying to have it on a future agenda or study session probably for us to talk through and kind of get a good confidence on. Is that still on the list for something that can come up?

I will take yes as the answer there. I hope that is something that we will see sooner rather than later because it is a concern that we're hearing multiple times. And so want to make sure that we're as transparent as we can be following the rules and regulations and making sure that folks understand when they can comment and weigh in. So thank you. Other commission comments? Council Representative Popkin. Anything for me this evening?

Good evening, Commissioners. Thanks for your thorough consideration, as always, of these proposals. I don't think I have too much for you all tonight. I'll note that some of the last night the Urban Renewal Authority approved additional tax increment finance development agreements for some of the urban renewal areas that this body has reviewed. So just connecting the dots between kind of the plan areas that you reviewed at a high level and then the implementation of that at more of a tax and current financing negotiation and development financing level. We approved an agreement for the Twin Pe

Thank you very much. We're on to last item. Well, second to last item. Items from the planning director.

Commissioners, any feedback? Director Penland on the 6 p.m. for the October?

Is anyone opposed to that? Okay. I'll let you take that as your informal feedback. I appreciate it.