Longmont planning commission finds notice inadequate, schedules special Dec. 10 hearing

The Longmont Planning and Zoning Commission unanimously concluded on Nov. 19, 2025, that adequate notice was not provided for agenda item 7a because the applicant posted a “development under review” sign rather than the required public‑hearing sign. Chair Hite moved the determination and the commission voted 7–0 to halt the hearing.

Nathan Jones, a principal planner with the Planning and Development Services Department, told the commission that the wrong sign had been posted on-site and that the city’s land development code requires a distinct public‑hearing sign that lists meeting time and location. Jones recommended postponing the hearing and holding a special meeting on Dec. 10 so the applicant could re‑notice the site in conformance with the code.

Assistant attorney Terrell told commissioners that the code’s notice provisions must be satisfied before a hearing can proceed and said the commission could not legally hold the hearing in the absence of the required notice. Following those legal and procedural clarifications, the commission voted to find notice inadequate and to schedule a Dec. 10 special meeting at 6:00 p.m. to continue item 7a; the motion passed unanimously.

Two members of the public who attended the meeting urged clearer procedures. Tom Smith, who identified his address as 1049 Champion Circle, urged simplification of development procedures and alleged inconsistent enforcement of code provisions on trees and fire hazards, saying a lifted citation preceded a large cottonwood stump falling into a nearby yard. Shaquille Doral of Francis Street objected to removing item 7a from the original agenda and argued that repeated hearings and procedural complexity increase the cost of housing; he asked the commission to forward a resolution to city council to study how process costs affect housing affordability.

The commission’s action does not decide the merits of the development proposal. Staff said mailings and affidavits had been sent and returned but that the on‑site sign type was incorrect. The commission’s formal determination that notice was inadequate means the item will not be considered again until proper notice is posted and the matter appears at the Dec. 10 special meeting.

The commission advised the applicant to post the correct public‑hearing sign and staff recommended following the city’s standard sign template and re‑mailing notices as required by the land development code. The hearing will be continued to the special meeting on Dec. 10 at 6:00 p.m.; if the required notice is posted in accordance with code, the commission will consider the item at that meeting.