January 5, 2021 — City Council Regular Meeting

Transcript

Captions from City of Boulder YouTube recording.

[0:00] Walk and Run event inviting and encouraging Law Enforcement Officers their families the community and special Olympic athletes and families to participate in this fundraising and awareness building event his dedication and efforts largely done on his own time but with the full support of the Boulder Police Department and in conjunction with others passionate about this cause have made an indelible imp impact on so many lives from the special Olympic athletes he and officers bonded with to new relationships created with community members during these events Dave's efforts brought positivity and goodwi not just to the Bolder police department but to the city of Boulder as a whole we the members of the Boulder City Council recognize thank and appreciate the service and significant contributions made to our community and Beyond by

[1:01] Sergeant Dave sa and recognized internationally by the Special Olympics thank you for all that you have done and for passing the torch to the Next Generation day so with that I believe that we have Sergeant sa here to say a few words and to receive the Declaration I'm afraid I'm not actually seeing him in the meeting at the moment Sam unless he's here under a different name um perhaps Chief Herold would like to say a few words mayor first thank you he was here I don't know if technology uh pushed him out of the uh the meeting room but um this is so special today because he is actually retiring um in a week or so and I can just tell you from my perspective since I've been here he has been an outstanding uh supervisor and a professional and I really appreciate this and it means a lot to the other officers that have worked with Dave and so from the bottom of my heart mayor and

[2:01] members of city council I most certainly appreciate this declaration and unfortunately I don't see Dave coming back in but I know he's very appreciative and thank you so much very good thank you very much Chief and I'll turn to other council members to see if anyone else would like to say a few words of recognition or thank you to Dave so we see collaps everywhere thank you very much for all your hard work Sergeant SA and with that we will turn to our second recognition of the evening and for that I will turn to council member young Mary Mary as a reminder you need to change um language channels please Gra

[3:24] Grand Le n ens

[4:28] for B

[5:17] individual idas and engl Ned way

[6:28] n boulderfield

[7:28] EAP Boulder

[8:28] bould n

[9:21] [Music] n [Music] for

[10:28] com I actually believe that nah is going to speak on her fa for her family on um in honor of her father Norma is here but the family would like nah to speak she is in the meeting and Nina you might like to turn on your camera and you should be able to unmute yourself hi everyone can you hear me okay okay um hi everyone my name is Nina Christensen I'm Nino's um I grew up watching my dad work

[11:02] tirelessly for our community and have always admired his dedication and his passion for serving others on behalf of our family here in Colorado and those joining us um in Chile um we want to say thank you for this incredible honor um in declaring January 5th my dad's birthday as Nino Gallow day so thank you so much um yina christans

[12:06] thank you thank you Nina for your words and thank you Mary for reading that declaration uh I would turn we're having some difficulty with the channels Crossing Mary I think you might still be in the English Channel I I think now if we bring it back to a single Channel perhaps um and and I guess the translation can continue in the Spanish Channel that's helpful Mary I did hear you um speaking to the

[13:00] um group in Spanish so uh is there anyone on Council um who would like to say a few words of this point I'm watching for hands seeing none I want to thank you Mary again and thank um all the members of Mr Gallo's family who are here tonight um the service that he's provided um is spoken to very well in the Declaration and the memory uh of the service that he's providing to our community will continue to live both through his family and through the programs that he has worked with with that I think we're ready to move on to the final of our opening items which is the covid public health briefing and response and I think I will turn to Chris and see Chris do you want to bring us the first few folks and introduce them sure yeah to begin the presentation we'd like to welcome Jeff Zak and Chris Campbell from Boulder County Public Health thank you Chris thanks uh Sam and to

[14:02] council members always appreciate coming back uh we're certainly hoping that 2021 is going to be a better year uh Nino was a very special person and did a lot of incredible work for all of us so um certainly starting off the year in a better place uh would be positive as we move forward so what I'm going to do tonight is I've shortened my typical update a bit and provided more space for Chris Campbell who is our emergency manager um and so that we can talk about what I know is on everybody's minds and that's vaccine updates um so I will quickly go through the data give you a picture of what it looks like what we anticipate over the next few weeks um and then we'll turn to Chris to to work through some vaccine information in addition we have Dr Chris arbina on the phone with us this evening who can help answer questions uh around vaccines as well if if they come up uh so next slide

[15:06] please this is the state data uh reported as of this morning and what you can see here is a spike and then a downward Trend uh and you can see there's little tails on multiple spaces in that graph as it goes down what we hope we will see is a tail that's going up now but then continues down um but we are expecting uh to see some increases in cases and I'll talk a little bit more about why we're expecting that next graph please this is the Metro data that I've shown you uh each month that I've presented and you can see on this graph that there's little Tales there as well and just as a reminder uh Boulder County is the is the the graph that's in red the line graph that's in red there uh we have remained for the most part the second lowest if you look overall and

[16:00] have stayed pretty low in terms of our 7-Day moving average for new cases um but unfortunately what we're still seeing uh coming off of this Christmas holiday season and New Year's um is this little bit of a tail that we hope doesn't cause another Spike for us next slide please this is the dial that I have shared with you each month I've presented and as you know the last time I presented to you we were in red on the dial which is severe risk I think everybody is pretty aware at this point that the governor made an announcement last week that as of Monday this week he would be moving all counties that were in red incidence to Orange so as of Monday uh we are now in the orange level on the dial uh so we have made adjustments in terms of our messaging uh and are reaching out with our partners to make sure that all of the folks in our community know that we have switched

[17:01] on our dial itself what you can see are the three measures below that that that we are that we measure relative to where we are on the dial positive news here is that our incident is below 350 per 100,000 for a two-e period we're at 342 um our second indicator is in green um which is our two-e average positivity rate at 4.3 um and our third indicator is uh is just in the red at seven days of declining or stable hospitalizations in Boulder County uh and I'll show you another graph of specific hospitalizations in Boulder County for people who are both uh in our hospitals that live within and outside of Boulder County as we go through this next slide please this is the state uh three-day incidence Trend and the reason I wanted to show you this is the three-day incidence Trend allow allows us to see more quickly what our case numbers look

[18:01] like and in the state of Colorado you can see that where the line goes from green to Red there uh that we are heading in the wrong direction that essentially means that we are seeing more cases increase over a short period of time um and as I had mentioned earlier we expect to see this um increase a bit more today when we met with the State Health Department we learned from the Mobility data that our Mobility data over the last two and a half weeks as compared to Thanksgiving as an example um we were showing more Mobility so less people staying at home um so unfortunately we are expecting uh to see some increased cases associated with both the Christmas holiday as well as New Year's we will not know exactly what that looks like until we get to about the 15th of January and again the reason for that is even though people show symptoms um the majority of people show symptoms within 5 to seven days um

[19:01] some people do go the full 14-day incubation period um but most will show symptoms earlier than that there is a delay from the time that somebody shows symptoms to the time they get tested to the time that those reports get back to us at the local public health agency so really by the 15th of January we'll have a better picture of what it looks like uh for us moving forward next slide please this is our 5-day average number of new cases and uh as you can see we are at 83 uh this was absolutely headed in the correct direction we are back into the space where we have a much better chance at following up with all of our cases as well as all of our contacts uh obviously we want to keep that as low as possible um it it did come up a little bit in the last couple days so again we'll continue to watch that next slide please this is a busy graph but it's our

[20:00] it's each of our age groups from the 0 to9 age group to the 75 plus age group and it shows what the two-e incidence is of new cases in Boulder County uh as you can see it's pretty much flattened out with some increases 75 plus and unfortunately uh when we see increases in that age group we know that that often results in hospitalization so it's something uh we want to keep a close eye on in general our cases um have stabilized but again it's flattened and we do expect a bit of a bump up we just don't know how significant or severe that bump up will be next slide please this is our five-day rolling average percentage uh positivity rate uh so the one that I showed you on the dial was a two we or a 14 day so this allows us to be a little more to see Trends a little more quickly so we can see that our positivity rate is increasing it's

[21:01] now above 5% uh which means that we want to do all that we can to continue to increase testing we have plenty of testing capacity in our County if you just go to Boulder County Public Health covid-19 testing it'll give you the sites locations hours where it's free um and how to access that testing uh because we have plenty of access it's really important especially after holidays like this to get tested um and you don't have to have symptoms to get tested the testing is free it's available please take advantage of it we we know the testing is available at least until March 31st next slide please this is our hospitalizations um so as you can see here we've been on a decline uh and this is what we would hope to continue to see typically what we see as a pattern is we'll see our cases increase 14 to 16 days later we'll see hospitalizations

[22:00] increase and then our lagging indicator um is unfortunately deaths and we've certainly seen a lot more deaths in Boulder County um in the latter half of this surge uh than the previous part of this surge so it's really important that we see our cases go down it's really important that we see our hospitalizations continue to decline so that we continue to see red reductions in death as well next slide please this is the number of deaths as mentioned and the difference between the blue graph and the orange graph is just people who are associated with long-term care facilities we know that this has uh this disease has a higher impact on our older population in terms of severe um death and disease what is interesting about uh the disease in the latter half of this is that we see less people from

[23:00] a percentage standpoint impacted who are in the long-term care or or the uh most elderly age group and we're seeing a little bit more people impacted in lower age groups um so it is a little bit of a shift from the early part of this but the bottom line for us is we want to do everything we can to prevent these deaths and we know that if we follow the strategies that I've talked to you about each week that I've presented here that we can that we can actually eliminate and reduce what we're seeing on this graph here next slide please uh this is my last slide and then I'm going to turn it over to Chris uh this is the message that I like to make sure I continue to share um and at this point uh this is an estimate as of late last week about one in 92 people are infectious Statewide and this number will probably go up a little bit to to look a little bit better with projections at the end of this week that the Colorado School of Public Health

[24:01] will run um and we hope that it continues to go up because what with this much infection in our community we still have a high chance of people being exposed to somebody who is infectious um and if you compare this number to three and a half four months ago we were around one in 800 to 900 people who were infectious so we have a lot more infection in our community at this point uh and we want to continue to to make sure we're doing everything we can to reduce spread and again the the challenging um part here is that 50% of those people are roughly 50% of those people are asymptomatic and don't even realize they have the disease hence again please take advantage of our testing uh it'll help you figure out if you one of those one in 92 who could be potentially infectious but not but not even know that you're infectious uh last thing I'll end with here is again this

[25:01] is preventable we wouldn't have to to have the debates that we have around some of the prevention strategies and controls uh if we could maintain the distance at least six feet apart we could make sure that we're masking masking definitely works as I've showed you previously on on slides I've presented to you um and there is hope with vaccines coming uh and we definitely want to spend the a fair amount of time here just talking about where are we with vaccines lots of confusing information in the Press so we really appreciate the opportunity to provide some clarity here tonight so with that I'll stop and turn it over to Chris Campbell thank you Jeff uh good good evening Council uh good evening to um all the city staff it's so great to see you all good evening to all the community members that are joining us um my name is Chris Campbell I'm emergency manager with B count and public health

[26:01] and I'm going to do a brief update just on where we're at today with um with our progress on covid-19 vaccination so I'll jump right into that and again thank you for letting me present this even uh I I would like to uh just remind the group that we are just now going into our fourth week of vaccinating so we're just uh we are three weeks in starting our fourth week um so we're excited to share this update and and provide some good information next slide please so today we uh Statewide have administered about 115,000 uh vaccines that's gone to our phase one and phase B group which I'll talk a little bit about and you might be familiar with uh in Boulder County we've administered approximately 6,000 vaccine doses today and we're excited about that number although we know uh we have quite a bit of work to do next slide

[27:03] please so just to uh get a little granular and where we're at with with community members and vac and and getting them vaccinated um we um let's see little bit out of order but uh so we have worked very hard I'll go back just a little bit to that that first phase of onea Frontline Healthcare work uh so we have uh just about completed our work with that I I I definitely want to make sure and recognize all the incredible work of the hospitals in the county and in our community to help with those very Frontline healthcare workers um these are these are healthcare workers that worked very directly with uh covid positive patients because covid positive community members uh have really been in the trenches for many many months and weeks uh and we have um worked we're really working through that group and excited to be working with

[28:00] them uh additionally as part of that initial phase of vaccine um we uh the the state and uh is working along with a federal partnership uh with CVS and walgre and this is focused on long-term care facilities in our community I think as you just saw Jeff mentioned this is a group of community members that really have been disproportionately impacted by this by this disease uh and we are working very hard to get that group vaccinated uh through this Federal Pharmacy partnership uh so that is continuing uh we have connected we have about 40 or so uh facilities in our County we know that they have been connected with either CVS or Walgreens um teams are being sent out to facilities uh for uh to provide vaccine to both staff and residents of long-term care facilities the state is providing vaccine allocations to these to this Pharmacy partnership

[29:02] and we know that these have have started and they are um we've had feedback that they've done very well in in facilities where they have gone and vaccinated uh both residents and staff next slide please We additionally uh have moved to um another phase within the Statewide plan uh this is moderate risk healthcare workers we're working with them as well um we are excited that we have been able to partner with our hospitals uh we have about 2700 First Responders in our community uh that are are getting vaccinated currently uh and we're excited uh that the hospitals have helped out with that partnership uh so that is in process and and moving very well um we have had uh it's now our third um uh vaccination clinic that Boulder County Public Health has held uh

[30:01] and this is really focused on outpatient healthcare workers that aren't necessarily associated with with a hospital um so this includes just community members it could be dentists it could be community members uh working in physical therapy uh so we U we had a great clinic today we've actually about 420 community members today we're very excited about that process in progress uh additionally uh Safeway uh pharmacies we have three locations that are providing vaccines throughout the community in Boulder County um one in Erie one in Boulder and one in lawnmont and they started vaccinating this past weekend so uh as you see we're we're gaining momentum we're gaining additional providers uh and additional options for community members to get vaccinated so that's all very excited next slide please um and and you might have heard so there

[31:00] has been some shifts in uh in the Statewide phasing and the Statewide vaccination plan um so we we just want to acknowledge those and just let uh community members know let the council know we're methodically moving through these phases um and we are working with the State Health Department um to continue to understand some of the shifts they're making um and adjusting our planning assumptions accordingly um so again we're working through that phase 1A group um and nearly done with that we're working with phase 1B and moving through that I think the uh important point I want to make with this slide is just a a little context around the vaccine allocation that's available for our state currently so um our state um is being allocated between the two vaccines Mna and fiser we're getting about 60,000 vaccines allocated to the state of

[32:02] Colorado on a weekly basis about 30,000 give or take for the madna vaccine and about 30,000 doses for the fiser vaccine um currently about 20,000 of those doses are going to the pharmacy partnership so that we uh work through and get our long-term care facility staff and residents vaccinated that is about 40,000 doses for the entire state that is being allocated so I think what's important with that message is um the vaccine allocation is it's just not quite there uh it is ramping up uh it's going to take us a little while longer to work through this phasing and I'll talk a little bit more about that on the next slide I just want to give some context about really what's available um to the state and really what's being allocated to to our community B next slide please so um you might have heard so we did uh

[33:01] certainly one big shift that we recently heard about in the Statewide phasing was adding a group of um of older community members 70 plus um we know that that group is approximately about 30,000 community members in Boulder County so our um with this knowledge and knowing that this group has been moved to this phase uh 1B uh we're engaging as many partners as possible so you've heard me mention hospitals uh you've heard me mentiones we're we're uh working with additional Pharmacy partners and they're going to be on board very soon uh we're working with the University of Colorado we're working with um the additional clinics in in the community uh including a clinic G salute oured qualified Health Centers to really start to meet this demand uh but I also want to frame that in in the messaging for community members and again is um the vaccine allocation the available amount of vaccine is going to take a little while

[34:01] to ramp up and be available to this group I just wanted to to make that point here um additionally uh I I I would like to mention uh you'll see this group um of essential workers as well that was added to into this phase 1B uh Frontline essential workers so Educators uh other Frontline Community members uh have been uh move to this phase and uh what we also want to be clear about is uh we have been has been made very clear to us that we need to get through the phases ahead of that the 70 plus community members before we move on to those front line Central work so it's going to take a little time uh to methodically move through this um and we're working our hardest um and to really meet that need and and get vaccine out community members as as quickly as possible uh one other point point I want to make with this slide is um we have been very involved in the

[35:01] Statewide planning from the very start uh we had a plan the Statewide plan was submitted to CDC about two and a half months ago our Health Equity coordinator Sheila D Davis uh was very involved in the creation of that plan and d g draw our communicable e Emergency Management division manager was very involved every part of that uh plan and our our work in that was really framed and the health Equity lens so as we move into uh this phase of working with Frontline essential workers uh we know that we will very strive very we will work very hard um to to put that Health Equity and racial Equity lens uh front and center and ensuring that we meet the need of community members we're providing vaccine access Clarity of work folks and access vaccine to all B County community members um so we've hired a um we've hired a vaccination cultural broker that is

[36:02] helping with forming a Grassroots um uh really a community engagement plan and uh we we're continuing to work on that so we're ready to go when when vaccine is more widely available um and we know that we can work with community members and meet them where they're at and and and answer their questions about the vaccine and make sure they have access to the vaccine than uh and again just kind of talking about scale the plan so as we move into the second phase potentially in the spring of of this year um the the groups are are looking like this with the plan um so this is uh older community members this is a really big group those with underlying health conditions uh so we uh we continue to also work on planning around this um and our goal again is to uh to scale to bring every provider on

[37:02] that possible uh and and very clearly communicate to community how they can access vaccine next slide please uh again we do know in that phase in phase two uh we will be working to ensure that community members of comorbidities with underlying health conditions have access to the vaccine these are some of the uh some of the ways that or some of the um kind of those underlying health conditions that we're looking at ensuring that folks have access to vaccine if they do have these these conditions next slide please uh I I talked about this a bit but I I will mention again that the limiting factor is always going to be the supply of vaccines so we're going to be very uh transparent with the community about how much vaccine we have access to um and the the the picture is

[38:00] becoming clearer and clearer but we will continue to um you know manage that look at that and and be very transparent with community members about where we're at with vaccine allocation next slide please uh as we move in the summer and again this is part of the plan um our planning assumption and understanding is the vaccine will be even more like ly available uh so this will be commun community members basically between 18 and 64 years old that really don't fall in these other categories um and you know our goal is really to really open that up at that time every provider out there Prim Primary Care Providers potentially all the providers I I I mentioned previously hospitals uh pharmacies in our community um will have access to vaccine and be able to administer that to the General Public next

[39:01] slide uh we we would like to cly know that um they uh certainly will be able to uh sign up um we can they can go to our website at Boulder County Public Health we'll be able to share this with Community um you the group uh community members can sign up to be notified um and our goal is uh as folks give us some information uh about their situation uh we'll be able to let them know approximately when they might have access to the vaccine um we we know that folks um you know really would like to have a place to go to put their information in and receive information so we've set up set that up to be able to provide information to community members so we' really encourage the the community to sign up at our website and again we will notify folks as information becomes available and when vaccine be becomes available to them as a community and next slide

[40:02] please U the State Health Department has a great website with a lot of information um we I I didn't want to go too much in the information about the vaccine itself today we can certainly ask answer questions about that um but uh we we would definitely recommend going to the State Health Department's website uh cdph additionally for those uh that would like to have some information if if they don't want to access it online um there's a call center with cph that is available currently that can ask answer questions for Comm MERS next slide please so we are really encouraging community members to get the vaccine um when they can um when it's available to them this is really going to help ultimately uh get back to a little more sense of normaly uh as we get more and more vaccine in the community um you know that certainly hopefully be

[41:00] able to help impact our economy and businesses in the community to be able to stay open schools certainly um some relief for healthcare workers that really have been working tirle throughout this response and ultimately save lives and final slide please and I would just uh I would like to reiterate Jeff's Point um it's just crucial still uh to continue to uh um to do all those things that are really helping keep community members safe and healthy uh so that distancing masking all those um all those things we know that really are effective at preventing the spread of this dise and thank you so much for your time mayor is it okay if I add just a couple things please do jff thank you so much appreciate that I just want to emphasize a couple points with folks who are listening because we' we've received a lot of phone calls about this in the last 48 to 72 hours

[42:03] and a couple things that are really important to know uh the first one is when the change to That vaccine priority happened our plans went from vaccinating roughly a little over 20,000 people to tens of thousands of more people overnight uh so we're having to do a little bit of adjustment to work with our hospitals and our providers to figure out how we're actually going to accomplish all that the second thing that's been really confusing um and has been a challenge for every public health agency and school districts across the state has been the press that you saw About Cherry Creek having access their teachers having access to vaccines within the next week or two that is actually outside of the guidance and the clear guidelines from the Colorado Department of Public Health and environment and the reason and purpose for those guidelines L is to make sure that people who can die from the disease and who are at most risk from this

[43:01] disease are getting the vaccine first um and then those those categories would get addressed so cdph has been addressing that directly but I want folks to know that we will get to our teachers and those uh critical service workers just as soon as we can but we cannot do that without approval of cdph and we cannot do that until we've addressed all of those High uh priority category so I just wanted to make sure I shared that as well thanks thank you Jeff and thank you Chris so much to both of you um this is great information as always and our community is very interested in uh the vaccination roll out for everyone um I was going to ask if I could have a slide put up which is another version of the link to get to the vaccine um sign up that was referenced by Chris and Chris if you wanted to so in chat I'm going to

[44:00] put my version of that link so I've just posted that to all panelists and attendees there is a link on the slide that if one of our staff could pull that link which is different than mine but goes to the same place and put that in the chat that would be helpful also the Daily Camera um the lead story today on the front page of the paper add a link to the site so all community members who are interested one of the things that you can do at the moment is you can go to the um Boulder County website that's that's up on the screen right now and you can sign up to be notified so Chris told us this I just want to reiterate it and we will try and get this information up on on our website and I will also try and make an announcement about it or have someone make an announcement about it before each of our meetings so that um we can you know it's one it's hard to know what you can do personally given that the rules change so quickly and That vaccine access is limited but one

[45:02] of the things that you can do is get signed up for notification so that as things change the county can reach out to you and tell you what is available and with that I want to turn to council members to see if we have questions I see a few hands um the the order of events now will be to ask and answer questions of the folks who are here and then once we're done with questions and feedback we'll let the county folks move on and we have a few more issues to talk about around Co so hands I see right now are Bob and Rachel and Aaron so let's start with Bob uh thanks Chris um and uh and Jeff that was really helpful as always I guess this is probably more of an observation of the obvious but I can make it a question or you can respond if you want to it occurs to me that sometime I don't know if this will be February or March we're going to have I don't know 10 or 20 or 30% of our

[46:01] community vaccinated and I I think it's going to be pretty natural for people who have been vaccinated to let down the guard right you know not wear masks not social distance figure they're pretty bulletproof they've been vaccinated which seems to me would have a knock on effect then to other people in the community who haven't been vaccinated but they look around they don't see a lot of people not wearing masks you know they want to go to the movies they want to you know go to restaurants and so on so forth have you guys thought forward about how we get through that transition period where you know a quarter or a half of people been vaccinated but a bunch of other people haven't been vaccinated and and how we're going to deal with the challenge of having people continue to um comply with the guidelines that we have had in place for the last nine or 10 months during this period of through this period of vaccination to the point where we get you know true hert immunity which may not happen till the summer or even fall absolutely I'm gonna ask Dr being to answer that we just came off of another a town hall where we answered that same question because that's been on people's minds Chris do you want to

[47:01] take that you're happy to council member Yates great question now they think this is on the minds of everybody who's lined up to get the vaccine it's going to take us a while it's made months and hopefully not a year to get everybody who wants to get vaccinated vaccinated during that period of time we'll still have to be using our standard precautions as you've talked about wearing a mask physical distancing washing your hands dis infecting not social Gathering and large groups because that virus is still going to be circulating it is not going away magically because some people are going to be vaccinated so our message to you and to all of our community is to continue to wear those protections as we increase layer upon layer of protection and we get less people who are potentially susceptible to the virus then I think at that point and we don't know when exactly that point is going to be that we that will uh had that ability so I think you're right on in your question and it's part of all of our

[48:01] responsibility to continue that message and remember vaccines are not 100% effective n if you have n 100 people 95 people who got the vaccine will be protected 5% won't be and so there will still be people who will potentially get infections and that will continue the virus until we get to a certain level where the virus just doesn't have any hosts so I think that's a very important me and I'm glad you asked the question thank you Dr I suspect we'll be having this conversation uh at the first of each month for the next several months appreciate it thank you Bob thank you Dr Aina um next Rachel Aaron Mark and Mary Rachel thanks I have a couple questions um first there was a slide that showed that rates were going up in a in a way that looked pretty alarming for 75 plus age group um and I know that they're in the 1B category so just wondering is there any thought of like speeding that up I know

[49:00] that I think somebody said we weren't yet Distributing those and we're still on 1A but are we prioritizing people who are whose rates are going up where that's such a catastrophic outcome Chris Campbell do you want to take that yeah I do think that's a a great question um you know I think uh those uh we are moving that direction um we're getting that direction from the state as well um to work with the hospitals to really start to delve into and work with the 70 plus age group um I think we also have to keep in mind that the vaccine supply has going to be challenging so uh we're working as diligently as possible to um get vaccine to that group um and it is direction we're starting to get from the state as well to to work with hospitals to work with the clinics clinic and Salud in the county um and really start to start to vaccinate that group as soon as possible okay um that's

[50:01] good to hear and then um Sam and others mentioned you know signing up for the alert to know when the vaccinees available and obviously not everyone's going to have the ability or capacity to do that so how will people in that group um learn about it if they don't sign up and and what's the roll out just to make sure that people aren't Left Behind yeah we you know we are looking at all different ways the messaging out so through press releases through social media um through uh again our our our work with cultural Brokers so getting it out of community members um directly um even by word of mouth so it's all part of our Communications plan um it's a great question I think it some of these bigger larger groups trying to get the message out to them is um something where we're uh we really want to ensure we're doing the right things there so any form we can speak at where we're getting messaging out um we're going to we're

[51:02] going to try every form possible and like will people's doctor's offices call them if people have doctors to say like it's go time your group's up yeah um that's yeah that's a good question I think uh we yeah the our our primary care providers for example in the community uh I think is a good is a good option to to leverage and get messaging out even with the 70 plus group right they're they're certainly uh they their community members are already reaching out to them and we're connecting with them and we will connect with them with our strategy this group we to go these hospitals whose groups will be able to go to these clinics um so that's that's a great suggestion and it's one we'll definitely look at cool thanks um one is I'm not sure who this goes to but I've been a little bit frustrated with the um color category ories um throughout that they don't distinguish between indoor and outdoor activity very well so like

[52:01] 10 people can get together from two households I think under orange and it seems to me it's pretty different and and under phase red like you I couldn't see anybody from any different household even if I was outside and 20 feet apart which felt sort of um inordinately restrictive so I just wonder is anybody is there any room to advocate for um recognizing that outdoor really is different for socializing and to help us get through these next six months to make some um some allowances for people to continue to get together especially if we move back to a phase red where um you know I could go see Mary and take a walk still and um that wouldn't violate a health order if we have M masks on and are standing far apart is there room for advocacy there Rachel I can follow up with you and just make sure we have exactly what you're thinking I'll have Trina do that um there is a difference between indoor and outdoor events but you're correct with Gathering size um that that is a limitation so uh we can follow up we do

[53:02] want people if they are going to gather to gather outside there's no doubt I think the LA last number I heard from the state was T 20 times less chance of Contracting or spreading the disease when you're outside versus inside so um so we definitely do want people to be outside if they're going to gather and I'll just make sure that we do a specific followup with you and Trina meets on a weekly basis with the AG's office and cdph so we can carry that forward through that mechanism okay I I just think that might make it a little bit less onerous if we did recognize that there are there distinctions there um and then just last question is there is you know a lot of chatter about the new more contagious strain and I've been a little bit confused on is there any anything that we should be doing differently personally like other than doubling down on you know staying six feet apart wearing the masks is there anything special about the new more Super contagious strain that that calls for any different action on a personal level to avoid

[54:01] it Jeff if you don't mind uh see council member friend great question this is a very common question it's all over the media so let me just talk about viruses in general viruses mutate and so we probably have gone through several different mutations or variants this one has gone a lot of public because in the UK where they do surveillance a lot more commonly than we do in the United States they found that it was more transmissible or more contagious and so as they started to evaluate that they said oh there's something wrong with this and so they found out this variant and now we know it's here in the United States it's probably been here for a while uh but we just didn't because we don't have the same amount of surveillance now you you hit it on the head um the prevention strategies that were recommending the masking the the physical distancing the washing your hands disin infections social Gatherings is exactly the same things we should be doing for this variant and any future

[55:01] variant that comes about I think what people are also asking uh that you could could ask is are the treatments that we're using now effective and the answer is yes so the same R and disae the monoclonal antibodies all of those things are also very helpful and the also other question is we often hear are the testing going to be able to detect this and the answer is also yes so that the testing is still going to detect the virus whether or not it's a variant or not now not everyone's going to have the genomic typing that that it's doing that's probably less important because we know it's here and finally is the vaccine going to be protective against this variant and so far we think it is but the pharmaceutical companies Mna fizer and the newer ones are being tested also against this new variant to make sure it's also protective but it's likely that it's protective because many of the vaccines that we've talked about have different uh attack different components of the virus not just one because it's

[56:01] stimulating our body's immune system to produce neutralizing antibodies T lymphocytes and a whole lot lots of imuno component things that protect you against lots of viruses so it should protect us against the variant but we're looking at it very closely thank you so much uh I think that's all my questions thanks Rachel Aaron Mark and Mary Aaron all right well I'll add my thanks for the presentations and for being here um and also for standing up that notification website um I just uh clicked on the link in the meeting took me about 30 seconds super easy so thanks so much for that that'll be very helpful my question is just as we get to some of these uh bigger categories uh certainly the last category of like every other adult 16 and up um but Al some of the other ones are larger like 60 69 what's the pr prioritization method within is it just kind of first come first serve or or how are we going to kind of you

[57:00] know see who gets it when within those larger categories Chris Campbell do you want to take that I will um another great question and I think one that we're we're still looking at so we um a couple things with that I um we are working as a region um and certainly as a state to be consistent with that prioritization knowing again with limited vaccine uh and with all those lenses we talked about so Health Equity lens um and that's really that's been our goal with with all this work with all our planning so that's that's the ones we're going to look at uh and likely um work through to to make a a v vaccine accessible to those committee members um uh so you know I we we haven't landed on that exactly with those groups but um we're building those systems as we move inly phase to phase so that's a conversation we've had and

[58:01] and we hope to basically have a very clear and consistent and fair way we put that out okay great thanks so it sounds like still still under development because your early categories are smaller right so you have some time to to figure that out so I'll I'll just make a a comment if you don't mind you know we're uh considering a resolution later on this evening about encouraging the the state and other organiz ations to um highly prioritize Equity issues um during the vaccine roll out so I'll I'll just put that out there that imagine we're going to be talking and probably passing something later on and just I know you all are thinking about that but just to make sure that those um racial and other Equity issues are considered for those larger groups and who gets what one and Erin it's Jee I'll just add that we have reviewed that uh and support that as well that's great to hear thank you and I know you contributed some edits so thank you for that thank you Aon um Mark and then Mary mark

[59:00] thank you gentlemen I greatly uh appreciate the briefing and I thought it was useful and comprehensive I have two questions the first is what was the reasoning behind putting the medically compromised in phase two as opposed to 1B it would seem to me that that if you're immuno compromised or had cancer that would be a fairly strong argument for um inclusion in 1B as opposed to two was there a particular thought pattern there I'll see if one of the Chris's has an answer to that uh uh this is Chris beina here uh Council m w great question at this point the earlier phases were were issues around um close contact with patients or close contact with covid um uh risk factors I.E healthcare workers long-term care facilities medical workers so those were the early issues the same thing is

[60:02] true about those first line First Responders so that was some of the strategy around that now because imuno compromised folks as well as people with chronic medical conditions are susceptible to complications they're not necessarily to susceptible more to the virus so I think that's some of the thinking behind it although I I would I would I would agree with you it seems like the most vulnerable should be prioritized first and that's some of the the uh the strategies around people over the age of 70 and those healthcare workers and particularly people in long-term care facilities but but the challenge is there's at this point everybody is important everybody is going to have access to the vaccine eventually and as long as we can protect those folks that are not only susceptible but also vulnerable to complications will be in a lot better uh strategy so we'll take that uh take your

[61:01] suggestion to heart and make sure that we can uh we we've already I know had some discussions around people that are imuno compromised when those first priorities and we've given them the vaccine so I I hear your your comment and and my thank you and my second question is uh everything the entire timeline is based upon what we anticipate to be the availability of the vaccine uh are there any real prospects for an accelerated timeline and an accelerated provision of vaccines is is that at all possible or are we fairly locked into the schedule based on what we are getting today so I go ahead Chris uh I'll just yeah you know I think this has been such a fluid scenario so um I I would hesitate to say that that isn't possible and I I do know and and

[62:01] and Dr B I can probably com on this there's strategies being looked at with you know potentially um you know using just one dose of the vaccine or to make it more widely available um you know that certainly hasn't happened yet but uh you they're um you know we're we're just going by we can only go by the planning assumptions that keep being put before us so that's that's that's how we plan from the start uh with the knowledge that we'll need to be nimble and shift as needed I I think the message to the group here is we are our goal now in in understanding the breath or the need the scale what's the need to get the the vaccine on the community is getting as many providers involved as possible understanding how to handle the vaccine getting them lined up and ready to go so that when the vaccine does become available or ready and we can meet the needs of that second phase group like we talked about um and so we have as many providers as possible doing

[63:02] as much vaccine as possible seven days a week to meet these numbers we you know we have 320 plus thousand people in our community um others that come in so uh you know that's that's our goal right now um trying to build that so if we all of a sudden no there's a doubling of the vaccine we're ready to get it out thank you I appreciate council member I'd like to add something if I can to Campbell's uh comments um there's also the development There's Hope Insight that there's development of two other vaccines Johnson and Johnson as well as astrogenic is vaccine so there there's Hope on the way as we're trying to produce more vaccine at a national level um uh and the other two vaccines are in the pipe actually there are three um vaccines that are in the pipeline that will have more vaccine by Springtime time as those go through the FDA and emergency use use authorization as well and I also think frankly if I

[64:02] can be blunt you know with new federal leadership I think that we'll have a lot more organization and a better plan to not only produce vaccine but also to distribute the vaccine as well okay well let's hope thank you thank you Mark I've got Mary and then Rachel again Mary so thank you um Drina and Chris and Jeff for being here and to all of your staffs for all of this really hard work and long hours that you've been putting in for months on end so thank you for that um I um I want to first of all thank Aaron for his question on intersectionalities that was going to be one of my questions which um arose from going actually going to the that link and um wanting to click on trying to click on more than one category and you couldn't do that you can only click on one so um so that was interesting so I

[65:03] just wanted to point that out that that might be a place where you could collect more information on folks um my question um my first question has to do with um after you've been vaccinating um what do we know about whether or not you know you can't contract the disease but can you um be contagious to others after you've been vaccinated what what do we know about that yes council member young it's a great question we're learning about it madna uh one of the Mr vaccines actually did studies that show that their vaccine did prevent the infection from happening uh fiser did not they didn't do the same kind of studies so we're learning as we go along remember these vaccines were approved under emergency use authorization which means that they because the problem is so significant and because the vaccine is effective and

[66:01] safe enough to give we still have to look at those over twoyear period of time to to answer your question as well as answer the question about how long the vaccine immunity is going to last and so those are all questions that we're looking that and as as well as how it affects pregnant women or breastfeeding women or our IM no compromise people as one of our council members asked you know are they going to be protected to get with this vaccine are children going to be added to the clinical trials all of those questions are still being asked and so I think we're going to learn more about that as we go along so it's a great question keep asking it and hopefully at Future meetings we'll have more and more answers as those clinical trials continue uh because it's still a little bit unknown thank you very much um my next question is about um vaccine uptake so there's probably a a a a differential

[67:00] between the number of doses that are actually injected and um the people that actually and the the estimate that we've made of people that qualify and the number of those people that are actually taking the vaccine um what do we know about what that differential is a and b um what do we do with the I guess for lack of a better word surplus of um doses well you mind if I try to tackle that one Campbell um so I don't think we'll have a surplus of vaccine uh at this point I I'm hopeful that everyone will say you know I'm ready to get my vaccine but so far we have not seen that and and I think I in particularly in some long-term care facilities and in some healthcare workers they're saying I'm not sure I want more data let me wait a little bit so there are people that are very

[68:00] hesitant so we're going to have to do a better job at communicating and hopefully enlist all of your support As Leaders to talk about the safety of the vaccine its Effectiveness and how it reduces overall the transmission of virus in our community because there are people that are cautious I understand it uh uh but I think we have to do a good job of talking about the safety and if it is not just for protection of you as an individual hopefully you you might consider taking the vaccine for your family or taking the vaccine for your neighbor or your community to reduce the amount of infection or even for school AG children so as we get more people and and triggering what their their reason for getting the vaccine and answer their questions about why they're not taking it we can hopefully get more people to take the vaccine because we really do have to R match it up uh that emphasis because I'm hopeful that we don't have any access of the vaccine and we get it

[69:01] to everybody who wants it thank you very much um I I I wanted to just share a few thoughts um that you've likely already considered but I just wanted to make sure that um I shared them with you um in the listings of who qualifies and prioritizing folks in terms of um those who need it and the intersectionalities between um various um things is um to consider folks that don't have access to health care who are more likely to not even go to the doctor if they do get sick um access to Transportation um would be another one and then to consider in terms of notifications and trying to get the word out which was a question that um um Rachel had asked I'm wondering if it wouldn't be possible to include notifications within um utility

[70:00] bills so um those are just some thoughts that I wanted to share and you get what you pay for thank you that's all I have thank you thank you Mary um and then Rachel just real quick wanted to ask is there any shortage of like medical manpower to get the shots into people's arms I just happened I've had several retired medical professionals ask if there is a need for people to sort of come in off the sidelines to help distribute or inoculate people is another great question um you know actually what we have learned in in doing these initial clinics is the the actual shot itself is is the easy part um vaccine handling is a challenge uh and really a lot the sign up process the logistics there and then planning out for a second uh Clinic is challenging so as soon as you so we vaccinated 420

[71:00] folks today we're committed to vaccinating 420 folks um four weeks from now 28 days from now so uh that just impacts that the operations and your Staffing and your commitments um um hospitals are seeing that as well uh as we are scaling this up uh we likely will be asking additional Comm members we I am very um I should mention we we've had volunteers with our Medical Reserve CP Boulder County who have stepped up and helped with our vaccine clinics they've been incredible I'm very helpful um additionally with throughout this response they've worked at the co Recovery Center uh ongoing for months now tremendous community resource and and they should all be recognized um there's a chance that we will have something we're looking at something larger scale uh that really has a big throughput to help community members uh and that's where we might be reaching out for additional help additional

[72:01] clinical help likely through our medical resarch okay thanks sure thank you Rachel juny thank you Sam I just wanted to add I did have the opportunity to also well thank you for the presentation I did have the opportunity to also check the link on the website and I was just thinking based on Mary's comments about notification and thinking I'm sure Mary knows more about um understand more about the ethnic makeup of Boulder County but I'm thinking for Boulder City the Hispanic population is one of the biggest ethnic minority groups and then when I look at the website I clicked on the link I looked around to see maybe if somehow the link was translated in Spanish um but that was not that option was not

[73:00] available so I don't know if maybe that's something your organization may consider but also I wonder when it comes to notification as well is there a phone number I didn't I didn't hear anything about maybe a phone number people can call from uh thank you for both points and we'll definitely look into uh the translation of of that of that sign up there um and uh we we are working with the state on a potential call center uh for folks to to call in uh to to get signed up and to potentially then also set appointments um when the time comes uh to access vaccine we know that there could be some barriers some technological barriers is there sudden you go on the website and sign up um and and so we're we're hoping to be able to work with with the state on that um

[74:01] where they would just be able to basically sign someone up uh on the phone so appreciate both those points thank you can I add one more comment Sam yes and I I think it's just from a previous conversation that we had on Council and it was from council member bracket I believe and he mentioned how it is how important it is when we have um whether it's forms or even on websites you know having um the disclaimer that for instance some of our population here in this community uh because of misinformation or out of fear sometimes they're they don't come forward so some type of disclaimer letting people know that for instance um their information well not be shared with um you know um enforcement agencies might be helpful so that's from um

[75:00] council member Brocket from our previous um discussions and I just thought that might be something to bring forward very good thank you jnie um so I'm I'm gonna make a quick comment here um and that is a comment of thank you to our Boulder County Public Health people because the rule rul of the road have been changing for these folks so quickly and as soon as the holidays happen and they think they have their feet under them for the vaccine roll out um something might change from the governor's office or from cdph and it is for these folks who are representing our County to have to respond quickly with a lot of extra work so please take our suggestions and feedback in the spirit that we understand how much pressure you're under and we're attempting to be helpful and represent you know kind of community feedback but I know and I think all of us understand how difficult the position

[76:02] that you get put in is and we also know that there's a lot of public interest in this and that almost any moveie make comes under intense scrutiny so we appreciate the the intestinal fortitude that you're showing in sticking with this and helping our community get through this crisis so thank you very much and with that if there's no other questions I'll let the county people go with our thanks if you want to stay and watch I think we're going to address our five star program so if you County folks have any interest in that you may watch our conversation but again thank you for all the hard work you're doing and together we will get through all of this thanks so with that you bet thank you Chris if it's okay I was going to kick us off just with a summary of uh kind of what I did on council's behalf for five star but would you rather start or have AET start or would you like me to just go ahead and Lead this off uh

[77:01] Sam your preference I'm I'm happy for you to kick things off and AET is uh uh here and and happy to kind of dive into more details explaining what what the festar program is and what's happened today very good well I'm gonna just start because I took an an action which could have been interpreted as on behalf of council and it happened over The Break um and it was because we needed to turn something around really quickly so I just wanted to tell Council and the public about it um as the year was winding down there was a lot of conversation and push among Mayors at the regional level and the state level to um emulate the five-star certification program that had a pilot of which had been done in Mesa County and this was a quickly evolving situation and as you all saw in some emails that you received there was a lot of Desire on the part of businesses in

[78:01] Boulder County to explore this five-star program and so back in the days when our dial was read and we were looking at maybe in a number of weeks potentially going to Orange um I received a requ request from AET to um send a letter of support to the county and here's the Crux of what the letter said that IID sent to AET and was forwarded to the County Commissioners it said the city of Boulder is supportive of efforts aiding the viability of businesses impacted by covid public health orders limiting indoor capacity like the county Boulder will continue to prioritize Public Safety and as such we support Boulder County's consideration of an application for participation in the state of Colorado five-star program we have and will continue to encourage adherence to safety standards by businesses in our community so that was

[79:00] sent on over the holidays in order to keep the process moving forward of again consideration of an application of a uh for Boulder County to participate in the five star program without giving much detail at the about the fstar program I just wanted to make sure that you all knew that I had sent this on behalf of the city um stating essentially what staff was was doing was okay to consider an application since then um we have moved to Orange based on the governor's orders of last week um so what that means is that um now there can be indoor service at um restaurants and other businesses and so with that I think maybe we want to think about the five-star program in the context of what has changed even since we sent in this note for the county so I just wanted to bring you up to speed on I did that it kind of represents Council but I think now it's

[80:00] an opportunity for us all to think about it and talk about it and hear the full picture and with that that I will turn it over to you to bring us up to speed good evening everybody thank you mayor and members of council for an opportunity to just provide a little more information um that's exactly right the request came to look at this as more of a countywide opportunity to explore whether we would want to put in an application um as a county for five-star certification it doesn't provide an automatic for any business it would still be a process let me just give a little thought on what five star is to State program that encourages businesses to implement safety measures beyond the public health orders that you know in order to slow the spread of covid-19 and it certifies uh businesses through a set of criteria that can be established on a county basis um so that they can operate

[81:01] at one level lower um than what would be the applicable level so if we were read and had already gone through this process and had been approved and they had been certified against whatever criteria is established for our County they would be then eligible to operate at Orange when the uh chamber and um some of our peer cities and the county initiated this conversation we were in red and um and so I think as has been directed by Council and all of you and the community we will continue to prioritize Public Safety and work with our partners at this point I think it's about a process that can benefit from and learn from not necessarily what mesa's experience is but what is is uh going on right now in Summit Douglas and some of the other counties that are and larer who have already been approved and who are

[82:01] looking at a similar kind of review process at this point um there is uh being an established countywide administrative committee with representatives from all the cities and various other disciplines to look at how it would would be applied for as a county um and to answer questions that we as municipalities will have in that regard to make sure that Public Safety continues to be our primary concern uh we're working closely with the county with our peer cities and certainly with the chambers including the Latino chamber and Boulder chamber to make sure that this is a thoughtful review and a thoughtful process I am afraid that at this point I don't have much more information as this is all a very Dynamic situation but as I get things I'm happy to post them on the city's

[83:01] Business website or provide councel with any additional information if you have questions for me tonight thank you very good thank you that um and so I I have been in several of the meetings at the Metro mayor's Council and other Regional forums and uh both before and the governor's order moved all counties to Orange and I will say that there is an enormous amount of confusion about what the five-star program means how it's implemented and what requirements need to be now that uh every county is officially orange so for instance the Colorado Municipal league president Kevin bomber um I was on a call that he was on he asked a bunch of very insightful questions and apparently has a a opinion piece out now which um among other things encourages us to be careful and go um with due speed but not too

[84:00] fast to try and make sure that if we put something in place for a certification program that we know what that means at each level of the dial and how the dial is being used so an example question he gave was okay we're all now moved to Orange but many Cy indicators are actually still in red and they should be read by the indicator metrics but if they wanted to apply is an Orange County through the five star program to move a restaurant to Yellow um but the metrics would automatically kick them out of the five-star program because the way the County's performing how can we move them to yellow in the first place so just for what it's worth there are a whole bunch of logistical details that are not worked out and I I will make the comment that I think our staff should hear from our Council and move somewhat

[85:00] deliberately to make sure that we consider this in the context of where we are today so where we started thinking about this was can we open restaurants to 25% occupancy if they meet certain certifications and where we are now with the five star program would be can we move them from 25% to 50% % occupancy if they meet certain standards and we don't even know you and I as council members haven't yet seen even what the proposal looks like so I wanted to bring this forward give you the background that I have and and just give you my opinion that we ought to be awful careful with this now that we've been moved to Orange because in the Front Range region Boulder and Broomfield would probably have been eligible to move to Orange sometime in the next week or two but definitely not to yellow and so we are long and you saw Jeff's report about what we think might happen for a bump

[86:01] and what we're starting to see at the moment so I guess I would invite council members with questions either now or to follow up and with any feedback that you have about this for staff because right now I think you've heard all that we know um we do know that there are members of the community that are eager to move forward with this and I expect if it were more more widely understood there might be members who had concerns so council members any thoughts or questions great well I see no hands thank you Chris thank you avette for your work on this please keep us updated and I guess my thoughts are let's let's make sure to get whatever the draft is to council so that we can see if there is a draft certification we can at least have a look at it and understand what that might be I also believe and Chris correct me if I'm wrong on this but I also believe that as a home rule City

[87:00] should we decide that whatever is proposed at the county level is too permissive for our taste or our judgment that I believe that we could impose additional restrictions on the program maybe Tom you wanna I think that's right Sam would depend on the program and the authority but yeah I think you're right okay all right very good well thank you to staff for bearing with this uh also the changing rules that are coming at you very quickly that's much appreciated uh with this I think we're going to wrap up the covid briefing and with that I believe that the interpreted part of this meeting is also going to end so after this statement is interpreted I I believe that the live interpretation will be ending so thank you Anella and staff also for providing providing that for us the beginning of the meeting with that um Alicia what comes

[88:05] next we have the open comment that is next sir very good thank you and for open comment we have 16 um folks signed up at the moment so each speaker will get two minutes um our first three speakers for open comment tonight are Shirley Scher Roger Pak and Kelly denal Shirley bear with me while I find Shirley and give her the option to unmute I'm actually not seeing a shle schaer in the meeting Shirley if you're in the meeting under a different username that's difficult for me to discern you could send us a message in Q&A and we will come back to you um as soon as we can

[89:01] determine if you're in the meeting Sam I suggest we move on to Roger who is in the meeting very good let's do that Roger you should be able to unmute now hello can everybody hear me yes terrific my name is Roger posac and I live at 4925 Valkyrie drive with my wife and two young daughters we are within a one M radius of the boulder Reservoir I sent an email to you uh regarding the city's approval and support for a liquor license at the DIN and Dash's dockside bar at the boulder Reservoir in this email I provided new factual information showing the significant danger and negative impact on the safety health and wellbeing of our community if liquor is served at The Dockside Bar note that this bar would be in the addition to the existing bring your own alcohol policy at the res I urge you to read my email in summary a bar at the reservoir serving liquor

[90:01] p.m. at night where patrons will exit onto a dark hilly road with no lighting a narrow shoulder and an existing dangerous intersection at Kelo road if you are not familiar with the hill here visualize the hill at 9th and Mapleton or the one at Norwood and 19th only with no street lights this area is also used extensively by Runners hikers and cyclists who are often out in the evening hours no lighting limited line of sight due to Blind Hills and unless you live in a fantasy land there will be intoxicated drivers and tragic accidents and deaths I ask that Boulder City Council protect the safety health and well-being of our community and take immediate action to reverse the city's approval and support for the liquor license at the DIN and Dash's dockside bar before the Liquor Board hearing on February 17th thank you very

[91:01] much thank you Roger mayor we have determined that um shirle schaer is here under her husband's account so I'm going to cue her up if that's okay perfect Shirley you should be able to unmute yes um yes this is early and um I had spoken with uh uh Debbie earlier um my neighbor Evelyn Hobbs does not have internet and she would like to speak to you would that be possible uh Mr Weaver yes that's totally fine thank you very much for providing her with access and we'll restart the counter at two minutes when she begins speaking thank you very much H and I am 82 years young I have lived at 5349 North so I'm I'm sorry to

[92:01] interrupt we're having a very hard time hearing you maybe if you could get closer to your microphone we could hear Shirley just fine so if you could reposition my name is Evelyn Hobbs I am 82 years young I have lived at 5349 North 51st Street which is near the entrance to the reservoir for 55 years the reservoir was designed for water storage and family oriented water activities I'm in favor of a family oriented restaurant that would be open during normal Reservoir hours uh the proposed restaurant is not family oriented food trucks will serve lunch shared plates appetite ERS and will be served from 6 until closing from 6:00 p.m until closing beverages containing alcohol

[93:01] will be served all day is this what the Boulder parks and wreck proposed last February 2020 is this the cafe you approved our Dark Night Sky will be gone the sound of the great horned owl will be muffled and the of the coyotes will be history this is why I live here please reconsider this plan thank you please thank you you very much and I believe we're ready to move on to our next three Kelly denal Misha and Dorothy Cohen Kelly great hi my name is Kelly dinatali I reside at 4833 valala Drive I'm a former City Water Resources Advisory Board member and chairperson I'm also commenting on the restaurant bar Event Center planned at the

[94:01] reservoir to be clear I am not against the reservoir Cafe restaurant that was originally presented however I'm greatly concerned about the now proposed operations allowing Amplified music and liquor until midnight the city council aware of the history of how this transpired the neighborhood presented to Council in 14 and the very significant neighborhood concerns about the environmental Wildlife sound and traffic impacts from the expanding number of special events that until covid had continued to expand every year at the reservoir there was a commitment by the city at that time to address concerns some concerns were addressed and others continue to be major issues with the coming of the vaccine will'll be back will be be back to the inundation of noise and traffic from these weekly summer events only now to be inundated most evenings by music and traffic I attended numerous Boulder Reservoir Southshore master plan meetings that were conducted by Parks and Rec staff

[95:02] and Consultants during the development of the plan during this entire master plan process that had extensive public input there was never any indication that the master plan included a nighttime venue with Amplified music and special events such as weddings concerts graduations parties and liquor until midnight why does the city need a publicly subsidized bar and evening event center to compete with the private event venues and caterers in the city that are barely surviving a below market cost lease to one vendor is not the right way to generate income for the Parks and Recreation Department thank you thank you Kelly next we have Misha tour Dorothy Cohen and Lyn seagull Misha hi can you hear me yes so city council has proven over and over that you don't give a what we have to say so this

[96:01] speech is for Shay Castle I hope she writes it down recently Denver homeless out loud went to court to sue the city of Denver over their inhumane and lethal policy of sweeping houseless people around the city this is a policy declared unconstitutional in Martin versus the city of Boise a policy that violates among others the eth Amendment prohibition on cruel and unus ual punishment and international human rights laws and this is a policy that the city of Boulder shares last month Advocates called in to bring attention to the death of Jesus Duron the latest person murdered by your genocidal housing laws rather than reflecting on your role in his death or addressing our concerns you responded with tone policing as you've left our neighbors to die independent citizens have been forced to step up stretching our limited resources as far as they can possibly go to provide food warm clothing healthare it is never enough every week I hear another Horror Story a man who hasn't eaten in 5 days another woman raped by a Boulder police officer a mother whose daughter froze to death

[97:00] so forgive us if our anger offends you human suffering offends me each and every one of you is soaked in the blood of huster Ron and everyone else who has died on the streets of so-called Boulder Colorado do you even know your victim's names you do well to remember that you are occupying the stolen land of the Arapaho U and trien Nations as indigenous people are over represented in our ress community and incarcerated population you are perpetrating an ongoing armed occupation and genocide history will see that you are far greater squatters on this land than the people you send your trigger happy pigs to terrorize how many of my neighbors have to die we will not take this forever thank you Misha next we have Dorothy Cohen ly seagull and Katherine Walker Dy my name is Dorothy Cohen I live at 2845 Elm Avenue in

[98:00] Boulder I use the CU South Campus periodically to go walking it's a very beautiful area out there but it is in the flood plane I think the idea of putting housing out there is absurd the East Campus has lots of land that's undeveloped and this would be much more suitable it would also be closer to campus um we're concerned that the travel between um CU South and the main campus would create traffic problems the the amount of the amount of soil that would have to be filled in by trucks the not only the cost but the environmental impact of that would be absurd that expanding CU South when they already have the main campus and the East Campus which are much more amable I feel that developing CU South

[99:02] makes no sense CU has not even come up with their plan yet as to what they plan to do so the city should not really be looking into this until we know what CU is going to do so I feel that the cost to us taxpayers would be incred would be incredible and I don't feel that we should have to pay for you know the flood mitigations to put all that dirt out there and destroy an environmental beautiful area thank you thank you Dorothy next we have Lynn seagull Katherine Walker and Jason Smith ly yeah um so long for them to get up the unmute okay so my sentiment exactly on Dorothy and

[100:01] um can you hear me okay yep cool okay I support alternative six um you know you're talking a football field size 20 stories high of dirt that the city of B is being asked to deposit so that CU can develop their campus $10 million plus another $15 million for other stuff this is absurd you know CU has three other campuses they can go somewhere else they can build on the East Campus this should not be a discussion we should not be having City staff as Sam Weaver did on February 14th he redirected staff without going to city council at a study session that they should be studying an upstream detention some other stuff and not following the 500-year flood plane

[101:01] which the planning board and the city council both decided on he violated that Sam you violated that on February 15th not okay you have to have a hearing before the city council before you do that stuff so we've been paying all this time for these people to do these studies that we should be doing because see you shouldn't even be building a campus at all a whole a campus the size of their present campus at the South Campus no way um now I have a solution because at South Boulder Creek there's a depression natural depression we need to guide the waters into South Boulder Creek the the jumping mouse is there I have a friend he's got Bucky uh goldsteen Mouse Ranch he has a mouse preservationist he'll help with saving these Mouse you take them up the hill a little bit and reposition them thank you thenen next we have Katherine Walker Jason Smith and joy Ry uh

[102:04] Katherine hi there can you hear me we can so I just want to Echo uh the first three commenters Roger Kelly and Evelyn um regarding the boulder Reservoir restaurant liquor license uh so I live about 200 yards from the reservoir I live right next to Evelyn that I think she said she was 82 years old she's my neighbor um we can hear everything you know all the events that take place we I can hear the words that people are yelling in their microphones during the events during the summer um I understand and I appreciate the events taking place there we've been in contact trying to fix those those no noise problems but um with this restaurant the noise is one thing but the the my real concern is the drinking

[103:00] and uh the after hours timing um you know we're talking about drinking and driving and down 51st which I drive you know my whole family I've five of us in our family and there's bikers there's joggers there's people walk their dogs our neighborhood is full of kids and families walking around and it just seems outrageous to me with all the downtown Boulder restaurants to bring something all the way out here where we moved out here for peace and quiet for nature to protect the animals my husband's a burer and he is um one of the leaders for the boulder Reservoir nature uh burdening areas to keep track and and keep them safe and it just seemed seems really very dangerous and irresponsible to bring something out this way and to be honest you know we've already talked about getting lawyers involved because

[104:01] there will be there there'll be injuries there'll be cars hitting people thank you Katherine next we have Jason Smith Joy rode and Sharon Anderson Jason all right can you hear me great thank you for your time I live in a Valhalla neighborhood next to the bould appear to be unmuted but we cannot hear you um can you hear me can you try speaking yep can you hear me hello I am sorry we cannot hear you so we can hear you I'm wondering I can hear I can hear okay to get his technical difficulties next we have Sharon Anderson and Paul Coleman Sam we can hear you Sam look at

[105:02] this I'm I'm I'm live if you can hear me Sam hello I see waving yeah you're one you it's you have the problem Sam I'm trying to chat with him in the chat box so that he understands keep going with Jason then okay thank you okay can you guys all hear me we can sorry about all right so I live in a Valhalla neighborhood um next to the boulder Reservoir as you've heard I really feel that I've been part of a bait and switch scam when D and dash originally promoted the upcoming restaurant at the res to the neighborhood I loved the idea I pictured having a nice sitdown meal with my young daughters and wife while sipping a glass of wine however after learning about the intentions of D and dash through their open house and an open records request of liquor license application I now realize D and Dash's restaurant is not really a restaurant as advertised but an

[106:01] after hours liquor serving Event Center and concert venue masquerading as a restaurant the city of Boulder RFP from 2017 for consideration of an on-site food and beverage partner States the following about the customer base for this proposed restaurant and I quote customer type families boers swimmers exercise enthusiasts and a wide variety of individuals Community educational or corporate events this is a normal Reservoir customer perfect for a restaurant but the actual business case for din and Dashers operation is to host after hour private events such as weddings parties and concerts dond Dash's intended operations as is proposed can operate after hours seven days a week till 11 PM with no limitations on crowd sides these intentions are fully documented in a liquor license application dond Dash's applications is is quoted as follows the establishment will be a restaurant bar and EV vent facility at the boulder Reservoir the food menu will be served in part by a rotating roster of food

[107:02] trucks and Caterers the liquor control board then asks about seating DIN and dash responds no limit for outdoor seating is this a description of a family-friendly restaurant I don't think so a true restaurant at the res would be great but not food trucks during the day morphing into a late night concert men and Event Center I respectfully request that the city council strongly reconsider the allowance of D and dashes after hours parties events and Concert Productions thank you thank you Jason and apologies for my technical difficulties I heard all of that so next we have joy Roy Sharon Anderson and Paul Coleman Joy hi everyone my name is Joy roie I live at 4195 Martin Drive in Martin acres and I'm here to talk about uh cuu South it's

[108:00] not only a beautiful ecosystem home to endangered species but it's also kind of a vital resource that's used a lot by the Boulder Community I'm not sure if we have an accurate count of who uses it but as an example the last three days I've tried to take my dog out I'll tell you that um Dry Creek was overflowing on the parking lot uh eagle Trail Marshall Mesa the back side of the reservoir I've had to go to up to five places to actually get outdoor exercise and CU Boulder South always has a uh a full parking lot as well it's used by Runners it's used by people with dogs a variety of people in Colorado in regard to public use laws a prescriptive easement applies when someone has made a use of access to a property continuously without the owner's consent with no attempt of concealment of the use or access for a period of 18 years most commonly this is applied to thorough fars crossing over somebody's property and I would have to say that I think this really applies to areas like that

[109:00] Loop and the parking lot and the path around the lake at a very minimum now um And in regards to traffic Confluence in Martin anchor many of our neighborhood people actually exit via Morehead and in fact there's a post office a public post office there and it can get backed up to the entrance of the post office I don't believe given that a lot of the ccil members are actually North Boulder residents that they really understand the traffic Confluence of that area where table ma Mesa 36 157 and Broadway all come together and and unfortunately the traffic study that has been done really doesn't represent all of that traffic coming together at once and this is supposed to be a 247 traffic up to 2200 more residents plus students coming and going um into two different access points so I think Majestic Heights as well as Martin anchor will be significant ific L impacted um the study certainly was not comparable when it looked at the exterior areas in terms of um sorry your time's up sorry you okay y

[110:04] next we have Sharon Anderson Paul Coleman and Patrick Murphy Sharon is it unmuted yes okay uh hi uh I just want to let you know that valal I'm from valala and I uh we really do not care if there is a cafe at the reservoir what we don't want though is a music venue with bars or 12 at night meaning that some people could stay over at night and there could be up to if not more than 200 people present your contract does

[111:01] not adequately protect us from this happening a cafe was in the motion on February 4th council meeting a cafe similar to the library would be great its atmosphere and quiet nature would be an add uh added to the area but the words of the motion have changed from the cafe to a nice restaurant then after a nice restaurant we started hearing the word small plates and Tapas an event menu with music now we understand it's an event venue with music and bars and open till midnight with no limit to outdoor seating does this sound like a quiet rural venue bahala is surrounded by open space and the reservoir we have nature in our backyards I have a number of questions I can't get them all in I'm sorry I timed this it didn't come out right but the main thing I want to get across is we really want to meet with you we want to um invite you to Valhalla

[112:04] and to come visit either personally or by Zoom we will arrange whatever you like to do so you get to know us and to know the neighborhood and what uh the possibilities are for keeping this a very natural quiet and beautiful place for the people that visit the reservoir as well as our neighborhood I appreciate you listening thank you please we'll try to contact you thank you Sharon next we have Paul Coleman Patrick Murphy and Robert smoke Paul good evening mayor W mayor Weaver and city council I'm Paul colan 3555 silver plume Court in Boulder um our brief email exchange last week sparked some thinking on carbon Emissions on Monday last week the city sent out an energy future email blast

[113:00] with a 2020 recap and one story link to this um covid building closures led to reduced energy uses in the city uh and had statement CommunityWide Boulders 46,000 plus buildings account for two-thirds of the community's total energy use uh that really got my attention so I emailed staff asking for the source of this and Carolyn Elum graciously took time last week to let me know that the stat was from the city's 2019 greenhouse gas emissions report even if 70% of my emissions come from my house tackling emissions one building at a time is not scalable and here's why uh after I bought my house in 2015 I had both solar thermal and solar PV panels installed in my room I've had the house insulated sealed with triple pane windows doors I bought a Nissan Leaf as my primary vehicle and now I'm having air source heat pump

[114:01] installed in place in my gas furnace so I've shrunk my carbon footprint quite a lot but the uh cautionary part of this taale is all this stuff cost me after rebates and tax credits about $9,000 I am incredibly lucky I have the resources to afford this but multiply that by 46,000 buildings and it's a financial problem uh also my solution is not scalable I have too much production in the summer and not enough in the winter very common problem um I don't have a currently have a solution for this we need long-term storage so we need CommunityWide solutions to these problems not building by building problems building by Building Solutions sorry thank you thank you Paul next we have Patrick Mur mph Rob smoke and Chas Samson Patrick my name is Patrick Murphy I live in Boulder Plan B with Equity that I

[115:01] presented to you makes it clear that there's a path to fast carbon reduction without immunity climate change Devastation exceeds the covid devastation and slowly evolving carbon reduction is likely worthless or too little too late we need to move fast and quit fiddling installing electrical vehicle charging stations is an insensitive subsidizing of the wealthy when the alternative use of those resources could achieve much more in an equitable way a free LED giveaway to all low and middle- inome Boulder residents would reduce their electric light use and cost by 87% just focusing on wind incentives I could get all my electricity from wind for about a150 a month with windsource I alone would get the Rex not Excel note that the cap tax is zero if you use windsource a friend of mine uses 200 kilowatt hours per month and pays $3 for

[116:03] 100% wind and gets the Rex not Excel he doesn't have to pay the cap tax which is about $1 so the net cost to be 100% Renewables was $2 per month or 25 $24 for the whole year but he only needs to cover % of his usage since Excel is already at 30% Renewables his real cost would only be $17 a year to be 100% Renewables Boulder could provide a sliding scale of wind Source incentives for example low-income users could be totally covered and the city would get the reck middle users could get a 75% incentive and large users could get a 50% incentive there are many paths to fast carbon reduction this is only one more next time thanks Patrick next we have Robert smoke Chase Samson and Riley manuso

[117:08] Robert Sam I'm not seeing Mr smoke in the meeting um Rob if you're here please put in the Q&A box what name you're here under and we'll Circle back to you I do believe sh Samson is in the meeting perfect Shay okay Shay is on an older version of Zoom so I'm going to have to promote this individual momentarily or temporarily to panelists bear with me okay sh you should be able to unmute okay uh hi my name is jayton Samson I'm an eighth grader here in Boulder uh you've already heard heard from a lot of my neighbors I also live in the balla neighborhood I was born in Boulder and have lived here all my life and for my whole life I have been going to the boulder Reservoir the boulder res is always has been and I think should stay

[118:01] a family destination since I was just a toddler I've been going to the res whether that's building sand castles when I was younger paddle boarding and fishing with my family running my bike around the reservoir or through it to get to my North po LLY baseball games and even now going on school files with my friends I always feel safe at the boulderz but like I said I live across the street from the res and on 51st Street I feel scared the cars speed down that road they go over the speed limit and it's really scary I'm scared to take my bike out on 51st uh I would like to bring up the fact that Boulder is a vision zero City Vision zero is a movement that wants to stop deaths due to car crashes that's what they're all about we've agreed to follow the vision zero program and I think we should uphold that one of vision Zero's big points is about how alcohol and driving don't mix and how roads need to be safer I personally don't understand how providing alcohol will make things better or safer the boulder reses is a family environment how does alcohol enhance like this restaurant is saying it will how will

[119:01] alcohol enhance this family environment worse than that is how will non-s sober drivers affect the already dangerous driving conditions and Public Safety on 51st Street okay next we have Riley man cuso Deborah biasa and if Rob smoke is on if you could put something in the Q&A or the chat letting us know that'd be great Ry hey what's up city council um so originally I was gonna call in today and talk about and remind everybody that Bob Yates tried to intimidate uh the emergency family assistance association into not supporting a bill he opposed uh and that Tom Carr was chased out of Seattle for ALS for attempting to intimidate journalists and yet you know that we're still letting these people serve on Council and paying uh them to be City attorney um but actually what I want to talk about now is one of the

[120:00] items on the consent agenda where tonight's city council is going to approve a 1 million doll settlement with a victim of police brutality from the Boulder Police Department um and uh as much as it's not that I don't want Mr Mayan to receive uh compensation to help cover his hundreds of thousands of dollars in medical bills um but what I oppose is that the city is going to ratify this as a line item in expected losses of legal cost for once again covering the asses of police officers with no accountability and no meaningful change um officer Benjamin rled who used any inappropriate Force to tase someone uh resulting in serious injuries has not been fired uh there has been no consequence for deputy chief Weinheimer or commander truo who helped cover up and minimize the damage uh the city has

[121:02] admitted no wrongdoing despite refusing to go to court and settling for a million dollars because it knows that it would not win in court um and would have to pay even more um and nothing has meaningfully changed Chief Herold goes on and on about how IAT is supposed to be this you know huge reform but I and I'm trying to avoid uh you know IDI but IAT is polishing a turd because the policies that existed at the time that officer rled brutalized Mr Mayhan also discourage use of tasers and um and I cat discourages them just as much but when the rules aren't followed then it doesn't matter because cop aren't held accountable thank you Riley and last tonight we have Deborah biasa

[122:01] Debra my name can you hear me yep my name is Debra basa I live at 230 South 38th Street I'm going to address cu's petition to Annex CU South property also this evening but in particular the adverse traffic impacts that flow from this petition some South Boulder west of 36 where I live currently experiences major congestion on Table Mesa South Broadway and also cut through traffic through Morehead Avenue why almost 60,000 people commute into Boulder to work or attend CU every day most arrive via 36 and many of these come into town on Table Mesa to work at local schools Anar nist CU and other places during rush hours their cars pack Table Mesa creating mile long bumper-to-bumper traffic this congestion currently adds countless person miles as South Boulder neighbors divert their normal routes to

[123:01] shop or fulfill appointments South Broadway a major access route to campus is similarly clogged during the morning and evening rush hours and its own rush hours that snc with class schedules now imagine see you South developed according to what little information the university has shared about their plans adding over 2,200 new residences at CU South and an average I'm assuming of two or more vehicles per household these new folks will have to use Table Mesa and South Broadway to reach the campus on the two major thorough fares that are already bumper-to-bumper during large swaths of weekdays significantly increasing cut through traffic most likely another access point to Highway 36 south of the existing Table Mesa exit will be required to deal with this mess please carefully analyze traffic studies before approving any annexation to ensure that these problems will be

[124:01] adequately mitigated and the costs borne by cuu and not the citizens of Boulder thank you thank you Deborah and with that uh Sarah I'll turn to you and see if Rob smoke has joined us receive no indication that Mr smoke is in the meeting under a different name so I think you can probably um end the public hearing very good with that we'll bring public hearing to a close and I'll turn to Chris and Tom to see if staff has any responses no comments for me tonight I I did want to explain one thing Sam uh you several speakers spoke about the liquor license application apparently pending for the new facility at the boulder Reservoir and they seem to be asking Council to take some action with respect to the liquor license uh Council has no authority over liquor licenses that Authority has been Del delegated by the boulder revised code to the B beverage licensing Authority appeal from the beverage licensing Authority is to The District Court not

[125:00] to the city council hearings before the beverage licensing Authority are quas judicial in nature C Council interference would be inappropriate and perhaps violate constit or they could be a violation of the applicant's constitutional rights so Ju Just to be clear that what they seem to be asking you for is something cannot do the the liquor the beverage licing Authority does meet on the third Wednesday of each month and they do take public testimony and will consider neighborhood um neighborhood comments uh generally on an application okay very good thanks for that feedback Tom I can speak to the settlement now or later whichever you'd prefer you can speak to which now I'm sorry the settlement Mr manuso made some comments about the settlement if you prefer we could do that during the consent agenda or I could respond now if you pref or or not if if Council doesn't want me to respond to those let's do it during the consent agenda if there are questions how's that great thank you yep

[126:00] okay council members any response or questions nearby Tom just to go back to the reservoir question there's literally nothing Council can do about this I mean this seems to be pretty upsetting for many residents and living Rel relatively close to the area and going down that road for the fire department often for their training center um I know what they're talking about in terms of the you know level of danger that people experience biking and walking or pets and Etc I mean there there literally we're just our hands are tied right now with respect to the liquor license yes you you have no authority over the liquor license and interfering with the Quasi judicial process would be inappropriate uh I see uh Ali rhods is on the is in the meeting uh she has been responding diligently to the community and working with the community to try to seek Solutions there may be a contract rule based response um we do have a contract with the vendor uh we could see about changing that uh but my comments

[127:01] were relating to the liquor license which seemed to be what the commentators wanted Council to take action on okay yeah I mean I guess it would be nice to hear from Ally because it sounds like you know again I I haven't been involved in these but they're talking about a baiten switch and having gotten information that was one way during the discussions and now all of a sudden finding out different information I mean that obviously is concerning to to the to the process so um I don't know if Ally if if you can kind of give a quick update on that I I think that'd be great yeah um Ali rhods director of Parks and Recreation and appreciate the opportunity to clarify there continues to be a lot of misinformation and unfortunately the liquor license application I can understand why that feels confusing in a liquor license application and applicate applicant has to lift the maximum amount of any operations because if they were ever to deviate so if they were to say we are 00 am to 9:00 p.m and

[128:00] then have a special event that goes till 9:30 or 10:30 it would be a violation of the liquor license and so the liquor license say the maximum they would ever be open but if Council refer to the operational hours that we've set and outlined we've been listening hard to the neighbors um our incoming Gates will still close at 9:00 and the operation will close at 10:00 Monday through Thursday the um there might be some fluctuations on the weekend and in the peak season I want to note that in the offseason the lease actually allows for an abatement of the agreement and and the um and the operation should there not be business so we fully recognize this is a seasonal operation the other thing I want to point out just around the concerns around sound I want to remind Council that we've clarified the limitations of the sound that actually go more strict than the sound ordinances in most case and then finally regarding just a bait and switch of the services I I do look forward to talking to neighbors we've been talking to a few of them or trying to set up another conversation we have

[129:00] been we think have been clear from the beginning from the boulder Reservoir master plan to the concept for the visitor service center that called out out um based on a lot of you know Community engagement for that process as is typical anytime the city builds a building such as this um you know at that time there was interest in extending shoulder use opportunities establishing Partnerships such as we have for many of the amenities at the reservoir expanding concession offerings with the possibility of a liquor license so we don't while we understand people are concerned we don't share the perception that it was a bait and switch we feel like we've been really open from the beginning about the partnership we were hoping to achieve and we're really grateful that um D and dash is interested we think they are a great local partner they've demonstrated it in their philanthropy to the community and their commitments to us in this journey thanks Ally thank you Ally I have two more hands here I have Rachel and Mark Rachel

[130:01] yeah my question is also on the boulder res it just sounds like a lot of the concerns are around driving and do we have um no um public transit or shuttles to the reservoir and I guess maybe a question to Ally are we looking at any ways to reduce um people driving and make it easier to get there yeah we are so traffic demand management TDM strategies have been part of our work at the reservoir for a while now things that we've implemented um in the past include the shuttles for special events that's had been a big concern of Neighbors in the past the amount of traffic that some of the larger events bring in I will note again there will be no Iron Man in 2021 which has been a source of concern as the people hear the announcers as people finish and learn that they're an Iron Man um and so we have done that this year in 2021 for the first time we have a um post 6m Twilight fee to encourage car pooling this will facilitate um car pooling it'll support the Partnerships with Rocky Mountain

[131:01] paddle and um with the restaurant so those are a few things Rachel I also am going to you know we have talked to the county in the past about bike and pet access out there and we'll revisit that with them I he you know while we're working hard um and and believe that our partner understands the responsibility of providing alcohol I want to make sure everyone understands common consumption is currently allowed at the reservoir and so we believe controlling the alcohol cells is an improvement because of the diligence required this is their livelihood and they take the responsibility very seriously thanks Alie very good and then Mark I think this question is is more for Tom um as I understand it Tom it's on the res uh as I understand that the liquor license provides for operations until midnight um does the approval of that liquor license created an entitlement that can overcome any of the operational

[132:01] limitations that Ali has described no Mark as you know any lease the the landlord can always limit the time that that a business operates so if you were running if you had a building and you releasing to a commercial restaurant and the restaurant had a liquor license allowed them arbitrate to 12 you could say through in the lease by contract that they had to close at 10 and that's essentially what Ali is saying that we've done with the business so the liquor license would not then be a defense to uh a violation of the lease if they operated until midnight yeah it it would not be a defense to to to a breach of the lease and with the gate closed it would be really H hard to operate till midnight effectively prevents that by closing the gate okay thank you Tom very good and then we have Adam and Mary Adam I think my question Also regarding the reservoir is uh towards both Chief heral and Ally and that's whether there

[133:01] is a DUI mitigation plan uh in place for that stretch of road and I'm also interested in what the sort of in restaurant enforcement mechanism is going to be like down at the bars downtown we always had police officers rolling through to check on people see what levels of intoxication were and make sure that everyone was following the guidelines so just wanted to see uh what the plans are for that restaurant I I can speak to that if uh my good friend Ally uh wants a DUI plan then she will have one and we will we will provide DUI enforcement and mitigation for this area I mean Adam I think that the the response is best I can answer it now and I certainly welcome to get more information is that to get a liquor license applicants have to have a detailed plan for how they and it sounds like you're familiar with this for how

[134:00] they will control the alcohol and prevent DUIs from even being an issue right so that's the first part and then should there be an issue and there need to be a prevention strategy absolutely I will talk to the Chief and certainly our partner to follow up on that appreciate that Ellie I I always noticed in the bar industry it's a push and pull strategy so both the people who are earning their livelihood need to push to make sure that they're not over serving but on occasion um police officers also need to pull to ensure that they're doing their part too we have great Partners in the police department and the county sheriff we work with them regularly because they um 51st street is a County Road and they regularly support around special events and other needs that we have so happy to follow up on that great thank you Adam Mary thank you Sam um this is a question for Ally I think um how would a good neighbor

[135:00] agreement factor into this particular situation if at all it's not required by code right so this is an approved use but we have created the operational overview that we've shared with Council we I mean we think we are doing many of the things to demonstrate we intend to be good neighbors some of the neighbors acknowledge the efforts we've made since the master plan in 2012 to address concerns around events that was the major concern at that point so while a good neighbor plan is not required we believe we're working in that direction thank you Ally okay very good I see no more hands up so with that I think we will close this portion of the agenda and Alicia could you move us forward of course sir our next item is item number three the consent agenda with items a through D very good thank you and Chris do you have anything you want to speak to us

[136:01] about on the consent agenda uh I'll just flag one item which is there was a a small correction in uh 3D which is the intergovernmental agreement with Boulder County so there was a a a new version of that IG sent out over the hotline today that just corrected one of the Clauses so we're happy to to answer any questions that you may have on that thank you Chris I see Mary's hand yeah Chris I just have a quick question on item 3D the IGA um do other municipalities within the county have their own agreements how or does this particular one cover the whole County how how does that work sure it's it's a good question um the boulder office of emergency management proposed to be renamed to the office of disaster management is a joint Office of the city of Boulder and the unincorporated Boulder County

[137:01] governments and so um that office's jurisdiction covers um Boulder County and the city of Boulder the city of Longmont has its own office of emergency management um and the remaining communities within within the county do not have their own office of emergency management so um so our our current office The Joint office that the city and the County shares covers Boulder County as well as the city of Boulder and if the jurisdictions that do not have their own office of emergency management are in need of one where do they go the typical practice in say large scale events is that uh the the boulder office of emergency management will support those communities uh so for example some of the wildfires that occurred uh this last summer um that affected either lions or Jamestown um

[138:02] the boulder office of emergency management helped support uh any of the emergency um management needs of those communities um and is there a um some sort of agreement um within I mean I guess the the bottom line is the bottom line do they pay for that it is my my understanding that no they do not um uh but if that's something that you'd like us to follow up on I can I can have Mike chard get you a little more information on it yeah I'm just interested in um finding out how um Boulder would be compensated for that kind of service if there should you know when the the need arises sure thank you yep good next I have Rachel and Mark Rachel I just had a quick question on

[139:00] item 3B the um Boulder Arts commission new language I think it's within new language that says Council May remove any board member who displays lack of Interest or who fails to attend board meetings for three consecutive months without formal leave of absence the council shall fill all vacancies is that um standard board language that we're adding everywhere is that special to the Arts commission or or why is that new language it's common language in the in the sections of the code relating to the boards that the council have adopted so we're just kind of catching Arts up to what's in there for other boards already okay thanks Mark uh yeah I want to go back to uh disaster management um a comment and a question the comment uh is simply that I think on page four you've got a uh typo where reports is listed as repots and you might want to fix that but my question is on page five um what is the thinking behind the fact that we're paying 50% of the expenses um

[140:04] but we have no there is no reporting authority to our police chief the entire Authority for reporting is to the older County sheriff and that may just be a practical thing but I'd like to understand the thing yeah that's a good question mark and and the the short answer is it is it's a practical thing when we first created the Office of Emergency Management um recognizing that it was a joint office some of the employees of OEM reported to the county and some employees reported to the city um and so Mike chard was essentially needing to serve as both a city employee and a County employee um and had to follow both practices of both organizations which from just a management standpoint was difficult um when there's different policies between the two organizations so several years ago and I'm I don't remember exactly it was maybe five years ago we made the decision to move all employees of OEM to

[141:00] be County Employees um for that that management uh uh um uh Effectiveness and efficiency got it thank you very good I see no other hands so I think we're ready for a motion on the consent agenda I move the consent agenda second okay does anyone oppose passing the consent agenda this is a show of hands I believe I see no opposition so that passes unanimously yeah Lisa back to you next we have item four which is the callup check in for the consideration of a concept plan review for a new twostory fire station located at 2751 and 2875 30th Street the first

[142:00] floor includes an appro apparatus Bay with four drive through bays and Associated support spaces along with fire administration offices and a public community room the second floor is proposed to house the living spaces for firefighters 12 bunk rooms and a roof patio the site includes a secure parking for firefighters and public parking for Administration staff and public visitors the site also includes proposed Bluff Street extension and rear public alley vehicular access to the site will be from the Bluff Street Extension fire apparatus will respond to calls from 30th Street it is reviewed under case l2020 d43 thanks CAC requested that we do a brief presentation on this item so I'll welcome main mcglaughlin from planning and development services very good thank you Chris and good evening everyone I'm gonna uh just

[143:02] run through a few brief slides just to familiarize everybody with the project so um hopefully you can see my screen um I'm just going to boot it up but um just to begin with um this particular uh concept plan was reviewed um just a couple weeks ago really at planning board and the next steps of course in the process will be to do site review and at that time they'll be required to do a design Advisory Board visit um there's an opportunity in site review for Council to also consider the call up of the site review uh but um just to kind of uh move through these quickly the site's uh slightly under two acres it's located on the west side of 30th between Mapleton and Valmont it was actually part of a site selection process on this side of town to find a fire station somewhat near Boulder Junction and something that's outside of

[144:00] the flood zone it's intended to replace the existing Fire Station 3 that is located in the high Hazard Zone um at 30th and arapo and given that it's considered a critical facility the need to find this location outside of a flood zone it's very important and then in terms of the proposal the applicants illustrating two options both shown as two stories um including um four apparatus Bays bunk rooms kitchen and dining uh Training Fitness facilities and laundry facilities as well as outdoor space option one is essentially the preferred option shown on the right and it's intended um as full build out of the site um it's approximately 29,000 square feet option two is a a bit small smaller 6,000 ft smaller and you can see uh from the images that it would remove that administrative offices and meeting rooms that are adjacent to 30th and then um you'll note both show the extension

[145:01] of Bluff Street as well as um a one-way circulation pattern for fire apparatus and this is to ensure that um there's no backing of fire apparatus tracks onto 30th Street and they'll also work in concert with the stoplight at Bluff and 30th that's planned and planning board discussed uh bbcp policies found the proposal generally consistent with the various relevant policies and overall the board found that the proposal was architecturally attractive and consistent with most of the tvap design guidelines they also noted some minor plan refinements um necessary assur consistency at the time of site review and so with that I'm happy to answer any and then also note that Adam Goldstone with fams available on the call as is um fire chief Mike uh calderazzo deputy chief um dur so if you have any

[146:00] questions for them as well very good thank you for that Elaine and I do see some hands coming up so we'll start with Aaron and then Mark Aon thanks for that El I I'll just say up front I'm not interested in calling this up but I just had a couple quick questions um so the there's the phase one phase two is there any chance those will be done as part of the same phase or is that definitely going to be two separate phases what's the current thinking on that if this all gets one of my applicant team members here um I I can I can tackle that one so what we're doing there is we're just exploring um the option that if funding is not available to build the admin portion at the beginning how it could be added later how it could be done in two stages the the goal right now is to do it all um all is one with the admin portion got it and so we'll we'll know do do you have a sense of when we would

[147:01] know whether we would be able to do it all in one step or not um well I believe those those funding questions are are upcoming um and so that that will be a larger discussion but we're just trying to cover our bases and keep the project moving right now until that happens okay great I guess one thing that that was a little unclear to me was how signalization would work with the fire engines exiting the site could could you speak or could somebody speak to that please I think I'll refer to one of the fire Personnel on that one uh good evening Council Mike alazo fire chief um I don't have the details on on the system that we'll be using right now we use an opticom system that connects to some of the traffic signals we'd be working with Transportation if we did anything of that nature um and I

[148:00] do not know how far we've gotten um on that planning stage okay yeah just curious I'm sure if this go gets approved you'll work out something very functional that was it thank you thank you Aaron um next we have Mark and videos off because apparently the host has prevented me from starting it there we go start it back up so Mark go ahead and just a quick question do we have any cost estimates for this facility we we do um back in April after we completed the the preliminary design before we started any of the U Planning Development Services review processes we did prepare a cost estimate um and it's coming in around $675 a square feet square foot now having gone through some of the review processes right um we we do have some more public improvements to factor in that's not included in there and um we

[149:01] still have you know further designed to you know to finalize but that's where we're sitting at right now you've done the math to to uh tell me what the total of that looks like yeah so if we were to to um build the the whole project as shown the the you know with with the admin component um Let me let me just double check that one more time that number um we're at 202 million of construction cost so that doesn't include the already purchased land price this would just be the hard hard and soft construction cost okay thank you very good thank you Mark and this moment I see no more hands so um yeah the intention of this uh pause here was just so we could have a look and speak to it so I also have no interest in calling this up I will say um as long as

[150:02] I've been uh working with the city this has been an issue that has been on the radar that we're going to have to move the fire station at 30th Street and this um New Station proposal um solves a couple issues gets us the fire station out of the flood plane makes it a more capable fire station the apparatus uh management is a big deal there and then adding the administrative components as well as um the training and the and the um slipping facilities all of that is really important and vital and it's great to see this moving forward um because it has been a longstanding concern that we wouldn't be able to get this done so kudos to everyone who's worked on it I'm super happy to see it seeding and it'll be great if we can get this um kind of fully dialed in by the time this council is done so with that any other comments very good um seeing no desire to call it up I don't think we'll do

[151:04] so and Alicia before we move on I guess I will say it is getting pretty close to 9:00 so would Council be amenable to a 5 minute break and then we'll come back and hear the next okay very good five minutes so right now we will reconvene 50 10 till 9 thanks everyone hey Chris this is Debbie hey Debbie um Alicia's internet went out so I'll be handling the rest until she gets back in so here okay okay

[152:01] just let want to let you know great thank you for letting me know okay Danica can you hear me Danica and the Macy's team I brought everybody in who I'm recognizing as being part of the Macy's team if anybody is there can confirm if there's anybody else who needs to be able to speak during this next item that would be really helpful Sarah can you hear me me I can so I brought in the Macy's team that you mentioned Dan as well as some of the individuals that I had got the name for I'm just bringing Brian Valentine in but

[153:01] the names of provided with me for me so I think everybody's here needs to be here um in a speaking Ro if you determine that I need to bring somebody else in pleas chat with me and I'm happy to do that thank [Music] you [Music]

[154:32] [Music] [Music]

[155:04] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music]

[156:09] [Music] [Music] [Music]

[157:18] [Music] [Music] thank [Music] you thank you ladies I kind of panicked there for a

[158:00] second it's a good time to get kicked out right is there a good time Sam really when we're on break is the best time right in the middle of the meeting miss anything I don't think so okay great okay I see five of us so there's Rachel that's six mark seven everybody's coming eight so if we can get Bob I think we're good to go

[159:05] Sarah unless I'm missing something I don't even see Bob in the meeting at this point let me make sure he's not um no I see him oh an attendee he must have gotten booted out let me bring him back in as a panelist yeah I didn't see him on the panelist must be the thing tonight that's four of us all right there's bobah I was I was in limbo yeah sorry about that okay now now I think we're ready to go so turn it over to you Alicia to bring up our next item okay good to be back our next item is item number five which is the public hearing for the consideration of a site review Amendment to the 29th Street shopping center to adaptably reuse and redesign the

[160:00] existing Macy's department store located at 1928 Street in the business- regional one br1 zoning District as an office and Retail building thank you appr Chris great thank you uh for this item uh we have several folks from planning and development services so with this I'll turn it over to Charles phoh to introduce the item great thanks so much Chris good evening mayor members of council and happy New Year everyone uh before we begin this evening with staff's presentation I just wanted to note that Harmon Zuckerman the city's planning board chair has joined us this evening in case there's questions related to the planning board's deliberations about the Macy site review application um that said I'm pleased to turn it over to ELA mlin our case manager and she'll be presenting staff's analysis this evening great Charles thank you and good evening mayor and council members I am also going to suggest that Tom Carr um

[161:01] uh review some of the Quasi judicial procedures I do have a slide that um goes over that but to begin with I understand Tom um you have a couple opening remarks and you're on mute Tom as you all know that you're sitting in as as in a quastion matter in the in the basically the role of Judges your decisions and on such matters are to be made on the evidence in the record not on any evidence that you receive outside the record the reason for this is that the applicant has a constitutional right to challenge anything that you any basis your decision and they can only do that if they if if it's matters in the record if you have received any information outside of the record now is the time time that you should disclose any such information any expart con contacts any conversations with any individuals about this that are not part of the record any emails that you have reviewed that have not been made part of the record please disclose those now to give the applicant an opportunity as part of this hearing

[162:01] to respond are there any exp parte contacts that council members wish to disclose so I'm sitting here looking at the participant list I look for raised hands if anyone has any I'll I'll start I had oh about a year ago or so I sat down with a couple of Representatives of Mich and um it was made clear to me that MRI did not have much specific to do with the project but we did mention the coming renovation and I believe that's the only uh communication of substance I've had since this has come up uh I see Mary's hand Mary yeah on October 15th of 2020 um I and Bob and Danica had a discussion where we reiterated the importance of um housing um on the site and um that was the extent of the conversation um we

[163:02] went over um items in the comp plan and um they talked about the um Regional um employment center and we discussed the jobs housing imbalance and um that was the extent of our conversation um and Bob can elaborate if I miss something I'm seeing no other hands here Tom oh my hand is up also Sam interesting I'm in the panelist view oh there they are okay apologies Aaron first then Bob my thoughts thanks Sam um yeah I also had a spoke with applicant repres represenative Dan capow um I guess about a couple months ago just asking about the feasibility of housing on the site and received information that um was no different than we've gotten in official Communications from the applicant um and then I will also

[164:00] mention that earlier this morning someone tagged me on Twitter and said hey Aaron Macy's seems like a pretty good idea what do you think and I said sorry I can't talk about that it's a quasi judicial uh Affair and then pointed them to the information on the hearing thank you Bob and then juny Bob thanks first Mary accurately uh relayed the meeting that she and I had with Dano Howell on October 15 u i I believe I had two subsequent phone conversations with danah uh in in which danah pointed uh out certain um elements of the application which is in front of us uh so no additional information that is not already public thank you Bob juny thank you Sam I did have have a conversation with Danica as well it wasn't much substance it was just um briefly what I remember affordable housing um and not much else and that was a few months

[165:03] ago okay thank you Tom I think we're done with that and maybe ready to move on that's fine El do you want to pull up the slide now you bet uh hopefully everybody can see that while um this is coming up here um takes a few minutes so um we've taken care of the uh first part of the Quasi judicial hearing procedures and um just to quickly run over these the um staff will present Council can ask questions of Staff there's an applicant present and Council can ask questions of the app applicant the public hearing is opened for comments um and then Council can also ask questions of members of the public there is an opportunity for an applicant rebuttal the public hearing is then closed for Council discussion and a motion requires an affirmative vote of

[166:01] at least five members and a record of the hearing is kept by staff so with that with regard to this evening's staff presentation uh we'll go over the review process the existing context brief uh touch on the proposed project that the applicant will spend more time on um we'll talk about a couple key issues that were noted in the staff memo and then uh staff presentation so regarding the review process it's a site review Amendment for a height modification invested rights are requested uh the applicable standards for the proposal include relevant site review criteria bbcp policies and relevant design guidelines and as described in the staff memo this proposal was submitted prior to changes to the land use code that occurred December 17 2018 um and including changes to the opportunity Zone uses code changes related to provision of community benefit for height and then planning

[167:00] board reviewed the application on September 24th and approved the site review with a vote of four to three um important to note that the three dissenting votes um indicated that they believe the application wasn't consistent with the BB CP policy regarding provision of housing uh then the required public notification process important to note um was given in the form of written notification to Property Owners within 600 feet a sign was posted on the property for at least 10 days Public Notices were published by a Daily Camera news from City Hall there were three residents and U the owner of 29 North Apartments across the street who sent comments during the review and additional comments were also emailed to council staff also reached out to some of those um who had sent emails and um just notifying them of the hearing this evening so in terms of the context we'll start with a big picture here the sites located within the bvrc Boulder Valley

[168:02] Regional Center which has been identified for decades in the comp plan as one of three regional centers uh defined as forming a triangle at Boulders geographic center and which provides um a range of activities that draw from the entire region um the site's located Central in the bvrc and that's defined in the C plan as primarily um commercial area providing retail at a range of scales restaurants offices hotels and um at the geographic center of Boulder the site's also adjacent to Boulder Junction which is important to not it's um guided through the uh tvap Transit Village area plan it's become a Regional Transportation Hub as well as a new neighborhood with about 1,400 new residential units built really just in the last decade and still some are being completed um and then when you combine that with T9 North across the street from the site there's about 1600 new

[169:02] residential units near the site 29th Street is Transit Rich it hosts a number of local buses um and of course the RTD facility in in Boulder junk just a quarter mile to the north access to that RTD facility for bikes and pedestrians is along walkways in the multiuse paths along with on Street Lanes within 29th Street Walnut 30th Street the multiuse paths uh north of Walnut along 30th that connect over to the RT facility um and essentially throughout this the rest of the city within the bvrc the site's part of the 29th Street Mall as we all know and that was approved as a site review amendment in the mid 2000s and today includes a Main Street core with a mix of uses including Home Depot Sentry movie theater number of inline retailers restaurants some small offices along with Fitness and athletic clubs and then of course that 29 North Apartments up um

[170:03] in the North End uh 29th Street um we've seen this image before but it's fun to take a look back it's a former Crossroads Mall that existed on the site from the 1960s essentially classic 1960s enclosed mall with several large retailers that include the subject site that you can see there that um is labeled as May dnf the May Company and some of us actually went to the crosswords Mall back in the day so um that it's important looking at the site itself it's a separate simple um fee simple lot that's described as lot five of 29th Street subdivision so it's owned separately from the rest of the um mall and uh the existing Macy's building is 150,000 square feet um there's one level above grade and then a basement level with a large loading dock on the north east corner

[171:02] and the Macy's building site is uh separately owned from the rest of 29th Street as I noted um surrounding the building again the 29 North Apartments to the north along with Target parking structure to the east along with Colorado Athletic Club those inline shops with offices above and then a smaller pad site uh commercial buildings to the West uh the comprehensive plan designates the property mixed used business and both office and Retail fall under the use definition uh the property is zoned br1 business Regional one that's defined in the code as business centers of the Boulder Valley with a wide range of retail and Commercial operations including the largest scale businesses Regional businesses zoning at the time of the application submitt um permitted office uses by right and ended recent code changes today office uses over 20,000 square feet would be subject to

[172:00] use review the proposed Project's planned is an Adaptive reuse of the existing building uh there's a third story addition planned on the west facade some fenestration changes in daylighting at the building a lower Plaza and a roof deck along with reduced curb cuts and expanded bike Lanes landscaping and Plaza improvements the applicant plans to reuse all of the structural elements inside the building the steel beams trusses and floor decks and add new windows and a third story on the west side and that West Side reads as two stories but with a new lower level Plaza to Daylight the basement it's essentially a three-story portion and that's essentially the only place you'd be able to perceive that uh third story um it's on that side it's planned to be um the buildings plann to have it uh to be opened up essentially with exterior windows to bring in the natural light uh on the southwest side of the building

[173:00] the applicant's proposing to remove that existing exterior uh covered escalator with um a building um uh proposal for 7700 square feet of marketplace retail and that opens up to the plaza that's planned to be upgraded with benches Planters Community dining tables and shade structures essentially with the intent to invigorate the space and activate that space so for key issue one uh staff finds the application consistent on balance with the bbcp policies per site review Criterion a and you can see there's a number of policies that staff finds consistency with and in that regard um staff meets the U staff finds that the plan meets the land use designation of mixed use business is consistent on balance with um these various policies beginning with policy 2.03 um since the Adaptive reuse of the

[174:01] building responds to the expected compact development pattern of our community uh with infill Redevelopment since we can't go up and we can't go out um revitalization um also response to policy 2.17 variety of centers where as we've noted um activities are expected such as working shopping Etc with uh Regional Centers located near Transit uh the planned office and uh retail uses in the transit Rich U Regional Center meets this policy and then um we'll touch on a few more of these regarding policy 2.18 and the bvrc the proposal to reuse use the existing department store building and diversify the mix of uses in 29th Street with additional office is consistent with the city's goals to maintain the bvrc as a high-intensity regional commercial center as is noted in the policy um and provides for a mix

[175:02] of uses um that proposal maintains retail with the 7700 foot Marketplace um and upgrades to um that uh space facing 29th Street and then it's important to note that policy 2.18 describes guiding principles that encourage residential infill for new construction and Redevelopment and it's important to note in that regard that the policy specifically references Regional or general business areas rather than the mixed use business land that the site and 29th Street mall are within so it's essentially um focused on the those areas in red um and um in that regard um at the time the application submitt was made the applicant or the city had not yet adopted code changes to increase housing capacity and reduce non-residential capacity in the bvrc which of course we've discussed has

[176:00] occurred since then and then for policies 2.33 and 37 408 and 409 that are related to environmental and energy policies the applicants plan to adaptively reuse and Remodel and repurpose the building and essentially retain the embodied energy of the building rather than demolish it and construct a new one on an infill site is in support of these policies of course and then of course the intent to add natural daylighting and light Wells um to the interior structure basement as well as ADD um the photo volic array to the roof is in support of Energy Efficiency policies so then for key issue two staff finds the project meets the site review criteria including the proposed height of the building that's in general proportion of the height of the existing buildings in the area that are also subject to existing grades that drop off um it's it's almost imperceptible if you

[177:00] think about moving through the space but it's there is a a bit of a hill or a rise where this particular site is um and in this case you can see that the existing building which is shown above and then the proposed remodeled structure below um the topography drops about a story to the East and so when we measure height from the low point at the base of the Hill the height of the existing and proposed building um on the west is about um 36 and a half feet when you measure it from the low Point although the perception is only of a single story um and then that architectural mechanical element at the middle is at 55 feet again when you measure from that low point a story down below and so the new edition uh that on top of the roof there that third story Edition slightly lower at around 51 feet um and then as you can see um again the only way you'd perceive all three stories is near that uh blow

[178:01] grade Plaza space where the basement is daylighted and then also in the site review findings were made that the plans address a human scale with ground floor entrances and plans to open up the building with windows that create transparency and activity at The Pedestrian level that doesn't exist today and um it's pretty evident from the comparison that you see on this West Side um with the proposed retrofit and then similarly on the South Plaza Side by removing that um escalator and opening it up with walls and windows again the goal and policy of transparency and activity at The Pedestrian level would be um met findings were also made that the plans create a sense of of permanence through the use of authentic materials glass curtain walls projecting sun shades and metal panel we're always seeking um permanence in our structures the PLS were found to be consistent with the bvrc and 29 Street guidelines uh they support pedestrian circulation usable

[179:01] open space the building is designed to intermingle the inside with the outside remove blank walls and design all sides of the building as the guidelines recommend and then consistent with 29th Street guidelines the building styles appropriate to the time with the clean and contemporary design and material finishes of the era so with that staff recommends city council approve the application subject to the conditions of approval found in the memo and I'm happy to answer any questions let me start again very good thank you for that lane and I am looking to councel to see if there are any questions and I just turned to staff and say it looks like Council May hold their questions um would you prefer questions now I see one that's come up but generally staff you can answer in a

[180:01] moment but would you prefer questions now or after the public hearing so Mark you've got your hand up hold my questions if if staff would prefer yes Steph how would you like to get our questions now or after we've heard the public hearing actually either way whatever is um appropriate for uh the context if there's um questions or clarifications on any the site review criteria or anything I've presented I'm happy to answer them now very good Z Mark I'll do a couple of Fairly technical questions the um the memorandum states that open space requirements are being met in part by including the light wells in the calculation well those light Wells have people inside them I mean is it just a source of light or is it actually going to function as a form of open space there are open space areas as part of those light Wells and little gathering spaces um similarly with the

[181:00] plaza space that's just below 29th Street where it opens up and Daylights the basement there's a rather substantial uh Plaza space in that location um my next question is why do we only request Eco passes for three years as the expense of this is essentially going to be a pass through to the ultimate office tenants it's not as if after three years we're not going to have a need um for this kind of program why does it why does it expire yeah that's a that's a great question Charles do you want to take that one great thanks for the question mark typically three years is about what it takes to establish the program to determine whether or not um it's been successful whether or not it's a type of business that um has utilized it and you know wants to continue to utilize it so working with Go Boulder that's always

[182:00] been the magic number um that we've used to kind of go back and uh revisit whether or not a program has been successful but if it is shouldn't there be a requirement that that the applicant continue to provide those passes there can be and that's definitely something that past planning board um conditions of approval have entertained okay um is it too late to suggest that we might entertain it here I think that that's something that the council could discuss if that was of Interest okay um and for the adjacent apartment buildings what protections are there going to be in place during the construction process to protect them against noise and dust so it's uh there are standard protocols in place for uh noise and construction and it's tends to be standard hours for construction uh Monday through Friday with some to 5:00 p.m um and then

[183:01] uh control of dust that may be a fine question for the applicant as I know with regard to being able to retrofit this building and adaptively reuse it there's some real surgical types of U removal of materials that they're proposing so it's it's a little different than your um standard construction site where there's a pretty significant demolition that would occur Charles do you have anything else to add to that no I think that's well said okay and my last question for the moment um would be I know that that one member of planning board uh asked for a projection of the number of of employees that would be uh encompassed by this new facility and the staff's response was that that information was not contained in the application but aren't there General metrics for employees per x square feet of office space that would let us get a sense of what

[184:00] this uh what this facility will will incorporate in in terms of employees you bet and and you know I've actually got a a some of that information contain on a slide so I'm just going to scroll through this a little bit um so in terms of what the applicant had suggested would be the number of employees um they are estimating um about four to 500 employees and that compares to 80 to 100 employees at Macy's today plus daily customers um when we looked at it we looked at it with regard to The Institute of Transportation engineers um data that was provided in the TDM plan the transportation demand management plan um that the applicant prepared and uh this is data where they uh make assumptions based on um average daily trips uh per types of uses and in

[185:02] this case you can see the department store tends to have a higher number of average daily trips uh as opposed to an office retail combo that tends to be a similar percentage to um what occupancy loads um are and again obviously we wouldn't stack this many people in this small space but the existing retail you can get about 2500 people into that um 151,000 square foot space um assuming it's a retail use and then for office retail it's about um 1,00 so it's a Sim similar proportion of number of bodies in the space but essentially what the applicant is suggesting is about for to 500 people okay I'll hold the rest of my comments for later thank you okay

[186:00] Rachel I think I just have um two questions first I think that the rooftop um was mentioned in open space and I'm wondering was that open to the public uh no that is my understanding is that's intended to be open space for um the office users of the tenants so the open space that would be available for members of the public is that improved Plaza space um on the south side of the building where the existing Plaza is today okay but that somehow counts as open space for private use as well in the open calculation yes that's correct okay thanks um and then also we had some emails um before we were looking a month ago um I'm trying to recall it exactly but the the um gist of it was that this is um a site review which is different than a use review um and so you know that we've already sort

[187:02] of decided the use through um our zoning and so I was just hoping that either Ela or Tom could clarify like what exactly is with our within our purview to look at tonight because we've gotten a a fair amount of emails about you should use this for residential instead as an example so I was just hoping to get clarification on um before we get into public comment what is it that we are um properly looking at tonight um so this is not use review um and you are bounded by the criteria in the code and the Boulder Valley comprehensive plan so you can make any decision that you can support based on this criteria that were established before the application was filed as you probably know the use criteria were changed uh in response to updates to the comprehensive plan after this application was filed you cannot use those changes to um to either affirm or deny this

[188:01] application thanks um and then I guess just one one last question I had heard somewhere along the way and I'm sorry I can't remember where it was or if it was in tonight's um uh packet but about the if we were to look at it for residential use what the potential number of residential units could be at that site and it was pretty low I think due to zoning could could somebody remind me what that was yeah my the estimates based strictly on calculation of lot area per dwelling unit works out to be about 64 residential units and again remember it's a discret parcel of land it's essentially a postage stamp within the overall 29th Street so um you're basing that on 102,000 square feet of um area of lot area okay thanks Len thanks Tom so I guess I have a followup on Rachel's question which is that were an

[189:00] applicant in theory to do something residential um there is that uh requirement for open space would there be any way if an applicant came forward with the residential application at this site with this zoning to relieve that through site review or a zoning change so in other words if somebody strongly desired to build residential on that site and it fit in with council's and the community's uh focus on affordable housing would there be Pathways to getting more than the 64 byright units probably not effectively under the existing zoning Sam there's not really a mechanism um you know in this particular Zone that um would allow you to modify the open space down so much that it would be um more meaningful for a higher density multi family project so in that case and you're probably looking at more of a legislative solution like an ordinance or a rezoning in order to accomplish that and also if I could jump

[190:00] in um briefly one of the challenges of this particular site as I noted it's on this hill or it's a a small Promontory essentially is that um it would be difficult even if you were able to double the number of units it would be difficult to go up and that would be the way that you would accommodate additional units um in this case that U mechanical architectural element that's part of the building is at 55 feet so um you can see that there's very little opportunity to add additional height to the building so that's the challenge really if I'm not mistaken isn't the applic before us going to add a little bit of height to the building that's correct yeah and that's on that third story but I think what I'm suggesting is even if you were to double the number of units um and say for example look at a a typology like the 29 North Apartments um

[191:02] that are four stories it would be very difficult to achieve because we essentially have a two-story building that's capped at 55 feet in this case or 51 Fus is the case yeah and given that as I recall wasn't there an election um that went to the people that had to do with the height on this site and a ability to go to higher than the the kind of standard method for measuring 55 ft because it was such a large site and because of that that there are different considerations here so we have current application but when we talk about height on this site isn't it a little more complicated than that uh Charles do you happen to know about the 29 North and any um yeah so there was a charter amendment that took place um when the mall was being redeveloped and the methodology for

[192:01] measuring height changed a bit to recognize um the fact that there is a lot of fall over the site because it's um fairly large um but I think to Elaine's point just based on the Topography of where that's at I don't know that that would be of a huge benefit um when it comes to adding height to this particular site so to follow up on that Charles tell me a little bit about 29 North is 29 North part of the um the area that was included in the um Charter amendment I I actually I don't think so but I'd have to double check Sam so when the applicant's presenting I can look that up okay that'd be helpful and then just because I'm already here Mary I see your hand and I'll grab it in a moment um there was one specific slide Elaine in your presentation that I wanted to ask about that's slide eight and in there you talk about Boulder Junction phase

[193:00] one area and you were kind enough to tell us the number of residential units that were there and affordable units I was curious has there been any commercial development in Boulder Junction phase one if so how many square feet in employees and I'm just curious um was there a reason that you didn't put that into the presentation um I don't have that off the top of my head um I was placing it in the context of residential since residential appeared to be U the key issues for this evening's discussion uh there has been some office built in that um first phase Boulder com is one of them um there's some office going in at um spark as well but I don't have any numbers to share with you on uh of um square footage or employees Charles do you happen to have that not off the top my have that's data we'd

[194:00] have to pull okay well I guess the reason I bring it up is we know that right in this area Google has gone in uh the boulder Commons as you mentioned the lane the offices that are going in at um the spark development so I was just curious as far as context goes I guess we do know that there has been um some significant office space development in the area immediately around this is that correct that's correct and it's not part of the site review criteria that we would be evaluating um in our criteria based decision this evening absolutely understood I was just curious I guess I wouldn't think that the affordable housing would necessarily be part of our criteria based decision either so I guess with that um I got a lot of other questions I'll come back to Mary what are your questions just a real quick one um on the size of the freestanding lot that

[195:01] this is um I Heard 102,000 square feet and could you just um what is that in acres um I believe it's about two and a half acres um off the top of my head I don't know okay thank you that's that's all I had very good I think if that's the end of the questions I guess we're ready for the applicant hi everyone sounds like that's me um all right I think if the rest of my team is ready I will get

[196:01] going yep Jess we're just getting the uh presentation queued up here okay let me know when you're ready all right go ahead all right good evening everyone my name is Jessica Fraser and I'm the director of development for Macy's I just wanted to give you a quick heads up that we have five speakers today um and our presentation should last about 18 minutes and also thank you all for taking the time to thoughtfully consider our project in early 2017 we began thinking about the future of our 29th Street mall location we started our design process in Earnest that summer without any preconceived notions of what our store could become and after three and a half years of working closely with

[197:01] the city and Community we believe we have designed the best possible project for our site for the mall and for Boulder our plan is to recycle the existing building con converting our outdated Big Box store into a sustainable Innovative project that complements and brings new life to the existing tenants of 29th Street we've put to we've put everything we have into delivering a use to Boulder that has garnered support from our neighbors conforms to existing use requirements and Zoning utilizes the embodied energy of the building and provides multiple elements of public improvements delivering on these items is important to us both as a long-standing member of the Boulder Community and as is a close partner to Mich the owner of the mall to proactively address the changing Retail Landscape over the last several years Macy's has been making changes Nationwide to repurpose our existing stores as they phase out of use throughout this process we've learned that without a thoughtful plan in place

[198:01] when a store closes it runs the risk of sitting vacant or being turned into a seasonal retail concept given the state of the retail environment today something that Co has only exacerbated we expect this is what will happen if our store closes without implementing our proactive and thoughtful plan news of department store closures and bankruptcies are all too common in today's world we have a real window of opportunity to create something special at the store while Macy's still has the resources to do so while no project can solve every problem ours delivers on balance a meaningful new asset that will make the North End of 29th Street more vibrant thank you again and now I'm going to turn things over to Eric compa from Corum to take you further into the details thanks Jessica greetings I'm Eric compa with corm real estate before we dive in I wanted to take the opportunity to discuss the timing of our sub midle next slide please this slide shows you our

[199:01] internal project schedule from October 2018 you'll see that in May 2018 we met the city staff and then worked diligently over the subsequent months to compile our site plan Amendment with an initial Target submission date on December 3rd 2018 since our submission would be amending ma Rich's site plan from 2004 their signature was required on our application while we were collaborating with them throughout the process we submitted the full package to them in early November for their review and execution their approval was ultimately received on December 14th of Friday and we submitted the following uh business day Monday December 17th the week before we were able to submit we learned the opportunity was going to opportunity Zone was going to be discussed at Council we made the decision to submit our application once Complete because our submission is reflective of the code we've been working under since the summer of 2017 while we recognize our submission may have appear to be a quick decision it truly was not at this point we had worked almost 18 months on the project

[200:01] spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to complete our 186 page application now let's move on to the fun part next slide please as staff thoroughly discussed we have a uniquely constrained site where the mac's owns essentially just the footprint of the store as Illustrated before you with the red highlighted area showing the property boundary next slide there are severe topographical challenges such that there is a 17 foot grade break in the middle of the store and if you drew a line from the Western Street Frontage to the Eastern Frontage the equivalent slope between those two points would be that of a Nava ski hill next slide please with these constraints in mind we analyzed every possible alternative then no other option prevents a feasible solution to reuse this building in the context of the site combined with the pr private covenants within 29 street that govern use and parking and the overall zoning next slide please on the other hand adaptively reusing this store by saving the foundations floor structure super

[201:00] structure roof structure Etc allows us to embrace the embodied energy of the building saving more than 23,000 tons of carbon which represents a 43% reduction in carbon emissions compared to that of new construction this is the equivalent of over 3,000 households annual electricity usage furthermore as evidenced by the traffic report the change in use would reduce the daily trips to the to the store by more than 1500 trips per day which is estimated that 115 daily tons of carbon would be a saved equating to more than 30,000 tons annually reusing the building combined with a traffic reduction will save more than 53,000 tons of carbon which is the equivalent of of taking 10,000 cars off the road these statistics are staggering and clearly demonstrate that the Adaptive reuse of this structure is the most sustainable approach this project could take next slide now moving on like to address the number of occupants that could potentially be in the building while we don't have a tenant identified for a

[202:01] majority of the building we can estimate that there could be a wide range of uses within the building it's conceivable that a data data center could be in the lower level of the building which has few employees or it's conceivable the city of Boulder could occupy and consolidate their entire footprint in this location in the end we're estimating the occupants would be anywhere from 300 to 500 compounding the complexity of this answer is the situation we've all collectively found ourselves in with covid it's quite conceivable that the average square foot per occupant will increase as people return to the workplace and thus it's hard to predict exactly how or who will occupy this building next slide at the end of the day as staff thoroughly discussed we we are simply requesting a height modification a move that allows this project to embrace all the constraints and create a truly fantastic project while it is a formal modification of the height of the entire structure given the thoughtful design the building will continue to look as if it's only two stories from any adjacent perspective and no taller than any

[203:01] adjacent structure thank you and now I'll hand it over to Dano who will talk about our comp plan analysis Community engagement and Community benefits Dan thank you Eric the BBC's built environment section designates the property as within a regional center and is appropriate for mixed use Business Development the BBC describes Regional centers as areas that constitute the highest level of intensity and provide a wide range of activities and draws from the entire city as well as region next slide in evaluating the project with policies of the bbcp it is important to note that each project is not required to satisfy every goal and policy in the comp plan this inherently is not possible as many policies conflict with each other the site review criteria requires that a site plan is on balance consistent with the land use map and the service area plan and on balance the policies of the Boulder Valley comprehensive plan as outlined by staff the project meets these policies on balance next

[204:00] slide since early 2019 we have conducted significant public Outreach on this project ranging from meeting with established groups such as better Boulder plan Boulder Boulder chamber Boulder housing partners and Uli Boulder to meeting directly with Mesa Rich the owner operator of 29th Street many times over the course of the project we also held an open house on March 5th right before quarantine hit and invited all retailers tenants and business owners of 29th Street to an open house to view our physical model and talk about the project most recently we invited all 244 units at 29 North to attend a virtual meeting two residents attended and one reached out with questions about the proposed development overall the input was positive and all were compelled by the creative approach to reuse an outdated department store into an energized anchor for the outdoor mall the plaza Concepts and increased Landscaping were all seen as positive outcomes of the project next slide as Elaine mentioned the site is

[205:00] ideally located within a Transit R Regional Business Center where many modes of Transit are available including on-site car share and B cycle nearby EV carg charging stations and bus Rapid Transit at w Junction the hot bus has a major Hub at 29th Street directly in front of the plaza and significant site improvements associated with this project will include the addition of a new bike lane and new sidewalk to south side of Walnut and the removal of a curb cut to reduce conflicts between bikes cars and pedestrians our project includes bike parking that exceeds the requirements bike repair stations lockers and showers our TDM will ensure that employees receive Ecco passes as well as requirements at 29th Street to provide eco passes to all employees next Slide the city of Boulder has identified affordable commercial as a community benefit in order to provide space to smaller businesses nonprofits arts and other community uses over the last several years we have been working with Community Vitality to understand the characteristics of successful affordable

[206:00] commercial spaces which include small spaces with flexible lease terms below Market rents High customer exposure and lowered energy cost all of these qualities offer small businesses and retailers the ability to prove a business model and test approaches with their consumers without incurring significant debt and long-term obligations through our community outreach on this project we started working with firefly handmade to partner on the 7500 square feet of proposed affordable commercial space located at the plaza level next slide we felt that this was the community the biggest opportunity for the site to provide significant Community benefit for the retailers Shoppers visitors and public next slide the current Plaza has minimal placemaking and site Furnishing it's often a windy empty space we've worked closely with Mesa who owns The Plaza area to transform this area into a dynamic Active safe and flexible space filled with shade activity transparency all to support retailers and create a flow in public space on the end of the

[207:00] outdoor mall next slide as Eric described earlier the Adaptive reuse of this building drives a sustainable process by recycling many of the building components and materials to ensure they don't end up in the land pill in addition a 450 kilowatt solar array will be designed for the rooftop to offset energy use which significantly exceeds the minimum City requirements next slide there are many opportunities for public art on all sides of this project we're excited to work with Street wise Boulder and other local artists to discover where and what types of art will activate the building and Plaza the loading docks on the North End of the site present a compelling space to be creative and activate walnet next slide we understand council's concerns about the housing and jobs disparity that has been impacting our community for years resulting in significant Inc commuting and high housing prices specific land use changes within the transit Village and Boulder Junction have paved the way for over 1700 units of housing including a high percentage of affordable housing all within a half

[208:00] mile of the Macy's property next slide balancing jobs and housing is a CommunityWide effort and we recognize the steps taken by Council for tackling it with code changes and efforts to calze more housing in the bvrc however even with the used table changes that were enacted during the moratorium period the challenges of the site preclude the development of a meaningful and economically viable residential Community while the project remains on Bal consistent with the bbcp on balance including policy 1.10 jobs housing Macy's recognizes that members of council remain concerned that the proposed the proposed project will create some new jobs therefore if Council approves the site review for the current proposed project and to further the site review's consistency with the site review criteria Macy's would agree to voluntarily pay the full amount of the affordable housing commercial linkage fee at the 2021 rate of $30 a square foot without any credit for the existing use this would result in Macy's

[209:01] paying a linkage fee equal to $4.8 million as opposed to 1.8 million a difference of $3 million that can be used to further create affordable housing and Loc ations or site considerations and Zoning support housing that meets the city's affordable and moderate income housing goals now on to Boyd Hamilton with me thank you Danica Mr Mayor and council members I come to you today to offer our full support of the Innovative adapted reuse of the Macy store 29th Street as one of the largest tax generators for the city of Boulder we believe this project is critical to the long-term sustainability and economic Vitality of 29th Street as we adapt boxes around our portfolio we must also consider office space as it generates higher wage earners with means to spend more at the center and during the work week which is a time that we could always use more activity let's consider what we currently have retail a

[210:02] large gym numerous fitness centers movie theater and housing an office building supporting around 450 individuals who will shop and eat where they work will support the community and provide services in a much more meaningful way than 64 unit residences in the same size building 29th Street was at the Forefront of the mixed juuse 24-hour shop work play and live environments when we convert converted the former Crossroads Mall to the Open Air Center of today with retail restaurants movie theater gym fitness salons office housing with the 2 29 North residential component of 29 Street this mixed use and limited traditional anchor environment has allowed us to bring 10 new Concepts to Boulder during Co when most centers around the country are struggling just to remain viable Macy's

[211:00] conversion from an under underperforming department store to an office used with additional fresh retail Concepts will further enhance the balance uh the mixed use of this Center as we think about mixed juuse and Community enhancements The Pedestrian Plaza immediately to the south of Macy's is going to add a community center for the area which will also enhance the best commuter experience bringing more people to the center to shop and play the impact of a balanced mixed use environment cannot be overstated when we are leasing a significant selling point to new tenants is the proximity of Google of the Google tampus Twitter in Zoo's headquarters this been a primary reason we've been able to attract tenants like Shake Shack Amazon fourstar Lululemon's new large format store Madison Reed and others throughout the United States and truly around the world retail was already changing prior to the co pandemic in many ways Co has propelled

[212:01] retail into a new reality and in that reality companies are not investing in 150,000 SQ foot anchors such as Macy's Nordstrom nemans Dills and others as a matter of fact department stores are Contracting doing more with less and shrinking their overall Footprints more and more new format small salale score stores are coming online we also PE see people wanting to work where they shop because it's convenient as Boulder like so many other communities reflect on how to increase sales tax revenue I invite you to consider this Boulder needs office to survive and thrive the community is simply not large enough to support to expect the folks who live here to drive the visits and revenue for the amenities we all love and expect the visits at office space will bring will complement the visits already brought by those who live in Boulder be visitors during the

[213:00] week as well as at night and on weekends which are the time when people who live in the community normally eat and Shop we should take advantage of Macy's wellc conceived adaptive reuse that does so many of the things Boulder believes in including environmental thoughtfulness sustainability transportation and visual appeal to enhance all of our lives through the increased sales tax revenue it will bring to 29 Street and the surrounding area we appreciate your consideration of the Macy's project now I'm going to turn it over to Chris shares thank you Boyd and good evening as an appropriate end to our presentation this evening we would like to present a short video of our proposed project the video circles the building hold

[214:03] onr okay this video circles the building from the Northeast to the Southwest this closeup views views identifies the building materials including tapered aluminum composite panels CL wall aluminum sunshades and Wood Sage the north parking area shown here seen in the foreground has been altered to eliminate a curb cut and enhance The Pedestrian and bicycle experience consistent with the city's Vision zero objectives as we move around the building note the second Courtyard allowing daylight into the lower level in the second floor step back resulting in a roof Terrace facing west the west elevation replaces a blank wall and becomes completely transparent

[215:02] additional Landscaping is added along the street the South Plaza will be transformed into a better functioning public space with shade seating and Landscaping as the afternoon shifts to Twilight we see the plaza in the building lighting communicating the transparency of the building a welcome change from the current windowless elevation imagine this transformation as an active and appropriate reuse of this big box introducing renewed Vitality to the North End of the place that we know as 29th Street special thanks to El colani and other City staff for leading us through this process we're looking forward to your questions and the discussion this evening thank you very

[216:00] much okay so I assume that completes the applicant presentation is that correct or is there more that's correct okay so um I would bring it to council at this point for any questions of the applicant seeing N I have one um there's a slide in here that goes over the detail of the um additional affordable housing linkage fee so if you could bring that slide up one thing I I haven't heard um yet I I see this wonderful um sentiment expressed here I don't understand the mechanism by which we tie this additional payment to the approval here so if staff wouldn't mind walking us through that I will recall for Council the uh the movie theater Art

[217:02] House theater we were going to get at the Earl Place project which never occurred and so I'm always concerned with how side deals are structured so that we actually get what is Promised here so staff of the applicant like to talk about how we're going to make this part of the site plan approval so it's important to uh note the fact that um the um affordable housing commercial linkage fee uh is not tied to site review and it's uh something that would occur at building permit to do anything above and beyond what is um written in the code uh would essentially be a donation um to the affordable housing fund um so that's something that uh in terms of a mechanism I'm going to defer to Tom who

[218:01] may understand a little bit better about how something like that could occur well and there I there really isn't a mechanism I mean we in in the 311 project I believe we did a we we filed a a statement with the deed but um a covenant but there's I mean it's as Elaine says this is paid time of building permit um it's not part of site I don't see a way to make it part of site review um I don't think you can condition approval on it so I think it's it's a matter of Faith uh and Sam you're right at the begin con ered because we have had situations where U things didn't happen as they were promised U but it's up to council whether you want to trust this okay and and I'll just ask one further question you brought up 311 which I was going to bring up as well Tom at the 311 hearing the applicant understood this concern and showed up

[219:00] with a document in hand ready for Signature which did add that Covenant to the deed so um we did see it was a matter of Faith but it was a matter of faith that the applicant would sign the document upon approval and I'm curious a you know is this in any way different and be if there were a document that the applicant um had tonight that would contractually obligate them to do that um would that be something that we could look at like we did with 311 Mapleton it is something you could look at I don't know I mean I'd ask the applicant to respond to that yeah we're happy to this is Charlie Smith um an attorney with Brownstein height Farber and Shrek I represent the applicant uh we'd be happy to enter into a covenant that would be recorded in the real property records for the the property that would impose this obligation um which is a voluntary donation as was mentioned into the linkage fee uh fund but we'd be happy to

[220:02] document that in the form of a covenant um and Tom would be happy to talk with you about the the form of that document of course we've done a lot of them uh declarations and we could draft it ourselves and and work with you to finalize the language on that to make sure that you're happy with it and Charlie I'm assuming you're saying that you would not object if Council conditioned approval of the site review on the filing of that Covenant correct okay Charlie so if we were to condition it in such a way as to do that uh what what Assurance will you offer as a condition that you'll follow through on that because that's I think what we're we're look if it's being offered as a package which it appears it is it's in the applicant presentation I I would ask what we can have tonight if we put that as a condition what Assurance do we have that you don't either just walk away or challenge it in court absolutely well if it's a condition of the approval then of course for the site review to

[221:01] remain valid we would have to uh comply with that condition or you would have rights under your code to enforce those conditions of approval Tom could probably speak more to the specifics of the code on that front but uh if it's a condition of approval that we record a declaration against the property that obligates the property owner and so this declaration would run with the property uh with the real property records then we would have to comply with that obligation first of all because it'd be a condition of approval but secondly because it'd be recorded in the property records it's a a matter of title at that point sure once it's a matter of title I wouldn't have much concern but I guess um Tom just turning legally for a moment um if if the applicant accepts um by answer to one of our questions this is a condition of approval we we can't put something IL legal as a condition of approval right we can't say you have to paint your building pink um but if we

[222:00] said applicant will you accept you have to paint your building pink and they say yes is that a matter of record that can be legally binding and in future court hearing so Sam the way I would structure it is you can you can condition the approval Mr Smith has said they will not object to that condition um I would take that as binding uh if they were to sue we would have an asole argument saying the council would not have approved this but for the condition I think you'd be in a pretty strong position if if um you had that condition uh you you know Sam that the council is required not only to make to decide this but to State clearly the conditions and the the basis for the decision in in the ultimate approval um I would ask that Council vote to do that give us Direction but not approve the conditions tonight let us draft them let me work with Mr Smith on the Covenant uh get that included in the conditions and have that be part of the council's final decision very good and if we did that

[223:02] just so I'm clear on the mechanics would we continue this hearing to get that drafting completed or would we approve it tonight and you would come back for some later approval if you could just walk us through the mechanics there so this is a little bit out of my area of expertise and I'd ask Charles or Elaine to help me but the I think the answer is that we D we would ask you to to just give us Direction on how how you want to make the decision what the conditions are we would draft those that and bring it back for final approval which would be the on a consent agenda is that right okay but but just to be clear as as Charles or Lane um weighs in would we continue this hearing and do final approval at another hearing in order to get those condition terms drafted or would we do an approval tonight and then approve something else later so elain or Charles um we can really do it either way yeah I I agree code allows you to close the public hearing issue your F

[224:01] and then issue your final decision later okay very good just from our perspective uh it would be fine if that was on the consent agenda um handled at a subsequent hearing but we have done it in the past uh in many jurisdictions where the condition itself is just uh worded such that um it's a condition of approval and the specific language of the Covenant would be agreed upon by us and and approved by the City attorney for instance um prior to approval of tech dos or prior to approval of some other step in the process and then we're tied to having it done before we're allowed to move on that would be another option got it very good I just want anything that we do to be something that we can't lose later in court so uh Rachel and then Mark Rachel yeah thanks for those questions Sam um enforceability was one of mine as well

[225:01] and then just a small one for Danica on the affordable commercial space Could you um elaborate or remind me how how much um of that space is Affordable commercial what that looks like as a percentage maybe of the project yes it's 7500 square feet and it's the plaza level so it's the retail facing the plaza um and we as I mentioned have been talking to Firefly handmade to have a permanent um maker space and art space for their Artisans who you're probably familiar with um our local artists who have been at 29th Street with their fairs um hopefully you'll hear from them during public comment but they um have presented some diagrams and site plans for us on how to use that space to be an active Art Space um kind of eating display space and maker space where the makers and artists can demonstrate their wees and also kind of teach and do workshopping as well and have a

[226:01] continuing changing landscape of Artisans um many of their artists have gone on to a larger brick and mortar permanent locations like bohemi and and others so they um would be a Launchpad for some of our Artisans to get into some um more permanent brick and mortar spaces as they can have a permanent space to be right now they're all virtual so hopefully um Beth and Steve will tell you more about their Concept in public testimony all right great thanks it's all that was a m question Rachel I'd like to cqu on that and get to a uh enforceability as well so 7500 Square ft out of the 158,000 about 5% of the area Rachel to answer that question directly um but I'm curious again there's nothing I just search through the the site plan application there's nothing about the enforcement mechanism for affordable commercial nor about how lease rates will be set or what they're tied to um could I hear from the applicant on how

[227:02] you intend to keep this space affordable how you intend to Insurance permanence and guarantee that the since it's part of the site plan review application and how you intend to manage the space um yeah I think one example we could follow the deed restriction um that they did at Pard for the affordable commercial so we've reviewed that need a deed restriction another let the attorney answer but that would be one mechanism to follow that is that I guess I would ask is that a proposed mechanis I'm aware of what happened at Pard I'm just curious is that what's being proposed here um would it follow the same resetting mechanism what is the proposal here it's presented as affordable commercial in the presentation but I don't see it designated that way in the site review application or how it would be managed so is there a a proactive proposal here and again I guess the question is what

[228:02] kind of condition is the applicant willing to accept on the permanence of the affordability yeah so Charlie Smith again so uh similarly we would have a recorded declaration or Covenant against the property um that could be a condition of approval if the city council thinks that that's uh appropriate and the the exact specifics of how rent would be calculated and those sorts of things we would discuss with the city it sounds like the city is um learn some things since the PO uh example and and might want to be able to have some more flexibility for how rent is calculated for affordable commercial moving forward but happy to discuss that with the staff and then get the Declaration of covenants uh negotiated to be recorded very good and could I ask also how was 7500 Square fet arrived at because it's about 5% of the entire

[229:00] project so that more or less says 95% office 5% affordable commercial how was that arrived at yeah this is Eric with corm I'll also defer to Chris shears a little bit on this uh in regards to the size but uh this space being the most prominent looking in terms of retail leasing depths of the space if you enter this space you'll recognize that you're as you're walking in uh it's I think 60 feet deep and as on the western edge you are elevated above grade because that's where the sunken Plaza in the basement level Daylights and so it's really about leasing depth of retail because we don't want to create a bowling alley and then as you walk in the front door and transition to the right or east if you're looking North again the building falls away from you and so it we wanted to maintain that first floor Plaza level retail that's right and what I can add

[230:00] is that we wanted activity on the Plaza and so there could be outdoor seating U for a coffee shop or or comp mentary uh uses associated with that that commercial space so it just seemed like the right location in the right depth uh in terms of uh and and the size of the space as well sort of a critical mass there that seems to work okay so you you explained the depth and the location so I get that I'm curious about 7500 square feet was there no other location on the site where might be appropriate because we're losing 155,000 ft of retail replacing it with office and 7500 Square F feet of permanently affordable retail so um I haven't heard a driver I have heard while you chose the site to put it I'm just curious was there a reason for 7500

[231:00] square feet or a 5% proportion of building for that use I think to try and answer your question a different way that it's it's based on the building configuration so if you look at the site plan it lines up with the stairwell and the bathrooms and so it is and it's there's no magic number um we did talk to Firefly and that was a a good amount for them um and it provides a lot of Frontage and not too much depth so it it's not there wasn't a magic calculation it was what fit well from a design standpoint with the building and from a retail standpoint I avoid probably talk about depth of retail spaces um I I I don't need to hear about depth that's the fine answer thank you Rachel I think you're down is that right and I appreciate the the follow-up and clarifying questions um and and I think what you were kind of getting at is could we could we get more than 7500 maybe that's something for us to

[232:02] discuss Mark yeah first Sam I wanna I want to thank you for raising those issues the enforceability of these obligations has been uh of great concern to me uh I just want to express a very strong preference for rendering final decision on this project in the context of seeing what the covenants look like and and being able to make that decision at one time um you know unfortunately the city has had un poor experiences in the past with respect to these issues and I would like there not to be any misunderstanding or any mistake in how we move forward with this project so thank you for thank you Mark and so I believe we're ready to move on to the public hearing staff or applicant let me know if there's anything else we should do from your perspective before going to the public hearing great hearing none I think we're ready to move there let me pull up my

[233:02] speaker list a moment okay here we are so I have 11 people on my list 11 speakers on my list so that means that each speaker will be getting three minutes and pooling of three will produce five minutes I'll turn to Sarah Sarah did you want to speak to anything here about pooling so it just be helpful if a person who is called upon intends to pull to just stop and let us know that you intend to pull I need to verify that the individuals who you're pooling with were already signed up on the list and are currently in the meeting I have at least one individual who intends to pull and the folks who are seating their time have already let me know that they are so we should be good to go there but if there's other individuals who wish to pull please indicate that and we will

[234:00] just confirm and move on great and is it John teer who's GNA it is yes very good thank you okay so so we will begin with Lynn seagull and then ban jubin and John T will be cooling so Lynn and ban will get three minutes each and John will get five Lyn um first can you hear me I'm using my laptop as a laptop but sometimes doesn't work can we got you ly okay H my blood is boiling you know I had my blood taken the other day if I had it taken right now it would be like a fraking fire hose um just say no stop already with the growth growth growth the more housing that you put in and granted that the high-end housing the 64 units are going to be high-end users of services but the more housing you have the more

[235:01] services it requires the more contribution to the jobs housing imbalance less so actually more so with higher end housing so we need to stop we need to stop stop growth period you know I was concerned about the Oz and the moratorium and the timing that Macy's did this and we need retail and oh my God my most unfavorite law fir Browning h far burn shre this is like a nightmare to the most extreme um this is shooting from the hip with urban planning you know you need to calculate how much we need to have a whole different design for urban planning because we need to know what

[236:00] commercial is there quantitate that exactly Sam asked good questions about how much commercial how much this how much that with all that affordable housing nearby um we don't need more office no no no uh oh the impact fees 4.8 million versus 1.8 who's to say you know that this shouldn't be 50 million that's more like it Boulder can't handle any more growth like this we've got a virus going on here like you won't believe Transit oriented development Transportation plans who's going on the bus hello people hello God oh my God stop at the office you know 21st in Pearl I've talked to you a lot about that you know my unfinished furniture store now I have to drive to

[237:00] Broomfield now I have to commute out to get my services to get my retail what could you be thinking what could you be thinking this violates the Boulder Valley comp [Applause] plan 2.18 2.41 no 51 foot heut everything is a third story no third story no more subk thank you your time is done thank you next we have B jubin John teer and Eddie Chang desan hi uh hi city council uh thanks for hearing me out um uh my name's uh ban jubin I currently live at 770 Mohawk Drive but I actually used to be a resident at 29 North right across the street for about three years prior um

[238:01] before uh Google was built right there so I'm very familiar with the the commercial nature of the area um and basically being a uh being a resident um you know this is this space needs to be used um and the idea of 64 units housing units is not is not going to do much for us in the grand scheme of things when we're looking at housing stock um what I am happy to hear about is the uh linkage fee issue and then the Covenant approach as well as um the affordable commercial as being a uh a former business owner myself um the idea of um you know new opportunities for local independent businesses come into play uh except for the fact that the 7500 square foot square feet is is is problematic um but for the most part um I am uh for I am for this project

[239:00] because uh there's very little you can do with big box and this seems to be the most thought out um uh well-developed plan that we can use for um uh Antiquated uh a big box space while reusing it otherwise it doesn't make sense to knock it down uh and rebuild from scratch and you know maybe those offices bring in some uh you know bring in some jobs jobs for people such as myself who've lost their business to covid and are looking for new opportunities um I'm more on the pro um not um on feder development side but we need to be looking for sustainable growth looking for the next 20 years from now um so I am for I am 100% for um for uh for this if we can get more affordable uh commercial that would be ideal but

[240:02] with covenants and proper drafting of the legal documents I don't see why we should uh uh why we should wait any longer um once we get people spending money once those Google employees start walking over there once we start getting transactions um we're going to see Revenue growth that is going to be able to carry the city looking forward um otherwise I I I'm concerned I'm concerned about the as I would call it nimbyism not in my backyard um and I I understand I understand why people feel that way I appreciate it but we have to consider the uh Community as a whole and the community 20 years from now and those who are here going to be in the future thank you appreciate the time thank you bean next we have John tayer Eddie Chen and Beth Pat and John you're up and I'll just State for the record that I believe you're pooling with Andrea Manel and Lord col you could

[241:02] confirm that when you start that' be great John John you are on mute there we go I think I'm I'm back on great you should be a pro at this jump I you know my computer just did this wacky thing so sorry about that um well first of all uh mayor and members of council I I thank you for hearing me tonight and I just start by wishing you all a Happy New Year um uh cheers to 2021 so I join you tonight on behalf of the boulder chamber in the B business community advocating that you please partner with us in securing a more sustainable economic future for our town even before the current pandemic there were signs of concern a concerning trajectory for Boulder's retail and restaurant sales Trends with Boulder

[242:00] sales tax flat relative to inflation during a period of strong economic growth these FL flat sales tax numbers concern us because they reflect a shift away from Boulder as a retail dining and entertainment center and because of the impact of reduced sales tax revenue has on our ability to fund city services even more these numbers reflect very real impacts on our small business owners and their Workforce forcing many businesses to consider closing their doors today we turn to you in the face of of even more dire circumstances stances with much Graver concern for our local restaurants retailers and other small businesses and the severe consequences for the diverse people members of our community and members of our valued Workforce who own and operate them while some other s surrounding communities are experiencing sales tax

[243:01] increases even double digits Boulder is seeing nearly a double digit decrease reflecting a corresponding decrease in business activity most dispiriting are the empty storefronts which tell the story of businesses that lost the fight and workers who are now on unemployment lines yes the covid Health crisis will subside and over time business will return to normal but we expect a new normal current projections indicate that between 20 and 30% of our Workforce will permanently operate remotely some of us may see a benefit to this change in workplace conditions but the loss of these employees coming into Boulder represents further erosion of Boulder sales tax spase with fewer Shoppers and diners commuting into town with that we stand here today with one of our most important retail and

[244:01] dining centers asking you for a Lifeline 29th Street has experienced year-to-date sales tax losses of more than 35% and we can project that that number will drop precipitously in the face of the fall in early winter public health restrictions yes those losses are exacerbated by the covid-19 circumstances but we also know they will not return to previous levels without a focused effort to drive customer traffic the propo proposed Redevelopment of Macy's will do just that so not only is it a beautiful redesign of a tired structure that conforms to long-held commercial activity vision for the 29th Street area not only will it drive affordable housing development in other areas of the community an exceptional amount given Macy's decision to pay the full linkage fee and not only will it avoid leaving Boulder with a big

[245:01] hulking empty box in its retail Center the proposed Macy's Redevelopment will help our community begin its healing from the covid-19 crisis bringing back life in the form of credit card wielding workers and sales tax generating business activity to an important retail Center it also will save many small businesses from failure and secure employment for their diverse Workforce please approve the Adaptive reuse plan for Macy's and let's demonstrate that Boulders stands with its small businesses and responding to our economic challenges thank you all thank you John uh next we have Eddie Chang Beth pomerance and Perry shapow

[246:06] Eddie sorry I'm having some difficulty finding Eddie in the meeting bear with me for a moment sure I'm wondering if he's here under a different name um so I'm going to suggest that if Eddie Chang is in the meeting under a different name please um write to me in the Q&A box so that we can come back to you otherwise I suggest we move on to um Beth P yes who I'm also not seeing in the meeting um so I do see Perry shapo in the meeting so Beth if you are in the meeting under a name other than your own please communicate with me using the Q&A box and I'm happy to let the mayor know

[247:00] that we should Circle back to you very good uh Perry when you're ready good evening my name is Perry shapo and I've lived in Boulder for five years um I'm a current resident of 29 North the building directly across from Macy's and I have no plans of moving I love living in this central location that I just learned is called the triangle very cool I reviewed the proposed plan and I'm in full support of the Macy's project currently when I walk out the primary door of my building that I use to walk my dog many times a day I'm faced with an unsightly loading dock I love the proposed modern design in the ReUse plan it's representative of Boulders Forward Thinking Innovative and entrepreneurial energy I think the plan development will be great for local businesses in this area since it's it's in walking distance to my favorite condition Fitness Yoga Pod and the Walnut Cafe and of course

[248:01] the soon to be Shake Shack Boulder is a place that broadly supports the concepts of re use and recycle and I think buildings such as Macy's should be no exception I urge Council to support the ReUse of Macy's and move forward with this thoughtful plan thank you bar next we have Mason Roberts Brenda Lee and Brian fry um Mason and uh let me know everyone can you hear me yeah we can great well thank you for the opportunity to speak with you all um as Aon mentioned I reached out to him when I heard about this project trying to learn more uh he beautifully rejected my uh question and pointed me towards the proper information where I read over this plan um obviously I did not read all 191 pages of the PDF that I downloaded but um from what I could tell

[249:00] and from the presentation and conversation tonight I am 100% uh for this I spent a lot of time um in the area uh of this uh project uh member of the the CAC there my family goes there uses the pool and everything um you know shop at the various shops Home Depot get food um and I I really do much like the previous speaker mentioned appreciate the design and reuse of this building um I you know learning about the linkage fee and the proposed Covenant um signage and um the thoughtful responses to Sam your questions uh makes me even more positive about this project I would like to know more about the affordable space I do agree that it would be great to have more opportunity to support um local small businesses um that are trying to get off

[250:01] the ground I think this would be a great uh space for them to be in given the surrounding resident uh office space and other restaurants and shops um I I didn't really hear an explanation of why 75,000 was selected um obviously I'm sure there's business considerations and design considerations so if there's an opportunity I would like to hear more about that um other than that I'm not going to take up my full time I appreciate you all and your work that you've done thank you Mason next we have Brenda Lee and Brian fry Brenda Brenda you should be able to unmute yourself now okay um hi can you hear me we can

[251:02] yes okay great so um I'm Brenda Lee and I live at 30246 Street in Boulder um I the number one issue in Boulder is affordable housing um so really my main concern is that this project does not make this issue worse um hearing about the linkage fee discussion it does make me feel more comfortable um reading through the plan I saw that it aims to revitalize 29th Street Mall what I find kind of sadly ironic is that while retail and restaurants are mentioned mentioned in this revitalization plan many businesses at 29th Street Mall have come and gone leaving behind empty storefronts and vacant restaurants um it's become quite clear across Boulder that only the large corporations are able to afford commercial rent for example 29th Street mall is lined with apple Victoria's Secret H&M anthropology any mom and pop

[252:02] stores that tried in the past to maintain a business have long gone so why exactly we need more retail space is not clear in July 2019 a comprehensive study by City staff looked at the state of Boulder's retail environment main takeaways from that study um showed that Boulder and surrounding areas have much more retail space relative to population than the United States as a whole city staff noted that Boulder has a high vacancy rate and low absorption rate indicating that the city may have as much or more retail space than it needs staff recommended that the retail strategy include careful consideration of any increase to Boulders retail inventory secondly is there a need for more office space as a small business owner who recently left Pearl Street in fact today we closed down completely due to the high rents I can confidently say that there is no lack of office space in

[253:01] Boulder the building that we were in was 60% vacant the entire four years we were there I've always wondered why that was and um so I and that's just one example the problem is not needing more space but having reasonable rents when ground level retail is 20,000 a month in some of those plac on Pearl it's no wonder small businesses can't survive so I I find it sad that our city is transitioning from a strong small business Community to one that is being sold out to large corporations and making it impossible for small businesses to survive so hearing of the discussion about the linkage fees and talking about um commercial uh sustainability is just has to be key to this because otherwise we're going to end up with just um more high-end stores and corporate businesses so thank you so

[254:02] much thanks Brenda uh next we have Brian fry and then we will go to the phone to see if either of our missing speakers have called in so Brian hi this is Brian fry I'm I'm a current resident at H 29 North and I frequently walk through uh the 29th Street mall and uh this Macy's area with my wife and my new puppy and we're really excited about this development because we believe it can bring energy and vibrancy back to this area um we're really excited about being able to support business again um bring social spaces shopping um and and allow patrons who

[255:00] frequent this area um an opportunity to maybe stay around and linger and uh and really enjoy this space um so I I I really like the Aesthetics of the design I think this is a great opportunity um for us to support uh the economy it's it's a great walkable space and um I I'm really uh looking forward to uh to supporting this thank you thank you Brian okay Sarah if you'd like to check on the phone next okay give me one moment please sure okay we have an individual who's called in with a 614 area code um in order to unmute you would press star six

[256:00] on your phone and we just want to check and see if by any chance you are Eddie Chang or Beth pomerance this is Beth pomerance okay terrific Beth you may speak you have three minutes okay thanks so much good evening everyone um I'm the owner of firefly handmade and just as an introduction I wanted to mention that for those that don't know that Firefly is a woman-owned business um owned strictly by myself and it is a handcraft um handmade craft Market supporting small businesses um small maker businesses and Artisan businesses and the local economy for the past 10 years we've operated markets in Boulder at the 29th Street location as well as on Pearl Street Mall we're very much in support of the Macy's Redevelopment project and have been working with um the Quorum and Macy's group about the possibility of bringing the Firefly experience to Brick and Mortar at their Marketplace space this

[257:02] project would incubate small local businesses give them a below market rate opportunity which is very hard to come by in our city and in many cities and to start their businesses in Boulder which is a place many want to be in and offers them the opportunity to then graduate to their own brick and mortar which several of our Artisan groups have done over the past several years um our support of the Macy's adaptive reuse project um comes from our experience at the 29th Street location having had our markets there as I mentioned and we're convinced that this brings a more Dynamic use and renovated plaa more Dynamic use to the plaza space as well as the indoor marketplace and that the entire project would help to energize sales at the 29th Street location the Adaptive reuse of

[258:00] this loc of this project would also help to achieve Boulders climate goals among other things that have already been mentioned thank you thank you Beth so Sarah I'll just check in one more time we don't think Eddie Chang is available one way or the other correct that is correct he's not let me know that he's here very good so with that I'll close the public hearing and I would like to turn now to Harman Zuckerman who's the chair of the planning board if uh we all agree I think it would be good to hear from Harmon to give us kind of the pros and cons of the way the planning board viewed this project so if you're ready Harmon we'd love to hear from you sure hey Sam thanks nice to see all of you all and um say this is a weird year to be doing the kind of stuff that you do and that I think we do on planning boards so thank

[259:01] you for hanging in there and uh helping to guide the city through um some really tough times um so I have some comments that I I just prepared just to kind of make sure I captured everything that I wanted to convey to you guys about uh our decision um it was a a split decision and and I think it merits a conversation so thanks for offering to have me um the planning board agreed unanimously that the project is consistent with the land use map the service map and so forth but uh the board narrowly decided that the project on the balance uh met the policies of the comp plan and by a 4 to3 margin planning board voted to approve the site review the big issue that split the board was whether the Project's negative impact on the jobs housing imbalance outweighed its design um which most board members deem to be maybe all board members deem to be excellent um

[260:00] the general sentiment among the yays was that the Project's only significant failure was that it adds jobs but not housing um this might have been a fatal failure for some of the a um if the site could be repurposed to add a significant number of affordable units however the site zoning requires 1600 square feet of open space per unit the site's small it's only the footprint of the Macy store and the maximum residential count is therefore limited to 64 all things you've heard tonight um moreover the building itself is cavernous and it can't be repurposed for residential to use the site for residential development would involve a total tear down and the new construction of just 64 residential units that to make the project feasible we all agreed would be large and expensive um this would also not benefit the jobs housing balance in Boulder um because I don't I don't believe that

[261:00] multi-million dollar condos are are what we're really looking for to uh to benefit the jobs housing balance the A's also noted that the proposed project represents a 40% decrease in average daily vehicle trips versus the current Macy's which is a big positive um the 64 potential residential units on the other hand would create about twice that number the number of daily trips of the Macy and three times the number of trips of the proposed project so overall the the planning board majority found that the project meets the goals and policies of the comp plan via its adaptive reuse its environmentally sensitive design uh its appropriate height its infill and enhanced design with natural daylighting and improved Public Access and the significant decrease in average daily vehicle car trips despite uh additional on-site employees and then we deliberated collegially uh the three board members who voted against the project did so for the following reasons

[262:01] which they stated and which uh I'm quoting or at least paraphrasing from the record um John G still found it difficult to think that we'd move ahead with a project that would exacerbate the jobs housing imbalance John suggested that some housing on the top floor would be a benefit lupito Montoya felt very positive about the project but in the end she chose to vote against it because of the need for more housing in Boulder and Sarah Silver's nay was not about the building but rather it reflected the importance of highlighting the jobs housing imbalance she stated that we've got to rep prioritize I that um Other Board member comments which I'd like to convey are that Peter Vitali was excited by the Project's adaptive reuse of the structure and the decarbonization that the project allows us to realize Lisa Smith OED that the proposed uses create a better balance of uses in the shopping center but she also noted the large swats of surface parking in the center and hope that housing can be added on

[263:01] site in the future and David enstein and other planning board members suggested that the project in include affordable retail space which um as you can see is a change that made it up to uh your hearing tonight so in a nutshell planning board approved the project as meeting on balance the goals and policies of the comp plan while every member expressed approval of the project uh for one or more of the reasons I've mentioned three board members felt strongly enough about the exigency of our jobs housing and balance to vote nay on that basis so that's my synopsis if you have any questions I'll stick around for a little more great Harmon thanks so much for the synopsis that was really complete um Adam thanks for coming Harmon and speaking to us uh my question is at your hearing was the additional commercial linkage fee money on the table at the time or was that put in after your hearing that's that's new for me uh that was not in our

[264:01] hearing awesome that's that's a good thing to know appreciate it yeah eron well I just want to thank Haron for being here and uh it it waiting through to the late hour and that wasn't excellent summary I've given a fair number of planning word summaries to councel in the past I don't know if I ever did that good a job so thank you appreciate the information thanks Aaron very good I see no other hand so Harmon you can go to bed or keep watching whatever R you happy appreciate it Sam thank you thank you all okay um with that I believe um there is time for an applicant rebuttal which I'll just take to mean any additional information the applicant would like to um Supply at this point staff correct me if I'm wrong about any of the blow here you're correct Sam thank

[265:02] you is it okay would the applicant team like to address anything that you've heard so far specifically thank you mayor I think just one last um comment on the issue about the Declarations uh appreciating understanding that a declaration about uh a linkage fee and about affordable commercial rent are a little atypical issues however uh it is very typical for Council to impose condition of approval that would then require the applicant to negotiate specific things uh even very technical things such as uh architectural changes or design changes uh or development agreements um and for Council to impose those changes and require the applicant to negotiate those things with staff after approval and uh in this case we think it would be best

[266:02] to take that route for a couple reasons um for one thing it allows Council to rely on its staff and City attorney uh who have expert knowledge about uh these matters and to work through those matters thoughtfully uh rather than trying to do so on the fly during a hearing um and uh Council would still have the opportunity each council member would still have the opportunity to interact with staff or the City attorney after having approve approve the application to ensure that the intent of the conditions of approval are being met during that negotiation process so council members wouldn't be cut out of that process they would still be able to interact with staff to uh during the negotiation of the Declarations to ensure that their intent is being met but it allows those negotiations to happen uh directly with staff and the City attorney over hopefully not a not

[267:02] too long of a period of time but um to happen in a thoughtful way while gathering information about what Market rents look like and uh other factual items like that and uh that would also allow us if we have a vote tonight to have some finality on this application which uh I think we would certainly appreciate we've tried to be very accommodating in um extending uh deadlines extending uh hearing dates um and uh want to continue to be accommodating but it would be nice to have some finality on this application so what we would propose is that the two conditions of approval be that uh if Council approves this project which we hopefully uh which we certainly hope hope for that the two conditions of approve will be that uh the applicant work with City staff and the City attorney to finalize declarations that will be recorded in

[268:01] the real property records uh with respect to the linkage fee and with respect to the affordable commercial rent and for the affordable commercial rent declaration uh the condition could expressly reference using the par document as a precedent or starting point document uh including uh an 80% threshold for uh 80% of fair market value rent as what would constitute affordable rent for this commercial space and um obviously that would give us some flexibility to fix some of the uh some issues that were unclear in the P document uh such as there's some language in there that actually prohibits certain women and minority owned businesses from being eligible which we don't think is the city's intent so we'd be able to work those issues out um but that would be our request hopefully that would provide each council member some comfort that they'd still be able to participate in

[269:01] the process after this project is approved because it is subject to those conditions of approval and you would be able to rely and trust your city staff and City attorney to uh carry the ball over the Finish Line with your continued input on that front thank you that that preference is duly noted um is that the end of the applicant for ble else yes I think we're good thank you very good okay with that I think we'll bring it back to council I guess I would like to structure this um portion to start with questions so if there's any questions that council members had raised through what we've heard um in the public hearing or the applicant rebuttal or anything else that's come up so we start with questions and then I'm sure that we'll pretty naturally move into putting our opinions out um and then we can talk about several things so I guess first questions and then once we get into the discussion probably want to

[270:01] go through methodically and answer um a few of the questions um about uh the approval and the conditions so that being said are there any Council questions okay seeing uh Mark you have questions just just one I I think there are some there are many many architectural details in in this project that are terrific um but one still leaves me cold and I wanted to ask the applicant if there's any possibility that that they can address this the mechanic the cube mechanical building um which is now quite hideous is under the current plan going to be I think also hideous uh for those of you who have watched your Star Trek the mechanical section of this looks like it was designed by the Borg it's it's just a cube with black plates on it and I'm

[271:03] wondering if the applicant has given any thought to somehow lightening that design or you know creating an alternative that's a little friendlier to the eyes well um gee that's that's an interesting question um as as the architect I think my answer um that the answer that I'll give you is that we we will continue to use some of that space to screen the mechanical equipment for the building and of course that that's the present use of that space uh as well uh so and of course that's a requirement that is always present in any u in any site review so I I believe that that we would like to uh to keep that as it is I I don't as the architect I don't see really that

[272:01] that's a a significant U NE to that North portion of the building uh but of course we're all entitled to our opinions uh I respect your opinion but I think we'd like to use that as it's presently used as a screen for mechanical equipment well I wasn't commenting on the on the use so much as the those elements of the design which by the way I don't want to misre I don't want you to misunderstand I think the overall design is excellent um that's simply one issue that that I'm raising with you and you're entitled to that view as well right thank you for your opinion he and Adam thanks Sam um this is a question for staff and I just want to be reminded of what is the um what could happen at the site if this isn't approved what are the potential other things that would happen

[273:00] by right and can I Cy before St jumps in I'd love to hear the answer to that question in light of both current zoning and use and where we're going with our use table update and our community benefit update so if you could answer Adam's question and if there's anything that you think in the coming code changes would add to that flexibility or or optionality it be I'd like to hear that as well yeah that's a a very good question thanks for that and I my understanding is at this point um a retail establishment would have to go through a use review so non-residential or a component of non-residential that uh doesn't include any residential would be required to go through a use review um so um not sure there is a BuyRight option for a

[274:02] use and if we update the use tables as we are talking about and as I'm sure you know better as planners than we do what's coming would any of those changes that we expect in the use tables um change how this site would be likely to be redeveloped um I would love to rely on Charles for that I know he's been working closely with u Carl Gyer on the use tables Charles great yeah thanks for the question Sam so regard to Ed tables um probably not this round um that we're GNA this this most recent grouping of changes to the use tables are really going to be more about the 15minute neighborhoods um as you'll recall we did you know the initial round um which um required use review for a lot of these retail areas in our shopping centers and the second phase was really focusing on 15minute neighborhood so I don't think

[275:01] that there would be additional use table um amend ments that would impact the property at least at this time got it thank you okay Council any other questions for staff I'm reviewing mine as well I guess I have one question for staff before we jump into our thoughts and that is Staff found on balance and we heard this from the applicant of course that um this application meets the camp comp plan um policy requirements could staff talk about how staff looks at on balance because I think that's an important thing that we need to discuss so I'd love to hear staff's perspective on how you arrive at on balance is it counting is it waiting like what what leads to on balance yes or on balance no well when we look at the policies um

[276:03] it's in terms of what's relevant to the particular application in front of us and so um when we review all of the different policies of which there's numerous policies to select from they need to have some relevance to this particular project and so there were a number that staff found this to be consistent with not all of the policies are going to be applicable and not all the policies can be met with every project and that's how we determine on balance in other words um there's certain things that are absolutely rise to the measure and level and sometimes you have to look at um what's really important and critical in a certain application in this case the environmental um reuse of the building

[277:01] and um retaining embodied energy was really critical um and so again it's just a measure of what's in front of us right now and how it meets specific relevant policies Charles yeah would also add you know really the Bedrock of I think how we approach these analyses with the comp plan is really the underlying land use designation and in this case um you know Regional business zoning which is really our most intense um uh land use designation for commercial properties it's located um in our most commercial our most intense commercial center in town um and it really does put an emphasis on office and Retail uses so I think that's I'm really the underpinning of of the analysis got it I guess just I'll follow up on that and then go to Mark here um

[278:01] on slide 23 of the staff presentation you present your consistency with the comp plan you call it a bunch of items and I'll speak to those maybe in a bit but I I'm curious why there's a slide that says here's all the things it comports with and not also a slide that says here's all the things that it either May conflict with or it's not clear about because I think what you heard from at least three members of the planning board was um comp plan policy 1.1 job's housing balance that's clearly a concern and it was addressed but I didn't see it called up so I don't know if you want to answer it now or think about it going forward but when we have the list of things it's consistent with there's going to be things I'm going to bring up which I think it isn't clearly consistent with what is staff's perspective on um is it just you analyze what it works for and then say on balance or how how does you know because

[279:01] we don't see the balance here we just see your um points that staff feels and I agree with these that it's consistent understood um in with regard to the 1.10 U staff found it's not inconsistent because that also talks about appropriate locations for residential and in the case of um areas to evaluate where there's an appropriateness for residential uh the transit Village was a very comprehensive um planning process to determine what the mix of uses should be and where is a good location for Transit um or rather U Transit oriented development and residential and so in that case um the 1.10 um it it it's it was we we didn't find

[280:00] it to be a relevant policy in this case um if at some point um Council wants to take a a good look at um the bvrc in particular and how we would want to um seek appropriate locations for housing you know I think 1.10 would probably factor in but in this particular case given that it's um an office use in the Boulder Valley Regional Center a business uh oriented um Regional Center it it didn't appear to be an appropriate um or relevant policy and as I noted earlier not all policies are going to apply in every circumstance so we have to essentially determine which ones are the most relevant to compare it to okay thank you Mark yeah to to follow up on on Sam's

[281:00] comments it seems to we we seems to me we tend to honor BBC policy 1.10 the jobs housing IM balance only in theory never in application um I I noted on your memo on page five the explanation for why um this project is not inconsistent with that policy and and frankly I thought that explanation was how do I say it nicely ludicrous um of of course this project is not consistent with 1.10 um we may balance again decide that other benefits outweigh that but to suggest that this is not um a problem under 1.10 is is just doesn't make any sense to me and I would ask um um since it's always easy to to enumerate the policies that are consistent and leave 1.10 on the other side of the Ledger as as a policy that's

[282:02] sort of standing by itself um on that theory we would never um either deny or substantially modify a project on the basis of its inconsistency with 1.10 in fact I would ask have we ever done so I don't know the answer to that there are a number of uh residential projects that do obviously meet 1.10 and in fact that's been um cited a number of times in recent cases that uh you may or may not have seen but you know I I think I think part of the challenge is it it almost sounds like we're waiting putting more weight or emphasis on 1.10 um than any other and and that may be some of the challenge that applicants would face as well as staff in determining um should certain policies be elevated and more important than others and in this particular case um you know we didn't view it as

[283:02] necessarily being relevant to this my well issue I'm other way but but to say it's not relevant is is is a little bizarre and again my question my specific question is have we ever looked at a commercial or um IND or office development project and either rejected it or shrunk it or or substantially reduced it on the basis of 1.10 have we ever utilize that or is it simply a an expression of value with with no content well again it's it's not that one specific policy it's a spectrum of policies that are relevant and balance and unless we Elevate that to be more important than other policies we can't make that determination well it's a fairly important policy and I've just never seen it used so um I find that peculiar all right thank you thank you

[284:01] Mark okay so I think with that we're starting to shade over into opinion so I would just say um I would remind people as we go there and I'll call Aon I see you and Rachel next I'll just remind us that a few things that we probably need to speak on as we um pull our opinions out and our analysis is is it consistent with the land use map is it consistent with the zoning um and then there's the question of the site plan review criteria consistency and then one of those that's important is the comp plan consist consistency that's the first site plan review criteria so as we speak as we move through the um the outlining of our findings and opinions let's try and keep in mind that there's some buckets that we need to tend to as we talk about this so with that I'll turn to Aaron and then Rachel I was I was actually gonna call on this if you don't mind Rachel since

[285:01] I'm little little was just called I just I just want to be a little careful here uh St staff is working very hard they prepared uh assiduously for this presentation it's it's fine to to disagree with some of the conclusions Mark I just worry about words like ludicrous and bizarre for characterizing staff's work um I think it'd be good if you were I I I appreciate that and I would use in retrospect I would use uh different language thank you for that thanks so there's that one point I'll Rachel you can go ahead and I'll I can come back to my larger your opinions just wanted to clarify because I had written down before um Elaine started speaking um within the comp plan like I pulled it out to look before you started talking there's not a like 1.10 isn't a an elevated priority right they we we are looking equally on balance my my lack of history on planning board might be showing but I wasn't aware that like there's one that's preferential so like

[286:01] and it's true three planning board members did say this doesn't meet the housing criteria which seems not to be looking on balance so I just want to make sure there's not something preferential or special about that one criteria I guess Rachel I'll express my opinion on that um is that no no sing actually if I I okay sure I could get hers and then happy to hear that too sure and and thank you for the question the it there is no um premacy or importance that's placed on that 1.10 that I am aware of um and maybe Charles you have other thoughts on that but they're all intended to be equal as far as that's correct there's no Defence that's you know granted in any of the goals or policies that are in the compant thanks sorry to cut you off Sam I I was just going to reflect on the the

[287:02] time on planning board that that would be what I would say is that the waiting that anyone would give sitting in our seats is subjective as far as what we think the relative importance of the different items are so it's neither counting up I don't believe you know the number of of uh terms that it meets or doesn't meet nor is it just one trumps everything else and so on balance my recollection and staff can also weigh and Tom in particular my recollection is the on balance is a judgment call that's made by each member of the body that's correct so just to clarify Tom legally like I could ignore all but one and say on balance it doesn't mean if I just like that one best because I would think as quasi judicial I have some I would be very uncomfortable with that if that's what you did and also I'm I'm not comfortable with calling 1.10 a criteria

[288:01] um it's aspirational it's and it's drafting it doesn't it doesn't prohibit this it doesn't even suggest that and I think reading it it's it's it's an aspirational goal that's set among other aspirational goals in the bbcp appreciate that clarification thanks and Erin thanks for letting me jump in with that okay with that the floor is open for folks to start giving their feedback analysis input Aon nobody else jumped in um I'm happy to to go ahead um so I thought I thought the the planning board did a good job of reviewing this um I think they're they're I agree with the broadly with the conclusions of the majority that I think this project uh conforms to the site review criteria as as I read them I

[289:00] don't I don't see any issues with the site review criteria do you think it conforms with those and then in terms of the uh compatibility with the um Boulder Valley comprehensive plan um you know I do think that on balance it it conforms with that I think staff's analysis of that is on point I mean I share people's concerns about um housing here I mean I you know if if it were up to me I would um I would prefer um a nice solid affordable housing project here our zoning doesn't accommodate it very well um and we actually have a a project in the works that's been on on the books for like five years to change uh the zoning of this area to to incentivize more housing we haven't gotten to it yet um so you know the the site itself doesn't accommodate it well the zoning doesn't accommodate it well so I I think um what the applicant has done um with the Adaptive reuse um I think meets a lot of our comprehensive plan um aspirations um so I think that that

[290:00] reuse piece is great as well as the a aable commercial and then that their gift of the additional uh linkage fee amounts uh amounts to um a significant shot in the arm for our affordable housing program so I think that does mitigate I think some of the concerns that folks have around that job's housing balance so I I mean I think I think it's an approvable project I think um Sam I really appreciate your questions about the enforceability of the applicants promises and I I think the the points that you made were excellent and um I would be in favor of an approval that that was conditioned upon um you covenants that committed them to those commitments so I'll leave it there thank you Aaron I've got Mary Bob Rachel and then I'm going to slot myself in at that point so Mary unmute Mary unmute um

[291:06] so I guess I wanted to State my opinion on um on the whole on balance issue and we talk about the jobs housing IM balance all the time the 60,000 Inc commuters pre covid I will say though um comes up all the time um the 2017 Trends report um I think many of you are familiar with that it's it's put out by the Community Foundation of Boulder County every other year and the lead story in the housing and economy in um the 2017 um Trends report um quotes the state demographer um Elizabeth Garner saying

[292:01] typically higher pay jobs create low paying jobs you have lots of jobs at higher incomes what do they want to do buy coffee go out drinking go out eating use dry cleaners rather than doing their own laundry as they create $100,000 jobs they're creating $25,000 jobs $25,000 jobs the 2019 turns report two years later again in the economy and housing um reads um the local economy has been on a tear for several years growing at a fast clip between 2007 and 2017 employment grew by 39,7 19 position positions a 177% increase housing however has not kept pace for every three and a half new jobs

[293:01] that came to Boulder County um in the last decade just one housing unit was added 11,262 in all 39719 positions 11,262 housing units this extreme imbalance in supply and demand forces tens of thousands of people and their cars into the county each day just to work the imbalance has also contributed to a rise in homelessness according to experts and pushed up housing prices that's the 2019 Trends report onto the Boulder Valley comp plan um the major update the 2015 major update which was actually passed I believe it was 2017 um so at the very front of the comp

[294:02] plan um is usually the the focus areas for that particular um comp planine year the focus areas um as I recall are established at the very beginning of the launch of the update um and so in the 2015 major um update the focus areas are um housing affordability and diversity there's like six of them um several of them have to do with the housing imbalance um housing affordability and div diversity growth balance of future jobs housing keep in mind that's a focus area and subcommunities and area planning so those all have to do with housing those are three out of the six Focus areas um in the comp plan itself

[295:04] there were a whole bunch of um policies that were added to support those Focus areas so in the question of whether or not there is a little more weight to be given to the jobs housing IM balance I think in light of what we always talk about and is referred to in documents such as the trends report as well as the comp plan itself that says that this is a focus area this is a serious problem I kind of lean where the minority the three planning board members landed in that housing is an issue and you know somewhere between I heard tonight 350 to

[296:00] 500 more people um though people working in those spaces are probably going to be making some of those $100,000 jobs a year jobs that generate more of those $25,000 jobs um what those numbers are is is not clear but between 350 to 500 people um in that space so to me um you know I I I lean in the direction of we have to make housing a priority um and the comp plan policy 1.10 along with the focus areas for that particular update in 2015 to me does elevate that priority that policy itself um so that's where I am and um I don't think because

[297:01] of all of that I can support this project Mary next we have Bob Rachel I'm going to jump in nearby and Mark um thanks Sam um first I think it's it Bears stating that um many of us maybe all of us regret the fact that Macy's will be leaving our community um I think it's important for the community to know that we're we're not pushing them out and I think many of us would like Macy's to say Macy's been a good uh source of uh retail for our community for and its predecessors for many many years many decades and it's regrettable that that Macy's had to make the financial decision about three years ago that it was going to close over 100 stores in the United States including the one here in Boulder and so this is the last chapter of that and it's it's too bad and so now we now we have to figure out what to do with the building um like Aaron I I wish I could wave a magic wand and uh make this all

[298:02] hous I wish I could um change our zoning I wish I could pick it up and move it to a slightly different location I wish I could wave the requirements as far as open space um so that we could get a lot of housing um but unfortunately those are not the cards we've been dealt um I do take very seriously the jobs housing imbalance I think I agree with Mary that it is um it is the first amount equals as far as the things that we need to consider here so I think it's a very very important thing thing and so what we're doing is trying to balance that um that imbalance against um the other factors here uh unfortunately the the the way this is set up and the zoning that this is the land use that is um presented to us that is was something of our creation our predecessor's creation on this Council um would only allow 64 units um to be built here and those units as as previously observed would

[299:01] probably be multi-million dollar Condominiums um and that would also require the destruction of the building and the release of a lot of carbon um I do take some consolation of the fact that we um continue to add lots and lots of affordable units um throughout Town including this immediate area I think we recently announced that we added 277 units of affordable permanently affordable housing last year alone that doesn't make this any better but it's nice to know that we're we haven't given up on that side of the equation so I'm going to be um supporting um the approval of the site review um as as noted by staff uh and a majority planning board it does meet the site review criteria is consistent with the land use map and zoning and on balance I do believe not withstanding the fact that jobs housing balance uh is super super important on balance it does meet the comp plan goals and I'll I'll list a few of them um that I think that um tip the balance in that direction I'm

[300:00] not going to use the magic words from the comp planine I'll just use my own language first I think it's consistent with the land use designation for the area I think that's pretty clear um second I think the design is very good I think Mark said it well I think this is a very very good design The Architects should be complemented for that and I think it's going to be a much more attractive building that exists right now um it does create some uh affordable commercial I compliment the Developers for that I'd like to see would have liked to have seen more um I don't know how the 5% uh came came up um I'm glad that uh we've got a great new tenant that's going to go in there and I hope they're very successful there um it is important that it reduces traffic impacts and so while we may have more people working in that building um it sounds like based upon what the Traffic Engineers have calculated will'll have less toing and fro frowing from that building and less traffic uh generally speaking and it does add to Alternative modes of transportation and walkability um which of course our s our comp plan

[301:03] uh priorities um I I was very impressed by the amount of embedded carbon that will be kept in place that won't be released that won't be destroyed uh and the carbon that we won't have to add um by building something new there uh and then finally um I can't ignore the fact that there's a $3 million gift uh in additional linkage fees um being provided and committed to here taking it up to a total of $4 million $4.8 million uh that will go in directly into our affordable housing fund and and our rule of thumb is is is we can usually create about one unit or one door of of perly affordable housing for about $100,000 u in City contribution so that $4.8 million will turn into eventually uh 48 units of permanently affordable low-income housing and if I had to make a choice between getting 48 units of permanently

[302:00] affordable low-income housing or 64 units of multi-million dollar condos it's it's a no-brainer for me I know that 48 is smaller than 64 but that's going to be 48 families um who can't currently afford to live in Boulder um but who work here most likely um who will be able to um live and work in the same community and enjoy our good schools and be part of our community so I think on balance as I consider those um against um some of the negatives it's hard for me to um to ignore the the positives outweigh the negatives I I do um feel very strongly that we do need to have binding commitments and documentation of the two conditions we talked about that is that the um the affordable housing commitment um uh the gift of the incremental $3 million must be documented and that um the affordable commercial space must be in place um at the on the terms that were annunciated by the um by the applicant so subject to

[303:02] um those two conditions I'm going to be inclined to um approve uh this site plan Bob great job Bob just made my job pretty easy I agree like almost uniformly um with what Bob just said beginning with I also am really sorry to see Macy's go um I I shop there my my with my kids and um I think it's a loss to the community um and I think the last of It's kind in the community so that that's just um sad to me um and and as Bob said it's not it's not like we want to see them go so um in terms of the um jobs housing balance and imbalance I guess I'm I'm a little bit concerned that we not try and have this one application solve our our crisis um it's

[304:01] it will be a way of that space to put 64 housing units there it's not like the right place for housing and I'm also a little bit concerned that I don't hear us talk about this more when we're looking at housing projects like you know can we add another um x amount here because we have this imbalance and so for us really to like Hammer that tonight when we're talking about um the one side of the you know the job side but we don't really bring that up too much on the housing side is um I think something for us to look at and and consider as we go forward on on um housing developments that come before us um so you know I I I don't understand still why we would um focus just on that one I appreciate Mary saying that it's um it's an important one from um being specified in the 2015 major update Focus areas um but you know so so is arts and culture and small local business and

[305:01] we're getting some Arts um Art Space use there and um some affordable small business so I I I think also as an attorney I'd be legally worried about being in this quas judicial space and prioritizing something um kind of late in the game um that that isn't really specified in our comp plan and and I would I would be concerned about legal ramifications of um saying that it doesn't um come out on balance to be consistent with the Boulder Valley count plan um I I guess I will just I'm trying not to repeat what Bob said so I'm going through my notes and not trying to waste people's time but again we'll reiterate like the the 64 units that that could go there would be wasted space and um require the tear down in the building and instead we get to do this cool adaptive reuse which seems like that's very in line with our our values so um it's pretty easy for me to support it on

[306:02] that basis along with reduction in vehicle trips which is um a big reason I think that we care about the jobs housing imbalance it's the you know number of the cars on our roads um so I think that um I'm I'm grateful to Macy's for adding in the additional $3 million um and the affordable um commercial space so I think that right now during Co we are um at a precarious time in our um budget and it would be um I think um sort of cavalier for us to say we don't need your money and we don't need the additional affordable space so I'm going to support it um I think it's a good-look building that makes good use of that space um and I appreciate um the years and effort that have gone into working with the community and even all the neighbors who testified um are are excited for the Improvement which is a

[307:00] little bit unusual I'm so used to Neighbors not being supportive so I think for most of the reasons that we heard tonight um it's a pretty good project thanks thank you Rachel well I'm gonna um be like Bob I'm gonna have a bit to say here uh I I want to start by saying some nice things I agree about Macy's I've spent many years um shopping for many many different things at Macy's so uh it it is regrettable that it will be gone um and we heard that from our community as well so sorry the decision had to be made in this way the era of stores like this may be passing for sure um but it is too bad because it did provide a whole bunch of things in one place so you could both go there for something that you wanted and find things that um you might enjoy there as well so um it is regrettable uh that they're going and I do appreciate their uh offer of the full affordable housing linkage fee I'll get to that in a bit

[308:00] the other good things I to say here are adapted reuse but that's not really a differentiator over other projects that could be here but it is good that that is there and that is a positive here it's also a pretty building so it it does take a whole bunch of boxes that yeah it's better than the tired old building that's there but then again if it were a project that had housing built in whether all or part it also could be pretty so that's not a differentiation so when I'm looking at what here is is different between this and any other modern project I think modern projects would be pretty I think they would be highly energy efficient I think they would go above and beyond to to meet not only the requirements which are getting stricter as far as efficiency and construction waste minimization so that's not really a differentiation for this office use in this location so just to note that also traffic reduction yay

[309:00] but we would also see traffic production if this were more mixed use or more housing so again not a differentiation so anything going here is going to almost certainly have less traffic going forward um contribution to affordable housing If This Were A again a housing project there would be 20% of the amount and so if there were highend 64 and I'm sure that we could get more than 64 if we were creative here but if there were just 64 luxury condos there would be a bunch of money going into a pot to create additional affordable housing uh so there may be a difference in scale but is not a differentiator so when I look at the key issue slide that lists the comp plan items that this project ticks the boxes I agree there isn't one of those that I think is wrong most of them aren't uh met because it's an office development they're met because of the building and

[310:01] the location so you know compact development well that's because of the location Transportation stuff that's because of the location TDM you would have that anyway and and so when I look at what it does tick as far as comp plan boxes that is true and also almost any other project built in this era in this location would also tick those boxes so um that is part of um my look at this as far as whether it meets our criteria so when we look at the criteria for land use map the answer is yes and Zoning the answer is yes when we look at the comp plan which is the first uh whether the project comports with the comp plan everyone is focused on 1.1 so I'm going to list some that it either doesn't meet or partially meets where gray area and it goes Way Beyond 1.1 so I won't even mention that one so one .09

[311:02] growth requirements adds and improves the quality of life yes and no significant Community benefits not at all clear and that's in 1.09 1.1 jobs housing balance we get it uh 1.11 enhance Community benefit requirement for height does it do that probably not is there any enhancement that comes for 1.1 with this project I don't really think so um up until the change that was made after comp plan we look at um policy 1.22 which is growth will pay its fair share into housing I think with the change that's been made with the offer which is voluntary and not part of the site plan review per se that that is a condition will help meet 1.22 so let's go there for a moment we're talking about $5 million Bob did the math um I think that the math is a little better

[312:01] than Bob did so I think that on um on balance we're going to get more than 50 I think we'll be able to use 50,000 or 75,000 of City money to get those units enabled wherever they are so what does it really do well the requirement if they get their credit is it would provide about 40 units is in the way I do the math and the addition is 60 so you can scale it down however you think it works but on 1.2 to I think with the condition it will do something for paying its fair share then we look at 2.14 and I'll go there and see my notes which talks about complimentary land uses and so when we look at that I believe it calls out that mix of complimentary land uses in existing neighborhoods this is existing and mix of land use type has sizes and lot sizes and um whenever land uses are mixed and

[313:02] it talks about how we can do good mixed land use right across the street from this site obviously is housing at 29 North and very near the site is commercial at Google and both are at rev so um the question of what it does on 2.14 is more open you go to 2.16 mixed fuse with substantial amounts of affordable housing in 2.16 that's called out specifically we go to 2.18 and I referenced this when this application came in at the time it did which was very unfortunate but when it did come in the day before we had a quick look at this site uh sorry the opportunity Zone there's a specific area about the Boulder Valley Regional Center in 28th Street the city will pursue regulatory changes to increase housing capacity now eron is right we did not yet do that but it is absolutely clear in the comp plan

[314:01] what we hoped for and intended at this specific site reduce the current non-residential capacity in the bvrc while maintaining retail potential so I think it's a very open question whether this meets that in spirit or in practice we move on 2.16 mixed use with substantial amounts of affordable housing so so there are there are a few more but I guess my point that I'm making here is that from the standpoint of legal um it's not like there's one um comp criteria on one side 1.1 and absolutely everything else on the other side many of those things would be true regardless of how you did it and we must note that adding office space in the middle this will be the largest office building in Bolder or at least compete for that that is very questionable at the moment a bunch of Class A office

[315:01] space when we're in a housing crisis is exactly opposite of what we are wanting at this moment however many of the things that Bob said are true and many of and Aaron's point is also true that there are mitigating circumstances difficult site um and you know we will get some affordable housing out of it you know however I vote on this project and I'm not sure I've really completely decided yet it certainly could be better it certainly could be something different and it could be mixed and we could work with it and we unfortunately in the Quasi judicial position of having to say does it on balance meet criteria and I'd say it's damn close to on balance and it's not just one weight against a bunch it's a bunch that would be true for any project so you can kind of take those off the table on the non

[316:01] balance question and then how is it meeting our community's needs and I would say it is meeting our needs on the whole in a very mediocre fashion um and that is not the fault of Macy's and it is not the fault of the site exactly but it it could be better and it could have been brought forward in a way that really did pay attention to the entirety of our needs and not just the particular needs here so I want wanted to get that out most importantly that there are a bunch of areas where I think it is very questionable what this does on balance um so I've cited those and I've said kind of what I think I wanted to to say also that I do appreciate Macy's um being willing to talk about the additional money for affordable housing because that does indicate that um better late than never they came to appreciate what an important piece of

[317:02] the puzzle that is for us so I will hold off on anything else there thank you for indulging me but I did want to go through some chapter and verse to make sure that folks knew that I didn't think it was just one cont policy that I had concerns with mirbi and then Mark mirbi thanks Sam um as always very well thought out um is a great perspective to one of the sides um I think Bob for me probably said it like Rachel said kind of took most of my thoughts um and put them in a really well thought out statement um being born and raised here I've seen this go from what we used to call it as MF to foolies which it was mnf to foies to um Macy's so it's you know it's sad for me because it's just where I've kind of grown up I trapped my first and only feral cat that I've ever

[318:00] seen in Boulder outside there and fed it with the uh food court orange chicken to entice it and it's a big change I am pleased to see that I think the building in general I think most of the buildings that have recently been developed in Boulder are just the ugliest things and have totally destroyed this town but it is nice that this one actually seems to be a little bit more open um welcoming than others I've seen so I am pleased with that um I like a lot of the points regarding the carbon uh less miles traveled but again then as Sam is saying any project really would do this I think for me it comes down to the difficult point of this is where the zoning is this is the buite um and we have not adjusted this so yes we could put the 64 units in but are the 48 units better I think this is going to be a you know as usual it's somewhat

[319:00] divisive and it's going to be a difficult decision for some of us to make I'm still slightly on the fence but um I think I'll be leaning to support the project just because again I I think with the economy uh where Macy's is the additional uh money for affordable housing and the fact that there really isn't another great option right now um is pushing me in that direction it's a shame that we didn't have our zoning um and again everyone's swamped and we can only do so much you know I wish there were other options but again I think for where this project is right now um I'm hoping that it brings the best that it can and again I I think the vibrancy of the um Plaza and the affordable retail I wish there was more of that as well um especially for small businesses I think that I'm sorry I don't know if I think her name was Brenda who had just closed up shop uh said exactly correct I mean small businesses cannot afford to live here

[320:00] and that's shame so um definitely not perfect and as Sam said I think it's kind of meeting our needs mediocre you know in a mediocre way but right now I'm not really seeing another option unfortunately so I think I'll probably be supporting the project Mark I'm sorry are you ready to speak I'm always ready um there are there are elements of this project that I think are are are quite good I I expressed the reservation about one element of the design but the remainder of the design I think is is quite good um I am very impressed with the increase in the linkage fee and I think that will go a long way um I was prepared um to

[321:01] in effect reluctantly support the the project um but I will tell you that I have been um greatly impressed by Mary's analysis which was much deeper than my own in terms of of um uh the jobs housing imbalance uh and Sam your analysis of policies that that may not be met as a result of um uh this project in terms of the comp plan compliance um so I'm a little more on the fence than I was um I would say that I am the one thing I am I am fairly strong about is I would like not to approve this project until such time as we have uh we can see the um uh the documents relating to the increase in linkage fees and the affordable commercial space

[322:01] um uh you know disputes can arise um language issues can arise I'd like to do this all as one package I'm probably still slightly in favor um but I I would like to see the entirety of it uh and not do it pecem I know that the applicant will be disappointed by that if that's the direction we go um but I would encourage us to be able to do this in its totality um not peace meal and as those conditions of approval are fairly Central to this project I would like to understand that we've got those uh issues in hand uh before we make that decision so that would be my strong suggestion to this Council that that we um uh see all of it not see at peace meal uh in terms of our approval thank

[323:04] you thank you Mark Adam I also agree with Mark um that this can't be peac meal um to me this is some really beautiful late stage capitalism in effect um this is the best way to get to the thing we need the least and how we've gotten to this point is pretty interesting to me um I too am really on the fence here with this um what I think about is when it comes to the potential housing units that could be here or anywhere based on this project who are they most going to benefit and I know that 64 luxury condos are not going to help the people who need help even if it Nets us nine affordable units um or whatever the math would end

[324:00] up being on that 20% um yeah this is this is a tough one um for all the things Sam said I agree this is like one of those micras Ms of where we use the comp plan and find the things we like about it to support our own arguments um and we can do that with almost anything in the comp plan that's the beauty and the the horrible part of it um this project itself though to me I think I'll likely end up supporting it very begrudged um simply because they did enough to put it over the top for Community benefit um that's the affordable commercial space and the additional commercial linkage fee that they didn't have to pay and are looking to pay uh again I don't think this is the project that any of us want here and what does that say about how we're doing

[325:00] City Planning right now um but it's probably going to end up being the project that happens um and one one final word I think we heard the best arguments from both the applicant and the Chamber of Commerce as to why sales tax is not a good way to run a city um so maybe that's another thing we need to look at from this uh discussion we've had this evening if we're planning on having people with $100,000 incomes coming in to save this community both by pushing up area median incomes and um expecting them to spend more money than people who absolutely have to uh I think we're kiding ourselves this pandemic has shown that towns like Superior who have a lot of things that people need not high-end luxury stores that people sometimes may buy at

[326:01] uh helps people weather the storm towns weather the storm a whole lot better so I know that was a lot of things all thrown into one but this project really I think teases out so many things that we need to do better thank you Adam Aaron I had a question for Tom but I wanted juny hasn't had a chance to speak if she wanted to to go and you don't need to juny but if you'd like to thank you Aron I think you know everything that needed to be said tonight have been said I'm fully in support of the project and part of it is it's this vacuum that Adam talked about because of covid-19 we have a lot of challenges in our community and having affordable commercial space is even more needed right now so I I think there's an opportunity to uh

[327:01] um to help people to help you know um community members and also the linkage fee for affordable housing I think it's very important as well so I think all in all everything that's been said on the positive side I do support and of course with everything in life that's good there are there will be some challenges you know whether it's with Transportation or you know the job imbalance that we talked about there will be challenges but we can overcome them and we have overcome them together as a community so I don't think we should just look at the challenges and say oops because of the challenges we will not move forward so I think this is an opportunity to make a difference and also to ensure that our community is viable because there is a pandemic and we are dealing with a lot of the the economic challenges of covid and I think this particular project is moving in the right direction so I think um I fully

[328:02] support it thank you thank you jie so we've got Aaron and Mark and then Alo yeah so uh Tom my question is is do you think is it what would be a mechanism whereby we could have a motion and a vote tonight but have some um followup on the um covenants um uh for the the linkage fee and the affordable commercial thanks Aaron that's a great question I think what you could do is vote um it up or down with directions to staff to bring back a decision um incorporating the conditions that Council has has has suggested uh the code gives you 30 days to issue your decision after the public hearing so um you could you you and I I I understand that's a common practice in planning board where planning board will approve a project or disapprove a project and ask staff to join up draft up findings to consistent with this the the will of the planning board so that that's what I would suggest if you want to go that

[329:01] way okay well I would put out to my fow council members that that that might be a good way of going ahead and taking a vote but also having some visibility on uh covenants that um staff Drew up with the applicant can I ask a follow question to that um if I can jump in sure I I will too I want to follow up on that go ahead Bob so if we were to go down the path that Tom and and Aon just talked about and this is probably a question for Tom and um so we voted tonight and the vote let's say it's POS positive um but subject to these conditions and subject to coming back within 30 days with the documentation let's say that that something goes wrong Tom you come back and say you know these guys are really difficult to deal with and I couldn't strike a deal with them or C Council just doesn't like what you bring back you you bring back the best you can and Council says no this did not satisfy the conditions that we talked about back on January 5th can we undo this in other words if we determine that the conditions that we are going to set tonight have not been met in our

[330:01] discretion um can we um turn down the site review at that point in time I think so okay if you if you say that you you will approve it based on these conditions and the condition and the based that the conditions be brought back in a manner satisfactory to council and they're not satisfactory to council then you could deny it okay thank you and that's that was my question so I won't ask it again um just just to be clear when we vote to approve it with conditions and findings to be developed by the attorneys then the actual final approval comes when we approve those conditions on our consent agenda is that correct yeah so so the code says that you have 30 days to issue your decision so you can give a vote that that directs us to draft a decision that that it would not be final until you issue that decision which would be on the consent

[331:01] agenda or under some matters or some other way if you wanted to have a discussion for it great well when when someone goes to make the motion let's just make sure that that is super clear in the motion that um it is contingent Upon Us reading what um gets brought back as far as the terms of the condition C can I add one thing there's um a discomfort in my office about conditioning a imposing conditions that are not part of the site review criteria um and I am prepared to to to support doing that because these were voluntary proposals by the applicant that council is accepting um there the the line that we are straddling here is not having a council um induce additional payments that are not in the site criteria and that's the troubling part of of this

[332:00] uh and it was the same thing we have the same challenge with 311 Mapleton when an applicant comes forward and says to induce you to propo to to approve this we will do something that's good uh you may recall I asked uh Mr Smith early on do you consent to these being conditions and he said yes so there'll be no objection I am a little concerned about the precedent and I do not want to suggest that Council has an absolute authority to demand anything from a developer to get yet to induce approval at site review because I think that would uh raise constitutional issues that that's well stated and understood and I think just again to put context for anyone who might be listening that is the reason the community benefits project exists in the way it does is so that we don't have this chicken and egg and this weird kabuki dance around when the applicants willing to do something in principle how do we get it done and so the community benefit

[333:00] that uh process will get around that that discomfort that you have that we don't arbitrarily create a condition for approval is that correct is that the way to think about that absolutely Sam okay very good um so I've got two things I've got Mark and I'll let you go and then I see a note from uh the applicant attorney that they'd like to weigh in on this for the record so we will do that next Mark youo and then we'll turn to the applicant one question and then a comment Tom as as the granting of a uh an exemption for height is within the council's perview um is there a reason why that cannot explicitly be linked to uh an exchange of another benefit um I really think that the benefit has to be in the code to link it explicitly

[334:03] like that Mark to condition the approval uh because the the even the the site the height exemption is governed by the criteria that were adapted prior to the application the applicant has to be able to judge what the what the basis for your decision is going to be and I don't think you can just tie it to anything that you want no okay um my comment is is actually based on something you said said earlier Tom which is you you described the section 1.10 as aspirational um I am very uncomfortable with taking parts of the comp plan and deciding that some mean it mean what we say and some are purely aspirational and do not mean what we say and I think we ought this has nothing to do with this application but we need to have a a a different conversation about um whether we are serious about the the

[335:03] jobs housing get balance or it's simply words that we we like to express once in a while again I think Mary's analysis of this was was quite compelling and um I am very uncomfortable with the idea that this particular provision um is guidance only and has no content where other uh provisions of the comp plan have content and meaning and that's for another day but um expressing my view on that Mark I was just referring to the the very language of the provision I mean I I I I completely respect Mary's View and that that's based on real facts and I I it's not my job to sort of Judge balance the facts it's to read the words and the words it says talking about the jobal fixing the job housing imbalance this will be accomplished by encouraging new housing and mixed use neighborhood in areas

[336:00] close to where people work encouraging Transit ored development in appropriate locations preserving service commercial uses converting commercials there's nothing in that that says shall that's mandatory that's directive it it uses the word encouraging and that my my use of the word aspirational was referring to that and I don't mean to demean that or or to suggest that there isn't a jobs housing and balance and it's not a major problem I'm just looking at a lawyer at the words on the paper and tell telling you that it's not as directive as I would hope if you wanted to base a decision on that okay fair enough thank you and okay so let's turn to um the applicant team and then I see Rachel has her hand up as well so before before we um go to the applicant team I just want to Tom make sure that we're keying this up um one possible path that we've heard Aaron and Bob refer to is that we take a vote tonight and we approve it with

[337:00] conditions and then we finalize and accept those conditions on consent within 30 days is that correct yes okay so applicant how do you feel about that yeah I think we're all on the same page there and what I wanted to clarify was um just to provide some additional record that these covenants that we're offering to impose against the property for the linkage fee and for the affordable commercial rent are voluntary and they uh were not extracted or imposed by the city they're being offered by the applicant uh voluntarily and uh specifically with respect to the uh rent I think it would be helpful to clarify that the uh the par document will serve is our hope that that will serve as the basis for what this document will look like it's a document the city's already comfortable with uh specifically the

[338:02] terms about 80% affordable rent um but it it will need to be adapted for retail use because that was for an office use and there are other items in there that I think the city would have interest in clarifying as well as I mentioned earlier about certain women and minority owned businesses perhaps being even excluded from participating under the power language obviously we would want them included here so I think that there are some specific things to negotiate through there but with a power document serving as that basis uh and the affordable rent threshold being 80% of fair market value uh that's what we're proposing voluntarily and offering that as part of this package very good and I very much appreciate you clarifying the voluntary nature of those two offers Rachel I wanted to make a motion to extend the meeting because sometimes we forget to do that we did forget to do thank you for catching it it's only an

[339:01] hour late my fault so thank you um all does anyone object to Rachel's motion nope okay thank you and I would offer to make a I I don't think we have a motion on the table yet for this actual discussion item I'd be happy to make it but I'm not sure the right wording so I'm I'm happy to to make a motion to approve the site plan review application subject to the two caveats that we need time to work on and come back in 30 days but it if there were motion like that could be flashed up by staff say I would be happy to say those words may I make a certainly can I just turn to Aaron Aaron were you gonna talk about motion language as well I was just goingon to make a motion but I defer to Rachel oh no perfected it okay Tom Tom go ahead go with your your input I would suggest a motion to approve the application um sub to uh in a decision to be issued by Council within 30 days the decision to incorporate conditions uh providing for

[340:01] covenants for the voluntary uh offers the two voluntary offers the one on the linkage fee and the one unaffordable commercial uh to be incorporated into the final decision can can I just hang on I just want to make sure I got everything right Rachel did you make that motion I just adopted Tom's language and said so moved that language so moved okay perfect Aaron to you second well I'll second it and then just suggest um W with the addition that uh that the affordable commercial um space agreement be uh based upon the polard agreement um with an 80% of Market um rent and and can I further um suggest Aaron that you also add in the dollar amount for the commercial linkage fee I don't have that in front of me well so let me ask it this way then it's in our packet that we're we're

[341:01] considering tonight this offer is explicated in our packet so if we accept the motion that Rachel had with aon's suggestion about Pard does that essentially capture the 4.8 million um that is on offer the 1.8 that would be required and the additional roughly three I think it does okay so the fact that it's in the packet means that the motion language that you put out there kind of outlines the terms that you're going to negotiate with the applicant is that right yes I accept uh Erin's amendment by the way okay very good we have a motion in a second um Rachel would you like to speak to your motion uh yeah no I will be brief I think that we made our points pretty clearly and uh cogently half hour ago but I I support um that

[342:03] Macy's is making the best use um or or a a best use of um land that's difficult to redevelop in a way that's environmental and um add some Community benefit um and so I support the project and um hope that we can vote in favor and move this along thanks uh I'll just note in addition to the things that have been said that a very likely outcome of denying this proposal would be an empty building that persisted for years which I think would be a negative for the community so just mention that as well and then I'll just put in a placeholder here that I would love to get to that project about incentivizing residential in this area and I hope we can get to it before too long very good we have a motion in a second anyone else want to to speak to anything here let me check and see if anyone else

[343:01] has put their hand up I don't see any um I'll go ahead and say I I am ultimately going to support this I will say that um the applicant's credit I would not have supported it without the additional commercial linkage Fe it wouldn't even have been something I'd have considered so for what it's worth that um that offer a voluntary offer um was meaningful to me because affordable housing is is one of the most important things to me so with that last chance for anyone else to speak okay with that this is a show of hands vote for my notes uh all in favor raise your hand and I'll count there 1 two 3 4 Arc is five nearby six 78 all opposed Mary so this is to one boat and

[344:00] it passes and uh per for I think all of council's understanding we will see the um conditions of approval um on a consent agenda within 30 days is that correct Tom yes is there anything else Tom that you think that we need to do to take care of this item tonight I can't think of anything else Sam very good Charles Charlie do you have any objection to the process that went on tonight are you are you um do you have anything else you want to add or any objections you want to raise at this point nothing I think uh well Tom I can get in touch with you tomorrow about drafting the covenants um I think we have a pretty good idea on where to start with the par document and uh our understanding is and and I guess about when this will be scheduled for coming back to council uh within 30 days is that right y but Charlie I just want to confirm that you had no objections and if if you had any please voice them

[345:00] now all right no we're good thank you and thank you all for your time and consideration tonight and during this whole process we truly appreciate your time and uh your ultimate support for the project thank you okay with that I will turn to staff say thank you all for your very hard work on this project I think it has gotten better um the first submitt wasn't super great it was improved by planning board and thank you staff for your work with planning board thank you planning board for your work on it and um I look forward to making the best of this situation that we possibly can so thank you all and that is resolved and Leisa what's next we have uh item number six which is Matters from the city manager in regarding the South Boulder Creek flood mitigation project Upstream Alternatives analysis update and sir please be reminded there is no public hearing

[346:03] Chris thanks Sam and uh before Chris lunches in I just want to do a process check with Council I have my hand up um sorry sorry didn't say it um you know this is scheduled to take an hour I don't know if it will or not but it'll probably take at least 45 minutes or so um I'd like to make a proposal I would I do want to get to the letter that Sam and Mary um wrote and council's approval of that so I'm not suggesting that we we truncate that but I'm going to suggest to council that we reschedule this matter we've got a couple of Council meetings coming up that are relatively light I don't believe this is time sensitive in light of the fact that the open space board gave their a unanimous uh vote in support of staff's recommendation I don't think we were going to take a decision tonight I think we were going to kind of Nod our heads and said that we agreed with staff in open space um I think that the staff is off working on the plan that which we have previously approved so I don't think that it's time sens for us to hear this tonight and I think we could do it

[347:01] in two weeks or four weeks so I'd like to hear what other council members say about that I would like to first turn to um Chris and Joe and and get your thoughts on the feasibility of of rescheduling this yeah thanks Sam and and Bob you you read my mind we were actually GNA turn and and ask that same question to to council so I'll I'll look to Joe to kind of lay out what the options could be for tonight and thanks for that Chris and I see at this late hour I still have my background from a holiday party [Laughter] apologies a faux paaw but um yeah it's a very big faux paw by the way yeah looks great especially here in Colorado but I'm showing my true colors so in terms of options we could certainly do it another time um I I could also just quickly bottom line it for you if you want move on but I also know that Kurt

[348:00] Brown is here from the open space board and was planning to speak so there's that um or we could do an abbreviated version of the presentation so whatever your preferen is uh that works for us great well Bob said his preference I've got Rachel and Aon Rachel yeah I was going to suggest what Joe said which is given Bob said we were all probably going to KN along and say you know open space is taking it off the table that sounds okay um Can Joe do a a truncated version and he and and Kurt are both already still here at midnight can we get through this and and I would guess that there are community members who have also stayed up to this late hour to see us finish this discussion Daron and the mark Daren oh well I could support like a 15minute version other otherwise I'd note that we could do this at a study session since no action has being taken

[349:00] Mark I suggest that we have suffered enough and uh I I'd like to look at this in its in its full uh scope uh but I'd rather do it another evening very good and meby Mark and Bob I I did actually want to hear about this um so I'd prefer to do it when I have a functioning brain and I'll jump in I I am sorry I apologize to Joe Brandon uh Dan and Kurt all of you um for the late night and um we will make sure this doesn't happen this way again but I am also in favor I would like to have time to actually hear the substance and ask questions because I'm afraid even if we have the best of intentions going towards 15 minutes there will be enough substance that we're going to need to get clarification so if it is okay with staff and again apologies I think I'm going to support what Bob suggested

[350:00] it totally okay with us and that would give me time to fix my background uh any council members with real harburn that wants to speak right now no I'll just apologize to the community members who stayed up waiting for it too y well the good news is that this is mostly informational um and as Aaron pointed out we have the additional flexibility of potentially doing it at a study session so with that I will thank staff let you get off to bed here and um sorry that it took us a long time to get here so with that back to you Alicia all right our last item sir okay am I okay I'm not unmuted I just want to make sure I wasn't muted is the city council the city council letter to the state regarding equity and vaccinations very good Mary

[351:00] yeah um thank you all for taking this item um under matters tonight and um this originally started out as if you recall a um letter that was going to suggest that the movement on the dial be based on meeting certain criteria with respect to equity um that's yesterday's news and so here we are with the vaccine and um and so this is basically an attempt to encourage the state to um put Equity at the center of um the vaccine distribution and um that's the main point the main driving Point um my personal fear is that as we start to get more into the distribution that it's it's it could

[352:02] turn into um a kind of anybody who can get their hands on it well instead of it going in an orderly manner to the ones who need it the most so um I hope you've read it um the version that was sent out this afternoon included some um edits that were made made by uh members of the response and recover Co response and Recovery team um and um I think they were good ones they were based on the Health Equity Fund um criteria that they use and um and so we're asking um for approval um we're headed in the right direction we can make some more edits if anyone has requests for more edits um but um yeah

[353:00] we just need a thumbs up to clean it up and send it off thank you Mary and I will just say um I collaborated with Mary on this but the the idea for this and the research that went into it um was hers so Mary did all the heavy lifting on putting this together and that's much appreciated and I also want to say that um if council's agreeing to support this um that I would like to make sure that we get it to State agencies the governor's office as well as our own um Boulder County Public Health we heard from them that they are thinking about this and so this is timely to get some specifics about what we' be thinking about and looking for so I think it it is good um to to have the state think about it as well as our County Health Department B uh first I just want to thank Mary and Sam Ford working on this this is um it

[354:00] was an important thing Mary I'm glad you brought this forward Sam thanks for collaborating with Mar I think the letter is great I have no edits to the letter and I would encourage my colleagues on Council to authorize Sam to sign this as mayor on behalf of all of council and to send it to the county and to the state thank you Bob any other feedback from Council uh Aon I'll just uh did what Bob said thanks so much for putting this together it's very important great thank you Aaron okay with that um nearby say please look at the senate race looks like we have one one and the other guy just took the lead okay all right it's super exciting okay interesting we'll take that under advisement if council members offline have any edits they'd like to please get with Mary and I otherwise um

[355:00] unless I hear objections I'm going to take this as Council support from moving ahead with giving this letter to the state and the county very good okay thank you very much with that that brings us to the end of the meeting I will ask for any comments that folks have I thought it was a good meeting very heavy lift to start the year I think looking forward uh things will be lighter at our next several meetings and um um and study sessions I do want to report what I heard from nearby I think we'll have a full compliment of us at The Retreat this year so I'm looking forward to that as we go forward so thank you all good night and with that I'll gavl the meeting closed night everybody happy Wednesday night everyone good night good night good night all

[356:01] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] based on the facts and the laws as I will describe them to you now so it is our decision that no charge will be filed um I will say that Jacob is you

[357:02] know he's very disappointed I mean how do you feel being paralyzed shotting the back seven times never had the men's Rea of wanting to cause any harm to anyone he just wanted to get away over 50 Hong Kong pro-democracy activists have been arrested on suspicion of violating the city's National Security Law and the biggest Crackdown yet against the opposition Camp under the contentious new legislation The Sweep at dawn of some of the city's most prominent minent activists and even former Democratic lawmakers is likely to raise a further alarm that the territory has taken a swift authoritarian turn the authorities there saying the action was necessary and that the group planned to cause destruction to seriously damage Society well we're going to cross to Hong Kong we're going to talk to our correspondent Oliver farry who joins us from there Oliver this is um a real crack down there isn't it yeah it's as you said it's the largest swoop to date under the National Security Law since it came into force on

[358:01] June 30th last uh until today uh only 40 people have been arrested under the law and only four charged including the the business Mogul uh Jimmy Li uh his Apple Daily was one of three uh media Outlets that was actually raided today in connection with uh the cases uh uh to dat uh 53 people uh so far today have been uh arrested according to police uh they range from a number of former lawmakers some of whom have been already arrested several times this year on other charges and also District counselors and there's even a foreign national uh the American uh lawyer John Clancy who is treasurer of one of the parties um he is according to uh the best news we have is the best