Longmont planning commission recommends Erwin Thomas land‑use, rezoning and PUD amendments with conditions

LONGMONT, Colo. — The Longmont Planning & Zoning Commission voted 6–1 on Aug. 27, 2025, to forward to City Council a group of land‑use changes for the Erwin Thomas annexation area, approving an Envision Longmont map amendment, a concept‑plan amendment, two rezonings and two gravel‑mining PUD amendments with conditions that tie rezonings to reclamation and allow limited administrative density flexibility.

The action sets a framework for future development on land east of Harvest Moon Drive, south of Ken Pratt Boulevard and west of North 119th Street and does not authorize any construction.

The commission’s recommendation matters because it defines how mined parcels will be reconfigured for housing, mixed use and supporting streets, and it requires further technical review — including traffic, utilities and subdivision approvals — before any building permits are issued.

Staff, represented by Kristen Cody, senior planner in Planning & Development Services, told the commission the six related applications would reconfigure Envision Longmont land‑use designations and remove portions of the site from an existing gravel‑mining PUD so reclaimed areas can be developed later. Cody said the hearing was only to set a land‑use and zoning framework: “Ultimately nothing. No physical construction is authorized at this stage. This is only land use and zoning framework.”

Applicant team members led by Barb Brunk of Resource Conservation Partners (representing Diamond G Concrete Company) described phased reclamation and development. Brunk asked the commission to approve the concept plan while allowing staff an administrative option to increase the phase‑5 density up to 25 percent at the time of development review. “We respectfully ask that you approve Erwin Thomas…subject to the conditions as set forth,” Brunk said.

How the site would be zoned and quantified

- Rezoning No. 1 (reclaimed land east of Harvest Moon Drive): 17.68 acres to Mixed‑Use Corridor (MUC) and 22.13 acres to Residential Mixed Neighborhood (RMN). - Rezoning No. 2 (eastern portion along North 119th): about 85 acres to Residential Single‑Family (RSF) and about 15.99 acres to RMN. - Concept‑plan unit totals cited to the commission: mixed‑neighborhood buildout estimated at roughly 803 dwelling units (1,004 with a 25% increase); single‑family neighborhood shown as 174 units (217 with 25% increase). Staff and the applicant noted those are plan‑level estimates; final unit counts will be set at later plat/site reviews.

Traffic and technical review

Commission and staff discussion focused heavily on traffic. Public Works civil engineer Josh Sherman and the project traffic consultant said the preliminary traffic analysis shows heavy background traffic on State Highway 119. The study identifies unsatisfactory levels of service at the Ken Pratt Boulevard intersections under future background growth: Cody summarized the study’s timing of impacts, and Public Works noted the intersections degrade through 2030 and 2045 without mitigation. City staff emphasized that comprehensive traffic studies and any required improvements will be submitted and reviewed at future subdivision and site‑plan stages.

Public notice and site‑sign posting dispute

A member of the public, Lawrence Bashir of Western Sky Circle, testified that the project signs were positioned and assembled so the notice was not visible to many neighbors and said he believed some residents did not see the signs. “My complaint is basically about the signage that it wasn't put in a place or it could be seen,” Bashir told the commission.

Applicant Barb Brunk provided a sign‑posting affidavit and photographs and said she reposted and repaired a vandalized sign after Bashir raised concerns. Assistant City Attorney Jeremy Terrell advised the commission that notice sufficiency is the applicant’s burden under Longmont Development Code 15.02.040.j.3 and related notice provisions; staff and the applicant advised that mailed notice to property owners within 1,000 feet was sent and that weather‑resistant signs were placed on each public street frontage.

The commission first voted on whether notice posting met code requirements. Commissioner Earl moved to find posting and mailing sufficient; Commissioner Jordan seconded. The motion passed 6–1 (Ayes: Lang, Boone, Jordan, Poland (chair), Earl, Wayne; No: Saunders). The commission record indicates staff will continue evaluating policy and code language on sign visibility.

Formal action and conditions

Commissioner Earl moved and Commissioner Jordan seconded that the commission recommend approval of PZR‑2025‑7B (the staff resolution) with an added condition allowing the total density shown for phase 5 on the concept plan to be increased by up to 25 percent subject to administrative approval; any such increase must comply with city standards in effect at the time of development, and any proposal above 25 percent would require a formal concept‑plan amendment. The motion passed 6–1 (Ayes: Lang, Boone, Jordan, Poland, Earl, Wayne; No: Saunders). The staff resolution and the commission motion include additional conditions tying rezoning to completion of gravel‑mining reclamation and recordation steps before certification.

What the action does and what’s next

The commission’s approval only sets the Envision Longmont amendments, concept plan and zoning framework and forwards the items to City Council. No site improvements or construction are authorized by the planning commission’s recommendation. Future steps before any building include final plats, subdivision and site‑plan reviews, stormwater and utility approvals, geotechnical and traffic studies, and any required permits from CDOT for work affecting Highway 119.

Quotes (selected)

- Kristen Cody, Senior Planner: “Ultimately nothing. No physical construction is authorized at this stage. This is only land use and zoning framework.” - Barb Brunk, Resource Conservation Partners (applicant representative): “We respectfully ask that you approve Erwin Thomas…subject to the conditions as set forth.” - Lawrence Bashir, resident: “My complaint is basically about the signage that it wasn't put in a place or it could be seen.” - Josh Sherman, Civil Engineer, Public Works: “The long and the short of it is the background traffic on 119 is heavy.”

Discussion vs. decision

- Discussion: public notice and sign placement; traffic impacts and timing; reclamation sequencing; the requested administrative 25% density flexibility; geotechnical/reclamation standards for former mining cells. - Direction/assignment: staff will continue to evaluate code and internal guidance on sign posting and visibility, and future development applications will require detailed traffic and geotechnical studies. - Formal action: Commission recommended approval of PZR‑2025‑7B with the added 25% administrative flexibility condition and conditions tying rezoning certifications to completed mining reclamation; motion passed 6–1.

Ending

The item will be forwarded to Longmont City Council for final action; staff and the applicant said they expect future subdivision, site‑plan and technical reviews before any development begins.