September 14, 2021 — City Council Regular Meeting

Transcript

Captions from City of Boulder YouTube recording.

[0:01] foreign [Music] it's good to see you [Music] okay

[1:00] [Music] all right and mayor from our uh from over here we're all ready to go when you are super and Brenda are you ready I am ready yep record [Music] our recording okay [Music] welcome everyone to the September 14th 2021 special meeting of the Boulder City Council we are going to begin tonight with uh slides about interpretation before we move into announcements and roll calls so Brenda would you like to talk to us about interpretation good thank you Sam can everyone see my screen it says welcome to this Zoom meeting I can see it it's great thank you so we are supporting just the first item on

[2:01] the agenda this evening with interpretation into Spanish and we encourage everyone to look at the icon at the bottom of your screen if you are if you've joined us here in the zoom meeting today find the globe icon and please choose the language you would like to experience this first item in your choices are English and Spanish we do default to English but we ask that everyone choose English because our recipient of tonight's declaration will be receiving that in Spanish and if you'd like to understand her words well we encourage you to choose the language of your preference and thank you so much all right very good thank you Brenda and with that we will move on to our announcement for tonight um it is as usual about vaccinations for covid-19 thank you yes Alicia I'm sorry

[3:00] no we need to do the Roll Call I was going to do the announcements and then go into roll call got you thank you uh and covid-19 vaccination information can be found at the link on your screen that's bouldercounty.org families disease covid-19 and vaccines and with that um we will please Alicia have roll call all right thank you sir I knew that it's just been a little hectic for me so I apologize councilmember Brockett president thank you friend here sweat Nick present walek present mayor Weaver here and council member Young present mayor we have a quorum

[4:00] very good thank you very much Alicia and I'll remind everyone that um councilwoman Joseph and councilman Yates will not be with us tonight both are recused from the main public hearing that we have and councilwoman Nagel um is not able to be at the meeting tonight but she is not refused she will be watching a recording of this meeting and attending the September 21st Council deliberations on the main item tonight so with that Council we have one item to add to the agenda tonight that is item 1C which is the City attorney recruitment committee process and timeline update so if I could get a motion to amend the agenda please so moved second super we have a motion in a second does anyone object to amending the agenda awesome seeing no one that's great we will move right into our first item which is Hispanic Heritage Month

[5:01] declaration which will be presented by councilwoman Mayor Young Mary I had to unmute and I had already gone to my PDF file so sorry I'm just juggling here sorry for the delay [Music] um all right um Hispanic Heritage Month declaration September 15th through October 15 2021. National Hispanic Heritage Month is recognized from September 15th through October 15th and it is a time to honor the invaluable ways Hispanic and latinx

[6:01] Americans have shaped our community celebrate their diverse cultures and work together toward a stronger more inclusive and prosperous Society for all the Hispanic heritage observance began in 1968 as Hispanic heritage week under President Lyndon Johnson recognized that five Central American countries Costa Rica El Salvador Guatemala Honduras Nicaragua celebrate their respective Independence Day on September 15th while Mexico celebrates it on September 16th in 1988 the week was expanded by President Ronald Reagan to cover a 30-day period to celebrate the contributions of Hispanic and latinx people to the United States and those American citizens whose ancestors came from Spain Mexico the Caribbean Central

[7:00] America and South America the act of recognizing and celebrating contributions of Hispanic and latinx individuals is important however it can be difficult to accurately do so when we examine the complicated history of their many diasporas between Spanish colonization the transatlantic slave trade and the forcible seizure of indigenous lands including in the recent past in Hispanic and latinx Americans have known many homes and traveled many paths people with ancestry in Spain and the countries that today form a part of North Central and South America and the Caribbean include indigenous peoples and also the descendants of African peoples enslaved by European colonizers and forcibly brought to these lands we acknowledge that capturing these complex histories and identities as only Hispanic and latinx oversimplifies

[8:01] history and neglects the richness of these peoples as individuals and as a community Hispanic and Latin America are all foreign names placed on the peoples and land of this continent we recognize and support the movement for self-determination and epistemic decolonization efforts of indigenous peoples that call this continent Hispanic and latinx people are the second largest ethnic group in the state and Boulder County and they continue to be a fast-growing segment of the population the 2021 theme for this month is Esperanza a celebration of Hispanic heritage and Hope which invites us to celebrate Hispanic heritage and to reflect on the potential greatness of our Collective future if we recognize and cultivate our Collective resilience

[9:01] and Hope it encourages us to reflect on the contributions of Hispanic and latinx individuals have made in the past and will continue to make in the future it is also a reminder that we are stronger together Hispanic and latinx people have enhanced and influenced our City's character through contributions of their talents cultures values ideas labor as well as new and old traditions that reflect the multi-ethnic and Multicultural customs of their communities while adding their own distinct and dynamic perspectives to the story of Boulder we recognize Hispanic and latinx community members in leadership positions throughout a myriad of organizations including in science education non-profit business and government

[10:00] we also recognize that many Frontline employees identify as Hispanic or latinx and these positions Place particularly heavy burden in the covid-19 pandemic local data have reflected the disproportionate health and economic impacts on their Community due to increased viral exposure and income inequality as we soberly acknowledge these systemic inequities we also commit ourselves to the ongoing work of confronting and correcting disparities at their root to create a more just and Equitable Boulder for all we the city council of the city of Boulder Colorado declare September 15th through October 15th as Hispanic Heritage Month and invite the entire Community to share and participate in the celebration of this month and consider the great impacts that Hispanic and latinx people

[11:01] have had on our lives and the community at Large learning about valuing and honoring honoring Heritage is an ongoing and reflective process that goes well beyond tonight's declaration and this month alone please take this opportunity and all year long to come together in unity to celebrate this significant month and its people thank you Mary was there someone to receive this yes I didn't realize I wasn't introducing Adriana um Adriana Paula is here to accept the Declaration thank you thank you Mary and thank you everyone um buenas noches

[12:05] sentido mean there is Cultura is fundamental

[13:45] is fundamentals materials

[14:24] foreign determination is Elemento

[15:01] is ambient is

[16:01] status gracias thank you Marion thank you Adriana for being here um Council anyone want to speak to this okay very good seeing none thank you again Adriana for being here uh with that we'll move to the next item on our agenda which is uh declaration honoring Francis striper and I'll be presenting this tonight on Wednesday September 1st of this year Francis Draper passed away after a decades-long battle with cancer a well-respected and inspirational Community leader Francis will be greatly missed by those who had the honor of knowing her working with her and those who enjoyed her friendship Francis was born in Bridgeport Connecticut on March 31st 1956 and grew up in Albuquerque New Mexico

[17:00] after getting her undergraduate degree at Stanford and an MBA at UC Berkeley he moved to Boulder in 1981 to pursue her professional career early on in Boulder Francis was employed at First Interstate Bank and access Graphics where she quickly Rose to Executive positions before transitioning to a long and successful career working with many of Boulder's local Flagship institutions during her more than 30 years working and living in Boulder Francis served as the executive director of the boulder Economic Council from 2006 to 2011 where she established its annual Boulder economic forecast event and Boulder economic Summit and was a key figure in establishing code Labs a Consortium of colorado-based Research Laboratories in 2013 she was the Chamber of commerce's business person of the year and a woman woman who liked the community honoree in 2019.

[18:02] one of the biggest parts of francis's time in Boulder was her employment by and passion for the University of Colorado at Boulder Francis came to see you in 2011 as the vice Chancellor for strategic relations and Communications in this role Francis transformed the University's entire marketing and Communications organization and aimed to measure and improve the University's reputation locally nationally and internationally she also developed a Central Communications unit on campus that offered strategic guidance and services to the University's colleges schools research institutes and academic and administrative units to ensure collaboration consistency and overall mission success for CU Boulder throughout this period Francis also led the campus town and gown efforts with a passion for cultivating and improving

[19:00] the relationship between the city and the University in 2019 Francis stepped back from her Vice Chancellor role to focus on these important Community engagement efforts as a senior strategic advisor for community and government engagement she retired from this position in March of 2021. throughout her time at the University Francis was heavily involved in many important city and CU efforts including relations between the campus students and Neighbors on the hill and the CU Boulder Hotel Conference Center by far the most controversial and enduring of these efforts has been annexation of CU Boulder South the parcel of land where CU would one day like to build housing for faculty staff and upper division students francis's expert consensus building skills played a major role in crafting a jointly developed annexation agreement between the city and University in March of this year Draper announced

[20:01] her retirement at a Boulder City council meeting saying that since I've spent the last couple of decades working on City and University issues I thought a council discussion of the CU City's issues was the right place she was only able to enjoy a few months of retirement before she passed Francis is remembered for her leadership in fostering good relations between the university and the city collaboration skills that brought people together on even the toughest of issues sharp wit and a distinct Charming humor she often said there's a pony in here for everyone and she worked hard to make that so round trip retirement Francis was asked about the legacy of her work to which she said I hope it's a simple Testament to what can be achieved by working together tonight we the city council of the city of Boulder Colorado recognize honor and appreciate the Life

[21:00] of Francis Draper and her many contributions to the community and with that I will also let everyone know that there is a memorial service for Francis Draper and that is October the hang on I'm just pulling it up October 9th at 10 A.M and I'll just stop with those announcements and say that it was uh an honor and a pleasure to be able to work with Francis in her role with the university I did not know Francis personally but I will say that she did an excellent job at being an ambassador from the University to both us and the city government as well as to the people of Boulder more broadly and with that I would turn to anyone who might like to say a few words I know that we do have a few people here from the University as well as council members Aaron well Francis will be greatly missed by

[22:00] so many people it's it's fitting that this resolution is done the night of the hearing on the CU South annexation which she worked on very hard I think regardless of how you feel about that project I think we all acknowledge that she did an extraordinary job in trying to bring the community and see you together and will be greatly missed by all of us resolutions thank you Aaron and I see Derek Silva from the University Derek all right thanks Sam yeah I just wanted to say that I had the pleasure of working with Francis for the first four years I was here and working on this project and it was just a complete joy to work with someone who is so professional so caring and so um had such a sharp wit and I I we miss you Francis thank you Derek Rachel yeah I just want to Echo um what Derek and Aaron said Francis will be deeply missed and if her family's watching a

[23:01] dishonest and my condolences it was always a pleasure to work with her thank you Rachel and Pat O'Rourke from cu thank you mayor Weaver I think that I can speak on behalf of the CU Community to be able to say that Francis was not just an employee she was a friend and someone who we all trusted she gave us the advice that we needed to hear whether we wanted to hear it or not and her passion for both the community and for the campus was unsurpassed we will all miss her and I can't tell you how much I appreciate the fact that the council has chosen to recognize her contributions both to the campus and to the community tonight um you have our thanks thank you Pat um Abby Benson from the University as well

[24:00] thanks mayor and I just want to Echo a lot of what's said I don't think we would be here tonight without francis's leadership especially on this project uh I was personally honored to have Francis be the one that convinced me to come to Colorado and work at the University of Colorado she told me I should come and represent this amazing research University and by the way it's in a beautiful city uh and she has just been a real force in my career and a real Force for a lot of people on the boulder campus so we will miss her tremendously and thank you so much for Council for honoring her tonight in this way all right well thank you Abby and again Francis will be greatly missed by the community and by the University and with that we will move to the third item at the beginning of this meeting um Alicia would you like to take us to that item of course sir that item is item 1C the city attorney's recruitment committee update on recruitment process and timeline Greg and Nuria

[25:00] do you like to introduce this item yep I'll ask uh Jen sprinkle to come in and share where we are in the process good evening well done sprinkle HR Director I'm here on behalf of the City attorney recruitment subcommittee to share with you the great work and progress that has been made to date just as a reminder this is the timeline and process um we have gone through a number of steps to completion the position profile the active recruitment phase which closed on August 30th and the candidate review and we're now moving forward to the semi-finalist stage of the process and so that will consist of the hiring subcommittee City leadership representative City attorney staff Representatives interviewing the semi-finalist candidates um and then sharing that information um back with you Council in terms of a

[26:00] recommendation from the subcommittee on finalists that will take us to the in-person interview process and then finally to hiring and so we could go to the next slide I wanted to share with you some more information and detail um what has happened in the active recruitment process so the position was posted in a number of national Publications and lots of websites and and social media the recruiter outreached more than 260 applicants and those were tailored based on their qualifications and this was through targeted emails and phone calls that resulted in 13 candidates um for um from Estates outside of Colorado but predominantly from states with uh or from applicants within the state of Colorado the recruiter did a screening process and presented seven qualified candidates to the subcommittee and the recruiters shared this information on Race

[27:00] regarding those qualified candidates just about 42 percent are white uh 28 were Hispanic or latinx 14 were black or African-American and 14 were two or more races the subcommittee reviewed all the applicants and identified five of the most highly qualified candidates to be interviewed as semi-finalist we could go to the next slide foreign your role and next steps so you'll receive a confidential memo with the semi-finalist application materials and we're asking you to read through those candidate materials and during this time frame we will also be doing both virtual and in-person interviews with the semi-finalists the hiring subcommittee uh Bob and Rachel will collect feedback

[28:00] from the semi-finalist interviews as well as your feedback from reading through the candidate materials and we'll ultimately recommend two to three finalists based on the feedback that's received from there we'll move forward to the final interview process uh we'll ask you to select finalists at the cable meeting on September 28th and then on October 1st we ask that you be available to participate in in-person interviews this would be two by two you've already received some Outreach from the city manager's office on the scheduling of that to place a hold on your your calendars and then from there we'll collect feedback on that process and hopefully position us to hire um and we would like to select have you select the finalist at the October 12th council meeting so those are your next steps and I'd like to sort of open it up if you have any questions I'm happy to answer any of

[29:02] those for you thank you for that Jen council members any questions for Jen I am not seeing any which means you are very clear okay thank you everyone all right thanks very much Jen and with that Alicia I believe we're ready to go to the next item yes sir thank you next we have item number two on tonight's agenda which is the consent agenda and that will include items a through C okay good thank you very much um we have two regular meeting minutes to approve and a special council meeting to call for September 28th so any discussion of the consent agenda or a motion Aaron I'll go ahead and move the consensus agenda second all right we have a motion and a second Alicia I believe this is a show of hands

[30:01] correct that is correct sir very good does anyone object to passing the consent agenda I see no objections so that motion passes unanimously and then I believe we're ready for the next item next on our agenda tonight is the item number four the public hearings we have item 4A which is the public hearing and consideration of the following items related to a petition to Annex a 308.15 acre parcel generally known as CU South at 4886 and 5278 Table Mesa Drive 718 Marshall Road zero Highway 36 two parcels and 4745 Westmoreland with an initial

[31:00] zoning designation of public in reference to lur 2019-00010 first is a consideration of a motion to adopt resolution 1295 setting forth findings of fact and conclusions regarding the annexation approximately 308.15 acres of land generally known as CU South and located at 4886 and 5278 Table Mesa Drive zero Highway 36 two Parcels 718 Marshall Road and 4745 Morehead and if resolution 1295 is adopted by Council finding that the area may be annexed we have the second reading and consideration of a motion to adopt ordinance 8483 annexing to the city of Boulder approximately 308.15 acres of land generally known as

[32:02] CU South located at 4886 and 5278 Table Mesa Drive zero Highway 36 two Parcels 718 Marshall Road and 4745 West Moorhead with an initial zoning classification of public as described in chapter 9-5 modular Zone systems of the BRC 1981 amending the zoning District map forming a part of said chapter to include the property in the above mentioned zoning district and setting forth related details or the second reading and consideration of a motion to adopt by emergency measure ordinance 8483 annexing to the city of Boulder approximately 308.15 acres of land generally known as CU South located at 4886 and 5278 Table Mesa Drive zero Highway 36 two Parcels

[33:01] 718 Marshall Road and 4745 West Morehead with an initial zoning classification of public as described in chapter 9-5 modular Zone systems of the BRC 1981 amending the zoning District map forming a part of said chapter to include the property in the above mention Zoni district and setting forth related details thank you very much Alicia that was a mouthful and with that Nuria how would you like to take us forward thank you Sam and uh welcome Council obviously today we have a presentation that is many years in the making staff is ready with a substance of presentation who will be walking us through a bit of context and highlighting the outcome of those many years of conversations and negotiations that have culminated in a draft ordinance an agreement between the city and CU that you now have before you for consideration the question of annexation of Cu South

[34:01] is complexed and nuanced and we look forward to hearing from you all as well as our community in this very pivotal moment in the process before we get to staff however I'd ask our interim City attorney Sandra yanes to preface the meeting with some introductory remarks before turning the reins over to staff Sandra thank you Nuria good evening mayor Weaver council members and community members tonight we will be conducting the second reading public hearing on the seized authentication I would like to provide some background and information related to the recusals by council member Joseph and Yates they each sought my advice on whether to recuse themselves from the matter being discussed tonight as is allowed pursuant to the boulder Revised Code 2-7-12a which reads as follows any city council member employee or appointee to a City Board commission task force or similar body May request an advisory opinion of the City attorney whenever a

[35:00] question arises as to the applicability of this chapter to a particular situation I have addressed the I have excuse me I have advised them to recuse themselves in an abundance of caution and believe a strict interpretation of the city the city's code requires it both City both council member Joseph and Yates were employed by CU for a short period of time my legal advice is based on code section 2-7-5a which reads in part as follows no person shall be disqualified from service with the city as a public official or a Public Employee solely because of his or her prior employment public officials and public employees shall not take any action with respect to their former employers for a period of six months from the date of termination of the prior employment if such action involves an exercise of discretion by the public official and provides direct benefit to the prior

[36:01] employer including but not limited to a contract lease employment or regulatory approval in addition the city code has a broad definition of the term employment and is defined as follows employment means providing personal services as an employee or an independent contractor with or without consideration the proposed agenda for this evening will be as follows we will begin with a staff presentation where where you will hear a summary of the proposed annexation agreement key issues and recommendations the staff presentation will be broken up into three parts to allow council members to ask questions at the conclusion of each part the presentation will take roughly 45 minutes next you will hear a 15-minute presentation by our partners at the University of Colorado followed by another opportunity for Council questions following cu's presentation and Council

[37:03] questions we will move into the public hearing and allow for comments from our community members at the conclusion of public comment the applicant will be given an opportunity for rebuttal if needed lastly Council will motion to continue the matter to September 21st 2021 for a continuation of second reading and for deliberations we have many staff present at this meeting that have worked tirelessly and move mountains to bring you this matter tonight and with that I will hand it off to Phil kleiser senior planner thank you Sandra I'm sharing my screen uh good evening Council community members my name is Phil kleisler and I work at the city of Boulder as a planner in the planning and development services department um as Sandra mentioned this is a team effort and as such we have team members

[38:00] joining us this evening from various departments including the city manager's office city attorney's office Public Works Open Space Mountain Parks as well as the transportation and mobility department as um just mentioned um the and the Order of events for the staff presentation we'll cover the review process in the existing conditions and then we'll hit the high points of each section of the agreement followed by key issues and recommendations and as noted we did want to break Midway through this a couple of times in order for Council to ask questions along the way annexations do require action by the city's planning board in the form of a recommendation to city council and that recommendation that action took place on July 29th the planning board's recommendation is included as attachment I to the memo this evening and just to provide a little bit of context to that document when you see it and have read through it the recommendation does

[39:00] include an 11 page Matrix of specific recommendations in addition to the level of board support at that meeting the attachment does include a column that was created since their meeting indicating whether and and if so how we were able to incorporate each of those recommendations into the agreement so we hope you found that found that useful city council does have has decision authority over annexation applications and council is expected to deliberate and take action on the proposed resolution as well as the or proposed ordinance next Tuesday September 21st and then if required Council may consider the annexation ordinance on third reading October 5th uh public notification consistent with Section 943 public notice requirements of the BRC 1981. City staff did provide notification to all Property Owners within a thousand feet of the subject location of the application when 600 feet is required and signs have been posted on the property additionally we have been keeping tabs and recording the

[40:01] public comments particularly the emails that Council has received since receiving the application in early 2019 that document is linked on the project webpage there are two recommended actions associated with this application um per the state annexation statutes city council is asked to consider the proposed resolution 1295 which is included as attachment C to the memo adoption of the resolution is a procedural step step set forth under state law and it makes determinations and findings about after the public hearing is completed including whether or not the legal requirements are met whether or not there's an annexation election required or whether or not additional terms and conditions should be imposed the second action is ordinance 8483 and so if Council does adopt the resolution and finds that the area may be annexed then council is asked to consider at second reading the proposed annexation ordinance which are

[41:02] is included in two forms regular and emergency attachments d and e and so if Council finds that the immediate passage of the ordinance is necessary for the preservation of public peace health or property then the ordinance to Annex the property through the emergency process is provided again as attachment e City staff is asking Council to give strong consideration for the Emergency ordinance this evening as you are aware the South Boulder Creek drainage way has been subject to significant flooding events that have impacted the property and threatened The public's peace health and property the flood risk continues to exist and as a result the city is pursuing pursuing the flood mitigation project for this drainage way the annexation does provide a path for implementing the flood mitigation project and after a lot of conversations amongst City staff we found that the emergency form Urban ordinance would give additional certainty with the

[42:01] permitting agencies and the city's ability to spend funds for further engineering the project itself as you are aware has a pretty long history to it but just a hit on some of the Milestones over the last couple of decades the University of Colorado did purchase uh the property it was a former gravel mining site in 1996. um and and shortly after that began a process to develop a conceptual framework plan for the property and so the the map that you see here just kind of an icon image of it is a composite map concept map that the university developed at that time I believe it was the August of 2001 that did identify flood mitigation as a process that should be explored on the Northern portion of Cu South and it was also at that time where the university began becoming interested in discussing land use designations for the property and eventually annexing the site into the

[43:01] city of Boulder and as such made several requests to the city to do this and so for the folks listening who aren't as familiar with the land uses The Landings designations are in the comprehensive plan map from the city of Boulder that Define long-term use of a land and it informs what type of zoning a property gets when annexed into the city um so the City Deferred those changes in land uses until there was a plan in place for flooding in along the South Border Creek drainage way in 2015 city council adopted the South Boulder Creek major drainageway plan that included a preferred option then called option D that used a portion of the CU South property for Regional Detention at us-36 with that plant adopted the city was updating comprehensive plan in 2016-2017 and partnered with Boulder County and the university to not only examine the land uses but also take a unique step in developing guiding principles for the

[44:00] property and adopting them as part of the comprehensive plan in 2018 in in 2017 in 2018 we began looking at variations of that preferred flood mitigation option in 2019 the university submitted an annexation application framed after the kind of modeled after the guiding principles uh and in summer of 2020 Council directed staff to pursue a flood mitigation option known as the variant one 100 year flood mitigation concept and so staff has been furthering the engineer on that engineering on that concept and that was really a milestone and a turning point in the project in that staff staff needed a decision on the flood mitigation project in order to proceed negotiating the annexation agreement and so after receiving that direction we have negotiated set agreement and are presenting it to you this evening and now we're at another decision point but it's sort of flipped in that a decision on the annexation is requested in order to proceed with the

[45:01] engineering and ultimately construction of the flood mitigation project and so in looking back at the key Milestones of the project the council the the decision that's being asked for a council is built on a lot of layers of previous decisions over a couple of decades and we'll get into this more later but there will be a three to five year period whereas the university the city will be getting permits for the flood mitigation project and the university would be only permitted to construct recreational facilities on the property that don't require connection to the City Utilities but we'll get into this in just a little bit more later we felt it was important to Circle back around on the initial conversation we had about annexation with Council in October of 2018. so we had a study session where we talked through what an annexation could look like and council at that time recognized that there this is a lot of this a lot of complexity and there should be an enhanced process for community members as well as City boards

[46:00] commissions and city council meet and city council to provide input along the way more so than what a typical annexation process would allow and so this was the diagram discussed at that meeting and and tweaked over the over time since and our our process through this that the main deliverables the the normal process is typically the top and bottom rows we were releasing documents along the way several term sheets in that first phase of development on the top the middle phase was a lot of community engagement and we developed a couple of briefing books and now obviously we're before council with an annexation agreement and the process was Guided by the CU South process subcommittee and there was a very conscious effort to default to openness and transparency and that's why we really continually released term sheets between the city and the university the briefing books describing everything that we've talked

[47:00] about in the direction it was heading and at times weekly drafts of the annexation agreement as we're making changes so we've tried to bring the community along and council members and board members and frankly the agreement is much stronger as a result of it and there's been a lot of changes changes as a result of the input that we've received special thanks to the process committee for over two dozen meetings over this last couple of years as well as Council the community members who attended the community meetings drop in office hours online questionnaires and so forth this is just a vicinity map showing where the campus is in relation to the other CU campuses and and just to note that this is the largest undeveloped site in the Boulder Valley that is currently eligible for annexation and by eligibility um the primary tool for that is the areas one two three map in the comprehensive plan with areas one being in the city areas two being eligible and

[48:01] generally adjacent to the city or nearby and areas through three being not eligible for annexation and so to Annex it has to meet in order for an annexation to occur it needs to meet state and local laws it has to be in areas to an area to the comprehensive plan generally and annexations in general will be accompanied by an agreement an annexation agreement that is a negotiated binding contract between the city and the property owner in this case the University as noted earlier in 2017 we did change the land use designations to three shown on this and we'll get into this a little bit more later we also adopted The Guiding principles to guide these annexation discussions uh and in 2016-2017 that public process um it was clear that folks wanted a bit more certainty about what would happen in the future and that's why we drafted those guiding principles Council was instrumental in drafting those and it really set up the framework for negotiating this agreement and a central

[49:01] part of the negotiating teams efforts was translating those guiding principles into annexation terms the initial zoning proposed on the property is public properties directly adjacent to the west of the site are primarily designated as residential with Tantra Park generally bisecting the low and medium density residential areas properties to the East and the South are designated as open space with some existing low density residential and manufactured housing to the South the site overall is largely undeveloped except for tennis courts shown here as well as a warehouse building is pretty popular for informal dog walking and when conditions allow cross-country skiing did want to Overlay some of the existing conditions relative to the flood plain and the floodplain overall is an area

[50:01] that's expected to be flooded in in a given flood event what's shown here in dark blue is the 100 Year floodplain and so this is defined as a one percent chance of occurrence in a given year it's the base or regulatory flood plain for FEMA and represents a 26 chance of flooding over the life of a of a 30-year mortgage and so that's shown here and it kind of goes along the edge of the um of the existing Levy system on the property what's shown here and I'll do this a couple of times it's a 500 year floodplain this is defined as a one in 500 chance of occurring in any given year or one-fifth of the flood risk compared to the 100 year flood zone and then finally the high Hazard Zone which is regulatory for the city of Boulder and represents the greatest risk to Life Safety we showed this slide not only this show just kind of where the floodplains are adjacent to the site but also to indicate and point out that the development Zone where the residential academic facilities will be is

[51:02] anticipated to be built is not in the flood plain and furthermore the agreement does state that no enclosed habitable structures are permitted in the 500-year flood plan this shows just a few more existing conditions on the property we did do a suit of an environmental suitability analysis um that looked at streams Wetlands floodplains plant communities um and it and it ultimately indicated this kind of heat map of the areas in Darker shade of a yellow orange as more sensitive to development or disturbance pointing out that also in the middle map that there are a couple of steep slopes on the site on the Southwest in particular the Hillside and a berm on the northwest portion of the property and then lastly Wetlands exists throughout the site so the annexation agreement the the kind of table of contents is shown here and it was important that it be structured a certain way because the university as a

[52:00] state entity is not bound by the typical development limitations of the city's development restrictions like in Title IX such as Building height restrictions and so on and so however we are able to implement some of those restrictions through the annexation agreement and so in some ways the agreement is structured in a similar way to a land use code where there's definitions use standards and so on wanted to just highlight a few of the key points in sections two and three before breaking for questions specifically we heard a lot of concerns from community members and planning board members about what happens if a property or a portion thereof is sold this is not something that was necessarily addressed in The Guiding principles specifically but we heard that and we developed a section two and this is requirements for subsequent owners if the portion of the property is is transferred to a non-university affiliate and so the overall intent here

[53:00] in looking at the guiding principles and City policies and the comprehensive plan was to encourage a 15-minute neighborhood and so we did this both through allowed uses as well as through a pretty robust intent statement in this section these list of uses so if the property is sold to another owner these use of list of uses will supersede those of the public zoning that's will be applied to the site some of the uses we opted to um ensure that they go undergo the city's useful use review process and those are indicated here with the U in parentheses there's also other requirements such as a 45 affordable housing requirement for any new units um for those subsequent owners and we also heard some additional comments from Boulder County around some concerns of not having just a single family Enclave if the property were sold and so we added an intent statement indicating that as well that that is not what the intent is

[54:02] the section 2 also includes some language around a university and owner and describing how that relationship works and it's also you'll notice through the annexation agreement specifying that certain standards apply even if sold and the intent there was to really ensure that the community benefits and certain restrictions transfer on even if the property is sold and also we later in the process we did get some responses and some input from the planning board community members council members and so we were able to negotiate a 10-year exclusive purchase option for the city so for the 10 years following annexation land can only be sold to the city and it can only be sold at a set price a few other pieces of this the section three is the general standards and those are generally things that impact pretty much the property as a whole um and so consistent with the guiding principles Public Access will remain consistent with University access and

[55:02] use policies and again I mentioned earlier but there will not be any enclosed or habitable buildings in the 500-year floodplain we also had a neighborhood meeting and heard some concern around the location of some of the potential future buildings and in response to those concerns we negotiated an enhanced setback on the northwest portion of the property that setback setbacks buildings 30 feet for certain residential uses and 50 feet for non-residential uses certain city regulations will apply such as Wetland outdoor lighting and noise restrictions and as with other property owners the university is required to pay plant investment fees at the time prior to connecting to our systems lastly before breaking for questions this is one of the important parts to highlight here visually is that the agreement provides a path for the city to own about a half of the property so the proposal is to dedicate 80 acres to

[56:03] the city of Boulder for flood mitigation and what's not needed for flood mitigation will be dedicated as open space and so while engineering is still happening the flood mitigation concept shown here we would anticipate needing approximately 36 acres of land and if that is the case that would be dedicated to the city at no cost and therefore 44 Acres the balance of that 80 acres would be dedicated as open space that to the area shown here in Hatch and hatching and the agreement also does provide a purchase price and an opportunity for the city to to purchase the remaining land in that open space Zone which would be 75 Acres and so with that I'm going to go ahead and break for questions I can stop sharing a screen if there's um questions um otherwise I could keep going thank you Phil much appreciated Council this is an opportunity for questions about anything you've just heard

[57:03] all right and Mark and then Mary Mark okay um I'm not sure this question is for you or for uh uh a City attorney um but with respect to the restrictions on future use um housing and Associated uses for 15-minute walkable neighborhoods um as a matter of um the matter of law you believe that those are binding upon a future owner sounds to me like that question is to Aaron or Sandra I can take that Aaron Poe with the city attorney's office um we have have it built in in a variety of ways one is if it's the university and then also if it's transferred and so if it's transferred to a non-university owner they would have to go through use review for many of the uses and that

[58:00] would be part of the review process and they would be required to do that for the University it is more of an intent statement and so less binding on the University than it would be a non-university subsequent owner foreign all right my my next question um Aaron um I have heard it described that that we need about four or five acres for the actual flood mitigation damage is that correct or was that incorrect let's go back to you Phil that that's my understanding but Joe tatiucci is also here okay and if I could add a distinction to that Joe when you answer could you talk about the flood wall the concrete flood wall on the earth and Dam and just give us a sense of those two components yeah in in total um I if I'm remembering correctly the

[59:02] by the way I'm Joe tariuchi director of of utilities for the city um our team is is responsible for the flood mitigation project and um I might come back and clarify some numbers after I look things up but there there is an Earthen embankment portion that's on the western side of the dam footprint and then there is a concrete flood wall that goes roughly from the boundary of the University property over to South Boulder Creek and then there's also an area when the most of the time the the reservoir behind the dam will not have water in it but during a flood it'll also store water and I'm I'm recalling that the the total footprint for the uh the dam components and the inundation is about 36 acres and I think Mark you're asking about the the flood wall and the impact open space potentially

[60:00] and that's five acres okay thank you um and I guess my last question is my understanding of the planning board meeting is that they did not recommend the annexation is that that correct or does that change over time they they made two motions uh one was to recommend the um the Matrix and recommend that those changes be made to the agreement the motion to recommend approval failed okay and how many of the items in their Matrix would you say ended up being incorporated into the document if any I can count but I as many as possible um was our our goal um but we can give you uh we can do do a quick tally during this meeting if you'd like to do right now a little later um okay that's that's what I've got for me thank you Mark Mary thank you Sam and thank you Phil for the

[61:00] presentation kind of um along the lines of um what Mark asked regarding the 15-minute neighborhoods um one of the questions that came up for me today was um well a little context um recently Council looked at an affordable commercial um recommendation from staff and after the work that staff did came back to us with a fairly complex ordinance um and mostly as I understand it it was complicated because of the difficulty of providing discounted commercial space in new buildings so given that all of the buildings would be new within this development um and we're talking about 15-minute

[62:01] neighborhoods and the businesses that typically um provide Neighborhood Services or personal services tend to be in not so new um buildings were there any conversations and if so what were they like regarding um the affordability of such commercial um space we did not specifically discuss affordability affordable commercial space and the negotiations this was something that kind of came as a result of kind of the planning board input and some other community input we're receiving along the way we did want to ensure that other city regulations and so if the community benefit program were in full effect when that was built then all of those other city regulations that apply generally would apply here if sold

[63:01] okay so but but nothing specific into the agreement about of affordable commercial great thank you Phil and then um my second question um has to do with we received several um comments today regarding um that the agreement in terms of the Energy Efficiency of um the buildings and I'm wondering um you know the the comments that we received were um suggesting that the agreement include Net Zero building so I'm wondering um what to what standards would the university build because the the building codes that particular set of building codes is not within the set that of building goats that they would follow the cities um so what standards would they follow and what do those standards contain in

[64:01] terms of efficiency and sustainability so this was something that um we would like to the university to speak to we have included as an exhibit design goals and these were the kind of the precursor to design guidelines on the property and it does talk about lead certification and so on but I think the university may be best suited to discuss that and and we could do that now Derek if if you'd like um yeah happy too uh thank you and hi Mary uh to answer your questions some of the things that were Derek I'm sorry to interrupt could you introduce yourself and Abby as well just to get started absolutely uh so Derek Silva assistant Vice Chancellor for business strategy at CU Boulder and uh so there's a few few things that we have around sustainability and that kind of Define where we are with uh

[65:00] Energy Efficiency sustainability and resiliency and those type of topics and so first of all Chancellor to Stefano announced last spring and it's called the climate action of the university has set a goal for full carbon neutrality by 2050. and our under development energy master plan is focusing on increasing efficiency of our buildings and built infrastructure and that includes goals like reducing energy use intensity by an average of two percent a year to arrive at a 30 increase in building efficiency by 2035. uh another goal was 100 emissions reduction from from 2005 Baseline by 2050 and we do that through transition to clean thermal energy and implementation of financially viable mix of on-site and Regional clean electricity another goal we have is two and a half percent on-site solar and 14 off-site purchase solar energy by 2026 and then for our facilities we've got lead certification for facilities that have

[66:00] basically we've got 30 League buildings on campus 11 of those are read Platinum uh which exceed the state requirement of gold and then we our indoor practice facility is Lee platinum and a net zero facility so those those are just some examples of how we approach sustainability and Energy Efficiency uh here on campus and that these would apply to the Future CU South Campus thank you Derek um that's all I have super thank you Mary and seeing no more questions Phil I think we're ready for you to keep going foreign okay thank you so you should be seeing the the section 4 Zones of consideration so we'd like perfect thank you um we'd like to just run through the different

[67:00] um zones on the property and so the annexation agreement includes these zones and they align with the land use designations for the property shown on the left the initial idea for this concept was from an intergovernmental agreement that the city has with the nist campus where it does identify specific areas for research preservation and so on and so the first Zone that we'll go over is the development Zone this is 129 Acres of the 308 acre property and this is where University development will take place predominantly residential with academic buildings built on a scale that is less intense than what you see on the East Campus so just to highlight some of the efforts the negotiation teams made in terms of translating certain guiding principles one of the big ones is ensuring that housing is the predominant use on the property and that a significant amount of housing is billed prior to any non-residential development with a goal

[68:00] of 1100 units residential units so to achieve this the agreement includes Provisions that 150 residential units will be constructed prior to any non-residential space that uh and then once that threshold is reached there'll be a two to one residential to non-residential phasing formula whereas the university must construct two square feet of residential uses in order to construct one square foot of non-residential space the intent here was really not only to further our jobs population our our housing goals in the city but to also avoid any scenario whereas um more non-residential structures could be built and then the market goes south or something happens where the housing ends up not being built and so that's what we were avoiding with that there's also a cap of 750 000 square feet for non-residential space there was originally No Cap but we were

[69:02] able to achieve this in the agreement after hearing from the planning board community members it was negotiated later in the process after hearing those concerns and it's helpful for providing more certainty about what will be built in the future and and helps further some of the city's policies that I just mentioned so the allowed uses for the University these um as we were developing these um the overall intent of this was to describe a University campus that also provides housing for faculty staff and students and so the um uh permitted uses are here listed here both residential and non-residential each of these are defined in the definition in section one definitions and in addition um the agreement also does require that the university convey five acres of the property to a university affiliate or partner

[70:01] um with the and then partner with the city's Housing Authority for the development of permanently affordable housing The Guiding principles also specify that there are certain uses that are will not be appropriate on this property one of those are large research complexes like those on the East Campus and so in order to achieve that and kind of translate that guiding principle we develop this definition whereas a large Residential Building is not allowed and in this case that would be able to be a building that would have a floor area of above 175 000 square feet just for context this is the biotech building and the size of this is 417 Square thousand square feet The Guiding principles also discussed that there won't be any large-scale sports venues like a football stadium so then the question is how do we Define a large-scale sports venue so we looked at some examples Boulder and Fairview High shown here and we looked at fixed

[71:00] seating capacity and ultimately negotiated a definition whereas a large-scale sports venue which is not allowed would it would have a fixed seating capacity in excess of 3 000 people which is somewhere in the ballpark between Fairview High School and Boulder High foreign The Guiding principles also talk about building Heights that will maintain a general consistency with our height limits and trans transition gently to the west and so in this case Building height will be limited to 55 feet as prescribed in the city's Charter and then we also further identify that the buildings that tall won't be appropriate on each portion of the site and so height is further limited as the elevation increases to the West we did that through what we call a height ceiling so there's a surveyed description in the agreement that sets an elevation that's roughly uh or it is equivalent to a two-story home along Chambers Drive in the Highview subdivision and so PR in practice the

[72:00] height ceiling would allow four to five story buildings on the lower portions of the site in the development Zone only and with progressively shorter buildings permitted as the site increases towards the West this is just on top of that Southwest Hillside looking North Northwest and this is just an approximation just to show you the horizontal plane that that would be in effect with this agreement we also wanted to translate the guiding principle that describes that development will be contextually appropriate to neighboring properties and so we developed this use transition zone which is that Southwest Hillside that we just saw development here would be scaled down to residential uses and recreational uses like neighborhood parks and clubhouses and this is really where the height ceiling that we just mentioned will be in full force the second Zone that we wanted to highlight is the flood control Zone this is 60 Acres of the 300 Acre Site and it's designated as Park Urban other in the comprehensive plan and per The

[73:01] Guiding principles the flood mitigation Project Life safety issues associated with that is the primary driver of the project the footprint of the flood project is shown here and so that would be the primary use in this area secondarily there will be parks and recreational uses that will be allowed in the remaining portion of the Land There is a an exhibit to the agreement that this is a rough kind of drawing of it but the university will have the opportunity to construct recreational facilities here however I did want to note that the city does have a responsibility to review and approve those plans to ensure they don't adversely impact the flood mitigate the flood structure the next is the open space Zone which is 119 Acres of the property in its designated open space other in a comprehensive plan and so the agreement does provide a path for the city gaining 119 Acres of the property for open space and that's shown here in green

[74:02] it also provides an opportunity for the city to remove the existing Levy system that's shown in red and this will have a benefit of reconnecting the floodplain and promoting more environmental connectivity between the property and open space and the state Natural Area to the east water rights will also be conveyed to the city in exchange for City irrigation plant investment fees and water supply and this is a this was a critical negotiation piece because it was absolutely needed in order to perform the environmental mitigation in this area and so the entire area the vision from the city is to have a comprehensive mitigation area to offset all the impacts of the flood mitigation project as well as offset impacts of the University's development and relating to the latter the university the agreement provides a path for the University to pay the city for the cost of doing that mitigation on a per acre basis if it

[75:00] does need that mitigation to offset its impacts through its own regulation regulatory process um there will be um light and noise standards from the city will apply on this site and Trail connections will be at the city's discretion and follow our normal process we did have I'm not going to read all of this but we were we felt really fortunate to have um several recommendations from the open space Board of Trustees to help guide the process um some some of the more recent ones includes an intergovernmental agreement whereas the city and University will conduct an independent third-party study of the existing light and noise conditions on the property prior to construction of any recreational facilities which would probably be the first thing built um and and the study would then inform decisions on on development to encourage um the city and the university to consider different ways to to mitigate those impacts we also negotiated into the agreement recently

[76:00] um of 250 foot setback from the state Natural Area which is generally the open space to the east of all lighted recreational facilities including Fields as well as a 20 night limit so 20 nights per year of any parks and rec night events that require pole lighting so those were some of the more recent um amendments we we made to the agreement to be responsive to some of the concerns about impacts to adjacent open space so with that I'm going to go ahead and pause for questions thank you Phil Council questions um Mary I see a hand up but that may be an old one there's a hand up again and Mark so Mary you're first if you have anything I refreshed my hand because it was getting sweaty um so yeah I have a couple questions um thanks again Phil and my question has to do

[77:00] um with the IGA um that will be forged between the university and the city um so my understanding is that this IGA will be um negotiated um I presume after um well actually when would it be happen that IGA what what is the timeline on that um and then um and what do you expect to have that IGA include no Recreation or event facility or field can be constructed until that IGA is in place and the noise study is completed um and so what we would expect is that there's that deannexation period that we'll get into three to five years after the annexation the university has the option to construct those types of recreational uses but they can't connect

[78:00] to City Utilities so it could happen in that three to five year period though it it all and so it would also depend on if the university opts to not construct those recreational facilities it could be later but there's no deadline to do it of like we have to do it in five years and I see Aaron unmuted so she might want to also chime in that's what pretty much what I was going to say it sounds like the University's plans are not firm yet um so in a way it depends on their timeline and when they would like to design and start construction and what do you um foresee being the contents of that IGA I would expect it to have agreements about how to set up the Baseline study and what sort of of consequences there could be for violating that Baseline and mitigating or minimizing any sort of

[79:01] impacts on the state natural area in particular from noise and light from the recreational facilities that would be built in that area and would it also be the place that um if you mitigate to what level would that mitigation occur is that where that would be contained correct okay um and um so that's it for that question thank you and then um my next question is about the the commercial cup of 750 000 square feet so and I guess this would be for the University Representatives um so 750 000 square feet is where we're at right now a cap initially there was no cap and so my question

[80:02] um is why was the study conducted at 500 000 square feet of commercial well the study I suppose you're talking about the traffic study yes I am yeah so with that we had to come up with some assumptions and that was prior to us negotiating the annexation agreement and negotiating the annexation agreement one of the things that we really stroke for is a Perpetual institution like the city you guys would appreciate this is that we needed to maintain flexibility especially for our future research facilities and how we organize our different facilities around our different campuses and so what we did is we negotiated for the 750 000 square foot cap but the way it ties back to that trip cap and that's based on the 500 000 is that we're incentivized to have no net trips above that 500 000 square foot commercial level or non-residential level and so we have to

[81:00] do a stellar job of doing managing our TDM programs and keeping our trips down off of the site to be able to unlock that extra 250 000 square feet of space thank you okay it looks like that's it from Mary um then is that right Mary yeah that's right that's all I have thank you okay super um then we've got Mark and Aaron Mark okay uh I think that the height ceiling is a really um uh interesting proposition I I I'm glad that we've got that um does it apply to all buildings or just residential all buildings Okay so would it be appropriate to infer that most of the non-residential will be located up at the northern portion of the property or is that not simply not accurate

[82:00] you know development will be phased from north to south um but the university may need to chime in on where they would anticipate that and my guess is that they do not know but um the lower elevation areas is where we would anticipate higher buildings up to that 55 foot limit and and for the to get to that 750 000 square foot cap they would have to build in effect million five of residential is that accurate yes double okay I guess my question is on a piece of ground this size um is there actually going to be room for that much residential and that much commercial you know these caps are actually capable of being hit so that is a question that we did posed to the university so they may want to to chime in at this point um specific site planning has not been

[83:00] done and so I don't have um a firm answer but we did we have asked that of the university in the past so I might refer to the applicant it's great Abby or Derek would you like to speak to the question of can we fit 1.5 million residential and 750 000 non-residential on this site yeah absolutely just to give you some perspective to break it down on the square foot per acre basis our main campus is sitting at about 29 300 square feet per acre and this that uh the the numbers you mentioned mark would add up to 17 400 square feet per acre so it's a much less dense than even our main campus which has plenty of those in space interspersed between the capabilities um thank you thank you Mark Aaron well um Joe or somebody else I was hoping you could clear up an item of confusion I think that that we've heard

[84:00] from the public which is uh that we are not allowing um construction of buildings in the 100 or 500 year flood plain but there is some fill that will be necessary um as part of the project so can you just explain how those two things interact please I can um so before we build our flood project as Phil described in the land use maps all of the the property that the university would develop on and it's 129 Acres would be out of the the flood plain when we build the dam and it detains water during a flood it will inundate a portion of that property and a portion of the 129 Acres that they otherwise um would have had without the flood project so the Earthen fill is will be placed on the Eastern end of their Eastern side of their development Zone to kind of make them whole After the flood project is built so that they will

[85:02] have that development acreage again and that was uh definitely an item of community interest and and we heard loud and clear the concerns around the costs the initial costs that we came up with for that Phil and uh that is something that we worked hard on with our design team and uh the university in negotiating and we came up with a different refined concept that reduced costs from 10 million down to 3 million for the placement of that fill that's all I got all right thank you Aaron and I have a follow-up Joe to that um we see from the slides that um we can take the levy down which is currently there um and I know there's been some talk of whether we can use the dirt the Earth from the Levee as Phil do you know if we'd be able to use all of the Levee

[86:02] dirt as part of the fill uh we we wouldn't necessarily use it in the fill but uh in in talking to our design team and and Brandon Coleman who's not able to be here tonight uh I believe we're planning to use that in the earth and embankment portion of the dam very good okay so not in the fill but uh the Levee Earth can be used in building that Dam then yes awesome okay thank you any other question I just wanted to colloquy on that one and um if taking the using the levy um dirt and on the embankment does that represent a cost savings it it does in in the sense that all of the the Earthen material for the the fill and the dam is planned to be imported which is more from off-site

[87:00] which is more expensive and so um there's a different cost associating with being able to use materials that are can be locally sourced on the site I don't remember off the top of my head what the difference is but yes it's less expensive to use that thank you and would that cost savings be in addition to the cost savings that was um accrued I believe I guess um by changing the design of the the embankment it it would not that use use of the levy Phil was accounted for in our original cost estimates okay thank you okay any other questions from Council right seen none so back to you

[88:00] thank you for the final installment of this presentation um we'll hit on transportation and then the final a couple of sections so the overall intent of thinking about future Transportation on CU South was to ensure that the transportation needs generated by Future development on the property don't unduly adversely impact the surrounding Transportation Network as well as the adjacent neighborhoods and primarily we've envisioned doing this through performance-based standards and so the transportation components of the agreement we thought could be in kind of three buckets of establishing access limiting trips and looking at proactive measures to manage future Mobility um so first establishing access um as as noted in the report um there'll be as proposed two primary points of Access One would be the existing access from South Loop Drive or Road um this is how you access the site

[89:00] currently as well as a new primary access to State Highway 93 on the southern portion of the property once reconstructed by the University South Loop Drive would it be constructed as a complete street with a multi-use path and a buffered bike lane secondary access may be taken from Tantra drive though that access would be controlled limited to emergency maintenance and Transit Vehicles only we have heard some concerns a quite a bit of concerns around the safety of establishing a primary access at State Highway 93 did want to mention that the university is required per the agreement to gain the necessary permits from CDOT acquire right of way way construct any improvements necessary to establish that access such as if a traffic light was required acceleration Lanes deceleration lanes and so on and so that is a requirement on the University and we also did add some phasing language

[90:01] that development will be phased from the north part of the site to the South per the University's request in the phasing line showed in an exhibit here and so that later phase of development on the southern portion of the site that would be the point in time or the university would apply for those permits to State Highway 93. um Additionally the agreement does require that the university constructed 12-foot wide multi-use path along the western part of the property and that's consistent with the city's Transportation master plan the agreement also does provide a path for a cost-sharing Arrangement a 50 50 Arrangement between the city and the university for a new multi-use underpass under Table Mesa connecting the RTD parking ride to Thunderbird Drive as shown here another component this the question of a bypass has a lot of history to it um and there historically has been

[91:01] concerns about the CU South property being used as a shortcut between State Highway 93 heading north up to Foothills Parkway or vice versa so this was identified in the guiding principle shown in bold on the top of this slide and so our initial approach to this was to Define what a bypass is and prohibit it and so that the agreement did that um we continue to hear some concerns especially from Boulder County and so the agreement was recently strengthened to include this language here around employing physical and Tech measures like our RFID activated gates to really prevent the use of the property from being used as a bypass and bypass and so this would be kind of similar to how some of the other campuses are are structured one of the big components of the transportation program is a trip cap and this is a requirement that Limits The Daily automobile trips to and from the property and so a trip in this case is a

[92:01] one-way trip too or from the property with public transit being excluded the numbers for the trip cap are based on a study submitted by the applicant and the total amounts for South Loop Drive and State Highway 93 are shown here um monitoring enforcement um there there will be several points in which the university will need to be kind of monitoring the progress of this um there'll be need to be one traffic count conducted prior to development um once um at once up to 900 000 square feet of any kind of development which is roughly about halfway build out built out the university would commence annual monitoring um of the of the property to ensure compliance with the trip cap program and also one monitoring period between phases to ensure compliance the agreement does also spell out what a special event is and that there's 12 special event days per year that could exceed that trip cap

[93:01] and then lastly the compliance and access limitations the compliance if a monitoring period comes back as out of compliance the university several things happen the university will have three months to identify and communicate the strategies for lowering those trips and then they'll have a period of 180 days to implement those strategies and so some of that might be bigger Capital Investments or different programming changes and during that time any un um phases of development that are not underway would be placed on hold the university would then be doing quarterly quarterly monitoring and would need to do so unless until at least two monitoring reports show compliance with the agreement and then if we go a whole year of those quarterly reports then specific damages are applied on a per trip basis and reinvested into the site until again the site the trips get within the allowable threshold did want to

[94:01] mentioned access limitations and so with the concern around State Highway 93 if for some reason a permit is not obtained for that those trips are forfeited and the university would have the 500 550 trips to South Loop Drive so that was one point that we wanted to mention we also negotiated maximum parking requirements based on one square foot per attached dwelling unit or 600 square feet of one space per 600 square feet of non-residential space other requirements such as paid parking will be set at Market rates and shared among different uses of the property the university would construct a multi multi-modal Hub to implement connections between on the property and between other campuses my Transportation demands management strategies are identified in the agreement like micro Mobility Program vanpool carpool subsidy programs and parking management and lastly to further the city's policy of growth paying its way there is a transportation

[95:01] fee that's assessed at the time of development for each non-residential or each residential unit and each square foot of non-residential space that fee if the site were totally built out would be estimated at around three million dollars the review of plan section is is pretty basic it does provide and formalize an opportunity for the city to provide comments review and provide comments on the CU South master plan and conceptual design plans the conceptual design plans is something that University does and it's early enough in the process for the city's comments to have weight and actually make potentially make changes if necessary and then the disconnection from the city this is an important one that was negotiated later in the process and given that flood mitigation as a primary driver and dedication of land for the project is one of the key Community benefits proposed we felt it was necessary to tie the annexation to the flood mitigation project and so the city if we do not

[96:01] receive the permits for the flood mitigation project in three to five years following annexation known as the de annexation time frame then we can Council can choose to reverse the annexation decision the section 7 write a first offer this just provides an option for the city to purchase the property if or portions thereof if if the CU receives an offer from a third party or wants to sell a portion of the property under its own volition we won't go into the details here but I did want to say that we we heard a lot of community input Council input and so on and we're able to extend the time frame for responding to one of those to also include a referendum if necessary and again just note that the 10-year exclusive purchase option for the city at a capped price and recently a right of second refusal was also entered into or added to the annexation agreement that provides an additional opportunity for the city to make an

[97:02] offer on a property it previously declined lastly key issues we identified several key issues consistency with the comprehensive plan state statutes and as well as whether or not initial zoning of public is appropriate for the land being annexed um and staff finds that on balance the proposed annexation is consistent with the Boulder Valley comprehensive plan um the most relevant policies in the comprehensive plan are probably the CU self-guiding principles so in the memo we included both The Guiding principles and and a lot of other policies and about how um the agreement is or isn't uh consistent with those uh those uh policies the property itself also represents a significant development potential and as such the comprehensive plan identifies that extra Community benefits need to be expected for those this sorts of

[98:01] annexations um and and oftentimes affordable housing is the number one benefit but also provision of land for Public public purposes open space and so on and so staff does find that the proposed annexation is consistent with State statutes and City policies around growth uh shown here the annexation agreement that council is considering does represent the single largest annexation in 30 years the agreement overall was written to enable the city and the university to meet each of its each organization's needs and provide a path to the flood mitigation of project and gain additional open space while also allowing the university to be permitted to expand its housing options for students faculty and staff it also allows the city to apply certain regular regulations that otherwise would not be applied to the university additionally city services are available

[99:00] to the property with the annexation and relating to policies 110 and 117 staff finds that the proposed annexation does represent a significant development potential and also provides a significant Community benefit some of those are listed here lastly is the key issue of initial zoning of public and so staff finds that the proposed initial zoning of public is appropriate for the land proposed to be in to be annexed zoning of annex land needs to be consistent with the comprehensive plan the land use designations uh and Paul End goals and so the goals in this case are most clearly articulated again through the guiding principles and so just to hit each of the designations briefly the portion of the site designated public we found consistent with the public zoning because this definition for public the public land use specifically anticipates the university and it's also consistent with how other campuses are zoned in the city the

[100:02] public the park Urban other area of the property is also consistent we found with the comprehensive plan in that the definition of Park Urban other allows for flood control and recreational purposes which is both the primary purposes of that area of the property and then lastly the open space other land use designation there is no complementary zoning district for the oso land use designation however we did find that the public zoning in this case was appropriate for the oso land because the terms of the annexation agreement apply to that area control the future uses in a way that are consistent with that land use of open space other and so the suggested motion um we won't read through these they were read through earlier in the introduction um both regular and emergency and before wrapping up Joe tediuchi with the utilities

[101:00] um division of Public Works would like to have one final comment to council thank you Phil so again for those who might have missed the introduction earlier I'm Joe tadayucci I'm the director of utilities our utilities department is responsible for the South Boulder Creek flood mitigation project which is closely tied to this annexation process that we're talking about tonight and you just heard Phil summarize the annexation agreement which really sets the stage for one of the key property owner Arrangements that we need to be able to proceed with the flood project design and permitting and we can certainly go back to it if you have questions but when Phil showed the land use figure that Illustrated our damn footprint and the inundation area behind the dam um the the recreation facilities

[102:00] and where those would go and are talking about are obtaining the open space and the water rights those are all key parameters of this agreement that um really set the stage for us to be able to proceed with the final design and to be able to mitigate the environmental impacts of our project and know where that can happen on the open space and so uh it's it's important to have this pinned down by the annexation agreement as we approach the permitting and approval agencies earlier in the presentation we showed a timeline that went back to 1996 and there have been many uh Council decisions along the way in the last couple of of years of city council has made some key decisions which have really put us in the position to be here tonight having this discussion and one of those decisions was choosing

[103:02] the variant one 100 year option as the basis of design that really gave us the clarity we needed to know what our project footprint would look like and to be able to sit down with the university and talk about how the property could be divided up for various uses and various objectives so this second reading that we're here for presents another major decision point in the process and at the core of what we're doing and Phil mentioned that the flood project is a driver and it's kind of at the foundation of everything uh at the core is a life safety issue and this slide summarizes some of the key figures of people and structures protected and when U.S 36 over tops as it did in 2013 and water rushes over the highway

[104:00] and into the West Valley it really puts People In Harm's Way whether they're on the freeway or if they're people who live in or are visiting the neighborhoods to the north and Phil if you'll go to the next slide and here here's what that looks like just just as a reminder and this photo for me it's it's been about two years that I've been working on this project in earnest and this is a powerful image that I saw staff put up in Prior presentations it's really stuck with me throughout this process and I I actually go back and glance at it every once in a while just to remind myself of of what we're doing and and what's driving this and certainly we're with the annexation agreement that we're wanting to protect the people with the that are in danger from the flooding but we've put just as much emphasis into

[105:00] negotiating other things that Phil mentioned for the benefit of the community like the open space and and reducing costs and have taken all the perspectives we've heard over the last few years into account so following the 2013 flood I was in a different role in in City Utilities at the time but I remember being at many of the rap meetings and hearing the harrowing accounts of what happened in the West Valley when U.S 36 overtalked there we don't usually get a lot of interest in our in our lab meetings but at times there were busloads of people there I've never seen so many people at RAB and just hearing their Tales of of what happened to them and uh like there were times where I was standing in the back of the room and just had a lump in my throat listening to it the flooding situation that we're trying to protect against does present a threat to the public peace health and property

[106:03] and I I know and can appreciate that the council members have so much to think about with the approval of this agreement and whether or not to do it on an emergency basis and I can appreciate the position that you're in for the plug for the flood project the emergency ordinance would be another one of those key decisions that would give us the most certainty and would give us Clarity to move forward with the design and permitting so that um thanks to Phil for carrying most of the load tonight in our prepared remarks that's that's the end of our prepared presentation and we have lots of backup slides and and staff here and are happy to answer any questions that you might have great well I want to say thank you to both of you and to the whole team for the presentation it was super clear and very helpful um council members do we have any

[107:00] questions uh after this third phase the presentation if not uh Mark go ahead yeah Joe um or Aaron what are the legal distinctions between doing this on an emergency basis and not on an emergency basis I mean there's no present emergency um you know this is going to be two three four year project what what drives that and what are the distinctions I can answer that question and thank you for the question mark um so if the ordinance passes by non-emergency and if it so happens that a referendum moves forward to election in other words signatures are certified then the annexation ordinance is suspended however whether emergency or non-emergency the city can still expend funds provided that the funds have been budgeted and appropriated

[108:01] the larger issue is weather and how much money should be spent in light of the uncertainty that a referendum would place on the project ultimately it's a policy call if passed by non-emergency then Council may want to provide staff Direction on whether to pursue flood mitigation prep work by motion or general direction however that could be changed by newly a newly seated Council who might provide a different direction the agreement and annexation ordinance will be suspended until it receives a vote rejecting repeal at the next municipal election and um and then in the alternative if the ordinance passes by emergency in the referendum moves forward to election again signatures are certified then the ordinance is not suspended from

[109:01] going into effect while the referendum proceedings are pending if the voters approve the referendum the annexation ordinance shall be considered repealed with respect to any further action in other words any actions after the referendum approval in all rights and privileges conferred by the annexation ordinance would be null and void but even if the voters approve the referendum any payments made or expense incurred prior to a referendum vote is expressly allowed if passed by emergency I I'm simply not understanding the difference in um the risk factors from one to the other uh in either case the approval is going to be contingent upon the outcome of a referendum is it not neither neither action

[110:01] um for stalls a referendum or a vote on that referendum if the signatures are obtained am I missing something if it's passed by emergency then staff has clear Direction on what they can do if it's passed by non-emergency it's not as clear there's just simply more risk from what in one circumstance versus the other and can't Council provide that direction cancel can't if we pass it by non-emergency can we not provide you with sufficient direction as to what we would like you to do or not I I'm I'm trying to grasp the necessity or one over the other I'm not unalterably opposed to to doing it that way but I'd like to understand sure New England and why it's important to do it that way as opposed to Simply a new ordinary course in addition I'm sorry let me just okay can I answer that last question real quick so one thing that I want to point out is that

[111:01] if it's passed by emergency then we have a signed agreement and in the other circumstance we don't because everything is suspended and so it provides the city with a greater legal position and less risk you may have to we disagree a little bit on that because I'm just I'm not seeing the reduction in Risk can I add to what Sandra's saying it with the signed agreement that puts us in a better position to go to the agencies that we need permits from and demonstrate to them that we have a right to uh the land it's that's that's always a standard uh condition that you'll get from permitting agencies is is they'll give you the approval and and you have to be able to demonstrate that you have the ownership and the and the right to to build whatever it is

[112:02] you're permitting on that property and so that it's it's just a it's a more desirable position to be in when we're going and approaching those those agencies have we have we contacted those agencies to see if they are flexible and how they would review our project we we have been in preliminary discussions with with all of the permitting agencies and will be starting to submit um formal permit applications in the beginning of 2022. but have any of them said to us don't come back to us unless you pass this by emergency we have not had this discussion with them uh specifically what I'm saying to you now is more based on just my years of experience and being around these projects and um and the the conditions that you need to be able to demonstrate to get the

[113:00] permits so we would as as Sandra's saying from that aspect that we we could certainly proceed with those permitting activities but we would be more at risk of something changing um or getting their full attention if we if the land ownership situation is less secure in neither case I assume are we blocked from spending money to continue design but that's that's our discretion is it not that that's correct all right thank you the fact that my colically I just had a question just a quick follow-up question on the financial portion of it um I did hear Sandra say something about the expenditure of funds I did hear a difference in the two situations on how the expenditure of funds works is that was was I imagining something or

[114:00] um you're correct so if it's passed by emergency then there's there's clear Authority um that expenses can be made payments made and incurred um prior to a referendum decision being made so there is clear Direction in our in our Charter that says that okay Sandra if I can colloquy back um and is there clear prohibition on the expenditure of those funds in our Journal if we do it without an emergency ordinance there is not but conversely I mean it's it's called out in the charter that payments made and expenses incurred prior to the referendum vote are allowed it's it's it's silent in the other case so we would be making an assumption okay I'm I I as I said we we will have to agree

[115:02] to disagree on this issue in terms of the necessity of uh emergency legislation thank you so um I guess I'll call it Queer as well Mark I have a lot of thoughts on this but I I'm going to hold those until the 21st um because I think there's more Nuance to this but I'd like to hear from the public before we begin our discussion with each other but I'll just say that there's there's there's more details to go into on this discussion point I think in the future okay any other Council questions for staff Mary yeah I think my hand was still up well I couldn't tell it was publicly or I know me neither um I just have one question about the um the access to um Highway 93 if it is ever built um one of the more recent additions to the annexation agreement was

[116:01] um that um RFID Gates would be used on that entrance do we know um how and who would have or or how and who would have access to that opening and closing of the gate um how would that be determined and this is probably a question for University Representatives I agree if Derek and Abby don't mind or Patrick yeah I would just add and I'm Abby Benson I'm the deputy CEO of the boulder campus and the agreement allows for physical or technological barriers to prevent that road from being used as a bypass between 93 and foothills which is one of the key aspects of the Boulder Valley comp plan I would say because we don't have a site plan at this point it's premature to give you details about who might may or may not have access but what we've committed to is making sure that it's not used as a bypass for the

[117:03] bbcp comp plan and I would also add Mary that that's we do have the ability currently on the campus where we have people who essentially have cards and other ways to be able to access facilities much like a gay controlled community in order to be able to ensure that people who are not CU Affiliates would not have the ability to Simply cut through the property um because we currently use that on the campus to be able to make sure that it's not used to the bypass so it's not a stretch in terms of the technology okay and just one just a little follow-up question on the the current use of rfids um on the current campus um what who does have access and and and not have access what criteria are used it's role-based access which is if somebody needs to be able to access a

[118:01] particular location because of their need to work or study in a particular location we can do that so we would have to look at who needed role based access to the site if we had a research who was working in a facility they'd have an RFID or if they had people living on the site then you could be able to to do that so we would be able to do that much the way the same way that we do that with our current affiliates thank you that's all I have thank you Mary thank you Pat any other questions okay seeing none then I guess I'll turn it back over to you Phil and I'm assuming that we're going to the applicant at this point yes so now's the portion of the meeting where the applicant has an opportunity to address Council and so I I might let um the applicant and their team introduce themselves um for for speakers so Ryan thanks for sharing this slide I think we're actually going to hear from

[119:00] the chancellor first so uh if you don't mind just unsharing for a minute that would be excellent Chancellor I think you're here somewhere yes and uh I just need Brenda to allow me to start my video oh great you should be able to now Phil thanks all righty thank you I appreciate it and uh good evening and and really thank you for the opportunity to join this meeting uh the city of Boulder South annexation has been in our Civic conversation for so many years and is tremendously gratifying to have an annexation agreement that reflects the share of values of the city of Boulder and the University of Colorado in that vein as we did earlier I also want to recognize the recent passing of Francis Draper Francis LED this process for CU Boulder for many years and as long as she could while she bravely battled through her cancer and I want to publicly honor and thank

[120:00] Francis for her contributions to both CU and the city of Boulder she was a firm believer that the university and City success were deeply intertwined and that we could both maximize our potential by working together and building off each other's strengths none of us could have gotten here without her work her collegiality and her dedication to this project and she is with us and always will be in spirit as a 47-year resident a voter as well as the university Chancellor I am fully invested in ensuring that the city will be able to construct critical flood protection while preserving valuable open space for the community and allowing CU to eventually move forward with much needed attainable housing for students faculty staff and the broader

[121:00] community on the site they want to be able to live in the community where they work and where they study and after more than a generation of discussion planning and negotiation I have no doubt that this version of the annexation agreement is our best path forward the agreement on the table is a world-class example of how a university and a community can work in tandem toward inequitable and sustainable future and allows the community to continue to enjoy the wonderful natural beauty and accessibility of the site while moving to protect 2 300 residents from the very real threat of future floods it sustains a relationship between the city of Boulder and the University of Colorado that began in the 1800s and has carried us through both good and challenging times

[122:02] and I'm very pleased that this University and the city have worked collaboratively since the initial draft of the annexation agreement was released to address concerns that were voiced both by council members and the community the annexation agreement before you after the public vetting process fairly balances the needs of both CU and the community having addressed those concerns I respectfully asked the council to approve the annexation agreement that has been many years in the making so that we can move this process forward and the time to act is now I will turn it over to Derek and Abby to speak about specifics of the annexation agreement and they and Pat O'Rourke our campus Chief Operating Officer will be able to answer any questions that you have of them as well so thank you and

[123:03] now I'll turn it over to Abby and Derek thank you so much Chancellor for those remarks Phil are you able to share our slide deck thank you excellent so uh good evening everyone my name is Abby Benson I'm the Deputy Chief Operating Officer of the boulder campus and I'm really excited to be here along with my colleague Derek Silva to present on the annexation agreement for CU Boulder South but city council is considering as we heard earlier I just have to say I'm really honored to be working on this project and building upon all the hard work that Francis Draper carried out for so many years on the project uh and I appreciate the council's uh declaration around Francis today so I also want to thank the chancellor for being here and for his absolute dedication to this effort and recognize paddle work our chief operating officer who will also be able to answer questions tonight so if you could go to the next slide so the annexation of CU Boulder South is

[124:01] a top priority for the University of Colorado Boulder and we're really focused on ensuring that we can continue to deliver on our mission for years to come while offering significant benefit to the community this has truly been a team effort City staff has been amazing we've worked with them for so many years and we have appreciated the commitment by city council City boards and the community to get involved and share feedback on the agreement and thanks to Phil for walking through very uh easily the key points of this really complex agreement this agreement is a culmination of years of collaboration between the city the county the university and the community with the goal of achieving that vital flood protection for the thousands of Boulder residents Who Remain at risk of flooding eight years this week after the catastrophic 2013 floods additionally we have a rare opportunity with this site to make a sizable impact on the severe housing shortage in Boulder the values that drive this agreement are values the university shares with the community which is why we're so pleased that the agreement solidifies these values with a series of binding

[125:00] commitments the annexation agreement also helps achieve our mutual goals of sustainability and resiliency to values that see you and the city embed in every project that we embark on next slide please so Community protection this slide shows a city of Boulder rendering of what the proposed sled embankment would look like at the North End of the site as we look to the South and Phil already walked through a lot of what this is going to look like while flood protection has been the Catalyst for driving the Sanic station agreement and we are so pleased to contribute to the agreement by dedicating adhers of land for the project the overall agreement itself offers a number of additional benefits to the community next slide please housing is going to be the primary use of the site for CU Boulder we are committed to building additional housing options for our University Affiliates and for the community our ability to provide approximately 1100 units of new attainable housing comes at a time when the cost of living in Boulder is increasingly Out Of Reach for many and it will help take pressure off of the local housing market

[126:01] Additionally the agreement dedicates five acres of land for an affordable Housing Partnership which would be open to anyone in the community who qualifies this project alone would allow the city to meet the annual goal for new affordable housing units with just one project as you heard from Phil we've also committed to a two to one minimum required ratio of residential square footage to non-residential square footage to ensure that the predominant use of the site will always be housing we believe the housing on this site will be a vital Community benefit that will further our city and the university share goals around diversity equity and inclusion next slide please permanent open space another major benefit to the community is that this agreement will add 119 Acres of permanent open space to the city's inventory one concern we have heard and responded to in this agreement is the need for the city to have access to water rights on the site in order to Aid in the city's restoration of land related to the flood mitigation project CU Boulder does currently own water rights on the land and these will be permanently conveyed to the city as part

[127:00] of this agreement to support this mitigation both the city and University will be required to mitigate any Wetlands displaced by the development of construction of the flood protection and as has been mentioned previously we will ensure access to the site for the community that we know has really enjoyed recreating on the facility for many years now I'm going to turn it over to Derek to talk about some other details of the agreement thank you Abby uh yeah so as far as permanent open space goes this is a contribution and the dedication is going to happen with this annexation agreement and it will ensure that more than a third of the site is preserved as permanent open space in addition to that conveyance of water rights uh to the city of Boulder will Aid in the restoration of land and mitigation of wetlands displaced by CU Boulder development for the City construction and flood mitigation can also occur in that area next slide please

[128:00] and so for transportation the agreement contains some pretty Innovative Transportation Solutions which will be implemented on the site over time now some of these are new to the city of Boulder will not only mitigate future traffic impacts and support those City's Transportation goals but we'll also keep over the Forefront nationally as a leader in Sustainable Solutions and they include performance-based Transportation plans and establishment of a multi-modal hub as well as the trip cap concept safety is going to be a top priority at the site for all users no matter the mode an annexation agreement establishes a trip cap that is unique to Boulder and limits daily traffic in and out of the site creating an additional constraint on development and finally the agreement also includes parking ratios that are lower than what the City generally requires and this is a TDM effort to again try to reduce the number of single occupancy vehicle trips on an alpha site next slide please so for sustainability and resiliency I

[129:00] covered a lot of this earlier in answering various questions but I'll just hit the high points again and that is that you know the Big Goal that the campus has is full carbon neutrality by 2050. and some of the other interim goals are the by 2026 two and a half percent on-site 14 off-site solar energy generation and then the lead certification for our facilities we aim to exceed the state standard of the gold and do that in 11 of our 30 facilities including one facility the indoor practice facility which is a net zero facility and then the housing and transportation components of the agreement will play major roles in supporting the city and University values around climate action and sustainability so that includes the implementation of the campus energy master plan and reducing in commuting if we're able to just take a few hundred cars off the road by enabling people live in the town and where they work and provide them with sustainable Transportation options we can reduce CO2 emissions by millions of pounds and

[130:01] finally the permanent protection development space provides a layer of protection that doesn't currently exist at the site and ensures that this land will continue to provide ecological benefits long into the future next slide please and so just to talk about about some of the shared values and how we've addressed them so through the agreement the university will adhere to the city's 55-foot height limit and the agreement creates a height ceiling that further restricts the building Heights along the western edge of property to ensure a low impact transition to neighboring residential areas we have provided public asset access to the site for years as Abby mentioned before and we'll continue to do so and that's a priority within this agreement and we touched on the collaborative piece earlier that includes over 100 public engagement events since 2018 providing valuable feedback from the public helping to shape this agreement and I want to reiterate that all of these values are now embedded within this legally binding agreement next slide please go

[131:02] and so as far as incorporating Community input since the initial graph this agreement in July we've heard a few questions and concerns come from the community and wanted to make sure to address them we've worked diligently with City staff to incorporate those into the agreement these include questions about how much oversight the city will have on feature development and support and remember that the annexation agreement is legally binding so it's provision supersede the University's rights as a state in state and the city will maintain compliance review and comment periods for all phases of development to ensure alignment with the annexation agreement now we've agreed to cap the purchase price only for the city for unimproved land at current as annexed appraised value for 10 years adjusting for inflation and we've also agreed to not sell to any third party for 10 years so that gives the city the exclusive right to be able to purchase the property during that period if we were to sell it but I do want to emphasize that selling the property is not in our plans so this is

[132:02] an extremely low likelihood event that is something that would be un unaccounted for in the future okay but if we were to sell it to a private party another question that is addressed in the agreement centers around the unlikely this unlikely scenario and first as I mentioned we don't anticipate selling the property but if we would if we do sell it to a private developer some of the conditions and these are things that we've heard quite a bit from the community about uh is having the guardrails around what would happen if it sold a private developer and some of the big ones are 45 affordable housing requirement would uh would become effective on transfer and that would ensure that the property continues to convey the community of housing benefits that the city's bargained for into the current agreement other Provisions that are currently being or other Provisions that will place greater emphasis on development of the housing beyond the affordable

[133:00] housing requirement above and future land uses would need to be compatible with a 15-minute neighborhood meaning that people would have access to their basic needs Parks Food Etc within 15 minutes of walking biking or Transit and then Highway 93 access so we're committed to the health and safety of our students faculty staff and the larger community and we have a demonstrated history of partnering with the city and spending Millions on safety improvements including underpasses at Broadway and Euclid Avenue along Baseline Road in the current under construction project at 30th Street and Colorado Avenue the university in the city will use the vision zero action plan robust data and the most current best practices in traffic engineering to inform and create safe mobility options for all users that simultaneously support the multimodal transportation and climate goals of the city and the University all aspects of the site at 93 including safety will require review and approval by CDOT and CU Boulder will work closely with the city and CDOT to determine the best approach to safety at the

[134:00] intersection have agreed that Highway 93 access will not be necessary until development occurs beyond the southern half of the site which is at least 10 years off next slide please Phil and so as far as updates to the agreement you know a lot of what is incorporated into the agreement is in response to the feedback again that we have taken in through numerous public engagement events there has been collaboration and compromise on both sides and that includes several revisions just since the annexation agreement was first released back in July and prominent among these are Provisions around a potential sale of the property once annexed which we've already covered but there are also some other prominent recent updates and those include the ones listed here on the slide where disincentivized from building housing units larger than 2 000 square feet uh prohibition our University connected utilities prior to expiration of the city's the annexation option period a limit on the number of nighttime

[135:00] events that we can hold at lighted Recreation facilities each year setbacks from the state Natural Area and adjacent residences for all lighted Recreation and event facilities and technological or physical measures to prevent use of properties of bypass which we've spoken about in phasing of development from north to south to have that Highway 93 access be required later on down the road as well the university is going to be paying that transportation fee to the city and with that I will shift back to Abby great thanks Derek next slide please though so in closing I wanted to share this annexation purpose statement that was accepted by the city in October 2018 which Phil actually also referred to in his presentation this statement is so important because it demonstrates the foundation upon which we've worked meticulously with the city and the public over the course of the years to craft this agreement that comprehensively achieved flood protection for the community is access

[136:01] to housing preserves open space and valuable habitat protects views and sight lines implements sensible development demonstrates leadership on climate action and transportation and continuous recreational use of society we have met the goals set forth so many years ago when the decision was made by the city county University to jointly pursue this annexation path thank you again for the opportunity to be here tonight and present on the agreement or to answer any questions that you might have thank you so much Abby and Derek and Phil and Pat for being here and for walking us through your perspective on this I'll turn now to council council do we have any questions for cu Mary just a quick follow-up question for Derek on the sustainability and and building efficiency um

[137:00] would your plans include Net Zero that they do in the 2050 I mean that's we're looking at full uh basically a carbon-free campus at that point so by 2050 yes but then in the interim working to the to that I don't know that there are any Net Zero um type goals okay thank you that's all I have Mary may I just add a comment to that which is one thing we really have demonstrated is that we try to act before we're required to so Derek mentioned you know we we abide by the state guidelines but we also try to exceed them we do have a net zero facility on the campus even though there is a requirement for that so I will say even though we don't have development plans and we can't necessarily predict what's in the future these commitments I think will drive us to try to act proactively and and try to get ahead of regulations that may be opposed on imposed on us because we really feel that this is core to see Boulder

[138:01] sustainability resiliency this is something that chancellor has been I think we all know we have a long history of it so I just wanted to add that much detective make sure the question thank you Abby and thank you Derek that's all I have thank you Mary okay with that the time is now to turn to the public hearing but before we do that um Council it looks like it will be a long public hearing we have almost 100 speakers signed up so I'm going to propose a short break for folks are we good council members give me a thumbs up if you're good okay I'm seeing thumbs up so let's take a 10 minute break it is 8 17. let's return at 8 27 and we will start once we come back by opening the public hearing and we'll begin that with um Brenda reminding us of the guidelines for one so I will see you all in 10 minutes foreign

[146:11] foreign foreign I will let you know that um I'm having some intermittent technical issues um but we have Taylor in the host role with me as co-host it does not compromise my ability to do my role um and Christmas check is here as backup as well so you're covered but uh if things get a little strange that's why okay that's no problem at all um it looks like we've got people coming back now and um we got maybe one more minute before we get started Sam I'm here but I'm gonna turn my video off because I'm eating okay

[147:07] and Mary if you could let us know when you are back foreign there she is all right okay welcome back everyone um it looks like we have our Quorum back

[148:02] and we are at the part of the item where we have heard from our staff and asked questions heard from the applicant and ask questions and now we're going to open the public hearing and hear input from uh people in Boulder and with that Brenda would you please walk us through the rules of decorum for a public hearing absolutely thank you Sam we know that we have a lot of folks here to share their thoughts with us tonight and have these rules in place both to keep our meetings safe from disruption and also to make sure that we stay in a positive atmosphere for a productive conversation together so I'll just read them over quickly the city has engaged with community members to co-create a vision for productive meaningful and inclusive Civic conversations this Vision supports physical and emotional safety for

[149:01] community members staff and Council as well as democracy for people of all ages identities lived experiences and political perspectives for more information about this vision and the community engagement processes that led to it please visit the website that you see on your screen which can be found by searching productive atmospheres on from the city's home page here are some examples of the rules of decorum that are found in the boulder Revised Code and on the other guidelines that support this Vision these will be upheld during tonight's meeting all remarks and testimonies shall be limited to matters related to City business in this case the issue on the floor tonight no participant shall make threats or use other forms of intimidation against any person obscenity racial epithets and other speech and behavior that disrupts or otherwise impedes the ability to conduct

[150:00] the meeting are prohibited and participants are required to sign up to speak using the name they are commonly known by and individuals must display their whole name before being allowed to speak online currently only audio testimony is permitted um I do have some folks who I'm only seeing the first name or a collection of letters if that is the case for you I've been reaching out to you in the chat please just use the Q a box to give me your full name I'm happy to change it for you I also have one person on the phone the last four numbers are 9646 and we also need your name before we can unmute you I've sent you a text message so please respond to that message if we don't hear from you we will figure out a way to get your name so thank you so much Sam that's it for me great thank you Brenda and I think we all understand that there are lots of strong passionate feelings about this issue it has been a long time

[151:01] um a subject of discussion in the community so please if you can try and treat this as you're trying to convince people of the way you see things rather than probably them so if you could please treat each other with respect that would be most appreciated for tonight we do have a lot of people signed up and so it will be two minutes per speaker there is a provision for pooling time so if a speaker has two partners and they pool time together the designated speaker for that group will get four minutes so with that our first three speakers tonight are Lori dornberger elmar dornberger and David McGuire and we will start tonight with Lori I'm Lori dornberger and reside at 4890 koala Drive in Boulder as a resident of Boulder since 1998 I fully support the

[152:00] annexation of Cu South I ask you to vote Yes to Annex as an emergency to prevent additional delays firstly I believe that Boulder is Boulder in large part because of the University of Colorado CU faculty staff and students should have the opportunity to live here and to experience all that the city of Boulder and CU have to offer annexation and the associated housing that CU is planning to build will help address this critical issue I also believe that this housing will help to reduce commuter traffic into Boulder and the associated CO2 emissions secondly the annexation agreement addresses flood mitigation another critical issue my family and home were impacted by the devastating and traumatic 2013 flood the comprehensive flood mitigation plan put forth in the annexation agreement has been created and vetted by many experts to address the protection of lives and safety

[153:00] thirdly CU has owned this land since 1996 and has allowed residents including myself and others to enjoy it as open space for many years the annexation agreement incorporates open space habitat protection and enhanced recreational amenities on the land for the benefit of Cu and the greater Boulder Community I would like to commend and thank the Boulder City Council the city of Boulder and the University of Colorado for your hard work negotiations and ultimately an annexation agreement that addresses multiple constituents perspectives and priorities I again ask you to vote Yes to Annex as an emergency to prevent additional delays thank you thank you Lori next we have elmar dornberger David McGuire and Kathy Joyner Omar you're up good evening my name is elmar dornberger and you just heard my wife and of course I totally endorse whatever she said

[154:01] and I did have a script prepared that I'm gonna have to get um kind of pass and just talk about emergency because before we just heard the definition about emergency that was probably like a legal from a legal perspective but I want to talk about emergency from an experiential perspective um I have been involved in this process of flood mitigation since day one September 11 2013. eight years ago to this day we still don't have a warning signal a system in place we didn't have one then we still don't have one now and I know you have taken notes on this many times and you have gotten back to us many times and there still is no

[155:01] warning system um there's also no evacuation plan our neighborhood cannot be evacuated I've talked to many experts they came to us they talked to us and what we were told our evacuation plan is a ladder and an ax what are you going to do with a ladder and an ax while we were told you use the ladder to climb on top of your roof and if we're out of subsides or does actually not subside eventually you take the ax and you break a hole in your roof and then get it get back into your house this is our emergency this is an emergency please vote for annexation and move forward with flood mitigation thank you thank you Omar next we have David

[156:00] McGuire Kathy Joyner and Louise Bradley David um also members I'm David McGuire we bought our house and lived on koala Drive in 1985 through 2018 when we felt we had to move uh but all of our our neighbors and friends are still In Harm's Way and that's why I'm addressing you having read the CU annexation agreement and I followed the Amendments from board and public inputs I strongly recommend a positive vote from all of you on the 21st this is a great win for the city and it's the right thing to do I appreciate all the time and effort you and your staff and the University have committed to complete the negotiations on this agreement the annexation agreement addresses several Key Community benefits which we've heard a lot about and you're going to hear more about them tonight but long

[157:01] overdue adequate flood protection for thousands of Downstream residents critical habitat expansion and restoration housing options for cu's Workforce and for City residents affordable housing comprehensive and Innovative Auto pedestrian Transportation Planning continued enhanced recreational access for City residents and the list goes on and on this is a big win for the city please consider passing this as an emergency action Boulder is one of the most flash flood prone cities in Colorado and every minute lost puts lives at risk thank you very much and I appreciate all your efforts thank you David next we have Kathy Joyner Louise Bradley and Tim Johnson Kathy thank you mayor Weaver my name is Kathy Joyner I live in Westminster now I'm a former older resident I appreciate the time tonight and while it might seem it might seem a little bit of the ordinary for someone from Westminster to be

[158:01] speaking to you Boulder and quala drive were my home for several decades I left dear friends many of whom are like family when we felt we had to move for safety reasons but my friends and neighbors remain In Harm's Way and they are the reason I speak tonight I want to thank you Council and staff from both the city and CU for your persistence and diligence that resulted in this remarkable draft agreement above all else it provides for the safety of 2300 residents in addition it provides notable Community benefits particularly related to housing I consider critical flood protection and much needed housing to be the pivotal issues of this document and I'm impressed with how well both are addressed on the eighth anniversary of the 2013 flood we know that such a flood or worse can occur at any time we don't have a moment to lose to ensure the safety of so many I would like to urge you to adopt the annexation agreement by emergency measure when you meet next

[159:01] week I appreciate the discussion tonight on the emergency issue as you can imagine many of us are concerned about any action taken that has the potential to slow flood Protection work for even one day I understand Council has adopted issues in the past by emergency when health and safety are the clear drivers I'm assuming that flood protection would be considered a health and safety issue I have a question that I'm hoping you might be able to address at the appropriate time can you let us know how adopting this agreement as an emergency or not would affect the flood Protection work particularly the schedule and thank you again for the opportunity to speak on this critical important project and an even bigger thanks for the incredible effort we know went into successfully getting us to point thank you Kathy next we have Luis Spradley Tim Johnson and David slack Luis Bradley I've been living here in this

[160:02] town for 63 years and I want to quote you something quote what this town needs is an uninvolved citizen that was spoken by a former city council member some years ago but you current council members will understand the sentiment behind its statement after 99 of us had spoken tonight you may really understand it you've heard many involves this in these recent months of pros and cons all aspects of the South annexation agreement have been debated before you thank you for listening thank you for your courage to take a stand on this divisive issue I urge you to vote in favor of the CU South Annex Station Plan before you earnest negotiators informed experts and citizen input have molded an excellent plan let us put it into action without another decade delay

[161:02] and as an emergency ordinance thank you thank you Luis next we have Tim Johnson David slack and Nikki Lewis I have Tim as pooling time with Michelle McFarland and Jenny hoteling so can I get a confirmation that those have been in the meeting and then we'll give Mr Johnson four minutes so that would be Taylor what was the uh I have Michelle what was the other name Sam Jenny hoteling it's number 14. uh they are both here um and I am going to give permission to T.A Johnson um in hopes that as Tim and if Tim if that is you please identify yourself as you start to speak yes this is Tim very good Tim you have four minutes my name is Tim Johnson and I'm the CEO of

[162:00] Frasier I'm in support of the CU annexation now and I want to encourage you to make the right decisions to make this possible which we will be the first step in helping protect the lives of the people of Boulder but I also want to bring you back to our experiences during the flood of 2013. eight years ago because while I'm sure the support of many of the council members I even this evening sense of why hurry from others I helped Shepherd our Fraser residents to safety on the night of September 11th of 2013. from what could have been near-death possibilities for at least 54 of our totally dependent residents residing in our skilled nursing community during the days weeks months and now years since the flood I've spoken to many groups about our experience this is what I tell them it's not an issue of if it's an issue of when I tell them how on Tuesday September

[163:00] 10th Thursday afternoon the soap ceiling tiles began to fall precariously close to our residents later that afternoon we began to evacuate our Assisted Living Center and it was completed by early evening Thursday I tell them how our health care center flooded that life changed at 8 pm when suddenly there was a new disaster that a wall of water forced its way into the building that it was hard to grasp how quickly the situation was deteriorating that there was no time to gather thoughts review and systematically follow emergency procedures procedures and preparedness scripts that we began evacuating 54 Healthcare residents half of them from our our secured memory unit most in bed carrying them to safety some over our shoulders and that I called 9-1-1 and was told that help was not available no so I also tell them don't depend on police or fire department assistance

[164:01] since it may not be available I tell them in the immediate aftermath that we lost the Assisted Living Center 34 Apartments we lost the first floor of our health care center 54 beds we lost independent living apartments 14. I walked them through their immediate needs after the crisis that they should plan for the immediate and future staffing needs develop a communication plan recruit volunteer and Community Assistance contact FEMA for assistance Public Assistance but don't be expected to be reimbursed for the seven years that it took us to be reimbursed to contact insurance companies to continue operations as well as you can in a compromised capacity to organize and preserve residence belongings to recover damaged medical business records and computers while continuing to provide care and operations in summary I remind

[165:01] them that immediate action is required that you will likely be on your own that the unforeseeable will occur that you need to know who to contact for immediate assistance know who you will be making important financial decisions and that you will be making them quickly and know that there will be lingering effects that may last years or in our case the better part of a decade and finally I do tell them that sometimes good people do make bad decisions but give them time and hopefully they will come around when they realize that lives really do indeed matter thank you thank you Tim next we have David slack Nikki Lewis and Gina McAfee um David I do not see David in the meeting um David if you're here under a different name please let me know in the

[166:00] Q a and so I am moving forward cm to Nikki excellent Vicky you should be able to unmute okay good evening and thank you for allowing us to speak at this presentation my name is Nikki Lewis I am the CFO at Fraser and excuse me for my trembling voice because we're living what Tim just spoke about we were there and it does need to be a priority to save our neighborhoods and to save our residents so I do ask that you approve the annexation under the emergency measure I appreciate all the time that everybody has spent on this but as Tim has spoken to um we can't wait any longer it'll take several years to build and put that protection in order and just to say that 13 years ago

[167:00] Frazier was not in a flood plain until some decisions made by the city to change some roadways put us there so I ask you again to please make the decision to take us out of Harm's Way thank you thank you Nikki next we have Gina McPhee Jim wolf and Ann Grand champ Gina um good evening I'm speaking tonight to express my support for the annexation agreement I first learned about this plan for floodplain mitigation about 15 years ago when I was working on the us-36 Eis it was clearly identified in that Eis at that time so it's been planned for a long time the need for this became more personal after the 2013 flood when my car was almost washed away on U.S 36 as we were evacuating from my neighborhood and most recently I've been impressed

[168:00] with how responsive the city has been to comments and concerns expressed making even more changes to the draft agreement to reflect Community concerns the current annexation agreement has many benefits to the city transfers 119 acres to open space provides desperately needed housing it will reduce traffic coming into Boulder and therefore air pollution not only carbon dioxide which is a greenhouse gas emission but also carbon monoxide and hydrocarbons which are both contributors to Ozone it caps trips it has a multimodal emphasis um and obviously it provides floodplain mitigation it is time to do the right thing to protect the health safety and Welfare of not only the people who live and work in Fraser Meadows but the drivers on us-36 like we were on Thursday September 12th

[169:00] these people are currently In Harm's Way there will be another large damaging flood you have the opportunity now to do whatever you can to protect lives and property it is time thank you thank you Gina next we have Jim wolf and grandchild and Colleen Ryan Malin Jim Jim you should be able to unmute um okay can you hear me now yeah after uh 46 years in what is now near North Boulder my wife and I moved to Frazier eight and a half years ago just in time for the flood um now after these years I am the elected president of the resident Council of

[170:00] Frazier I know I although I don't speak for all of those people who who live here all of them will benefit by the annexation of the CU property and the uh flood mitigation that will flow from that so I want to thank the city council I want to thank the staff of the city council over the many years that they've worked on this to come up with this agreement and uh I hope very much that it goes through I am only will only say that I've been distressed by the tone of this argument over the last half year I'm happy to say that the city council now is going to resolve it thank you thank you Jim next rehab and grandchild Colleen Ryan Mallon and Thomas Mendez and

[171:01] good evening City Council Members thank you for the opportunity to speak this evening to you I work at Fraser my name is Anne grandchamp and I have listened to many of the conversations that residents have had about this issue I can tell you that this community understands the enormity of this decision and the difficult position city council members are in they are very nervous about their safety and believe this plan is the only option that will keep them safe I encourage you to consider the lives of all of those that are in the closest path of flooding which includes Frazier and the neighbors that surround 36. thank you thank you Ann next we have Colleen Ryan Mallon Thomas Mendez and John tayer Colleen thank you very much I appreciate the opportunity to speak to you tonight I'm a staff member that works at Frazier and though I was not there in 2013 I have worked in the senior housing field for

[172:01] more than 30 years and have had to respond to some pretty scary situations in communities throughout the country but I've never had to respond to a flooding situation in which rescues would have to occur in the dark with Emergency Services unable to reach the community to assist the work that has been done thus far on the plans between the city and Colorado University is really impressive and seems to check most of the boxes that people have raised concerns about I know that you have a very difficult situation and difficult situ decision making and that you're getting conflicting voices but I hope that you will support the plan to move forward with the annexation without delay because with the weather related emergencies that we are seeing across the country we would be very naive to think that this won't happen again and could happen any day I would be one of the staff members that would need to respond to the next flood at Frasier and it scares me to think

[173:00] that in the next flood we may not be as lucky to have as many staff as we happen to have in the community the night that we had to evacuate thank you very much for the work the hard work that you do and please support the annexation thank you thank you Colleen next we have Thomas Mendez John tayer and Nicole Speer Thomas good evening can you hear me we can thank you for having me my name is Tomas Mendez and I'm the Vice President of Operations at Frazier I was not present I apologize that was a miss fire of a button on my part Thomas I am giving you your mute button back I apologize yeah all right can you hear me now yeah you can start again that'd be great Tomas okay no problem my name is Tomas Mendez and I'm the Vice President of Operations at Fraser I was not present at the flood

[174:01] of 2013 but I have seen the images of that night I have spoken to the residents and colleagues that were involved in working tirelessly to evacuate vulnerable older adults in the dark in four feet of water it is a miracle that no one was hurt and that no one died during that horrific event at Frasier however there was significant loss of property and many older adults were permanently displayed this place excuse me that flood was a significant and pivotal event in the history of Frazier and I hope that no one has to live through that ever again and I think that's exactly what this is all about preventing this from ever happening again by implementing the plan you have worked so hard to present to all of the residents in South Boulder I hope you put the lives of people ahead of any other interest and continue with the plan you Pro you presented for to prevent future disasters and the possible loss of life

[175:00] the residents of Fraser Fraser Meadows South Boulder appreciate the time and effort you're putting into this and hope you will decide to help protect our Boulder residents from future flooding by moving forward with this project under the emergency action thank you so much for your time and for all your hard work thank you Tomas next we have John tayer Nicole Speer and Donald Cote and John I have you as pooling with Andrea menegal and Jill Grano and so Brenda if you could confirm that Andrea and Jill are here we'll give John four minutes yes I see Joe chamber I've reached out for confirmation that that is Andrea I'm going to unmute the boulder chamber computer first just to get that confirmation that is thank you Brenda thank you Andrea

[176:00] all right very good we have both um people here with John and so John you have four minutes and you are up wonderful thank you mayor Weaver this is John tare president of the boulder chamber I address you tonight as someone with a history of Engagement and discussions surrounding the future of the CU South property since it was first purchased by the University of Colorado in 1996. in fact as an employee in the city manager's office I helped to manage Community engagement for the first city commission study outlining South Boulder Creek risks that the CU South site could help alleviate I also come to you as a voice for the business community that recognizes the University of Colorado as a Cornerstone of our local economy the University's academic and scientific research has spawned much of the business activity that supports the vibrancy we enjoy today CU Boulder is responsible for an estimated 4 billion in annual economic impact that is something none of us should take

[177:00] for granted in light of the clear toll that last year's upset in the normal university activity had on city of Boulder tax revenue receipts representing the suffering of many businesses that lost valuable sales finally as many have before me I thank you for honoring our dear friend Francis Draper in many ways she embodied the Deep ties between the city of Boulder including our business community and the University of Colorado as Chancellor de Stefano noted we were particularly we particularly celebrated today was the special effort Francis made to build Bridges between the university and the City recognizing that it lifted all of us for my admittedly unique perspective I make this observation in so many ways our community in the University of Colorado are inextricably linked in a symbiotic relationship and it lifts all of us with that symbiotic relationship in mind

[178:01] we all now recognize the critical importance of the CU South property as a defensive front against life-threatening flooding incidents as a separate Sovereign entity the university is under no obligation to allocate its property assets to meet the city's needs none in the spirit of partnership and in recognition of shared flooding risks though the university has agreed to commit a hundred acres of a 300 Acre Site to flood protection and open space purposes further further proposed annexation agreement the university is setting aside roughly half of the remaining total sea of South acreage for development Housing Development our community regularly calls in the university to expand its responsibility for housing students faculty and staff the CU South property annexation will help them meet that call accommodating 1100 housing units of all types from efficiencies in one bedroom apartments

[179:01] to modest single-family homes I live here with the same theme from the outset of my comments over the course of 145 years the direction of the University of Colorado and the city of Boulder have been inextricably intertwined I focused on the economic aspects of this relationship because that is what you would expect to hear from a chamber president from my past role in the Boulder City manager's office though I'm also well aware of the opportunity annexation of the CU South property represents for protection of a wide swath of our community from future flooding if we're helping to address our Workforce housing challenges and that way is the perfect symbol of our symbiotic relationship disposition of the CU South property under the terms of the proposed annexation agreement will help secure critical elements of community safety and vitality while securing the long-term future needs of a thriving University

[180:00] please approve CU South annexation agreement an agreement that lifts all of us thank you John next we have Nicole Speer Donald Cote and Rick Mahan Nicole thank you thank you my name is Nicole Speer I live in Tantra Park just west of Cu South and as you all know I'm one of the 10 current candidates for city council I encourage you to vote Yes to annex by emergency to prevent additional delays on this project thanks to your leadership and hard work and the engagement of nearby neighborhoods like mine the outcome we're arriving at is excellent this annexation agreement honestly reflects some of the best community engagement and negotiation work I've ever seen our city do in my 16 years here so big thanks to all of you who've worked on this process at various stages over the past four to five years this is truly a job well done I'm excited about the flood protection this agreement will give my friends on the north side of Table Mesa as we're all aware we're in a climate emergency

[181:00] hurricane Ida showed us that our communities don't have a lot of time in between extreme weather events to prepare and protect ourselves from future dangers part of adapting to living on a planet in crisis is courageously accepting change when it saves each other's lives and benefits our entire community and this is exactly what you're doing with this annexation agreement you're protecting Public Safety by ensuring our residents are protected from floods this isn't easy because change is hard but given our cities exceptionally high risk of flash flooding we must move forward not just to protect people in this flood zone but to enable us to move on to protecting people in other areas of town so please vote Yes to annex by emergency to prevent additional delays thank you thank you Nicole next we have Donald Cote Rick Mahan and Amanda Adams Donald hi my name is Don Cody and I'm a race Frasier resident

[182:01] and I'd like to keep just short and sweet I'll talk to you many times about this subject and I'd like to commend the council for its hard work diligence and following through to bring us to the point we're at I was and I'm almost also asking you to vote to accept the CU South annexation agreement and I'd like at this time to ask you to remember some of my friends here at Frasier who work so hard to get to this point Al LeBlanc and Pat Carden who would be thrilled to find out that we're at this point thank you very much thank you Don next we have Rick Mahan Amanda Adams and Jonathan stabile Rick and here one of the yeah this is Rick Mahan um I'm a third generation native of

[183:01] Boulder Colorado on the night of the flood I was at Ground Zero um there was 44 inches of water coming down our street on koala if this would have happened in the middle of the night me and my wife would have been in our master bedroom in the basement with no way to get out so I'm fortunate to even be speaking to you but 2016 came around and we had not progressed anywhere on the mitigation and I no longer felt safe living there so I have since moved but as you can tell from my voice my passion for this with Boulder was my home I have tons of friends that live there um this just needs to happen emergency however it's something that I feel has actually taken too long but I appreciate that you guys stuck with it I think you came up with an excellent cooperation which seems unheard of these days to be able to cooperate and get something done so it's very much

[184:00] appreciated and um there's little details in there that people don't even think about I forget the exact number of shares of water but water is going to be very critical coming up too that's part of what Boulder will receive out of this two acres for Public Safety my uncle is the retired Battalion Chief from the boulder fire department and we all know what happened that night so um I just want to strongly thank you guys and please please proceed with this we are just so lucky that no lies were lost thank you thank you Rick next three of Amanda Adams Jonathan stabilate and Janet Brewer Amanda hello my name is Amanda Adams and I enthusiastically support the CU South annexation plan I respectively request that you approve the plan to Annex on emergency basis to prevent further delays I live in a neighborhood that was devastated during the 2013 floods and

[185:00] I'm grateful for all of the work that city of Boulder staff CU and city council have done in the ensuing years to work towards a flood mitigation solution and the inclusion of flood mitigation as a major component of the CU South annexation plan I'm also excited about other elements of the plan including affordable housing open space and enhanced recreational access I hope that you will move forward without delay to approve this plan and again request that you do so on emergency basis thank you so much for your time thank you Amanda uh next we have Jonathan stabile Janet Brewer and Matt Benjamin Jonathan you're up and I'm sorry if I butchered your last name that's pretty close actually it's John stabile um thank you and I'd like to uh join my friends and neighbors here in South Boulder in urging the city council to vote for the annexation the more I hear about this plan the better it sounds it just sounds like it just keeps getting better and better the flood Mitigation Of course but also the additional

[186:00] housing the various community community benefits it really is just a fantastic plan and I'd like the city council to vote to Annex on an emergency basis thank you thank you John next we have Janet Brewer Matt Benjamin and Katie farnan Janet Janet you should be able to unmute now thank you good evening council members my name is Janet Brewer and I live at Frazier I support the city's annexation of the CU self property and I thank you and your staff for your persistence in bringing flood mitigation Within Reach of residents of South Boulder there is precedent in other parts of Boulder

[187:00] for the city's implementation of flood mitigation where needed I believe it is the responsibility of the city to protect the lives and property of its residents considerable time and effort have been spent in crafting the CU annexation agreement it is inclusive and balanced it is a good agreement and I feel it will benefit both the University of Colorado and Boulder's citizens as such I ask you to please vote Yes and move the process forward thank you so much Janet next we have Matt Benjamin Katie Farnam and Terry Walters Matt members of Council in the Boulder Community I'm Matt Benjamin and I live off Table Mesa I first want to add some

[188:00] clarity as to why we should pass this on emergency my environmental work has given me great familiarity with both the National Environmental Policy Act and The Endangered Species Act studies both of which we will likely need to get approval for flood Protection One key element is that the applicant must have legal authority over the land in question without emergency passage we will risk a more complex and possible rejection of those studies and massive delays in my experience working in the community on array of issues I have found that sometimes what limits our success is the inconsistency of the application of our values we cannot cherry pick the actions that were defined by our goals if you support health and safety be the first in line to support flood protection at CU South that protects 2300 residents if you support addressing our climate crisis be the first in line to defend these residents from the next flood if you support greater access to housing be the first in line to support the annexation agreement which provides 1100 units of housing and a hundred of which will be

[189:00] affordable if you support reducing in commuting and traffic in Boulder be the first in line to support the annexation agreement which saves at least two and a half million miles of commuting that's roughly 104 trips around our planet these residents are neighbors friends grandparents and co-workers are no safer today than they were eight years ago since the 2013 flood we have had three presidents and NASA design built launched and landed the perseverance Rover on Mars it is also a helpful reminder that in the same time frame we have not dug an ounce of dirt toward building flood protection the facts are simple and the data shows supporting the CU South annexation agreement achieves many of our community goals and values it's time we start investing in those values it's time we move forward and allow thousands In Harm's Way the confidence to sleep a little easier than they have in the last eight years thank you for your time thank you Matt next we have Katie farnin Terry Walters and Eric but Katie

[190:02] hi there my name is Katie farnan I am here to urge support for CU South annexation I could not say it better than Elmer dornberger the second person to speak tonight or the 20 others who have spoken before me this is an emergency I moved to the Boulder area in 2014 and the first conversations I recall having with my South Boulder Neighbors at that time were stories of what happened the year before we arrived this is an opportunity to protect the region from that Devastation in the future with a partner see you that already owns the land and has made a lot of effort to work out an agreement with area residents and the needs of the region flood protection for the 2300 people who are in this area is needed as they are the highest risk for flooding in the future and as we've seen over the past few years environmental emergencies are becoming only more frequent and more deadly in addition up to five acres of this land will be allocated to affordable housing which is another key

[191:01] priority of the city if it hopes to meet its housing goals it adds open space this is a good deal please approve by emergency the annexation plan and protect the residents of South Boulder thank you thank you Katie next three of Terry Walters Eric Budd and Sarah Don Haynes Terry hi I'm Terry Walters and I live on koala court with my husband and my children we're directly in the path of South Boulder Creek flooding and I urge the city council to vote Yes on this annexation agreement this is an emergency situation and this vote can prevent further delays and protect lives and property in our neighborhood first thank you to the city council to staff to boards who have worked diligently for decades to analyze the issue identify options develop Partnerships and negotiate this amazing agreement this process has been long we attended meetings with City staff 20 years ago when they told us the existing flood maps were wrong and we were vulnerable

[192:00] started looking then for Solutions more than a decade later the 2013 floods hit it happened exactly as promised but even so we weren't expecting how sudden and violent the flooding would be with no warning a wall of water hit our house shattered our windows with rocks and debris snapped doors in half and destroyed everything in its path the street a raging River we prepare to be evacuated through our roof hoping our house would stand it did but 40 percent of our home was gone nevertheless we were lucky it was only a 50-year event a hundred year flood May destroy our entire home we were lucky that we were upstairs escaping the Raging Waters would have been nearly impossible we are lucky that Boulder takes the safety of its residents seriously though it has taken years to assess options and gather public input we know you're serious about keeping us safe and we want to stay in our home can this vote really be an emergency eight years after the flood yes

[193:00] our luck will run out we remain at high risk with every storm in this case knowledge is not power it didn't help in 2013. action is what will save us please vote Yes to Annex and again thank you for your patience diligence and your efforts to protect us thank you Terry next we have Eric Bud Sarah Don Haynes and Dan Williams Eric thank you uh Eric bod I live in Martin Acres um I'm absolutely gutted to hear these the stories of people um who have struggled um with with flooding in this community and 2013 flood was was absolutely horrible and I'm really glad that the city council is taking this up I realized that you know it's it's challenging issue for the community and we have people that are In Harm's Way and people out of Harm's Way who who may feel that um this annexation is not benefiting them and I want to say that protection

[194:03] of people is should be a top priority for this community but also as someone who lives in Martin Acres I I really am looking at the benefits of this annexation um someone who goes to the CU South property regularly to run or ride my bike or to walk um you know I'm really glad that the majority of that land will be preserved as open space I'm I'm glad that much of that will be much of the land that's developed will be used for critically needed housing in our community um and and I'm glad that um we're starting to really take the transportation needs in Boulder seriously and that um there there's an excellent plan to both had ad housing and um really minimize any any issues with transportation and as someone who lives on Morehead um streets um looking at like how how can we make this better for transits and

[195:01] better for people who bike on that every day like I do um so I think I think there's a lot of benefits and I'm absolutely in support of this and I really thank the council for taking this up thank you thank you Eric next we have Sarah Don Haynes Dan Williams and John Carroll Sarah Dunn thank you mayor I live in South Boulder and I support emergency annexation and the agreements that very caring and smart people have collaborated on for many years I tried and could not help evacuate my then little tiny nieces and their parents on the night of the floods I remember being on the phone panicking with them that I I could there was a wall of water I couldn't get over to them with a truck um we also put ones pulling out the innards of the basement and repairing their home as an executive committee member of the Indian Peaks group of the Sierra Club I am proud that we are formally endorsing annexation of Co South as it aligns with

[196:00] key National CR Club policies interested folks can search CR Club info policy for details I also work with sustainability staff at CU and there are many incredible professionals who have dedicated their careers to sustainable operations of campus and educating and supporting sustainable personal choices for all staff students and faculty we have student leaders who have 50 plus years of advancing some of the most Cutting Edge sustainability on any campus in our country I believe in our ability to offer our community a climate resilient development that is an inspiration for our whole city I hope we can explore a living building challenge and stand proudly in our Legacy as a leader in higher education and sustainability Fraser Meadow sages it is so good to hear from you thank you sir Don next we have Dan Williams John Carroll and Clinton April and hi good evening I'm Dan Williams I live

[197:02] in North Boulder and I'm currently a candidate for city council I know we've heard from a few other candidates this evening and I joined them in urging you tonight to approve the annexation agreement vote Yes and do so on an emergency basis I guess I'd really like to start by commending the city's staff you know I've been watching this develop for some time and um I know there's been some um pushback and I think staff has just done an excellent job of continuing to refine and continuing to push on CU and continuing to make this a better and stronger agreement for our city I am now strongly in support of this agreement and I get there because this agreement really recognizes the reality that today we are in the midst of a climate emergency if we haven't figured that out over the last couple months of watching our air quality deteriorate you

[198:02] know I don't know what I'll do it but given we're in a climate emergency the city staff actually have outlined the two goals we need to focus on and the first is to protect ourselves from the effects of climate change and that means flood protection and that means flood protection now and realistically the only way to get there is if you all vote Yes on this agreement and the second and I really think equally important is mitigating the climate crisis and that means thinking differently about um infill housing and if we can build over a thousand housing units for students and University staff these are people who won't be driving in this will make an enormous difference in terms of reducing boulders uh carbon footprint so I strongly urge you to vote Yes on this agreement thank you thank you Dan next we have John Carroll Clinton heipel and Sean rata John

[199:01] uh thanks for your time tonight Council my name is John Carroll I'm the treasurer of the no on 302 campaign and I live at 4995 Quality Drive in Boulder I fully support the proposed CU South annexation agreement the agreement offers numerous Community benefits including flood mitigation protecting open space and supporting housing goals City staff and Council have done a great job negotiating this agreement over the years I want to thank them for all the time and effort they've put into this recent flooding and Associated loss of life around the country in the world should be a wake-up call to us all about the seriousness of flooding events like this are becoming more frequent and serious and the reality of the climate emergency we all face flood protection is protection from climate change and this should be treated like the emergency it is I'm here to urge you to vote to pass annexation by emergency to ensure this project moves forward without further delay thank you thank you John next we have Clinton

[200:03] hateful Sean Rada and Laura Tyler Clinton I'm speaking tonight in support of the annexation agreement between the city of Boulder and the University of Colorado for the CU South property the agreement's a huge win for the city in return for the city providing water and sewer service CU is donating land so flood mitigation structures can be built to protect South Boulder and there's lots of other benefits to the city as well including Public Access agreed upon limits for development and other uses of the property habitat restoration open space strip caps and conveyance of certain water rights to the city there's been some discussion about it but see you purchased the property in 1996 after Boulder voters turned down a proposal to buy the land for open space and actually the residents of South

[201:00] Boulder a little fortunate that that the city didn't buy it for open space because if it were formally voter open space the open space Department would never allow all the flood mitigation structures to be built I suppose the city has the option to refuse to Annex CU South and not provide water and sewer service you should be aware that in 2000 the city cities of Boulder Louisville and Superior signed an intergovernmental agreement declaring that the CU South Campus is in the influence area of the city of Boulder and as such neither Louisville nor a superior would attempt to Annex the Harrier provide water and sewer service the agreement expires June 20th 2030. and if Boulder doesn't conclude an annexation by this date this University would be free to try and get water and sewer service from either Superior or Louisville and if they did so we wouldn't have flood mitigation

[202:00] Boulder would have no control over what happened on the property and 2030 is not that far away I really urge you to support annexation now thank you Clint next we have Sean Rada Laura Tyler and Brian fry Sean thank you um I wanted to start by thanking all of you on Council for your time I know it's a lot of personal sacrifice and there's been a lot of toxicity in our local excuse me and I really hope that this is something we can come together on I had I had a script also I had talking points but as I'm listening to the testimony I'm really struck by how we could think of this as anything other than an emergency yes it has been eight years absolutely but anyone who lived through what happened in 2013 I mean I'm immediately brought back I'm almost in tears listening to the testimony of the people from Fraser

[203:00] I think about the sounds of the sirens going off and the helicopters over our house and the stories pouring in about people whose homes were lost and and lives that were being lost and I would just submit to you that if it starts raining tonight it's too late um we don't have time I know there's been talk about North Boulder selfishly I live in North Boulder I think it's it's insane to think about building housing for CU in North Boulder when the campus is in South Boulder but practically speaking we don't have time every day we talk about this we're wasting potential lives in homes and this is absolutely an emergency if you were here in 2013 you know that um let's not you know I live in North Boulder my house didn't flood um I don't believe that my personal life or house is at risk but I I care about my community and I could talk to you about housing and commuting and carbon numbers and all of those things that you're going to hear about but the bottom line here is that we have to do something to protect the homes and lives

[204:01] of the people who are affected by these floods and so I I beg you do something um this this is a great plan I know you all have worked really hard I really hope that we don't have another 2013 event to bring us all together because I think it's time right now and we can do it now thank you thank you Sean next we have Laura Tyler Brian Frey and Regina Zaragoza and I believe that Laura has a PowerPoint and Laura you are up okay hello my name is Laura Tyler thank you for this opportunity to speak I'm here to urge your support for the annexation of Cu South because the flood risk in Boulder is an emergency this project has changed my life in unexpected ways I became interested in it due to the flood risk the image that you're seeing

[205:01] is my car over time getting involved in local governance meeting many of you learning about how flood risk and housing are intimately linked in Boulder I've come to embrace the housing and other positive changes that are coming up at CU South I love this annexation agreement because it's not just a piece of paper it's the embodiment of years of hard work back and forth collaboration and compromise the benefits that the city of Boulder has been able to negotiate are remarkable housing is not only going to be allowed at the site but it will be sensitively built I'm excited about the Innovative Transit Solutions on offer the trip cap concept parking maximums I want to welcome new people to South Boulder in my neighborhood without increasing

[206:00] traffic possibly even reducing it in this method of planning that you've gone through with the annexation agreement is the way to go it has my wholehearted support not just for this project for others going forward thank you Sam Rachel Mary Aaron Mark and Adam for your hard work and excellent questions vote Yes to Annex because flood risk in Boulder is an emergency and we need to stop further delays thank you thank you Laura next we have Brian fry Regina Zaragoza and Carla rickensrut Brian hi I'm Brian fry I live in Boulder and I'm part of the no on 302 campaign just want to give a quick shout out to city council for all your amazing work on this issue it's taking a lot of time and effort a flood emergency is a Known Unknown we know it's happened before and we know it will happen again we just don't know

[207:01] when it's also a matter of public safety we're fortunate to have a known known that annexing CU South will ensure the safety of our community with immediate flood protection and when it comes to safety we have a moral obligation to prevent known unknowns from happening when we have a clear known solution now we know that putting this off in hopes of a better alternative could have devastating consequences to our community and we can't wait around on matters of safety that are unknown when we know it could be too late thank you for your time thank you Brian next we have Regina Zaragoza Carla rickenzerud and Pete Dawson Regina yes we can my name is Regina Zaragoza I'm a student at the CU law school and I'm also a

[208:02] diversity and inclusion professional um we're dealing with an equity issue here annexation opponents share pictures of their nature walks and their families who can afford to live in Boulder they think about how this decision will impact them you know who they don't don't think about all the people of color and low-income folks who commute on 36 and would be left stranded and in danger in a flood they try to justify land swaps saying that North Boulder would be better why don't you ask someone who rides the bus if commuting to North Boulder would be easier for them they make excuses about the housing that would be built a hundred units of permanently affordable housing and they have the guts to say that minorities should support them because construction would inconvenience low income housing around them give me a break I'm tired of being tired of white people telling me what it's what is in my

[209:01] community's own best interest when it's clear they're only looking out for themselves do the right thing Boulder next Annex you South thank you Regina next we have Carla Riggins Road Pete Dawson and David Mardis Carla council members I urge you to take seriously your highest responsibility to City residents protecting life and safety by voting next week to nxcu South all of you and many current residents are intimately familiar with the thousands of steps and meetings and conversations and documents that have occurred in getting to where we are now to your pending annexation votes it's always an uphill battle in Boulder to talk about undeveloped land but that's exactly what's required in order to protect our neighbors annexation opponents continue to fling red herrings and misinformation for the record and as you all know number one

[210:01] this process has not been rushed you all have witnessed and participated in the process every step of the way number two 100-year flood protection is the gold standard not 500 year number three a land swap has already been asked and answered and who wants a solution that would put tens of thousands of in commuters driving through Boulder Daily number four the latest easement idea is untenable number five the agreed upon Boulder Valley comprehensive plan the pending annexation agreement and additional CU statements ensure that any cu development aligns with Boulder building restrictions and protects our cityscape this process has been tedious yet thorough and transparent during the flood of 2013 as you heard vulnerable Fraser seniors were carried to safety when I worked at the Fraser retirement community with each Heavy Rain PTSD was palpable

[211:00] it's been my honor to work with Fraser residents on this project to help protect future Fraser residents and our neighbors two friends who carried the flood mitigation Banner for Fraser have passed away Al leblang and Pat Carden please vote Yes on annexation to ensure the next headlines don't announce deaths caused by flooding thank you for your service on Council thank you Carla next we have Pete Dawson David Mardis and Heather Kelly be thank you Sam some people a friend of mine and Fraser has been talking to friends who don't live in Fraser and I want to talk about them some of them are feeling that there's no reason the South Boulder should get all the attention they feel neglected well there's a good answer why we're getting so much attention in South Boulder and we know that from 2013.

[212:01] but if you ask the city government Boulder has 16 drainages and it's hard for us to be aware of it because we don't drive on them we don't see them but a city map shows them all and they have to juggle the needs of these 16 drainages each has its own risks and opportunities and they have to use careful planning to figure out what's next there is work going on there Wonderland Creek was recently made safer in the south in the Northwest part of the city for a few years projects that cost 30 million now the department has worked on plans for three more areas around the city than the flood protection Fraser as South Boulder are the highest risk and the most flood-prone city in the in the state and I urge you to

[213:01] proceed as an emergency and protect the citizens thank you thank you Pete next we have David Mardis Heather Kelly and Kevin Kelly David just a moment for David David are you with us yep you guys hear me we can great my name is Dave Martis I've lived in Boulder for 35 years as a note kudos to fill for his hard work as well as his patience answer my many questions along the way this is not a debate about flood mitigation which I think we all agree if Don smartly is a great idea but about good governance and how far the city should go to get flood mitigation from cu in my opinion we're not there yet my question which has gone unanswered an email sent to various members of council simple why not wait until after the election to move forward the annexation agreement is still a draft with significant changes occurring just in the last several weeks council member Wallach tonight brought

[214:01] up great points about the use of emergency measure as defying the Oxford online dictionary an emergency is a serious unexpected and often dangerous situation requiring immediate action the proposed use of emergency measures to Ram the annexation agreement through is a travesty and a late person would find it hard to imagine what emergency in Oxford's full definition exists is the emergency letting voters opine on the biggest annexation issue in 30 years what could it be is an active electorate unexpected or dangerous city Charter Article 2 Section 17 speaks to emergency measures and I'm hard-pressed to how this could be used in this situation this agreement needs more time there are too many the university will consider items I encourage everybody listening to go through the briefing book and the annexation agreement and see how much of this is vague in reality this looks to be real estate development pure and simple we'll go backwards in terms of affordable housing as the five acres will only provide 110 units or less than 10 percent of the

[215:01] current best guess number the city requires a far higher percentage you know I got some other notes but I'm just about running out of time I want to thank Council for their hard work I encourage them to wait for the outcome the election recognize there's not a true emergency and show good governance thank you thank you Dave next we have Heather Kelly Kevin Kelly and Lynn Siegel Heather hi my name is Heather Kelly I'm speaking tonight to urge council members to vote Yes to Annex as an emergency to prevent additional delays I live on koala Drive we've lived here since 2008 and lived through the 2013 floods you've heard many of my neighbors tonight and I Echo their concerns and comments I also wanted to just reiterate the human element here my husband and I are hard-working middle class folks this home was not an investment property for us we live here we're real people living in this neighborhood in fear of another flood and now we have a two-year-old daughter

[216:00] you've heard the prior speaker David say why not wait why not wait is because we're waiting on another flood we know what will happen and we need some protection and not only do we face these real safety risks of another flood but there's real Financial losses that happen to everyone on my block I may saw my neighbor Laura's car our the impact to us from those 2013 floods was significant so I hope you will remember this human element please pass this annexation as an emergency because it is one and protect the residents of South Boulder thank you Council and staff for your hard work on this issue thank you heather next we have Kevin Kelly Lynn Siegel and Eric Peters Kevin Kelly here homeowner on koala Drive I'd like to thank Council and staff for their hard work over these long years please vote Yes to Annex I live through 2013. we can't let it happen again

[217:03] please vote Yes thank you thank you Kevin next we have Lynn Siegel Eric Peters and Gary erling Lynn let's get clear nobody wants a disastrous flood Laura's car full of water it was CU that caused the first flood let's not let them cause the second flood and it's CU that caused the delay alternate six is cheaper and more protective keep the stream in the Stream lawsuits are potential here Sam did not have the authority at the study session in February 2020 to change from a planning board and city council ruled 500 year protection to 100 years just like with the 10-year undermining

[218:00] of the municipal municipalization election Sam did it again and now he's got a job with the state in climate policy isn't that interesting secret negotiations just like with the muni pif fees exchange for water rights no there's a Priceless value of water I don't trust anything that went on in those secret negotiations sewer 42 inch intercepting crosses 36 near seating South Redline robotics did a video inside the sewer line there's been a danger of a CL of collapse of that line that that takes the sewer feeders come into it all the way East Boulder to the north to the Sewer treatment plant flood increases the potential of a disastrous talk about disaster people

[219:02] how'd you like a sewer disaster all over Boulder how do you want to pay for the storm water costs because they're going to make a fee not a tax then it would have to go to the voters the 500 year the illusion the 500 year doesn't cost more the filter thank you Lynn your your time is up we have a lot of speakers tonight but you can send us the rest of your thoughts by email Rachel I see your hand um thanks Sam I just wanted to clarify that there was a study session in 2020 and an accusation was just made that um you made a decision and want to clarify that all of council participated in that study session and would have uh Taken part in any vote that that changed course so did not want you to um get blamed for something that all of council participated in and also will say that I have been in uh negotiation rooms with you and I have not seen Sam do anything untoward thanks Rachel and with that our next

[220:01] three speakers are Eric Peters Gary erling and Roger Hibbert Eric I do not see Eric Peters or Gary erling in the meeting so we'll go straight to Roger Hibbard followed by Barbara Miller and Mike curopoulos but I'm sorry Mike if I mispronounced your name Roger you should be able to unmute now hi there we can hear you Roger good evening Council my name is Roger with 90 Plus speakers and I I will keep this very short and to the point as a resident of Boulder since 1996 and a homeowner in the South border since 2000. I've been able to witness the progression from the time of property acquisition until now the amount of time spent by city council and staff and their diligence to keep this bumpy process going is truly become

[221:01] an edible it is certainly not lost for my neighbors or myself but eight years ago today my house was flooding when the Waters of the South Water Creek over top U.S 36. as the most at risk City for flash flood in Colorado we must move forward with protecting our residents from the climate change that is now upon us in addition to the flood production this annexation agreement provides many benefits including much needed housing for students and staff additional affordable housing and reduce traffic on roads into and out of the city police vote Yes by emergency on the annexation of CU Boulder South thank you thank you Roger next we have Barbara Miller Mike chiropoulos and Sarah Cote Barbara Barbara you may need to press star six on your phone or your phone's mute button

[222:01] foreign six on your phone and then perhaps your phone's mute button or unmute button okay Brenda we'll move on and if you could work with Barbara we can come back to her okay there we go there we go we can yep okay okay um well I am going to urge you to vote no on CU South because not because of flood mitigation I mean I definitely had my house flooded

[223:00] um so I know what it what that means um I've been in Boulder back and forth since the mid 1970s and I've lived here permanently since 1986. um and I I totally agree with everything about flood mitigation I wish that CU would just give that land to the city for well-being and for Community however I have a sincerious problems uh with the rest of the proposal in terms of building I think it just flies in the face of Common Sense it seems like we are all in this together an age of climate change brought about by our own species through

[224:02] irresponsible actions we're in a global pandemic both of these events are holding massive unknowns and it seems like we're returning to a model uh rather rather than moving this along and hit in human evolution will actually stifle any conscious growth by the city to the city by limiting teaching when we return to these models and formulas that are being used for this project thank you Barbara Barbara I'm sorry but your time is up if you want to email us you can email us at Council Boulder colorado.gov with the rest of your thoughts next we have Mike chiropoulos Sarah Cote and Florence Anderson and Mike I have you as pooling

[225:02] with Jim Morris and one other Linda and so if Brenda could let me know if the pooling people are here if they are Mike you will get four minutes uh they are here Sam we are all set excellent Mike you're good to go with four minutes sounds great can you hear me we can good thank you mayor and Council Mike chiropolis Martin Acres first I'd like to recognize Francis Draper as a professional and as a person second seeking common ground on the rationale for annexation Public Safety we can all agree that 500 year protections are preferable to 100 Year especially if we believe the science behind our climate action plans 800 dwelling units 1800 people 460 some structures and close to a billion dollars in property value are

[226:01] unprotected by this agreement City Experts acknowledge that future floods greater than 100 Year could overtap and close U.S 36 and other vital arteries let's address that see if we can do better housing in commuting vehicle miles traveled and Emissions as we know the annexation agreement allows 750 000 square feet of new non-residential development creating new jobs and in commuting that could cancel out most are all gains from the new residences third open space and environment close to 170 Acres of the natural flood plain would be developed the remaining 138 acres is barely half of the 220 plus acres targeted for open space protection since the 1970s undeveloped natural flood Plains greatly enhance flood mitigation and downstream

[227:02] safety for all residents under all storm scenarios annexation ignores our 2018 Open Space Mountain Parks Master Plan update exploding use and overcrowding are negatively impacting open space resources and the visitor experience habitats and species lose connectivity and terrain needed to adapt the climate change repealing annexation will affirm our open space Legacy to Future Generations opening the door to more flexible Housing Solutions and more units which could be built sooner at safer locations once the natural flood plan is developed in wetlands and springs are quote unquote mitigated we can never go back to 500 year flood protections or our original open space vision for greater South Boulder Creek and the state Natural Area a potential community-wide win-win would direct CU to a North Campus on City

[228:02] owned land at the planning reserve on Jay Road saving taxpayers tens of millions of dollars in subsidies the Excel franchise requires 100 clean power annexation sacrifices more than 40 percent of the homes in Frazier and almost two-thirds of open space in the natural flood plain once lost paved and bulldozed they're gone for good if excel's 20-year franchise had locked in 40 percent Coal Power and perpetuity with no exit ramps while sacrificing open space citizens would have decisively rejected it in a New York Minute after tonight's vote concerned citizens can sign the new petition for a city-wide vote and I urge them to vote Yes to repeal to take a hard look at a better alternative last a lighthearted Limerick and effort there was an agreement styled emergency annexation across the People's Republic fueled

[229:02] heated consternation climate science failed to walk the talk Public Safety CU squawk Boulder Bach solution North Campus land exchange negotiation Council leadership and collaboration can unite a divided Community to reap benefits while avoiding downsides please pursue guiding principle six thank you very much you might we have Sarah carte Florence Anderson and Deborah biaska Sarah excuse me I no longer see Sarah quotations um and Florence Anderson also is not with us um so we're going to go straight to Deborah biaska I also don't see Sarah kowalchuk so after Deborah will be Claudia team and um Nicholas Vinson sorry Claudia for mispronouncing your name and let me just get Deborah um

[230:03] unmuted shortly okay this is Deborah biaska I live in Martin Acres and I urge you not to approve the annexation and not to invent an emergency in order to Scuttle the people's right for initiative and referendum looking at the camera letters we've seen and the speakers on in favor of the annexation and you'll quickly see the pattern almost all in favor are either from the city's team who have let CU run rough shot in negotiations or people who directly benefit from the weak flood mitigation in The Proposal some 1100 structures in Fraser Meadow subdivision and mostly the 350 residents of Fraser

[231:01] Meadows Manor the reasons for this are clear well no one begrudges flood protection to our neighbors the city can't acknowledge their own ineffective negotiating skills so they have dug their heels in on a lopsided bargain the Fraser Meadows folks get all the benefits while the rest of us are getting sold out this has nothing to do with NIMBY I call this deal a bimby a crappy all the benefits in my backyard all the crap in yours it's not complicated flood protection for Fraser Meadows Manor has driven the annexation from the start and here are the trade-offs for their surprisingly weak protection in the proposed agreement they get 100-year flood production in the era of Mega storms which is barely 30 percent protection based on the city's own 2013 flood analysis the rest of us get 6 000

[232:00] more pollutions spewing vehicles on already gridlocked South Boulder throughways a 3 000 seat Sports Stadium 750 000 square feet of non-housing real estate a meager five acres out of 308 for affordable housing and no enrollment cap at CU to guarantee any real effect on our affordable housing deficit thank you your time is up and you can send us the rest of your thoughts to council at bouldercolorado.gov next we have Sarah kowalczyk who's probably not here Claudia team and Nicholas Vinson so unless Sarah has shown up uh Brenda if you could bring Claudia up that'd be great Claudia you should be able to unmute thank you Brenda good evening members of council this is Claudia Hanson theme I'm a resident of North Boulder when I started following local issues I said that CU South was the one topic I

[233:01] would never touch it was something that had too much history it was too far away and it was simply not my place but I've come to understand that it is mine the decision about annexation at CU South is ours as a whole community as people who share this city we have responsibilities to each other and the highest of those is the protection of human life West Valley residents have spent years asking for flood mitigation and many others who were lucky to dodge catastrophe in 2013 are in line behind them the climate crisis is here and will not respect our delays it's time to act beyond that we have a responsibility to be deliberate and judicious in our use of land in Boulder we have fundamental disagreements about what this means but the negotiation process has served the city well CU South may not become the car free Urban Village that I see as the epitome of compact development and it will certainly not be the pristine ecosystem

[234:00] that annexation opponents extol but it never was in our lifetimes but with much needed housing open space protection and Innovative Transportation programs on top of flood protection it is a remarkable compromise and it's not likely to get better I appreciate the tireless efforts of City staff to craft a comprehensive agreement and the work of council member friend and mayor Weaver to keep this process moving towards a vote I appreciate council members Yates and Joseph for recusing themselves decisions for which they've taken heat but which I hope help protect this decision from legal challenges and I appreciate council member Wallach no friend of mine on most issues who has made a politically difficult decision to support this agreement I hope you all and our neighbors will stay the course and approve this annexation thank you thank you for Claudia next we have Nicholas Vinson Margaret lecompte and Brookie Gallagher Nicholas hi there yes uh my name is Nicholas

[235:02] Vinson I live at 4965 koala Drive uh my wife and I just welcomed our firstborn child he's five months old and we're very excited the city council has been working on this planet it's been a long time coming and we really appreciate everything you guys have done with staff and negotiate us this far uh I urge you guys to to vote Yes on this um CU annexation agreement by emergency um our five-month-old can't understand what this means for him and his ability to to run free as our his parents are are relaxed uh this time uh during this this flood period so please see cut through the noise get us over the Finish Line protect our families again wrote yes on this to you annexation agreement you have my full support and my family support by emergency please get this through thank you thank you Nicholas next we have Margaret

[236:02] lecompte Brookie Gallagher and Margaret Tilton Margaret lecompte yeah you did it one moment Margaret thank you for your patience you should be able to unmute now hello I am Marky lecompte I live in Fraser Meadows neighborhood not the retirement community you've just heard a huge snow job from CU fans and a small segment of the community now some cold hard facts one there's no Charter sanctioned emergency facing the city that requires immediate annexation of Cu South no flood has just happened no emergency exists in cu's offer of land for flood detention two annexation of Cu South is not required to have flood mitigation in South Boulder three this agreement will

[237:00] greatly damage our environment neighborhoods and it will increase the cost of mitigation so every Boulder residence utility bills will double 4. over 4 500 Boulder residents signed our petition putting let Boulder voters decide on CU South annexation on the November 2 ballot 5. City council's persistent threats to deny us a vote violate the Colorado Constitution our city Charter and democracy itself this flawed vague annexation agreement is a very bad deal for Boulder the very rush to push to pass it before the election makes clear the council is afraid of what the voters will say if they do get to vote on it if there's an emergency in Boulder it's caused by Council putting the entire city at risk by caving in to cu's outrageous annexation proposal if there's an emergency in Boulder its council's violating open meeting laws by secretly negotiating with CU on annexation its council's undemocratic

[238:01] hijacking of public processes and safety silencing of the public of the public and bargaining away our neighborhood safety endangering our open space and being putting making sure that Boulder will be less resilient as climate changes it's clear what CU wants to do they want to build out and pave over South Boulder Creek this is just a real estate giveaway to see you and its developer buddies it's not good for Boulder let us vote on it and vote no on this agreement thank you Marky um I want to take a pause here Brenda I think Sarah kowalczyk might be here under Ilya kowalczyk I saw that too Sam so I think you are correct okay if we could bring Sarah up next and then we'll go on to rookie Gallagher and Margaret Tilton great Sarah you should be able to unmute now

[239:00] thanks you all for working with that actually my name is Elia kowalchuk I'm Sarah's husband uh Sarah is unable to meet with us right now due to a child care issue so if it's okay I'll speak on her behalf please do yes thank you so um first off a long night thanks to everybody Adam I've really been appreciating the LEDs behind you it's keeping me smiling right now so thank you for that and Sam I would love to know where you get that view at this time of night I'm looking for it all over town but I can't find it um I just wanted to say three things in particular I wrote a letter to the editor in Daily Camera that talked about my um jobs a Fairview teacher uh I see kids every day taking risky decisions as they ride bikes uh to Manhattan and Fairview and other schools in the neighborhood trying to cross the roads so um this underpass that's going to help kids safely cross South Boulder Table Mesa is going to be really important for their safety as well so that I haven't heard that mention yet so I wanted to say that um the other thing that was said earlier

[240:01] was that the plan only benefits South Boulder which is untrue as you probably know this plan is going to benefit all of Boulder by preventing damage to a significant portion of Boulder that damage could reallocate and distract city council people and resources that could be better allocated for city-wide funding and plans so please consider that as a whole city benefit as well I haven't heard that mentioned and the last thing I wanted to say is that to the folks who say that we're not ready yet for this plan I'm reminded of a conversation that I heard about that Barack Obama had with Dennis kucinich when he was trying to get the Affordable Health Care Act passed and he needed as much support as he could and as some of you know Dennis kucinich is a very um staunch liberal and he was not really in favor of the first iteration of Obamacare because it was such it was more limited than he wanted it to be and uh President Obama said to Senator

[241:00] kucinich at the time this isn't the final version this is the best that we can do at this point in time and while we can't anticipate future climate change and and future climate threats this is what we can do and are able to do at this point in time and for those reasons I urge you to vote Yes on this uh with emergency passage so that we can make this necessary change to our city for all the reasons I've mentioned and more thank you thank you Elia next we have Brookie Gallagher Margaret Tilton and Ben Bender Brookie my name is Brookie Gallagher I'm concerned that it's not been made sufficiently clear to the public that once this document is signed the city will have no power to object to any aspect of cu's future development plans no power to demand changes to object or

[242:01] to add requirements this agreement requires only that the university provide the city opportunities to review and comment on development plans commenting has no teeth no matter how weighty the comments are so when CU eventually makes public their plans the city can comment all we want on aspects of the plan that are objectionable and see you will be in a position to respond with the equivalent of thanks for sharing they can proceed as they please held only to terms explicitly stated in this current document it's unrealistic to be expected to anticipate today what development possibilities see you may come up with in a couple of years from now flood mitigation Solutions should not be tied to cu's development desires they are not intrinsically linked demanding full annexation was a negotiation stance of cus that the city did not push back

[243:00] against effectively we've been sidetracked from the important work of developing real flood mitigation solutions by the demand to negotiate terms for development plans for which we have no tangible proposals at this time I worry that a subpar agreement is being pushed forward to justify the years of work that have brought us here today this is no justification for a poor decision with ramifications we will be living with for decades to come this annexation should not be approved thank you thank you Brookie next we have Margaret Tilton Ben bender and Rachel Anderson Margaret sorry it took me a second to find the unmute button there um I'm Meg Tilton and thanks for taking the time to listen to me and all the other public speakers I am strongly in support of annexation by emergency measure and many people have already

[244:00] spoken about the critical need for flood protection which I don't think is an invented emergency so I'll just say I agree with them I'd like to talk a little bit about affordable housing I work at CU in the largest Institute on campus which has about a thousand employees and we routinely run into problems recruiting and especially retaining um younger researchers and in particular minorities we have diversity equity and inclusion goals but if we can't provide them with options that make it possible for them to live in Boulder it's really hard to get the diverse Workforce that we're after and I think this plan does a very good job of providing affordable housing specifically for CU Affiliates but also for community members and I think that's extremely important I also feel like at this point it's a bit of a moral issue and it see you bought that property over or about a quarter of a century ago in good faith that they

[245:01] could use it at least in part for development and they have spent years um working with the city and public servants like yourselves coming up with a good plan um I think the plan is good it may not be perfect but it does an excellent job of balancing the needs of the different stakeholders and in my mind it would be a mistake to put it Forward um as a voting measure because many of the biggest beneficiaries of annexation won't be able to vote they are people who can't currently afford to live in Boulder or they are future students deaf and faculty of the University so I would urge you again to pass this annexation measure by emergency thank you thank you Meg next we have Ben Bender Rachel Anderson and Sally Greenwood and Ben I have you down as pooling with Cecilia Casey and Lindsay sweet so if I can get confirmation from Brenda that they are here you'll be good to go with

[246:00] four minutes they are here Sam excellent thank you Ben you are up with four minutes good evening my name is Ben Bender before I begin I would like to thank and compliment the city clerk Alicia Johnson for how courteously and promptly and efficiently she's helped the public in issues dealing with this hearing I've been following the events in cu's South Gravel Pit since 1981 when the flat iron Gravel Company applied for a controversial permit from the Boulder County to mine sand and gravel at the 1981 hearing an old farmer said the Lush sub irrigated grassland was a water Meadow that God made very few water metals and the property should not be mined to sell the property to the county the gravel company promised the site would be reclaimed as a park with lodged ponds and riparian areas and that the reclaimed land would be suitable for wildlife habitat those promises were memorialized in the County's Reclamation plan which everyone thought was etched

[247:01] in stone until CEO gutted the plan in 1997. in 1996 I learned that CU was going to purchase the Gravel Pit as an engineer and land surveyor I was curious why a university which plans to be around for centuries and whose peers wisely built on Hills to avoid major floods would want to purchase the flood from gravel pit at the foot of a major Front Range drainage basin for a new campus so I obtained the official 1988 FEMA floodplain map which indicated that the entire sunken Gravel Pit was erroneously removed from the Hundred Year floodplain by an unsafe 6 000 foot Earthen Levy which at the time was not in the Reclamation plan and not constructed to FEMA specifications the Colorado joint budget committee had to approve the cu's purchase in 1996 to protect cu's interests I advised JBC staff of the floodplain issues as a result the JVC requires CU to perform a

[248:00] floodplain study which found that most of the Gravel Pit was in the floodplain as were hundreds of homes on the other side of U.S 36. in 1997 CU lobbied the Colorado mineland Reclamation board to revise the Reclamation plan in Fraser Meadows my people might be interested in hearing this not to protect residents from flooding but to maximize development of the site and make flooding worse against objections from the city the county and CU is late professor emeritus Dr Gilbert white CEO gutted the Reclamation plan by eliminating ponds which would attenuate flood waters and by adding a six thousand foot Levy to divert flood waters around its sunken Gravel Pit when the 2013 flood hit hundreds of homes were flooded with cu's vacant flunked sunken Gravel Pit was dry so I cringe when I hear Phil de Stefano in members of the city council talk about the wonderful Cooperative relationship that has always existed between CU and the city there's a November November ballot

[249:02] an issue initiative to refer this annexation a vote to the vote of the people everybody wants flood control in many flavor housing but if this hearing is to be more than a charade I suggest you make the following simple changes to the annexation agreement to make it more palatable to Boulder citizens one eliminate the 750 000 square feet of non-residential buildings two eliminate the three thousand feet seat Stadium three eliminate the extremely hazardous intersection with State Highway 93 which is going to be on a curve on a hill in an area that's often icy and snowblown and four recognize that climate change is real everybody is saying we have a climate change uh uh at uh event taking place now and design the flood control project to protect against the 500-year flood not

[250:00] the 100 year flood which is totally inadequate during these times thank you very much thank you Ben next we have Rachel Anderson Sally Greenwood and Peter Mayer Rachel I don't see Rachel in the meeting Sam so I am I'm meeting Sally Greenwood Sally you should be able to speak hi I'm against passingly annexation agreement as it's appears now there are too many loose ends and on the the plans are sort of a moving Target um what I do do is I applaud the addition of a baseline study for light and noise affecting the state Natural Area that we taxpayers bought and I'd

[251:01] hate to see it compromised as written however 14a is meaningless unless 14c is amended so that the university and Boulder agree to restore noise and light conditions to the pre-development Baseline and that the restoration be paid for by the University I have other concerns as well these must seem like minor issues in the in the face of all of the flood stories but then I spent a night bailing out my subgrade basement and thinking about other things I would rather be doing I'm please clarify about the fire station

[252:00] is that going to be an addition to the fire station on Gillespie or to replace it I do not see the value of being able to reach a fire station within 15 minutes on foot I ask because my insurance pre and whim will likely change also the Postal Annex is that an addition to Morehead or replacement also I'm concerned about of the area becoming a gated community by using the RFID activated Gates thank you Sally appreciate your comments your time is up but you can always email us at council bouldercolorado.gov with the rest of your thoughts and with that we will move on to Peter Meyer Nick Linson and Sherry hack Peter hi this is Peter Mayer

[253:01] I am the co-chair of plan Boulder County the Boulder City Charter is a wonderful document and I highly recommend reading it sometime in section 17 emergency measures it clearly states quote no ordinance making a grant of any franchise or special privilege shall ever be passed as an emergency measure unquote since annexation is the most special privilege there is for a landowner outside the city limits and with all the smart attorneys around and since you all swore to uphold the charter this should be easy to understand fact you can move forward with flood mitigation without annexation the only reason you're considering this annexation is because CU insisted on it fact if you truly cared about public safety and saving lives from flooding in Boulder you would be focused on flash warning system and efficient evacuation

[254:00] plan neighborhood scale planning signage and other inexpensive non-structural solutions that actually save lives you have ignored the basic actions that will protect citizens and you have swallowed a false narrative regarding Public Safety and flood protection in Boulder the citizens vote on the big issues like the muni like extending open space and transportation taxes like increasing occupancy for in our community and like the largest annexation of the century CU South this Council used to be big on Democracy we sure heard a lot about it when you wanted a franchise agreement with Excel what has changed in your minds here you are in 2021 rushing the biggest annexation agreement in memory without proper land disposal or a site plan and now you're even considering an illegal emergency measure and here we are with a citizens vote on CU South just 49 days

[255:02] away look at yourselves here in 20 or 21 trampling on Boulder's long tradition of citizens democracy good night thank you Peter and I believe that I got noticed that Rachel Anderson is here so we can go back to Rachel and then after Rachel we will have Nick lensen and Sherry hack you should be able to unmute Rachel foreign good evening my name is Rachel Anderson I live in South Boulder it is unfortunate this issue has become so divised and so divided the community see you could have avoided the 2013 flood damages and the current debacle if it was willing to cooperate with Boulder when it acquired the property instead see you cut the purchase secret from the

[256:01] city and ignored the city's request to address known flooding problems when CU modified the Reclamation plan when CU purchased the flood Chrome property 220 Acres was designated for open space CU paid no attention to these important environmental concerns and all was only interested in maximizing the development potential of the property when cyr purchased a property the asking price was 11 million but see you specified an appraisal with State a value of 16 million in order to give the well-connected sellers credit for a tax deductible gift of 5 million the city refused to play this game to outfit see you see you ignoring ignoring climate change has rejected the city's plan for 500 year flood protection and refuses to allow the city to use the land needed to

[257:00] protect residents lives into the city agrees to annexation it is hard to negotiate with a gun pointed at your head and that is exactly what's happening with this emergency plan adding traffic from 1200 dwellings 750 000 square feet of non-residential use a 3000 seat stadium and 30 Acres of athletic fields to already congested growth will create a transportation nightmare in South Boulder Council please deny this annexation see you please recognize your past unethical wrongdoings and shows some true leadership thank you thank you Rachel next we have Nick lensen Sherry hack and Jim wolf Nick yes good evening um I'd like to comment on the pronounced annexation agreement and the process the city council has pursued to approve it Jan Burton is almost right so usually leadership has a

[258:01] fiduciary responsibility to pursue the interest Financial interests of Cu however the Boulder City Council you has a 100 Financial fiduciary responsibility to the citizens of Boulder I hope you will start practicing it the draft agreement has many failings to watch other speakers have provided details on but I will focus on two the lack of final development plans from CU which should be a requirement prior to annexation just like any private entity would have to provide and the lack of sufficient flood control measures which given the rise of extreme weather events hesitates the 500-year solution voters utilities director was quoted in the daily cameras saying quote if we were to pursue that 500 year alternative we would be throwing money away because it is a project we cannot bring to life this implies that we cannot do it when in fact we could have a 500 year plan if CU is willing to work with the city and Council was actually wanting to pursue such a solution the city's February 2020 concept design report States page 35

[259:00] just how a 500 flood solution can come about but CU apparently does not want to dedicate sufficient land for this proper solution it is disingenuous and misleading the state that we cannot achieve the proper level of flood control that East Boulder neighborhoods deserve given the lack of a final development plan and sufficient flood control I urge the council to reject the proposed annexation plan and it should pursue the simple steps that spent laid out in his editorial doing so would allow Boulder to improve flood safety and we could learn what CU has actually planned for the south campus lastly a quick comment on why is extremely disturbing to me that the council would have a final vote on the annexation agreement prior to the November election you knew that this ballot initiative was coming we tried last year your your City attorney basically provided incorrect information it it's an affront to democracy in our city please let Boulder citizens have a say before you decide for them thank you thank you Nick thanks we have sherry

[260:00] hack Jim wolf and Matthew vondrasek Sherry thank you dear council members my name is Sherry hack and I'm a 22 22-year residence of Table Mesa and I was here during the 2013 flood I urge you not to vote Yes on this annexation it is not an emergency the presentation stated Wetlands exists throughout this site it was also stated that the first building would be a sports complex I feel this is being pushed through as an emergency needed for flood mitigation but really it's about development we the voters of Boulder have the right to vote on this in the upcoming election Which is less than two months away you cannot convince me that building 750 000 square feet in a natural Wetlands is good for flood mitigation this type of development will ruin my neighborhood clog the streets with traffic especially

[261:01] on snow days when I already can't get to 36 it so it takes so long this development can be relocated to North Boulder instead of a sensitive wetlands I enjoy the natural beauty of this land by biking horseback riding and walking through it I enjoy seeing the variety of wildlife there we talk a lot about climate change and diversity what about considering the wildlife species and plant diversity of this area that will be destroyed if this project goes through it will add lots of pollution with 1100 housing units there's a fire station on Darley has moved my homeowner's insurance will premium will go up this is a wolf in sheep's clothing don't be fooled please vote no let the voters decide as is our constitutional right thank you thank you Sherry next we have Jim wolf Matthew vondrasek and Robert sharp Jim I

[262:01] spoke already so I'm sorry no that's fine you are on here twice no problem next we have Matthew vondrasek Robert sharp and Ray Bridge Matthew good evening my name is Matthew vondrasek I'm a law student at C Boulder and I serve as the president of the graduate and professional Student Government at CU Boulder I wanted to speak on behalf of the almost 6 000 graduate and professional students I represent I encourage you to approve the CU South annexation plan by emergency measure CU South project plans provide affordable graduate students staff and faculty housing finding affordable housing in Boulder is one of the biggest and most consistent concerns I hear from my constituents the current wait list to get into existing University graduate student housing is more than a year long adding housing at CU South will help alleviate this critical shortage of housing many graduate students live outside of the

[263:01] Boulder area and commute for hours every day to reach the classes that they teach and the labs where they conduct their research myself among those students after living in Boulder for the last three years I moved to Denver this summer as I could no longer afford my apartment in Boulder if we've also identified affordable housing as a central barrier to recruiting a more diverse graduate student body at C Boulder Los affluent students from diverse backgrounds simply cannot afford market rate apartments in Boulder and are in need of sparse University Housing spoken to many of my pers many prospective graduate students over the years who said their decision to go elsewhere was a forced decision after evaluating the cost of housing in Boulder New South advances the goal of providing more affordable housing and many other benefits to the community I once again urge you to approve the CU South annexation by emergency measure I

[264:01] yield back my time thank you Matthew next we have Robert sharp raybridge and Mark McIntyre Robert Sam I have a Robert with no last name on the list so um Robert I'm going to go ahead and unmute you and please identify your last name before you speak this is Robert Sharp thank you you're good to go Robert get two minutes thank you I'm a County resident but I am very concerned about nature and protecting neighborhoods I spent uh at least 10 years when the property was purchased trying to do both things to work on the protection of both in 96 the property was offered for 11.5 million dollars the city decided not to buy because they believed it had to be restored by by firm agreement and it could not be

[265:02] developed without annexation which no one was about to do for a private developer no one imagined CU would buy the property and abuse its special powers to void all the agreements prevent flood protection and to make the 2013 flood even worse even though the property was offered for 11.5 million the regions were persuaded by some of their wives and others to try a scam to add 55 million more to the to the buyer so the so I mean to the seller so the seller could um presumably give 5 million for a women of the West Museum and get a tax deduction for doing so that didn't work out for them but nevertheless CU agreed to pay 5 million more 6.5 million and uh when and I saw

[266:03] the document they submitted to the JBC which asked did you negotiate the price which of course meant down and see you answered yes which was deceptive and really a lie they negotiated the price up rather than down it was it's shameful um higher education needs have been identified by the state as they need the needs the greatest need is to direct resources to rural areas not to see you expansion thank you Robert your time is up and if you'd like to send us the rest of your thoughts you can send it to council at bouldercolorado.gov with that we will go to raybridge Mark McIntyre and Steve palmerance right

[267:02] right you should be able to unmute right you should see an unmute button on your menu now I'm Raymond Bridge a 45-year resident of Boulder and I'm speaking on behalf of older County automate Society we oppose adoption of this annexation agreement because of its likely impacts on the Boulder Community as a whole and because of likely big radiation of the adjoining City open space and state Natural Area for which the city is responsible development of an additional campus at CU South would have enormous impacts on Boulder no site plan has been provided violating the normal process the city

[268:01] requires for annexation applicants and making it impossible for City residents to judge the likely impacts Outreach to adjoining neighborhoods has been late and an inadequate the site just one example the traffic study associated with this proposed annexation was a joke and not a funny one the actual traffic impacts are likely to be major in a part of the city that is already suffering from major congestion problems in addition to creating a new Hazard on State Highway 93. another obvious deficiency is the draft agreements ignoring the status of the landing question for flood control which legally requires disposal by the open space Board of Trustees if Council elects to proceed with annexation we would urge at least that the IGA be modified to require that in the section on collaboration on open space land CU should be required at its

[269:02] expense to restore noise and light conditions to the Baseline conditions found in the required independent study the term mitigate is far too vague in this context the point is to avoid unacceptable segregation of the adjoining open space and state Natural Area as a condition of the IGA thank you thank you Ray and next we have Mark McIntyre Steve pomeritz and Edith Stevens mark I'm Mark McIntyre I'm a member of the city of Boulders Transportation Advisory board by the speaking strictly for myself tonight first I want to thank the entire Council for their hard work on this issue and especially mayor Weaver and counselor friend for their skill and deftly negotiating and annexation agreement that provides a variety of benefits for Boulder residents they have produced an agreement that reflects well on the realm of the possible while not falling

[270:02] into the Trap of magical thinking and wishing for a different past speaking of the realm of the possible I want to focus my comments on the transportation aspects of this development rather than project out our current state of Automotive dependence greenhouse gas production and extreme safety risk for non-automotive users the annexation agreement allows us to Envision and then create a different Transportation future this future can include a reduced number of incommuters reduced emissions and reduced dependency on single occupancy Vehicles one of the ways we can have this brighter and better transportation future is by approving the agreement with the trip caps as agreed but then make the trip caps completely unneeded by turning Moorhead into a bus bike pedestrian Corridor that is so pleasant

[271:00] so calm so safe that is that it's an easy choice to leave the car behind every day and ultimately not to rely upon a car at all for those people residing at the new CU South Campus let's get this done let's have a safer cleaner more sustainable future that benefits us all thank you thank you Mark next we have Steve pomrence Edith Stevens and Katya Kanan Steve I'm not seeing Steve the list Sam so Steve if you are here under a different name please reach out to me in the Q a box so we can get you back in the line um in that case we will go to Edith Stevens I don't have an Edith but I do have an Edie with no last name so Edie I'm going to go ahead and unmute you and if you would identify yourself as you start to speak that will be helpful

[272:00] thank you my name is Edie Stevens I am concerned about this plan um it is anti-hydrological science in limiting flood protection to a 100 year flood despite hydrological Studies by renowned Boulder and CU scientists that show protection against a 500 year flood is necessary to protect the lives and property Downstream I am concerned about the anti-protection of federally recognized and endangered species on the state Natural Area by allowing flood waters to overwhelm their natural habitat I am concerned by the anti-protection of groundwater flows necessary to preserve rare native grasslands and I am concerned about the

[273:02] anti-protection of native Wildlife by endorsing a stadium surrounded by floodlights and holding 3 000 shouting supporters of Cu teams all of which will interfere with the feeding resting and mating habits of the wildlife finally I am concerned by the transportation study by uh I hope that all the members of the city Council have seen the transportation study by Boulder County that shows that traffic to and from CU South will increase the flow of vehicles on and between Broadway and Table Mesa to unmanageable levels thank you thank you Edie um next we have kavya Kanan Meha Kana

[274:02] and Karen trout kavya hi everyone my name is kavya Kanan and I am a senior at the University of Colorado Boulder as well as one of the student body presidents for this Academic Year I'm here to speak in full support of approving the annexation agreement of CU Boulder South on behalf of the executive branch of Cu Student Government because of the impacts it has on affordable housing and the environment especially for our community members from low-income backgrounds annexing CU South hinges on the very idea of accessibility and affordability for many of our students faculty and staff that create the community we have at CU Boulder today it is not a surprise to many that affordable housing options in Boulder are scarce but what is alarming is that numerous prospects of students and other community members are continuing to decide not to attend CU for the sole reason that housing is too expensive in this area simply put students faculty and staff do not just want more

[275:00] affordable housing options they need them CU desires creating a more diverse student body while maintaining its Prestige through attacking attracting Noble winning faculty and staff however none of this is possible without listening to the very constituents who are saying that they cannot afford to live close to campus moreover the housing options that would be created because of this annexation would help address one of the most pressing problems we have in society today climate change our world is in a climate emergency transportation is the leading source of CO2 emissions in Colorado and represents nearly one-third of all emissions within our state when considering common ECU faculty staff and students commute into Boulder Daily because they can't afford to live here or there's not enough Supply on the market to accommodate their family that adds up to a lot of unnecessary carbon emissions building more CU Housing closer to campus is one of the most effective ways to combat climate change and reduce CO2 emissions from Vehicles while supporting our community members thank you all for

[276:00] your time and consideration today thank you kavya next we have Neha Tana Karen trout and rosemary hegarty Mayhem hello all my name is mehal Khanna and I am a senior at the University of Colorado Boulder and the director of diversity and inclusion for CU Student Government I am here to show my full support for the annexation of CU Boulder South in conjunction with you executive branch because of the positive effects and expansion of housing would have on incoming and future bipoc students faculty and staff at CU Boulder since the start of the pandemic rents and Boulder have risen dramatically and the CU Community especially those from low-income backgrounds are affected by Rising prices CU cannot attract a diverse set of Faculty staff or student body without more housing options that can help people live affordably and closer to campus supporting equity and addressing systemic racism in the community means supporting attainable housing for all students faculty and staff of the University who help make

[277:01] the Boulder Community so vibrant as we know bypoc people have a smaller accumulation of wealth in America due to Historic and current day systemic barriers since CU Boulder claims to support anti-racist-based projects and aims to increase diversity on campus housing options need to be more affordable speaking from my own experience due to the soaring housing prices in Boulder I have had to sacrifice my own comfort and well-being within my home in order to live within Boulder at a slightly more affordable rate and have access to the CU campus my sister who graduated in 2016 from the same university did not struggle to the same degree that I have with housing since since prices have skyrocketed since then pushing for affordable housing through the annexation of CU Boulder South is a huge way we can guarantee a growth in diversity at CU Boulder and create a more Equitable housing system please support this project that has been built through the consideration of bypoc students and staff in order to makes you

[278:01] Boulder a more diverse and inclusive community thank you so much for your time and consideration you may have next we have Karen trout Rosemary hegerty and Gwen Dooley Karen I do not Sam so I'm going straight to Rosemary hegerty Rosemary you should be able to unmute hi thank you for listening tonight um I have a lot of concerns about this project and asked me to vote no I'm highly concerned that the FEMA study from 2014 states that Flooding at Fraser Meadow was was only 30 percent from South Boulder Creek how is Fraser Meadows going to be protected by 30 flood protection what are the citizens of Fraser Meadows really need to be doing to protect their homes versus relying on this city flood mitigation which will only give them 30 percent protection traffic concerns have not been adequately addressed the Boulder

[279:01] County Traffic Studies have been ignored total traffic trips did not take into account the non-residential square foot increase from 500 000 to 750 000 that the traffic cap is a joke I do not trust the protection of the Wetland and the adjacent open space Wildlife have been adequately secured a stadium that will hold up to 300 up to 3 000 observers with the noise and night lights will have a big impact not only on traffic but on the open space Wildlife adjacent to CU South how can the city sign any annexation agreement without knowing which city would see you will actually be doing CU has no plans to stop an increase in the size of their student body the minimum amount of housing at CU South will do nothing to decrease housing issues if CU keeps increasing their student body and increasing non-residential buildings and the minimal amount of

[280:01] affordable housing at CU South will have very little impact on the low income residents of Boulder or the students of Cu our City's planning board in open space board rejected the annexation you need to do the same thank you very much thank you Rosemary next we have Gwen Dooley Ken Beitel and Jim Morris Gwen trying to unmute here am I unmuted you are great we citizens have a CU South annexation agreement initiative on the ballot to be voted on in less than a month ballot issue 302 the last item on the November 2nd ballad please table your push to nxcu South until after this important citizen initiative is voted up or down I'd like Council to acknowledge the many

[281:00] times and ways our citizens can shape the city of Boulder in our relationship to the natural environment that makes Boulder so special most of them without city council or staff support and in that spirit I again ask you to hold off on annexation before the citizens can vote on this issue soon after the ballot is mailed out on October 8th the emotional drum beat for flood protection tonight is intense when council could have should have acted on some very basic flood safety moves over the eight years since the 2013 flooding flooding primarily caused by a Thousand-Year rain when our lands were too saturated to deal with more water and what is currently proposed by CU in the city will not truly protect uh lives Downstream of South Boulder Creek please respect the citizens of Boulder to have their say on something that was so drastically impact all of our city in so many ways for so many years into the

[282:02] future please table what you have before you and wait for the citizens to vote on this it's terribly important and it's what is defined all of our important actions in this city for the last 50 years thank you keep going next we have Ken Beitel Jim Morris and Sarah Meyer Ken two years ago I asked city council for two items first to pause annexation until either city council or CU performed an environmental impact assessment the prebble's jumping mouse a federally endangered species exists we believe in the wetlands of the South Boulder Creek State Natural Area and in the wetlands of Cu South without an impact assessment this annexation agreement is in violation of the federal Endangered Species Act and therefore must be halted immediately until an eia

[283:03] is performed secondly to follow up on Central Lane's read that Joseph and Yates need to recuse themselves from CU South votes and involvement two years ago Bob Yates was acting as an active champion of Cu South in writing on October 17 29 2019 I asked Mr Yates to recuse himself and for city council to recuse Mr Yates because he is a past CU employee and a current executive of the CU Conference of global Affairs both Bob Yates and city council refuse to recuse Mr Yates who has continued to be a champion of Cu self for the last two years Bob Yates was instrumental in reducing flood protection from a powerful 500-year protection to a weak 100-year flood safety level so CU could have more buildable land Mr Yates also supports Dam Construction in one of Colorado's most sensitive wetlands in order to build CU South by not recusing

[284:02] Mr Yates a past CU employee city council has invalidated all Council votes taken on CU South in the last two years therefore this annexation process must be restarted to the point prior to Mr Yates first vote to strip open space other protection from CU South thank you Ken next we have Jim Morris Sarah Mayer and Tanya dueri Jim sorry Sam Mr Morris just moved on my list and now I am not I see his hand up I just saw him here he's trying to help me out thank you Mr Morris you should be able to unmute now okay thank you I opposed to see you annexation plan I mean the planning board voted against it

[285:00] it's Rush full of loopholes allows CU to sell to developer to develop a one and a half million square feet of market rate luxury housing last minute increases in square footage of 250 000 square feet inflate the value of the land to make it hard for Boulder to do a counter offer to buy it to keep it out of a developer's hands it doesn't deal with cu's plan of 35 000 more students adding about a thousand more next year it's unfair you're trying to preempt the citizen vote Like We Gather during covet with masks on getting signatures and now you're trying to say we don't care about you and your vote we're going to rush this through it requires Buller to pay 12 million to fill them upon so see you can build on them Boulder must pay more if the flood plans don't work it's in the wrong place I mean 2.25 million square feet should not be in a flood plain housing should not be in a flood plain not by a creek not by

[286:00] threatened orchids and jumping miles and rare prairies and grasslands in a state protected area not in a wildlife migration corridor all full of wildlife wetlands and healthy ecosystems it should be at the planning Reserve at 28th and J it's the wrong approach it's fantastic said installed the flash flood warning system storm gauges really warming warning email and phone trees flood proof critical structures trained volunteers you know consider all the creeks in the city it's much better to like remove the berm the way it was supposed to be removed allow the gravel pits to function as flood Retention Ponds not be filled in with gravel and CU buildings ponds and vegetation absorb and like a sponge hold water and make floods more under control it's a natural and effective way to deal things of course

[287:00] we should be dealing with a 500 year flood not up 100. thank you thank you Jim your time is up you can send the rest of your thoughts to us at council at Boulder colorado.gov um next we have Sarah Mayer Tanya duary and Mike Marsh Sarah I don't see Sarah so I will move to Tanya dewari Tanya you should be able to unmute now thank you council members for all your hard work thus far and for listening to us tonight my name is Tanya duary and I've been a resident of South Boulder since 1999 and I urge you to vote no on the annexation agreement I am all for flood mitigation and I think that should be a priority but it should not be tied to the annexation agreement if this is truly an emergency and if CU truly cares about the safety of the residents of Boulder it would do the right thing and provide an easement of the property to allow for proper flood mitigation planning and separate

[288:01] this from the politics of the annexation everyone here supports flood mitigation but the details of the annexation are far from ready and yet it's being pushed through because of the need for flood mitigation both the city's planning board and open space committee rejected the plan for annexation clearly this issue has complicated history in politics so I urge you to separate the two and focus on the proper 500 year flood plan but mostly I wanted to let you know I almost didn't speak tonight because I thought to myself what difference will it make anyway we have done everything possible within our Democratic process including the issue getting the issue on the ballot but yet now it seems like it won't matter we have better options such as a land swap for CU that would still provide affordable housing yet would not require development on Wetlands or in a flood plain I urge you to please vote no on the annexation agreement and take the

[289:01] time to do the right thing for the citizens of Boulder thank you thank you Tanya next we have Mike Marsh Alan delamere and Jerry shapins Mike good evening the city's process around CU South has been incredibly disappointing evasive and disingenuous the city has basically done a sales job or a snow job on its citizens while withholding critical details for example at 308 Acres CU South's overall footprint basically equals another main campus and the cost to all of us City Water rate payers will be 66 million to 99 million dollars while a landslop with planning Reserve Land would cost far less a traffic study done last November while all of Cu and most of Boulder was working remote due to covid as bogus as that was still predicted that CU South will add 7 000 additional daily trips to Boulder roadways then CU unveiled 50 percent more non-residential structures

[290:01] for CU South using commercial real estate guidelines of 150 square feet per person these 750 000 square feet of non-residential will likely bring 5 000 people yet the on-site housing of just 2200 individuals did not increase so CU South is no housing solution it actually means 2 800 more unhoused people and a city of Boulder report on the 2013 flood showed that only 30 percent of the damage to Fraser Meadows came from South Boulder Creek does Fraser Meadows realize this the city deep sixth that report because it was An Inconvenient Truth an undersized 100-year flood damage CU South will still leave Fraser Meadows largely unprotected my point none of the city's informational postcards or Community surveys included any of this information the public was denied critical facts we simply asked the city to tell people basic information like CU South size costs

[291:00] traffic implications how many cu South folks wouldn't have housing and how limited the dams protection would be we were ignored please vote no on this disingenuous badly botched project thank you and you make next we have Alan delamere Jerry shapins and making Coles Allen Alan it looks like you're unmuted you should be able to speak I have no doubt Alan is trying to speak looks like you're unmuted on our end can you hear me now we can oh good okay and I have two major concerns the first thing is cu is growing at two and a half

[292:01] percent per year that's per year not uh not in total so you just look 10 years into the future and we see this huge growth in cu it really is the big concern that I've got that uh we'll ever see you is growing at a greater rate than Boulder we've got the student population growing and making the housing situation worse and worse and as people have said before this solution is not going to solve the housing thing because of the growth rate my other concern is the 100 year flood is not good enough just locally we had the uh thunderstorms up near Fort Collins we had Flooding at 9th and Balsam with thunderstorms here what's going to hit us next none of us know and I think it's time for us to wake up and do something more seriously in 2007 we had a beautiful storm water

[293:01] plan was put in place for 60 million dollars that plan has not yet been completed a new plan was put in place for 40 million dollars in 2016. that is underway and still not completed um utilities department really needs to wake up and start moving some of the suggestions were changing diamond sort of pipes from 24 inches to 60 inches to get water to move through Boulder faster so I encourage you to table this uh emergency thing because it's not an emergency yet we need to take the real emergency and come up with a really good plan which will give true protection to all of Boulder thank you thank you Alan next we have Jerry shapen's making Kohl's and Landis Arnold Jerry thank you this is Jerry shapens I

[294:00] sincerely appreciate the 20-year by all since my former firm shape Associates in November 2001 completed the CU Boulder Southland use assessment which delineated a variety of possibilities for the site that we are talking about tonight so finally now 20 years later we all have achieved a compromise solution with really excellent benefits for all number one significant flood Hazard mitigation to decrease damage to Downstream areas you heard all about it for many years diverse habitat enhancements will be gotten better on the site as uh different uh enhancements are made and extensive public open space will be accessible to many of us and also as Mark McIntyre described will be multimodal Transportation possibly and hoping for walking cycling buses and hopefully more Boulder in various Urban forums and configurations will be built and this

[295:00] will be a living demonstration of green urbanism will benefit us all for future generation and help us have a reduced carbon footprint but particularly important for our future Community respect and our abilities to mitigate climate change with energy sensitive and car-like development surrounded by native and cultural landscapes in his former travel mine to the naysayers and sketches who have tried to steamroll this for so many years seed development is more rigorous Compact and attractive than the city proper the main campus is proof so you remains a fabulous partner who can patiently listen adapt and change to fitbolder 20 years later and how great it is we'll have another another gorgeous beautifully designed public campus where people can enjoy themselves those of you who say no because there's not enough and it's makers are evil please recognize that the city CU partnership over the years have brought

[296:00] you an economy a culture and a future for so many wonderful alumni teachers researchers let's get started and help our annexation agreement thank you thank you Jerry and with that we will take a pause I was gently reminded by Sandra that we need to have a vote to suspend the rules and extend the meeting so if I could get a motion to do so so movement I'll take that as a motion in a second uh anyone object to extending the meeting seeing no objections that is done rules are suspended will continue our next three speakers are making coals Landis Arnold and Annette white making good evening Council making Kohl's at 17th and Mapleton it's hard to stand up against the people who oppose the annexation of Cu South into the city the

[297:00] opposition has been long standing over many years it's been unrelenting and ceaseless the effort is intensified with opponents throwing more and more against the wall waiting for something to stick but you are elected council members have been studying flooding flood water storage climate changes impact on storm events endangered species habitat open space protection and development potential in relation to see yourself for nearly seven years options have been considered reviewed and rejected you've read thousands of pages of experts reports you've asked searching questions and received the best answers that Engineers are capable of making given the great uncertainties in our flood water future you've heard the demands of residents for safety from flood waters as well as the insistence of some homeowners not to Annex cu's property period so that nothing ever is built anywhere near where they live the opponents have engineered a

[298:00] referendum with a popular slogan let the citizens decide in order to take this decision out of your hands and have the outcome decided by a vote of the citizens this is not good democracy you might as well have the voters weigh in on whether Einstein got his algebra right you're the elected officials with whom we've entrusted the decision on annexation it's important that you make the best decision for the whole community that you can we cannot let the implacable opponents of this project direct the outcome of this it's for you to decide and I urge you to approve the annexation of Cu South with an emergency ordinance thank you and good night and and really thank you for your service this is a hard job thank you Macon you should probably know um Macon is a former city council person uh next we have Landis Arnold Annette white and Ellen De money

[299:00] mandis yeah hi uh can you hear me we can great yeah I'm amazed I'm awake at this error um I was actually born in uh Boulder many many decades ago uh when I was about six we moved to Denver so my father could start medical school but we came back to Boulder frequently through those years and I remember the steady growth of The Nightlife night lights over Boulder through that period and then and about probably the mid 70s that growth slowed considerably Boulder [Music] really took having its Green Belt seriously and um made itself a place that was different than everything that grew

[300:00] together on the Denver side of things used to be there was a lot of space going to Denver but that space basically goes all the way now to the top of the hill at Superior as one town and we still call it the Denver Boulder area Boulder being what 120 000 people in Denver being you know one and a half two million people developing that space at South Boulder is a major break in that thematic separation of Boulder from the rest of metropolitan area it has been in whether it was a sand pit or a ranch or something held in trust for 20 years it has been an open space that really is important to the valley to the community to um everybody's lives here and I think

[301:00] calling for an emergency resolution to Annex it so that developers can go you know do another Research Park or you know I don't know I think what is the 25 larger campus it's not an emergency if you've had 25 years to sit on it um thank you Landis I'm sorry but your time is up you can email us the rest of your thoughts at Council Boulder colorado.gov and with that we have Annette white Ellen De money and Crystal gray Annette do not see Annette or Ellen in the meeting Sam so I'm going to Crystal followed by Ed smutney and Stephen telling Crystal you should be able to unmute now hi Council Crystal gray here so first of all thank you for appointing me to the a temporary

[302:00] position on planning board I just want to clear up one thing it was a six to one vote we did not approve nor did we then deny but we sent you 37 recommendations and you took some you took action on some of them and I totally appreciate that there's a few that I think some more work needs to be done first of all the resale option by CU should be eliminated it just cast doubt on the future many of us know that CU will do the right thing with Net Zero sustainability but we don't know the private developer that might purchase this number two 750 square feet really you should have more conversations on what that means to see you um that's non-residential it really should be reduced if it's the driver of emissions increased emissions and Mark

[303:01] McIntyre outlined such a wonderful vision of what Morehead could be if it is going to be clogged with cars so please work with CU to Define that number um three please take one more look at the DX annexation Clause uh D Dave Koontz sent you a letter on this it's really important and then finally housing on this site is excellent and needed please make sure that a CU addresses housing for their lowest paid workers because that's not in the agreement and finally Nuria you have wonderful floodplain awareness people and they're doing a great job and finally Phil is an Al's All-Star don't freedom in September okay thank you very much bye-bye thank you Crystal I I'm afraid that Phil may have traded himself we had nothing

[304:00] to do with it and with that we have Ed smutney Stephen taline and Timothy Brody Ed oh hello council members um yeah I'd like to speak uh on this uh big annexation plan uh that is really laced with soft language and a lot of the a lot of kind of the the guidelines or at least the things that that kind of constrain and limit uh the impact um or use that soft language and it's to the you know we will consider doing more um uh consider following more um environmentally friendly policies or or uses of of construction um and I think that's kind of upside down but when I think about this whole process and uh I think I've shared it

[305:00] before is that the notion of of having an annexation without a site plan is just totally upside down and I don't know how you get there and really understand the impact of it without you know in any other way like not have a site plan not have a development plan and yet really know what what that's what's going to happen so with that I I stick with my my stance that uh and and I feel like it is more than possible to decouple blood mitigation from annexation and that there are possibilities and of of note and and related to that I notice on the CU South annexation website that there's the uh there is the guiding principles there's there's some information but there's no information that I've ever seen as far as what else has been researched you know the timeline shows two two

[306:00] years somewhere around there that other things were researched and we don't get to see that um we don't get to see a lot of things and I think that would help instill confidence in this uh yeah thank you you're heading next we have Stephen tilleen Timothy Roadie and Marie venner Stephen hello can you hear me we can okay thank you we can no longer hear you yeah I think that was me Steven sorry try again it's still there you go okay so where's my timer there we go I'd like to start by pointing out that all the housing and transportation benefits presented tonight are not a property of this piece of land and should not be considered as a reason to Annex this particular

[307:00] property these same benefits can be provided probably more easily from a North Campus so these are not valid reasons for approving annexation of this property the only consideration should be safety and saving lives from flooding this should begin by creating a flash flood warning system neighborhood scale planning efficient evacuation plans signage and other non-structural solutions that have not yet been addressed meanwhile this agreement does not address the flood dangers of the changing climate at all this is a hundred year flood solution not even adequate for today's risk and a solution that cannot be scaled what happens when the flow exceeds the Hundred Year design under this agreement what are the options for scaling up protection when this happens this agreement ensures there will be no flood resilience because the land required for protecting people uh will have been built out and not available regarding the emergency designation the preliminary design

[308:00] needed as the basis for permitting discussions with CDOT and others will not be completed until the end of this year at the earliest the engineering design for phase one will not be completed until 2024. there is nothing a council vote before November election on the annexation agreement will do to either speed up or slow down the flood mitigation work so approving this agreement is not emerging an emergency a quick response often provides a comforting false sense of security but it is not the same as an effective solution therefore I urge you to vote no and take more time to ensure a more resilient plan that actually protects people going into the future instead of a quick Placebo thanks thank you Stephen our final three speakers are Timothy Rhodey Marie venner and Paula Mosley Tim Timothy hi can you hear me we can good

[309:03] hi my name is Tim Rohde I'm a resident of South Boulder and thank you for the opportunity to speak and thank you to the council and the city staff for the recent progress on increasing the specificity of the CU South annexation agreement much more specificity is called for in this agreement but there's a far more troubling aspect of it for flood control plans uh and other things that relate to the Future once signed the city will have no power to block or alter any aspect of cu's future development plans future councils will have no power to add changes or add requirements unlike the earlier mentioned example of Obamacare this will be the final moment of the City's power to enact critical Solutions on the CU South site for centuries a de-annexation clause will not be enough future city councils will only have the right to review and comment not amend or block that is insufficient

[310:02] successful flood mitigation depends upon exactly what is built on the CU South site and exactly what is built depends upon ongoing City authority over building decisions on the seat on CU South and those need to be informed by whatever information becomes available as the project and climate impacts and other things in the future show up and become available continued equal partnership in solving future issues in decades to come will be absolutely critical climate change will move the goal post from 100 to 500 year flood standards it already has we can only hope that this is not demonstrated by a catastrophic catastrophic event in the next few decades or sooner getting this wrong now will be extremely complex and expensive to fix later if it's even possible that's a lot of pressure and collegial relations between the city and CU are

[311:01] highly unlikely to result in adequate floods flood safety measures without appropriate City authority over the site's development even the current 100 Years thank you thank you Tim your time is up if you would like to send us the rest of your comments please do at Council bouldercolorado.gov and our last two speakers tonight are Marie venner and Paula Mosley Marie I don't see Marie in the meeting um and I just want to recognize that we do have some folks in the meeting who were not on the speaker list so if you were registered on the speaker list and um we may have skipped you because you might be in the meeting under a different name let's use this two minutes while Paula Mosley is speaking to reach out to me in the Q a box and let me know that you are here so we can hear from you if you were registered to speak this evening so Paula I am

[312:02] giving you your mute button now you should be able to use it hi I'm Paula Mosley South Boulder Night Owl eventually let me start by saying that I like the University of Colorado I am my late husband both graduated from CU I am however unhappy about how this process is going I'm disappointed that public input came after the annexation agreement was well underway of course we all agree that flood mitigation is needed and we can probably all agree that affordable housing is needed but these two needs do not have to be tied together I recognize that a great deal of work went into this draft agreement but it's not too late to pause if CU really wants to be the good neighbor then the area needed for flood mitigation can be sold or given to the city without tying it to the annexation negotiation it's not too late I have great empathy for everyone who experienced flooding in 2013. in my

[313:00] neighborhood every basement and every crawl space had flooded flood mitigation does not mean we have to allow CU to develop that property please let's rethink this there are other ways to acquire the property please let's pursue those options it's not too late yes we need more affordable housing but CU is proposing a relatively small portion as affordable I don't think it's enough to justify the development wouldn't it be better to provide housing for the University that is actually closer to the main campus in Phil close enough to transportation is not such an issue it's not too late for CU to seriously reconsider where to locate housing I do appreciate the draft agreement continues to improve based on community input but please let's try to separate the flood mitigation from the annexation go ahead and keep going I'm sorry we

[314:02] should all be pressuring the university to do the right thing rather than caving into cu's development demands we need to find a way to appeal to their sense of responsibility to Boulder cooperate with us rather than treat this as a hostage situation it's not too late thank you thank you Paula and with that I'll turn back to Brenda Brenda did we have anybody who responded to you no one has reached out to me Sam so I think we are complete tonight very good with that we will bring the public hearing to a close and bring it back to council I believe the next step here and correct me if I'm wrong is an opportunity for CU to respond to anything that they've heard in the public testimony that they might want to weigh in on thank you mayor if it is pleases the council I really appreciate the opportunity to

[315:01] provide some final thoughts this evening this portion of the hearing is designated as a rebuttal but in actuality there's little to rebut what you heard in opposition to the annexation agreement this evening was mainly objections to Provisions that the annexation agreement carefully considered and fairly addressed and I regret that you endured personal attacks as public servants who are doing your level best represent the needs of the community in reality we owe a debt of gratitude to Mayor Weaver and council person friend and the staff of the city who work tirelessly to bring the annexation agreement forward we also owe all of the council a debt of gratitude for your service to the community in holding this hearing as part of a comprehensive annexation process this is not and was not a rush measure it began years ago when the city and CU with division of Francis Draper created

[316:00] The Guiding principles and it continued after the city invited CU to submit a petition for annexation along the way there were dozens of meetings that shaped the agreement including the most recent terms negotiated this month that limits cu's ability to transfer the property to a third party and protect open space in the community the agreement before you is fair and if approved it is binding on cu it will allow the city to take title to the property upon which you will conduct flood mitigation it will allow the city to take title to open space in the water rights that accompany it it contains Provisions to protect the open space in the environment these transfers of property and the ownership rights that accompany it are something more than easement could ever accomplish it is the quickest and most effective means to protect the community and there's not a better option the annexation agreement also serves a critical need for CU and its community

[317:01] we have thousands of students faculty and staff who cannot afford to live in the community in which they work and study you heard from kavya Conan main Akana and Bobby vanderzek all of whom describe the unaffordability of housing in Boulder and it's disproportionate impact upon diverse communities the annexation agreement addresses this problem for every single foot of non-residential space the TSU developed CU will develop two feet of residential space and it's not an exercise fund restraint growth at CU it doesn't bring housing for a larger incoming class of first-year students and instead this agreement allows us to offer our upper division students faculty and staff an opportunity to live in Boulder and we will also extend that opportunity to other members of the community who will live in affordable housing so you will partner with the city to build John tayer described see you in the city

[318:01] is intertwined and it's been that way since the citizens of Boulder pledged their own fortunes to bring the University to our community in the 1800s over the past year those ties have been deepened as we've worked through a pandemic and tragedies in our community we are stronger together and this annexation will allow us to become even stronger as we work together to advance the community's needs it's the council's decision whether to approve the annexation agreement and it's also the council's decision whether to approve it as an emergency measure well what I know is this passing this is an emergency measure simply allows the city to begin the permitting necessary to conduct flood mitigation to protect the community if the city is unable to obtain the necessary approvals and permits the annexation can't move forward so this is a debate and switch if the city can't protect those who are

[319:02] vulnerable to flooding see you can't proceed with any development we're committed to the future of CU Boulder in the city of Boulder together we appreciate the opportunity to partner with you on the annexation agreement and greatly respect your role in serving our community thank you for the opportunity to have presented our petition for annexation and we welcome your vote next week thank you thank you Pat and thanks again to everyone who testified tonight um we appreciate hearing from you we heard some very powerful testimony with lots of different perspectives and that's much appreciated so with that Council I believe that as we've laid this out for the community and ourselves that now would be a time to continue the meeting to September 21st where we will have plenty of time for a a debate which covers kind of all the

[320:02] points that were raised tonight um so the reason that we scheduled it this way was so that we wouldn't be talking about complicated issues at 11 20 at night which is what it is now so I think the right thing to do is to make a motion to continue the meeting but I would welcome any other suggestions if that is not the direction that we want to go there you go I just have a clarifying question um at the beginning of next week's meeting um deliberations will we have a period for follow-up questions based on the hearing oh absolutely yes so uh we hadn't laid it out completely but I intended to start with questions first um any other clarifying questions to either staff or cu great and then another clarifying question is um

[321:01] if there are um is there a potential to make any more suggestions to changes to the annexation agreement or is what was what we received last Thursday the one that we will vote on well I will um say that I think there is but I will turn to Sandra and let Sandra answer that question from a legal perspective hey Mary thanks for the question um I I do think that there's opportunities for you all to make suggestions um there there can be potentially changes made to the annexation agreement up until the decision that you make next week um but of course that would be the the last opportunity um and of course um it would but most assuredly create some challenges for CU I would imagine but I'm not going to speak on their behalf but um with respect to the procedure

[322:01] um there wouldn't be any changes to the agreement that would require a third reading so you could make potential changes up until your decision next week thank you okay and I guess the colloquy to all of council my suggestion would be if you have thoughts sooner is much better because I don't think doing it on the Fly is going to be any good at all so if you come away and sleep on this for a day or two and think of things that you think are really important to talk about if you could put them out on the hotline or reach out to see you directly whichever seems most appropriate to explore ideas it's up to you so that was my colleague at Rachel I see your hand yeah thanks Sam um actually Mary asked my question so I wanted to make sure that we would have a chance for follow-up questions sounds like we can do that next week so that sounds good to me too and I will agree with you that if if people would like to

[323:00] make changes my observation of how negotiations you know between staff have worked is that people on CU side have to kind of run it up the chain so I would think that that we wouldn't be able to do that very effectively at next week's meeting so that should be worked through ahead of time um and with that I will make a motion to continue this until next Tuesday second great we have a motion and a second um does anyone object to continuing this hearing until next Tuesday seen none we will do so so this this hearing is continued until September 21st um we'll have a regular council meeting September 21st so it will begin with open comment so folks who have more thoughts that they'd like us to consider you can always write to us council at Boulder colorado.gov you can also sign up to speak at open comment um if not everyone will be selected it's

[324:00] a lottery system but that's another opportunity to speak before we will consider that and I guess the last thing that I would say is I know that staff is perfectly willing to work with council members with questions so if you have questions that need more exploration than just an answer right before we begin our debate I also encourage council members to reach out to the appropriate staff and ask those questions anything on the flood project probably starts with Joe teddyucci legal questions Sandra of course and anything else Maria can help find the appropriate staff to be able to answer your questions I'm Jacob may have answers for any planning questions so with that I will turn to council any last thoughts okay seeing none we have our continued hearing until September 21st and with that I will bring this meeting to a close at 11 24. thank you all and thanks

[325:03] to everyone in the community who testified tonight everyone right [Music] thank you [Music]

[326:06] foreign [Music] foreign