Agenda is approval of meeting minutes for January twenty first, twenty twenty-six.

Do we have a motion?

Um, I have a question.

Uh the original agenda I had uh had a subjourney at seven thirty.

I believe that meeting will a little bit longer than 7 30.

Okay, that's that's going to change our head.

Do we have a motion to approve minutes as amended?

Move to approve.

Yes.

All right, motion to approve the minutes as amended.

All in favor?

Aye.

Aye.

All right.

Meeting minutes are approved.

Moving on to public hearing.

Um next item on the agenda is a public hearing for resolution number PC 2026 12 uh recommending approval with conditions of an application for special use reviews and site plan and architectural review for lot 10, block one, black diamond subdivision.

Planning commission will review and provide comments on the application.

Um go ahead and read all this knowing.

Okay.

Uh Commission will consider the record, including city planning staff's report, presentations by the applicant and city's planning staff, and any public comment received during the hearing.

Commission will evaluate this proposal based solely upon the record and the applicable criteria established at a municipal code, which are highlighted in the staff report.

The commission's role this evening is to review and provide comments on the application.

The comments we provided, we provide will be done documented by staff and provided to city council before its review of sketch plan.

Following the city council's public hearing on sketch plan, planning staff will compile the planning commission's and city council's comments and provide those to the applicant.

It is important that each commission member remain objective and capable of considering information offered into the record.

Does any commission member believe that he or she is incapable of evaluating reviewing and commenting on the application consistent with due process requirements?

If so, please describe the situation and recuse yourself from further participation on this agenda.

Commissioner, Commissioner Watson?

Chair Thomas, I will need to accuse myself from the special use review public hearing in spar matter due to a potential conflict of interest.

I'm on the board of directors for the Lafayette History Museum, which has a potential interest in revenues that could result from the proposed use.

Therefore, out of abundance of caution and to avoid any appearance of conflict, I will be recusing myself from participating in this public hearing.

Uh Chair Thomas, I also am on the Lafayette Historical Society Board and therefore have the same potential conflict as Commissioner Phillips, and will also need to recluse myself.

Thank you both.

Um the other commission member have a conflict of interest or other matter he or she would like to disclose prior to proceeding on this item.

All right.

Since we do not have a quorum tonight, the public hearing um will be uh moving.

We'll be requesting to move the public hearing to April 8th, 2026.

Do we need to take a vote?

Uh yes, Chair Thomas.

Thomas, if you could have um a member of the commission make a motion and then click on that motion to continue.

I will go ahead and make that motion if I can make it or just someone else made too.

Uh anybody can make that motion.

Okay.

Yes.

I would like to move that we move this public hearing to April 8th, 2026.

Second.

Um, all those in favor?

Aye.

Aye.

All right.

This public hearing has been moved to April 8th, 2026.

At 6 p.m.

At 6 p.m.

That's 6 p.m.

And Chair Thomas may make a couple of comments uh while we're on the record for the meeting tonight.

Um so the planning commission has moved and approved uh the continuance of tonight's public hearing to April 8th at 6 p.m.

A couple of comments for the public who may be watching or in attendance tonight.

Uh first, anyone who has appeared tonight to testify in front of the commission is now on notice that the public hearing has been continued and that they are welcome to attend on the 8th to testify instead.

Um if they're not able to attend, they do have the opportunity to submit written uh written public testimony to planning staff uh no later than 1 p.m.

on April 8th in order to get written comments into the record for that for the continued hearing.

Um and I'd also uh because of how the commission has continued the hearing tonight, I'd like those members of the public who have already submitted written testimony to know that they do not need to resubmit uh their testimony that all of the written testimony that the city uh planning department received today prior to 1 p.m.

will still be entered into your record on the um on April 8th at your continued hearing.

So I just wanted to make sure that that was clear for the public.

Uh even though this technically counts as the notice of that continued hearing, it's my understanding that planning staff will still be re-noticing or or publishing.

Um I don't know about publishing, but we will definitely be very clearly posting that the public hearing has been continued to April 8th, and then um this will also affect a city council hearing on the same matter.

So we will be rescheduling that and reissuing the public notice for uh the previously scheduled city council public hearing on this same matter.

So just for the public, more uh notice to come, and uh just know that for this hearing you still have the opportunity to submit public to submit written comment or to appear on April 8th, if you'd if you would like to testify in person for this particular hearing.

Thank you.

Thank you.

All right, moving on to other business.

Are there any committee reports for commissioner comments?

Um, or shall we can we get Frank and follow that?

Commissioners Watson and Phillips into the remote committee.

Did you miss us?

Yes, so that's I have a question um maybe not for discussion today, but maybe future if it makes sense.

Um I saw that Boulder has created a special exemption to allow folks to rent their homes during Sundance without requiring a different process than would normally be for short-term rentals.

I know we've had a lot of conversations about short-term rentals here, and I wondered if we might talk a little bit about that at some point.

There are internal discussions about that.

Uh I don't know that.

Yes, we are we are aware that Boulder is doing kind of a special exception over that period of time that essentially I I think it allows them to, if I remember correctly, kind of use the space as is without doing building improvements related to like fire life safety, some of those types of things.

Um we have talked about it.

I don't know that there's been any formal decisions made on that, but it is on our radar.

We are aware of it.

I think part of it was also allowing folks who are renters to also um sub letter or to do a temporary rental uh with the approval of their of a building owner.

So I think that's an important uh thing to make sure we cover yes.

Or discuss.

If there were to be action taken, would that come here?

Or would it be that might be more of a legal question?

I don't know if that would have to be if the special exception is codified, it would need to come to planning commission first because you do have to have a public hearing and review any potential changes to chapter 26 and our short-term rental regulations are I believe in chapter 26, or at least there are regulations in chapter 26.

We may also have licensing regulations elsewhere in the code.

Um, but if it does affect those provisions in 26, we would have to bring that to planning commission.

I would say even if it doesn't, we'd probably still uh know what the proposal is before bringing anything to council so you could provide a recommendation as well.

Okay.

Any other committee reports or commission comments?

So uh the open space had its annual presentation to council on goals and and those kinds of things.

Um we currently have 1,640 acres of open space in the city.

Um talked about their projects by strategic goals and designation alignment, which you know, restoration, weed removal, planting plants, tree seedings, maintenance.

Um they look like they have Boulder County, has a bitty uh good crop of open space volume of of youth core volunteers, so they're gonna be using those as well this year.

Let's see.

It's probably the major stuff there.

Um, then we had an open space meeting, and uh Philip attended and uh part of the meeting and did a presentation on the current status of the land use code.

And he said some interesting.

I didn't didn't think it was that long.

He said 1986 was the last time there was a review of the land use code.

And thinking modification.

And I don't know that that can be I don't think that can be because as usual, whenever you do um the comprehensive plan, a major rewrite of a comprehensive plan with that comes land use code revisions, and the last one that was done was in 2003.

So I think they did some revisions, but not a full rewrite.

That's what I understand.

It was it's still but anyway, um and again the idea being one you know to review reduce PUDs and of course looking at form-based code for commercial old town and large residential.

plan with that comes land use code revisions and the last one that was done was in 2003 so I think they did some revisions but not a full rewrite is what I understand that was it's still but anyway um and again the idea being want you know to review reduce PUDs and of course looking at form base code for commercial old town and large residential some of the things that came up uh that were brought up by the open space folks um talking about uh tightening fencing and lighting requirements on open space adjacent properties um and then if there's wildlife connections through the sites um you know how how would they they look at those in the code um require ecological assessment if there is a wildlife corridor and this is by an outside company not by staff internally and looking at different requirements based on potential species in that corridor and have an approved contractor list for that uh another question came up is a little bit of kind of interesting to us because if you have a wildfire and if a building burns down and it is not conforming to current code must they be rebuilt to be conforming so generally speaking if you rebuild something you do but this was from the open pace space perspective of okay if they were actually non-conforming and encroaching on open space or whatever because of how long ago they were built would they then be required to be built a differently and then some revised looking at revised definitions so now you'll have three categories open space parks and amenity space which is not something we've yeah we we have we look at having that in large you know large residential developments like having a park in the middle or gathering area or whatever but actually have a specific definition called amenity space and the other thing was the Wanaka granary they did receive the assessment from whoever they had to do the assessment and they're now um putting out an RFP for repair of that facility and also start looking for the funding for it and that would be it for me thank you.

I went to the historic preservation board and they had a fairly short meeting they had public input about the mural and the coca call mural and the Arapahole building um basically what they're talking about is historic preservation offers grants every year for pupil tower discussed there I think they want to make them bigger but that's historic preservation what was the consensus on the mural what was there other than it's it's lifetime is finite I got a sneaky feeling our consensus are going to grow the city and see about having it placed as original as it originally was there could be relocated so it's not on the south side of the building or I think that's right between the five of us here that mural is such a hot potato okay and there's so between the five of us here so many little strings into the chair and the uh I see the mural okay I really don't want to bring it up okay all right um well I know that it will be in good hands with strict preservation yes city council's got a big deal I do believe okay um any other commissioner comments all right do we have department comments I've been wracking my brain trying to think of some updates I can provide uh as you can see the Dutch Bros moving along daily grains has been fully demolished but we still do not have a building permit submitted so uh there's no no immediate kind of expected movement on that uh we along with the meeting that was scheduled for tonight we do have another uh spar for April no sorry that's gonna be on April 22nd um I don't have any other updates that I can think of off the top of my head but I'm happy to answer any questions if you have questions about any kind of development happening in the community I might be able to provide some insights so since we weren't in the room when was the meeting rescue April 8th okay 6 p.m right here be there basically we've saved the food for tonight for that meeting so the refrigerator perfect that is so nice twinkies for everyone they're for me for 1980 for 1986 yeah all right thank you um can I get a motion to um adjourn so moved I'll second that all in favor uh thank you all for being here oh so Darcy

All right.

Thank you.

Um can I get a motion to um adjourn?

So moved.

I'll second that.

All in favor?

Okay.

Thank you all for being here.

Oh, so Darcy.