March 19, 2025 — Boulder Junction Access District Regular Meeting

Transcript

Captions from City of Boulder YouTube recording.

[0:02] Morning. Welcome to the Boulder Junction, Access District Parking and travel and management Joint Commissions meeting. It is March 19, th 2025, and I will roll right, hook. Let's just hear it Present. Evan Knapp will be joining us 30 min late. Robin Ronan Awesome. Rebecca, do you, Michelle Present. And Stephanie, Susan, and Jennifer will not be present for this meeting. So the minutes and the actions of this meeting will reflect that we did have a forum for Bjat parking and not a forum for Bjat. Tdm, so we'll handle any of those for like minutes, and whatnot in the future oops. I will turn the meeting over to Chair Vernon and give a shout or procedural, administer

[1:09] Becca should I lead, or should you? Okay? It's me. Hello, everyone. Thanks for attending today. So let's start off with, do we have any questions or comments before we take a vote on the approval of January's meeting minutes. Wanna note that there are no notes. So for parking, which we have a quorum for right now. Can I please get votes on approval of January's minutes? If you approve, say aye. Hi Bye. Bye. Okay? And I don't think we can do the approval on on the other group, because we don't have a quorum. in which case, I will move on to allow for the updates from the Commission recruitment. Update

[2:07] Okay, that's what you need. Yes. Hello. So there were 2 applicants interviewed Daniel Eisman for both Tdm. And Parking and Kevin Krause for Tdm. Only. City Council will vote on Commissioner appointments at the regular meeting tomorrow night, March 20, th and new appointees and city staff will be notified of the appointments on Friday, March 21.st So we're anticipating that all those seats will be filled. Not all the empty seats, but the seats that folks are eligible for so we anticipate that Daniel will serve on both commissions, and that Kevin will serve on the Tvm Commission. We're not. I'm not sure which Seats Council is going to appoint to yet, so that will determine what commissioners are relieved moving forward. Of course we'll still have vacancy, I believe, on both commissions, and so I anticipate. The clerk's office will then reopen applications here shortly, and we will continue to do outreach to get additional applicants in this next round.

[3:25] and we did just have Kevin join us, although I don't think the video is on Hey? Everyone! Sorry for the delay. I am here Yeah. Sorry for the delay here. Does that give us what we need to do? The to do the the vote or not? I don't think so. No. 7, Okay? And per, Ellie's email to us, your update on tracking 2025 volunteer hours Yes, so I will be sending out an email tomorrow with some more information on this in an effort to more accurately capture the volunteer work that you all do for the city as commissioners. I am going to be asking for

[4:14] hours that you've done outside of the Commission meeting. So reviewing meeting packets. If you're meeting with members of the public in your capacity, any kind of work that you're doing outside of the meetings, so we can have more accurate representation in the annual report that we put out every year Point of clarification on that I was wondering if attending our our events would count towards that as well It doesn't have to be an exact science. I would say, if there's anything that you're doing that you wouldn't be doing if you weren't on the commission. So if you're going to the events because of your involvement as a commissioner, certainly welcome, adding that Okay. This time, but it's not an exact science. So up to you Okay. great. Thank you so much. Do you have any more contacts anymore? Any more comments on those 2 things

[5:06] No, thank you Okay, fantastic. So we are now coming to the public participation part of the meeting. Do we have any members of the public present, either online or in person. Today Who has spoken in the past, and he just raised his hand, so I will allow him to talk Fantastic Travis, you now have the floor to speak Hello! Can you? Everybody hear me? Okay. Yes. 1st of all, thank you for this opportunity to to greet you all, and to participate in the planning overview of Boulder Junction in general. My comment is more of a Tdm comment and so let me also defer

[6:00] Should I wait until that board comes together? I would actually love to have the comment. Now we do all receive minutes every single month, and you're, of course, welcome to come to future meetings as well, but the members of that those commissioners will receive the meeting notes, so your notes, your comments will be given to them Right on. Thank you. I'll proceed. Let's see. Last meeting. I made a comment about the destroyed, and bollards that are on junction. Right? It's a pedestrian safety issue. When that whole construction area clears, there's going to be tons of traffic, and we want to make sure that traffic is restrained for the sake of pedestrians. So you know, mitigating that Junction way. Post construction was the point that I raised last meeting. This meeting. I guess you know I'm making a little bridge here. I had

[7:01] summoned Woodrow Wilson, the spirit of caution, and you know I'm motivated to come back because of that spirit of caution. The building that I'm in, which is the Boulder Depot building. This is a small local concern nothing to get anybody's hair raised about. But the boilers of this building are right alongside the Eastern. you know, part of eastern and southern corner of the building, right near where the train line comes through. And so I had a little mystery to unsolve about. How is it that I was smelling natural gas. There. We solved it for the building ultimately, but in my journey I discovered that across the street there is a high pressure, natural gas main that runs right under Pearl Parkway.

[8:01] At 34th Street, you know what would be 34th Street really right there by the train. This is again on the east side. Now of the of the the what is it called the Griffin building? 31, 20 it's just important to keep this on everyone's mental map of what? What makes this this puzzle piece? Somehow fragile right? If we look at Boulder Junction as a piece of on a jigsaw puzzle. You know this. This piece of this jigsaw puzzle has some fragile features to it, and it's important for us all to keep that in the overall definition of what Boulder Junction brings together. There is a high pressure main here and and the psi is around 450, but it has the potential. As I spoke to gents on the subject, that it gets to about 700, you know, at the, at the others at the full capacity of that pipe.

[9:07] If there were to be a a leak or a collision here we could see something like what happened in Houston. So these things make the area fragile. And it's important to keep that on our mental map of the area. If I had another little comment. I don't know if it's really worth it compared to that one. But there! There's a little need for green space. as I see in the overall plan. If we if we were to build out phase one and phase 2 as as I've seen drawings and drafts for I kind of think that the warehouses that I'll I'll call Block 2,800. I don't know that you guys have a name better name for it. But this is the warehouse that includes the

[10:06] boulder B cycle Okay. Right, and there's a a number of different warehouses down that are on there. It goes down to climbing cats. Gym! All that, I believe that in the greater Master plan. That building is one of the keystones, and if that building were to be raised and that property were to be turned into green space. then we would see visually a pedestrian path that would draw people into Boulder Junction, and and I think. You know. frankly, it's kind of an Achilles heel if we don't think about it, because if we had thought about it too late, then we're in this position of of seeing what kind of a beautiful treasure such a small part could be.

[11:05] 2 visitors and tourists who would come to the area particularly, who would stay at the Hyatt. And so, if I were to imagine, like, you know, that little Hyatt have a little boulder beachhead. it should be right here between 30th and 33, rd in what I'm calling block 2,800. I just leave that open for everyone else to bite on and I hope we have a a safe and eventless spring May I have? May I ask clarifying question just to ensure that our notes are up to date, and that we know the exact property you're talking about, are you? In the roadhouse boulder depot? The the roadhouse itself is a kind of historic building that used used to be on another street. It's not large enough for residents. The the boulder depot is kind of embraces it. It's above the the bus station, and I'm in the footprint of the bus station

[12:10] Okay, great. I just wanted to make sure we have the right place so that we can clarify the notes for the other commissioners who are not present. And also I tend to keep a little map open during these meetings. So I always know what people are talking about. So it's really helpful just for me visually to do that. I really appreciate your comments. Do you have anything else you'd like to say, Travis No, I'm I I try to keep some thoughts together throughout the week, so thank you for the opportunity to list them off I appreciate that, and we hope to see you at future meetings. Do we have any other members of the public here today? We do not Okay, thank you so much for that update. And we are moving on to the consent agenda portion. do we have? Oh. Travis, change your mind real quick before we get to the next section. What was your comment?

[13:02] I just. I just lowered my hand. I wanna thank you guys and have a great meeting You, too. Thank you. Okay. So going on to the consent agenda, do we have any questions from commissioners on the consent portion of the agenda? I see a raise hand. Sure demo show Yes, this is just about the flat floating permits. Does that specifically apply to Bjot? Or is that for the other general improvement districts? Chris probably is a question for you. Great question. I'm actually gonna see if Christine is able to answer. I can. But I'm gonna convert Christine. First.st The flexible permits where those will find. or Chris might actually know. This is a the flexible loading sound. Yes. where they guess. Could you repeat the question

[14:01] Yes. So in the consent, agenda, right? There's the idea of moving from specific loading times of the day to the flexible loading permit. That is, any time of day for 15 min. I'd like to know how that may or may not be implemented, and bj, specifically how that might be implemented next to residences on Junction Place Okay? So we have had as part of our curbside management policies that we implemented a year ago. We have the flexible loading zone. We've had one request from a property owner to install a flexible loading zone at Junction Place gets outside of a coffee shop. That's, I believe, part of the Commons building. So that's what we had. That is on our short action list. So we are gonna be doing kind of wholesale changes on University Hill in the 3rd quarter and downtown in the 4.th But we have a short action list that we hope to complete earlier. So in kind of a

[15:07] beginning of the second quarter, and that junction place space is on that list for to be converted into a flexible loading zone. So it'd be a 24, 7 loading zone, but still with a 15 min use time, use restriction. So in short, yeah, the the concept of the flexible loading zone while we've been used most extensively in the downtown area because there is more competition for limited space in the downtown. It's a tool that can be used anywhere in the city. And there is a play, a location that's being contemplated currently Okay. Both the North and the South Boulder common buildings are directly across from residences. The still yards is on across from the north side, and the Nickel Flats building is across from the south building. So I would be cautious about any 24 h loading zone for those buildings that would have especially any kind of beeping, or, or, you know, larger engine trucks that are stopping and going. In fact, in some cases 15 min makes it worse right? Because then you you're cycling in and out very rapidly.

[16:24] Yeah, so we do have some. We do have anti idling State laws that could could be enforced by the city of board that is concerned. Idling delivery trucks. I think the the property owner really wanted for the coffee shop for people to be able to have a spot where they can park quickly. Run in, get their coffee ordered that that was the intent of it. But if there's an any concerns, you know, we can certainly discuss those with our traffic engineers.

[17:00] Yes, those are my concerns I would love if they were discussed further, and an update provided later Can do that Thank you. Any other questions from commissioners on the consent agenda Kevin, are you putting your phone on because you have a question Nope, just cause I was getting ready to vote Oh, okay, in that case, let's go ahead and Or I guess we don't need to vote on these I don't think we don't need to vote on that one. No in that case I will pass it over to Will to give us the connections, update Hi! Everybody nice to be here. Transportation is trending, as I like to say. We've had numerous capacity events at the Chamber in all forms of transportation.

[18:02] I've spoken a little bit about the city's core arterial network specifically along 30th Street. We had an amazing review from city Staff at our luncheon on Thursday last week, over 5,000 residents within and beyond Boulder Junction have chimed in, shown up and really had their voice heard, and I know that many of those folks live within Boulder Junction, the steel yards. So this is, I'm starting with praise because it's it's a tremendous endeavor that the city is doing to garner feedback for the improvements on what's called North 30th Street. That's immediately adjacent to Boulder Junction, and kind of some of this gateway that the Resident was speaking to earlier. Robin, for your reference. I put the address of the Depot Square residence within the chat. Just so you got that. That's 1 of the properties that I help with ecopass and B cycle and car share in terms of our Tdm Update the marquee event since we last met was winter bike to work day, and it was excellent. I shared a few photos with Ellie that are welcome to be shared with the group, but we had over 60 people at the Logan's Cafe

[19:15] on Junction Place. That business formerly was at Lucky's Market, on North Broadway, or in the Lucky's Market Plaza on North Broadway. They've closed that location and they are reopening in the armory district of North Broadway. So just for a bit of context. But they are maintaining the I think it's 2495, Junction place cafe. So a great little local coffee shop they might start doing some jazz nights for community things. Over 60 people came to Logan's, which was great. Over 85 people, and this could be upwards of 100. I wasn't attending the entire time. But we had a robust turnout on February 14th in the district.

[20:00] I'm actually giving a Tdm. Tour to some of the new community vitality staff. One of the names I see on the call right now. So there's a lot happening in Boulder Junction that we're really happy to see the uptake on. A few hours ago I was at one of our major employers, who have actually expanded their commercial occupancy footprint to bring on more staff for a return to office plan that they'll have underway for many years to come. So they were very happy to hear what we're seeing to be an essentially guaranteed return of service in the Boulder Junction, Rtp. Station in September. And and just the the interest that we're seeing among the public and active transportation into the district is really inspiring for what we're trying to do in a closing comment. It's still in the planning stages, but my team is talking with Lime to try, including their scooter devices in the Tdm. District benefits. This, as I mentioned, is still underway, but we're we're

[21:06] hopeful that we'll be able to get some traction from what it would take from their operational standpoint to include them within the funded benefits in the district. So I hope to share a more concrete update with that when we meet. I suppose that would be in May. Happy to stick around for any Q. And a. And then I'm off to the next event Does anyone have any questions for? Will? Looks like you're off to your next adventure will have a great day Always great to see you all wish you the best Okay? And next, we have Chris to give us an update on the transportation and accessibility. Update That's you, all right. I'm not. That might not have been the agenda topic or or title you were looking for. But yeah, over you, Chris? All right. So, Kelly, if you can put up my presentation.

[22:08] So I understand I have 10 min. I probably have like 30 slides, so I'm going to go through quickly. A little bit of flexibility. So what I was asked to do was to come and share with you some of the survey findings that we have from our tri-annual resident and employee. Travel surveys next slide, please. So we've been doing both the Resident and the employee survey since 1990 and 1991, respectively, we started the Resident Travel Diary Survey in 1990. That is published in a report called the Modal Shift Report. These are available on the city website, I think it's called transportation data and maps. So if you just Google boulder transportation data maps, you'll get it. We've been conducting these really to understand resident travel, behavior, and demographics and changes over time. And we look at our progress towards meeting several of our transportation master plan goals

[23:20] soon to be a transportation strategic plan, I understand. And these, it's just a it's really great to have this type of longitudinal data to understand how our investments and changes in programs affect both resident and employee travel behavior. But I'll start with the residents next slide, please. So we typically have a 3rd party do this. We, we try and get a thousand responses. That gives us 1.3% sampling error. Error. we look at households. We also take into account. See you students, since they're, you know, once a 3rd of our population, basically, what we ask people to do is to track their travel over a 24 h period. In terms of what trips did they take? What mode did they use the time, distance, purpose of the trip. So again, there's a link to the full report next slide, please.

[24:21] So this is kind of the all in big summary slide of what is the modal split for all trips by boat or residents? So it looks at all trips. So this could be a work trip, a recreation trip, a social trip you name it. And one of the transportation master plan. Goals that we've had is to reduce single occupant vehicle trips for board residents for all trips. So you can see, you know, it was 44%. Back in 1990, we've steadily reduced that to about 35%. The city goal is to get that down to 20. So it's very ambitious goal. While we're making progress, we're certainly not on track to meet that goal. We also track, you know, bicycle trips which have significantly increased as we've made investments in our multimodal infrastructure and and safety infrastructure.

[25:19] You can see transit has. You know, it's kind of experiencing steady growth. We started seeing service declines in about the 2,015 to 2018 era. And so we can see that you know we have had some transit use. Decline over that time period, as some of our service has been reduced. One of the newest things we started tracking is the use of e-bikes or e-scooters, whether they're private or shared. And you know, as you can see, they've jumped to 4.4% of all trips now are being taken on an e-bike or scooter next slide, please. We also track work trips by residents. And I think what one of the most interesting things is. It really depends on where you work.

[26:07] You know of how you, how you get how you get to work. For those people who are border residents, and they work in boulder we've done a tremendous job in reducing single travel for work trips down below 40% still doing good if people live in Denver. So, traveling on the Us. 36 corridor probably making use of that flat iron flyer. But if you work anywhere else. most of most people are driving. And so we've seen that we also see that in the reverse. When we start talking about employees, including into board next one, please. So one of the things that we've been tracking over time, and especially with Covid is teleworking, and we have seen, you know, without any surprises there. Significant increases in teleworking a quarter of all of our respondents, said they telework on the day that they were assigned to fill out the survey. So it's tremendous, you know, if this keeps up, you know, it's going to have a tremendous impact on overall vehicle trips

[27:12] and our greenhouse gas emissions. But we do see some return to work happening, so it will be very interesting when we do this survey in 2 more years you know what we'll see for residents next one, please. Cu students travel differently. If every resident was a Cu student, we'd be meeting all our transportation goals. You know, just 20% of their trips are in single occupant vehicles. But I think that's the result of a very strong Tdm program for Cu students. They receive Eco passes, b-cycle memberships, and they are riding scooters like crazy. Probably they'll be up to almost probably 700,000 trips on scooters this year. So they, they travel so much differently. But it's interesting to see, but also the fact that you they have very high paid parking on campus. So a lot of times when you provide Tdm benefits. But then you also have an environment of paid parking. That's where you really see the travel

[28:17] behavior change next slide, please. We also track vehicle miles of travel. In our transportation master plan. We we do an aggregate number, and it's, you know. 3.1 million Dmt per day. It's kind of hard to comprehend what that is so. Fairly recently we looked at a vehicle. Miles travel per capita. So this is really, if you were to combine all the miles of travel in a vehicle that boulder residents make in a day. it's just under 12 miles is the is the average. So it's a little bit more relatable versus, you know, millions of Dmt on aggregate. But because of the survey methodology has been consistent since 1990, we're able to go back in the data and calculate this. So it's very interesting how it's changed over. Time reached Peak in 1996, and then we've seen pretty much steady growth downward. Next one, please.

[29:22] one of the things this survey has done over the years has really showed the power of the the Eco pass. Even with, you know we've we've certainly seen a recent decline in it due to our Td. Service cuts that came starting with Covid, then really declined during Covid. But still, despite those service reductions, the ecopass is an extremely powerful tool. We have in changing travel behavior. When you compare the resident population with an ecopass versus those without significant, you know, 4, 5 times likely to to use the bus. We also look at the use of the Eco pass for work trips versus non work trips.

[30:07] and we've always seen kind of consistently over the years that you know. You're maybe 4 or 5 times more likely to use it for a work trip if you have use transit for a work trip. But the non work trips you're like 9 times more likely to use transit for a non work trip. If you have. So it, it's really it's an incredible program. And and you know, that's why these districts provide this next slide, please. One of the other kind of newer things we started tracking is deliveries. So you know, one might think you know how. How is this connected to travel behavior. But when you've seen this, the increase in Amazon ups Fedex package delivery. It's less trips people are taking outside their home to do that, that shopping or anything like that. So we have seen this incredible increase, you know, almost more than doubling, almost a tripling the amount of people that said, yes, they received a delivery. And then we start asking, okay, you know, if you hadn't received it, would you have taken the trip? So 38% of residents who received a delivery said it did replace a vehicle trip. So you know the way in which commerce has changed.

[31:22] how it's how it happens, is also affecting our view terms. Next slide, please. So you know, key key findings, you know. Sob, travel continues to climb, not at the pace to meet our goals. The hybrid work environment is continuing post covid vmt per capita is holding steady but overall slight decline. Unfortunately, we are seeing lower transit use with with our team service reductions but we are seeing tremendous increases in the use of both personal and charity bikes and scooters and we've just started measuring those. So now we have a baseline. So that's our resident. I can pause now see if there's any questions on the resident side of things before moving to employees.

[32:15] Yeah, Brian. Hey, Chris, thanks for the slides. Can you just clarify on the chart that showed the different proportions of travel by mode you mentioned the increase to 4% for e-bikes and e-scooters, which one of the modes did that fall under on the chart Yeah. So we in that chart, we include that in the bicycle motion Bicycle. Thank you. Yeah, we. We're we've started using a new term and it's it's a term that's used in the city in Canada. Denver. It's kind of just bike plus because there's so many different new devices and ways to travel. It's kind of like bike scooters, those little one wheel things electric skateboards. We're kind of lumping them into a category. We're called bike, plus

[33:06] Got it. Thank you. Yep. yeah, let's let's move on. We'll move on to the the Boulder Valley Employee survey. So again, you know, we've been conducting this one since 1991. We used to do them every 2 years. Now we do them every 3. So same thing. The reasons why we do it so next slide, please. So you know, we're we usually shoot for a thousand responses. I think last year we got yeah. Last time in 2022 we had about 900. But this one. What we do is we look, we're surveying employees. But what we do is we select employers, and then they provide the survey to their employees, and the employers are selected through a scientific sampling program where it's criteria based. We look at size, location and type of business. So we get a representative sample of the businesses in Boulder, and then we collect data on their employees.

[34:12] not only on their work trips, but on the trips they take during the day as well, and you can imagine that how you get to work really determines how you travel around boulder during the day. And so the full report is now published on that same address associated next slide, please. So what we track, you know, primarily with this number looking at employee travel is sob trips and transit trips. You can see significant declines in transit use related to Covid and Rtd. Service reduction. So not very happy about that. And then sob travel. You know, we were overall making a good downward trajectory, and this one we went up. But I think a lot of that is due to our changing workforce. When we 1st started this study.

[35:09] you know, over 60% of the jobs held in Boulder were held by voter residents. Now, it's pretty much flipped. About 60% of jobs in boulder are held by non-resident employees. They're commuting in one thing that we have noticed over time is, not only do we have more non resident employees commuting in, but they're generally commuting longer distances each year and more and more. They're moving outside of the Rtd service area. So their residences. You see the growth kind of north and east of border, and that's generally you start getting outside of Rtd service districts. So we've been and we do split up work mode shares between residents and non-residents. And there's a tremendous difference next slide, please. So this is showing that. So

[36:02] if you look at boulder residents, we did have an upward tick, but overall across time we've been making good progress on reducing single occupancy, travel by people who both live and work in boulder. But you can see that over the years we've made pretty much. No change in that non-resident employee mode share. The only time there was a statistically significant change was in 2,008 dropped down to 74. That was when we had the highest gas prices per session. It was like $5 a gallon went right back up to 80 the next time we surveyed. But I tell people that even though we haven't made any progress. I still kind of consider it a win because of the uphill battle we are facing. As I mentioned, we have more and more non-resident employees, and they live further and further away and usually now more outside our service district. So maybe we're doing okay fighting, you know. The current next slide, please.

[37:12] So this is just a you know, a more granular breakdown of that mode split for work trips between boat residents and non resident employees. So you can see both of residents. Just, you know, 53% of people in. Sov you've got a high work from home number, you know. The bike number has gone really up and down over the years transit has seen that decline it. It did. It was steadily increasing, but we had a significant decline last time, whereas the non resident employee, it's almost the same, except for that big change of work from home. But it appears, though the work from home took up people who didn't drive before. So maybe that just be maybe the type of job in the office workers

[38:00] next slide, please. So as I mentioned telework. just an incredible amount. So when we ask this question we look at. We ask people now a variety of teleworking questions. So we asked, you know, did you telework the day that you received the survey. Have you teleworked in the last week in the last 6 months? I think this is based on kind of you know. Have you ever teleworked last 6 months? So 61% of of all employees said they. They had telework. So you can see that you know pretty much a doubling that next one, please. So again, you know, impact of the Eco pass. You know, these, the ratios have changed over time, but you know it is typically, you know, if you have an Eco pass in your pocket, you are gonna travel differently from the people without an eco pass.

[39:03] pretty self explanatory. I would say that those numbers change drastically when you think about do the is there is there workplace in a paid parking environment. So we know from the downtown, the combination of paid parking plus an Eco pass is even more effective than an equal pass in an environment where employees are different. Next one, please. But we have seen some declines in ecopass participation. This was related to Covid. You know, we had 30% of employees who were surveyed 2,017, saying, they have were receiving an Eco pass that dropped down significantly. I am working with the Border Chamber Chamber of Transportation Connections to get that number back up. So if you were an employer, you dropped out during Covid and maybe you would in the past received the the rebates from the city. We're offering those rebates again

[40:01] to try and incent people to come back to the program. So we have made good progress, and you know we had about 25 new businesses sign up last year and we've got more and more returning, which is good. But there was a time when you looked at boulders, daytime population of residents and non-resident employees that over half almost 60% of the people had access to an eco pass, and we've seen some drives. Yes, please. So key findings. You know. We're still seeing the lingering effects of of Covid from this survey. We'll be doing another one of these surveys this fall. and we'll see. You know, the continuation of a telework and hybrid work schedules. Hopefully, we'll start seeing some transit service improvements. And then it's really, you know it. It really informs the work that we do.

[41:02] knowing what's effective, knowing what changes have occurred and our ability to try and break that chip. So, as I said, we'll be doing this again in the fall. We typically have the report published. You know we do it September, October, usually in kind of February March. like we have the results published, so we'll be able to come back and share the results again. happy to answer any other questions hopefully. That is Yes. Sorry. Taking your 1st part of your presentation and second part of your presentation. Do the Vmt numbers include the the non boulder residents that are employees, and their lengthening commutes So the the Vmt per capita that I show that is just boulder residents. But I do work with climate initiatives, so they have their annual greenhouse gas inventory report, and that is the report where we look at the aggregate Vmt, so it includes trips that start in boulder and somewhere else start somewhere else and in boulder

[42:19] the internal internal trip. So start boulder, end in boulder, and then also the trips that just pass through Boulder. So like, you know, someone going to rock about National Park and just pulling up 28th and then we use the model. It's a. It's a protocol environmental protocol to assign vehicle miles to travel to municipalities. So if a non resident employee is coming in and then going out folder takes in. You know, it's portion is half of that work trip. So one of the directions, so we do have that report. You can go look at it. You know we have changed our methodology for the aggregate Vmt numbers. We used to use Dr. Cog's regional travel model. Now, we use cell phone and connected vehicle data

[43:11] to to track trips and you know, roughly, we're seeing a little over 3 million Bmt per day which includes those non residents. One thing that we do know is that the average non resident employee travels more in a vehicle for just their work trip and the average boulder resident drives for all their trips in a day. So when we look at you know who's contributing to our greenhouse gas. you know by number. It is, you know, the non resident employees contribute much more to our greenhouse gas emissions

[44:01] that data that reports available. If you just Google Boulder Greenhouse Gas Inventory. You should be able to get into that report Thank you. Any additional questions. I didn't I'm no longer moving. I'm sorry. Or you. Okay, I don't think we have any additional questions. Thank you so much, Chris, for your presentation. Moving on to matters from Staff. We are skipping Section A, and going on to the proposed increase to district parking fees. By Jones. you are now cleared Well, we we do have a presentation prepared for the Improvement district analysis, even though we don't have a quorum we do have Regan, and our consultant team, I believe, is also on the call.

[45:07] this is a preview. We do have a a joint commission meeting coming up on April 8, th but want to give you all an opportunity to preview the work. So far Sure. Okay, I'm sorry. I I misunderstood that. Then that go ahead, Regan. Thank you. So yes, we're joined by our friends at Puma. They're on the screen, Amanda and Brad, and they're going to be providing an update on the District analysis work, which, just as a reminder, is an analysis as a study of our existing general improvement districts, and it will provide recommendations on how our Gids should evolve to address some immediate needs. And yeah, a key date to keep in mind is that April 8th special meeting. It's a joint commission meeting where Brad and Amanda will join us in person to present some more concrete recommendations that we'll be bringing to Council on April 24.th So we really encourage in person attendance. They'll be here in person, and we'll have an engaging, thoughtful conversation. With the consultant team.

[46:17] Brad and Amanda want to kick it off Yeah, thank you, Regan. And Hi, everyone can everyone see my screen? Okay. Yeah. Great. Okay. So our agenda today will be relatively brief. As Regan mentioned, we're going to be there in person in April to give you all a deeper dive on these things. But we'll just provide you a brief update with where we're at and where we've been. So we'll 1st just give an overview of what we've done as far as existing conditions analysis goes. And then we'll talk about priorities, challenges and opportunities for bj.

[47:05] so again, we'll dig into this more in April and show you some actual numbers and things. But we did conduct an existing conditions analysis, just to get grounded in the districts and understand what work has already been done. So we looked at the history, governance structure, and assessment methodology for each of the general improvement districts in the Bjat area. We looked at some key commercial market indicators, which are pretty interesting. And like I said, we'll share some actual numbers when we're with you all in person in April. But we looked at sales tax data. We looked at property value data going back to 2019 as a Pre covid base year and some other key market indicators like vacancy that we think will be of interest to this group. So we'll share some key findings about that. In April. We also looked at the sources and uses of funds for each of the general improvement districts from 2019 to 2025. Just to understand

[48:06] where you all have been. And then we looked at all of your past planning efforts to make sure we're building on priorities and recommendations that were recommended as parts of those efforts. We also looked at some anticipated projects in the near term and key partnerships for the districts. So some key priorities that we found in looking at past planning efforts, and in some of the conversations that we've had with this group and other key stakeholders, we know that the whole reason for Boulder Junction's existence is to create a walkable and transit oriented area. So that's clearly a priority. Looking at Boulder Junction Phase 2 has also emerged a priority, and understanding what that'll look like over the next several years. Here, as we know, the the Gids were formed to look at parking and transportation demand management.

[49:06] So those are key priorities moving forward for these districts as well. Looking at some capital improvement improvements is also a key priority, including the slew and the potential for a pocket park. In the districts increasing vibrancy is something we heard quite a bit about, and looking at different options for programming and activation. And then, as Rtd. If and when Rtd. Service returns, ensuring that the garage parking amenities are balanced, also emerged as a priority. so some challenges that we flagged, and and things will be digging into. As we look at, opportunities for the future are that the funding levels for the the general improvement districts in Boulder Junction currently exceed the current plan program and capital needs for the districts. We also want to look at how to define the the role of the General Improvement districts. When we look at phase 2 of the Boulder Junction Development

[50:16] we heard that there has been commission debate over the appropriate mill levy amounts, and and sort of in that same vein. We've also heard that there has been a challenge in recruiting commissioners to be part of both of these commissions. So that's that's a challenge as well. And then the fact that there are 2 Gids overlapping does result in a bit of an administrative burden. So we just wanted to flag that as well. So next I'm going to turn it over to Brad to talk about some opportunities Thanks, Amanda, and thanks everyone for having us as part of the agenda. So in looking at the general improvement districts, and to remind you. We're doing this for all the Gids in Boulder. So we're looking at downtown. We're also looking at University Hill. But for each set of improvement districts we're looking at are there near term adjustments that we should be looking at? We, the city and board members, your stakeholders

[51:19] versus longer term horizon. So we actually have a phone call scheduled Monday with our legal counsel, because we think these 1st 3 actually have legal implications. But we think we need to explore them as adjustments could be warranted here in the near term. one is combining your districts, so there is a pretty strong relationship between transportation demand and parking. They have different boundaries, and that's going to make it a little tricky in terms of how they could be combined. But we definitely want to raise the question and look at maybe streamlining this into one district. Temporary mill, levy, reduction. You are generating more revenue than is being expended. Certainly, on the uses that were envisioned originally for these districts. So the thought here is is

[52:12] because we want to make sure that in the future that you're maximizing your opportunities, that perhaps your current rates are maximums or caps. But is there an opportunity to provide a lower mill levy some relief to the ratepayers in the near term also expansion. We need to understand how these districts could potentially expand. There is development potential around Boulder Junction, certainly to the east of you guys. So so how does that play? And we have a game plan for evaluating expansion of these districts? And then in terms of services, and and what the districts actually do more programming and activation to increase the vibrancy of of the area moving forward. And that's similar to what the districts do. And on the hill and downtown, and then long term. And some of this gets to the development potential and the surrounding area that I mentioned.

[53:11] Not to forget urban renewal. It's it's an old tool that boulder still has, and it could be appropriate, particularly for new development. The existing phase one, I mean, you're brand new. So you're not particularly good. you're. You're not a good candidate for traditional urban renewal, but some of the empty properties that will be developing near you might be there might be other special district ways to finance infrastructure again in new development areas. So we want to bring up some options that boulder doesn't typically use, such as special improvement districts or metro districts that could be used again for infrastructure in neighboring areas. And overall, looking at continued support for a variety of transportation options that evolve pretty clear. And from prior presentation this afternoon the types of transportation options that we were thinking of 7, 8 years ago, and some versus some of the new ones just don't exist. So, having flexibility for the future as as mobility evolves.

[54:15] so with that. That is a quick run through our evaluation and some of the opportunities. And, Regan, I'll probably toss it back to you Thanks, Brad, I will toss it to the Commission to see if there are any questions Yeah, hey, Brad, real quick a couple of questions as you look at. Possibly the legal options for combining districts. I'd like to encourage that we keep the mill levies as 2 separate levies, so that in the future something like building a parking garage. If that comes up, does it cannibalize from the transportation demand funds.

[55:04] So that's kind of question. Suggestion number one. The second one is about metro districts. So while the districts today kind of act in a similar ways, and in which case, you know, we have a mill levy. It is against an ever increasing property valuation which increases over time. Metro districts specifically have earned a lot of well well deserved criticism. In the news. Recently there there does tend to be some charges of corruption, but definitely a lot of neighborhoods that never get out from underneath them long after that infrastructure has been paid off. So that is something that I would be concerned about before bringing those into into this neighborhood, and then we'll talk about it a little bit more later. But when we talk about reducing temporarily or otherwise than the levy

[56:05] for the parking district. My understanding, after reading the municipal code and previous minutes, is that the voters have approved up to 30 mil levy for this district. So as long as we stay within those bounds, and we meet the public meeting notices and things like that, to to raise them above to 20, or to raise them up to 30. There's different cliffs there for for public notice that it is the city council can can lower them without any any other legal stuff. But obviously I'm not a lawyer. Consult, you know, with your representation. There Great Rebecca. Thank you for that. A couple of quick comments on on your questions or comments. I'm intrigued at the notion of a combined district with different levies, so that hadn't crossed our mind. And I thank you for that. We'll definitely run that

[57:01] by legal counsel. And in Metro districts. Yes, there has been misuse of them. I actually teach this for a graduate class at the Cu planning school in Denver, and part of the misuse has been because of negligence by municipalities. So if if we would argue, if used properly, there, there could be some benefit to this only for new development, that we would not recommend that this be introduced into the area that's already been developed in Boulevard Maybe just a quick question about the use of the word temporary with the mill levy reduction. I'm just wondering what the intention is behind that the the, what, the, what, the meaning is with with temporary. There Well as as we understand the dynamics in Boulder Junction. Your world could change quickly if the transit amenities that you've had in the past, and and that were promised by Rtd if they return or they're enhanced.

[58:06] So we wanna make sure you've got flexibility to respond to changes in the market changes in the transit amenity that is so close to you guys. And and really was the impetus for the for the development in the 1st point. So so it's really to retain flexibility and understand that the demand for both Tdm and parking could change pretty quickly, based on transit access Do. Do you think that? The factor that Rebecca mentioned about the the voter pre-approval for the higher levies than we currently have? The ability for Council to move that number up and down within that boundary. Is that fit? The that maybe what you might suggest, as far as meaning temporary, like just keeping it within those bounds, changing it lower until such future need arises. Is that what you're

[59:05] the meaning is Yeah. And I see I see Matt is getting on the screen. He'll know this better than than I do. But that's interesting, because you might already be lower right than your charter allows, which in theory could be a temporary reduction from the beginning. So I think we want to go back and look at the source documents again. See where you currently lie in all of this, and then look at the. And again, part of it is us just brushing up on the latest on Gids. These tools have been around for 50 years. There have been some amendments to how they're they're used over time, and we just want to get the the word from legal. Is this something that this Board could determine, you know, from year to year? Or does it need council authorization. And if I could add on, I'm pretty sure it needs council authorization. But, The the other part of this. It's true that you know, we wanna do a good job of understanding the governance of this, and and how get recommendations from puma about how to do that properly. But there's another part of this that I think is important. Ryan. Is

[60:11] that the way that we announce this to the taxpayers is and saying it's temporary. It may not be functionally different than city council, making some change for any number of reasons. but to to express that, you know temporary relief right now. It. It is meaningful. But we, you know, with an eye towards changes that are in, you know, sort of mapped out in the strategy when different things come online so that people aren't surprised and think they've got a permanent change. And then we take it back. So it's about expectations. I guess Yeah, messaging makes sense. A separate thought. I had. also have done some reading for our

[61:01] matters from Commissioners section that's later in the meet. You know this this current session meeting. There was a note in the founding docs around how the 2 different commissions could function administratively, as one you know. Appointments to them could, you know by Council could effectively be to both. We do function as a joint commission today, although not. Everybody is a member of both. So it's kind of like a it's a little bit strange, right? We meet together always at the same time, but not everybody is a member of both. If you look at our 2 rosters, I think the combination of both would fill all the seats if they did if everybody had to be a member of both at the same time. So it's just an interesting factor there that they were anticipating the curiosity of having 2 overlapping districts when they were founded. But for whatever historical reasons, it's kind of ended up that we have people that are on one and not the other.

[62:06] So even just considering that suggestion in the founding docs could create some streamlining administratively. Just a just a thought. Thanks Brad. I'm not sure if you can see the the notes, but I just copied in the link for the Muni code. So if you're looking at the parking commission. 2 dot, 3, dot, 2, 2. Then it's dot 2 underneath that, and that talks about property taxes and would give you some a little bit more detail into what voters approved and what those thresholds are for changes

[63:01] Great. Thank you, boy. Instant gratification with this group. That's that's great. Any other questions for this team Thank you, Brad and Amanda. We'll see you in person on the 8th Yes, we'll be there on the 8.th Also, it'll be with the other districts, too. Right? So I think you'll find that quite interesting because we're gonna try to get all the Gids to have a Gid fest on April 8th and we'll go from there Thank you. I apologize for my confusion before, but now we move on to the proposed increase to district parking. Permit fees Thank you so much. I want to know. We have Molly map also on the call with boom properties. We provided a really brief memo for you all for this agenda item, we certainly can spend more time and energy on it. But we're really making this proposal and service to work that Molly, and Jessica Dieter at boom properties, have been doing with the Owners Association, of which

[64:21] the district is one of 5 owners of the parking garage at Depot Square, but through our parking management agreement with the owners the district is empowered to set the monthly parking permit rate fee for any pool, and leased parking spaces in the garage. So as the owners have decided to make more spaces available, to folks who want to purchase monthly leases. There is a role for the district to help normalize the rates that are charged for those pool, parking spaces for all the owners.

[65:01] Up till now. The the fee that we've published in the city's annual budget has been a $75 per month fee for garage permits at Depot Square at the same time. Owners had already previously went into an agreement with Morgan Creek, ventures to pool and lease a number of spaces for the past many years to help finance the conversion from the old gates and camera system that we had in the garage to the current gateless system. to the tune of a price of about a hundred $50 per permit per month. Morgan Creek ventures would like to continue this arrangement, and there are other folks that are interested in leasing spaces at the depot square garage. And but there's a question about the price. Morgan Creek ventures has been paying the equivalent of $150 per month. Our current posted rate for the district is $75 per month.

[66:06] Our when we look at the market. Comparisons is certainly a hundred $50 per month, fits with demand fits with what's charged in in other garages. And so we wanted to present this opportunity for you all to approve a rate increase effective April first, st or future pool parking at the depot square garage we do have, you know, more details in our heads in the background. We didn't. We don't have a formal presentation, for you can certainly spend more time on this but I just wanted to present the the issue for you and see if there's agreement on moving forward with the increase Yeah. And one thing to add to Chris's presentation here is there'll be more participation from the other owners of Depot Square Owners association. If we can raise this because they're gonna lose out on being able to

[67:04] place it to tenants or Hotel Parkers. And I know there's there's a demand from other entities that want this. So I think they want to. We want to be able to provide more. Permit parking, and we have to have the other owners participate in that. So. and they'll do it if they can get higher monthly rates Rebecca Yeah. I have a few questions which uses does Morgan Creek ventures use their their parking for today? They use it for their What's the building? That's right on junction on the east side of Junction. the office building right there that they think they even occupy in there So boulder commons Yes, yes, sorry Boulder Commons, and then they're also wanting to use it for one of the new properties that they're developing, or that's almost complete. The 30th on 30th Street

[68:04] Okay, so is the parking garage underneath Boulder Commons. North building is that full to capacity It's they've been using. It is full. I'm pretty sure it's full because they've needed these parking spaces for years. They've had them for 3 years. At this point Okay? And then, Chris, this this price increase. Would this affect the the low income residents and depot square building It wouldn't affect their oh, sorry, Chris, yeah, go ahead. No, this doesn't affect the the permit price that event charges for their their users. It just affects the price for any any parking spaces that they've decided they're not using for their residents that they want to make available to others. And again, eligibility is limited to other property owners in the parking district. That's who we're allowed to lease any additional spaces to

[69:08] Okay, what about other residents and other buildings in the district compared to commercial? As long as there is Associated with a property that's owned in the district. They're eligible, of course, the demand for space, as we see in most of our facilities of the city. The demand exceeds the supply, and so we would need to figure out a wait list system for any folks who would like to purchase a permit. Once all permits have been sold When I was on this board the 1st time, I believe the resident rate for a parking space in the garage was $50 a month, and that was including some kind of discount for residents in the district. Right? So I don't think that necessarily applied to commercial uses. So do you know what the rate is for Depot square residents? And do you know, if there's still a discount for for residents? Who want to purchase a spot or lease a spot in the garage

[70:18] Molly, do you know the rate that Havana charges for their residents I don't know. I don't know if they even charge. I don't know what they would charge for their. but that just would be the advantage apartments. If you're talking about residents within other buildings, the discount Not currently have a separate rate for folks who are purchasing as a resident. I would note that Morgan Creek ventures is looking to make some of the purchase some of the permits that they're purchasing available to their residents. You mean employees that also live in the district No, so they have both commercial and residential spaces. They're looking to make permits available. And I'm they're they're not allowed to up charge for permits there could be a pass through charge. But I'm not sure of that. How they're arranging that with their tenants

[71:20] Okay? If I just quickly pull up like a rent.com site, or something for 3,100 pearl, which is a which is a market rate residents across the street that's in the district. I think they charge $125 a month for permits. So I just want to make sure that while we're charging, based on demand and and for use that we're also still, it sounds like we. We've got a plan for those those affordable apartments which is a different rate, which is good. So I want to make sure that we're not penalizing people who can't afford it. But then, you know, there might be a different rate still, compared to to market rate across

[72:06] the neighborhood and other properties. I think, Chris, you said, maybe you have additional research for that I mean, we we don't currently have a different rate advertised for residents versus commercial Cern. Certainly something we could look into as far as the rates charged in other garages. Part of the challenge here is as some of our permits. We've only been charging $75 per month that's been holding the price of other permits and other garages down. So that's part of the dynamic as well. So we do need to and plan to make a more comprehensive do some more comprehensive analysis of all the, both on street and off street parking in Boulder Junction. so certainly looking to add that to the work plan moving forward. And Christine Edwards is here, and would be leading that with her team to do a more comprehensive analysis, because there's a lot of different challenges that are starting to crop up in Boulder Junction. As all of the new properties come online. So I know we're we're wanting to do that.

[73:22] hoping that we can get both on this particular issue today, but with the assurance that we're going to do a deeper dive on all the different products, and both garage and on street parking in the district, moving forward Yeah, my concern. I'm I'm fine with charging what what the market allows us to charge for parking in the garage. But my concern is that that's going to drive all of those cars that are buying $75 permits today to park on the street, and more in and outs more contentious like, you know, competition for street parking spaces. That also right now don't benefit the district because it goes to the general fund

[74:15] Christine, do you know how many people are currently paying for $75 a month? It had been 55 current partners through the Gid And I don't think And I think it was 55. Does that sound right, Molly? Yeah. And most of those aren't all those permit Parkers, Morgan Creek Yeah, I believe so, so. Yes, there's no any additional current permit Parkers out there just Morning Creek, and they've agreed to the 150 through other yeah. And then That's all. And also just to clarify the city, isn't leasing permits to the abandoned residents. That's what their own parking. So this won't affect that at all.

[75:07] because they own part in that garage I understand, Rebecca, you're referring to residents that don't live in the Advantage apartment building, but our owners, essentially or owner representatives within the Boulder Junction district, who sounds like at one time, and they were able to purchase permits in this garage. And that's news to me. So we're gonna have to do some deeper digging. There was that surface slot before. All of the development also happened at 30 Pearl, where there was a temporary arrangement there, but I think that was also Morgan adventures, so we can certainly do a deeper dive, not just with this garage, but an understanding. We have other challenges with residents because of desire for a neighborhood parking program. areas where we're charging hourly for on street parking, on residential streets, which is a unique

[76:01] condition in Boulder Junction that doesn't exist in most other areas where we're managing partner in this way. So we know that there is work that needs to happen in the neighborhood in this realm, but just want to be able to make this 1st step right now. So just to clarify. You're asking us to approve this language for this price increase effective before our next meeting. Without this additional information If you are so willing. Yes. I'm willing to make a motion to approve it. Okay, so let's officially get a motion. This is based upon the proposed recommended motion, which can be found on page 35 of your packet. which the motion reads, I move that Boulder Junction Access District Mission Parking approve an increase of the mark. The monthly district parking fee from $75 to 150 effective. April first.st The submit adjustment is intended to align, permit pricing with demand market conditions, and previously issued permit rates while ensuring the long term sustainability districts, parking assets.

[77:22] So if Ryan is proposing, do we have a second? A second? Okay, and approve Right. Like Ryan Kevin and Robin approve? I don't know why I had a hard time thing of the word. It's like not approve and abstain Am abstaining right now. I I'm okay with the with it on its merits. Given the information that the 55 permit holders are expected to be Morgan Creek ventures. I just would like to make sure that we're not driving people to the street parking

[78:17] It's very reasonable. So let's go ahead and note in the notes that we have 3 yays, no nos and one abstention. and so that passes Thank you so much Thank you. We unless we have additional discussion on that. We are moving on to matters from commissioners. And specifically, we're gonna start with Privilege while we have Molly here with boom properties. I did want to give you all an opportunity to to say hello and make sure that we're just all the same page of the role that boom properties plays in the management of the plaza area. Molly, I'm not sure how long you've been on the call. But we did have some comments at our previous meeting. Related to the the state of

[79:07] the infrastructure there, and I know that you all are instrumental in in helping to keep that space looking nice. And that, there is a list of things that you have upcoming. Just wanted to make sure that while we're all here, if there are any questions, or if there's anything more you wanted to share about the work you're doing. That would be a great time Yeah, yeah, so we do. We manage the upkeep of that plaza and the garage for the 5 different owners of that area. And so the city is owner in 2 different spots. The Gid is what Chris is the board member for is the parking, and then Christine is the board member for the depot. How like the restaurant which is owned by the city. And then there's 3 other users that own in that area, the plaza.

[80:01] So we work with those 5 owners on the that area, and we do keep up the maintenance of that area. So I did hear a comment about the bollards and that. and that is, we're working on a solution for that that works, and it won't just continue being hit. We're hoping the construction a little less construction that it will. You know we'll have be able to have something in there, but that is being worked on right now. And then. I think we do have a project coming up. Jessica is more on the maintenance side. I do the financial work on the property. But there'll be a paver project coming up for any tripping houses in the area trying to think of any other and then painting we're gonna work on, I think a painting proposal for the garage and continue keeping that up. So there are any questions that we can answer I'd like to thank you, Molly, for specifically addressing something that a member of the public brought up

[81:04] Yeah, no. Problem. Just about to say the same. Thanks, Molly. Thanks so much, Molly. Right. Thank you, Molly. See you guys. Thank you. Nice to meet you. We weren't. We were sent via email. But we are now moving on to discuss, approving the final Bjad parking. And Bjad, Tdm, although I don't think we can actually vote on that today priorities. So for the parking group has everyone had sufficient time to look over the matters and updates that were made from our last meeting Yeah, I I think, I I appreciate that it. We have kind of like the sub lists in the sense that we can share the 5 focused

[82:02] items depending on the context. And then obviously, we can expand into more detail where appropriate for the others. and it's just nice to feel that we have that a bit more of a limited scope of what we find really important rather than everything. Feeling like it needs to be important somehow. That kind of have that paradox of everything is important, that nothing's important, you know. I really appreciate the streamlined aspects of it as well. Any other comments Have a brief request. The words I highlighted are duplicates in their subject. And so I just wanted to make sure that everyone sees that, and that they're okay with this. Or if you wanted to change that, we could This is just my own neuroticism. But if we could change 10 Year Plan like capital improvement plan, I'd rather get rid of the yeah, I'd rather yeah. The 1st one

[83:08] Care about these 2 1.9 That one, for some reason, doesn't bother me Thank you. Okay, can do. We have a motion to approve this. This list with edits Oh! Should we wait till we're all together? Is it matter if we approve it as parking today versus waiting till we're all together to approve as both or Chris, do you have a So I don't have a a strong opinion. I think it's fine if you approve it as parking today. We could also, you know again, put it in the minutes we could actually do a formal consent agenda item with a vote to approve that if the Tdm. If we have a form with the next one, and they don't have any issues or concerns of the decision that you all make here today. Then we can consider it approved by them at the next meeting, for consent

[84:17] Okay. That seems good, so we would vote, and then it would go in the next packet, and if, unless someone brought up requested changes or concerns, it would just be what it was moving forward Yeah. Okay, I can make motion to approve with that X that Robin mentioned Like in a second that thanks Okay, all approve that is unanimous. So no further notes. We can note that and put that in consent, agenda, for next time. I would like to move on to the letter to City Council, which one of you will be representing, that

[85:11] We didn't discuss. I'm happy to talk about the process we went through. I don't know. Did did you all have a chance to read it. Okay, Rebecca, I mean you. You were the driver, you know, kind of in the last meeting. Do you want to just kick us off at least, and then we can just see where the discussion goes. Yeah. So in the subcommittee with Commissioner Cook, we went through. We looked at Muni code staff, helped answer some of our questions as well as track down some previous meeting minutes from 2,012, which was the last time the mill levy was changed for parking. Prior to that it had been 5, it was increased to 10 specifically to take on debt, to help with the parking depot square parking garage. Since that parking garage has been paid off, we do think it is a good time to to reduce it. City council acts as the board of directors for the district, and they have the actual authority to

[86:14] adopt a resolution. So our our letter definitely goes through. Here's the history of the district where we are today, what our needs are right now and then. We've also attached a our letter from last year as sorry independence and example, resolution, language to help speed up adoption by council, should they wish to adopt it. That doesn't mean it would not go through a legal review, but it should at least provide a starting point. Questions about it I was just gonna add a little bit of context that around our conversation, you know, we at the beginning, we're kind of talking about a bit more of a broad letter discussing a number of the items, but just given that they weren't requesting letters. We just thought it was important to focus on what it is. Why it was that we thought it was important to write this letter anyways, right? So that's why we narrowed in on the one specific issue.

[87:17] and attaching the letter from the previous year is. in my mind at least, important as a call out to say that we've brought it up to them before. Right? so I just think that yeah. 2, maybe helpful pieces of context for how the letter ended up looking the way that it did I definitely appreciate the amount of work that you've put in. I do think it's good to. And I I appreciate this time we put in the specific assessed value like an examples. That was, I think it. It's better than when we did last year. But I guess I'm curious. Are there any other considerations about the wording or anything else that the staff would like to add at this time

[88:07] Just for the Commissioners. Consider. So I'd say that the timing of this works really well with the work that puma is doing and the recommendations that we are taking to city Council? In April, I'd say that. this is context that we can certainly provide to counsel at that study session. If we get a formal vote of both commissions hopefully, at the April 8th meeting, in support of this work, and in support of language that's been provided, I'd say that on the staff side we want to do some more internal analysis to understand, not just the impact on an individual property owner which might be really attractive. But we need to do a multi year understanding of fund financials over time to understand what the impact of these changes could be over several years.

[89:03] so certainly appreciate the work that's been done, and would love to figure out a path with a formal vote of the commissions, to to get this in front of council as an officially approved message, but we'd like a little bit more time in advance, probably of that April 8th meeting to do some analysis to make sure that that we're all on the same page And Ryan. I see your hand No. Yeah, it. It's relating to actually, what Chris brought up, which is. how do we look at sending this letter in the context of the research be done by puma. I guess I was pleasantly surprised by that presentation today in that how specific it was I was maybe expecting, just given the amount of work to look at. the current state of, and then come up with suggested improvements, for across all the districts I thought it might be a bit more broad. So to see a specific suggestion in there already

[90:06] around the levee was promising. So I just don't know if. do we just continue with this as is, and we send it to counsel. They read it, and then just know. They also, of course, know that they're expecting the presentation and suggestions from the consultants upcoming soon, anyways like, is it? Or do we change the way that we want to deliver this to them, knowing that they're also getting that delivery of your information, you know, in the near future So given that we don't have a form for Tdm. We could only officially approve it as a as a message from Commissioners for parking currently. So might be worth making sure that we have time on the April 8th meeting. And Ellie, do we know for sure that we are going to have a forum for both of these commissions at the Joint Commission meeting. Yet no, I have not

[91:11] so Because this affects primarily parking. I I think it is fine to probably approve it with the parking commission, and if we don't get quorum for Tdm. On the 8th to to proceed as a parking commission only. Even if that means a slight change to to the intro Already passed on. And that is, yeah, entirely up to you. and how you want to proceed. I will add the certification of no levies typically happens during the second reading of the Budget adoption, which is in October. So not to delay this. But we do have a little bit of a time on our side with this one, if we do want to. To. Chris's suggestion, look at fund financials and the fund health

[92:15] from the impact of a reduction in Bill Levy, bring that back to the Commission for further information, and also to further explore the improvement and out district improvements analysis on that as well. So typically, again, the certification of property mill levies happens at that second reading, which is usually in October by counsel And Kevin Yeah, thanks, Robin. I'm I think. Rebecca took a bit most of my comment, which was just that this letter reads as if it's from the Parking Commission. It seems appropriate that the Parking Commission would have the the most say over its own its own mill. Levy, seeing that we're not recommending here a change to the Tdm. Mill levy. So I I think it's it's good. I appreciate the time and thought that went into it. I I think we we get it off as a way to to start the discussion, and you know, at least this is kind of on the front burner, and then we can continue to evaluate. See if we get any additional feedback. And,

[93:20] you know, provide even more more information as the year goes by. I I think that if I was on, if I was on council and and I saw that I'd probably want to know where you know why we aren't reducing it further on the parking commission, you know. Where is, you know the other amount of the the proceeds going towards? And is there other, you know? Is there other plans, or is it all just a contribution into the general management of the districts that's shared with the the other Tdm. District Calling on myself. So I I agree with the the general premises and everything that that was just said previously by both Rebecca and Kevin. On this. I I do think that the purpose of the mill levy has, you know. That's that's

[94:11] if if the the primary purpose is different, then we should, we should consider reducing it. We've discussed this past couple of years. I also think that this is primarily a parking issue, so it would be completely valid. Having said that, and also in keeping with the presentation we had today. If there is a discussion that we would eventually merge. Tdm, and especially if that's going to be discussed, I think there's a value in having their input as well, especially since it seems like we have time. So while I would completely support this letter as is going forward. I just I think there's not necessarily the the rush with getting this out and approved today, and I think I would like to give the staff time to at least present all of the additional information that they would want to have by April 8.th

[95:00] And that's just my perspective on that. So Ryan I just wanted to ask for some clarity on the study from puma. What? What are the expected delivery dates for their work to council again. They're presenting at the study session in April. Okay. April 24, th okay, so we have our joint meeting, April 8.th And then that's where we see what they will present on the 24, th is that right? Yeah, that's correct. Okay? And so we're the quorums are required there because that we want the commissions to approve the what they are going to deliver to council. Okay. Got it. So I want to raise, too, and this is a hypothetical but the work that commences after this initial touch to Council is the commercial areas blueprint.

[96:02] And this is a longer term visioning effort for each of the commercial areas that we manage. And it could include some recommendations of how resources could or should be programmed for for both capital and operations, for instance. And as again, this is just a hypothetical, not a not a. This is what we're doing. But right now. Rtd owns 75 parking spaces at the depot square garage that essentially have been completely unusable for a number of years now, because they are prohibited by law to lease out those spaces for monthly permits, and there with their bus station closed. Folks can't use it as the Rtd. Parking. So that's partially why the garage has been so underutilized. An option could be for this commission to decide that they want to purchase those 75 parking spaces from Rtd. And then your ownership goes from 100 parking spaces to 175 parking spaces which we could then lease out to more residents and commercial owners. I just say that as a hypothetical of something that could be on the list of prioritized

[97:22] uses of funds that might help you achieve your goals, but comes with a price tag that we'd need to cover it doesn't mean that we couldn't revisit the lower the mill levy and then and then make some decisions that might suggest we need to adjust it. But I want to make sure that you all are aware that that's the realm of contemplation that we're currently in of. Yes, one route is reducing my levy to current uses Another route could be contemplating other uses that we haven't really talked about yet.

[98:01] Brian. Chris. Do you think that that would be something that you might include in some additional information on April 8? th Or is that too soon to to like hypothesize what a purchase might look like in a multi year budget of those spaces. As an example I just wanted to share that as a hypothetical. But a 10 Year Plan could look like. And that's the next steps of this work doesn't preclude us from lowering the mill levy. But there, that's you saw the word temporary, and pumas Right. Presentation. I just wanna let you all know some of the some of the work that's upcoming, and maybe a. Our purchase of Rtd. Is not even in the cards, but that that's not a small expense, either. Yeah, I think I do. All I meant was, is that the kind of thing that you you said we want Staff to present some additional information on April 8, th or or in other future meetings are related to this topic. Is that the kind of thing that you would include in a presentation like that? Or is that

[99:08] And then that would be future as far as the blueprint. The April 8.th What we want to do is present numbers associated with with the recommendations of adjusting the levy and the impacts on the long term fund financials, and making sure that the adjustments that we make can keep the fund healthy. And so that's the work that we would do before. April 8.th Okay. So if we hold off on voting, whether we want to deliver this letter to council by the 8, th then we get a chance to understand this additional information that you want to present, and we can make a better. We can make a decision at that point is that your suggestion I, yeah, I mean, I I want to remain agnostic. If you want to make decisions today, that's totally fine. But we do again. We're right in the middle of this work.

[100:04] the and there's and we have Wiggle Room certainly want to make a decision on all this before the recommended budget. and and 2026 mill levies go to the county and we do have wiggle room to work with, but also agnostic, as whether whether or not a decision gets made today. April 8, th or sometime thereafter Okay, thank you. That's helpful. Appreciate it. Rebecca Yeah, I don't know that we should be making decisions on continuing to collect a higher mill levy on the chance that in the future we may take on. Take on that to buy parking spaces. You know there are a couple of things that we know right? Rtd is hopefully planning to resume service this summer. And I don't want to take away from our transit demand management aspects by permanently leasing out those parking spaces on the monthly aspect, and not having them available for for transportation users. So I do think that the mechanisms already exist to to raise the rate again in the future. If if and when

[101:20] that ever becomes a concern that we, we would want to buy more spaces Thank you. Kevin Thanks again, you know same comments as Rebecca. It's helpful. Just have her go right before me because I I feel the same way. It's I. I feel like we should get this off. We've had a on our priority list a 10 year sit plan for 2 to 3 years now, you know, as of now, we don't have any identified expenses. I I feel like this, Mill Levy, how we've been charging this to property owners is irresponsible to a certain point, and I think, like it's even more responsible for, you know, just to charge it in case there's something that we may want to spend it for in the future

[102:10] Thank you for your feedback. Rebecca again Oh, I forgot one comment, and that is the fact that we know that the mill levy is disincentivizing other properties from joining this district, even as they join the transportation Demand management district. So you know, if we could lower it so the pilot doesn't isn't out of control when they want to join the district that could actually add increased revenues generally in the future as well, because it's more accessible Do we have additional comments or discussion on this point? Does anyone want to vote on whether or not parking would vote on like, does anybody want to make a motion on any way of of parking, either sending this forward as themselves, or waiting for Tdm. Or just voting our section and doing. Tdm, later.

[103:17] What are thoughts? If if we, if we vote and we want to send the letter to council when it would go in the packet for the 28.th Is that right? Or it would go like to some sort of internal delivery address more immediately, or something It could go either way, if I mean we would. Probably the quickest way is to add it on to a next meeting packet. If there's a formal motion it. Probably if it was requested of the Commission as the parking commission, to make sure, is included in the meeting packet for the study session. We would gladly do that as well.

[104:02] which would probably When. Perspective make more sense to me When does that packet get finalized? When when would be the last day we could provide you with the the letter to for that 10, April 10.th The only reason I ask is, I'm wondering if we, if we learn anything new from the larger presentation from puma on the 8th that might encourage us to change any of the language, or to speak in support of their work, or I don't know anything like that. Would we wished we would have waited for their presentation to make any last adjustments to the letter, or do we want to vote now to send it as it's written I mean, it sounded like they could possibly even suggest lower than 5, which would also be fine, but would build upon our letter, and not necessarily, you know, detract from it. I I guess I would say that I would rather get Parking's votes today in case for some reason, any horrible reason or good reason out there that we don't have a quorum on the A as parking that we are ready to go.

[105:15] and not a fan of punting it Yeah, I agree with that. And I actually think it's most appropriate for for it to come just from the Parking commission You're you're also okay, Kevin, with voting for it as is written today. And and and okay. I'm I'm okay with voting today. Okay, would one of you like to make a motion Would the would the motion be something Like, would we vote to to send it as is today? And I'm I'm hearing expressly and specifically from the Parking Commission I think we would need Ellie to bring up the word version of this document so that we could edit Tdm. Out of the intro and out of the signature line

[106:01] Okay. And then So with those edits, then Yes, with those setups Okay. Is there any concern about the I think? Isn't there one other parking Commissioner? That's not here, is it? Actually, is it only just us 4 Everyone else. Growing. Yeah. Every parking's fully represented today. Oh, okay, got it. So that's why I feel comfortable voting on it for for just parking So with the edits of taking out Tdm You want me to do that now, or can I do that off screen? There I think you can do that off screen like. yeah, we don't need to see it on. We don't need to sit it. We we believe you that you're taking out? Tdm, so if we're so with that in mind, can we, just for official notes, have have a vote on who would support sending letter, as is with the edits of taking out Tdm.

[107:02] I make a motion motion to Make a voucher Approve as commission. After Tdm. Has been removed, I will just at least once you have it on here. Not not all instances of Tdm. Need to be removed. That second thing of Tdm. That you have highlighted. There is just like clarifying that. But they have a middle of 5. So And That that one needs to stay in because that's contest. It just needs to not come from. Tdm, okay, so I I move that we. We remove the introduction and the signature from Tdm. Make this letter from the parking commission and get it sent off to Council Okay, do we have a second Yes, I can. Second.

[108:00] Hey, Ryan? And all, all in favor Okay. Bye. All opposed. I'm abstaining, and we can put that in the notes Our next meeting, for this is May 21, st but to the point we do want and need quorum at the April 8th meeting. So just as a reminder to commissioners. If you haven't gotten back to the staff, please let them know now that you are, I'm probably the worst person on this commission, I always think I've rsv'd, and I haven't. So if you haven't, Rsvp's the staff, please do so now. But do we have any other matters before we adjourn today. In that case I want to thank everyone for your time. I want to thank the staff, and I want to thank our presenters today for all of the information, and I look forward to seeing everybody. At April 8th

[109:06] Thanks for Landing Robin Yep, thanks, Robin. Thanks. Steph. Thanks, Steph, thanks, Robin. Thanks. Everyone. You all, everyone. See you guys