►
From YouTube: 12-6-22 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
A
A
We
have
some
general
guidelines
that
are
advisory
in
nature
to
share
with
all
of
our
meeting
participants,
this
evening
from
the
community,
as
well,
as
planning
board
and
city,
staff,,
and-
and
we
ask
that
all
remarks
and
testimony,
raised
tonight,
be
related,
to
city
business,.
We
will
not
allow
any
participant.
A
A
A
B
B
B
C
C
C
E
A
E
E
F
F
F
F
F
D
D
it's
very,
very
challenging..
I
have
been
in
the
position
of
trying
to
condense
long
meetings
into
summary
minutes,
and
I
think,
for
me,
the
most
important
concept
or
principle
is:
is
the
substance
conveyed
such
that?
If,
if
it
decision
maker
was
trying
to
understand
what
was
our
conversation,
what
did
we
care.
D
About,,
what
were
the
particular
points
that
people
made,
that
they
can
find
them
pretty
easily,,
because
I
think
I
think
lisa
is
right.
That
long
minutes
are
not
gonna
get
read,,
but
I
do
think
that
city
council
goes
back
and
looks
at
the
issues
that
they
that
are
controversial
or
that
they
particularly
care
about
or
that
they're
going
to.
D
Have
to
take
up
later.
some
of
the
members,
do
go
back
and
read
those
particular
portions
of
the
minutes,,
and
I
think
they're,
probably
not
gonna,
go
back
and
watch
the
video.
So
in
the
respect
that
the
purpose
of
the
minutes,
is
to
be
a
record
of
what
was
the
discussion
so
that
somebody
can
understand
it
without
having
to
watch
the.
B
G
H
H
H
H
And
updating
that
all
the
time
has
become
part
of
our
practice,,
also
across
all
of
the
boards,,
because
of
the
website
that
and
the
with
the
website,
was
just
redone,
in
the
last
year.
So
that
might
just
be
something
that
we
work,
on
with
communications,
and
all
the
uploads,
and
and
figuring
out
that
piece.
D
D
H
H
D
Okay.
that
that's
great.,
I
I
think
that
it
was
not
the
practice
in
the
past
and
going
back
even
to
meetings,
since
april
this
year,
they're
in
different
locations,,
like
the
the
separate
minutes,
not
just
within
the
packet,
but
the
separate
here's,
the
final
meeting,
summary.
Sometimes
it's
with
the
meeting
where
it
was.
B
B
B
A
I
I
I
J
J
J
J
J
J
B
K
K
K
K
Would
also
place
additional
costs
on
us
for
per
protecting
the
structure
from
whether
it's
and
construction
cost
increases
and
less
rental
income,
and
the
community
would
have
the
continued
loss
of
24
units,
of
much
needed
housing,.
Our
variance,
request
meets
all
the
city's,
requirements,
and
most.
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
B
B
M
M
M
M
B
M
If
they
didn't
approve
the
lumber.,
then
that
would
mean
there
would
be
another
round
of
that.
The
flood
plane
lines
may
change
again,.
I
think,
in
this
particular
location,,
so
in
the
in
the
lower,
model,.
This
whole
stretch
of
wonderland
creek,
where
the
issue,
is
in
the
technical
lower
model,
is
down
by
foothills
parkway.
So.
M
B
Okay.
well,,
thank
you.
I
see
there
couple
of
other
folks
with
questions.
to
ml..
Maybe
you
have
8.
oh,.
Sorry,
I
was
gonna
just
call.
You
have
aj
unmuted
and
kim
got
it.
Thank
you.,
john
yeah,.
My
questions
were
a
along
that
same
that
same
line
of
thinking.,
and
so
what
I'm
understanding
you
to
say,
is.
If
the
lumber
is
it's
for
some
reason,,
the
lower
is
not
approved.
The
flood
boundaries
would
have
been
changed.
Anyway.
right.
M
No,
that
that
what
we're
waiting
on
is
the
final
approval
to
to
change
the
lines
on
a
map.
So
so
what
I'm
saying
is
that
the
all
the
work
has
been
completed,
and
where
the
the
issue,
that
fema
is
having
is
further
downstream.
So
it
might
slightly
alter,
some
of
the
boundaries
at
that
location,,
but
very.
M
Likely
not
further
upstream,
where
this
oh,,
so
they
could
approve
what
they've
already
so
signed
off
on,
and
continue
to
handle
the
rest
of
the
stuff.
okay.
so
that
that
was
one
of
my
questions..
I
have
a
second
question,
and
I'm
not
sure
that
this,
is
that
this
is
for
you
or
not,,
but
in
some
of
the
other
bullets
that
were
in
the
information.
N
M
M
M
M
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
B
C
B
B
B
B
E
John
there's
something
like
33
people
who
might
want
to
speak
to
this,
so
I
was
gonna
suggest
that
maybe
we
limit
everything
to
everyone,
to
2,
min.,
so
that
we
are
not
here
for
2,
h
and
they're,
not
here
for
2
h.
and
if
we
decide
that
now
people
can
edit
their
comments
to
fit
the
2
min..
I
don't
know
how
people
feel
about
that.
B
P
P
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Criteria,
and
again,,
no
formal
action,,
like
an
approval
or
a
denial,,
is
being
taken
tonight
on
the
project,.
It's
just
do
identify
those
key
issues
and
concerns
and
provide
that
guidance
and
feedback
to
the
applicant.
So
written
notice
was
provided
consistent
with
the
land
use.
Code,
and
notice
was
posted
on
the.
Q
Property,
the
applicant
also
held
a
virtual
neighborhood
meeting
on
november
ninth,
at
about
which
20
community
members,
attended.
A
summary
of
all
the
feedback
provided,
at
the
neighborhood
meeting
and
through
written
comments
received,
is
included,
in
the
memo
and
attachments,.
Some
of
the
major
concerns
and.
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
These
are
proposed
to
be
located
on
individual
fee,,
simple
lots..
The
unit
sizes
would
range
from
about
a
1,000
to
1,800
square,
feet
of
space
per
year,.
The
lots
based
primarily
on
to
propose
private
streets,,
while
some
homes
also
face
on
to
existing
roadways,.
The
dwellings
have
a
compact
form
with
minimal
internal
setbacks,
and
they.
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
And
the
streets
wouldn't
meet
the
city's
typical
street,
section,
and
the
provision
of
private
streets,
also
places
the
future
financial
obligations
for
repair
and
maintenance
of
those
streets,
on
the
future.
Residence
of
the
neighborhood.
The
staff
is
generally
looking
for
typical
street
section
with
the
t.
Q
Q
Time,
the
site,
review..
These
are
things
that
include
the
relationship
of
the
proposal
to
the
various
adjacencies
on
the
different
sides
of
the
site,
and
support
for
a
strong
design
presence,
along
the
community
edges
since
it,
serves,
as
an
entryway,
into
the
city.
We
would
want
to
look
at
the
proposed
alignment.
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
E
E
Q
C
C
P
That's
that's
correct
planning
to
plan
reserve
as
area
3.
I
think
I
read,
and
I
could
be
wrong,.
I
could
be
miserable,,
but
I
think
I
read
that
area
3
contains
both
the
planning
reserve
and
also
some
areas
that
are
designated,,
that
we
want
to
preserve
as
rural
agricultural
and
both
of
those
things.
D
N
N
N
Q
Okay.
so
there's
the
the
typical
one
that
everyone
thinks
of.
That's
the
I
don't
know
the
correct
term
for
that,,
the
the
lower
to
mid
income
houses,
and
then
there's,
the
middle
income,,
which
is
a
new
tier
that
was
recently
established,.
So
those
are
one
where
we
don't
have
a
lot
of
those
in
the
city
yet,,
and
so
there
is
a
focus
on
bringing
those
middle
incoming.
N
N
N
N
N
Q
Right.
yeah,,
so
I
think
those
I
don't
know
that
those
are
regulatory
in
terms
of
the
descriptions
of
the
of
the
land
use
designations
themselves.
I
think,
through
the
annexation
process
is
where
we
would
provide
and
and
agreement
that
would
take
place
with
the
appointment
in
terms
of
the
amount
of
affordable.
N
T
T
T
T
T
T
N
N
N
T
T
T
C
Okay.
I'm
glad
michelle
and
I
see
housing.
People
kurt
are
on
the
line.
tonight,.
So
my
my
first
question
is
when,
in
what
year
did
we
establish
our
middle
income,
housing
goal,
and
which
is
2,500
middle
income,
market
rate,
units
by
twenty-thirty
and
a
1,000,
permanently
deed,
restricted
middle
income,
housing,
units,
by
twenty-thirty?
What
year.
T
C
C
Q
O
O
C
C
Q
D
D
Q
D
C
C
C
P
P
D
D
D
Q
Q
So
I
think,
when
we
get
this
in
per
site
review,.
We
would
want
to
kind
of
determine
all
of
the
information
about
that
and
make
sure
that
we're
looking
closely
with
the
folks
that
boulder
count
agri
transportation
so
that
we
are
all
on
the
same
page,
all
of
the
information
related
to
that
access.
Road.
D
Q
D
D
Q
P
D
D
The
city,
own
that
land
or
is
that
county
land,
or
is
that
privately
owned,
like
what's,
the
ownership
of
the
planning
reserve.
There
is
a
combination
of
ownership,
the
city
owns,,
a
sizable
piece.,
I
think
of
what
it
is..
That's
considered
the
planning
reserve.,
but
I
don't
know
that
we
own
all
of
it,,
but
that's
something
else
that
I
can
verify
as
I'm
doing.
some
research
here
on
my
map.
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
T
D
D
D
Rental
product
am.,
I
understanding
that
correctly
yeah,
yeah,.
I
would
say,
it's
a
number
of
fat,
factors.
back..
When
you
know,
20
years,
ago,
we,.
We
occasionally
have
some
annexations.
that
did
60%..
It
was
difficult,,
but
they
managed
to
do
it,,
but
now
the
cost
of
construction,,
the
cost
of
land,
the
cost
of
utilities,.
All
of
this
costs
are
are
going
up
so
high
that
what
we
found,
is
that
it's,
just
not
possible
to
to
hit
those
higher
numbers.
We
did
one
of
the.
T
T
D
D
P
P
D
D
T
D
But
you
know
my
understanding
from
previous
discussions
is
that
the
best
practice
when
you
are
going
from
an
area
of
lower
density,
to
higher
density,
is
that
there's
some
kind
of
transition
area
and
it's,?
Usually
the
responsibility
or
the
burden
of
the
higher
deity
developing
parcel
to
provide
that.
D
And
so
my
questions
for
staff,
are..
Can
you
talk
about?
Is
this
the
best
practice
in
planning
a
mini,
understanding,
that
correctly
and
and
if
so,
why
do
you,
view
this
particular
proposal
as
providing
adequate
transitions,
between
low
density,
and
high
density.?
You
know,,
I
think,
baby,
I
can
speak
to
the
former..
Maybe
shannon
can
talk
about
specifically
the
issues
that
we've
identified
with
the
transitions,
so
it's
absolutely
a
best,
practice..
I
think
it's
something
that's
reflected
throughout.
You
know
the
account
plan
design,
guidelines,
throughout
town
area,
plans
throughout
town.
D
I
think
it
is
a
thoughtful
planning
construct
to
manage
the
transition
between
higher
density
uses
and
lower
density
uses.,
and
I
really
think
you
know
very
simply
the
reason
behind
that
is
to
help
manage
impacts..
You
know
both
visually,
whether
it
be
buildings
that
are
higher
in
height..
We
have
a
different
scale,,
you
know
and
then
just
kind
of
the
quality
of
life
impact.
so
always
light.
You
wanna
make
sure
that
parking
garages
aren't
shining
into
people's
homes.
and
you
know
those
sorts
of
things..
D
So
I
think
the
answer
to
the
first
part
of
the
question:
is,
yes,.
It's
absolutely
a
a
best
practice,
and
it's
a
construct
that
again
is
reflected
in
a
number
of
our
guidelines.
throughout
the
city,
so
and
something
else
that
I
think
also
as
reflected
in
a
site
review,
criteria
that
ultimately
the
applicant
is
going
to
have
to
demonstrate
consistency,
web.
D
P
Q
Q
B
E
E
On
planning
board,
and
what
would
happen?
does
that?
Does
that
agreement
with
a
third
party
developer
have
to
be
in
place
before
a
site
review
can
be
approved,
and
then
it
says,.
If
there
isn't
a
third
party
agreement,
the
affordable
home
should
be
integrated
into
distributed
throughout
the
project,
which.
T
T
T
Okay.-
development.-
there
are
those
affordable
units
are
not
going
to
be
produced
by
sars,
regis,,
the
developer
of
the
market,
united
states.
They
brought
in
a
second
developer,,
so
that
was
very
typical.
We
see
that
a
lot,
so
in
this
case
that's
sort
of
what
the
developer
is
talking
about,
doing
that
they.
T
Wouldn't
produce
them
themselves,
that
they
would
try
the
land,
the
utilities,,
and
then
they
have
an
agreement
between
them
on
the
cost,
but
ultimately,.
It's
the
market
developers
responsibility
to
get
them,
built,
but
they
do
anticipate
bringing
in
a
third
party,
developer.
But
that
might
not
happen.
I
mean.
T
T
If
they
did
produce
them
themselves,,
we
would
probably
ask
that
they
distribute
them
differently,.
So
when
they're
aggregated,,
it's
basically
has
to
do
with
the
timing
of
the
2
construction.
Projects,
one
is
a
market,
the
construction,
project,
the
other,
is
the
affordable,
and
so
it
works
better
to
have
them.
T
T
Of
them
initially
and
then
the
city,,
our
home
ownership,
department,
monitors
all
of
the
resales
over
time,.
So
then
it
goes
into
private
ownership,
and
then
that
then,
to
another
private
owner,,
another
private
owner,,
you
know,
their
condos,,
essentially
their
their
like
a
condo,
think,
of
them
that
way,
yeah.
E
E
E
Q
B
T
Sure.
yeah,.
I
would
like
to
answer
mark's
question,
if,
if
that,
if
this
is
a
good
time
for
that,,
so
market,
as
and
probably
planning
board,
is
aware
that
we
haven't
made
a
huge
progress
toward
the
middle
income.
Goal,
we've
added
36
middle
income
units,,
since
the
goal,
was
adopted,
and
there
are
another
30,
or
so
in
the
in
the
pipeline.
That
will
be
coming
down,.
T
We
have
done,,
we
have
gone
into
purchasing
some
condos
deed,
restricting
them,
and
then
reselling
them.,
that's
portable
to
middle
income,,
but
you
know
not
producing
huge
numbers.,
and
so
we
had
a
long
conversation
with
council
about
the
challenges
around
producing
middle
income
housing
at
our
study,
session
last
month,
and
one
of
the
things
that
we
will
be
going
forward
with
we're
going
to
do
an
update,
to
the
inclusionary
housing.
Program,
we've
already
started
it
and
we'll
come
back
to
you,,
guys
at
mid,
mid
2,023.
T
C
T
T
C
C
B
B
B
Q
Q
B
Q
Q
Q
Q
P
Yeah,
at
the
time
of
site,
review.
john,
they'll
be
required
to
provide
a
detailed
traffic
study,
as
opposed
to
just
a
kind
of
generic
trips,
analysis,
that
we
get
at
the
concept
plan
phase.
So
they
would
have
to
demonstrate
to
us
that
you
know,
the
intersection,
was
going
to
be
functional
and
safe.
V
B
V
W
W
W
W
B
W
Director,
I
habitat,
at
28,,
o
one,
j.
road.,
there's
an
opportunity
to
achieve
some
of
the
city's
most
primary
housing
goals,.
This
site
is
one
of
the
largest
of
the
few
area,
2
sides,
left
and
boulder
in
in
2,000,
and
16.
I
submitted
a
plan
for
rental
apartments,
at
this
site,,
including
mostly
smaller
units.,.
W
W
A
viable
project.
forward,,
I
heard
repeatedly
that
for
sale,
middle
income,
homes,,
specifically
home,
suitable
for
families,
is
the
housing
type
that
is
most
desperately
needed
in
bolder.
Based
on
these
conversations,,
we
created
a
plan
that
would
work
from
a
development
perspective
and
bring
community
benefit
to
boulder
by.
W
W
W
W
Something,
we
can
only
do
the
streets
remain
private,,
most
importantly,.
It
allows
each
homeowner
to
own,
the
land,
under
their
unit
and
with
party
wall
agreements,.
A
homeowner's
association
can
govern
our
approach,
keeps,
monthly
fees,
and
costs
much
lower
with
than
a
con
than
with
a
condominium.
W
W
W
If
you
reduce
the
density,
I
suggested
by
staff,
the
impact
on
massing,
and
the
experience
of
the
neighborhood,
for
those
living
nearby
or
passing
by
will
be
men.
The
impact
on
the
quality
of
the
community,
and
those
who
live
there
will
be
great.
I
hope
you
will
carefully
consider
this
opportunity
to
make
such.
V
V
V
Just
running
through
the
overall
site,
metrics
in
terms
of
how
access
and
open
space
are
handled.,
obviously
28,
and
j
primary,
circulation,
as
we've
discussed
primary
access
point,
along
the
access
easement
on
the
east
of
the
property.
The
our
proposal
for
fire
accessing
a
loop
road
around
the
interior,
and
because
we've
tried
to
use
smaller
scales,
streets,
on
the.
V
V
In
in
orange,
is
the
multi-use
path
connecting
the
corner
of
20,
eighth,
and
j.
with
the
future
open
space
in
the
reserve
and
park.
That's
slated
in
the
comprehensive
plan,
the
park
parking
is
going
to
be
illustrated
in
red
and
as
discussed
before,
we
have
these
small
scale,
streets,,
which
we
are
trying
to
develop
in
lieu
of
a
parking
lot.
V
V
V
V
V
If
we
go
with
a
lower
density,,
the
feasibility
of
the
project
will
drive
larger
market
rate
units,,
which
is
definitely
gonna,
substantially
change
the
character
of
the
neighborhood,
without
necessarily
changing
the
relationship
with
the
surrounding,
area
significantly.
So
that's
one
of
the
drivers
that
really
we
feel
works,
for.
V
As
we
could
on
site
and
create
a
unified
community
in
the
process,
open
space
is
a
question,.
Obviously,
one
of
our
focus
on
the
open
space
that
we
provided
in
the
center
of
the
property
is
to
make
room
for
active
use,
community
gardens,,
outdoor
dining
and
play
areas
integrated
into
that
component.
It's.
V
Also
a
situated
in
relationship
to
a
central,
pedestrian
spine,,
and
this
is
a
view
looking
back,
showing
how
these
areas
connect
the
the
market
rate
and
middle
income
portions
of
the
project,
really
to
create
a
gathering
space
where
the
the
common
community
can
can
meet
together,.
This
is
a
real
world.
V
V
V
Another
example,
of
a
compact,
open
space
integrated
in
the
rosewood
neighborhood
in
north
pole,,
integrated
in
this
case
with
the
water
management,.
The
perimeter
of
the
project
open
space
is
very,
is
very
important
as
well,.
This
is
private,
open,
space,
this
this
this
alludes,
to
the
relationship
between
the.
V
V
V
V
Is
what
we
want
to
do.,
thus
the
town,
home,
approach?
This
is
just
a
good
example
of
how
those
type
of
units
might
relate
to
some
of
the
common
open
space
areas
around
project
perimeter,
the
other,,
the
other
piece
that
we
agree,
is
a
challenge
is
parking
access
from
the
street.
We
feel,
like
this
is
integral
to.
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
B
D
W
Those
are
van
accessible
units,
they're
designed
under
the
nancy
code,,
to
be
able
to
accommodate
a
van
for
someone
who
may
be
in
a
wheelchair,
or
something
like
that
great
thank
you..
I
was
wondering
if
that's
what
those
were..
I
really
appreciate
that
you
called
out
that
this
development
would
include
2
of
those
van
accessible
units
for
folks
who
have
mobility
challenges..
I
think
that's
a
wonderful
addition
to
any
community
in
your
description
of
those
units..
W
V
V
V
Well,
for
for
that
that
demographic
great,,
that
sounds
like
a
very
thoughtful
design
for
that
product..
Thank
you
and
am
I
understanding
correctly,
that
the
primary
open
spaces
are,
you
know.
on
on
this
diagram
in
the
like,
second
to
last
row
from
the
bottom,
and
third,
to
last
row
from
the
bottom.
and
those
are
your
those
portions
in
the
middle,?
That's
what
you
showed
the
renderings
of
is
those
particular
open
spaces
that
are
in
those
second
to
last
and
third,
to
last
rows
from
the
bottom.
You
know.
V
V
V
V
V
D
D
V
V
V
I
think
that
it's
also
it
works
in
both
directions.
right..
It's
when
people.
wh..
When
people
observe
the
project,
when
they're
driving
by
or
people
within
the
project.
Looking
out,,
we
want
to
make
sure
those
spaces
work
for
everybody,
okay,,
so
you're
not
planning
any
kind
of
screening,
from
28
than
j.
road
between
the
open
space
and
the
road.
there's
no
like
tree,,
lawn,
or
kind
of
screening,
elements.
V
V
V
V
V
V
Getting
further
away,
from
the
intersection
still
quieter,
and
this
will
be
more
developed
as
a
as
an
area
for
maybe,,
some
sort
of
outdoor,
recreation,,
connectic,
area,
etc.,
or
some
seating
area,
yeah,.
We
will
examine
each
one,
of
these,
carefully
okay,
thank
you,.
That's
that
very
clarifying.
Thank
you.
D
W
D
W
Okay,,
thank
you
and
that
actually
connects
to
my
my
next
question,.
You
know
some
of
the
people
who
wrote
to
us
and
commented
from
the
public.
asked.
you
know,
could
other
accesses
be
considered
rather
than
something
that
connects
to
j.
wrote,.
I
think
one
person
suggested,
did
you
consider
a
direct
access
out,
on
to
20,
eighth
street,,
maybe
with
a
new
traffic
light,
we're
any
other
traffic,
patterns
considered
or
access
patterns
considered.
D
W
W
W
D
Correct
correct
road
that
goes
to
the
church,
parking
lot,
and
that,
and
that
would
be
closed
in
this
proposal-
is
that
okay.
okay.
correct,
yeah,?
What
is
on
j
road.
now,
yes,
yeah,,
so
we
are
only
accessing
the
site
from
j
road
today,
is
all
I'm
saying.
gotcha,
thank
you,.
Thank
you.
A
a
question
that
came
up
when
I
was
talking
with
staff,
with
michelle
allen.
W
I
had
asked.,
you
know
what
happens
if
the
staff
proposal
were
to
hold
sway
and
you
had
64
units
maximum,,
because
the
site
were
had
a
land
use
of
mr.
and
if
that
were
to
happen,
and
you
and
you
had
to
reduce
down
to
64
units,
michelle's
thought
was
that
that
might
be
make
it
prohibitive
to
do
for
sale,
housing
and
you
might
have
to
go
back
to
a
rental
housing
product.
But
she
said
that
you
should
weigh
in
on
that
as
the
appointment
like
what.
What
is
your
thought
on
what
implications??
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
B
Okay,
great.,
thank
you
very
much.,
thanks,
john,,
so
my
my
questions
are
interrelated.
I'll
begin
with
the
private
street
question,
boulder
county,
has
a
history
of
misunderstanding
between
subdivisions
who
owns
the
streets,,
who
maintains
the
streets,
and
that
all
came
to
a
wicked
head,
not
that
long,
ago,
and
and
it's
still
even
a
containious
issue
today,.
So
my
my
concern
is
that
private
streets
are
problematic.
in
the
distant
future,
when
streets
are
falling
apart..
So
my
question
to
you:
is,:
are
you
proposing
private
streets
solely
to
fulfill
the
parking,
requirements.
C
W
W
W
W
In
this
case,,
every
homeowner
would
maintain
their
own
unit
unless
there
was
an
issue
with
the
carding
ball,,
their
own
facade,,
their
own,,
because
they
would
own
the
fee,
simple
under
their
unit,.
So
the
burden
of
those
fees
would
leave
the
association
in
that
regard
and
we
believe
free
up
the
resources
to
take
care
of.
C
O
V
But
it
functions,
this
lane
functions
to
really
provide,.
If
you
think
about
what
you
see
in
higher
density
situations
in
older
east
coast
cities
or
in
europe,,
it
allows
us
to
be
creative
in
a
way.
That's
proven
to
be
effective.
You
know,
give
give
giving
you
smaller
scale,
rights,
of
way,,
but
the.
V
V
V
Alternative,
that's
always
been
pointed
out
when
we've
tried.,
this
approach
is
like,
well,.
Why
don't
you
just
make
that
one
way
street,
a
pedestrian
way,?
And
you
see
that
and
it
that's
not
necessarily
something
that
hasn't
been
done,
successfully,
but
then
somewhere
else
you
have
to
have
a
parking.
C
C
W
W
W
A
C
W
W
About
some
of
these
smaller
spaces
at
the
perimeter-
and
I
would
agree
that
we
could,
you
know,
lose
another
unit,
or
2,,
and
and
and
and
enlarge
the
existing
central
space
and
probably
still
make
this
project
work,
and
and
we
just
started
here,.
In
fact,
we
didn't
have
that
central,
space
that
you.
N
N
N
W
W
W
W
W
Right.
the
bill
here.
right,,
okay,
well,,
so
my
my
comment
about
you
know
the
intention
of
what
you're
wanting
to
do
here
in
the
holistic
approach
to
it
down
many
layers
of
of
planning.
Thinking.
Is,
is
really
very
appealing
what
I
think,
what
challenges
what
I
find
challenging
about.
This
is
the
plan.
B
B
B
W
B
B
W
B
B
W
W
We
would
have
an
agreement
between
us,
and
if
something
broke
in
that
common
wall,,
the
agreement
would
dictate
how
we
shared
the
repair
costs
of
that
okay,
and
then
the
the
land.
Underneath
your
unit
would
go
with
your
unit,
just
like,
the
parking
space,.
You
would
have
that.
That
would
be
yours,
and
you.
W
W
W
W
B
D
D
D
D
P
D
W
W
D
D
B
We
have
another,
very
significant
item,
that
I
think
deserves,
our
thoughtful
attention
and
discussion,
and
public
comment.
and
it
doesn't
seem
like,
we're
going
to
be
done
with
this,
item,
before
10
pm
at
anywhere
near
because
we
saw
public
comment
and
discussion
you're,
not
alone
in
that
concern..
I
I
think,
that
what
we'll
do.
is.
We
should
do
a
take
a
little
thumbs,
up
thumbs
down
test,
and
see
who
is
interested
in
deferring
the
next
public
hearing
to
later
on.
D
B
G
D
B
A
So
just
want
to
remind
everybody
that
the
board
agreed
for
2
min.
per
person.
and
I'll
just
add
john,
that
january.
third,
should
work
for
me..
I
think
we
have
some
pretty
packages,,
but
if
something
unexpectedly
ends
up
moving
and
we
can
clear
january,
third,,
I
would
also
appreciate
that,
but
I
know
we
may
not
be
able
to
so
we'll
what
here
to
that
and
I
see
a
few
hands
popping
up.
A
Y
Y
Y
Y
Of
the
city,
development
of
the
property
should
be
done
as
part
of
a
larger
plan,,
and
although
I
did
hear
the
applicant
indicate
that
there's,
a
recognition
that
they'll
have
to
do
some
work
on
jay
road.
There
was
nothing
about
the
plan
that
they
submitted
that
took
that
lower
acreage
into
account.
Y
And
so,
given
the
comments
that
have
been
made
tonight
about
the
need
to
in
order
to
make
this
an
economical
project.,
you
need
this
density..
I
think
these
2
things,
just
collide,
in
such
a
horrific
way
that
it
really
needs
to
be
taken
into
account.
Seriously,-
and
I
am
I
want
to
be
clear
too-
I'm
not
a
post,
to
a
high
identity.
Y
Project,
here,,
but
it
needs
to
take
care
of
the
impacts.
that
we'll
have
on
j
road
and
the
safety,
and
one
reason,,
the
buses
and
everything
aren't
used.
Here,
is
because
it
is
so
unsafe
to
get
on
and
off
the
bus,,
and
especially
on
the
other
side,
of
the
road
that
isn't
part
of
the
city,
and
you
guys
have
no
control
over.
Thank
you.
Y
Z
I've
seen
a
lot
of
changes
in
the
community
and
not
all
of
them.
do..
I
approve
of,.
However,
I
am
in
support
of
this
proposal,
and
the
one
that
now
has
been
moved
on
glenwood
place,
but
I've
been
doing
a
lot
of
social
justice
work
in
this
all
the
years,
that
I've
been
in
and
the
possibility
of
changing
zoning
so
that
more
affordable
units
can.
Z
Z
Z
Z
A
I
Hi,
my
name
is
aj.
grant
hello,
planning,
board
and
staff
thanks
for
all
your
work.
first
of
all,,
I
think
the
greatest
challenge
to
us
all
is
and
the
planning
board
and
the
city
staff,
and
the
developer
is
actually
to
figure
out
how
to
develop,,
boulder,
and
grow,,
without
sacrificing
the
very
character
of
both
and
roll
boulder
that
drew
us,
all
here
in
the
first
place.
Unfortunately,
that's.
I
I
I
I
I
AA
AA
AA
AA
AA
AA
AA
AA
A
AB
AB
AB
AB
AC
AC
Dictionary,
defines,
rural,
as
quote
of
or
relating
to
the
country,,
country,,
people,
or
life,
or
agriculture,
end
quote.
This
project
is
completely
incongruous
with
the
surrounding
rural
residential
area.
With
respect
to
density
and
for
example,
I
can't
think
of
a
single
three-story
building,
in
the
survey.
AC
AC
AC
AC
AC
AC
A
AD
AD
AD
AD
Focus
on
how
to
optimize
housing,
utility
and
shared
spaces
for
future
residents,,
please
work
with
city
staff
and
the
applicant,
to
minimize
the
space
devoted
to
parking
and
paved
rights,
of
way
and
allocate,
open
space,
within
the
development
in
ways
that
will
enhance
community
life.
The
shared
space
at
the
center.
AD
AD
AD
AE
AE
AE
AE
AE
AE
AE
AF
Can
you
hear
me
now
thank
you!
oh,
good
evening.?
My
name
is
wiley
hodson,
our
family
lives
at
2,,
8,,
2,,
3.
j.
road,,
so
we've
been
here
before
during
the
previous
attempt.
This
developer
made
up
zones,
property
and
the
rationale,
then
for
why
it
should
not
be
developed,
as
for
post
still
applies
today,
the
requested
mxr
land
use
absolutely
does
not
conform
with
the
surrounding
neighborhood,,
and
we
do
appreciate.
AF
AF
AF
The
city
has
singled
that
is
going
to
move
forward
with
its
service,
study
as
a
first
step
to
opening
up
the
planning
reserve
and
the
upcoming
boulder
valley,
compound,
update,.
So
from
a
planning
perspective,
it
doesn't
make
sense,
to
push
approval
of
this
proposed
development
just
prior
to
the
start.
The.
AF
You'll
end
up
with
a
poorly
planned
housing
project
that
creates
traffic
and
safety
issues
that
are
mentioned
and
really
lacks
conformity
with
the
surrounding
area,.
The
worst
case
is
that
now
you
set
the
precedent
for
what
they're
planning
reserve
is
going
to
become
and
doing
so.
The
risk
of
burning.
AF
AF
AF
Now
have
a
new
tenant
at
the
church
on
the
property,
city.
Church
has
made
improvements
to
the
property,
and
overall
they've
been
a
really
good
neighbor,.
So,
let's
not
forget
about
the
impact
this
development
will
have
on
them.
Thank
you
thank
you,
wiley..
Next
up
we
have,
greg
schwartzer,,
followed
by
adrienne.
fine
greg,.
Please
go
ahead.
AG
AG
AG
AG
AG
AG
AG
A
A
AH
Meet
their
middle
income,
housing
goals,
which,
as
described
earlier,
we're
having
some
trouble
meeting.
The
staff
report
really
robust,
appreciate
that
2
issues,
I
saw
raised
there
so
one
on
the
annexation
of
change
of
land
use
doesn't,.
I
would
just
suggest
at
some
point,
like
if
you
want
the
housing.
Those
are
things
you.
AH
AH
I
would
say
yes
to
the
west,,
as
some
people
have
mentioned,
the
holiday
neighborhood
less,
so
to
the
east,
towards
my
neighborhood,
of
orange
orchard,
and
that
actually
seems
like
a
fair
compromise.
The
applicant
is
asking
for
density
similar
to
north
broadway,
in
the
holiday
neighborhood.
The
project
massing
is
sensibly.
AH
Designed
to
put
the
density
away
from
other
uses.-
and
I
would
also
suggest
compatibility.-
does
not
mean
the
same-
there's
actually
kind
of
stepping
back,
stepping
up
all
that
kind
of
good
stuff,
few
other
comments,
cafe.
I
would
love
that
reduce
me
driving
into
town
for
coffee,
a
number,
of
folks
have
mentioned
j,
road,
and
28.
I
would.
A
AI
AI
I
don't
know
how
it's
tenable
to
have
that
many
cars,
as
the
developer
said..
It's
a
working
community,
come
out,
a
rush
hour
in
a
short
distance,,
with
one
lane
road,
with
a
right
turn:
off,
there,,
a
bus,
stop
and
a
bike,
lane,
and
bikers
going
from
from
east,
to
west,
and
then
making
a
right,
there,
or
going
left,
or
going,
straight
there,
have
been
bike.
AI
AI
Day,
dream,
rush,
hour
and
see
what
that
intersection
looks
like
and
experience,
the
traffic
there,
and
then
decide
whether
you
think,
you
can
have
high
density,
housing.
At
that
point,
as
many
of
the
other
people
said,
as
a
planning
board,
we've
lived
around
the
country,
in
a
lot,
of
different
places.
We
need
to.
A
X
X
X
X
Now,,
just
so
in
summary,,
I
just
don't
think
it's
a
good
idea,
I'm
I'm
a
more
elaborate.
yeah,,
that's
great,
maybe
in
my
letter.,
but
please
shove.
This
thing,
make
it
a
comprehensive
plan,
where
all
of
boulder,
valley
compound,,
with
the
planning
of
3
reserve,
in
a
couple
years,
and
then
let's
talk
about
what
would
be
appropriate
for
this
property
in
the
future.
Thank
you
for
your
time,.
Have
a.
X
AJ
A
S
S
Criteria?,
which
is
what
a
concept
review
points
to
that,
makes
a
criterion
that
you
can
take
a
property
in
area
2,
and
treat
it
as
though,
or
in
the
planning
reserve,
where
development
can
only
be
considered
once
every
10
years.
I
think
you's
really
important
that
we
get
this
housing
and
get
it
online.
S
S
AK
AK
AK
AK
R
R
This
evening,
a
couple
of
things
that
haven't
been
addressed
so
far.
there's
a
lot
of
traffic
at
this
intersection,.
That's
already
been
mentioned,,
but
there's
also
been
a
lot
of
wildfires
up
to
the
north
and
west
of
boler,.
Recently,
in
the
last
several
years,
j
road
and
highway
36,.
That
intersection,
is
one
of
the.
R
R
R
I
understand
that
we
need
more
housing
and
boulder.,
but
this
is
not
the
spot
to
do
that
once
you
bring
it
utilities
across,
highway,
36
to
the
north,
and
east,,
an
entire
area
from
jay
road,.
All
the
way
to
the
open
space
to
the
north,
about
2
miles
worth
is
going
to
be
developed,
and
I
don't
think
that's,
what
we
want.
A
AL
AL
AL
AL
AL
And
any
disruption
of
the
ground
with
would
be
the
underground
or
their
parking,.
The
putting
in
the
underground
parking
and
stuff,
I
mean
water
table
in
some
areas
is
maybe
only
less
than
10
feet,
maybe
sometimes
5
feet,
from
the
ground,
so
disruption,
of
that
water
did
affect
a
lot
of
wells
in
the.
AL
A
B
B
Are
there
any
additional
questions
for
staff
or
applicant,
laura
yeah,,
just
a
couple.
thank
you.
I'll
try
to
be
quick.,
I
wanted
to
ask
charles,.
Did
we
have
an
answer
on
the
holiday
density.?
Were
you
able
to
work
on
that
okay.?
Thank
you.
We'll
come
back
to
that..
I
did
also
want
to
ask..
I
did
ask
the
applicant
about
this,,
but
I
wanted
to
give
staff
a
chance
to
respond
as
well.
D
Q
Yeah,,
we
don't
have
any
transportation
staff
here
with
us
tonight..
I
can
try
to
address
the
question.
We
would
be
looking
for
the
city's
minimum
access
spacing
requirements
to
be
met
and
for
turning
to
do
that.
So
that's
my
understanding
of
how,
when
the
city
reviewed
it
the
right
in
right,
out,
in
the
location,
let's,
look
at
so
we.
Q
Didn't
review
alternative
placements
to
that.?
I
think
we
kind
of
looked
at
what
was
propose
and
kind
of
review
that
again.
thank
you.,
shannon
and
I'm
seeing
some
public
comment
in
the
q.
a
that
people
were
not
able
to
hear
that
some
of
the
the
folks
on
the
line
were
not
able
to
hear
you..
It
sounds
like,.
Maybe
there's
a
microphone
issue..
I
don't
know.
If
shannon
either
you
could
repeat
it
or
if
someone
else
could
repeat
it.
so
that
folks
on
the
line
could
hear.
Q
Q
So
we
didn't,,
we
didn't
attempt
to
evaluate
like
alternative
locations
for
that
access
point..
They
really
just
looked
at
what
was
proposed
in
it.
okay..
Thank
you.
It's
good
to
know,
and
then
I
we've
had
a
lot
of
people
question..
How
could
this
be
approved?
given?,
the
current
bbcp
land
use
that
it
limits
it
to
4
units
in
in
this
particular
zoning
and
land
use.
Q
Q
Q
Q
If
it
were
to
apply
for
annexation,
and
the
benefits,
that
the
city
would
see
out
of
that,,
particularly
in
terms
of
the
orbital
housing
piece,
that
many
folks
have
mentioned,
be
one
of
those
key
items
that
would
come
into
play
so,.
So
this
is
a
piece
of
so,
if
I'm
understanding
correctly,.
This
is
a
piece
that
has
been
designated..
I
think,
since
the
seventys
or
eightys
as
appropriate
for
annexation
area
to,
and
it's
anticipated
that
at
the
time
of
annexation,
that
land,
use
zoning
would
excuse
me
not
the
land
use.
Q
The
zoning
would
change,
allow
the
only
reason
why,
the
city
would
I'm
still
digging,,
but
I'm
close
annex
it
is,
if
we
receive
a
benefit
to
our
housing
stock.,
so
annexing
a
rural
residential
property
with
no
change
of
zoning
is
not
something..
We'd
be
likely
to
do.
Is
that
correct?
That's
correct.
N
B
B
Well,,
so
just
so
you
know
what
we
did
was
we
took
that
first
question,
and
we
broke
it
into
2.
parts..
The
first
question
that
was
in
the
memo
we
broke
it
into
the
land,
use
designation,
part,
and
then
the
zoning
part
just
so
that
we
could
have
full
robust
discussion
about
each
each
of
the
they'd
combine
2
questions
which
are
probably
better
separated.
So
the
first
question
is
specifically,
about
the
land
use
designation.
D
B
D
D
E
E
E
F
F
F
D
B
B
B
B
D
I'll
agree
with
sarah,,
I
think
staff
and
the
applicant
have
both
requested
this
zoning,
and
and
so,
and
this
is
allows
for
a
very
wide
range
of
housing,
types
and
densities.
So
I
think
a
very
good
project
could
be
made,
with
rmx
2
and
it
is
consistent
with
the
goals
generally.
I
will
often
defer
to
staff.,
so
I
certainly
take
their
recommendation,
seriously.
so
yeah,
I'll
I'll,
say
I'm
somewhere
kind
of
in
the
middle,,
which
perhaps
isn't
super,
helpful,,
but
it's
concept
plan
so.
F
F
B
B
B
B
B
N
N
N
N
N
N
B
E
E
E
N
N
N
N
B
D
D
Stay
basically
rural,,
there's
also
a
strong
contingent
of
folks,,
probably
including
some
of
our
city
council,
members,
who
are
interested
in
seeing
it
be
developed
and
used,
especially
for
this
types
of
housing
that
we
just
have
a
very
hard
time,
developing,
in
boulder,,
such
as
missing
middle
and
affordable,
housing.
So
we.
D
D
B
We
want
at
this
point
sure,,
but
the
applicant
has
come
to
us
with
a
concept
that
they
would
like
to
take
to
the
next
stage
of
a
site,
review,
and
so
part
of
the
purpose
of
what
we're
doing
here
tonight
is
to
give
them
some
indications
of
what
we
would
need
to
see
in
a
site
review.
And
you
know
if
this
board
has
some.
D
D
U
N
N
D
U
U
P
P
P
That
will
probably
command
some
additional
conversation
as
part
of
the
upcoming
compound
process..
But
if,
if
that's
a
recommendation
to
board,
wanted
to
make
as
part
of
tonight's
conversation,,
you
certainly
could
do
that
and
then
you
know,
we.
We
would
ask
that
the
board,
raise
that
again,.
Once
we
start
talking
about
the
next
update
to
the
conflict.
D
D
P
P
D
C
C
C
C
C
C
B
Mark
this,,
your
hand
is
still
up,,
so
you
can
go
first,
oh,
well,,
okay,,
then,,
fine.
I'll
I'll
I'll
I'll
I'll.
I'm
ready
on
that
one.,
so
I'll
try
to
make
it
quick..
I
think
that
this
I
I
I
spend
a
lot
of
time
with
the
zoning
map
like
I've,
said
before,
and
the
the
whole
issue
of
contiguity
of
gee,.
If
we
have
a
condition
here,
then
we
have
to
carry
on
with
that
same
condition
somewhere.
C
C
E
E
E
We've
all
kind
of
said
something
along
the
following
lines:
already,,
which
is
as
staff
an
applicant,
move.
Forward,
their
challenge
is
going
to
be
finding
that
balance
that
can
help
that
can
help
meet
all
the
other
I'll
call
them
variances,.
That
would
be
needed
to
to
make
this
particular
concept
plan
happen.
E
B
F
And
makes
sense,
with
certain
major,
thoroughfares
and
that
it's
absolutely
not
compatible
you
know,
with
some
other
largest
states
that
are
very
close..
I
shouldn't
call
to
the
states,
but
you
know
larger
parcels
and
homes
that
are
more
rural
and
character,
and
so
it's
sort
of
both.
So
so
without
rehashing
what
sarah
just
said,
I
I
think
the
devil's
very
much
in
the
details.
I'm
sure
there
are
some
neighbors,
and
and
some
folks,
who,
who,
you
know,,
won't
want
to
see
it
developed
or
won't
want
to
see
it
developed
at
all
densely,.
F
My
preferences
to
see
it.
You
know,
get
some
middle
income
housing.
I
really
appreciate
the
duplex,
tripx
and
townhouse
style
and
I'll
talk
about
that
more
a
little
bit
later,,
but
at
the
same
time,,
given
that
on
certain
sides,
it
is
a
adjacent
to
vary,
different
uses,.
I
I
think
it'll
come
down
to
kind
of
how
how
it
gets
developed
over
time.,
how
we
handle
access,,
how
we
handle
open,
space,,
you
know,.
All
of
that
is,
is
really
gonna.
Determine.
D
D
D
Careful
design
will
be
required
to
ensure
compatibility,,
accessibility,
and
appropriate
transitions
between
land
uses
that
vary
in
intensity,
and
scale,.
You
know,,
and
I
think
mark
makes
a
good
point
that
we
have
lots
of
zones
in
the
city
where
you
do
have
higher
density,
budding
up
against
lower.
D
W
N
N
N
N
N
B
B
B
B
B
You
know
exactly
how
I
feel
about
it.,
but
yeah,
so,
yes,.
I
am
no
also
so
go
ahead..
Yep,
may
may
be
out
about
soon..
So
I
imagine
a
lot
of
what
I
touch
on
this
stuff..
Other
folks.
will
will
go
into
too.,
so
I'll
just
say
that
the
what
was
brought
up
before
you
know,
just
making
sure
that
there's
adequate
parking,
including
guest
parking,
that's
always
a
challenge
when
you've
got
you
know,
people
closely
together,
and
I'm
not
obviously
advocating
for
a
ton
of
parking,.
B
F
I'm
not
overly
concerned
about
that,
because
I
have
one
and
it
works.,
maybe
there's
other
folks
will
have
the
opposite,
bias,
and
live
on
one.
that
doesn't.,
but
I'd
be
open
to.
You
know
that
being
continuing
to
be
part
of
the
proposal.
well,
thinking
about
what
people's
concerns
around
that
are
for
maintenance
and
all
of
that..
F
One
thing
that
I'd
like
to
see,
potentially,
and
that
that
I
enjoy
where
I
am
that
I
enjoy
elsewhere
in
the
city,,
would
be
maybe
more
varied
setbacks,
even
some
of
the
images
that
I
think
they
put
forward
showed
that.
But
then,
when
I
look
at
the
rendering,
at
least
from
the
aerial
it,
it
didn't
really
seem
like
much
variation
and
setback..
So
I'd
be
interested
in
that,
and
I'll
also
say
that
off
of
what
I'm,
what
I'm
commenting
on
my
inclination
isn't
necessarily
that
it
has
to
drop.
F
down
to
like
64
units,
like
I'd
like
to
actually
see
more
than
that,
but
I
suspect
that
it
may
not
end
up
being
85.
You
know.,
so
I'd
be
interested
in.
You
know
what
can
be
done
with
the
performer
on
the
use
case.
On,
you
know,
and
and
trying
to
keep
that
missing
middle,
and
I
I
love
duplexes.,
I
love
triplexes,,
I
town
houses,
are
great..
I
appreciate
the
successful
units
like
all
that's
fantastic,,
but
you
know,.
F
Maybe
it
doesn't
end
up
being
85
or
whatever,
and
then
I
agree
that
more
central,,
open,
space,
and
then
and
then
I
just
have
concerns
about
the
open
space
being
pushed
the
perimeter,
especially
with
those
busy
roads,,
I'm
picturing
kids
trying
to
play
there,,
and
that
seems
bad.
You
know,
so
yeah,.
I
I
I'd
like
to
see,
some
refinement,
on
that
as
well,.
It
would
be
nice
if
there's
a
way
to
get
second
access..
F
I
bet
the
fire
chief
would
really
like
that,
too,,
you
know,,
so
you
know,
when
we
talk
about
traffic,
and
some
of
those
concerns
and
improvements
that
would
need
to
occur,.
You
know
yeah,,
you
know
another
way,
out.
Another
way,
in,
I
think,
could
somewhat
eliminate,
that
yeah,,
I'm
probably
forgetting.
oh,
I,,
one
thing,,
I
was
gonna,
say
and
other
people
may
have
a
different.
take
on
this,
depending
on
like,
how
it's
step
back
to
in,
and
like
where
the
three-story
units
are.,
and
I
thought
that
they're
some
thought
into
that.
F
I
don't
I
don't
mind
the
3,
story,
particularly
because
you're
giving
me
a
gable
roof
and
I
am
tired
of
boxes,.
So
you
know
that's
me
personally,,
but
you
know
what,
whether
that's
an
extra
half
floor,
or
whatever,
if
it
gets,
me
some
kind
of
an
interesting
roof
line,
and
depending
on
what
planning
things,
depending
on
what
other
planning
board
members
think
and
so
on.
You
know
where
that
falls,
within
the
site
and
the
lines
and
the
views
and
so
on.
I'm
I'm
not
necessarily,
against
that.
F
B
Review,
cause.
we
realize
that
the
staff
questions
were
more
big
picture
and
they're.
Not
everyone
had
lots
of
comments
on
the
specific,.
So
that's
what
question
question
number
3
is:
who
else
is
ready
to
site
all
their
concerns.
here?
Sarah?
So
I
agree
with
pretty
much
everything.
lisa
just
said..
I
have
a
couple
more..
I
have
a
big
long
list
that
I
wrote
out,
but
I'll
try
to
I'm
I'm
pretty,.
I
appreciate
staff's
focus
on
tdm
and
the
traffic
impact
study.
B
I
during
covid
I
walked
that
big
loop,
a
lot,
and
it
does
seem
like
an
awkward,,
perhaps
not
very
safe
intersection
for
pedestrians
and
cyclists,,
even
though
it
then
bumps
into
this
lovely
little
neighborhood,
on
the
on
the
west
side,
gonna
bring
up
prairie
dogs,,
just
because
you
know,
every
time
we
upset
a
prayer,
dog,
neighborhood,,
we're
we're
address,
we're
dealing,
we're
limiting
the
pstn
species..
I
I
shared
staff..
E
Requirements,
and
that
may
not
have
been
the
intention,,
but
that
is
how
the
proposal
uses
the
streets.
I
did
notice
if
I
read
it
correctly,
that
the
applicant
is
requesting
0
parking,
spaces,
for
12
of
the
permanently,
affordable
units
and
if
the
pita
was
still
on
planning
board.,
she
would
have
blown
her
top
over
that
because,,
as
she
has
always
made
the
point
that
folks
who
are
living
in
permanently
affordable,
housing,
of
any,
type,
or
are
often
folks
whose
cars,
are
or
trucks,
are
key
to
their
work.
E
E
E
okay.,
I'm
sorry..
Let
me
just
one
more
thing,,
the
relocation,,
the
the
the
point
that
the
multi-use
path,
as
currently
imagined,
I,
think,.
It
sounds,
like
a
staff,,
just
described
it.
It
goes
right
like
right
next
to
people's,,
front
stoops,,
steps,
and
there's
not
a
necessarily
the
kind
of
buffer
that
you
might
want
so
figuring
out
where
that
would
go
from?.
So
those
were
my
comments,
and
I
will
leave
it
at
that.
C
Could
you
repeat
the
statement
I
I
I
was
really
struck
by
that
that
you
said
12
of
the
permanently
affordable
units,
have
no
parking
so,
if
you
look.
yes,.
That
is
what
I
said,
and
I
got
that
I
didn't
get
to
ask..
I
didn't
think
to
ask
the
question
of
staff
or
the
applicant.,
but
let
me
see
if
I
can
find
the
there's
a
on
page,.
If
you
all
just
give
me
one
seconds.
E
Yeah
alright,
here,
yeah,,
so
on
page
9
of
a
125
just
of
this
portion
of
the
thing,,
they
have
a
table
that
lists,
each
of
the
housing
types,
the
number
of
stories,
the
finished
area,,
the
bedrooms,
bathrooms
garage,
carports
and
parking,,
and
what
you'll
see
is
for
the
blue
permanently
affordable..
There
are
30
parking
spaces,
required,
and
only
20,
provided
for
the
red
permanently
affordable.
There
are
5
sorry,,
7
parking
spaces
required
and
0
parking
provided
for
the
good
permanently
affordable.
There
are
5,
parking
required
and
0
parking,
provided
so
they're
made.
E
There
may
be
families,
that
want
to
look,
in,
who,,
who
qualify
for
and
want
to
live
in
these
houses?,
who
will
not
have
a
car,,
but
I
don't
think
we
should
assume
that
that's
the
case,
and
I
said,
and
from
a
just
from
an
equity,
perspective,,
and
these
are
not
low-income
families,,
but
from
an
equity.
perspective,.
These
these
homes
should
have
at
least
a
parking
spot..
So
that's
a
concern
for
me.
D
Lauren
I,
think
we
should.
fact,.
I
think,.
We
should
fact
check
that
because
I
think
that
those
counts
might
not
include
the
street
parking,.
They
might
not
be
allowed
to
count
the
street
parking,
spaces,,
because
when
I
actually
look
at
the
map
there
are
little
rectangles
right.
Above,
that
chart
there
are
little
rectangles
that
seem
to.
E
E
Yeah,
right.
right.,
so
maybe
it's
just
the
moving
things
around,,
I
mean,.
A
lot
of
things
are
gonna
move
around
in
this
proposal,,
based
on
all
the
input,
they're
getting
right
and
to
limit
the
number
of
variances,
that
they're
ultimately
requesting
and
maybe
but
and
maybe
as
part
of
that
there
has
to
be
some
moving
around
of
parking..
I
I
just
stand
by..
You
can't
have
permanently
affordable
housing
and
no
parking.
E
D
D
D
D
Z
D
Know
filling
potholes
and
repaving
and
stuff
like
that,
so
I
I
do
think
that's
very
challenging
to
have
private
streets
that
the
would
have
to
maintain
very
different
than
just
contracting.
With
someone
to
plow,
your
snow,
I
was
on
things
that
I
really
appreciate
about
the
project.
I
did
really.
D
Appreciate
that
they
had
the
lower
heights
towards
the
eastern
edge,
and
towards
the
ends
of
streets
that
seemed
like
very
thoughtful
design.
You
know,,
as
I
said,.
I
think
they
need
to
make
take
more
care,
with
that
eastern
edge
and
what
that
looks
like,
but
I
did
appreciate
that
they
were
trying
to
employ
some.
D
D
So
whatever
can
be
done
to
try
to
find
another
access,
point,
or
find
a
different
solution
for
access,
definitely
whatever
legal
issues
there
are
would
need
to
be
resolved
and
and
trying
to
find
a
better
circulation
pattern,,
because
I
do
think
that
the
traffic
issues
there
are
significant.
I
personally,
am
not
super,
concerned.
D
D
The
any
time
that
you
are
capping
people's
appreciation.,
I'm
not
sure
that
people
who
are
buying
those
homes
really
understand
what
that
means,
like
it's
not
going
to
be
a
vehicle
for
wealth
creation,,
which
is
what
a
lot
of
people
want
home
ownership,
opportunities,
for.
So
I'm
not
super
concerned,
about
whether
the
changes
result,
in
a.
D
D
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
D
D
D
D
D
I
mean,
I'm
sensitive
to
what
you're
saying.
okay.
but
it,.
I
mean,-
I
just
literally
just
now
pulled
this
up,
and
had
not
thought
about
it
before
this
very
moment.
I
just
gives
me
a
hesitation,
that,
because
this
property
owner
owner
came
forward
with
the
proposal,
they
would
be
treated
somehow
differently,
than
other
property
owners
that
a
butt
that
are
in.
D
B
B
O
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
B
E
Okay.
right.,
it's
just,
but
it's
not.,
it
hasn't.
been
and
next,.
Yet
the
question
is
the
annexing.
I
don't
think
we're
talking
now
about
moving
it
into
area
3.
That
was
something
that
was
brought
up
in
the
2,015
planning
board.
Conversation.
about
this.
It's
more
the
question
of
the
the
land
use,,
the
the
land
use
designation,
change,,
and
I
I
don't..
I
don't
think
I
know
enough,
or
have
heard..
I
agree
with
both
john
and
laura,
and
I
I
think
it
needs
to
actually
be
a.
it
was
not..
E
It
was
not
the
question
that
staff
brought
to
us,
and
so
there
wasn't
any
that's,
not
fair..
They
brought
us
the
question
of
what
do
we
think
of
that.
and
you,
mx,
or
m.
dx,,
which
everyone
it
was
not.
What
do
you
think
of
changing
this
from
public
to
high
density
when
it
was
framed
a
different
way,
which
I
think
presumes,
I
will
assume
means
that
staff
once
this
change.
from
public,
to
some
kind
of
residential?
E
That's
that
would
be
my
assumption,,
but
that's
how
they
wrote
that
memo,
because
I
write
a
lot
of
memos,
and
I
write
them
in
ways
to
convey
what
I
want
to
convey
and
I'm
guessing
staff.
does
here
as
well,,
and
I
I
do
think
when
step
one
planning
board
in
2,016,
voted
against
the
change
land
used
as
a.
I
think
they
voted
against
changing
the
land
use
designation
at
that
time.
I
think
that's
what
the
vote
was
yep
it.
E
E
I
thought
it's
a
bigger
question,
and
the
one
that
we
have
the
knowledge,,
what
we're
we're
opining
without
like,,
a
a
ton
of
information.
You
know
that
would
help
us
to
frame
our
thoughts,
that's,
kind
of
my
take,
on
it
like
it's
really
interesting,
it's
important
and-
and
we
don't
have-
but
we
didn't
have
that's
not
that's
not
the
conversation
we
had
today..
So
it's
a
little
hard
to
respond.
D
That's
right,
but
I'm
a
little
bit
tired..
My
my
recollection
was
that
planning
board
said
that
they
thought
that
the
concept
was
too
dense,
and
they
kicked
it
back
to
the
applicant
and
then
the
applicant
withdrew,
and
so
I
don't
think
planning
board
ever
denied
anything,
never
approved,
never
denied.
D
And
I
think,
they
withdrew
again,
if
I'm
not
mistaken,,
yeah,,
yeah.
right.,
but
then,
a
year
later,
they
this
applicant
applied,,
and
I
don't
think
it
was
the
same
applicant.
it
may
have
been.
I
don't
know
the
applicant
applied
for
annexation
and
then
through
again,
right
right,
and
so,
but
you
know
we
don't
know
it.
Gonna
have
the
back
story.
R
E
N
Oh!
you
know,,
I
mean
I
I
every
time
we
do
an
annexation,
and
we
just
oh,
well,.
Let's
change
the
underlining
use
and
I'm
just
like.
We
have
our
arbitrarily
changed
that
boulder
valley,
compound.
use,,
use
designation,
many
times
and
I'm
just
consistently
like
impress
that
huh!,
I
guess
the
boulder
valley
compliant.
Isn't
it's
pretty
porous.
B
B
Well,
and
also
the
if
you
read
the
comp
plan
right,
you
could
design
any
kind
of
city
you
want
out
of
that
comp,
plan,
right
and
right,
there's
a
lot
of
discretion,
and
we
the
way
our
processes,
work,
is
someone,
applies
an
applicant,
submits
a
proposal
and
we
respond.
The
city
responds
like
that's:
that's
how
it
works,,
and
so
we
are
put
in
this
position
where
we're
asked
to
meet
multiple
objectives,,
some
of
which
are
contradictory
to
each
other,
and
that's..
Why
they
ask,
they
put
smart
people,
like,.
B
E
Of
the
update
to
the
boulder
valley,
comp
plan
versus,,
the
whole
big,
boulder
valley,
comp.
plan
redo,
is
to
do
that
more
often,,
so
that
an
applicant
like
today's
applicant
could
come
forward
in
2021,,
specifically
with
a
request
to
change.
the
underlying
zoning
that
and
if
that
got
approved.,
then
she
could
move
forward
with
the
rest
of
the
process.
Instead
of
I
think.
E
Yeah
hmm.,
it's
the
we
did.
We
did
this
in
2020,
right,
john,
we
had
a
and
and
this
applicant
for
I'm
sure,
good
reasons
did
not
apply
for
to
be
part
of
that
mini
update,.
So
maybe
we
just
need
to
do.
Many,
updates
every
couple
of
years,
instead
of
1
75
years,
it's
an
area,
too.,
it's
periodic,
period
on
the
end.
B
D
D
N
E
E
D
On
the
the
critical
importance
of
providing
missing,
middle
housing,
and
that
we
really
appreciate
that
the
applicant
talks
with
staff
about
that
listen
to
staff,
about
that
designed
a
concept
about
that.
Obviously
this
is
a
tricky,
site,
and
there's
a
lot
of
issues
still
to
you
know,
to
clarify
and
to
work.