►
From YouTube: 5-5-22 City of Boulder Planning Board Meeting
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
Okay,
thank
you.
This
is
the
opening
of
the
city
of
boulder
planning
board
meeting
of
may
5th
2022
and
we
have
a
quorum
with
five
of
our
oh
four
of
our
members.
Here,
let's
see,
we
have
mark
mcintyre
ml
robles
lawrence.
A
And
I'm
hoping
laura
will
join
us
soon.
Okay,
there,
you
are
laura.
C
A
D
Virtual
meeting,
yes,
thank
you,
mr
chair,
welcome
to
the
planning
board
meeting
we're
also
happy
that
you're
here
we're
aiming
to
keep
our
meetings
respectful
and
orderly.
As
such,
we
have
some
specific
protocol
for
our
meeting
and
I'm
going
to
share
my
screen
quickly
here.
D
This
vision
supports
physical
and
emotional
safety
for
community
members
staff
and
council
and
board
members,
as
well
as
democracy
for
people
of
all
ages.
Identities,
lived
experiences
and
political
perspectives
more
about
this
vision
and
the
full
rules
of
deform
can
be
found
on
our
website
participate
in
city
council
members
on
this
page.
All
you
would
need
to
do
is
put
in
participate
in
city
council
meetings
in
the
search
bar
or
you
can
send
me
a
message
in
the
q.
A
and
I'll
be
happy
to
send
the
link
to
you.
D
The
following
are
examples
of
rules
of
decorum
found
in
the
boulder
revised
code
and
other
guidelines
that
support
this
vision.
These
will
be
upheld
during
this
meeting.
All
remarks
and
testimonies
shall
be
limited
to
matters
related
to
city
business.
No
participants
shall
make
threats
or
use
other
forms
of
intimidation
against
any
person.
Obscenity,
dehumanizing
language,
racial.
D
Or
other
speech
and
behavior
that
disrupts
or
otherwise
increase
the
ability
to
conduct
canadian
or
prohibited
participants
shower
are
required
to
sign
up
to
speak
using
the
name
they
are
commonly
known
by
and
individuals
must
display
their
whole
name
before
being
allowed
to
speak
online
and
currently
only
audio
testimony
is
permitted
online,
and
at
this
time
we
are
in
what
is
called
a
meeting
webinar.
So
the
chat
function
is
only
for
our
board
members
and
the
q.
A
function
is
for
our
public
and
it
is
to
only
be
used
for
technical
questions.
D
A
So
tonight
we
have
only
one
major
item
on
our
agenda,
which
is
a
continuation
of
the
public
hearing
regarding
the
adoption
of
the
east
boulder
sub-community
plan,
but
before
we
do
that,
we
normally
have
a
public
opportunity
for
public
comment
and
public
participation,
and
on
in
this
we
accept
comments
on
any
issue
other
than
what
we're
dealing
with
in
public
hearing
tonight,
which
is
that
east
boulder
sub-community
plan.
D
Thank
you,
john.
If
you
do
have
something
you'd
like
to
address
the
board
about
you'll,
have
three
minutes.
Please
hover
down
at
the
bottom
of
your
screen
and
you'll
see
a
raised
hand.
Click
on
that
and
your
hand
will
be
raised
and
I'll
see
that,
yes,
we
do
have
someone.
We
have
lynn
siegel
lynn,
I'm
gonna
unmute,
you
there,
you
are,
I'm
gonna,
give
you
three
minutes
on
the
clock.
E
E
I
want
to
see
who's
talking
and
I
want
to
know
who
the
participants
are
in
this
meeting
now
I
was
just
at
a
police
town
hall,
and
you
know
what,
for
you
john,
to
say:
well,
if
it's
something
unrelated
to
east
boulder
sub
community
or
it's
unrelated
to
our
public
hearing,
guess
what
I
have
news
for
all
of
you,
it's
all
interrelated
and
you
all
know
it.
So,
let's
be
upfront
about
that:
the
police
town
hall,
just
now
what
they
were
talking
about
is
exactly
what's
happening
at
east
boulder
sub
community.
E
Okay,
so
I
guess
I
can't
talk
about
that.
I
can't
talk
about
the
fact
that
we
are
understaffed
in
our
police
department
were
were
under
ma
under
economically
managed
in
our
open
space.
You
know
these
all
these
infrastructure.
Nobody
will
work
at
the
parks
and
recreation
centers
where
all
the
new
people
from
diagonal
plaza.
Luckily,
that
isn't
on
the
public
hearing
tonight,
diagonal
plaza
is
sending
all
these
people
to
the
rec
center
right.
No
problem
they
get
free
wreck
passes,
they
don't
have
to
swim
in
the
swimming
pool
with
the
rich
people,
shucks,
no
problem.
E
What
about
the
problem
of
the
emissions
of
them
driving
there
with
their
families,
because
they
only
get
one
bike
per
unit?
You
know
and
that's
from
the
rich
people
side,
I
guess
at
boulder
housing
partners.
I
don't
know
how
many
bike,
how
much
bike
parking
they
have,
but
in
any
case,
there's
issues
you
know
with
transporting
yourself
across
town.
I
thought
we're
supposed
to
have.
You
know
I
drove
my
bike
6th
street
and
you
know
I'm
at
dewey
and
on
concord,
there's
the
the
daisy
grocery.
E
That's
what
we
need.
You
know
the
neighborhood
grocery
store
again.
You
know.
We
all
know
that
you
all
know
that
you
know,
but
let's
do
it.
Let's
do
something,
and
the
best
thing
you
can
do
is
say
no
to
the
developers,
because
guess
what
the
developer
nice
as
bill
holicky
is
nice
as
harman
zuckerman
is
nice,
as
all
these
people
are
they're
wonderful.
E
I
love
them
dearly
and
what's
his
name
that
wrote
in
the
paper
today,
you
know
they're
lovely
people,
but
guess
what
they're
on
the
wrong
track
and
they're
laughing
all
the
way
to
the
bank
all
the
way
to
the
bank
as
each
new
business
fails
because
they're
they
rents
too
high.
We
got
to
do
something
and
you
know
we're
constrained.
E
It's
an
inelastic
market,
there's
a
line
waiting
a
mile
long
for
each
place
in
town
to
rent,
because
they'll
pay,
the
higher
rent
and
the
rent
will
go
higher
and
higher
and
higher
and
they'll
come
from
not
only
the
rest
of
the
united
states
but
the
whole
world.
And
yet
maris
harold
says.
Oh,
we
have
this
problem.
We
no
no
police
will
come
and
take
care
of
us.
Well
guess
what
the
and
they're
sending
all
the
chopped
up
bikes
down
to
mexico?
That's
because
we,
the
united
states,
have
a
corn.
A
E
D
Number
I
apologize,
I
was
muted,
so
I
think
we
can
carry
on.
A
Okay,
so
I
I
don't
see
any
other
raised
hands,
so
I
think
we
can
end
the
public
participation
section
and
move
on
to
our
discussion
of
of
the
east
boulder
sub-community
plan,
don't
see
any
deposition
dispositions
or
planning
board
call-ups
that
we're
dealing
with
right
now
with
mark.
I
think
we'll
talk
about
your
proposal
to
call
up
an
issue
in
the
matters
from
from
the
city
attorney
later
on
tonight.
A
Good
all
right!
Thank
you,
okay,
so
kathleen.
Maybe
this
is
a
time
for
you
to
initiate
the
discussion
and
we'll
see
how
it
goes
from
there.
F
Okay,
that
sounds
great.
I'm
gonna
share
my
screen
and
before
I
do
that,
just
hello
to
everybody,
I
couldn't
see
you
at
the
council
meeting
because
of
the
way
the
screens
were
all
set
up
so
great
to
see
your
faces.
F
Thank
you
for
for
having
our
team
tonight
and
considering
the
east
boulder
sub
community
plan.
So
I'm
gonna
put
up
the
motion
that
you
are
considering
this
evening
and
let's
see
screen
one
and
we'll
hit
this
and
let
me
just
switch
this.
F
Do
you
see
the
motion.
F
Okay,
great,
so
the
motion
for
consideration
is
to
adopt
the
east
boulder
sub-community
plan,
including
the
incorporated
55th
and
arapahoe
station
area
plan,
as
we
described
on
tuesday.
F
Sub-Community
plans
require
approval
from
both
planning
board
and
city
council,
so
you
will
consider
to
a
motion
to
adopt
the
plan
you
can
move
to
adopt
the
plan
with
recommended
amendments.
If
there
are
any
remaining
changes
that
you
would
recommend
be
made
to
the
plan
or
you
can
deny
adoption
of
the
plan.
F
So
I
think
there
were
some
additional
questions
about
the
opportunity
zone
and
we
do
have
yvette
bowden
with
us
from
the
city
manager's
office
this
evening,
if
folks
wanted
to
go
through
any
of
the
material
that
was
shared
with
planning
board
earlier
today,.
A
All
right:
well,
if
it
suits
you,
maybe
we
should
focus
on
on
those
questions
for
miss
bowden
now
and
and
then
move
on
with
other
issues
later
on.
Is
that
what
you
would
intend
for
for
the
procedure
tonight.
F
Yes,
yes,
we
can
answer
any
clarifying
questions
that
are
remaining
and
then
planning
board
should
deliberate
and
you
will
deliver
your
decision
on
adoption
this
evening.
D
B
A
B
B
Funders,
who
are
getting
quite
a
quite
a
nice
break
on
their
taxes
as
a
result
of
the
opportunity
zone,
and
I'd
like
to
really
in
I'd
like
to
understand
how
the
city's
thinking
about
how
it
might
itself
financially
benefit
from
that
and
encourage
you
to
be
thinking
that
way
as
well.
G
Thank
you
for
your
question,
sarah
and
I'm
I'm
sorry
that
I
misunderstood
your
prior
question
and
thanks
to
planning
board
for
having
me
I'm
yvette
bowden,
I'm
the
assistant
city
manager,
good
to
be
with
you
and
nice
to
see
you
kathleen
and
actually
sarah
we've
met
several
times.
H
G
No,
no,
it's
actually
fine.
So
thanks
for
your
question,
I'm
gonna
do
my
best
to
explain
and
give
you
a
high
level
and
then
I'm
going
to
try
and
answer
the
question
that
you're
asking.
I
appreciate
planning
for
board's
time.
The
federal
opportunity
zone
program
is
actually
regulated
by
the
irs
it.
The
the
beneficiary
of
it
is
the
ultimate
taxpayer,
who
must
then
invest
in
a
qualified
opportunity
fund
and
in
the
case
of
real
estate.
G
That
fund
can
then
invest
70
percent
or
more
of
the
fund
into
a
qualified
opportunity
zone
census
tract
the
city
of
boulder
had
at
the
time
that
this
program
was
created,
six
qualifying
census
tracts,
but
one
only
one
is
actually
participating
in
the
program
based
on
what
was
the
low,
low
income
and
level
of
density
in
that
area
that
warranted
reinvestment.
G
You
cannot
subdivide
a
census
tract.
You
cannot
tell
the
federal
government
what
qualifies
as
a
census
tract,
and
so
ultimately,
this
program
is
around
investment
long
term
in
parcels
that
are
desirous
of
reinvestment.
G
For
that
reason-
and
I
am
not
an
accountant-
and
I
don't
even
play
one
on
tv
or
in
these
little
boxes,
but
for
that
reason
the
city
is
not
privy
to
who
is
investing
or
has
cap
realized
capital
gains
on
any
particular
parcel
in
the
city.
It's
not
part
of
the
irs
program.
It's
not
how
the
program
was
designed
and
it's
managed
by
the
federal
government.
G
G
First,
there
is,
I
wanted
to
clear
up.
There
was
a
question
the
other
night
about
whether
or
not
people
could
invest
in
their
own
property
or
somehow
realize
benefits
from
their
own
projects,
and
there
are
caveats
in
the
federal
guidance
around
that
to
prevent
that.
So
in
that
essence,
no,
in
order
for
somebody
to
benefit
under
this
program,
they
would
have
had
to
invest
in
a
parcel.
G
That's
in
an
opportunity
zone
track
through
a
qualified
fund
realize
a
sale
of
that
within
the
time
period,
capture
those
capital
gains,
and
so
in
terms
of
time
it's
not
impossible,
but
the
gains
go
down
for
the
shorter
amount
of
time
you
hold
a
property.
G
The
city
is
not
privy
to
the
capital
stack
of
any
particular
project,
and
for
that
reason
I
don't
have
an
answer
to
your
question
about
which
projects
are
utilizing
the
opportunity
zone
census
track
in
boulder.
There
are
some
communities
that
are
participating
as
part
of
developing
prospectus
for
projects,
in
that
instance,
they're
able
to
track
a
little
bit
more
about
the
capital
investment
because
they're
financially
participating
in
that
project.
G
There's
a
couple
of
ways:
one:
we
could
look
at
the
mix
within
the
east,
boulder
sub
community
plan
of
things
that
generate
sales,
tax
revenue
right,
so
a
good
portion
of
the
city's
general
fund
comes
from
the
generation
of
sales
tax
revenue,
and
I
know
you
all,
because
I
actually
attend
a
fair
number
of
your
meetings.
G
I
know
you
all
care
a
lot
about
walkable,
neighborhoods,
and
so
one
of
the
things
I've
been
thinking
about
and
kathleen-
and
I
have
been
talking
about-
is
what
are
the
things
that
this
community
is
going
to
need
that
also
generate
sales
tax
revenue.
And
how
might
we
encourage
their
development
like
a
grocery
store
right,
which
will
certainly
be
one
of
the
things
that
I
think
we
continue
to
try
and
look
at
the
areas
of
our
community
that
are
now
somewhat
challenged
in
access
to
food
without
getting
in
a
car
right.
G
The
other
thing
is
stabilization
of
jobs,
so
the
more
of
our
businesses
that
we're
able
to
retain
in
the
area
that
help
stabilize
employment
and
don't
and
and
or
could
contribute
to
affordable
commercial
opportunities
would
be
also
things
that
contribute
to
our
local
economy.
We
have
many.
We
benefit
from
a
lot
of
different
industries
right,
so
shared
spaces.
G
Good
use
of
floors
base
trying
to
do
things
that
generate
sales
tax
revenue,
but
from
the
deal
itself,
sarah,
at
its
very
basis
and
I'm
not
a
developer.
I
will
tell
you
it's
relatively
difficult
unless
you're
doing
a
tourism
magnet-
and
I
think
I
shared
with
you
all
an
example
of
that-
that's
happening
in
pueblo-
that
that
city
is
trying
to
participate
in,
and
you
also
asked
a
really
great
question
of.
What
do
I
mean
by
the
city
is
unaware
of
things
that
are
being
marketed
as
opportunities
own
projects.
G
The
city
has
a
website
that
does
acknowledge
that
there
is
a
qualified
census,
tract
and
information
on
the
city,
existing
programs.
We
created
no
additional
programs
to
incentivize
development
specifically
to
this
zone,
which
was
targeted
and
in
large
part
selected
because
of
diagonal
plaza
and
the
long-term
interests
of
this
community
and
having
redevelopment
there
with
affordable
housing
on
site,
and
I'm
I've
been
paying
a
lot
of
attention
to
your
progress
in
consideration
of
that
project.
G
This
is
the
same
kind
of
issue
where
you'll
be
looking
at
this,
but
I
don't,
I
don't
see
other
than
a
tourism
magnet
or
generation
of
sales
tax
revenue
a
way
to
pull
funds
out
of
the
deal,
because
the
deal
is
only
beneficial
beneficial
to
the
ultimate
tax
payer
under
the
under
that
particular
program.
G
There
are
always
ways
for
the
city
to
partner
with
the
for-profit
community
to
hopefully
do
things
that
generate
sales
tax
revenue
and
support
our
economy
through
great
jobs
and
and
trying
to
have
more
affordable
spaces
for
people
to
live
and
work.
I
hope
I
answered
your
question.
B
Remember
that
going
forward
is
there
a
prohibition
on
our
knowing
the
capital
stack
of
a
project.
G
B
It
so
the
reason
I'm
asking
is
that
the
I
I
do
recognize.
I
understand
how
I
understand
mostly
how
the
opportunity
zone
project
works
and
that
the
ultimate
beneficiaries
are
the
folks.
The
relatively
few
folks
who
have
lots
of
capital
gains
taxes
that
they
want
to
avoid
paying.
I
get
that,
but
they
are
benefiting
and
their
benef,
their
benefit
will
appear
after
2028
or
2030
or
whatever
point
at
which
they
exit.
B
2047
which
point
their
their
fund
exits
this
the
project
that
they're
in,
but
I
just
keep
thinking
that
if
we
do
know
what
the
capital
stack
is
that
couldn't
it
couldn't
we
imagine
some
sort
of
on
the
skip,
not
on
the
scale
of
but
similar
to
the
linkage
fee
that
if
it
is
an
opportunity
zone
fund
investment
that
there
is
an
additional
fee
that
we
might
charge
that
would
go
directly
into
our
affordable
housing
fund
or
directly
into
a
business
improvement
district.
B
G
G
That
is
not
to
say
that
we
couldn't
do
more
research
to
try
and
find
out,
but
I
am
not
familiar
with
a
project
like
that.
I
am
familiar
with
a
couple
of
projects
around
not
in
colorado
but
in
other
parts
of
the
country
where
the
city
is
actually
acting
as
a
developer.
G
To
then
flip
the
project,
but
in
a
way
I've
seen
where
the
city
is
actually
acting
in
its
own
worst
interest
because
as
the
property
appreciates
and
then
you're
selling,
you're
selling
to
yourself
and
then
there's
a
loss
there
or
you're
losing
control
of
a
public
asset
which
isn't
always
desirable.
All
of
these
things
and
any
experience
I've
ever
had
in
lan
is
very
specific
to
the
project
and
very
specific
to
what
we're
trying
to
accomplish
you're
asking
me
a
great
question.
G
B
I
appreciate
that
that
there
may
not
be
anything
like
it,
but
I
it
would
be
awesome
if
the
city,
I
know
that
everyone's
already
extremely
busy,
but
I
would
love
it
if
the
city,
in
the
same
way
that
it
was
creative
enough
to
put
offline
all
the
housing,
that's
already
in
the
the
the
census
track
in
in
the
opportunity
zone
for
10
years
to
protect
it
from
being
redeveloped
as
high-end,
expensive
housing.
B
I
I
just
think
it
would
be
really
valuable
for
the
city
to
try
to
be
as
creative
as
possible
in
it's
hard
to
imagine
that
you
know
increasing
a
fee
would
or
adding
a
fee
of
some
enough
amount
is
going
to
stop
developers
from
wanting
to
develop
in
boulder.
That
does
not
seem
to
me
to
be
a
problem
in
general,
so
I
think
it's
worth
at
least
looking
into,
and
that's
really
what
I
wanted
to
kind
of
back
and
forth
on.
B
I
don't
know
that
it's
going
to
end
up
being
a
motion
that
I
suggest
for
this
plan,
but
this
because
the
census
tract
overlaps
with
an
awful
lot
of
east
boulder
sub
community.
I
thought
it
was
worth
bringing
up.
A
I
might
just
follow
up
a
little
bit
on
that,
and
this
I'm
sure
there
are
several
people
in
our
meeting
who
might
be
able
to
answer
that,
including
you
or
or
hella,
or
kathleen.
What?
If,
for
example,
there
was
a
different
sort
of
use
table
or
zoning
applied
to
the
opportunity
zone,
which,
for
example,
might
require
additional
open
space
for
public
benefit
anywhere
within
the
opportunity's
own
boundaries?
A
G
I
yeah
kathleen
or
hello.
Would
you
like
to
answer
that.
F
So
it
sounds
like
you're
suggesting
that
we
might
tailor
a
new
zone
that
would
be
an
opportunity
zone
coming
with
requirements
for
x
amount
of
open
space
x
amount
of
affordable
commercial.
Whatever
we
determine
those
community
benefits
would
be
is
that
is
that
what
you're
describing
does
that
represent?.
A
Yeah,
I
mean
one
could
imagine
lots
of
things,
but
where
one
determines
the
requirement
based
not
on
the
ownership
of
a
property
but
the
boundaries
of
a
zone
which
which
would
which
would
identify
where
that's
required
and
that
boundary
could
could
be
the
same
as
the
opportunity
zone
boundary.
For
example,.
F
It
sounds
like
you're
describing
maybe
an
overlay,
so
I
would
ask
hella
what
our
power
is
to
do
that
yeah.
I
But
not
everybody
in
the
opportunity
zone
is
developing.
There
may
be
taking
advantage
of
that,
so
it
and
and
it's
difficult
for
us
to
know
who
is
and
who
is
not.
So
there
may
be
difficulties
associated
with
that.
A
Well,
I
mean
not
not
to
debate
it
the
details
here,
but
if
we
were
able
to
develop
that
existing
overlay
zone,
you
know
preventing
demolition
of
of
housing,
which
is
a
you
know,
an
understood
to
be
a
valid
government
purpose.
One
could
imagine,
for
example,
providing
additional
park
space
for
local
neighborhoods
might.
I
Yes,
I
think
to
to
create
open
space
is,
is
a
valid
government
purpose,
one
of
the
things
that
that
law
might
be
evaluated
against
is
why
this
area
is
being
treated
differently
than
others,
and
I
guess
then,
when
it
comes
down
to
the
tax
benefits
that
might
be
available
in
that
area,
and
maybe
maybe
it
could
hold
up
and
maybe
there's
ways
to
to
do
that.
B
Yvette,
I
do
have
a
follow-up
to
the
email
that
you
sent
the
memo
because
it
was
caught
my
attention
because
I'm
super
interested
in
ownership,
residential
ownership
opportunities
in
the
east,
boulder
sub
community
plan
and,
in
the
last,
the
last
four
bullets,
the
ver
of
your
memo.
The
first
one
says:
application
for
the
east
boulder
sub-community
area,
re-expedited,
review
permitting
or
financial
match
components
offered
by
the
city
says:
incentivize
development
redevelopment
project,
inclusion
of
on-site
workforce
housing
for
ownership.
B
So
I
will
put
aside
for
the
moment
the
fact
that
we
don't
have
a
definition
for
workforce
housing
and
that's
my
pet
peeve-
that
we
use
that
phrase
when
we
don't
have
a
definition
for
it.
But
I'm
really
interested
in
the
ownership
discussion
here
and
I'm
just
hoping.
You
can
tell
us
a
bit
more
about
this.
G
Yeah
what
I
understood
so,
I'm
sorry
y'all.
I
thought
we
did
have
a
definition
of
workforce
housing,
but
I
that's
great
to
know
for
me.
I
I
have
heard
a
lot
of
your
prior
meetings,
the
the
interests
and
highly
warranted
right
for
the
need
for
housing
that
can
be
owned
rather
than
rented,
and
there
are
different
things
that
motivate
different
kinds
of
developers
in
land
use.
G
If
the
city
were
to
create
some-
and
we
don't
have
an
incentive
program
like
this-
but
if
the
city
were
to
have
an
incentive
program
that
wanted
this
particular
area
to
have
more
units
that
were
available
for
purchase,
that
might
be
a
distinguishing
factor,
it
doesn't
stop
a
landowner
from
doing
what
they
have
an
ability
to
do
under
zoning.
But
the
city
could
develop
a
program
to
incentivize
ownership
units
over
rental
units.
G
I
have
seen
that
in
a
couple
of
other
parts
of
the
country
again,
I'm
I
did
not
have
a
lot
of
time
to
respond
to
your
joint
meeting
the
other
day,
but
you
know
if,
if
you
wanted
us
to
look
further
into
that,
I
certainly
could
ask
staff
to
do
that.
B
Great,
so
if
we
were
to,
if
we
were
to
have
a
friendly
to
the
motion
with
a
recommendation
to
encourage
staff
to
our
city
to
develop,
to
consider
development
of
a
program
to
incentivize
ownership
units-
and
that
would
be
something
we
could
conceivably
add
to
this
motion
to
encourage
the
city
council
to
think
about
it
and
consider
it.
G
A
A
Okay,
well
thanks
very
much
that
is,
has
been
very
useful.
J
A
Okay,
kathleen,
you
were
in
the
middle
of
your
of
your
thoughts
there,
so
why
don't
you
continue.
F
K
Thank
you,
as
you
might
have
noticed,
I
didn't
have
my
questions
organized
for
tuesday,
so
my
questions
are
here,
so
I
have
four
clarifying
questions
and
I'm
going
to
refer
to
them
by
page
number
and
policy
number.
So
my
first
one
is
on
page
87
and
it's
policy.
K
K
F
Right,
I
will
pull
it
up
and
share
my
screen,
so
we
can
look
at
it.
At
the
same
time,
great.
K
So
I'll
wait
till
you
pull
it
up.
It's
h4
is
what
I'm
looking
at.
F
F
K
Yes,
so
I'm
wondering
about
an
incentive
program
should
be
established
in
in
concert
with
future
zoning
updates.
So
is
this
a
new
tool,
or
is
this
an
expansion
of
something
that
already
exists?
What
what
is
the
thought.
F
Yeah,
so
this
would
look
at
new
tools
that
could
either
be
a
part
of
or
added
to
our
existing
tool,
which
is
the
community
benefit
program
or
the
creation
of
a
a
new
form
of
an
incentive
program
for
affordable
housing.
F
Yeah,
that's
a
great
question.
Yes,
first
we
would
do
the
land
use
change
and
that
will
update
the
bvcp
land
use
map
and
then
we're
going
to
go
into
the
zoning
study
where
we
will
look
at
potentially
rezoning
creation
of
new
zones
and
creation
of
form-based
code.
K
F
F
So
this
is
about
this
is
a
project
to
annex
the
san
lazaro
mobile
right.
K
And
I
think
you
had
started
to
talk
about
it,
my
I'm
only
questioning,
so
I
see
that
it's
in
the
plan
to
annex
it
and
it's
it's
a
privately
held
property
out
of
out
of
state
owners
and
by
annexing
it
do
we
get
a
do
we?
How
do
we
assure
that
we
get
the
benefit
of
affordable
housing
because
clearly
the
landowner
is
going
to
get
a
huge
benefit
by
becoming
a
part
of
the
city
and
all
the
services.
So
how
does
that
work
at
this?
At
this
stage,.
F
Yeah,
so
this
would
be
considered
like
a
special
annexation.
K
F
Yeah
so
because
the
san
lazaro
mobile
home
community
is
located
within
the
boundaries
of
the
sub
community,
we
have
worked
pretty
closely
with
some
of
the
residents
in
that
area
and
there
is
a
desire
from
those
residents
to
annex
into
the
city
so
that
they
have
first
and
foremost,
access
to
city
water.
F
But
I
think
part
of
what
we're
hoping
would
come
out
of
an
annexation
process
and
an
annexation
agreement
would
be
rent
stabilization
and
that's
identified
as
one
of
the
goals
goals
of
our
manufactured
housing
strategy
and
that
strategy
describes
how
we
would
request
that
or
negotiate
for
that
in
annexations
of
mobile
home
parks.
F
K
Great
thank
you
for
that.
My
next
question
is
on
page
91:
okay,
b2
and
3.
K
K
I
think
a
recurring
concern
on
the
plan
is
trying
to
retain
the
local
businesses
and
affordability
and
in
both
b2
and
b3.
So
I'm
wondering
how
many.
K
F
The
plan
also
includes
at
the
55th
and
arapahoe
station
area,
the
idea
of
a
general
improvement
district
and
in
other
improvement
districts.
The
city
has
participated
in
those
projects
and
since
we
have
that
still
with
us,
I
don't
know
of
that.
If,
if
you'd
be
able
to
describe
the
rental
spaces
or
the
spaces
that
the
city
has
for
lease
in,
I
think
it's
kged.
G
Yeah
that's
one
example
of
some
of
the
work
we've
been
piloting,
sorry
again,
bowden
assistant
city
manager,
so
the
easiest
example,
I
would
say,
is
if
you
look
at
all
of
our
parking
structures
to
encourage
the
sump
parking
in
the
business
districts.
G
There
is
a
retail
wrap
on
those
garages.
Those
retail
wrap
hosts
a
myriad
of
different
business
types
at
both
spruce
and
1500,
and
as
just
examples
and
our
typical
rent
is
somewhere
between
75
and
85
of
what
the
general
market
rate
is
for
base
rent
the
biggest
challenge
for
commercial
entities
that
we
are
aware
of
now,
I'm
speaking
like
I'm
still
in
community
vitality.
But
I'm.
H
G
Is
is
that
the
triple
net
lease
is
a
challenge,
and
so
our
ability
to
stabilize
and
have
perhaps
smaller
spaces
or
spaces
that
could
be
shared
or
spaces
that
the
city
has
greater
control
over
the
rental
has
proved
somewhat
beneficial.
We
don't
always
do
that
with
retail
wrap.
G
I
was
very
fortunate
when
I
was
in
parks
and
recreation
to
know
that
we're
also
having
challenges
for
some
of
our
non-profits,
so
we
were
able
to,
for
example,
house
the
women's
wilderness
project
in
what
is
the
harbeck
house
a
park
and
recreation
asset,
and
they
can
sub
lease
as
part
of
their
sustainability
to
other
non-profits.
G
B
K
Similar
to
the
question
I
just
asked,
it
looks
like
it's
something
that
is
just
an
idea
at
this
point
in
time
is:
is
that
correct
retained
retention
of
existing
businesses?
I
think
that's
a
big,
a
big
consideration
when
you're
looking
at
changing
land
use
to
a
more
robust
use
that
what
happens
to
the
people
that
are
already
there.
F
Yeah,
so
this
recommendation
in
the
plan
is
intended
to
really
address
a
lot
of
the
concerns
that
we've
heard
from
the
community
about
business
retention
and
particularly
in
this
part
of
town,
and
so
in
the
past,
when
certain
sites
in
the
city
have
gone
through
redevelopment,
businesses
have
worked
with
community
vitality
to
locate
space
that
is
appropriate
for
their
business
in
another
part
of
town,
and
it's
been
sort
of
a
one-off
program.
F
I
think
in
the
past,
and
so
the
idea
for
this
would
be
to
really
formalize
it
and
put
some
resources
towards
that,
so
that
we
can
have
that
service
for
businesses
in
the
city.
K
So
those
are
all
my
questions.
I
have.
H
K
Considerations
for
changes
but
I'll
hold
on
those,
and
thank
thank
you
kathleen.
A
Okay,
I
just
like
to
follow
up
on
a
couple
of
ml's
questions
with
miss
bowden.
How
is
it
working
at
at
30th
and
pearl?
I
understand
that
there's
some
some
of
the
proportion
of
the
ground
floor
of
one
or
two
of
those
buildings
is
designated
for
affordable
commercial
activity,
and
I
just
wondered:
what
is
the
arrangement
that?
G
We
are
really
not
fully
developed
out
there.
One
of
the
tenants
that
has
moved
in
under
the
covenant
arrangements
is
ramble
on
pearl.
They
have
already
located
a
store
in
that
location,
but
the
majority
of
the
commercial
spaces.
On
the
ground
floor.
We
just
had
an
opportunity
to
meet
with
mr
bush
about
two
weeks
ago
to
understand
the
status
of
his
outreach
to
fill
the
first
floor
of
the
building
on
the
corner,
which
is
where
most
of
the
affordable
commercial
was
envisioned.
G
So
it's
under
a
covenant
that
was
part
of
that
project
that
was
really
brokered
through
an
arrangement
with
housing
and
human
services
and
then
community
vitality
will
aid
that
developer
in
helping
to
do
outreach
and
populate
those
sites.
So
it
isn't
full.
Yet
it's
not
built
out
yet.
G
Well,
we
we
had
that
discussion
a
couple
weeks
ago.
I
don't
want
to
jump
ahead
too
far
on
that
on
on
who
he's
talking
to
or
about
what
it's
very
difficult
to
fill
those
kind
of
spaces.
Unless
you
have
a
final
kind
of
look
and
feel
of
what
it's
going
to
be,
and
so,
as
the
building
comes
out,
I'm
sure
he'll
be
doing
some
tours
and
we
look
forward
to
helping
him
with
that
outreach.
However,
the
city
will
not
control
those
leases
per
se.
A
Is
is
that
general
approach
or
arrangement,
something
that
you
could
imagine
being
desirable
in
in
east
boulder
in
the
future,
with
new
new
developments
and
new
buildings
or
or
what
do
you
think
about
that.
G
Oh
wow,
okay,
kathleen,
I
you
know,
I
think
there
are
many
many
different
ways
there
are
lots
of
models
happening
that
I'm
studying
the
couple
in
toronto.
There
are
some
things
that
are
happening
in
seattle,
I'm
looking
at.
I
think
our
staff
is
always
paying
attention
further
exacerbated
by
some
of
the
concerns
that
ml
pointed
to
that
came
out
of
our
citywide
retail
strategy.
G
So,
to
be
honest
with
you
in
east
boulder,
my
biggest
priority
is
to
figure
out
where
people
are
buying
grocery.
That's
what
I'm
thinking
about
the
bounce
back
for
small
businesses
that
exist
today
in
the
process
of
redevelopment.
If
it's
staged
and
if
there's
great
coordination,
I
think,
is
a
possibility.
There
are
challenges,
because,
just
to
give
you
an
example,
if
we
were
to
move
our
favorite
person
who
makes
chocolate
because
they're
making
chocolate,
we
want
to
keep
them
in
the
neighborhood
to
another
area,
it
triggers
a
whole
bunch
of
different
uses.
G
Even
if
and
then
they
have
to
pay.
You
know
to
relocate,
and
you
know
there
are
a
lot
of
other
implications.
How
do
small
businesses
absorb
those
costs
right
now?
The
city
doesn't
have
a
program
for
that.
I
look
forward
to
hearing
ideas
across
all
of
the
city's
boards
and
commissions
about
those
topics,
but
I
don't
have
an
easy
answer
for
you
today.
A
Okay,
laura.
I
see
your
hand
this
up.
C
Thank
you.
Well
I'd
like
to
start
by
doing
something
I
should
have
done
on
tuesday
night,
which
is
to
give
a
huge,
warm
shout
out
to
kathleen
and
gene
sanson
and
holly
opansky,
so
glad
to
see
you.
I
am
so
so
glad
to
have
this
plan.
Finally,
up
for
adoption,
I
think
everybody
is
super
excited
to
get
this
of
reality
to
have
it
become
a
reality.
So
thank
you
so
much
for
all
your
hard
work
and
as
a
former,
I
guess,
still
a
member
of
the
east
boulder
working
group.
C
I
am
so
so
glad
so
so
glad
to
have
you
here
tonight
and
to
be
here
on
planning
board
to
be
part
of
the
glory
of
what
hopefully
will
be
a
smooth
adoption.
So-
and
I
can't
say
enough
nice
things
about
the
plan.
I
may
have
a
few
concerns
and
I
may
offer
a
few
conditions,
but
that
is
in
no
way
a
detraction
from
the
beautiful
work
of
art
that
you
have
put
together.
C
So
a
couple
of
questions
first
and-
and
this
is
a
curiosity
on
my
part-
I
don't
know
if
it's
significant,
but
I
I
would
like
to
know
before
the
plan
goes
for
approval.
So
on
the
place
types
map
you
have
innovation,
tod,
residential
overlaying
on
two
different
kinds
of
land
uses.
It
appears
in
the
industrial
mixed
use
zone
and
it
also
appears
in
the
innovation.
C
So
would
the
implementation
of
innovation
tod
residential,
look
different,
whether
it
is
in
a
mixed-use
zone,
land
use
zone
or
in
a
sorry
an
industrial
mixed-use
land
use
zone
or
a
tod
mixed-use
land
use
zone?
Sorry
very
complicated
question,
but
I
think
I
think
you
understand
what
I'm
saying.
F
I
I
do
understand
what
you're
saying
and
we
have
updated
the
land
use
map
in
the
latest
draft,
so
that
that
mixed
use,
tod
land
use,
is
applied
for
the
entire
area
that
the
innovation
tod
place
type
is
so
those
are
now
lined
up.
Oh
fantastic!
Well,
I'm.
F
That's:
okay,
that's
okay!
They
were
not.
They
were
not
aligned
in
the
90
draft,
but
we've
cleaned
that
up
in
the
latest
version.
Thank.
C
You
so
much,
I
think
you
probably
said
that,
and
I
missed
it.
So
thank
you
for
that
sure.
The
only
other
clarifying
questions
I
have
are
related
to
implementation
m16
around
the
airport.
Okay,
so
I
don't
know
if
you
want
to
pull
that
up
on
the
screen,
so
people
can
look
at
it.
Yeah.
F
J
C
E
J
C
Is
I
think,
in
response
to
the
concern
that
some
folks
approached
john
about
in
terms
of
that
that
box,
where
the
glider
planes
get
towed
and
that
runs
over
east
boulder,
and
so
this
policy
says
that
you're
going
to
conduct,
conduct
a
level
of
noise
study
or
a
part,
150
study,
which
seems
completely
reasonable
and
then
consider
whether
any
changes
to
the
boulder
revised
code,
section
on
the
airport,
influence
zone
or
other
parts
of
the
boulder
revised
code
are
necessary
to
ensure
compatible
land
use?
F
I
don't
remember
exactly
what
the
other
parts
of
the
code
that
we
were
looking
at,
that
maybe
referenced
the
airport
influence
zone.
I
don't
know
if,
charles
you
remember
what
the
other
section
was
or
what
that
language
was
referring
to.
F
C
Oh
sorry,
I
was
thank
you
on
my
headset.
My
question
is
less
about
what
does
a
part
150
study
look
like
and
more
about
the
implications,
so
it
sounds
like
we
there's
no
specific
parts
of
the
boulder
revised
code
other
than
the
airport
influence
zone
that
you
had
in
mind
when
you
wrote
this.
F
Yeah
we
identified
that
the
code
updates
may
include
a
revision
to
that
influence,
zone
or
consideration
of
navigation
easements
for
redevelopment
in
the
sub-community
and
so
how
we
would
pursue
those
avigation
easements.
I
might
ask
john
or
charles
to
guide
us
on
how
how
we
pursue
those.
C
C
An
avigation
easement
is
an
agreement
that
compels
property
owners
to
cede
air
rights
over
their
property
to
the
government.
This
agreement
restricts
owners
from
building
above
a
specific
height
waives,
their
right
to
file
suit
against
owners
and
pilots
of
low-flying
aircraft
and
limits
the
liability
of
aircraft
operators
for
causing
a
nuisance.
Is
that
a
correct
definition.
F
C
F
I
I
think
that's
correct,
that's
essentially
what
a
navigation
easement
does
and
at
the
same
time
it
puts
property
owners
on
notice,
and
we
do
actually
have
standards
for
that
in
the
code
already,
and
there
are
certain
circumstances
when
the
city
requires
property
owners
to
sign
navigation
easement.
If,
for
example,
a
subdivision
occurs,
if
you're
in
a
certain
zone,
airport
influence
zone
and
navigation,
easement
has
to
be
signed
because
development
increases
and
more
people
would
be
impacted
by
airport
noise.
I
I
also
remember
working
on
some
associated
with
some
annexations
and
in
the
airport
influence
zone
area.
C
Yeah
and-
and
you
know,
I
think
that
is
reasonable-
I
mean
that
seems
like
that's
a
a
tool
that
is
pretty
common
for
folks
who
live
near
an
airport
is
to
have
to
sign
an
navigation
easement.
C
I
did
also
look
up
the
airport
influence
zone
statute
in
the
boulder
revised
code
and
it
looks
like
there's
four
different
levels
and
the
first
two
zone
four
and
zone.
Three
are
fairly
light
consequences
that
you
know
it's
it's
about
signing
navigation,
easements
and
about
placing
utility
lines
underground,
but
the
other
two
zone,
two
and
zone
one
can
actually
restrict
development
or
prohibit
development.
So
I
guess
I
have
a
clarifying
question
of
when
you
say
that
you
would
look
at
revising
the
airport
influence
zone.
C
F
Yeah,
I'm
just
looking
up
the
map
of
those
zones
so
far.
A
Just
while,
while
you're
doing
that,
I
I
could
just
mention
that
this
is
more
than
just
an
academic
issue,
I
was
formerly
on
the
county
planning
commission
and
we
dealt
with
this
quite
actively
on
a
number
of
projects
that
that
were
of
concern.
C
Thank
you,
john.
I'm
glad
you
have
experience
with
it,
because
this
is
all
new
to
me.
This
is
all
just
like
desk
research
for
me,
but
it
seems
like
an
important
potential
implication
of
revising
that
airport
influence
zone
and
I'll
just
say
you
know
my
bias
is.
C
I
would
not
want
to
see
development
in
east
boulder
restricted
because
of
concern
about
airport
noise
complaints
to
me
that
is
not
a
a
higher
priority
than
having
housing,
although
I
mean
I
understand,
like
you,
don't
want
people
to
to
move
someplace
and
then
be
surprised
and
then
be
unhappy
with
the
noise.
So
I
get
that
I
get.
You
want
to
notify
people,
but
restricting
development
would
be
a
much
larger
concern
for
me.
F
Yeah,
so,
let's
take
a
look
at
the
zones
zone.
One
is
this
central
area
here
and
it's
really
just
over
and
just
beyond
where
the
runway
is
and
then
zone.
Two
is
the
green
hatch,
and
I
think
that
these
are
the
landing
and
takeoff
areas
and
then
zone
three
is
the
pink
hatch
and
zone.
Four
is
the
blue,
so
I
I
do
not
know
enough
about
how
the
zones
are
identified
or
what
the?
What
determines
the
difference
between
a
zone
three
and
a
zone?
F
Four-
and
I
don't
know
john-
if,
if
you're
able
to
unmute-
and
you
know
that
john
kinney-
that
is,
if
you
have
an
answer
about
that-
but
just
kind
of
based
on
what
I'm
seeing
on
the
map
and
how
it's
applied
in
these
areas
to
the
north
of
the
airport.
I
would
assume
that
we
would
have
a
similar
kind
of
reflected
application
on
the
south
side
of
really
just
zone
three
and
zone
four.
M
Terry
gerson
members
of
the
planning
board
commission
good
afternoon
good
good
evening.
My
name
is
john
kinney,
I'm
your
new,
relatively
new
airport
manager.
So
some
great
questions
laura
those
zones,
two
and
one
are
really
height
restrictions.
M
So
there's
really
two
aspects
of
the
airport
influence
zones.
The
federal
aviation
administration
requires
airports
to
control
the
air
space
immediately
around
those
critical
areas,
as
kathleen
was
shown
in
zone
one
and
two
the
arrival
and
departure
corridors
so
that
you
don't
have
a
five
six
story.
Seven
story
building-
and
I
realize
there's
probably
a
five
story
limit
in
the
city
of
boulder.
But
this
is
a
program:
that's
a
national
overlay,
so
that's
the
applicability
of
where
you
would
restrict
building
components.
M
The
other
is
more
as
just
simply
a
disclosure
trying
to
get
those
folks
who
some
folks
don't
mind,
aircraft
noise,
but
it's
just
heightening
the
folks
awareness
through
disclosures
or
abigation
easements
for
those
properties
that
are
really
close
proximity
to
the
runway
and
just
fully
understanding
what
the
airport
is
doing
today.
What
it
could
possibly
do
tomorrow,
but
does
not
preclude
that
developments
unless
it's
inside
a
noise
contour
which
it
would
preclude
and
that
does
not
apply
to
boulder.
Given
our
low
activity
levels.
C
Okay,
so
I
just
want
to
make
sure
I'm
understanding
correctly.
So,
as
I
read
the
code
in
zone,
one
no
new
construction
is
permitted
and
that's
over
the
runway.
Unless
it's
related
to
the
airport,
it
says
other
than
airport
construction,
you're,
not
proposing
expanding
zone,
one
and
zone
two
says
no
new
residential
use
can
be,
can
be
built,
and
so
I
hear
you're
not
considering
expanding
zone
two.
M
Kathleen
would
be,
would
it
be
helpful
to
point
out
the
proposed
residential
areas
in
terms
of
applicability
and
that
that
might.
F
F
This
just
for
I
don't
oh,
I
can
turn
on
a
sub-community
boundary.
Actually
let
me
turn
that
on
so
we
can
see
what,
where
east
boulder
is.
F
Okay,
so
here's
our
east
boulder
boundary,
there
is
existing
residential.
Here
we
have
existing
residential
in
san
lazaro,
which
is
here
and
then
the
proposed
areas
of
change
that
would
include
residential.
Is
this
pocket
down
here
a
pocket
here
this
area
generally
here
and
this
area
generally
here.
C
Thank
you
that's
helpful,
and
some
of
this
could
be
in
that
zone
three,
I'm
assuming
which
says
that
applications
for
development
shall
be
referred
to
the
airport
manager
for
review
and
comment
and
john.
What?
What
kind
of
review
and
comment
would
you
be
doing
in
a
zone?
Three.
M
The
review
comet
that
we
would
be
doing
is
would
be
to
make
folks
aware
that
that
is
a
very
heavy
overflight
area,
specifically
for
the
glider
operations,
leaving
the
airport
and
primarily
the
flight
corridor,
coming
back
to
land
at
the
airport.
So
you
would
have
aircraft
at
approximately
a
thousand
feet
coming
into
and
out
of
the
airport,
there's
really
no
hard
fast,
but
that's
a
pretty
close
in
terms
of
altitude
and
you
would
have
multiple
operations
on
a
daily
basis,
so
it
would
be
more
of
a
disclosure
component
at
that
point.
M
A
You
excuse
me
just
to
follow
up
while
we
have
john
on
the
on
the
in
the
party
here,
I
had
understood
that
it's
the
toe
the
glider
towing
operation,
which
focuses
its
towing
on
on
the
area
over
east
boulder,
as
opposed
to
the
glider
landing
operation,
which
is
more
to
the
north
of
the
airport,
and
so
the
concern
I
had
heard
was
that
there
might
be
complaints
with
respect
to
the
noise,
because
towing
gliders
is
noisier
than
landing
gliders,
but
but
that
I
think,
would
be
dealt
with
under
the
the
avigation
arrangements.
M
M
The
faa
does
not
consider
us
to
have
technically
a
noise
problem
now
try
to
tell
that
to
the
homeowners
and
you
will
get
an
earful
and
so
what
the
faa
then
allowed
airports
to
start
doing
is
creating
these
airport
influence
zones
and
based
on
individual
counties
or
city
sponsors
of
airports,
the
owners
and
operators
of
the
airports.
They
are,
then
allowed
to
use
this
navigation
easements
to
a
rare
of
a
variety
of
degree
or
these
disclosure
components
to
try
to
put
folks
the
most
compatible
folks
in
and
around
airports.
M
Some
people
airplanes,
just
they
have
a
very
low
threshold
in
terms
of
tolerance
and
others-
have
very
high,
so
you're
just
trying
to
make
that
disclosure
buyer
be
aware
before
that
purchase
and
that's
kind
of
one
of
your
most
effective
tools,
as
well
as
to
also
working
with
the
pilot
groups
and
the
homeowners
to
make
them
understand
how
airplanes
operate.
But
at
the
same
time,
if
pilots
have
latitude
to
operate
the
airport,
the
airplanes
differently
to
do
so
in
over
noise
sensitive
areas.
A
M
You
sure
can
I've
seen
numerous
municipalities
do
it
for
the
the
tran
more
the
transitory
residents
as
well.
Some
some
communities
have
made
it
part
of
the
plat,
so
it's
in
perpetuity
and
as
people
change
over
their
their
awareness
is,
is
made
by
signing
actual
disclosure
form.
M
The
discussion
that
was
really
coming
out
of
the
airport
tenants
is:
they
wanted
to
see
the
airport
influence
zone
expanded
to
that
portions
over
the
study
area,
and
it's
it's
just
didn't
allow
for
us
to
fully
flush
those
issues
out
that
kathleen
was
talking
about.
So
to
do
so.
That's
why
it's
time
for
us
to
go
back
into
a
master
plan,
but
we're
also
trying
to
add
on
to
that
airport
master
plan.
M
A
part
150
noise
compatibility
study
that
it's
a
very
scripted
study,
but
it's
funded
by
the
faa,
and
it
allows
you
to
identify
mitigating
measures
to
try
to
reduce
the
impact
or
influences
on
the
surrounding
community
and
those
are
both
of
those
together
about
an
18-month
study.
So
real,
we'll
do
a
deep
dive
into
that
and
we
felt
that's
probably
the
more
applicable
approach
to
take,
as
opposed
to
trying
to
quickly
determine
what
we
should
do
with
an
airport
influence
area.
At
this
point,.
C
And
I
have
one
follow-up
kathleen:
are
you
able
to
pull
up
a
graphic
of
what
john
was
describing
that
that
box
for
the
glider
toe
planes?
F
If
you
have
that
pulled
up,
I
do
not
have
the
airport
master
plan
pulled
up,
I
could
get
it
pulled
up
and
you
could
come
back
to
me.
C
J
C
It
bigger,
please
make
it
bigger.
Here
we
go.
H
C
C
This
is
55th
street
here
and
then
you
know
so
so
this
would
go
right
through
flatirons
business
park
and
part
of
the
innovation
tod
zone.
Basically
all
of
our
areas
of
change,
except
for
the
55th
street
stamp
area,
which
is
pretty
close
by
and
so
again
I
don't
mind
notifying
people
about
noise.
That
seems
perfectly
appropriate.
C
I
would
be
concerned
if
there
were
any
attempt
to
limit
or
discourage
development
in
these
areas
of
change
because
of
airport
needs
or
airport
noise
or
concern
about
complaints.
So
I
may
offer
a
condition
at
the
end
of
this,
but
I
just
wanted
to
get
my
questions
answered
about.
You
know
the
different
zones
and,
and
what
is
thought
about
in
terms
of
expanding
the
zone
of
influence
because
expanding
the
zones
that
don't
allow
you
to
build
would
concern
me
greatly.
H
B
All
right,
so
I'm
gonna
bring
up
a
motion
friendly
when
we
get
to
our
when
we
finally
get
to
dot
to
discussion
and
then
voting
that
has
to
do
with
the
jobs,
housing
balance.
So
kathleen,
I'm
wondering
if
you
can
kathleen-
and
I
have
been
having
a
very
productive,
very
interesting
back
and
forth
on
this
topic.
B
She's
been
extremely
generous
with
her
time
kathleen.
Can
you
pull
up
whatever
was
the
final
excel
that
you
developed
based
on
our
conversation
earlier,
so.
B
F
So
sarah
had
asked
whether
we
could
start
to.
F
Understand
the
best
match
for
an
far
limit
for
the
flatiron
business
park
to
ensure
that
future
redevelopment
in
that
area,
in
particular,
does
not
exceed
the
projected
number
of
jobs
that
are
included
in
the
east
boulder
sub-community
plan.
So
what
we
started
looking
at
were
the
existing
numbers.
So
we
know
that
in
all
of
the
east
boulder
sub-community
today
there
are
17
666
jobs
in
the
flat
iron
business
park.
There
are
4
224
jobs,
and
these
are
real
jobs,
they're,
not
an
interpreted
number
from
the
amount
of
space,
and
so.
F
It's
not
necessarily
the
number
of
people,
it's
the
number
of
jobs,
so
one
person
might
work
at
a
restaurant
and
a
coffee
shop,
but
it
that
one
person
occupies
two
of
the
jobs
that
are
generated
in
the
sub
community.
A
F
F
So
what
we
understand,
then,
is
that
24
of
the
real
jobs
are
located.
24
of
the
real
jobs
in
east
boulder
are
located
in
flatiron
business
park.
F
So
if
we
look
at
our
projected
number
of
jobs
for
the
total
total
number
in
the
sub-community-
and
that's
you
know,
with
the
caveat
that
this
number
is
not
really
a
jobs
number,
it's
a
interpretation
of
the
amount
of
space
that
we're
anticipating.
F
F
So
I
went
through
a
kind
of
series
of
mathematical,
acrobatics
and
scenario
testing
to
try
to
start
and
think
about
what
would
be
the
most
appropriate
far
and
where
I
landed
was.
F
I
I
think
that
recommending
an
far
for
that
particular
area
really
requires
more
robust
study
and
more
collaboration
with
folks
in
the
development
community
and
architects,
and
so
we
could
get
a
better
understanding,
I
think,
of
what
properties
we
really
would
expect
to
pursue
redevelopment
and
get
a
better
understanding
of
also,
I
think,
not
just
redevelopment
but
internal
rehabilitation
of
spaces.
F
As
you
know
was
described
on
tuesday
night
that
we
have
these
industrial
spaces
that
we
know
are
turning
into
office
spaces,
and
so
I
just
didn't
feel
comfortable
putting
out
a
far
recommendation
this
evening.
But
I
do
think
that
it
is.
You
know
if,
if
the
board
wants
to
look
at
a
method
for
limiting
job
growth
in
flatiron
business
park,
pursuing
an
far
limit
is
an
appropriate
strategy.
F
But
we
would
need
more
study
to
come
up
with
a
great
recommendation
for
a
number
for
that.
Far.
B
B
The
original
calculation
for
jobs
in
the
flat
irons
business
park
portion
of
the
east,
boulder
sub
community
plan
was
done
by
a
square
footage
per
employee
ratio
and
that
square
footage
per
employee
ratio
was
490
square
feet
per
employee,
which
is
what
got
you
essentially
to
that.
A
round
number
that
5
000
person
number.
B
B
Office
space
is
when
you're
trying
to
figure
out
the
square
footage
per
employee
ratio
is
230
square
feet
per
employee.
So,
if
you
were
to
calculate
as
if
the
entire
east
flatirons
business
park
was
just
going
to
be
offices
which
it's
not
you'd
end
up
with
something,
you
could
end
up
with
something
like
13
000,
more
13,
000
jobs
in
that
area,
which
would
blow
out
of
the
water.
B
This
effort
to
have
east
boulder
sub
community
plan
somewhat
address
our
in
commuting
jobs,
housing
and
balance
problem,
not
not
by
any
stretch
completely,
but
it
would
have
it
would
blow
out
of
the
water
any
chance
of
it
doing
that
so,
and
even
if
you
did
a
fifty
percent,
fifty
percent
fifty
percent
at
two
thirty
square
feet
per
employee
and
fifty
percent
at
490,
you
still
end
up
with
a
much
higher
number
than
that
five
thousand
number.
B
So
I
kathleen's
suggestion-
which
I
think
is
a
good
one,
is,
is
and
we'll
get
into
this
in.
The
discussion
is
that,
in
order
to
make
in
order
for
the
implementation
of
the
east,
boulder
sub
community
plan
to
accurately
reflect
the
goals,
which
was
a
lot
of
housing
and
a
little
bit
of
job
growth
that
we
end
up,
making
a
recommendation
that
recommends
to
council
that
they
that
staff
develop
an
far
that
is
consistent
with
what
is
proposed
in
the
plan
in
terms
of
job
growth
for
the
east
for
the
flatirons
business
park.
B
So
we're
not
going
to
be
I'm
not
going
to
be
recommending
or
offering
up
a
specific
far,
but
rather
tying
the
far
to
being
consistent
with
what's
proposed
in
the
plan
in
terms
of
job
growth,
and
it's
just
gonna
be
specifically
oriented
towards
the
flatirons
business
park.
So
I
just
wanted
to
put
that
out
there
and
have
kathleen
walk
us
through
the
numbers
so
that
when
we
do
get
to
our
discussion,
it's
not
coming
out
of
the
blue
so
that
that's.
I
just
wanted
to
put
that
out.
There.
C
B
B
I'm
sorry,
that's
natural
workplace,
so
not
the
purp,
there's
pink,
there's,
blue
and
there's
purple.
It's
only
the
blue
in
that
map,
and
we
can
be
very
specific
in.
I
will
be
very
specific
in
the
language
that
I
draft
for
us
to
discuss
so
that
it's
not
meant.
This
is
not
meant
to
be
across
the
board.
It's
not
meant
to
change
anything
else.
It's
just
meant
to
again
we're
just
making
recommendations
to
council,
but
it's
to
keep
us
from
blowing
up
one
of
the
main
goals
of
this
project,
which
is
more.
H
A
So,
just
to
follow
up
on
that.
Why?
Why
limit
it
to
that
area
specifically,
why
not
include
it,
the
you
know:
do
it
develop
an
far
for
other
areas
in
east
boulder
as
well.
F
So
the
place
types
that
are
in
the
station
area,
so
the
neighborhood
tod
innovation,
tod,
residential
and
innovation,
tod
non-residential
all
have
recommendations
for
far
the
other
place.
Types
right
now
do
not,
but
that
would
be
something
that
we
would
develop
as
part
of
the
zoning
recommendations
in
in
the
implementation.
A
B
Yeah,
because
if
you
remember
we
approved
hundred
and
twenty
four
fifty,
I
think
with
the
addresses
central
avenue,
which
was
a
light
industrial
low,
low
impact.
I
mean
there
weren't
that
many
employees
in
this
light
industrial
building
and
now
it's
a
three-story.
B
All
glass
fancy
fancy
office
building
with
many
many
many
more
employees
and
many
more
cars
associate,
it
will
be
when
it's
completed
and
realizing
that
that
was
a
potential
direction
that
a
lot
you
know
not
all
of
these
parcels
would
be,
will
be
redeveloped
that
way,
but
recognizing
that
it's
a
the
for
for
applicants,
office
space
is
a
more
lucrative
investment
than
light
industrial.
B
C
Sorry,
just
another
colloquy
on
that
so
would
changing
the
far
and
presumably
lowering
the
far
prevent
an
industrial
building
from
becoming
office.
Space.
B
No-
and
there
is
no
far
right
now-
if
for
this
particular
slice
of
the
slice
of
the
plan,
it
has
to
be
developed,
it
has
to
be
determined
and
it
will
be
determined
during
the
implementation
process.
So
this
would
just
be
a
guidepost
of
what
to
what
the
far
that
is
developed
is
intended
to
accomplish,
and
no
it
wouldn't
prevent
office
space
it
would.
It
would
limit
the
far
now
you
could
build
an
office
space
within
whatever
that
far
is,
or
you
could
build
industrial
space
within
that
far,
but
it's
it's.
B
B
C
F
Yeah
it's.
This
is
like
the
hardest
thing
to
explain
in
planning,
but
it
is
it's.
It
determines
the
developable
proportion
of
a
parcel.
So
if
you
have
a
far
of
one,
you
can
build
to
the
limits
of
that
parcel
one
story:
you
could
also
build
two
stories,
but
on
half
the
parcel
you
could
build
three
stories
but
on
one
third
of
the
parcel,
so
it's
a
ratio
between
developable
square
footage
and
and
parcel
size.
C
F
B
A
A
All
right
too
well
so
mark
you've
been
rather
quiet
tonight.
Did
you
have
any
questions.
L
I
do
thank
you
for
asking
john,
and
I
thought,
maybe
is
appropriate.
I'd
be
a
little
quieter
tonight.
L
Well,
anyway,
I
in
this
I'll
just
say
you
know
I
I
feel
like
as
a
new
planning
board
member,
although
laura
has
shown
that
as
a
new
planning
board
member.
But
as
a
member
of
these
folder
sub
community
plan,
she
has
an
in-depth
knowledge,
but
as
an
in
as
a
as
a
newer
finding
board
member,
not
as
involved
in
the
east,
boulder
sub
community
plan,
I
find
it.
L
L
F
How
that
would
be
applied
in
the
east
boulder
sub-community
plan?
Yes,
I
think
you'd
describe
that
accurately
as
a
future
work
plan
item
as
part
of
the
implementation.
For
this
we'll
be
doing
a
pretty
in-depth
look
at
the
zoning
out
here
and
the
types
of
changes
that
we're
looking
to
make
to
be
consistent
with
the
sub-community
plan
and
certainly
form-based
code
is
one
of
those
tools
that
would
help
implement.
F
L
Will
happen
in
different
zones
in
the
east
polar
sub-community
plan
that,
in
fact,
it
won't,
is
a
risk
that
it
won't
happen
because
I
for
me,
as
as
I
learn
more
about
forum
based
code
and
the
the
potential
greater
creativity
in
the
results
and
greater
variety
of
building
types
and
and
so
forth.
L
I
envision
for
me
that
that
that
the
east
bowler
sub
community
would
would
certainly
benefit
from
a
you
know,
a
liberal
application
of
form
based
code
that
that
really
encouraged
a
greater
variety
of
building
types
than
what
we've
seen
our
site
review
process
produced
to
date
in
in
other
parts
of
the
city.
F
That's
a
good
question:
if
we
don't
state
it
directly,
is
there
a
risk
that
we
would
not
use
form-based
code?
I
think
you
know
from
feedback
that
we've
gotten
throughout
this
process
from
our
development
review
staff
and
how
successful
form-based
code
has
been
in
other
parts
of
the
city
where
it's
really
sort
of
been
treated
as
as
more
of
a
pilot,
and
now
it's
been
gaining
steam.
F
L
A
So,
oh
ml,
I
see
your
hand
there.
K
Thank
you,
john,
so
I
have
a
I'm
not
sure
what
kind
of
a
question
I
think
it's
a
clarification
and
maybe
just
to
gain
an
understanding
and
it's
about
the
mui
applied
to
the
belmont
park.
West.
K
So
kathleen,
can
you
can
you
bring
up
the
map?
That's
on
that
shows
the
underlying.
K
K
So
what
we
have
currently
on
that
belmont
park
west
site
it,
the
current
land
use
designation,
includes
ci,
which
is
community
industrial.
It's
got
a
swath
of
open
space
and
light
industrial.
K
So
my
in
looking
at
this
so
ci
is.
K
Holds
the
kind
of
small
community
industrial
that
we've
been
hearing?
People
refer
to.
You
know
the
banjo
maker,
the
print
shop,
those
small
local
businesses
that
inhabit
these
older
and
established
industrial
sites,
and
so
I'm
I'm
concerned
about
losing
that
benefit,
and
especially
in,
for
example,
right
at
the
corner
there
of
pearl-
and
I
guess
it's
47th,
there
is
the
47th
street
industries
and
in
that
area
they
have
about
50
small
businesses
and
in
two
buildings
that
whole
area
that
is
called
belmont
park
west
is
made
up
of
18
different
parcels.
K
So
there's
a
lot
of
different
owners
that
are
in
that
area.
There
are
two
creeks
or
I
guess,
they're
really
ditches
that
go.
Excuse
me
following
where
that
green
swath
is
in
the
land
use
designation.
K
So
there's
some.
There
is
some
interesting.
I
guess
existing
fabric
in
that
area.
That
I
think,
would
be
in
jeopardy.
Now
the.
H
K
K
I
know
that
that
was
one
of
the.
If
we
take
it
from
this
map
and
go
to
the
one,
I
think
it's
21
or
22.
K
That
shows
the
use
proposed
use
types.
D
K
No,
it's
not
this
one,
it's
the
one
that
has
the
the
use
place,
types
ml!
I'm
sorry!
K
Yes,
that
will
we
just
yes
that
one,
oh
that
there,
so
you
can
see
by
what's
what's
the
diagram
that
is
put
for
the
belmont
park
west,
it's
intended
to
be
hands-on
industrial
there's
a
little
main
street
that
is
identified
and
parkside
residential.
So
I
I
have.
I
don't
have
a
problem
with
the
idea
that
that
hands-on
industrial
would
become
more
dense
and
it
looks
like
it's
proposing
to
have
offices
and
manufacturing
on
the
upper
floors.
K
But
what
I'm?
What
I'm
concerned
with
in
that
specific
area
is
that
I
think
that
the
existing
land
use
designation
speaks
more
directly
to
what's
already
there
and
to
what
we've
identified
as
being
valuable,
the
small,
affordable
and
local
businesses
and
enterprises.
K
It
there's
a
very,
very
vibrant,
little
community
out
there
right
at
that
corner,
as
I
described
on
pearl
on
47th,
I
think
in
two
buildings,
they've
got
over
50
little
enterprises,
and
I
I
guess
I'm
my
question
is:
what
is
the
thinking?
K
I
understand
the
housing
is,
is
being
added,
but
really
the
housing
is
being
added
to
that
parkside
area
housing
can
happen
there
under
the
current
land
use.
So
what
is
the
thinking
about?
K
We
have
just
three
little
areas
in
this
sub
community
that
are
called
community,
industrial
and-
and
this
is
one
of
them-
and
I
think
that
that
just
supports
the
the
iconic
character
that
we
have
come
to
associate
with
looking
at
these,
whether
it's
on
a
tour
or
whether
we
do
business
out
there
with
this
area
that
oh
there
are,
these
little
industries
that
create
their
own
culture.
E
F
Yeah,
I'm
happy
to
talk
about
that.
I
know
that
the
two
buildings
that
you're
describing
and
there
are
awesome
businesses
in
there
and
artist
studios
and
lots
of
of
great
things.
I
think
you
know
over
the
course
of
this
project.
F
So
one
of
the
things
that
is
really
important
to
keep
in
mind
for
this
plan
is
that
we're
looking
at
a
20-year
plan
and
the
buildings
that
you're
talking
about
in
particular,
are
really
at
the
end
of
life,
and
so
we,
what
we're
trying
to
do
is
think
about.
What's
the,
how
do
we
put
in
place
the
vision
and
in
the
next
step,
the
regulations
to
ensure
that
the
next
phase
of
life
for
those
parcels
and
those
businesses
achieve
some
of
our
goals?
F
F
Could
also
live
in
that
neighborhood
and
so
being
able
to
incorporate
that
and
really
define
that
vision
through
a
mixed-use
land
designation
land
use
designation
is
really,
I
think,
one
of
the
key
features
of
this
plan
is
we're
really
hoping
to
build
on
the
strengths
of
some
of
that
existing
fabric
and
describe
how
we
want
them
to
evolve
over
the
next
20.
K
I
think
part
of
the-
and
I
I
I
am
thank
you
for
sharing-
you
know
that
reminding
that
it
went
through
a
very
thoughtful
process.
I
I
have
no
doubt
about
that.
What
my
concern
is
how
what
and
maybe
it's
a
bigger
question,
what
gets
the
project
from
where
it
is
now
and
which
is
supported
by
current
land
use.
You
know.
K
I
think
that
that
community
industrial
is
a
very
powerful
land
use
proposal
in
the
boulder
valley
comp
plan,
because
it
really
does
specifically
talk
about
things
that
are
services
that
are
vital
and
that
are
local
and
that
are
necessarily
small,
and
I
think
that
that
is
easily
lost
in
redevelopment
in
large
part
due
to
cost,
which
is
all
my
previous
questions
about.
K
I
I
don't
know
that
they
would
be
displaced
and
then
come
back
in
redevelopment
scenario,
so
I
guess
my
question
is:
is
there
any
any
thought
any
thinking
that
would
take
these
redevelopment
areas
from
where
they're
at
now
to
where
you're
projecting
in
a
in
a
future
build
out
and
because
I
think
it's
in
that
space
in
between
the
two,
where
some
of
the
nuance
of
the
fabric
and
the
culture
that
exists,
that's
where
it
gets
lost
is
is
between
in
that
evolution
of
a
site
rather
than
a
redevelopment
of
it.
K
So
is
there
any
anything
in
in
the
implementation
strategies
or
in
the
thinking
that
can
speak
to
an
evolution,
leaving
community
industry
all
behind,
because
that's
essentially
that's,
I
think,
the
biggest
change
and
that
will
influence
you
know.
I
think
the
ability
for
these
little
businesses
to
survive.
F
Yeah,
I
think
the
idea
of
business
retention
and
how
we
incorporate
a
lot
of
these
existing
beloved
businesses
into
the
future
of
this
area
is
not
solved
by
land
use
or
zoning
alone.
And
while
we
have,
you
know
pretty
specific
recommendations
describing
the
character
and
the
form
of
future
redevelopment
in
the
area.
The
plan
also
tries
to
sort
of
attack
that
issue
from
a
couple
of
different
angles,
and
so
that
business
retention
program
is
is
one
idea,
that's
included
in
the
plan.
F
And
those
are
the
two
that
are
at
the
top
of
my
mind,
but
I
you
know
I
I
I
definitely
understand
what
your
concern
is
and
I
think
it
was
shared
by
community
members
and
working
group
members
throughout
the
process.
H
F
B
Ml,
I
think
also
the
discussion
that
we
had
last
in
the
last
meeting,
not
not
the
city
council
meeting
but
back
in
march,
about
protecting
encouraging
staff
to
develop
tools
to
protect
the
areas.
The
indus,
the
commercial
industrial
areas
that
are
not
in
the
areas
of
change
and
one
of
the
suggestions
was
to
exempt
those
areas
from
the
residential
redevelopment
allowance,
and
I
believe
that
that
was
taken
up
and
will
be.
Is
one
of
the
items
in
the
implementation
plan.
It'll
be
a
discussion
item.
B
F
That
would
be
one
of
the
pieces
of
the
code
that
we
would
consider
when
we
implement
the
plan.
K
Retains
those
kinds
of
small
businesses,
it's
it's
very
easy
to
imagine
that
this
will
default
to
the
highest
market
value
and
it's
a
tough
it's
a
tough.
It's
a
tough
place
to
be
in
right,
we're
looking
at
at
an
area
that
we
all
want
to
see
begin
to
thrive
in
a
21st
century
kind
of
way
and
to
help
us
solve
some
of
the
issues
that
we've
created
getting
here.
K
K
K
Excuse
me
our
r8,
no
d15
d15.
It
talks
about
inventory.
You
know
the
properties
out
there
and
that
starts
to
sound
to
me
like
a
tool
for
understanding.
What's
there
at
a
granular
level,
it's
like
what's
really
there
and
what
does
this
crosshatch
mean
because
that's
a
pretty
big,
bold,
high-level
move,
but
when
you
go
and
actually
inventory
the
buildings-
and
I
appreciate
that
yeah-
I
think
anybody
who's
been
out
there.
K
Those
buildings
don't
have
much
they're,
probably
at
the
end
of
their
useful
life
in
some
regards,
but
is
the
culture
and
the
pattern
valuable
and
how
do
we?
K
What
do
we
include
in
the
implementation
of
moving
from
the
current
land
use
to
the
proposed
land
use
that
will
honor
and
begin
to
create
a
way
to
respond
to
not
necessarily
the
physical
forms
that
are
there,
but
the
cultures
that
are
created
and
the
patterns
that
those
cultures
create,
because
that's
an
important
part
of
place
making-
and
you
know
for
something-
that's
been
there
for
generations
and
generations
it
it
takes.
It's
like
it's
a
patina
right.
K
It
isn't.
It
doesn't
come
with
new
stuff,
it
comes
with
old
stuff.
And
how
do
we
acknowledge
that
in
the
trends
in
the
transition
would
it
be
through
an
implementation
strategy
that
would
make
that
d15,
maybe
more
robust
and
have
it
not
just
inventory
the
physical
buildings
but
the
cultures
that
are
created
and
the
patterns
that
are
created
there,
which
which
gives
the
place
its
character?
K
And
I
think
that
a
lot
of
the
sentiments
that
the
public
input
and
I'm
not
sure
about
you
know
all
the
input
is
talking
about
that.
K
K
K
Where
there's
areas
of
change
that
there
be
an
inventory
that
that
looks
at
the
physical,
the
cultural
and
the
you
know,
the
patterns,
the
land
patterns.
A
C
I
think
ml,
you
are
bringing
a
perspective
that
this
board
has
been
lacking
and
I'm
so
grateful
that
you
are
doing
this
and
I'm
wondering
if
there
is
some
crossover
here
between
planning
and
the
the
dei
initiatives.
C
The
the
jedi
initiatives
where
that
group
that
works
on
racial
equity
and
diversity
would
have
a
sense
of
how
to
do
this
kind
of
inventory
that
you're
talking
about,
because
what
we're
really
talking
about
is
gentrification
and
losing
spaces
that
are
accessible
for
lower
incomes
and
that
generate
lower
profit
right
and
if
there's
anything
in
planning
that
kind
of
calls
out
for
crossover
with
our
jedi
work.
C
F
I
I
just
the
the
types
of
things
that
ml
was
just
describing
so
beautifully.
F
I'm
I'm
really.
My
brain
is
just
running
through
folks
who
might
be
able
to
help
us
at
least
capture
the
moment
of
what
you're
describing.
I
think,
where
I'm
challenged
in
how
we
address
this
in
the
sub
community
plan.
F
Is
you
know
the
the
tools
that
are
provided
in
the
sub-community
plan
really
are
intended
to
be
either
regulatory
or
direct
our
capital
improvements
or
direct
the
staff
work
plan?
So
if
there
was
something
that
we
could
come
up
with,
that
might
fall
under
a
project
or
a
program
that
could
direct
staff
attention
and
effort
to.
F
Whatever
this,
this
sort
of
capture
might
be
that
you
know
I'm
trying
to
help
formulate
like
what
we
would
include
as
a
amendment
to
the
plan,
but
I
think
I
I
would
need
more
more
time
to
think
about.
I
I
really
am
thinking
more
of
this
could
be
a
match
for
our
arts
and
culture
work
group
who's
in
community
vitality.
F
I'm
there's
some
really
talented
people
there.
That
might
have
some
great
ideas
about.
F
F
You
know,
I
think,
I'm
just
struggling
with
the
idea
of
trying
to
to
generate
and
build
something
that
has
manifested
organically
over
time
like
we're
getting
pretty
heady
now,
but
it's,
I
think
you
have
a
really
challenging
request,
but
I'd
love
to
think
more
about
it.
A
You
know
I
gotta
say
ml
when
you're
talking
about
how
it's
been
there
for
generations.
K
I
absolutely
appreciate
laura
that
you
brought
the
word
equity
in
because
what
I've
been
thinking
about
this,
as
is
place
based
equity
there's,
not
a
one
size
fits
all,
and
I
think
that's
what
worries
me
and
seeing
the
crosshatch
superimposed
over
that
very
special
area
that
we
all
have
different.
You
know
relationships
to
whether
we
currently
still
use
the
places
or
we
know,
but
it's
about
equity.
K
It's
about
land
equity,
it's
about
place,
equity
and
I
think
we
were
talking
about
putting
forth
a
vision
that
is
as
extraordinary
as
this
one
is
and
that
will
help
us
evolve
and
meet
the
goals
that
we
want.
K
I,
I
think
it's
important
to
bring
that
equity,
that
the
place
manifests
to
into
the
conversation,
and
I
don't
know
how
to
do
that.
You
know.
Do
we
do
we.
I
mean
I
appreciate
that
things
have
been
identified
as
areas
of
change,
but
I
am
concerned
that
what
currently
exists
and
and
precisely
in
that
area-
I
don't
know
the
other
areas
as
well-
that
they
have
an
evolutionary
consideration
and
that
there's
equity
applied
to
to
the
place
so
yeah.
K
I
guess,
if
you,
you
can
think
of
any
any
any
way
to
inform
moving
forward.
I
like
the
d15,
but
it
it
isn't
robust
enough
and
it's
out
there.
I
don't
know.
I
don't
remember
how
far
out
it
is,
but
you
know
that
there
is
an
intent
to
get
to
understand.
What's
here,
I
think
is
at
the
base
of
of
this.
A
You
know
ml,
I
can
just
embroider
a
little
bit
on
that
because
it
we
realize
that
boulder
lumber,
which
is
not
exactly
in
the
in
the
blocks
that
you're
talking
about.
But
it's
an
area
yeah
the
last
lumber
store
in
town.
C
A
And
yeah,
so
we
are,
I,
I
am
in
complete
agreement
with
you
that
we
are
losing
things
that
are
important
to
us,
whether
next
year
or
10
years
from
now,
by
virtue
of
making
these
changes-
and
we
want
to
be
aware
of
what
those
changes
are
likely
to
be.
I
value
having
a
lumber
store
in
town.
C
Me
too,
but
can
I
make
a
comment
just
from
the
perspective
of
the
east,
boulder
working
group
and
and
john?
I
know
that
you
are
in
all
of
these
discussions
as
well,
but
you
know
one
of
the
things
that
I
took
away
from.
That
is
that,
if
whether
we
market
as
an
area
of
change
or
not,
it
is
still
subject
to
change
right.
Those
property
owners
can
redevelop
now
the
same
way
that
the
property
on
walnut
that
restaurant
supply
company
has
decided.
C
Most
of
these
don't
exist
right
now,
and
so
it's
bypassing
this
plan
that
we
make
those
things
come
into
existence
right
and
those
are
some
of
the
best
shots
at
getting.
You
know,
affordable,
commercial
and-
and
these
kind
of
considerations
to
be
thought
about
in
redevelopment,
whereas
right
now
they
don't
have
to
be
so.
C
I
don't
think
that
by
putting
it
with
the
crosshatch
in
an
area
of
change
is
going
to
be
that
much
influence
on
the
property
owner
to
redevelop
unless
we
have
suddenly
increased
their
property
value
and
in
the
hands-on
industrial
you
know
the
heights
are
pretty
limited.
It's
still
you
got
to
have
industrial
kind
of
stuff
on
the
ground
floor,
I'm
not
sure
that
making
this
change
makes
that
property
so
much
more
attractive
than
just
a
redevelopment.
That
could
happen
now,
but
I
don't
know
if
staff
want
to
comment
on
that.
A
Okay,
I
I
wonder,
if
we're
reaching
an
end
to
our
discussion
section
and
we
should
start
thinking
about
the
motions
and
how
we
want
to
move
ahead
on
this
approval
or
denial
or
change
thereof.
A
C
C
D
H
D
Wanted
to
let
you
know
charles
is
with
us,
but
he
is
on
his
phone,
and
so
he
is
but
he's
here
he's
in
zoom
jail,
no
fault
of
his
own.
D
When
his
computer
crashed,
I
had
to
remove
him
and
unfortunately,
I
didn't
believe
I
didn't
realize
his
removement
removed
as
if
he's
a
bad
guy
and
I
can't
fit.
I
can't
bring
him
back
until
we
end
the
meeting
and
then
I
can
bring
him
back
as
a
nice
person.
So
I'm
so
sorry,
charles,
I
know
you're
out
there
and
you
can
hear
me
I'm
so
sorry,
we've
been
I've
been
troubleshooting.
It
like
crazy.
This
whole.
D
He's
been
trying,
he
can
probably
he
might
be
able
to
star
sticks
and
speak
we've
been
trying.
We've
been
doing
all
kinds
of
things:
other
computers,
other
emails,
we've
been
trying
all
kinds
of
things,
but
he's
in
jail.
So
I
will.
I
will
release
him
when
the
meeting
is
over
and
bring
him
back
as
a
good
person.
So
my
apologies
charles,
if
you're
out
there
I
know
you
are
out
there
and.
A
D
A
D
And
hella,
but
so-
and
I
can
I
just
want
to-
let
you
know
that
I
can,
if,
if
so,
if
you
so
choose
to,
I
can
put
up
a
screen
as
we're
drafting
conditions
and
stuff.
If
you
want
to
send
me
your
conditions,
whatever
you
prefer
to
do,
and
we
can
put
them
up
on
the
screen
and
and
if
you
prefer
to
do
that.
D
Wait
a
minute
charles
has
something
to
say:
go
ahead,
charles
he's,
muted
I've,
I've
there
he
is
there.
You
go
charles.
H
A
Okay,
charles
charles,
we
would
be
grateful
for
any
wisdom
you
have
here.
So
don't
be
shy
about
responding
to
these
various
questions
as
they
come
up.
N
While
I
was
trying
to
resolve
tech
issues
here
and
fire
up
an
old
laptop
and
nothing
seemed
to
work.
So
I
guess
I'm
just
going
to
be
stuck
on
my
phone
tonight,
so
I'll
unmute
when
when
necessary,
but
please
feel
free
to
call
on
me.
If
there's
specific
questions
for
me.
N
I
was
actually
enjoying
the
part
of
the
conversation
I
heard
that
ml
raised
so
but
I
apologize,
I've
missed
probably
the
last
20
minutes,
so
I
apologize
cindy.
You
can
feel
free
to
remove
me.
H
A
Well,
I
was
just
we're,
I
think,
we'll
we'll
come
back
in
session
now.
I
think
we're
all
here.
I
was
just
looking
at
the
at
the
participant
list
and
I
realized
that
miss
bowden
is
still
here,
and
so
I
wondered
if
she
might
have
some
response
to
ml's
comments
about
the
nature
of
the
businesses
at
in
this
one
area.
That
is
particularly
interesting.
G
I'm
just
very
thankful
for
your
conversation
and
for
email,
your
your
conversation
as
well,
and
all
of
you
who
participated
and
continue
to
participate
with
us.
We
are
not
in
the
current
state,
where
I
have
done
an
inventory
recently.
G
We
do
several
kind
of
assessments
a
couple
of
times
a
year
in
areas
of
change
and
based
on
your
direction
and
suggestions.
We'll
look
at
capacity
to
do
a
little
bit
more
outreach.
My
I
can't
speak
for
the
department
now.
My
prior
responsibilities
would
have
me
basically
get
on
a
my
appropriate
mode
of
choice
mark
and
go
out
to
wherever
we
are
about
to
do
some
work
and
then
meet
just
walk
into
businesses
and
talk
to
them
so
ml.
You've.
G
Given
us
a
lot
to
think
about,
I
lean
into
kathleen
and
hella
tonight
and
know
that
I
will
continue
to
partner
with
them
and
share
that
with
my
colleagues
in
arts
and
culture
and
community
vitality.
More
broadly,
and
now
I
am
going
to
not
be
a
panelist
thanks
cindy,
but
I
am
listening
to
you.
Thank
you,
but
you.
A
Oh
and
then
laura
you
were
just
about
to
ask
a
question,
as
I
recall.
B
C
A
So
does
anybody
else
have
inquiries
of
kathleen.
A
Okay,
well,
that
went
fast
all
right.
Let's,
let's
talk
about
this
now
among
ourselves,
I'd
be
interested
in
your
thoughts.
Laura
go
ahead.
C
C
The
other
things
that
I
brought
up
on
tuesday,
one
of
them
was,
you
know
what
governs
maximum
heights
in
the
sub-community
and
at
one
point
in
the
development
of
this
plan
there
were
maximum
heights
or
maximum
stories
that
were
in
the
plan
and
it
sounds
like
staff
have
made.
What
I
think
is
a
very
reasonable
decision
that
that
should
be
part
of
the
form-based
code
and
zoning
discussion.
C
That
is
yet
to
come,
and
I
have
been
reassured
by
hella
that
the
you
know
form
base
code
and
zoning
are
things
that
are
parts
of
changes
to
title
ix,
and
so
those
things
would
come
back
to
planning
board
and
city
council
for
approval.
So
this
isn't
our
last
chance
to
see
what
they
do
right,
they're
not
going
to
go
in
a
black
box.
It
will
come
back
to
us.
So
I
was
very
reassured
by
that.
I
was
also
you
know
reassured
by
kathleen's
answer
on
tuesday.
C
You
know
she
noted
that
in
the
discussion
that
both
east
boulder
working
group
members
and
myself
included-
and
people
in
the
community
had
expressed
that
they
didn't
think
that
the
the
maximum
by
right
height
should
be
lower
than
what
is
available
to
be
built
in
that
zone.
Now
right,
so
we
shouldn't
be
using
the
sub-community
plan
to
take
heights
down
from
what
exists.
C
Now,
if
I
understood
kathleen
correctly-
and
I
was
also
reassured
by
her
comments-
that
community
benefits
will
still
be
available
to
get
additional
height,
for
example
in
some
of
these
zones,
where
we
think
that
taller
buildings
may
be
appropriate,
but
we
still
want
to
get
something
out
of
it.
It's
not
necessarily
going
to
be
by
right.
C
You
get
up
to
the
the
55
foot
limit,
that's
in
the
charter
right,
so
all
of
that
was
very
reassuring
to
me,
and
some
of
that
I
may
want
to
document
any
condition,
so
I
just
wanted
to
put
that
out
there
that
that's
coming
and
then
the
other
comment
that
I
would
have
for
discussion,
and
I
would
welcome
you
know
everybody
else's
comments
in
response
to
this.
If
they
would,
like
the
other
one
that
I
wanted
to
put
out
there,
that
came
up
on
tuesday
night
was
this
idea
of
policy
d7.
C
That's
in
the
sub
community
plan
that
talks
about
varied
roof
lines
and
screening
mechanical
equipment,
and
we
and,
as
you
all
know,
we
saw
this
come
up
in
the
the
walnut
project,
where
an
industrial
building
redevelopment.
C
One
of
the
reasons
why
they
were
asking
for
or
justifying
additional
height,
was
in
order
to
have
that
beautiful
peaked
roofline
that
simulates
the
flatirons
and
also
so
that
it
wouldn't
be
that
the
mechanical
equipment
on
the
roof
wouldn't
just
be
like
sitting
on
a
flat
roof
behind
a
screen.
That's
very
obvious
that
they
would
be
able
to
hide
that
with
some
of
the
building
architecture,
and
I
think
that
those
are
wonderful,
wonderful
things,
but
I
also
have
a
concern
that
goes.
C
You
know
it
goes
beyond
east
boulder
and
it
goes
beyond
that
project
that
you
know
giving
people
that
additional
height
above
the
buy
right
is
the
main
one
of
the
main
ways
that
we,
you
know
get
community
benefits
that
the
city
gets
back
from
developers
and
that
you
know
we
get
especially
the
inclusionary
housing.
Our
affordable
housing
program
is
funded
in
large
part
by
that
community
benefit,
not
in
industrial
zones
but
but
in
other
kinds
of
development.
C
So
here
in
east
boulder,
if
we're
going
to
have
a
policy
that
includes
these,
you
know
encouraging
these
peaked
roofs
and
the
integration
of
mechanical
equipment
into
buildings
rather
than
having
it
sit
on
top
of
the
roofs,
that's
probably
going
to
produce
more
height.
I
would
like
to
see
that
connected
to
community
benefits,
pretty
explicitly
so,
I
will
probably
offer
a
friendly
amendment
on
that
score.
B
This
year,
so
I'm
just
going
to
respond
to
a
couple
things
that
laura
just
said
specifically
about
the
airport.
So
I
really
appreciated
that
she
put
the
airport
the
current
airport
airplane
patterns
up,
because
what
you
see
is.
B
The
glider
takeoff
path
goes
over
something
that
currently
is
industrial
and
is
going
to
be
transformed
into
residential,
and
I
think
we,
since
we
know
that,
there's
a
objective
of
building
a
lot
of
affordable
housing
in
this
area.
I
think
we're
going
to
have
to
apply
an
equity
lens
when
it
comes
time
to
for
the
city
to
take
a
look
at
the
airport,
not
just
the
airport
master
plan,
but
the
the
the
18-month
study
that
john
walked
us
through,
and
I
think
we
can't
I.
B
I
appreciate
laura's
point
that
you
don't
want
to
sacrifice
housing
because
of
airport
noise,
but
I
also
think
we
need
to
be
aware
of
environmental
justice
issues
and
to
say
that
the
airport
we
shouldn't
worry
about
the
airport
airport
sounds
just
because
it's
going
to
be
over
housing
when
at
least
25
of
the
housing
is
planned
to
be
permanently
affordable.
B
B
Nothing,
it's
not
going
to
say
anything
else,
other
than
that,
but
hopefully
it'll
be
a
guide
city
council
will
take
it
up
and
it
could
be
a
guide
going
forward
first
staff,
and
then
I
am
going
to
make
this
second
friendly
about
the
an
un
un
unnamed
far
that
supports
job
growth,
consistent
with
the
approximately
5
000
jobs
projected
for
the
destination
office
area
as
a
way
of
not
exploding
the
jobs,
housing
balance
issue
going
forward.
B
A
Okay,
I
can
just
make
a
note
in
response
to
one
of
yours.
I
I
have
pushed
a
lot
on
the
airport,
both
with
respect
to
noise,
but
also
with
respect
to
what
happens
at
that
area
itself,
and
there
was
a
quite
a
strong
response
back
from
erica
vandenbrandt
about
how
how
the
airport
was
not
intended
to
be
considered
as
part
of
this
assignment.
So
it'll
be
interesting
to
pursue
that
later.
On,
mark.
L
Both
ml
and
I
believe
I'm
I
should
be
last
here.
L
L
I
would
like
to
see
us
take
our
comments
and
one
at
a
time
put
them
out.
There
have
them
as
as
a
as
a
motion,
if
that's
the
correct
way
to
do
this
and
debate
them
and
approve
them
or
not
and
then
go
on
to
the
next.
I
I'm
getting
a
little
bit
lost
with
people
putting
things
out
there
and
we
seem
to
move
on
without
anyway
are
we?
Are
we
taking
inventory
and
getting
everything
out
there,
and
then
we
come
back
to
that
or
how
are
we
going
to
proceed.
A
B
A
K
Thanks
and
thanks
mark
for
for
trying
to
let
us
go
first,
so
I
I
have
something
on
d7,
which
thank
you
laura
for
bringing
that
up.
K
I
my
thought
about
it
and
I'm
looking
off
to
the
side,
because
I've
got
it
up
on
my
other
screen
here,
but
I'm
not
exactly
sure
why
we
have
this
here.
K
I
saw
in
the
notes
that
were
in
our
packet
that
a
council
member
asked
for
this
roof
piece
to
be
added
in
my
concern
with
the
way
it's
written
is
that
roofs
really
aren't
about
an
aesthetic
gesture
and
they
can
be,
but
roofs
play
a
very
important
role
in
our
response
to
climate
and
environmental
factors,
and
I
would
suggest
that,
given
the
goals
of
this
project,
this
plan
that
we,
we
have
the
resilience
and
climate
commitment
embedded
into
this
plan,
that
we
refocus
the
interest
in
roofs,
and
I
would
look
at
keeping
so
the
sentence
would
look
something
like
structures
and
nice.
K
I
think
that
is
the
highest
highest
use
of
a
building's
form,
and,
although
I
appreciate
you
know
some
of
the
intent
here
that
it
is
it's
shielding
mechanical
and
that
sort
of
thing,
I
would
like
us
to
begin
thinking
about
it
in
a
in
a
higher
route,
a
pun
intended
right
roof
in
a
higher
way
that
we
actually
encourage
this
plan
to
reach
its
its
goals
in
as
many
places
as
we
can,
and
I
think
this
is
an
obvious
place
to
to
bring
some
different
languages.
A
Okay,
I
I
think
the
the
right
time
to
talk
about
that
is
when
I
presume
laura
will
offer
a
friendly
amendment,
and
we
can
discuss
it
at
that
point,
whether
if
it
should
be
changed
and
whether
it
should
be
changed
and
how
you'd
like
to
see
it.
It
seems
to
me.
K
Okay,
I
I
I'm
with
mark
I'm
kind
of
confused
as
to
what
we're
doing
when
and
everything
else
I
have
are
about
a
very
specific
thing,
so
I'm
I'm
understanding
that
that
is
something
that
happens
in
the
next.
C
H
C
Yeah,
it's
the
fun
things
that
you
learn
when
you
facilitate
zoom
meetings.
So
I
do
want
to
respond
real,
quick,
just
a
little
bit
about
the
history
of
that
policy.
D7
and
I
think
I'm
one
of
the
people
that
promoted
this
at
the
east,
boulder
working
group,
d7
being
the
one
about
varied
rooflines,.
C
One
of
the
I
would
say,
most
prevalent
and
most
passionate
comments
that
we
got
from
local
neighbors
as
local
neighborhood
people
was
that
they
have
a
very
negative
reaction
to
big
blocky
buildings,
big
rectangular
buildings,
and
we
hear
this
over
and
over
and
over
and
over
again
at
city
council
meetings
at
planning
board
meetings.
Anytime
redevelopment
projects
come
up
at
one
of
our
outgoing
council.
C
Members
nearby
was
very
passionate
about
this
issue
as
well
that
these
large
buildings
people
just
don't
like
the
way
that
they
look
and
that's
a
matter
of
taste,
but
I
think
it
feels
like
the
city
is
moving
in
the
direction
of
encouraging
these
varied
and-
and
I
personally
think,
that's
probably
a
good
choice.
You
know
so
that
we
have,
because
the
economics
would
typically
push
developers.
C
It
seems
into
these
large
boxes
to
maximize
what
kind
of
floor
area
they
can
get
for
the
height
that
they're
allowed
to
have,
and
so
I'm
all
in
favor
of
a
policy
that
responds
to
the
aesthetic
judgment
that
we
hear
over
and
over
and
over
again
that
people
don't
like
big
blocky
boxes.
My
concern
is
just
if
that
is
going
to
be
part
of
something
that
we
are
encouraging.
C
I
I
would
like
that
to
be
part
of
a
broader
conversation
around
what
kind
of
community
benefits,
if
that
is
a
community
benefit
to
have
interesting
architecture
and
hidden
mechanical
and
buried
rooflines.
I
don't
want
that
to
be
the
only
thing
that
we
get
and
we
just
give
up
on:
affordable
housing,
affordable,
commercial.
I
think
it
needs
to
be
part
of
a
broader
kind
of
hierarchy
or
discussion
about.
How
much
are
we
asking
the
developer
in
different
categories?
And
what
trade-offs
are
we
getting?
C
C
I
think
I
wouldn't
want
to
see
it
go
away,
but
I
totally
get
what
you're
saying
ml
about.
Maybe
there
needs
to
be
something
in
here
about
the
city's
climate
commitment
and
how
buildings
respond
to
that.
Although
I
think
that's
in
other
places
in
the
building
code-
so
I
don't
know-
maybe
when
we
get
to-
if
you
offer
a
friendly
amendment
about
that,
maybe
we
could
pull
staff
in
to
talk
about
if
there
are
other
places
where
that
exists.
C
That's
one
comment.
I
also
just
wanted
to
respond
briefly
to
sarah's
comment
about
the
environmental
justice
of
having
planes
flying
over
east
boulder.
You
know
I.
I
really
appreciate
the
sensitivity
to
the
history
that
people
who
live
near
airports
and
power
plants
and
landfills
and
other
kinds
of
municipal
services
that
are
deemed
to
be
less
desirable
and
therefore
the
property
is
less
expensive.
C
B
No,
you
didn't
understand
my
comment.
My
comment
was
about
when
they
get
to
the
airport.
I
think
you've
misunderstood
my
entire
position
on
this
okay
good.
The
challenge
is
what
to
do
with
the
operations
at
the
airport
and
over
time
as
the
airport
master
plan
is
developed,
the
question
will
be.
B
Do
we
keep
allowing
the
current?
I
don't
know.
I
don't
know
enough
about
how
airports
operate,
but
do
we
continue
to
allow
the
current
error
uses
to
continue
now
that
this
area
is
going
to
be
redeveloped
from
industrial
to
housing?
Or
do
we
try
to
change
that?
Maybe
move
it
in
a
move
it
northward
move
to
the
north
or
to
the
west,
or
I
mean
I
realize
you
have
air.
B
You
have
winds
and
there's
all
kinds
of
things
you
got
to
worry
about,
but
I
think
when
and
I'm
not
going
to
support,
I
don't
think
I'm
going
to
be
able
to
support
anything
that
suggests
changing
the
language
right
now,
because
it
seems
based
on
the
conversation
we
had
with
the
staff
that
they're
just
beginning
this
discussion,
but
when
we,
when
they
go
through
the
discussion,
I
think
part
of
the
conversation
has
to
be.
How
do
we
make
this
area
which
is
transitioning
to
residential
as
livable
as
it
can
be
period?
B
So
my
comment
was
about,
maybe
was
not
about.
I
don't
know
quite
where
you
came
up
with
this
idea
that
I
was
opposed
to
more
residential.
That's
the
complete
opposite
of
my
position
on
things.
So
my
problem
is
with
the
aircraft
itself
and
the
way
in
which
it
could
impact
the
people
who
actually
live.
Who
will
be
living
underneath
it.
A
Okay,
let's
see
have
we
heard
from
everybody,
oh
mark
now
it's
your
turn.
L
No,
I'm
I'm
just
ready
to
go
to
the
more
specific
section
of
our
disk,
of
our
discussion
and
motions
and
actual
word
crafting
of
changes.
So
I
don't
have
anything
else
to
say
thanks.
A
Okay,
well,
I
can,
I
don't
have
a
long
speech
here
to
make,
but
there
were
just
a
couple
aspects
that
some
have
been
mentioned
previously
and
some
haven't
that
I
would
like
to
see
if
there's
agreement
on
just
in
including
as
an
amendment,
one
is
the
question
of
the
opportunity
zone
considerations
and
how
the
city
might
be
able
to
benefit
from
them
to
a
greater
degree
than
is
presently
in
described
in
the
in
the
plan
right
now,
because
I
think
those
benefits
are
so
significant
and
the
intention
of
the
of
that
whole
opportunity
zone
effort
was
to
ultimately
benefit
the
cities
rather
than
the
than
the
investors
that
I
think
this
is
the
this
is
when
we
should
be
thinking
about
that
explicitly.
A
So
I'd
like
to
see,
I
intend
to
suggest
an
amendment
in
that
respect.
A
Secondly,
I
am
very
concerned
about
the
maintenance
of
affordable
industrial
space,
and
I
think
ml
did
a
beautiful
job
of
describing
the
the
concerns
and
issues
associated
with
with
that
and
basically
the
the
fact
is
that
whenever
you
do
anything
on
a
market
basis,
you
lose,
you
lose
your
affordability
very
quickly.
So
it
seems
to
me
that
we
should
be
more
directly
concerned
with
that.
A
And
thirdly,
I
have
a
concern
about
the
dis
proposed
distribution
of
housing
types
that
kathleen
described
briefly
a
couple
nights
ago
with
in
our
in
our
meeting
with
city
council.
A
As
I
re,
you
know
that
the
the
distribution
of
units
that
was
described
there
and
I
understand
that
these
are
not
clearly
determined
and
not
and
that
they
can
change.
But
the
distribution
bothered
me
because,
in
addition
to
our
concerns
about
providing
affordable
housing,
we're
also
concerned
about
missing
middle
type
housing,
and
it
seemed
to
me
that
there
was
a
very
small
proportion
of
the
proposed
housing
units
allocated
for
missing
middle
type
housing.
B
So
john,
I'm
actually
proposing
an
amendment
or
a
it's
a.
It
would
be
a
emotional
amendment
to
encourage.
I
can't
remember
exactly
what
the
language
is,
but
it's
about
home
ownership.
So
maybe
that's
something
that
we
could.
We
could
add
some
language
that
has
to
do
with
missing
middle
to
that.
A
So,
okay,
now
that-
and
everyone
has
unburdened
themselves-
maybe
maybe
we
should
move
to
our
detailed
phase
of
of
motions
and
amendments
and
oh
yeah-
we
were
going
to
ask
hella
to
to
give
us
a
brief
description
of
how
this
should
happen.
I
Yeah,
so
one
of
you
will
make
a
motion,
and
that
can
be
the
motion
as
proposed
in
in
the
staff
memo,
but
it
can
also
be
a
different
motion.
So
if
one
of
you
already
knows
that
you're
going
to
propose
a
certain
change
that
you
want
to
be
part
of
that
motion,
the
original
emotion
could
already
incorporate
that
and
then
any
changes
that
and
then
then
a
board
member
would
second
the
motion.
I
If
the
maker
of
the
motion
and
the
seconder
do
not
agree
with
the
proposed
change
or
really
it's
just
the
maker
of
the
motion
who
has
to
agree
because
the
the
person
proposing
the
amendment
could
become
the
second,
if
they
don't
agree
with
that,
then
the
way
to
get
the
motion
to
change
would
be
to
make
a
separate
motion
to
amend
the
first
motion.
I
So,
and-
and
I
can
help
you
through
that
as
you
go
through
that
exercise-
what
it
is
that
that
you're
doing
if
the
friendly
is
not
accepted,
whether
you
want
to
consider
to
to
make
a
proper
motion
to
amend
the
main
motion,
one
of
the
things
that
you
may
want
to
consider
is
you
talked
about
several
changes
that
you
would
like
to
see,
and
some
of
them
seem
to
be
things
that,
where
you
mainly
might
like
to
give
direction
to
staff
on
next
steps,
but
maybe
not
change
the
text
of
the
plan,
maybe
those
maybe
you
can
start
categorizing
where
you
want
to
put
these.
I
And
then
you
may
have
a
category
where
you
draft
specific
changes
to
the
plan
before
you
want
it
to
be
adopted,
and-
and
I
think
I
I
guess,
I'm
having
difficulty
parsing
out
where
you
want
to
draft
the
change
or
if
you
are
intending
for
to
give
direction
and
for
staff
to
draft
the
change
and
maybe
adopt
that
not
knowing
exactly
what
the
language
looks
like.
I
B
Hello,
so
I
mean
we
could
do
a
count
of
noses
and
my
guess
is
there's
nobody
who
wants
to
vote
down
the
east
boulder
sub-community
plan,
but
it
sounds
like
we
have
some
a
couple
of
thoughts
about
specific
language
changes
in
the
plan,
and
we
have
some
guidance
that
we
would
like
some
direction.
We'd
like
the
city
to
go
in,
which
is
augmenting
the
plan
not
changing
it
so
is,
can
can
each
of
those
friendlies
be
part
of
be
proposed
as
friendlies
to
this
one
motion?
I
But
I
think
you
could
do
it
that
way,
but
I
think
it
would,
it
might
get
very
complicated,
might
become
a
very
complicated
motion.
You
could
just
have
a
separate
motion
for
anything
that
doesn't
that's
not
depending
on
your
adoption
of
the
plan.
You're,
not
cond,
anything
that
you're,
not
conditioning
the
adoption
of
the
plan
on
could
be
in
a
separate
motion
as
a
recommendation
for
staff
to
consider
as
staff
starts,
to
implement
the
plan.
B
A
A
C
I
I
guess
a
process
suggestion.
If
this
is
kosher
with
board
procedures
is,
could
we
it
sounds
like
there's
about
maybe
10
friendly
amendments
between
a
lot
of
us
that
we
might
want
to
propose.
A
Okay,
that
sounds
reasonable
to
me.
What's
the.
B
D
I
do
let
me
share
my
screen
here
and
maybe
totally
off
on
what
all
I
just
said
so.
L
L
But
I
think
we
also
we
need
to
leave
time
for
if
someone,
if
there's
a
3-2
vote
on
a
particular
motion
that
that,
during
the
debate
and
the
discussion
of
that
motion,
either
changes
can
be
made
or
persuasion
can
be
found
to
for
for
someone
to
change
their
change.
Their
initial
vote.
B
That's
how
that's
that
has
been,
how
we've
done
it
in
the
past,
so
I
but
first
we
have
to
get
everybody's
friendlies
put
on
the
table
and
so.
L
When
we
say
friendly,
so
a
friendly
amendment
is
is
seeking
the
motion
maker's
agreement
to
an
amendment
to
the
motion
that
was
made
a
friendly.
We
don't
have
friendly
amendments
as
an
initial
motion,
so
I
I'm
a
little
lost
and-
and
maybe
it's
something
I
don't
understand
about
roberts,
but
a
friendly
amendment.
As
I
understand
it
is
as
hella
described
it,
which
is
someone
makes
a
motion
and
then
someone
would
would
ask
the
motion
maker
if
they
would
accept.
B
A
friendly
amendment-
yes,
so
that
is
so.
The
motion
is
made
it's
seconded,
then
people
can
start
offering
friendlies,
but
we
haven't
gotten
to
the
motion
making.
Yet
because
hello
was
explaining
to
us
what
the
process
was
and
offering
up
some
suggestions
about
how
to
approach
this.
Given
that
some
of
the
conversation
we've
had
has
been
about
implementation
of
the
plan,
and
some
of
it
has
been
about
the
plan
itself,
and
so
we
haven't
even
we
haven't
even
made
the
motion
yet
to
even
begin.
The
conversation
right
about
friendlies
was
made.
B
Let's
put
all
the
we,
let's
put
on
the
table,
the
the
motions
that
we
each
have
thought
about,
and
then
we
can
have
a
conversation
about
well.
Would
it
make
sense
for
each
of
these
to
be
proposed
as
friendlies
to
the
motion
that
that
the
staff
has
put
up
or
maybe-
and
if
not,
maybe,
there's
a
second
motion
we
want
to
make,
which
is
about
implementation?
It's
right,
we're
still
talking
process.
We
haven't
even
made
a
motion,
yet
that's
right.
L
B
One
is
the
motion
that
the
staff
has
recommended
to
us
and
there
be
friendlies
attached
to
that
that
have
to
do
with
the
plan
and
a
second
motion
that
has
to
do
with
implementation
and
the
amendments.
The
friendlies
that
have
to
do
with
implementation
would
be
discussed
under
that.
That's
that
we're
just
trying
to
figure
out
if
that
makes
sense
as
a
way
to
approach.
This
does
that
you
seem
very
frustrated
mark
well.
L
L
L
Okay,
can
you
let
me.
A
C
So
let
me
just
point
of
order.
I
would
like
to
second
this
motion,
but
but
I
don't
want
us
to
move
right
into
offering
friendlies
I
would
like
to
if
we
have
the
motion
and
the
second
to
then
table
that
while
we
have
a
more
open-ended
discussion
of
what
are
all
the
things
that
we
want
to
accomplish
and
how
do
we
put
them
in
buckets
as
either?
These
are
amendments
to
the
motion,
or
these
are
things
for
implementation,
because
I
I
feel
like
I
don't
know
yet.
C
I
want
to
talk
with
you
all
about
whether
my
things
are
amendments
to
the
motion
or
whether
they
are
something
else.
So
I
just
feel
like.
We
have
10
things
that
we
want
to
accomplish,
whether,
as
a
friendly
amendment
to
the
motion
or
as
a
separate
motion,
so
I
would
really
like
to
see
the
list.
The
full
list
of
what
everybody's
stuff
is
all
put
together
before.
A
Okay,
I
I
well,
I
I
think
laura
your
suggestion
is
good.
It
will
help
us
to
organize
our
thoughts.
So,
let's,
let's
get
all
the
friendlies
the
proposed
friendlies
or
conditions
to
on
on
the
screen
here.
C
Thank
you,
john.
Can
I
make
a
process
suggestion
that
we
take
a
five-minute
break
and
the
people
who
are
ready
to
write
out
their
motions
and
send
them
to
cindy
can
take
that
five-minute
break
to
write
out
their
stuff
and
send
it
to
cindy,
and
then,
if
there's
anything
left
over
that
people
need
help
writing.
We
could
do
it
as
a
group
or
with
staff
help
after
that
five
minute
break,
because
I
have
I
have
things
that
I
have
not
written
out
yet.
A
All
right
does
that
seem
reasonable
to
everybody
else.
Okay,
let's
do
it
and
cindy
we'll
just
email
this
stuff
to
you
right.
Does
everybody
have
cindy's
email?
I
presume
they
do.
Okay,
so
we'll
see
each
other
in
at
905.
H
H
A
Okay,
cindy
is
man
she's
fast,
okay,.
L
L
So
if
you
want
to
take
the
first
item
and
just
push
it
off
to
the
side
or
whatever
I'd
like
to
concentrate
on
my
item,
that
says
policy
d9,
and
we
can
come
back
to
that
other
item
if
we
need
to,
but
if
you
want
to
stick
it
off
to
the
side,
that'd
be
great.
Thank
you.
A
Okay,
all
right
so
ml
needs
a
couple
minutes
more.
I
guess.
C
Cindy,
I'm
noticing
a
typo
in
one
of
mine,
okay,
the
second
to
last
one.
The
very
last
end
of
the
sentence
says
additional
height
up
per
the
brc.
You
can
take
up
out
of
there
additional
height
per
the
brc.
A
Okay,
let's
see
ml,
are
you.
K
A
K
A
Okay,
so
I
think
what
we'll
do
now
is
when,
when
mls
gets
there,
we
have
it
on
the
screen,
we'll
go
through
each
of
them
and
do
a
very
quick
nose
count
and
see
how
much
you
know
if
there's
a
majority
who
feels
there's
some
future
in
in
working
with
them,
then
we'll
work
with
them.
If
there's
a
majority
opposed,
then
we'll
have
a
little
discussion
and
see
if
that
changes
and
then
move
to
the
next
can.
B
I
ask
you
a
question
hella:
is
it
a
majority
of
those
of
us
here
or
does
it
have
to
be
for
majority
of
the
total.
L
But
I
was
just
gonna
ask:
might
there
be
a
simple
majority
I.e
three
that
would
lead
to
additional
discussion.
L
Before
we
take
a
final
vote
and
obviously
we
have
to
adhere
to
the
four
for
a
final
vote,
but
if
something's
going
to
die,
I
would
hate
to
see
it
on
a
on
a
3-2
vote
without
any
discussion,
maybe
I'm
making
the
meeting
longer
than
it
needs
to
be,
but
just
a
we
can
certainly
discuss
if
three
of
us
are
in
support
of.
It
would
be
my
thought.
A
Okay,
all
right,
so,
let's
see
sarah.
What
what
did
you
just
suggest
here.
B
Well,
I'm
just
still
operating
on
hell
as
hell
suggestion
that
we
separate
out
elements
that
are
literally
changes
proposed
changes
to
the
plan
as
written
and
those
that
are
proposals
that
have
to
do
with
implementation.
L
Not
if
I
one
of
what
my
one
thing
is
in
the
implementation
section
of
the
plan
not
to
be
confused
with
something
we
would
convey
to
council
and
staff
regarding
implementation,
but
would
actually
not
be
a
text
change
to
the
plan
is
that
do
I
understand
that
correctly.
I
Yeah,
that's
a
good
question.
I
think
changes
to
the
implementation
section
would
be
a
change
to
the
actual
actual
plan
and
that's
something
that
you
can
propose
and
incorporate
into
your
motion
and
and
then
the
separate
motion
I
was
suggesting
for
something
that
you
feel
like
doesn't
have
to
be
written
in
the
plan
but
you're
comfortable,
giving
that
direction
to
staff
right
now,
so
staff
can
consider
it
as
they
start
working
on
implementing
it.
C
I
mean
I
think
that
sometimes
there
are
different
ways
to
suggest
it.
Like
the
fourth
bullet
point
here,
staff
should
review
and
recommend
procedures
to
maximize
public
benefits
from
the
opportunity
zone.
If
you
wanted
that
written
in
to
the
implementation
section
as
a
policy
suggestion,
that
would
be
a
change
to
the
plan
if
you
simply
want
it
to
be
additional
recommendation
accompanying
the
plan.
That
would
be
hella
second
motion
am
I
am
I
getting
that
right.
L
I
think
the
the
maker
of
the
amendment
should
clarify
what
their.
C
Intention
is
so
so
why
don't
we
go
down
from
I
mean
my
suggestion
at
the
chair's
pleasure
would
be
to
go
down
from
the
top
and
have
whoever
made
that
motion
make
any
clarifications
that
they
need
to
about
whether
it
is
part
of
the
plan
or
a
supplementary
recommendation,
and
I
don't
know
if
we
want
to
have
discussion
on
each
of
these.
You
know.
B
That's
mine
and
I
I
don't
really
know
whether
it
would
be
a
ch.
I
might
benefit
from
some
input
from
kathleen,
if
you
don't
mind
kathleen.
If
you're
still
there.
B
B
B
Maybe
it's
under
key
steps
and
it
would
be
a
third
key
step
that
would
be.
The
city
creates
an
far
for
destination
office
space.
That's
not
the
correct
words
destination
office,
destination
office,
aka,
flatirons
office
park
that
would
support
job
growth
consistent
with
the
approximately
5
000
jobs
projection
for
that
area
in
the
east,
boulder
sub
community
plan.
So
just
make
that
a
step.
F
B
It
could
be
heroes,
reserve
revisions,
title
nine
and
the
bps
blah
blah
blah
comp
plan.
Zoning
map
comma
include,
including.
F
Creating
including
yeah,
including.
B
For
destination
office
that
would
support
job
growth,
consistent
with
the
approximately
five
thousand
jobs
projection
for
that
area,
as
stated
in
the
east
boulder
in
the
east
boulder
sub
community
plan,
so
it
would
be
language
change.
B
So
cindy
it
would
be
d9
policy
d9
at
the
beginning,
yeah
put
just
just
so
we
so
it's
policy
d9,
and
then
it
would
be
three
in
parentheses,.
B
C
B
Great
thank
you
for
that.
So
then,
a
comma
and
then
planning
board
record
you
get
rid
of
all
the
others.
Planning
board
recommends
the
city
create
an
far.
B
That
and
then
you
can
erase
everything
up
to
until
that
would
support
growth,
yeah.
C
Sarah,
you
may
also
want
to
limit
it
to
just
the
destination
office,
place
type
within
the
flat
irons
business
park
because,
as
we
discussed,
there
are
two
other
place
types
that
are
also
within
flatiron's
business
park.
There's
the
main
street
live
work
and
there's
the
innovation
tod,
and
you
said
you
wanted
to
limit
it
to
just
the
blue
part
of
flatiron's
business
card
right.
B
So
flatirons
par
so.
C
B
So
consider
so
I
would
then
you
can
get
rid
of
for
the
destination
office
space,
so
it
would
read
item
three
proposed
revisions
of
title
ix
and
the
boulder
valley
comp
plan.
Zoning
map
planning
board,
recommends
the
city
create
an
far
for
the
destination
office
place
type
within
the
flat
irons
office
park.
That
would
support
job
growth,
consistent
with
the
approximately
5
000
jobs
projection
incorporated
in
the
east,
boulder
sub
community
plan.
B
So
then
that
would
be.
That
would
be.
If
we
agree
to
this,
it
would
be
in
the
it
it
it
would.
It
could
still
be
a
condition
of
approval
for
the
main
motion
the
staff
wants
us
to
vote
on.
Is
that
correct
hello.
I
Thanks
yeah,
that
was
my
follow-up
question.
For
you,
too,
this
sound
you're
drafting
this
as
a
recommendation.
If
your
intent
is
that
this
language
be
added
to
d9
in
this
spot,
then
I
would
recommend
that
that's
what
the
motion
states
that
this
language
be
added
under
key
steps
to
d9
and
and
write
exactly
what
language
you
want
to
add
and
then
you
could
adopt
it.
That
way.
B
Perfect
and
then
that
so
this
is
the
exact
language
that
I
would
then
recommend
that
I
would
propose
sorry.
C
B
A
Okay,
so
shall
we
count
noses
here?
A
I
I
have
a
question,
and
that
is
why
do
you
restrict
that
to
the
flat
the
flatirons
park.
B
Well,
so
for
me,
my
answer
to
that
is-
and
I
don't
think
we're
discussing
it
yet
because
we
haven't
made
a
motion
under
which
friendlies
could
go
yet,
but
the
the
other
areas
have
already
have
a
mix
of
of
retail
and
commercial,
and
this
area
was
solely
calculated
with
the
490
square
feet
per
employee
light
industrial,
current
metrics,
and
I
wanted
to
make
sure
that
this
area,
in
particular,
where
there's
the
greatest
potential
for
job
growth,
not
just
explode
the
number
of
jobs
because
of
the
opportunity
to
build
commercial.
B
I'm
sorry,
I'm
starting
to
lose
track
of
my
own
thinking,
because
it's
getting
late,
but
I
didn't
think
in
the
other
areas.
It
was
necessary,
since
this
was
the
area
one
of
two
areas
with
the
greatest
potential
for
office
growth,
and
I
think
the
stamp
is
its
own
thing
and
it's
designed
to
be
super
dense
and
I
don't
want
to
mess
with
that.
B
L
L
Let's,
let's
get
it
done
kind
of
guy,
but
anyway
I'm
so
I
apologize.
If
I
have
interrupted,
I
I
thought
the
way
we're
going
to
do.
It
was
a
nose
count
and
then
discussion.
C
Just
real
quick
there's
one
typo:
if
we're
going
to
match
the
language,
that's
in
the
plan
now
that
first
line
should
say
propose
revisions.
It's
an
action.
Staff
are
going
to
propose
revisions,
so
it
should
not
be
proposed.
I
So
you
could
also
consider
just
making
this
part
of
the
separate
motion
to
put
that
out
there
that
you're
going
to
be
looking
for
this
when
it
comes
back,
I
just
wanted
to
give
that
as
an
option
as
well,
so
you
can
consider
how.
B
Yeah,
why
don't
we
keep
moving
on
so
that
we
can
then
make
the
motion
to
make
motion
get
through
all
these
others,
and
then
we
can
figure
out
each
one
as
we
go.
I'm
sorry
sounds
good.
C
F
C
B
And
I
would
just
say
that
much
of
the
east
boulder
sub
community
plan
we're
voting
on.
We
don't
exactly
know
what
it's
going
to
do.
Fair
point,
fair
point:
this
is
a
very
broad
brush
aspirational
plan
that
will
we
the
the
hard
work.
This
has
been
a
lot
of
work,
but
there's
a
lot
more
hard
work
to
come
and-
and
much
of
this
will
come
back
to
us
and
not
all
of
it
but
much
of
it.
J
A
L
I
I
am
not
going
to
support
this
and
I'll
briefly
state
why
we
have
what
is
called
an
industrial
park,
and
I
think
that
to
without
me
having
a
real,
intense
grasp
and
in
fact
kathleen
again,
we
did
some
estimating
tonight,
but
what
that
would
do
to
limit
the
density
with
what
is
already
a
one,
mainly
one
level
very
wide
street
lots
of
surface
parking.
L
What
is
supposed
to
be
an
industrial
park?
That's
between
a
quarter
and
a
half
a
mile
away
from
what
will
what
we
hope
to
be
the
you
know:
a
real
transit
hub
in
the
name
of
limiting
jobs
anyway,
I'm
I'm
not
ready
to
commit
to
that
in
as
a
as
as
something
we
need
to
do
here,
especially
when
we're
the
far
needs
to
go
up
from
0.5
to
something
else,
but
I
I'm
not
ready
to
limit
it
at
this
point.
B
Except
that
we're
not
trying
to
limit
jobs,
we're
trying
to
avoid
having
so
many
jobs
that
the
purpose
of
building
more
housing
is
not
blown
out
of
the
water
by
the
presence
of
not
five
thousand
jobs,
but
thirteen
thousand
jobs
we'll
just
gonna
exacerbate
the
jobs,
housing
and
balance
and
housing
prices
will
continue
to
go
up
and
they'll
continue
to
be
a
shortage.
B
If
we
don't,
if
we
don't
work
and
I'm
I'm
sure
that
there
are
folks
out
there
who
do
not
like
this
idea.
But
if
we
don't
do
this,
the
potential
is
for
far
more
jobs
than
our
actually
projected
in
the
plan
and
then
we'll
just
be
back
here.
Five
years
from
now,
10
years
from
now
with
the
same
jobs,
housing
balance
problem.
A
Okay
ml,
what
do
you
think.
K
I'm
looking
at
the
place
types
map
and
I
I
I
think
I
understand
the
spirit
of
what
sarah
is
is
wanting
to
do,
and
I
I
agree
with
it.
I
agree
with
it
because
I
think
we
have
a
jobs
imbalance
and
it
reflects
in
so
many
ways
in
our
in
our
current
city.
So
I
am
looking
at
the
place
types
and
I
wonder
if
the
way
to
I
hear
also
what
mark
is
saying
that
we
want
density,
we
want.
K
You
know
we
want
to
use
the
land
in
a
in
a
useful
way,
and
so
I
wonder
if
there
is
a
if
you
would
consider
sarah
looking
at
that
destination
workplace
footprint
on
the
map
and
have
the
language
talk
about
that
footprint.
In
other
words,
don't
limit
the
far
but
say
that
the
amount
of
jobs
that
relates
to
you
know
as
your
intent
is
the
percentage
the
projection
is
anchored
to
the
size
of
that
destination.
Workplace
area,
in
other
words,
the
rest
of
the
land,
would
then
go
to
other
uses.
K
Rather
than
going
to
surface
parking,
you
would
still
get
you
know
the
the
limit
on
not
the
limit,
but
you
would
still
get
the
relationship
to
the
proportion
of
of
jobs
wouldn't
change.
K
However,
instead
of
of
keeping
the
area
that
you're
highlighting
the
size,
it
is
now
which
could
result
in
a
in.
You
know
what
people
are
saying:
lots
of
surface
that
isn't
a
building
which
might
become
parking
but
instead
say
the
footprint
of
that
destination.
Workplace
area
would
would
be
the
size.
It
needs
to
be
to
allow
the
f
to
allow
the
jobs
projection
to
work
out.
K
That's
just
another
way
of
getting
to
it
without
incurring
potentially
an
far
that's
going
to
give
us
bad
consequences.
B
F
F
B
J
Sorry
about
that
guys,
she
just
got
her
sorry
about
that.
She
just
dropped
her
internet
and
laura.
If
sorry,
just
so
sarah
or
cindy
can
get
this
laura,
I
think
it
bounced
to
you
as
the
host.
H
J
C
J
Yeah
so
hold
on
a
second
and
the
pleasures
of
the
world
wide
web.
I've
got
charles
on
on
a
phone
and
our
secretary.
Without
you
know,
internet
we'll
just
hang
out.
B
I'm
just
going
to
say
that
maybe
what
we
could
do
in
that
language,
if
this
would
make
ml
comfortable
with
it,
is
like
the
language
is
not
in
front
of
me,
but
something
like
create
an
far
or
use
uses
that
blah
blah
blah
blah
blah
so
that
we
can
the
whoever,
as
the
city
staff
moves
forward,
they
can
use
both
tools
as
needed.
A
Dude
to
limit
the
yeah.
F
I
I
think,
if
the
I
think,
if,
if
your
metric
is
that
5
000
number,
you
should
consider
stating
that
as
the
goal
and
then
when
we're
going
through
the
code
work
and
zoning
updates,
we
would
come
to
you
with
here's
the
tool
options
so
that
we're
not
boxed
in
okay.
B
So
again
I
don't
have
the
language
in
front
of
me,
so
we
work
on
it
to
say
something
like
using
tools
available
to
maintain
the
goal
of
5
000
jobs
in
that
particular
place
type.
So
we
can
come
back
and
with
that
ml
does
that
make
you
more
comfortable.
K
I
I
was
actually
okay
with
your
language.
I
just
wanted
to
see
if
it
could
be
less
problematic
in
implementation
insofar
as
the
the
amount
of
land
that
would
potentially
be
parking
right.
C
You
know,
as
kathleen
suggested
here
are
some
options
that
would
keep
jobs
at
around
5000
for
this
spot
and
here's
how
we
model
what
that
looks
like
and
what
that
would
do.
You
know
it's
like
the
idea
of
you
pull
a
thread
here
and
what
does
it
do
somewhere
else?
So
I
would
just
like
more
staff
analysis
of
that
and
coming
back
with
options
sounds
really
good
to
me.
H
B
I
think
okay
or
we
could,
I
think
we
could
change
that
language
to
where
it
is
and
and
make
it
make
it
less
specific
to
the
far
and
and
then
accomplish
what
you're
trying
accomplish,
what
we're
all
what
I'm
trying
to
accomplish
and
what
I
think
everyone
else
is
most
everyone
else
is
comfortable
with
without
tying
staff's
hands
and
and
once
the
language
comes
back
up
as
we
move
on
to
the
other
ones,
I
will,
I
will
try
to
wordsmith
it,
so
it
satisfies
your
concerns
and
we'll
come
back
to
it
after
we've
done
all
the
others.
C
It's
definitely
a
handicap
yeah.
I
guess
I'm
just
looking
at
this
this
you
know
we
were
building
off
of
this
key
step.
That
says,
propose
revisions
to
title
ix
and
the
bvcp
zoning
map
and
like
proposing
options
and
modeling
does
not
seem
to
me
to
be
a
proposed
revision
to
title
ix
and
the
bbcp
zoning
map.
It
seems
like
it's
still
in
the
land
of
discussing
options
rather
than
proposing
revisions.
C
B
D9
that
we're
modifying
I'm
looking
at
it
right
now,
I
am
looking
at
it.
I've
got
it
over
here,
oh
okay,
okay,
so
why
don't
we
move
on
the
others,
because
I
it's
very
hard
to
do
this
without
being
able
to
look
at
our
link
so.
C
Yeah-
and
I
don't
know
how
we
move
on
to
the
others
without
the
list
that
cindy
has,
unless
holly
did
you
get
the
list
from
cindy
holly
looks
like
she's
calling
cindy
and
she's
gonna
be
right
back
okay,
so
I
could.
H
A
Come
back
at
nine
holy
cow,
it's
already
9
47.!
So
let's
say
10
o'clock.
Does
that
give
you
enough
time?
Oh.
C
L
B
B
Hey
john:
if
we're
not
able
to
get
cindy
back
on,
what
do
we
do?
Do
we
have
to
do
a
continuation
again
like
what
do
we
do?
Hey.
H
J
Hey
yeah
cindy
and
I
are
just
working
on
it-
her
computer's
down
she's,
trying
to
send
me
the
information,
I'm
also
thinking
of
having
a
shared
document
and
everybody
resending
the
information
and
then
pasting
it
in
the
document.
Instead
of
re
emailing
me,
if
that
makes
sense.
B
J
C
I
would
actually
I
don't
know
if
there's
any
public
access
issues,
because
other
people
won't
be
able
to
see
it,
they
would
have
to
use
the
internet
to
go
to
that
document.
We
won't
be
able
to
share
the
screen
and
show
it
on
screen
as
we're
working
on
it.
I
guess
we
could.
I
guess
we
still
could.
J
I
think
in
my
onedrive
I
think
I
can
do
that
and
it's
or
you
could
just
email
it
all
to
me
again.
I
do
think
it
would
take
five
minutes
to
do,
but.
J
I
think
we're
in
it
and
I
think
we
should
go
for
it
like
that
we're
here
we
are
like
90
percent
on
our
way
to
make
this
happen,
it's
not
perfect
and
just
one
more
moment
to
have
resilience.
L
F
J
And
hi
everybody
I'm
sorry
ml
and
and
mark
and
who
where's
everybody.
Everybody
else
knows
I'm
an
administrator
in
comp
planning.
So
there
you
go
and.
J
K
Again,
holly.
J
Sure
opansky
opan.
J
Yeah
opansky
h
h
at
boulder
colorado.gov.
J
I
don't
know
I
feel
like
this
is
a
good
time
for
somebody
to
do
a
song
and
dance
or
some
something
like
that.
I
don't
know
if
you
should
take.
It
will
take
me
probably
a
couple
of
minutes,
but
to
do
that
as
it
did
with
cindy
I'm
going
to
look
at
my
chat,
because
I
have
a
feeling
that
charles
hella
and
everybody
else
are
talking.
B
I'm
gonna
try
to
revise
mine
to
reflect
what
we've
already
talked
about.
So
it
may
take
me
a
minute
to
get
it
to
you,
but
there's
lots
of
other
ones
to
talk
about.
J
Okay,
awesome,
I
would
say
then
another
five
minute
timeout,
so
that
would
be
1003
and
then
I'll
share.
My
screen.
J
A
Thank
you,
I'm
just
saying,
while
you're
working
on
that,
perhaps
the
others,
the
planning
board
members
who
aren't
otherwise
occupied,
can
talk
about
one
of
the
other
proposals.
J
A
C
Well,
I
was
saying
I
can
share
my
screen
and
pull
up
my
language
if
that
would
be
helpful
to
folks.
I
I
If
it
cannot
be,
then
there's
additional
requirements
for
things
like
you,
can't
put
it
on
the
facade
unless
it
can
otherwise
not
properly
function,
and
then
it
has
to
be
incorporated
into
the
roof
if
it
has
to
be
on
the
roof.
So
there
there's
some
pretty
robust
standards
that
are
actually
more
than
a
page
along.
I
C
Right-
and
I
think
I
think
that
is
my
concern-
is
that
if
people
are
asking
for
additional
height
above
the
buy
right
maximum
in
order
to
achieve
these
things
in
order
to
achieve
a
varied
roofline
or
in
order
to
achieve
putting
the
mechanical
equipment
out
of
sight
if
they're
getting
additional
height
in
order
to
do
that,
I
want
that
to
be
part
of
a
broader
community
benefits
conversation,
because
we
don't,
I
mean
I
think
we
have
in
the
past.
C
Just
let
people
have
additional
heights
for
varied
reasons,
but
but
right
now,
that
is
our
major
tool
for
getting
community
benefits
is
letting
people
have
additional
height,
and
so
people
can
have
additional
height
just
because
the
architecture
is
prettier.
We
get
fewer
community
benefits
from
that
additional
height,
we're
giving.
I
feel
like
we're,
giving
away
our
leverage.
If
we
just
say
you
can
have
additional
height
in
order
to
screen
your
mechanical
equipment
and
have
a
pretty
roof
line.
So
that's
that's.
C
I
Well,
I
right
now
the
form-based
code
requires
it
to
be
within
the
building
unless
it
cannot
function
within
the
building
and
and
there's
like
tears
that
we
look
at
where
it
may
be
allowed
to
be
located.
If
if
it
cannot
function
differently,
and
that
applies
whether
somebody
asks
for
a
height
modification
or
not,
and.
I
B
So
if,
if
that
is
that
what
you're
trying
to
respond
to?
Yes,
that
was
a
motivator,
so
I
guess
I,
the
question
for
staff,
particularly
for
hella,
would
be.
Is
that
something
that
has
to
be
examined
through
a
separate
ordinance,
or
is
that
some
like?
How
do
we?
How
do
we?
B
How
do
we
begin
to
address
that
challenge,
because
I
think
that
there
were
a
number
of
us
on
the
planning
board
who
were
concerned
about
that
that
there
are
industrial
buildings
or
industrial
zones
where,
for
some
reason
or
another
there
isn't
it's
the
height
limit,
the
the
going
to
55
feet
is
not
also
connected
to
the
increased
linkage
fee.
So
is
how
would
we
do
that?
Is
this
the
place
to
do
it?
Do
we
need
to
suggest
a
separate
ordinance
like
what's
the
way
to
think
about
that.
I
I
You
would
create
those
standards
right
now
placing
the
mechanical
equipment
into
the
building
if
possible.
This
is
already
a
requirement,
just
a
design
requirement,
but
maybe
laura
is
expressing
a
different
concern,
because
I'm
hearing
a
little
bit
that
this
form-based
code
area
may
actually
have
community
benefit
requirements.
If
you
go
above
a
certain
height
and
if
that's
the
case,
we
would
be
creating
standards
for
standards
that
would
allow
you
to
go
above
a
certain
height
and
it
sounds
like
laura
is
saying
she
doesn't
want.
C
But
I
don't
want
that
to
be
the
only
thing
that
we
get
out
of
allowing
additional
height
is
just
it
screens
the
mechanical
equipment.
I
think
that
is
a
community
benefit.
I
like
pretty
roof
lines.
I
don't
like
looking
at
coolers
on
rooftops.
I
think
that's
a
great
thing
to
be
part
of
a
broader
conversation,
and
I
think
kathleen
did
say
that
community
benefit
would
be
a
tool
that
would
be
applied
here
in
east
boulder.
If
people
want
to
go
above
the
by
right,
height,.
B
B
A
film
studio,
except
it
never
happened,
and
so
the
whole
one
of
the
purposes
of
the
community
benefit
process
we
went
through
was
to.
I
can't
even
think
of
the
word,
to
quantify
to
specify.
B
Benefit
was-
and
in
this
case
it
was
an
additional
1.5.
You
had
to
pay
more
money
into
the
affordable
housing
fund,
blah
blah
blah
blah,
but
we
were
never
able
to
pass
a
community
benefit
for
commercial,
affordable
commercial
space,
so
we'd
have
to
expand.
The
conversation
about
community
benefit.
We'd
have
to
reopen
that
conversation
in
some
way,
and
I
don't
think
personally,
I
don't
think
you
want
to
do
it
sort
of
as
a
dash
off.
I
think
you
want
it
to
be
a
more
comprehensive
conversation
going
forward.
L
That
combined
to
make
them
able
to
have
that
height
without
triggering
the
the
additional
community
benefit
because
they
had
two
floors:
industrial
zone
and
a
laboratory
use
that
required
tall
mechanical
equipment
so
that
all
those
things
conspired
and
so,
if
we're
trying
to
do
something
about.
L
But
for
the
east
boulder
sub-community
plan,
I
I
anyway.
I
don't
think
that
that's
the
right
response.
C
I
think
that's
totally
fair
and
I
think
well,
it's
not
just
about
that
one
project,
just
that
project
made
me
think
about
what
could
happen
if,
when
we
are
encouraging
these
varied
roof
lines
and
the
screening
of
the
mechanical
equipment
inside
of
buildings,
that
what
could
happen
is
that
that's
all
we
get
for
additional
height
and
we
don't
get
community
benefit.
But
I
agree
with
sarah
that
this
you
know,
community
benefit
has
been
a
tricky
thing.
C
We
have
definitions,
it's
part
of
a
broader
project,
I'm
sure
that
some
of
the
staff
are
probably
like
biting
their
fingernails
right
now
would
love
to
talk
to
us
about
this.
I
am
totally
fine
with
taking
this
one,
either
off
the
table
or
making
it
an
implementation
recommendation.
C
That's
not
even
associated
with
the
boulder,
the
east,
boulder
community
sub-community
plan
and
just
put
it
in
the
hopper
for
the
future
that
you
know
this
is
something
that
needs
to
be
thought
about
very
carefully
when
the
community
benefits
conversation
continues.
So
I'm
happy
to
just
leave
that
as
a
marker
for
staff
that
that's
something
that
I
am
concerned
about
and
take
it
off
the
table
entirely
for
east
boulder
subcommunity
plan.
So
I'm
just
going
to
go
ahead
and
strike
this
one.
If,
if
that
everybody's?
Okay,
with
that,
I.
J
Yeah
and
john
and
laura
just
a
heads
up,
I
I
did
get
everybody's
comments,
except
for
maybe
sarah's
maybe
already,
but
I
did
want
to
just
check
in
about
time
and
how
we
felt
about
it.
J
And
the
process
I
think,
like
cindy,
is
communicating
through
her
phone
and
you
know,
texting
and
and
also
staff
just
kind
of
concerned
about
time
and
and
this
oh
thank
you,
sarah
and
I'm
not
sure
exactly
what
the
temperament
of
staff
is
just
just
a
note
about
checking
in
about
time,
and
that
would
and
how
you
feel
about
that.
A
All
right,
let's,
let's
take
a
take
a
poll
here-
usually
at
10
30.
We
we
check
with
everyone
to
make
sure
they're
still
able
to
function
and
continue
or
whether
we
should
end
the
meeting.
I.
J
J
Sorry,
john,
I
just
got
a
note
from
charles
said
whether
we
would
continue
tomorrow
at
9
00
a.m.
A
Let's
we
can
take
a
we
can
check
with
folks.
I'm
not
sure
anybody
can
do
that.
D
I
Yeah,
you
can
definitely
continue
the
item
to
another
to
a
later
date
and
the
notice
requirements
are
not
going
to
be
a
problem
because
you
started
the
meeting
and
it
is
always
possible
to
continue
it
to
another
date.
As
people
who
are
interested
and
would
you
know,
would
be
participating
tonight
and
then
would
know
when
when
it
would
be
continued.
A
F
Yeah
we
are
scheduled
to
go
to
council
with
your
motion
for
tuesday
night,
so
I
don't
think
I
think
it's
the
preference
of
counsel
that
they
have
your
emotion
before
they
make
a
motion,
but.
L
I'm
just
gonna
ask
the
five
that
are
here
tonight:
do
we
think
in
the
in
the
name
of
getting
this
done
for
so
that
council
has
our
recommendations
and
can
we
can
we
hammer
this
out
in
half
an
hour,
45
minutes
and
and
and
fly
through
as
as
efficiently
as
we
can
through
these
amendments.
C
I'm
willing
to
try,
but
I
actually
I
know
that
kathleen
has
some
young
ones
at
home
and
I
hope
that's
appropriate
to
bring
up.
But
I
I
do
feel
for
that
and
I
don't
know
what
kathleen's
preference
is.
So
I
would
like
to
ask
her.
B
Well,
my
situation
is
that
we
often
have
long
meetings
and
the
expectation
that
our
meetings
end
at
10
is
perhaps
unrealistic
in
general.
So
I
I
realize
that
for
the
folks
who
are
new
and
who
may
have
served
on
other
boards,
this
might
seem
unfair,
but
this
does
happen.
I'd
rather
power
through
it.
I
can't
do
it
tomorrow
night.
I
can't
do
it
tomorrow
morning
and
our
our
task
is
to
get
this
to
council.
So
that's
my
feeling
about
it.
A
All
right
and
what
about
you
know,
yeah.
K
My
my
only
concern
is
that
cindy
isn't
isn't
available
and
I
guess
does
she
have
a
problem.
K
L
J
Yeah
very
big
issues,
but
I
can
do
it
and
she
could
join
by
phone
if
she
if
she
wanted
amanda
herself
and
I
serve
on
the
same
team
and
we
do
fill
in
for
each
other
quite
often
so,
certainly
not
as
good,
but
definitely
maybe
good
enough
for
the
moment.
Well,.
C
Okay
and
holly,
I'm
really
glad
to
see
that
you
have
taken
over
the
screen
so
that
there
are
there's
absolutely
no
doubt
that
there
have
been
no
shenanigans
in
translating
between
planning,
board
members
typing
stuff
and
sending
it
in
so,
okay,
okay
policy.
So
my
next
suggestion,
so
how
you
can
strike
that
first,
one
to
add
to
policy
d7
that
we
are
not
going
to
do
that.
C
Okay,
okay,
these
two:
I
care
about
a
little
bit
more-
that
maximum
building
heights
will
be
no
lower
than
what
was
available
based
on
zoning
prior
to
adoption
of
the
east
boulder
sub-community
plan,
and
that
community
benefits
will
remain
a
key
tool
in
obtaining
additional
height
per
the
brc.
You
can
delete
that
word
up.
That
was
a
typo
there.
This
is
just
to
memorialize
what
I
think
staff
have
said.
C
Their
intention
is
that
they
heard
this
as
feedback,
and
I
just
want
to
get
it
memorialized
in
the
plan,
because
you
know
staff
turns
over
people
change
things
get
forgotten.
I
would
like
to
have
it
memorialized
and
again.
This
is
the
idea
that
the
fact
of
doing
this
plan
we
are
not
lowering.
What's
available
now
in
in
east
boulder
in
terms
of
heights,
and
so
I
guess
I
would
ask
kathleen
first
if
there
are
any
edits
that
should
be
made
to
make
this.
F
F
It
could
be
already
in
there
just
so
that
it's
sort
of
time
stamped
in
that
way.
L
C
F
Holly,
we
can
see
your
oh
sorry.
C
B
B
I
don't
know
I
I
would.
I
would
defer
to
staff
on
it,
but
I
you
know
those
the
look
the
in
the
place
types.
I
think
the
shortest
place
types
are
in
the
neighborhood.
B
Again
I
don't
remember
the
place
type
names
completely,
but
in
the
parkside
neighborhoods,
that's
the
lowest
proposed,
I'm
looking
for
the
graphic
of
the
five.
The
types
across
that.
B
H
C
A
Yeah,
I
don't
have
much
to
say,
except
I
don't
see
the
need
for
this,
and
I
think
that
it
would
provide
some
this
affects.
I
don't
know
how,
but
it
could
conceivably
affect
the
form-based
code
in
a
way
that
that
is
undesirable
and
therefore
I
I
don't
support
this.
C
If
I
could
ask
kathleen
to
weigh
in,
I
think
I
think
I
heard
kathleen
say
during
the
joint
city
council
and
planning
board
meeting,
that
this
is
their
intention
is
that
they
heard
this
from
the
working
group
and
that
they
heard
this
from
community
input
and
that
this
is
what
they
intend
with
the
form-based
code.
So
I
was
just
trying
to
memorialize
that
did
I
get
that
right,
kathleen.
F
Yeah,
I
think
I
think
I
understand
the
intention
of
this.
F
I'm
trying
to
think
of
like
what
are
all
the
potential
outcomes.
A
F
Yeah,
I
think
there
there
was
a
there-
was
a
significant
discussion
around
that
idea
that
we
wouldn't
want
to
create
a
condition
or
create
a
restriction
where
we'd
be
taking
away
building
height
from
an
area.
You
know
we
wouldn't
want
to
make
it
35
feet
in
an
area
that
today
is
40
feet.
For
example,.
F
C
B
Let's
see
what
how
did
you
say
it,
but
it
was
much
simpler
than
what
is
here
and
I
think
per
our
community
benefits
conversation
just
a
few
minutes
ago.
I
don't
think
you
need
to
have
that
sentence
there
only
because
by
definition,
community
benefits
and
height
are
now
connected.
B
So
I
feel
like
just
in
terms
of
some
simplicity
or
some
that
you
probably
don't
need
to
have
that,
and
I
you
know,
I'm
not
personally
a
big
fan
of
form-based
code,
but
I
know
that
it's
one
of
the
tools
that
the
staff
will
be
looking
at
for
implementation
and
I
don't
really
know
how
form-based
code
and
height
will
fit
together.
It's
you
know
it's
a
it's
like
a
rubik's
cube
for
trying
to
achieve
all
the
objectives
of
the
plan
and
of
the
boulder
valley
comp
plan.
B
C
Knowing
that
this
is
going
to
come
back
to
us
when
the
form
base
code
and
the
zoning
come
back
to
us,
I'm
okay,
with
letting
this
go
if
people
think
it's
unnecessary,
but
I
will
ask
this
question
when
this
comes
back.
Are
any
of
these
heights
lower
than
what
was
available
prior
to
adoption
of
the
east
folder
sub
community
plan?
So
if
this
is
a
hang
up,
if
people
don't
feel
like
this
is
a
very
simple
codification
of
what
we're
going
to
plan
to
do
anyway,
I'm
okay
with
letting
this
go
right.
C
A
C
All
right
so
in
the
interest
of
moving
forward
I'll,
just
put
a
marker
down,
I'm
going
to
be
looking
for
this
when
the
form
based
code
comes
back
and
you
know
for
group
harmony
sake,
because
people
think
it's
unnecessary.
We
can
strike
it,
but
if
it
turns
out
that
it
was
necessary,
you're
totally
getting
it,
I
told
you
so
from
me.
C
All
right,
I
will
trust
you
all
right,
my
last
one.
This
is
also,
I
think,
an
important
codification
of
what
I
think
we
heard
so
that
what
is
in
italics
here
is
what
I'm
proposing
to
add.
C
C
So,
according
to
what
we
heard
from
staff,
they
would
not.
Hopefully,
at
least,
I
think
we
can
trust
that
they
are
not
looking
to
expand
zones
one
and
zone
two,
but
I
would
like
to
codify
that
because
I
think
there
might
be
pressure
upon
them
to
do
that.
So
my
proposed
change
is
changes
to
the
airport.
Influence
zone
may
include
expansion
of
zone
three
and
zone
four.
C
These
are
the
two
zones
where
notification
would
happen
where
the
navigation
easement
could
happen
and
where
the
airport
manager
could
review
and
comment
on
development,
but
not
zones
1
or
zone
2
under
section
3
9-3-10
of
the
boulder
revise
code.
That's
what
I'm
proposing
to
add
is
just
make
sure
we're
not
talking
about
restricting
development.
When
we
look
at
the
airport
influence
zone.
A
So
I
have
a
question
for
hella
on
this.
To
what
degree
can
we
in
in
this
exercise,
make
put
in
limits
on
what
will
happen
in
the
future,
with
the
coming
airport,
faa
exercise.
I
Well,
I'm
I
don't
advise
the
airport,
so
I'm
I'm
not
very
familiar
with
that
part
of
it,
but
I
think
what
laura
is
trying
to
do
is
give
direction
to
potential
changes
to
the
zoning
code,
because
there
is
an
overlay
zone.
The
airport
influence
zone
is
an
overlay
zone
in
the
zoning
code.
I
A
I
Yeah
and
I'm
kind
of
wondering
too,
I
don't
know
if
there
are
ever
a
regulations
that
that
kind
of
set
what
an
airport
influence
zone
is
and
whether
or
not
we
can
deviate
from
that
and
if
a
study
maybe
wouldn't
allow
us
to
make
it
zone
three
or
four.
I,
I
suspect,
that's
not
the
case,
but
I
haven't
looked
at
that.
C
I
would
be
happy
to
put
something
in
here
about
as
allowable
by
faa
regulations
or
something
like
that.
C
C
K
A
Right
can
we
do
a
quick
thumbs
up
on
thumbs
down
on
this?
How
do
people
feel.
B
H
A
A
All
right,
let's
see,
okay,
then,
shall
I
take
the
next
one.
I
think
I
drafted
that
and
I'm
I'm
unclear
about
my
own
wording,
but
basically,
after
our
discussion
with
ml,
about
what's
happening
at
to
the
west
of
belmont
park,
where
those
nice
small
businesses
are,
I
was
just
trying
to
think
how
we
could
explicitly
recognize
what
is
being
lost
and
how
it
can
be
mitigated
to
a
greater
degree
than
is
presently
done
in
the
in
the
sub-community.
A
Plan
so
perhaps
I
I
should
have
said
plan
you
know
the
staff
should
identify
the
specifically
identify
the
loss
of
affordable
industrial
and
commercial
space
and
develop
recommendations
for
for
mitigation
and
to
provision.
You
know
how
to
how
to
provide
additional,
affordable
space.
K
F
F
So
I
don't
you
know
I
don't
have
a.
I
don't
have
an
impact
that
I
can
inventory
yet.
K
K
K
Something
that
we
put
forth
for
you
all
staff
to
begin
looking
into
and
seeing
how
this.
K
H
F
I
know
so
one
thought
is
if
you
want
to
recommend
a
change
to
the
land
use
map
included
in
the
plan.
That's
a
significant
recommendation
and
you
know
just
to
advocate
that
folks,
keep
in
mind
the
amount
of
community
review
that
has
gone
into
the
land
use.
N
F
And
kind
of
the
buy-off
on
the
the
land
use
plan
that
that
we
already
have,
but
certainly
you
have
the
choice
to
recommend
a
change
to
the
land
use
plan.
F
Yeah,
I
I
think
it
it
sounds
like
a
a
future
project
that
would
influence
potentially
work
in
east
boulder,
but
because
it
it's
not
describing
something
that
could
be
either.
F
K
So
the
closest
I
got
was
d15
and
that's
just
about
conducting
a
city-wide,
but
that's
much
broader
industrial
land
study.
F
Yeah
so
well
that's
a
that's.
That's
a
good
one
to
consider
because
you
know
I
think
what
was
intended
for
this
was
really
more
about.
F
Some
of
the
physical
characteristics
and
maybe
part
of
that
future
study
might
have
more
of
a
cultural
component.
F
So
yeah,
you
might
might
revise
the
just
the
d15
to
description,
a
comprehensive
study
of
industrial
uses,
trends,
culture
and
needs.
So
you
may
add
the
word
culture
in
there
if
that,
if,
if
that
captures
what
you
are
looking
for,.
K
Would
there
be
a
way
to
have
that
study?
Have
the.
K
Belmont
park
west
be
a
pilot
so
that
it
is
directly
related
to
the
unfolding
of
this
plan
to
the
implementation
of
this
plan,
rather
than
just
being
a
city-wide
process.
But
have
there
be.
B
L
K
On
to
d15,
I'm
thinking
under
under
would
it
be
under
a
key
step.
H
K
C
Under
key
steps
it
says
develop
scope
and
schedule
for
the
project
and
maybe
you
could
add
it
there
develop
scope
and
schedule
for
the
project
using
belmont
park
west
as
a
pilot.
K
K
That
we
turn
it
into
a
pilot
that
way
we
can
see
what
needs
to
be
seen
to
inform
the
form
base,
and
all
of
that
so
let
me
see,
do
we
know
exactly
where
how
so
d15
we're
looking
at
adding
it
to.
K
Yeah
so
laura,
if
you
can
help
me
yeah,
but
put
it
where
it
belongs.
You're
like.
D
J
J
C
And
not
to
monkey
wrench,
but
I
I
want
to
potentially
add
one
additional
component
and
I
might
not
be
using
the
right
words
here,
but
I
and
somebody
from
equity
and
diversity
world
probably
would
have
a
better
term
for
this.
But
I'm
thinking
about
the
concept
of
participatory
research
or
community-based
research,
where
you're
really
partnering
with
the
community
to
do
the
research
to
design
the
study.
C
So
it's
not
so
much
you're
the
anthropologist
coming
in
and
studying
their
culture,
their
culture,
but
you're
doing
a
participatory
study
with
the
people
that
you're
talking
to
about
how
what's
the
best
way
to
to
inventory
the
cultural
aspects
here,
so
that
I
don't
know,
if
that's
a
concept
that
that
would
work
here
or
that
ml.
You
would
like
to
add
as
the
author
of
this,
but
it's
something
that's
kind
of
resonant
for
me.
When
I
hear
you
talk
about
this.
K
C
C
A
Okay,
other
mark:
what
do
you
think.
L
I'm
good
with
what
is
on
the
screen
now
the
word
culture
and
the
and
the
words
in
bold
under
number
two.
K
A
Okay,
let's
see
what's
the
next
one,
oh
yeah,
I
think
that
was
something
I
wrote
also,
and
that
may
be
controversial.
Basically,
I'm
concerned
that
with
the
numbers
that
we
that
that
kathleen
provided
us
two
nights
ago,
I
just
saw
that
that
the
missing
middle-
oh.
J
A
A
Is
is
a
very
small
fraction
of
the
total,
and
so
that
concerned
me
and
I
I'd
like
to
see
that
increased,
but
I
don't
have
a
number
to
propose.
I
just
think
that
if
we're
concerned
about
having
really
integrated
neighborhoods
that
that
we
need
to
get
more
missing
middle
in
there
also.
H
A
Large
apartments,
so
that
adds
up
to
something
like
six
or
seven
percent
of
the
units,
and
I
I
think
that's
too
small
if
we
want
to
integrated
neighborhoods
and
stable
neighborhoods
where
people
are
willing
to
to
live
for
a
long
time
and
raise
families.
K
John,
do
you
have
a
place
in
the
plan
where
you
are
looking
at
inserting
this
language.
A
B
Can
I
also
add
the
down
at
the
bottom
of
this
list
I
have
mine,
which
is
about
increasing
ownership.
B
We
know
from
the
housing
studies
that
we
have,
that
in
commuters
and
missing
middle
want
certain
housing
types
and
they
want
the
opportunity
to
buy
otherwise
they're
not
going
to
move
into
the
city
they're,
not
interested
in
spending
a
lot
of
money
on
rent
if
they
can
spend
that
same
amount
of
money
to
own
a
house,
you
know
and
just
give
themselves
a
15-minute
commute.
B
So
I
feel
like
those
are.
Those
two
pieces
actually
are
related
to
each
other
and
intersect,
pretty
help
in
a
pretty
healthy
way.
A
Absolutely
agree
yeah,
so
it's
not
clear
to
me
where
that
would
go
and
how
it
would
be
phrased
or
inserted.
But
I
I
think
it's
a
pretty
important
issue.
C
Yeah,
can
I
ask
kathleen
to
weigh
in
you
know,
kathleen
you
got
urged
by
city
council
to
say
if
you
were
going
to
include
more
housing?
Where
would
you
include
it?
Can
you
do
something
similar
for
if
you're
going
to
be
increasing
town
homes
live
work,
units
and
large
apartment
types
where
where's
the
opportunity
and-
and
I
do
think
john,
I
suspect
and
kathleen
correct
me
if
I'm
wrong,
but
those
numbers
that
kathleen
provided
were
modeled
before
there
was
a
change
to
the
main
main
street
industrial
place
type
to
allow
housing
on
the
ground
floor.
F
That's
correct
the
numbers
that
kalani
provided
did
not
include
those
changes
that
were
made
to
ground
floor
place
types
and
I'm
sorry.
I
like
unmuted
myself
and
then
lowered
my
microphone
so
it
my
headset
spoke
to
me
and
covered
up
what
you
were
saying.
You
said
I
had
recommended
something
for
council
and
then
I
lost
you
for
a
second.
F
C
F
So
I
I
think
the
first
thing
to
consider
is
the
numbers
that
we
provided
were
modeled
on
one
concept
of
many
that
could
play
out
in
how
the
housing
develops
in
that
area.
F
That
would
be
an
edit
to
the
place
types,
and
so
let's
say
you
wanted.
F
Parkside
residential
to
really
be
focused
on
that
missing
middle
format.
A
F
Sorry
so
I'm
trying
to
say
you
know
if,
if
you
wanted
to
maintain
the
areas
of
change,
but
you
wanted
a
larger
proportion
of
any
of
these
areas
of
change
to
be
a
missing
middle
format
instead
of
and
thereby
maybe
disallow
or
prohibit
a
smaller
unit,
then
that
would
be
a
change
to
one
of
these
place
types
or
multiple
of
these.
If,
if
you
wanted
to
change
main
street,
live
work
to
only
include
those
formats
and
not
include
apartments,
I
mean.
H
A
Is
my
desire
is
not
to
specify
a
specific
area
where
there
should
be?
You
know
a
certain
type
of
housing
as
long
as
we
don't
specify
it
ourselves,
the
owners
and
the
developers
will
build
whatever
is
most
profitable
for
them,
which
is
probably
stack
flats
for
rent
until
we
don't
let
them
do
that
and
require
something
else.
So
that's
what
I'm
trying
to
get
at.
B
And
can
I
make
a
suggestion
what
if
we
were
to
create
an
an
h10,
that
was
that's
said,
develop
tools
to
incentivize
home
ownership,
units
for
low
moderate
and
missing
middle
housing.
B
The
areas
the
area
areas
available
to
build
missing
middle
and
then
it's
a
direction
rather
than
sort
of
we're,
not
telling
staff
how
to
do
it.
We're
we're
at
work
we're
incorporating
into
the
implementation
process
to
the
goals
of
diversity
and
home
housing,
diversity
and
home
ownership,
which
I
feel
like
isn't
neces.
B
I
I
know
we
we
there's
gestures
to
it
I
mean
there's,
definitely
housing
diversity,
I'm
not
saying
there's
not,
but
there's
sort
of
gestures
at
home
ownership,
but
but
not
as
far
as
I
can
tell
in
the
in
the
h
implementation
list,
not
a
a
directive
to
seek
out
home
ownership
opportunities
and
then,
with
that
john.
B
A
B
B
Didn't
see
that
number
okay,
so
h10
and
it
would
be
develop
or
explore
what
develop,
explore
programs
to
incentivize
home
ownership
options
in
the
east
boulder
sub
community
plan.
H
B
And
I
would
say
programs
and
then
because
they're
probably
different
ways
and
then
to
say
home
ownership
units
for
low,
moderate
and
missing
middle
home
households.
K
B
That's
what
they've
used?
I'm
sorry,
except
that
in
boulder.
So
far
when
we
talk
about
missing
middle,
we
are
actually
talking
about
a
very
specific
financial
spread
from
60
percent
of
ami
to
something
like
110
of
ami
and
we
so
missing.
Middle
housing
forms
is
a
form,
but
when
we
have
talked
about
missing
middle,
we
are
actually
talking
about
an
income
spread.
B
That's
at
least
that's
in
informally
how
we've
talked
about
it.
So.
H
C
C
H
H
H
C
H
C
C
Okay,
thank
you.
We
can
move
on
so
the
question
I
have
is
when
you
say
it
says
incentivize
homeownership
units,
which
is
a
phrase
that
I'm
not
entirely
clear
on.
Do
you
mean
incentivize
building
home
ownership.
B
Allow
people
to
purchase
unless
things
have
changed,
we
tend
to
talk
in
dwelling
units
du's
and
it
covers
everything
from
the
efficiencies
to
the
home
single
family
homes.
So
dwelling
units
is
a
generic
that
covers
all
housing
types,
maybe
that
language
has
changed
too,
but
that
has
been
the
language
we've
been
using
for
the
three
years
I've
been
on
planning
board
so.
C
B
B
So
if
you
want
to
add
dwelling
units
in
dwelling
in
front
of
units
so
that
it's
very
clear
that
it's
about
home
ownership
of
units
of
any
type
great,
but
this
is
not
about
a
specific
ins
incentive
program-
I
the
city,
is
going
to
explore.
It's
got
some
programs
already
in
the
in
its
toolbox.
B
We
need
more
and
because
we're
going
to
be
building,
hopefully
over
time,
5
000
dwelling
units-
and
we
know
that
right
now
the
market
keeps
producing
rentals,
but
we
know
we
have
a
home
ownership
need,
especially
when
it
comes
when
we're
talking
about
missing
middle
and
equity
issues.
We
I
think
we
need
to
priority.
We
need
to
make
that
a
priority
and
that
we're
in
the
project,
since
this
is
going
to
be
where
much
of
the
new
housing
is
built
in
the
foreseeable
future.
B
C
A
Okay,
can
we
just
take
a
quick
survey
who
who
can
support
that?
A
J
Did
anybody
look
at
policy
dx9,
yeah.
L
B
L
L
J
L
L
L
So
and
I'll
I'll
just
speak
to
why
I'm
proposing
this,
if,
when
you
do
a
search
form
based
code
is
mentioned
many
times
and
in
particular
in
implementing
it
under
d9,
then
the
column
to
the
left,
which
states
form
base
code.
But
it's
not
really.
L
It
says:
recommendation
east
boulder
zoning
and
form
based
code
study
and
then
and
then
key
steps
is
missing,
form
base
code.
The
description
is
missing,
form-based
code,
it's
kind
of
I
just
want
it
to
be
that
we're
going
to
do
it,
not
that
we're
thinking
about
maybe
someday
kind
of
planning
on
it
sort
of.
B
H
B
It's
clearly
something
staff
wants
to
focus
on
and
it's
clearly
something
that
will
be
part
of
the
development.
So
for
me
I
think
the
idea
that
city
plans
for
form-based
code
to
be
an
option
for
development
or
redevelopment,
I'm
fine
with
that
clause.
B
I
think
the
rest
of
it
is
sort
of
reads
more
like
I
just
think
I
don't
think
the
rest
of
it
is
necessarily
accurate,
but
I'm
totally
supportive
of
making
sure
that
form-based
code
is
understood
to
be
one
of
the
tools
that
the
city
will
use
to
develop,
to
to
more
fully
articulate
the
place
types
and
what
goes
on.
B
But
personally,
I
I
don't
think
I
see
cindy.
C
Can
I
mark
before
you
offer
edits?
Can
I
just
add
in
a
comment
that
I
think
the
the
thrust
of
policy
d8
is
contributing
to
city-wide
goals
for
climate
resilience,
it's
talking
about
innovation
and
architecture
and
new
materials
and
methods,
but
specifically
for
the
purpose
of
contributing
to
citywide
goals
for
climate
resilience.
C
L
Actually
it
was
it
was
you
know
what
I
I
appreciate
you
saying
that
what
it
was
I
was
trying
to
like
figure
out.
If
I
created
policy
d9,
then
suddenly
you
just
renumbered
everything.
I
I
think
that
my
sentence
could
would
be
good
standing
on
its
own.
So
if
it's
policy
d8
b
or
if
the
if
the
graphic
designers
want
to
renumber
everything,
I
was
looking
for
a
place
to
put
it.
That
was
convenient,
and
I
appreciate
you
pointing
out
that
that
is
really
about
the
goals
of
climate
resilience.
E
K
L
B
B
No,
it's
not.
It
is
in
there.
It's
that's
the
language
right
now,
d9,
just
it's
right
here.
D9
implementing
the
vision
of
the
east
boulder
land
use
plan
will
require
code
updates
and
because
you've
added
form-based
code
in
there.
It
requires
form-based
code.
So,
and
I
and
I
I
don't
know
the
proposal
as
nearly
as
well
as
laura
does,
but
I
I
feel,
like
staff
has
made
it
clear
that
form-based
code
is
going
to
be
in
the
mix
of
as
they
move
forward
to
try
to
implement
it.
That's
my
sense.
C
I
think
we
could
resolve
sarah
potentially
this
concern
by
saying,
I
think
it's
just
a
matter
of
parallel
structure,
and
so,
if
we
added
the
words
the
development
of
form-based
code,
so
it
says
that
the
land
use
plan
will
require
code
updates,
the
development
of
four
base
code,
zoning
changes
and,
possibly
the
creation
of
new
zones.
I.
B
But
it
doesn't
require.
I
mean
this
is
the
problem.
It
doesn't
require
form-based
code
form-based
code
is
going
to
be
one
of
the
potential
tools,
not
saying
that
it
won't
exist,
but
it's
not.
It
is
not.
J
B
Not
changing
require
is
not
our
verb.
We
know
that
it's
gonna
require
code
updates,
like
that's
gonna,
be
what
staff
is
working
on
for
the
next
year
is
code
updates.
All
this
stuff
has
to
be
updated,
so
to
tie
their
hands
with
requiring
form
based
code,
which
we
know
they're
going
to
use,
but
requiring
it
might
tie
their
hands
in
ways
that
we
don't
want
to.
We
don't
want
to
do
so
myself.
H
F
Nope
that
that
works,
fine.
C
J
Is
I
can't
my
team's
is
not
open,
but
the
communication
still
pops
up.
B
J
J
J
J
J
A
Okay,
should
we
how
many
people
can
would
move
ahead
with
this.
A
C
D9
thumbs
up.
B
I
I
am,
I
would
prefer
it
to
be.
We
used
to
keep.
I
would
prefer
the
way
I
had
originally
suggested.
B
B
A
All
right
well
mark
you
still
don't
like
seriously.
B
C
H
L
Laura,
so
I'm
sorry,
so
it's
it
took
me
a
while
to
figure
this
out.
So
the
section
is
design
quality
and
place
making.
Then
you
have
policies
and
the
policies
are
numbered
d1
through
d8,
and
then
you
have
design
quality
and
place
making,
and
then
you
have
the
projects
and
programs
that
are
implemented
different.
L
A
L
So
what
I
I
think
it
would
be,
you
know
as
a
placeholder
policy
d8
a
or
d8
plus
or
whatever,
but
it
was
just
everything
would
renumber
and
so
the
the
policy
it
would
just
fall
on
on
page
81
and
it
would
be
its
own
policy
and
and
then
the
rest
would
get
re-numbered.
L
Well,
if,
if
that's
the,
I
would
rather
have
the
wording
under
d9
that
laura
crafted
and
I
it's
when
I
read
the
policies
in
design,
quality
and
place,
making.
L
It
feels
like
it's
lacking
in
in
mentioning
how.
L
L
It
doesn't
form
based
code,
doesn't
guarantee
good
design,
it
just
allows
for
it
rather
than
what
we
have
with
our
current
focus
on
the
site
review
process.
So
my
advocacy
here
is
to
have
an
additional
policy
and
to
change
the
wording
as
laura
has
described
in
d9
now.
If,
if
the
renumbering
is
really
it,
then
I
I'm
looking
here
and
are
there
any
other
policies?
C
D9
is
a
project.
D9
is
a
project
to
do
a
study,
an
east,
boulder
zoning
and
form-based
code
study,
and
you
don't
want
this
to
get
buried
in
a
project.
You
want
it
to
be
its
own
standalone
policy
that
encourages
form-based
code
and
that's
why
you're
being
so
a
stickler
on
this,
because
it's
important
to
you
that
it
be
a
policy.
L
B
I
can't
support
form-based
code
as
a
policy,
I
think
form
paste
code
is
a
tool.
It
is
not
a
policy,
so
I'm
very
I'm
very
comfortable
with
hella's
suggestion
to
add
form
based
code
will
be
an
implementation
option.
I'm
totally
fine
with
that.
But
form-based
code
is
not
a
policy
it.
I
don't
believe
it
should
be
a
policy.
B
I
think
it
is
not
a
tool
that
produces
the
outcomes
you're
saying
it
produces
it's
a
tool
that
gives
developers
a
checklist
and
we
end
up.
I
I
personally
don't
think
that
tvapp
is
particularly
appealing
and
that's
all
form
based
code,
so
I
think
it's
a
tool.
I
do
not
think
it
should
be
a
policy,
so
I
wouldn't
support
it
as
a
standalone,
I'm
perfectly
happy
to
support
what
hela
has
here
and
eliminate
the
the
development
of
form
based
code
that
you've
added.
B
No,
I
think
I
think
you
go
for
me.
No,
I
think
you
go
back
to
requires,
instead
of
involve,
eliminate
this
development
of
form
based
code
and
add
form
base
and
then
use
hella's
language.
That
is
at
the
last
sentence
in
this
because
it
is,
it
is
not
anyways.
I've
already
said
what
I'm
going
to
say,
but
I'm
I'm
very
comfortable
with
hella's
language,
because
it
adds
to
our
toolbox
rather
than
constricting
our
toolbox.
L
So,
okay,
here,
maybe
I'm
getting
hung
up
on
hella's
wording,
form
based
code.
L
B
Developer
can't
use
it
unless
the
it's
part
of
the
the
the
chapter,
nine
title:
nine
right
staff
has
to
develop
it
in
the
first
place
and
they're
not
they're
the
same
way.
They
did
form-based
code
for
the
hospital
site.
You
know
they
took
the
lessons
that
they
learned
from
tvapp
and
they
manipulated
it
and
changed
it
for
the
shape
and
size
and
scale
of
the
hospital
site,
and
they
will
likely
do
the
same
thing
in
east
boulder
for
certain
parts
of
east
boulder.
B
So
it
needs
to
be
a
tool,
but
it's
it's
not
like,
and
it
will
be
part
of
the
discussion
around
what
has
to
change
in
our
code
and
our
zoning
and
everything
that's
in
chap
in
title
nine.
So
it's,
although
I
think
form-based
code
is,
is
like.
I
can't
remember
what
what
title
it's
under,
but
maybe
or
maybe
it's
like
9
15
or
something,
but
it's
it's
a
tool.
It's
it's
part
of
the
toolkit
got.
L
Right
now,
including
the
word
involved,
so
I'd
like
to
call
that
question
and
we'll
see
what
happens.
C
And
mark,
if
I
can
just
ask
you
to
clarify
the
reason
why
you
want
to
keep
that
that
co,
the
the
changes
that
were
made
first,
where
it
says
implementing
the
vision
of
the
east
boulder
land
use
plan,
will
involve
code
updates.
The
development
of
form-based
code
is
because
you
don't
want
it
to
be
optional
for
staff
to
develop
the
code.
You
want
to
make
sure
that
staff
will
develop
the
code
and
then
that
code
will
be
available
as
an
option
for
development.
H
A
A
B
B
If
they're
asking
for
a
variance
of
variance,
thank
you
variance.
B
A
I
So
I,
if
I
may
speak
to
that,
there
is
actually
a
large
part
of
tvapp
that
was
developed
under
the
site
review
criteria,
because
the
form-based
code
was
not
yet
adopted,
like
the
spark.
Entire
spark
area
was
approved
under
site
review
criteria,
and
then
there
are,
I
think,
it's
the
pollard
side,
that's
being
developed
under
form-based
code
and
the
old
airgas
side.
I
believe
maybe
charles
can
correct
me
if
that
was
not
correct
and
there
is
there's
not
generally
an
option
to
choose
between
form-based
code
and
site
review
once
the
form-based
code
was
adopted.
I
C
I
Yes,
I
actually
loved
it
and
I
had
actually
said
form
based
code
will
be
considered
as
an
implementation
option,
and
I
proposed
it
because
mark
had
made
a
statement
that
that
was
in
his
intent,
but
maybe
his
intent
goes
further
than
that.
I
thought
he
wanted
at
the
time
I
proposed
it.
I
thought
he
wanted
to
make
sure
that
would
actually
be
con
at
least
considered
to
implement
it.
L
I
I
and,
and
maybe
I'm
betraying
my
ignorance
about
this.
L
B
The
one
hella
it
is
when
the
air
gas
project
came
to
us,
it
did
even
though
it
was
foreign
based
code.
It
came
to
us
because
it
was
requesting
150
feet
for
a
wall
where
only
100
feet
was
allowed
cindy
welcome
back,
and
so
that
did
maybe
that
wasn't
considered
site
review.
But
it
did
come
to
us
because
they
were
requesting
a
variance
so.
I
B
So
mark
I
want
you
to
understand,
I
don't
have
a
problem
with
us,
adding
form-based
code
as
a
tool.
What
I
have
having
a
problem
with
is
the
idea
that
form-based
code
is
going
to
be
the
thing
that
is
across
the
whole
east,
boulder
sub-community
plan,
because
I
don't
think
that
leaves
much.
I
I
think
that's
a.
I
just
personally
think
that's
the
wrong
way
to
go.
B
L
Know
with
with
additional
education,
I
thank
you
all
for
suffering,
my
my
need
for
additional
education
so
having
having
now
now.
Where
are
we?
Do
we
just
drop
this
whole
thing
or
do
we
drop
the
development
of
form
based
code
and
leave
hella's
suggested
wording?
B
No,
I
don't,
and
then
I
think
we
can
go.
We
can
change
involve
back
to
require,
which
is
in
fact
what
it
requires
and
and
then
and
then
form
based
code
is
clearly
in
there
as
a
as
a
component
of
the
just
you're
describing
you're,
describing
the
the
recommendation
and
it's
in
there
and
it's
in
the
toolkit
and
staff
will
move
forward
with
it
in
the
way
in
the
places
that
they
determine
make
the
most
sense.
L
Okay,
so
the
the
task
at
hand
is
to
take
out
the
words,
the
development
of
form
based
code,
and
we
are
leaving.
C
L
C
H
A
Oh
yeah,
let's
see
if
everyone's
happy
with
it.
A
A
C
A
See
ml
that
did
you
have
some
more
did
we
get
all
yours.
K
B
C
You
know
coin
toss
should
we
go
to
ml's
first
or
sarah's?
First,
let's
do.
K
K
My
thought
is-
and
I
think
I
already
stated
this
earlier-
is
that
you
know
the
function
of
a
roof
is
is
to
deal
with
climate
and
environment.
K
One
of
the
I
guess,
consistent
comments
about
buildings
was
that
they
were
big
boxes
and
bulky.
I
would
suggest
that
that
has
more
to
do
with
the
articulation
of
their
form
than
with
their
roof.
If
you
look
at
most
of
the
pictures
that
are
in
this
document
very
few
show
buildings
that
don't
have
flat
roofs.
Now,
I'm
not
saying
that
flat.
Roofs
is
a
good
thing
or
a
bad
thing.
K
I'm
just
saying
the
imagery
that
the
staff
chose
to
get
us
excited
about
this
plan,
wasn't
about
fancy,
roofs
or
expressive
forms
at
the
roof
scale,
and
I
don't
think
that
roofs
is
the
way
to
get
to
informing
the
image
of
the
city
or
experience
from
the
street
generally
at
the
street.
K
You
don't
really
see
the
tops
of
the
buildings,
we're
not
looking
at
short
buildings
in
in
this
plan
in
the
areas
of
change,
so
my.
K
Thought
to
make
it
an
actual
useful
addition
to
design
quality
and
placemaking
is
to
consider
that
roofs
respond
to
climate
and
environmental
factors,
and
I
think,
if
we
bring
forth
the
purpose,
then
it
isn't
just
about
form-making,
it's
actually
about
creating
some
intelligence
and
some
impetus
to
have
the
form
be
in
response
to
something
and
yes,
mechanical
moderating.
K
K
I
I
wouldn't
want
a
policy
to
direct
this
to
do
something
that
is
a
you
know,
singular
in
its
in
its
purpose,
but
rather
to
have
it
be
a
result
of
a
real
need.
So
that's
why
I'm
looking
to
change
the
language.
K
Much
specificity
in
in
the
paul,
the
d7
as
written.
K
I
think
policies
should
be
more
about
what
are
you
trying
to
get
at
rather
than
than
how
explicitly
what's
the
solution,
all
right,.
B
Can
I
make
a
suggestion
sure,
because
I
think
I
think
that
the
rooftop
design
the
rooftop
the
different,
the
the
what
exists
there
now
is
intended
to
allow
for
a
diversity
of
shapes,
and
I
think
your
point,
though,
which
is
structures
in
east
boulder,
should
respond
to
climate.
Environmental
factors
should
actually
go
in
the
our
policies,
which
is
about
resilience
and
climate
commitment,
and
we
could
just
make
an
r,
whatever
the
last
make
a
new
number
and
have
it
be.
B
Our
whatever
structures
in
east
boulder
should
respond
to
climate
environmental
factors
and
then,
as
staff
works,
to
create
the
tool
kit
to
put
all
of
this
into
place,
they
can
figure
out
how
to
integrate
the
roofs
and
the
materials
and
the
climate
I
mean,
I
think
you
can.
It
can
become
part
of
a
broader
conversation
that
allows
for
the
weaving,
together
of
all
of
these
multiple
components
that,
by
definition,
have
to
be
woven
together
to
to
to
create
to
make
the
plan
come
to
fruition.
C
Can
I
can
I
ask
a
question
I
you
know
I
appreciate
ml
your
attention
to
you
know,
building
design
contributing
to
the
needs
of
the
building
to
be
resilient,
and
I
guess
my
question
to
staff
is
how
you
would
see
a
policy
that
says:
structures
in
east
boulder
should
respond
to
climatic
and
environmental
factors.
How
would
you
see
that
being
implemented?
C
F
And
yeah,
I'm
wondering
is
it
about
like?
Are
we
trying
to.
F
K
K
You
know
it.
I
think
it
it.
It
causes
people
not
to
think
about
what
they're
doing
and
just
say.
Oh
okay,
I'm
going
to
bury
the
roof
and
that'll
be
good
because
I'm
very
in
the
roof,
but
it
should
be
you're
very
you're,
creating
the
roof
that
makes
sense.
F
H
H
K
So
that's
that's
really
what
I'm
that's
really
what
I'm
wanting
and
I
and
I
put
it
in
d7
as
as
a
way
to
avert
the
limiting
factors
of
create
a
buried
roofline.
F
Yeah,
so
it
sounds,
I
think
the
the
idea
of
this
as
an
our
policy
is
fine,
and
that
makes
sense.
I
don't
know
that
we
would.
F
Assign
a
an
additional
project
or
a
program
to
it.
I
think
we
have
that
energy
code
in
place
and.
F
So
yeah
related
to
the
form
question
it
sounds
like
you
may
be
proposing
that
we
remove.
That
is
it.
I
don't
see
it
on
the.
A
K
I
I
I
think
well,
I
know
that
this
was
originally
in
response
to
the
roof,
the
roof
language
and
I'm
like.
Okay,
if
we
want
to,
if
we
want
something
that
speaks
to
the
form
of
the
building
brought
in
a
broad
sense,
then
I
was
proposing
alternate
language.
K
I
think
if
we
want
to
not
have
a
roof
driven
policy,
I'm
good
with
that
too.
I
K
I
I
K
I
Measures,
passive,
solar
orientation.
All
of
that
your
sentence
is
very
correct
in
that
regard,
correct.
I
Well,
you
could
leave
it
that
way
and
there
are
two
policies
to
be
considered
if,
if
you're
comfortable
with
that,
it
sounds
like
you,
you
may
not
want
to
have
a
policy
that
supports
a
very
rough
line
because
it
might
be
counterproductive
to
your
climate
goals,
but
there
might
be
a
balance
that
can
be
found,
or
maybe
you
make
it
broader
and
and
make
it
about
varied.
H
C
Well,
I'm
one
of
the
people
on
the
east
boulder
working
group
who
promoted
policy
d7
to
begin
with,
largely
because
that's
my
understanding
of
where
the
community
aesthetic
is
going
that
this
is
something
that
the
dab
regularly
suggests
when
they
give
input
on
building
design.
This
is
something
that
was
basically
required
of
diagonal
plaza
that
they
had
those
kind
of
townhouse-y
style
of
buildings.
C
But
I
do
support
adding
the
language
that
ml
had
suggested
to
policy
d8,
as
hella
described.
I
think
that's
a
great
addition.
A
Great,
let's
see,
do
we
have
further
suggestions
and
I
think
you
had
a
couple
more.
K
Oh,
these
are
implementations
and
I
was
just
suggesting
that
we
prioritize
them
a
little
bit
differently
and
I
can
speak
to
them
quickly
and
as
why
so
in
h9
expand
the
community
benefit
program.
K
We've
seen
the
community
benefit
program
referenced
in
in
a
lot
of
different
places
in
the
plan
and
I'm
instead
of
being
priority
a
second
priority.
I
I
suggest
that
it
would
be
changed
to
priority
number
one.
C
And,
and
just
for
for
folks
who
don't
have
the
plan
open
in
front
of
them,
I
think
what
ml
is
responding
to
is
that
in
this
section
of
the
plan,
every
policy
is
assigned
a
priority
number
of
one
two
or
I
guess
one,
two
or
three,
and
it's
not
as
if
she's
saying
this
is
the
number
one
policy
in
the
whole
section
she's
just
saying,
rather
than
being
a
one,
two
or
three
rather
than
being
a
two,
it
would
be
a
one
among
many
priority
ones.
C
So
I'm
sorry
just
a
little
facilitation
clarification
for
people
who
don't
have
the
plan
open.
K
Perfect
that
it
just
seems
like
it
it's
in
enough,
it's
referenced
enough
times
that
we
shouldn't
we
should.
We
should
attend
to
it
sooner
rather
than
later.
B
E
B
F
Do
you
have
a
thought
about
that
yeah?
I
think
you
know
if
you
wanted
to
recommend
that
it
becomes
a
priority
number
one,
that's
great
and
it
will
help
us
advocate
for
more
resources.
K
Oops,
my
next
two
are
going
to
put
us
in
the
same
category.
Oh,
the
community
benefit
b6
is
updating
the
community
benefit
program
and,
again
to
me
it's
one
of
those
tools
that
we
like
to
refer
to
and
use,
and
I
also
am
suggesting
to
make
it
a
priority.
One
from
a
number
two.
K
This
is
establishing
an
adaptive
reuse
incentive
program.
If
we're
going
to
be
seeing
change
with
existing
structures.
K
We've
already,
we've
got
a
big
loophole
right
now,
in
people
being
able
to
not
deconstruct
the
building
and
just
to
pay
the
fees,
because
the
fees
are
cheaper
than
the
deconstruction
would
be
of
the
fine.
Rather
so
I
think
the
sooner
we
close
we
put
in
place
mechanisms
to
encourage
people
to
do
right
by
our
building
waste,
the
better
off
we'll
be
so
there
is.
K
Especially
at
the
scale
that
big
buildings,
the
scale
of
waste
that
is,
that
is,
that
is
created,
I
think
it
would
make
sense
to
try
to
get
that
loophole
closed
and
it's
currently
a
priority
too.
B
So
I
have
a
question
ml
because
I
I
agree
we,
you
know
I've
talked
about
this.
I
I
agree
with
you
that
we
want
to
incentivize
deconstruction
rather
than
rather
than
paying
a
fine,
and
we
want
to
encourage
adaptive,
reuse,
I'm
just
thinking
about
what
the
building
stock
is
in
the
east,
boulder
sub
community
plan
and
a
lot
of
it's
not
really
amenable
to
adaptive
reuse
for
the
for
the
kind
of
development
that
is
embodied
in
the
plan.
B
So
I'm
wondering
if
in
it,
in
addition
to
priority,
you
might
want
to
add
some
language
that
has
to
do
with
that
incentivizing
of
of
and
deconstruction
yeah
the
deconstruction.
B
Program
right,
so
I
think
we
we
don't,
we
we
have.
We
have
the
deconstruction
requirements,
but
we
have
an
out
so
maybe
revising
the
deconstruction
program.
That
might
be
language.
That's
you
might
want
to
add.
H
B
Yeah,
I
just
I
just
I'm
not
sure
how
much
adaptive
adaptive
reuse
in
the
neighborhood
in
the
whole
area
is
really
realistic,
given
what's
there
now
and
what
20
years
from
now,
we
expect
to
see
there.
C
Can
I
ask
a
clear
clarification
on
terminology?
Sorry
newbie
here
so
when
we
say
adaptive
reuse,
what
that
means
is
you
don't
demolish
part
of
the
building
and
you
just
build
build
an
addition
or
build
another
story
or
but
there's
part
of
the
building
that
you're
keeping?
Basically
the
same
so
like
when
my
neighbors
wanted
to
do
a
redevelopment,
they
didn't
knock
down
their
entire
house.
They
just
knocked
down
half
of
it
and
added
on
rather
than
a
complete
deconstruction.
H
K
C
K
K
K
K
H
L
H
K
L
C
C
C
The
recommend
it's
recommendation.
Yes,
but
what
I
don't
remember
the
name
of
the
program,
the
the
deconstruction
right,
revise
the
deconstruction
program
to
ins
to
incentivize
deconstruction
rather
than
fee
paying,
or
I
don't
know
exactly
how
to
say
it.
But
I
think
that's
an
area
that
I
know
you're
very
interested
in
this
is
a
place
where
it
can
be
proposed
and,
if
approved,
you
know,
have
a
real
impact
on
a
very
large
area
of
town.
C
So
I
have
a
I'm
sorry.
I
have
a
follow-on
question
and
this
is
again
in
in
the
are
you
proposing,
as
you
make
something
priority
number
one
again.
I
have
r8
on
my
screen.
Are
you
proposing
r8
make
it
priority?
One?
Are
you
proposing
to
demote
any
any
other
item?
No
okay,
there's
a
whole
bunch
of
ones,
there's
a
whole
bunch
of
twos.
Just
I
don't
know
how
many
threes
there
are,
but
it's
just
it's
just
kind
of
like
all
of
these
kind
of
end
up
on
the
table.
C
Yeah,
I
I
can
I'm
happy
with
it.
I
can
support
that
as
well.
I
don't
want
to
lose
the
suggestion
that
ml
and
sarah
were
working
on
together
around
deconstruction,
because
I
think
holly
we
were
going
a
little
fast
there,
and
so
I
want
to
make
sure
you
have
a
chance
to
catch
up
cindy.
Are
you
back
we're
trying
to
get
I'm
back?
Oh,
it's!
Okay,
holly
and
I
are
working
together.
Okay,
so
what
part
was
of
our
eight?
Was
it
it's
under
the
recommendation
and
the
in
the
sort
of
first
sentence?
C
Right
now
it
says:
establish
an
adaptive,
reuse,
incentive
program
of
r8
yeah,
so
let's
let
them
copy
that
over
eight
holy.
Can
you
grab
that?
Because
you
have
the
plan
open
and
I
don't
know
it's
not
the
key?
No,
it's
it's!
The
very
first,
it's
right
after
program.
It's
the
name
of
the
recommendation.
It's
in
that
second
recommendation
column,
or
I
guess
that's
the
third
column
where
it
says,
establish
an
adaptive,
reuse,
incentive
program.
C
C
C
Holly,
this
would
be
after
the
word
program,
establish
an
adaptive,
reuse,
incentive
program
and
I've
got
it.
I'm
doing
work,
oh
gotcha,
okay,
cindy.
So
this
is
we
want
to
change
the
wording,
and
this
is
in
our
eight
yeah.
I'm
changing
the
wording
in
r8
recommendation.
C
So
what
you
have
right
there
right
now
is:
what's
in
it
and
after
program
ad
and
revise
the
deconstruction.
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
Oh,
I
think
I
I
think
I
find
the
new
language
so
establish
an
adaptive,
reuse,
incentive
program
and
incentivize
the
deconstruction
requirement.
C
C
Okay,
so
I
think
what
happens
it
is
what
that's,
what
happens
so
we're
trying
to
incentivize
that
they
meet
the
requirement.
Let's,
let's
keep
moving
here.
Are
there
any
other?
C
C
C
Thank
you,
yeah
and
I
I
support
what
ml
has
recommended.
C
Ella
has
her
hand
up.
Oh
yeah,
go
ahead,
helen
yeah!
Thank
you
yeah.
I
was
hoping
you
could
take
another
look
at
age.
10,
you
drafted
language,
but
if
you
look
at
the
table,
there's
several
columns
that
are
filled
in
for
each
of
these
and
you
haven't
done
that
for
h10.
It
just
would
fill
in
one
column.
Maybe
the
description.
C
C
C
Emergency
is
growing.
There
welcome
to
planning
board
just
fyi,
coffee,
coffee
and
iced.
Tea
are
essentials
in
this
gig
I
I'm
young
again.
I
can
party
all
night
good
for
you,
so
I
think
I
think
so
kathleen's
going
to
give
us
some
language
there
do
we
want
to
work
on
sarah's
last
one
in
parallel
and
then
come
back
to
this
one.
C
C
C
Well,
I
I
might,
I
guess
my
feeling
about
that
is
they're
gonna
come
back
to
us
anyway,
like
I,
I
don't
really
feel
like
well,
I
could
be
wrong,
but
this
is
a
this
is
guidance
and
they're
gonna
bring
back
to
us
whatever
they
bring
back
to
us
in
whatever
form
they
bring
it
back
to
us
whether
it's
as
a
far
or
use
or
some
other
you
know,
maybe
they
propose
additional
residential
units.
For
that
you
know
who
know
we
don't
know.
C
So
I'm
not
sure,
I'm
not
sure
what
the
added
value
of
at
putting
modeling
in
there
is
per
se,
because
there
once
this
passes
and
once
once
the
whole
plan
passes,
then
they
move
into
a
whole
new
stage
of
work.
And
you
know
things
are
just
going
to
keep
moving
forward.
So
I'm
not.
Maybe
you
can
explain
laura
what
what
you
think
the
modeling
will
accomplish,
because
they're
going
to
do
that,
anyways
they'll,
run
numbers
and
stuff
right
right.
C
Can
I
ask
a
question:
well,
laura
is
looking,
of
course,
sarah!
I'm
are
you
looking
to
create
tools
to
support
job
growth
project
projection?
C
No,
the
goal
here
is
to
to
let's
see
the
goal
here
is
to
remain
at
that
5
000
job
projection
in
the
destination
office
place
type
in
flatirons
office
park
and
to
and
that's
the
goal,
and
so
what
we
want
to
do
is
have
the
city,
the
staff
utilize,
the
tools
that
they
have
to
get
us
there
and
that's
the
that's
the
goal,
so
we
had
originally
suggested.
C
I
had
originally
suggested
focusing
on
the
far
because,
in
conversations
with
kathleen,
there
were
sort
of
two
tools
available
use,
table
and
uses
and
far,
but
I'm
happy
to
not
specify
a
tool
and
instead
leave
that
up
to
staff
to
address
the
concerns
that
you
and
john
brought
up
about
not
wanting
to
leave
massive
amounts
of
parking.
C
Although
I
think
for
a
lot
of
what
will
be
built
there,
there's
still
going
to
be
a
lot
of
parking
just
because
not
everybody
who
will
be
working
in
this
area
will
be
living
in
this
area.
They'll
still
be
coming
in
from
elsewhere,
some
will
still
be
coming
in
from
whatever,
but
but
I'm
wondering
about
the
word
support
and
if
there
might
be
a
better
word
to
meet
your
goal.