Silo Phase 2 public hearing April 6
A Planning Commission meeting
Just when I thought I had a free weekend, here comes another development!
A few people told me they saw a sign on the Silo property which usually means a public hearing. Yes indeed, that is happening. I checked with the planning department and learned the planning commission will hold a public hearing on Phase 2 of the Silo project at City Hall 1290 S. Public Road on April 9, 2025, 6:00 pm
The 67-page planning commission packet with all the information about this project was posted to the city website on Friday. I am including some information from the packet but I encourage everyone interested in this project to read it fully.
I see in the packet that Community Supported Agriculture (CSA) was part of the original plan. The developer’s narrative says “A previously proposed CSA farm on the Northern edge of the property was zoned Agricultural (A). It was determined that the CSA farm was not of a scale to make it economically viable to run, so that will be rezoned to R3” R3 is a residential zone.
There was also a Central Park which the narrative tells us has been reduced and redistributed throughout the development.
AGENDA ITEM
A. Resolution No. PC-2025-01/Recommending Approval of the Silo Phase 2 Planned Unit Development Sketch Plan (10364 Arapahoe Road) [Public Hearing/Noticed in the Daily Camera on March 28, 2025]
PROVIDING INPUT
You can see below what the agenda says about providing input for this public hearing. But first a few comments.
Obviously, this is a cut-and-paste template and someone should have included a real name rather than “insert liaison name” because this agenda leaves the public with no link to contact anyone at the city to provide this input.
It says if your remarks are submitted by 3 pm on the day of the meeting they will be read into the record. That’s great.
It refers to “Public Input”. Public input happens at the beginning of the meeting and is for anything for which there is not a public hearing. The Silo project is a public hearing and Chair Thomas will formally open that hearing during the presentation.
There is a link to a Zoom videoconference, I’m not sure if that is workable for the planning commission. If you want to use this I recommend checking with the staff before the meeting.
CONTACT INFO FOR STAFF
Here’s contact information for the staff members listed on the memo, send your written comments to them.
Steven Williams, Planning and Building Director Steven.Williams@lafayetteco.gov
Jake Nitchals, Current Planning Manager Jacob.Nitchals@lafayetteco.gov
Jesse Rounds, Senior Planner Sorry, Jesse is new. I haven’t met him yet and I can’t find a contact email in the staff directory.
OPTIONS FOR PARTICIPATING IN THE MEETING
• Submit written comments to insert liaison name. If your remarks are received by 3pm on the day of the meeting, they will be read into the record.
• Participate on your computer via videoconference at https://lafayetteco-gov.zoom.us/j/83243974552.
• Use the “Raise Hand” icon during Public Input to request to speak. When it is your turn to speak, we will unmute your microphone.
• When listening over the phone, press *9 during Public Input to raise your hand to request When it is your turn, we will unmute your microphone.
The agenda says: Listen to the meeting by calling 877-853-5257 (toll free). Once connected, you will be asked for the meeting number. The meeting number is 832 4397 4552. Press # after entering the number.
THE PROJECT
OK Let’s check out the project. I know many of you are more familiar with this than I am.
WHERE IS IT?
I snagged this graphic from the Kensington plan because it gives us a good image of the location of the Silo project and tells us what was planned for it before the change being presented now.
THE CHANGES
I’m taking text and graphics directly from the documents in the planning commission’s packet.
“The City received an application from Lennar Colorado, on behalf of Sue Weems (the property owner), to amend Phases 2 to 5 of their Planned Unit Development (PUD). The applicant is proposing to develop 235 housing units on an almost 38-acre site along northern edge of the City, south of Arapahoe Road and west of the proposed extension of Aspen Ridge Drive. The applicant proposes to develop 122 townhome units, 107 single family units, and six (6) duplexes. This updated mix of land uses will also require this parcel to be rezoned to Single-family and Two-family Residential (R2), Multi-family Residential (R3). The Legacy Lafayette Comprehensive Plan designates this area as a Housing Area.”
“The Silo Final Planned Unit Development (PUD) plan was approved by City Council on October 17, 2017 (see Attachment B). In 2023, the applicant approached City staff about making changes to Phases 2 to 5 of the First Filing. Because these changes are significant and involve rezoning this portion of the Silo subdivision, the City directed the applicant submit a Sketch Plan. The 2017 PUD approval included a five-phase predominantly residential development, with multifamily apartment buildings along Aspen Ridge Road, 20,000 SF of commercial floor area, a primary “Central” park separating the Phase 1 development from Phases 2 to 5, and community supported agricultural (CSA) farm in the northeast corner of the site.”
“Lennar Colorado was not the applicant on the original PUD entitlement but was one of two developers involved in Phase 1. After the completion of Phase 1, the applicant chose to modify the PUD to combine Phases 2 to 5 into a single phase, make adjustments to the mix of development proposed, update the distribution of open space areas, and concentrate the development’s detention needs into the northeast corner of the property.”
“Phase 1 of the Silo development is largely constructed. It includes 82 single-family detached homes, 48 townhomes, and 4 duplexes. The table below illustrates how the proposed Phases 2 to 5 development area would differ from the original PUD approval.”
“Utilities and rights-of-way will be publicly owned and maintained once they are built by the applicant and dedicated to the City. The applicant is proposing to construct the western half of Aspen Ridge Road from Arapahoe Road to Lucerne Drive. This portion of the road is within the subject property. The other half of Aspen Ridge Road would be built by the adjacent property developer when/if this property develops. This half of Aspen Ridge is on adjacent property. Staff will continue to work with the Silo applicant to ensure that their traffic needs will be met independent of the adjacent property development. Specific design of these facilities will be accomplished during the Preliminary Plan review, once updated traffic studies are completed to inform this design.”
“Community Feedback
The applicant held an online public forum and a neighborhood meeting prior to submitting the Silo Phase 2 application. Comments were limited in nature, as the plan is refined through the preliminary plan, we expect more comments to arise. Comments in the online forum and at the neighborhood meeting included questions about the proposed community center, the relationship between fire and emergency building codes in phase one and phase two, the evolution of the park feature in the park, and the potential impacts of outside agencies on the development process.”
Want to offer more support? Awesome!
God, can they please just put a pin in all of this stuff for a hot New York minute? We’re over here trying to stop a mentally ill criminal from unfolding an authoritarian regime and to stop our democracy from crumbling. We don’t have the bandwidth to keep up with all of this million mile a minute local development crap to also have to protect our community every 15 minutes. I’m literally exhausted. Don’t we have a 1200 permit per year limit? How can we possibly be staying within that limit with all this stuff? I’d like to see them addressing those limits and prioritizing what projects in the pipeline best fit our long term goals. I don’t want to stop everything. We literally have to keep growing because Colorado is growing. I want them to stay within the permit limits, keep it to agreed upon heights and density, ensure we have the resources and services to support the added residents (including water), consider the impacts on traffic, wildlife, infrastructure, etc., and make sure the project actively contributes to our agreed upon vision of the outcome. If there’s a one off issue that causes concerns, let’s address it. Otherwise, if these things are all in line, I don’t want to oppose it. If I’m wrong here, sell me on it. I’m too tired to look at it closely enough to see it clearly, so I’m open to push back. Sell me.