►
From YouTube: Boulder City Council/Planning Board Meeting 07-20-17
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).
D
E
A
So
we
have
for
all
the
people,
the
audience
we're
just
gonna,
convene
and
then
move
into
executive
session.
So
don't
worry
the
meeting
you're
here
for
will
begin
shortly.
We
only
have
one
item
and
that
is
to
go
into
executive
session,
but
first
we
need
to
amend
our
agenda
to
give
a
fuller
description
of
the
executive
session.
A
A
F
Like
to
call
to
order
the
planning
board
meeting
for
July
20th
2017,
we
have
two
main
items
on
our
agenda
tonight
and
a
couple
of
pieces
before
we
get
to
our
public
hearings.
The
first
is
approval
of
the
minutes,
which
we
don't
have
any
so
we'll
move
on
to
number
three
on
our
agenda
is
public
participation
for
items
that
are
not
on
our
public
hearing
agenda
and
those
include
public
hearing
regarding
recommendations
to
City
Council
regarding
revisions
to
the
zoning
map
and
then
public
hearing
regarding
the
2018
to
2023
capital
improvement
program.
F
G
F
Correct
so
it's
one
of
the
three
rezoning
--zz,
that's
part
of
the
rezoning
matter,
which
will
be
our
first
public
hearing.
Thank
you
for
the
clarification
absolutely
so
with
that.
The
next
piece
that
we
have
to
formally
cover
is
discussion
of
any
dispositions
call
ups
and
continuations,
but
we
don't
have
any
of
those
either
which
brings
us
to
our
public
hearing
items,
the
first
of
which
is
a
public
hearing
and
consideration
of
a
recommendation
to
City
Council
to
adopt
a
general
revision
of
the
city's
zoning
map.
F
Consistent
with
the
land
use,
designation
changes
adopted
in
the
2015
major
update
to
the
Boulder
Valley
comprehensive
plan
and
just
as
a
preview
of
coming
attractions,
will
have
a
short
presentation
by
staff
that
will
be
followed
by
questions
from
the
board.
We
won't
be
making
any
decisions
or
making
any
comments,
but
just
trying
to
understand
any
questions
that
we
might
have.
F
Then
it
will
be
your
turn
and
if
you're
not
signed
up
but
interested
in
speaking
on,
that
issue
see
Cindy
and
she
could
get
you
signed
up
and
then,
after
everyone's
had
a
chance
to
speak.
It'll
come
back
to
the
board.
For
us
to
make
a
decision
before
we
go
there,
this
is
a
legislative
matter,
so
it's
not
a
quasi-judicial
ones,
but
if
anyone
has
any
disclosures
or
things
that
they'd
like
to
cover
now
would
be
the
time
anyone
right.
I
Welcome,
thank
you
so
J
segment
with
the
city
of
Boulder
mining
and
housing
and
sustainability
Department
before
I
get
started.
I
just
wanted
to
be
make
sure
that
everyone
understands
the
all.
The
documents
that
the
city
has
received
will
be
entered
into
the
official
record,
so
tonight's
I'm
just
going
to
give
a
very
brief
overview.
I
John
just
read
the
motion,
so
I
won't
repeat
it,
and
I
will
go
straight
to
why
we're
doing
this.
So
this
is
a
follow-on
from
the
Boulder
Valley
Comprehensive
Plan
Update,
the
there
were
four
tracks,
as
you
may
recall,
from
the
update-
and
this
was
the
first
tract.
The
public
land
use
request,
process
where
property
owners
or
citizens
could
request
changes
to
land
use
designations
as
part
of
that
process.
I
I
So,
although
there
was
a
long
process
involved
with
that
fall
of
2015
winter
of
2016,
the
initial
screening
Planning
Board
and
City
Council
went
through
that
and
determined
which
ones
they
wanted
to
move
forward.
August
8th
in
the
26th
I
was
staff
held
open
houses
to
review
the
draft
staff
recommendation
october.
13Th
is
one
planning
board
and
city
council
held
their
public
hearing
and
they
deliberated
amid
their
decisions
on
November,
17th
and
December
15th
respectively
and
as
I
recall
from
the
Planning
Board
decision,
it
was
unanimous
to
change
those
land
use
designations.
I
So
the
recommendation
hearing
it
there
are
three
properties
that
are
being
carried
forward
as
part
of
the
rezoning
I'm
to
are
innumerable
and
campuses.
One
excuse
me
I'm
on
the
Arapahoe
campus
and
the
other
on
the
Nalanda
campus
and
the
other
is
mell
Calvary
Church
on
Stanford
Court,
so
the
Naropa
campus
I
think
everyone's
familiar
with
it.
There
was
a
portion
of
the
property
that
has
had
a
land
use
designation
of
high
density
residential.
This
was
initiated
by
the
University
for
that
3.6
acres,
to
change
it
to
public
and
the
ration
now
for
that
decision.
I
Last
fall
consistent
with
the
current
intended
uses
of
the
university.
It
acknowledges
Naropa
as
a
university
named
community
asset
and
it
clarifies
the
policy
intent
for
future
zoning
implementation,
so
in
terms
of
the
zoning,
so
them
as
John
mentioned.
It's
not
quasi-judicial.
This
is
the
legislative.
The
comprehensive
plan
states
that
the
primary
is
the
rationale
for
changing
zoning
is
consistency
with
the
land
use
designation.
So
it's
consistent
with
the
land
use
designation.
I
The
other
parcel
is
the
Naropa's
Nalanda
campus,
also
initiated
by
Naropa,
and
this
was
changing
up
from
community
just
Realty,
community
business
and
part
of
the
discussion
was.
This
is
word
Naropa
plans
to
expand
or
expand
their
campus,
that
they're
fairly
constrained
Arapahoe
campus
and
community
industrial
was
not
appropriate.
I
I
I
It
was
initiated
by
the
church
for
the
entire
site,
4.8
acres,
as
it
previously
had,
low-density
residential
land
use
designation
and
the
request
was
for
medium
density
residential
so
far
to
be
rationed.
Now
there
was
an
intent
on
the
church's
part
to
provide
housing
on
the
site.
I'm,
so
part
of
the
rationale
was
that
there
is
a
scarcity
of
housing
sites
in
the
city.
I
Additionally,
the
range
of
units
was
consistent
with
the
land
use
designation
to
the
south
and
through
good
site
design.
It
could
be
compatible
with
the
sites
to
the
north
and
to
the
west,
and
because
it
is
such
a
large
slide,
there
was
a
lot
of
design
flexibility,
some
of
the
constraints
on
the
site.
I
So
the
recommendation
to
change
the
zoning
time
again
is
consistent
with
the
land
use
designation
of
medium
density
residential.
It's
consistent
with
the
zoning
to
the
south
and
could
be
compatible
with
the
single-family
neighborhoods
through
good
site
design,
and
it
helps
achieve
city
housing
goals.
I
B
The
because,
there's
that
steep
slope,
that's
sort
of
not
buildable,
we
had
talked
about
maybe
setting
up
a
separate
zones,
one
for
the
buildable
portion
and
another
one
for
the
not
buildable
portion.
It
would
be
I,
don't
know,
maybe
open
space
other
or
something
I,
don't
know
what
the
other
zoning
designation
would
be.
But
did
you
all
it
explore
that
at
all
after
we
talked
about
it.
B
I
B
J
K
K
Why
you're
looking
that
up?
If
you
look
on
the
zoning
map,
which
was
in
our
packet,
you,
you
see
it's
this
map
here
and
it
shows
it's
the
Sony
map
that
was
in
the
packet
and
I
forget
what
page
it
was.
It
was
a
link
but
you'll
see
right
in
the
middle
of
the
whole
complex
whole
low-density
complex
around
Table
Mesa
that
you
have
an
are
empty.
Do
you
have
a
that.
I
K
So
if
you
look
at
that,
pinkish
color
right
in
the
middle
of
the
whole
Table
Mesa
area
on
the
very
bottom
there's
an
R
M,
1,
R
M,
one
of
that
pinkish
area.
So
it's
a
transition
from
the
RM
to
the
r
l1
and
so
I
was
just
wondering.
Why
did
you
choose
RM
for
the
zoning
and
not
have
a
transition
into
the
low-density?
K
I
L
R1
and
r2
are
regulated
quite
differently.
Rm
1
doesn't
actually
have
a
number
of
dwelling
units
per
acre
limitation,
it's
regulated
by
minimum
open
space
per
dwelling
unit
and
it
requires
3,000
square
feet
of
open
space
per
dwelling
unit,
while
RM
2
is
limited
to
12
point
for
rolling
units
per
acre
and
it
requires
a
certain
lot
area
per
dwelling
unit,
but
doesn't
have
the
same
open
space
requirements.
K
K
K
Sorry
would
you
is
there
a
range
in
the
phoneme
I
thought
you
read
range
for
the
so
named
six
to
fourteen
for
this
zone.
I
think
that's
for
the
land
use
map
designation.
Okay,
what
is
the
what's
the
units
/
rm2
in
the
Sony
on
the
phoning
twelve
point,
four,
her.
Okay,
twelve
point:
four
I'm!
Sorry
I
didn't
hear
that
hella.
When
you
mentioned
it
before,
okay
and.
L
Then
insight
review,
it's
I
think
you
were
starting
to
talk
about
that
insight.
Review
has
a
lot
of
different
standards
that
are
being
considered.
Compatibility
of
of
the
mass
of
a
building,
the
height
and
so
forth,
but
also
a
cotton
fill
into
a
hillside,
open
space
preservation
of
you
know
a
certain
area,
so
it
will
be
reviewed
in
a
lot
of
different
ways.
Great
well
compatibility
how.
I
K
L
M
I
Let
me
clarify,
because
we
confuse
land
use
and
zoning
a
little
bit
right,
so
the
zoning
has
always
been
RM
to
or
from
those
sites
for
at
least
two
decades
I
believe.
So
what
we
did
as
part
of
the
land-use
change
for
the
Mount
Calvary
Church
as
we
change
the
land
use
designation
from
low
density
residential
to
medium
zoning
hasn't
changed
so.
M
B
F
All
any
other
questions,
so
I
just
had
a
one
or
two
procedural
questions.
The
first
was
if
the
Planning
Board
doesn't
recommend
the
zoning
change
tonight.
Is
that
something
that
would
would
or
could
come
back
up
at
some
point,
there's
no
restriction
in
the
same
way
that
there
is
for
site
review.
Is
there
no.
I
M
I
Looks
like
hell
is
breaking
out
the
code,
so
my
recollection
from
this
whole
discussion
was
yes,
it
is
limited,
but
keep
in
mind
they're
also
limited
by
their
annexation
agreement,
particularly
for
the
Nalanda
campus,
so
they're
city
granted
specific
exemptions
for
more
commercial
and
also
auditorium
space,
and
all
that
was
documented
as
part
of
the
land-use
change.
So.
K
I
O
F
B
Ahead,
Liz
just
to
follow
on
something
on
your
last
question:
if
is
there
any
risk
of
if
we
rezone
upzone
the
Stanford
core
property
that
it
gets
sold
to
a
regular
for-profit
developer
and
they
put
in
medium
density
housing?
And
we
don't
get
the
community
benefits
that
we
are
hoping
to
get?
What's
the
risk
of
that?
So.
I
F
Terrific,
so
we
have
looks
like
seven
or
eight
folks
signed
up
just
a
few
ground
rules
here
as
we
get
started
when
you
come
up,
if
you'd,
let
us
know
who
you
are
and
where
you
live.
We
appreciate
that
for
the
record
and
to
know
where
you're
coming
from
and
then
we
care
deeply
about
what
everybody
has
to
say.
F
Some
of
you
are
pooling
time
and
what
I'll
need
to
check
to
make
sure
the
person
that
you're
pooling
with
is
here
with
you
and
we'll
double
check
that
and
move
on
and
then
the
standard
time
to
speak
will
be
three
minutes
if
you've
pulled
what
another
person
which
I
see
there's
at
least
one
or
two
that'll
be
a
five
minute
period
and
with
that
I
think
we're
ready
to
go
and
and
fenerty
will
join
us
again
on
that.
One
and
thank
you,
see
that
you're
here
as
well
so
and.
G
Infinity
2805
Stanford
Avenue
welcome.
Thank
you,
so
I'm
asking
you
to
deny
the
rezoning
of
the
property
at
3485,
Stanford,
Court
and
I
will
tell
you
why.
Presently
there
are
two
plants.
There
are
no
definite
plans
for
their
two
plans,
one
to
build
45
units
on
the
site
and
the
other
one
is
to
build
57
units
on
the
side.
The
option
one
is
the
church
and
a
two
large
parking
lots
remain
occupying
3.3
acres
of
the
site
of
the
4.8
acre
site.
That
leaves
1.5
acres
for
45
units.
G
G
Option
to
the
church
leaves
and
57
units
are
built,
even
though
this
has
not
been
decided
which
optioned
both
the
housing
partners
is
going
to
choose.
They're
asking
you
to
rezone
from
our
l1
Adam
in
order
to
facilitate
the
sale
of
the
property
between
Calvary
Lutheran
Church
and
between
Frazier
Meadows.
That
sale
is
contingent
on
the
rezoning
of
the
property.
G
Is
accepting
a
few
multiple
Apartments
on
Harvard
Lane
and
five
duplexes
out
of
the
side?
I
would
like
to
talk
about
the
five
duplexes
that
gentleman
here
asked
about.
They
were
built
in
1954
and
they
were
non-conforming
until
their
land
use.
Designation
was
changed
fifty-seven
years
later,
in
other
words,
at
the
time
that
the
land
use
designation
for
Stanford
Court
was
changed.
The
land
use
designation
for
the
duplexes
was
changed
so
that
it
should
be
a
more
compatible
environment
for
the
multiple
housing
under
Stanford.
G
Court
I
would
also
like
to
point
out
that
Planning
Department
sent
me
some
information
about
1966
when
this
was
a
very
small
town
and
owners
of
the
site
planned
to
build
three
multiple
used,
high-rise
apartments
and
at
that
point,
Planning
Board
simply
said
no
you're
in
a
single-family
area
and
a
slope
is
16%.
You
can't
build
so
the
access
I
would
simply
like
to
talk
about
the
access
to
the
development.
G
It's
only
through
Stanford,
Court
Stanford
Court
is
a
very
short
street
that
goes
out
to
Stanford
Avenue
and
from
Stanford
Court
before
you
get
to
the
church.
This
whole
thing
is
about
a
quarter
of
a
mile
or
less.
There
is
also
an
access
to
four
huge
buildings:
Boulder
Creek
Apartments,
that's
their
only
access
and
their
only
way
to
come
out
to
stand
for
the
Avenue,
so
these
are
for
a
large
apartment
buildings.
G
Each
of
them
have
about
six
units,
and
then
one
of
them
has
eight
units
and
their
only
access
is
through
Stanford
Court,
which
will
be
the
only
access
for
these
fifty-seven
units.
If
that's
what's
going
to
be
built
there-
and
this
is
the
only
access
to
Stanford
to
Table,
Mesa
and
Table
Mesa
is
already
a
veritable
Mesa
and
Stanford
is
already
a
very
congested
intersection
about
the
neighbors.
Some
of
us
here,
part
of
the
building
charrette.
G
They
really
questions
question
why
Planning
Board
is
told
that
the
45
units
are
going
to
be
built
at
48
at
45
units
are
built
at
4.8
acres,
when
they're
really
only
built
on
1.5
acres.
This
is
called
density.
Transfer
I
had
not
heard
about
it,
but
it's
a
way
where
you
consider
an
entire
built-up
site
as
if
it
was
bare
land
when
it's
owned
by
the
same
owner,
and
you
can
build
on
it
as
if
you
were
building
on
a
plain
empty
side.
G
Then
we
at
one
of
the
meetings
with
the
developer
Tim
Johnson
from
Frazer
matters
Manor.
We
asked
him
why
his
inclusionary
requirement
is
not
building
on
their
own
site.
We
were
told
that
the
units
that
they
are
building
are
expensive
and
wouldn't
be
suitable
for
affordable,
rentals.
Okay,
then,
the
other
thing
that
we
found
out
so
one
of
our
neighbors
that
Colorado.
G
Tennessee
allows
neighbors
who
live
it
in
10
feet
of
the
development
to
petition
for
relief
from
a
rezoning,
and
you
have
got
those
petitions
so
I
would
also
like
to
say
that
on
a
Planning
Department
survey,
September
23
of
25
of
the
neighbors,
who
replied
opposed
that
additional
87
people
sign
in
our
position.
Please
support
our
neighborhood.
Thank
you.
Thank.
F
D
I'm
Chris
mole,
two
five,
nine
five
Stanford
Avenue
I'm,
asking
you
not
to
rezone
the
Stanford
property
and
for
that
matter,
to
kind
of
stop
this
development
stuff.
That's
going
on
all
over
Boulder.
We
have
60,000
in
commuters.
We
have
many
teachers,
social
workers,
police
officers
and
the
like
who
can't
afford
to
live
here.
We
have
long
term
citizens
who
can't
afford
to
live
here,
yet
we
are
considering
rezoning
the
Stanford
property
without
addressing
any
one
of
these
issues.
Instead,
this
rezoning
will
add
to
our
community's
problems.
D
D
What
yeah
so
Berger
is
proposing
to
have
20%,
affordable
housing,
but
imagine
what
citizens
of
Burma
would
think
if
they
knew
that
these
people
in
need
of
affordable
housing
were
not
our
citizens.
I
was
told
they
were
retirees
age
55
by
the
way,
I'm
55
and
I,
don't
like
to
think
of
that
as
a
senior
but
anyway
above
seniors,
they
are
not
essential
services-
people,
not
nurses,
teachers,
social
workers,
police
officers,
nor
are
they
any
of
the
60,000
in
commuters.
They
are
people
that
will
add
to
our
commuting
problem.
D
We
are
going
to
import
another
person
here
so
then
we're
gonna
have
100,000
and
it
sounds
like
56
people
and
of
that
56
people
we're
gonna,
have
to
have
20%
more
housing
anyway,
so
we
are
considering
building
a
huge
number
of
homes
for
retirees
who
don't
live
here.
They
won't
work
in
essential
services
programs.
Nor
will
they
address
reducing
the
60,000
in
commuters
who
clog
our
roads.
D
They
will
utilize
our
services
and
many
of
the
developments
that
this
board
is
considering
are
developments
that
don't
pay
property
taxes,
so
we're
going
to
be
burdened
as
citizens
to
pay
more
share
for
more
people.
Let's
take
our
citizens
money
to
subsidize
subsidized
housing
out
of
city
folks
who
pay
no
property
tax
and
utilize.
Our
services
who
benefit?
Does
anyone
benefit
from
this?
D
Why
are
we
doing
this
because
the
developers
want
to
make
a
ton
of
money
I'm
against
this
rezoning,
I'm
against
affordable
housing
for
anyone
who
doesn't
perform
essential
services
and
I
know
I
speak
for
many
of
fellow
citizens
who
are
sick
and
tired
of
having
our
communities
ruined
by
poor
planning
that
doesn't
address
our
city's
major
issues.
Thank
you.
Thank.
K
D
D
We
want
affordable
housing
that
addresses
our
affordable
housing.
If
we
are
importing
people
from
other
communities-
and
we
are
asking
every
for
houses
to
subsidize
an
affordable
house
for
a
fifth
person
which
is
what
happens,
we
can
have
20%,
affordable
housing.
Actually
it's
more
than
that
and
and
we're
doing
this
in
all
the
communities.
D
I
think
there's
like
18
or
something
I'm,
not
sure,
but
but
everybody's
talking
about
this
and
everybody's
upset
by
it,
especially
why
are
we
importing
people
who
can't
afford
the
housing,
but
not
any,
of
the
60,000
people
who
are
already
driving
in
and
clogging
our
roads?
That's
a
huge
issue
that
we
need
to
address
it,
and
yet.
D
E
Our
the
zoning
of
our
home
is
low-density
residential
and
even
with
that,
zoning,
the
quality
of
our
life
is
not
the
same
as
it
was
when
we
first
moved
here.
Part
of
that
is
at
large
apartment,
complex,
which
is
south
and
east
of
us.
You
know
every
day
we
get
out
there
on
our
lawn,
and
you
know,
Stanford
Avenue
is
a
very
popular
walking
path.
You
can
walk
all
the
way
up
to
the
mountains
with
it,
and
so
every
morning
we
get
out
there.
We
pick
up
the
cigarette
butts
from
our
lawn.
E
E
Absolutely
if
there
could
be
a
way
to
really
justify
it
and
to
me
the
justification
is
not
affordable.
Housing
is
to
have
affordable
housing
for
the
people
who
provide
services
to
the
people
who
live
in
Boulder
to
those
people,
the
firemen,
the
policemen,
the
nurses,
even
doctors.
If,
in
total,
no,
we
we
can't
limit
it
to
those
essential
services.
E
And
business
came
up
all
of
a
sudden,
at
least
to
us,
to
say
that
this
was
going
to
take
place
and
as
far
as
the
Lutheran
Church
they're
still
affair,
I've
heard
discussions
about
that.
There's
going
to
be
shared
parking
there
there's
no
way
you
can
have
shared
parking
whenever
there's
a
big
event
up
at
the
church,
and
we
have
cars
parked
up
and
down
Stanford
that
you
know
impact
our
neighborhood
and
the
low-density
residential
housing
that
we
had.
So
that's
the
remainder
of
my
comments,
I.
Thank
you
for
your
attention.
Thank.
P
481
Harvard
Lane,
which
is
directly
below
the
steep
slope
I'm
a
school
psychologist
in
the
Bordeaux
Valley
School,
District
and
I'm,
one
of
the
few
of
my
friends
and
colleagues
that
can
afford
to
live
in
Boulder,
so
I'm,
very
acutely
attuned
to
the
issue
of
affordable
housing
in
that
community
and
I
am
actually
completely
enthusiastic
about
the
idea
of
affordable
housing
for
seniors.
It's
not
that
that
I'm
opposed
to
at
all
it's
the
density
and
I
think
AM
expressed
in
detail
some
of
the
concerns
about
about
increasing
the
density
to
that
level
in
our
neighborhood.
P
P
Good
and
I
think
that
the
idea
of
putting
that
many
units
in
that
space
is
terribly
worrisome,
because
the
intersection
of
Table,
Mesa
and
Broadway
has
already
colossal
e
congested
and
is
very
difficult
to
get
out
of
and
morning
I'm
on
my
way
to
work
and
I'm
really
worried
about
the
parking,
whether
or
not
they
can
support
the
number
of
vehicles
that
they
that
they
intend
to.
But
more
than
anything,
as
you
mentioned,
there's
the
issue
of
the
steep
slope.
I
live
directly
below
it.
P
During
the
flood
we
worked
through
the
night
to
hold
it
back,
as
it
was
trying
to
collapse
down
on
our
property.
But
soil
is
soft
and
I'm
really
worried
about
how
they're
going
to
build
that
much
on
that
space
and
be
able
to
support
it
safely
and
I
think
that
our
property
is
greatly
at
risk
in
that
situation
so
anyway,
and
also
I
want
to
say
that
I
support
many
of
Maine
neighbors
and
many
of
my
neighbors
statements,
but
not
every
single
one.
Ok
thank.
Q
Normally
3398
Overdrive
I
was
actually
on
the
part
of
the
design
group.
They
worked
together
with
all
the
stakeholders
and
some
of
the
neighbors
to
try
to
implement
a
plan
that
would
get
affordable,
housing
there
and
something
that
the
neighbors
could
live
with.
You
guys
know
it
I
think
they
can
put
30
units
on
that
site,
as
is
without
rezoning.
Q
It's
a
lot
of
back
and
forth
in
there.
The
Builder
housing
partners
in
the
architect
for
good
good
people
to
work
with.
So
what
we
kind
of
finally
ended
up
with
is
a
46
unit
development.
It's
a
pretty
massive
development,
it's
kind
of
overwhelmed
the
neighborhood
a
bit,
but
they
tried
to
keep
it
pushed
back
as
far
as
they
could.
Q
The
neighbors
kind
of
look
at
me
to
kind
of
know.
What's
going
on
on
this
development,
and
most
of
the
neighbors
I
talked
to
would
prefer
that
it
just
stays
a
church.
They
like
having
a
church,
they're
hearing
the
kids
playing
the
recess
and
all
that
stuff.
They
accept
that
they
have
buy
rights
to
develop
the
30
units
without
rezoning,
they're,
ok
with
the
46
units,
as
long
as
it
is
truly
affordable,
senior
housing
for
older
residents,
anything
greater
than
46
units
they're.
Very
adamantly
opposed
to
that.
Q
They
didn't
like
that
idea,
which
makes
me
think
that
they
have
perhaps
plans
to
develop
more
on
the
later
part
of
a
lot.
Even
though,
at
the
time
of
this
design
group,
we
were
told
that
there's
this
only
one
phase
and
it's
going
to
be
46
acres
at
the
last
meeting.
They
said
that
they
might
have
to
build
more
units
if
the
cost
isn't
cost-effective.
Q
Q
It's
about
five
hundred
twenty-nine
thousand
dollars
a
unit
which
to
me
doesn't
seem
particularly
affordable,
which
also
makes
me
think
they're
gonna
try
to
get
more
units
on
there,
so
either
I
would
say:
have
them
split
the
Lots
or
I
do
a
conservation
easement
on
it,
where
you
get
your
46,
but
then
the
rest
of
it
can't
get
built
on
in
the
future.
So
at
this
time
I'd
say:
don't
rezone
it
until
a
better
plan
comes
up,
Thanks.
R
Welcome
yeah.
Thank
you
good
evening,
members
of
Planning
Board
jeremy
dam
here
on
behalf
of
boulder
housing
partners,
4800
North,
Broadway,
Boulder,
Colorado
I'm,
mostly
here
just
to
let
you
know
that
we're
here
to
answer
questions
and
we've
obviously
heard
some
questions
already,
some
good
ones
from
from
the
Planning
Board
that
we're
hearing
able
to
answer.
If
you
call
on
us
and
and
some
good
comments
and
questions
from
the
from
the
neighborhood
as
well
that
we're
here
to
answer,
we
sent
you
an
email
earlier
today.
R
I
hope
that
you
had
a
chance
to
review
it
and
it
provides
an
update
on
where
we're
at
with
this
project
and
and
what
were
requesting
now.
I
can
summarize
that,
briefly
here
now,
we
in
2005
Mount,
Calvary,
Lutheran
Church,
applied
to
have
the
property
land
use
changed
from
Road
density
to
medium
density
residential.
We
took
note
of
that
because
it's
part
of
our
mission
to
look
for
sites
that
would
be
suitable
for
affordable
housing,
development
and,
in
general,
medium
density
sites,
our
sites
that
would
be
in
most
instances
as
suitable
for
affordable
housing
development.
R
We
think
that
there
might
be
some
tremendous
benefits
to
being
able
to
pause
and
wait
until
the
church
vacates
the
property,
allowing
us
to
take
a
more
holistic
approach
to
planning
the
site,
allowing
us
to
perhaps
reduce
the
amount
of
parking
that's
required
which
helps
with
the
project.
Financials,
as
well
as
providing
I,
think
a
softer
footprint
for
the
neighborhood
in
terms
of
overall
square
footage
that
might
be
built
because
perhaps
some
of
the
existing
church
and
community
space
could
be
repurposed
in
the
really
soft
and
elegant
way.
R
That
would
perhaps
worked
really
well
for
the
neighborhood,
as
well
as
for
our
residents
and
m4b
HP
is,
of
course,
stewards
of
our
assets.
We
got
a
question
from
Commissioner
Peyton
about
whether
or
not
there
would
be
guarantees
about
affordability.
So
one
of
you
really
clear
out
a
technical
point
here,
which
is
that
the
church
still
owns
the
land,
we're
under
contract
and
partnership
with
Frazer
to
require
that
contingent
upon
this
zoning.
R
However,
I
did
speak
with
the
church,
as
well
as
with
Frazer,
and
all
three
of
those
parties
are
willing
to
commit
that
any
additional
density,
that's
created
as
a
result
of
this
rezoning,
would
be
permanently
affordable,
provided
a
couple
of
conditions
can
be
met
through
the
negotiation
with
the
City
Attorney's
Office
and
I
can
talk
in
more
detail
about
what
that
would
be.
So.
F
F
R
Sure
so
we
have
a
contract
with
the
church
that
requires
us
to
close
on
this
by
November,
or
else
let
it
go.
The
church
is
I
think
been
very
patient
so
far
with
the
process,
of
course,
could
not
predict
what
they
would
do
if
we
didn't
meet
that
deadline,
but
land
in
Boulder
is
very
valuable
or
they
have
I
think
simpler
options
for
disposing
of
it
than
being
patient
with
us
to
do
an
affordable
housing
project
in
this
manner.
M
Would
you
be
using
the
base
zoning
that
is
applied
to
the
property
now
at
one
7,000
square
feet
per
unit
about
30
units
that
are
available
as
the
current
number
of
market
rate
houses
that
are
margaery
units
that
are
available
in
Shorewood
subtract,
that
from
whatever
number
67,
for
example,
or
46
and
come
up
with
in
that
case,
16,
affordable
units
that
you'd
be
required
to
build
in
30?
That
could
be
market
rate.
Is
that
the
yeah.
R
I
think
that's
right,
so
I
think
under
the
existing
zoning
29
units
what
would
be
available
so
anything
above
29.
It's
my
understanding
that
I
know
67
has
been
thrown
around
a
lot.
That's
I
think
what
would
be
allowable
under
the
land-use
change,
but
not
the
zoning
change
that
has
been
administratively
initiated
by
the
city,
which
I
believe
would
only
go
to
59.
B
R
And
so
we
think
that
that's
should
be
an
exciting
thing
for
the
neighborhood
to
have
bhp
development
coming
in,
because
an
alternative
might
not
have
that
and
it
might
just
be
a
bunch
of
single-family
homes
spread
all
throughout
the
law,
including
down
the
slope,
and
instead,
we've
proposed
something
that
we
think
would
be
overall,
less
intense
use
of
the
site,
as
well
as
provide
that
community
gathering
space
both
for
our
residents
in
the
neighborhood.
Okay,.
B
R
So
we're
currently
in
the
process
of
actually
working
with
HUD
on
this
and
I
think
that
it's
our
intention,
HUD
housing,
Urban
Development,
the
federal
agency.
It's
our
intention
to
push
the
preferences,
for
you,
know:
Boulder
families
both
their
seniors
seniors
of
grandkids
and
Boulder
family
members,
the
kind
of
thing
to
the
maximum
extent
allowable
by
law.
But
there
are
limitations
to
what
we
can
do
on
that
under
the
Fair
Housing
Act
mm-hmm,
okay,.
B
And
then
this
there
going
to
be
any
coordination,
then
between
Fraser,
Meadows
and
Boulder
housing
partners
on
who
gets
to
live
there
because
I
know
as
a
meadows
project.
They
wanted
to
meet
their
affordable
housing
rural
here
and
since
it's
for
seniors,
is
there
some
I
mean
people
know
them.
Did
you.
N
R
I
think
that
would
in
general
be
coordination
because
Fraser,
like
any
other
member
of
the
community,
and
particularly
here,
of
course,
we're
gonna-
want
to
look
at
people
that
they
refer
to
us,
but
that
one
in
particular
allowing
I
think
a
particular
funder
or
a
particular
agency
in
the
community
to
have
reserved
spots
or
a
particular
preference.
Like
that,
we
know
we
can't
do
under
the
Fair
Housing
Act
and
Fraser
is
okay
with
that
they
haven't
asked
for
this
or
anything
mm-hmm.
B
Okay,
the
other
thing
is
about
congregate,
care,
which
you
know
is
that
I
don't
know
what
your
vision
is
exactly
for
this
senior
housing,
but
we
have
a
congregate
care
density
sort
of
bonus
and
where
you
can
get
three
units
for
every
one,
regular
unit
or
whatever.
Is
that
something
you
anticipate
pursuing
at
all?
I.
R
Would
say
no
I
mean
I
think
that
already
I
mean
we
already
approached
once
and
went
through
a
process
with
a
design
advisory
group
and
while
the
site
could
have
yielded
potentially
59
units,
we
landed
that
45
for
that
concept
in
part
because
of
the
coexisting
uses,
but
we
felt
that
with
the
coexisting
uses
that
was
about
the
appropriate
number.
So
I
really
can't
imagine
the
scenario
where
the
church
leaves
and
suddenly
would
jump
to.
180
I
mean
that's,
that's
not
gonna
happen,
so
I
would
say
now
so
will.
R
Yeah
so
we're
not
proposing
the
assisted
living
or
congregate
care
and
the
in
the
sense
that
I
think
it's
traditionally
thought
of,
but
we
always
want
to
provide
the
highest
level
of
resident
services
as
we
can
to
our
residents,
and
so
we
have
a
whole
resident
services
team.
Both
our
housing
partners.
K
So
I
think
I
understand
now
the
church
wanting
to
retain
nearby
right
uses.
That's
right
in
case
you
all
went
away
and
they
still
have
that
youth.
So
I
understand
that
and
I
think
you
got
off
on
the
right
foot
by
we're
starting
the
conversation
with
the
neighborhood
and
mr.
Graham
Lee
apparently
was
on
a
committee
I.
Your
report
was
was
really
interesting
and
thanks
for
sharing
that
with
us
and
then
this
letter
I
thought
it
was
great.
Can
you
distribute
this
to
neighborhoods,
so
they
kind
of
her
up-to-date
on
what's
going
on
yeah.
R
Absolutely
so
that
was
actually
based
on
some
talking
points
that
we've
already
distributed
to
the
neighborhood
group
and
the
design
advisory
group,
but
we
and
of
course,
in
the
spirit
of
full
transparency,
we'll
distribute
that
letter
too
to
anybody.
That's
here
tonight
as
well
as
anybody
else
that
wants
to
see
it
and.
K
Then
city
has
a
public
participation.
Working
group
that
came
out
with
the
report,
and
all
you
have
to
do
is
google
it
for
city
of
Boulder
and
I
would
encourage
everybody
here
to
read
it
because
we
keep
having
these
contentious
hearings
and
it's
all
about
the
density
and
a
few
other
issues.
But
I
don't
know
if
you
could
take
a
little
bit
of
time
if
we
actually
had
a
place
saver
for
a
rezoning
for
you
to
see.
If
you
could
get
closer
to.
You
know
having
more
of
a
consensus
with
the
neighborhood.
R
K
K
F
R
K
R
I
think,
similarly,
with
our
family
sites,
we're
exploring
the
maximum
extent
to
which
we
can
push
preferences
for
people
to
work
here,
because
I
think
that
we
sit
in
traffic
on
the
way
to
work,
just
like
everybody
else,
and
we
feel
that
part
of
the
service
that
bhp
can
and
should
provide
the
city
is
housing
our
workforce
and
housing.
Our
seniors
here,
so
our
grandparents,
our
workforce,
our
firefighters,
our
teachers,
that
has
a
tremendous
benefit
for
all
of
us
and
the
environment
when
we
do
reduce
those
60,000
and
the
commuters
a
day.
R
S
We
moved
from
Dover
Drive
in
Auburn
30
years
ago
to
Stanford
Avenue
to
avoid
people
moving
in
and
a
lot
of
traffic
through
there
and
I'm.
Fine
and
I
have
been
sitting
outside
on
my
porch
reading,
usually
for
the
past
10
years,
I've
retired
from
the
University
and
former
commanding
officer,
the
Navy
had
CU
and
I've
do
a
lot
of
reading
outside
lately
in
the
last
year
or
so
in
particular,
we
have
an
excess
of
traffic,
but
it
isn't
just
traffic.
S
It's
speeding
in
the
speeding
bumps,
don't
seem
to
alleviate
any
of
the
speeding
us
going
on
and
there's
a
lot
more
noise.
Also,
the
neighborhood
across
the
street
has
seven
people
the
house
next
to
that
is
over
10
or
12.
The
one
next
door
has
several
and
the
place
is
getting
crowded
already.
I,
don't
understand
how
rezoning
is
going
to
help
the
current
problems
of
traffic
and
noise
that
are
going
on.
I
have
written
a
letter
to
the
City
Council
three
years
ago
few
weeks
ago
or
whenever
wiser,
so
I
won't
cover
anything
more.
F
T
Thank
you
evening.
My
name
is
David
Madrid
and
I'm.
Here
on
behalf
of
my
wife
Marla,
my
brother
mark,
we
own
the
house
at
3155
Stanford.
We
recently
inherited
it
from
my
parents,
my
father
and
mother,
both
passed
away
this
last
year,
my
father
Lieutenant
Colonel,
never
married
a
veteran
of
three
wars
asked
before
he
died.
As
we
spoke
of
this
matter,
he
said
well,
if
I'm
gone
before
a
decision
is
made
to
let
them
know
my
opinion
and
as
well
as
my
mother.
T
She,
by
the
way
you
might
be
familiar
with
her
Mary
Agnes
I
am
medrood.
The
Bolar
City
Council
named
I,
think
it
was
July.
18Th
last
year
was
her
day,
so
he
had
an
official
day
named
after
I
always
have
a
hard
time
saying
that
with
some
humility,
so
we
live
there
at
31:55,
Stanford
and
I'd
like
you
to
know
that
the
medrood
family's
philosophical
orientation
is
one
that
supports
low
income
housing
and
is
certainly
understandable
to
the
kind
of
densities
that
come
along
with
that
situation.
T
However,
the
rezoning,
of
course,
I
think
it
brings
it
out
from
a
understandable
and
something
one
can
support
to
something
that
is,
as
you've
heard
from
others
intolerable,
there's
also
a
quality.
To
my
experience,
this
family's
experience
with
this
change
I
believe
this
is
an
honorable
thing
to
stay.
Full
transparency
and
I
hear
a
lot
of
that
from
others,
but
here
lies
in
the
entire
time
of
this
process.
The
Medford
family
has
not
once
been
contacted
in
person
through
written
material
or
otherwise.
Perhaps
we
missed
it,
but
I
can't
see
how
we
miss
it
all.
T
Through
this
time,
we've
been
continually
informed
informed
of
the
matter
through
my
neighbors,
the
first
actually
I've
heard
from
it
personally
was
my
son
came
up
to
me
and
said:
there's
somebody
in
the
backyard
dad
and
they
seemed
to
be
drilling,
and
so
we
both
went
down
there
and
sure
enough.
There
was
a
company
they're
doing
soil
sampling
from
our
yard
and
we
said,
ask
them
who
they
were.
What
was
going
on,
you
know
whether
or
not
they
were
Kurt
or
dis.
T
Disregarding
is
maybe
not
a
matter
that
colors
this
entire
issue,
but
it
seemed
like
that
was
definitive
from
that
from
the
get-go
of
our
treatment
by
this
process.
So
here's
the
objection,
the
intensity
of
rezoning.
It
is
not
acceptable
to
us
and
secondly,
to
encourage
those
involved
in
this
full
transparency
to
be
a
little
more
active
in
their
claim.
Thanks
for
your
time.
Thank
you.
Mister
metric,
okay,.
F
Sir
anybody
else
who
would
like
to
address
the
Planning
Board
on
these
three
rezoning
matters,
seeing
none
I'll
close
the
public
hearing
and
bring
it
back
to
the
board
and
maybe
Jay
and
hello.
You
could
follow
up
on
one
of
the
last
points,
which
is
what
notice
was
provided
to
neighbors
or
what
notice
is
required
on
a
rezoning.
I
F
I
Thank
you
so
for
rezoning,
it's
a
legislative
process,
so
there
isn't
are
not
specific
requirements
for
notice,
but
during
the
Comprehensive
Plan
Update
there
was
a
significant
amount
of
notice,
so
it's
not
required,
but
the
city
did
send
out
a
notice
to
all
neighbors
within
600
feet
at
the
property
I'm
announcing
the
open
house
that
was
up
on
the
screen
earlier,
as
well
as
a
newspaper
had
the
the
main
requirement
is
for
a
citywide
and
convert
us
communicate.
Land-Use
change
requests,
okay,.
I
F
Good,
so
why
don't
we
start
our
deliberation
and
what
I
would
suggest
is?
Let's
start,
we
haven't
had
as
much
discussion
about
the
no
rope
properties
and
ask
if
anybody
disagrees
with
the
recommendation
from
staff
to
rezone
those
two
naropa
properties
and
then
we'll
turn
to
Stanford
once
we
resolve
those.
So
anyone
like
to
speak
to
the
Naropa
properties,
okay,
so
seeing
that,
why
don't
we
turn
then
to
the
Stanford,
where
I
suspect
will
have
more
discussion,
because
we've
we've
had
more
input
and
I?
F
Think
my
recommendation
is:
why
don't
we
go
down
the
line
and
just
at
least
provide
an
initial
sense
quickly
in
a
couple
minutes
where
people
are
we'll
take
that
temperature
and
then
we'll
figure
out
what
makes
sense
in
terms
of
further
discussion
motions
or
how
to
move
ahead
crystal
want.
We
start
with
you,
okay,.
M
At
that
time,
Brian
was
recused
as
he
is
today,
and
the
Planning
Board
voted
six
to
nothing
to
approve
the
land
use
re-designation
to
medium
density
residential
and
we
were
concerned
about
guaranteeing
affordable
housing
and
senior
housing.
At
the
time
we
probably
talked
a
little
more
on
that
evening
about
traffic
impacts.
M
Then
we
have,
at
this
meeting
and
I
think
the
there
wasn't
a
consensus,
but
one
of
the
points
that
was
brought
up
was
that
the
traffic
impacts
of
forty
or
sixty
senior
affordable
units
are
probably
less
than
the
traffic
impacts
of
thirty
single-family
houses,
and
so
I
wanted
to
I
just
wanted
to
focus
the
the
discussion.
From
my
perspective
on
the
criteria
for
rezoning
and
I
think
that
staff
is
correct
and
that
the
applicant
application
meets
the
criteria
for
rezoning,
there's,
clear
and
convincing
evidence.
M
L
I
may
interrupt
this.
Zoning
is
actually
not
based
on
an
application.
This
is
something
where
the
staff
is
asking
the
Planning
Board
to
initiate
the
rezoning,
and
would
it
would
be
a
general
rezoning
of
the
city
and
the
adoption
of
the
entire
zoning
map.
So
the
standards
are
slightly
different.
Okay,.
M
L
If
you
read
through
the
rezoning
section,
it
states
that
the
rezoning
has
to
be
consistent
with
the
policies
and
goals
of
the
Comprehensive
Plan
and,
if
not
incidental,
to
a
general
rezoning,
then
you
go
to
that
list
of
six
different
standards
that
would
have.
One
of
them
would
have
to
be
met
and
you
started
to
talk
about
those
those
don't
apply
here,
because
it's
a
legislative
act
so.
U
B
L
I
think
we
can't
yeah
yeah,
so
we
don't
have
that
concept
in
our
code
right
now,
when
the
zoning
zoning
has
changed
off
a
parcel,
it's
designated
on
the
zoning
map
as
a
zone
and
there's
there
are
no
conditions
associated
with
that,
and
then
that
zone
determines
a
whole
host
of
standards
that
apply
based
on
that
zoning
district.
So
we
don't
be
here
as
far
as
I
know,
we've
never
done
a
conditional
rezoning.
L
I
haven't
had
time
to
to
think
about
it
very
much
other
than
just
now
for
five
minutes
in
this
hearing
it
seems
to
me
it
sounds
a
little
bit
like
creating
a
new
zoning
district.
Yes,
yes,
crystal
I
was
suggesting
it's
kind
of
what's
being
proposed
or
adding.
It
almost
seems
a
little
bit
like
a
special
ordinance
I.
Don't
know
that
I
would
recommend
going
down
that
route,
because
it
just
seems
inconsistent
with
how
our
zoning
code
works.
B
I
B
All
right,
as
far
as
comments
go
well,
that
is
a
kind
of
a
scary
prospect
and
I'm
sure
that
the
neighbors
wouldn't
wouldn't
want
that,
because
that
would
mean
I
mean,
wouldn't
want
it
to
just
go
to
strictly
market
medium
density
market,
because
that
would
be
definitely
more
traffic
and
higher
impacts.
Senior
housing
would
be
so
I
have
that
issue,
but
otherwise
I
actually
think
it's
a
good
place
for
senior
housing.
It
doesn't
have
any
flood
issues.
B
These
nightmare
stories
we've
been
hearing
them
for
months
about
Frasier,
Meadows
and
the
flooding,
and
here
we
have
this
site
that
is
probably
pretty
safe.
First
for
a
vulnerable
population
and
I
as
far
as
senior
housing
goes,
I
think
that
that's
one
of
the
demographics
that
actually
where
it
makes
sense
to
have
a
clustered
development,
concentrated
development
instead
of
some
of
the
other,
like
family
housing
or
whatever
we
read
it
might
work
better
to
be
dispersed
through
the
neighborhoods.
B
Parcel
and
developed
with
you
know:
high
end
housing.
So
that's
those
are
my
oh
and
another
thing
is
that
I
know
a
lot
of
people
who
live
at
Frasier,
Meadows
and
they're
people
who
have
lived
in
Boulder
for
a
long
time
and
contributed
to
Boulder,
and
you
know
a
lot
of
former
plan,
older
members
and
people,
edge'
slater's
lots
of
people
and
and
they
you
know
they
need
they
want
to
stay
in
Boulder
when
they
age
and
I
think
providing
senior
housing
for
folks
like.
That
is
a
really
good
idea
and
I.
B
F
I'll
I'll
go
next
and
I
agree
with
you.
Liz
I
do
think,
there's
a
critical
need
for
this
I'm,
a
south
boulder
resident
and
I've
seen
many
of
my
senior
neighbors
moved
to
Lafayette
and
Longmont
and
other
places,
because
there's
no
available
senior
housing
and
certainly
almost
no
affordable
senior
housing
in
Boulder,
and
it
is
a
need
and
I
think
this
is
a
good
use.
In
addition
of
the
flood
issues,
it
has
close
proximity
to
public
transportation,
to
the
library
and
to
King,
Soopers
and
so
I
think
it's
it's
an
ideal
use
on
that.
F
The
worst
thing
that
could
go
in
here,
I
think
are
just
regular
low-density
homes
right
now,
which
will
drive
the
most
traffic,
will
waste
the
opportunity
of
this
as
a
senior
housing
spot
and
will
be
I
think
exactly
what
would
be
worse
for
the
neighborhood
in
the
long
run.
This
is
a
place
close
to
one
of
the
regional
centers
that
deserves
a
little
bit
of
density.
F
K
I
think
a
number
of
planning
board
members
have
spoken
to
the
quandary
here
and
that's
why
of
making
sure
that
we
have
some
kind
of
guarantee
to
the
community
that
it
will
be
affordable,
housing
for
for
seniors
for
starters
and
I.
Think
that
there's
good
partnerships
and
I
like
how
things
have
progressed
since
since
the
first
couple
of
concerns
at
the
beginning
that
I
had
but
but
I,
think
it
I
would
prefer
to
just
take
another
month.
K
K
I,
don't
expect
it
to
be
on
the
high
side
and
then
later
on
the
some
members
of
the
neighborhood
emailed
us
and
said:
did
you
know
that
the
church
is
going
to
stay
so
the
units
are
gonna,
be
clustered
on
one
side
of
the
property
which
made
it
kind
of
really
out
of
character
with
that
neighborhood
and
I
brought
it
back
to
the
board
and
said
this
is
some
new
information?
Would
you
be
willing
to
reconsider
the
vote
and
the
Planning
Board
said
no,
the
vote
on
the
lam
juice
designation.
M
So
you
know
this:
this
is
not
the
first
and
won't
be
the
last
time
that
I
disagree
with
staff
statutory
interpretation,
but
looking
at
the
criteria
for
rezoning,
it's
written
there
for
City
Council
shall
grant
a
rezoning
application
only
if
the
proposed
is
consistent
with
the
policies
and
goals
of
the
Boulder
Valley
comp
plan
and
for
an
application
not
incidental
to
a
general
revision
of
the
zoning
that
meets
one
of
the
following
criteria
and
that
it
lists
six
criteria.
So
you
know
that
can
be
read
in
a
number
of
different
ways.
M
You
could
read
it
as
to
say
that
City
Council
would
grant
rezoning
if
the
application
meets
the
comp
plan
and
one
of
those
six
criterias.
It
would
be
pretty
easy
criteria.
It
would
be
pretty
easy
to
read
it
that
way.
I
think
if
you
wanted
to
make
it
clear
that
this
is
the
way
staffs
gonna
interpret
this
paragraph.
You
should
say
that,
for
general
revisions
of
the
zoning
map,
the
rezoning
has
to
only
meet
the
goals
and
policies
of
the
comp
plan
for
all
other
applicant
initiated
rezoning
x'.
M
They
have
to
meet
only
those
six
criteria,
but
that's
not
how
it's
written,
but
that
does
bring
us
to
I.
Think
an
important
point,
which
is
that,
in
order
to
have
an
applicant
revive,
an
applicant
requested
rezoning
approved,
all
it
has
to
do
is
meet
one
of
those
six
criteria,
and
so,
if
we
at
Planning
Board
decide
not
to
go
forward
with
this
rezoning
that
meets
the
land,
use
designation,
change
that
we
made
back
in
October,
then
we
can
just
put
the
onus
back
on
the
applicant
and
say
pay
all.
M
The
fees
for
rezoning
come
back
in
with
an
application
for
rezoning
and
make
the
first
criterion
the
entirety
of
your
application
that,
by
clear
and
convincing
evidence,
this
rezoning
meets
the
underlying
land
use,
map,
designation
and
then
I
would
find
it
very
hard,
as
a
Planning
Board
member,
to
deny
that
application.
When
the
code
is
so
clear
that
you
only
need
to
meet
one
of
those
six
criteria
and
that
first
criterion
is
certainly
met.
So
I
don't
see
any
benefit
when
we're
trying
to
promote
affordable
housing
to
force
an
applicant.
M
B
F
So
you're
correct
just
to
be
clear.
You
would
recommend
acting
tonight,
but
with
some
further
language
on
to
a
motion
here.
That
would
say
something
like
City
Council
and
the
applicant
would
explore.
You
know
ways
of
ensuring
affordability
for
any
increased
density.
Something
like
that
thing
like
that
right
and
then
council
will
have
all
of
that
information
to
deal
with
mm-hmm
thoughts
about
that.
B
R
Join
us,
Lincoln,
jeremy,
Durham,
Boulder,
housing,
part
yeah,
I,
think
that
we
would
certainly
work
hard
with
with
the
staff
between
now
and
the
City
Council
hearing
on
this
topic,
to
try
to
figure
out
a
way
to
provide
assurances
contractually
within
the
limits
of
the
the
bull,
the
Revised
Code.
And
we
have
a
lot
of
creative
people,
some
I'm,
confident
we
could
come
up
with
something
you
know,
perhaps
perhaps
at
the
minimum.
R
We
asked
the
church
even
now,
while
holding
the
property
to
provide
some
kind
of
a
cabinet,
or
perhaps
an
agreement
from
bhp
and
Frazier
to
the
city
of
Boulder,
that
if
and
when
we
take
titles
of
the
property,
we'll
build
it
as
affordable
within
these
ways,
we're
open
to
all
those
things
because
for
us,
like
it's
so
hard
to
get
our
hands
on
a
piece
of
property
that
we
can
really
do
this
with.
And
so
we
run
into
these
difficult
situations
where
process
doesn't
always
line
up
with
our
goals
in
our
policy.
R
N
R
The
church
is
the
property
owner.
Now
is
also
on
board
with
this
approach,
because
I
anticipated
this
question
tonight,
I
spoke
with
them
and,
and
they
don't
want
to
see
their
their
use-by
right
now,
decreased,
but
they're
willing
to
sign
agreements
and
to
agree
that
anything
above
that
and
be
affordable.
So
if
we
could
possibly
set
this
up,
that
your
issue
is
addressed,
I
would
expect
that
we
could
and
also
for
just
a
point
of
clarity.
R
We
we
have
a
contract
that
not
only
it
has
a
contingency
for
for
a
zoning
approval,
but
we
were
required.
A
Fraser
really
is
the
contract
holder
and
we're
in
partnership
with
them,
but
they're
required
to
close
if
the
zoning
is
approved.
So
this
will
come
into
our
hands
for
for
development
of
affordable
housing.
Great.
K
L
R
So
there's
that-
and
the
other
thing
I
can
say
is
that
this
is
certainly
the
reason
that
we've
looked
at
pausing
here
is
is
for
the
goal
of
trying
to
find
an
overall
intend,
less
intense
use
of
the
site
and
I
think
that
oftentimes,
when
we
talk
about
intensity,
that
gets
sort
of
narrowed
to
just
one
more
density,
but
it's
a
lot
more
than
that
right
I
mean
so
it's
it's.
It
is
number
of
cars,
and
so
we
are
proposing
senior
affordable
here.
It
is
also
total
building
square
footage.
R
So
right
now,
there's
a
really
large
church
structure
that,
if
we're
move
forward
in
a
way
that
we
cohabitate
with
them
I
think
would
ultimately
result
in
a
more
intense
use
of
the
size,
so
we're
being
very
sensitive
to
those
concerns
in
trying
to
meet
our
goals
and
the
goals
of
our
residents
in
the
city
and
the
least
intense
impact
of
the
site
possible.
You.
R
B
I'm
wondering
if
we
are,
if
there's
any
possibility
or
risk
that
we're
gonna
get
into
one
of
situations
like
we've
seen
recently,
where
the
low-income
tax
credit
you
know,
we've
the
boulder
housing
partners
or
whoever
the
developer
it'll
locks
in
the
certain
number
of
units
and
the
financing,
and
then
we
see
it
and
it's
not
flexible
anymore.
So.
R
We've
already
done
that
once
right,
so
we
already
put
together
a
package
worked
with
the
neighborhood's
been
spent.
Our
funds
exploring
this
well
in
advance
of
the
tax
credit
application
period
and
what
we
would
have
applied
for
here
if
we
were
to
move
forward,
would
be
February.
So
we've
already
engaged
in
a
lot
of
that
I
would
have
brought
the
concept
plan
last
week.
Well
in
advance
of
that
tax
credit
process.
N
I'll
just
add
a
comment
on
the
traffic
impacts.
I
understand
how
neighbors
are
always
very
concerned
about
traffic
impacts.
I
do
having
walked
the
site
and
looked
and
I
do
have
to
say
if
Stanford
Avenue
is,
is
this
stunning?
You
know
that
view
into
in
is
just
amazing.
I
had
never
really
taken
notice
of
that,
but
I
do
feel
that
there
is
a
pretty
direct
line
to
the
Table
Mesa
Drive
I.
N
You
know,
I,
think
that
there
is
ways
to
kind
of
try
to
make
sure
that
there
isn't
too
much
traffic
spillover
along
the
Avenue
going.
The
other
direction
so
and
I
do
feel
that
the
this,
what
we
are
hoping
for
to
work
out
will
actually
be
something
that
would
not
have
traffic
impacts
at
the
times
where
it's
really
demanding
on
that
intersection.
So
so
I
think
that
you
know
if
my
from
I'm
very
favorable
to
this
the
future
of
that
property
from
that
standpoint
compared
to
many
of
the
other
alternatives,
honestly
without
even
changing
zoning.
F
R
Guarantee
that
the
church
would
do
that
and,
like
I
said,
I,
think
that
the
church
has
been
pretty
patient
to
this
point
as
my
feeling,
because
we
originally
approached
them
about
this
I
spent
a
while
now
I
think
over
a
year
and
a
half,
and
so-
and
this
is
just
the
process-
takes
a
while.
But
I
do
think
that
I
mean
with
the
land
value
where
it
is.
They
could
probably
sell
this
for
low-density
residential
in
excess
of
what
they're
selling
to
us
for
so
I
think
there
would
be
a
risk
of
that
and
I.
F
Thank
you,
mr.
Drumm,
so
why
don't
we
bring
it
back
to
the
board
and
I
think
just
to
keep
us
moving,
because
we
also
have
another
matter
with
a
lot
of
people.
Waiting
on
this
I'm
gonna
make
a
motion
that
the
Planning
Board
initiate
a
general
revision
of
the
city
zoning
map
and
recommend
to
City
Council
adoption
of
a
general
revision
of
the
city.
F
I'd
rather
leave
it
open
for
their
creativity
of
staff.
The
applicant
neighborhood
comm
the
church
to
look
for
those
I
do
think
a
covenant
or
easement
or
others,
probably
the
leading
candidate
but
I-
think
let's
leave
it
as
broad
as
possible.
If
maybe
there's
a
better
way.
Maybe
hello
will
come
up
a
way
to
think
about
some
conditional
uses
or
a
different
zone,
or
something
else
like
that.
But
it'll
give
at
least
six
to
eight
weeks
for
people
to
think
creatively
about
it.
K
I
I
was
just
gonna
say.
The
other
issue
is
the
number
of
uses,
and
you
know,
as
Jeremy
said
their
issue
I
mean
you
could
address
the
intensity
by
the
size.
It's
even
in
our
code.
If
you
had
something
in
the
code
that
could
address
the
size
of
the
units,
but
that
is
troubling
for
me
because
on
all
of
these,
we
go
right
to
the
high
side
immediately,
without
considering
the
some
of
our
site
review
criteria.
Well,
I.
K
We
do
when
we
get
to
a
site
when
we
get
to
the
site
review,
but
without
considering
the
compatibility
with
the
neighborhood
and
the
different
characters
of
neighbourhoods.
So
that's
where
we
always
seem
to
get
stuck
and
even
though
people
say
I'd
like
this
in
my
neighborhood,
it
seems
like
a
good
fit.
K
F
I'll
just
say,
as
a
mover
and
just
to
help
explain
to
the
the
public.
Any
I
think
development
on
here.
That
would
be
over
a
relatively
small
number
of
units,
but
anything
bhp
is
talking
about,
we'll
have
to
go
through
the
site,
planning
process
and
we'll
have
to
apply
those
criteria
and
some
of
those
criteria
do
get
to
the
size.
F
I
personally
think
that
the
full
range
is
appropriate
in
this
case
and
that,
given
the
proximity
to
transit,
given
the
transportation
in
the
particular
use
for
senior
affordable
housing
that
that
would
be
appropriate,
but
we'd
have
to
have
to
see
a
proposal
and
judge
it
against
the
site
review
criteria
at
that
point,
I
do
think
if
you
made
it
not
affordable.
If
you
made
it
more
like
single
housing,
I
think
it
actually
have
a
harder
time
meeting
it
because
of
the
traffic
generation,
but
others
may
have
different
thoughts
on
that.
Liz
yeah.
B
So
we
still
haven't
even
seen
a
concept
plan,
I,
don't
think
heavily.
No,
so
there
were
a
couple
layers
of
review
still
before
anything
happens
there,
but
I
hope
that
when
it
does
come
back
for
concept
plan
that
the
development
has
something
for
the
neighbors,
so
that,
because
so
many
of
the
projects
it
seems
like
it's,
it's
really
kind
of
a
just
a
loser
for
the
neighbors
and
they
just
have
to
accommodate
so
I
hope.
This
one
comes
back
with
something
for
the
neighbors
other.
N
Just
on
that
line,
I
mean
I
did
know
that
we
were
given
a
draft
concept
plan
and
I
did
notice.
You
know
things
like
that.
A
new
path
die
angling
down
through
the
slope
that
would
connect
to
an
existing
path
down
there,
which
would
provide
some
neighborhood
walkability
and
a
nice.
You
know
you
pedestrian
news
path
that
doesn't
exist.
So
I
just
I
noticed
that
one
on
the
draft
so
I
would
expect,
hopefully,
to
see
that
you
know
really
in
the
upcoming
concept
and.
K
K
The
zoning
I
recommend
the
zoning
change
for
one
and
two,
but
I
don't
think
we've
explored
enough
on
what
a
medium
zone
could
look
like
in
this
area
and
address
some
of
the
affordability
issues
and
some
of
the
compatibility
with
the
neighborhood
for
that
site
because
remember
we're
taking
four
point:
eight
acres
and
putting
it
all
in
one
area.
So
to
me
there
should
be
some
kind
of
mitigating
factors.
Now
maybe
when
we
come
up
with
our
you
know,
our
community
benefit,
it
would
still
apply
to
a
site
review.
K
F
F
So
that
motion
passes
for
one
with
member
gray
and
with
that
I
think
that
closes
up
agenda
item
5a
and
I'm
going
to
suggest
we
take
a
few
minute
break
before
5b,
just
to
get
everybody
set
up
Jay.
Thank
you
very
much
and
thank
you
very
much
to
the
public
for
joining
us,
and
this
process
is
not
done
because
we
will
see
proposals
specifically
on
a
project
and
I
do
hope
that
the
public
will
remain
engaged
on
that.
So
thank
you.
V
Through
the
annual
review
of
the
CIP
before
but
will
spelt
will
spell
out
a
few
things
for
Peters
benefit
on
the
planning,
Bart's
role,
so
first
on
I
want
to
do
a
big
shout
out
to
all
the
staff
that
have
helped
with
this.
Phil
would
have
been
here
tonight
doing
the
presentation,
but
unfortunately
he
had
a
family
emergency.
V
So
let's
keep
his
family
in
our
thoughts,
but
I
know
he
wanted
to
be
here
because
we've
all
worked
so
hard,
and
this
it's
I
mean
we've
got
a
really
great
capital
budget,
a
proposed
capital
budget
this
year
to
achieve
a
lot
of
really
great
things
for
this
community.
So
with
that
and
I
also
want
to
recognize
Chris
Wranglers
our
intern
who's.
V
This
is
his
second
CIP
with
us
and
has
done
just
an
amazing
job
of
helping
to
Shepherd
this
along
and
heard
a
lot
of
cats
and
a
lot
of
moving
pieces
and
organize
helped
organize
the
tour
on
Monday.
So
wait
a
we
had
a
really
fun
time.
I
hope
that
those
of
you
that
were
able
to
go
yeah
great
enjoyed
really
interesting.
That's.
V
So
with
that
I'm
going
to
start,
we
did.
We
typically
do
a
video
that
introduces
and
describes
our
capital
our
proposed
capital
budget
for
the
next
year.
We'll
use
this
for
this
board
for
also
for
council,
but
again
for
the
community.
If
it
tells
the
story
about
our
town,
the
CIP
I
can
figure
out
how
to
start
it.
W
The
city
of
Boulder
has
an
extensive
inventory
of
assets
and
facilities,
including
highly
used
public
spaces
such
as
streets,
libraries,
recreation,
centers,
pools
parks
and
public
areas
like
the
Pearl,
Street,
Mall,
or
open
space
and
mountain
parks.
Our
essential
assets
include
fire
and
police
stations,
water
and
storm
water
systems,
as
well
as
those
that
most
people
don't
see
or
use
very
frequently,
such
as
city
offices
or
maintenance
buildings.
Each
year
the
city
revisits
its
Capital
Improvement,
Program
or
CIP
to
plan
for
the
city's
future
capital
investments
over
the
next
six
years.
W
Guided
by
the
community's
sustainability
framework,
the
CIP
lays
out
a
plan
for
maintaining,
enhancing
and
at
times
expanding
the
city's
capital
infrastructure.
The
sustainability
framework
identifies
seven
overarching
themes
which
are
the
basis
for
city
plans
like
the
Ebola
Valley
comprehensive
plan
and
department
master
plans.
The
CIP
is
when
a
community
vision
becomes
a
reality.
Boulder
continues
to
be
committed
to
the
ongoing
maintenance
and
repair
of
capital
assets,
recognizing
the
critical
value
of
civic
infrastructure
to
the
economic,
aesthetic
and
functional
viability
of
the
city.
W
In
fact,
over
three-quarters
of
our
CIP
funding
over
the
next
year
will
be
for
maintenance
and
enhancements
to
existing
assets.
This
approach
of
taking
care
of
what
we
have
saves
the
city
money
over
time
as
well
as
ensures
that
quality
services
the
community
expects
community
members
will
enjoy
the
benefits
of
a
number
of
important
projects
that
will
be
completed
in
2017.
These
include
the
construction
of
significant
improvements
at
Wunderland
Creek,
which
will
decrease
risks
to
almost
600
homes
which
are
located
in
the
100-year
floodplain.
W
Three
new
under
passes
to
provide
safe
passage
for
pedestrians
and
cyclists.
The
completion
of
the
new
Civic
area
park,
which
used
voter,
approved
community
culture
and
safety
tax
funding
the
now
completed
baseline
underpass,
the
city's
80th
underpass,
which
is
connecting
a
busy
shopping
center
nearby
neighborhoods
and
see
you
in
a
safe
and
easy
connection,
as
well
as
the
reconstruction
of
the
diagonal
highway,
which
replaced
the
existing
roadway
and
constructed
new
medians
bicycle
lanes,
multi-use
paths,
sidewalks.
W
The
2018
CIP,
with
proposed
funding
at
just
over
120
million
dollars,
includes
a
range
of
capital
investments,
including
facility
enhancements
throughout
the
city
and
maintenance
and
rehabilitation
of
existing
infrastructure.
Several
high
priority
safety,
recreation
and
mobility
improvements
include
the
scott
Carpenter
aquatics
replacement
and
enhancements,
which
will
replace
and
expand
the
aging
pool
and
bath
house
to
provide
leisure
amenities
to
serve
all
ages
and
abilities,
as
well
as
general
park
improvements.
W
The
Broadway
reconstruction
will
provide
reconstruction
of
Broadway
from
Island
Avenue
to
us
36
and
will
include
bicycle
and
pedestrian
and
transit
improvements
to
new
underpasses
30th
in
Colorado,
which
will
join
the
University
of
Colorado's,
Maine
and
East
campuses
with
the
neighborhoods
in
the
area
providing
a
safe
new
grade-separated
crossing
and
direct
access
to
transit
stops
and
foothills
in
Colorado,
which
will
replace
an
existing
bicycle
pedestrian
overpass
bridge
that
is
deteriorating
and
does
not
meet
a
VA
design
once
completed.
The
new
underpass.
W
This
has
been
just
a
small
sampling
of
the
full
list
of
capital
investment
planned
in
the
city
of
Boulder,
full
lists
and
description
of
the
proposed
capital
projects
over
the
next
six
years.
Please
see
the
2018
to
2023
draft
capital
improvements
program,
as
always,
Boulder
will
continue
to
invest
in
our
capital
infrastructure
in
order
to
ensure
our
community
is
a
sustainable
and
resilient
City.
A
X
V
That
was
perfect
timing.
Video
took
care
of
my
most
of
the
introduction
needed
and
spelled
out
a
lot
of
the
key
things
and
and
a
little
bit
of
the
highlights.
We're
gonna
just
talk
a
little
bit
about
the
planning
or
all
point
to
a
few
things
in
the
CIP
document,
talk
about
the
community
and
environmental
assessment
process
projects
and
then
a
little
bit
about
the
community
culture
and
safety
taxed
and
potential
capital
tax
renewal.
And
then
let
you
guys
ask
us
some
questions
so
with
that.
V
As
the
video
said,
CIP
definition,
it's
really
about
major
capital,
major
projects
that
our
infrastructure,
our
facilities,
the
city's
investment,
the
capital
budget
really
is
I
mean
just
like
just
as
the
operating
budget.
It's
our
it's
our
statement
of
community
values.
I
mean
it's
it's
where
we
really
put
them
put
our
money
and
needs
to
be
reflective
of
our
plans
and
to
that
point
way
back
in
the
50s,
our
our
city
charter
gained
I,
don't
know
Houston
there
is.
V
The
service
standards
that
are
set
forth
within
that
so
well,
I,
guess
I
should
I,
should
move
ahead
and
talk
about
the
planning.
I'll
talk
about
this
with
the
planning
boards
are
all.
But
it's
it's
a
big
wide
amount
of
things
to
be
looking
at,
but
it
really
does
tie
back
to
a
lot
of
the
key
things
that
this
more
it's
responsible
and
helping
us
move
along.
V
How
can
I
review
this
whole
massive
thing
and
the
reality
is,
is
that
the
planning
for
the
CIP
starts
way
back
much
further
to
the
left
of
this
timeline,
and
you
guys
see
it
in
the
master
plan
reviews
you
see
it
in
the
comp
plan.
Updates,
you
see
it
in
the
area
plans.
You
see
it
in
the
sub
community
plans,
so
we're
gonna
have
a
number
of
departmental
master
plan
updates
that
are
coming
forward
in
the
next
couple
of
years.
So
there's
gonna
be
a
lot
of
really
interesting.
V
Work
and
you'll
be
able
to
see
will
be
forthcoming
in
many
future
CIPS
through
those
planning
efforts.
I
would
like
to
highlight
the
we
have
as
the
dots
that
say,
PRT
review.
That's
the
peer
review
team
number
I.
Think.
Actually,
all
the
folks
that
are
in
this
room
either
are
on
the
PRT
or
have
served
on
the
PRT.
V
V
V
This
year
and
the
CIP
we
handled
the
highlight
section
a
little
differently
and
made
it
more
colorful
and
tried
to
tie
back
to
the
sustainability
framework.
We're
really
hoping
that
this
section
was
kind
of
geared
to
the
stuff
that
this
board
really
has
purview
over
and
hope
that
was
helpful
for
you
and
then
in
the
special
highlights
section
on
the
central
Boulder
long
term
planning
some
big
initiatives
that
are
underway.
V
That
will
be
informing
that
are
part
of
this
year's
CIP
and
we'll
be
informing
future
CIPS
for
quite
a
few
years,
but
some
really
important
projects
to
shape
this
community
and
to
really
provide
a
lot
more.
The
livability
aspects
of
our
of
those
special
places.
So
with
that
the
just
say
a
little
bit
about
the
community
environmental
assessment
process.
This
ties
back
to
our
city
plans
and
projects
handbook
that
is,
it
adopted
by
code
that
spells
out
our
whole
process
for
master
planning
and
capital
improvement,
planning
and
and.
V
C
Members
of
planning
boy-
thank
you
very
much.
I'm
excited
to
be
here
for
my
first
capital
improvement
plan,
just
as
background
I
worked
in
the
Parks
and
Recreation
Department
for
the
past
four
years,
so
know
a
little
bit
about
the
city,
but
really
excited
to
learn
more
holistic
approach,
especially
as
we
go
into
budget
season.
So
with
that
the
next
few
slides
I'm
going
to
take
time
to
paint
the
picture
financially
of
what
we're
talking
about
for
2018
to
2023
capital
improvement
program.
C
As
you
can
see,
utilities
continues
to
comprise
the
majority
of
the
funding
for
your
capital
improvement
program
year
after
year
and
no
surprise.
You
saw
this
last
year,
this
big
spike
in
2018
related
to
the
utilities
projects
and
won't
really
comprises.
That
is
a
Carter
Lake
pipeline,
which
is
about
32
million
dollars
and
a
water
or
wastewater
sewer
in
there
scepter,
which
is
about
10
million.
So
when
you
looked
at
last
year,
CIP
you
saw
about
61
million
dollars
in
investments
and
this
year
it's
almost
double
primarily
related
to
that
those
two
projects.
C
But
we
have
a
few
more
projects
that
I
love
to
highlight
for
2018
and
other
departments
in
green
you'll,
see
that
transportations
included.
There
are
several
underpass
that
you
saw
through
the
video
under
passes
that
are
going
to
be
started
and
completed
throughout
18,
including
the
Broadway
reconstruction
30th
and
Colorado
underpass
and
foothills
in
Colorado
underpass.
C
So
a
lot
of
what
you
see
right
now
in
the
capital
program
are
all
because
of
dedicated
funding
and
there
isn't
really
a
capital
program
for
our
major
departments
like
fire
and
police,
and
this
is
something
that
we
really
started
to
take
a
hard
look
at
as
we're
developing
an
18
budget
and
something
that
I
really
anticipate.
Coming
back
to
the
Planning
Board
next
year,
with
a
more
robust
plan
of
how
do
you
also
have
a
capital
improvement
program
for
IT
systems
and
our
large
legacy
system
replacement.
C
We
have
this
lovely
pictorial.
That
is
a
little
bit
different
than
what
we
showed
last
year,
which
was
just
another
line
graph,
but
I
think
this
really
emphasizes
how
we're
really
focused
and
continue
to
be
focused
throughout
the
years
on
our
capital,
maintenance
and
enhancements.
Keeping
and
maintaining
what
we
own
86%
of
our
funding
in
2018
is
going
to
go
towards
those
specific
programs
with
smaller
majorities
in
new
capital
projects
and
land
and
asset
acquisition,
in
just
a
small
portion
of
it,
going
to
capital
planning
comprising
that
122
million
that
you
see
in
2018.
C
Finally,
we
wanted
to
talk
a
little
bit
about
the
public
art
policy,
that's
new
to
this
year
and
is
continually
to
be
refined.
The
community
culture
plan
adopted
in
2015
highlighted
the
desire
to
reinvent
the
public
art
program.
Over
the
past
year,
staff
has
worked
to
create
a
policy
that
includes
fun
for
an
integration
of
public
art,
with
our
capital
improvements
in
the
public
spaces.
C
We're
now
in
its
final
stage,
and
the
Planning
Board
will
be
seeing
much
more
in
the
upcoming
CIP
is
related
to
the
components
which
includes
a
percent
for
art
criteria
for
eligibility
and
the
framework
for
implementation.
We
do
have
current
projects
such
as
the
Civic
area
and
some
transportation
projects
that
integrate
it,
but
this
really
takes
a
more
holistic
approach,
with
departments
are
integrating
art
into
their
community
or
capital
improvement
programs,
and
with
that
I'll
turn
it
back
over
to
Jean
who's,
going
to
go
through
the
capital
tax
renewal
process
and
the
next
steps.
V
So
there
was
a
little
highlight
section
in
the
CIP
about
how
the
funding
for
the
2014
approved
community
culture,
safety
tax
is
progressing.
We
see
that
every
day
and
you
guys
do
too
the
new
bridge
and
all
of
the
work
going
on
in
the
Civic
area,
but
a
lot
of
great
projects
already
completed
up
at
Evan
fine
parks
on
the
University,
Hill
lighting,
so
much
underway
right
now
so
and
the
you
know,
gonna
be
really
I.
Guess
it's
that
way.
The
new
underpass
or
the
replaced
underpass
coming
up.
V
V
With
that,
so
their
recommended
package
includes
a
number,
a
really
wide
range,
a
diverse
range
of
projects
that
our
urgent
unfunded
needs
in
the
city
that
will
serve
to
fulfill
a
number
of
different
goals
and
achieve
a
number
of
different
outcomes.
They
worked
very
hard
to
think
about
what
was
that
mix,
how
they
aligned
with
the
city,
master
plans
and
the
city
goals,
how
they?
What
communities
they
served,
making
sure
that
they're
not
too
much
additional
operating
I
mean
they
considered
a
lot
of
different
things.
V
It
was
a
great
committee
and
they
worked
very
hard
on
this
and
they
also
we
talked
with
a
number
of
community-based
project.
So
it's
really
trying
to
round
out
this
package
to
have
a
wide
range
of
community
support
for
a
renewal
of
the
of
the
tax.
There
are
a
lot
of
different
nonprofits
that
would
benefit
from
this
as
well,
so.
V
The
information
that
you
received
and
I
know
we
got
a
comment
Monday
about.
Well
it
really
a
staff
recommendation
on
that,
because
we
didn't
have
a
staff
recommendation
yet
we'll
be
talking
to
Council
next
Tuesday
about
this,
and
our
staff
recommendation
is
to
support
renewal
of
the
tax.
The
committee's
recommended
package,
the
staff
recommendation
and
analysis
and
memo
should
be
available
tonight
or
tomorrow
should
be
online.
So
there
are
a
lot
more
information
on
there.
V
We
provide
a
little
more
information
on
various
projects
with
some
urgency,
so
the
council
will
be
considering
input
from
various
advisory
boards
that
have
offered
support
for
the
renewal
and
also
some
suggestions
around
potential
package
changes.
So
what
we
might
be
looking
for
from
the
Planning
Board
is
something
around
support
or
your
thoughts.
You
know
this
will
definitely.
This
will
feed
into
future
if
it
passes
will
feed
into
future
CIPS,
and
so
you
would
be
seeing
them.
We
would
all
be
seeing
the
benefits
of
these
projects
all
around
the
community.
V
F
B
B
O
Think
originally,
we
thought
that
the
fed
mitigation
plan
that
we
completed
in
2015
looked
at
I,
don't
know
15
different
alternatives
and
came
up
with
this
Regional
Detention
Facility.
So
we
felt
like
and
looked
at
environmental
impacts
of
each
and
cost
and
essentially
did
a
seat.
I
know
that
you've
probably
learned
a
lot
about
the
flood
mitigation.
B
O
Creak
and
we
were
looking
at
whether
we
should
maintain
that
flow
and
four-mile
or
let
it
spill
a
wonderland,
and
you
know
we
involved
some
technical
experts
in
that
icy
conversation.
You
know,
so
we
have
done
that
flood
mitigation
plans.
Okay,
I,
don't
know
if
it's
ever
been
done
as
part
of
a
seat.
I
see
so
great.
B
I
know
City
emissions
numbers
for
the
city
facilities
and
operations.
I
don't
have
that
right
in
front
of
me,
but
anyway
I.
If
that's
excellent
news
on
the
city's
emission
reduction
efforts
and
I
was
wondering
if,
in
the
charts,
are
the
city
numbers
net
with
the
solar
that's
been
implemented,
you
know
on
some
of
the
city
facilities
so.
U
Joe
Castro
Public,
Works
facilities
and
fleet
manager,
so
those
numbers
reflect
electrical
usage
so
in
the
city
facilities
that
have
solar
PV,
we
have
about
two
megawatts
of
solar
PV
throughout
our
city
facilities,
and
so
when
we
measure
greenhouse
gas
emissions,
we
measure
the
electrical
use
and
by
having
solar,
the
electrical
use
is
decreased,
and
so
in
that
way
it
is
counted.
We
can't
count
the
actual
renewable
energy
credits
off
those
solar
panels.
K
Joe
since
you're
here
and
I
know
how
many
good
things
you've
done,
including
those
electric
bikes
for
four
people
rather
than
opting
into
a
car
but
I
have
you
talked.
Have
you
thought
about
a
different
graphic
presentation
on
our
emissions
reduction?
Just
because
I
thought
it
was
a
little
bit
confusing
and
I
thought
it
could
be
I
thought
it
could
be
more
dynamic,
I,
don't
know
if
you'd
ever
thought
about
them.
K
U
K
U
U
Good,
that
was
because
we
had
to
correct
fuel
numbers:
we've
been
actually
providing
Cu
fuel
because
they
lost
their
biodiesel
fuel
source.
So
they
were.
They
are
now
fueling
at
this
city,
municipal
service
yard
and
unfortunately,
that
was
captured
in
our
2015
and
2016
numbers.
And
so
we
had
to
make
a
correction
to
the
graph,
because
it
showed
a
significant
rise
that
we
couldn't
quite
figure
out
until
we
really
looked
at
the
numbers.
So.
V
K
K
How
is
parks
gonna
serve
that
and
and
I
guess
I'd
like
to
say
we
also
talked
about
the
public
realm
which
may
be
which
would
benefit
people
that
live
in
those
projects
that
may
not
quite
fall
under
a
park
definition.
But
how
does
the
park
this
apartment
discuss
that
and
I
read
about
all
the
good
parts,
stuff
you're
doing
yeah.
Y
So
Jeff
Hayley
planning
manager
for
Parks
and
Rec,
there's
kind
of
multiple
ways
that
we
approach
providing
parkland
provision
to
the
new
residents
or
new
neighbors
in
the
community.
Most
importantly
right
now
we
have
enough
parkland
scattered
throughout
the
city,
to
meet
the
levels
of
service
that
are
required
by
industry
standard.
So,
for
example,
and
as
you've
probably
seen
through
the
comp
plan
update,
we
required
a
park
within
a
half
mile
of
every
resident
and
then
we
also
have
playgrounds.
Y
That's
in
a
quarter
mile
and
different
types
of
levels
of
service
through
needs,
assessment
and
GIS
mapping.
We're
currently
meeting
that
level
of
service
pretty
much
throughout
the
community
in
different
ways,
and
so
right
now,
there's
not
a
lot
of
new
park
land,
that's
being
acquired
or
developed.
In
that
way,
we
do
have
a
couple
undeveloped
park
sites
that
are
mentioned
in
our
CIP,
like
violet
Park
up
on
violet
Avenue
and
then
Eaton
Park,
which
is
out
in
Gunbarrel.
Those
are
yet
to
be
developed
and
we're
working
on
those
and
actually
programming.
Y
Y
Typically
during
site
review,
they'll
have
a
certain
amount
of
acreage
of
Park
or
open
space
provisions.
So
it's
area
set
aside
for
the
playgrounds
or
small
amenities
for
those
little
developments,
so
we've
carefully
monitored
those
and
work
with
the
applicants
and
developers
to
provide
nice
and
minun
ease
to
those
neighborhoods,
but
those
are
kind
of
the
primary
ways.
We're
approaching
that
yeah.
K
So
what
about
Boulder
junctions
and
how
is
the
park
development
going
there?
Do
you
feel
as
you're,
seeing
that
area
developed
that
we're
getting
enough
kind
of
outdoor
space
for
people
within
some
of
those
bigger,
bigger
site
reviews
and
then
the
lamb
that
was
set
aside
as
public
lamb?
Do
you
think
we've
hit
that
on
a
right
number,
I
believe.
Y
So
in
terms
of
the
original
Transit
Village
area
plan,
and
in
fact,
in
the
CIP
document
we
had
last
year
funding
to
start
the
design
process
for
the
we
call
pocket
park
at
Boulder
junction
we're
working
on
that
this
year
and
then
as
you'll
see
in
the
CIP
for
2018,
an
additional
350,000
that
allow
us
to
construct
those
improvements
at
that
small
park.
So
as
part
of
that
Boulder
Junction
development,
as
it
continues
to
grow
and
develop,
we
do
have
that
small
park
space
that'll
serve
that
immediate
community
with
a
public
gathering
area.
Y
It's
basically
where
the
pathway
goes
down
to
the
creek.
We've
also
looked
at
similar
to
my
last
comment:
what
is
the
service
area
of
that
Boulder
Junction
and
what
are
other
parks
nearby?
So,
for
example,
if
you
go
under
30th,
you
can
be
right
at
Mapleton,
ball
fields,
for
example,
just
on
the
west
side
of
30th
there's
a
small
player
there.
Y
We
have
plans
to
redevelop
that
park
into
a
more
community
type,
Park
Park,
instead
of
just
ball
fields
and
then,
similarly,
if
you
go
East's
eventually
you
can
get
to
Valmont
city
park,
which
is
also
included
our
CIP.
So
a
lot
of
times
it's
not
about
just
having
a
park
right
next
door.
But
what
can
we
do
like
the
small
pocket
park
in
Boulder
Junction,
but
also
close
proximity
connected
by
pathways
and
those
kind
of
things
so
yeah
we're
working
on
that
has
Boulder
Junction
continues
to
develop.
K
I
think
back
in
Whittier,
when
we
kept
track
of
all
the
infill
that
was
going
on,
and
then
we
literally
nag
City
Council.
Luckily,
Don
Mach
was
in
our
move
to
our
neighborhood.
He
became
a
city
council
member,
but
before
he
did
he
actually
we
all
got
the
City
Council
to
buy
what
was
the
old
bradford's
lumber
yard
at
spruce
between
spruce
and
pearl
off
folsome
I
know
some
of
you
remember
that
and
it's
great
basketball,
court
and
people
from
surrounding
higher
density
projects.
You
know
use
that
fully.
K
Y
N
I
have
a
transportation
related
question.
The
with
the
underpass
at
30th
in
Colorado
I
was
happy
to
see
all
to
see
that
in
there
and
I'm
on
the
working
group.
That's
looking
at
the
you
know.
The
30th
in
Colorado
corridors
and
I
know
that
there's
a
lot
of
really
interesting,
Street
design
concepts
being
tossed
around
that
will
come
out
of
that
working
group.
N
Z
Later
with
the
transportation
division
of
Public
Works,
and
so
to
answer
your
question
as
you're,
well
aware:
the
through
work,
your
involvement
in
the
working
group,
so
the
study
is
overlaying
and
that
is
out
of
the
gate.
First
in
the
design
is
now
underway
following
behind
and
at
some
point
once
we
have
a
better
understanding
of
the
recommendations
for
the
study
as
to
what
would
happen
at
the
node
of
30th
in
Colorado,
then
we'll
start
working
on
the
preliminary
design
of
that
so
you're,
probably
asking
well.
Z
N
Z
Z
The
thought
process
for
the
quarter
studies
is
that
they're,
going
through
largely
the
same
process
as
a
seep
would
require,
but
to
a
whole
much
to
a
much
greater
degree,
there's
a
big
broad
effort,
that's
looking
at
variety
of
disciplines
and
and
aspects
and
resources
of
these
corridors,
and
so
for
Canyon,
as
well
as
Arapaho
and
xxx
in
Colorado.
For
all
these
quarter
studies,
the
efforts
that
are
have
been
undertaken
are
considering
all
the
factors
that
a
seep
would
require
and
then
a
whole
lot
more
beyond
that.
K
Z
It
is
funded
and
we
are
starting
design
on
that.
We
expect
to
get
have
a
kickoff
meeting
for
that
design,
actually
here
in
the
next
few
weeks,
and
so
in
terms
of
what
that
entails.
That's
a
construction
project
that
is
funded
from
Norwood
to
sumac
and
then
we're
going
to
look
at
options
for
for
the
future
between
sumac
and
Yarmouth,
and
there
will
be
a
seep
on
the
19th
Street
project
as
well,
and.
K
I
bring
that
up,
because
it's
almost
in
my
pet
peeve
on
Broadway
they
they
eliminated
across
Broadway,
especially
from
downtown
north,
a
lot
of
the
crossings
that
people
would
just
have
always
taken
to
get
across
Broadway
going
east
and
west,
and
so
the
reason
I
asked
about
the
Cephas.
Do
you
bring
that
up
and
a
seat?
Because
I
think
we
do
a
good
job
on
cars
and
bikes
and
I
know
you're
gonna
put
in
you
have
a
big
sidewalk
program,
but
less
so
for
pedestrians
and
I.
K
Think
it's
really
important
if
people
don't
feel
safe,
getting
out
of
their
cars
and
being
able
to
cross
streets
and
etc,
they're
not
going
to
get
out
of
their
cars.
They're
gonna.
Take
that
easy
jump
in
the
car
and
not
worry
about
the
kids
crossing
the
street.
So
is
that
an
issue
the
seat
would
address
within.
Z
The
context
of
the
19th
Street
Quarter,
the
both
through
the
to
and
across
will
all
be
addressed
for
for
nineteen
streets,
but
to
be
sure,
the
reason
we
received
the
federal
funds
to
actually
implement
improvements
to
19th
Street
is
because
of
the
lack
of
pedestrian
facilities
in
and
around
Crestview,
and
so
that's
the
the
whole
premise
and
purpose
of
that
project.
But
as
we
undertake
all
our
projects,
we
look
at
opportunities
to
incorporate
complete
Street
principles
and
so
certainly
we'll
be
looking
at
the
crossings
along
19th
Street.
Z
K
Z
So
not
affiliated
with
the
19th
Street
effort.
I'll.
Add
that
one
of
the
items
that
are
that
it's
in
the
transportation
CIP
budget
and
has
been
for
many
years
as
the
missing
links,
pedestrian
budget,
which
incorporates
missing
links
the
sidewalk
as
well
as
crossing
treatments
across
the
streets,
and
so
that
budget
is
going
to
be
funding
the
implementation
of
a
crossing
at
Broadway
and
poplar.
And
we
expect
that
that
will
be
implemented
late
this
year.
So
that's
one
small
effort
towards
one
of
the
things
you're
describing
that.
V
Fact
there
has,
but
I
think
we're
starting
is
at
the
master
planning
level
so
especially
with
a
lot
of
these
plants
that
are
going
to
be
going
through
updates
in
the
next
year
or
so
we're
really
trying
to
have
a
framework
around
resilience.
We're
asking
a
lot
of
very
specific
questions
around
that
about
our
service
delivery
and
planning
with
each
of
each
of
these
departments
or
services
from
a
resilience
lens.
V
So
it'll
start
there
and
I
know
that
I
mean
there
are
a
lot
of
our
CIP
projects
that
really
are
about
resilience
at
their
core
but
and
I'm
sure
joke
Joe
and
others
can
speak
to.
You
know
this.
It's
a
important
concept
that
is
by
being
adopted
with
the
new
comprehensive
plan
and
all
of
the
work
going
on
with
the
resilience
strategy.
That's
it's
something
that
all
of
the
departments
are
working
on
as
we
as
we
do.
F
F
Would
anybody
like
to
address
the
board
on
the
CIP
tonight,
seeing
none
I'll
bring
it
back
to
the
board?
We've
got
some
framing
questions
here
for
us
and
I
think
what
I'll
suggest
is
we
quickly
go
through
each
of
these
questions
and
then
look
for
a
motion
on
the
CIP
overall.
So,
let's
start
with
the
big
enchilada
question
number
one,
which
is
just
whether
the
CIP
is
consistent
with
the
long
term,
big-picture
policies
in
the
boulder
valley,
complan
and
I-
think
staff.
K
K
K
You
know
plant
because
all
of
these
projects,
whether
they're
developing
new
programs
or
they're
planning
for
facilities,
take
money
to
get
them
going
and
or
to
at
least
get
them
to
it.
The
stage
where
they
know
what
the
whole
project
is
going
to
look
like
and
I
think
about
goko
great
outdoors
Colorado.
They
have
money
for
their
planning
grants.
Well
you!
You
know
this
planning
grants,
capacity-building
grants
grants
for
programs
and
then
all
the
capital
infrastructure
as
well,
and
then
they
have
different
goals
that
change
every
five
years
or
so,
depending
on
who's.
K
So
that's
my
spiel
and
I'm
all
right
to
the
council
in
the
capital,
capital,
improvement,
tax,
renewal
group
and
let
them
know
this
but
I'd
love
to
have
the
Planning
Board.
You
know
your
thoughts,
either
in
emails
or
tonight
on
how
we
might
really
kind
of
kickstart
the
arts
and
give
them
the
respect
that
a
community
of
our
size,
you
know,
should
be
funding.
K
F
Just
throw
in
I
know
Denver's
having
a
similar
conversation
right
now,
and
one
of
the
things
that
they're
I
think
wrestling
with
is
that
affordable.
Both
living
and
working
space
for
artists
are
disappearing
and
we
have
that
problem
to
a
much
greater
extent
than
than
Denver
does
and
if
we
don't
address
that
I'm
not
sure
how
much
some
of
the
other
stuff
will
matter
and
so
I
think.
If
we're
gonna
have
that
big
picture
conversation,
we
also
need
to
follow
up
on
both
funding
to
help
write
work
on
affordable
spaces.
F
And
probably
you
know
looking
at
some
of
the
things
we
talked
about
with
our
community
benefit
policy
on
you
know,
finding
ways
to
incentivize,
affordable
space
for
artists
and
that
sort
of
thing
as
part
of
it,
but
it'll
it's
a
real
resource
requirement.
If
it's
gonna
make
a
real
difference,
so
yeah
I
agree
with
you,
but
I
think
that
needs
to
be
part
of
it.
M
Armen
yeah
I
want
to
pick
up
something
that
I
left
off
with
last
year
and
it's
about
the
the
nexus
between
community
resilience
and
and
local
businesses
and
and
the
capital
improvements
plan
program,
and
you
know,
I
think
a
big
part
of
our
resilience
is
having
a
diverse
community
and
we
talked
about
this
last
year
in
terms
of
promoting
local
businesses
that
can
actually
perform
some
of
the
functions
that
are
in
the
capital.
Improvements
program
and
I
had
a
motion
last
year
that
was
approved
by
a
unanimous
vote
of
Planning
Board.
M
This
year
the
CIP
doesn't
include
any
new
language
around
that
and
in
the
comp
plan
we
also
added
two
new
policies
around
local
business
development
and
supporting
local
businesses
in
the
name
of
that
type
of
resilience.
So
I
see
there
being
a
pretty
strong
nexus
between
supporting
our
local
contractors.
I
think
if
we
want
to
have
affordable
housing,
one
way
is
to
produce
more
affordable
housing
units
and
another
way
is
to
get
people
who
live
in
Boulder
to
make
more
money
so
that
they
can
afford
to
live
here.
M
So
there
are
a
lot
of
intertwined
positive
impacts
that
we
have
if
we
support
our
local
businesses
and
in
a
in
a
plan
that
provides
for
half
a
billion
dollars
worth
of
spending
over
five
years,
I
think
we
could
make
a
better
effort.
You
know
I
understand
that
the
city
does
not
give
special
concessions
to
local
minority
vendors
on
the
award
of
its
contracts
and
I.
M
V
Know
that
we
we
passed
along,
submit
that
information
to
the
council
last
year
with
with
some
minute
additional
analysis
of
what
we
may
or
may
not
be
able
to
do
in
that
and
I.
Don't
have
I,
don't
recall
the
ins
and
outs
of
that
specifically
at
the
moment,
but
I
can
be
happy
to
forward
that
information
back
onto
you
guys.
So
we
had
provided
last
year
extra.
M
B
This
way
or
that
way
I
mean
it
could
even
apply
to
like
you
said
holistically,
apply
to
IT.
You
know
it
could
have
applied
to
rec
centers.
Are
they?
You
know,
equipped
to
be
emergency
shelters
or
whatever
things
like
that?
I
won't
go
any
further
because
John
covered
it
really
well,
but
and
then
there
was
one
other
thing
which
I
brought
up
I
think
every
year,
but
and
that's
because
I
was
on
Landmarks
board
and
there
is.
B
We
have
a
preservation
plan
and
I
see
land
acquisition
in
here
under
utilities
and
under
open
space,
and
we
don't
have
any
budgeting
for
acquisition
of
historic
properties,
but
when
a
property
comes
up
for
landmarking,
if
there's
a
board,
that's
inclined
to
landmark
it
over
the
owners.
Objection.
Then
we
end
up
in
this.
B
If
that
means,
you
would
have
to
target
particular
structures
ahead
of
time
or
how
it
would
work,
because
it
is
a
very
reactive
sort
of
situation
where
you
don't
know
when
something's
going
to
go
up
for
sale,
you
don't
know
what
the
proposal
for
demolition
might
be.
Things
like
that,
but
anyway,
I
feel
like
we're
we're
always
in
this
really
reactive
mode
when
it
comes
to
preservation,
and
maybe
the
CIP
is
a
place
where
we
could
be
a
little
bit
more
prepared.
B
F
So
I
had
one
kind
of
a
overarching
comment
that
went
in
the
number
one
actually
to
one
was
the
resilience
issue
which
I
think
was
just
raised
again.
That
I
do
think
we
need
to
have
some
more
feedback
into
the
CIP
and
it
may
be
that
it'll
take
a
little
while
to
work
its
way
up
through
the
the
master
plans.
But
if
we're
investing
this
much
money
in
a
capital
program,
we
need
to
understand
both
the
risks
to
that
investment
and
then
how
it
addresses
the
risks
that
we
have
that
are
out.
F
F
In
the
back
of
the
room-
and
we
can
never
let
that
that
occur
and
that's
to
focus
on
some
of
the
policies
of
projects
that
have
just
gotten
done
and
I
think
how
they
reflect
on
the
BV
CPD
policies
and
so
I
sent
a
couple
pictures
that
I
snapped
not
very
well
off
of
my
cell
phone
on
a
project
that
we
approved
last
year,
which
was
the
mesa
trail,
flood
recovery
and
the
bear
Canyon
Trail
recovery
process
and
I
just
wanted
to
flag
couple
things
about
this.
That
I
think
in
this
little
project.
F
That's
a
fraction
of
the
CIP,
that's
important
for
the
big
picture
of
the
CIP
I
thought
this
was
an
exemplary
project.
This
trail
was
closed
for
five
or
six
months.
We
were
all
missing.
It
wasn't
really
sure
what
to
expect
and
when
I
came
back
on
to
that
trail.
I
was
surprised
and
delighted
at
the
design
excellence
at
the
sustainability
at
the
resilience-
and
you
know
that's
the
sort
of
thing
that
I
think
makes
people
happy
in
this
case
for
the
open
space
taxes.
F
In
other
cases,
it
could
be
any
of
the
sort
of
taxes
or
funds
that
that
fund
these
projects,
and
so
just
a
reminder
of
I
think
how
important
it
is
to
tie
back
to
certainly
the
sustainability
and
resilience,
which
is
the
whole
nature
of
this
project.
I
mean
that
Crossing
was
blown
out
and
my
cross-country
skis
will
be
vastly
more
sustainable
now
that
that
that
crossing
is
is
in
place,
but
I
really
want
to
focus
for
a
second
on
the
design
excellence
area.
F
You
don't
have
to
do
a
crossing
in
a
beautiful
masonry
sort
of
approach,
but
you
did
you
don't
have
to
do
those
stormwater
recovery
projects
with
masonry
and
local
stone,
but
you
did
and
it
made
it
a
much
better
project
and
the
more
we
do
that
with
our
underpasses
and
other
things
and
I
know
we
do
it
and
I'm
picking
on
Jim,
but
I
could
easily
pick
on
transportation
or
parks
or
anybody
else.
You
know
what
really
I
think
does
improve
it.
F
So
I
just
wanted
to
make
that
tie
back
to
the
to
the
comp
plan
into
general
city
principles
on
design
excellence
and
then
also
think
about
ways
in
the
future.
Just
make
sure
you
know
we're
capturing
and
celebrating
some
of
those
pieces.
We
talked
about
the
public,
art
element
and
I
think
it
is
good,
it
is
important,
but
the
basic,
fundamental
design
is
also
something
that
I
think
makes
people
feel
better
about
their
investments
in
the
long
run
harder
to
do
with
IT
infrastructure
I
know.
F
K
I
I
agree:
I
did
want
to
make
a
comment
on
the
library.
Well,
first
of
all,
I
was
really
pleased
who's
ever
in
charge
of
library,
scoping,
I,
guess
the
our
librarian
arts
are,
but
I
was
pleased
to
see
North
Boulder
Library,
we've
all
talked
about
in
North
Boulder
kind
of
move
up
through
this
whole
process
and
then
also
mention
of
the
gun
barrel
library,
but
I
did
want
to
point
out.
K
You
know
over
10
years,
15
years
we've
grown
as
an
organization
and
trying
to
catch
up
on
our
backlog
of
maintenance.
I
know
that
we
haven't
always
been
great
about
that,
but
it
just
kind
of
jumped
out
at
me
as
kind
of
ironical,
that
we
repurposed
the
library
taxes
now
creating
a
new
tax
to
adequately
fund
them
is
is
was
just
interesting.
Mm-Hmm
and
I
totally
support
funding
the
library
and
the
two
new
libraries
potential
new
libraries.
K
B
V
Know
the
open
space
has
an
acquisition
plan
and
I
know.
Jim
can
probably
speak
to
that.
More
specifically,
probably
Annie
and
Douglas
can
talk
about
the
utilities
that
I
think
that's
a
little
more
opportunistic
they've
identified
areas
that
are
key
risks
and
when
those
opportunities
arise,
we
try
to
meet
them
and.
F
I'll
save
Jim
my
trip
up
I
can
say
for
open
space
that
the
funds
in
there
for
acquisition,
if,
like
water
rights
and
mineral
rights
and
land,
and
that
sort
of
thing
there
is
an
acquisition
plan.
But
it's
also
opportunistic
based
on
when
mm-hmm
landowners
have
those
things
coming
up,
and
sometimes
the
Department
will
know
because
they're
in
negotiations
with
them,
and
sometimes
they
don't
know
in
those
kind
of
oddball
opportunities
just
pop
up.
So
it's
it's
some
of
both
but
you've
got
to
have
gas
in
the
tank
and
in
order
to
make
it
happen.
K
H
AA
Jim,
reader
trails
and
facilities
service,
an
area
manager,
yeah,
John,
you're,
exactly
right,
and
basically
we
we
have
a
team
of
about
three
or
four
real
estate
agents
that
deal
with
looking
for
land
that's
available,
and
it
really
is
opportunistic.
On
the
one
hand,
on
the
other
hand,
we
know
some
properties
where
we'd
really
like
to
to
get
a
hold
of.
AA
If
we
could,
we
have
worked
with,
they
have
worked
with
some
owners
for
20
years
or
more
in
order
to
get
a
piece
of
property
and
in
the
end
we
got
it
and
we're
very
happy
to
do
that.
So
it's
it's
a
little
bit
of
both.
We
try
to
have
enough
money
available
to
hit
those
big
properties,
the
expensive
properties
and
we've
got
a
couple
coming
up
so
that
we
can
buy
them
when
they
are
available,
but
basically
it's
both
sides
opportunistic.
When
something
comes
available
and
those
that
we've
been
looking
for
for
20
years.
AA
AA
F
Thank
you
Jim,
so
why
don't
we
move
on
to
number
three,
which
is
recommendations
regarding
policy
issues
raised
by
the
proposed
location
and
design
of
CIP
projects
and
I'll
just
start
based
on
some
conversations
we've
had
on
the
South
Boulder
Creek
flood
control
project
that
I
think
there
was
we've
had
vigorous
conversations
over
the
last
six
months
or
so
on.
Some
of
the
kind
of
money
answered
questions
about
design
and
as
it
moves
into
a
more
refined
set
of
design.
F
F
V
The
process
moves
forward,
we
evaluate
those
I
know
and
Douglas
we're
having
a
conversation
next
week
about
the
sewer
interceptor
project
on
what
it
really
benefit
from
a
seep.
Is
it
going
to
go
through
this
other
thing
and
we
really
try
to
hone
in
on
what
would
be
the
benefit
of
what
process
and
so
I
think
as
we
go
through
the
revisions
for
the
handbook
and
the
chief
see
checklist
will
be
around.
That
is
because
we've
got
a
lot
of
different
projects
with
a
lot
of
different
things.
F
N
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
you
know
from
my
from
what
I
said.
This
is
really
important.
The
CCS
has
been
very
important
source
of
funding
for
all
these
wonderful
things
that
we
see
pop
up
around
town
around
our
city
and
so
I.
Don't
know
if,
if
we're
being
asked
for
a
special
recommendation
on
that
or
if
our
recommendation
to
approve
the
CIP
in
general
will
say
that
it
will
include
that,
but
it
couldn't
warrant
a
special
recommendation
to
put
that
on
November.
N
B
We
see
the
list,
the
the
recommendation
list
or
whatever
that
yeah
at
the
committee
recommended
project
list.
I
mean
those
those
all
seem
reasonable
to
me
and
I
know
there
are
several:
we've
talked
about
quite
a
bit:
the
North
Boulder
Library
reclose
relocating
the
fire
station
on
the
community
projects.
B
Those
are
all
I
support.
Those
I
am
a
little
concerned
about
the
this
is
probably
gonna
go
over
like
a
lead
balloon,
but
I
mean
if
there's
an
organization,
that's
not
a
city
organization,
that's
actually
politically
active
I
think
we
should
be
careful
and
just
you
know
just
be
aware
of
whether
we're
you
know
you
know
in
a
position
of
supporting
political
action
with
people's
tax
dollars.
I
don't
know
if
that's
something
we
want
to
do
or
not
so
otherwise
looks
okay.
Good
to
me,
I
agree.
K
F
Think
a
lot
of
these
are
kind
of
citywide
benefits
and
that
will
appreciate,
but
I
think
people
also,
if
they're
gonna
increase
their
taxes
want
to
see
something
in
their
back
yard
as
well.
So
I
would
look
for
some
of
those
opportunities
to
help
kind
of
smooth.
This
out.
I
wouldn't
necessarily
take
anything
so
I
think
these
are
good
projects
but
may
need
to
rebalance
a
little
bit.
The.
V
Committee
did
look
at
that
and
we
did
a
whole
mapping
of
all
the
projects
under
consideration,
and
the
thing
was
is
that
there
there
weren't
there
was.
There
was
timing,
ready
readiness,
urgency,
different
types
of
things
that
there
weren't
projects
in
other
parts
of
the
community
that
really
met
that
same
level
of
urgency
and
readiness,
but
I
think
that's
part
of
why.
You
know
that
the
2014
renewal
was
really
pretty
focused
on
the
downtown
core
areas.
F
F
H
F
F
B
K
F
Don't
we
make
that
as
one
of
the
separate
category
of
emotions
that
that
we
can
touch
any
other
discussion
on
the
main
motion
made
by
member
Payton?
Seeing
none
I'll
call
the
question
all
in
favor
of
this
Payton's
motion,
please
say
aye
and
raise
your
hand
hi
any
opposed
that
passes
unanimously.
Are
there
other
error
motions
that
members
would
like
to
make
Carmen
so.
M
Cindy
I'll
send
you
this
by
email.
So
don't
worry
so
my
motion
is
planning
board
well.
I'll,
just
read
its
way
around
for
consistency
with
amended
comp
plan
policies
regarding
environmental
purchasing
and
sustainable
business
practices
that
call
for
purchasing
of
local
products
and
services,
as
well
as
policies
promoting
diversity
and
resilience.
Planning
Board
further
recommends
that
council
developed
guidelines
for
CIP
expenditures
that
encourage
procurement
from
disadvantaged
business
enterprises
and
local
businesses
to
promote
social
and
economic
equity
and
community
resilience.
Second,.
K
K
B
K
Ahead,
okay
and
the
mission
of
the
folder
office
of
arts
and
culture
is
to
facilitate
an
alignment
in
the
creative
community
around
our
shared
vision
for
culture.
Together
we
will
craft
folders
social,
physical
and
cultural
environment
to
create
to
include
creativity
as
an
essential
ingredient
for
the
well-being,
prosperity
and
joy
of
everyone
in
the
community.
So
I
think
that
that's
fine,
so
this
would
just
help
identify
a
source
or
analyze
a
source
of
funding.
Maybe
they'll
say
we
have
enough
funds.
Maybe
people
will
say
yeah
we
really.
We
really
could
do
a
lot
more.
K
B
K
F
Just
know
in
response
to
your
question
that
if
you
look
at
the
pottery
lab,
if
you
look
at
other
cities,
often
the
space
that
you
find
for
affordable,
artists,
space
or
residents
are
historic
structures.
And
you
know
they
often,
if
you
look
down
Denver
a
lot
of
those
spaces
are
old
industrial
places
with
a
lot
of
original
buildings
and
that
sort
of
thing
so
I
think
there
could
be
a
nexus.
That
would
make
a
lot
of
sense
there
right.
It
won't
work
for
everything,
but
it
might
work
for
many
right.
Q
F
O
M
And
yeah
then
fluctuates,
but
we're
I'm
averaging
over
the
five
year
period
and
and
I
think
that's
pretty
awesome
that
I'm
getting
a
thousand
dollars
worth
of
capital
improvements
for
a
person
just
for
living
here
and
and
beyond
that.
It's
being
done
really
well,
it's
being
managed
well
efficiently
and
it
looks
great.
So
thank
you.
Yeah
thank.
V
You
guys
three
really
really
really
sick
things
so
to
lead
off
on
that
a
big
thank
you
to
all
the
staff
and
all
the
folks
that
aren't
here
as
well.
They
contribute
to
this
work
a
lot
and
everybody
does
a
really
great
job
and
they're
really
awesome
to
work
with
we're
very
lucky.
We
are
David
I
wanna
apologize
for
calling
you
Peter.
V
I
think
this
is
a
point
of
pride
for,
for
you
guys
and
for
all
of
us
at
the
city
as
David
you
know,
I
was
invited
to
do
a
presentation
at
the
National
planning
conference
this
year
on
capital
improvement.
Planning.
I
was
asked
to
provide
the
example
of
how
it's
done
well,
and
we
had
a
pretty
healthy
number
of
folks
at
the
session
and
a
lot
of
folks
that
ask
questions
and
looked
at
our
stuff
afterwards
and
I've
been
sending
examples
of
our
prioritize
or
project
prioritization
document
that
we
put
together
for
this
year's
CIP.
V
So
there
were,
you
know
there
are
a
lot
of
folks
that
are
struggling
with
us
and
DIF
they're,
a
bunch
of
folks
who
were
like
you
get
your
planning.
But
your
planning
board
looks
at
this
and
and
wanted
to
know
kind
of
how
we
did
that
and
how
that
worked.
So
that
was
kind
of
it
was
kind
of
cool
to
see
that
other
communities
are
looking
at
our
stuff
and
looking
at
us
as
an
example,
so
I'll.
F
N
You
you
know,
and
I
was
really
impressed
with
the
footprint
that
Boulder
had
at
that
conference.
It's
a
huge
conference
with
people
from
all
over
the
world
and
also
how
few
cities
actually
send
plan
board
members
to
these
conferences.
Yeah
I
didn't
really
run
across
that
many.
So
you
know
Boulder
really
really
I
think
it
took.
It
takes
advantages
of
that
and
really
contributes
a
lot
to
the
public.
Thinking
on
these
things,
that
was
pretty.