Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Process topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Resident urges council review after one-month delay he attributes to incorrect notice sign
Summary
At a Dec. 10 Longmont Planning & Zoning Commission meeting a resident said a calendar delay tied to an incorrectly colored notice sign imposed costs and asked the commission to ask council to study the development-review process and its impact on housing affordability.
At the opening public-comment period of the Longmont Planning and Zoning Commission special meeting on Dec. 10, resident Shaquille Daulau (219 Francis St.) asked the commission to press the City Council to review how development review procedures affect housing costs after a one-month delay he attributed to an incorrectly colored notice sign.
Daulau told commissioners he understood the meeting was scheduled because the sign posted in front of the development notice was the wrong color and that the resulting one-month delay could translate into higher financing costs for the project. Using a sample calculation, he told the commission a one-month financing delay on a $6 million construction loan at a 10% annualized rate could raise per-unit costs by roughly $1,000 for a 60-unit development. He asked the commission to pass a resolution asking the council to evaluate whether review procedures and notice technicalities impose disproportionate cost burdens and to suggest changes that would advance Longmont’s affordability goals.
Chair Judson Hite and staff accepted the comment; Assistant City Attorney Jeremy Terrell said he did not see a notice defect that currently required pausing the hearing. The commission did not take formal action on Daulau’s request at the meeting; several commissioners later expressed interest in broader discussion of process efficiency at a future study session.
Quote: "This one month of delay ... is going to increase the cost of every single home in this community by $1,000," Daulau said during public comment.
Status: No formal resolution was adopted during the Dec. 10 meeting; commissioners suggested process efficiency could be a future agenda or study-session topic.
