sy 29,2085 ae a JUL 29 2085 Development Serces Center Services 565 KimbarkSrest Fasokng tengmontCO 80501 4:08 pom iy of Longmont Gy Cen's Oftcs S50 Kimbark Saat Longmont, CO 80501 DESCRIPTION of APPEAL: ‘This APPEAL Is being submittadin response to the decision made by the City of Longmont Planing and Zoning Commission approving te PROPOSAL (below) by Acts, LLC. forthe development ofthe 20 89 ‘20% parcel of land at the southwest comer of Arport Road and Clover Basin rive in Longmont The decision being appealed was made athe Cty of Longmont Planning aed Zoning Commision Meeting that commenced at 700 pm on Wednesday, July 22,2015, The decsion was delivered by the Planning and Zoning Commission between 12:01 am and 100 am on Thursday, July 23,2018, The location ofthe Planning and Zoning APPELLANTS: Micha and Jennifer Schufer 4716 Boia Vista Dive Longmont, CO 80503 720-234-0967 720-582-4731 DESCRIPTION OF GROUNDS FOR APPEAL: ‘The Panning and Zoning Commitee's decision to approve the proposed development by Acts, LLC. bs notin the best intrest of Longmont. “The decison makers exceeded thet authority o jurscicton as contained in he Muniipal Cage or Charter. The most relevant secton being 18.01.030.- Purpose and intent Specialy sections ‘A This project does not promote pubic health, safety, convenience, comfort or prospenty 8 This project does not secure the safety of persons, specifcaly young pedestans who need rots the aioady high volume intersection © This project could negatwely impact he value of neighboring property. E This project endangers an aleady established praiie dog cemmuniy. Many of which hhave been pushed to this corner Io because of other new eensructon,F This project could negatively impact water and other environmental resources for an already adding many new residences, Hl This project contributes a large amount of new taf to already congested intersection “The western sie of Apot and Clove: was never meant tobe the min road 6 current used as, A look atthe landscaping shows the intended use is more ofan {entrance and feeder road, nota main road tats supposed to handle wnat shouldbe four lanes of trafic. The proposed car centric use of he egress points aso endangers pedestrians, many who are chigren commiting fo echoal P&G This project does not adequately manage growth or encourage a balance of residential {and nonresidential use. The orginal intent of hs land was only commercal. There are no ‘sores that ar west fo service the neighborhoods. Many people bought homes inthis part cof town because they expected more retalto be but ‘The alowance of residential only on the 14 acres goes against the intended use designation, On top of that mast ofthe board members have never been tothe ste for 8 wat ane could not possibly understand the true impact. ‘The decison isnot supported by any competent evidence in the ecard paca “The paperwork ted fs based on questonable deta mainly provided by the developer. The raf study dates donot account for peak usage times dung the choo! {year or the eventual new traffic that willbe added fom alfeady approved to Bul andr under Construction homes in Southwest Longmont ‘The decison is plainly inconsistent with the review eta an was amended up uni the day of he Panning and Zaning Commitee meting on ly 2, 2018, The data provided by the schol iit only looked at elementary schon and ld not explain the impact on missle ang high schol. This review also ‘ed not account for impacts from already approved-o-buid homes. The school disvcts numbers ae very low in regards tothe total numberof new students. Given thal the two elementary schoo aieady have Potable trates to sccommedate the large numberof students, any potenti inease wil impact he Schools and the quality of education ‘According othe questionable dat, this project fs within the tiesholis fr bath trafic and school volume, Bu, this projects beneficial ony tothe developer and does not wel in the proposed ection This and was expected tobe commercal innate, bul the developer nas found the mixed use alowng _apartmentss more francialy rewarding than jst commercial | am requesting thatthe Cty Counc reject ths proposal and encourage the developer to include area residents to better determine the needs of tis pat of Longmont. | understand that wnen paperwork in ‘fda, there i tle an average cltzen can do. The rule ofthe lw is beng folowed, but the spit ofthe law i being ignored in leu of short term feancial gains you truly care about the future of Longmont, please reconsider the approval ofthis project.