►
From YouTube: Boulder City Council Meeting 12-15-22
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
A
A
A
B
D
F
G
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
F
F
E
F
With
that
we'll
go
on
to
our
our
announcement
here
about
covid-19
testing
and
vaccinations
so
for
covid-19
testing,
information
and
provider
locations
for
free
testing
go
to
www.bocode.org
covet
testing.
The
boulder
site
is
located
at
2445,
stazio
drive
it's
open
seven
days
a
week
from
8
AM
to
6
p.m,
and
for
vaccine
information
and
provider
locations
go
to
www.bocode.org
covid
vaccine
and
with
that
I
will
go
ahead
and
call
us
to
order
and
turn
to
Elisha
for
the
roll
call.
All.
D
D
F
K
F
Thank
you
Elisha
right,
and
can
we
just
confirm
that
the
video
is
on
for
channel
eight
I
just
I
had
a
comment
from
somebody?
Lauren
is
not
sure
that
that
it
is
on,
and
at
least
in
my
zoom
council
chambers
is
dark.
There
we
go.
That
looks
better.
Thank
you.
Thanks
for
calling
now
Lauren
all
right
we're
going
to
get
started
right
now
with
a
declaration
for
National,
homeless
persons,
Memorial
Day,
read
by
council
member
friend.
Thank.
L
You
mayor
Brockett,
it
is
my
honor
to
read
this
declaration.
The
winter
poses
extreme
hardship
for
our
unhoused
community
members.
At
the
same
time,
the
spirit
of
the
holiday
season
provides
an
opportunity
for
affirmation
and
renewal
regarding
our
commitment
to
end
homelessness.
December
21st
has
been
designated
national
homeless
persons,
Memorial
Day
by
the
National
Coalition
for
the
homeless
and
the
National
Health
Care
for
the
homeless
Council,
and
it
is
so
recognized
by
cities
Nationwide
to
safeguard
and
support.
L
F
D
Right,
thank
you,
sir
and
good
evening
to
everyone.
Elisha,
Johnson,
City,
Clerk
and
tonight
we
are
tasked
with
the
approval
of
the
November
8th,
2022
special
municipal
election
results.
I
am
here
by
joined
by
our
election
administrator
John
Morrison
case
Council
has
any
questions
about
how
that
process
with
the
election
and
the
returns
in
the
canvassing
went.
The
city
council
sits
as
the
general
canvassing
and
election
board
and
I
as
the
city
clerk
will
serve
as
the
Secretary
of
that
board
and
as
the
designated
election
official
for
the
city
Emily.
D
If
you
would
pull
up
my
slides,
please
this
on
the
board,
we
will
see
the
steps
we
will
follow
as
the
as
we
move
from
the
city
council
into
the
general
canvassing
and
election
board
will
ask
for
a
motion
to
convene,
as
the
general
canvassing
and
election
board
from
the
city
council.
We
will
take
a
roll
call
of
the
board
members,
and
please
note
this
year.
The
entire
council
is
considered
the
boar
because
we
did
not
have
candidate
elections
this
year.
We
will
then
present
the
oath
of
the
board
members.
D
D
Then
we
will
move
for.
We
will
ask
for
a
consideration
of
a
motion
to
approve
the
election
returns
for
the
city
of
Boulder
2022,
coordinated,
special
municipal
election
that
was
held
on
November
8th,
and
then
we
will
ask
again
in
that
motion
to
adjourn
from
the
general
canvassing
and
election
board
and
reconvene
as
the
Boulder
City
Council.
F
D
E
L
D
M
J
B
D
E
I
D
D
D
We,
the
undersigned,
do
solemnly
swear
or
affirm
that
we
will
perform
the
duties
of
the
general
canvassing
and
election
board
for
the
November
8
2022
coordinated,
special
municipal
election
held
in
the
city
of
Boulder
County
of
Boulder
state
of
Colorado
according
to
the
law
and
to
the
best
of
my
ability,
I
do
I
do
thank
you.
Now
we
will
ask
for
a
nomination
for
a
person
to
serve
as
the
board
chair
for
this
meeting.
I.
D
D
Next
slide,
the
city
of
Boulder
has
six
issues
on
the
2022
coordinated
specialist
municipal
election
ballot.
We
had
two
ballot
issues
and
four
ballot
questions
ballot
issue
2A
can
concerned
the
climate
tax,
which
was
a
Tabor
action
that
measured
past
yes,
Thirty,
One,
Thousand,
nine
hundred
and
forty
seven
votes
ballot
issue.
2B
were
the
bonds
to
be
paid
from
the
climate
tax,
which
was
also
a
taper
measure.
D
That
item
passed
with
a
yes
vote
of
thirty
thousand
one
hundred
and
fifty
one
votes
ballot,
question
2C
in
relation
to
the
repealing
of
the
library,
commission
and
tax.
If
the
library
district
was
created,
that
item
passed
with
a
yes
vote
of
26
821
votes
ballot,
question
2D,
which
was
in
reference
to
the
clarification
of
candidate
issues
that
measure
that
question
passed
a
yes
vote
of
33
079
votes,
valid
question,
2E
concerning
the
change,
regular
Municipal
elections
to
even
years.
D
D
Please
note
again
that
the
official
results,
as
well
as
historical
information
related
to
the
election
results,
are
available
on
the
Bode
County
elections
website
and
at
this
time
could
I
have
a
motion.
Please
to
approve
the
election
returns
for
the
city
of
Boulder
2022,
coordinated,
special
municipal
election
held
on
November
8
2022,
and
to
adjourn
from
the
general
canvassing
and
election
board
and
reconvene
as
the
Boulder
City
Council,
so
moved.
L
O
P
B
D
F
Thanks
so
much
for
leading
through
us
through
that
ably
Elisha
and
it's
it's
always
a
solemn
duty
to
help
with
the
workings
of
democracy
like
this.
So
all
right,
we're
now
going
to
move
to
open
comment
and
I
believe
Ryan
henchen
will
be
presenting
our
public
participation
guidelines.
Q
Thank
you.
Brian
hanchen
here
I
serve
the
people
of
Boulder
as
our
community
engagement
manager
and
appreciate
each
of
the
speakers
here
this
evening,
and
we
want
to
be
sure
that
we're
clear
that
the
city
has
engaged
with
community
members
to
co-create
a
vision
for
productive,
meaningful
and
inclusive
Civic
conversations.
Q
Q
Q
Q
Participants
who
are
participating
are
joining
by
the
name
they're
commonly
known
by,
and
we
ask
that
virtual
participants
share
their
their
name
before
participating
and
will
be
on
Audio
Only,
and
we
do
ask
that
folks
refrain
from
expressing
support
or
disagreement
verbally
options
do
include
jsons
here
to
show
support.
Finally,
in
council
chambers
thank.
F
You
thanks
for
that
Ryan
all
right,
so
we
have
seven
people
signed
up
to
speak
in
person
and
seven
people
just
signed
up
to
speak.
Virtually
I'll
call
out
three
names
at
a
time
and
if
you're
in
Chambers,
if
you
wouldn't
mind
coming
down
to
the
front
when
you're
coming,
your
turn
is
coming
due.
So
we'll
move
through
folks
and
our
first
three
participants-
and
you
do
have
two
minutes-
each
are
and
say:
David,
Sue
and
Travis
Cully.
R
Hello,
I'm
City,
Council
Members.
Thank
you
for
your
service
and
then
listen
to
my
comments.
This
is
regarding
the
annexation
of
BSD
land.
What
you're
trying
to
approve
tonight
is
not
about
affordable
housing.
This
issue
is
whether
a
Factory
opening
on
a
weekend
should
be
adjacent
to
a
residential
area
and
open
space.
Common
Sense
dictates
that
the
answer
is
no.
The
city's
zoning
code
and
the
Boulder
Valley
comprehensive
plan
also
says
no
imagine,
there's
a
developer
and
coming
to
ask
you
to
change
the
zoning
in
a
residential
area
so
that
they
can
build
a
factory.
R
We
do
allow
that
we
do
allow
that
without
getting
a
specific
condition
in
written
from
the
Developers.
The
IGA
agreement
did
nothing
of
the
things
that
this
Council
and
the
planning
board
had
recommended.
There
was
no
enforcement,
no
specifics
that
guarantees
the
noise
lights
or
traffic
mitigations.
R
The
only
vague
and
highly
interpretable
languages,
I
co-founded
each
IGA
here,
deliveries
to
and
from
the
factory
via
63rd
Street
will
be
minimized
to
the
greatest
extent
possible.
I
do
not
understand
what
that
means.
The
way
I
interpret.
It
is
zero
deliveries.
However,
mere
bracket
will
interpret
that
as
12
trucks
per
month.
The
the
staff
would
tell
me
that's
a
smaller
number
than
that.
R
If
you
are
a
person
impacted
by
this,
would
you
accept
this
vague
agreement
with
no
teeth,
no
enforcement?
Lastly,
the
city
had
told
me
that
to
talk
to
be
because
bvsd,
if
we
have
concerns,
however,
there
was
no
Good
Neighbor
policy
in
IGA.
Nor
was
there
sufficient
effort
to
demonstrate
that,
for
example,
we
have
requested
in
writing
that
igab
moved
to
to
move
off
the
consent
agenda
in
bbsd
meetings.
The
request
was
ignored.
R
S
Good
evening,
I'm
also
asking
city
council
to
reject
the
proposed
annexation
of
6500
Arapahoe
Road,
because
the
annexation
would
allow
manufacturing
use
in
public
zoning,
which
is
prohibited
under
city
land
use
code.
There's
a
good
reason
why
noise,
environmental
issues
and
traffic
are
front
and
center
with
this
annexation.
The
land
is
next
to
open
space.
It's
in
close
proximity
with
several
residential
neighborhoods
and
it's
on
land
with
a
public
school
manufacturing
use,
is
not
compatible
with
these
nearby
land
types.
The
Boulder
Valley
comprehensive
plan
and
its
vision
for
the
county
recognized
this.
S
The
bvcp
designated
the
property
as
public
and
not
Industrial.
Boulder
City
code
prohibits
manufacturing
and
public
zoning.
The
bvcp
was
approved
by
the
County
Planning
Commission
County
Commissioners
city
planning,
board
and
city
council,
including
two
current
council
members.
The
land
should
remained
public
zoning
and
not
allow
manufacturing
use
because
that's
what
is
consistent
with
bbcp
and
makes
sense
with
the
surrounding
land
types.
S
Finally,
neither
I
nor
my
neighbors
here
tonight
are
nimby's.
We
agree
with
affordable
housing.
We
are
neighbors
of
the
Columbine
mobile
home
park.
I
personally
would
welcome
a
mobile
home
park
on
bvsd
property.
I.
Would
support
Boulder
allowing
adus
and
multi-family
dwellings
in
all
residential
zoning?
These
would
be
high
impact,
Market
driven
solutions
to
the
affordable
housing
crisis,
but
this
annexation
is
not
about
affordable
housing.
This
annexation
is
about
a
factory
that
operates
on
weekends,
nearer
homes
and
in
environmentally
sensitive
area.
S
T
Good
evening,
Council
happy
Hanukkah,
happy
New
Year,
it's
my
effort
to
make
our
conversations
more
comfortable
and
conversational,
but
two
minutes
is
pretty
brief.
I
agree
with
Evan
rabbits
that
we
need
to
have
three
until
the
Marshall
fire
investigation
is
completed.
We
should
not
have
any
construction
on
the
Wildlife
Refuge
or
the
South
ucu
campus,
the
Marshall
fire
revealed
weaknesses
in
our
system
and
the
October
25th
facilitated.
Learning
analysis
is
not
going
to
be
the
last
word,
while
the
facilitated
learning
analysis
rightly
portrays
the
confusion
that
took
place
on
December
30th.
T
T
There
is
no
explaining
why
we
have
no
State
Fire
Marshal
slide,
I
believe
the
rocky
flat
Stewardship
Council
ineffectively
fills
this
Gap,
and
this
is
beginning
to
represent
a
liability
in
our
region
in
terms
of
communication
and
organizing
the
rocky
flat
Stewardship
Council
operates
like
a
legislative
doorstop,
a
dead
end,
giving
the
governments
that
share
a
border
with
the
rocky
flats
wildlife
refuge
as
we
do
keeping
them
from
developing
an
emergency
response
plan
appropriate
to
the
contamination.
T
U
Good
evening,
Evan
rabbits
North
Boulder.
A
few
weeks
ago,
former
state
representative,
Jonathan
singer,
appeared
here
in
his
new
job
for
the
Chamber
of
Commerce,
saying
the
chamber
wanted
to
work
with
the
city
for
more
affordable
housing
before
posing
as
our
pal,
the
chamber
should
fix
what
it
broke.
U
Former
city
manager,
Jane
brodigam,
admitted
here
at
a
2020
council
meeting
that
she
worked
behind
councils
back
to
obtain
so-called
opportunity
Zone
status
for
Eastern
Boulder
part
of
the
Trump
tax
cuts
for
the
wealthy.
This
will
speed,
gentrification
and
reduce
affordable
housing.
Emails
obtained
through
the
Colorado
open
records
act
show
that
the
chamber
worked
secretly
with
the
city
to
make
this
happen.
Chamber
President
John
tare,
who
participated
directly
in
the
incriminating
emails,
was
on
kgnu
radio
on
October,
7th
and
I
questioned
him
on
this.
He
pretended
that
the
opportunity
Zone
would
reduce
housing
costs.
U
This
is
laughable
and
City
councils,
laudable
effort
to
delay
and
mitigate
the
opportunity.
Zone
damage
proves
it.
The
chamber
corrupted,
whatever
Democratic
process,
still
happens
here,
to
increase
investor
profits
at
the
expense
of
the
rest
of
us
and
its
president
and
CEO
lied
publicly
about
the
intentions
and
effects.
It
should
apologize.
The
only
way
to
undo
the
opportunity
Zone
would
be
to
get
Congress
to
repeal
the
legislation.
U
V
We
have
been
actively
working
to
make
sure
that
we
minimize
noise
pollution
coming
from
this
Factory
to
the
greatest
extent
possible
we're
in
support
of
the
language
that
you
are
proposing
for
that,
and
we
will
do
everything
in
our
power
to
make
sure
that
we
are
minimizing
any
noise
that
would
come
out
of
the
factory.
We
can
make
that
commitment
to
the
community
deliveries.
V
We
are
actually
not
anticipating
huge
numbers
of
deliveries
for
this,
so
we're
also
in
support
of
the
Lang
in
support
of
the
language
around
deliveries
and
it's
highly
workable
with
what
we
are.
What
we
are
proposing
to
do.
The
other
area
I'd
like
to
address
is
capacity.
Some
older
documents
before
we
really
had
an
opportunity
to
work
with
Consultants
indicated
that
the
capacity
of
this
Factory
would
be
much
larger
than
it
actually
is.
V
Habitat
is
not
interested
in
operating
and
creating
a
factory
that
runs
fully
staffed
with
30
people,
24
7,
to
pump
out
50
to
80
homes
a
year,
we're
Habitat
for
Humanity.
We
build
with
volunteers.
That
is
the
primary
reason
we
are
able
to
make
our
homes
as
affordable
as
they
are.
If
we
were
to
change
that
model,
the
cost
of
these
homes
would
go
up
significantly.
We're
not
interested
in
doing
that.
After
working
with
the
Consultants,
we
think
it's
very
reasonable
that
we
can
produce
12
to
15
units
a
year.
V
F
You
Susan
now
we
have
Alex
Cassidy
and
Joe
pritzio.
W
W
Thank
you
for
your
time.
You
were
all
very
generous
with
your
time,
those
of
you
that
I
spoke
with
on
the
phone,
so
you've
heard
this
before,
but
I
still
have
questions
regarding
this
project.
Why?
Why
was
Community
involvement
limited
to
only
one
for
information,
only
public
meeting
in
September?
Why
isn't
there
a
good,
neighbor
agreement?
Why
wasn't
an
environmental
impact
assessment
completed?
W
Why
wasn't
a
traffic
study
completed
that
would
include
traffic
construction
traffic,
the
I
the
IGA
released
last
Friday
has
no
teeth
at
all
regarding
traffic
on
63rd,
in
fact,
it
leaves
bvsd
to
decide
where
construction
and
Factory
traffic
will
be
routed
with
no
monitoring
or
Consequences
for
funneling.
Everything
onto
63rd
I
recommend
a
trust
but
verify
approach
be
negotiated
with
bvsd
to
protect
the
residents
of
Columbine
mobile
home
park,
the
sombrero
Marsh
critical
wildlife
habitat
from
excessive
traffic.
W
There
are
many
legitimate
environmental
concerns
surrounding
this
project
that
have
been
marginalized
by
City
staff,
most
notably
your
open
space
director.
For
example,
did
you
see
Dana
beau's
guest
opinion
on
the
camera
on
Wednesday
as
knowledgeable
thoughtful
people
like
Dana,
who
are
dedicated
to
preserving
the
environment,
chime
in
a
different
story
emerges.
W
So
no
doubt
you
and
other
council
members
are
all
under
tremendous
pressure
to
prove
this
annexation,
but
there's
no
shame
in
putting
on
the
brakes
just
long
enough
to
get
it
right.
The
factory
will
be
there
for
a
long
tonight
time
tonight.
My
call
to
action
for
counsel
is
simple.
Please
hold
this
project
to
the
exact
same
standard
as
any
other
project
in
the
city
of
Boulder.
Thank.
X
11
17
you
postponed
to
proving
the
then
IGA
with
the
school
district
pending
modifications
to
address
traffic
concerns
on
63rd
Street.
You
have
before
you
now
the
amended
version
council
members
I
respectfully
ask
that
as
a
minimum,
you
send
it
back
to
staff
unexecuted.
This
is
a
matter
of
unacceptable
work.
X
The
amended
IGA
contains
item
H,
which
concerns
Factory
deliveries.
To
paraphrase
it,
deliveries
to
and
from
the
factory
will
occur
on
65th
Street
when
impacts
are
low.
The
impacts
fall
into
two
categories:
one
safety
risks
for
students
for
employees,
for
parents
and
for
other
members
of
the
public
using
65th,
and
then
two
District
Operations
with
that
said,
deliveries
to
and
from
the
factory
via
63rd
will
be
minimized
to
the
greatest
effect,
a
greatest
extent
possible,
without
objective
criteria
as
to
what
constitute
low
impacts
on
school
operations
and
safety
item
H
is
meaningless.
X
X
Despite
our
pointing
out
deficiency
deficiencies
in
the
IGA,
the
school
board
on
Tuesday
approved
it
unanimously,
the
district
has
incentive
to
want
meaningless
traffic
provisions,
and
you
any
resolution
and
any
resolution
offered
tonight
to
correct
deficiencies,
will
be
unilateral
and
thus
not
binding
to
the
district
for
insights
on
how
your
negotiations
with
the
district
might
play
out.
Please
look
at
attachment
K
and
the
your
1117
packet.
Thank
you.
F
H
F
H
Excellent
hi
everybody.
This
is
your
friendly
neighborhood
Sammy.
You
know
well
not
in
the
neighborhood
I
first
wanted
to
take
a
moment
to
tell
you
all.
Thank
you
because
I
didn't
say
it
before.
I
have
been
going
through
a
loss
of
a
great
friend
that
shared
Thanksgiving
with
the
streets.
It
was
rough.
H
That
being
said,
it
has
been
difficult
to
stay
away
from
you
all.
Do
not
speak
up
and
to
keep
to
myself
in
healing.
However,
I
would
be
remiss
like
Iron
Man
in
endgame,
but
I
did
not
say
something.
H
L
Mayor
bracket
can
I
just
respond
please
quickly,
although
we
usually
do
it
after
in
case
Sammy's
gonna
sign
off
because
he's
not
in
Boulder,
maybe
later
just
nice
to
hear
your
voice.
Sammy
and
I
hope
that
you
do
make
your
way
back.
F
Very
good
now
we
have
Chuck
Hardesty,
Lynn,
Siegel
and
Jennifer
Rhodes.
K
This
truck
hard
history
after
reading
the
latest
Council
packet
regarding
the
factory,
it
seems
that
things
have
gone
from
bad
to
worse.
Please
pause
the
bvsd
site
for
the
factory
and
have
a
serious
site
selection
study.
We
Now
understand
that
there
has
not
been
one
an
alternate.
Factory
location
creates
a
win-win
situation.
There
would
be
no
excess
traffic
for
bbsd
and
63rd,
no
forever.
K
K
Close
places
to
consider
are
the
area
north
of
stasio
ball
fields.
Unused
power.
Plant
areas
are
part
of
the
old
Western
Disposal
Site.
These
are
near
the
bus
barn
for
students
that
may
come
from
around
the
district.
There
are
buses
available
for
other
possible
sites
further
away
next
slide,
please
the
new
IGA
says
bvsd
can
do
what
they
want
when
they
want
with
no
penalty.
This
needs
revision
with
specifics.
K
We
are
asked
to
rely
on
good
faith,
but
still
have
no
Good
Neighbor
policy.
After
months,
the
Mayor's
Hotline
proposal
should
include
construction
year
limits,
not
just
Factory
limits.
Construction
is
the
biggest
disruption
time.
Removing
language
that
requires
deliveries
during
operating
hours
means
we
can't
even
have
a
peaceful
dinner
or
sleep
in
a
little.
Please
pause.
Our
next
slide
turn
on
yes,
but
please
pause
the
bvsd
site
have
a
serious,
multiple
site.
Selection
study
with
documentation
that
we
Now
understand
has
not
been
done.
K
Y
Not
only
what
folks
have
spoken
tonight,
it
has
height
no
height
variation
restrictions.
This
is
goes
far
beyond
this.
Annexation
goes
far
beyond
what
can
be
built
there
long
term,
far
beyond
this
modular
home
Factory.
Now
someone
spoke
from
Habitat
for
Humanity,
it's
wonderful,
that
habitat
is
doing
their
own
work
and
that
it
makes
for
less
expensive
housing.
Y
Well,
my
brother
is
going
homeless
as
of
the
first
of
the
month
and
I
wonder
really
what
is
actually
going
on
here,
because
with
as
Eric
as
rabbits
spoke
about,
the
opportunity
zone
is
basically
the
fundamental
policy
of
Boulder,
which
is
giving
to
Developers,
not
accepting
any
impact
fees
to
them
and
as
a
result
having
a
major
housing
crisis
and
then
using
the
manufactured
housing
as
an
excuse
to
use
other
public
interests
of
these
neighbors
and
I
am
not
from
this
neighborhood
I'm,
not
from
Sombrero
March
I'm
from
Central
Boulder,
and
this
is
just
unacceptable
that
they
should
accept
this
burden
and
see
you
South
and
the
growth
and
development
here
as
Travis
spoke
about
with
the
radioactivity
from
Rocky
Flats
that
was
experienced
with
this
fire.
Y
F
Z
F
O
Great,
thank
you.
My
name
is
Jennifer
Rhodes
and
I'm,
a
Boulder
Community
member
psychiatrist
and
a
bvsd
parent
I'm,
a
part
of
a
parent
group
advocating
for
safety
of
all
children
in
our
community.
As
most
of
you
know,
our
group
of
parents
believed
that
Lisa
Sweeney
Moran
is
unfit
to
serve
in
a
position
on
the
police
oversight
panel,
as
she
is
both
biased
and
has
a
clear
conflict
of
interest.
Both
violations
of
the
city
ordinance
outlining
rules
for
the
panel.
O
It
is
irrelevant
that
her
name
was
recently
removed
from
the
lawsuit
as
a
bargaining
chip
to
get
on
the
panel
at
a
recent
bvsd
meeting,
and
please
watch
the
recording
Lisa
said
and
I
quote:
I'm
very
proud
of
the
lawsuit
against
Chief
Harold
in
the
city.
As
a
psychiatrist,
I
can
tell
you.
People
do
not
change
overnight.
O
Miss
Sweeney
Moran
has
mocked
parents
and
be
included
regularly
on
the
on
her
Twitter
feed
parents,
who
are
standing
up
publicly
to
advocate
for
children's
safety.
I've
spoken
to
a
handful
of
bvsd
teachers
who
are
afraid
to
speak
up
and
ask
that
I
use
their
personal
email
because
of
fear
of
Retribution
by
her
Miss
Sweeney.
Moran
also
frequently
makes
accusations
against
BPD
and
chief
Harold
before
critical
facts
are
gathered
or
known
to
the
public,
all
on
her
Twitter
feed.
O
She
was
suing
the
city
and
chief
Herald
up
until
yesterday,
I
believe
a
clear
definition
of
conflict
of
interest.
Premier
candidacy
is
proof
of
her
absolute
blindness
to
her
ethical
obligation,
in
my
opinion,
to
the
bvsd
school
board,
and
now
this
panel
Miss
Sweeney
Moran,
should
not
be
in
more
leadership
positions,
especially
one
that
advises
and
weighs
in
on
law
enforcement.
I
believe
that
she
is
a
threat
to
Public
Safety
to
my
kids
and
is
clearly
biased
and
cannot
serve
legitimately
or
fairly
on
the
police
oversight
panel.
Thank
you.
AA
Hi
Karen
Council
Eric
bot
I
live
in
Boulder
I'm
here
to
speak
on
council's
action
on
the
police
oversight
panel.
You
know
we
need
everyone
in
our
community
to
feel
safe,
and
that
includes
people
who
are
homeless
or
people
of
color,
among
many
other
people,
winning
police
officers
that
are
going
to
engage
in
what
keeps
people
safe,
and
we
also
need
the
oversights
to
protect
people
from
violence
from
the
police
and
it's
hard
not
to
watch
the
documentary
about
Boulder.
This
is
not
who
we
are
and
not
demand
better
police
oversight.
AA
AB
Hi
Council
thanks
so
much
for
inviting
us
to
come,
speak
to
you
tonight,
I'm
representing
Boulder,
County,
Audubon,
Society
and
I
want
to
read
our
mission
statement
because
I
think
it's
very
pertinent
to
this
issue
with
the
annexation
of
6500
Arapahoe.
Our
mission
statement
is
that
we
are
a
voice
for
birds
and
wildlife
conservation
through
habitat
protection
and
nature
education,
so
on
tonight,
I'm
going
to
advocate
for
Sombrero
Marsh,
which
I
think
is
one
of
the
most
special
places
in
Boulder
County
and
it's
by
the
way.
AB
In
case
you
don't
know-
or
if
you
don't
remember
and
I'm
a
newbie
to
Boulder,
because
I've
only
lived
here,
13
years,
that
property
was
designated
as
a
habitat,
Conservation
Area
and
there's
only
nine
of
those
in
the
county,
so
gay
for
you
for
doing
that.
It's
very
special
place.
It's
it's
kind
of
weird,
because
it's
been
around
since
before
the
Europeans
settled
here
it
was
a
dump
for
a
while
and
the
city
and
Open
Space
Mountain
Parks
actually
restored
it
to
a
the
wetlands
that
it
is
today.
AB
It
is
truly
a
habitat,
Conservation
Area,
in
that
a
lot
of
migratory
birds
come
through
there.
A
lot
of
Shorebirds
come
through
there
on
their
way
to
the
breeding
grounds
in
the
north,
and
in
case
you
don't
know
what
at
least
a
third
of
the
birds
in
North
America
have
disappeared
in
the
last
40
years.
If
we
don't
conserve
areas
like
this,
we're
not
helping
conservation
at
all.
AB
So
I
really
want
us
to
think
about
how
we
can
conserve
that
area
in
a
better
way
and
I
would
urge
the
council
to
go
back
and
look
at
the
IGA
and
really
be
fat
up.
Make
sure
that
you've
got
noise.
Pollution
under
control.
I
mean
mitigated
a
light
pollution
under
mitigation,
and
let's
look
for
a
different
place.
Please
I
think
that's
the
thing
we
could
do.
The
best
is
just
to
move
it
to
a
different
place.
F
AC
Good
I'm
talking
about
the
modular
home
Factory,
the
bottom
line
for
me
is
that
if
you
try
to
design
the
worst
possible
location
for
a
huge
Factory,
this
would
be
it.
It
has
Equity
issues
with
the
Columbine
trailer
park.
It's
going
within
10
feet
of
the
the
marsh
it's
directly
adjacent
to
open
space.
It
would
be
violating
all
the
city,
ordinances
and
open
space,
weapons
and
Noise,
but
the
Boulder
Valley
school
district
has
sovereign
immunity,
so
they
do
not
have
to
comply
with
any
city
or
county
ordinances.
AC
This
would
never
be
allowed
by
any
private
sector.
Developer.
Bbsd
has
also
promised
to
hire
a
sound
engineer
once
the
factory
is
built,
so
they
can
consider
options
for
reducing
the
noise.
However,
the
time
to
hire
a
sound
engineer
would
be
when
the
building
is
still
in
the
planning
phase,
not
after
it's
completed.
AC
For
me,
the
most
frustrating
thing
is
that
there
are
other
locations
close
by
that
are
zoned
for
industrial
use,
where
the
impact
on
the
environment
would
be
minimal.
A
couple
blocks
north
of
the
campus
is
the
Belmont
power
plant,
which
is
permanently
closed.
It's
directly
across
from
where
the
buses
are
located
on
thinking,
Excel
Energy
would
be
receptive
to
donating
some
of
their
unused
land
to
a
good
cause
and
a
better
ESG
score.
There
are
numerous
other
sites
that
could
also
be
considered.
AC
At
the
very
least,
there
should
be
due
diligence
and
other
sites
considered
before
proceed
with
this
I
think
this
is
being
rushed
through
way
too
quickly.
You've
got
a
lot
of
environmental
groups
concerned.
You
got
Equity
issues,
you
got
neighborhoods
where
that
are
going
to
be
losing
their
property
values
you're
going
to
have
a
lot
of
people
out
there.
AC
F
AD
F
Great
and
I'll
just
note
that
we
are
going
to
have
an
item
on
the
6500
Arapahoe
in
just
a
few
minutes
and
then
discuss
it
further.
There
mark.
B
Just
a
quick
correction
to
to
Mr
bud
my
concerns
with
the
consent
agenda
item
3E
were
not
the
product
of
consultations
with
any
other
group,
although
it
is
rare,
I
occasionally
reach
my
own
conclusions
and
I
did
so
in
this
case.
Thank.
F
M
Good
evening,
Council
earlier
this
evening,
or
rather
this
afternoon,
mayor
Pro
tem
Wallach
sent
out
a
hotline
with
information
about
the
possibility
of
pulling
an
item
from
the
consent
agenda.
That
item
is
3E,
which
has
to
do
with
the
appointment.
Approving
the
selection
committee
recommendation
for
members
of
the
police
oversight.
Panel
I
did
touch
base
with
with
mayor
Pro
tem
Wallach
regarding
procedure,
but
wanted
to
inform
the
whole
Council
of
the
procedure.
It's
a
little
bit
tricky
here,
but
should
Council
choose
or
a
council
member
choose
to
request
a
call
up
for
this
item.
M
I
believe
the
proper
procedure
would
be
to
request
a
call
up
to
take
a
vote
on
that
call-up,
which
would
then
schedule
it
for
a
public
hearing.
Another
option,
of
course,
is
to
to
stay
with
it
as
it
is
now.
Council
could
have
a
discussion
with
respect
to
that
item
and,
finally,
council
could
pull
that
item
from
the
consent
agenda
for
a
separate
discussion
per
Robert's
Rules
of
Order
and
take
action
on
that
item
just
after
the
consent
agenda.
F
N
M
Sure
so
that
would
depend
on
on
the
motion
on
the
table
and
what
council
decides
so
in
terms
of
having
a
discussion,
some
options
are
to
remove
the
item
from
the
consent
agenda
and
then
have
a
conversation
immediately
following
the
consent
agenda,
so
that
that
sort
of
option
number
one
another
option
is
you
could
you
could
someone
could
make
a
motion
to
call
this
item
up
and-
and
this
is
a
little
unclear
because
other
items
in
our
code
with
a
call
up
option-
have
a
call
up
procedure
attached
to
them.
M
This
one
does
not
so
instead
I
look
to
the
rest
of
the
code
to
be
informed
about
what
the
proper
call-up
procedure
would
be
here.
My
recommendation
would
be
that
there
would
be
a
motion
to
call
the
item
up
and
then
a
vote
again
only
only
if
council
is
so
inclined,
but
a
vote.
That
would
take
a
majority
to
carry
that.
If
the
item
were
called
up,
the
council
rules
of
procedure
provide
that
there
would
be
a
public
Hearing
in
the
future.
N
N
L
F
N
Go
ahead
and
do
that
since
I
started
this
I
I
move
consent,
agenda
items
a
through
G
except
e,
and
I,
as
part
of
my
motion
I,
would
ask
Council
to
have
an
immediate
discussion
which
I
turned
to
our
colleague
Rachel
friend
for
uhe.
Right
after
we
assuming
we
passed,
the
consenogenics
of
vitamin.
F
I
have
a
second
all
in
favor.
F
D
B
AF
AF
D
L
Happy
to
kick
us
off
and
I
might
have
one
question
for
Amy
Kane
if
she's
interested
in
rolling
forward
here
she
looks
excited
I.
I
want
to
preface
my
question
in
comments
with
a
couple
of
thoughts.
First
is
I'm,
so
grateful
to
all
the
community
members
who
have
applied
to
be
on
our
police
oversight
panel.
L
It's
mostly
volunteer
work
and
I'm
grateful
that
we
have
such
outstanding
candidates
in
my,
in
my
view,
including
those
who
are
recommended
and
I
also
want
to
say
that
we
talked
in
2020
early
in
my
Council
tenure
about
appointing
this
panel
and
that
Council
would
have
a
a
role
in
approving
the
nominations
and
I
I
advocated
vigorously
that
we
not
have
a
role
in
improving,
because
I
was
worried.
It
would
reflect
politicization
and
that
somebody
would
would
inevitably
be
nominated.
L
That
different
factions
of
the
community
were
strongly
for
against
and
I
think
that's,
unfortunately,
what's
playing
out
and
I
hope
that
we
will
revisit
that,
because
I
don't
think
that
this
is
a
good
role
for
Council
to
be
in
nor
a
good
use
of
our
time
and
I.
Think
we
have
have
created
structures
that
we
should
be
able
to
trust.
So
with
all
that
said,
I
wanted
to
know
from
Amy.
If
we
were
to
Maybe
in.
In
response
to
my
my
colleague,
council
member
wallach's
request.
L
If
we
were
to
say,
let's,
let's
just
send
this
back
to
the
nominating
panel
and
and
committee
and
have
them
just
verify
that
they
were,
they
had
all
the
information
about
all
the
applicants
and
they've
verified
that
everyone,
or
have
them
re-look
at
everyone's
application
and
ensure
that
they
meet.
You
know
the
threshold
criteria
such
as
residency,
tethers
and
and
minimum
age.
If
that's
such
a
thing
as
well
as
bias
and
conflicts
of
interest
and
then
bring
that
back
to
us.
AG
I
appreciate
the
question
council
member
friend.
Thank
you
so
much
so
my
name
is
Amy
Kane
I'm,
the
equity
officer
for
the
city
of
Boulder
and
my
pronouns.
Are
she
her
and
hers?
It
depends.
I
know,
that's
not
the
best
answer.
It
really
depends
on
when
we
would
be
able
to
bring
that
back
to
back
in
January
we
have
our.
L
It's
helpful
okay,
so
I
will
just
toss
that
out
as
a
starting
point
for
conversation
that
we
that's
one
direction.
We
could
take.
AE
AE
How
do
I
put
it
that
we
are
being
put
in
a
difficult
space
exactly
as
Rachel
mentioned,
and
the
thing
is
we're
talking
about
one
member
out
of
six
and
I:
don't
want
that
particular
person
to
feel
how
do
I
put
it
that
we're
picking
on
them
right
so
I
hope.
Whatever
process
we
decide,
we
keep
that
in
mind
and
I've
read
all
the
email
that's
been
coming
from
community
members
and
a
lot
of
them
is
about
the
language
somebody's
using
on
Twitter
and
I
understand
they
have
constitutional
rights.
AE
AG
Sure
thank
you
for
that
question.
Council
member
Joseph.
So
the
subcommittee
looked
at
the
ordinance
and
defined
the
must-haves
for
that
particular
slate
of
candidates
for
this
recruitment
period,
similar
to
what
they
did
the
last
recruitment
period.
We
can
go
back
and
have
them
affirm
the
list
of
candidates.
That
is
an
option.
I
believe
Council
forever.
AG
B
B
Going
to
speak
in
support
of
mayor
Pro,
tem,
Emeritus
friends,
suggestion
I
think
it's
a
good
one
practical
one
and
I
support
it.
B
AH
And
I
think
for
me
kind
of
going
back
this
again
supporting
Ann
just
want
to
tweak
it
a
little
bit
for
me.
I
think
that
they,
just
at
their
meeting
last
week,
affirmed
the
selections
and
I
think
what
it
feels
like
you
know
we
in
the
community
may
be
missing,
is
just
a
little
bit
more
information
about
the
selection
process.
What
were
the
criteria
that
were
used?
What
you
know,
how
were
folks
evaluated
against
those
criteria
and
what
was
the
process
for
making
this
recommendation
to
us?
AG
We
can
give
you
some
specific
details:
I
have
a
printout
here,
so
there
were
57
applicants,
including
one
return
applicant
from
2021.
The
applications
and
supporting
materials
were
provided
to
the
selection
Committee
in
October
via
a
single
PDF
of
100
Pages.
The
Kennedy
review
sheets
were
made
available
as
a
Google
form,
and
then
each
selection,
Committee
Member
got
that
to
their
email.
They
were
grouped
in
separate
groupings
with
total
of
six
groups.
The
committee
members
were
instructed
to
score
each
candidate
on
three
categories.
AG
One
was
must
have
criteria,
contribution
of
lived
experience
and
overall
candidacy.
Their
overall
score
did
not
have
to
be
a
mathematical
average
of
the
two
scores
and
then
committee
members
could
also
enter
comments
for
each
applicant
and
leave
comments
or
leave
the
comment
section
blank.
So
the
the
review
criteria
must
have
criteria
that
were
ranked.
AG
Awareness
that
the
mission
of
the
community
LED
police
oversight
panel
is
for
police
accountability.
Another
criteria
was
the
candidate,
has
tangible,
tangible
connection
to
Boulder,
also
just
demonstrates
being
respectful
of
difference
and
understands
the
need
for
fully
attentive
communication
within
a
group
setting
active
participation
in
the
decision-making
process.
That
may
include
challenging
conversations
and
different
opinions
being
able
to
take
a
stance
with
Integrity
building,
trusting
relationship
with
other
panels,
including
the
need
to
have
conversations
offline
accountability
to
one
another.
AG
F
So
I'll
I'll
call
on
myself
because
I
thought
well.
Rachel's
initial
suggestion
had
Merit
and
I
thought.
Nicole's
ideas
were
a
good
additional
ones,
because
I
think
you
know
hearing
more
from
the
panel.
You
know
about
their
both
their
thinking
process,
but
also
how
they
applied.
The
code
criteria
I
think,
would
be
really
helpful
and
getting
a
little
time
for
them
to
look
at
that
and
come
back
to
it
and
finish
in
January
in
time
to
make
sure
that
people
get
seated
for
that
February
9th
start
date
sounds
good
to
me.
F
AG
Oh
I
was
asking
a
clarifying
question
if
you're
wanting
us
to
go
back
to
the
panelists,
the
sex
selection
committee,
if
that's
an
expectation
to
do
in
person
perfect.
Thank
you.
E
Thank
you
so
I'll,
just
I
guess
my
question.
It's
a
question
sort
of
perspective,
a
little
I
guess
I'm
a
little
confused
as
to
how
well
let
me
just
start
this
Mark's
Mark's
email
when
it's
sent
out
based
on
the
practice
of
for
as
long
as
I've
been
watching
or
participating
in
Council
meetings,
was
that
that
was
a
that
foreclosed
really
any
need
to
have
continued
conversation,
because
historically
single
members
of
council
were
able
to
yank
stuff
off
consent.
E
So
I
think,
in
light
of
maybe
how
I
assume
that
if
we
were
to
discuss
it
tonight,
I
was
missing
out
on
some
conversations
that
I
probably
needed
for
some
clarity,
so
I
feel
a
little
bit
like
I
didn't
get
that
finalized
prep
in
for
this
thinking
that
we
weren't
going
to
have
this
conversation
based
on
Mark's
thing
so
I
would
all
that
means
is
I
would
support
where
Rachel's
going
to
buy
a
little
time
and
get
a
little
bit
more
clarity
on
those
pieces.
But
a
part
of
me
is
just
curious.
M
Sure
I'm
happy
to
address
that
again:
council
member
Benjamin,
so
this
is
a
call-up
procedure
and
that's
provided
in
the
ordinance
and-
and
that
was
called
to
council's
attention
and
a
collet
procedure
is
not
the
same
as
simply
removing
something
from
the
consent
agenda.
M
M
That
can
certainly
happen,
but
a
call-up
is
a
different.
Is
a
different
animal.
F
And
if
I
might
just
kind
of
qualically
with
with
Teresa's
point
is
because
I
reviewed
some
of
the
code
Provisions
with
her
this
afternoon,
that
there
is
a
unique
bit
in
the
code
about
the
appointment
of
the
police
oversight
panel
members
that
designates
it
a
little
differently
from
essentially
any
other
action
that
we're
taking
so
I.
Think.
That's
the
part
of
why
this
is
being
treated
a
little
differently
than
than
other
consent.
Removal
items,
Nicole.
AH
Yeah
and
I
just
had
a
clarifying
question.
Does
this
you
know
if
we
are
asking
for
a
little
bit
of
additional
information
before
we
make
a
decision
on
it?
Does
that
necessitate
it
being
a
call-up
later
I
mean?
Is
that
just
a
kind
of
where?
Well,
you
know
we
would
like
a
little
more
additional
information.
You
know
please
bring
it
back
to
us
with
that
information.
AH
M
A
yeah
I
believe
I
understand
your
your
question
council
member
spear,
so
so
the
council
could
vote.
The
council
has
already
voted
to
remove
this
item
from
the
consent
agenda
and
discuss
it
separately.
The
council
could
make
a
motion
with
respect
to
an
action,
for
example,
referring
it
back
to
the
selection
committee.
M
To
call
up
the
item
would
require
its
own
vote
and
so
doing
there
they
are
not
taking.
One
action
doesn't
necessitate
the
other.
F
N
Amy
think,
thanks
for
reading
off
the
things
that
we're
looked
at
and
as
Teresa
pointed
out,
there
are
some
other
criteria.
Right
and
some
of
them
are
are
negative
criteria.
There
shall
not
be
you
know,
bias
or
Prejudice
and
I
think
there's
a
list
list
of
things
that
there
shall
not
be,
and
it
sounded
like
from
your
description
and
maybe
from
what
Rachel
was
asking
for
that.
There
was
a
a
request
to
go
back
to
the
selection
committee
and
have
them
look
at
the
Four
Corners
of
the
application.
N
But
we've
seen
some
things
have
been
sent
to
us
from
the
community
that
are
outside
the
Four
Corners
right,
they're,
they're,
social
media
posts
and
so
on
and
so
forth,
and
those
could
be
evidence
one
way
or
the
other.
With
respect
to
some
of
the
criteria
that
that
Teresa
mentioned
and
so
I
guess,
my
question
is
probably
more
for
Rachel.
Would
your
motion
include
looking
at
those
other
materials?
Are
you
limiting
the
selection
committees,
examination
to
the
four
corners
of
the
application.
L
Is
going
to
be
to
send
this
back
to
the
selection
committee
to
apply
the
criteria
that
the
City
attorney
has
indicated
need
to
be
looked
at
for
panelists?
So,
however,
they
apply
those
criteria,
I,
don't
I
I,
don't
know
whether
that
would
be
the
four
corners
of
the
agreement
looks
like
Teresa
may
have.
F
M
N
N
If,
if
you
came
back
to
us
in
January
and
say
yeah,
the
selection
committee
looked
at
that,
and
some
of
us
said
well.
What
did
they
look
at?
You
said
they
looked
at
the
application,
and
that
was
it,
and
so
then
I
would
feel
that
that
the
the
direction
that
we're
sounds
like
we're
about
to
give
would
would
not
have
been
fulfilled.
So
I
would
I
would
hope
that
you'd
be
also
be
able
to
bring
back
what
exactly
the
selection,
the
selection
committee
looked
at
or
didn't
look
at,
as
the
case
may
be.
N
So
if
you
tell
us
what
they
looked
at
that'd
be
great
and
if
it
was
just
the
application
and
that
I
would
consider
that
a
failure,
but
if
they
looked
at
all
things
that
were
brought
to
their
attention,
that
would
be
helpful.
F
AE
Yes,
because
it's
very
tricky,
even
I
am
confused
about
what
we're
asking
her
to
go
back
and
do.
Are
we
asking
her
I'm
looking
at
the
qualification
and
appointments
right
based
on
the
code?
Are
you
asking
her
to
go
back
to
ensure
that,
for
instance,
as
part
of
the
application
process,
which
is
already
she's
already
been
through
it,
and
six
people
have
already
brought
forward
I
just
don't
know?
What
is
the
expectation
that
she
went
back
and
looked
at
the
code,
all
16?
It
seems
there
is
one
through
16
parts
to
it.
A
F
Be
what
we
would
be
asking
so,
yes,
Amy.
AD
I
appreciate
that
I
I
believe
we're
getting
Clarity
to
go
back
to
the
selection
committee
and
for
all
candidates,
not
just
the
singular
one
that
we
reaffirm,
that
they
have,
that
we
have
looked
at
the
code
and
all
the
criteria
and
the
code
has
been
looked
at
and
and
applied
to
all
the
candidates
and
get
an
affirmation
on
the
Slate
of
candidates
that
is
moving
forward.
We
believe
that
we
can
probably
do
that
and
bring
that
to
the
January
19th
meeting
and
we'll
try
to
do
so
expeditiously.
AH
And
I
just
wanted
to
make
one
comment
that
I
want
to
make
sure
the
police
oversight
panel
and
selection
committee
doesn't
feel
like
we
don't
trust
them
or
you
know
we're
trying
to
micromanage
or
anything
like
that.
I
think
it's!
It's
really
for
me,
at
least
just
about
providing
a
little
bit
more
documentation
for
kind
of
the
public
to
understand
what
the
process
wasn't
and
what
went
into
it.
I
just
I
want
to
be
clear
on
that
where
I'm
coming
from.
Thank
you,
council
members
here.
F
F
Good
thanks,
Amy
thanks
everybody
for
working
through
that
I
want
to
to
Echo
the
the
Rachel.
How
Rachel
started
with
this,
with
a
huge
thanks
to
the
selection
committee
for
all
the
hard
work
that
they've
done
and
appreciate
their?
F
Hopefully,
their
willingness
to
work
through
a
little
bit
more
to
collaborate
with
Council
on
this,
as
well
as
to
all
the
applicants
who
are
participating
in
the
process
and
with
that
I
believe
we
can
move
to
our
call
check-ins.
D
F
D
D
2021-00032
we
have
five
items
under
this
matter.
First
item
refers
to
the
annexation
of
the
Westerly
portion.
There
is
a
motion
to
adopt
resolution
1317
setting
for
findings
of
facts
and
conclusions.
The
second
item
for
the
Western
portion
is
item
number
two,
the
second
reading
and
motion
to
adopt
ordinance
8550,
which
is
annexing
the
Westerly
19.097
acre
portion
of
the
property
and,
if
85
80
8550
is
adopted,
we
have
the
second
part
of
this
action,
which
is
the
annexation
of
the
easterly
portion.
D
That
first
item
is
the
motion
to
adopt
resolution
1322,
which
is
setting
forth
the
findings
and
facts
and
conclusions,
and
the
second
item
is
the
second
reading
and
Adoption
of
ordinance
8553,
which
is
annexing
the
easterly
28.882
acre
portion
of
the
property
and
if
both
ordinances,
85,
50
and
8553
are
adopted.
We
have
the
last
item,
which
is
the
consideration
of
a
motion
to
approve
an
intergovernmental
agreement
between
the
city
of
Boulder
and
the
boli
Valley
School
District
area.
AD
That
was
a
mouthful.
Thank
you.
Alicia
I'm
gonna
go
straight
to
our
planning
and
development
services.
Rockstar
shamnam
Vista.
For
this.
F
And
Shannon
before
you
get
started
just
to
outline
I
think
tonight,
if
you
weren't
going
to
say
so
we're
going
to
hear
from
you
we'll
have
an
opportunity
to
ask
you
questions.
We've
already
had
the
public
hearing
the
public
testimony
on
this
item.
So
after
we
ask
you,
questions
we'll
then
go
to
our
deliberations.
That's.
AJ
AJ
Okay,
good
evening,
council
members,
my
name
is
shabnam
bista
senior
planner
for
planning
and
development
services.
Today,
I'll
just
walk,
walk
you
all
quickly
through
the
annexation,
an
initial
Zoning
for
6500,
Arapahoe,
Road,
and
just
to
note,
this
is
a
continuation
of
the
the
second
reading
and
public
hearing
that
was
held
on
November
17th.
AJ
AJ
and
the
notice
for
That
Was
Then
consistent
with
the
land
use
code,
sending
written
notification
to
Property
Owners
within
600
feet
and
then
on.
September
6,
2022
planning
board
held
the
public
hearing
for
the
annexation
and
they
recommended
adding
two
conditions
regarding
the
height
limits,
as
well
as
a
form
of
Good
Neighbor
agreement.
AJ
AJ
And
then
a
first
reading
was
held
on
October
6
2022
at
Council.
During
the
first
readings,
the
council
supported
modifying
the
agreement
to
include
the
compliance
with
the
city
height
limit
prior
to
this
second
reading
and
public
hearing,
the
amended
annexation
agreement
was
then
sent
to
the
school
board
and
they
agreed
to
comply
with
the
condition
complying
with
the
city's
Charter
height
limit.
AJ
On
November
17th,
the
second
reading
and
public
hearing
was
held
at
city
council
in
that
meeting,
staff
presented
the
amended
annexation
agreement
and
the
intergovernmental
agreement
between
the
city
of
Boulder
and
the
Boulder
Valley
School
District,
as
well
as
information
on
the
operations
of
the
affordable
housing
modular
Factory.
AJ
During
that
discussion,
Council
proposed
to
bbsd
that
they
modify
the
annexation
intergovernmental
agreement
to
require
the
access
to
the
site
be
taken
from
65th
Street
instead
of
63rd
Street.
This
would
avoid
excessive
truck
traffic
on
63rd
and
could
have
that
could
have
negative
impacts
on
the
Columbine
Home
Park,
the
other
nearby
residents,
as
well
as
Sombrero
Marsh
foreign.
AJ
That's
kind
of
where
we
are
today,
so
the
annexation
terms
from
the
annexation
agreement
haven't
changed,
and
this
was
the
same
kind
of
conditions
that
I
presented
on
November
17th
in
terms
of
the
intergovernmental
agreement.
As
of
December
13th,
the
bvsd
board
agreed
and
approved
the
modified
intergovernmental
agreement.
That
incr
includes
conditions
regarding
the
deliveries
to
and
from
the
factoring
occurring,
mostly
on
65th
Street,
when
traffic
impacts
on
bbsc
operations
are
limited
and
then
also
excuse
me
minimizing
the
access
on
63rd
to
the
greatest
extent
possible.
AJ
AH
Appreciate
of
the
revisiting
of
all
this
information,
because
our
last
one
was
a
while
back
I
just
had
a
couple
of
questions
to
clarify
after
hearing
you
know
some
of
the
comments
from
folks
and
some
of
the
emails
we've
been
getting.
So
my
understanding
is
that,
once
this
annexation
goes
through
bvsd
anything
they
do
on
that
property.
The
entire
property
will
be
held
to
our
light
pollution
standards.
AH
AJ
AH
AJ
Jay,
would
you
be
able
to
respond
to
that
question?
Thank
you.
G
AH
M
I
AH
Okay
and
then
the
other
question
that
I
had
was
just
around
the
The
Good
Neighbor
agreement
and
I.
You
know
I
understand
some.
Some
groups
were
looking
for
one,
it
seems
like
it.
There
was
not
really
a
requirement
that
it
was
put
in
place
and
I
was
just
wondering
if
you
could
explain
a
little
bit
about
why.
AK
Good
evening,
council
members
glenster
grew
Boulder,
Valley
Schools.
The
Good
Neighbor
agreement
was
something
that
the
school
district
decided
it
couldn't
agree
to,
based
on
our
own
sovereignty
and
our
own
ability
to
deal
directly
with
the
public
ourselves.
I
think
we
thought
it
would
be
improper
to
have
the
city
have
that
imposition
on
us.
Okay,.
AH
AH
And
with
that
I
mean
one:
oh
thank
you
I.
AH
That's
the
only
question
I
have
for
the
district.
This
is
just
another
question.
Coming
back
to
City
staff,
I
think
what
role
do
our
staff
play
after
you
know?
This
agreement
goes
through
after
the
annexation.
So,
for
example,
will
osmp
staff
play
a
role
in
the
construction
and
monitoring
anything
after?
H
A
G
So
again,
Jay
segment,
housing
and
Human
Services,
so
there
isn't
a
formal
regulatory
role.
However,
there
is
a
structure
in
place
or
there
will
be
a
structure
in
place
where
the
school
district,
housing
and
Human
Services,
as
well
as
habitat,
will
meet
at
least
quarterly
to
discuss
Factory
operations
and
that's
sort
of
that.
That's
a
perfect
venue
to
discuss.
How
are
things
going?
What
are
the
neighbors
saying?
How
can
we
address
those?
AH
No,
it
does
thank
you
and
Jay
I.
AH
Don't
this
next
question
may
be
a
little
bit
for
you
as
well
or
shabnam,
so
maybe
hang
out
for
a
second
I
mean
I,
think
you
know
one
of
the
things
that
I'm
hearing
from
community
members
is
just
a
concern
that
this
goes
through
and
then
they
never
have
a
voice
at
all
again
in
anything,
that's
going
on
over
there
and
you
know,
I
think
that
sometimes
especially
with
kind
of
council
changing
every
two
years
there
there
maybe
is
perceived
a
lack
of
kind
of
follow-through
or
consistency
in
in
people's
voices
being
heard.
AH
So
I'm
just
wondering
if
there's
anything
at
a
city
level
outside
of
the
you
know
the
IGA
and
bvsd.
What
can
we
do
as
a
city
to
kind
of
commit
to
you
know
all
the
things
that
we're
sort
of
assuming
are
going
to
go
in
here?
That
they're
actually
happening
once
once
things
get
started
over
there
and
are
there?
Can
we,
as
a
city,
commit
to
some
checkpoints
with
residents?
AH
Can
we,
you
know,
look
at
with
osbt
or
osmp,
whether
impact
on
Wildlife
or
anything
after
you
know
this,
this
kind
of
goes
through
just
so
it's
not
we're
not
sort
of
sending
it
through
and
then
not
seeing
anything.
You
know
not
not
checking
in
to
see
if
there
are
any
impacts.
G
Yeah
absolutely
I
I
would
assume
that
would
happen
regardless.
So
neighbors
are
always
welcome
to
come
to
city
council.
You
could
share
those
concerns
directly
with
staff
staff
will
be
involved
in
in
the
ongoing
operations
of
the
factory.
F
Because
so
Jay,
you
know,
we
talked
a
few
days
ago
right
and
I
put
together
some
a
potential
motion
that
I
will
talk
about
a
little
bit
later.
Could
could
we
add
to
that
something
to
request
the
city
like
it
say
at
the
one
year
point
do
a
check-in
with
the
factory
operations
and
you
know
make
sure
that
they're
complying
with
the
noise
lighting
Etc
like
absolutely.
F
B
B
A
couple
of
technical
questions:
first
I
was
not
here
for
the
November
17
meeting.
So
if
anything
I
ask
has
been
covered
just
kind
of
wave
and
I'll
I'll
move
on
to
the
next
back
in
2021,
we
received
the
number
of
comments
from
the
County's
Department
of
planning
and
permitting
did
we
respond
to
and
satisfy
those
those
requests,
or
did
we
have
any
obligation
to
do
so
or
have
we
already
discussed
that.
AJ
Foreign
yeah
I've
I've,
spoken
to
the
the
County's
planning
staff
member
and
we
kind
of
went
over
the
questions
and
I
believe
Jay.
You
also
met
with
Hannah
hippley
to
kind
of
cover
any
of
their
other
concerns.
B
If,
if
bvsd
terminates
for
convenience,
as
is
provided
in
the
in
the
IGA,
I
assume
we'll
have
to
return
the
grant
funds
and
the
and
the
Hud
loan
that
we're
taking
out
on
this
property?
Is
that
correct?.
B
Yes,
correct:
okay,
will
those
payments
have
to
be
made
immediately
or
over
time,
because,
under
the
terms
of
the
IGA
bvsd
has
five
years
to
repay
those
to
to
repay
I?
Guess
it's
almost
a
damage
payment
for
our
inconvenience,
but
they
do
that
over
five
years
without
interest
I
assume
we
will
not
have
a
similar
luxury
in
repaying
our
obligations
under
the
grants
and
and
the
Hud
loan.
G
Sir
I
would
say
there
there
might
be
a
distinction
as
long
as
we
fulfill
our
promise
to
build
the
factory,
then
then
I
would
say
our
grant
funding
is
secured.
I
B
And
was
the
LOI
with
habitat
part
of
our
package?
I
didn't
see
that
and
if
so,
I
apologize
for
missing
it.
G
G
It
so
there
will
be
a
lease,
so
the
way
the
IGA
is
structured
currently
is
that
the
lease
could
be
between
the
city
and
the
school
district,
and
then
we
would
sublease
to
Habitat
and.
G
B
But
if
one
is
interested,
might
one
see
it
absolutely?
Okay
and
lastly-
and
this
was
triggered
for
me
by
mayor
brockett's
hotline-
is
it
not
the
case
that
we
are
both
funding
construction,
constructing
and
through
habitat,
essentially
operating
this
facility
correct?
So
many
of
the
community
members
have
looked
for
changes
to
the
IGA
cannot
most
of
their
concerns,
as
mayor
Brockett
pointed
out
in
his
hotline,
be
satisfied
by
us
alone,
in
other
words,
rather
than
having
to
negotiate
something
new
with
bvsd.
B
Because
I
think
there's
opportunity
there
for
us
to
address
Community
concerns
because
for
the
most
part,
the
school
district
is
not
going
to
be
involved
in
the
issues
that
we
want
to
deal
with
and
resolve
on.
Behalf
of
community
interest
am
I
off
base
on
that.
G
B
To
give
you
an
example
and
then
I'll,
let
my
colleagues
ask
their
questions.
If
the
school
board
says
it's
not
convenient
for
us
to
allow
you
to
use
65th
Street
under
certain
terms,
conditions
or
hours,
we
have
the
option
of
Simply
doing
deliveries
at
a
different
time.
Do
we
not
it's
not
that
we
need
to
to
negotiate
something
with
bvsd?
We
have
to
Simply
Be
Prepared
to
commit
to
the
community.
What
we're
doing
am
I
wrong.
No.
E
All
good
my
dad
was
my
dad's
name's
Mark
yeah,
appreciate
it
flattery,
so
so
Mark
I
well
I
just
want
to
say
great
questions
and
I
think
spot
on
on
trying
to
find
a
place
to
alleviate
some
of
the
stress
points.
So
I'd
really
appreciate
what
you
brought
up
and
clarified.
I
think
in.
X
E
Conversation
so
I
just
want
to
draw
light
to
that
awesome.
My
question
centers
specifically
around
I,
think
the
the
piece
that
was
changed.
What
we
changed
to
bring
us
to
tonight,
which
was
regarding
six,
the
the
change
for,
as
as
Bob
pointed
out,
we're
changing
one
digit,
or
at
least
we
were
hoping
to
change
one
digit,
maybe
less
successfully
than
we
had
hoped,
but
the
language
says,
sort
of
you
know
to
the
extent
of
deliveries
to
and
from
the
factory
via
63rd
will
be
minimized
to
the
greatest
extent
possible.
E
E
My
my
and
I
and
I
understand
some
need
for
flexibility,
given
that
there
could
be
constraints
on
when
deliveries
can
happen
based
on
Staffing
or
or
operator
issues
with
those
bringing
materials
so
I
get
there
could
be
constraints
and
so
needing
a
safety
valve
is
important.
I
get
that,
but
really
where
my
question
is
going
to
come
from
is,
if
we're
the
operator,
can't
we
monitor
that
traffic
and
into
some
extent
make
sure
we
set
some
guard
rails
for
ourselves,
because
we
own,
if
I'm,
not
mistaken,
part
of
63rd.
E
So
we
can
throttle
that
to
our
content,
if
I'm,
not
mistaken,
and
so
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that,
even
though
in
here
there's
ambiguity,
we
can
remove
that
based
on
our
actions
and
how
we
run
this
facility
so
I,
just
in
the
specific
specificity
of
the
issue
that
brought
us
to
tonight.
I
just
wanted
to
sort
of
get
that
Clarity
that
we
can
control
that
for
ourselves
and
the
ambiguity
is
really
Irrelevant
in
the
IGA.
To
that
extent,
is
that
a
good
way
to
say
that
I
see
people
searching?
Yes,
awesome.
Z
F
G
Hey
there
Jason
again
housing
in
human
services.
So,
yes,
the
the
12
is
really
to
try
to
provide
operational
flexibility.
You
know
again
it's
12
each
month
and
I.
My
understanding
of
the
intent
of
that
was
to
be
clear.
We're
not
talking
about
10
to
12
trips
a
day
we're
talking
about
10
to
12
a
month.
G
We
could
go
lower,
but
it's
really
difficult
to
predict
without
having
a
factory.
That's
up
and
running,
not
understanding.
You
know
what
issues
we
might
have
with
supply
chain
in
the
future.
G
So
yes,
it's
possible
and
we
would
do
our
best
to
to
adhere
to
that.
But
I
guess
our
our
request
would
to
try
to
keep
it
as
as
high
as
possible.
Z
G
N
N
So
could
you
live
with
whatever
an
X
is
going
to
be
because
we're
going
to
come
back
to
that
in
a
second
per
month,
not
per
month
on
average?
Could
you
live
with
that?
Yes,
okay!
So
are
you,
okay,
that
Aaron
thinking
about
the
average
part
okay
I
want
to
come
back
I'm,
going
to
turn
it
back
over
to
Tara
I
want
to
come
back
to
the
number
two
so.
Z
Z
I
was
specifically
moved
by
the
fact
that
this
is
a
Flyway
for
migrating
birds,
and
so
what
I
would
like
to
see
is:
is
there
a
way
to
know
to
come
for,
for
whoever
is
there
a
way
that
we're
going
to
monitor
whether
we
do
affect
the
birds
or
not?
We
have
a
lot
of
stress
on
birds
right
now.
We
have
airplanes
and
we
have
climate
change
and
so
I
don't
want
to
just
hope
for
the
best
when
it
comes
to
well,
hopefully,
the
factory
won't
affect
the
birds.
Z
I
I
really
do
want
to
know.
Will
it
affect
the
migratory,
the
migratory
behavior
of
the
birds?
Can
we
come
back
as
well
and
I
really
like
what
Nicole
said
thanks
Nicole
about
coming
back
to
us
and
I
would
like
that
study?
As
well,
because
I
feel,
like
a
lot
of
the
community,
really
hit
it
spot
on
when
they
said
this
is
this
is
an
unusual
space
and
I
would
really
like
to
see
protection
for
the
Wildlife
and
the
birds
in
a
specific
matter.
Z
AD
I
know
that
we
have
our
director
of
open
space
in
Mountain,
Parks
I,
don't
know
if
at
this
moment
we
know
that
for
sure,
but
we
can
certainly
take
that
back.
If,
if
that
is
not
known
to
staff,.
AL
Dan
Burke
director
open
space
and
Mountain
Parks,
just
in
terms
of
monitoring
impacts.
I
just
want
to
point
out.
It's
certainly
something
that
our
department
staff
does
throughout
the
year
on
a
number
of
different
species
in
a
number
of
different
areas.
AL
But
I
would
just
like
to
caution
that
one
year
data
does
not
necessarily
mean
a
trend,
for
instance,
there's
a
lot
of
reasons
why
you
might
see
a
fluctuation
in
certain
numbers
in
a
certain
location
in
a
given
year,
and
it
may
or
may
not
have
something
to
do
with
a
very
specific
attribute,
such
as
the
new
Factory,
or
something
like
that.
But
our
staff
would
be
more
than
willing
to
help
in
any
sort
of
monitoring
or
any
sort
of
Trend
analysis
over
time
in
this
area.
AE
That's
why
I
love
Tara
so
much
because
she's,
so
she
has
such
a
big
heart
talking
about
the
birds
and
and
thank
you
for
bringing
that
up,
because
that
was
part
of
my
question
or
my
thought,
because,
as
I
was
reading
the
packet,
it
talked
about
the
Environmental
Education
Center,
with
bvsd
and
in
relations
to
some
of
community
concerns
with
sombrero
Marsh
so
and
also
talking
about
osmp,
so
I'm
thinking.
Well,
there
must
be
some
type
of
work
already
being
done
there,
or
at
least
there's
some
level
of
care.
AE
AE
Even
with
bvsd,
because
the
thing
is
one
of
the
question-
or
at
least
the
thought
that
I
had
with
whether
it's
with
the
traffic
with
sombrero,
March
and
I
understand,
you
will
be
doing
some
type
of
monitoring
but
I'm
wondering
how
can
we
offload
some
of
that
process
to
bvsd,
since,
for
instance,
they
already
have
this
Center
that
they
mentioned
about
the
Environmental
Education
Center
and
the
the
ecological
Institute
and
osmp
so
I'm
wondering?
Is
there
a
way
of
offloading
that,
instead
of
us
taking
on
that
role,
ourselves.
AL
Yeah,
certainly
citizen
science
could
could
play
a
role
over
time
and
and
monitoring
this
area,
and
what
I
mean
by
that
is.
We
often
have
a
number
of
volunteers
volunteer
groups,
individuals
that
are
out
on
our
system
monitoring,
for
instance,
our
Raptor
monitoring
program
is
done
primarily
through
volunteers.
AL
It
is
a
very
popular
program
for
people
wanting
to
get
involved
in
this
type
of
thing,
so
monitoring
very
much
could
rely
on
non-staff
Personnel
that
is
Guided
by
parameters
that
staff
sets
up.
So
that's
certainly
a
possibility.
AE
U
I
AE
A
month
again,
I'm
wondering
who's
going
to
be
doing
the
monitoring,
because
my
hope
is
that,
at
the
end
of
this
process,
we
will
not
be
doing
any
type
of
monitoring
because
again
I'm
wondering
what
type
of
Staff
time
will
be
utilized
for
that,
as
opposed
to.
Let's
just
have
a
process,
or
at
least
put
it
into
the
IGA
that
it's
going
to
be
12.,
that's
it
in
whatever
other
process.
Bvsd
will
do
it
because,
again,
why
should
it
be
us
doing
the
extra
money
monitoring
taking
stuff's
the
time?
AE
AE
AE
AE
F
F
I
N
I
very
much
appreciate
Aaron
you,
you
I'm
submitting
those
clarifying
points
and
I
think
that
the
noise
one
in
particular,
is
very,
very
helpful.
So
thanks
for
that,
but
I
am
still
concerned
about
the
number
I
voted
in
favor
of
this
in
the
first
reading
in
Reliance
upon
staff,
saying
there
would
be
one
or
two
deliveries
per
week:
inbound
and
one
or
two
removals
per
month.
N
Outbound,
if
you
add
up
those
numbers
that
comes
out
between
5
and
10.,
so
it
was
obviously
a
little
concerned
when
staff
says
oh,
no
more
than
12.
and
so
I,
don't
know
where
12
comes
from.
It
seems
to
me
like
it
should
be
a
number
that
be
well
below
the
maximum
number
of
deliveries
that
you
anticipated,
which
was
10
per
month
and
so
I'm,
not
understanding
how
we're
at
10
or
12.
N
If
that's
supposed
to
be
a
maximum,
because
that's
that's
all
the
deliveries
and
there's
language
here
as
Matt
points
out
it's
a
little
ambiguous,
but
I
thought
the
school
district
did
a
pretty
good
job
of
saying
that
that
they
would
would
permit
deliveries
on
65th
Street
as
long
as
it
didn't
interfere
with
their
operations
and
I.
Appreciate
that
so
that's
great,
and
so
this
is,
this
would
seem
to
be
with
within
our
country
because
it's
us
and
habitats
from
the
factory,
not
the
school
district.
Let's
just
be
honest
about
that
right.
N
It's
us
and
habitat,
and-
and
these
are
you
know,
the
best
problems
are
problems
that
are
fixable
with
money,
because
those
are
the
easiest
problems
to
fix
right
and
so
we're
going
to
control
deliveries
we'll
be
able
to
control
those
I
get
the
fact.
There's
supply
chain
issues,
and
so
on
so
forth,
but
with
enough
money
a
delivery
company
will
deliver
anytime,
you
want
day
or
night
right,
and
so
why
do
you
need
10.
or
12.?
A
G
I
G
Trucks,
one
to
two
a
month
right
and
then
every
14
to
16
weeks
or
18
weeks
was
the
the
modules
would
be
removed.
N
I
N
AH
Yeah
I
just
want
to
colloquy
just
with
kind
of
a
clarifying
question
we're
talking
like
when,
when
we
say
10
trips
or
12
trips
a
month
like
we're
talking
about
one
vehicle
kind
of
coming
down,
63rd
to
that
property.
Is
that
correct
and
do
we
have
a
sense
of
how
many
vehicles
are
kind
of
already
doing
that
trip?
Because,
like
I
look
at
63rd
there
is
the
manufactured
home
community
that
looks
like
it's
got
a
few
dozen,
maybe
homes
there
I
believe
the
access
was
on
63rd.
So
that's
kind
of
a
car
coming
down.
AH
There's
the
storage
facility
that
has
quite
a
few
units
I,
don't
know
sort
of
how
many
vehicles
are
coming
in
for
that
and
then
there's
Thorn
there's
kind
of
the
bvsd
access.
So
you
know
when
I
think
about
the
difference
between
10
or
12
a
month
with
all
the
the
car
trips
that
sort
of
seemed
to
be
already
happening
there.
AH
It
really
feels
like
it's
a
bit
of
a
drop
in
the
bucket
and
I
feel
like
I'm
misunderstanding
something
about
what
we're
talking
about
with
regard
to
trips,
because
that's
it's
I'm,
just
kind
of
confused
on
the
difference
between
10
and
12,
when
we've
already
got
cars
and
vehicles
moving
through
here
I
mean
is
the
concern
about
trucks.
Is
the
concern
I
I,
just
I
feel
like
I'm
missing
something?
No,
so
I
don't
know.
If
that's,
maybe
just
some
clarification.
No.
G
I
I
really
appreciate
your
question
because
yeah,
so
my
understanding
is
the
for
the
Central
Kitchen.
There
are
about
four
to
five
semi
trucks
that
access
the
side
via
63rd
every
day,
there's
also
about
60
maintenance
vehicles
on
the
school
district,
campus
about
half,
leave,
63rd
half
through
65th,
and
then
that
doesn't
even
include
all
the
all
the
all
the
vehicles
accessing
Thorne.
So
there
is
quite
a
bit
of
traffic.
G
That's
why
you
know
we
just
wanted
to
try
to
set
that
ceiling
to
say
you
know
we're
not
talking
about
hundreds
of
trips
or
dozens
of
trips
every
day,
we're
just
talking
about
one
to
two,
but
it
again
it's
council's
prerogative.
If
you
want
to
set
that
ceiling
lower,
we
will
follow
it.
F
Absolutely
yeah,
thanks
for
that,
maybe
are
we
done
with
questions
move
on
to
comments,
some
more
okay.
AD
B
Stop
myself
hang
on
the
city
is
responsible
for
utility
upgrades
for
the
project.
Do
we
have
an
estimate
of
the
cost
on
that.
G
B
B
If
I'll
go
and
don't
go
anywhere
as
we
construct
these
modular
homes
in
the
event
that
there
are
construction
defects
who
Bears
the
liability
and
the
expense
of
remedying
those
defects,
it
happens.
It's
Construction.
B
B
G
Do
I
know
exactly
when
it's
going
to
happen
so
the
week
of
January
9th,
the
acoustical
engineer
will
set
up
a
noise
monitoring
equipment
on
School,
District
property
and
they'll
also
set
up
equipment
in
a
another
modular
Factory
in
Denver,
and
then
they'll
be
able
to
compare
those
two.
So
we
have
purposely
not
finalized
the
construction
documents
until
we
have
the
results
of
that
the
acoustical
Engineers
work
and
recommendations.
Thank.
AE
I
do
have
a
question
we
can
before
you
go.
I
would
I
would
maybe
just
to
clarify
not
confuse
all
the
way
as
I
was
reading.
It
says
that
the
modular
homes
the
homes
would
be
for
CD
residents
and
I
was
wondering
okay.
Well,
this
is
a
bvsd
project,
or
will
it
be
for
teachers
specifically
or
no?
It's
no
I
can.
G
So
it's
Habitat
so
basically
they're
taking
their
habitat
model
and
moving
it
indoors.
That's
the
easiest
way
to
think
about
it,
so
everything
that
habitat
currently
does
they're
going
to
continue
to
do
so.
They
serve
the
entire
Boulder
County
roughly,
but
the
first
units
that
come
out
of
the
factory
will
be
dedicated
to
the
city
in
particularly
Ponderosa,
so
we're
replacing
those
aging
mobile
homes
with
fixed
Foundation
super
energy,
efficient,
Fix,
Foundation
modular
homes
after
Ponderosa.
There
are
other
opportunities.
We
talked
about
that
last
time.
G
F
And
specifically,
as
we've
been
talking
about
to
to
put
a
maximum
on
the
number
of
factory
deliveries
on
63rd
Street
and
also
to
say
that
we
will
implement
the
noise
reduction
recommendations
by
the
acoustical
engineer.
To
the
extent
reasonably
feasible
and,
and
then
I
was
now
thinking
about
adding
in
the
one-year
check-in
that
we
were
talking
about
from
before
as
well.
So
just
wanted
to
get
that
that
out
there
as
part
of
the
discussion
and
so
because
so
I
and
and
I'll
just
start
with
that.
F
But
then
people
can
add
additional
thoughts
but
I'm
hoping
to
be
part
of
what
we
consider
tonight
and
the
way
we
would
do.
That
is
that
we
would
pass
all
the
Motions
that
were
put
up
on
before,
and
this
would
be
a
separate
motion
to
then
you
know
give
direction
to
City
staff
about
how
this
is
operated.
Okay,
with
that
on
the
table,
I
got
I,
saw
Matt
first
and
then
Nicole
and
then
Tara.
This,
yes,
oh,
go
ahead.
Then.
F
The
deliveries
would
be
about
operations
rather
than
construction.
The
the
acoustical
engineer
is
yeah,
so
it's
about
how
it's
built.
F
E
For
your
hotline
I
think
this
helps
Focus
us
and
I
do
think.
Given
that
we
are
the
funder
Builder
operator,
we
can
take
on
some
added
responsibility
to
better
the
environment
and
hopefully
meet
some
of
the
needs
of
the
neighbors
and
the
surrounding
Community
I
think
we
can
take
some
of
that
out.
E
So
I'm
glad
that
we're
we're
approaching
that
a
couple
pieces
that
I
would
like
to
add
to
that
is
I'd
like
to
be
clearer
with
regards
to
63rd
versus
65th
I
I
I,
see
where
Bob's
going
and
I
would
like
to
you
know.
If
we
can
go
further
say
we
just
want
you.
E
63Rd
I
mean
if
we
get
to
schedule
this
and
say
there's
constraints
on
when
bbsd
is
in
session
and
school
starts
school
lets
out
the
rest
of
that
timing
is
fair
game
and
if
we
need
to
bring
in
some
deliveries
at
at
five
or
six
a.m,
to
avoid
63rd,
then
I
think
it's
on
us
to
try
to
do
that.
I
would
try
to
keep
63rd
just
off
the
table
to
minimize
impacts
to
Columbine
and
Sombrero
March.
So
if
we
can
take
on
that
onus,
we
control
the
entry
point
of
63rd
I'd
love
to
see.
E
If
we
could
put
that
in
there
that'd
be
something
I'd
like
to
see
the
other
one
is
I'd
love
to
take
Dan
Burke
up
on
thinking
about
how
we
can
use
this
opportunity
for
a
citizen
science
project
and
or
a
long-term
study
of
impacts.
I'm
a
wildlife
photographer
I'm,
not
a
bird
expert,
but
I
am
a
proud,
birder
and
so
I
go
to
that
area
to
photograph
all
the
time.
E
So
it
would
be
nice
just
for
my
own
professional
photography
perspective
to
know
the
impacts
and
whether
or
not
my
trotting
around
is
causing
impacts
or
if
it's
noise
from
further
away
kind
of
ingest
a
little
bit
my
impacts,
but
but
I'm
saying
I
would
like
to
take
that
opportunity
to
study
that
environment
and
I
think
it
would
be
good
for
us
as
a
whole
and
I
think
that
would
be
worthwhile
thing.
So
I
think
we
could
take
that
on
ourselves.
E
Won't
impact
the
rest
of
bvsd,
but
we
build
that
facility
with
perhaps
the
lighting
ordinance
that
gets
modified.
If
there's
any
changes
there,
that's
something
we
could
take
on
ourselves.
If
we
change,
perhaps
the
brightness
temperature
or
change
our
shielding
requirements,
perhaps
that's
something
we
could
do
there
as
well.
So
I
think
there's
a
few
instances
that
we
could
take
a
little
greater
onus
to
make
this
a
little
better.
Z
I
have
a
lot
of
confidence
in
this
city
that
we
can
simultaneously
do
a
great
project
with
Habitat
for
Humanity
and
also
take
care
of
our
Marsh
I,
really
think
we
can
do
both
so
I
want
to
start
out
with
that.
When
I
went
to
that
a
Columbine
school
who
went
there,
you
did
so
Lauren
did
the
kids
were
so
excited
about
about
flood
mitigation
and
environmental
impacts.
It
was
it
was
stunning
and
so
I'm
going
to
combine
Lauren
everybody's
ideas
of
from
the
McCalls
and
duties
and
mats
and
I.
Z
Have
this
thought
that
I
wonder
if
it's
possible?
If
we
can-
and
this
is
probably
for
Susan-
can
we
combine
what
habitat
is
doing
with
the
children,
with
the
kids
right
with
the
kids
and
ask
them
to
also
do
their
own
environmental
impacts
and
noise
and
and
add
no,
how
the
noise,
whether
or
not
the
noise
in
the
lighting
is
affecting
the
marshes?
Well,
can't
the
that
be
part
of
the
educational
process.
I
mean
because
I
think
that
these
students
would
care
about
that
environmental
aspects.
The
most
out
of
everybody,
that's
my
personal
opinion.
Z
J
Thank
you,
I
appreciated,
Aaron,
your
hotline
and
other
council
members
and
kind
of
thinking
about
how,
as
the
owner
and
operator,
we
have
there's
a
significant
amount
of
not,
but,
as
the
Builder
operator,
we
have
significant
control
over
what
happens
on
this
property.
J
I
appreciate
the
IGA
includes
height
limit
constraints
that
it
requires
the
entire,
not
just
this
property,
but
the
entire
campus
to
meet
our
quite
strict
lighting
regulations
are
city-wide
noise
ordinances
and
then
you
know.
The
missing
piece
like
is
that
traffic
piece
and
I
think
that
as
the
operator
that
is
within
our
control,
instead
of
focusing
so
much
on
exactly
how
many
trips
per
month
we're
seeing
what
I
would
really
like
to
see?
Is
this
being
an
iterative
process?
So
you
know
one
of
the
things
that
was
brought
up
was
sort
of.
J
How
is
the
community
able
to
bring
forth
issues
that
they
have
once
this
project
is
built
and
I
think
that
we
should
be
facilitating
that
that,
once
a
year,
check-in
I
would
appreciate,
if
that
included,
reaching
out
to
the
neighbors
to
understand
what
their
experience
is
of
this
and
how
we
can
address
any
concerns
that
come
up
in
the
operation
of
this,
as
well
as
reaching
out
to
Thorne
and
osmp
and
finding
out
what
they
have
learned.
J
So
that
not
only
can
we
do
the
right
things
in
terms
of
taking
into
account
the
sound
engineers
recommendations,
but
also
continue
to
improve,
because
a
lot
of
noise
mitigation
and
things
like
that
does
have
to
do
with
use
and
not
just
with
how
exactly
the
building
is
built.
L
Thank
you,
mayor
I
want
to
just
step
back,
maybe
a
little
bit
and
compliment
Kurt
and
Jay,
and
our
I
guess
bbsd
for
a
pretty
cool
project.
I,
remember
Kurt,
we
were
sitting
in
a
coffee
shop
like
I
would
say.
Maybe
two
I
don't
know
it
was
a
long
time
ago
with
with
Sam
Weaver,
when
you
were
really
excited
talking
about
how
cool
it
would
be
that
we
could
create
the
space
right
where
bbsd
students
are
where
they
could.
L
You
know,
go
right
out
the
door
into
this
Factory
where
they
could
learn
these
skills
and
we
would
get
affordable
housing
like
it's,
a
I
guess
I,
just
don't
want
us
to
lose
sight
of.
This
is
a
really
awesome
thing.
That's
going
to
bring
us,
affordable,
housing
and
and
help
our
our
students
to
have
good
good
life
skills
that
they
can
turn
into
careers
in
in
careers
that
are
highly
needed.
L
So
just
just
want
to
say
thank
you
for
all
the
work
and
thank
you
to
bbsd
for
considering
all
the
Amendments
that
we
have
asked
for.
L
In
terms
of
the
you
know,
what
we're
talking
about
around
sort
of
Good,
Neighbor
agreements
and
stuff
I'm
I
am
worried
that
we
are
saying
things
that
that
don't
have
teeth
like
we're,
committing
to
things
that
are
not
necessarily
enforceable
and
potentially
tying
our
own
hands.
So
I
understand
Bob's
concern
that
you
know
it
could
be
one
trip
and
then
130
a
different
month
and
and
that
we
could,
you
know,
try
and
make
some
differences.
But
I
don't
know
like
from
from
what
I
heard
from
habitat
like.
L
So
you
know:
I
I,
guess
I'm
a
little
bit
concerned
about
us
trying
to
get
in
the
weeds
in
ways
that
I
I
don't
do
I,
don't
run
a
a
workshop
or
manufacturing
facility,
and
if,
if
there
are
supply
chain
issues
or
something
that
we're
into
the
13th
delivery
of
a
month-
and
we
can't
then
figure
out
a
way
to
get
it
there.
And
then
we
don't
get.
L
You
know
a
whole
unit
of
housing
built
that,
like
I
I
I'm
and
we
can't
use
the
other
street
because
bvsd
won't,
you
know
won't
but
I,
don't
know.
Just
doesn't
work
out
like
I
think
that
I'm
concerned
about
us
getting
in
the
weeds
when
we
have
staff
who
have
worked
on
this
for
for
well
over
a
year,
I,
think
and-
and
it
is
a
I-
think
it's
a
project
that
we
support
so
just
concerned
about
committing
to
things
that
are
unenforceable
and
then
thinking
that
we're
wed
to
that.
L
I
think
that
we
should
be
considerate
and
we
should
be.
We
should
be
good
neighbors
without
having
to
be
asked
on
something
these
things
and
yet
I
think
as
an
operator
of
a
something
that's
supposed
to
be
a
community
good,
and
you
know
if
we
go
offline,
I,
don't
know
if
these
students
are
then
relegated
to
I,
don't
know
what,
for
that
day,
that
they're
supposed
to
be
in
there
working
on
stuff,
so
I
I
just
want
us
to
to
be
mindful
of
Ripple
effects
of
the
things
that
we're
talking
about
thanks.
B
You
know
I
think
we've
taken
a
lot
of
steps
to
try
to
address
Community
concerns
I'm,
not
that
concerned
about
a
good
neighbor
agreement
as
I
am
about
are
making
the
appropriate
commitments
to
our
neighbors
in
terms
of
enforceability.
B
The
community
is
always
welcome
to
enforce
it
against
us
in
November
and
I
I.
You
know,
but
I
think
we're
doing
things
here,
trying
to
address
legitimate
concerns
and
I'm,
not
unhappy
that
we're
doing
it.
I
think
you
know,
Aaron's
suggestions
about
the
noise
consultant
are
spot
on.
I
would
be
in
agreement
with
Matt.
If
we
control
the
traffic
we'll
find
a
way,
we
just
won't
use
63rd
Street.
It's
not
that
there
won't
be
any
other
traffic
on
there,
but
it's
a
community
concern.
B
It
doesn't
cost
us
anything
to
try
to
be
a
good
neighbor
in
that
fashion
and,
if,
for
some
reason,
there's
a
real
problem
down
the
road,
we
can
revisit
it,
but
I'm
happy
to
make
a
commitment
or
to
have
the
the
city
maker
commitment
to
not
use
65th
Street,
because
I
think
it
goes
not
entirely
all
the
way
in
what
the
community
wants,
which
is
probably
don't
build
it,
but
I
think
it's
a
good
project
and
to
the
extent
that
we
can
address
those
concerns,
I'm
happy
for
us
to
go
beyond
the
letter
of
the
IGA,
which
is
really
an
agreement
between
us
and
and
bvsd,
and
it's
not
relevant
for
most
of
the
things
we're
trying
to
address
this
evening,
because
bvsd
doesn't
control
the
traffic
doesn't
control.
B
B
I
agree
with
with
Tara
and
others.
Who've
spoken
about
some
kind
of
monitoring
process:
I,
don't
necessarily
care
if
it's
staff
or
if
we
authorize
osbt,
to
stand
up
a
committee
put
on
some
students
put
on
the
Audubon
Society
just
to
take
a
look
at
this
and
make
sure
that
a
year
from
now
we're
not
causing
damage.
I.
Think
that's
a
a
an
easy
commitment
to
fulfill
I
think
it
will
address
some
specific
problems
that
people
have
had
with
this
proposal
and
will
let
us
move
on
and
and
get
this
thing
going.
N
Yeah
I'm
going
to
agree
with
what
I
think,
Matt
and
Mark
both
said
it
with
reason
and
actually
Rachel
too,
but
about
ongoing
commitments,
because
I,
don't
I,
really
I,
don't
think
we
should
try
to
make
ongoing
commitments
that
are
very
difficult
for
us
to
measure
and
enforce
I
I.
Think
the
the
noise
thing
is
a
one-time
thing:
let's
just
go
out,
there
have
have
an
acoustical
engineer,
tell
us
what
we
need
to
do
and
we
do
it
and
then
we're
done
with
that
right
and
same
with
maybe
the
annual
report.
N
You
know
whether
it's
around
Birds,
whether
it's
around
other
impacts,
that's
a
that's
a
one-time
thing.
You
know,
maybe
it's
annual,
but
it's
not
frequent
I
would
I
would
suggest
that
we
take
out
all
the
respect,
our
the
the
bit
about
traffic
altogether,
because
I'm
afraid
that
whatever
number
gets
slotted
in
there,
whether
it's
12
or
10
or
some
other
number.
That
then
becomes
the
delivery.
Number
and
I
don't
want
a
delivery.
Number
I
want
I
want
the
delivery
number
to
be
zero.
N
The
school
board
was
I,
thought,
I'm,
generous
and
giving
us
what
we
wanted.
What
I
thought
we
wanted
and
I
feel
like
we're
kind
of
backsliding
a
little
bit
by
saying
but
yeah,
but
but
we
we,
the
city,
reserves
the
right
to
have
a
bunch
of
deliveries
there
and
I.
Don't
want
us
to
reserve
that
right,
I,
wanna
I
want
the
school
board.
School
District
controls,
65th
Street,
so
I
get
why
they
have
constraints
there
and
and
what
they.
N
What
they've
written
is
fine
with
me,
but
I
don't
want
us
to
then
go
and
say,
but
but
we
reserve
the
right
to
do
a
bunch
of
deliveries
on
63rd
Street,
whether
it's
10
or
12
or
whatever.
The
number
is
I,
would
just
eliminate
that
part
of
Aaron's
suggestion
and
then
and
then
we
have
the
nice
thing
about.
This
is
we're
trying
to
we're
trying
to
to
get
traffic
off
of
63rd
Street
for
two
principal
reasons:
one
it
could
adversely
affect
our
open
space
and
next
it
could
adversely
affect
residents.
N
We
have
there
at
the
mobile
home
park.
Well,
the
good
news
is,
you
guys
are
in
the
human
services
department,
so
you
have
some
sensitivity
around
the
mobile
home
park
and
I'm
pretty
sure.
The
Dan's
going
to
be
in
and
the
open
space
board
is
going
to
be
kind
of
watching
if
there's
a
lot
of
traffic
going
by
that
open
space.
So
this
is
all
really
internal
and
I.
Don't
think
we
need
to
write
to
Rachel's
point
I,
don't
think
we
need
to
write
this
down.
N
I
don't
want
to
put
a
number
in
it,
because
that,
because
then
becomes
the
number.
So
I
would
just
eliminate
that
my
suggestion
Aaron.
Would
we
eliminate
that
part
of
Aaron's
hotline
post
everything
else
I
think
is
just
fine
and
that's
kind
of
what
what
what
would
earn
my
vote
and.
N
F
Do
you
mind
if
I
go
first,
because
there's
a
sort
of
address
so
Bob
I
hear
you
so?
F
But
the
reason
why
I
put
that
in
there
is
that
I've
heard
from
concerned
neighbors
and
people
concerned
about
the
the
health
of
the
marsh
that
well,
the
the
language
in
the
IGA
strives
to
to
minimize
traffic
on
63rd
that
we
could
potentially
have
a
lot
of
traffic
on
63rd
right
so
and
so
I'm
trying
to
provide
some
assurance
that
no
there
will
not
be
a
lot
of
traffic
on
63rd,
because
language
in
the
IJ
is
not
super
specific.
F
So
what
what
I
would
suggest
is,
rather
than
eliminating
that
language
entirely
is
to
add
something
to
the
effective
say
that
we
shall
strive
to
eliminate
all
traffic
along
63rd
Street,
but
ensure
that
no
more
than
sure
that
factory
deliveries
will
be
limited
to
no
more
than
say
10
a
month.
So
we
get
language
and
then
that's
showing
that
hey
we're
number
one
we're
starting
to
go
to
zero.
But
in
no
case
will
it
be
more
than
a
certain
amount.
And
then
people
know
okay,
but
they're.
F
AE
I
think
I
was
just
going
to
ask
you
I
mean
if
my
fellow
council
members
are
in
agreement
with
that.
I
was
just
going
to
ask
you.
Where
did
you
put
that
and
I'm
sorry
if
I
didn't
hear
it?
How
did
you
come
about
the
12,
because
I
did
see
a
Community
member
did
send
an
email
about
how
there
were.
There
was
a
previous
conversation
about
10,
and
then
you
came
up
with
12.
F
AE
AE
Thank
you
and
I
think
my
other
question
to
Bob's
point
I,
hear
him
and
I
hear
you
as
well,
and
yours
was
on
consultation
with
staff
and
staff,
who
has
already
been
in
consultation
with
bvsd,
so
I'm
more
inclined
to
follow
your
position.
But
my
question
is:
if
we
were
to
go
where
Bob
is
going,
would
we
have
to
go
back
to
bvsd
because
we've
already
been
there
so
I'm
wondering?
Would
we
have
no
it's
our
own?
Yes,
okay.
Thank
you.
AH
Yeah
I
just
wanted
to
offer
a
few
comments.
First
of
all,
I
think
you
know
with
this
project
it.
It
is
really
helpful
for
me
just
kind
of
hearing
this
reiteration
that
the
city
has
control
over
the
operations,
as
well
as
the
construction
right
that
we
really
have
some
control
there
I.
You
know
I,
hear
that
there
was
kind
of
one
meeting
with
bvsd
that
you
know.
Maybe
the
neighbors
did
not
not.
All
neighbors
walked
away
feeling
satisfactory
about
that
meeting.
AH
I
have
just
personal
experience
with
how
great
the
city
can
be
with
regard
to
engagement
on
bigger
projects,
just
from
all
the
work
that
City
staff
did
around
CU
South
and
my
neighborhood,
that
about
sea
of
South,
and
so
you
know
as
I'm
thinking
about
this,
what
Lauren
was
saying
about
having
an
iterative
process
going
forward
building
some
relationships
with
some
of
the
nearby
community
members
organizations.
AH
You
know
with
Thorne
that
I
know
we
already
have
some
of
those
really
just
kind
of
giving
people
a
point
person
that
they
can
go
to
with
questions
with
concerns.
Things
like
that
I
feel,
like
that's
part
of
that
relationship.
Building
that
becomes
really
helpful
as
a
neighbor.
Next
to
where
a
big
big
project
is
being
talked
about.
I
think
you
know
it's
good.
The
entire
property
is
going
to
be
subject
to
our
city
noise
and
light
ordinances.
AH
That,
to
me
feels
like
it's
addressing
a
lot
of
concerns
there
and
just
to
the
to
some
of
these
discussions
about
making
63rd
off
limits.
AH
Recognizing
that
we
have
heard
a
lot
of
community
concern
here
about
the
impacts
of
of
this
project
on
people
living
and
studying
in
this
area,
and
some
of
the
the
organizations
that
are
out
there.
So
I
I
would
just
like
us
to
offer
some
flexibility
there
in
terms
of
letting
staff
bring
in
equipment
and
things
as
as
is
needed
throughout
the
project.
And
what
I
hear
people
saying
is:
that's
not
likely
to
be
more
than
12
or
so
trips
a
month,
so
I
I.
AH
F
F
Is
it
which
is
I,
think
where
the
Crux
of
council's
discussions
coming
and
it
would
it
be
possible
to
make
the
motion
about
those
constrictions
before
we've
passed
all
the
other
emotions,
so
that
we've
established
that
that
we
will
make
these
commitments
and
then,
if
the
other
motions
fail,
it
all
becomes
irrelevant,
but
because
I
feel,
like
Council,
probably
wants
to
get
this
done
before
we
make
all
those
other
motions
would
be
my
guess.
M
Yes,
mayor,
that's
certainly
possible
I
I,
believe
you
would
make
it
a
motion
conditioned
upon
the
annexation
item.
Passing.
F
Very
good,
so
here
here's
what
I!
If
I,
could
you
know
move
forward
on
this?
So
here's
here's
what
I'm
I'm
hearing
in
terms
of
potential
conditions?
What
I'm
going
to
suggest
is
changing
the
traffic
one
to
say
that
we
will
strive
to
eliminate
all
traffic
on
63rd
Street
but
ensure
that
factory
deliveries
on
63rd
Street
will
in
no
case
exceed
10
per
month,
so
that
we
have
this
driving.
But
we
also
place
a
cap
and
it
sounds
like
10.
F
E
F
B
Two
words:
wildlife
and
pollution.
One
of
the
concerns
was
pollution
of
Sombrero
mark.
F
F
AL
Yes,
excuse
me:
Dan
Burke,
Open,
Space,
Mountain
Parks.
One
of
my
my
concerns
with
where
we're
going
with
this
is
that,
if
you're
asking
us
to
monitor
specifically
due
to
the
factory
I
mean,
like
I
said,
when
we
monitor
different
Trends
in
different
years,
could
point
to
a
number
of
different
situations.
A
lot
of
these
migratory
birds
come
from
out
of
the
area,
and
so
climate
and
impacts
in
that
area
could
impact
the
numbers
that
we're
seeing
that
come
to
the
marsh.
E
E
Did
I
respond
to
that
since
I
brought
that
up
yeah
thanks
Aaron
and
thanks
Dan
for
bringing
that
up,
I
agree
with
you
completely.
There
are
a
lot
of
variables
that
go
into
that
I
I'm,
very
aware
of
those,
and
so
I
would
not
be
tying
it
to,
and
then
you
know
yes,
I
would
not
tie
it.
E
I
just
think
we
want
to
study
those
bass
lines,
and
maybe
something
is
maybe
something
arises
where
it's
clearly
obvious
it
or
obviously
Factory
or
not,
but
I
think
I
wouldn't
study
it
with
a
preconceived
outcome
that
we
would
be
judging
the
study
against
the
factory,
specifically
so
I
I
would
I
would
agree
with
your
assessment
that
just
enhanced
study
to
understand
what's
going
on,
and
maybe
something
shows
up,
maybe
it
doesn't
but
to
but
to
just
ignore
that,
and
not
do
it.
E
AL
I
think
that
it
I
think
that
does
alleviate
that
concern
and
I
would
use
the
word
enhance,
because
obviously
we
have
done
studies
out
there,
and
so
it
would
be
more
of
an
enhancement,
beautiful.
F
So
would
you
say
to
have
ongoing
enhanced
monitoring?
Is
that
what
you're
looking
for
okay
and
then
I
think
if
we
just
don't
mention
you
know
due
to
the
factory
specifically,
then
you
can
your
your
department
can
just
look
at
the
status
of
things
in
general
out
there,
okay,
good
any
other
comments.
There's
Nicole
and
Rachel.
AH
Yeah
I
was
just
wondering
about
this,
because
some
of
the
emails
that
we
got
were
asking
about
environmental
and
environmental
study
or
of
something
of
the
marsh
there
and
I
am
just
wondering
if
that's
anything
that
could
illuminate
the
kinds
of
things
to
be
paying
attention
to.
If
there
were
some
sort
of
environmental
study
and
I
don't
know
if
that's
kind
of
all
together
in
the
same
thing
or
if
that's
totally
different,.
F
So
I
guess
I
would
look
I
think
there
have
been.
We
have
done
some
environmental
evaluation.
This
would
measure
potential
impacts.
There
were
specific
requests
for
like
an
Eis,
I,
think
environmental
impact
study,
which
I
think
would
have
far-reaching
implications.
If
we
did
that,
but
maybe
I
can
look
to
Jay
or
Kurt
to
address
that.
G
Yes
and
I'll
try
to
get
it
right
this
time,
because
I
think
I
butchered
it
last
time
so
because
we're
receiving
Federal
funding
there
was
a
requirement
to
do
an
environmental
assessment
phase
one,
and
that
is
predominantly
looking
at
cultural
resources
known
contaminants.
It's
not
the
full-blown
environmental
impact
statement,
which
is
what
the
neighbors
were
really
asking
for.
G
So
the
this
environmental
assessment
phase,
one
found
basically
findings
of
no
significant
impact,
so
that
basically
allows
us
to
progress
forward.
So
one
of
the
neighbors
did
challenge
this
with
the
housing
Urban
Development.
We
responded
to
HUD
and
HUD.
Actually
just
I
think
it
was
yesterday,
replied
that
there
was
no
merit
to
that
objection.
So
I.
F
M
I'm
afraid
I
don't
know
a
timeline,
but
what
it
would
do
is
trigger
additional
obligations
that
we've
been
told
are
not
necessary
and
are
not
required
right,
because
if
the
environmental
assessment,
they
look
at
certain
factors
in
the
environmental
assessment
to
determine
whether
an
environmental
impact
study
is
required.
I
L
Can
I
go
back
to
the
deliveries,
real
quick?
So
if
I'm
hearing
you
it's
128
year,
Max
right
10
a
month,
so
I
would
say
you
know
for
anybody.
Who's
ever
had
like
a
refrigerator
even
lined
up
to
be
delivered
like
that.
That
stuff
can
get
moved
around,
and
so
let's
say
we're
at
we've
had
our
10th
and
it's
supposed
to
come
on
the
first.
But
then
something
happens
and
it
shows
up
on
the
30th.
Are
we
really
not
going
to
receive
that?
That
seems
silly
to
tie
her
hands
like
that?
L
So
I
would
at
least
if
we're
going
to
say
10,
which
I
I
probably
would
bump
up
say
and
up
to
20
a
month
or
like
just
give
ourselves
a
buffer.
It's
not
going
to
be
every
month
it's
going
to
be
120
total
a
year,
but
there
could
be
one
month
where
it's
five
trucks
are
lined
up
to
come
at
one
time
and
then
you
know
I,
don't
know
something
happens
so
that
we
don't
disrupt
the
process
and
then
a
different
month.
A
F
F
F
No
okay,
all
right
well,
so
here's
then
I'll
propose
that
I
move
forward
with
this
contingent
motion
and
then
we
we
proceed
from
there
and
then
maybe
I'll
speak
a
couple.
F
Words
after
I
make
the
motion
so
I
move
to
declare
that
it
is
council's
desire
that
the
city
will
mitigate
potential
impacts
on
neighboring
properties
and
during
the
operation
of
the
affordable
housing
modular
Factory
and
will
strive
to
eliminate
all
traffic
along
63rd
Street,
but
ensure
that
Factory
delivery
is
on
63rd
Street
will
in
no
case
exceed
10
per
month
to
the
extent
reasonably
feasible,
Implement
noise
reduction
recommendations
by
the
acoustical
engineer
in
the
design
and
operation
of
the
factory
work,
with
the
open
space
and
Mountain
parks
department
to
have
ongoing,
enhanced
monitoring
of
potential
impacts
on
wildlife
and
water
quality
at
Sombrero
Marsh,
and
have
a
check-in
on
operations
at
the
facility
one
year
after
commencement
of
operations
that
includes
neighborhood
Outreach.
F
And
just
to
speak
to
it
I,
you
know
I
appreciate,
you
know
all
the
concerns
that
have
been
registered
and
I
think
we've
been
trying
to
listen
to
to
neighbors,
but
also
we've
got
an
incredibly
important
program
for
the
community
to
move
forward
and
I.
Think
the
residents
of
Ponderosa
mobile
home
park
will
thank
us
all
very
much
when
they
move
into
these
energy
efficient
homes
that
were
built
at
this
facility.
We're
going
to
be
mitigating
noise,
light
runoff
traffic
Etc
we're
doing
the
best.
F
We
can
to
make
sure
that
it
does
not
have
a
negative
impact
on
the
marsh
or
the
neighbors.
So
I
feel
like
it's
a
it's
a
tough
set
of
compromises,
but
I
feel
like
we're
coming
to
the
best
outcome
possible.
So
there's
my
little
speech
call
for
a
vote
then,
and
this
is
a
show
of
hands
right,
Alicia
I'll,
all
in
favor
of
the
motion
on
the
table,
all
right
that
looks
like
that
looks
like
unanimous
one
thanks
everybody
now.
Could
we
get
the
motion
language
for
the
rest
of
it
and
I'll?
E
M
Because
it's
a
Serial
annexation,
let
me
actually,
let
me
see
if
hell
is
available
hella
with
the
serial
annexation.
Can
we
do?
Can
we
do
one
vote
since
there's
language
in
here
that
that
the
second
annexation
is
contingent
upon
the
first
passing,
or
would
it
be
better
to
take
these
motions
one
at
a
time.
AI
You
say
if
I
would
take
them
one
at
a
time,
or
at
least
bunched
together,
first,
the
annexation
of
the
Westerly
portion
and
then
after
that
passed
the
annexation
of
the
Eastern
limo
portion,
because
only
the
first
annexation
creates
the
contiguity
for
the
second
annexation.
F
Okay,
so
Matt,
do
you
want
to
start
over
again
with
the
first
one
I
think
you
can
just
mention
the
resolution
number.
E
E
Know:
okay,
let's
see
I
think
I
can
just
go
from
each
one.
Each
number
on
down.
Okay,
so
I
may
I
make
a
motion
to
approve
as
state
of
the
agenda
resolution.
1317.
F
L
N
AI
F
E
F
N
AE
B
E
I'll
keep
going
I
make
a
motion
to
Pat
to
pass,
as
stated
in
the
agenda
ordinance,
85
53.
E
13.,
oh
I
was
just
reading
the
ordinance
50
feet.
Yeah,
sorry,
look
redundant!
So
sorry,
all
right,
I'll
go
back.
I
make
a
motion
to
pass
as
a
as
stated
in
the
agenda
resolution.
1322.
D
F
F
L
L
D
Weiner,
yes,
Yates,
yes
and
Benjamin.
Yes,
the
IG
referenced
in
the
the
annexation
agreement
between
the
city
of
Boulder
and
the
Boulder
Valley
School
District
is
hereby
improved
unanimously.
F
All
right
well,
thanks
to
everyone,
who's
worked
so
hard
on
this
and
I
want
to
particular
call
it.
Our
partnership
with
the
Boulder
Valley
School
District
appreciate
all
the
hard
work
you've
done
and
also
to
Habitat
for
Humanity,
and
we
look
forward
to
working
together
on
getting
people
in
some
great
homes
and
teaching
some
students,
while
we're
at
it.
D
Next
item
on
tonight's
agenda
on
the
public
hearings
is
item
5B.
It
is
the
second
reading
and
consideration
of
emotion
to
adopt
Ordnance
8556
amending
Title
IX
land
use
code,
BRC
1981
to
update
the
use
tables
and
use
standards
related
to
Industrial
uses
and
districts
and
setting
forth
related
details.
AF
Thank
you
Nuria
and
good
evening,
mayor
and
council
members.
We
are
happy
to
bring
forward
this
item
to
you
this
evening.
AF
There
is
a
lot
of
detail
and
we
even
have
some
additional
thoughts
this
evening
on
further
simplification,
going
back
in
just
the
last
couple
of
weeks
and
augmenting
the
significant
public
input
that's
taking
place
over
the
five
years
regarding
this.
So
with
those
introductory
comments,
I'm
going
to
turn
it
over
to
Lisa
Hood
who's,
the
project
manager.
For
this
for
the
presentation.
Thank
you.
AM
AM
The
planner
and
looking
forward
to
a
lengthy
discussion
or
lengthy
just
getting
you
ready
for
some
lengthy
slides
about
these
table
and
standards,
module
2
related
to
industrial
areas.
We
were
last
year
in
August
at
a
study
session
and
discussed
this
second
module,
so
I
won't
go
too
much
into
the
background,
but
for
the
overview
of
the
presentation,
we'll
do
some
background.
A
few
of
those
background
slides
talk
about
the
public
input.
That's
been
heard
over
the
several
years
of
this
project,
as
well
as
the
last
few
months
and
then
I.
AM
AM
The
goals
of
the
project
since
its
outset,
back
in
2018,
have
been
to
simplify
and
streamline
this
really
important
part
of
our
land
use
code.
That's
gotten
very
complex
over
time,
so
trying
to
make
it
more
predictable
and
certain
for
people
that
are
using
it
as
well
as
also
trying
to
better
align
the
use
table
with
the
Boulder
Valley
comp
plan
goals
and
policies
and
land
use
designations.
AM
The
project
importantly,
does
not
include
a
few
things
so
reassessing
the
comprehensive
plan
policies.
It's
truly
meant
to
be
an
implementation
of
the
adopted,
comprehensive
plan.
Comprehensive
plan
is
the
result
of
many
years
of
community
conversations
and
elected
official
discussions
and
planning
board
meetings,
and
things
like
that.
So
not
going
back
into
what
those
comprehensive
plans
are.
Plan
policies
are,
but
rather
the
best
way
to
implement
those
through
the
code.
Also
not
this
doesn't
involve
changes
to
things
like
the
form
and
bulk
standards.
AM
AM
Just
a
reminder:
you
have
seen
these
slides
several
times.
We've
talked
about
this
project
many
times
over
the
last
few
years,
so
you
saw
it
back
in
2019,
2020
June
when
you
adopted
the
first
module
and
then,
like
I,
said
we
were
here
in
late
August
with
a
study
session
where
we
talked
about
this
for
a
while,
just
a
quick
summary
of
the
feedback
that
we've
received
from
the
council.
So
far.
AM
So
when
we
talked
about
the
industrial
changes
back
in
2020,
it
was
a
bit
more
of
a
general
discussion,
but
there
was
support
from
the
council
for
additional
uses,
such
as
residential
retail
and
restaurants
in
light
industrial
areas.
But
also
the
council
expressed
a
need
to
balance
the
protection
of
existing
industrial
uses
while
introducing
new
residential.
AM
We
got
a
little
bit
more
specific
in
our
more
recent
study
session
with
you
all
back
in
August,
and
the
direction
that
was
given
from
Council
a
few
months
ago
was
to
was
support
for
updating
our
current
standards
for
residential
development
in
industrial
districts.
Specifically,
if
you
remember,
we
talked
about
the
contiguity
requirement,
getting
rid
of
the
continuity
requirement
and
instead
looking
to
sub
community
plan
and
comprehensive
plan
guidance
on
where
residential
would
be
appropriate.
AM
Council
at
that
time
did
give
the
direction
that
they
didn't
think
or
you
all
didn't,
think
it
was
appropriate
for
all
industrial
areas
or
sites
to
accommodate
residential
and
that
you'd
like
to
see
guard
rails
put
in
place
to
protect
industrial
uses
in
particular
in
is
zones
and
then
related
to
office
uses.
The
council
gave
direction
that
there
was
support
to
combine
our
professional
office
and
Technical
office
designations,
but
the
that
there
still
needed
to
be
some
restrictions
on
office
in
order
to
avoid
displacing
industrial
uses
and
accelerating
speculative
office.
AM
Development
I
did
want
to
go
through
the
public
input,
because
this
has
been
kind
of
a
long-standing
project,
nearly
five
years
in
the
making.
So
we've
heard
things
back
in
2019
and
2020
that
continue
to
inform
the
discussion.
We
had
a
questionnaire.
We
also
had
this
in
pre-coveted
times
we
even
had
open
houses
and
booths,
and
things
like
that
where
we
discussed
this
project,
but
also
virtual
questionnaires
during
the
the
height
of
the
pandemic.
AM
We
also
had
a
planning
board
subcommittee
that
their
detailed
work
continues
to
inform
the
changes
in
this
use
table
project.
They
met
over
20
times.
The
input
continues
to
guide
the
project.
They
developed
areas
of
consideration
for
this
project
to
include,
and
they
really
did
the
the
Deep
work
of
line
by
line
going
through
the
use
table
and
all
of
the
columns
to
analyze
what
changes
could
be
made
to
better
align
the
use
table
with
the
comprehensive
plan
policies.
AM
Over
the
last
year
we've
been
doing
additional
public
engagement
as
the
project
has
kind
of
become
more
narrowed.
In
spoke
in
scope,
specific
in
scope.
We
actually
decided
to
kind
of
re-envision
that
that
planning
board
subcommittee
into
two
different
groups,
so
we're
meeting
with
the
planning
board
a
planning
board
liaison
group.
So
it's
two
members
of
the
planning
board
where
we
can
do
that
deep
dive
and
we've
met
with
them.
AM
This
Summer
and
also
in
October,
but
because
of
the
limitations
of
the
planning
board
subcommittee,
it
was
fairly
formal
and
the
public
couldn't
directly
interact.
We
wanted
a
forum
where
there
was
much
more
opportunity
for
robust
conversation
from
people
with
diverse
perspectives,
so
we
we
put
together
this
use,
table
and
standards
public
working
group.
So
that's
a
group
of
about
20
different
stakeholders,
residents,
business
owners,
the
Chamber
of
Commerce,
where
we
could
discuss
these
changes
for
use
tables
both
from
the
outset
and
then
also
as
we
would
get
more
detail
into
drafting
ordinances.
AM
So
we
met
with
them
in
August
and
October
of
this
year.
Specifically
talking
about
these
proposed
changes
for
the
industrial
areas,
we
also
had
a
virtual
questionnaire
on
be
heard.
Boulder
that
was
in
place
from
late
August
through
mid-september.
I'll
talk
a
bit
about
that
more
in
later,
slides,
we've
had
regular
updates
to
over
200
industrial
business
owners
and
other
stakeholders
where
we've
been
keeping
them
apprised
of
the
opportunities
for
public
input
and
the
process.
AM
For
adoption
of
this
ordinance,
we
have
our
planning
and
development
services
newsletter
that
goes
out
to
over
5000
people,
which
has
had
monthly
updates.
The
draft
ordinance
was
released
on
October
12th
because
it
goes
to
planning
board
before
it
comes
to
you
all.
So
at
that
point,
before
the
planning
board
public
hearing,
then
there
was
an
updated
draft
that
incorporated
the
planning
boards.
Minor
changes
related
only
to
live
work
that
was
available
on
November
25th.
AM
We've
also
had
this
promoted
on
social
media,
the
opportunity
used
for
public
hearings
and
things
like
that,
and
then
we,
as
I
mentioned,
we
have
the
public
hearing
for
planning
board
on
October
18th,
so
I
mentioned
I
wanted
to
touch
a
little
bit
on
the
industrial
areas,
questionnaire
that
the
be
heard
Boulder
questionnaire
that
we
had
in
September.
We
had
91
responses
because
we
met
for
the
study
session
before
this
questionnaire
had
been
released.
That's
why
I
want
to
do
just
a
quick
summary,
there's
a
much
more
detailed
summary
in
your
packet.
AM
If
you
want
to
take
a
look
at
that,
I
won't
go
through
all
the
ways
we
promoted
it,
but
very
similar
to
what
I
said
on
the
last
slide.
AM
So
we
asked
people
it's
a
pretty
simple
questionnaire.
We
ask
people,
how
important
is
it
to
re
to
you
to
retain
space
for
industrial
uses
in
Boulder,
and
it
was
pretty
important.
It
was
a
very
important
topic
to
respond
in
so
about
three
quarters
of
people
that
responded
to
the
questionnaire
said
it
was
either
important
or
very
important.
AM
Then
we
followed
up
with
another
question,
a
question
specifically
about
housing
and
we
asked
people
if
they
agreed
with
the
following
statement
that
housing
should
be
allowed
in
industrial
areas.
The
responses
to
this
was
much
more
mixed.
You
can
see.
There's
about
a
little
over
half
of
people
said
that
they
would
support
or
strongly
or
they
agree
or
strongly
agree,
and
then
about
35
percent
said
that
they
are
about
about
a
third
said
that
they
disagreed
or
strongly
disagreed.
So
much
more
mixed
results.
AM
There
we
dug
in
a
little
bit
more
about
housing
and
asked
that
if
housing
was
allowed
in
industrial
areas,
what
would
be
the
best
way
for
the
city
to
determine
what
areas
or
sites
are
appropriate
for
that
and
people
said
most
people
said
close
to
supporting
uses
proximity
to
Transit
case-by-case
basis.
We
got
a
lot
of
other
really
great
additional
feedback
in
that
kind
of
other
ideas,
section
where
people
either
supported
supported
or
explained
their
disagreement
for
housing
being
allowed
in
industrial
areas
related
to
businesses
in
the
industrial
areas.
AM
AM
That
said,
they
thought
it
was
appropriate,
but
I
think
it's
also
helpful
to
kind
of
look
at
it
in
these
different
colored
boxes,
because
you
can
see
that
the
the
businesses
that
are
in
the
green
boxed
over
three
quarters
of
people
said
they
thought
that
that
was
appropriate
in
that
middle.
At
least
half
of
people
said
that
they
thought
those
were
appropriate
in
their
opinion
in
industrial
areas,
and
then
the
gray
box
is
kind
of
the
lowest,
but
still
the
lowest
was
more
than
a
third.
AM
So
this
was
just
really
interesting
and
informative
in
what
the
the
draft
ordinance
proposes.
So
you
can
see
in
the
green
box
the
the
most
highly
appropriate
from
the
respondents
includes
research
and
development
artist,
workshops
manufacturing,
biotech
Labs
things
like
that.
Then,
in
that
blue
box,
that
kind
of
midpoint,
retail
stores,
physical
therapists,
graphic
design
firms,
restaurants
and
then
the
kind
of
lower
on
the
lower
end
are
things
like
Law,
Offices,
hair,
salons
and
schools.
AM
I
mentioned
the
public
working
group
that
we've
been
meeting
with
and
I
did
want
to
just
highlight
some
of
the
discussions
that
we
had
once
they
reviewed
the
draft
ordinance
in
October.
The
discussion
was
really
primarily
focused
on
residential
uses,
so
some
members
of
the
working
group
expressed
concerns
about
the
proposal
to
prohibit
residential
in
the
is
and
IM
zoning
districts.
AM
Some
even
had
concerns
about
requiring
a
use
review
requirement
in
IG
so
saying
that
it
should
just
be
allowed
by
right,
but
then
we
also
had
the
other
side
of
several
of
the
working
group
members
also
supported
prohibiting
residential
uses
in
is
and
IM
and
requiring
use
review
in
IG,
so
kind
of
mixed
opinions
there
as
well
related
to
office.
We
heard
some
concerns
about
the
proposal
to
limit
offices
on
the
ground
floor
of
buildings,
and
then
we
had
some
good
discussions
about
the
best
way
to
define
art
and
craft
Studios.
AM
We've
received
public
additional
public
feedback
on
the
ordinance
you
all
either
receive
those
directly
or
through
hotline
before
today.
There
were
also
public
comments
that
were
attached
to
the
memo
if
we
got
those
before
the
point
that
that
was
published,
I
won't
go
through
these
Point
by
point,
but
just
generally,
I
would
say
that
residential
and
office
are
the
main
topics
that
people
either
support
or
have
concerns
about
and
and
I
did
just
want
to
highlight.
AM
We
got
letters
from
the
Chamber
of
Commerce
as
well
as
Holland
and
heart,
representing
some
Property
Owners
with
concerns
about
residential
and
office
and
then
finally
related
to
public
input.
On
October
8th,
the
planning
board
reviewed
the
proposed
ordinance.
They
unanimously
passed
their
recommendation
for
Council
to
adopt
the
ordinance.
They
did
request
some
minor
changes
to
the
definition
of
live
work
units
and
where
those
were
a
lot,
how
those
were
allowed
and
then
also
just
some
minor
things
about
which
policies
are
referenced
in
the
memo.
AM
So
that's
the
public
input
that
we've
heard
so
far.
Look
forward
to
hearing
more
tonight
in
the
public
hearing
portion
I
wanted
to
frame
the
proposed
ordinance
with
a
little
bit
of
policy
background.
We
did
go
into
this
a
bit
during
the
study
session,
but
just
as
a
reminder,
I
wanted
to
highlight
a
few
things.
AM
We
did
some
additional
analysis
to
try
to
understand
what
businesses
are
currently
located
are
in
industrial
districts,
and
it
actually
was
very
interesting.
There's
a
lot
more
data
attached
to
your
memo.
If
you
want
to
dive
in
deeper,
but
I
just
wanted
to
highlight
the
kind
of
three
top.
AM
These
are
the
North
American
industry
classification
system
codes,
so
groupings
for
types
of
businesses,
but
so
these
are
the
top
three
professional
scientific
and
Technical
Services
manufacturing
and
wholesale
trade.
So
you
can
see
some
examples
of
those
types
of
businesses,
our
research
and
development,
computer
systems,
design
things
like
that
in
that
first
category
in
manufacturing,
there's
pharmaceutical
manufacturing,
navigational,
manufacturing
and
beverage
manufacturing
and
yes,
beverage
manufacturing
does
include
beer
and
then
for
wholesale
trade.
That's
things
like
bicycles,
climbing
gear
things
like
that.
AM
So
this
was
just
a
way
for
us
to
understand
what
types
of
businesses
are
currently
located
in
the
industrial
districts
and
then
in
regards
to
the
policy.
So,
as
I
mentioned,
the
one
of
the
main
goals
of
this
project
is
to
implement
the
comprehensive
plan
and
make
sure
that
it
is
aligned
with
what
our
use
table
is
allowing
so
when
we
were
looking
at
that,
we
looked
really
specifically
at
this
policy
2.21
related
to
light
industrial
areas
and
especially
these
three
guiding
principles
in
that
green
box.
AM
So
from
the
outset
of
undertaking
this
module
to
work,
we
were
looking
at
where
the
gaps
might
be,
in
addition
to
everything
we
had
heard
through
public
input
and
as
well
as
the
public
planning
board
subcommittee
and
everything
we'd
heard
up
to
this
point.
So
when
we're
looking
specifically
at
those
those
principles,
just
some
initial
ideas
for
the
gaps
were
that
in
regards
to
preserving
established
businesses
and
the
opportunity
for
additional
businesses,
we
thought
that
the
land
use
table
could
better
support,
small-scale
manufacturing,
arts
and
creative
uses.
AM
We
noticed
that
there
are
some
desired
uses
that
have
maybe
an
overly
complex
review
process
and
then
also
the
is
the
Industrial
Service
and
I.
Am
industrial
manufacturing
districts
currently
allow
residential
use
where
the
intent
for
them
is
really
probably
more
for
service
and
Manufacturing,
and
then
for
the
encouraging
housing,
infill
and
appropriate
places.
As
we
talked
about
in
the
study
session,
residential
is
only
allowed
with
a
use
review
and
it's
only
in
contiguous
locations.
AM
So
that
does
limit
the
parcels
that
are
available
and
it
kind
of
creates
a
scatter
shot
of
which
Parcels.
It's
not
a
super
logical
approach
for
that
for
determining
eligibility
and
then
also
again,
that
the
is
and
IM
districts
currently
allow
residential
use,
where
perhaps
that
might
be
a
less
appropriate
zoning
District.
AM
Finally
offering
a
mix
of
uses.
This
is
a
little
more
direct,
so
retail
is
currently
prohibited
in
all
industrial
districts.
Restaurants
are
not
permitted
on
major
streets.
They
require
conditional
use
process.
Similarly,
personal
services
are
also
prohibited,
so
those
are
things
like
hair,
salons
and
bakeries,
and
then
mixed-use
buildings
have
a
higher
level
of
review
required
than
if
it
was
just
residential.
So
we
saw
those
as
some
pretty
clear
gaps
to
providing
a
mix
of
uses
in
industrial
districts.
AM
So
thinking
of
all
of
that
analysis
that
went
into
this
as
well
as
the
public
input
we
now
have,
these
proposed
changes
in
ordinance,
8556.,
we've
written
into
the
ordinance
that
this
these
changes
would
have
an
effective
date
of
March
15th.
That's
a
bit
longer
timeline
than
we
typically
have
for
an
ordinance
to
go
into
effect,
but
we
thought
there
needed
to
be
a
little
bit
more
transition
time
for
projects
that
are
in
process
right
now.
So
that's
the
reasoning
for
that
and
I'm
going
to
go
through.
These
proposed
changes.
AM
It's
going
to
align
pretty
closely
with
the
summary
handout
that
was
provided
in
your
packet,
but
starting
out
with
kind
of
the
bigger
topics
and
the
topics
that
have
been
brought
up
through
a
lot
of
the
public
comment.
So
I'm
going
to
start
and
go
through
one
by
one,
so
we'll
start
with
residential.
Just
a
reminder
going
back
to
that
slide
with
that
green
box,
that
policy
2.21
from
the
comprehensive
plan
related
to
light
industrial.
It
says
that
housing
should
occur
in
a
logical
pattern
in
proximity
to
existing
and
planned
amenities.
AM
AM
So,
in
the
proposed
ordinance
we
have
proposed
prohibiting
residential
uses
in
the
is
and
IM
districts.
There
is
an
exception
that
live
work.
Units
would
be
allowed
as
a
conditional
use,
but
all
other
residential
uses
would
be
prohibited
and
then
in
the
IG
District
we
would
continue
continue
to
require
a
use
review
for
residential
uses,
but
would
update
the
standard.
AM
So
these
are
very
directly
in
line
with
the
direction
that
was
given
in
the
August
study
session,
so
removing
that
continuity
requirement
that
we
talked
about
in
August
and
instead
using
the
land
use
guidance
from
those
adopted,
subcommunity
or
area
plans
to
identify
where
the
appropriate
locations
are
for
residential
use,
while
also
removing
some
of
the
standards
that
exist.
Currently.
So
there's
a
minimum
lot
size
of
two
acres
and
there's
some
unique
form
standards
that
overly
complicate
the
residential
development.
AM
I
wanted
to
show
just
a
little
bit
of
how
this
would
work
based
on
the
area,
plans
and
sub-community
plans
that
we
have
adopted,
starting
with
the
most
recent,
the
East
Boulder
sub-community
plan.
So
in
the
areas
where
the
land
use
plan,
which
each
sub-community
plan
has
identifies
a
land
use
that
says
that
it's
appropriate
for
residential
any
parcel,
that's
zoned,
IG
within
those
areas,
would
be
eligible
for
residential
development,
so
I've
highlighted
those
in
kind
of
the
black
dashed
areas.
AM
Similarly,
Transit
Village
here's
the
land
use
plan
from
there,
so
an
example
there's
the
office
industrial
kind
of
at
that
northeast
corner.
It
says
specifically
non-residential
so
Parcels
within
that
would
not
be
eligible
for
residential,
but
these
areas
that
have
mixed
use,
industrial
or
high
density
residential
would
be
considered
appropriate
and
therefore
eligible
for
residential
development.
AM
So
those
are
all
the
slides
related
to
residential
I
will
move
next
into
office.
So
the
proposed
changes
for
office
really
come
out
of
the
kind
of
code:
simplification
intent
of
this
project,
as
well
as
implementing
the
part
of
that
com.
The
comprehensive
plan
policy
that
says
to
preserve
industrial
land
for
industrial
uses.
AM
So
this
proposal
is
to
establish
a
new
strategy
that
can
simplify
that,
but
also
prevent
the
proliferation
of
offices
in
industrial
districts.
Since
that
was
an
issue
that
Council
had
raised
and
also
planning
board
brought
up
as
well,
since
the
change
in
combining
them
would
make
it
more
permissive
for
professional
offices
which
are
currently
prohibited
in
industrial
districts.
AM
So
the
proposal
is
to
limit
the
office
size
to
5000
square
feet
in
is,
and
IMS
that's.
Actually,
the
current
requirement
for
technical
offices
in
the
is
District
so
expanding
that
to
IMS
and
then
in
the
IG
and
IM
districts.
We're
proposing
to
limit
offices
and
I
did
want
to
clarify
those
are
offices
that
are
as
a
principal
use,
so
not
an
office,
that's
accessory
or
part
of
a
research
and
development
use
or
industrial
use,
but
one
that
is
purely
office
use.
AM
So
offices
would
be
limited
to
only
above
the
ground
floor
and
only
with
a
combined
floor
area,
maximum
of
50
000
square
feet
on
a
lot
acknowledging
that
there
are
many
offices
in
the
industrial
districts.
We
did
include
part
of
the
ordinance
that
has
flexibility
for
existing
office
space
that
would
become
non-conforming,
and
this
is
a
similar
standard
that
we
have
actually
in
our
business
districts
already
right
now.
AM
Just
some
explanation
about
where
the
those
two
ground
floor
and
the
maximum
came
from
the
East
Boulder
subcommunity
plan
identifies
many
Place
types
where
office
is
appropriate
above
the
ground
floor,
so
that
was
somewhere
where
that
came
from,
and
then
the
combined
size
limit.
AM
So
we
think
that
the
result
with
these
changes
to
office
would
simplify
a
part
of
the
code
that
is
difficult
to
administer,
while
still
limiting
the
amount
of
any
type
of
office
allowed
in
industrial
districts
and
keeping
flexibility
for
existing
offices.
Brad
already
mentioned
that
there
we
do
think
there
are
opportunities
to
further
simplify
that
we
can
discuss
as
well
related
to
research
and
development,
because
it
is
another
common
use
in
our
industrial
districts.
But,
interestingly,
was
not
a
defined
use
in
our
land.
AM
Use
table,
we
recommend
updating
a
current
medical
laboratory
definition
to
include
more
types
of
r
d,
so
it's
not
just
specific
about
medical
and
that
but
use
those
same
the
same
regulations
that
we
have
for
those
right
now,
so
allowing
those
in
the
same
districts
and
limiting
them
in
size
in
is
and
IMS
instead
of
requiring
a
used
review.
This
is
because
there
is
significant,
comprehensive
plan
policy
support
for
research
and
development
uses.
It's
it's
actually
part
of
the
stated
purpose
of
industrial
districts.
AM
It
just
was
never
identified
as
a
line
in
the
use
table,
so
the
proposed
definition
for
research
and
development
specifically
incorporates
the
offices
that
would
be
part
of
those
research
and
development
uses,
as
well
as
warehousing
and
laboratory
space.
Some
examples
of
r
d
could
include
industrial
biotech
Pharmaceuticals,
including
that
medical
and
medical
and
dental,
which
is
the
current
definition
as
well
as
computer
or
electronics,
and
they
would
have
to
be
engaging
in
product
or
process
design.
Prototyping
things
like
that
to
be
research
and
development.
AM
So
I'll
go
a
little
bit
more
quickly
through
these,
so
retail
uses
and
personal
services
I
mentioned
that
those
are
currently
prohibited
and
we're
really
trying
to
encourage
a
mix
of
uses
in
these
areas.
So
we're
recommending
allowing
these
at
a
limited
scale,
so
they
would
have
a
maximum
size
of
2000
square
feet.
They'd
have
to
be
in
a
building
with
other
uses
so
because
the
intent
is
that
they're
serving
other
existing
uses
in
the
area.
AM
Similarly,
the
restaurants
would
also
be
required
to
be
in
a
building,
so
it's
not
just
kind
of
a
standalone
restaurant,
but
it
would
be
serving
those
other
office
users
or
residential
use
nearby
for
restaurants.
We're
also
recommending
that
they
be
allowed
by
right
instead
of
needing
a
conditional
use.
I
mentioned
there's
complex
standards
with
restaurants,
so
simplifying
those
but
still
keeping
some
hours
of
operation
and
then
giving
an
option
for
use
review.
AM
Otherwise,
so
some
flexibility,
if
they
can't
quite
meet
the
standards,
they
would
be
able
to
go
through
that
process
live
work
units,
that's
a
current
use
in
our
code,
but
it
was
fairly
restrictively
defined.
So
the
rec,
the
recommendation
is
to
update
the
definition
to
include
commercial
uses
as
the
work
function
instead
of
just
industrial
uses
and
then
allow
them
in
most
of
our
mixed-use
downtown
business
and
high
density
residential
districts
in
the
industrial
districts.
The
recommendation
is
to
make
those
conditional
uses.
AM
This
was
the
the
main
point
that
I
mentioned
that
planning
board
added
to
their
recommendation,
so
they
would
be
require
a
conditional
use
in
industrial
districts
and
they
would
have
to
meet
this
requirement
of
50
of
the
building
would
have
to
be
devoted
for
non-residential
floor
area
related
to
private
schools.
We're
recommending
allowing
private
schools
in
igim
and
IMS
with
a
use
review
and
also
allowing
private
colleges
in
IMS
so
kind
of
aligning
the
way
that
schools
are
allowed
in
the
industrial
districts,
indoor
athletic
facilities.
Those
are
gyms.
AM
So
the
only
substantive
change
in
doing
that
consolidation
is
that
the
is
would
have
a
district
limit
or
a
size
limit
of
15
000
square
feet
without
a
used
review,
but
really
that
was
intended
to
simplify
a
overly
complex
part
of
the
code.
AM
Finally,
we
have
updated
definitions
and
names,
so
the
art
or
craft
studio
we've
recommended
renaming
Art,
Studio
or
Workshop.
That
is
intended
to
reflect
what
that
use
is
really
supposed
to
be
like
crafts,
people
and
things
like
that,
but
the
name
didn't
really
show
that
that's
what
it
was
so
I'm
just
trying
to
better
reflect
what
that's
intended
to
do.
AM
Similarly,
just
updating
and
generalizing
to
Media
production
for
that
other,
the
other
facilities
and
then
we're
recommending
changing,
manufacturing
use
and
Manufacturing
use
with
potential
off-site
impacts
to
light
manufacturing
and
general
Manufacturing,
and
then
remove
removing
a
few
uses
or
definitions.
We
have
a
use
called
an
industrial
service
center,
which
we've
only
had
one
property
ever
develop
under
that
use
type
and
the
intent
there
is
really
to
allow
a
mix
of
uses
within
a
building.
So
the
other
changes
that
we're
we're
proposing
would
actually
allow
those
uses.
AM
So
we
would
no
longer
need
that
use
classification
as
well
as
removing
some
unused
definitions.
Some
other
cleanup
things
so
I
made
it
through
each
step.
There
are
some
additional
changes,
there's
an
annotated
version
of
the
proposed
ordinance.
If
you
had
any
other
questions,
but
those
are
kind
of
the
the
main
changes
to
the
specific
business
types
and
housing
types
I
do
have
this
slide.
AM
Just
with
like
a
summary
of
all
of
the
topics
that
I've
gone
over,
I
will
just
highlight
that
the
residential
uses
and
offices
are
the
topics
that
have
come
up
most
in
the
public
comment,
as
you've
probably
seen,
and
so
the
ones
that
we
would
probably
recommend
for
additional
discussion
and
then
I
can
keep
this
up.
Just
as
a
reminder,
if
that's
helpful
but
I've
gotten
to
the
end
of
my
presentation
and
I'm
happy
to
take
any
clarifying
questions.
F
Is
comprehensive
and
well
explained
appreciate
that
and
boy
a
huge
amount
of
work
has
gone
into
this
over
many
years
for
many
people
and
just
extremely
appreciative
for
all
of
that.
So
questions
for
staff
and
then
we'll
go
to
the
public
hearing.
I
got
Tara.
Z
AM
So,
as
I
mentioned,
the
East
Boulder
sub
community
plan
does
identify
some
areas
where
it's
appropriate
to
only
have
office
above
the
ground
floor,
and
so
it's
really
coming
out
of
that
primarily,
but
also
the
assurance
that
if
there
is
space
devoted
for
industrial
use,
at
least
on
the
ground
floor,
then
we
wouldn't
be
losing
those
industrial
uses
on
those
properties.
So
that's
the
that's.
The
reasoning
behind
the
ground
floor
requirement.
AM
Yeah
I
think
I
think
it
was
council
member
folkerts
who
brought
it
up
as
an
example.
So
we
looked
into
that
during
the
after
the
discussion.
Yeah.
AM
Think
the
intent
and
it's
it's
similar
to
the
intent
of
some
of
the
more
complex
standards
for
restaurants
right
now
is
that
a
restaurant
is
really
not
intended
to
be
like
a
destination
in
the
industrial
districts
for
outside
of
the
industrial
districts.
It's
meant
to
serve
the
uses
that
are
within
those
industrial
districts,
so
in
being
Incorporated
within
those
buildings
with
other
uses
that
better
serves
the
uses,
because
you're
nearby
other,
like
industrial
or
office,
uses.
B
What
is
the
thinking
behind
the
processing
of
raw
materials
as
a
differentiator
between
light
and
general
manufacturing?
And
this
is
something
I've
heard
from
some
of
the
people
in
Flatiron
Park?
They
use
raw
materials
but
they're.
You
know,
they're,
not
heavy
manufacturing
operations,
they're,
basically
Life
Sciences
research.
AM
Yeah
I
think
so
that's
kind
of
a
common
practice
in
like
differentiating
between
light
manufacturing
and
heavy
or
heavier
manufacturing.
What
we're
calling
General
manufacturing
to
focus
on
those
bad
use
of
raw
materials,
I
think
that
we
were
trying
to
create
some
more
specificity
on
what
where
that
line
is
between
light
and
general
to
better
support
those
light
manufacturing
uses
because
General
manufacturing
is
very
restricted
in
our
city,
so
it's
prohibited
in
every
District,
except
ignim,
where
it
needs
a
use,
review
and
So.
AM
Currently
we
have
manufacturing
use
and
Manufacturing
use
for
potential
for
off-site
impact,
which
is
pretty
ambiguous,
the
potential
for
off-site
impact,
and
then
you
have
to
do
a
use
review
to
determine
what
those
impacts
might
be.
So
we
were
trying
to
give
an
example
of
raw
material,
so
I
think
I
put
in
the
hotline
post
what
we
were
thinking
like
Tire
manufacturing,
leather
tanning
things
like
that.
That
would
inherently
have
a
greater
impact.
AM
F
You,
the
answer
that
you
provided
was,
was
really
helpful,
and
so
it's
like
Tire
manufacturing
clearly
you
know,
goes
in
that
General,
but
one
thing
I
was
wondering
about
is:
would
there
be
people
who
did
this
at
a
very
low
level,
like
occasionally
combined
raw
materials,
to
into
dough
to
bake
cookies
that
might
be
caught
up
in
this?
Is
there
like
a
minimum
threshold,
the
where
you'd
have
to
meet.
AM
We
haven't
worked
that
there's
not
a
minimum
threshold,
it
does
say
predominantly
uses
raw
materials
that
food
manufacturing
is
not
the
intent
of.
We
would
not
intend
that
food
manufacturing
would
fall
into
General
manufacturing
that
would
be
like
manufacturing,
but.
AM
I
think
the
the
term
raw
materials
would
be
like
directly
from
the
Earth,
like
the
I.
Don't
know
how
time
like
gas
to
make
tires
things
like
that
leather
tanning
directly
from
an
animal,
something
like
that,
if
that
makes
sense,
okay,.
B
Thanks
my
my
to
follow
that
up
my
my
question
is
that
it's
not
clear
to
me
that
the
differentiator
that
you're
proposing
won't
snare
some
some
operations
that
cannot
really
be
considered
manufacturing
or
heavy
manufacturing
and
again
I'm.
Looking
at
the
a
a
drug
company
trying
to
develop
a
vaccine.
How
are
they
going
to
be
specifically
assured
that
they're
not
part
of
the
heavy
manufacturing
restrictions?
AM
And
that
was
something
that
we
saw
as
kind
of
a
best
practice
common
practice
around
other
communities
in
differentiating
between
light
and
general
manufacturing.
So
if
there
are
other
ways
that
we
can
support,
drawing
a
clearer
line
between
the
two,
that
is
the
intent
so
I'm.
E
It
kind
of
comes
down
to
the
I
I'm
wondering
if
the
question
is
the
differentiator
rather
than
the
input
the
output
with
regards
to
raw
materials
and
I
sort
of
think
of.
Could
the
output
meaning
be
like?
Are
we
dealing
with
harmful
emission?
Are
we
dealing
with
byproducts
that
are
harmful
versus
the
input
of
earth?
Materials
may
not
necessarily
be
harmful
in
any
way
like
again
to
use
Aaron's
analogy
you're
using
wheat,
which
comes
from
the
earth
I.E
flower,
so
they
could
get
caught
in,
but
the
output
is
is
of
harmless,
it's
steam.
E
So
so
my
point
is
I
wonder
if
we
don't
focus
on
the
raw
input,
but
what
the
output
is
and
what
that
be.
A
differentiator
of
what
kind
of
raw
material
really
does
transition
to
a
different
threshold
versus
what
what
isn't
and
I'm
wondering?
If
that
helps
us
find
a
different
differentiator,
so
things
that
we
don't
want
to
get
caught
up
won't
because
their
outputs
are
intrinsically
harmless
or
or
benign,
and
so
I'm
just
I'm.
Just
thinking
of
what
could
be
a
different
temperature.
So
I
just
want
to
know.
AM
Yeah
I
think
that
could
definitely
be
something
that
works,
that
current
def
or
the
proposal
specifies
that
light
manufacturing
results
in
a
finished
product.
So
maybe
that's
something
to
build
off
of
there
related
to
the
output
yeah.
B
Just
two
other
quick
questions:
on
page
nine
of
the
memo
of
the
three
characteristics
that
define
Industrial,
General
and
Industrial
Manufacturing,
two
of
them
are
identical
and
and
so
I'm
I'm
kind
of
questioning.
Why
we
have
two
separate
categories
when
they're
only
differentiated
in
a
very
small
way.
B
AO
AM
Yeah
and
if
I
yeah,
if
I
could
just
add
that
part
of
the
memo
is
actually
talking
about
the
North
American
industry
classification
system.
So
it's
saying
which
businesses
are
located
in
those
districts.
So
I
was
just
trying
to
highlight
that
there
are
what
which
businesses
are
most
common
in
which
district.
B
J
K
J
Having
depends
keeping
my
train
of
thought
in
terms
of
when
you
have
a
non-conforming
office
use.
What
kind
of
flexibility
does
the
city
allow.
AM
Sure,
thanks
for
the
opportunity
to
clarify
that,
so
in
a
typical
non-conforming
use
anytime,
you
swap
out
even
a
tenant,
you
would
have
to
go
through
a
change
of
non-conforming
use
review
with
the
city.
The
flexibility
that
we've
worked
into
this
this
ordinance
is
that
changing
minor
things
like
that,
like
changing
out
tenants
or
owners,
would
not
have
to
go
through
that
non-conforming
use
review.
They
would
still
be
considered
a
non-conforming
use,
but
doing
those
minor
changes
within
the
existing
floor
area
where
there
was
office,
wouldn't
have
to
go
through
that
use
review.
AM
J
What,
if
it
wasn't
an
expansion,
but
a
modification
to
the
space
would
like
for
something
that
they
were
required
to
pull
a
permit
for?
Would
they
be
able
to
get
that
permit?
They.
B
Won't
I
want
to
call
it.
We
Lauren's
comment,
a
question:
what
about
a
company
that
leases
a
building
and
its
uses
change,
or
your
the
Holland
and
heart
letter
was
concerned?
With
this,
you
manufacture
a
a
vaccine
and
you've
you've
developed
it.
You
then
do
manufacturing
elsewhere
and
you
bring
in
a
bunch
of
marketing
people
in
that
space,
and
then
you
later
bring
in
a
bunch
of
attorneys
to
deal
with
patent
issues.
B
I
mean
what
was
impressed
upon
me
was
that
these
are
fluid
situations
and
that
landlords
need
some
assurance
that
they're
not
suddenly
going
to
be
in
violation
of
of
city
ordinances
as
they
handle
the
space
with
that
kind
of
fluidity.
Where,
where
you
know
it's
a
a
chain
of
events-
and
maybe
it
starts
with
one
type
of
use-
evolves
to
another,
and
there's
a
lot
of
concern
about
that.
AM
Understood
and
yeah
that
has
been
a
a
common
theme
of
several
of
the
public
comments
and
I
think
that
it
has
been
Illuminating
the
examples
that
they've
given
and
the
complexity
of
commercial
Leasing,
and
so
that's
why
we
did
want
to
highlight
that
this
is
something
we
want
to
discuss
further
and
that
potentially
what's
proposed
tonight
might
be.
AM
There
might
be
simple,
simpler,
Solutions
than
what's
proposed
in
the
ordinance.
Thank
you.
J
No
I'm,
okay
for
the
moment.
Thank
you
all.
F
Right
well
now,
I
think
we
can
move
to
the
public
hearing.
Then
all
right
we've
got
three
people
signed
up
in
person.
Six
people
signed
up
virtually
everyone
will
have
three
minutes
to
speak
and
we
are
going
to
start
with
our
former
planning
board,
chair,
Dave
enzyme
and
then
have
Stephen
Eckert
and
Jonathan
singer.
AP
Well,
hello,
good
evening,
members
of
city,
council
and
City
staff-
it's
exciting
to
be
here,
I'm,
Dave,
Ensign
and
for
like
Aaron,
said
former
planning
board
member
and
resident
of
Boulder,
and
this
is
the
first
time
addressing
you
since
the
completion
of
my
five-year
term
and
I'm
excited
to
be
here
to
talk
to
you
about
ordinance
8556
as
Lisa
covered
really
well.
There
are
the
history
of
this
goes
back
to
2018,
and
actually,
when
Carl
and
I
are
the
two
people
in
the
room
who
actually
go
way
back
to
the
beginning.
AP
The
insights
from
a
group
of
detail-oriented,
I
might
even
say,
geeky
community
members
come
in
through
use
tables
and
standards
is
not
only
resulted
in
the
module
one
functional
fixes
that
were
adopted,
but
also
informed
other
parallel
initiatives
that
impact
use
standards
such
as
addressing
opportunity
zones
grappling
with
ground
floor
uses
in
neighborhood,
centers
and,
of
course,
developing
the
East
Boulder
sub
community
plan.
AP
This
ordinance
that
addresses
module
2
reflects
the
achievement
of
an
important
milestone
in
the
project.
Hopefully,
you've
had
a
chance
to
look
at
the
email
comments
I
sent
to
Council
on
December
5th.
I.
Won't
repeat
all
those
comments,
but
we'll
try
to
highlight
tweaks
that
you
might
want
to
consider
to
the
ordinance
regarding
allowing
residential
in
industrial
zones.
AP
Happily
I
found
out
today,
because
somehow
I
got
removed
from
hotline,
but
there
was
a
message
from
mayor
Brockett
sent
out
on
Tuesday,
prompting
Lisa
to
offer
up
some
options
that
directly
address
the
concerns.
I
outlined
in
my
email,
I
believe
the
options
that
Lisa
provided
satisfy
the
tweaks
I
would
recommend
so
I'll
just
quickly
cover
them.
The
first
option
is
to
preserve
the
current
allowances
for
residential
in
is
zones.
AP
This
makes
sense
to
me
since
I.
Don't
really
recall
the
use
table
sub
community
community
identifying
a
pressing
need
to
affect
the
current
allowances,
NIS
zoning
areas
that
are
covered
by
an
existing
sub-community
plan.
It
makes
sense
for
guidance
from
the
plan
to
drive
the
decision
on
whether
residential
is
appropriate.
So,
for
example,
the
East
Boulder
subcommunity
plan
guidelines
would
apply
to
is
sellings
within
its
boundaries.
AP
To
largely
preserve
the
youth
standards
for
both
IG
and
IM
zones
that
are
located
outside
of
the
subcommunity
plan
boundaries
and
to
apply
the
subcutane
plan
guidelines
with
when
those
zones
are
within
the
boundaries
of
a
plan,
I
think
the
option.
This
option
is
the
best
way
to
assure
that
we
don't
inadvertently
remove
the.
AD
AP
I
AQ
Stephen
Eckert
and
I
am
down
and
I
I
used
to
be
a
former
member
of
Boulder
housing
Partners,
so
I
just
want
to
say
thank
you
for
this
work
and
we
said
what
you
guys
have
done
for
five
years.
This
is
great.
It
really
is
modernizing
mixed-use
development
that
you
know
Boulder
can
can
do.
In
my
two
hats
of
working
in
Boulder
housing,
Partners
opening
up
housing
in
the
zone
is
going
to
be
a
game.
Changer
I
mean
it's.
AQ
It's
going
to
provide
so
many
more
opportunities
for
for
BHP
and
other
housing
developers
to
provide
housing,
and
what
that
really
envisions
you
know
is
a
place
where
potentially
people
could
live
there,
they
can
walk
out
their
door
walk
to
bring
their
kids
to
an
independent
school.
Not
a
private
school
go
to
the
independent
school
drop,
their
kids
off
go
to
work
at
their
high
tech.
AQ
Prototype
company
go
out
to
lunch
with
colleagues,
go
pick
up
their
kids
from
the
independent
school
and
then
go
back
to
their
housing
all
without
getting
in
their
car,
which
is
you
know,
sort
of
a
big
intent
in
one
of
these.
You
know
in
in
this
process,
so
I'm
very
excited
about
that
I.
Think
it's
going
to
be
really
a
game.
AQ
Changer,
the
other
hat,
I
wear
as
an
architect,
we've
been
doing
a
lot
of
work
for
Independent,
Schools
and
I
want
to
encourage
the
council
to
take
a
look
at
one
of
the
things
in
this
provision,
which
is
requiring
a
use
review
still
within
this
process.
AQ
Currently,
Public
Schools
do
not
have
to
go
through
a
use
review
in
these
zones,
so
I
want
to
know
why
we
would
require
Independent
Schools
to
do
the
same
thing
being
on
a
place
where
we're
sure
where
the
rubber
hits
the
road
in
terms
of
costs
for
these
schools,
it
becomes
a
real
barrier
in
terms
of
purchasing
the
property
having
to
go
through
due
diligence
period,
which
includes
a
used
review,
and
that
adds
a
ton
of
time
that
a
lot
of
these
schools
can't
afford.
AC
AQ
They
gotta
buy
it
and
move
in
quickly.
So
I
encourage
you
to
take
a
look
at
that,
and
perhaps
you
know
we
can
remove
some
of
those
restrictions
and
not
have
a
use
review
and
just
let
the
current
rules
apply
and
and
take
a
look
at
the
definition,
because
a
modern
definition
is
independent
school,
not
private
school.
So
that's
all
I
have
to
say
thank
you.
AR
Thank
you
mayor
and
city
council.
My
name
is
Jonathan
singer.
I
am
the
senior
policy
program
director
with
the
boulder
Chamber
of
Commerce
and
you're
gonna
hear
from
some
other
folks
tonight,
I
know
online,
but
what
I
wanted
to
make
is
is
a
carpentry
reference.
AR
Actually,
when
we
think
about
what
we're
doing
here
today,
building
a
better
community,
we
want
to
measure
twice
and
cut
once
right,
and
so
we've
built
a
great
process
thanks
to
the
work
that
Carl,
Lisa,
Charles
and
Brad
have
done
as
well
as
the
work
that
planning
board
has
put
forth.
But
when
Penn
finally
came
to
paper,
there
were
a
few
outstanding
things
that
you've
heard
about
today.
So
I
want
to
thank
council,
member,
Wallach
and
Weiner
and
mayor
Brockett
for
bringing
up
some
of
those
concerns.
AR
Today,
the
less
or
lessee
concerns
what's
happening
with
definitions
of
raw
materials,
the
exclusion
of
affordable
housing
or
housing
for
from
certain
land
use
designations.
All
of
those
things
can
be
resolved,
probably
not
tonight,
and
so
before
you
take
final
action.
I
want
you
to
measure
twice
on
those
issues.
AR
At
the
same
time,
I
want
to
make
sure
we
don't
lose
the
forest
through
the
trees,
because
staff
has
done
an
exemplary
job
of
committing
to
public
Outreach
and
they've
done
an
even
better
job
over
the
last
week
and
a
half
working
with
industrial
property
owners
and
manufacturers.
Listening
to
those
concerns,
understanding
that
all
those
details
could
not
have
been
pounded
out
in
the
last
week,
so
I
won't
repeat
anything
but
I
do
want
to
bring
up
a
couple
of
other
specific
options
or
specific
items.
AR
AR
So
when
you
think
about
this,
I
don't
want
you
to
be
thinking
just
about
your
major
pharmaceutical
companies,
your
manufacturing,
but
also
our
mom
and
pop
and
larger
non-profits
that
are
looking
to
do
the
right
thing
and
save
money
for
their
donors
and
provide
a
community
service
and
locate
within
an
area
that's
more
affordable.
AR
So,
with
all
those
things
being
said,
I
know
that
you
know
last
time,
I
spoke
about
the
city
budget.
I
said
a
budget
is
a
moral
document.
The
use
table
is
a
table,
and
so,
let's
measure
twice
and
make
sure
that
table
is
on
even
footing
and
we
look
forward
to
working
with
staff
and
coming
together
before
you
take
final
action
to
do
the
right
thing.
The
whole
way
through.
Thank
you
for
your
time
and
I.
Look
forward
to
the
conversation.
F
Thank
you
Jonathan
all
right
now
we're
going
to
go
to
our
virtual
speakers.
I
understand
that
the
third
speaker,
Jennifer
Rhodes,
is
not
present,
but
our
so
our
next
three
speakers
will
be
Lynn,
Siegel,
Kelsey,
Hunter
and
Rosie
fivion,
oh
you're,
in
person.
Well,
in
that
case,
Jennifer
I
would
just
invite
you
to
come
up
right
now
and
finish
out
our
in-person
speakers
and
then
we'll
go
to
the
virtual
ones.
O
On
the
agenda
so
I'm,
actually
speaking
about
8430
again
and
support
of
my
my
parent
group
to.
O
Is
in
favor
of
an
oversight
panel
for
the
police
department,
an
unbiased
panel
under
city,
ordinance,
8430,
the
qualifications
for
serving
on
the
police
oversight
panel
include
one
an
absence
of
any
real
or
perceived
bias,
Prejudice
or
conflict
of
interest
and
two
an
ability
to
build
working
relationships
and
communicate
effectively
with
diverse
groups.
O
We
also
believe
in
the
First
Amendment,
but
free
speech
often
contains
bias,
but
it's
not,
but
it's
not
only.
What
is
on
Twitter
Miss
Sweeney
Moran's
participation
in
the
lawsuit
against
the
city
and
Harold
is
a
blatant
conflict
of
interest
which
would
lead
to
the
inability
to
address
matters
coming
before
BPD.
The
oversight
panel
in
an
unbiased
manner.
Removing
her
name
from
the
suit
recently
is
mere
proof
of
bias
and
does
not
change
overnight
through
her
position
as
bbsd
board.
O
Member
Lisa
has
also
shown
that
she
is
incapable
of
building
relationships
with
groups
that
may
have
different
viewpoints
than
her
own.
Her
behavior
has
often
in
times
in
direct
violation
of
bvsd
code
of
conduct
and
several
complaints
have
been
filed
with
bvsd
legal.
In
response,
a
decision
to
approve
Lisa
Sweeney
Moran's
nomination
would
be
in
direct
contravention
of
city
ordinance
8430
as
well
as
Boulder's
stated,
Community
Values
of
respect,
integrity
and
collaboration.
O
It
would
also
undermine
Community,
Trust
and
confidence
in
the
work
of
the
police
oversight
panel,
as
well
as
the
decisions
of
this
city
council.
Given
the
conflicts
of
interest,
personal
Twitter,
account
statements,
ethics
concerns
and
questionable
treatment
of
other
community
members.
We
urge
the
selection
committee
to
disqualify
her
as
a
candidate
for
the
police
oversight
panel.
F
Thank
you,
Jennifer
I
mean
we
are
currently
on
the
use
tables
public
hearing,
but
your
comments
are
duly
noted,
so
back
to
potentially
use
table,
commentators
we're
going
to
our
remotes
now
and
they
are
first,
three
ones
are
Lynn
Siegel,
Kelsey,
Hunter
and
Rosie
Vivian.
Y
Y
Y
Sorry
I'm
sick
too
Lauren
how
the.
Y
I'm
here
I'm
trying
to
to
provide
being
sick
and
make
my
discussion
too,
and
that
is
that
the
architect
said
that
the
people
that
are
going
to
be
using
this
housing
appear
to
be
upper
end
techies
that
are
going
to
take
their
kids
to
the
independent
school,
which
I
imagine
is
not
a
public
school
that
is
free,
and,
although
it's
not
private,
it's
some
other
entity
that
High
income
earners
would
be
taking
their
kids
to
I've
listened
to
the
east
Boulder
sub
community
issues
of
equity
inclusion
and
the
people
that
are
minorities
do
not
want
to
be
in
industrial
zones.
Y
This
speaks
to
the
fact
that
there
aren't
industrial
Zone
components
in
my
neighborhood
on
the
margin
of
Mapleton
Hill
or
in
most
other
Boulder,
besides
Gun
Barrel,
North,
Boulder
and
East
Boulder
sub-community,
and
the
the
discussion
that
Jonathan
had
about
non-profits
the
illusion
that
non-profits
are
a
good
thing
for
our
economy.
The
illusion
that
lie.
Tech
funds
are
a
good
thing
for
the
economy.
The
illusion
that
opportunity
zones
are
a
good
thing
for
the
comedy
for
the
for
the
economy
are
not
true
that
well
they're
good
for
the
economy.
F
P
P
P
The
proposed
ordinance
has
a
lot
of
Welcome
change
that
will
strengthen
the
industrial
Zone
and
that
we
are
supportive
of
such
as
the
amenities
with
expanded
possibilities.
This
is
a
great
addition
to
any
Innovation
district
and
we
look
forward
to
building
on
this
immediately
also
a
clearer
definition
of
r
d
that
will
give
our
customers
regulatory
certainty
and
the
confidence
to
invest
in
the
future
right
here
in
Flatiron
Park.
P
We
would,
however,
like
to
bring
to
your
attention
a
few
unanticipated
side
effects
with
this
ordinance.
These
are
further
articulated
in
two
letters
dated
November,
30th
and
December.
13Th
that
have
been
sent
to
council
primarily
accessory
use
needs
accessory.
Use
needs
to
be
construed
broadly,
as
it
relates
to
r
d
users,
so
they
can
evolve
and
change
the
way
they
operate
over
time
without
failing
without
falling
out
of
compliance
with
the
zoning
ordinance.
P
Many
of
these
r
d
companies
are
focused
on
confidentiality
and
keeping
their
Trade
Secrets,
and
if
the
ordinance
is
written
in
a
way
that
requires
users
to
disclose
disclose
their
internal
operations,
we
worry
that
users
will
elect
to
go
elsewhere.
We
do
believe
our
goals
here
are
aligned
on
this
issue,
but
wording
of
the
ordinance
needs
further
refinement
to
achieve
the
shared
goal.
P
So
this
restriction
will
create
challenges
that
we
believe
we
do
believe
can
be
alleviated
while
still
achieving
the
city's
goals.
Here,
we
believe
that
further
discussion
is
critical
before
passage
of
these
changes
in
order
to
ensure
that
the
changes
fully
addressed
and
balance
the
goals
of
the
city
and
the
needs
of
the
research
and
development
Community,
we're
very
fortunate
to
be
in
this
industry
and
sit
at
the
cost
of
innovation
here
in
Boulder,
and
we
sincerely
appreciate
the
ongoing
engagement
we
have
had
with
city
council.
Thank
you
very
much
for
the
opportunity
to
speak
tonight.
AN
I'm
sorry,
good
evening,
my
name
is
Rosie
fivian
I
agree
with
David
ensigned
I
know
that
he's
been
involved
working
through
the
details
of
this
project
for
years,
I'm
also
on
the
use
table
working
group,
but
speaking
for
myself
tonight,
I
believe
it's
important
now
and
for
Boulder's
future
to
keep
our
housing
options
open
in
the
industrial
zones,
we're
in
a
housing
crisis
earlier
I
emailed
emailed
you
all
an
article
from
The
sightline
Institute
entitled
our
outdated
housing,
our
outdated
Notions
of
industrial
areas,
hiding
a
giant
Housing
Opportunity.
AN
The
article
highlights
the
taxi
project
in
Denver
as
an
example
as
well
as
projects
in
Seattle
and
Portland.
We
we
could
have
Creative
Solutions
such
as
these.
Here
too
David
has
suggested
simple,
edit
edits
to
accomplish
allowing
housing
without
delaying
the
years-long
effort
by
many
talented
people
and
staff
had
suggested
options
to
allow
housing
to
remain
in
response
to
our
Mayor's
Hotline
questions
that
I
hope
Council
will
consider
adopting
tonight.
Thanks.
AS
Could
you
hear
me
okay?
Yes,
my
system
doesn't
work
all
the
time
good
good
good
evening,
mayor
Brockett
and
Council
Members
Mark
painter
from
Holland
and
heart
I'm
speaking
tonight
on
behalf
of
several
industrial
property
clients,
including
biomed
Realty,
which,
as
you
know,
owns
the
majority
of
the
buildings
in
plan
Arts,
Business,
Park,
first
and
foremost,
I
do
want
to
acknowledge-
and
it's
been
said,
a
lot
tonight.
Councils
and
planning
staff's
work
on
this
ordinance.
AS
The
new
r
d
definition
in
particular,
and
many
other
changes
and
expanded
permitted
uses
help
with
Clarity
and
predictability
in
many
areas.
But
if
the
intent
is
simplification
of
the
code
for
users,
not
everything
under
this
ordinance
yet
works
as
intended,
and
the
stakeholders
need
some
time
to
work
with
the
city
staff
further
to
get
this
important
and
complex
ordinance
right
in
those
last
respects,
we
responded
to
a
request
this
week
from
staff
for
examples
and
hypotheticals.
As
you
know,
and
those
are
in
our
letter
in
your
packet.
AS
AS
Those
who
are
aware
of
the
new
ordinance
are
still
scrambling
to
absorb
the
long
memo
and
evaluate
all
the
ordinances
impacts
on
their
different
tenants.
Scrambling,
usually
doesn't
result
in
good
planning
results.
More
crucially,
notwithstanding
staff's
presentation
regarding
Outreach,
there's
still
a
lot
of
stakeholders
who
aren't
aware
of
this
ordinance.
AS
As
we
noted
in
our
submittals
to
you,
the
ordinance
impacts
both
existing
leases
and
future
tenants,
large
and
small,
who
need
certainty
before
committing
on
a
long-term
lease.
Many
Boulder
commercial
tenants
a
fast
evolving
entrepreneurial
businesses,
as
their
businesses
succeed,
their
space
needs
them
all.
They
need
to
know
if
that
evolving
use
is
going
from
a
lawful
principle.
R
d
use
with
accessory
office
to
something
the
city
will
will
view,
is
unlawful
office
that
takes
the
property
over
the
50
000
foot
threshold.
AS
They
need
to
know
that
in
advance
they
need
to
know
in
advance
whether
their
use
will
qualify
for
being
on
the
first
floor
now
or
through
an
expansion
rate.
Later
we
know,
planning
staff
has
already
stretched
thin
and
without
further
Clarity
in
this
kind
of
language,
The
New
Normal
will
be
constant
calls
to
staff
to
opine
in
advance
as
to
whether
a
use
will
or
won't
violate
the
ordinance.
F
Mark,
your
your
time
is
up
all
right.
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
Thanks
for
your
comments,
Jordan
Bunch
you're,
your
last
one.
F
AT
Great
thank
you
I'm
Jordan
Bunch,
also
with
Han
and
heart
and
I'd
like
to
follow
up
Mark's
presentation,
with
a
discussion
of
some
of
the
specific
provisions
of
the
ordinance.
AT
First,
we've
proposed
removing
the
prohibition
against
locating
office
on
the
ground
floor,
like
in
other
Zone
districts,
where
this
prohibition
exists
to
create
a
pedestrian
experience.
In
this
case,
it
is
not
driven
by
a
particular
public
policy.
It
only
exists
to
help
limit
office
use
in
the
industrial
Zone
and,
unfortunately,
this
creates
a
multitude
of
unintended
consequences
and
will
harm
property
owners
in
the
industrial
Zone,
for
example.
AT
First,
it
will
unnecessarily
create
non-conforming
uses,
while
some
of
the
existing
Ground
Floor
Tech
offices
will
fall
under
the
new
r
d
definition,
that's
not
the
case
for
for
all
of
them,
and
it
also
hurts
owners
of
single-story
buildings.
There
are
a
number
of
single-story
buildings
in
this
Zone
that
would
be
ideal
for
office
because
they
were
not
designed
for
a
traditional
industrial
use,
nor
retail
use.
AT
Second,
with
respect
to
the
square
footage
cap
of
50
000
square
feet
for
office,
we
believe
that
the
majority
of
concerns
with
this
limitation
can
be
addressed
through
the
definition
of
accessory
use,
which
we've
proposed
to
modify
slightly
often
often
as
businesses
grow
and
change.
They
try
to
move
different
operations
into
the
same
general
area,
given
the
nature
of
the
industrial
zones
and
the
large
business
parks
that
are
located
within
those
zones,
we
believe
that
limiting
accessory
use
to
the
same
building
or
even
the
same
lot,
will
prove
too
restrictive.
AT
For
example,
does
it
make
sense
that
an
r
d
company
could
have
twenty
five
thousand
square
feet
of
accessory
office
on
the
same
lot
as
it
as
its
industrial
use?
But
if
that
same
company
could
only
find
the
space
it
needs
for
its
office,
use
on
the
next
block
over
on
a
different
lot,
that
would
be
considered
regular
office
and
not
entitled
to
the
same
first
floor
or
square
footage
rights,
and
we
believe
the
answer
to
that
question
is
no.
That
does
not
make
sense.
AT
Finally,
with
respect
to
non-conforming
uses
and
grandfathered
rights,
as
written
rights
are
grandfathered
in.
If
the
use
is
quote
legally
established
before
the
adoption
date
of
the
ordinance
which,
as
mentioned
earlier,
will
be
March
15
2023,
but
what
about
a
party
who's
already
signed
the
lease
two
months
ago,
but
the
space
won't
be
ready
until
April
2023,
because
they're
doing
a
tenant
improvements
or
what
about
an
existing
lease
that
has
the
right
of
expansion
in
2024
to
take
office
space
on
a
first
floor.
AT
Would
those
be
considered
legally
established
uses
by
the
city?
Those
are
really
important
question
that
we
need
answers
because
they
are
both
most
definitely
legally
enforceable
rights
by
the
landlord
and
tenant
and
if
the
tenant
isn't
going
to
get
what
it
bargained
for
because
of
a
change
in
law.
There's
a
very
real
risk
of
disputes
and
lawsuits
between
landlords
and
tenants
has
been
noted.
We
want
this
to
be
a
dynamic
area
that
can
attract
r
d
companies
and
we
look
forward
to
working
with
staff
on
this
matter.
Thank.
F
You
thanks
Jordan
right
that
wraps
up
public
testimony,
so
we
should
probably
do
a
time
check
here.
We're
getting
to
950.
We've
got.
We
obviously
we're
gonna
need
to
no
that's
and
that's
off
by
an
hour.
It's
9
50..
F
So
we're
going
to
want
to
wrap
this
one
up
and
we
still
have
the
check-in
on
County
committee
assignments
and
potential
selection
criteria
for
Library
District
Board
of
Trustees.
Are
we
feeling
like
we
can
do
all
three
of
these
things
tonight,
or
should
we
maybe
take
one
of
them
off
the
table
or
quick
opinions?
F
We
got
a
whole
extra
hour.
Isn't
that
exciting?
Okay,
so
we'll
we'll
attempt
to
do
that,
we'll
see
how
the
the
changes
go
through.
F
I
now,
officially
close
the
public
hearing.
Thank
you
did
I
get
that
right.
Yes,
very
good!
Okay,
so
now
we'll
bring
it
back
to
council
for
discussion,
I'm
actually
going
to
get
us
started
with
it.
Just
a
potential
path
forward
here,
so
I'm
hearing
a
lot
of
con
questions
and
maybe
some
potential
areas
for
change
from
the
current
ordinance
and
I'm
thinking,
maybe
rather
than
attempt
to
Wordsmith
ordinance
changes
tonight.
What
we
might
consider
doing
is
give
feedback
to
staff
for
areas
to
modify
and
potentially
continuing
the
hearing.
F
AM
F
And
then
so
what
I'm
going
to
do
is
I've
I'd,
like
I,
have
categories
that
I
think
we
probably
want
to
address.
I
I've
got
a
few,
and
people
can
add
more.
One
of
them
is
the
Rules
for
residential
in
the
industrial
zones.
One
of
them
is
the
the
office
restrictions
and
another
is
the
light
and
general
industrial
definitions
and
then
the
Independent
Schools
there
we
go
any
other
categories.
People
would
like
to
tackle
tonight.
F
Seeing
none
we
can.
You
can
come
back
to
one
if
you
want.
Maybe
we
can
take
those
in
order
residential
in
industrial
zones.
Does
anybody
want
to
offer
an
initial
thought
on
that
topic?.
F
Okay,
I'll
get
it
started,
so
you
know
per
my
per
my
hotline.
I
was
concerned
that
the
additional
restrictions
would
eliminate
too
many
opportunities
for
residential
in
a
town
that
obviously
needs
substantially
more
housing.
So
I
really
appreciated
your
answers.
So
thank
you
for
that,
and
so
there
were
some
good
ideas
in
there
as
well.
F
You
know
and
I
think
that,
in
terms
of
where
sub
communities
guide
us
in
this
matter,
I
think
the
East
Boulder
subcommunity
plan
newly
adopted
gives
us
great
guidance
on
this,
but
I
feel
like
the
North
Boulder
subcommunity
plan.
The
gun
barrel
plan
are
a
little
old
to
give
us
really
precise
guidance
areas,
so
I
might
look
at
still
allowing
residential
in
is
and
IG
and
then
I
think.
Potentially
the
East
bowler
subcommunity
plan
could
control,
but
I
would
I
would
not
necessarily
look
to
the
other
ones
to
add
additional
controls.
F
So
if
we
still
allowed
them,
you
know,
maybe
we
take
away
the
contiguity
requirements
and
the
you
know
you
had
a
proposal
for
maybe
how
to
approach
that.
So
that's
the
direction
I'd
be
interested
in,
seeing
us
go,
and
that
was
Dave
and
son.
I
thought
expressed
that
well,
I,
think
he
more
or
less
said
that,
and
so
that
seemed
like
a
potential
path
forward.
What
thoughts.
AM
Yeah,
so
we
could,
one
of
the
alternatives
are
what
I
had
described
in
the
hotline
was
that
currently
we're
proposing
just
the
IG
zoning
District
would
be
determined
by
sub-community
plan.
You
could
expand
that
and
say
IG
and
IM,
or,
and
also
is,
if
that
was
your
desire,
would
be
fall
under
subcommunity
plans,
maybe
just
East
Boulder.
It
sounds
like
maybe
you'd
want
to
specify
only
East
Boulder
subcommunity
plan
and
then
in
the
other
areas
of
the
city
with
industrial
zoning
we
would
still
use
contiguity
if
we
were
to
keep
that
continuity
requirement.
F
J
J
You
know
the
way
we
ask
for
what
we
want
is
by
allowing
it
by
right.
So
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
there
is
some
housing
in
those
areas.
You
know,
particularly
where
it
aligns
with
the
East
Boulder
sub-community
plan
and
where
we
want
housing
that
we
are
considering
that
by
right
and
not
everything
is
through
review.
B
B
One
of
the
reasons
I
asked
about
the
breakdown
in
acreage
of
the
various
zones
is
to
see
if
it
may
not
make
sense
to
exclude
is
because
it
may
not
be
that
large
and
I
think
generally
in
terms
of
the
pro
Parkway
industrial
district.
When
you
turn
left
off
of
Pearl,
none
of
those
businesses
will
survive.
If
you
can
put
housing
there,
it.
AK
B
And
so
you
know
we
have
different
values
we
need
to
to
balance
here.
One
is
obviously
we
want
to
promote
some
appropriate,
infill
and
residential,
but
the
other
is
if
we
want
to
keep
that
sector
of
the
industrial
Community
vibrant
you've
got
to
give
them
a
little
more
protection
against
being
thrown
out
raised
and
and
redeveloped
as
housing.
That's
that's
a
council
choice,
but
I
would
advocate
for
at
least
in
the
is
zones
being
very
careful
and
about
the
residential
opportunity
there.
The
rest
of
the
industrial
sector
I
feel
less
much
less
strongly
about
I.
E
Just
wanted
to
maybe
follow
up
on
that.
Mark
I
understand
the
point
about
it.
You
go
wholesale
to
residential
it'll.
The
economics
may
just
squeeze
everybody
out,
I
appreciate
that
and
I'm
I
in
its
current
proposal
and
Forum,
because
I've
now
heard
it
so
many
different
ways:
I'm
going
to
anchor
on
what
it
currently
is
or
the
proposal
it
it
would
be
currently
prohibited
in
is
correct.
I
AM
Allow
residential
and
is
above
the
ground
floor
The
Proposal
tonight
is
to
prohibit
them
entirely
in
is
prohibit.
E
Residents,
okay,
I
appreciate
that
so
I'm
wondering
if,
because
I
mean
housing,
housing,
housing,
right,
I,
think
that's
the
clear
kind
of
mandate
from
this
body
I
would
I
would
say
if
I
could
speak
on
that
behalf.
So
what
about
use
review
being
a
conditional
way
in
which
we
can
be
sensitive
to
some
of
that,
but
be
deliberate
with
where
it
goes
in
versus
outright
prohibition
versus
outright
like
no
holds
bar?
B
B
If
it
is
a
relatively
small
portion
of
the
industrial
Zone
I
would
feel
comfortable,
stating
that
this
can
be
an
exception
to
housing,
housing
housing,
because
we
also
have
an
interest
in
preserving
services
for
our
community.
If
it's
70
percent
of
the
industrial
Zone,
then
we
can
talk
about
guard
rails
and
where
it's
appropriate
and
where
it
might
not
be
so
I
I
think
that's
the
way
to
look
at
it.
Let's
see
what
we
are
talking
about
before
we
make
final
decisions.
AM
Sorry,
we
don't
have
the
actual
acreage,
but
if
you
look
at
the
map
the
teal
areas
are
is
so
you
can
see
in
North
Boulder.
It's
mostly
is
and
then
around
Pearl
Parkway,
as
you
mentioned,
and
then
the
gray
is
IG
and
the
purple
is
IM.
So
that
gives
you
just
gives
you
I'm.
Sorry,
it's
not
the
actual
numbers,
but
it
gives
you
a
visual
clue.
That
is
definitely
the
least
the
least
land
area
of
industrial
other
than
IMS,
which
we
only
have
a
few
Parcels
of.
F
J
Yeah
I
think
I
forgot,
I'm.
Sorry,
sorry.
F
It's
hard
to
be
sick
and
be
at
a
council
meeting.
You
can
come
back
to
it,
so
I
I
mean
I
think
there
are
good
points
here.
I
mean
the
in
having
Service
Industrial
uses
for
the
community
is
important
right.
So
what
maybe
there's
some
additional
guardrail
on
is?
Maybe
it's
enough
to
be
used
to
review,
but
it
is
I
would
say
it's
worth
looking
at
is
maybe
a
little
differently,
but
I
still
wouldn't
prohibit
it
personally.
J
And
I
think
also,
you
know
when
one
of
the
things
that
I
hear
a
lot
about
is
sort
of
the
parking
lots
in
the
industrial
Zone,
and
so
you
know,
are
there
ways
creative
ways
that
we
could
allow
for
infill
without
jeopardizing
the
industrial
area
that
we
currently
have
and
I.
Don't
know
what
the
answer
to
that
is.
But
I
just
I
feel
like
it's
worth
a
little
bit
more
thought
in
terms
of
how
we
might
allow
residential
to
complement
existing
uses.
AM
Think
maybe
some
additional
clarification
about,
so
the
alternative
that
I
had
proposed
in
the
hotline
was
to
retain
contiguity
because
the
continuity
requirement
up
in
Gun
Barrel,
so
the
the
proposed
restriction
increases.
The
number
of
parcels
that
would
be
allowed
or
the
proposal
for
residential
would
increase
the
number
of
parcels
in
land
area
that
would
be
allowed
for
residential
in
East
Boulder
and
the
tbap
area.
But
it
would
reduce
the
number
of
parcels
in
land
area
and
Gun
Barrel.
AM
So
that's
where
we
were
saying
that
the
subcommunity
plan
could
could
cover
East
Boulder,
but
then
in
Gun
Barrel
we
could
still
use
the
contiguity
requirement
because
in
Gun
Barrel
the
continuity
requirement
actually
is
much
more
logical
than
it
is
down
in
East
Boulder.
So
that
could
be
an
option.
And
then,
if
we
were
to
get
rid
of
that
lot
size,
it
would
even
be
even
more
logical
up
in
Gun
Barrel.
AM
F
E
Z
Is
that
right,
I
think
the
Holland
and
heart
letters
had
a
lot
of
examples
and
I
thought
they
were
most
of
them.
The
ones
I
understood
were
excellent.
So
can
we
look
at
those
I
was
thinking
about
the
ones
that
stick
out,
in
my
mind,
was
when
you
you,
a
company
is
in
one
location
and
then
they
acquire
another
location
that
one
and
also
there
was
somebody
that
was
speaking
of
tonight.
You
know
which
one
I'm
talking
about
like
different
buildings.
K
Z
F
And
I'll
I'll
call
myself
and
just
add
in
yeah
I
share
what
Matt
said
about
the
concern
about
the
large
number
of
non-conformities
being
created
and,
and
we
don't
know
how
many
there
are
and-
and
it
makes
sense
I
understand
why
we
don't
know,
but
it's
also
concerning
it
does
seem
like
a
lot
of
that
centers
around
the
no
office
on
the
ground
floor,
like
that
seems
to
be
the
one.
That's
the
biggest
problem.
AM
So
I
think
that
that
I
I
just
want
to
thank
Colin
and
heart
for
giving
those
examples,
because
I
think
that
that
was
really
helpful.
There's
kind
of
a
a
lack
of
data
that
we
have
to
be
able
to
analyze
so
having
those
was
really
helpful
and
I
I
hope
you
saw
that
we
responded
to
each
one
of
those
scenarios.
AM
Like
a
fun
little
zoning
problem,
but
so
that
was
really
Illuminating
to
what
the
reality
of
administrative
administering
this
regulation
would
be,
and
so
I
think
we
have
some
ideas
for
what
would
be
simpler
and
especially
from
both
a
city
perspective
and
also
business
owners
and
property
owners,
and
so
I
think
that
you're
correct
that
the
ground
floor
has
come
up
regularly
as
an
issue
for
non-conformities.
So
perhaps
removing
that
and
then
the
combined
floor
area.
AM
Administering
that
a
combined
like
thinking
about
it
as
a
combination
is
really
challenging
and
so
a
potential
other
option
that
would
still
support
the
policies
that
we
are
intending
to
implement
through.
These
changes
would
perhaps
be
a
square
footage
limit
per
use.
So
because
that
is
something
that
the
city
receives.
You
know
through
a
building
permit
or
a
business
license.
AM
We
know
the
size
of
that
business
at
that
time,
and
so
that
would
be
significantly
simpler
to
administer,
and
in
that
case
we
wouldn't
either
we
or
businesses
would
not
need
to
keep
track
of
the
changing
from
one
building
to
the
other
or
how
much
space
is
being
used
and
how
much
non-conforming
and
then
in
that
way
there
are
significantly
fewer
non-conforming
uses
created.
F
J
J
You
know
as
a
way
to
ensure
that
new
buildings
aren't
only
office
space,
or
you
know
that
they're
preserving
that
kind
of
space
on
the
ground
floor,
which
is
why
I'm
not
in
charge
of
writing
code
on
from
the
dice,
never
mind,
but
I
think
that
the
suggestion
that
you
brought
up,
at
least
it
sounds
like
a
good
one
to
me.
F
It
sounds
like
it
has
potential
and
seen
some
nodding
heads
and
no
shaking
ones
any
other
things
on
office
restrictions.
F
The
next
is
the
light
versus
General
industrial
categories.
I
had
heard
a
couple
comments
on
this
before.
F
All
right,
don't
everybody
go
at
once
all
right,
so
I
guess
the
I'll
just
throw
out
the
I'll
call
myself
again.
The
my
concern
was
that
maybe
the
the
small
uses
that
could
get
caught
up
in
this
and
and
I
heard
you
that
the
intention
is
not
to
catch
up
like
food
production,
for
example,
but
it
seems
like
the
definition
might
and
so
there's
a
concern
there.
F
How
do
we
make
sure
not
catch
up
a
bunch
of
smaller,
not
impactful,
manufacturing
uses
and
to
you
know,
there's
the
question
about:
could
we
regulate
what
they
produce
rather
than
what
they're
using
as
raw
materials?
So
that's
a
thought.
I,
don't
know
if
that
works
100,
but
it's
a
reasonable
thought,
but
I.
AO
I
AO
F
Very
good
anything
else
on
that
Independent
Schools
Tara.
E
A
I
Z
M
Yeah
I'm
happy
to
address
that
so
school
districts
are
seen
as
a
state
entity
where
Independent
Schools
are
not.
They
are
private
entities.
AI
AM
Doesn't
necessarily
you
could
allow
what
we
call
private
schools
but
Independent
Schools
by
right
in
the
industrial
districts?
It's
a
use
that
we
would
typically,
the
purpose
of
use
review
is
to
be
able
to
further
evaluate
the
compatibility
of
a
use
within
its
actual
location
and
so
for
schools,
both
the
impact
of
industrial
uses
on
the
school
and
then
the
school
on
the
industrial
uses.
We
think
that
that
would
be,
and
that's
an
appropriate
use
to
go
through
a
use
review.
That's
kind
of
the
purpose
of
use
review.
F
F
AI
Lisa
is
this
where
you
propose
some
changes
to
the
use
review
criteria?
Was
it
for
the.
AM
AO
Coordinates
there's
a
one.
The
compatibility
Criterion
has
a
sentence
that
says
the
use
of
a
minimal
negative
impact
on
the
use
of
nearby
Properties
or
for
residential
uses
in
industrial
zoning
districts.
The
proposed
development
reasonably
reasonably
mitigates
the
potential
negative
impacts
from
nearby
properties,
so
I
think
it's.
AM
AM
It's
proposed
to
include
also,
instead
of
all
just
residential
uses.
It
also
includes
Community,
cultural
and
educational
uses,
which
is
one
of
our
use
categories,
so
similarly
puts
that
that
part
of
that
analysis
in
the
use
review
too.
E
I'm
about
to
say,
I'll
just
be
frank:
I'd
rather
I
would
like
to
keep
the
use
review
for
the
schools
just
because
I
wouldn't
want
a
school
to
want
to
necessarily
go
right
next
to
court
and
Pharma,
not
next,
no,
no
offense
to
court
and
Pharma,
but
that's
not
a
use
that
I
would
sit
there
and
go
yeah
good
good
decision.
So
so
you
know
in
that
sense,
like
anyway,
I
I
think
it's
important
for
us
to
have
some
way
of
making
sure
that
we're
getting
compatibility
right
so
I,
just
I.
Don't.
AI
F
Your
family's
right
now
I
appreciate
Mr
Eckert's
points
from
before,
but
I
I'm
when
you're
talking
about
is
you
know,
is
it
going
to
be?
Is
it
mitigating?
You
know
the
potential
impacts
from
off-site
uses
on
the
school.
It
seems
probably
worth
looking
at
so
yeah
any
other
comments
on
this
or
any
other
topic.
Well,
this
or
anything
else
about
use
tables
which.
L
If
we're
sticking
to
use
tables-
yes
and-
and
just
on
that
last
point,
I
think
you
know
when
I
heard
preemption
it's
maybe
not
that
we
were
singling
out
Independent
Schools
for
bad
treatment.
It's
like
we
can't
do
Public
Schools,
also
so
like
like
any
other
private
company.
We
we
would
do
the
Independent
Schools.
So
that
makes
sense
to
me.
L
L
If
I
may
continue
on
that,
and
so
I
wonder
what
what
is
our
plan
for
engagement,
we'll
just
go
back
to
planning
board
like
what
is
what
is
what
is
the
plan
for
the
next
steps
from
all
this
feedback,
and
also
what
I
heard
loud
and
clear
from
Community
is
great
job.
Most
of
this
is
awesome,
and
we
didn't
you
know
we
didn't
quite
given
us
enough
time
for
that
final
step
to
be
reviewed.
So
I'd
just
like
to
understand
that.
AF
Y'all
Brad
Mueller,
with
planning
and
development
services,
the
level
of
Direction
and
the
nature
of
the
changes
would
not
require
us
to
go
back
to
planning
board.
AF
We
do
want
to
respect
the
fact
that
massaging
this
so
that
it
feels
final,
for
you
makes
sense
and
also
close
the
loop
with
the
conversations
we've
had
with
industry
and
such
so,
we
would
recommend
a
continuance
to
January
19th
as
being
that
kind
of
good
balance
between
moving
forward
still
and
and
yet
giving
time.
L
And
when
you
say
continued
dialogue
like
how
will
we
be
pretty
sure
that
we've
we've
gotten
all
the
feedback
we
need
because
I
agree?
Most
of
the
emails
that
we
have
gotten
have
been
excellent.
I
am
I'm
far
from
an
expert
in
this
area,
so
that
the
examples
and
the
concerns
have
been
super
helpful
to
me
and
I
want
to
make
sure
that
we've
gotten
all
them
and
that
we've
gotten
them
addressed
and
and
that
Community
who's
going
to
be
impacted.
Much
more
than
me
have
been
heard
and
we've
worked
through
it.
Yeah.
AF
You
know
I
would
say
the
the
group
of
interested
users
has
narrowed
significantly
and
we've
engaged
heavily
in
the
last
two
weeks
with
that
more
narrow
group.
AF
Just
because
we
got
the
letter
recently,
and
you
saw
the
responses
to
that
just
just
this
afternoon-
even
I,
think
with
absorbing
that
you
know
we're
sliding
into
home
and
and
we'll
have
covered
all
that
by
then,
which
is
not
to
say
there
may
not
be
a
point
or
two
at
the
final
reading
that
we
agree
to
disagree
in
in
trying
to
interpret
the
direction
given,
but
I
think
we
feel
confident
we're
there.
L
Okay,
thanks
and
I
might
just
be
curious
what
what
colleagues
think
about
possibly
planning
board
looking
at
it
again,
because
again
they
they
have
so
much
more
expertise
in
understanding
that
than
I.
Do
so,
I
think
we'll
flag
things
that
I'm
certainly
not
going
to
be
super
capable
of
flagging
and
I.
Don't
know
I'd
like
like
Dave
Ensign.
Can
you
give
me
like
a
hand
signal
if
it's
a
good
or
bad
idea.
F
AH
Yeah
I
was
just
wondering
if
you
know
maybe
to
expedite
it,
if
folks
could
kind
of
maybe
weigh
in
rather
than
sending
it
back
to
planingboard,
because
I
also
I
feel
like
planning
board
is
one
of
the
boards.
That
always
has
things
specified
well
in
advance
too
so
I'm
just
wondering.
If
there's
you
know
a
way
for
you
know,
I.
Imagine
that
you're
talking.
AF
With
them,
let
us
know
if
it's
helpful
I
would
say
you
know:
they've
been
very
engaged
in
what
you
saw
today,
and
so
these
you
know
relatively
finer
points.
We
certainly
would
advise
them
of
I,
wouldn't
expect
them
to
necessarily
pick
up
and
want
a
full
discussion
on
that
not
to
represent
them,
but
I
think
they
recognize
there's
other
items
on
their
plate
for
the
next
year
as
well.
So,
but.
F
F
F
Good
and
then
just
to
the
point
I'm
glad
to
hear
about
engagements,
because
the
finalizing
the
engagement
will
be
important
with
the
the
property
owners,
the
stakeholders-
and
you
know,
probably
filtering
through
the
chamber
as.
F
AH
So
what
I
just
wanted
to
say
is
just
some
very
general
kind
of
high
level
feedbacks.
This
is
not
not
my
area
of
expertise
either,
but
it
seems
like
one
of
the
one
of
the
reasons
we're
in
a
space
where
things
are
kind
of
complicated
is
because
over
time
we
kind
of
kept
adding
a
little
bit
more
to
each
one.
AH
You
know
just
thought
about
this,
or
I
just
saw
this
part
of
it
and
now
I
have
this
concern,
and
so
I'm
just
wondering
where,
where,
if
anywhere,
are
there
any
opportunities
for
folks
to
let
us
know
if
there's
something,
that's
just
completely
disastrous
for
a
an
industry
or
a
group
that
you
know
we
didn't
catch
where
the
opportunities
to
kind
of
come
back
as
well.
If
there
are
any.
AM
Yeah
I
think
just
building
on
what
Brad
had
said
just
the
the
stakeholders
we
have
been
discussing
this
with
over
the
last
few
weeks.
I
think
that
they
they've
been
getting
the
word
out
as
well
to
additional
people,
so
I
think
we'll
just
circle
back
with
everyone
that
we've
been
talking
with
talk
about
the
discussion.
That's
been
had
tonight,
some
of
the
proposals
that
we
might
have
to
simplify
and
be
able
to
run
through
some
of
those
scenarios.
AM
You
know
with
more
time
than
we
had
this
week
so
be
able
to
to
make
sure
that
those
aren't
creating
unintended
consequences
either.
AH
I
F
Writing
it's
a
show
of
hands
motion
is
second,
all
in
favor,
pretty
good
and
Lauren.
You
got
your
hand
up
just
to
make
a
comment
not
just
to
vote.
Yes,
that
was
that
passed
unanimously
by
the
way
learning
an
additional
comment:
no
okay!
Well
then,
this
this
is
my
moment
here
before
you
leave
to
just
sing
your
absolute
Praises,
because
we
haven't
done
enough
of
that.
F
Yet
we've
been
to
right,
like
so,
we've
been
focused
on
the
changes,
but
there
is
so
much
that
is
good
in
this
ordinance
that
I'm,
like
as
a
planning
wonk
I'm
super
excited
about
like
so
phenomenal
work
like
and
I'm
really
excited
to
get
this
done.
It's
the
culmination
of
years
of
work
and
January
19th.
At
the
end,
we
can
do
a
big
happy
dance
about
all
the
progress
that
we've
made
so
yeah
huge,
huge
thanks.
Thank.
F
AD
This
is
really
thank
you
mayor.
This
is
really
a
matter
of
Council,
but
I
will
note
that
we've
got
Taylor
Ryman
at
the
ready
that
if
you
wanted
to
look
at
those
committees
and
track
those
in
real
time
that
she
is
available
to
do
that
and
put
those
on
screen.
But
it
really
depends
on
how
deeply
you
want
to
go
into
the
topic
as
we
move
forward.
Yeah.
F
I
defer
to
you,
thank
you.
So
what
yeah?
What
I
would
propose
is
just
that
people
would
mention
their
requested
changes
and
we'll
stick
to
that,
and
so
I'll
just
call
on
people
who
would
like
to
change
something
and
I
got
a
Rachel,
and
this
is
by
the
way,
not
to
make
force
other
people's
changes.
But
changes
you're
interested
in
your
own.
L
F
Okay,
very
good!
Oh
actually,
you
know
what
there's
something
that
I
wanted
to
mention
as
well.
This
isn't
for
tonight
I'm
going
to
bring
this
back
at
another
meeting
in
January,
but
we
have
a
potential
opportunity
to
participate
in
the
Rocky
Mountain
Airport
Community,
noise,
Roundtable
group,
and
so
that's
something
that
that
staff
is
interested
in
us
participating
in
it
will
require
elected
representation
at
that.
F
So
just
kind
of
keep
that
in
your
head,
I'm
going
to
come
back
in
January
and
ask
Council
if
we're
interested
in
applying
to
that,
but
just
as
you're
thinking
about
committee
appointments,
you
might
be
interested
in
that
if
Council
approves
it
going
forward,
but
we're
not
going
to
talk
through
the
substance.
I
just
want
to
mention
that.
L
M
F
An
interest
in
does
anybody
else
want
to
put
forward
for
financial
stress
I,
don't
I,
don't
think
we
have
to
replace
Juni,
because
I
think
we
would
still
have
enough
people
on
the
committee.
We
would
still
have
three
people,
so
someone
could
replace
you,
but
it
would
not
be
necessary.
B
Yeah
yeah,
if
in
fact,
I'm
going
to
take
a
second
term
on
FSC
I'd
like
to
make
room
for
Matt
if
he
is
he's
expressed,
interest
in
intergovernmental
Affairs,
so
I
will
step
down
from
that
to
accommodate.
AE
You
want
to
address
that.
Yes,
I,
don't
because
I
will
be
staying
on
Council
and
completing
my
term
and
also
be
a
state
legislator
at
the
Capitol
I
think
it
would
be
wise
to
to
step
away
from
this
particular
subcommittee,
so
there
would
be
I
suppose
more
than
one
opening
for
that
one.
Thank
you
and.
J
I
do
I
would
be
interested
in
taking
that
seat
on
the
intergovernmental
mental
conference.
Yeah
intergovernmental
Affairs
committee.
F
Z
Z
Z
AU
Evening,
Council
Taylor
Ryman
city,
council
administrator,
so
we
are
one
of
the
properties
that
share
a
border
with
Rocky
Flats,
which
gives
us
a
seat
at
the
table
at
the
Rocky
Flats,
Stewardship
Council
and
its
ongoing
management.
It's
it's
mostly
monitoring
the
the
testing
and
maybe
adding
new
testing.
That's
that's
a
conversation.
That's
been
happening
recently,
but
it
is
in
our
best
interest
to
continue
being
engaged.
AU
In
those
conversations
we
do
have
an
obligation
sort
of
generally
speaking,
to
make
sure
that
the
continued
remediation
work
is
is
being
monitored
and
we
also
have
the
opportunity
to
develop
Partnerships
and
collaborate
in
that
setting.
F
L
Does
that
did
we
confirm
that
it?
It
has
to
be
a
council
member
and
not
a
staff
member,
though
yeah.
AD
So
I
appreciate
that
and
I'll
just
say
that
Carl
Castillo
has
been
in
contact
with
them.
They
have
indicated
that,
yes,
it
is
their
strong
preference
that
it
would
be
a
council
member
who
attends.
Certainly
there
are
there
are
occasions
where
a
staff,
member
and
I
know
Taylor
has
been
a
part
of
those
meetings
and
has
done
admirably,
but
they
have
a
preference
that
it'd
be
the
council
member
themselves.
They
meet
about
four
times
a
year
for
about
two
to
three
hours.
I
mean
yeah
two
to
three
hours.
Each
meeting.
AU
And
if
I
may
mention,
Marnie
Razzle,
also
with
osmp,
has
done
a
great
job
as
being
the
second
stop
staff
alternate,
and
so
we
both
kind
of
tagged
team.
The
alternate
support
for
Council
can
can
certainly
go
in
place
of
council
members
of
couple
or
three
times
a
year,
but
there
are
a
couple
meetings
where
a
council
member
participation
would
be
much
desired.
F
A
I
F
A
witch
no
exactly
right:
well,
maybe
we
we
need
to
table
this
one
if
nobody's
volunteering
right
now,
I'm
going
to
send
Lisa
marzel
to
all
of
your
houses.
F
Yes
right,
she
she
probably
she'd,
probably
go
for
it.
If
we
did
so,
maybe
we'll
have
to
hold
on
off
on
this
one
I'm.
I
AU
The
council
is
contemplating
a
hybrid
format,
but
it's
it's
not
been
offered
yet.
F
Cool
okay,
all
right
great
great
suggestion:
Nicole
that'll,
be
our
next
step
there
all
right,
any
other
requests
to
withdraw
or
add
to
any
committees
all
right:
okay,
seeing
none!
Then
here's
what
I
got
so
on
the
intergovernmental
Affairs
committee.
We've
got
Juni
and
Mark
resigning
and
Matt
and
Lauren
joining
Juni
is
not
re-upping
for
financial
strategies.
Mark
is
re-upping
to
financial
strategies
and
council
members
are
removing
themselves
from
the
hill.
Revitalization
working
group
sound.
AU
AU
Yeah,
just
one
more
point
so
because
of
section
9
that
describes
how
Council
meetings
of
counseling
Committees
of
council
can
be
appointed
and
sort
of
organized.
We
are
required
to
provide
justification
for
all
groups
that
have
more
than
two
council
members
on
them.
We
have
prior
justifications
for
intergovernmental
Affairs,
but
we
actually
look
back
in
our
records
and
and
we
we
couldn't
quite
find
a
justification
for
the
financial
strategy
committee
having
more
than
two
council
members.
AU
So
if
council
could
just
provide
a
justification
for
that
and
and
Teresa
I
guess,
I'd
look
to
you
to
just
ensure
that
justifications
that
were
defined
in
the
last
appointment
cycle
would
hold
this
appointment
cycle.
F
C
AN
C
M
F
You
thank
you
all
right,
we're
almost
done
here
great
and
then
this
will
come
back
for
Council
approval
and
ratification
on
consent,
I
believe
in
the
first
meeting
in
January,
so
we'll
so
we
will
approve
those
changes
at
that
time.
Great
we
got
one
more
I
think
it's
to
take
something
new
up
after
10
30
we
have
to
have
a
vote
is
so
that's
right.
M
So
you've
you've
already
done
the
check-in,
so
you
can
take
a
new
matter
up,
but
it
would
require
a
vote
if
you're
going
to
extend
beyond
11
o'clock
and
that
would
require
two-thirds.
F
E
E
We're
on
thank
you,
Aaron
I,
appreciate
it
and
thanks
for
indulging
this
request,
and
it's
certainly
coming
at
a
later
hour.
E
My
goal
is
to
keep
this
brief,
knowing
that
we've
entrusted
Aaron
and
Nicole
to
represent
the
city
in
regards
to
lifting
up
the
library
district
and
select
the
Board
of
Trustees
I,
just
thought
we'd
want
to
maybe
think
about
what
some
guard
rails
and
or
some
ideas
we
want
them
to
take
to
that
conversation
with
their
County
Commissioner
counterparts
and
how
we
can
just
sort
of
as
a
body
provide
some
of
that
guidance,
and
they
can
take
that
as
they
will.
E
E
There
first
is
I'd
love
for
us
to
recommend
that
we
we
we
exclusively
pull
really
from
a
set
of
specific
skill,
sets
that
come
from
being
current
or
former
members
of
the
library
condition,
commission,
ldac
and
or
Library
employees
I
think
we're
lifting
up
a
new
institution.
So
we
need
people
with
explicit
experience
on
how
to
run
a
library,
but,
more
importantly,
experience
and
already
discussing
and
understanding
the
IGA
process,
so
I
think
focusing
on
those
individuals
would
be
a
great
first
start.
E
It
doesn't
foreclose
on
other
community
members
participating
at
later
terms,
but
I
think
the
inaugural
class
should
come
from
this
core
group
of
people
that
have
this
unique
skill
set
and
experience
and
how
to
operate
and
manage
Library
systems
within
the
city.
My
second
would
be
discussing
how
the
city
of
Boulder
would
perhaps
have
proportional
representation
with
regards
to
the
Board
of
Trustees
that
we
end
up
appointing
the
infrastructure,
the
geography
and
the
population
is
predominantly
the
city
of
Boulder,
and
so
it
makes
sense
that
city
of
Boulder
Representatives
carry
a
proportional
weight.
E
If
the
Board
of
Trustees
ends
being
a
body
of
five,
we
should
have
three.
If
it's
a
body
of
seven,
we
should
have
five
and
so
I
would
I
would
like
to
make
sure
that
that's
cooked
in
because
I'd
hate
for
there
to
be
an
instance
that
you
have
five
people
from
from
unincorporated
Boulder
County
representing
a
Library
District,
to
which
90
percent
of
the
assets,
geography
and
population
reside
within
the
city.
So
I
I
want
to
I.
Think
a
guard
rail.
E
F
E
And
Nicole
have
to
negotiate
that
with
your
counterparts
at
Commissioners,
but
I
I.
That's
your
discretion
on
that
I.
Just
I'd
like
to
carry
forward.
However,
that
works
and
if
you
agree
to
carry
that
forward,
I
trust
you
too,
to
figure
out
how
best
to
manage
that,
but
I
think
that's
a
that
would
be
a
strong
preference
I
have.
However,
we
can
execute
that
I
trust.
You
guys
to
figure
that
out.
N
I
first
agree
with
with
everything
Matt
said:
I
would
I
would
add
to
Matt's
category
of
strong
preferences,
also,
a
skill
set
that
I
think
at
least
one
of
the
trustees
should
have,
and
that
is
the
the
expertise
in
pulling
things
apart.
Those
of
us
who
are
lawyers
who
have
done
m
a
work.
Sometimes
we
put
things
together
and
sometimes
we
pull
things
apart
and
that
can
be
more
difficult
actually
than
integrating
two
things
and
and
we're
gonna
have
a
lot
of
pulling
apart
to
happen
happen
over
the
first
two
or
three
years.
N
I
get
the
fact
that,
after
the
the
library,
District's
up
and
running
steady,
State
Library
skills
are
going
to
be
super
important
and
I.
Think
that
should
be
the
predominant
skill
among
the
trustees,
but
I
think
it'd
be
helpful
if
we
had
one
or
two
trustees
in
this
first
batch
that
knew
about
what
I
call
de-integration,
which
is
all
the
stuff
that
we're
going
to
have
to
do.
N
We
in
the
negotiation
of
the
IGA
with
them
on
the
other
side
of
the
table
and
understanding
how
to
pull
things
apart,
how
to
separate
employees
how
to
separate
assets.
How
to
separate
all
the
financial
stuff
and
I
think
one
or
two
skill
sets
on
in
that
category
would
be
a
strong
preference
from
me
and
and.
F
F
Thanks
quick
Teresa
and
then
sorry,
then
Juni
of
Denmark.
M
So
I
I,
just
I,
have
a
an
observation
about
about
it
being
a
library
staff.
Member
in
my
mind,
that's
that's
tricky
because
they're,
currently
an
employee
of
the
city
with
duties
running
to
the
city,
duties
of
loyalty
running
to
the
city,
in
addition,
say.
AE
Thank
you,
I,
like
everything
that
you
said,
I,
think
it's
a
great
idea
on
number
one
I
think
the
idea
of
having
a
diverse
board
with
people
with
diverse
thought
in
perspective
is
extremely
important
as
well,
but
Point
well.
Take
in
that
we
need
people
with
the
right
expertise,
but
also
we
need
that
diverse
Point
set
of
skills
as
well
right,
someone
with
financial
literacy
or
financial
prior
Financial
experience
might
be
very
helpful
as
well
right,
and
maybe
someone
with
a
legal
background.
AE
So,
yes,
I,
understand
having
the
library
perspective,
but
also
having
someone
was
willing
to
listen
and
communicate
and
engage,
and
one
last
thing,
which
is
probably
something
else.
Can
you
someone
mention
how
if
someone
in
the
community
is
interested
in
this,
how
can
they
contact
the
city?
I've,
had
community
members
reach
out
to
me
and
say:
hey
I
have
a
strong
interest,
whether
it's
possible
or
not,
for
them
to
apply
or
be
part
of
the
process.
That's
something
different,
but
who
do
they
reach
out
to
thank
you.
M
I'll
address
that
question:
I
think
that
that
is
that's
still
coming
together,
right,
as
as
the
appointees
from
the
from
the
county
and
the
city
are
establishing
themselves
as
a
as
a
body,
that's
going
to
select
I
think
that
information
just
isn't
available
yet,
but
certainly
from
a
communication
standpoint,
the
city
can
make
sure
to
to
help
spread.
The
word.
F
Got
Mark
and
then
Rachel
I.
B
Want
to
also
agree
with
both
Juni
and
Bob
I
think
it's
important
to
have
people
with
Library
experience
as
members
of
the
group,
but
I
also
think
that
we
need
a
broader
experience
base
for
the
process
of
actually
creating
the
library
district
itself.
I
think
it's
going
to
be
a
little
more
complex
than
people.
Imagine
and
there
may
be
issues
of
employment
law,
corporate
law,
real
estate
law
finance,
and
we
need
people
who
also
have
those
disciplines
in
their
toolkit.
F
L
Believe
it
or
not,
I've
never
formed
a
Library
District
in
my
life,
nor
run
a
library
so
I
and
there's
no
staff.
Memo
here
and
I
probably
missed
an
email
that
this
is
even
on
tonight's
agenda.
So
I
I
did
not
give
this
much
thought
so
I
just
wanted
to
turn
to
staff
and
see.
Do
you
all
have
thoughts
of
what
we
should
be
looking
for,
Nuria
or
others
again,
just
just
wanted
to
toss
it
out
and
see
if
there's
input.
AD
I
think
a
quick
stab
at
something
that
I'm
probably
going
to
be
kicked
under
the
table
for,
but
what
I
do
appreciate
and
I
I
do
think
it's
the
diversity
of
skill
sets
that
will
be
important.
I
do
think
if
I
think
of
sort
of
something
as
a
merger
of
two
businesses
that
sometimes
you
have
to
look
through
personnel,
there
will
be
policy
discussions.
There
will
be
conversations
about
the
transition
of
assets
or
not
staff
or
not
there.
AD
If
there's
a
lot
to
be
considered
here
and
having
a
multitude
of
diverse
experience
from
both
the
perspective
of
what
will
folks
need
just
for
the
IGA,
but
then
also
the
trustees
beyond
that.
So
knowing
a
little
bit
about
libraries,
important
but
also
knowing
about
financial
and
setting
up
a
business
and
startups
and
so
forth,
the
legalities
of
it
I
think
are
important,
so
I
think
you're
on
the
right
track
of
having
a
diversity
of
folks
on
the
panel
or.
F
F
F
AV
It's
really
up
to
the
discussion
of
the
selection
committee
and
I'll
also
say
I,
think
I'm
envisioning,
the
first
meeting
of
the
selection
committee
establishing
what
the
process
is.
So
with
the
question
of
how
do
we
communicate
this
or
how
do
we
let
people
from
the
community
know
about
it?
That
would
be
a
part
of
what
the
committee
discusses
in
their
first
meeting,
how
to
set
that
up.
Thank.
L
F
L
Something
under
discussion:
what's
up,
I
have
discussion.
I'm,
sorry,
I
know
it's
late,
but
I
had
a
couple
things
I
wanted
to
put
under
discussion
couple.
I
do
I'll
be
I'll,
be
quick,
though
number
one.
There
were
a
couple
times
tonight
where
people
spoke
on
at
times
that
I
thought
was
odd.
So
we
had
people
doing
open
comment
speaking
to
a
public
hearing,
and
then
we
had
someone
at
a
public
hearing
speaking
to
something
that
was
not
relevant
for
that
public
hearing.
L
So
I
just
wanted
to
flag
that
and
and
maybe
discuss
how
we
do
that
going
forward,
because
sometimes
it's
been
handled
differently,
so
flagging
that
number
two.
We
do
not
have
police
oversight
panel
amendments
on
our
work
plan-
I,
don't
think
I
think
we've
all
appreciated
this
week
that
we
probably
need
to
shore
up
some
of
the
procedure
on
that
and
so
I
don't
know
where
that
needs
to
be
flagged
and
put
in.
L
But
while
it's
fresh
I
think
I
think
we
should
be
making
sure
that
somewhere
on
the
work
plan
to
come
back
to
us
and
then
number
three,
a
speaker
mentioned
he's
not
on
hotline
I've
had
I'm
not
on
hotline.
On
my
personal
email
anymore,
I've
had
several
people
say:
I
got
dropped
off
hotline,
so
there's
something
wrong
with
Hotline.
AL
AD
We
will
indeed
and
I'll,
say
that
the
current
oversight
panel
is
also
thinking
about
that
and
we
will
be
deferring
to
them
as
well.
In
terms
of
some
things,
we
as
staff
have
some
considerations.
We
want
to
bring
forward
as
well
and
some
fairly
quickly
to
allow
for
discourse
currently
in
the
in,
for
the
panel
heard
the
concerns
about
hotline.
It
is
something
that
staff
is
aware
of,
and
so
we're
going
to
be.
F
E
AD
Oh
God,
I
think
that's
to
the
council
forum
and
I
will
certainly
bring
that
to
to
Sarah
who's,
been
taking
a
look
at
that
with
it.
F
Okay,
see
nothing
else,
nothing
else.
Nothing
else.
I
will
say,
happy
holidays,
everybody
and
congratulations
to
a
very
successful
22-2022
for
this
Council
and
our
amazing
senior
staff
very
appreciative
of
each
and
every
single
one
of
you,
and
it
is
a
pleasure
to
be
working
with
you
day
in
and
day
out
on
these
sometimes
hard
questions
that
we
wrestle
with
so
I'm
very
grateful
and
here's
to
the
end
of
a
good
year.