October 26, 2022 — Housing Advisory Board Regular Meeting

Transcript

[MM:SS] timestamps correspond to the YouTube recording.

[0:11] So that's my solution to that. Are we ready to open the meeting and start 6 o'clock Okay, we got to feedback for a second. Everything to be gone. Welcome everybody! To the October meeting of the boulder Housing Advisory Board. I'm Michael Lucas. The chair of him Happy to see our fellow board members And this is some commenters present, and so, calling the meeting to order, and we'll do roll call to see if we have a quorum. Julianne Ramsey. Are you present? Did. Thank you. point point of order, Michael. I don't think we're recording yet. Oh, yeah, I got a message that we were. Yeah, is that right? Okay, Thank you. yeah. Philip! Oh, great

[1:12] Great Terry Bomos, Great Danny Tadoro I don't think Danny is here. Brother, have 4 present, and Danny sometimes joins us late I'm hoping you'll do that. yeah, we do have a quorum, So we'll proceed with the meeting. Yeah, item number 2 on the agenda is reviewing the agenda. I am 3 will be approval of the September minutes, which are included in the packet for the meeting. I will have public participation following that, and before we have public participation, Jason, we'll read some of the rules regarding public comment.

[2:02] Open comment item 5 is matters from the board will be discussing 80 use this evening, and we actually will have a recommendation on the table for a potential vote. We'll be discussing future listening sessions. Previously We talked about waiting until we we're in live meetings again to do listening session. And that day may be coming. By the way, I know that I see Danny Torrid. I I am! Can you hear me? Alright? Hi! Everyone. Are you present? Wonderful? Yes, we can. Okay, our vice chair is here We not only have a form, we have a 100, So thank you all for being here. I'll also be discussing, combining the November and December meetings into one meeting to work around holidays. Item, 6 is matters to the staff from staff, and that will include a discussion of returning to in person needs to remember and then we'll be talking about tomorrow nights, Council study session on inclusionary housing update 9 11 will be a meeting debrief and we'll try to

[3:07] Oh, okay. adjourn bye 9 any questions before we keep going? Okay, item, 3 approval of the meetings from September 28. Nope. Do I have a motion from the board to approve our minutes from that meeting? Okay. So moved. Oh, no, I'm sorry. Never mind, I I I refrain I wasn't there Okay, is there a second Oh, oh, you can't, because you're right here. Yes. Okay, I think I see Terry moving I move to approve the minutes. I'm moving. I I can't. Yeah, I can't move. I can't move Yeah. Great. We have a second. Okay. Okay, all in favor of approving the September 20, eighth minutes. Say, I thank you. looks like we have a 4. Nothing vote with one abstention from Danny was absent from the meeting before we move on to public participation. Last J.

[4:17] thank you, Michael, so I'm gonna share the rules, and you might know we do not have our board Secretary tonight. So Tiffany is on vacation, very well deserved vacation, so please have patience. I'm trying to do her job in mind at the same time, so I can't guarantee everything is going to go smoothly just some quick rules. I think everybody should be familiar with how our virtual meetings have been going for the last, So we're trying to create a meaningful transparent engagement, and balance that with online security So it's to the the purpose. Is to conduct business of the city of Boulder that disrupt delay, or otherwise interfere, are prohibited.

[5:06] The time for speaking or asking questions. Maybe but so no person she'll speak except when recognized by the person presiding, which is Michael. How's the chair? You should not speak for longer than the time of the lot? It. I did figure out how to get the timer in a small box, so it's not on the big screen. each person shall register to speak so. If you, if your name is not properly displayed, please change that. If you cannot figure out how to do that, just let me know. and no video is permitted for people sharing their thoughts with the board. only the board members, employees, and invited speakers are allowed to do that, Michael shall enforce these rules as chair and please, give in mind the chat function. Is really just to make sure there to address any technical issues. Please do not try to communicate with the board on specific issues. Philip.

[6:05] yeah, I've been kind of curious about how the time limit works. It seems like people who arrive just to make a comment. You got a question Have 3 min to just say whatever they want. But then I have noticed also that at the end of the 3 min maybe someone like particular Michael will ask a question or a follow make a follow up comment is there some like I don't I don't quite understand what the what the ethos is supposed to Sure good, I mean, it's really up to the board members. So if someone's taking the time to be at the meeting and share their thoughts, I think it's it's common courtesy to you know.

[7:00] If you do have questions to ask them questions. So the 3 min is just purely. The amount of time they have to share If a board member wants to ask questions, it's really up to the chair to decide how long that you go. Does that make sense? and if if if I could, just yeah, basically all all these local local entity, public boards go off of essentially very modified Robert Roberts rule of order. And so, having a discussion during public comment with with someone speaking from the public, is usually kind of on orthodox. So if there's a clarification, I think it would, it should run through the chair If there's something we need to have a clarification, on, and then, typically after public comment closes then there's an opportunity to address those things. So if there's a clarification, I would say that for all of us we should address the chair.

[8:00] If If we have something we need to address to somebody, because just as a matter of early process, that's that's just usually way it goes so that we don't run kinda run off. Course and stuff like that off of the the the typical order, reflective of Robert's rules. Is that hopeful So Because standard point as well taken. It becomes more important when board is actually making a decision. and since the Housing Advisory Board is purely advancedory it's it's less of an issue. okay. If you're planning board making it cause a judicial decision, then it would be much more important to sort of limit the scope Oh! I definitely agree with that Jay Great, and as far as the clarification goes, is that kind of the boards, for I I mean the chairs prerogative, or anybody on the board for asking a phone question to clarify

[9:01] yeah. Well, that that was a little. Those 2 answers I got from Danny and Jay. I feel like they're on other ends of the spectrum. So some of this polite let let let me know if I'm out of. Yeah, I'll I'll be polite. I'll be very polite. Okay, I think we are now ready for public service participation. I'm gonna go from the bottom right to my screen, and someone needs to mute their phone because we're getting bathroom noise. Okay, I think that took care of it. Thank you. This pro is listed as sonnet. Grant Len, you need to stop your video. Please I'm sorry Lena. This is again Mike, Ken's one of those rules. Thank you. Okay, thank you We're gonna start with sonic Grant.

[10:10] Hi, thank you. I just actually wanted to sit in the meeting and hear what you guys had to say. I am listening to you, but I'm gonna go walking a few steps and grab my dinner, so please say Hi, identify yourself and tell us what you have What's on your mind Okay, Well, then, I didn't get my dinner yet. Well, thank you. I don't really have any other comments. Thanks for doing this so, hey, Michael? Not everybody may want to testify, so I think you wanna ask people to raise their hands. Thank? You. No, no, no, I don't. We'll go to Fran Barrel if I know that correctly. Oh, okay, okay, Well, we do have a hand raise. We'll start with Curt nor back. Remember. Okay, Can you hear? Great. I'm for going back. I'm following up on an email that I sent you hopefully. You received that yesterday. I'm a member of the boulder housing network that are older subcommittee on aid use.

[11:03] But I'm speaking just for myself, hey, right now. So there are a couple of the items that I wanted to raise. They go beyond the suggestions that. That subcommittee sent to you. And so I just wanna to raise them for your consideration. What is the possibility of allowing condo conversion of properties with abus, which I believe are currently not allowed, As you probably know, the the biggest challenge in terms of housing that we face especially for middle income people in the city is homeownership. Rentals are relatively afraid. Home ownership is unattainable, for almost everybody, even at the middle income level. And so it seems like allowing Count Condo conversion of properties with a use would allow them for a home ownership. Possibility of the Abu that are relatively affordable.

[12:07] Twice. You know, kind of the same as a typical condo, so significantly more affordable than a standard detached loan unit. And so I it seems like that would be worth consideration. In addition condo conversion would make would probably make the primary dwelling somewhat more affordable, because, you know, people wouldn't The kind of conversion would detract a bit from the attractiveness of that well so that's one thing the second one is the owner occupancy requirement. This, obviously is a sensitive issue. But if we want to really achieve more AD use, if it use our housing typology that we want to improve, and I think that it is it's certainly one that I want to encourage And I think it's one that the board wants to encourage.

[13:01] And city Council wants to encourage. Then I think it's worth consideration of how we can. Oh, no! No or occupied a use in a way that avoids the problems that could result from just allowing them across the board. Obviously there are a lot of concerns about that. And so I suggested a few possibilities like Oh, no, not allowing not allowing non-occupied abus in sort of student focused areas like the hill or art makers or applying a a saturation limit to. If we remove the saturation limit for me to use, generally apply a saturation limit to non-occupied 80 use, or maybe something. You know, with the with the the rental licensing.

[14:12] And so so I would just encourage you to think about creative ways that we could allow to get more while the waiting, the the possibly can, competent problems. Nice I'm gonna suggest that we discuss these additional recommendations when we get to our adu portion of the agenda quite soon. those are great comments. Thank you. Do We have additional people would like to raise your hand and offer a public comment Okay, Ever Lynn? Tiegel Linda, you ready

[15:13] you did so I'd like to be able to speak, but I can't, because of your over administrating your site. I agree with Kurt. I think that we'll need to make it so that people can buy one bedroom or a half of the house, or a lot of things like that. Or just buy equity in a place in some manner, and there's always going to be the problem of Cu students. If we expand, see you south it's gonna be I live in hell for boulder and I wanted to make a comment also on 123 proposition.

[16:01] 123 on affordable housing, and that is a big no philanthropy is the barometer of social injustice. 123 will bring 300 million dollars to those who are in housing crisis. But you know what it will cost. 1.5 million dollars in more UN affordable housing, and more of a housing crisis. It is a trick question 123 is yes, like the library. Everybody loves the library, but giving the city a $10,01010,000,000 flush fund. They don't know that the people that are voting for the library and the people that are voting for 123 don't know that they're making housing crisis worse, now. Do you realize every time that you set money in matching funds for Federal or for State funds? You don't get that free, you you think you just get that free.

[17:17] No, no, no! That goes with growth, and the more that you have growth, the more you have a problem with jobs housing, imbalance when there's not a linkage, B an appropriate one when it's gone from all the way from 20 to 25% in decades and when the impact fees. The true impact fees. Our is 4 foot, and the developer is paying $30 a square foot. That is a problem. That is a problem for the Housing Advisory Board to plead to city council, to stop subsidizing the developer and making wealth inequity worse and increasing the housing. Crisis.

[18:00] I wonder if there's anything that any of you don't understand about what I've just said, because it is, ebbs absolutely how the system operates. And I really think we need to have a sit down. You know where we can debate these things out instead of me. Just talking into a black hole to every single board, because it all makes a difference planning board transportation Advisory board water resources, Advisory board, open space board of Trustees. Invented Advisory Board. They're all interactive, and they all have a huge problem. When it comes to see you south and when it comes to these jobs housing imbalance, and the inclusionary zoning that needs to take place to be fair It would probably be not 25%, but probably a 140% would be a fair amount for the developer to have to pay because they are causing more of the problem. And you are sticking it.

[19:03] You know what 123 It's sticking it right back on the taxpayer, because it's a Tabor reimbursement that you get, and that taxpayer would get that cable money back instead. They are paying for something. Nothing 3 done. J. Nothing's free. Yep, and I'm sorry your time is up. Thank you. Lynn, and I'm sorry I My clock disappeared from the screen, so I wasn't sure if Lynn was running or not. I Think we understand. What you say. Land! You have a valid point of view. I want to thank you for introducing the topic of 1 23. I wanna be sure everyone's aware that affordable housing is on the ballot is a statewide issue. And please study that issue, and decide how you'd like to vote on. It is very important one. Do we have other folks who would like to comment. I don't see any other hands raised Okay, going Once we're gonna move on to matters from the board.

[20:13] Item 5 We had a really good discussion on AD use last month, and we now have a draft of a list of potential pop topics to recommend the Council. we got great input from having have a kitchen boulder from members of the Housing Advisory Board and shaping this list. It's actually a package that we could endorse, adopt, and pass on his recommendation as a whole, or he could go through it one by one, So I'll open it up for discussion of the board you've all had a good chance to review this and see what? You think? Oh, Danny. Can you hear me? Okay, my God, I thought, the letter is fantastic.

[21:04] loved all the points in there. I'm sorry, stuck in Lax Airport for the meeting last last month, but I've I've you know, been well, a prize of everything going on and stuff, and I've read it and I wholeheartedly. Yep. Support the contents of the recommendation, and and happy to move that forward to the city council, as is or with, any modifications, anybody feels are important Okay, Thank you. For that comment. Terry, You gotta have something. We're gonna go down line. Everybody's got to speak about this alright. I loved it, but send it in. It's great

[22:11] I I will say this, though there's a couple of things in there that I I think Big picture the pendulum I mean, if this all gets adopted, which I don't know if it will but that quite a bit the other way, and I think that's okay, but let's see if it gets You're muted, Terry Thank you, Terry. We will have more discussion about this, but this is kind of our straw. I think it included everything that we talked about last meeting, which is good didn't leave anything out Yeah, that's about it. Hold here, Julianne.

[23:00] yeah, I I really love this letter of recommendation. I hope that city council will consider it and give it. Give it some energy. I think you know I I I actually word Smith a bunch of this. So I I like the way it reads. I. The the 1 one thing I wanted to say is, it might be nice to have an additional recommendation that basically says something along the lines of have is, you know, we recognize that there's a bunch of simple. Changes that we can make to liberalize and encourage more adus, and that and that we're making those in this letter.

[24:09] but that there's also other things that are kind of more complex, that deserve consideration to, and they are the, you know, the following things: that aren't really in the recommendation letter, and and just encourage city council to to to circle back on this again, and 2 or 3 years I can't remember how many years It's been since the last time, but it hasn't been super long since the last time. It shouldn't be super long until the next time. The thing the things on that list that I think that should go on that list like what we correct was talking about with with condo conversion. I think is a is a wonderful idea. I don't know if it's something that we can. You know, put in there. But you know right right this minute, like I don't know. I mean, I don't know what the effort is in involved with that. It feels like something that requires maybe more research and more, you know, kind of do some of the heavy lifting before we just dump it off on the city Council. But I don't know. Maybe city council is ready to weighing on kind of a conversion.

[25:00] To me it sounds like something that's kind of complicated. And the reason I say that is because I actually brought this up on the very first. We talked about a to use earlier in the summer cause. I and I didn't know I didn't know it was called condo conversion. I was just. I was just asking if if there's a mechanism to buy by a to use. Personally, I would love there to be, because to me it seems like another opportunity for market rate, affordable housing, and so that that's one that I mean I think the other thing that he mentioned with owner occupancy that one feels kind of fuzzy in my brain about what you, know what what the I think I understand what the problem is. I think I sort of kind of understand what he's suggesting, although I don't know what I I I mean. The spirit of what he's suggesting. I don't.

[26:12] I don't know what the actual suggestion is, but it feels like something we could just put in and say, Hey, let's anticipate this for the next time, and then the third one is the because the number 7 which is the the sort of outlier non recommendation that we that we have in our in our list of recommendations, and I think I think 7 was just was just more of a maybe maybe not right now, because it's it's you know we don't we don't really have the sense that the thing keeping us from having lots of a to use is the fact that a single owner can have 2 you know that, doesn't it? It seemed pretty clear from the staff presentation that, like the big thing that's sort of like the elephant in the room right now, is saturation limits. And but you know if if City cancel modify saturation limits, and makes those much easier to navigate, then you know, 3 years from now, but maybe it will make sense, to say hey?

[27:01] What's what's working, and what isn't working. Maybe we could re visit that, so I don't know. I think I think number 8, or or maybe a number 7, maybe just rewrite number 7. Is what I just said that says, Hey, here's some, you know, incurred. encourage them to revisit it. In a few years, and anticipate the following things that weren't really discussing both. would you be? Oh, thank you, Philip, Are you done? Okay, So I can I'm sorry. Okay, we do care to propose a different language for that this evening, or temporarily remove it and make a recommendation on our next meeting. yeah, I think I could. I could come up with something in the next couple of minutes.

[28:01] What? What would you see? Jess? I started working on it before the meeting, but then the meeting started, and I if if I could, if I could just work on it for a minute or 2, I I think I think we could do it now, but I don't I don't also mean to. Yeah, oh. Oh, you you won't be! I've got some other things I want to discuss before we even ask for a vote. Yeah, and my only suggestion would be thought that maybe if you have something that's just as kind of like a catch over, generally demure towards everything else. And say, You know we understand that to use are always gonna be someone of a work in progress, And we'd encourage other creatives, solutions as as I've been proposed by other entities. As you move forward this, and to keep revisiting it, to see what works and what doesn't, or something like that, rather than give a list of the things that aren't on our list. But they're kind of on our list. You know. If we just have some of this general, I think it.

[29:13] But I think Danny's got his hands up hand up, and then John Crystal yeah, Thank you. Well, I I think the letter is is very clear and articulate. I I just have a suggestion that you may want to thank you, You know. Consider more of the the parking paragraph that you've added here, because I think that is the source of a lot of the resistance that the will be found in connection with AD use.

[30:06] And the the reason that it is that there's resistance is because it is a real issue in in many neighborhoods that is difficult just to wish away. And so my suggestion is to reconsider the the parting recommendation. it's it is A is a real matter, and I think it has to be dealt with appropriately. Thank you. We have had some good discussion about that. I agree with you that that could be hot button that would inadvertently increase opposition to Edu reform. so the way our discussion went if I can summarize and anybody can jump in is the areas that have limited parking tend to be the ones that are the most walkable.

[31:02] And transit, invite friendly, and you might get a self selecting group of tenants who tend not to own cars and wouldn't not be contributing to the problem. No, that's a speculative, but I think it's a valid point of view with anybody else on the board like to comment on that Well, I could talk all day about about parking minimums if I was prepared to do it. I have lots of opinions about it, I guess I don't. I don't remember. Ever reference thing. Donald shoots the high cost of free parking in the in one of these meetings, but that's a that's a an essay that I'd recommend everyone read I I'd like to point out that Cambridge Massachusetts just this week and announced that they're eliminating all parking minimums throughout the city. and yeah, it's been a real sorry if you can hear the piano bang in the background.

[32:15] it's it's been a real mind shift to, You know we have a We have a very car centric city here in Boulder, a very car centric country and in North America used U.S.A. and it's gonna it's gonna take you know, some some inversion of of reasoning, perhaps to to wrap our heads around the fact that parking minons make make things worse than before. yeah, I I frankly, I agree with Philip, and I'm no fan of encouraging people to to drive and have a car. But there are many ways of dealing with the issue and one of them would be, for example, to have eightyus, in which the residents may not own cars or half cars in the neighborhood.

[33:07] that could be put into some sort of regulation that would deal with that issue. So my point in mentioning this is not to say that everyone needs to have off street parting. It is to say just that it needs to be X explicitly considered and dealt with in a way that we'll satisfy the neighborhoods in the city in general. John has a follow up comment, a question. Thank you, John. So have did a tour of affordable housing projects a few weeks ago was informal. Not a meeting, and I noted when we went by a senior affordable housing project. At the Lutheran Church, just off Broadway, that they have a a parking garage they have structured, parking as part of that project. Believe it's 16 apartments, and you know, it was a transparent structure.

[34:11] You could see into it. I didn't see any cars in that parking structure and I don't know if that's because the residents don't have them, or because it's paid parking through the cage, network could you perhaps clarify that jay that's a a downtown you know, parking challenge location Okay, okay, Well, I would draw that comment then, cause it's very speculative. With anybody on the board care to amend our parking statement, or would you prefer to let it ride at this point Okay, and it's not a vote, but it sounds like we're not gonna get a request to revise. I'm gonna to do 2 things. One is quickly run through the recommendation for members of the public who are attending.

[35:14] I might know. Want to know what we were thinking, and how we got there, and then I would do want to discuss some of Kurt Nordbeck's ideas a little bit to see if we might want to move toward the recommendation of some of those in the future. So Hav. Has spent several months studying this issue. We've had really excellent presentations from city officials on giving us metrics and facts of that Addu production, who the eightyus how many rented and so forth what's changed since the last year, of reform in 2019. The policy changes comp comparison to peer communities. That's where we learned that there was. It's not a single peer community with a saturation limit. For example, and And then we got input. From housing advocates. Primarily the browsing boulder housing network that really helped us shape our recommendation.

[36:03] So and I'm just gonna Bullet point these recommendation. One is eliminated, saturation limits. We talked about that a little bit, too is eliminate parking requirements 3 is eliminate minimum lot. Sizes, radius, currently you can't apply for an adu if you are live on a home lot, that's less than 5,000 square feet There, that many home sites like that in boulder. But It could be an inhibiting factor. 4 was revised. Eightyu size limits, that or formulas that relate the size of the do you, to the size, the primary dwelling, and that would essentially liberalize that ratio, and make it possible to build large radius that could accommodate more than a single person let me, talk about excluding the square footage of a basement of it detached to you from the size, calculation.

[37:11] There's certain situations where people, have a basement they'd like to convert, and they're not able to use all the space because of that ratio in place which is kind of silly you just have to leave leftover, space instead of creating. More livable space even though that space already exists. Hi then 5 is create pre-approved Adu plans. numerous communities have done that basically allows the applicant to pick pre-approved designs from a pattern book. And it's an attempt to speed up the process. Time is money and make it easier to do an Edu without doing a custom. Design, 6 with streamline. The entitlement process we talked about. combining the Abu application to make it a one stop process instead of a 2 stop of entitlement.

[38:11] And yeah, code compliance. And then item, 7 in which we've talked about and are not recommending in this draft in any cases, allowing a detached to you and addition to adding a detached at you in addition to an attached, say to you not quite ready to endorse that one so far, So that's where we're coming from, and where we could possibly going. I do want to talk, make my own comments on Kurt's letter. I think the condo conversion idea is really interesting. that's one. We could maybe study a little further to make a recommendation down the road. Not quite sure. I understand the second one about finance, and then there's the issue of whether Edu should be owner occupied. Actually I mean to use primary resonance should be on active.

[39:10] I strongly believe that that restrictions to remain in place I think that's just basic neighborhood preservation to have the homeowner overseeing the property as a landlord and not be an absentee landlord for 2 properties others may disagree with that. But that's how I feel about that one. So any other comments about Well, I have a point of clarification. Is City Council is gonna debate. Measures we could consider outside of what's in our written recommendation. I heard I heard. That's November or was gonna be October. And then the the mayor was called out of town to do a sister city visit and it's not gonna be so. We do November tenth is this study session.

[40:06] Do we have a data on that, hey? Do you know 80 years soon. Is that right? Do we? Do we know when that is Well, I guess the question I'm asking is, you know it's it it feels like with all these different subjects that we're gonna be addressing over the months and over the years. There's always like lots of direction and there's always kind of more details that can be delved into. And I just wanna I just kinda wanted to ask the question of like, How productive is it to contemplate? You know 3, 6 more months of like exploring all the things we could explore, as they relate to Aus?

[41:09] Okay, Well, put that on your calendar to at least listen in or attend, because council meetings are live again Or are we really just like talking about what can be passed, and that we can recommend to city council before November tenth, before we start moving on to the other thing? Yeah, thanks. That's a great question, I think. And we should consider this packet tonight with whatever modifications board members would like to propose and vote on it, not waiting to consider any additional recommendations and everything to make additional recommendations I don't think we should. You know. Dwell on it for 6 months. It could happen much sooner than that. The Council meeting on the tenth, I believe, is a study session I don't think they're gonna vote on anything related to use, but Council is motivated to move forward in 2023.

[42:11] And this issue. So yeah, I don't think there'd be any. If If you're suggesting there might be some delay. I don't think there's any need for that with this packet in front of us or not a lot of delay with other measures we might consider so I I I think I think it's pretty imperative, and given the bandwidth that we've dedicated to this, and the latter part of this of this year I think it's pretty imperative that we get. This out there and get it out there before the first study session. Whether or not they're gonna vote on that is, is not as material as saying that we've work through, this and we've come down and distillate it to the things that we feel are most important in the most driving things. You know we we could. The The list is almost endless, and that's why I you know I do support some kind of catch. All you know. Conclusion like we talked about with Philip just before. But you. Know, once we start getting to some of these things, I mean frankly, like condominium conversion.

[43:13] You can say that it doesn't affect density, but there are a lot of people that can say that it does, and it creates its own debate and its own set of considerations and circumstances, and so that to try to throw some more things in there in the fly i'm just not comfortable with now I think that we've really tried to work through some of these things. I think that it's a very thoughtful letter. It's been a very thoughtful process and I think it's really important for us to take that thoughtfulness and turn it into something concrete that we can provide to the city. Council. So whenever they want to start working on it, they can, and and and our thoughts are in front of them in a timely basis, so they can do so. there's always a chance for revisiting something. As we talked about a few years down the line, but I I really think right now to get something out that we finalize today and get something out to them prior to the tenth is imperative from my perspective. I want to see us provide those recommendations, and not just continue to to think about.

[44:09] Right. Thank you, Danny. I hope that's what I just said. Okay, here's another thing, and shiny right? And And and so, my my strong feeling is, you know, I want to see something move forward today. Yeah. Okay, I agree with you. I'm just saying Just trying to make it clear. I think you know it's time. Yeah, And and I think I'll just say to that the condominium conversion thing is from a legal perspective, from a policy perspective. Is much more complex than than kind of. We're letting on there. I I can think of 20 issues just off the top of my head You know that we'd have to work through, or something like that, you know. It's it's separate ownership, it's it's it's not You know. There, there are a lot of things that go with it. And so you know, I'm not dismissing it at hand at all. I'm just saying, you know, we've put a lot of work into this.

[45:01] But if if you were not agree with me, I will say I I agree with you, and that you and yeah, yeah, we we we should vote on what's in front of us and get it to Council before tonight, be pointed to that yeah, just to follow up. So I appreciate both of your common standing and Michael. And it. It's sort of honestly kind of takes the Hmm. Well, I I I kind of after your first comment earlier about the proposal I made for a a a recommendation 7, I kind of took the wind out of my sales, and I didn't really start writing It here. While while there was other discussion going on, and I'm kind of like, I kind of agree. I I like. I like what you said about just having a positive statement about the things that we actually recommend, instead of like, you know. Great anyone else Here's the laundry list of possible things. We could have considered, you know. Maybe maybe you know, we know what that list is, and we can we can.

[46:17] You know. Bring that up when we this comes around again. So my my recommendation is actually I I wouldn't mind seeing Number 7 just taken out, because it does have that sort of negative like here's what we didn't endorse. And like I don't, I don't actually don't see the point having it there, so that that would be 1 one suggestion. Hmm. Yeah, I think that's a good suggestion. I understand, you know, trying to run down the clock while you wrote something there, but not not necessary. yeah, thank you. I don't get to vote on this, but I I think Danny's a suggestion made a lot of sense to me.

[47:17] All of all of his comments, and in addition, the idea of condominiumizing home and an adu, I can say from a planning board perspective is a very complicated, decision that would take a long time to move ahead with if if the decision, was in fact to move ahead. Perhaps John Garcia Yeah, I cause I had another comment. It's the next thing I don't know if you were gonna follow up on what John just said Great. So oh, go ahead! This up again

[48:02] Well, yeah, Yeah, okay, So kind of with the with what Danny was saying about, you know, let's and and you, Michael saying about, let's let's get a version of this to to vote on tonight and get it to city Council I'm i'm all for that I like that idea which makes me think like you know, of of the other 6. go on to the next thing I'd say we should, you know, if if we have comments it, instead of having them be To me it seems like productive discussion would be about the 6 that we've that we've written down here rather than trying to it, pretend like we can come up. With another recommendation this evening that would go into this. That's my sense, anyways that of of of the ones that perhaps should. Could could use some discussion. It is just to circle back to John's comment about parking requirements, and you know one of the things I was thinking about while he was expressing that concern is, just you know thinking about how when when people have expectations about free parking for their

[49:04] cars in the streets, and those and the reality of the situation doesn't meet their expectation. That's when you get people throwing punches, you know in front of their houses. And so that's we don't want to create a situation where we're. We're encouraging violence, you know, and I don't know if there's if there's simple language, or if there's ways of thinking about you know setting expectations, or you know the notion of of actually having restrictions on car ownership. I don't, I I I feel like that may have came up, and maybe Jay waited on that. I can't remember now what's been discussed around that.

[50:13] I don't know if I'm missing something, but I saw we talked about all this stuff last meeting, and hey, came up with this letter and kind of agreed on all these points, and and that was my understanding of things maybe I misunderstood. Jerry. Hey, Terry, you're the one who likes long meetings. I think we did. I think it's okay to to do a little enable gazing on this before we vote. It. Are we just wanna rehash it again, or just to double check or cause? I we talked about all this stuff, didn't we? Or am I thinking of a different meeting No problem. I just. I just wanted to see if, if yeah, because you know, we talked about the park. It's important stuff. Can we? I don't know. I just. I just remember having all talking about all this stuff We'll talk about it again. Yeah, you know.

[51:02] Yeah, I'll share a conversation I had with our mayor about. You know how controversial hab should get versus just strictly thinking about policy and what's the right thing, and what he said. Is, let Council worry about the politics and have make the recommendations Let's call him as you see him, So I I agree with that. I don't think we need to tiptoe around some of these recommendations, and if Council decides, they wanna implement it as a as a pilot project or revisited a year. I'm here, and then on on. If my memory is right Yeah, I mean, yeah, these are just our thoughts I mean, this isn't gonna get adopted in the wall, you know, based on this vote, Right? This goes to council, they take it into consideration, and and if this is what we think, then let's suggest it. I I was under the impression last meeting. We We've vetted all these 6 7 topics. I think that should be up to them.

[52:00] I do agree with Philip that why include Number 7? Because really doesn't add any value. Yeah. I'm gonna keep us moving ahead here. If we were to vote on this excluding Number 7, do we need to have a separate vote? to strike that? Or can we just say we're adopting recommendations one through 6, And that's how we send them to Council But but but even if you do, if you don't, not a big deal, that's that's just my phone Terry, Bobos. Oh, on the heels of my last comment, I move that we that we submit the letter as written no deleting Number 7

[53:04] I don't feel that passionate about if somebody else does no problem, make an amendment somebody at my understanding. Is, somebody approves of amending it. Are we gonna start with the amendment of removing Number 7 that we vote on the amendment I think we need a motion if we're gonna mad that we need a motion for somebody to amend it, proposed, and then we vote on that right now. Terry's motion is good where you already? Yeah, we didn't. We didn't prove that, either. So there's a motion there to prove it, as is so, Terry I. So we probably need a second or vote on that, unless you pull that back to see if somebody wants to. Yeah, yeah. Men, but No, I'm good with the way it is. Okay, so I'm confused. Does that mean we had to vote this down and then get another motion? Let's let's have a friendly amendment.

[54:00] That'd be easier. Who would like to make it friendly? Only amendment. Yeah. You can make it, Michael Somebody's got a second, then correct, or you can have a friendly amendment Amendment. I can make it. Okay, I offer friendly amendment to accept the recommendation on Edu as written striking. Item: number. 7, Wonderful. Okay, all in favor of this recommendation with the friendly amendment. Let's hold on that Say hi Bye. The motion passes 5 0 Hey, hey, Have Have is gone from glacial to, you know, at least like a slow scroll. Hey! Hey! This is good, really good. No, I got it from now. Got it.

[55:01] So what did we? Just we just we, just we just approved the the letter for recommendation. This is a breast base, you know. Hi! We did. Is that what happened? Yeah, see? Yeah, What was it? I wasn't sure if that was I wasn't sure if that was a proving it. Wha wait with the with the amendment? You know I'm I'm I'm getting a little freaked out because my sister accused me of looking like John Federman. As I'm looking at this zoom, I think I do that debate last night. Okay, strike that comment. We can now move on to a discussion on a future listening. With the amendment, taking out 7, Hey. so can I have a little bit of context. Michael So this will come up as part of the staff update. But so we're we're returning to in person with our next meeting.

[56:06] And we'll talk about that, too. But as I mentioned that the chairs were thinking, well, maybe this is an opportunity to have another listening session, and probably good for the the group to think about what are the one of the right topics, and we had so listed topics, before, i'm can. Can you? Would you mind giving a quick introduction to what a listening sessions are and like? yeah. And and I, I, I have to kind of retract that, too, because what I learned about returning in person with the boards and commissions is that Boards and Commission Members will return in person but the public will still be remote so it still doesn't really lend itself to a listening session as well. Oh, sorry! So the the direction from council and city is that the Board's and commissions will return in person. But the community will still can only participate remotely. say that again. I'm sorry you were breaking up

[57:09] I think that I think that kinda aviates the notion of a listening session, cause a whole. So I probably say I I I You know we've had this conversation before, but I'd still say I I like to table it until we have some idea we might have this in person, because I mean obviously it's important for us to be in person for those but I I really do believe having the public there having to be able to communicate with each other as well as with us, is really at the core of what makes the listen session effective, and so, rather than just do it for the sake of doing that I think once we have a idea I'm assuming that'll be next phase or whatever Got it. Okay, So quick. Quick review for anyone who doesn't know what a listening session is. you hear from Brendan on a particular issue.

[58:02] I think they were, and I. I did not attend any of the live ones I wasn't on the board yet. I heard they were pretty effective on certain topics. The one I did attend as a new board member was on the subject of housing insecurity, resulting from Covid issues. And we only had a couple of residents show up for that in there didn't really get a whole lot of about. So that's where we decided to table the idea for a while. it just wasn't effective in a virtual format, and there seems to be, sentiment, if not consensus, that this is not going to be effective. it is whenever that comes. That's when we can kind of plan for it. And I'll just I'll just pivot off to that and say, you know, if you look at that one It was really awkward just having it on zoom and yell.

[59:00] The conversation we had in the beginning of the meeting about the notion of, you know, 3 min back and forth between people that are speaking during public comment, etc., The nice thing with the listen session it is much, more conducive to kind of an ebb and flow conversation where a lot of people get a chance, to to listen, talk, ask questions, ask questions of each other where it's it's it's less of a formal structure that then you have in a typical board meeting. And so I think that's why it's great. And I think that's why to see it again. I mean I'd love to have another one, but I I think to see it again when it's live would be terrific. But you know, probably we wait till then, because just zoom just doesn't. Oh, can I push back on that just a little bit? If if you know the public's not gonna be allowed in for another year, then that means we wouldn't have a listening session for a long time. If it's gonna be 3 months, 6 months to me, Do we have some sense about that? We don't know. Jay showed his shoulders. But you know, with one.

[60:11] But is that hey? We We tried a listening session on Zoom, and it was related to Covid and housing insecure and it was a flop, and you know, less Lesson learned it, but maybe you know maybe we ought to try again. Every 12 months or so, and and see if see if we could try it again. See if see if it I don't. I don't necessarily assume Zoom can't. Okay, can't facilitate a listening session. I also like would hope that even if the public is welcome, that it would be a hybrid. So then people, that aren't comfortable with you know with their immuno compromised, or whatever can can participate. so I mean, part of part of my feeling is like what we we maybe ought to figure out how to make zoom work, so that it works for the people who can't attend in person or it it, works in the meantime if if it's going to be a while

[61:08] thank you. Philip. Is there any potential to do the type of hybrid that Philip is you testing according to the city's rules or those rules evolving to give us hope that could happen? I mean, that's my assumption is that, moving forward, the people will be able to participate, remotely and definitely. So I think Zoom has taught us that that's a great way to get people to attend public meetings. That's a question for J. it's much more convenient than having to show up in person. Was. That is that where you're going with that My understood it was people could zoom in if they wanted to, and if they wanted to attend in person, they could come, and interact with the board in person.

[62:03] I'm sure I'm sure they'll they'll implement that whenever they start having people come back in every I've I've been coming to a lot of public hearings. Lately, and every single one of them has a hybrid model. There's nobody that says nobody that's gone back to in person, has said, Well, you can't zoom, either. They always have a zoom function as well. So yeah, I think that's perfectly fine, and and Philip, I agree, if it's a year, you you that that points well taken, But you know, I think maybe we just kinda just keep checking in and and and seeing how that goes and maybe somewhere you know somewhere early. into 23. If it's not changing, it looks like that's the way it's gonna be. And then, we can tackle this and figure out. did the one zoom based listening session allow for videos of the participants?

[63:04] The best way to do a zoom. Listen, session. But you know again, I just feel in person definitely works better for that particular form, that particular type of of structure Or was was everyone on required to keep their video off yeah, any other piece, I mean, so have is talked about listening sessions for years. No, I'll add for it and I think we're one of the things that everybody who's been on have agrees with is you have to have the right topic. not every topic lends itself. So maybe that's just something for the group to think about. Thank you. One other thing about the zoom, I'm on another board where the board is in a hybrid format as well. It's a large, board I would say, 5 or 6 show up in person and 20, zoom in and we've had some really good public participation with that board.

[64:03] As well. I Just wonder if that kind of hybrid format is proposed or possible in Boulder, which would, you know, helping? Sure we have quorums when people are traveling, and so forth. Yeah, if I mean the preferences would be for members to come in if they can. Okay. Yeah, or if a member gets gets covid, they they can still participate I like Jay's idea about discussing topics. Does anybody have any good ones that we could put in The Hopper for future discussion? Missing middle is always a big one. Maybe that's too broad.

[65:00] Yep, I was gonna say, Michael, that's one in the same ownership and middle income how about housing pilots? Maybe that's not great for listening session, but I always like to. I was like to talk about David Adams. Co-OP slash, micro condo project this could be lively, suit. You think of something on neighborhood character that could bring in zoning.

[66:18] It could bring in very large custom homes. They could bring in lots of issues, and it might generate a lot of interest, because it's something a lot of people care very passionately about yeah, yeah. Hmm. Well, how about if we put this on the agenda for our next meeting and give people a chance to think about it? oh, right. I just thought of something else that a meta comment, and 1 one thing that might make a listening session effective and increased participation is, if we are, again we're anticipating something that city council is very likely to to bring up, so that the listening session

[67:07] is relevant to the work plan. So like, you know one thing that came that came and the reason I thought of this is because one. Of The things that came up in my mind is, you know, occupancy where, and I know that's something that city Council has talked about, and so I mean, I don't mean that to single that issue out what what whatever is, like a major, thing coming in the spring of 23 for city council's. Work. Plan. Maybe if we had a listening session 3 months ahead of that that was on that subject, and then subsequent discussion from have and recommendation with dovetail into, you know, productive recommendations for them when when they get around to having a study session and you know on whatever those topics, are I I really like that idea specific. It's been battered around for a few years.

[68:02] Council is stated in intent to act on it, and perhaps have doing a like listing session. So that's that might be a good way to engage and make make it relevant Yeah, but that that's another way of thinking about it. Could speed things up, will We can. We could brainstorm this more tonight, but I think it deserves its own agenda item but it has an agenda item. But actually coming with some topics to prepared to discuss that the next meeting would be really really viable, Since we're not in a hurry to act on this yet. hey? Any other comments on listening sessions, or going on to item C.

[69:10] Okay, item C is a proposal to combine our November December meetings because of holiday schedules into one meeting on Wednesday, December seventh. I think that's a great idea I think that's perfect. timeframe, as well right in between the 2. How do our Board Members feel about that? Right. Yeah, our our next 2 meetings actually would conflict with holiday time. So So right, right. I think it's great. My question is, is it? it'll be in person, I assume, because after November we can be in person. Right, Terry. You got one Is that right?

[70:07] I think that's right. Right? Yeah, we don't correct. Yup and I have a room reserved already for it, so we'd be in and the Brent building on out at Broadway and help Oh, wow! Can, we Can we put a holiday spin on it, or something, can we? That's great. You know good, yeah. Okay, alright. Alright. If we're gonna be fed, I'd prefer to have 2 meetings Okay, Yeah, aware of Santa Hat. And you know all that That sounds funny. I I assume there's I assume there's precedent for this. yes, I mean often. What happens is, you know, December gets canceled, and Thanksgiving moves the November meeting. do we need to

[71:02] So this is actually actually new, but I think it works well. Okay, Do we need to vote on that? Or we do, we just do that? need to vote to cancel both, or it's great. Okay. Okay, Do I hear a motion to combined or November December meetings into one on December seventh? so moved. Oh, in favor. okay. Yeah, we're like we're like to use an Astros. Hi! Oh, I I don't like that. I don't like that. I love it. We can go yeah, No, I don't like the users either of the same steam rolling in the opposition, as it were Right are there at or rather, not. they're rolling Having Oh, God, the Yankees! So I item 6 matters from the board Oh, I'm sorry matters from Staff. I think we've already covered item.

[72:08] no Tiffany will send out revised meeting invites for just Number Seventh, and cancel the other 2. any other questions about returning to in person how that's gonna work Yeah, it's called the Brenton Building. B, r, e, n t o N. A But do you have anything to add to that, Jay? So it's a current city building that that was renovated a few years ago. It's actually quite, quite beautiful inside. But it's right across from Boulder Community House, the P. Yeah, what's the name of the building again? Let's do. Building. Okay. We'll send you directions 2 blocks from my house. I like it. I didn't. Item B. Council, study, session, and inclusionary housing update. Yeah.

[73:01] Yeah, it should be interesting tomorrow It's a study session, and it's really going to be a big part of it is. Just giving a primer to cancel on how this city affordable housing program actually works. We have some new members who aren't as familiar with it, but it's also helpful for people that've been on for quite a while to get that refresher before we start talking. About making changes to the visionary housing program, and also try and put in the context of all the other tools that we have been pursuing to address middle income which is ownership opportunities in boulder so I just wanna let you know that that was coming tomorrow also Tab is gonna play a role in hoping to shape that proposal to council. So we are posing to do a in January sort of an inclusionary housing, one o one, so similar to what we're doing tomorrow, but sort of a deeper dive into the logistics?

[74:13] how we implement inclusionary housing so that you guys have sort of a better understanding, for when we start talking about making changes to the program, So it it's pretty detailed stuff. But I think you'll find it interesting and I think that's it. Any questions about that Oh, yeah, tomorrow is just to say Staff is just saying, this is our proposed process. and these are the topics that we have in mind so far. Only one for me is that soon enough for us to make a recommendation council? You think they're gonna take their time acting on inclusionary housing updates Oh, okay. So we January is plenty of time for us to start educating ourselves on it. it won't go back to Council for formal adoption until July and the year at least. Okay.

[75:04] And we'll be doing the same thing for planning board to Joan thanks! Oh, may I mentioned something? I know Planning Board writes a letter to city Council at the end of each year, just letting them know what's on. Their mind, and what they think is important, and what they hope. Council is aware of, and might do, and that, might be something that that you should be thinking about. Double there. Also given that you only have very few meetings left this year. Absolute. Oh, so I just wanted to mention that So John did is planning board working on their letter right now. Well, we we haven't started, but I know it's always a the struggle at the end of the year to to make it happen. Yeah. yeah. Hi forgotten about that. So thanks for bringing that up Now we do. We do it every year to John's good point.

[76:04] Right yeah, instructions. I usually get instructions from the city manager's office while in advance. We we do regard that is pretty important. So we will be, you know, Yeah. So Hi, there! I missed it, or something's different. But and thanks for reading up Thank you, John, for the reminder, as we did send a letter to Council last year. we should probably resend that to everybody to be a couple of new members here. Remind them what we said, and I think sending them a letter is a great idea And we could put that on the December agenda to review and approve. Okay. I agree, Jay, if we got, if we sent that in January.

[77:00] So, just logistically speaking. So if we had something to finalize, or at least to to consider In in December, and then send it out in January. Let me find out, and I'll get back to you guys. Huh! Is, that is that bad? Did we miss the cut off, or or would be able to vote on something like that abstantial electronically again, internal to finalize it. Maybe Maybe you're if we could chew on that, and and and and then maybe try to figure that out, and maybe we can address the next chairs meeting so that we have we have a game plan for that, because I just realize we're we're up on in it given the the Yeah. Yeah. timeframe. But if we if we could set it in January, I think we're fine, you know, or okay. I think January might be too late, Danny, to your point, because that's the the Council usually has their retreat before the fourth Wednesday, Huh! Oh, okay, So maybe you see, if we can vote on that, if we can have a letter that everybody gets a chance to, or maybe just have a letter propose ahead of time. And Right, so

[78:00] Yeah. But then that'll be a big thing. We try to to finalize at the December seventh meeting. So let me look into the and I'll get back to you, because you know, typically Council will provide very specific instructions for the letter. Cool. So you can remember in the past. They typically will say, we want you to identify your top. Yeah. Yeah, So I'm hat. Yeah. hey? If we can get that guidance, I hope we do. I'd be happy to draft a letter. Send it to members at a time, as we did. With this recommendation we approve tonight, and and you know, we could potentially vote it. On December seventh, assuming everyone had a chance to think about it. Okay, perfect. We can discuss it in person 2 or top 3 challenges, or you know, there's always something specific that they're looking for, and the fact that we haven't gotten that guidance concerns me. So let me look into it and i'll get back to you this week

[79:00] Okay, So, Jay, you'll get back to his son. Council directions, and great any other questions about the Council study session tomorrow. I hope you'll all tune in. And listen to that Okay, onto item 7 meeting debrief. We had a good meeting. I thought we had several public participants, approved our minutes, approved a recommendation to council with 6 discrete recommendations on 80 use at least, started our discussion on listening session topics which we will have as a formal agenda item in December agreed to rescheduled. In November of December meetings, due to holidays, to one meeting on December seventh I got an update on returning to invincible meetings and the council study session thanks revolutionary housing coming up tomorrow.

[80:02] Calendar check before you talked about December seventh, and we talked about tomorrow. Any other calendar items we might consider Any additions to the summary I just provided, and the debrief Okay. Do I hear a motion to adjourn All in favor So moved. great meeting guys Okay, have a great hi. Guys. Thank you. Thank you all. Wow! Go ahead, dinner, see everybody soon. Happy, happy, happy Halloween!