May 18, 2023 — City Council Regular Meeting

Transcript

Captions from City of Boulder YouTube recording.

[0:00] [Music] foreign [Music] foreign [Music] thank you

[1:01] [Music] foreign [Music] foreign [Music]

[2:24] [Music] thank you [Music] foreign [Music]

[3:30] foreign foreign [Music]

[4:11] thank you [Music] [Music] foreign [Music]

[5:17] foreign [Music] foreign [Music]

[6:14] foreign [Music] [Music] foreign [Music]

[7:17] foreign [Music] foreign [Music] [Music]

[8:02] [Music] foreign [Music] thank you [Music]

[9:20] thank you [Music] [Music] thank you [Music] do we have a channel rate Channel 8

[10:00] ready to go and ready to record the meeting and council member council member Benjamin and mayor Pro Tim Wallick are online all right my mic was muted council member Benjamin and mayor Pro tem walek are online and present well welcome everyone to the May 18 2023 meeting of the Boulder City Council I'm going to go ahead and gavela started call the meeting to order and so if we can begin with a roll call please Elisha yes Sarah and good evening everyone tonight's welcome we'll start with because present mayor Brockett president councilmember folkerts present friend here Joseph president Speer president mayor Pro Tim Wallick present in spirit

[11:01] councilmember weiner here and Yates right here mayor we have our quorum thanks so much Elisha and I'll just note that by our rules of procedures with mayor Pro tem Wallach being remote if I need to leave the room for a minute I will turn to Mayor Pro tem Pro tem Rachel friend to take over the reins in that event America okay fine I like Pro tem Pro tem better um so I'm I will now ask for a motion to amend the agenda to make two changes to add item 3C which is a consideration of emotion authorizing the co-acting City attorney to appoint special counsel to investigate and if necessary prosecute all complaints related to a code of com conduct complaint and to remove item 6A ccrrs non-profit Support Program Grant criteria review which has been rescheduled to the June 8th study session still moved second we've got a motion in a second all in favor raise your hands

[12:01] okay that's unanimous Maybe or close do you want me to say something no you don't have to say okay thank you okay all right then we will head to the first item of our agenda 1A which is the 25th anniversary of the dushan bay Tea House declaration presented here by council member Yates foreign I got it we got some guests joining us come on up here folks we're right here yeah we used to stand over in the corner and then the TV people told us we need to stand in the middle go right 25th anniversary I'm gonna introduce these folks in a second 25th anniversary of Boulder de chambe Tea House May 15 2023. December Tajikistan has been Boulder's

[13:01] sister city since 1987. in Tajikistan the tea house is the center of community and culture often elaborately painted and decorated the tea houses where tajik people gathered to share stories debate politics celebrate birthdays and mourn deaths so in 1987 as Boulder and dushanbe were cementing Boulder's second sister city relationship the mayor of dushanbe visited our city and offered a gift to Boulder with tajik Tea House Boulder accepted the offer and the tea house was constructed into geekistan by Master wood Carvers and other tajik artisans the tea house was then deconstructed into gigasan and its 2 343 pieces were created and shipped seven thousand miles to Boulder for assembly here the delivery of the disassembled tea house was followed by almost a decade of Spirited Community debate

[14:00] on whether to move forward with assembling the gift and where to actually erect it finally in March 1997 on a five to three vote the city council approved the construction of the Tea House on 13th Street one block east of here the chambe's tea house was open on May 15 1998. since then the tea House's operators Sarah and Lenny Martinelli have been serving meals and more than 100 varieties of tea from all over the world the tea houses become a local favorite and a must-see destination for visitors the interior features 12 Cedar columns each uniquely carved supporting magnificently painted coffers recessed ceiling panels depicting Birds butterflies and flowers handcrafted ceramic tiles with bright geometric patterns fill every corner that is not painted seven bronze sculptures depicting the seven princesses from a 12th century Persian poem dance around a central Fountain and pool visitors who looked closely at the walls will find ancient poems written in Persian as well

[15:01] as the signature of the tea House's proud Artisans and builders inside and out the building is so special that in 2020 it became the city's youngest designated Landmark preserving the exterior and for the very first time in Boulder the designating designation covered the interior as well because the dushanbe tea house is such a special place in our community we the city council of the city of Boulder recognize and celebrate the 25th anniversary of the boulder dushanbe Tea House we invite the community to attend the Museum of Boulders exhibit displaying the artifacts of tajik art and culture and telling the story of the building of Boulder's December tea house and we invite the community to join us in anniversary celebrations at the Tea House itself the weekend of May 19th to 21st this coming weekend I want to introduce our guests up here first so let me hand this to Rhett Ertl who is the president of the boulder dushanbe sister cities committee

[16:02] uh Tourette's left is Sophia's Stoller so if I had a few a thing or two to do with the organization of our sister city Arrangement going on 40 years ago her husband Peter also had a hand in that as well and then our our esteemed guest umatov um his grandfather was one of the Artisans who created the tea house uh more than 35 years ago and and and watch it language for 10 years Sarah Boulder and marouf is visiting us from Tajikistan this week to celebrate the 25th anniversary marouf was here about five or six years ago to help us with some repairs to the tea house that his grandfather helped build and we hope to have marouf back here this coming summer to do some more repairs to the tea house and with that I want to turn over the mic on to two people um roof is going to give us a greeting in tajik and then I'll hand it over to um Sophia who will tell us a little bit more okay thank you so much

[17:10] thank you so much for for the Boulder and it's really really pleasure for me it's a thank you guys for having the boulder to somebody's Tea House great thank you so much it's placebo and now I turn over to Sophia I stole her who's going to tell us a little bit more about the history and then we'll yield to the next presenter thank you Bob I just want to take a minute to talk a little bit about the Journey of the Tea House you know it didn't just emerge from under a cabbage leaf um I'll just hold it okay thank you at any rate uh the journey began over 40 years

[18:00] ago during the heated part of the Cold War when an ad hoc group of citizens just ordinary Boulder citizens came together because they were quite frightened by what was happening in the world these people are rarely mentioned and I really wanted to say their names because I think it's important to know that it wasn't just a few people there was a core of people that came together and it was under the support of Mayor Ruth Carell who said yeah this is a good idea later with Linda Jorgensen and over time the group used to meet up at IBS in a little attic room and it included Mary Haye the chairperson who was the Peace secretary for the Friends Meeting the friends was very uh important in supporting the group along with Anne trone and Anne White who were members of the meeting Mary acts who many people know at the University Marcia Johnston

[19:02] who worked at International films at cu cu Russian language professors Nicholas Lee Earl Sampson and graduate student Kathy Dewey all worked for years along with religion Professor Doris Havas and philosophy Professor Jim Frank attorney Philip Gordon helped us become incorporated as a non-profit Margaret casual was a a member and Russian language speakers Bob Wells red Ertl here and then Samsung Sussman who recently passed away and John George the group searched for five years relentlessly sister city said we're sorry we can't help you so we were on our own trying to find a sister city on the other side of the Iron Curtain and it was difficult finally interestingly through a wedding announcement in the Daily Camera

[20:01] there was an announcement that CU physics Professor Jim Scott had married his Russian translator and I thought oh wow that's interesting how that happened and it turned out scientists were keeping contact with Soviet scientists meeting all the time and there were meetings going on in each country with each other so I called him up and I said blah blah blah we're looking for a sister sitting and he said great idea I know just the city duchampe and we were like wow we never heard of it because we were looking for Russian cities and it's a tajik city and he said it's a great place and all the reasons that we know now which it matched their scientists there were by the mountains it was really wonderful so we sent many delegations to do after the Soviet Embassy said oh okay we sent delegations

[21:00] to duchampe asking if they would become our sister city and that included not only Mary Haye and Sam Sam and Cheryl Sussman but Noah scientist Joe Allen who was a solar flare specialist and his wife Cheryl Charlotte rather excuse me and James and Golia Scott also went delivering letters and finally people said oh okay and we were able to invite mayor maksuti kromov about this time of year the Tulips were out and he came here with a scientist a high school movie star and a bricklayer and after many conversations it was sort of fun and sitting over Pizza on the floor at red ertl's house he said we should have an exchange and it will give you a tea house a traditional tea house and we said oh that sounds wonderful nobody really knew what it was and we'll give

[22:02] you a pizza restaurant okay so he went home and with a great deal of political problems and finding money from the Soviet government was able to get Artisans together a huge effort and construct this unbelievable structure the architect lado schnitza worked with Boulder architect Vern syro and it eventually came here and was unfortunately in storage for almost 10 years very very controversial as City Council Members know it was people searched for funding to build it it was really really difficult to find enough money finally Frank day who is a well-known restaurateur in Boulder was convinced that he could that he would take it on and he would find Bank funding to erect the building well this was good and so they were in the process of negotiating all of this when it

[23:00] turned out the site that the city had identified was an EPA Superfund Site and as soon as the banks heard that they said forget it and that was sort of now what do we do and Vern and the um future Builder and Mary came to the city to talk with city manager Tim honey and him honey said I have an idea and he knew about some funds in a water fund and along with the support of uh city council president Leslie Durgan and Don mock came up with the idea of borrowing I think it was eight hundred thousand dollars to build the tea house and with a very close vote with city council it was passed and in fact it uh it was built and four Artisans came from duchampe over Ramadan when two of them were fastening the whole time and it was put up and opened in May 25 years ago to

[24:03] a huge crowd of thousands of people and it has been one of the most popular sites in Boulder since then so it wasn't born under a cabbage leaf but it really came from a lot of citizens who have many who are now deceased and large groups of people who supported the effort so I just wanted to say their names and to thank everybody Florida picture all right thanks so much for that and uh thanks to that uh Council 25 years ago for passing that uh by five to three and

[25:00] creating a community treasure okay so moving on to item 1B which is the older Americans month declaration presented by council member friend thank you mayor Brockett I'm gonna um sit and read this and I will invite our guests to join me uh in just a minute after I'm done reading it if that's okay they're being very generous and allowing me to read from a seated position because I'm still getting over coveted and it's a little bit hard to stand for too long but it is my pleasure and honor to read our declaration for older Americans month of May 2023. each May the administration for Community Living sets the theme for older Americans month and this year's theme is aging Unbound this theme opens the opportunity for all community members to explore diversity in the Aging experience and invites conversations about combating aging stereotypes and bias in 1963 when President John F Kennedy created older Americans month only 17 Americans had reached their 65th birthday today there are currently 55 million older adults in the United States who are who are 65

[26:02] years of age or older currently in Colorado there are more adults age 60 than children under one year of age in the next decade adults over 65 will be the fastest growing age group older Americans month is a time to honor and acknowledge and value older adults as they contribute their time wisdom and experience to our community it is time to emphasize the many positive aspects of Aging to push past traditional boundaries of Aging stereotypes and to embrace our community's diversity we the city council of the city of Boulder Colorado declare May 2023 as older Americans month and urge the community to take time this month to recognize the strengths of older adults in our community as essential and valuable members as well as acknowledging the individuals who support them with that I'm going to invite Charlie erdrich and Barbara Middleton who are with our age well advisory committee to come on up and meet me and I will hand you this declaration and invite you to say a few words

[27:09] you're welcome thanks for being here congratulations here's the Declaration and if you'd like to say a few words oh just thank you very much and I see there's some people who are out there who are gray-haired thank you for being here yes likewise for me thanks a lot for being here and for the Declaration yes thank you so much [Applause] all right thank you for that thanks for joining us for that declaration all right now we're going to move on to open comment and Ryan is going to go over our public participation guidelines before we get started

[28:01] Ryan take it away thank you good evening on thank you for being here this evening to share your thoughts your perspectives and opinions we're grateful for your participation want to make sure we talk through some of the guidelines for this evening and share that the city has engaged with Queen members to co-create division for productive meaningful and inclusive Civic conversations this Vision supports physical and emotional safety for community members staff and Council as well as democracy for people of all ages identities lived experiences and political perspectives there's more information on the city's website about this vision and then as we turn to the next slide sharing a few examples of rules of decorum found within the boulder Revised Code and other guidelines that similarly support this Vision we will uphold these during this council meeting

[29:00] all remarks and testimony shall be limited to matters related to City business no participants shall make threats or use other forms of intimidation against any person obscenity racial apopaths and other speech and behavior that disrupt or otherwise impede the ability to conduct the means are prohibited 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 on the audio testimony is permitted online in-person participants are asked to refrain from expressing support or disagreement verbally or with Applause with the exception of support for declarations as we just saw thank you traditionally during open comments and public hearing support is shown finally through American Sign Language plots or jazz hands thank you thank you Ron all right we've got 10 in-person speakers and two virtual ones I'll read three names at a time if you're in person you can start moving towards the podium if your name is getting queued up

[30:00] and you have two minutes to speak our first three speakers are Douglas bent Marcia buyer and Evan rabbits uh good evening my name is Douglas bent I'm the president of horizon West Condominium Association located at 1850 Folsom Street tonight however I'm speaking my capacity as an individual resident I'm opposed to the locating the homelessness day Services Center at 1844 Folsom Street many factors make the proposed location unsuitable as one example it's only two blocks from Hazel's and two dispensaries providing easy access to alcohol and marijuana products but I want to focus this evening on the fact that the site would incur costs of approximately three million dollars in unnecessary costs element properties and its partner paid 5.3 million dollars in late 2021 for the

[31:01] six thousand square foot building on a 0.66 Acre Site a vacant lot across the street at 1855 Folsom almost exactly the same size is listed for 2.7 million dollars therefore the implied value of the building is 2.6 million dollars City proposes to renovate this building and use it for only 18 to 24 months before tearing it down current plans call for the day's Services Center to be temporarily relocated while constructing a bigger ground floor shelter day sources Center and 50 housing units above at the 1844 Folsom site so the location has not been identified yet and but would likely also need renovation why not choose a more suitable vacant location now to avoid these extra costs a temporary location could be rented and used during the construction period

[32:01] choosing a different site that is vacant would avoid nearly 3 million dollars for the acquisition renovation and demolition costs for the existing building for these reasons I urge the city to scrap the current plans for homelessness day Services Center at 1844 Folsom and seek another location thank you thank you Douglas now the Marsha buyer Evan ravitz and Robert helterbrand good evening mayor Brockett and city council my name is Marcia Byer I have been a boulder resident for 27 years Chautauqua I think is a crown jewel of Boulder its goal remains as it was in the late 19th and 20th Century to promote the Arts education and community we're fortunate to have Chautauqua however the current CCA board is allowing the executive director to overreach in her actions and make Reckless decisions that do not align with the mission recently a decision was made to destroy

[33:02] the 100 year old Garden that has provided flowers fruits and vegetables to the staff visitors and the cottagers a 50-year resident of Chautauqua has maintained the community garden the historic Garden was destroyed at the direction of CCA staff without approval from the building and grounds committee the CCA board and without obtaining a landmark's alteration certificate this is one example of sheer disrespect and disregard for the longtime resident but considering that Chautauqua has a National Historic Landmark designation and is a tremendous value to Boulder with over 1 million visitors a year there are strict rules regarding this additional the Additionally the Ed made a decision to implement a centralized trash collection system without seeking Community input and ignoring questions and concerns from the cottage owners and neighbors but now have a trash dump in

[34:00] their backyard again the overreach affected all the cottagers especially the multi-generational families who started our Chautauqua unfortunately there is a pattern with this board and the Ed especially not to involve the cottagers in the important decisions that ultimately affect them the residents have an Institutional knowledge that is invaluable to Chautauqua and should be called upon rather than ignored finally I'm asking you the council to enforce the collaborative stewardship framework that the city and the CCA agreed but he could email us the rest of your comments please so we get them thank you for your time thank you Evan ravitz then Robert helterbrand and C palmrants waiting for the presentation four years ago Dan Newman president of the non-profit map light flew at their

[35:00] expense to Boulder to show us the free online petitioning system they offered and are still offering Boulder for free he demonstrated it here at City Hall but then in the words of former council member Steve pomerance the city went dark seven months later we learned that the city had rejected the free offer on false pretenses then City I.T director Julia Richmond falsely told two city council members and our city elections working group including Matt Benjamin that quote maplight had never made a secure website but they had for the California Secretary of State the League of Women Voters and now Denver elections Julia left her job with the city a month later instead the city spent half a million dollars on inferior software which has

[36:00] hobbled petitioning ever since I urge people to try to sign the two petitions now active at the city website on the screen which is petitions.boldercolorado.gov you can try the process without completing your endorsement the maplight software is superior because it allows you to receive your ID code by email or mail as well as text or phone and it's open source instead of proprietary software so we can inspect and control and improve and share it the city manager should accept the free software test it against the existing software and choose the best one you owe it to the 71 percent of Voters who voted for a usable system them coming up on five years ago seven now Robert helterbrand Steve pomerance

[37:00] and Patrick O'Rourke thank you Council my name is Robert helterbrand I'm a resident of the Whittier neighborhood as well as a business owner in that neighborhood I have a CPA firm located at 1823 Folsom Street almost directly across from the 1844 Folsom the site selected for the new homeless day Services Center I've seen the considerations given to that site selection and I see no consideration given to the neighborhood the overall Community the residents or the businesses of that area the Whittier neighborhood is a thriving business Community with very few empty commercial or retail buildings unlike many areas of this city it is composed mostly of local businesses that are will be severely impacted by slight changes such as an increase in the homeless population of the area it is home to Boulder institutions like the dairy Arts Center McGuckin's Hardware and the Village Coffee Shop it is the economic Crossroads of our

[38:00] town it is 0.5 miles from Pearl Street Mall 29th Street mall and the CU football stadium it is 0.25 miles from the dairy Arts Center as well as four of our largest hotels that are frequently full of business Travelers and tourists and yet no consideration was given to the economics of the neighborhood why was the impact on the neighborhood the businesses the residents and the overall economy and potential tax revenue of this city not considered when a location was selected why is an economic impact study not been performed as to what impact this will have on our neighborhood and our businesses thank you very much thank you Robert now we have Stu Steve pomerance Patrick O'Rourke and Fran Mendel sheet I have the first slide please great thank you Steve pomeranz335 17th Street uh this comments regarding the process for setting titles for ballot measures my request is you add three

[39:01] points to the BRC or the charter uh Point number one the committee the council shall seek the input of the committee of petitioners Point number two ballot title shall be clear as regard the effect of yes versus a no vote and that any registered voter May protest at the adequacy of a ballot title next slide please removing the offending section of the BRC as you are doing will fix some of the title setting problems but not all in particular the municipal election code in the state code which we will be following does not allow petitions to have a title only a summary that would have solved the problem with the CU South petition Additionally the state law provides clear standards for ballot titles especially with regard to what a yes or a no vote means but the current Charter does not have that requirement about a

[40:00] yes versus a no vote so that needs to be added somewhere probably in the BRC uh next slide about the charter the charter only requires that the council get input from the petitioners about titles for initiatives but not for referenda or recalls if you had that in place that would have helped solve the problem with CU South that needs to be fixed next slide this is the one regarding uh state law next one next next okay state law leaves it to local governments to set rules for protesting poorly written battle ballot titles that's what you will be operating under but unfortunately it says as provided by local Charter ordinance or resolution so provides no direction on protests so in summary you're on a good path to start with which was getting rid of the car Amendment but now you need to add these other three points thank you thanks Steve

[41:00] and I have studied this stuff so much I'll be happy to give you any information you need thanks uh Patrick O'Rourke and Fran sheet and Michael Zhu good evening city council my name is Patrick O'Rourke I'm the preservation chair for historic Boulder the people from the D Hauser here it's an amazing story just imagine if it was voted the other way what would have occurred there I wanted to thank council member Folkers for attending the Boulder County preservation Awards last week and staying the entire time oh we had over a hundred I counted numbers are important to me I counted 150 people there so preservation is important in our community I specifically want to thank council member Bob Yates for your newsletter it's the first time I've had to do it while I agree with 90 of the things you state I think it keeps me informed in what I enjoy in the community I also want to thank City Council

[42:00] for the time commitments you've given to the services of Boulder in the Boulder Community your time is well noted and your continued support for preservation is well appreciated well I don't agree with all your decisions your deliberation is open Fair and well discussed for example in June of 2022 historic Boulder bought before this board a recommendation to expand the Bandshell at that time staff did not agree that it was appropriate to move forward for three reasons one it was part of a hip the hip is complete it hasn't been finalized by Parks and Rec but that's their problem not ours number two is that you wanted collaboration between the landmarks board and the Parks and Recreation board it's been 10 months and

[43:00] they've not met yet they've met on the staff supposedly but not between each other 10 months is more than enough time and number three is that James Hewitt the senior historic director for historic Boulder recommended that this be part of a future historic district and that's what historic Boulder is about to apply for it thank you thanks Patrick okay friend sheet Michael Zhu and Don bergel hi I want to thank you all for what you do do join up the question I have is why bother with City boards if they're ignored why bother hiring knowledgeable staff who keep paying costly Consultants to tell us what we already know June 14 last year Council rejected proposal by the landmarks board to extend the landmarking of the block 13 containing the Band Shell in favor of a historic district in the Civic area council's recent memo dated May 18th

[44:00] from the city manager and staff is the result of months of their working together without boards or citizens their proposal is to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on outside Consultants when we could be doing the work creating a historic district as staff was directed last year the memo carefully proposes stalling the historic district process for the property at the heart of Boulder that is undoubtedly the most well documented and studied Block in the entire city the information in history are at our fingertips and readily available the Civic area along the creek was designed by this country's first and most famous landscape architect the history and importance of Boulder of the to Boulder of This Land Is Well documented the fact is without the designation historic preservationists and the landmarks board don't have a seat at the table for the already funded phase two of the East End if staff is determined to have a cultural landscape assessment it should be for that entire Creek Way as Olmsted suggested 100 years ago if it should be

[45:03] done at the same time as the historic district is created making them both relevant despite the barriers to develop the historic district we hope to have an application submitted as soon as possible in the next day or so so hopefully it will be designated by this Council thank you so much thanks friend Michael Zhu Donald burgle and Dan Corson hello my name is Michael Shu ladies and gentlemen of the city council thank you for the opportunity to address you today I'm here to advocate for a tennis center in our beautiful city of Boulder Colorado as many of you know the closure of Rocky Mountain Tennis Center next year is a serious problem for the thousands of tennis players in Boulder and the next year we are losing the only indoor tennis facilities in Boulder and the largest group of courts in town the great people at parks and rec are addressing some of the media issues around a few of the outdoor courts in town but the long-term problem facing us

[46:00] is that tennis won't have a home in Boulder after next year there will be nowhere to play for nearly half of the year and all the people looking for the courts coaching events and community of a tennis center will have no options this isn't just a tennis issue this is an issue around the attractiveness of Boulder and its reputation as a great place to live when all the other nearby communities like Longmont Lafayette Louisville Arvada and Westminster have better recreational options than us can we still say that we belong on the list of best places to live Parks and Rec is said that they are running a court study this year around potential new tennis facilities I sincerely hope that the outcome of this study is that we find the land for a new tennis facility for Boulder residents thank you thank you Michael Donald Berkel and then Dan Corson hi my name is Dawn burgle a boulder resident and also a tennis player I'm

[47:02] here to raise awareness of a once in a generation opportunity for the city to allocate space for a facility that will bring community-wide benefit decisions are being made in the coming year regarding the development of Valmont Park the last suitable space to build a significant tennis and pickleball facility my request is not about routine maintenance and neighborhood courts the the P R department has that under control this is a bigger picture one that city council should be aware of Boulder needs to allocate land for a public private partnership to create an indoor outdoor Tennis Center Parks and Rec is well aware of the exploding demand for courts since the pandemic pickleball is a phenomena that competes for the same resources then add the loss of the cu's South courts in the annexation and the impending closure of the rmtc with the Millennium Hotel

[48:00] note that both of those are used by the public for lessons for leagues for tournaments they're not just for CU athletes or private members Arvada Longmont Parker Centennial and Denver are among others have significant public tennis facilities attracting wide usage Boulder has none Valmont Park is the last suitable place in Boulder and it needs to be a Civic priority to allocate the land and then allow the tennis and pickle communities to organize and fundraise and build if this opportunity slips by there's no next location to consider in the future I ask that the city take advantage of it and help create a project of lasting value thank you next time I would go to Dan Corson and then our remote testifiers council members I'm Dan Corson as I

[49:00] celebrate my 50th anniversary in Boulder I reflect on my great privilege and having chaired the landmarks board chair the planning board and served in your seats for a while for a total of 18 and a half years during the my final 17 years of my career I was employed with the state historic preservation office now as I entered dinosaur Hood in the community I am disappointed in saddened with the unbalter-like process for the proposed Civic Center historic district that eliminates meaningful meaningful participation by Boards and citizens for example the recent letter to you from the friends of the Bandshell sent over my email address was written because we could not obtain a status on the Civic Center historic district project from staff why the secrecy the email response I soon I soon to his credit received from Park staff States and I quote in part note that the development of a cultural landscape assessment that is part of the staff planning process and review of a historic district application will be related but are separate efforts do the code required time frames for review of applications these two processes will overlap and

[50:00] proceed concurrently however the staff memo to you implies that a historic district will not be considered until after completion of a cultural landscape assessment and is unclear whether it is Staff making the decision to proceed Central Park is a small parcel and perhaps over recent decades the most studied and assessed piece of land in the city the two experts on the cultural significance of the site and its features are right here in Boulder former planning director Peter pawlik and architect Catherine Barth their research has stressed interests that are transited Colorado to DC and Massachusetts and elsewhere and just last year landscape architect Tina Bishop Bishop issued a report addressed to planning staff on the cultural significance to the park and its various features listing both contributing and non-contributing features to propose an RFP with project completion in a few months just does not happen in the real world in June 22 2022 this Council asked that the district we bought back to it in 2023 this will not occur under the plant

[51:00] or what I believe may be the planned scenario thank you and thank you for your service thank you Dan all right we've got two virtual speakers and they are Lynn Siegel and Stephen Bentley so Lynn you're up yeah Lynn Siegel um you need to zone for a drugstore like Alpine Balsam it's not going to have a drugstore pharmaca's gone from from Pearl Street now it's gone from ideal you need to do Zoning for the services that we need not building another condo I was riding my bike out by The JCC my God Coburn's building a whole city there of condos you know more expensive condos this is going to be renamed condo City this is ridiculous it's it's you know you blink and you're not going to recognize this place not okay balance jobs housing just say balance jobs housing put that in

[52:02] your mind when you go to sleep every night and do that because that is the only thing that will save this city jobs housing balance otherwise you're on the cycle of Despair more housing more services needed more low-income jobs to provide the services more more housing needed for those low-income people can't live in Boulder you know homeless Center on Folsom Street that's problematic you know that we get these federal funds from the government for the homeless so what we should not accept them even because you know what it's a pittance compared to what's happening with lightec funds that are supporting growth in all of the Cities throughout the United States blowing our economy as of June 1st and the global economy for that matter you know this housing is a crisis and it starts here in Boulder we can change it stop the subsidies stop the subsidies and increase the historic

[53:01] district right up to even Fine park that Frederick Law Olmstead had it right it's like everyone said I how come I agree with everyone that speaks at these meetings every time and every time after the meeting nobody says anything to them there's no response you have a lot of community anger here and you know I have an angry voice I'm sorry it's not a happy voice but do something maybe you won't have so much clean your tennis up but thank you for your testimony right our our final testifier tonight is Stephen Bentley on the more Mortuary I was violently attacked and chased out of Emma Gomez Martinez part by a man who was angry that I had reported another person to Boulder Police for allowing their dog to repeatedly antagonize my service dog in that same park the attacker pursued me threatening to beat me the entire time

[54:01] BPD officer Kate Pierce ID number 17424 eventually responded to that 9-1-1 call took my statement and opened a criminal case number 23-01815 on 26 February I saw the assailant again in the park and called bpd's non-emergency dispatch to report that person's location later that afternoon I received a phone call from one of those responding officers who said that the man admitted to chasing me out of the park and threatening to beat me but the officer decided not to cite them because they seemed to be a responsible person and their dog was well behaved on 25 April I submitted a formal complaint regarding the action to officer Peterson the other responding officer as of this time I have received no response from BPD regarding a formal complaint I know that BPD officers refused to enforce the laws in Boulder this refusal to take action can be completely arbitrary as in my case simply because

[55:01] yasser's liked the appearance of The Suspect with absolutely no concern for the impact that protection for the perpetrator has upon the victim oversight of bpd's actions is critical because they can simply decide to ignore complaints or summarily disregard any concerns raised by those complaints I have a lot more that I could say regarding this incident and ppd's refusal to enforce laws in my neighborhood and specifically with anima Gomez Martinez Park put my time this evening is limited I thank you for your attention cheers thank you Steve okay that brings open comment to close thanks to all of our speakers tonight and I'll turn to City staff to see if we have any responses thank you mayor a couple things and thank you all for sharing your voices as always um I want to say I I know that City staff in relation to the Services Center I know that City staff has been working with folks particularly those at Horizon West and there is a meeting scheduled at the end of the month and hope to

[56:01] continue to have conversations with community on that project I want to also just thank for the passion of those that are interested in tennis in our community I know that I have heard from our Parks and Rec that they are involved in a court system plan to really think about what does that look like and what is the future for continuing to support tennis activities in the city and Council will be hearing about that in the future um I wanted to speak to the questions about the historic preservation and the Band Shell and just want to appreciate I know everyone's passionate about um such a wonderful asset in our community staff continues to move forward on the cultural assessment I don't have the deadlines and the dates at my fingertips right now but know that we will continue to advance that and we will make sure that we keep community and Council apprised as that moves

[57:01] forward um and I think for now that is what I had at my fingertips very good any questions or comments from Council I got three so far Ginny Nicole Rachel thank you mayor Brockett I just have a question based on some of the comments that were made earlier and I know Maria you um you've answered a few of them concerning the day Center and one of my question to you and I'm wondering if maybe the speaker can't speak for him but if he was talking about a different bill or proposition we've talked about on Council before because one of the comments were that were made was that there are businesses that sell uh different

[58:00] substances or shall I say marijuana and my question to you is whether the day Center will allow any type of substances meaning that if someone is using the day Center will they be able to bring such substances own property um I know that the services that we're doing and we continue to think about what that is but there is no usage allowed in our facilities and that will be part of sort of the rules and protocols for the day Services Center as we move forward thank you for that and I think my next question is about Outreach also I believe that was by Mr hilderbrand he mentioned Whittier and he mentioned the lack of community outreach and you just mentioned you know we're doing a lot of Outreach but my question to you to the best of your knowledge what type of Outreach has been done to that

[59:00] Community itself not just one particular organization but to the community to ensure that there is buy-in and also that they are involved as part of this process I might have to put our director of Housing and Human Services on the spot to answer more directly I do know that staff has been responding to emails as we move forward and continuing to converse with Community but Kurt that'd be helpful good evening Council Kurt fernhauer housing and Human Services thank you for your question councilman member Joseph um so the from a zoning standpoint the use on that use on on that type of site what is required is a good neighbor meeting um and that will be occurring only once we are further along and have more information to give residents and neighbors um and the purpose of a good neighbor meeting under the code is for Neighbors

[60:02] to be able to give feedback on the operations of such a center it's an administrative approval that use in that type of building um so it doesn't require um sort of Outreach of an approval from Neighbors that's pretty unusual but we will so we're having additional meetings we're meeting with the direct neighbors to the North and then we're also in conversations with the chamber about having conversation with the business community thank you for that my last I just have one quick question when is our next update I'm sorry our next update uh on on homelessness or or for the day shelter or we don't have anything scheduled at this point um it would probably however align with a similar update on General homeless

[61:00] Services which I think is September I believe that's when we have it scheduled yeah yeah thank you for that and thank you for your response um based on what I hear I can understand now well I mean we've been having those conversations for a very long time and I know that's something that we strive as a CD to ensure that community members or um receive notice that's why we have those community outreach and engagement with community members so um I appreciate your statement that hey here's the code requirement but I can understand as well that community members they are coming before Council and expressing um some of this their discomfort sure so but thank you yeah thank you machine Nicole I had a cup stay there I think I think you're probably the one to answer this uh maybe more than area but I'll post an area and then you can tell again I'm just you know it strikes me that there have been a few times in our City's

[62:01] history where we have opened up some sort of service facility that is primarily working with people who are experiencing homelessness so we had the the um overnight shelter in its original location downtown right we also had um the uh shelter when it moved to this North Broadway location and then we also have Lee Hill Road and I'm just wondering you know do we have some kind of accumulated information or data on what happened to those neighborhoods because I look at North Boulder North Boulder seems to be thriving right now um but you know was there kind of were there any you know less desirable impacts of having those things there and and I don't know if that's something you know an area that's that's being included in in these discussions or um or something we can learn more about I'll defer um to director fernhauber to respond to it just because I haven't been in my two years that hasn't opened uh and during my tenure but I certainly will say that I have seen that in other communities as well and understand the concerns um and have seen that not play out uh

[63:01] the concerns um play out in the way people think but it also has to do with the programming and the resources given to the particular location Kurt would know more about Boulder yeah so that's that's obviously a difficult question to answer some examples I can give like and you mentioned Lee hill we have seen a significant reduction in interaction with uh PD related to the individuals who are staying at Lee Hill from when they became unhoused to when they became housed there is very little calls of service to Lee Hill um and probably not any more than any other sort of apartment complex however we also know that there are impacts on the community when we introduce new services and we want to be careful and thoughtful about how the

[64:00] operations of that could either have positive or negative impacts on the neighbors but lastly I'll say these impacts that we have are are community-wide and throughout our entire community and a lot of the programs that were were working on which are also initiatives of of yours are to have a wider Community impact this one was about CSL somebody mentioned that the tennis courts were going to be gone I thought that they were just being relocated and I don't know if there's anybody here who could speak to that but I was just trying to get my facts straight on that yeah we can double check on that but my my thought was that that was the plan from CU and so we'll get back to you on it Rachel Denmark my recollection on CU South was that I think one tennis court was going to be required to be demolished to make room for the road or their construction but

[65:00] the others were not going to be impacted as I recall okay my questions thanks to everyone who is here this was a very interesting open come at night first on the day Services Center again you know I um I I think we need to be pretty empathetic to people's fears um and I I don't think right now we have a ton of trust from the community that we can adequately enforce um you know incidents and and issues so I think we have some trust building to do and I can understand why people are worried um my question or maybe one thing that might be helpful to get an update on there you are director for knobber um is um when we toured a safe outdoor space the the result there was an improvement in the in the neighborhood impacts on crime and and encampments was reduced um when we when council member Yates and

[66:00] I toured um a day shelter in Denver they had a pretty rigid rule like you could not come in for services if you were camping within or or you know caught doing anything within a certain number of blocks or something so there were really tight efforts to make sure that there weren't going to be the neighborhood impacts that people worry about so I think it might be helpful for us and for the community to hear in addition to the Good Neighbor agreement that that's being worked on like what is the research kind of to Nicole's Point as well of how we're going to be planful and and can really assure the community and that they can have trust in us that we're going to carry that through so that's maybe more a request than probably something you can answer today did it make sense maybe that'll be my did my request make sense uh yes that did make sense um and thank you for that um yeah and I I think our um uh visits to those locations were similar and um that's why the

[67:02] um the input of the neighbors will be important as we look at at how it actually functions and how it operates and how it deals with the surrounding blocks around it as well but I in essence these these programs and services that we're starting are really meant to have a more positive impact on the entire community and knowing that where they occur we have to pay special attention and I certainly agree we need to be we really need to listen to the neighbors and be empathetic to their concerns as well thanks in just a extra angle to put on that maybe just confirm that the good neighbor agree or the Good Neighbor meeting and other meetings with neighbors and concerned folks will help to inform an eventual operations plan for the day Services Center so that we

[68:00] will be processing feedback in it and that's correct yes thanks um on the tennis commenters uh I am a former tennis High School tennis captain and uh my you know come from a family of players and I think our Fairview girls team just went to State as I recall like where we we do have a proud tennis history in this town and It's upsetting to hear that that is at risk so I'm like are we looking at it for Valmont which is what some of the speakers said and I also wanted to um note that I think there you know there's also the area 3 planning Reserve which will have some large Park opportunities so you know is that something that that we as a council could say we we do want to make sure that that tennis which is such a um popular sport thrives I'll say this um I know that for parks and rec uh tennis is also a sport that they want to see Thrive the purpose of the I want to

[69:03] get it right the court system plan because if not Ali will see this at another point and come down on me but the purpose of the court system plan really is to do to to think about what does our community want what does our community need it is the truth and I think this has happened nationally that pickleball has kind of taken the place of some of the tennis courts because they have to be played frankly leveraged on the same courts and thinking about where that is currently and what the needs are in the future uh there are sort of there will be considerations about where that locates uh I don't think uh staff is looking at Belmont this year but certainly the entirety of our city structure will be looked at as we do that and as we think about the court system plan and I'm happy to tag ali um after this meeting to make sure that we provide you all with an update thanks um next is on the the questions we got on the band shell and historic district I was one of the people who voted to to

[70:00] um move forward last year and so there has been delarity is this something that will come back possibly during my tenure well will this get across the finish line uh yeah I believe that the cultural assessment is being planned for the end of the year when that is I don't know but I'm happy again to follow up and let you know what the dates are that would be helpful just so that we're not causing undue delay um and then just the last I wanted to invite anybody who might know more than me on we had a someone speaking on a needed Charter amendments I don't know Aaron if that's you is that something we want to respond to and why we might not be doing that or if we're looking at it sure thank you for the question the legal challenge that was brought to the CU South ballot title the city prevailed in so it's not been brought forward by the city attorney's office due to a legal need if however it was the will of counsel to change the ordinance for policy reasons we would be happy to draft changes to the ordinance

[71:00] thanks um and then last one Nuri just wanted to invite you I thought I had a last one this is my last last one though there was somebody who mentioned being a victim of a crime or assault or maybe threatened is that somebody that you could follow up with I didn't I forgot when I meant when I was going through my list that is something that I'm certainly following up on and I have written the details I'm done thank you mark I have only one question and it is my last question um we are contemplating a good neighbor meeting um with respect to the day shelter and it's going to I assume it's going to be operated operated by a third party um Kurt do we contemplate entering into a good neighbor agreement with respect to that facility and the neighbors if not why not and uh if so what will that look like uh so we have not uh contemplated a good neighbor agreement

[72:00] um I mean what's we I mean we're basically following what's under the uh the zoning code which is a a good neighbor meeting um you know if Council wanted us to go in that direction they would have to uh to guide us on that I mean the purpose of my question is not to um uh suggest that it is required to have a good neighbor agreement but given the uh degree of concern that we're experiencing would that not be beneficial whether it is statutorily required or not do you mind if I jump in here this is basically exactly where I jumped in with Rachel Mark if you don't mind which is um which is I believe that for this facility we would have an operations plan right that we would um have publicly available that would be agreed to that I believe would contain Provisions in it that you know would probably overlaps with what would be contained in a good neighbor agreement or be I think you could accommodate anything potentially that you might have

[73:01] in a good neighbors agreement in the operations plan Kurt said sound yeah I mean it will have an operations plan um I think the process of getting an operations plan approved by a group of neighbors um is is a is a lengthy process um and it would it would take quite a bit of time to to implement something like that I I'm I acknowledge that I'm simply trying to be um responsive to what we're seeing in the community and the fact that it is hard does not make it undesirable um and I think something that the community could look to and say these are the standards we have been promised and these are the standards we're going to hold the operator to it is is not inappropriate in light of the um the difficult nature of what we're proposing to do um I I'm not suggesting it's not difficult and I'm not suggesting it wouldn't be difficult to adhere to those standards

[74:02] um but if we're trying to make the community understand that this is an important facility with benefits for the entire Community I don't know that this is an inappropriate direction to go in well if a council would like us to put that on the agenda um we you know CAC could discuss that um and uh it could be discussed at a future meeting okay thank you all right lots of good questions are we ready to move on all right looks like it Alicia can we move to our consent agenda please yes sir of course our consent agenda tonight is item three which consists of items three a through C any questions or comments on the consent agenda opportunity [Music] thank you I just have a question maybe for

[75:00] co-acting City attorney here and I see item 3C and I voted not to add it to the current consent agenda based on my understanding and my question to you in adding this particular item I have a concern about process and I think it's the same concern that I had since December when the first complaint came in my question to you is there any type of vetting mechanism for these type of for this particular I don't know what to call it is it a process to have a an attorney appointed by a special to have you appoint a special counsel have you done any type of vetting before that do you mean in terms of vetting who the special investigator will be no interim

[76:00] of vetting this particular complaint my understanding one Community member sent in a complaint and now we are appointing a special counsel has there been any vetting of this particular complaint before we appoint before we use City resources to appoint a special counsel thank you for clarifying that yes the code sets a very low bar if the facts as they are alleged would constitute a violation of the code of conduct then it's a requirement to re to move forward with an investigation and then the question becomes whether the city attorney's office should handle it or whether it should be a neutral third party and since the City attorney is a direct Council employee that's where we believe there could be a perception of impropriety if it was investigated by someone employed by the city council okay thank you I appreciate your your response here is that you mentioned that

[77:00] there could potentially be a violation and that's why this particular council is being appointed at this time if the facts as alleged are true it's not a finding by the city attorney's office that we believe there's probable cause or any sort of threshold like that thank you um anything else or perhaps a motion I moved to pass the consent agenda second I think I think Tara got it first so we have a motion and a second dealership we can do a roll call please yes sir thank you we'll start tonight's roll call for the consent agenda items a through C with mayor Pro Tim Wallick mark probably better that way yes thank you sir councilmember weiner yes

[78:01] Yates uh yes I'm 3A and 3B I'll be Q's on 3C thank you sir Benjamin yes mayor Brockett yes councilmember falcon yes friend yes Joseph yes and Speer yes the consent agendas items a through C are hereby past unanimous unanimously noting the recusal of council member Yates on item 3C thanks so much can we go into our call-up check-in please yes sir call up check-ins are number four on tonight's agenda 4A is the concept plan review and comment request for a proposal to redevelop the site at 2700 2710 2720 and 2750 Baseline Road and also 2765 and 2800 Morehead Avenue as a mixed-use student housing

[79:00] development that includes 84 units within a four-story four-story 55 foot tall building on the western portion of the site this is reviewed under case number lur 20-22-00058 and I believe we have uh Chandler Von Scott here for a short presentation members um may I be allowed to share my screen please go ahead Chandler that should work now yep okay can everyone see that and not my notes nothing's up yet nothing's up yet now it is ah okay uh good evening city council um as mentioned this will be a brief presentation on the 2700 Baseline Road concept plan call up before you tonight

[80:02] um so as you are probably aware of the concept plan purpose is to provide General feedback to the applicant there is no approval or denial associated with this hearing tonight um this was discussed at April 25th by the planning board and is now within 38 call-up period which include concludes on March 24th so in terms of public notification for this written notice was sent out um to property owner than 600 feet the applicant also performed uh a degree of Outreach on their own notice was posted we have received several comments from neighboring Property Owners um the majority opposed some in favor primary concerns include traffic parking lack of retail space and the scale of the proposed development uh the location so the subject property it's at the southwest of the intersection of us-36 and Baseline Road

[81:00] as you can see here the bvcp land use designation for the site is community business this is described as areas that are the focal point for commercial activity serving a sub Community or a collection of neighborhoods the Zoning for the site is bc2 which is the business Community too and as you can see it's adjacent to rl1 zoning the Martin Acres neighborhood to the South rh5 Zone in and then bt1 and public Zoning for the University of Colorado across Baseline to the north um so for surrounding context we'll go over this quickly um the character of the surrounding area is varied and eclectic there are some high density residential Apartments very near the site the union apartments and Creekside Apartments which are three and five stories respectively there's the basement shopping center across 27th just to the West uh the Martin Acres neighborhood lies to the southeast and then the CU main campus is across

[82:01] Baseline to the north this is just another shot of context looking from the West um you can see the u-club apartments and the Hub Boulder site which are on the east side of 28th and then Williams Village a little bit further on this is a shot of the existing site it was formally contaminated but it has been remediated you can see that skunk Creek runs through the center of the site but other than that the site is highly developed there's some vacant buildings there's Baseline liquor Grease Monkey Boulder gas Nick's Auto another shot of the existing site the Baseline Liquors signed the grease monkey and the existing gas station um as I mentioned in the memo but didn't show all the pictures just to keep it brief there are a number of access points essentially every business on the site right now has its own vehicular access either off of 27th way or off of

[83:02] Moorhead Avenue so access and circulation on the site is currently a bit of a mess a site is located within the regulatory floodplain including the 100 Year conveyance and high Hazard zones so the proposed project is a four-story 55 foot tall mixed-use student housing development it would include 84 units the development is Consolidated on the east side of the site on the east side of skunk Creek which leaves a large 1.2 acre landscaped open space area on the west side the applicant is requesting a 25 parking reduction and that is to provide um 166 parking spaces where 222 are required by code and bc2 so as you can see on the site plan here access would be taken from Moorhead as well as the us-36 frontage road would provide kind of a back access and drop-off point um there is a proposed pedestrian

[84:01] connection across the site linking from the sidewalk on Moorhead to the existing multi-use paths um they are preserving a floodplain Wetland buffer and again creating the large open space area on the Southeast portion of the site the total floor area of the proposed development is 136 694 square feet that includes about 1700 square feet of retail space and then about 95 000 square feet of open space where 50 400 is required so the application packet does not include specific architectural renderings for the project the applicant has provided numerous reference images as well as detailed massing studies showing the intent behind the proposed massing the applicant's written statement expresses a desire to provide a transition in massing from the Northwest to the south and east sides of the building with the corner of Moorhead Ave and 27th way being two stories in height to be compatible with the existing two-story commercial uses

[85:00] across 27th way to the West um as you can see the proposed building design also incorporates changes in plane articulation vertical elements step backs and changes in materiality to create visual interest and break down the perceived massing um here are some of the reference images that were included in the concept review packet um so a summary of the modifications that there would be requesting through site review there's a 25 parking reduction as I mentioned previously a height modification to allow for a 55-foot building where 35 is the maximum buy right height in bc2 uh modification to the maximum number of stories to allow for four stories where three is the maximum um just a note that the community benefit regulations from the boulder revised code for height modifications would apply um so the bonus floor area would be used to determine the required number of bonus units above the 25 inclusionary housing requirement so what this results in is that for the additional stories

[86:01] and additional floor area above three stories they would have to pay additional cash include and that is what they've indicated they would are intending to do is pay cash and loo so they would have to pay additional cash and low based on the additional floor area that they are getting oh so um to discuss the planning board hearing quickly on April 25th 2023 the planning board heard presentations 19 members of the public spoke during the public comments portion the majority of speakers expressed opposition to the Project based on the number of perceived impacts including increased traffic and spillover parking issues flood impacts neighborhood compatibility issues loss of the existing retail space and lack of on-site affordable units um there were several speakers who expressed tentative support for the proposal but desired to see additional retail space improved pedestrian connectivity and reduced height the planning board discussed three key issues um the first was whether the

[87:00] concept plan is generally compatible with the bvcp the second was whether the planning board had feedback for the applicant on the conceptual site plan and building design and the third was whether the planning board would be theoretically supportive of the proposed Building height of 55 feet so for key issue number one the board generally found the proposal to add student housing to the project site to be consistent with bbcp goals and policies they found that it was an appropriate location for student housing they agreed with staff's findings that the project will need to incorporate additional retail space in order to be consistent with the community business land use designation and bc2 Zone requirements some board members expressed a desire to see a more thorough analysis of parking and traffic impacts at time of site review and one board member expressed the desire for the applicant to retain existing businesses on the site um so for key issue number two which was feedback on the site plan of building design the board discussed a variety of different themes some of them included

[88:00] the need for additional public Outreach in the design process more activation on the primary ground level apprentages Courtyard or other features to improve permeability between the building and the open space on the east side of the site and a desire to see more detailed open space programming several board members indicated they would like to see a robust Transportation demand management plan a time of site review analysis of site access including the garage entry where access is located how circulation works and Analysis of traffic patterns on Moorhead and 27th way the board generally agreed with staff's comments regarding access open space and building massing additional considerations expressed by individual board members included reducing the building height reducing amenity space improving the north building facade design and incorporating noise mitigation factors key issue number three which was whether the proposed building had a 55 beep is generally proportional to the height of

[89:00] existing buildings three board members expressed support for the proposed 55-foot Building height but emphasize the need for excellent building design and appropriate Transitions and massing to reduce the perceived Mass two board members were unsure about whether the proposed site would be supportable and indicated the need for more details and two board members indicated that they did not support the proposed height and would prefer a maximum height of 45 feet um so next steps the following the concept review hearing city council may vote to call the item up for Council hearing to provide additional feedback that would be tonight city council May refer the concept plan to Tab and or dab the applicant will then either proceed with submitting development review applications or may submit a second concept review application or they would have to come back for a public hearing if you decide to call it up a site review application will require a decision by planning board subject to call up by city council and now I'm happy to take any questions

[90:01] thanks Chandler any uh questions for Chandler I'm not seeing any so any comments or desire to call this up from folks Lauren just given the amount of sort of bike infrastructure and how all those paths crisscross in there I would be interested in having tab look at this okay very good we can do it um maybe I'll just well let other people make their comments then I'll come back to that Matt and then Mark and then I got something and Tara thanks Aaron and uh uh Laura and I I like where you're going with that um my comment really centers around uh hopefully perhaps looking at reducing the parking even further and hopefully the um the folks developing this will will see opportunities to further reduce massing this was so much Transit and so much proximity for student housing I see it's good perhaps going down there but I'd also imbalance when I may have us

[91:01] also consider maybe an NPP uh for parts of Martin acres to help reduce those spillover impacts of parking that may go in that area so I think we can have sort of a balanced approach to reduce even more of that parking since that sort of becomes obsolete almost the day we build and bake in that parking uh with sort of our long-term Transit and also climate goals so I think we can play both sides of that equation and get to a good result sure that Matt although we might should clarify I think NPP the neighborhood parking permits can only be created by the request of neighbors themselves I don't think that's something we can do on our own but Point well taken and correct me if I got that wrong anybody um great uh Mark and then Tara and then myself yeah I would support um referring this to both dab and uh tab this seems to have an unusual number of concerns and qualifications uh at the planning board level and in terms of comments from the public it seems a little undercooked to me as a

[92:03] proposal I don't know that it's ready for us to make a decision as to whether to review it or not I'd like to see them go back and address a number of those concerns before moving forward are you calling calling it Al Dente Mark very Al Dente dear I don't I'm going to disagree for the first time in a long time um I don't think we should reduce the parking anymore because I I am already concerned about the spillover I think it's a great project let me just start out by saying it's a perfect location for student housing but I don't think we should reduce the parking anymore the neighborhoods are the neighbors are already worried about the spillover parking and it's not that easy I found out to do neighborhood parking plans everywhere so for that reason I I'm going to disagree with you on that but I did go to the community meeting at one of the locations that this company has and I

[93:00] was really impressed with the uh the inside the outside the way it was run the way they listened to community and the amount of community outreach they've already done I just want to say that it's been good and we we took a walk down towards where this location is by the alleged Creek which if you can call it that what was the name of that Creek that had a lot of garbage in it it's lovely at the right time of year and so I do want to say that it was great to actually visualize it to go down there and visualize it and I think it could do some good for that area so I do want to thank the amount of community outreach of course you can never have too much community outreach now can you so um as far as retail goes I think this might be a apropos or not we have a lot of vacancies at Baseline the Baseline shopping center right now so now not that I don't think it's great

[94:02] idea to have neighborhood retail on the first floor but we are having trouble in the city actually getting people to lease the said first floor um uh retail so I'm happy with the amount of retail that they have right now um that's just what I have to say about studying it and going down there and living right near there and biking through there I'm going to agree with Lauren that I am concerned about the bike pass and how they're going to work out I do like the buffer of the park I think that is a really great feature so I just wanted to bring out some of the good features that I've noticed since I go there almost every day on my little bike path thank you Tara I'll I'll call in myself and say I don't feel the need to call this up I think the project is going in a good direction I think that's a good location for student housing I appreciate that they're putting that park on the Southeast area next to the the single family home neighborhood I think that's a good choice

[95:01] um I support from my colleagues the idea of referring it to tab thanks a lot of things that seems like a reasonable idea and I'm certainly happy to send it to dab as well for some design feedback and I generally thought the planning board comments were good I thought planning board did a great review of it and had some excellent comments on that I'll just say on the um on the retail I I know the neighbors have a desire for more retail there if it's sustainable from an economic feasibility standpoint I think that would be positive to have additional retail in a walkable distance from this development and all the neighbors so if it's doable fantastic if it's not economically feasible like Tara says having empty retail spaces sitting there for years is not to the benefit of anybody and with a and I'll say on the parking question with a good enough Transportation demand management plan if you really do that very well I think you could support some additional lowering of the parking amounts as well so those are my thoughts so I'm not generally hearing any desire to call this up does

[96:00] anybody want to make a motion to that effect or I'm not seeing anybody jump to that but I have heard a desire to send it to Tab and potentially dab if somebody wanted to make a motion to that effect they could I'd like to make a motion to send this to Tab and dab a second okay okay yes Nicole go ahead thanks I fully support this and one of the things though that I'm wondering that I hear are the concerns of the Martin Acres neighbors and I don't know if tab could speak to this and if this is the right time but something about you know how how we deal with the fact that a lot of Cu staff and students and faculty do do use that area as basically a parking lot for CU right and and I get um you know just kind of the the extra traffic and things that adds and so I don't know if there's something that you know we could also be thinking about what are we doing in this area of town

[97:00] to try to encourage more folks to leave their cars a little bit further out like maybe at a parking ride or something like that rather than kind of driving it in to that neighborhood so I don't know if this is the right time to think about that but it may be just given some of the parking concerns but that would be something I would be interested in hearing from tab is you know is there anything as part of this project that could help um shift where folks are I second that Rachel oh this is a little bit off topic here but I want to call it Nicole's request and if we're if we are going to look at something like that I think it probably needs to be broader we've heard a lot from people across from willville with the same kind of theme so not just Martin Acres but also anywhere that there's a lot of I think student uh density with cars that uh CU doesn't provide parking for seems to be an issue right I'll just throw in real quickly I think that those are great topics to consider uh in general and hopefully the tab can think about those but just caution that any one project can't be

[98:02] required to make changes about larger city-wide problems so just throw that caution in there and okay so we got a motion and a second on the table to refer to Tab and show of hands all in favor it's unanimous great okay Chandler thanks so much I think you got what you needed great absolutely thank you thanks have a good night all right Alicia if we can move to our first public hearing of the night please yes sir and thank you our public hearings our item number five on tonight's agenda 5A is our consideration of emotion to approve the upper goose and Two Mile Canyon Creek that's referenced as ugt the flood mitigation plan Muriel thank you mayor um so as staff get settled uh we've got quite a presentation we've heard a lot from Community I'll say that last year if

[99:00] you'll recall you approved the comprehensive storm water and Flood Master Plan that highlighted sort of the vast amount of flood protection needs across the city's 16 drainages and you might recall that as we presented it the team had really taken a lot of efforts to highlight the use of the racial Equity instrument as we did some of that work tonight you're going to hear about the upper Goose Creek and Two Mile Canyon Creek flood mitigation plan as you'll hear from staff there are always trade-offs in any particular project and we're going to try to strike that balance between Life Safety benefits and the personal property and environmental impacts we know those impacts have been subject of intense Community conversation we know you have received a lot of those and so we will try to highlight and respond to some of the information that we have gotten in the past few weeks and so I will now that staff and I bought you enough time to get settled I will send that over to utilities director Joe tarayushi hopefully enough time for Brandon to get

[100:00] his PowerPoint going but good evening mayor and members of council as Nuria mentioned I'm Joe tadayucci I'm the director of utilities and I am here with Brandon Coleman Brandon leads our stormwater and flood engineering team and he will be taking the lead on our presentation tonight but before I uh turn it over to Brandon I did want to hit a few highlight a few things first what is before you tonight is a mitigation plan and for each of the city's drainages and and Brandon will cover this in a little more detail in his presentation there are several big picture process steps starting with mapping studies and then we do mitigation plans and then move into design and construction so for the situation tonight we're at the mitigation plan stage and that's where we choose between alternatives for a

[101:02] general concept to advance for the design development and then construction and so for this particular plan in terms of Alternatives and Concepts we looked at over 30 alternatives so we're really at the concept phase tonight and there has been a lot of public interest and and concern that this is maybe really far down the road and and um uh that's not the case I just wanted to clarify that as a as a plan moves into design and construction there's still a lot of opportunity for Community input and engagement and for the community members to shape the design as we move forward I also wanted to mention that I believe we have a few Columbine Elementary students with us tonight from the classrooms for climate Action Group and they'll be speaking under the public hearing portion and talking about a class project that

[102:03] they did associated with tonight's plan and I think they presented to a few of the council members and and board members earlier on that so we appreciate their engagement and I'm not sure how long this item will take and if it'll be past people's bedtimes but um hopefully they will get a chance to see what it looks like when we wrestle with all of the trade-offs on on a project like this so with that I'll turn it over to Brendan okay okay thanks Joe um I appreciate that and as Joe mentioned I'm Brandon Coleman I'm the engineering manager in the storm flood utility and tonight um we're requesting action on the upper Goose Two Mile Canyon Creek flood mitigation plan um and I do just want to say this plan has been a long uh hard effort and it hasn't been me working on it solely we do have a consultant team with icon

[103:01] engineering we have the mile high flood district has been a partner on the project and also lots of Staff have been involved in the project so just want to say thanks to them and then with that we also do have a really engaged community so thanks to the community for being engaged I think it really helps us frame these projects and understand concerns as we move forward so just starting off I'm going to cover some General's Flood information about the city and uh starting off Boulder is the number one flood risk in the state of Colorado and as a storm flood utility our mission is really protection of Life Safety and property and uh this photo on the slide is from Two Mile Canyon Creek right at Broadway during the 2013 flood most recently so as a storm flood utility um we are responsible for flood mitigation on all 16 of our major drainage waves in

[104:01] the city and this includes upper Goose Creek and Two Mile Canyon Creek as well and when we do flood mitigation we typically follow a life cycle approach as you can see here so that really starts by our floodplain mapping efforts and these efforts are really to identify the flood risk related to these drainage ways across the city and we really focus on the one percent recurrence interferral so that would be a one percent chance of flood in any given year and commonly referred to as the hundred year flood and then next we move to the phase we're here tonight to discuss and that's really our mitigation planning phase and we come up with Concepts Alternatives we really focus on community engagement in this phase and uh and hopefully our proposed Solutions are trying to balance the need for flood mitigation and also the community's interests and concerns and

[105:00] lastly once we have the overall plan and it's a system-wide approach and that really allows us to make for continuous improvements we move to the design and construction phase and in that phase that's really where we developed the design details deal with some of the more technical engineering challenges related to the proposed plan so again tonight we're just here talking about the mitigation planning phase and as Joe mentioned we considered over 30 alternatives for this plan so we also have just recently updated our comprehensive flood and storm water master plan and this life cycle approach was continued in this plan and it was really developed in our 2004 comprehensive flood and storm water master plan thank you let's see here you can you can move that up that's what I'm wondering I'm wondering there you go okay so the 22 uh 2022 CFS updated

[106:03] um update also had gave us some key goals for the utility and they included um prioritizing projects to do the greatest good first providing our services equitably making infrastructure resilient to climate change prepare for extremes inform the community to create a prepared community and also maintenance of the system we currently have and in response to that we heard a strong desire in the city to implement these projects much more quickly than we've been doing in the past so just the need for flood mitigation there's always a question of why do we need to do flood mitigation doesn't it work as well as it is we haven't been flooded so I just wanted to share this so this is the upper two or the Two Mile Canyon Creek and upper Goose drainage basin and this image is from 1938. so you can see a few things in this image starting with Goose Creek in the lower

[107:02] part of the image and then two Mile Canyon Creek which is a classic alluvial system you can see the fan up there in the upper left hand side of the creek and then there's a few key features that um historically have been there or are remaining there so you can see North Boulder Park this is the future site of North Boulder Park um it's existing as a lake in this image and then also Longs Gardens um a historical long Gardens um is shown here as well and just to get bearings there are a few roadways that still exist so 19th Street is highlighted here and also Iris Avenue just so you can get your bearings in the city and really the important thing to notice about this photograph is there's a lot of agricultural land use there is some development there but you can see the historic drainage path and you can also see an agricultural type land use here so moving forward to 2022 this is the

[108:01] same area same image but you can see a pretty Stark difference so a lot of houses and in some cases the natural drainage ways have been built over completely and this is just a result of our utilities relatively young so we were founded or we were started in 1973 and a lot of this development happened prior to that prior to the knowledge of where the floodplains were so I just want to highlight this as really what the need for flood mitigation is for these drainage ways so next as I mentioned we started with floodplain mapping for this project so this is the Two Mile Canyon Creek drainage way in Upper goose and this mapping was updated in 2015 and adopted by the city in FEMA and this figure is showing the 100 year or the one percent chance uh of flooding in any given year and there's also a city-specific Zone shown here which is our high Hazard Zone shown in red and that zone is designated

[109:02] as the greatest risk to life safety and that's really based on depth and velocity of flow that could sweep a person off of their feet during a flood event and it's important to point out that Two Mile Canyon Creek is an alluvial flood plain which means flow spreads out in larger storm events and this is shown here in the 500 year flood plain which is a 0.1 .02 percent chance of currents in any given year or the 500 year floodplain but it also indicates risk of shallow flooding in a hundred year flood plain so our flood mitigation plan really tried to take that into account in our proposed improvements So based on their approved flood plain mapping and the simulated 100 year flood the estimated damages we would expect in

[110:01] a hundred year flood in these two drainage ways for Two Mile Canyon Creek and upper Goose Creek would be on the order of 195 million dollars of potential damage and that includes 700 and about 750 structures what so we do have a recent flood event as a good reference so 2013 we saw significant flooding in uh particularly the Two Mile Canyon Creek drainage ways and there was definitely a wide range of personal experiences from the 2013 flood the event was not relatable to the hundred year flood that I mentioned in the mapping it was really a long duration event so it occurred over multiple days and we didn't see very high peak intensities out of that so it was kind of a different storm event but two Mile Canyon Creek around Linden we did see two fatalities related to the flood on that drainage way and it

[111:02] was really from people who were in their vehicle trying to cross flood waters during the time and it's just a good reminder that most flood related deaths happen in or around Vehicles so um just for the community and everybody listening just if you ever are in a flood never drive your car across flood waters as well and then the damages that we saw from Two Mile Canyon Creek from the city we did see significant damages all these photos shown here from the Two Mile Canyon Creek drainage way we estimated damages of about 39 million dollars from 2013. thank you so as I've mentioned this Project's been going on um we've been in the mitigation planning phase since the mapping update in 2015. we did prevent our draft recommendations to the Water Resources Advisory Board in 2021 and with Community Information

[112:02] sessions following those presentations of those draft recommendations to try and let everybody know what the proposal was our water resources at Advisory Board recommended approval of the mitigation plan to city council at their May 2023 meeting by a vote of five to zero and that's what we're here talking about tonight as well so as men as I mentioned previously Community engagement's a key component uh around this this part of the planning process and so we did have a significant Community engagement effort in 2017 and 2018 really to evaluate Alternatives and there was a lot of we heard support for flood mitigation from the community we also heard lots of concern from private property owners about private property impacts trees existing Wildlife corridors and how those would be

[113:01] impacted by the proposed projects there was also concern around potential impacts to Long's Garden in North Boulder Park so as part of this plan we have no detention Alternatives recommended for North Boulder Parker Long's garden and also we're not recommending Public Access along Goose Creek near the Edgewood Drive section and as a reminder the utility so this is just the planning phase as we've been mentioning and we're really looking to work with continuing to work with private property owner and private property owners as we move into the design and construction phase as well so I just want to mention um when we brought this to RAB it was 2021 the pandemic hit relatively quickly after that which slowed down some of our community engagement efforts and we were able to pick those efforts back up again in 2022 and in 2023 and we really wanted

[114:02] to try and inform the community about what the recommended Alternatives were so we included website updates a virtual map we did a virtual information session in in-person information session at Columbine Elementary followed by more email responses and some additional neighborhood meetings with concerned Neighbors so for the Alternatives that we considered as a utility we really have some tools in our toolbox we did consider over 30 Alternatives through both of these drainage ways and the way we approach flood mitigation is we can consider open channels and we really focus on places where there's existing open channels just for the natural stream processes which we think is probably the most resilient approach to flood mitigation there's storm pipe alternative so in places where we don't have existing natural drainage ways or they've been developed over we would

[115:01] consider storm pipe roadway conveyance which is not a preferred alternative but utilizing existing roadways detention which could minimize Downstream improvements and could be a cost-saving measures but require large open areas and then with these drainage ways and a lot of drainage ways in Boulder sediment capture is really important because we are moving a lot of sediment from the mountains into town so sediment capture was also considered as part of the alternatives and the design for our open Channel so this is really um our industry and our approach to flood mitigation is really focused on nature-based Solutions so this is a photo from our recently completed Wonderland Creek Greenways project which was completed after 2013 and you can see it is an engineered channel so there are definitely engineered features in there but we also Incorporated a lot of natural features so Wetlands re uh trying to create Wetlands re-vegetation practices and also native

[116:01] vegetation and these methods if they work and are implemented appropriately also serve as a lower maintenance solution for flood mitigation into the future so this slide is the proposed recommendations and I'd be happy to go into any of these in more details but I'll just give a brief overview right now so Two Mile Canyon Creek is in the red boxes and you can see it starts initially up at Linden Avenue with 100 Year Channel improvements and sediment capture we're very space constrained as we move into the next reach through the neighborhood so we have less than 100 Year Channel improvements and then as I mentioned the historic drainage way has actually been built over on Two Mile Canyon Creek so we proposed a drain system essentially from Two Mile Canyon Creek to the Confluence with Goose Creek on the lower right hand side of the screen and we've also considered two alternative alignments just looking at where the historic flow path is for

[117:02] where we would Outlet to Goose Creek so we have heard um recently community support for the alternative alignment shown down floral drive right now for that storm pipe so I just wanted to point out out those two alternatives are still considered in this plan and then the Goose Creek alternatives are shown on the lower portion of the screen they start at North Boulder Park and as I mentioned there's no detention being proposed in North Boulder Park we have an inlet structure that transitions to a new open Channel that would be incorporated into the Alpine Balsam property then we would transition to a storm pipe in a reach where we have no existing Channel and then we would propose enhancing the existing Channel behind North Street and then transitioning again to a storm pipe prior to discharge to the stretch of Goose Creek behind Edgewood Drive to its Confluence with two Mile Canyon Creek so for flood mitigation cost we

[118:02] estimated these in twenty twenty dollars and you can see the proposed mitigation for both drainage release is a combination of open Channel improvements and Culvert improvements and we would expect that would remove approximately 527 structures from the flood plain and the overall improvements for both drainage ways would be about 43 million dollars and just in summary I just want to say we are at the mitigation planning phase so really the action we're asking for tonight would allow us to move into the design phase where we'd be able to look at some of these more engineering details some of the details um related to what these open channels could look like and also continuing engaging with property owners who would be impacted it's really important to note out that we don't the city does not own all the land that I just showed on the proposed mitigation plan so uh easement acquisition would be a huge component of all of these improvements and we'd have

[119:01] to work with each private property and owner for those easement Acquisitions into the future and in your packet there's proposed motion language so motion to approve the upper Goose Creek and Two Mile Canyon Creek flood mitigation plan and with that um that's all the presentation I have for tonight so we'll take any questions okay and and before turning it over for questions I just wanted to mention at CAC on Monday there was a request for a RAB representative to be present and so we have John berggren who is our RAB co-chair he's actually on a business trip in New York but was willing to join us virtually and I I think he's prepared to summarize uh some thoughts from RAB if you'd like to hear that before we turn it over absolutely John thanks for joining us and going above and beyond on your business trip so I'm interested to hear a perspective from from yourself and from rap please

[120:01] yeah uh can you all hear me yes great thanks for having me and it's part business part pleasure so this trip is not all all fun but so I am a co-chair on RAB been on the board since uh 2020 and I have been following the The Goose Creek project uh upper Goose Creek Two Mile Canyon Creek project and I just want to uh wanted to disclose as I did in the March board meeting that I do live and own property in the upper Goose Creek drainage I wanted to disclose that um but it's brand new to cover this plan um has come to Rav a couple times in the draft plan in 2021 and then more recently the proposed plan that you all were discussing tonight in our March 2020 stream meeting um both times we've gotten pretty good discussion from the board on the on the planet itself there's you know over the years there's been from our perspective this question of whether we can do 100 Year mitigation or not um as as Brandon I know there's some kind of significant challenges in both

[121:02] drainages and then um so that was kind of the big question is can we get to 100 Year mitigation and with this uh final proposed plan uh before you tonight is pretty impressive that for the most part 100 Year mitigation is is the plan um for for most areas of these drainage ways with all those benefits um that has mentioned so um when it's come before rad we've had a lot of questions we uh the city staff utility staff has been great in answering our questions you know we've discussions have range for um what is the existing infrastructure in health functional it is now and if we just maintained it better but you get some of the flood uh benefits we had you know questions about um you know the 2013 flood that we um everyone know so well that was you know 10 years ago and how come we're talking about finally doing 100 Year mitigation now um questions about how this fits into

[122:00] the larger comprehensive flood in stormwater master plan and and priorities of this of this project versus other projects and um a lot of questions again going back to the maintenance issue and and um let's say this project built will it be maintained in the future a lot of we've heard from some residents that they're concerned about existing maintenance uh questions um you know a lot of discussions as Brandon mentioned there's significant easement acquisition required and so we did uh several questions and discussions about what that actually looks like for property owners um and um other um I think the other kind of big thing that came up was um uh the importance of that public engagement and going forward as if this plan is is approved as it stands today ensuring that through the design and construction phase um the significant public engagement is

[123:01] continued uh as as Brandon mentioned that we've heard a lot from from residents uh in the drainages about concerns to their private property to Wildlife corridors so and we want to make sure that those those legitimate concerns are earned by the by utilities and addressed As you move into the design and construction phase um and I think I'll leave it at that that kind of quickly summarizes it's been a multi-year thing with uh with Ravin so I'm happy I think there's time I'm happy to answer any questions if I can otherwise I will um let you all get back to it thanks so much for that John do we have any questions for John then maybe we can let him go I know it's getting on 10 o'clock in New York seeing none will just give you another thank you uh for your working for being here it's my pleasure great um any questions for City staff about the presentation the matter Bob

[124:05] um I don't know if this is for Joe or Brendan I I think we've done some flood mitigation work and other drainages um in the past here in the city and I wonder what staff could collaborate a little bit more on the recovery of um plant and Wildlife around those um when there's been disruption and there's been digging and channelization and ditching and so and so forth how long it takes um nature to kind of heal itself and recover some of those those areas where there's been some some damage because you elaborate on that a little bit more you want to start with that one sure uh yeah thanks Bob I I did put together um a few example projects and so I'll just pull up that um to kind of talk to here so as I mentioned um we do really focused on doing nature-based Solutions so we as a

[125:02] utility don't see um a wildlife Corridor or nature as a separate from flood mitigation we like to incorporate those two things as best we can so um we do try and protect high value trees where we can and incorporate new vegetation if we do have to remove trees or Wetlands type vegetation and that's a probity requirement and also a city requirement through our Forestry Department and the projects I've shown here just for reference the Wonderland Creek project which was recently completed in 2015 we're getting ready to be released from our 404 permit from the core for that project so we have seen good Wetlands establishment we we will have to wait for the trees to grow back up to some of those larger trees that were grown or that had to be removed as part of that project another area that's an engineering Channel but really this nature-based approach is Boulder Creek so this is Eben fine Park Boulder

[126:01] Creek's a really natural system but it's also there is a lot of engineered structures and drop structures and also erosion control measures along Boulder Creek and then most recently and it's just good to point out there will be temporary impacts from the project but we try and do our best to limit those to the project footprint and this was a project we completed last year up on Bear Creek by Bear Creek Elementary and you can see it's pretty Barren at the moment but we're starting to see grasses come back and we had to remove about three major cottonwoods for this project and we replanted about 10 trees out there as part of that project and granted they are definitely not as big when we remove those trees we pay back into the forestry fund for further forestry management as well as replacing in kind and usually above and beyond where we're at so those were the three kind of example projects we have great thanks Brian Nicole Rachel markhamat

[127:03] thank you so much for the presentation and I imagine it's exciting for you to see this this moving through the process I just wanted to confirm a couple of things that I think I heard just to make sure so this project is being done based on the new storm and flood water master plan right so it did take into account some of the newer features like the social vulnerability index is that right yes I I'm also um I'm just going to speak to that a little bit so um a key component of our comprehensive flood and stormwater master plan was to be able to prioritize projects across the city um so one of our major metrics that we heard from the community and also included was equity and the way we're scoring these projects we we do not have the full score yet but we'll be presenting it to RAB this year based on this prioritization framework and uh using the full social vulnerability index so we've Incorporated these

[128:01] proposed projects even in their draft frame into that prioritization criteria so we will see where they rank out compared to all the other projects across the city thank you I appreciate that it seems like you're jumping into that a little sooner than um than I at least expected so appreciate that I think it's an important measure um and I just want to make sure I've got my numbers about right so if we leave it as is and don't kind of make changes there's over 700 homes and businesses that are affected if we address it with this plan we're basically removing about 500 of those did I get that right so like 75 yeah that's correct okay great it's probably good just to clarify we're not actually modifying any of those structures as part of this plan it's just our mitigation efforts would remap the flood plain so that's why it's a life cycle approach once we construct these improvements we would remap the floodplain and then some of those structures would be removed from risk thank you and I was just wondering too I

[129:03] mean you know sometimes when you're up there after heavy rains right there's some streets that just have a lot of water and things are there areas that'll see improvements outside of that uh kind of hundred year flood event so we'll you know we'll will anybody notice some immediate impacts from some of these changes I can take that one this year I'll give Brandon a little break here um so the the businesses in that area around Alpine Balsam and like like Ideal Market right now every time uh in the summer we have a significant thunderstorm that area ponds up and it kind of turns into a lake or a pond and it's temporary and not hazardous but it's a real nuisance and as Brandon showed the 1938 photo versus that what the development looks like now that all took place before we had kind of the modern floodplain

[130:00] regulations and so our systems just are not great in that area some of the capital infrastructure that would be part of this plan would improve that situation where we get the just the local thunderstorm not even necessarily a hundred year flood level of events so some of that investment would help that as we move this forward and I just have one other question just want to confirm again it sounds like there weren't any alternatives that that wouldn't require Channel improvements is that correct yeah yes that's correct so essentially to meet our flood mitigation goals as a city we would need to improve the open Channel sections where we can and also add conveyance where we don't currently have it okay thank you and if I can just add to that a lot of the community input and the emails that Council received were concerning an area around reach

[131:00] number six and there's I think there's a belief and a hope that of the 30 Alternatives that we studied maybe if staff had had recommended a different one to move forward we could avoid the channel improvements in that reach and that's just really not the case there we did look at storage in North Boulder Park and some other things like that so what it really boils down to is we can we can leave the system as it is now and and not have any impacts in reach number six and and so then we would have a less than 10-year level of flood protection but if we're going to have any level of enhanced flood protection unfortunately there has to be some Channel improvements in that area Rachel thanks um Brandon I wrote down classic alluvial system it's so nice to see you hear

[132:02] words like that thank you um so I guess maybe following up on Nicole's last question so you know if we if we were to say well let's not do anything now within with the reach six um is that and then we're at less than 10 years is that just for like one street or is that for all of it like if we were to say we're going to carve that out are there Ripple effects on the rest of the system I I'm happy to take a shot at that and Brandon can elaborate on it but reach number six so this is the the upper goose and Two Mile Canyon it's really the Western portion of the flood plain the from say Folsom Street to the east The Goose Creek drainage has already been improved to a hundred year level and so reach number six is really the most Downstream of the the portion of this flood plain that we're trying to address and so if we if we don't have a way at

[133:01] the most Downstream point to handle the flows and we make improvements Upstream we could actually make things worse and so we really it it has to kind of be a comprehensive the whole stream has to be done fair to say it's all kind of integrated then for sure okay um and then you know I know that there's is worry about loss of wetlands and trees which I empathize with is there and you got to this brand in a bit but just maybe to have you emphasize it is there something other than like City council's desires or staff's wishes that restricts us being like brutish to trees and and wetlands what are what are the restrictions that we might have there sure yeah so um as a utility we do public engagement but there's no formal requirement in the design and construction stage really what binds us is uh Federal regulatory permitting so pretty much any major drainage way in the city when we work in we have to work

[134:01] with the Army Corps of Engineers for Waters of the U.S so they regulate Wetlands impacts across the country and then through that process they will also consult for impacts to threaten an endangered species Wildlife historic preservation requirements so if there was an archaeological site so that's that whole process we go through at a federal level and then also at a city level we have a very restrictive Wetlands ordinance as well and we have to meet that as a utility so we're not exempt from that and that's any Wetlands we impact we need to mitigate for and replace and most of the time we try and do that in the area where the impacts happen thanks so even if we said go and go fast you couldn't just go in there with a bulldozer and like do what you wanted correct okay um and then just one more question um we've talked about this being concept and then next will be design and construction and I think maybe like design and construction causes some

[135:00] heart burn like is that the same thing we are going to do this today and then you're going to go and start constructing or these concrete different steps and at any of these steps will it come back to council for review very different steps and typically for the major Capital Improvement projects design can take a year or two before we're ready to do construction and there are easements needed for this work and so as we if the plans approved tonight and we move into design part of it would be working with the property owners and kind of having the one-on-one communication to understand in more detail what their concerns are try to alleviate them and and address them and so there there's quite a bit of time before there would be any construction activity out there and prior to design getting finalized can it come back to council or will it come back to council so that people don't feel like tonight is like the end of the story for us to

[136:02] weigh in yeah that's a that's a great question so tonight's not the end of the line for public process it is a major there are major Capital Improvement and projects associated with this and those come forward in the in the budget process every year and certainly the the ones that have a lot of community interest get highlighted so we would be talking about that and then any time that there's a lot of community interest and concern about something that the city is doing Council can always ask for a check-in with staff and through CAC and and we do that a fair amount and and provide updates when asked that's all I got thanks fortunately I have a few questions um let me start with this one looking at the overall plan how many drainages have yet to be addressed other than this one in terms of flood mitigation

[137:00] do you have a backup slide I don't have a backup slide for that Mark um so right now through the comprehensive flood and stormwater master plan we have over 30 identified projects across the city that would go into that prioritization criteria and as I mentioned we would continue our mitigation planning so we may have more projects that get added to that into the future so right now we have about 36 projects across the city that we would put into that prioritization framework from a CIP standpoint for flood mitigation and do we have an estimated Capital cost for all of those we did do the estimated Capital cost and we estimated it about 350 million dollars so uh if you remember with the CFS approval that city council gave we did the we have to remind myself um sorry one second here well Brandon's looking for the information I would just mention so we

[138:00] are applying that prioritization formula to all of those projects I think 39 of them that Brandon just mentioned will be showing that to RAB as part of the budget process and and that'll be coming forward as as part of the capital Improvement package from utilities so you you will be seeing the detail on on everything else that's planned for the next 30 Years soon um with respect to the the cost of easement acquisition is that built into the 43 million or is that going to be on top of we do have a placeholder in there in the cost estimates right now it's a very variable cost I will say so it's a risky cost depending on what the negotiations with each property owner result in so we do have a property acquisition line item in our class estimates and if we do not come to agreement I assume you're going to need to go to a condemnation

[139:00] so that that is an option that the city has and Aaron may want to speak to that but um so far in our flood utility projects we've always been able to negotiate with property owners uh and and on the Wonderland Creek project that Brandon showed uh completion pictures for when we were at this this stage of that work there were similar concerns from community members but we were able to work through that and address them so it would always be our goal to negotiate and and work with the community to get those easements okay do you have any idea of how many trees are going to be impacted and have to be cut down of size we don't yet I'll say that's something we really try to identify as Channel geometry location alignments and trees we can save and trees we need to remove would really happen in the next design phase

[140:00] if I can if I can add to that I would expect there would be some large tree removal and um when we're in the construction phase of these projects it is impactful and a lot of Earth moving it's temporary and it and it does come back but I definitely want to mention that I would have to then ask you know when you say you want to work with the private property owners what does that look like you you know you've got a design um you've got a location you're not going to the property owner says I'm distressed you're cutting down my trees you're not going to not cut down the trees so what what does that working with property owners look like in a substantive manner yeah so our most recent example and a part of our Capital Improvement program in utilities one of our most important if not the most important projects is our main sewer improvements and um the the staff team working with the

[141:02] city attorneys and and some real estate support just meet one-on-one with the property owners and work through an agreement with each of them and we eventually get to a legal document that's that's an easement and same thing on the main sewer project right now a lot of those are coming through for Signature from the city manager and I'm looking at those and so it's a it's a lengthy process that takes place during the design it one-on-one meetings with with property owners just our staff and them when I say one-on-one it's not a big group setting it's each property owner meeting with City staff right my last question is um is there anything that might be more cost efficient between 43 million dollars plus the cost of acquisition of easements um and zero uh the concern I have is is you

[142:02] know at CU South we're protecting 2300 homes 65 million dollars that's about 28 000 a home in Upper Goose Creek the cost to remove 82 homes from the flood plain is 235 thousand dollars per home not just using the numbers you've provided us um that's awfully expensive [Music] um and is that the is the solution that we've got the only uh solution that is effective and cost efficient because you know behind this project as you've mentioned we've got another 300 million dollars of Capital Improvements yet to come and this this seems there seems to be highly inefficient in terms of the cost and protecting 759 homes is a wonderful thing um but we're doing it at a double the

[143:01] cost about 56 000 a home uh double the cost of what What it Took cost us to do CU South and at CU South we've got lots of side benefits um so I I I'm just asking is this is this the only way we can go it really is a process of elimination that we go through when we're at this mitigation plan stage and because of what I described in a in a for a previous response to a question the Edgewood portion for example is the most Downstream section and so we have to do that and if we're to make the storm water improvements that will address the the yearly ponding and pooling that we see during thunderstorms we really have to do that so as I've looked at this with the staff team I don't see a Part Way solution that

[144:00] still gets us some benefit one other aspect and it's a discussion we had internally I was asking them could we do something less than a hundred year could we do a 50-year design or a 25-year design and could that be a potential compromise that would reduce impacts and with the concern being along Edgewood unfortunately if you look at the flood plain mapping for those lesser levels of of flood and and what we know about construction impacts to do Channel improvements it really wouldn't make a difference so I in my experience looking at these projects and considering Alternatives I I don't see an obvious one or one that would lessen the financial impact and I do know as well talking to the team that the storm water investments we need to make across the city because of the issues in

[145:00] this drainage tend to be a little more concentrated here and so other areas of the city won't be as expensive but um in making the investment will just help us with situations even less than 100 year flood that the community sees impacts from every year every summer yeah and and Mark if it's okay if I could just add to fundamentally um South Boulder Creek flood mitigation is a very cost effective project because of detention um we're really limited as a utility to where we can do that scale of detention kind of uh speaking back to the slide of just within within these drainage basins we don't have a lot of large open areas where we could do detention but it is a very cost effective approach so we really think this is the best approach for these two drainage ways and it is going to be more expensive but it also has a lot of benefits similar to what I described for the open Channel improvements do you mind if I call it

[146:01] real quick council member wallet I do not mind it a bit thanks so I I remember or think I remember from the CU South context like there were a lot of people complaining that um it was so expensive for what we were doing and I was often like it's a screaming deal like for what we have done in other places as I recall so my question is if we're not comparing the cost per dwelling at CU South but rather to some other spots is is this maybe in line with some of those costs I I can so as Brandon said CU South is kind of an outlier when we look at all 39 of those projects in terms of the benefit and how attractive it looks in comparison and my impression from talking with the team that what we see here um what's with what's proposed in this mitigation plan and the projects that will come out of it the rest of the projects of the city would would be more

[147:00] like this all right thank you that's the end of my questions right Matt and then I got one quick one thanks well I was to say a colleague tonight or sharp the tip pretty much all the questions I had in a particular Bob Rachel and Nicole on that so thank you for saving some oxygen um my question really centers around I think Mark was kind of touching on a little bit this sort of efficiency factor and if and Joe's you sort of mentioning that if you're looking at even 25 or 50 year flood protection I would imagine that once you have your equipment in there you're already in there and and doesn't it just make sense to then just do the work and get to 100 I mean there's no real sort of you're not using like a little dingo versus a large excavator you got your heavy equipment in and you might as well just get the job done the way it needs to be done is that sort of a way to think about how how equipment would then equate to just going for the 100 or is or you using small hand tools versus other things we wouldn't be using small hand tools

[148:01] um but your what you're saying is correct it's it if we chose a a design uh capacity for the channel or a design flood that was 25 year it doesn't mean compared to a hundred year the the equipment would be a quarter of the size it's still the same equipment it's still the same general ground disturbance because of the constraints and the geography in this reach and so it really wouldn't change thanks Sergio that's all I got all right well that that actually segues nicely into my question which was about so one the one area where we still have two Alternatives and if we approve this plan is uh the piping kind of at the end of the line right whether it comes down to um Goose Creek um further west or whether it comes in to the east of reach six and so uh it certainly sounds promising to send a

[149:00] little further Downstream what would be the criteria that we would use to decide between those two options as we move forward to design I can give Brandon a second to think about that but that's an example of something that in the current plan the water can come down 19th Street in a pipe and connect with the Goose Creek channel that way or it can go down Floral Drive and connect a little bit further Downstream and what we're hearing especially in the last few weeks from the community is a strong preference for it to go down floral drive from a technical standpoint for staff either works equally well and it makes no difference for us so it's those types of things that I think there's still some opportunity as the plan goes forward for the community to shape exactly what happens great seems to cover it yeah and then just following up from that so I'll come back to that in comments but following up

[150:01] from that if we do the Floral Drive alternative what's the impact on reach six in terms of you know how different is the project in reach six that I asked that same question of the team as we were considering this and we would still need to do the channel improvements and all the discussion we've had so far with Council on your questions the the impacts would not be substantively reduced okay that's helpful to understand things that was mine junior got something thank you so much um my question I wanted to ask you earlier because you mentioned Mile High flood district and when I was Miracle time I was appointed to that by the mayor and I remember this particular project was heavily disgusted disgusted discussed discussed are you disgusted I was like sorry thank you heavily discussed and

[151:04] again the mile high flood District as a board and the type of expertise that it offers I wanted you to talk a little bit more about the type of support that this particular project received and I know one of the questions that may um mayor Pro tem Wallach had is the how much it's costing the CD but also the type of support that you we are getting in order to get this work done and also it's not just an issue for Boulder itself it's an issue for uh for it's a regional issue and there's so many other experts that are involved as part of that process so I wanted to hear a little bit more about that and also the investment from again Mile High flood district and other support that you're getting thank you yeah so the mile high flood District

[152:00] um the city is in the mile high flood District they're a great partner for these types of projects so they can support us in a number of ways so they can support us with their staff so we have a watershed manager they have environmental resources engineering consultant construction contractors they also can provide funding for us and the first step for us to get Mile High funding for a project like this from a CIP standpoint is for how to have them partner on this mitigation plan so if they don't they don't have a role in the mitigation planning it won't be eligible for Mile High funding and then they also are a huge educational resource for us as a staff of just being at that's really where this high functioning low maintenance stream concept came from it's really been Advanced by the mile high flood district and it's given us a lot of great Technical Resources to be able to design those types of projects good enough great so uh let's move to

[153:00] the public hearing then thanks for all those great answers oh another question maybe it's already lined up like this but is there any um way legally we can move kids to the front of the line who might be up past their bedtime we so rarely get kids here and I don't know if anybody is bothered by that but it's I think it was almost 8 30 last I looked at the clock I I certainly would support that um we so rarely get young folks here so if people don't mind uh maybe we could start with with the young folks uh so do we need to over like make a motion to spend rules or you probably technically should okay since it's a change to the rules of procedure okay I'd like to make a motion to invite anyone under age 18 or under 18 to testify first tonight again all in favor raise your hands okay unanimous great so we're going to start with the young folks I've got

[154:01] three people uh signed up to speak um who are under the age of 18. Gavin Devins uh Ren bauscher and Angel Luna Ramirez and you'll each have uh two minutes to speak although I might be a little more lenient with you than with some of your older colleagues in the room here so um Gavin on slideshow too hi my name is Gavin and I am a fourth grader at Columbine Elementary School I'm here with two of my classmates to encourage you to vote Yes for the city's plan to do flood mitigation on upper Goose Creek and Two Mile Creek all the students in fourth grade have been studying climate Solutions and climate Justice we know that climate change is real and it's very important that we prepare for severe weather events in our city we have been learning that storms are getting bigger and more frequent we also

[155:01] know that our city is doing a lot to prepare for climate change the upper Goose Creek flood mitigation project will help make our city more resilient and will help keep all people safe in the next Flood now Ren is going to talk about how important flood mitigation is to do to protect our community members hi my name is Ren and we're very grateful for the flooded mitigation that has already happened on Lower Goose Creek there are several reasons why we want that work to continue on upper Goose Creek lower Goose Creek is near our school and we took a field trip there to learn about flood mitigation and how it is working on our field trip we saw how well-fled walls Retention Ponds dropped structures and meanders are working to slow down the water on the lower Goose Creek this is keeping people and property safe we want upper Goose Creek to have the same opportunities next slide please

[156:03] in class we also built flood models and tested how well flowed walls Retention Ponds dropped structures and Manders are working to slow down water we built our models with different scenarios in mind and tested how slow water to how to slow down water down and observe absorb water we know that the flood plans for upper Goose Creek will be successful in slowing down water too our field trip and our model building convinced us how important flood mitigation is to our community resilience to climate change Now angel is going to talk about why doing the greatest good first is important for flood mitigation on upper Goose Creek turn down inundations

[157:01] [Music] affected us [Music] last slide please

[158:05] foreign a Claver hello my name is Angel I'm a fourth grade student in the Columbine Elementary School and I am an earth Guardian the city's new flood mitigation plan let's put the best first doing the best first in other words this plan represents putting the Community First the communities who live in the trailer parks such as myself and other families could be affected if we don't undertake the needed flood mitigations to protect us from floods one of the reasons why Justice is important is because the people who have fewest resources could be more effective than those with more resources thank you very much for your time I hope that you can make a great change in our community

[159:00] well thank you all so much for coming and speaking to us it's impressive what you put together and you Lauren fulkerts and I were at one of your presentations at Columbine and and Tara was there a different day as well I didn't see you there so it was so impressed by the work that you all had done and so thanks for engaging in the Civic process can I ask can I take a picture of you in the front row with the sign foreign I think other people are getting their cameras out too so let's be patient it's wonderful to have kids here thank you so much for using your voices all right yeah thanks so much all right uh we we will now move to the over 18 uh portion of the public hearing so uh

[160:02] adults only from here on out um anyway and thank you all the rest of you for your graciousness and being patient while we we let the young people speak you're you're very generous so um everyone will have uh two minutes to speak um we have a number of people in person then a couple online as well so our first three speakers are Devin Reicher arietta Roth and Beryl Stafford thank you guys uh we're the Rikers we own a home on Edgewood Drive and I've been at Boulder since the week of the 2013 flood as I feared and expected the positioning of our community feedback regarding the proposed flood mitigation is being construed as a few disgruntled ill-informed and NIMBY homeowners it's disheartening because the pain frustration and sometimes frantic Outburst year witnessed these past weeks should have you reflecting on the why and not the who the desperation is emblematic of a deeply flawed

[161:01] engagement process for which real lives and properties are at stake I ask that you reflect on the criticality of your review how much time have you each spent researching The Proposal not at face value but critically as you would do if it were your home your investment and your lives that simply needed to fall in line while we love the corridor flood mitigation is needed but we all should take issue with this approach during my career at Zeo I managed commensurate infrastructure projects with some of the largest Sports media companies in the world I can confidently say this is not how you manage the stakeholders specifically when there's inequitable impact Financial impact health and well-being impact this is not how it's done the inability to listen to questions from the community so that your answers may be thorough and honest instead of contradicting your statements days later this is not how it's done the delayed release of the full proposal and supporting documentation leading up to this meeting

[162:01] to mitigate our Effectiveness in being contributing members of this forum this is not how it's done plainly the community engagement efforts by the RAB board and you and the related utilities were perfunctory at best and negligent at worst this is not how it's done I ask you not to question the need we know the need I ask you to question the how do you know explicitly what you're approving we weren't the drain in 2013. for those who benefit for whose benefit should we be the drain going forward thank you thank you Devin now Arya to Roth Barrel Stafford and Dennis bashland uh good evening city council my name is arietta Roth I've been a resident of Edgewood Drive with my husband and dog since 2021. the backyard and natural surroundings were the reasons we decided to put an offer on our home finding out

[163:00] we were in a flood and conveyance Zone at closing made us take a considerable pause in the fall of 2022 our home received a flyer that noted the city was re-evaluating the flood zone by going to the link provided I saw some of the maps included in today's proposal however there was no indication that work would need to be done for this reclassification I have not received any notices from the city since that flyer I am here today due to the efforts of my neighbors to make sure our community was informed of a major project that would impact all of us after reading through the materials currently available and meeting with Joanna Bloom's team I support a budget approval to begin the engineering and design process for the greater flood mitigation project I have concerns regarding reach six as the work outlined in this plan would directly impact my property the natural surroundings and animal habitat of my neighborhood in order to maintain my support for upper Goose Creek reach six an acceptable project plan would include

[164:00] clear and timely communication of next steps to the property owners along upper Goose Creek an outline of assurances that property owners will be included and considered throughout the design process retention of as many existing trees as possible and addition of more trees and native plants for erosion control limitation of any Creek expansion to the south side of the creek instead of encroachment into the north side properties to the extent possible the use of natural design strategies to retain the banks of the creek when natural design strategies are not possible implementation of environmentally and aesthetically sensitive Solutions regular maintenance trash cleanup and Tree Care regardless of project scope and confirmation that increased pedestrian access will not be provided behind our homes thank you carry it out Earl Stafford Dennis peschelon and piggy bash line

[165:04] hi um my name is Beryl Stafford I founded a company here in Boulder 20 years ago Bobo's out bars I've lived in and have paid taxes in Boulder for over 40 years I came to see you and never left I live on Goose Creek on tidal Road my backyard abuts the creek I am asking city council to vote no or at least delay this vote on the flood mitigation plan my biggest concern is the short amount of time in which my neighbors and I were informed of all of this and that it is already up for vote after first hearing about it only a few weeks ago I never received notice from the city I was lucky that my neighbors put flyers around the neighborhood we whose lives will be severely impacted by 10 years of disruptive construction at our homes feel that the Outreach from the city has been a huge failure and that this has

[166:02] been and that this has been shoved down our throats my second concern is that the plan will completely destroy this unique Wildlife ecosystem that exists in our downtown Pearl Street area this little Urban wild Corridor is home to hundreds of cottonwoods mountain lions bear minks Fox deer tons of species of birds songbirds and Hawks I believe this Corridor is definitely worth saving your plan to bulldoze and concrete all of this seems irrational and rushed I know there are alternatives to this widening of upper Goose Creek one that is frequently mentioned during our neighborhood meetings is the existing Floral Street option I'm no engineer but I urge you to spend the time considering this or other Alternatives as they are way less intrusive to Boulder residents and will take a fraction of the money and time spent that the upper group upper Goose Creek mitigation would require in your plan on page 300 I quote one of the

[167:03] options is to delay so I'm asking you to please consider this today thank you Barrel Dennis Bachelor and Peggy bash line and Brian Bennett all right 2242 Edgewood Drive I was going to read all this to you but you're talking about 200 trees that are going to get chopped down into the mic please you're talking about 200 trees that are going to get chopped down that are huge they could live 400 years you're going to replace them with little Twigs where's the owls great horde owls that Nest there are not going to come back Debbie you guys need to really think about this you know one of the guys on TV are on the TV here said that he lives on Edgewood his house is up for sale he works for w r a p or whatever it is the water board

[168:00] Consultants you guys need to think about this I beg you to say no and vote no I've got Peggy bash line then Brian Bennett and Mimi Ito hickey bash line 2242 Edgewood South against the mission to destroy our backyards and easements along the Majestic Wildlife Corridor at Goose Creek my my the roller coaster of events put to this section of community it's been the ride of Our Lives I personally have never felt so much pain and so much despair yet so much love and connection in one short span these golden people my neighbors and Friends

[169:00] actually share with conviction my undying love and respect for the Towering cottonwoods the wild flowing grasses and our fuzzy Creek Pals who offer daily gifts to our souls and spirits I was stunned lost and alone at the beginning of this Wild Ride who would have believed a small batch of simple folded papers donned with colorful ink and the sentiments of my plight would result in such a frenzy of support and solidarity my dream tonight is to have my targeted coveted section of Edgewood and Creek deemed Untouchable protected designated ecosystem for the coming Generations may they never endure the misery of all that was 1988 sea dump or All That Remains reach six today I asked cancel vote no

[170:00] the Monstrous discrepancies dispersed as accurate between citizens and planning appear irreconcilable to all who support what is goose carry on my wayward son there'll be peace when you are done lay your weary head to rest don't you cry no more thank you Peggy Brian Bennett Mimi Ito and Edward Clark good evening my name is Brian Bennett I live at 1921 Tyler Road I am not an engineer I'm here tonight because I have concerns about the upper goose and Two Mile Canyon Creek flood mitigation plan specifically about reach six the plan aims to replace the wildlife Corridor to help with flooding mitigation however destroying this act of wildlife Corridor will have long-term

[171:00] lasting negative effects on the corridor and the neighbors who live near it this Wildlife Corridor is a vital part of our ecosystem it provides a home for countless species of native plants and animals including dozens of mature cottonwood trees that line the creek and over a hundred varieties of birds it helps to maintain the balance of nature destroying at risks losing many of these species forever once the proposed construction is complete we need to consider the impact of increased human traffic in the area which could lead to further environmental damage moreover we need to ask ourselves whether this is the best solution to the problem of flooding are there other options that would be less damaging to the environment and the neighborhood I urge those involved in the decision-making process to carefully consider the environmental impact of the construction and find a solution that protects our community from flooding and ensures the preservation of our natural resources we can find solutions that balance both

[172:02] safety and Environmental Conservation but it will require collaboration and creative problem solving in conclusion I'm not an engineer but there must be a better solution than widening upward Goose Creek between 19th Street and 24th Street let us work together to find a solution that addresses the concerns of all parties involved I urge city council to either vote no were delayed the vote until our concerns have been addressed thank you council members for your time and attention thank you Brian now we have Mimi Ito Edward Clark and Candace Walworth foreign 2254 Edgewood Drive and I joined my neighbors along Edgewood and are concern for the proposed Goose Creek flood

[173:02] mitigation plan um you mentioned that there was a lot of community engagement but most of us did not even hear about this till March or April and we were able to get these t-shirts in just a few weeks so we are disturbed by many aspects of this 10 plus year plan as you know if it's 10 years that really means 12 to 15. which will bring air pollution noise pollution it will disturb the sleep of many residents it will disturb our pets and residents who work from home it will destroy trees and other foliage and as has been mentioned before these won't come back in just a few years and it will greatly disturb the wonderful Wildlife we have have back there and some of the animals were mentioned by another one of my neighbors but that

[174:00] they're more than that um and it does not seem to be in keeping with Boulder's love of the environment and care for animals I also note that we have been told contradictory statements about the plan which is quite upsetting the purported goal of this plan is to prevent more flooding but my neighbors and I have actually had little to no problems with flooding on our street and that includes my house which has been in my family's ownership for 50 plus years and I believe there are alternatives as has been mentioned before the Floral Street is the one mainly mentioned but I believe there are others and so I ask you to please vote no on this plan or at the very least delay thank you thanks Mimi Edward Clark Candice Walworth and

[175:02] Brett Kennedy before I start I submitted a presentation I hope you've all been able to review it hello dear Council I'm Eddie Clark and I've lived at 2248 Edgewood Drive with my wife and dogs since 2010. we are strongly against this flood mitigation plan but we also value increased flood mitigation less than or our home did not flood in 2013 less than one percent of the community was engaged in less than 0.5 percent involved in the values and input of this plan the community engagement has been unsatisfactory and an inequitable representation nullifying the validity of this plan most of my neighbors were not even aware of it until a few weeks ago upper Goose Creek is an essential Inner City wildlife corridor

[176:01] and it's banks are lined with mature cottonwoods that provide vital carbon sequestration removes over ten thousand pounds of CO2 from our City's air that's over five hundred thousand pounds of CO2 from the atmosphere since our homes were built this plan will replace the cottonwoods with concrete it will increase global warming and the intensity of storms this plan seeks to mitigate it 12 million twenty twenty dollars nearly double or triple by implementation widening upper Goose Creek is the most costly alternative and it provides the worst cost to benefit ratio utilizing far less expensive and disruptive Alternatives such as the two mile-04a which enlarges stormwater drains under Iris and improving Floral Drive stormwater drains is better upper Goose Creek Alternatives include detention ponds in North Boulder Park and all border Hospital site and under

[177:03] the utilized Community Gardens additionally improving and properly maintaining existing stormwater drains and systems is Paramount the plan is not acceptable please I urge you vote no and require thorough Community engagement moving forward great thank you Eddie now we have Candace Walworth Brett Kennedy and Bev Daniels good evening my name is Candace Woolworth and I'm here tonight because I believe we can address the flood mitigation needs in North Boulder and at the same time protect one of the few remaining Wildlife corridors in the city the current plan calls for extensive and invasive construction on reach six that would put the Goose Creek Wildlife Corridor In Harm's Way we've been told that this plan has been

[178:00] well vetted yet my partner and I and many of our neighbors first learned about it in late March not from the city but from a neighbor a public utilities project of this cost and consequence requires timely and proactive Outreach and engagement with citizens this has not been the case before a decision is made all stakeholders need to understand the Matrix of options I recently discovered a report online authored by icon engineering dated in 2022 it describes reach 2 which is near Linden Avenue as being partially on private property it states that restoration of the full 100-year capacity would be overly disruptive to the adjacent land and concludes that a design with less than 100 Year capacity would quote be a good compromise for this reach of the creek end quote why not apply the same principles to read six and seek a good compromise one that aligns with the city's Green Space

[179:00] goals and environmental stewardship values as Citizens we don't have a vote tonight nor do our neighbors children who would lose beloved backyard play spaces essential to their health and well-being I urge you use the power of your vote to request additional conceptual design details including an environmental impact report vote no on the plan as it now stands proof of concept requires that the city council and homeowners understand the nitty-gritty impacts this project would have while we can still make a difference options do exist let's get them on the table thank you Candice we've got Brett Kennedy and Bev Daniels and then we'll go to our remote speakers sorry as a resident of Edgewood Drive whose

[180:00] home backs up to Goose Creek I understand and agree that flood mitigation is necessary yet I'm concerned about the negative impact that this will have on wildlife and the effects on the deer bear Fox Hawks owls and mountain lions and countless other species making their homes in the corridor as Boulder continues to expand in its development and growth this unique Swatch of land and home for wildlife warrants consideration and protection it's not clear to me from the flood mitigation proposal what has been assessed and determined relative to preserving the wildlife especially during an extended period of construction the width of the creek behind my home is five feet across and it's my understanding the current plan is to expand it to 30 which will necessitate the countless removal of trees and excavation of the natural landscape which held its own during the 2013 flooding and where my home remained dry as many people may not be aware living in a designated flood zone impacts what

[181:00] you can do with your own property permits are three times more expensive and you're limited in what you can do with Renovations and Home Improvements and I'm required to maintain a costly flood insurance policy that goes up every year so with all those challenges you would think I would hold no objections for flood mitigation as it may protect my home from a significant water event but it also provides me a lot more freedom and less expenses as a homeowner don't get me wrong I certainly appreciate that but not at the expense of an ecosystem improving the corridor while protecting and minimizing the alteration of the natural landscape and Wildlife Refuge can be achieved and should be prioritized through collaboration not only with the contractors and engineers providing additional assessments plans and Designs but active engagement from the residents there was very little Outreach or engagement from the city with those of us most impacted by this project and whose yards and quality of life will most be affected so please

[182:00] vote no today and request concept additional conceptual design details for consideration thank you thanks Brett Beth Daniels hello I'm Bev Daniels I live on Tyler Road Boulder City Prides itself on communication engagement and transparency with the community unfortunately that's not Apparent at all during this process how can the city council vote so soon on this proposal when the people most affected received so little communication and Outreach from the city when their voices have not been heard an alternative's considered reach six plan has such a far-reaching negative impact on this community most of us weren't even aware of the plan until last month and that was from some

[183:01] neighbors not the city it shows a complete disregard for the community and its concerns why weren't the members of the community a long time ago told of the likely outcomes of this plan that they're going to lose sections of their property that their lives are going to be appended by Major construction work in their backyards and I mean in their backyards that over a hundred cottonwood trees will be removed and that due to extensive construction animals and birds will no longer live and move through an undeveloped wild animal corridor countless foxes dear Bobcats and even bears and mountain lions the community deserves better than this it should have had time to fully evaluate the plan to understand the basis of the conclusions and consider alternatives there are alternatives to this plan which will not

[184:01] result in such drastic outcomes I urge the city council to vote no at the very least I ask you to delay the vote to give the community and the city the opportunity for Meaningful engagement and consider consideration of the Alternatives thank you for your time and attention I'm going to go to our two remote speakers now they are Lynn Siegel and Nancy Triggs so Lynn you're up when your mic is open you'll just need to unmute bad thanks Ryan um yeah um

[185:00] I want you to take the the um 30 000 foot perspective here you know um before he died Gilbert white told me took me aside and said you know the problem is people building on the flood Plains it's not the floodplains himself they're natural phenomenon and you know you look at those 1938 pictures that was 85 years ago can you imagine what this place is going to look like in the year 2108 which is another 85 years from now because at the rate that this place is growing and that you're developing and you're you're you know you're having to deal with these things after the fact not before the fact you know digging big culverts and changing ecosystems should not be an afterthought and it is an afterthought it absolutely

[186:00] is the way Builders the way Boulder is building up its landscape these 300 foot square foot places on Pearl Street and every single corner I see there's more and more development it's the built environment that's a problem not the flooding so I say of course no I mean look at the reception you've gotten tonight at city council at the open comment and at public hearing is anyone say anything positive where's the engagement you know I don't know I don't I live on the hill so I'm not even involved in this but you know what I am because my dad came to this town in about 53 and that's you know my attachment to this place is long-standing and this process needs

[187:01] to be different you need to think in the aerial perspective but thank you for your testimony you want to cut our last speaker is Nancy Trigg hi um Nancy Trigg I'm speaking on upper Goose Creek reach sex um when people buy a home they make a decision to accept some risks the residents along Edgewood understood this and chose to purchase these small homes with a beautiful natural Wildlife Corridor and accept some flood rest that came along with it now the residents of Medford are being told that we need to give up our peace and much of our property for risk mitigation these residents here today love their homes and way of life most of whom have lived on the street for decades we understand and appreciate that city-wide flood mitigation is necessary and support plans to ensure the safety of people and properties and we also want to protect the wildlife Corridor and the Peace of our daily lives two things can be true at the same time there must be Alternatives that could

[188:00] merge these two interests in um Goose Creek reach six some City staff continually state that there are not alternatives to Goose Creek reach six but there are significant options to reduce its impact detention in North Boulder Park and the city-owned property across the street is an option new Under roadway storm pipe system is an option not diverting to Mill Creek to Goose Creek at 19th is an option narrow channel improvements and maintenance is an option what I'm asking the council for tonight is more reasonable Community inclusive approach with shared impact equal Community voice and a willingness to build under city-owned roadways and spaces for mitigation instead of using personal property and Wildlife corridors we ask that you vote no on the flood mitigation plan as it stands now and instead call for increase in rigorous Community engagement with directly impact residents particularly among Goose Creek reach six and seek Alternatives and specific design details from the mitigation team including an environmental impact report for consideration at a later date if you vote to move this project forward there is no further city council involvement

[189:01] through the design and construction phases we fear that Assurance is made now will potentially collapse once approval is given any number of changes or additions to the project scope may occur during the next phase that they have continued to do up until this presentation was once again updated last week and heart numbers will have no recourse to help them please vote no on the plan of this phase and insist on more alternative design studies and details with real company Community input thank you thank you Nancy okay that brings to close our public hearing thanks everyone who came and spoke to us tonight appreciate your input so I'm going to bring it back to council and I'll just start to see if we have any follow-up questions based on the public testimony and then we'll go to deliberations I got Bob and then Nicole thanks everyone that came out um Joe I guess this is the question for you it feels to me listening to your presentation listening to some of the testimonies tonight that we have a little bit of a chicken rig situation because it sounds like you're coming to us and asking us for the green light to move on to the design phase and I hear

[190:02] from frustration from the community that they don't know what the design is and so I'm not sure how to resolve that can you lay out for us your proposed timeline like what what do you if you got a green light on I'm moving forward to design tonight what would be your timeline for each of these phases and do you and what's what's the timeline for the community engagement along the way and and um to that last speaker's Point um is there are plans to bring this back to council from time to time check-ins sure thank you for that one clarification I wanted to make can you hear me I feel like okay I feel like I might not be working a couple of the speakers mentioned uh referred to the Water Resources Advisory Board and I meant to say something in my introductory remarks it's it's been um the plan that we're presenting tonight has been represented as a RAB authored plan by some people and then just for I know the council members know this but for the community's benefit the

[191:01] Rab's a volunteer board and and this is really a staff and and consultant develop plan and and the board certainly looks at it to see if we follow a good process and if we've missed anything major but they're not getting into the nitty-gritty of checking our calculations and that kind of thing so I wanted to make that clarification um in terms of the process so if this moves into the design phase we would then have a concept that we would start to develop the design details and as I I think I mentioned earlier and Brandon I'll give you the opportunity to clarify anything that I get wrong I'll just speak from in general normally a project of this scale or the projects that come out of this plan and the scale of them it can be a year year and a half two years of design and working with the community on the property impacts and things like that

[192:01] negotiating easements before we would be in a position to go to construction and certainly council could ask us as I mentioned before at any time to come and give you an update given the concerns that you've heard here tonight and and see if we've addressed them satisfactorily so in general I would say a year or two of design I think the construction work from remembering the CIP correctly would potentially start in 2026 so that's the time frame that we're looking at and Brandon who's closer to the project team and the details may want to elaborate on that uh yeah I think you got most of it Joe but yes um we would start immediately on the concept design phase and it does include an element of community engagement so a good example right now is Gregory Canyon Creek so we're sharing designs as we develop them through the web page meeting with community members

[193:01] that would be impacted and yes we'd be happy to come back to council and give updates as we go just one other question which is kind of unrelated you guys may not know the answer to this but one of the speakers referred to flood insurance and I realized that people that are in certain female flood designated areas pay an insurance premium um or an extra insurance amount because of that um do you have any idea I know you showed you flashed up some numbers about how many houses would be taken out of different flood risk um and I know you guys aren't an insurance experts you may not be able to answer this question but do you have any idea how many of those homes would be relieved of that flood insurance requirement based upon what you know yeah so all those 527 um homes would be removed from the special Hazard flood zone so um I just want to clarify that doesn't mean there's no flood risk

[194:00] um it is just a line on the map so FEMA does have a new flood insurance system so it is a risk-based approach it's called risk 2.0 so that actually generates flood insurance rates for any home based on potential flooding risk so we would remove all of them from the special Hazard flood zone that we've identified great thanks Brandon that's it thanks um just a couple of follow-up questions and thanks Bob you actually knocked one off off of the list so not going to ask about the timeline um one of the things that I heard in the comment and thank you to everybody who showed up and stayed late with us to come in was around the accumulation of trash and and you know other things and I'm wondering if you could just speak a little bit to that of you know the work that's done to make sure that that these areas stay clear of trash because I imagine that impacts their effectiveness too yeah yeah so

[195:00] um I I don't remember the I may have missed that comment from the speaker but in general [Music] um in the master plan that we looked at last year with Council one of the six themes was increased maintenance and we heard that from the community that was already on on our staff teams radar that we needed to do enhancements and we're bringing forward a budget proposal this year to add staff to our maintenance team and so we're looking at that and and want to improve the the rate that we cycle through the system and and do maintenance so I don't know if that answers your question and Brandon may have heard it and can speak to it sure I didn't hear the exact public comment uh that you're referring to but we have maintenance Crews a difficult um issue about this Goose Creek reach six behind Edgewood is we don't have consistent easements currently as a city

[196:00] so we have helped some of the neighbors do maintenance in their backyard where we do have easements and that's debris removal trash cleanup that doesn't significantly impro increase the capacity just that routine maintenance but it does help remove debris blockages and things like that so we did see a lot of debris come down uh even recently this weekend with the rain that we've received so we do our best in the areas that we do have access to it's very difficult so one of the trees that fell down in a neighbor's backyard along this reach we had no way to access it from either side so we actually had to Crane it over power lines from the Edgewood Street so it just speaks to the importance of having that consistent continuous system mark thank you Aaron um a persistent theme of the comments tonight has been the lack of Community engagement uh Joe could you

[197:02] speak to that because I think there's a difference between engagement prior to moving forward and engagement in the concept context of we've already decided on our path now let's engage with the community to see how we can make it prep you know perhaps a little better at the margins and looking at the step memo it appears that they've been four opportunities for engagement since January of 2021 um which garnered less than 100 responses in total so I'm I'm trying to understand how we can represent that we have had robust Community engagement to this point and I've been wondering if you could speak to that sure so up to this point in terms of the community engagement I I believe the staff memo had a table that summarized all the different versions of Engagement that there have been over the years I will acknowledge that for this

[198:01] particular project or plan [Music] get those words mixed up the for this particular plan we had the covid situation in the middle of it which definitely had an impact on on our ability to do engagement and how we could do it that impacted projects and plans across the city so so that's definitely a factor from uh and for me my role changed in the middle of all of this and so I'm looking at what's been done historically and as I'm talking to the staff team to bring this forward and wanting to vet it and make sure it's ready I I'm looking at it and seeing how it compares to other things that we've done and it seems like a similar level of Engagement and while the numbers um of of respondents to surveys or participation in events can seem really

[199:00] low that's honestly fairly typical for utilities projects we as much as we try we don't generate a lot of interest in the work that we do and sometimes we get to a point like this in the project or a plan and and there becomes interests like we've had tonight so I I understand the concerns of the community and I know in my own household you get things in the mail and you get information and and you pass it aside so it's easy to miss but I I believe the team has provided opportunity and there have been door hangers and letters and things like that but those things can be easy to miss as well I think part of the initial part of your question also goes to what comes next and there absolutely would be an opportunity to work with not just the reach six community members but everybody um that would be involved in the projects that come out of this plan to

[200:02] work with property owners and make sure as we develop the more detailed design that um were addressing the concerns to the extent we can and and really all of this boils down to a value judgment and often for these flood projects there are competing interests and really important competing values and it's it's not possible to to have a perfect solution that addresses all of them but we do our best to find a reasonable compromise and really do want to partner with the community to do that so that would be Our intention going forward Joe I you know I read the same table that was included in the in the memo and the bulk of the community engagement responses occurred around 2017 and 18 so I'm I I'm suggesting that the 100 responses we've gotten in the last couple of years doesn't really represent a very robust engagement I

[201:02] sympathize with the difficulties of doing so a because of the intrinsic lack of sexiness of talking about utilities projects but I I'd be very I don't really don't want to place the onus of lack of engagement on the community and saying you guys didn't you know you guys didn't step up when we gave you an opportunity to I think it's kind of our job to be sufficiently aggressive and providing engagement so that we get them engaged and so that we don't have situations like tonight where everybody's coming before us and saying I heard about this you know three weeks ago four weeks ago that to me is not a very good um uh situation for us to be in and to me it doesn't represent the kind of Engagement I would really like to see and and when you work with the community assuming we we authorize this tonight

[202:01] when you work with the community does that entail the possibility of changing the actual design or we're just talking about I'll you know I'll move this over two feet that's over two feet I'll leave this tree and I'm gonna cut that tree instead um does it get to anything more fundamental such as a substantial alteration um to the reach six program if that should be what people are desirous of yeah so does it mean to engage with the community at post approval I understand and I I think some of the feedback we're getting tonight is is um placed in a way as if we were at the final design stage now and I I do appreciate that and accept the challenge to do better going forward but in this mitigation plan as we mentioned several times tonight we're looking at over 30

[203:01] different Alternatives in a large scale area and trying to narrow that down based on technical feasibility and the general level of community engagement that we do for this stage of of a plan and a project and so um in terms of how engagement will impact the design going forward taking reach six for example that's adjacent to Edgewood is there a likelihood that that will get moved to Glenwood or Iris of a street further to the north that's highly unlikely but the types of other modifications that you mentioned like can this tree be saved or can you move something two feet this way or that way those are the types of discussions that we've generally had like on the examples I gave of the main sewer projects and others like this that we have done and

[204:00] we've been able to work with the property owners to find a compromise so I'm not sure if that answers your question but those are my thoughts no I was really asking you that could you could those changes well those conversations involved in substantive changes to the Divine for reach six not necessarily moving into a different street but narrowing the canal going to a 50 years standard as opposed to 100 Year standard I'm just trying to understand what is further um Community engagement will look like if we're moving forward with this tonight and it seems to me that we're kind of nibbling at the margins once we give you the go-ahead to do this I I would say that's somewhat true some of the public comment mentioned that a hundred trees would be removed or a number of trees I from my discussions with Brandon and the team I don't know that we're at a stage yet where we know that for example so the the specifics of

[205:03] the the design and what the channel exactly would look like and there are options on on how to make it wider or narrower I think you know Brandon correct me if I'm wrong those types of things are all on the table so I I think there's there still is an opportunity for some substantive changes to happen but if I might jump in I think we if we approve the plan is recommended we are proven what's in the plan so like Mark you used the example of 50 versus 100 Year well the plan says 100 years so we're a proven plan that it would be approving plants at 100 years so it would be have to be within the confines of that plan if you made major alterations to what's in the plan I assume you'd have to come back that's exactly what I was asking yeah that's correct and we have I I have asked the team about different levels of flood protection and could that minimize construction impacts I think that particular set of options won't make

[206:02] substantive changes but Channel design and and the way we go about it there still are some options Mark you got anything else that's all for me thank you I got one then I got Tara and Rachel uh so uh one of the people speaking mentioned uh 10 years of construction and uh if you can just clarify uh in on a per reach basis like when you're doing one one reach about how long would construction take within I mean reach six is obviously the one of concern for tonight so we'll use that one about how long might it take from beginning to end of construction right we we typically see these projects for the length of reach we're talking about for reach six specifically take anywhere from eight months to a year of construction activities okay thanks thanks for that so just want to clarify we're not looking at 10 years of construction one any one area Tara then Rachel

[207:00] one of the community members mentioned in their backyard it would go from the creek or the channel would go from five feet to 30 feet is that sound right and is that what it's going to look like all along that in people's backyards the increase from 5 to 30 feet yeah so there are definitely some narrow reaches back there and I think that creates a very difficult engineering challenge um so we do recognize that and it's a matter of where that additional conveyance capacity would come from so that's where we'd actually have to see where that channel location would make the most sense and also working with the property owners who would be impacted by that channel alignment so it would increase pretty significantly from what it is currently today and that's really due to the need for the conveyance and it's a matter of what we do with that additional Corridor that it's really important we talk about

[208:00] Rachel okay um so obviously we've heard a lot about you know some people receive no notice or or minimum note minimal notice um I will say like I always got noticed from the city when my house has been impacted so I'm wondering did we brick or what are we going to do differently going forward to make sure that impacted community members get notice you asked did we I didn't hear the word I said bricked but it's not like my finest word choice ever do you want to clarify did we did we fumble did we do something different did we not give notice but my impression is that is not the case and and uh definitely don't want to put the team on the spot here tonight I I believe we use the traditional tools to to let people know um as I said in my own experience that it's it's easy to miss things so

[209:02] um we'll definitely review that as a team and if we did if we did have a miss or do less than we should have we will let people know and we will do better in the future maybe what can people expect in terms of notice going forward if if there's a a step in the process that people might want to engage on or something happen in a decision point or something they could weigh in on yeah for well for this uh for reach number six I think it was mentioned that Joanna kind of LED some walking tours in the last couple weeks that Brandon was part of and I I know we have an email list for this group of community members and so for the people who are really interested that just the direct communication from us would typically happen in the next phase so if if the concept plan is approved tonight we will know generally what the routes are and and be

[210:00] talking directly to people going forward and we'll all 500 or 700 households get mailed notice of this going forward and like there'll be in addition to you can sign on to an email they'll you'll get noticed um so typically if we move forward with the plan tonight we would Outreach to the people that would be directly impacted by Construction in the next phase So currently that would be scheduled to be this uh Goose Creek reach six section so that would be the community and neighborhood we would be working most directly with um through the design phase because we wouldn't design each of the improvements all at once we would do it kind of in that order based on the prioritization criteria and when we have the available budget and I do just want to mention um it's been a long engagement period and we are Engineers so we are doing our best and we do have Consultants that help us with that but we've really identified this as a need within the utility and um we're actively hiring a

[211:01] Communications position just to support our utility wholly I think we have a a different challenge where we do have a lot of impacts to people's properties a lot of above grade utility so it's really important that we do do our best job to engage people make sure they know what's going on and this has been a long run and we we recognize that as a need for the utility as well and that was a good segue maybe into my next question um you said like you would you would do engagement with impacted community members and then you sort of got an answer my question is what is an impacted Community member because I was pretty impacted on another flood mitigation project but I was not an adjacent neighbor so how will those folks get reached out to that kind of attached to me you know 500 homes question as well yeah I guess I I can speak to we do have an email listserv um that anybody can sign up for so when things change or things are going on it like the meeting

[212:01] tonight we do send out email notifications about milestones in the project uh upcoming engagement opportunities to reach us we have contact information on the web page we also have project information on the web page and then typically with these processes we'll start off the design with a community meeting just to let everybody know what's going on let them know how best to engage where they can find designs what we're thinking for that process so that's typically how we normally run these projects within the utility one of the um Columbine students who call themselves an earth Guardian talked about people who living who live in trailers being hit hardest and so I I guess I just want to understand like how well they hear about it because they're not going to look at the website they're not going to probably have a lot of people will not have watched this meeting and so you know I want to make sure that the folks here are getting the emails and also other people are getting the emails I'm not clear on how or notice on how we're going to make sure

[213:00] that we've shored that up for this yeah so um I think one of the things that we learned during the master plan process when we did some of that Outreach and we used our community connectors was that there were people who were being left out and and groups of community members who were being left out of our Outreach and so whether it's this project plan or the projects that come from it or or just our CIP in general I think taking what we learned in that Master Plan process and making sure that we're doing the Outreach in a more comprehensive and Equitable way would be Our intention going forward and using the resources of the city to to help us reach all parts of the community the community and connectors will definitely get engaged cool um next question we heard I heard a couple people talk about Floral Street option and should have considered that is that off the table if we vote Yes tonight no it's it's still Aaron already asked

[214:01] it sorry I guess I didn't hear it still an option and it wouldn't it wouldn't re result in no need to make Channel improvements and reach number six it it would reduce what's needed there but there still would be impacts okay um if if we had done engagement differently and and perhaps more to people's liking would would engineering options have changed like could might we have something different on the table had we done different Outreach it's a fair question and and for a plan like this it might be a situation where we look at 30 Alternatives and maybe there are three of them that look like they're pretty feasible and we don't have a strong feeling between them that's really not the case here as I've talked about it and looked it over myself with the project team it really boils down to one alternative

[215:01] and and the concept that we're bringing forward and unfortunately the area that's of the most concern the Topography of the region and just where the natural Creek and where the water wants to flow it reached it we can't avoid reach six if we do enhanced flood protection okay thanks and and it was some of the comments there's a perception that that's not the case but as I've reviewed this plan I don't see that last question when you when you um go in to do the widening is there a way to you know do it in in pieces within the different reaches that are you know allowing you know maybe some of the equipment to get in or or something differently that you can start trees regrowing quicker because I hear a lot of concern about the trees might I've looked at cottonwood trees for my own yard and been advised against them because they grow so fast like they're they're five feet a year or something like that so those could in theory like

[216:01] in two years if you can get something in and I don't know changed equipment you could have trees regrowing before the Project's even completed that makes sense yeah and in several roles ago at the city I used to do some of this project management work myself and I do know that there are techniques that can be used to Stage construction and do different things to minimize impacts and so I'm I'm sure the techniques have involved evolved and Brandon and the team that's doing the work now could probably run circles around the 20 Joe 20 years ago but certainly we would be looking at those types of things where there is a really important environmental feature that we want to save okay thanks uh Lauren and then maybe we can move to deliberations thank you um sort of early in your presentation you

[217:01] mentioned having to meet a lot of federal requirements because of wetlands and things like that so what kind of environmental impact studies would have to be done as this moves forward yeah um so number one is Wetlands mapping there's also migratory bird act and um there's an ecological surveys you have to do in advance so some of the species that have been mentioned tonight we would need to look for those prior to any construction and also make sure there's no nesting and things like that so it all falls under the Army Corps of Engineers and they consult with the other Federal Regulatory Agencies but if you do find species of concern they'll typically give you a mitigation criteria so I always use there's Preble Meadows jumping mouse is a pretty common threatened specie in the county and there's specific types of construction activities you do in specific type times

[218:01] of the year to mitigate your impacts to species like that so depending on what the species is they can give you those recommendations but generally speaking we that we will be doing a number of sort of looking at environmental impacts and impacts on specifically on protected species and things like that as yeah so we won't we won't more than likely we won't have to do a formal environmental impact statement but we will need to consult with the Army Corps of Engineers which they will dictate how deep of detail we need to go into for those documents thank you um kind of following up on Rachel's questions around notification and you mentioned notifying people who would be affected by construction but could we send the mailer out to people who are in the flood you know in the hundred year flood zone for that section okay and that's part of it

[219:01] um and then you know specifically as we look at this section six or I'm sorry reach six um I know for the South Boulder Creek flood mitigation we had like sort of a 25 check-in on the design and then like a 75 is that could we do that similar kind of a thing and would there be a b or c options at those stages or would there be other stages that you might recommend a check-in at we we could certainly do updates at different levels of design um South Boulder Creek is is a little bit different situation because of Cu South and the annexation and and and there's just a whole comprehensive set of stuff there

[220:01] um that's way deeper so for reach number six I I don't know that we would have as many options as something as comprehensive as the whole South Boulder Creek and CU South situation but we could certainly do design check-ins or that kind of thing whenever Council wanted at whatever levels seems like with the they can see that this is a challenging section with sort of the Steep Hillside and I believe having done some work in those areas that that Hillside soil tends to be fairly unstable um being right up against lots that aren't particularly deep where mitigation or widening of the creek is going to have a larger impact so like the locate the the precise location of that channel will have a big impact on the people involved and there might be

[221:02] different things that we're weighing back and forth with exactly where that channel gets located and if there are options I think it might be worth bringing that back to council all right thanks Lauren so let's deliberate who would like to kick off the discussion don't be shy folks they're Matt need to find that unmute button didn't I appreciate that um thanks for yeah just thanks for the feedback we've gotten from community and appreciate the presentation on this well you know an interesting theme is this sort of having it both ways in a good way right which is can we have proper flood protection while at the same time maintaining sort of quality Wildlife environments and yet yes I am um and I think that's exactly what we

[222:01] should do and I think it's within the context that you know we are choosing just a concept here from which we will further Define the details around it and you know this isn't really an interpretive or subjective exercise this is objective and it's really predicated on Sound Engineering and I think you know you have to get to a place where we can trust our team to eliminate the least viable options so that we have some some sound basis from which to work from and and I certainly understand the concerns of the community members about the Outreach but there's when we're dealing with Sound Engineering issues that we have to sort of start from that basis from which to then gain input because if we're sort of engineering by by Community I think we get into a real tough place in terms of how we actually get to a desirable outcome and so I think there has to always be some pre engineering that has to go to vetting these viable options and get to a better place and I I feel confident that our team can meet those needs of the

[223:00] community while also meeting the long-term goals of our flood protection and I just want to go back to the three students we had right you know Ren Gavin and no I mean they did a master class on linking public comments thematically between themselves and told us about the future generations and the impacts of climate change will have in making these flood events more severe and I think we have to build that resilient community and that impacts all of us in the now but there has to I hope there's comfort in knowing that that'll build more resiliency going forward um and and so I would just ask of staff that as we Embark we really work closely with these neighbors and do what we do in a community that values the environment which is leverage those natural landscapes as we deal with defining that detail in the project going forward thanks Matt well said Nicole yeah thanks um and thanks thanks Matt for your comments um thanks thanks to everybody involved especially those of

[224:00] you who came out tonight and who have been kind of talking with us over the last few weeks um this discussion to me really seems to be at the Leading Edge of a lot of hard discussions that our community is going to be having in the coming years as the climate crisis worsens we're at such high risk for flooding and we can't make the flood water go elsewhere so what we can do is try to help it pass through our community in the least destructive way possible and I'll vote Yes with that goal in mind and I know that's not what all of you edgewater's in the audience really wanted to hear as Dave mentioned this project is just about to move into the design phase which means that it's still a concept that hasn't been fully detailed and defined there will be a lot of opportunity for engagement on the design including some one-on-one discussions with affected property owners and staff and I don't say that as someone who just sits up here and makes decisions that impact other people in the community I live right by CU South and like you I

[225:01] had not heard much about what was going on prior to the nitty-gritty design details starting to come up my neighborhood also had to wrestle with these competing values of safety for people outside our neighborhood enjoy in our own neighborhood but once the concept was in place we had a lot of discussions around the design of that site before it was finalized and because of those discussions the final design did change in ways that significantly benefited our community they took our concerns into consideration and tried to help us maintain some of that joy that we were looking for in that area I know it won't be the same as it is now but I really hope that you will partner with us and with staff on staff I hope you'll continue to partner with the community especially more as we get into this design stage and hopefully the end result will create another magical space that you and future residents can enjoy and while it won't feel good for a while I know this it doesn't feel good to

[226:00] those of us living next to CU South either hopefully in time it will be even more magical knowing that you can enjoy the area while many others outside of your neighborhood are safe and just for for us to think about for moving forward since it's the not not going to be the first hard discussion we're going to have like this I'd really love for future councils to get some feedback what's going well what isn't going well as you mentioned Joe so that we know where there are ways that we can improve we're all learning together at the moment and because we have many more decisions like this coming it really does seem valuable to know how we can improve and what we should keep doing and as we do more of this work I hope we can get better and better at the sort of compassionate partnership that I've seen from your team with neighborhoods so we can keep more of us safe while helping people continue to enjoy their homes Mark and then maybe I'll call on myself and and then Tara and we'll see if we can move us forward go ahead Mark yeah um

[227:00] I want to start with a couple of premises obviously flood mitigation is required I don't think there's any significant dispute over that we can have conversations about the extent of it but it is required something has to happen but to use Rachel's term I I do think we bricked our community engagement responsibilities in this case and committing to the community that we will talk to you after we've made the decision as to how to proceed is sort of in the um verdict first then the trial category of of operation um I would love to support this as is um I actually have quite a bit of faith that Joe and his team have come up with the what I think will be the best possible solution but I think it's our responsibility to take that argument to the community before we make that decision and despite the the

[228:02] difficulties in uh conducting public engagement uh or getting people's attention that's our job and not doing that and and simply saying well you know we'll have good conversations with you afterwards um really doesn't make the grade for me so I think first of all that we should be re-engaging with the community and having this discussion frankly before we make this decision and and if obviously as I receive the will of counsel we're going to make a decision tonight I'm going to be a reluctant voter against on those grounds not because I'm against the the flood mitigation or even potentially this concept for providing flood mitigation but I don't think we've taken the proper steps with the community and if we don't think of a public engagement as as just some sort of show that we put on we need to take

[229:01] it seriously we need to conduct it seriously and we need to do a much better job than we did in this case and so if we are simply going to be forced to move forward this evening with a yes or no vote having very little to do with the merits of The Proposal I'm going to vote no thanks smart all right I'm going to call on myself um I appreciate the comments of my colleagues I mean it's a tough situation uh there's there's no question about it to the folks who are here tonight I appreciate your testimony and uh this is a about uh trade-offs right in terms of we need flood mitigation like this in our community we know that we're the highest flood risk in in the state of Colorado and uh the floods are only going to get worse as time goes on and so projects like this are required in order to make us the resilient community that will thrive in the future but there will be short-term impacts that are going to be painful and that's not avoidable but it

[230:01] is mitigatable and uh and so I think I think we need to move this forward but to do so and the most collaborative way possible that does minimize the negative impacts to the current Creek as possible so to that point I would uh like to say that hopefully we can do the Floral Drive alternative so I'd like to give some pretty clear Direction hopefully from Council because I heard from you that it's probably technically doable and so I'm hoping that a motion tonight could include direction to pursue that that approach because while uh changes to reach six will still be necessary I think they would be somewhat lessened right so there would be the need to move less water through that area and so therefore I think the impacts to that area would be lesser um and a couple of updates to council I think would be helpful so we can keep an eye on the process as well but I want to call out the testimony of arietta Roth from before I think Ms Roth has has left the meeting

[231:00] um but she had some excellent points that I think were already headed in this direction but I wanted to call them out because I thought they were really well put I will say there was something about where the bank impact should be that I didn't quite follow but I'll the the rest of them I'm going to mention these which were about clear and timely notification to Neighbors about changes to include residents in the design process going forward to retain as many trees as possible to plant more trees than there were before to utilize natural design strategies to not allow generalized Public Access and to do regular maintenance along that reach and I thought those were great suggestions and I think generally the direction we're ahead so I think Ms Roth for that constructive engagement and hopefully we can move forward I got Tara Bob Rachel so one of the we I know that I read the letters and so there was a lot of them

[232:00] so I apologize if I couldn't write back to every single person but I did want to wait to hear what everybody had to say one of the letters said if this happened to you you wouldn't want it I don't know if that person is here but I do know that I have a small backyard and my backyard sits on which one is it Joe the Blue Bell my next door neighbors flooded during the 2013 we did not flood until they of course pushed their water into our backyard and then we did flow but that's a whole other story so um if I lost from right now let's say the creek is five feet wide if it went to 30 feet that will probably have be half my backyard and I and there's a lot of cottonwoods there of course so I totally understand what you're saying so but I also know we need flood mitigation we just do need it so what I'm going to ask is even an extra foot or two when you're is

[233:01] Meaningful when you're losing a lot of your backyard so every single thing I'm going to ask that you can do to save as much as possible even if it means going slower I think would be worth it so I'm going to ask if you could if you need to slow down the design and take your time to figure out a way for people to to lose less of their backyard um then I think that it would be worth it and um that's what I have to say thanks I'll talk about the substance I agree with with what my colleagues have said as far as um obviously using natural design now you guys were already planning to do that and and I've seen like Judy I served in the mile high flood District board for a year and I've seen a lot of projects up and down the Front Range where where that's really been first and foremost that that um while there's and sometimes a need to disrupt the environment or to disrupt the channel uh to do that in such a way that it gets back to the Natural State

[234:02] as quickly as possible I know you guys are already thinking about that I agree with Aaron that the Floral Drive option sounds like it's better and if you guys are relatively agnostic about that and it has fewer impacts on reach six and that's certainly something we should pursue I agree with your offer of maybe checking in with us and with the community on a more formal basis at times you think are appropriate um I do want to reflect a little bit on on as Community engagement question because this seems to be one of the big issues um you know it breaks my heart and this has happened so many times um on so many different projects nothing to do with even necessary Public Works we have so many different things that we as a city are needing to do for the community good and um a group of people come forward and say well hold on a second here I just found out about this you know last month last week yesterday and I found out from a neighbor not from the city and I know on the other side of the coin the city staff tries so hard on

[235:00] community engagement you open houses are held and notices are sent out and websites are set up and everything that the community the staff can think of you know social media and so on and so forth and so I don't want to lay blame on any one side or the other because I know the staff tries really really really really hard on each one of these Community impacting projects to reach as many community members as possible and we have committee members to say I never heard and they're both right right some community members just simply didn't hear and and staff did try and and um I like to think that each one of these situations where we have that tension we have some tonight we learn from that process and we get better again not to be critical of Staff but I hope we learned some things from this that would cause us to figure out how on the next project the next project and quite frankly even later on in this project since we still a lot of community engagement ahead of us that we figure out better ways to engage with the community people have busy lives and sometimes they don't always um are aware of what's going on um and conversely sometimes we just miss as we just said we break it sometimes we we

[236:00] just miss opportunities to engage so I hope that that we will um I'm not sure the outcome would have been any different in other words if if we were to decide tonight oh let's just wait six months and you guys say well okay fine so then we come back you know in November my guess is from an injuring standpoint your answer is still going to be the same right we could probably have more conversations but if we waited on this and didn't move forward with allowing you to to work on the design phase my guess is your engineering answer your technical answer is not going to be a different six months from now regardless of how much Community engagement you had people might feel a little better about it but we'd probably be at pretty much the same place or if you had started some more robust Community engagement and reached out to more people six months earlier than than maybe um people felt that you did so I think we are where we are um again not not a criticism of of either the either the the uh the people delivering the message of the people receiving the message which obviously if people didn't hear the burden is on the communicator not

[237:01] not the recipient if someone genuinely didn't hear then they didn't hear and shame on us the collective us for not reaching out to somebody um so I guess I hope there's a lesson learned here um for future projects and for this project and I know I know we have a lot of work ahead of us over the next couple two three years on design and we're gonna have a lot of opportunity for Community engagement we're gonna get better and better at it so I do want to thank the community members who came out and shared their views um I think um if your Hope was your Hope was gosh you know don't touch reach six I think that's not going to happen because we do have some greater good to achieve here but if your Hope was to signal to the city staff that engagement could be better I think I think you did a really good job of that tonight and and I think other community members Downstream don't know pun intended we'll um we'll thank you for for those those improvements that you suggested so that's all I have thanks Mom Rachel

[238:01] thanks um and I also thank the community members who are out here and I you know I'm sure that you can probably read the tea leaves a little bit that um my reading is that there's going to be a majority of council that votes yesterday and I want to just invite you as someone who did long-term engagement on a topic um exactly like this that it's um it does bring your neighborhood together and it is something that if you engage on as Nicole said you can shape the outcomes in ways that that are meaningful so I also want to say with that in mind that it will be this Council that's making the decision tonight and I hope that any anger will come at us and not staff because they will just be doing what we're asking them to do and sometimes community members get very mad at the decision and take it out on the staffers who are working on the project so that that doesn't move any of us forward and I would just really invite people to direct anger our way I'm a little bit

[239:00] concerned about mayor brockett's motion request to limit to Floral drive because um this is a life Safety project and if Floral Drive means that we can you know we have to lose I don't know 25 years of flood protection for people who might die in a hundred year flood I'm not for that so I would be okay with the motion that says you know preferentially you know something like you know Floral Drive or something like it that minimizes impacts to neighbors and for but um the one thing I disagree with a little bit that was said tonight by my colleagues is um someone said our number one job is engagement and and I will say again I think we it sounds like we bricked on this but I think our number one job is Public Safety and this is about safety and protecting people from from dying in the next flood which is coming so I will not be supporting delay um and and that probably surprises no one I understand feelings that are not happy right now but with that I'm going to go ahead and make a motion

[240:01] um to approve let's see approve the upper goose and Two Mile Canyon Creek ugt flood mitigation plan with a preference if it is equally as good a flood protection for floral uh the Floral Drive option thanks for that Rachel and that was exactly what I wanted to do not to require it so appreciate your comments on that do we have a second got a motion and a second I think uh the motioner and the seconder have already spoken to the question does anyone else have uh additional comments before we go to a vote seeing none is a show of hands for this one roll call let's do it thank you all right we will start this roll call for item

[241:01] 5A with councilmember Weiner yes Yates yes Benjamin yes mayor Brockett yes council member faulkers yes friend yes Joseph yes spear yes and mayor Pro tem wallet early on the basis of our public engagement failures no all right item 5A the upper Goose Two Mile Canyon Creek flood mitigation plan is hereby approved with a vote of eight to one thanks everyone uh for your engagement on the topic and do rest assured that City staff will be doing significant Outreach and engagement during the next phases all right

[242:00] we're before we move on to our next item I'd like to do a time check with Council it's um it's getting late we have one more item in front of us but perhaps we can do at least some sections of it Bob yeah thanks for that Aaron I was gonna suggest the same thing um we do have a I think we have one item left and it is a public hearing so I hate I'm I'm I'm loathe to postpone the public hearing because um we've got staff here and we've got at least one person signed up to speak and maybe the applicants here as well so can I make a suggestion to my colleagues that we go ahead and hear hopefully Marcia brief brief staff presentation um open the public hearing I hear the testimony that might be offered but then and then adjourn for the night I think Aaron if I understand correctly we have actually 30 days in which to make a decision after a public hearing is that correct that's correct and I believe that the latest regularly scheduled council meeting would be June 15th okay

[243:00] so I guess my suggestion to my colleagues would be let's do the public hearing and then let's adjourn for the night because it's kind of late um and then we'll leave to CAC to schedule the actual deliberation about if that's okay it sounds good to me I think when we get there we'll need a formal motion but as a direction I think that sounds good or people feel like that's pretty good for all right I'm generally seeing nodding heads all right well let's do um the what I'm sure will be a fascinating presentation we can allow I believe the applicant is here we can hear some words from them do the public hearing and then maybe have a motion to continue I will need to read it into the record yes thank you thank you Alicia please do thank you all right our next item 5B under public hearings is the consideration of a motion to approve a landmark alteration certificate to rehabilitate and add on to building L the former nurse's dormitory at the Academy of Mapleton Hill at 2543 4th Street this is previously addressed 311 Mapleton Avenue a pending individual Landmark per sections

[244:02] 9-11-18 of the voter Revised Code it's referenced under his 2023-00018 thank you good evening Council my name is Marcy gerwing a principal planner in planning and development services and I will make this quick um tonight's uh hearing is a quasi-judicial hearing and so I'll go through the process it'll begin with council members noting any ex parte contacts followed by a staff presentation then the applicant has a chance to present and then the public hearing is open for public comment Council may ask questions after each one of those after the final person from the public has spoken the applicant has a chance to respond to anything that was said the public hearing is then closed and Council discusses promotion requires an affirmative vote of at least five members to pass and a record of the hearing is available in Central Records

[245:02] so with that I would pass it back over to you mayor for ex parte contacts has anyone had any ex parte Communications on this topic I'm not seeing any well um I'll elbow Rachel Martin when they come back in to make sure that they have negative response as well okay this is a landmark alteration certificate and your criteria for review is found in 9 11 18 of the boulder Revised Code hold on Lauren and Rachel have you had an expert take on Communications all right that's that's nine of us ten okay go ahead and the criteria is that the proposed work preserves enhances or restores and does not damage uh the exterior architectural features of the property that it is not adversely affect the historic uh or architectural value and that the architecture arrangement in color is compatible with the character and that economic feasibility incorporation of energy efficient design

[246:00] and enhanced access for the disabled is considered in your decision the options in front of you tonight are to approve the application deny the application provide the opportunity to withdraw the application or as just discussed continue the item this application began back in June of 2019 when the designation applications were submitted those have been on hold but we anticipate bringing those forward to you all in 2023 this Lac application was submitted in February of earlier this year and the committee referred it to the landmarks board for review on April 12th the board conditionally approved the application in a unanimous vote and on May 4th Council voted to call up the application which brings us here this evening the subject property is located on the northwest corner of 4th and Mapleton adjacent to the Mapleton Hill historic

[247:02] district the property has a very fascinating history which I will just summarize this evening in a few sentences which is that it was the home of two institutions that really shaped Boulder the first being the Boulder Colorado sanitarium which has ties to the sanitarium that JH catalog Kellogg ran in Battle Creek Michigan this sanitarium ran through the 1950s at its Heyday it had its own food production a nurse's school and about 30 buildings total today there are five structures that remain from the sanitarium's history and each of these structures is proposed for landmark designation and are pending tonight's discussion though is focused on the nurse's dormitory which was constructed in 1931 and designed by the

[248:00] reading and Sun's architectural firm who also designed the Boulderado and the uni Hill Elementary School so the proposed work has four main components um beginning with the restoration of the building including Windows cornice masonry removal of an elevator tower that was added onto the East facade and removing the exterior exit stairs on the North and South elevations second is the modification of Door and Window openings on each of the elevations including new window openings dropping the sill level of Windows on the east and north facades in replacement of all exterior doors third is the construction of additions including an elevator and stair Tower an enclosed walkway on the west or rear elevation balconies and decks on the south and north elevations and finally Landscaping including the construction of retaining walls and patios enclosed by glass walls

[249:01] so going to the site plan you can see changes to the footprint include removing the um stair tower that was added onto the front of the building and construction of a new star and elevator tower on the west side and then balconies and patios on the North and South ends of the building going to the East Elevation the stair Tower to be removed is there in the center and those openings will be restored there were a few window openings proposed on this elevation as well as the addition that you can see on the left side of the image it's on the second story it's a kind of a greenhouse Edition moving around to the South Side you can see that Greenhouse Edition on the top of the Second Story portion as well as the balconies and the retaining wall proposed at the rear of the building moving around to the west or the back of the building this is where the new stair

[250:01] and elevator Tower would be as well as modification to Window and Door openings and then finally going to the north elevation which is the um side that the building is approached from also includes removal of the non-historic stair and construction of the balcony as well as Window and Door modifications on to the staff analysis looking at the criteria for review as well as as the design guidelines we found that the restoration is aligned aligns and is encouraged by the general design guidelines and will restore the building to its original appearance as documented by historic photographs and we are fortunate enough to have the original plans one of the conditions of approval that the landmarks board made in their motion was to catalog the condition of these different elements for the window and door openings this is

[251:02] primarily where the board's discussion was and staff's recommendation of the appropriateness of Window and Door modifications based on the prominence of each elevation so the addition of new openings on the west or the rear are appropriate new window openings and modifications of existing openings on the East and North are not appropriate so the conditions of approval are to revise the proposal to eliminate the proposed new window openings on the East Elevation and the uppermost opening of the north elevation because those are the most visually prominent and then to revise the design to maintain the historic window openings on the North and East elevations moving to the additions generally staff in the landmarks board found the proposed additions to be consistent with the design guidelines they do not directly obscure the character defining features of the building they are

[252:00] clearly of their own time and however the mass and scale of the Contemporary style distracts from the overall character and so the conditions were to modify the design language to lighten it up a little bit still keep them in set from the masonry walls and then redesign the balconies to minimize their visual impact including analysis from public rights way including public trails and then finally there were a few detailed conditions including revising the location of the retaining wall to be outside of the conservation area shown in the recorded development agreement there's a very small portion of the retaining wall that intersects with the conservation piece and well that's not directly a historic preservation piece we wanted to ensure a smooth process as this then goes into development review and then there are final details about the retaining wall drainage trees Etc

[253:03] and so with that staff and the landmarks board recommend that city council approve the application with conditions um the main question in front of you all for the discussion is does the project meet the standards for issuance of a Lac if yes approve the application it would then go to the committee level to work out the final details if no deny the application and I have the criteria for review if you'd like to reference those or the conditions and with that I'm happy to answer any questions you may have Mercy was very edifying um and so questions from RC keeping in mind that we can if we continue we can ask follow-up questions when we come back to it any questions tonight Lord um so with the recommendation around revisions

[254:00] so that the new additions are more in line with the architectural character um who would that come back to us for final approval or does that just go to the landmarks board it would go to the landmarks design Review Committee who meet weekly and would work through the conditions I know the applicant has some images to show of kind of what they're thinking in terms of revisions thank you further questions for staff and I would invite the applicant to come up and say a few words slides too so I can speak from here yes if you could just introduce yourself and speak from the podium there yes good evening I'm Nora bluntner and I'm a consultant in historic preservation more than 40 years of experience and a long-term Bolder resident I helped write the design guidelines for

[255:00] the Chamberlain historic district here but I've also written guidelines for historic preservation and more than 100 communities across the country including Denver Salt Lake San Jose San Antonio Seattle Tacoma a variety of communities and I mentioned that because it's from that National perspective that I want you to think about what preservation means and how it relates to this building with me oh I'm sorry next slide please I'm not sure who I'm talking thank you um the development team is headed by Michael Bosman Gary Berg and Gary is here this evening to help answer any questions you may have Mike mulhern of the mulhern group is the architect and I mentioned that our experience because of that not only has it been National but also locally here you see images of the other Academy on University Hill and we worked with Gary

[256:01] Berg on that some years ago with the city and of course that now is a is a wonderful asset to the community that we're all very pleased with we are asking that you approve the project as submitted and that is almost as the landmark sport approved but we would ask that you reconsider a couple of the items that they denied and I will go into that in a little bit more detail here next slide please I wanna from that National perspective or sorry yeah from the national perspective I want to point out that sometimes we lose sight of what preservation really means and we tighten up too much and get too restrictive it really means hitting on three of these very important points one keeping a building at active use two making alterations that are compatible

[257:00] in order to keep it functional and three preserving those key features that do Define its historic significance but that does not exclude appropriate alterations next slide please I do want to reiterate that the restoration aspects that staff mentioned are extensive and expensive it's going this building is going to require a lot of work and the window restoration itself is going to be enormous removing the incompatible Elevator Shaft and restoring the central stair element will also be very very important while the windows need restoration it also gives us an opportunity to be certain that they are easily operable by senior citizens since this is an important new adaptive use with a new user group for which this building was not designed

[258:00] next please what oh maybe I'm out of sequencer and part of that oh yeah you're keeping me on my toes um and so adding windows to the north elevation which we really believe is a tertiary or a back of house wall of this building should be reconsidered you see the cut the quality of the wall on the left hand side here and the rendering shows the additional Windows these will enhance the livability of these spaces enormously and they're very important for that reason now part of the question here is the rating of this facade the design guidelines have criteria for determining whether a facade is primary secondary or tertiary and therefore indicates how rigorous the city should be in applying its guidelines the criteria are the degree

[259:00] of visibility from a public way and the extent of character-defining features that are important to that elevation you can see this is a very modest wall basically built its backup house and I'll show you a little bit more about that next slide please and historically the north wall which is pointed out here by the arrow was looking into basically undeveloped land it was not visible from a street or a major public way at this point even the trail that was a internal trail to the facility next slide please looking at the original architect's plans we'll see that this area was very functional it was back of house if you're going to go to the next slide we're zooming in on that and you can see that the spaces here were a trunk room a kitchenette and a laundry and a back door leading out to that undeveloped area now this is important in terms of

[260:01] considering how significant is that facade and how susceptible is it to alterations uh if we didn't go to the next slide I wanted to write your attention now to the East wall coming around the corner from that north wall there is a related issue because those spaces were a a kitchen and a laundry area the windows were higher they were at four foot two elevation the Sills they weren't needed to be operated operable by senior residents the rest of this elevation the windows sit on a sill a ledger of projecting brick line whereas those windows at the right hand most portion of the building are much higher now that is going to impact the quality of life for residents in that area in terms of being able to operate them or even be able to sit and look outside

[261:02] so that's a if you go to the next slide you will see the existing windowsill height is four feet two inches and a variety of standards and guidelines for accessibility and for senior living recommend still Heights much lower than that the recommendation would lower those windows to match those on the rest of the facade which is in keeping with the character of the building and yet enhancing the functionality of that part of the building next slide please the staff did reference that the Architects are all already working on refining some of the aspects that we got direction from the landmarks board the upper right was the one that submitted to the landmarks board the lower left is one still needs work but you can see lightening up the impacts and and making the the balconies more transparent so that you could see through to the rest of the of the building so that is the

[262:03] steps that they that the team will be going through in terms of of refining the designs for the balconies still helping to distinguish them as new not fake historic ornamentation on them a contemporary design but in keeping with the character of the building at the next slide you'll see some of the Precedence that we're studying this is an example of a similar kind of transparent balcony design on an historic building where you can see old and new but new doesn't compete with the old and you could see the historic character of the building and that's what we're after in the next slide we're pursuing that same idea with the deck that is proposed on the south side which is rated as a as a secondary elevation the original architect strongly showed that this was always intended to be attacked next slide please and so uh the objectives here are to

[263:02] continue to refine the structure to make it thinner and lighter and even more transparent so that it sits lightly on the on the roof of the that two-story wing the next slide shows some examples of the kinds of Precedence that we're looking at of how to balance transparency and functionality and the lightness of the structure with the with the degree of of glass that's needed there we're looking forward to Great discussions working with the design Review Committee in terms of coming up with refinements to those to those Concepts next slide please so I've highlighted a couple of the points that we would really ask that you reconsider in the spirit of the Adaptive use of this building in particular of the special population that it needs to serve and recognizing that this building's been vacant now for a long time and we want to get it back

[264:01] into Service as quickly as possible I believe this project does hit on all three of those aspects of historic preservation it will keep a building and active use it will have a con it will accommodate compatible alterations and it will preserve the key features and characteristics of the structure then finally as staff mentioned it I wanted to if you go to the next slide please the last slide I did want to mention uh we all love the Boulderado and we would certainly consider that it retains its historic significance even though it has undergone several alterations throughout its history you'll notice here that a brick entry on the south side was removed that of course who have all died and the porch that was added in front on the first floor and we've all enjoyed the second floor balcony that was subsequently enclosed with glass these are all alterations in keeping with the spirit of this building and we're asking

[265:01] to do something similar with the nurses quarters thanks very much thank you nor I appreciate that um and so just a quick thought for you uh see if you might send us an email it sounds like we're probably going to continue the hearing but with maybe a summary of those comments that probably help us as we come to a final decision to hear the future meeting thanks for that any questions for Mr winter tonight just a quick question all right this that was very helpful presentation and I look forward to having a copy in front of us as well this is a little bit off the point on the Lac but I was just kind of curious how many um housing units does the developer hope to put in there Gary great that's it the answer number six for the Mike's purpose of getting it on the microphone um any other questions right uh seeing none let's go to the public hearing and we have one person signed up so uh Lynn SQL you get three

[266:01] minutes to speak to us no no um putting seniors in the line of fire on the wild fire Urban and Wildlife Urban inner folks is unwise the whole of the Mapleton project should not have been built to start with Michael bosma bulldozed one of the landmark cat Cottages he'll say it wasn't him it was someone that some Rogue person that broke in and and drove a bulldozer like how many people can drive a bulldozer if they're not working on the property you know I find his story very and sustainable or unbelievable um there was a fire also on the property on a trailer of his that's putting me at risk I live about four blocks from this place um let's see

[267:01] I say less is more particularly on the wooy the wildlife Urban interface um do not give this project any subsidies if they if they have certain rights there's nothing I can do to stop them but I'm certainly would not approve an Lac um also this is super high-end housing um 40 some thousand dollars a month for one of their places that you can live in there plus uh something like um let's see about five million dollars you put down and then you get 85 percent of it back when you die this is a big money making um Enterprise in this area in in my immediate neighborhood and I in no way supported it's going to drive up my or already my property taxes went up 445

[268:01] 000 from 900 000 um to 1.35 in my place here um I don't consider my home my cash cow I consider my home a place where I lived and my homeowners um well my taxes I mean my property taxes just went up from six thousand to nine thousand um this 311 Mapleton project is going to harm me directly and I don't in any way approve of anything to do with it um yeah and why would anyone put seniors in the line of fire it threatens me there's one way out and I'm not going to be able to get out of my own neighborhood when the fire comes and the other day I tried to get homeowners insurance because my homeowner's insurance went up from 1500 a year 1600 a year to 3 500. so I got

[269:02] another policy and in the process I found that I can't get they won't write me a policy because I'm in the fire zone and um that's right your time is up but thank you for your testimony all right so that's I know I will now close the public hearing and continue now would be a good time Bob yeah I move that we continue this public hearing uh to a date set by C.A Siebert and no event later than June 15th actually Aaron can I just ask a question do we have to pick a date certain tonight or is that with that final date being within the 30 days good enough I I believe as Bob suggested CAC would set it as June 15th being the latest possible meeting perfect do we have a second second motion a second uh all in favor we'll show of hands

[270:00] okay that's unanimous so the hearing is continued and we'll send it to CAC to schedule it for a future business meeting no later than June 15th thanks to the applicant for your time tonight and we'll come back to you before too long all right that brings us to the end of our agenda any final thoughts before we close up for the night wanted to thank thanks Dane just in case you were needed appreciate it we'll see you next time we discuss make sure you all staying late for sure okay seeing nothing else I'll gavel is closed at 10 21 PM thanks everybody [Music] thank you [Music]