►
From YouTube: Boulder City Council Study Session 8-25-20
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).
B
B
C
C
C
D
F
Or
so
we
are
almost
there
nearby
won't
be
here
tonight,
she's
still
recovering,
so.
F
G
And
aaron
wants
once
everybody's
here.
You
can
start
whenever.
C
D
All
right,
we
good
to
go
very
good
well
good
evening
everyone
and
welcome
to
the
tuesday
august
25th
2020
study
session
of
the
boulder
city
council.
First,
you
may
be
wondering
why
I'm
talking
and
not
sam
well,
don't
worry,
there
hasn't
been
a
coup
or
anything.
Sam
is
still
in
good
health,
but
we
have
started
something
this
year
where
council
members
are
rotating
leading
study
sessions.
D
So
the
mayor
steps
to
the
side-
and
each
of
us
is
taking
a
turn
at
leading
a
study
session
meeting
so
for
tonight
you
get
me
and
I
think
the
next
one
mark
are
you
doing
the
next
next
study
session
september?
8Th,
yes,
very
good,
all
right!
D
Well,
before
we
get
into
the
agenda,
we
have
an
announcement
for
the
evening,
which
is
about
the
2020
census,
so
the
boulder
county
is
currently
at
a
73
response
rate,
which
is
good,
but
there
is
still
time
to
respond
to
the
2020
census
and
please
don't
be
left
out,
because
your
response
matters
completing
the
census
is
safe,
easy
and
important.
The
questionnaire
only
takes
a
few
minutes
to
complete
your
responses,
are
secure
and
confidential
and
results
help
direct
billions
of
dollars
in
federal
funds
to
our
community,
including
resources
for
emergencies
and
disaster
responses.
D
844-330-2020
right
thanks
for
that,
okay,
so
we've
got
an
exciting
agenda
ahead
of
us
for
this
evening.
We're
going
to
start
with
an
update
on
phase
2
of
the
community
benefit
project,
followed
by
an
update
of
phase
2
of
the
youth
standards
and
table
project,
and
then
concluding
with
matters
regarding
policing.
D
J
G
G
Can
everyone
see
that,
yes,
okay,
so
we
had
a
check-in
with
city
council
in
april
of
this
year
on
the
community
benefit
project
at
that
discussion,
council
members
had
requested
that
we
return
in
quarter
three
to
check
in
on
this
project
again.
So
it's
good
timing
for
us
since
we've
been
part
of
the
community
engagement
phase,
so
it
allows
us
now
to
present
to
council
some
of
the
results
of
that
community
feedback,
as
well
as
some
preliminary
options
that
we
want
to
get
some
feedback
from
the
council.
G
What's
been
done,
the
progress
that's
been
made
in
phase
two
of
the
project
where
we've
been
basically
trying
to
define
the
three
community
benefits
that
are
part
of
phase
two
and
working
with
stakeholders
on
those
we
want
to
get
some
feedback
from
the
council
on
the
duration
and
penalty
fee
options
that
we've
discussed
a
little
bit
with
council
in
the
past,
as
well
as
our
approaches
and
updates
to
updating
the
site
review
criteria.
G
These
are
the
questions
I'll
read
through
them,
just
so
you're
thinking
about
them
during
the
course
of
the
presentation.
The
first
relates
to
the
community
benefit
uses.
We
included
a
number
of
tables
in
the
packet
tables,
one
through
five
that
talk
about
our
staff
recommendations
on
a
number
of
these
points.
So
does
the
city
council
agree
with
the
staff
recommendations
in
tables
one
through
three
related
to
adding
below
market
rate,
rent
commercial
arts
and
cultural
uses
and
human,
so
in
social
service
uses
as
community
benefit
uses?
G
One
of
the
goals
and
objectives
of
this
project
was
to
talk
about
duration
and
see
if,
if
there
is
consensus
around
perpetuity,
so
the
question
we're
asking
is:
should
community
benefit
uses
be
required
by
agreements
to
be
in
operation
for
a
certain
a
set
period
of
time,
so
some
other
jurisdictions
set
it
at
10
years
or
20
years,
or
should
they
be
required
in
perpetuity
like
permanently
affordable
housing?
G
The
next
piece
also
derives
its
the
topic
from
other
communities
that
we've
looked
at
penalty
fees,
so
the
question
is,
for
community
benefit
uses
that
cease
operation
after
approval.
G
Just
going
back
in
time
a
little
bit
prior
to
1971,
there
wasn't
actually
a
maximum
height
in
the
city
of
boulder.
You
can
see,
there's
quite
a
few
buildings
that
were
built.
You
know
in
the
50s
60s
and
70s
that
are
well
over
the
limits
that
we
have
today
over
100
feet.
G
G
Any
requests
in
a
zoning
district
to
go
over
that
two
or
three
stories,
depending
on
how
the
calculation
is
done,
would
require
site
review
and
what
we
call
a
height
modification.
So
that's
something
that
requires
planning
board
approval
at
a
public
hearing.
That's
also
not
changing.
This
is
something
that
would
still
be
the
purview
of
planning
board
and
still
could
be
called
up
by
city
council.
G
We
did
see
a
lot
of
buildings
going
up
prior
to
like
after
the
great
recession,
they
were
all
coming
up
out
of
the
ground.
G
If
you
recall
you
know,
community
benefit's
been
a
discussion
for
quite
a
while
now
but
prior
to
2017,
it
wasn't
really
applied
to
any
site
review
projects.
It
was
really
only
a
component
of
annexations.
G
So
when
the
comp
plan
was
updated
in
2017,
it
included
some
new
policies
that
set
the
expectation
that
for
any
projects
that
add
additional
intensity
or
floor
area
or
height,
that
that,
in
return,
there
might
be
an
expectation
for
some
community
benefit
and
even
listed
some
of
the
things
that
we
should
be
looking
at.
So
we
had
commenced
this
project
in
2018
after
those
policies
went
into
effect,
and
we
had
a
study
session
with
council
at
that
time,
where
we
went
into
a
lot
of
detail
on
the
goals
and
objectives
of
the
project.
G
The
range
of
community
benefits
to
look
at,
and
we
also
looked
at
a
number
of
peer
communities.
So,
ultimately,
the
project
was
split
into
two
phases:
phase
one
was
adopted
by
council
in
october
of
last
year.
I'll
talk
a
little
bit
more
about
that
on
another
slide.
G
So,
in
general,
what
this
slide
is
showing
is
that
you
know
the
building
in
blue
on
the
left
is,
would
be
considered
a
buy
right.
Building
wouldn't
have
any
additional
associated
community
benefit
with
it,
but
for
with
this
particular
project,
the
list
shows
that,
if
this
were
to
move
forward
with
all
the
community
benefits
that
we're
looking
at
there
would
be
basically
four
community
benefit.
G
Options
added
to
the
code
and
there'd
be
an
expectation
that
that
some
of
these
uses
would
be
in
a
building
that
has
a
fourth
or
a
fifth
story,
and
again
this
still
would
require
planning,
board,
review
and
approval
for
any
kind
of
hype
modification,
so
going
into
a
little
bit
more
of
the
detail
of
phase
one.
This
basically
shows
that
anything,
that's
above
the
height
limit,
that's
in
a
fourth
or
a
fifth
story
or
any
floor
area.
That's
above
a
floor
area
ratio
limit
of
a
zone
would
be
considered
bonus,
floor
area.
G
So
the
way
the
code
is
written
is
that
there's
additional
requirements
that
kick
in
for
those
areas
above
the
height
limit
or
above
the
floor
area.
So
phase
one
was
really
focused
on
permanently
affordable
housing.
We
had
an
economic
consultant
that
we're
still
working
with
to
look
at
a
number
of
projects
and
looking
around
town
and
where
this
could
be
an
incentive,
so
they
we
basically
want
by
their
recommendations
that
for
the
area,
that's
by
right,
we
have
our
standard.
G
25
of
the
of
the
number
of
units
would
have
to
be
permanently
affordable
for
the
bonus
floor
area
that
increases
to
36
percent.
So
there's
also
an
in
luffy
option
that
was
allowed
through
that
and
as
well
as
the
commercial
linkage
fee.
So
if
they
were
doing
a
commercial
building,
anything
that's
bonus.
Floor
area
would
have
to
be
43
percent
more
than
a
buy
right
option.
G
G
G
So,
moving
into
phase
two
we've
really
been
focusing
on
defining
the
three
community
benefit
uses
as
part
of
this
again.
These
would
have
to
be.
These
would
be
additional
options
to
permanently
affordable
housing.
G
The
nexus
between
these
particular
uses
is
just
the
high
rents
that
exist
in
boulder
that
have
been
driving
some
businesses
out
of
boulder
so
like
we
did
with
the
restrictive
covenant
on
the
30
pearl
project,
we'd
be
looking
at
some
sort
of
requirement
that
would
lower
the
lease
rate
by
a
certain
percentage
of
the
market
rate
to
make
these
spaces
more
affordable
to
these
particular
uses.
So
again,
we're
working
with
the
economic
consultant
to
advise
on
that.
G
G
What
our
economist
kaiser
marston
associates
has
recommended
is
that
we
use
the
pre-2020
assumptions
that
were
used
in
phase
one
just
so
we're
doing
an
apples
to
apples,
comparison
and
also
looking
at
what
would
be
equivalent
to
the
permanently
affordable
housing
that
was
adopted
through
phase
one
so
that
people
aren't
always,
you
know,
deferring
to
the
easiest
or
cheapest
option.
G
So
another
component
of
the
project
is
is
working
on
the
site
review
criteria.
These
are
linked,
if
you
recall,
when
we
did
phase
one
the
changes
that
added
the
community
benefit
for
permanently
affordables
in
the
site,
review
criteria
and
the
land
use
intensity
modifications.
G
So
we're
also
just
looking
at
how
can
we
make
the
site
review
criteria
better?
There's
been
some
criticisms
about
the
process,
so
we're
looking
at
trying
to
create
more
consistency
with
comprehensive
plan
policies
through
updates,
try
to
get
more
high
quality
design
outcomes,
improve
the
clarity,
simplicity
and
predictability
of
the
site
review
process
and
also
looking
deeper
into
view
protection.
G
This
has
been
something
that's
been
somewhat
vague
in
sight
reviews
and
that
perhaps
we
should
maybe
borrow
from
the
form
based
code
and
making
that
more
specific
we've
spent
a
lot
of
time
looking
at
the
criteria
internally
and
also
talking
to
folks
externally
about
what
updates
could
be
made.
So
we
do
have
some
suggestions
that
we've
been
trying
to
get
feedback
on.
G
We
we're
recommending
that
the
criteria
be
reorganized
in
a
top-down
approach,
so
kind
of
starting
high
level
with
policy
things
that
should
be
considered
and
working
down
through
site
design
and
then
to
more
detailed
things
like
the
building
design,
the
the
facades
of
buildings
there's
a
fair
amount
of
redundancy
in
the
site,
review
criteria
that
can
be
removed.
I
mean
the
criteria
are
like
seven
pages
long
and
there's
a
lot
of
statements
that
repeat
through
different
sections
that
we
think
can
be
consolidated.
G
There's
also
some
sections
that
are
unnecessarily
complicated
or
actually
don't
don't
get
used
at
all
that
we
are
thinking
about
removing
and
replacing
with
the
community
benefits
standards
to
add
more
predictability.
We're
also
looking
at
maybe
borrowing
some
things
that
make
sense
from
the
form
base
code
and
putting
them
into
the
site
review
criteria
to
have
more
of
a
black
and
white
kind
of
prescriptive
standard,
rather
than
what
we
have
in
the
site
review
today.
G
So,
along
those
lines,
we've
been
looking
at
some
of
the
things
that
were
implemented
through
the
form
based
code
like
limiting
building
length,
looking
at
other
bulk
restrictions
that
might
be
necessary
to
make
buildings
more
compatible,
specific
building
material
requirements,
we're
looking
at,
for
instance,
you
know
in
the
site
review
criteria.
It
just
says
that
the
building
has
authentic
building
materials
on
it.
The
form-based
code
goes
into
a
little
bit
more
detail
by
having
specific
percentages
of
masonry,
materials
or
wood
or
stone
or
metal.
G
The
form-based
code
also
protects
the
view
of
the
flat
irons
from
the
park
in
boulder
junction.
This
is
kind
of
set
the
the
stage
for
a
discussion
of
maybe
there's
other
areas
of
the
city
where
this
could
be
done
and
maybe
implemented
through
site
review.
G
It's
something
that's
certainly
important
to
citizens
that
we've
been
hearing
feedback
on
so
talking
about
community
engagement,
so
community
engagement
on
this
project
started
in
2018
we
com,
we
created
some
focus
groups
with
a
number
of
neighbors
development
professionals,
other
people
that
were
interested
just
to
get
their
viewpoints
on
building
height.
G
If
you
recall,
we
had
a
number
of
open
house
events
that
we
called
coda
paloozas.
We
had
some
stakeholder
meetings
and
we
also
did
a
be
heard
boulder
questionnaire.
Last
year,
this
year's
been
a
little
different
similar
in
that
we've
been
having
similar
discussions
and
focus
groups
and
like
open
houses,
but
it's
all
been
online.
G
We've
been
trying
to
get
the
word
out
with
the
updated
website
and
handouts.
We
did
a
channel
eight
segment,
we've
done
next
door.
Notifications,
we've
put
notifications
in
the
planning
newsletter.
We
did
a
community
information
event.
In
july,
we
put
together
a
site
review,
focus
group
that
was
composed
of
design
professionals
to
kind
of
get
their
input
on
the
changes
to
the
site
review
criteria.
G
G
G
What
we
saw
in
the
past
was
kind
of
more
of
a
split
between
folks,
those
who
support
it
and
those
who
don't.
You
know
like
48
to
48
something
like
that.
It's
it's
shifted
a
little
bit
more
towards
over
60
percent
disagreed
with
the
three
options
for
community
benefit,
allowing
additional
height
modifications.
G
There
was
30
percent
of
respondents
that
supported
it.
When
we
asked
the
question
about
just
appendix
j,
you
know,
should
it
be
repealed
or
should
it
should
it
be
kept
in
place
but
modified?
G
We
did
get
over
70
percent
that
indicated
their
opposition
to
removing
the
appendix
j
map,
which
means
keeping
the
restrictions
that
are
currently
in
place.
As
is
when
we
talked
about
questions
about
additional
requirements
that
would
apply
to
taller
buildings.
We
did
get
most
of
the
respondents
over
100
responses
for
each
idea
that
there
was
support
for
that.
G
We
originally
had
more
support
for
updating
the
site
review
criteria,
but
that's
kind
of
dropped
a
bit.
It's
nearly
60
now
or
saying
that.
There's
support
for
changing
the
site,
review
criteria
to
be
less
subjective
and
more
predictable.
G
So
this
is
the
specific
recommendations
that
we
have
at
this
time.
I'm
not
going
to
go
through
all
these
different
options
for
each
of
the
community
benefits,
but
there's
a
lot
of
similarities,
but
generally
we're
looking
to
create.
You
know
very
clear
definitions
of
what
the
particular
use
is.
G
Our
economic
economic
consultant
would
have
to
advise
on
on
a
minimum
amount
that
would
work.
This
would
be
memorialized
in
an
agreement.
The
same
way
that
we
do
permanently
affordable
housing.
We
would
have
to
set
a
minimum
duration,
we're
recommending
in
perpetuity
to
make
it
equivalent
to
the
permanently
affordable
housing
option.
G
G
We
are
we're
not
looking
at
restricting
tenant
furniture
that
we
talked
about
last
time
in
april
or
restricting
franchises
from
from
out
of
state.
Just
because
there's
some
there's
some
legal
questions
regarding
that
and
our
city
power
may
not
actually
allow
us
to
cover
that.
There's
some
complications
with
that
that
we
still
need
to
look
at.
G
So,
with
respect
to
art
and
cultural
uses
similar
recommendations,
we
did
ask
the
council
whether
the
arts
commission
should
provide
a
recommendation
on
the
consistent
consistency
of
the
use
with
the
definition
we've
talked
to
the
arts
commission
about
it
they're
supportive
of
it.
There
are
some
folks
in
the
arts
community
that
have
recommended
that
the
arts
commission
not
be
providing
a
recommendation
to
that
effect,
but
we
we
think
that
they
would
be
a
good
gauge
of
whether
something
meets
the
definition.
G
G
They've
also
asked
that
we
not
restrict
it
just
to
non-profits,
just
because
there
are
some
uses
that
serve
the
community
that
are
for-profit
like
child
care.
Things
of
that
nature,
but
I
know
that
nursing
homes
is
something
we
talked
about
in
the
past.
We've
put
a
definition
in
the
code
that
we
think
could
work
that
there
could
be
a
minimum
number
of
of
medicaid
beds.
That
would
qualify
a
particular
nursing
home.
So
that's
something
that
we
thought
we
could
move
forward
with.
G
We
want
to
get
your
feedback
on
that,
so,
lastly,
the
site
review
criteria,
we're
recommending
most
of
the
updates
that
I've
talked
about
again
with
the
site
review
focus
group.
We
had
a
discussion
talking
about
you
know,
making
the
criteria
more
prescriptive.
G
I
think
at
the
beginning
of
the
discussion
there
was
some
reservation
about
that
about
losing
flexibility,
some
skepticism
on
that,
but,
as
we
talked
through
kind
of
what
form-based
code
standards
might
work,
you
know
some
minimum
things
just
about
you
know
percentage
of
a
certain
material
or
where
material
changes
can
occur
or
maybe
building
length.
Maximums
might
just
make
sense
broadly
for
projects,
and
then
there
was
a
little
bit
more
cohesion
between
the
group
and
being
interested
in
that
particular
option.
I
think
it
all
obviously
comes
down
to
the
details.
G
So
we
went
to
planning
board
last
week
and
we
posed
all
these
questions
to
planning
board,
and
I
wanted
to
summarize
that
before
we
get
to
our
questions.
So
when
we
talked
about
the
community
benefit
uses,
there
was
general
support
for
the
three
uses,
but
there
was
some
skepticism
regarding
below
market
rate
commercial
in
the
sense
that
it
would
be
difficult
to
determine
what
users
would
go
into
each
of
those
space.
It
wouldn't
necessarily
always
result
in
a
business,
that's
of
benefit
to
the
community
and
may
not
necessarily
be
a
local
business.
G
So
there
was
some
concern
about
that.
When
we
talked
about
minimum
duration,
the
board
felt
that
perpetuity
made
sense
to
be
equivalent
to
the
permanently
affordable
housing,
but
they
felt
like
the
discussion
kind
of
moved
towards,
maybe
in
luffy's
might
make
sense
for
all
these
different
uses.
G
Perhaps
there
could
be
different
pots
where
the
where
money
could
go
into
to
help.
You
know
arts
and
cultural
uses
or
human
services,
or
you
know,
to
community
vitality
for
affordable
business.
That
might
make
sense.
There
was
there
was
some
cohesion
between
board
members
for
an
in-lieu
fee
option,
just
like
a
lump
sum
that
would
basically
be
easier
to
implement.
There
was
some
support
for
that,
based
on
the
fact
that
it
it
removes
the
cons,
the
the
questions
about
duration
and
and
penalty
fees.
G
So
that's
something
that
was
was
interesting
from
the
board
penalty
fees.
When
we
talked
about
that
there
was
concern
that
that
could
be
difficult
to
track.
How
would
we
know
if
a
particular
use
got
switched
out
for
a
use
that
doesn't
meet?
G
You
know
community
benefit
or
if,
if
a
space
has
been
vacant
for
some
period
of
time,
they
felt
like
there
needed
to
be
some
flexibility
there,
perhaps
like
some
sort
of
voucher
system,
but
there
was
concerns
that
that
basically
the
you
know
the
program
could
be
gamed
by
this
or
it
would
be
difficult
to
track,
and
then,
lastly,
we
talked
about
the
site
review
criteria,
another
mixed
response
from
the
board.
There
was
some
concern
about
mixing
form-based
code
standards
with
the
site
review.
G
G
G
But
after
we
get
more
direction
from
the
council,
we
want
to
start
refining
the
options
and
start
drafting
code
and
with
the
goal
of
trying
to
bring
something
forward
either
in
quarter
four
of
this
year
or
first
quarter
of
next
year.
D
I'll
bet
there
are,
of
course,
mark
put
out
a
number
of
questions
that
were
answered
this
afternoon
so
hopefully
mark
you
got
those
questions
satisfactorily
answered
anyone
else
with
questions
for
staff.
D
And
sarah
you're
gonna
have
to
tell
me
in
presentation
mode
how
to
bring
up
the
list.
Oh
there
we
go,
I
got
it
looks
like
we
have
sam
and
then
mary
and
then
mark.
F
Great,
I
want
to
compliment
staff
on
both
of
these
memos.
The
community
benefit,
as
well
as
the
use
table,
they're
very
thorough,
well
organized,
and
it
was
easy
to
find
what
your
suggestions
were
and
what
you
wanted
to
get
feedback
on.
So
I
thought
these
were
both
very
well
done
and
since
they're
complicated
subjects,
I
think
the
only
question
I
have
is
you
talked
about
in-lieu
funding
for
community
benefits,
so
you
know
that's
a
strategy
we
use
with
affordable
housing
as
well,
but
with
affordable
housing.
F
F
G
Well,
I
think
we
wanted
to
get
feedback
from
the
council
about
whether
there
was
interest
in
in
lieu
for
these
options
number
one
and
then
number
two.
If
there
is,
then
we
would
start
to
work
with
community
vitality
on
if
and
also
with
our
attorneys,
to
see
if
there
was
a
way
to
allocate
funds
to
you
know
a
community
vitality
bucket
or
if
we
could
put
something
into
an
arts
and
cultural
use
fund.
G
That
would
help
you
know
with
arts
districts
or
it
could
be.
You
know
something
that
goes
to
human
services
to
help
them
with
finding
spaces
for
tenants.
Obviously,
within
luffy's
we
don't
want
to
come
up
with
a
financial
or
monetary
option.
That's
going
to
be
easier
cheaper
than
the
permanently
affordable,
so
it
would
have
to
be
equivalent
to
that
as
far
as
the
the
money
it
just
might
be
like.
Where
do
you
direct
that
money?
G
The
other
thing
that
we're
working
with
the
economist
on
is
giving
us
advice
about.
You
know
how
the
in
luffy
may
change
by
adding
these
additional
options.
They're.
Looking
at
that,
more
broadly,
okay,.
F
And
then
another
question
that
the
polling
numbers
quote:
numbers
that
you
shared
with
us.
Those
who
are
all
self-selected
respondents
is
that
correct,
that's
correct,
so
we
can
view
those
polling
results.
Kind
of,
like
we
view
emails
that
we
get
on
a
given.
Subject,
it's
more
about
the
the
qualitative
suggestions
they
were
making,
rather
than
the
quantitative.
H
Thank
you
aaron.
So
one
of
the
things
that
came
up
from
commenters
was
process
and
changing
process.
To
what
extent
is
staff,
considering
that
or
is
it
being
considered
at
all
and
and
if
it
is,
what
kinds
of
things.
G
We
are,
we
do
plan
to
convene
the
site,
review,
focus
group
and
just
kind
of
get
comments
on
process
process
improvements.
At
this
point,
I
think
the
scope
of
the
project
has
really
not
been
focused
as
much
on
the
process.
I
think
where
we're
headed
with
this,
at
least
for
now
is
it
would
be
a
hype
modification
just
as
it
has
been
done
in
the
past.
It
would
be
us
it'd,
be
a
site
review
application.
G
There
just
would
be
new
criteria
that
would
relate
to
community
benefit
and
would
relate
to
the
updates
and
an
applicant
would
have
to
design
their
project
and
work
things
out
before
they
submit.
We
review
it
and
if
it's
a
hype
modification,
we
bring
it
to
planning
board
for
their
decision
same
as
before,.
H
Okay,
thank
you
and
then
how
did
staff
consider
linkage
fees
on
this
square
footage
that
would
have
the
reduced
rent?
How
or
did
that
work
into
it
at
all.
G
H
Okay,
thank
you,
and
then
you
mentioned
that
the
arts
commission
would
be
a
place
to
take
the
the
proposed
arts
community
benefit
to
have
you
all
considered
what
that
might
look
like.
Would
it
be
like
the
whole
arts
commission
taking
a
look
at
it,
or
would
it
just
be
a
couple
of
designated
a
subcommittee
of
members,
or
has
there
been
any
thought
into
what
that
might
look
like.
G
I
don't
know
that
we've
gotten
into
that
much
detail
about
it.
I
think
we
just
thought
about
it
in
the
same
way
that
you
know
a
site
review
project
might
go
to
dab.
You
know
that
it
gets
referred
to
them.
It
goes
on
their
agenda.
They
they
quickly
talk
about.
They
review
the
written
statement,
they
review
the
materials
and
they
provide.
You
know
their
comments.
You
know
based
on
whether
or
not
it
it
meets
the
the
definition.
That's
in
our
code,
whatever
that
is.
H
And
then
with
respect
well,
I
guess
we'll
yeah
this.
This
got
talked
about
in
the
memo,
which
was
what
kinds
of
businesses
might
get.
H
The
benefit
of
of
the
reduced
rent
and
what
did
staff
consider
looking
at
what
are
the
services
that
are
provided?
What
is
who
benefits
from
the
particular
business
as
a
gauge
as
to
whether
or
not
that
business
would
qualify?
Aside
from
the
fact
that
we
talked
about
national
chains
or
local
businesses,
I
mean
you
could
have
the
national
chain
either
be
gucci
or
walmart,
and
that
would
serve
different
people.
You
could
have
the
local
business,
be
some
high-end
clothing
store
versus.
H
You
know
a
small
business
that
that
sells
a
thrift
store
say,
for
example,
so
how?
How
did
is
that
shaping
up
yet
or.
G
It's
not
fully
formed,
you
know
it's
it's
we
started
by
looking
at
you
know
the
30
pearl
restrictive
covenant,
so
that
was
a
voluntary
agreement
that
had
you
know
what
kind
of
businesses
would
qualify
so
it
listed
women
owned
or
minority
owned
or
or
was
defined
as
a
local
business.
When
we
get
into
actually
putting
the
regulations
into
the
code,
there
are
some
challenges
with
that
of
being
too
specific
about
that
use.
So
that's
something
that
we
still
need
to
to
look
at
further.
G
I
think
the
30
pearl
gives
us
a
good
guide,
but
there's
still
more
analysis.
That
needs
to
be
done
on
the
legal
side
to
make
sure
that
that
can
work
in
our
code.
E
Hey
first,
thanks
for
answering
all
my
questions,
I
unfortunately
have
a
few
more
at
30
pro.
We
did
a
25
to
market
discount.
Is
there
any
particular
magic
in
that
number?
Does
it
have
to
be
75
percent
of
market?
Should
it
be
less
more?
I
mean.
G
G
E
Okay,
there's
a
great
deal
as
I
understand
the
program
of
discretionary
power
to
be
exercised
here,
to
some
extent
we're
picking
winners
and
losers
in
determining
who
gets
the
prize.
G
Well,
that's
precisely
what
the
goals
and
objectives
of
this
project
state.
So
that's
what's
been
driving.
You
know
the
need
to
really
define
the
uses
very
clearly
and
also
update
the
criteria
to
be
more
clear.
So
the
goal
is
hopefully
that
it'd
be
very
straightforward
to
find
out
when
an
application
comes
in
by
going
through
their
their
package,
that
it
would
meet
those
minimum
definitions
and
would
be
more
clean
in
the
site
review.
As
far
as
how
it
meets
those
criteria,
I
mean:
do
you
contemplate.
E
G
I
think,
as
this
discussion
is
showing
the
below
market
rate,
commercial
is
a
difficult
one
and
and
planning
boards
struggled
with
that.
I
think
we
thought
we
were
on
a
good
path
with
that
one,
but
because
there
are
some
things
where
it
may
not
be
consistent
with
federal
law.
I
think
we
need
to
dig
into
that
further
to
find
out
what
uses
could
fit
into
that.
Okay
and.
E
Have
we
defined
what
our
financial
goals
are
here?
We
are
conferring
a
benefit
on
the
developer
of
a
project
if
we
are
conferring
a
benefit
that
equals
100
extra
dollars
of
revenue
either
per
year
or
in
total
to
the
developer,
do
we
have
a
sense
of
how
much
we're
looking
to
recapture
as
a
community
benefit?
Is
it
based
on
a
percentage?
Is
it?
What
are
our
standards.
G
Well
again,
I
think
the
economist
is
going
to
advise
on
that.
When
we
presented
phase
one,
we
had
some
slides
that
actually
specifically
showed
you
know
with
a
buy
right
project.
The
city
would
get
this
much
with
a
community
benefit
project.
There
would
be
this
monetary
value
and
again
we
want
the
economist
to
make
sure
that
that
economic
value
of
these
particular
three
are
going
to
be
equivalent
to
the
permanently
affordable,
if
not
greater,
so
they're
going
to
have
to
advise
on
that.
E
My
last
question
is
in
the
criteria
for
review.
You
indicated
that
one
of
the
objectives
was
to
increase
high
quality
design
outcomes,
as
we
have
not
been
entirely
fortunate
in
achieving
that
to
date.
How
would
you
do
that?
Well,.
G
G
So,
for
instance,
you
know
the
form
based
code
has
fenestration
requirements,
so
a
minimum
percentage
of
windows
per
floor,
something
that
we
struggle
with
site
review
projects
on
because
there
might
be
a
lot
of
spaces
or
blank
walls
if
there
was
at
least
a
minimum
percentage.
That
has
to
be
you
know,
window
penetrations
that
improves
the
design.
There's
basic
detailing
requirements
like
a
differentiation
between
the
ground
floor
and
the
floors
above
that
do
result
in
in
better
designs.
More,
you
know,
masonry
buildings,
more
simplicity
are
things
that
we
think
result
in
better
design
outcomes.
G
E
Right,
thank
you.
I'll,
pass
the
baton
to
rachel
now
all
right,
rachel.
L
Tegan,
so
just
one
question
for
now
and
I
asked
the
same
thing
last
time
and
I
know
it's
touched
on
in
the
packet
and
you
touched
on
it
also
tonight,
but
do
we
have
any
data
for
phase
one
like
how
many
applicants
for
the
two
extra
floors
were
there
any
anything
you
tell
us
about
phase
one.
G
Well,
I
mean
the
way
we're
looking
at
it
is
that
those
particular
requirements
started
on
january
1st
of
this
year,
and
then
we
were
in
full
pandemic
mode
by
march,
so
it
hasn't
been
the
greatest
year
to
have
any
kind
of
you
know.
Analysis
of
this
we've
not
seen
any
applications
come
in
that
are
pursuing
it
to
phase
one.
L
And
any
so
we
we
did
have
a
couple
months
in
there
and
was
you
know:
were
there
any
inquiries
or
nibbles
or
anything,
because
my
concern
is,
if
we
make
it
so
you
know
if
we,
if
we
choose
to
offer
these
benefits
in
such
an
onerous
way,
that
nobody
wants
to
take
us
up
on
the
fourth
and
fifth,
then
we
have
a
de
facto
35
foot,
38
foot,
building
height
requirement
and
we're
trying
to
have
this
community
benefit.
L
G
At
all,
we've
not
gotten
any
inquiries.
We
we
have
gotten
some.
You
know
anecdotal
comments
from
some
in
the
community
that
that
feel
that
the
way
it's
written,
it
does
not
provide
an
incentive
which
contrasts
with
what
the
economist
had
stated.
There
would
be
an
incentive
again.
This
is
something
that
we're
going
to
have
if
we
do
implement
all
of
this
we're
going
to
have
to
continually
evaluate
it
for
feasibility
and
whether
it
does
make
sense
and
make
adjustments.
D
Great
so
I'll
call
myself,
I
have
one
question,
so
it
seems.
We've
got
these
three
buckets
right
of
different
kinds
of
community
benefits
that
we're
considering
with
this
phase
two,
but
it
seems
like
to
some
extent
the
they
could
be.
You
could
have
the
same
space
used
for
more
than
one
of
these
purposes.
D
Right
like
below
market
commercial,
you
know,
could
be
some
kind
of
local
business,
but
a
human
services
organization
could
use
that
same
space.
So
are
we
imagining
that
there
would
be
flexibility
built
into
these
requirements
such
that
like?
If
you
provide
you
know
one
of
them,
it
could
be
switched
to
another
one.
What's
your
thought
on
that.
G
G
You
know
the
economist
to
come
back
and
say
well,
it
makes
sense
to
have
this
amount
for
this
particular
use,
and
then
this
larger
amount
for
this
particular
type
of
use
and
then
there's
not
like
a
lot
of
adaptability
there.
So
we've
set
that
as
one
of
our
concerns
and
something
that
they
should
be
looking
at
and
advising
us
on.
D
F
I
put
my
hand
up.
I
just
had
one
more
question
carl.
Would
you
mind
going
back
to,
I
think
2015
and
just
recounting
it
was
briefly
mentioned
in
here,
but
I
believe
the
discussion
we
had
at
that
time
was
that
we
would
put
in
the
appendix
j.
We
didn't
call
it
that
back
then,
but
just
outside
of
the
areas
with
with
some
kind
of
area
plan
we
put
in
the
moratorium
on
going
above
35
feet,
and
then
there
was
a
vote.
F
The
council
took
at
some
point
after
that,
which
was
not
to
make
that
permanent,
but
to
continue
with
what
I
believe
was
the
original
discussion
which
was
put
in
place
until
we
had
community
benefit
definition
and
then
lift
it.
Could
you
just
recount
that,
because
I've
forgotten
some
of
it.
G
G
So
the
expectation
that
was
set
up
you
know
back
in
2015
is
that
this
was
a
basically
an
interim
map
that
would
allow
us
to
do
the
analysis
and
homework
to
put
together
a
community
benefit
program,
and
then,
when
it,
the
community
benefit
program
was
put
into
place
in
the
code.
That
map
would
then
go
away
and
it
would
open
up
to
the
rest
of
the
city,
but
we
have
heard
some.
You
know
comments
from
folks
about
you
know.
Maybe
it
should
be.
G
You
know
modified
or
incrementally
opened
up
in
certain
areas,
or
maybe
it
should
be
kept
restricted
and
see
how
the
the
program
gets
implemented
and
whether
or
not
there's
comfort
in
removing
it.
So
there
are.
There
are
still
some
questions
about.
You
know
what
to
do
with
appendix
j,
but
the
original
intent
was
that
it
was
going
to
be
temporary.
D
D
There
we
go
so
we've
got
these
four
questions
in
front
of
us
I'll
just
start
by
reading
the
first
one.
Does
city
council
agree
with
the
staff
recommendations
in
those
tables
one
through
three
in
our
packet
related
to
adding
below
market
rent,
commercial
art
and
cultural
uses
and
human
social
services
uses
as
community
benefit
uses?
So
because
the
question
for
us
here
is,
do
we
feel
like
staff's
recommendations,
are
on
track
or
do
we
feel
like
they
need
some
tweaking
for
those
three
areas?
D
So
if
people
want
to
raise
their
hand
to
to
speak
to
that
question,
go
ahead.
E
Every
poll
every
indication
we
have
is
that
lack
of
affordable
housing
is
the
number
one
priority
in
boulder.
Certainly
among
people
who
respond
to
these
kinds
of
things
and
a
more
broadly
based
program
will
serve
to
decrease
the
amount
of
affordable
housing
that
we
are
going
to
be
producing
through
through
a
program
of
this
type.
I
am
I
want
to
emphasize.
This
is
not
that
I
don't
think
that
affordable
commercial
housing
is
is
bad.
E
It's
not
that
I
don't
support
arts
and
cultural
uses
and
humans
and
social
services
uses,
but
that
the
highest
priority
that
we
have
is
housing,
and
it
seems
to
me
that
it's
most
appropriate
to
give
away
a
little
bit
of
extra
floor
area
and
height
in
exchange
for
our
number
one
need.
We
do
this
quite
frequently
where
we
tend
to
dilute
the
mission
to
try
to
accommodate
more
needs
of
the
community,
but
our
greatest
need
is
affordable
housing.
E
So
I
don't
understand
why
we
would
be
wanting
to
take
away
from
the
production
of
affordable
housing,
either
through
on-site
or
cash
and
lieu
fees,
and
make
this
much
more
complex
and
it
seems
to
me
more
arbitrary
system
that
will
again
foster
a
good
deal
of
gaming
on
the
part
of
developers.
E
And
so
my
my
view
of
this
is,
I
would
prefer
that
if
we
would
proceed
that,
we
would
be
proceeding
with
a
very
focused
housing-oriented
program
and
again
it's
not
to
say
that
the
other
goals
are
not
important
and
cannot
be
supported.
But
the
highest
goal
we
have
in
this
town
is
to
meet
our
affordability
standards.
D
E
Oh,
I
would
put
no,
I
would
do
the
community
benefit
program,
but
I
would
I
would
want
to
do
it
in
on
the
basis
of
housing,
and
you
know
there
are
other
aspects
of
this
that
that
could
be.
You
know
the
program
could
be
tweaked.
We
can.
We
can
look
at
a
better
site
review
process,
you
know
better
criteria
and
and
more
certain
standards,
but
to
me
the
benefit
that
we
should
be
extracting
from
developers
who
want
to
add
a
floor
or
two
of
residential
space
should
be
residential
space.
E
D
F
Yeah
and
I'll
address
that
same
point
and
I'll
disagree
with
mark
in
the
sense
that
we
already
address
affordable
housing
as
kind
of
the
entry
price
for
building
anything
in
boulder.
F
If
you
build
housing,
you
have
to
have
25
affordable.
If
that
your
development
project
is
is
residential.
If
you
do
commercial,
we
have
a
linkage
fee
and
that
commercial
linkage
fee
was
adopted
specifically
to
support
affordable
housing
as
brought
in
on
the
order
of
five
million
dollars.
So
far
since
we
put
that
in
place,
so
that's
been
a
success.
So
the
way
I
look
at
this
is,
we
have
made
affordable
housing
an
absolute
you
know
supporting
affordable
housing
with
new
development,
a
requirement
of
any
development.
F
It
is
just
you
can't
do
development
without
supporting,
affordable
housing.
More
is
better,
so
I'm
glad
we
did
phase
one
the
way
we
did,
but
I
think
there
are
other
needs
in
the
city
as
well.
The
reason
that
the
affordable
commercial
became
a
part
of
30
perl
is
because
we
had
been
lobbied
by
several
different
groups
about
how
we
could
create
more
affordable
commercial
space.
I
do
agree
that
that
is
a
more
complex
subject.
I
would
be
tempted
to
start
with
a
focus
on
non-profits.
F
It
might
be
easiest
to
start
with
something
like
non-profits
as
a
requirement,
but
on
the
whole
I
would
like
to
see
this
continue,
because
I
believe
that
three
identified
uses
are
also
high
needs
in
boulder
and
because
every
development
will
support,
affordable
housing
and
we
have
like
that's
the
floor.
That's
the
expectation
to
even
do
development
then
having
choices.
F
I
I
agree
that
I
hope
the
economist
makes
it
hard
to
game
the
system,
but
I
think
these
other
uses
are
valuable
and
I
think,
in
answer
to
the
rest
of
the
questions,
I
would
continue
with
that.
I
would
like
to
see
community
vitality,
provide
recommendations
and
then
I
don't
know
about
restrictions
on
size
and
width
or
national
franchises,
but
I
do
think
we
should
consider
seriously
the
type
of
businesses
and
I
think
nonprofits
is
kind
of
front
and
center
with
having
real
difficulty
finding
space
in
boulder.
M
Yeah,
I'm
gonna
agree
with
sam
on
this.
I
think
we
do
need
to
move
into
phase
one
and
not
pause
on
phase
two.
I
think,
if
all
we
do
is
is
focus
on
affordable
housing,
which
is
great
and
sam
sam
did
a
great
job
of
summarizing
all
the
ways
we
we
support,
affordable
housing.
But
I
think,
if
that's
all,
we
do
we're
gonna
wake
up
ten
years
from
now
and
have
nothing
but
really
high
end
market
rate,
commercial
and
affordable
housing
and
that's
it
and
the
affordable
housing.
M
Part
of
it
is
great,
but
we're
going
to
squeeze
out
our
arts
and
culture,
cultural
users
and
our
human
services
and
social
services
users.
I
agree
with
mark
that
we
have
to
be
very,
very
careful
that
we
don't
game
this
so
that
the
developer
builds
picks
the
lowest
cost
option,
and
this
is
going
to
require
a
very,
very
delicate
balance
and
we're
probably
not
going
to
get
it
right
the
first
time,
but
to
figure
out
what
that
kind
of
point
of
inflection
is
between
where
the
developer
is
kind
of
agnostic
between.
H
So
I'm
of
two
minds
on
this-
and
I
I
hear
totally
what
mark
is
saying
and
the
reason
that
we
started
going
down
this
path
was
because
last
year,
the
year
before
that
there
were,
we
were
losing
a
lot
of
local
businesses,
and
there
was
a
lot
of
concern
and
the
the
mention
of
30
pearl
came
up
and
how
that
came
about,
and
the
reason
that
that
is,
I
think,
working
out
so
well
as
it
is,
is
because
the
nonprofit
that's
going
in
there
has
a
serendipitous
relationship
to
the
housing.
H
That's
going
in
there,
so
the
housing
is
permanent,
supportive
housing
and
the
nonprofit
serves
folks
that
can
use
permanent,
supportive
housing.
H
So
I
think
that's
perhaps
the
way,
maybe
to
approach
it
is
when
there
is
a
relationship
like
that
between
the
business
that's
going
in
there
and
the
proximity
of
the
housing
of
the
folks
that
are
going
in
there,
whether
or
not
they
are
in
the
affordable
housing,
because
it
seems
to
me
that
and
I'll
say
more
about
this
in
in
the
use
tables
discussion
that
when
we
talk
about
walkable
neighborhoods,
it's
like
walkable
for
who
somebody
is
driving.
H
So
that
somebody
can
walk
and-
and
if
we
approach
the
the
affordable
commercial
from
the
standpoint
of
if
this
business
didn't
have
affordable
housing
close
by
then
they
would
have
to
either
have
the
business
way
far
away
and
residents
would
have
to
drive
or
if
the
housing
is
far
away,
then
the
the
workers
would
have
to
drive
so
there's
a
certain
relationship
there.
I
think
that
that
we
need
to
look
at
between
the
business
that's
going
in
there
and
the
proximity
of
the
affordable
housing.
So
are
they
living
in
the
affordable
housing?
H
And
maybe
that's
who
qualifies?
Maybe
those
are
the
kinds
of
businesses
so
that
we
balance
out
the
fact
that
people
who
have
low-wage
jobs
are
generally
the
ones
that
are
driving
into
town
because
they
can't
afford
the
housing
here.
So
I
would
just
say
that
you
know
kind
of
keep
that
in
mind
so
other
than
that.
I
agree
with
three.
J
K
Thank
you,
aaron
yeah.
I
I
feel
like
we
can
move
forward
with
phase
two.
My
biggest
concern
probably
is
about
the
the
fact
that
it's,
it's
usually
larger
companies
that
have
the
ability
to
find
and
navigate
the
systems
that,
like
you,
know,
lower
rate
rents
for
commercial
spaces.
They
just
have
the
ability.
So
that's
a
major
concern
for
me
is
the
size
of
the
business.
I
realize
that
there
are
legal
issues
with
limiting
out-of-state
businesses
or
types
of
corporations.
K
But
to
me
you
know,
the
the
soul
of
the
program
is
supposed
to
be
very
small
business.
The
people
who
have
a
hard
time
navigating
things
like
this
and
making
sure
that
they're,
the
ones
that
sort
of
rise
to
the
top
when
it
comes
to
options
for
businesses
inhabiting
the
below
rate
rental
properties.
K
So
that's
that's
kind
of
my
biggest
focus
area
is
making
sure
it
truly
is
supporting
those
types
of
businesses,
because
I'd
hate
to
see
stuff
happen
like
we
saw
with
the
carriers
act
where
it
was
rather
large
corporations
that
ended
up
getting
a
bunch
of
small
business
loans,
which
you
know
is
completely
defeats
the
purpose.
So
that's.
That's
my
biggest
sort
of
red
flag.
L
All
right
thanks
a
couple
things
so
to
answer
number
one.
Yes,
I
favor
us
going
forward
and
agree
with
this
staff
wreck,
but
I'm
gonna
come
back
to
you.
L
I
think
it
needs
to
be
done
in
such
a
way
that
red
tape
is
really
minimized
and
it's
not
so
onerous
that
we're
doing
this
in
name
only
and
that
we
are
taking
pains
to
ensure
that
the
way
that
this
is
is
offered
is
a
product
that
developers
would
actually
use,
because
otherwise
we're
not
getting
the
community
benefit,
and
I
think
we
all
want
the
community
benefit.
So
I
think
we
need
to
keep
that
front
and
center
on
the
issue
or
question
of
national
chains.
L
I
I
could
see
where
that
could
be
valuable
for
a
couple
reasons
number
one
like.
If
I
you
know
think
of
like
low-cost
grocery
stores
say
they
they
would
be
an
affordable
shopping
option
for
people
living
there.
A
walkable,
affordable
way
to
get
your
food,
and
I
think
that
that
that
is
not.
I
don't
have
the
data
on
that.
L
I
think
it
was
last
week
or
a
couple
weeks
ago
we
heard
about
how
our
tax
base
was
hit
more
than
nearby
like
the
elves,
because
we
don't
have
any
big
box
stores
here,
and
so
maybe
there
is
some
value
in
having
in
having
a
place
in
boulder
that
people
obviously
want
to
shop
at
because
people
from
here,
I
think
we're
going
to
the
nearby
towns
to
do
that
shopping.
L
So
I
think
we
can-
and
none
of
that
is
to
diminish
that
I
support
space
being
made
available
and
affordable
for
our
small
businesses,
but
also
just
noting
there.
L
There
may
be
value
in
the
other
category
as
well
and
then
to
the
point
of
if
I
followed
mary
accurately,
like
tethering,
the
community
benefit
to
the
the
occupants
of
housing,
or
I
think,
if
I
heard
that,
as
maybe
what
was
being
said
and
and
would
just
caution,
it's
not
always
going
to
be
a
benefit
to
have
an
employee,
either
living
or
coming
to
work.
You
know,
like
tying
everything
together.
L
Having
worked
for
a
non-profit
that
provided
services
to
people
with
disabilities,
there
is
sometimes
you
can
be
too
close,
and
you
can
be
seen
as
like,
overstepping
or
sort
of
not
giving
people
space
and-
and
there
can
be
some
ripple
effects
that
we
may
not
be
thinking,
but
the
employee
might
not
want
to
be
right
on
top
of
their
employer
when
they
go
to
bed
at
night
or
the
individuals
being
served
might
also
not
want
to
be
completely
tethered
to
the
organization,
that's
providing
the
services.
So
I
got
thanks.
I
Thank
you.
I
just
wanted
to,
I
guess
close
the
loop
with
all
of
us
saying
something.
I
support
the
recommendation
and
you
know
and
the
fact
that
we.
N
Want
a
vibrant
community,
that's
what
I
was
thinking
when
I
saw
number
one
community
benefit
and
it
talked
about
affordable
commercial
arts
and
culture
and
human
services.
So
I
was
thinking.
Oh
we've
always
talked
about
15
minutes
neighborhood.
What
would
that
look
like?
So
I
thought
that's
a
great
idea
to
have
a
balance
between
these
two
and
I
do
understand
the
concern
of
you
know
who
are
these
affordable
commercial?
Who
will
they
be
or
which
company
will
that
be?
N
And
I
wonder
if
there's
the
type
of
perimeters
that
we
have
to
set
to
ensure
that
the
right
institutions
get
access
to
them,
because
we
do
know.
You
know
there
are
a
lot
of
huge
corporations
in
organizations,
but
also
they
are
struggling
businesses,
especially
in
this
time
of
kobe
19.
N
D
Thanks
juni
I'll
just
wrap
up
just
by
saying.
I
do
also
agree
that
we
should
move
forward
with
these
three
items
that
affordable
space
for
local
businesses
and
space
for
non-profits
and
human
services
and
for
arts
and
culture
are
critically
needed
in
this
community
and
we
lose
small
businesses
and
arts
organizations
and
other
people.
This
would
be
designed
to
serve
on
a
regular
basis
from
our
town.
So
I
do
definitely
support
moving
forward
with
this.
People
have
made
a
lot
of
great
comments.
You
know.
D
So
because
I
think
that's
that's
where
a
lot
of
the
whether
it
becomes
a
very
successful
program
or
doesn't
work
so
well
will
depend
on
a
great
deal
on
how
this
criteria
written.
So
that's
something
we
want
to
be
really
careful
with,
but
also
maybe
to
have
some
flexibility
around
so
that
you
know
we
can
have
some
some
of
that.
Maybe
that's
written
into
an
ordinance
that
would
be
require
council
action
to
change,
but
maybe
some
some
bits
that
we
have
flexibility
for
for
our
staff
to
tweak
as
necessary.
D
So
that's
something
to
think
carefully
about
as
we
move
into
writing
ordinances
about
this
and
I'll,
just
echo
what
what
rachel
said!
You
know
we
that
we
need
to
make
sure
that
these
are
programs
that
are
actually
feasible
for
people
to
include
in
their
projects,
because
otherwise
we
won't
get
the
community
benefit
that
we're
hoping
to
get
from
the
program.
E
Yes,
obviously
it's
the
will
of
counsel
that
we
should
proceed
with
phase
two
and
not
narrow
it,
and,
in
which
case,
I'd
like
to
express
some
support
for
sam's
comment
about
focusing
on
not-for-profits,
at
least
at
an
initial
stage.
I
have
you
know
a
great
deal
of
discomfort
with
some
of
the
potential
users
of
this
kind
of
space,
I'd
hate
to
see
a
a
sophisticated
financial
services
firm,
taking
advantage
of
the
program
when
an
arts
user
might
be
foreclosed.
E
D
Thanks
for
that,
all
right,
so
the
next
question
is
minimum
duration.
So
staff
has
recommended
that
these
programs
be
required
to
be
in
perpetuity
and
not
have
a
shorter
time
frame.
Does
anyone
disagree
with
that
recommendation.
H
No,
I
just
want
to
show
that
I
did
not
disagree.
Okay,.
D
Great
good
well,
it
sounds
like
we
got
agreement
on
that
and
then
the
next
bit
was
the
penalty
fee
staff
is
recommending
that
if
a
development
is
not
complying
with
these
requirements
for
some
period
of
time
that
there
be
a
penalty
fee
assessed,
does
anyone
want
to
disagree
with
that
or
offer
a
comment
on
that
sam?
I
see,
you've
got
a
hand
up
yep.
F
My
comment
is
that
some
of
the
earlier
discussion
I
agreed
with
about
having
the
flexibility
to
change
the
use
you
know,
so
if
it
was
to
go,
for
instance,
from
affordable
commercial
to
some
kind
of
human
services
space,
I
think
we
should
be
flexible
to
that.
So
I
I
think
there
should
be
a
penalty
fee
if
the
the
community
benefit
goes
away.
F
That's
kind
of
one
of
the
things
that
started
this
whole
conversation
in
the
first
place
is:
how
do
we
make
sure
that
we
get
what
is
promised,
and
so
yes,
I
think
penalty
fees
are
a
good
idea
if,
if
the
benefit
goes
away
entirely,
but
I
do
want
us
to
be
flexible
enough
that
you
know
it
can
evolve
over
time
still
providing
community
benefit.
That
may
be
changing
its
form.
F
E
I
can
agree
with
sam's
comment
on
flexibility.
I
think
we
need
to
have
some
of
that,
but
what
I'm
wondering
and
I'd
like
staff
to
look
at
it
do
we
need
a
penalty
if
we
simply
bar
the
leasing
of
the
space
outside
of
the
program.
A
dark
space
is
a
penalty
in
and
of
itself
to
a
landlord,
and
if
you
cannot
release
it
other
than
according
to
the
criteria
that
are
established,
that
is,
is
in
itself
a
fairly
substantial
penalty.
E
So
I'm
just
wondering
if
if
in
fact,
we
actually
need
a
penalty
fee
or
simply
a
prohibition
on
leasing
outside
of
the
parameters
of
affordable
commercials,
social
services
and
arts,
okay,
good.
D
Question,
let's
see
juni
did
you
want
to
say
something
get
your
hand
up.
N
Yeah,
my
my
initial
thoughts
were
exactly
what
sam
said
that
we
needed
a
little
bit
more
flexibility,
especially
thinking
and
the
time
that
we're
living
in
you
know.
I
would
imagine
I
don't
own
any
buildings,
I'm
not
a
landlord,
but
if
you
know
they're
trying
to
rent
a
property
and
they
can't
access
people
who
wants
to
rent
at
an
affordable
rate.
So
I
think
we
have
to
look
at
the
minimum
and
the
maximum.
N
So,
okay,
if
the
person
can't
rent
the
entire
space
with
for
with
affordable
at
an
affordable
rate,
when
is
it
when,
when
does
this
penalty,
take
effect?.
K
Yeah,
I
have
a
quick
response
for
mark
and
that
is
that
there
are
already
those
dark
holes
of
commercial
space
and
office
space
in
this
community
that
have
been
sitting
idle
for
years
because
the
mortgages
are
paid
off
and
it's
better
to
just
let
them
sit
than
lower
the
the
rents
across
the
board.
So
to
me,
I
think
a
penalty
is
pretty
necessary.
H
So
I
think
we
need
to
consider
the
fact
that
retail
itself
is
changing,
so
if
the
space
was
designed
more
for
retail,
that
seems
to
be
decreasing
the
need
for
retail
space,
and
so
perhaps
that
speaks
to
the
kinds
of
uses
that
can
go
in
a
particular
space,
as
well
as
the
ability
for
the
space
to
be
subdivided.
H
That
might
be
another
option
that
could
happen
in
order
to
lower
the
rents
even
further,
and
I
I
guess
another
consideration
would
be
what
if
they
wanted
to
convert
to
housing-
and
you
know
that
could
be
a
very
desirable
way
out
of
this-
of
the
commitment
of
providing
a
community
benefit.
So
just
things
to
consider.
L
G
I
think
this
mostly
applies
to
phase
two.
I
think
our
housing
already
has
provisions
for
you
know
it's
once
you
build
housing,
it's
it's
less
likely
that
that's
not
being
used
as
housing.
You
know,
there's
a
lot
of
demand
for
it,
so
I
don't
know
that
it
pertains
to
proof
to
phase
one
like
like
this.
D
Good
now,
just
one
comment:
I
think
you
want
I
I
would
advocate
for
a
mix
of
flexibility,
but
also
actually
having
a
real
penalty
right
so
that
you
know,
if
somebody
has
a
use,
that's
really
no
longer
demanded
in
the
community,
and
they
want
to
switch
to
a
different
use.
That's
also
within
the
program,
let's
work
with
them
and
and
not
hit
them
with
a
penalty
if
it
takes
them
a
couple
months
to
do
that.
D
At
the
same
time,
you
want
to
make
sure
that
the
penalty
is
more
than
the
differential
of
the
rent
that
they
would
get
for
staying
in
the
program
and
going
to
market
rate
right.
So
if
it
to
make
sure
it's
not
just
a
little
slap
on
the
wrist
that
people
might
do
anyway.
D
So
that
was
my
one
comment.
Anything
else
on
penalty
fees,
all
right,
seeing
none
our
last
bit
on
this
is
the
site
review
criteria.
Do
people
agree
with
the
staff's
recommendations
on
updating
the
site,
review
criteria
and
I've
got
mary
to
get
us
started.
Then,
sam.
H
Yes,
I
thought
they
were
outstanding
categories,
so
I
totally
agree
with
them
and
the
approach
that
staff
is
proposing.
I
will
add
a
comment
about
process.
H
I
think
that
process
could
be
something
that
could
make
a
big
difference
in
the
way
our
projects
occur.
So,
for
example,
the
the
liquor
mart
project
that
we
looked
at
last
week.
We
saw
it
during
concept
and
the
comments
that
concept
were
taken
seriously
enough
that
when
they
came
back
for
site
review
there
weren't
even
people
from
the
neighborhood
that
showed
up
to
oppose
it.
H
So
how
you
know
how
can
concept
play
concept
review
play
a
greater
role
so,
for
example,
maybe
at
concept
review
vdab
looks
at
it
that
that
might
be
one
way
to
consider
things
another.
There
were
comments
also
about
how
there's
no
architects
on
planning
board
right
now.
Well,
there
could
easily
always
be
an
architect
on
planning
board
by
having
a
an
ex-officio
bdap
member
on
planning
board.
H
Then
you
would
always
get
that
feedback,
so
those
are
some
thoughts
on
on
process
and
then
I
should
have
made
this
comment
a
little
earlier.
I
want
to
talk
about
the
the
arts
commission.
Reviewing
whether
or
not
something
would
fit
the
community
benefit
definition.
H
I
actually
think
that
it
should
be
a
subcommittee
of
the
arts
commission,
because
otherwise
staff
is
trying
to
coordinate
the
review
of
bodies
that
only
meet
once
a
month
as
opposed
to
having
a
subcommittee.
That's
that
is
a
little
more
nimble
and
can
and
can
provide
the
feedback
on
more
of
an
ad
hoc
basis,
rather
than
having
to
wait
for
a
monthly
meeting
so
other
than
that.
I
think
that
the
the
categories
are
fantastic.
D
All
right
mary,
do
you
mind
if
I
call
a
queen
on
that
last
bit?
Please
thanks
so
I'll.
Just
say
that
that's
a
that's
a
great
point
and
maybe
staff
can
go
consult
with
the
arts,
commission
and
the
art,
commission
staff
and
kind
of
kind
of
do
a
a
gaming
test
of
how
it
would
all
work
through
the
process
to
sort
of
take
that
into
consideration
and
see
whether
a
subcommittee
or
the
full
commission
might
work
better.
If
is
that,
all
right,
mary,
I
was
just,
I
think,
it's
worth
considering
for
sure.
D
Great
thanks,
sam,
I
think
it's
next.
F
Yeah-
and
I
also
want
to
commend
staff
on
this-
you
know
in
a
way
this
is
site
review
criteria.
Update
is
its
own
project.
It
actually
fits
in
very
nicely
here,
so
you
know,
because
site
review
will
be
linked
to
the
community
benefit,
so
I
like
it
all-
and
I
I
will
just
point
out
to
other
council
members
that
sometimes
change
can
take
a
long
time.
F
I've
been
talking
about
the
minimize
and
mitigate
energy
use
issues,
since
I
was
on
planning
board,
probably
starting
in
2012,
so
here
it
is
2020
and
and
that's
happening,
so
these
big
projects
sometimes
take
a
long
time,
but
you
know
if
we
stick
with
it
enough
and
get
concurrence
on
what
to
do.
They
come
to
fruition,
and
so
this
is
an
example,
and
I
really
do
I'm
very
pleased
to
see
these
being
updated
and
streamlined
and
made
more
efficient.
So
thank
you.
D
Thanks
for
that,
sam
yeah,
I
remember
you
and
mary
and
I
among
others,
back
on
planning
board.
You
know
eight
years
ago
or
something
bang
our
heads
against
the
wall
going
wow.
These
criteria
could
really
use
some
revisions.
So
it's
really
great
to
see
this
coming
to
fruition.
I
also
agree
that
the
you
guys
are
on
the
right
track.
If
I
can
call
on
myself
and
say
that
I
think
you're
going
in
a
really
great
direction.
D
Just
one
particular
comment
like
I
saw
that
building
like
maximum
widths,
I
think,
was
one
of
them
and
which
seemed
like
a
good
one
to
look
at,
but
just
for
that
and
for
any
others,
just
keep
in
mind
the
possibility
of
flexibility
like,
for
example,
there's
a
building
across
the
street
from
me,
that's
wider
than
we
normally
allow
buildings
to
be
because
it's
an
elevator
access
building
for
seniors
right.
So
that
was
that's
a
good
enough
reason
to
make
it
a
wider
building
where
we
wouldn't
normally
allow
that.
D
Like
we
are
through
this
item
staff,
carl
and
others,
did
you
get
what
you
needed?
Do
you
think,
do
you
have
any
final
questions
for
us.
D
Excellent
well
thanks
for
an
excellent
presentation
and
project,
you
guys
are
doing
great
work,
but
don't
go
far
because
I
believe
you're
still
up
and
on
tap
for
our
next
project,
which
is
phase
two
of
yeah.
The
use
tables.
J
O
Great
and
good
evening,
council,
I'm
andrew
collins
with
the
planning
department
going
to
see
if
I
can
get
the
control
here.
O
So
we
have
the
questions
here
for
your
reference
to
keep
in
mind.
As
you
move
forward
with
the
presentation,
I
consult
a
version
of
the
questions
in
the
memo.
Basically,
we're
asking
you
if
you
agree
or
disagree
or
have
other
feedback
on
the
three
overarching
practicals
the
first
three
questions
relate
to
those
number.
One
is
whether
we
should
allow
a
rare
diversity
of
uses
in
our
neighborhood
center
areas.
O
The
second
question
deals
with
whether
to
allow
limited
instances
of
additional
uses
in
our
homogeneous
neighborhoods
to
help
foster
15
minute
neighborhoods.
The
third
question
deals
with
whether
additional
uses
should
be
allowed
in
industrial
zones
balanced
with
minimizing
disruption
to
existing
industrial
uses.
O
Question
four
is
asking
whether
we
should
allow
more
flexibility
for
some
of
our
creative
uses.
Citywide
things
such
as
our
arts
gallery,
spaces,
studios
and
woodwork
uses
as
well
question.
Five
is
simply:
should
we
continue
to
streamline
and
consolidate
some
of
our
use
categories
in
the
use
table,
and
particularly
the
office
use
categories
and
the
restaurant
use
categories.
O
So
why
are
we
doing
this?
This
project
was
a
city
council
planning
board
work
plan
item
in
2018..
O
The
project
was
undertaken
as
the
use
table,
maybe
out
of
alignment
with
the
goals
and
policies
of
the
bvcp
initial
goals
of
the
project
were
to
align
or
better,
align
the
use,
table
and
use
standards
to
those
goals,
to
identify
any
any
desired
land
use
gaps
by
the
community
and
the
use
table,
and
also
to
simplify
and
to
streamline
it.
O
So
here
we
have
some
of
the
guiding
bbc
policy
guidance
policy,
2.14,
a
mix
of
complementary
land
uses
which
speaks
to
having
a
mix
of
land
uses,
but
they
should
be
compatible
with
their
surrounding
neighborhoods
policy.
2.19
neighborhood
centers,
which
speaks
to
encouraging
the
evolution
of
neighborhood
centers
to
better
serve
the
surrounding
neighborhoods
and
the
policy
2.24.
O
The
scope
of
this
project
as
a
refresher
is
chapter
9,
6,
youth
standards
in
the
city's
land
use
code.
So
this
is
a
section
of
the
code
which
tells
us
which
land
use
which
land
uses
are
either
allowed,
so
we
can
get
a
future
permit
by
right
or
which
may
be
conditional
use.
These
are
uses
that
have
a
few
criteria
that
need
administrative
review,
also,
which
is
maybe
a
limited
use.
O
So,
for
instance,
our
l1
category
says
that
the
use
has
to
be
located
above
the
ground
floor.
Otherwise
that
use
would
require
a
use
review
or
it
could
be
a
prohibited
use,
and
so
our
use
reviews
uses
are
the
ones
that
require
the
discretionary
review
approval
and
has
additional
standards
they
must
meet
and
then,
of
course,
our
prohibited
uses.
O
So
the
planning
board
appointed
a
subcommittee
in
2018,
comprised
of
three
planning
board
members
to
help
guide
the
project,
to
make
recommendations,
act
as
a
sounding
board
for
ideas
and
help
us
to
engage
with
the
public
phase.
One
of
this
project,
wrapped
up
in
november
of
2019,
with
a
series
of
ordinances
that
were
passed
by
council
that
were
related
to
the
opportunity
zone
phase
two
commenced.
In
december
of
this
year,
we've
had
14
subcommittee
meetings
that
have
wrapped
up
in
june
they've
been
online
due
to
the
ongoing
pandemic.
The
last
few
months.
O
To
give
you
a
quick
flavor
of
the
work,
that's
been
done
so
far
by
the
subcommittee.
They've
done
intensive,
deep
dives
into
the
various
use
categories
and
zoning
districts
and
have
come
up
with
some
initial
considerations
for
15-bit
neighborhoods
structural
changes
to
the
use
table,
as
well
as
ideas
for
definition,
changes
and
considerations
for
other
topics,
also
that
might
fall
outside
the
scope,
and
so
those
were
put
into
the
parking
lot
items
as
you
can
see
here
on
the
screen.
O
This
is
in
addition
to
coming
up
with
the
goals,
objectives
and
action,
steps
and
reaffirming
those
for
phase
two
and
so
for
the
phase
two.
They
developed
three
overarching
project
goals
to
help
frame
out
the
project.
They
are
number
number
one.
The
first
primary
goal
is
to
support
a
string
of
pearls
consisting
of
mixed-use
nodes
along
corridors
and
support
walkable
neighborhood
centers.
O
In
terms
of
community
engagement,
the
14
subcommittee
meetings
have
been
open
and
notice
to
the
public.
We
have
an
open
comment
period
for
each
one
of
those
meetings
and
there
the
public's
feedback
has
been
informative
and
helped
to
shape
the
project.
So
far,
as
carl
mentioned,
we
held
a
community
information
session
online
on
july
27th.
O
In
addition
to
our
project
websites
and
information,
we've
done
next
door
online
notifications
and
newsletter
mailings
with
our
communication
staff.
The
subcommittee
helped
us
to
inform
the
online
questionnaire
on
bihar
boulder
we've
had
nearly
400
page
visits
and
about
82
questionnaire
responses
so
far,
and
that
questionnaire
is
still
alive
through
the
end
of
august.
So,
if
anyone's
watching
this,
we
encourage
you
to
go
online
and
participate.
O
So
the
first
overarching
goal
is
to
support
a
string
of
pearls
and
neighborhood
centers.
These
are
many
of
our
areas
that
correspond
to
our
older
shopping.
Centers
and
key
intersections
places
like
table
mesa,
basemar
the
meadows
and
they
are
often
have
a
business
sewing
district
component
to
them.
O
So
a
business,
commercial
or
a
business
main
street
or
business
transitional
zoning
and
the
subcommittee
first
talked
about
the
idea
of
a
string
of
pearls
which
was
conceptualized
in
the
90s
in
terms
of
a
series
of
small
neighborhood
centers
along
north
broadway,
and
so
this
project
is
taking
that
idea
and
broadening
it
out
to
encompass
all
the
neighborhood
centers
that
are
defined
in
the
bbcp
comp
plan.
So
the
map
on
the
right
hand,
side
of
your
screen.
O
The
dark
blue
circles
are
those
neighborhood
center
areas
and
we
have
a
couple
more
examples
of
these
locations.
So
the
gun
barrel,
one
your
spine
and
lookout
will
be
a
newer
example
of
a
newer
neighborhood
center.
The
idea
is
discussed
with
the
subcommittee
is
that
they
felt
the
evolution
of
these
areas.
They
should
be
human
scale,
they
should
be
walkable
and
have
a
more
diverse
mix
of
uses
that
were
allowed
to
to
better
serve
the
surrounding
neighborhoods,
and
also
they
felt
like
having
some
gathering
space
could
be
important.
O
O
There
was
a
broad
support
for
a
variety
of
uses,
including
restaurants,
coffee
shops,
retail
and
personal
services,
as
well
as
a
those
that
selected
residential
housing.
There
was
a
broad
mix
of
housing
that
was
indicated
for
support,
ranging
from
duplexes
all
the
way
to
condos
and
single-family
homes.
O
The
other
primary
overarching
goal
is
to
encourage
15-minute
neighborhoods.
This
is
the
concept
of
having
limited
commercial
or
mixed
uses
and
predominantly
homogeneous
neighborhoods.
Whether
these
are
single-family,
neighborhoods
or
industrial
neighborhoods.
You
know
how
can
we
get
a
little
bit
of
a
mix
of
uses
in
these
areas
to
foster
walkability
within
the
15-minute
walk,
and
so
the
examples
on
the
screen
here
are
from
boulder.
Everyone
talks
about
the
alpine
modern
coffee
shop
and
I
think,
9th
college.
O
O
The
map
on
the
right
is
shown
here
for
for
reference,
it's
from
the
city's
2019
bike
and
network
plan,
and
so
it's
there
15
minute.
Neighborhood
assessments,
area
in
green
has
high
walkability
to
more
destinations
and
uses
such
as
retail
and
stores.
Areas
in
red
and
yellow
have
less
access
to
those
key
destinations,
and
so
it's
just
shown
here
for
reference
to
see
how
the
inclusion
of
some
additional
uses
could
be
helpful
for
fostering
15
minute
neighborhoods.
O
The
subcommittee
talked
about
a
variety
of
different
uses
under
this
concept,
and
particularly
the
idea
of
having
small-scale,
grocers
or
hardware
stores.
Personal
services
live
work
spaces
allowed
not
just
in
the
industrial
zone,
but
perhaps
in
other
areas
of
the
city
so
places
where
people
the
shopkeeper
could
live
and
work
in
the
same
premises.
O
O
O
O
The
final
primary
goal
of
the
project
again
is
to
incorporate
updates
to
the
use
table
itself
to
help
streamline
it,
particularly
the
office
use
categories
we
have
six
or
so,
which
can
be
an
issue
for
the
development
community
and
staff
alike.
We
have
to
change
out
and
do
use
change
of
use,
applications
to
take
up
time
for
some
of
these
overlapping
office,
use
categories
and
definitions.
O
O
So
before
we
get
into
the
questions
for
council,
as
carl
mentioned,
we're
at
planning
board
last
thursday,
and
so
we
have
some
slides
about
their
feedback
that
what
we
heard
from
them,
they
agreed
about
neighborhood
centers
that
they
should
be
allow
a
more
diverse
mix
of
uses
regarding
15
minute
neighborhoods.
They
generally
agree
that
there
should
be
limited
instances
of
walkable
compatible
uses
to
help
foster
these
these
neighborhoods,
where
appropriate,
they
were
open
to
the
idea,
the
details.
They
were
still
wanting
to
see
what
those
would
be
as
we
move
through
the
process.
O
O
If
you
have
an
overlay
looking
at
other
limitations,
such
as
saturation
like
we've
done
with
adus,
possibly
looking
at
form-based
code
or
other
criteria
to
establish
appropriate,
appropriate
design
and
compatibility,
and
then
there
was
discussion
on
whether
if
there
was
prescriptive
standards,
whether
that
should
be
an
administrative
review,
you
can
have
your
approval
or
whether
a
discretionary
view
was
still
appropriate.
For
these
type
types
of
uses
regarding
streamlining
the
use
table
and
standards,
there
was
agreement
that
this
should
be
done.
O
Utilizing
the
new
limited
use
category,
as
well
as
the
use,
review
and
conditional
use
standards
regarding
restaurants.
They
felt
there
was
a
balance
to
be
struck
between
streamlining
those
regulations
and
and
not
making
them
too
permissible
worried
about
impacts
to
neighboring
properties.
Perhaps,
regarding
greater
flexibility
for
creative
uses,
there
was
agreement
that
that
should
be
done.
City-Wide
regarding
small-scale
performance
venues.
Again,
there
was
some
concern
about
maybe
focusing
those
mostly
to
the
mixed
use
in
commercial
areas
and
not
adjacent
to
single-family
areas.
O
Given
potential
sounds
noise
complaints
and
then,
regarding
allowing
additional
uses
in
light
industrial
areas,
they
agree
that,
to
a
limited
degree
that
this
should
be
allowed
with
additional
criteria
to
ensure
compatibility
with
those
industrial
users,
and
they
want
to
make
sure
that
flexibility
we
built
in
to
help
to
adapt
to
future
needs,
but
that
shouldn't
in
any
way
force
out
the
existing
industrial
users
and
on
this
last
one
you
know
our
intent
with
the
project
is
to
look
at
making.
O
In
terms
of
next
steps,
you
know
where
we're
at
in
the
process
we're
going
to
continue
to
collect
public
feedback,
develop
options
and
alternatives
based
upon
the
feedback
we
receive
tonight
and
from
the
public
and
planning
board,
and
then
go
back
out
with
those
options
and
get
more
feedback,
possibly
doing
targeted
stakeholder
outreach
as
needed.
Then
developing
our
you
know,
preferred
alternatives
and
recommendations.
O
We
hope
to
do
open
houses
and
public
hearings
in
quarter
four.
This
year,
as
carl
mentioned,
this
could
push
into
2021,
especially
with
more
intensive
code
changes
that
might
come
out
of
this.
D
Thanks
so
much
for
that
andrew,
it's
very
comprehensive
appreciate
that
so
does
council
have
questions
for
staff
on
this
project.
All
right
mark
comes
in
first.
E
Really
really
one
question:
when
we
talk
about
appropriate
locations
for
commercial
uses
in
residential
neighborhoods,
what
input
will
the
neighborhoods
have
in
making
that
determination
if
table
mesa,
wants
a
lot
of
coffee
shops
and
lower
chautauqua
does
not?
Is
that
going
to
be
accommodated,
or
is
this
going
to
be
a
one-size-fits-all
sort
of
regime.
O
It
would
definitely
be
have
to
be
accommodated.
I
think
the
15-minute
neighborhood
question,
particularly
you
know,
once
we
figure
out
what
our
options
are,
we'll
have
to
go
back
out
and
do
outreach
with
the
specific
communities
and
what
the
actual
tools
are
to
implement
some
of
these
ideas.
O
It
remains
to
be
seen
again
if
it's
a
pilot
project,
it
might
be
a
one-off
approach
to
see
how
it
goes
if
it's
an
overlay
that
could
be,
you
know,
potentially
another
appendix
map
which
highlights
areas
based
upon
public,
the
public's
feedback
that,
yes,
we
want
some
of
these
user
uses
here.
O
So
I
think
it
remains
to
be
seen
at
this
point,
but
that
the
intent
would
be
that
the
neighborhoods
would
have
a
voice
in
the
uses
that
would
potentially
be
allowed,
and
so
with
all
this,
it's
simply
allowing
the
option
to
occur.
You
know
the
the
business
owner,
the
property
owners
will
still
have
to
even
choose
to
even
go
through
with
changing
out
their
building.
Let's
say
from
an
older
residential
house
to
a
commercial
use
in
the
future,
so.
D
Great
mary
and
then
rachel.
H
Thanks
for
the
presentation,
andrew
and
for
all
your
work
on
this,
my
question
is
about
the
string
of
pearls
and
did
staff.
Consider
in
that
map
with
the
string
of
pearls.
Was
there
any
effort
to
look
at
how
affordable
housing
existing,
affordable
housing
fits
into
that
string
of
pearls
puzzle
and,
if
so,
what
was
done
and
if
not,
how
might
that
be
incorporated
in
the
future?.
O
I
don't
know
that
we
looked
at
particularly
in
terms
of
where
the
existing
affordable
housing
is,
I
think,
we're
looking
at
the
residential
land
uses
and
the
use
table
and
maybe
potentially
looking
at
whether
those
allowances,
if
it's
you
know,
prohibited
use
or
if
it's
a
limited
use
or
use
review.
Let's
say
for
maybe
some
other
types
of
housing
products
that
may
be
attached
or
versus
single
family.
Maybe
those
could
be
loosened
up
potentially,
but
I
can't
say
that
we've
looked
at
that
in
particularly
in
any
great
detail
in
terms
of
the
affordability
factor.
L
Thanks,
I
had
a
couple
first
from
the.
I
think
it
was
from
planning
board
feedback.
It
said
that
in
the
single
family,
home
zoned
areas,
something
wouldn't
go
there,
what
all
would
not
go
or
were
thinking,
maybe
wouldn't
go
in
largely.
O
Yeah
that
was
related
to
the
small
scale
performance
venues
in
particular,
that
came
up
during
our
subcommittee
meetings,
whether
to
allow
that
particular
use
more
broadly
and
during
the
planning
board
meeting,
there
was
actually
an
open
comment.
Someone
had
an
issue
with
an
existing
small-scale
performance
venue,
making
noise,
and
so,
as
part
of
that
discussion,
they
wanted
to
make
clear
that
perhaps
you
know
with
all
these
ideas,
details
remain
to
be
seen,
and
so
we'll
have
to
figure
out.
L
Okay
and
then,
second
to
mark's
question
about
what
would
neighborhood's
ability
to
give
input,
be
I'm
a
little
bit
wary
of
something:
that's
not
rolled
out
sort
of
with
concrete
boundaries
around
it
so
like
would
the
whole
neighborhood
have
to
agree
to
it
if
one
person
objects
like
that
seems
that
just
frightens
me
a
little
bit
if,
if
we're
getting
into
like
veto
power
for
neighbors
or
neighborhoods,
if
it's
you
know,
maybe
something
that's
going
to
be
beneficial
to
the
community.
O
O
Yeah,
we're
not
we're
not
there
yet
with
this
particular
project,
we're
still
kind
of
in
the
initial
ideas
working
our
way
down
to
the
options
phase.
So
our
goal
is
to
get
more
specificity
on
what
these
elements
could
look
like
with
this
particular
idea
of
15-minute.
Neighborhoods
is
maybe
one
that
would
do
more
outreach
around
what
tools
implementation
we
could
use
may
push
into
20-21,
and
so
it
could
be
that
if
we
come
up
with
an
appendix
j
map,
it's
only
with
certain
criteria
that
it
has
to
meet
at.
O
You
know
major
street
corners
of
major
streets
with
design
criteria.
The
public
process
may
be
more
in
this
process,
and
then
it
could
be.
You
know
a
discretionary
view
use
review.
So
it
follows
that
same
planning
board
approval
process.
We
haven't
thought
about.
I
don't
think
yet
the
specifics,
but
hope
to
get
there
kind
of
soon.
So.
L
All
right
and
then
last
thing
like
when
I
visualize
my
own
15-minute
walkable
neighborhood,
at
least
from
my
part
of
the
neighborhood
you're,
usually
walking
on
thunderbird
and
there's
a
lot
of
you
know
it's
very
unattractive
and
there's
a
lot
of
emission
vehicle
emissions
sort
of
you're
breathing
it
in
as
you
walk.
L
So
I
just
wonder
like
along
with
creating
walkable
neighborhoods
or
we're
looking
at
all
it
creating
corridors
or
pathways
that
are
going
to
make
people
more
want
to
walk,
because,
at
least
in
some
neighborhoods
there's
you
you,
don't
necessarily
want
to
get
the
noise
pollution,
the
vehicle
pollution
and
it's
ugly.
So
yeah.
O
I
think
I
think
that
would
be.
You
know
an
ideal
for
maybe
perhaps
other
projects
this.
The
scope
of
this
project
really
is
just
looking
at
the
chapter:
nine
six.
You
know
what
leases
are
allowed
or
conditionally
allowed.
I
think
it
dovetails
in
certainly
I
know
the
transportation
group
has
been
looking
at.
You
know
their
bike
and
network
plan,
their
15-bit
neighborhoods
assessments,
but
this
particular
project.
You
know
we're
not
really
considering
those
design,
kind
of
landscaping
and
other
comfort
level
elements.
G
So
obviously,
a
lot
of
that
we
included
in
the
packet
we
had
that
parking
lot.
So
a
lot
of
those
things
kind
of
well,
that's
a
good
idea,
but
that's
out
of
the
scope
of
this
project.
Let's
put
that
in
the
parking
lot
and
communicate
that
to
other
departments,
you
know
that
might
be
able
to
go
well.
That
might
be
a
good
place
to
remove
some
sort
of
transportation
barrier.
Or
you
know
this
is
a
area
that
we
might
want
to
do.
An
area
plan
on
in
the
future.
E
If
I
can
jump
in
for
a
second
rachel,
can
I
colloquy
on
your
first
question.
I
thought
I'm
a
little
late,
but.
L
You
may
let
me
just
tie
up
this
last
just
I
think
it's
helpful
if
we
do
move
some
things
along
together
and
I
understand
what
you're
saying
that
that's
you
know
over
in
a
parking
lot
for
another
department
to
look
at,
but
if
we
create
walkable,
neighborhoods
and
they're
not
appealing
to
walk
in,
I
don't
think
we've
achieved
what
we're
after
there
thanks.
E
Okay,
my
comment
to
rachel
is:
it
was
not
my
intention
to
suggest
that
that
a
cranky
neighbor
should
control
in
the
determination
of
what
goes
where
it's
just
that
there
ought
to
be
some
process
for
discerning.
What
the
community
at
large,
well,
not
at
large
but
in
in
small
areas,
might
want
for
their
communities
and
that
can
differ
on
a
neighborhood
by
neighborhood
basis
and
ought
to
be
to
some
degree
accommodated
out
of
100
but
to
some
degree
they
said.
If,
if
north
boulder
wants
many
more
coffee
shops,
they
should
have
them.
E
L
D
Fair
enough,
I
had
one
question
which
was
for
the
industrial
zone
changes.
Did
you
have
a
particular
list
of
zones
that
you
were
considering
targeting
with
that
or
is
it
all
industrial
zones.
O
It
would
be
all
the
industrial
zones
again,
I
think,
for
those
particular
sort
of
uses.
You
know
we're
looking
more
at
incremental
changes
for
the
youth
tables
now
and
then
again,
waiting
for
these
boulder
subcommittee
planning
process
to
play
out
in
terms
of
what
they
might
come
out
with
recommendation
recommendation-wise,
I
believe
all
uses
were
on
the
table.
All
zoning
districts
are
on
the
table.
Okay,.
D
K
Thanks
aaron
yeah,
my
mine
is
a
follow-up
to
yours.
It
seems
when
we're
talking
about
zoning
changes
a
lot
light.
Industrial
does
come
up
pretty
frequently
and
I'm
wondering
since
that's
something
that
we've
wanted
to
also
protect,
but
it
seems
like
we're
also
trying
to
open
it
up
a
little
bit
more.
K
At
some
point.
I'd
love
to
see
you
know
what
the
trend
has
been
in
the
total
area
of
light
industrial
that
we've
had
in
the
city
and
what
what's
sort
of
happening
in
that,
because
at
some
point
we
may
have
no
light
industrial,
and
I
think
that
does
have
an
important
role
in
the
city.
As
far
as
providing
some,
you
know
some
jobs
that
aren't
high
tech,
which
seems
to
be
the
majority
of
what
we
have
coming
into
the
city.
K
So
that's
just
one
concern
sort
of
looking
in
the
longer
view
for
me.
D
Okay,
fair
enough
any
other
questions
for
staff
all
right,
seeing
none!
If
we
can
get
those
questions
for
council
out,
please.
O
We
can
have
go
back
to
the
simplified
version
yeah
that
was
well
there.
D
There
we
go
okay,
so
I
think
we
can
take
these
one
by
one.
Probably
they
are,
I
think,
a
little
bit
different
from
each
other.
So,
and
I
think
you
know,
staff
has
a
particular
direction.
So
I
think
maybe
council
can
offer
up
comments
about
that
or
ways
in
which
we
think
the
direction
should
be
changed
in
each
of
these.
D
E
To
me,
this
is
the
low-hanging
fruit
I
mean
we,
we
don't
even
know
what
what
the
vibrance
of
neighborhood
centers
will
look
like
in
a
post-covert
era.
It
seems
perfectly
appropriate
to
look
at
those
spaces
and
try
to
reimagine
them
in
a
way,
that's
better
for
our
community
in
terms
of
different
uses,
housing
etc.
So
to
me,
this
one
is
easy,
great,
sam
and
then
mary.
C
F
Nodes
and
they're
very
important
nodes
for
the
surrounding
residential.
F
The
one
thing
I
would
comment
is
a
lot
of
these
are
bc1
and
bc2
business,
commercial
zones
and
one
of
the
bullet
points
in
the
staff
memo
was
a
question
about
office
uses
and
it
seems
to
me,
like
we've
kind
of
run,
that
down
in
our
bc
one
and
two
conversation.
We
had
lots
and
lots
of
discussion
about
offices
and
we
came
up
with
rules
that
we
eventually
adopted.
F
So
I
would,
I
would
de-emphasize
straight
office
uses
and
I
would
focus
on
you
know
the
community
serving
whether
it's
retail
or
coffee
shops
or
bike
shops,
or
you
know
many
many
different
things
I
just
would
emphasize
office
because
there's
lots
of
spaces
for
that,
and
maybe
these
aren't
the
best
space
and
I
think
I
think
we've
we've
run
that
one
to
ground.
So
that
was
my
only
comment
on
number
one.
H
Adam,
so
I'm
going
to
kind
of
respond
to
questions.
One
two
and
three
and
kind
of
to
hopefully
help
us
think
more
broadly
about
how
we
approach
this.
So
we
talk
about.
We
talk
about
restaurants
and
coffee
shops
and
retail
and
personal
services.
A
lot
of
those
businesses
produce
low-paying
jobs.
H
So
that's
the
reason
that
I
was
asking
about
affordable
housing
and
if
that
was
included
in
the
string
of
pearls.
I
think
that
if
we
look
at
the
string
of
pearls
and
consider
that
perhaps
affordable
housing
residents
could
benefit
the
most
from
having
walkable
neighborhoods,
because
sometimes
they
often
don't
have
cars
not
by
choice
but
because
they
can't
afford
them
so,
and
sometimes
they
may
be
the
ones
that
are
working
in
these
places.
H
So
I
would
to
the
extent
that
we
can
think
about
that
and
think
a
little
more
holistically
about
okay,
so
who's
going
to
be
walking
to
this
and
who's
going
to
be
driving
to
this.
And
how
can
we
minimize
that
driving
by
finding
synergies
between
what
is
there
and
what
could
be
there?
So
that's
kind
of
my
comment
other
than
that.
H
I
do
think
that,
yes,
yes
and
yes
for
all
three
of
those,
but
thinking
more
broadly,
about
walkable,
for
whom
and
and
who
can
have,
who
can
benefit
the
most
from
access
to
these
uses.
D
K
Yeah,
I'm
actually
here
to
second
both
of
those
points.
Sam,
I
think,
made
a
great
point.
I
remember
I
wasn't
on
council
yet,
but
I
was
sitting
through
that
meeting
where
you
guys
drilled
down
office
space
as
about
as
far
down
as
you
possibly
could.
So
I
think
that
doesn't
necessarily
have
to
be
in
here
and
to
mary's
point
when
you
look
at
the
map
of
walkable
neighborhoods,
the
green
areas
are
not
exactly
where
our
current
affordable
housing
is
condensed
right.
K
Now,
that's
for
sure
so
trying
to
incorporate
as
much
of
that
affordable
housing
in
the
wakable
neighborhoods
makes
absolute
sense.
It's
just
a
really
really
excellent
point.
D
Yeah
I'll
call
on
myself
and
agree
with
those
points
as
well.
Although
adam,
I
will
note
that
one
of
the
green
areas
is
up
in
my
part
of
town
at
the
north
edge
of
town,
where
there
is
actually
a
fair
amount
of
affordable
housing
so,
and
you
sometimes
will
see
folks
walking
from
the
neighborhood
to
jobs
in
the
local
retail
commercial
areas.
D
So
I
definitely
agree
with
this
and
just
like,
like
sometimes,
we
have
overly
restrictive,
narrow
requirements
on
what
can
go
in
some
of
these
centers
and
so
like
one
of
our
local
re.
D
Retail
strips
up
here
only
allows
for
neighborhood
serving
uses,
which
is
a
fairly
narrow
definition,
and
there
just
aren't
enough
businesses
that
want
to
be
up
here
that
meet
that
definition,
and
so
some
of
those
spaces
sit
empty
or
or
end
up
being
a
little
office
space
that
doesn't
have
any
retail
function
or
contribute
to
that
walkable
neighborhood
so
definitely
support
that
for
sure.
N
D
Thanks
juni
next
should
we
allow
limited
instances
of
walkable
and
compatible
uses,
such
as
small-scale,
cafes
or
corner
stores,
to
foster
15-minute
neighborhoods
in
typically
homogeneous
neighborhoods
in
appropriate
locations?
Who
wants
to
start
us
off
on
this
one?
D
F
Yeah,
I
think
the
answer
is
yes,
and
I
think
many
of
the
pictures
that
were
shown
to
illustrate
what
kind
of
cafes
and
and
stores
fit
nicely
in
neighborhoods
were
good.
I
want
to
address
the
question
of
neighborhood
input
here.
First,
a
question:
what
level
of
review
was
staff
imagining
for
this
kind
of
change
of
use?
So
imagine
that
it's
a
residential
use
that
changes
proposes
to
change
to
a
small-scale
cafe
in
an
rl1
district.
How
would
that
be
handled?
What
would
the
review
process
look
like.
G
Today,
under
our
code,
any
kind
of
non-residential
use
requires
a
use
review
and
those
types
of
uses
require
planning
board
review.
So
I
think
we'd
have
to
look
at
you
know
if
that
would
be
appropriate
in
a
particular
location.
It
doesn't
mean
we
couldn't
find
some
specific
criteria
that
could
apply
to
a
particular
location.
If
there
was
a
lot
of
buy-in
from
the
community
to
make
it.
You
know
a
conditional
use
potentially,
but
I
think
our
starting
point
would
be
use
review
unless
we
found
something
that
was
that
was
appropriate
for
conditional.
J
F
And
that's
where
I
think
that's
an
appropriate
venue.
I
I
just
wanted
to
comment.
You
know.
Rachel
has
a
concern
that
leans
one
way,
which
is
too
much
restriction
by
a
neighbor
who's
going
to
veto
it
and
mark
has
a
concern.
The
other
way
that
there
won't
be
any
neighborhood
into
it.
I
think,
to
start
with
in
this,
the
planning
board
use
review
is
a
nice
venue
because
it
provides
a
place
for
people
to
express
their
opinion
and
then
planning
board
is
going
to
look
on
balance
right.
F
F
If
it's
going
to
be
in
an
rl1
things
that
are
just
kind
of
the
ground
rules,
so
that
anyone
who's
considering
it
would
would
know
what
they're
going
to
go
into,
but
I
think
the
planning
board
actually
serves
as
a
very
useful
place
to
gather
the
community
input
and
not
listen
too
much
to
one
side
too
much
to
the
other
and
try
and
come
up
with.
You
know
a
a
solution
that
will
work
for
the
community,
so
I
think
that's
a
good
place
to
start.
D
I
think
you
know
when,
when
you
have
little
neighborhood
commercial
uses,
I
think
it
just
really
adds
to
the
vitality
of
the
neighborhood,
and
you
know
where
you
can
just
walk
around
the
corner
and
and
pick
up
something
that
you
need
or
or
want
from
a
coffee
shop
or
ice
cream
store,
or
what
have
you
or
get
your
hair
cut
or
something
so
big
fan
of
this-
and
I
just
said
I
think,
of
like
latin
american
neighborhoods-
are
very
good
at
this.
You
know
that
they'll
be
predominantly
residential.
D
Neighborhoods
that'll
have
a
a
little
taco
stand
on
the
corner
or
a
little
grocery
store
and
just
really
adds
to
the
street
life
and
vibrancy
of
of
some
of
those
neighborhoods,
so
really
glad
you're
working
on
this
and
and
I'll
just
just
say,
kind
of
from
kind
of
an
equity
perspective
in
terms
of
what
uses
are
allowed.
I
know
this
is
out
of
scope,
but
like
one
of
the
ways
that
you
do
see,
that
kind
of
neighborhood
used
sometimes
is
vendors
out
on
the
street
selling.
D
You
know
popsicles
or
or
corn
on
the
cob,
or
something
like
that,
and
I
always
which
is
totally
legal
by
our
code.
I
believe
and
and
but
I
always
I
enjoy
it
when
I
see
it
out
there.
So
you
know,
in
addition
to
allowing
a
little
neighborhood
serving
retail
uses
at
some
point,
it'd
be
great
to
consider
how
we
could
have
let
people
sell
on.
D
You
know
a
little
bit
of
food
on
the
corner
as
well
any
other
thoughts
on
this
one,
all
right,
seeing
none.
We
can
move
on
to
number
three,
which
is
about
allowing
additional
uses
such
as
residential
retail
or
restaurants,
and
light
industrial
areas
in
order
to
foster
mixed-use
walkable
neighborhoods,
while
protecting
and
minimizing
disruption
to
industrial.
Existing
industrial
uses.
D
All
right,
I
think
sam
beat
mark
by
a
half
second,
so
sam.
F
I
think
this
is
really
important
and
really
somewhat
difficult
to
do
a
good
job
in
because
I,
I
really
do
think,
there's
a
lot
of
opportunity
to
put
residential
in
late
industrial
areas,
but
two
problems
come
up
and
both
have
already
been
flagged.
One
is
compatibility,
and
so
there
are
light
industrial
uses,
for
example,
marijuana
grows
or
coffee
roasting
that
create
a
lot
of
smell,
and
so
one
challenge
with
bringing
residential
in
or
even
restaurants,
into
venues
like
that.
F
Is
you
end
up
with
a
conflict
that
can
drive
out
the
original
uses
that
were
there,
which
creates
the
smells
but
which
we
have?
You
know
pretty
pretty
good
industry
in
both
coffee
and
in
marijuana,
and
so
that's
something
we
definitely
don't
want
to
do
is
drive
those
out.
So
one
of
the
things
I
think
would
have
to
happen
is
there
would
need
to
be
covenants
on
these
additional
uses
that
you
know
kind
of
like
there
are
covenants
around
airports.
F
Sometimes
some
people
build
residential
near
airports,
which
is
you're
not
allowed
to
complain
and
attempt
to
drive
away
the
use
that
was
here
first
and
which
is
something
we
desire.
So
I
don't
know
how
that
would
work,
but
that
is
one
concern
about
about
doing
this,
and
the
other
concern
I
have
is
that
you
know
if,
if
a
place
was
attractive
for
residential
development,
you
could
lose
whole
swaths
of
things.
F
I
think
of
western
avenue
near
55th
street,
which
has
a
bunch
of
great
funky
little
non-profits
and
businesses
and
startups,
and
some
high
tech
and
many
not-
and
I
wouldn't
want
to
see
that
all
wiped
out
by
residential
development,
because
it's
a
starting
place
for
lots
of
small
businesses,
and
so
the
other
idea
that
I
saw
a
few
times,
but
I
want
to
really
flag
for
this.
F
One
is
the
saturation
limit,
so
in
other
words,
light
industrial
uses
can
go
anywhere
at
any
time
in
those,
but
there
would
be
a
saturation
limit
on
say
residential,
so
you
can
only
have
a
certain
amount
of
residential
developments
in
x,
foot
radius
in
an
attempt
to
preserve
the
light
industrial
uses
and
have
some
of
the
infill
there's
a
big
need.
For
this
I
mean
you
go
out
to
where
one
of
my
offices
used
to
be
in
on
55th
and
flat
iron.
F
It's
hard
to
get
to
food
from
there
there's
one
sandwich
shop
which
comes
and
goes
over
the
years,
but
that's
it,
and
that
was,
I
think,
a
non-conforming
use.
Everything
else
has
to
be
office
or
something
else.
That's
no
good,
because
it's
way
too
homogeneous
and
everybody
many
people
get
in
their
cars
and
drive
out
for
lunch,
and
so
I
think,
bringing
restaurants
in
there.
Some
amount
of
residential
would
be
really
good
for
that
area.
F
It
would
diversify
it,
but
you
wouldn't
want
to
again
see
it
so
attractive
that
all
those
other
uses
were
wiped
out.
So
I
think,
while
protecting
and
minimizing
disruption
to
existing
industrial
uses
is
the
key
to
getting
this
right,
so
I'm
a
big
fan
of
it,
but
I
also
think
that
we
need
to
use
tools
to
make
sure
that
we
preserve
the
industrial
uses
which
are
also
very
important
to
our
community.
E
I
support
the
idea
of
changing
uses
in
light
industrial
areas
to
provide
some
residential
to
help
offset
our
our
housing
jobs
and
balance,
but
we
need
to
be
very,
very
careful
about
how
we
do
it.
E
I
take
as
an
example,
you
know
the
many
many
small
businesses
located
off
of
pearl
parkway
if
you
zone
that
so
that
or
change
the
use
tables
so
that
residential
is
permitted,
you
will
increase
the
value
of
the
land
immediately
and
probably
drive
out
all
of
those
uses,
or
at
least
to
the
extent
that
we
permit
it,
because
residential
is
going
to
be
a
much
higher
performing
revenue
source
for
the
owner.
E
So
you
know
the
concept
of
protecting
and
minimizing
disruption.
I
I
support
I'm
a
little
concerned
that
we
can
actually
do
it
well,
possibly
with
some
of
the
restrictions
that
sam
articulated,
we
might
be
able
to
get
there,
but
I
don't
want
us
to
be
losing
all
of
our
small,
affordable
businesses
simply
to
level
the
area
and
end
up
with
pure
residential
thanks
yeah.
D
Thanks
for
that
mark
I'll,
just
chime
in
here,
I
agree
with
both
what
you
said
and
what
sam
said.
I'm
a
big
fan
of
this
idea
as
well,
and
particularly
you
know
getting
some
more
restaurant
and
food
uses
into
those
industrial
parks,
as
well
as
some
other
convenience
retail
and
then
also
allowing
you
know
some
residential.
D
So
with
the
caveats
already
stated,
I
think
this
is
a
great
project
and
one
thing
is
also
to
think
about:
protecting,
like
our
service
industrial
uses,
right
like
the
we
want
to
make
sure
that
we
still
have
the
ability
to
get
an
oil
change
in
town,
for
example,
you
know
those
those
kinds
of
those
are
things
that
well,
if
it's
a
car
use,
it's
not
about
a
walkable
neighborhood,
but
it's
about
having
a
complete
city
right
where
you
can
meet,
then
all
the
needs
of
the
citizens
or
the
residents
within
the
city
itself.
D
D
All
right,
I
is
that
a
thumbs
down
from
ginny,
oh
she's,
inverted
junie,
you're
turned
upside
down
somehow
anyway.
Okay
sounds
like
people
are
generally
in
favor.
Of
this
I
mean
who
doesn't
like
creativity
right.
So
I
think
that
sounds
good
and
then
next
they're,
proposing
to
oh
you're,
back
right
side
up
juni,
very
nice
they're
proposing
to
simplify
and
streamline
use
table
and
standards
such
as
consolidating
some
office
use
categories
and
restaurant
use
categories.
People
generally
feel
good
about
that
direction.
D
Okay,
I'm
getting
more
thumbs
up
all
right
and
any
other
kind
of
broad
brush
thoughts
on
on
the
overall
topic.
Those
are
the
specific
questions.
F
I
just
want
to
thank
staff
on
this.
I
mean
this
doesn't
use
tables
right,
they
don't
get
a
ton
of
airplay
and
a
lot
of
people
never
have
a
need
to
look
at
them,
but
they
govern
a
huge
amount
of
the
way
the
fabric
of
the
city
comes
together
and
evolves
going
forward.
So
I
am
just
pleased
that
council
supports
what
staff
is
doing.
I'm
pleased
that
staff
is
digging
into
this.
F
It's
a
great
job
like
I
said
the
memos
were
really
good,
so
I'm
excited
to
see
both
of
these
community
benefit
and
the
use
tables
and
the
site
plan
review
adjustments
get
completed.
You
know
in
latest
like
21,
because
I
think
it'll
be
really
good
and
it
will
have
things
in
updated
mode
and
we
won't
have
to
necessarily
adjust
them
again
in
a
significant
way
for
a
while.
So
thanks
to
staff
and
council
for
working
on
this
project,
thanks.
H
Yeah,
I
just
wanted
to
kind
of
follow
up
on
what
sam
said
and
and
point
out
that
this
is
again
another
thing
that
I
believe
aaron
and
sam,
and
I
have
been
talking
about
for
years
and
years
and
years
and
an
example
of
just
how
long
it
takes
for
things
to
come
to
fruition.
So
thank
you
for
that
and
I
appreciate
all
the
work
that
staff
has
done
and
that
the
planning
board
subcommittee
has
done
and
the
outreach
in
these
trying
times.
D
Yeah
I'll
echo,
all
of
that-
and
it
is
such
it's
such
a
great
project
to
get
done,
and
it's
really
not
very
exciting
in
certain
ways
like
use
table
standards.
But
you
know
when
you,
when
you
work
with
this
stuff
for
a
while,
just
every
once
in
a
while,
you
know,
there's
the
charts
are
so
complicated,
but
you'll
be
reviewing
a
project,
and
you
say:
oh
well
how
about
doing
this
interesting
things?
Oh,
not
allowed
by
the
use
tables?
D
Oh
that's
really
too
bad
so
and
it's
very
hard
to
just
change
them
incrementally
a
little
bit
by
a
little
bit.
So
I'm
really
glad
that
we're
undertaking
this.
So
I
want
to
echo
the
thanks
to
staff
for
all
the
hard
work
and
the
creative
directions
you're
going
here.
I
also
wanted
to
shout
out
to
the
planning
board,
particularly
the
use
tables
subcommittee,
which
has
had
something
like
14
meetings
right.
D
It's
been
this
really
long
involved
process,
and
I
know,
I
believe,
is
david
enzyme
and
sarah
silver
and
brian
bowen
have
been
on
that.
Has
anyone
else
participated
from
planet,
world
yeah,
yeah.
O
So
crystal
gray
was
on
there
well
and
lupita.
Montoya
joined
us
most
recently
for
the
last
committee
meeting.
I
think
that's
the
participants
so
far
great.
D
G
D
Thanks
everyone,
great
thanks,
everybody
all
right!
Well
we're
running
almost
50
minutes
ahead
here,
but
our
next
item
is
about
policing
and
so
is
chief
harold.
Here
there
you
are
marissa.
I
see
you.
A
Turn
out
by
introducing
the
two
presenters
for
this,
and
so
chris,
if
you
could
pull
up
the
presentation,
I'd
appreciate
it.
So
we
are
going
to
do
matters
related
to
policing,
and
you
all
will
recall
that
in
june,
chief
harold
was
here
to
talk
about
her
strategic
priorities.
A
So
if
you
could
go
to
the
next
slide,
yes,
here's
our
today's
presentation,
so
the
police,
chief
and
the
police
department
team
have
been
working
really
hard
on
establishing
new
strategic
priorities
for
the
organization
and
they've
made
quite
a
bit
of
process.
Progress,
I'm
sorry
and
process,
two,
probably
and
chief
harold,
is
going
to
start
out
by
making
a
presentation
on
that
and
then
she'll
be
turning
it
over
to
wendy
schwartz
and
you
all
know,
wendy.
A
As
a
member
of
our
housing
and
human
services
team,
particularly
focused
on
homeless
services,
we
have
asked
wendy
to
take
an
assignment,
a
special
assignment
to
be
the
project
leader
for
our
police
department
master
plan.
We
felt
like
wendy's
great
work
as
a
project
manager
would
assist
us
and
in
particular,
her
heart
for
human
services
and
the
homeless.
Issues
would
really
make
a
difference
in
this
particular
process,
so
those
will
be
our
two
presenters
and
I'll
turn
it.
Over
now
to
chief
maris,
harold.
P
If
you
would
afford
me
the
opportunity,
though,
to
first
say
a
very
quick
thanks
to
the
boulder
police
department,
reform
and
change
is
very
challenging
and
it's
challenging
in
any
organization,
including
the
police
department,
and
I
just
wanted
to
say
thank
you
for
all
the
hard
work
they've
met.
My
challenge
head
on
and
they've,
provided
me
great
support
that
includes
our
911
staff
and
our
civilians
that
work
for
the
boulder
police
department,
the
executive
team
supervisory
staff
as
well.
So
I
just
wanted
to
say
thank
you
next
slide.
P
I
think
this
was
a
question
for
council,
and
maybe
we
will
address
that
later
next
slide.
P
So
I've
been
asked
a
lot
over
the
last
several
months
about
how
I
see
policing
in
the
future
and
no
matter
how
you
look
at
it.
I
really
believe
it's
going
to
come
down
to
these
three
major
categories:
technology
and
science,
because
technology
and
science
present
provides
police
departments
and
cities,
strategies
with
strategies
and
solid
decision
making
policing
will
also
become
much
more
harm
focused
and
when
you
talk
about
harm
focused
you
get
away
from
policing
being
very
reactive
and
start
to
look
at
preventing
bad
things
from
happening.
P
Which
brings
me
to
my
next
point.
This
is
probably
the
most
interesting
thing
I
think
of
when
I
think
of
policing
in
the
future-
and
this
is
this
concept
of
holistic
governance,
and
one
of
my
favorite
quotes
is
from
perry.
Sixx,
who
is
an
organizational
change
agent
out
of
the
united
kingdom,
who
says
problems
that
government
is
expected
to
tackle,
are
not
neatly
organized
along
the
functional
lines
by
which
government
itself
is
organized,
and
so,
when
I
think
about
that,
I
think
about
any
successful
initiative.
P
So
everything
I
talk
about
tonight
is
really
going
to
fit
into
those
three
boxes:
technology
and
science-
and
you
know
I
don't
think
it's
scientific
to
mention
this
either
futuristic,
there's
engineers
and
scientists
that
are
working
in
this
country
right
now
on
developing
technology
that
will
stop
killing,
and
I
followed
this
technology
very
closely,
and
so
I
really
probably
will
not
happen
in
my
career,
but
I
do
think
that
we
will
develop
technology
that
will
incapacitate
weapons
and
incapacitate
people
without
pain
for
a
very
long
duration.
P
And
it's
it's
something
I'm
very
excited
about
and
I'll
follow
closely.
But
I
do
not
think
it's
like
science
fiction
to
start
thinking
that
way,
and
I
think
these
last
incidents
across
the
country
continue
to
move
this
technology
in
the
right
direction.
P
Next
slide,
you
can
go
ahead
and
change
it
again,
so
boulder
police
department's
commitment
to
ethical,
effective
and
equitable
policing
has
fallen
into
these
six
categories.
This
is
not
a
new
slide.
I
presented
this
last
time,
but
this
is
our
commitment
and
what
I've
tried
to
do
in
the
last
couple
months.
Is
I've
tried
to
at
least
pick
one
area
in
each
one
of
these
boxes
and
have
that
completed?
P
And
I
plan
to
do
that
for
the
next
couple
years
until
we
actually
have
a
huge
impact
in
each
one
of
these
categories,
keep
in
mind
each
one
of
these
boxes
contains
at
least
15
to
20
heavy
lifts
in
each
box,
but
let's
go
through
some
of
the
things
that
we've
been
able
to
accomplish
in
the
last
few
months.
Next
slide,
please.
P
P
P
I'm
very
excited
that
we've
signed
the
kali
accreditation
contract
and
this
work
has
already
begun.
The
importance
of
this
work
obviously
is
to
have
a
third
party
internal
expert,
come
in
review
our
model
policies
and
make
sure
that
the
processes
and
procedures
and
guidelines
that
a
police
department
has
is
meeting
best
practices.
P
P
So
in
the
data
category,
I'm
very
excited
to
present
that
we've
hired
a
strategic
data
and
policy
advisor
for
the
police
department.
Her
name
is
beth
christensen,
she's
an
outstanding
hire.
She
started
august
3rd
and
she's
already
started
to
change
the
automation
of
the
data,
how
it's
seen
how
it's
perceived
within
the
department.
P
She
has
20
years
experience
as
a
crime.
Analyst
she's,
a
gi
expert
she's
a
programmer,
and
she
is
a
national
problem-oriented
policing
expert,
which
provides
me
great
guidance
on
data
that
she's
seen
on
a
daily
daily
basis
and
she'll
really
bring
this
police
department
into
21st
century
policing
concepts
and
really
begins
to
form
data-driven
strategies
which
becomes
so
important
in
the
21st
century.
Policing,
reform
era
next
slide,
please.
P
So
none
of
the
reform
efforts
can
happen
without
a
very
talented
full-time
training
section.
So
I've
committed
to
not
only
have
one
supervisor
dedicated
to
this
function
but
have
four
full-time
24
7
training
employees
that
can
keep
us
up
to
date
on
all
of
the
new
reform
efforts
that
we'll
be
putting
in
place.
P
P
P
Recruiting
and
hiring
obviously
the
recruiting
side,
I
didn't
have
impact
on
the
recruiting
side,
but
I
did
on
the
hiring
side-
and
I'm
very
excited
about
this
new
young
group
of
recruits
that
we
just
hired
they're
36,
diverse
employees.
We
can
do
much
better,
but
I
think
we're
above
the
national
curve
and
standard
on
recruiting,
there's
always
room
for
improvement,
but
I'm
very
excited
about
the
educational
levels.
The
diverse
perspectives
of
this
group,
we've
hired
two
female
two
hispanic
and
one
asian,
and
they
just
do
provide
a
different
perspective
in
the
policing.
P
They
are
very
open-minded
to
reform
and
the
exciting
part
about
this
is
you
can
really
tell
that
the
new
training,
the
new
use
of
force,
all
of
the
new
policies
that
we're
going
to
be
putting
in
place
this
will
become
the
way
they
have
been
trained.
So
I
don't
have
to
peel
back
years
and
years
and
years
of
other
types
of
training,
they'll
be
getting
all
the
new
innovation
and
training
as
we
proceed
next
slide.
P
So
we
talked
a
lot
the
last
time
we
were
together
on
icat,
the
icap
model,
the
critical
decision
making
model
and
how
it
was
radically
different
from
other
use
of
force,
policies
and
other
use
of
force.
Metrics,
and
this
is
exciting.
I
was
able
to
bring
in
two
icat
nationally
accredited
experts
from
washington
dc.
P
They
have
trained
30
of
our
swat
and
tactical
officers.
This
included
university
of
colorado
police
as
well,
and
a
commander
from
erie
and
we've
also
had
a
relationship
started
with
cu
denver.
Dr
paul
taylor
is
evaluating
the
training
moving
forward
and
we've
also,
the
icat
model
has
also
been
trained
to
all
of
the
new
recruits.
P
This
will
be
ongoing
and
probably
take
us
up
until
december
or
january
to
complete
the
the
entire
model
for
the
whole
police
department.
The
other
exciting
thing
is:
is
dr
paul.
Taylor
has
put
in
a
grant
for
a
research
center
right
here
in
boulder
with
the
police,
including
boulder
police
department
and
cu
police
department,
that
I
think
that
if
we
work
with
the
independent
monitor,
we
really
could
do
some
big
things
in
policing
and
monitoring
moving
forward.
P
P
We
have
an
updated
use
of
force
policy
that
integrates
all
the
icat
model
into
the
policy
itself,
and
I
think
it
brings
us
up
to
date
with
all
concerns
on
a
national
level
prohibits
all
chokeholds
shooting
moving
vehicles
requires
intervention
if
excessive
force
is
witnessed,
emphasizes
withdrawing
taking
cover,
creating
distance
requires
consideration
of
less
lethal
alternatives,
and
it
gives
provides.
P
It
covers
all
use
of
force
in
residence
complaints
tomorrow
and
the
next
day
la
chief
is
coming
into
boulder
to
train
our
entire
command
staff
and
supervisory
staff
on
the
new
use
of
force
policy
leadership
and
the
expected
investigative
processes
that
must
be
undertaken
as
part
of
any
citizens
or
resident
complaint
and
use
of
force.
Investigation
next
slide.
Please.
P
So,
as
I
promised
you
and
probably
one
of
the
most
overlooked,
parts
of
police
reform
is
developing
comprehensive,
data-driven
crime
strategy.
I
could
have
selected
from
a
different
from
various
different
problems
that
I
see
boulder
is
facing,
but
our
first
major
problem-oriented
policing
project,
we've
selected
domestic
violence.
P
Domestic
violence
is
a
chronic
problem
in
boulder
and
it's
a
chronic
problem.
That's
often
under
reported
across
the
country,
and
my
one
of
my
main
reasons
for
selecting
domestic
violence
is
that
the
numbers
are
increasing
not
only
in
boulder
but
across
the
country
in
large
part
due
to
covid-
and
I
don't
see
these
numbers
going
down
with
some
type
without
some
type
of
intervention,
and
so
we
are
going
to
tackle
this
problem
next
slide.
Please
I'm
sorry
next
slide.
P
If
you
could
go
back,
I'm
sorry.
I
just
want
to
hit
this
on
the
domestic
violence.
P
Practices
really
suggest
that
co-response
is
so
powerful
on
some
of
these
type
of
crime
problems,
and
so
this
project
will
be
led
by
our
civilian
division
within
the
department
who
are
victim
advocates
and
domestic
violence,
crime
experts,
and
so
what
I'd
really
like
to
accomplish
here
is
we
have
chosen
a
lethality
assessment
that
on
serious
domestic
violence
will
have
a
co-response
and
we
will
try
to
using
this
new
tool
predict
if
future
violence
is
likely
and,
more
importantly,
if
fatality
is
likely-
and
so
this
this
is
just
a
really
good
project.
P
So
here's
here's
with
the
road
map
to
police
reform.
I
think
I've
covered
at
least
one
or
two
or
three
in
each
of
those
six
major
categories.
P
So
I
won't
read
through
all
of
these,
but,
as
you
can
see,
I've
tried
to
cover
each
of
those
six
major
categories
that
we
talked
about
in
june.
The
work
will
continue,
but
I
I
think
it's
really
important
to
talk
about
next
steps
in
pace
of
the
reform.
P
Next
slide,
please
so
next
steps
moving
forward
and
and
a
lot
of
these
initiatives
will
continue
to
take
place
throughout
the
fall
and
into
december.
But
the
next
steps
are
going
to
be
explore.
Evidence-Based
implicit
bias,
training
and
I
had
a
meeting
with
dr
kimberly
miller
from
colorado
state
university
she's
very
interested
in
developing
an
evidence-based
implicit
bias,
training
for
boulder
pd.
P
So
I'm
going
to
continue
to
explore
that,
and
I
think
that
is
another
great
step,
starting
in
the
next
quarter.
We're
going
to
start
to
integrate
the
I
cap
principles
into
traffic
in
all
of
our
bias-free
policies,
and
this
is
a
this-
is
a
heavy
lift,
because
the
importance
of
the
icap
model
has
to
be
integrated
into
almost
everything
the
police
officer
learns
and
does
so.
P
We
really
have
to
take
a
hard
look
at
all
of
our
policies
and
procedures
within
the
police
department
and
start
integrating
the
sanctity
of
life
into
all
of
these
policies
and
procedures.
The
importance
of
the
sanctity
of
life,
tactically
training,
everything
we
do
becomes
so
vitally
important,
I'm
very
interested
in
understanding
our
mental
health
request
a
lot
more
than
we
do
right
now,
and
I
foresee
this
is
going
to
be
another
heavy
lift.
P
But
we
we
really
need
to
understand
that,
so
we
have
to
take
a
deep
dive
into
that
and
understand
and
produce
some
type
of
quarterly
or
biannual
report
on
how
the
police
department
is
responding
to
mental
health
requests
and
concerns
from
across
the
community
and
then.
Lastly,
we've
already
begun
work
on
this.
P
The
officer
workload
analysis
which
beth
will
help
us
walk
through,
but
this
becomes
another
fundamental
piece
of
work
in
police
reform,
because
what
it
tells
the
community
what
it
tells
the
police
executive
team,
what
it
tells
community
leaders
is
how
much
time
police
are
responding
on
reactive
calls
for
service
versus
discretionary
time,
and
this
becomes
extremely
important
to
understand.
Do
the
police
have
the
time
to
engage
in
high
level
problem
solving,
or
are
they
just
going
from
radio
run
to
radio
run,
which
is
not
what
we
want
at
all?
P
We
want
to
be
in
a
preventative
stance,
understanding
problems,
understanding
harm
in
the
community,
and
it's
only
then
do
you
get
to
the
total
picture
of
police
reform.
So
this
will
help
me
guide
and
the
executive
team
guide
how
our
officers
are
patrolling.
Are
they
visible?
Are
we
problem
solving
and
that
we
can
develop
a
robust
patrol
development
strategy,
which
becomes
extremely
important
if
you
want
the
police
department
to
be
in
a
preventative
mode?
P
A
lot
of
police
departments
across
the
country
are
spending
80
percent
of
their
time
on
reactionary
policing,
and
that
is
detrimental
to
the
community.
And
so
it's
something
that
I
would
just
like
to
know.
Data
points
are
we
at
60?
Are
we
at
50,
and
so
this
becomes
critical
to
understanding
the
officer's
specific
workday,
and
then
you
can
start
branching
out
into
other
areas
of
the
police
department.
D
Thanks
so
much
chief,
harold
folks,
we
want
to
let
them
finish
the
presentation
and
then
we
can
ask
any
questions
at
the
end,
so
work
for
people,
okay,
very
good.
So
I
guess
we'll
go
to
wendy.
Q
Thanks
so
much
good
evening,
council
members,
deputy
chief
johnson,
were
you
going
to
say
a
few
words
about
the
master
plan
background
from
2013
absolutely.
R
Before
we
dive
into
future
master
planning,
we
thought
we'd.
Give
you
a
little
update
or
review
of
things
that
were
accomplished
based
on
the
master
plan
was
completed
in
2013,
so
real
high
level,
some
of
the
more
significant
accomplishments
and
where
we're
headed
into
the
future.
As
an
organization
in
2013,
we
really
wanted
to
look
at
what
community
policing
meant
not
only
for
the
boulder
police
department,
but
for
our
community
and
born
of
that
was
the
neighborhood
policing
area
program
which
we
rolled
out
several
years
ago.
R
R
As
far
as
responding
to
calls
for
service,
you
know
one
of
the
things
we
wanted
to
manage
was:
are
there
things
that
we're
responding
to?
We
don't
need
to
be
and
to
take
a
look
at
how
much
time
our
officers
were,
spending
on
calls
and
what
work
they
were
doing.
R
A
significant
piece
of
that
calls
for
service
reduction
was
born
out
of
the
alarm
ordinance
that
was
passed
by
council
several
years
ago,
which
required
alarm
holders
to
get
permits
and
has
helped
us
reduce
significantly
our
response
to
the
99
false
alarm
rate
in
the
city
of
boulder
and
so
far
we're
seeing
about
a
20
reduction
in
alarm
calls.
We
have
a
new
vendor
on
board
as
of
this
year.
R
We
also
looked
at
expanding
our
online
reporting
capabilities.
Our
community
is
very
tech,
savvy
and
being
able
to
file
a
police
report.
Online
is
something
they
were
looking
for,
and
it's
a
way
to
maximize
our
officers
time
and
generate
a
lot
of
police
reports
that
don't
need
an
in-person
police
officer
presence
through
the
online
system
with
technology.
There
are
a
couple
areas
that
we
worked
hard
on.
R
One
was
we
knew
we
needed
a
new
records
management
system
and
in
late
2016
we
really
dove
into
that
process
and
turned
on
our
new
system
in
2017,
and
that
system
has
helped
us
again
move
from
older
technology
to
newer
technology,
and
we
also
wanted
to
focus
our
energy
on
the
radio
system
that
we
use
and
if
you
recall
back
about
three
and
a
half
years
ago
now,
the
community
culture
and
safety
tax,
the
radio
project
was
paid
for
through
that
tax
and
we're
nearing
the
completion
of
that
project
now,
which
will
really
give
us
a
state
of
the
art
radio
communication
system
for
all
of
our
first
responders
in
boulder.
R
So
we're
happy
to
be
near
the
end
of
that
public
outreach
and
education
was
another
area.
We
wanted
to
focus
our
energy
on
several
years
ago,
we
decided
to
kind
of
reinvigorate
our
participation
in
national
night
out.
Many
of
you
have
been
out
on
that
first
tuesday.
In
august
with
us
meeting
the
community.
It
gives
us
a
great
opportunity
to
communicate
with
and
talk
to
people
in
their
neighborhoods,
and
we
also
wanted
to
partner
better
with
social,
social
services
groups
and
probably
the
biggest
success.
R
There
was
our
partnership
with
mental
health
partners
that
evolved
into
the
edge
program
and
really
gave
us
a
meaningful
mental
health
co-responder
program
several
years
ago
before
it
was
really
being
pushed.
That's
another
program
that
we
want
to
work
on
and
continue
to
make
better.
But
it
really
has
served
our
officers
well,
and
it
has
really
provided
better
crisis
intervention
and
mental
health
services
to
people
in
crisis
in
our
community
along
the
public
outreach
lines.
R
We've
done
a
significant
amount
of
engagement
with
the
university
of
colorado
athletic
department,
and
we
also
created
a
community
engagement
and
dialogue
panel
that
meets
with
the
chief
police
and
the
two
deputy
chiefs
every
other
month
to
get
feedback
from
community
members.
Allow
us
to
communicate
with
them
about
policies,
procedures,
things
going
on
in
the
community
and
what
they
expect
from
their
police
department.
R
As
we
move
forward,
you
know
we
policing
is
always
evolving
and
changing.
There
were
a
number
of
things
that
were
not
in
our
master
plan
in
2013
that
we
took
on
as
additional
work.
An
example
of
that
is
our
early
adoption
of
body,
worn
cameras.
I
think
most
of
you
are
familiar
with
senate
bill
217
that
passed
this
summer,
which
requires
body
cameras
for
all
law
enforcement
officers
in
the
state
of
colorado.
R
R
So
we're
happy
and
proud
that
we're
ahead
of
where
things
are
going,
both
at
the
state
level
and
our
community
level,
and
I
think
you
know,
as
we
talk
about
the
the
national
and
local
discussions
on
police
reform
for
us.
This
master
plan
really
gives
us
an
opportunity
to
create
that
roadmap
for
us
on
what
police
reform
looks
like
for
the
city
of
boulder
and
for
the
boulder
police
department
and
using
the
master
planning
process.
R
Q
Good
evening,
council
members,
I'm
going
to
start
by
giving
a
general
overview
of
the
city's
master
plan
process,
then
move
on
to
the
next
steps,
specifically
for
the
police
master
plan
process
to
so
to
start
with
the
general
overview.
Most
city
departments,
of
course,
have
master
plans
or
strategic
plans
to
establish
policies,
priorities,
service
standards
and
facility
and
system
needs,
and
acceptance
of
master
plans
provides
direction
for
city-wide
priorities
for
capital
improvements.
Q
Plans
are
also
required
to
be
consistent
with
the
boulder
valley,
comprehensive
plan
and
the
city's
sustainability
and
resilience
framework
master
plan.
Lengths
vary
based
on
a
variety
of
factors.
In
this
case,
the
2013
master
plan
was
designed
as
a
five
to
seven
year
plan
and
the
city's
master
plan
process
typically
consists
of
four
major
phases
over
the
course
of
approximately
two
years
next
slide.
Please.
Q
Q
Q
Next
next
slide,
as
we
look
to
get
started
on
phase
one,
we
would
like
to
recommend
that
council
appoints
a
master
plan
process
subcommittee
consisting
of
two
council
members,
and
this
is
a
structure.
That's
recently
been
used
with
other
master
plans.
I
believe
the
open
space
and
mountain
parks
plan
is
an
example
of
that.
Q
The
process
subcommittee
will
work
with
staff
on
the
project
core
team
and
those
members
are
listed
here
on
this
slide
to
guide
the
process
and
to
really
champion
the
project
and
those
council.
Members
are
in
a
good
position
to
do
that,
because
they're
so
involved
in
the
process
along
the
way
should
council
approve
this
recommendation.
Q
Go
ahead.
The
next
slide-
and
that
has
our
question
for
counsel
in
this
study
session,
which
is,
does
council,
agree
with
the
staff
recommendation
to
appoint
a
master
plan
process
subcommittee
composed
of
two
council
members
to
work
with
staff
to
develop
the
math,
the
police
master
plan
process
and
with
that
I'll
end
and
we'll
be
happy
to
take
any
questions.
Thank
you.
D
Yeah
thanks
so
much
for
that
wendy
and
also
deputy
chief
johnson,
for
your
overview
from
the
last
master
plan
and
and
chief
harold,
for
your
overview
of
where
we're
headed
so
really
appreciate
all
that
information.
We
have
questions
for
staff
on
any
of
these
topics.
Bob
I
see,
you've
got
your
hand
up.
M
C
M
Advice,
do
you
have?
Did
the
two
of
you
have
for
council
on
successfully
navigating
a
process
for
a
large
and
complex
master
plan.
H
Sure
I
think
that.
H
It
takes
some
dedication
and
the
process
that
that
we
were
in
took
an
entire
two
years
on
a
monthly
basis.
We
met,
and
one
of
the
key
things
I
think
was
to
be
recognized
our
role
in
the
process.
Our
role
was
to,
I
guess,
sort
of
a
a
course
correction
sort
of
role.
H
There
were
many
times
when
staff
would
come
and
say
we're
gonna
present
things
this
way
or
we're
gonna
ask
the
community
that-
and
this
is
how
we're
going
to
tell
that
story
and
the
process
subcommittee,
which
also
consisted
of
two
open
space
board
of
trustees,
would
I
think
I
can
recall
at
least
three
or
four
times
when
we
said
that's,
not
gonna,
work
and-
and
it
took,
I
think,
some
some
courage
on
our
part
to
just
say:
nope.
H
They
ain't
gonna
work,
and
I
think
that
it
took
some
openness
on
staff's
part
to
it
meant
that
they
had
to
scrap
some
of
what
they
planned
and
kind
of
go
back
to
the
drawing
board.
But
we
over
the
course
of
those
two
years
we
were
able
to
develop
a
very
strong
partnership
with
staff
and
we
worked
hand
in
hand
very
well
very
candidly,
and
I
think
we
all
learned
to
really
trust
each
other.
So
I
think
those
are
important
things.
H
D
D
I
think
what
we
understood
to
be
how
council
as
a
whole,
would
see
an
issue
you
know,
so
we're
really
trying
to
focus
on
process
and
how
the
process
would
work
well
for
the
whole
council,
and
then
we
also
served
as
ambassadors
back
from
the
open
space
department
and
the
subcommittee
back
to
council-
and
you
know,
would
present
things
every
so
often,
so
you
know
really
really
requires
you
to
be
in
a
fairly.
You
really
have
to
stick
to
process
over
substance
right
while
mary
and
I
have
some
different
perspectives
on
open
space.
D
It
rarely
mattered
because
we
really
both
were
working
together
to
try
to
make
sure
the
process
worked
as
best
as
it
possibly
could
for
the
whole
community.
So
I
think
you
want
that
kind
of
dedication
to
the
to
the
project
rather
than
to
a
particular
point
of
view.
H
Given
the
the
composition
of
this
council,
I
think
it
would
be
really
beneficial
to
have
one
senior
council
member
and
one
junior
council
member
who
is
not
yet
serving
on
a
process
subcommittee,
because
there's
a
lot
to
learn
about
process
and
that
junior
council
member
will
take
with
them
into
their
subsequent
service
what
they
learn,
and
I
think
it's
it
could
be
really
valuable,
not
just
to
the
council
member
but
to
the
entire
community.
H
F
So
aaron,
if
I
could
jump
in
sure
I
I
just
want
to
say
I
I've
served
on
one
with
aaron.
We
did
the
comp
plan
subcommittee
together
and
then
I'm
on
one
with
rachel
right
now,
and
one
thing
I
would
just
say
bob
in
answer
to
your
question-
is
one
of
the
roles
of
the
council
members.
It's
to
focus
on
process.
It's
also
to
be
a
political
sounding
board.
You
know
one
of
the
functions
and
I
think
that's
what
mary
was
alluding
to
one
of
the
functions.
F
Is
we
hear
from
community
members
all
the
time,
and
so
we
have
like
this
broad
view
of
what
the
community
thinks
and
so
sometimes
what
might
sound
good
in
a
staff
meeting
might
come
to
the
process
subcommittee
and
the
council
members
might
say:
well
that's
going
to
fall
flat
or
it's
missing.
This
element
that
the
community
will
want
to
hear,
and
so
you
know
the
role
the
council
member
on
these
process
subcommittees
is
not
to
be
at
all
a
subject.
Matter:
expert.
In
fact
you
know
it's
better.
F
F
I'll
give
a
specific
example
when
the
second
survey
was
coming
out
on
the
comp
plan,
aaron
and
I
both
were
fairly
unhappy
with
some
of
the
questions
that
were
being
asked
because
they
were
somewhat
leading,
or
they
left
out
important
background
information
and
so
aaron,
and
I
spent
a
few
hours
working
over
the
survey
questions
and
thought
that
that
was
very
important
because
we
could
see
what
some
community
members
might
think
were
shortcomings
of
the
survey,
questions
which
would
make
the
results
much
more
questionable.
F
L
Thanks
for
the
question,
I
would
think
in
terms
of
junior
and
senior
council
members
like.
Maybe
the
point
would
be
that
it's
somebody
who's
been
on
a
subcommittee,
a
process
subcommittee
before
and
somebody
who
hasn't
as
an
example.
I
could
see
mirabai,
maybe
from
her
background
being
good
for
the
subcommittee,
so
she
might
be
a
senior
council
member
but
has
not
done
a
subcommittee,
so
I
wouldn't
want
to
like
close
the
door
on
that
option
for
her.
H
Well,
I
think,
there's
also
something
to
consider.
I
think
this
is
going
to
be
a
two-year
process.
So
that's
another
consideration.
D
Yep
yep,
I
think
every
everybody
likes
it
lots
of
thumbs
ups
and
nodding
heads.
I
think
this
is
going
to
be
I'll.
Just
speak
a
little
bit
here
that
this
is
going
to
be
a
big
project.
There'll
be
a
lot
of
community
attention
on
it.
I
think
you
know,
chief
harold,
is
bringing
a
lot
of
new
perspectives
and
directions
the
department,
a
lot
of
there'll,
be
a
lot
of
attention
and
interest
on
this.
So
I
think,
having
a
couple
council
members
help
shepherd
it
through
would
be
really
useful.
D
F
B
F
D
Point
good,
well
anything
else
that
anybody
wants
to
add
on
the
topic
of
policing
and
the
master
plan.
The
upcoming
master
plan.
L
I
had
a
question
so
I
had
a
number
of
questions
as
we
went
through
the
slides
or
are
those
not
right
for
tonight
like
should
I
ask.
L
Okay,
sorry,
I
missed
the
earlier
call
for
questions,
so
thanks
for
the
presentations
deputy
chief,
john
johnson
and
chief
harold
and
wendy
as
well.
So
my
first
one-
I
don't
know
if
it's
if
it
can
be
answered
by
you
all
or
not.
I
know
there's
some
dovetailing
so
just
wanted
to
verify.
L
L
Is
it
used
in
boulder
because
it
would
be
used
in
conjunction
with
police
like
if,
if
police
call
and
and
ems
arrives,
they
might
be
asked,
as
I
understand
it,
to
sedate
someone
who's
perceived
as
out
of
control?
So.
P
R
I
don't
know,
but
we
we
can
certainly
ask
and
find
out.
You
know
our
ambulance
service
is
a
contracted
contract
situation
with
american
medical
response
amr,
but
we
can
ask
and
we
can
get
you
an
answer.
L
That
would
be
awesome.
Thank
you
number
two.
You
mentioned,
I
think
deputy
chief
johnson
mentioned
it
senate
bill
217
and
that
we
were
out
ahead
and
a
couple
criteria
there.
What
are
we?
What
is
the
timeline?
And
what
do
we
need
to
do
to
be
responsive
to
senate
bill
217,
going
forward
like
what
two
of
them
are
kind
of
covered,
because
we're
already
using
body,
cams
and
collecting
data?
Are
there
other
big
lifts
that
were
required
for
local
police
departments
that
we're
working
on.
R
Right
so
there
aren't
really
big
lifts.
What
we
haven't
figured
out
yet
is
how
how
the
stage
is
going
to
collect
data
from
us,
but
we
have
got
to
see
me
some
emails
from
the
state
looking
for
working
groups
put
together,
for
example,
with
the
stop
data,
how
the
state's
going
to
collect
that
on
a
statewide
basis
and
what
format
that'll
be
worked
on,
because
that
that
reporting
really
doesn't
start
until
2023.
R
I
think
a
lot
of
the
other
pieces
are
really
policy
related
and
many
of
them
were
already
addressed
in
our
policies
so,
for
example,
the
use
of
chokeholds
we
haven't
used
chokeholds
at
boulder
pd,
since
I've
worked
here
in
1993,
but
clarifying
that
in
our
policies,
not
not
any
real,
significant
heavy
lifts
that
we
have
to
do
to
comply
with
217.,
the
real
big
ones,
I
think,
are
going
to
be
financial
burdens
for
other
agencies
on
body
cameras
and
agencies
that
have
done
zero.
L
Okay,
I
mean
it
might
be
nice
to
see
sort
of
the
column
of
what's
required
under
that
bill
and
what
we've
already
done
and
what
we're
still
working
on
at
some
point.
Okay,
so
that
was
one
question
colloquy
on
that.
H
Just
a
real
quick
question
on
the
stop
data,
the
the
department
or
actually
recording
the
stop
data
is
really
time
consuming.
I
was
able
to
go
on
a
ride
along
with
a
sergeant
and
as
they
put
in
the
data
it
it
took
a
good.
I
don't
know
five
ten
minutes
to
manually
enter
all
the
data.
Will
that
be
improved
as
we
move
forward.
R
Yeah
we're
hoping
to
figure
out
a
better
system
to
collect
that
data.
What
we're
using
now
is
really
embedded
in
our
records
management
system,
but
we
are
working
with
in
org
through
our
our
cad
system,
our
computer
dispatch
system,
looking
at
ways
where
we
can
pre-populate
fields
and
make
things
easier.
L
All
right,
just
a
couple
more
for
me,
maris,
you
mentioned
a
focus
on
domestic
violence,
which
is
I'm
excited
to
hear
that
that's
gonna
be
a
focus,
and
you
mentioned
something
about
something
that
sounded
like
it
would
sort
of
be
a
point
of
data
that
would
tell
you
whether
lethality
was
indicated
in
a
particular
dv
situation.
L
L
P
So
the
lethality
assessment
tool
there's
a
few
different
versions,
but
they're
they.
Basically,
I
don't
want
to
say,
predict
it's
too
strong
of
a
word,
but
they
most
certainly
have
heavy
influence
on
the
victim
of
domestic
violence
to
indicate
the
threat
of
fatality
or
serious
physical
harm,
and
so
my
my
desire
is
to
have
a
co-response
with
somebody.
L
Thanks
interesting,
so
it's
not
so
much
from
the
you
know
whether
or
not
you
make
it
an
arrest.
It's
whether
or
not
the
the
victim
maybe
wants
to
leave
the
home
that
night
from
what
I'm
hearing
so
and
then
last
one
it's
a
little
bit
off
track,
but
from
I
think,
an
email
I
saw
earlier
in
this
week
it
sort
of
looked
like
in
our
response
to
covid
and
at
the
hill
we
had
maybe
moved
beyond
education.
L
I
just
wanted
to
understand
if
my
read
of
that
was
accurate,
that
sort
of
there
was
going
to
be
some
indication
to
the
community
that
there
was
going
to
be
lower
tolerance
for
parties,
and
things
like
that
that
sounded
to
me,
like
maybe
we
had,
we
were
moving
beyond
education,
which
the
last
update
we
got
was.
We
were
in
kind
of
an
education
only
mode.
P
The
police
department
has
been
pretty
consistent,
education
warning
and
egregious
behavior
requires
citation
and,
as
a
last
resort
arrest
and
some
of
the
behavior
that
we
saw
last
weekend
on
the
hill
was
egregious.
We
issued
a
lot
of
citations
for
underage
drinking
we've
investigated
a
tremendous
amount
of
nuisance
calls
for
loud
parties
too
many
people
at
the
parties,
and
so
I
don't
have
the
exact
data
in
front
of
me,
but
we
did
take
some
citations
and
we
did
write.
H
You
get
an
answer.
No,
I
I
have
a
couple
questions.
One
is
for
maris
in
your
presentation.
You
went
through
a
whole
bunch
of
things
that
have
changed
since
you
came
on,
which
is
pretty
amazing.
What
you've
done
in
such
a
short
time.
So
thank
you
for
that,
but
I
wanted
to
just
ask
how
those
all
align
with
the
requests
that
we
heard
so
fervently
from
the
community.
H
Well,
if
you,
if
you
go,
are
we
talking
about
if
you
like,
for
example,
we
heard
some
some
of
this
stuff
was
like
eight
can't.
Wait
was
one
of
the
things
and
there's
there
were
several
things
under
there,
and
so
how
do
the
changes
that
you've
made
since
then
align
with
those
requests?
Some
of
those
requests,
such
as
eight
can't
wait
that
we
saw
it
come
in.
P
Thanks
mary,
that's
a
great
question
and
I'm
sorry
I
kind
of
rushed
that
part.
So
all
of
the
use
of
force
changes
that
we've
made
the
icat
model
training.
P
The
eight
can't
wait
is
very
interesting
because
we
have
checked
every
box
and
they
can't
wait
with
the
exception.
If
you
keep
reading,
then
it
says
defund
the
police.
So
I
would
say
that
if
you
looked
at
the
categories
in
their
web
page
that
we
are
consistent
or
exceeding,
they
can't
wait.
We're
very
consistent
with
the
recommendations
by
the
obama
foundation.
P
I
think
we're
exceeding
that
and
I
think
we
have
a
model
policy
on
use
of
force,
and
I
think
that
the
independent
monitor
has
reviewed
that
and
would
agree
with
me.
So
as
far
as
national
standards
and
having
a
model
policy
on
what
people
are
demanding
across
the
country.
I
think
we
are
exceeding
that,
with
the
exception
of
the
defund,
the
police
movement,
so
I
feel
confident
we're
we're
ahead
of
the
curve
on
on
many
of
the
national
cries
for
new
policies
and
reform.
H
Thank
you
for
that,
appreciate
it
and
then
the
next
one
is
for
wendy
and
on
in
that
slide,
where
you
presented,
who
was
going
to
be
part
of
the
process
subcommittee,
I
don't
recall
seeing
a
member
of
the
community
and
I'm
sorry
if
it
was
on
there,
but
I
didn't
see
it.
Q
Thanks
for
that,
mary,
what
I
listed
on
that
slide
were
staff
members
and
departments
involved
in
the
internal
staff,
core
planning
team.
Q
So
it's
true
that
there
wasn't
a
community
member
in
that
group,
but
as
we
work
together
as
the
staff
core
team
works
with
the
process
subcommittee,
the
council
members,
then
what
we
would
really
want
to
do
as
as
part
of
that
process
is
determine
how
we
can
be
affected
in
getting
community
members
involved
in
the
process.
And
so
I
think
that
that
type
of
involvement,
the
best
way
to
accomplish
what
you're
talking
about,
hasn't,
been
determined
yet
but
determined.
During
our
phase.
One
planning.
H
Thank
you
and
the
reason
I'm
asking
is
because
the
the
open
space
master
plan
subcommittee
had
the
two
ospt
members
which
are
members
of
the
community,
and
I
think
we
really
benefit
it
from
those
perspectives.
H
So
in
terms
of
the
police
master
plan,
I
think
it
would
be
really
helpful
to
have
somebody
and
I'm
gonna
name
names,
because
I
think
she
would
be
amazing
as
part
of
this
process
subcommittee,
which
is
lou
scalisia,
who
works
for
nine
to
five
and
she's
very,
very
involved
with
the
spanish-speaking
community
and
does
a
lot
of
outreach
and
a
lot
of
work.
And
so
I
think
she
would
be
an
excellent
member
or
somebody
like
luz
would
be
really
great
and
or
somebody
from
the
community
connectors.
H
The
community
connectors,
I
think,
might
be
a
good
resource,
but
I
think
that
additional
element
would
be
really
helpful
as
it
was
in
the
in
the
open
space
master
plan
process.
D
Thanks
mary,
we
got
mark
and
then
junie
first.
E
I
want
to
thank
you
for
that
presentation.
It
was
really
terrific
and
very
informative.
Two
questions.
The
first
one
builds
on
one
of
rachel's
questions
with
respect
to
behaviors
on
the
hill.
I
had
understood
that
there's
going
to
be
some
sort
of
coordination
between
our
police
force
and
the
cu
administration
and
or
police
force
in
terms
of
passing
information
back
and
forth,
so
that
they
could
exert
pressure
from
their
end
for
better
behaviors
in
a
way
that
perhaps
a
citation
cannot
provide.
Is
that
going
on.
P
Yeah
mark
thank
you
for
that
question.
With
our
new
data
analyst,
we
actually
have
built
a
pretty
extensive
report
for
the
police
department
at
cu
who
actually
turns
that
over
to
her
administration,
but
it's
a
pretty
extensive
report
on
a
daily
basis
of
everything
that
we're
doing
either
we're
doing
it
together
or
we're
doing
it
individually,
but
she
is
getting
a
report
on
a
daily
basis,
so
they
are
kept.
You
know
as
close
as
real
time
as
possible
on
what
the
boulder
police
department
and
the
city
attorneys
are
doing.
P
So
I
think
that's
working
out.
Well,
obviously,
you
know.
I
would
like
to
have
a
much
more
robust
data
system
which
we're
working
on
to
work
with
cu,
which
is
going
to
require
data
agreements
and
so
forth,
but
we've
been
able
to
accomplish
that
in
short
order.
E
The
other
item
that
was
raised
with
respect
to
that
was
effectively
putting
some
pressure
on
property
owners
for
the
conduct
that
is
ongoing
on
their
properties.
And
are
we
doing
that
in
any
form.
P
Yes,
and
I
think
tom
carr
is
here,
and
he
his
team
has
been
really
at
this
for
at
least
a
couple
months
and
so
tom.
If
you
want
to
say
anything
or
I
can
take
it
whatever
you
want
to
do.
S
We
we
notified,
I
think,
13
properties
we're
in
the
process
of
following
up
with
12
of
them
that
that's
the
next
step
is
a
meeting
and
then
potential
public
nuisance,
we're
working
with
the
property
owners
to
try
to
address
the
issues,
as
marist
said
that
tool
that
she
described
the
data
rattles
dr
benson
drafted,
allows
our
team
to
in
real
time,
download
data
from
the
computeris
dispatch
and
ultimately
link
to
body
cam
video,
so
that
we
can
build
our
cases
so
we're
actively
working
that
we're
also
coordinating
directly
with
the
county
and
with
cu
on
a
weekly
basis.
E
R
I
can
answer
that
chief,
so
many
many
many
many
years
ago
we
had
an
asset
seizure
fund
and,
to
be
quite
frank,
as
time
went
on,
we
stopped
seizing
assets,
but
we
had
this
fund
that
we
needed
to
expend
because
it's
governed
by
the
federal
federal
government.
N
Thank
you
aaron,
so
I
really
appreciate
this
presentation
and
I'm
very
excited
to
hear
that
we
are
ahead
of
the
curve
when
it
comes
to
new
policies
and
reforms
around
the
country.
So
I
really
appreciate
you
saying
that,
and
also
I
appreciate
the
idea
on
building
relationships.
I
think
that
was
mentioned
by
curtis.
I
believe,
and
also
you
mentioned,
reducing
response
to
certain
calls.
N
So
a
week
ago
I
was
part
of
a
panel
discussion
with
a
few
of
our
state
legislators
and
I
learned
about
the
star
program
in
denver,
and
I
wanted
to
hear
from
you
maris
whether
it
is
a
program.
That's
already
been
implemented
in
boulder
or
are
we
looking
to
these
programs
and
basically
the
star
program.
I
learned
is
a
support,
team
assisted
response
program
and
basically
it
just
diverts
911
calls
from
from
armed
officers
to
paramedics
and
social
workers.
So
I
wonder
if
we
already
have
that
system
in
place
here.
N
P
Thanks
jenny,
that's
a
great
question,
so
I've
reached
out
to
denver's
police
chief
and
on
a
couple
issues
and
I've
talked
to
their
analytic
team
in
denver,
and
so
they
just
implemented
this
program
in
denver
and
I
think
in
the
upper
northwest.
There's
a
similar
program
and
I've
talked
to
our
fire
chief
about
you
know
his
input
and
I
would
be
we
could
most
certainly
I'd,
be
very
open-minded
to
do
a
pilot
project
here
and
determine
you
know
if
this
would
be
a
good
thing.
P
I
think
it's
too
early
to
tell
in
denver,
but
you
know
preliminarily.
The
analyst
that
I
spoke
to
in
denver
says
they.
They
can
divert
a
lot
of
these
calls
to
the
paramedic
team.
P
I've
also
had
conversations
with
our
edge
program
here,
and
so
I'm
kind
of
looking
at
the
evidence
before
that.
We
would
start
it
here,
but
that
doesn't
mean
we
can't
start
a
pilot
project,
but
that
would
require
the
fire
chief.
D
Thanks
for
that
jenny,
it's
great
to
hear
chief,
it's
promising
direction
for
sure
sam
did
you
have
something.
F
Yeah
mine
is
not
a
question.
I
just
want
to
compliment
everyone
involved
with
taking
a
deep
dive
into
our
policies.
It's
great
to
see
that
the
use
of
force
policy
has
been
addressed
kind
of
as
a
first
order
business,
because
that
is
something
that
we've
heard
nationwide
and
from
our
community
as
well.
So
I
really
appreciate
that
the
the
command
structure
and
the
police
department
has
really
really
dug
into
this
and
it
seems
very
committed
to
it.
I
also
spoke
with
our
new
auditor
monitor
I'm
joey
lopari
this
morning.
F
I
think
that
will
be
another
component
of
this
overall
policing
review
and
master
planning
that
we're
going
to
do,
and
so
I
just
want
to
say
thank
you
for
digging
in.
I
know
that
it
it
can
be
some
of
the
feedback.
We've
gotten
a
lot
of
it's
very
confrontational,
and
I
appreciate
it
being
taken
in
the
spirit
that
it's
delivered,
which
is
trying
to
improve
the
way
that
we
react
to
incidents
in
our
community.
F
So
it's
just
thank
you,
and
you
know,
council
definitely
supports
this
effort
and
we'll
be
very
happy
to
appoint
a
couple
council
members
to
help
with
the
process
going
forward.
So
this
is
all
this
all
sounds
like
progress
to
me.
So
thank
you
all
for
that.
D
Yeah
thanks
for
that,
sam
absolutely
I
mean
this
is
a
time
of
of
great
changes
right
between
the
things
sam
outlined,
the
new
monitor
the
new
oversight
task
force,
that's
coming
in
the
next
few
months.
The
new
master
plan
so
really
appreciate
all
the
the
work
that
you
all
are
doing
to
you
know
move
in
the
new
direction
in
the
21st
century
here.
So
thanks
very
much
any
final
comments.
H
Yeah,
I
I
have
a
final
comment.
I
just
wanted
to
you
know
chief
harold
started
out
the
presentation
with
acknowledging
the
the
difficulty
that
change
presents
and
the
open-mindedness
with
which
the
our
police
force
is
meeting
that.
So
I
wanted
to
just
echo
that
and
and
thank
all
of
the
police
force
for
embracing
the
changes.
H
L
Yeah,
I
just
had
kind
of
a
process
question
agreeing
with
those
who've
spoken
from
the
vantage
point
of
having
been
on
a
process.
The
sub
process
subcommittee
that
those
are
as
a
council
member,
your
role
is
process
and
not
getting
into
content
or
policy.
So
my
process
question
as
a
council
member
who
is
probably
pretty
interested
in
the
policy
ramifications
of
what
we'll
be
looking
at,
where,
where
do
we
plug
in?
Like
I'm
sure,
a
lot
of
us
feel
the
same
way
that
we
will
care
a
lot
about.
L
Q
I
will
go
ahead
and
answer
that
unless
someone
else
wants
to
jump
in
so
rachel
there's
going
to,
even
though
the
process
subcommittee
is
going
to
be
working
with
the
staff
on,
as
you
stated
the
process,
then
there's
going
to
be
multiple
check-ins
with
the
whole
council,
and
so
that's
you
know
throughout
the
stages
where
it's
you
know,
every
phase,
those
four
phases
that
were
up
on
the
slide.
H
For
that
and
the
that
particular
process
was
very
disciplined
in
the
opening
and
closing
of
engagement
windows
and
the
collecting
of
feedback,
and
I
think
that's
one
of
the
reasons
that
it
moved
along
smoothly
and
also
people
were
very
clear
as
to
when
to
provide
feedback
and
when
the
feedback
moved
on
to
the
next
step.
And
so
I
think,
that'll
be
real
important,
because
what
I
had
seen
in
the
past
was
you're
way
down
the
road
in
the
process.
H
And
then
somebody
brings
up
an
issue
that
was
addressed
at
the
beginning
and
if
you're
disciplined
about
the
the
engagement
windows,
then
people
will
be
clear
that
that
that
ship
sailed
and
if
that
wasn't
brought
up,
then
you
missed
the
opportunity.
And
so
I
think
whoever
gets
on
the
process
subcommittee
would
be
real
important
to
be
unflinchingly
disciplined
about.
That.
D
Very
good
any
last
thoughts
going
once
going
twice
all
right.
Well,
then,
we'll
we'll
call
that
a
night
thanks
so
much
maris
and
wendy
and
cj
for
those
presentations
and
working
on
this
and
all
the
planning
board
folks
as
well
all
right,
any
last
thoughts
before
we
get
gaveled
out.