February 28, 2024 — Housing Advisory Board Regular Meeting

Transcript

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

[0:03] Great. Well, good evening, everybody. This is the meeting of the Housing Advisory Board for city, the chair that have. and at the moment we did not have a form. but we do have a guest Speaker, David Dristel, who probably worked for the city of Boulder, and he's going to make his presentation. We think that we'll have a form, and we'll be able to continue with business, including approval of minutes, public comment and action items and so forth. So let's do the public comment now, later. Okay, is there anyone from the public who is waiting to comment, yep. yeah, we have one looks like Lynn Siegel. I recognize Lynn Siegel. you know I would

[1:04] probably tired of hearing them. Can you hear? Slim? Sorry I just got in from my bike. Dave. Long time. No, see, I can't believe it. Where are you from now? Sam is in Sacramento. He's the director of the office of Planning and research for the state of California. Wow, cool. Okay. So let's see, this is the same thing. I always say, Dave, which you probably remember from 10 years ago. Right? The same old thing. Just let the developer pay. You know this housing crisis has gotten out of hand and the the

[2:01] the the guy in Denver, Michael Johnson had to cut back services like the hours of the Rec. Centers and a lot of public services. Because of the housing issue, and he has to pay for it somehow, and there's no way to pay for it right? And the evictions and the the cost of cleaning up and everything. It it's 6 million a year or something. I don't know but it's way up there and I like. Last night II was at the minimum wage talk. And yes, it's great to raise the minimum minimum wage. And then the businesses have to raise the cost to the customers. It's just lists. Catapulting thing from one thing affects another thing. We need to just stabilize everything like rent control, you know, like food inflation control, like housing contractors. Inflation control every. It all just goes up, and it's all kind of disproportion. Catch up all the time.

[3:12] and the time spent just figuring out what's fair for different parties within the system is, can is, consumes a lot of the energy of the folks dealing with all of it. So I just say, let the developer pay. Don't give them parking, you know. Reductions don't give them height exemptions. Stop stop handing over the public's good to to the developer. It's just driving costs up way too much. And of course, this is what's going on with Housing Advisory Board. And I'm bringing this up because you're you should be the planning board there they need. It's multi-disciplinary, of course, but the biggest thing I've got to say is free, Palestine. That's the most important thing.

[4:06] because all of this is for nothing. If we're if we're in a World War 3. And Ramadan, it's on the tenth of March. It's gonna be up and it's gonna be over. So please free Palestine, PA, send the word to City Council to have a resolution anyway, too much money spent on military. And this is it. This? I've had it, you know. I've gotta pay my taxes tomorrow. It's due property. Thanks. Good. So much to see you, David. God, I wish I was down there. Okay, well, thank you. We don't have a form, or we are going to move on to our guest, speaker, though, and I'll give you a brief introduction. But I know your titles, not. Your former title is not absolutely correct. Here was just about this. David Driscoll was our client director, for I mean what yours

[5:17] see, it was 8 years 2,009 to 2,017, 6 or 7 and David is who's got extensive background and city planning. I think that's moved on to the West Coast, where he's been consulting for communities, especially in California, that are attempting to implement the whether of housing bills that have been passed through the State legislature. So David and I met and just chatted generally. About this reason I thought it would be useful for us to hear kind of lessons learned about what strategies are effective, which maybe, or

[6:03] well intentioned, but not use, and which are not going well in any regard but at that point, and you can certainly fill in any biopoints. You'd like to, David. But we look forward to hearing what you have to say. sure, and then I don't have a a formal presentation, but I just sort of talk a little bit about some of the things going on. We can steer into more detail whatever is the most interesting or pertinent? So yes, when 8 years city folder we did a number 8,000 initiatives lost here some of the first steps of implementation of number of affordable housing developments we had planning, housing, and sustainability together under one roof. For a time Jay was part of our team and Kurt and everybody. fantastic group that I miss. I often speak of. The city boulder team is one of the best groups of people I've heard.

[7:02] So yeah, we also did. We called it the middle housing purpose, middle income housing study. At the time. I left the boulder I went to Seattle, actually worked with City Seattle with Sam or chief urban designer here in Boulder, being planning director in Seattle, I was Deputy Dave with Sam for about 3 and a half years. Did a lot of work on technical development where there was equitable development initiative city that was mostly out of our department. Parent vision plan. And a bunch of things were into 80 years and launched pre-appropriate user program when I was in Seattle. and then I wanted more flexibility and be able to work from home and cities like that's not possible. So January 2020, I resigned and then march of 2020. Everybody with and I, rejoined the consulting practice. I'd started years ago to be already here.

[8:07] which had been operating under Baron. Just book community planning. We re title to community planning collaborative headquarter out of Berkeley. We've got folks all over the place. We're just. We're a small team, though, about 12 people and we do a lot of housing work in California. In the Bay area. Specifically, we've been supported. The Association of Barry governments for the last 3 years on a 23 million dollars technical assistance programs supporting 109 jurisdictions around the Bay area. On meeting, causing all the cloud. Recently completed a anti displacement strategy for Salt Lake, somewhere northwest, and then. most recently part of a team that's working with Dr. Cog on the regional housing needs assessment which will regional housing strategy. Here. cool Guy.

[9:00] you want me to follow, and I'm flexible. So very well. technical issue. Do we need to make real call and actually make this official point before continue? We don't have to. But we can introduce everybody as well, or you can wait till Terry gets here, too. So yeah, so I'm actually currently in Boulder for a few months being with the house in North Boulder, which is fun to be here and enjoy Colorado spring, summer and winter, all Monday. And yeah. So I ran into some people and asked that talk about some of the experiences going on in California. I think California is an interesting place to look to a number of things that the Colorado Legislature is looking at legislature. The Washington Legislature are all sort of variations of something things that California has been doing for a while.

[10:05] I initially started doing housing work in California a little over 20 years ago, and it was a housing crisis. That was the language we use then. The State had a process. State has a process in California mandated by the legislature, where every 8 years the State does projections of housing need, and they distribute the Housing need projections to each other regional Council governments. The Regional Council Government then goes through a process methodology to figure out how to distribute that to every jurisdiction in the area. So association of area governments is 9 counties. San Francisco Bay Area under 9 jurisdictions a bag goes through a process to distribute those numbers. It's called the regional Housing needs assessment, Rena process and states just gone through the Rena 6 process, the sixth cycle of doing regional housing needs projections. And the so the short story version is Rena 5, which was 8 years ago. The projections for the Bay area were about a hundred 80,000 units needed over 8 year period. Each jurisdiction has to go housing, only showing how that many units could be built in their jurisdiction by income level.

[11:14] used to be. The housing on the process wasn't painful, but you could get there and you could identify lands and programs that would help accommodate those needs. Rena 6. The state number given to the region was 440,000 units of housing, because not just projecting new need, they accounted for existing need that was being unmet. So overcrowding. And almost another issues came into the equation. Yeah, so is it like the same calculus, the same equation for every region, every agency is the same methodology, but the underlying projections where they go employment and other things. So there's a process where the State sends its number, and, like region, gets to comment on the number and on the State says, this is the official number.

[12:06] and then, once you have the number, that's the number. And so some of the jurisdictions and and also the methodology. This last round really put a lot of weight on equity. so jurisdictions that are not produced, affordable housing, or have not been given numbers really much in the past. Got weighted towards having more numbers. so Palo Alto. As an example, I think, their last round of housing element. They were 800 units of housing. They saw less than that actually produced. This time their number was 8,000 units of housing, so they had to demonstrate that they could accommodate 8,000 us, not just accommodate, but actually facilitate the development of and much stricter rules this time around about what qualified as a site. So it's kind of a yeah question facilitate the development. What what does that mean in terms of the make sure you actually market feasible? So it's not just theoretical zoning capacity, but actually something that the market could actually build at the density that you're saying they could. You had to demonstrate

[13:15] that the under that the property owner was actually interested in redevelopment. So if there was a a site that you had near site inventory from the last element, and nothing happened with it. You needed to answer the question, Why is it gonna be different this time. So a lot of places had, you know. 20 acre school district site that they said, there's gonna be a thousand units of housing on, and nothing happened. And the school district. Yeah, we're not doing anything with that property. Why did you put it in your site inventory, which wasn't an issue the last Rena. It wasn't issue this Rena. anyway. Jurisdictions in the Bay Area had till first part of last year to finish, and some of them are still finishing because the State is being very strict in how they interpret certification.

[14:03] And in California, if you don't have a certified housing, which is a part of your required general plan. That means you don't have a general plan, which means you could lose your land, use authority if you were sued and taken to court. And now the State has an enforcement unit that's housing development, which is actually bringing. or actions against heuristics that are not meeting their housing development requirements. So not saying that that's the future in all other places. But I think I think that is incredible to me as someone who's been working in housing for a while is this is not just an issue in Silicon Valley and sort of New York, and places that have traditionally been expensive places. It is an issue everywhere. we've done affordable housing strategy for Bakersfield, California, which was the place you moved to Los Angeles for the Bay Area. They have an affordable housing crisis in Bakersfield.

[15:02] Did an anti displacement strategy for Salt Lake City again. That was Utah was the place you moved to, and you wanted to find affordable place. One of the findings from the anti displacement analysis is, there is not an affordable neighborhood in the wassage front that is not experiencing displacement. So if you're in affordable neighborhood and you experience displacement, there's no stable affordable neighborhood to move to. It is. And it's not just all this. It is into all the beginning end of the day. There's just not enough house. There's not. If you look at the numbers. Regionally, nationally, there's just not been production of housing to need over a long period of time. So significant housing, shortage, and every jurisdiction is dealing with it, and here in the front range is kind of interesting compared to most other regions. The Front Range has produced quite a bit of housing but not at the low and moderate income levels, all at the upper sort of above moderate, above 100% ami level.

[16:11] So significant need here in the front range. seeming obviously in boulder but not just boulder. The entire entire region is short of housing. so it's a kind of a all the above strategy of like, what could you do to create more housing? talk, talk, talk about, I mean. So there's a slew of laws that have been passed by the State legislature in California. It's kind of a bipartisan thing. There's not really like that conservative legislators, or have their own ideas about what could be done to create housing? They've traditionally been very pro development. So a lot of this place to things that they like to hear like build more. But also, you know, there's, I think, an appreciation across the board of sort of need to find strategies and policies to encourage funding.

[17:00] Local land use is one of the barriers. It's not the only barrier to the comment Lynn made. It's not developer profit that is driving housing costs. That's not why things are expensive. It's planned and construction costs. Well, you could take developer profit out of the equation and affordable needs. cities doing developments where there isn't any really develop or profit, and even the land being donated, it's hard to make things pencil to need low income housing needs. so subsidies are necessary. Increases in density. The more units you can build on a site to divide the land cost across utility connection costs and the construction costs across more units. The more ability there is to meet and for housing outcome. One of the things that's been odd that we've done a ton of work on is 80. Use California change. It's that's the state wide law allowing you to use on any single family property

[18:01] 5 years ago. Now. you can actually understand what built to using one internal ad you on any property in the State. As a matter of law, as a matter of law. Obviously, there's there can be issues that get in the way of doing that on a property due to slope due to wildfire due to flood but you have a right to build up to an 800 square foot a to you. And then a junior adu internal to your unit. and that seems something up. I mean to use are like their own thing, because the the developer, the developer, is a hallmark. So there are some developers are now doing subdivision. They're building ad use into new development. But it's not something that like, there's not a lot of developers who are like, I'm gonna go build 180 us in the neighborhood because you gotta work with 100 different homeowners. So a lot of our work has been working with jurisdictions that really want to see use happen to provide resources to homeowners to help them understand how development happens, how to make an informed decision, what it's gonna cost to you. What's your payoff period? You find an architect. How do you go through the permitting process like sort of demystifying that whole process?

[19:17] To help people get from the idea of an ad you to actually having an Indian backyard or side yard or garage it's even legal in California. But in your front yard if there's not a place to put in the back. maybe you're the front So there's been in some of the jurisdictions in particular Los Angeles. San Diego, huge, uptick and 80 years construction. When I was in Seattle there was a change in you guys by the city, and a real push to see them developed. You have to take away the kind of salt I can say, like there were more ad use developed in Seattle than we're single family homes in the last couple of years. That's also because there's no place to build using. I mean, homes in Seattle. So what else you're gonna build? You're gonna build either multiplexes or you're gonna build 80 or in the backyard.

[20:07] One of the interesting things happening in 80 world is, it's not optional in California. It's actually currently about in Seattle to condorize. Need you? So 80 users are basically creating more affordable rental housing and existing neighborhoods which I'm a huge fan of yeah, it might be used as an office for a while. Yeah, it might be used for a place for a returning college kid to stay. But it's a housing unit in a neighborhood that will have multiple lives over the course of decades. and particularly in terms of equity training. Derek love it. creating the a relatively affordable rental opportunity. What are options maybe serve so in the equity world we talk a lot about sort of access to opportunity. most affordable housing is built in areas that do not have much access to opportunity. 80 user a way to integrate affordable rental housing into neighborhoods that have a lot of access to opportunity

[21:14] of so. But can they eliminate the requirement to have on our I got any feedback on? That's working. III think it's it's definitely been one of the factors. Washington State eliminated on our occupancy requirements for you to use statewide. California is limited. A few years ago, she said, you said they paid the path to to use, so you can sell the airspace to of the apu structure where you can sell, you can say, basically, you conduize the property, you and the detached 80, you could be sold as a. which is a great way to create a more affordable sale product in existing any local regulation about like 5 a lot.

[22:06] It varies so the California losses. It's option the Seattle place with some blood size requirements. But then there's there's other thing to California that Esp not we can talk about. There are literally like a hundred flaws that have been passed in California last few years for the housing. Do they require a so it varies by location in terms of access to transit. You can require one off street off street parking for any of you. Yeah. And you can now do that. As so 2 cars you got to backup the first one to get the other one out. But it doesn't require that parking. No

[23:02] yup State law also puts caps on fees that can be charged, and theoretically I haven't seen any court cases around it. You have 60 days as a jurisdiction to review and approve an 80 application and starting January of next year. If adu plan has been reviewed for code compliance in a jurisdiction once, and it comes in again. Plan, it needs to be considered pre-approved minutes. Yeah. I go back to the yep. So What's your experience with with that issue? Or if what did people say? When for? Do you think the arguments are forward against them people? Why do they want it? They want it because they they're afraid that now, if they're gonna 2 rental units next door. and they want to have the owner living there.

[24:04] You don't get to control someone running their house next door to you in the main unit. I don't know why it would apply to it specifically. So my attitude is either want you to use or you don't. If you don't want them, then regulate the hell out of them, and you won't see me if you want them, then don't regulate them, however, then, and you'll actually see some develop so you can rent a single family home. I'm I've been renting mine indoor folder, and it's completely legal, and the city doesn't say that I need to live there for a certain number of days of the of the year like, so if I had need you behind it, why couldn't I rent both the main. If I own the deflex, I could run both the events. So I get it. It's a way to kill you to use. So if you want to kill it. To use, then require owner, occupancy. gentrification, or investor

[25:00] investors buying up properties. There hasn't been much of that. I mean the thing that's driving. Gentrification is not enough. Housing and highlight costs any home you look at in boulder. It's not the home that's sitting on it that's driving costs the land. So if you want to stop gentrification, build more housing suit. So what's interesting to me is and California is kind of the the Og. With a lot of these things in terms of the housing pressures in terms of a lot of policies that have inadvertently maybe not unknowingly. But it really created some of the housing pressures. Right? So, you know, California, a lot of places in California, early jurisdictions that had Tdrs and density restrictions, etc., green belts, all those things which are wonderful policies. They also have strong implications on the number of views that can be built. And so what's interesting because we're running up on it. And jurisdictions like boulder mount communities, etc. We've had density caps or tried to, or, you know, equals bad. And so I'm interested. How? How

[26:18] these 2, you know, these 2 very positive progressive policies are are wrestling with each other now in California, because it seems like it's out in front, I mean, obviously, we don't have any State legislation remotely of the issue, and at least in the bear. I mean, I know the Bay Area. Most of most of all, is economics. It. It's it's the job growth. Yeah. So we do work with San Mateo county jurisdiction. There's 21 jurisdictions in the area just south of San Francisco, going down to Metal Park. Google headquarters like it's it's, you know, generated 350,000 new jobs over the last 10 years. 70,000. So do the math. Not enough housing. And there's still lots of land to build more commercial development.

[27:13] So there's underlying tax property tax issues. But like, and I would guess if you looked at boulders numbers which II couldn't bring up top of my head. You have a lot of land zone for commercial and probably less zone for residential. So, and you know we will did some work with South San Francisco biotech capital, and you can get a biotech building built, approved, and built in about a year. Try doing that with the multi family development. You're looking at 2 to 3 years of a really painful discretionary review process. So you've got to be have a really money sort of deep pocket developer coming in. Who's gonna do a multi family development. So that's what a lot of the State laws are about like. Make it as easy to build apartment building as it is to build a biotech building?

[28:00] So I mean, those are the questions like, we often ask jurisdictions like, What's the easiest thing to build in your jurisdiction. If the easiest residential building to build in your jurisdiction is a single family home. probably gonna see a lot of single founding homes right? If, if, like building a duplex is like going through a gauntlet, then you're probably not going to see many of them, because not many people want to go through a gate so, and then I'll talk a little bit about missing middle housing, which is different than middle income housing. Sometimes they overlap, but missing middle as sort of a typology. That's not a single family home, not deposit billing the kinds of things that used to be built in those cities around the country for a long time until they were made illegal. But one of the challenges now is the underlying economics like, if you're gonna build a duplex, which is probably gonna be a rental. It's not gonna compete in many markets against the single family. So one of the Sp. 9 statewide law that was valid is sort of the end of single family zoning in California. Now you can build 4 units on any single, not not just 80 Us. But actually 4 units on any single family property in State, California

[29:11] number of council members, council meetings. I went to where they were like the end of the world like everything is gonna be like, developed and like, no, it's not just because something's possible doesn't mean it's feasible. And just some because something's feasible doesn't mean that people are actually gonna act on it. So Sv, 9 made single family home properties a possible development. Here's the thing, the biggest trend in in housing the States has been tearing down small single family homes and building big single. not not the opposite. So there's a lot of money out there in the Bay Area of California, in Boulder, Colorado, that people who money is really not that much of an issue, and they want a big single family home. They don't want to live in a duplex. So yeah, you could build a duplex on it. But if I'm the developer and I'm building, and I'm gonna build the home. But I can solve for 6 million dollars, not the 2 duplexes that I could rent for $400,000.

[30:07] So it's just so you have to look at the economics. And again it comes down to like, what do you want? If if you say you want 80, us, then don't regulate that lot of 80 years. If you say you want smaller. You know, duplexes, townhomes, smaller homes that make those the easiest thing to build. But if the easiest thing to build is is 5,000 square foot, single, family home. Well, the markets happy to pay for those, and people are happy to bill them. So one of the things we've been wrestling with recently over the course of the past year is, and it's, you know. pretty endemic in in Boulder right now. A lot of the old little family homes, you know. Good old 950, you know. Series of robot bottle craftsman. Right gets torn down.

[31:01] up comes the trophy involved for somebody from California. But Trophy Hall comes up single failing. How do you account for that? In terms of saying, you know, there's the implications of taking that, you know, quadrupling it, or more, whatever And so is there any legislation in California policies in California that address it. Because that's what's one of the things that we've been talking about a bit lately. Yeah, I mean, there are some jurisdictions that's been in place. The longest is Portland, Oregon. So they did a missing middle sort of rezone. and they were the only jurisdiction at the time. I think others have done it since that put it basically tied it to the number of units on the site. So if you just want to build one unit, a single family home on your property. II making these numbers up. So don't quote me. You can build 2,500 square feet. You want to build 2. You can build 3,200 square feet. Wanna build 3. You can build 4,000 square feet.

[32:05] So you get more bulk because you're creating more housing, which most jurisdictions do not do so. And and they'll actually put open space requirements and parking requirements and things on a per unit basis so that sometimes physically impossible to build a duplex or you're gonna force those to be so small that no developers gonna build them. They'll build the monsters, because you don't have those open space requirements and like it's just easier to do so they were one of the first actually high number of units to the far, the the bulk on the property. And I think that's actually one of the things that in some of the conversations like we were having in Seattle. If you went into neighborhoods and talked about what is upsetting people like, it's the the Mcmansions. It's these monstroms. They tore down the beautiful cute little craftsmen. and they built a 5,000 square feet 9. Seen the people there kind of know where they are. They're like they live somewhere else. But they just come here like once a year. They want a house in Seattle. So that was one of the things where you could say, okay, well, let's talk about like 80 Us. And duplexes and things that actually could create housing

[33:13] for your friends and neighbors and your kids. That they could actually be here because most people can't afford that 6 million dollar. Okay? So so 20 years ago, we adopted Pdr policy and stuff. So we have the equivalency for Tdr, this just shows. you know, the transferable development, right? Right? So one TV are equals 1,400 square feet for multi family 2,500 square feet for a duplex, one TV are same price, or 4,800 square feet for a single family. So if you're looking there. And you say, where do I get my date for my buck? I'm just gonna build a single family right? So it's almost like upside down for what you want to do, and I've just seen so many policies like that, you know. Whatever jurisdiction you go into, where you know it's well minded just missing the evidence that we need to have to, you know, create opportunities for housing. So

[34:17] if you try late 80 s. Or somewhere in the in the 90 s. First program, New York City, right? Building up. And so it's transferable development, right? And and sometimes it could be really attractive. Right? But it's it's if it's it's a tool that can also work negatively. Right? Like I said. Because, you know, if if a multi family which you might want to build or duplex if you're trying to get more housing is worth that, much less in terms of square footage of a single family. You're forcing single family. And then you're pushing into an area that's probably more suited for multiple years. So

[35:28] but yeah, it's a good program. Need some refining. I have 2 2 questions, David, and I think it's probably most relevant to over in ideas. We've discussed endlessly. One is rezoning commercial properties, especially if it's slow if they are like one story. Little buildings run about a lot of parking. And it seems like that's real area of potential is allowing. You know the 5,000 square foot house to be built. But then.

[36:03] no restriction on what kind of density could be within that space, so it could be like 10 micro events, or for apartments whatever like that, I mean, have you seen those techniques applied in places you work and like when you if you go, if you're resend it, will they come? Does it? Yeah, I mean, it depends on I mean, that can be by market. And so, you know, definitely. So we did a lot of work with some of the bear jurisdictions early on in their house, rezoning strategies to understand what would be the likely market response. So don't go out and have a big, bloody battle in your community about rezoning something that's going to create 5 units. It's a lot of lot of that, you know. Sp, 9 is a good example of that. Okay, the State blew up single family zoning. not really, but it looks like it on paper. But when you look at the details of like, oh, could play out economically, it's not that big of an impact. Except for the subversion things that are built in desk behind.

[37:06] yeah. So under the commercial redevelopment, there's a ton of activity in the bay area around redevelopment of older shopping centers. Most communities are over saturated with retail and changes to online shopping and things. And so there's a lot of defunct shopping centers. Some of the quite large that are in sort of master plan and redeveloped. The State passed one of the state bills from last year, basically, and take any commercial property build housing on it? well intentioned, I think, problematic in practice and some jurisdictions. I know where it's happening. 200 years of housing in a site that really like. there's no sidewalks. There's no services there's like. So now the city is in a space for like, okay, now we gotta figure out how to like. Make it liveable in this like crappy old commercial property. That's not a housing on it, and they can't say, no, that

[38:06] cause it's a lot of So yeah, I think there's a huge amount of opportunity for redevelopment virtual areas. I think it happens fast through some kind of area planning process. Just to sort of look at sort of how it's gonna work as a commercial area. A lot of the if you're familiar with the Bay area. the Peninsula, there's 101 which traditionally sort of been a dividing line like this site is not residential. It's hotels and airport and biotech and sort of commercial development. And then this side is where the housing is not a lot of the jurisdiction. This development, in conjunction with plan water break rise issues, you know, price issues. But anyway, I think. yeah, there's a ton of promise for looking at, particularly retail.

[39:02] Hmm! Part of what I'm asking is it's just so appealing to people with bell housing that they're rushing in and taking advantage of the underlying owner and and sort of what? The what are the local economics, and what what can they build on that property? yeah. again, it's sort of driven by local market. I mean, there's been a couple developers in the in the Silicon Valley or San Jose Cubertina, where the city is actually kind of upset because they went through whole zoning, rezoning, and created a higher density zoning. And now the developers coming in building town homes because they've decided that's where the market's at, and they can do for sale feasible town on certain. Yeah.

[40:03] Santa Barbara County, like you can make $140,000 a year and qualify for for browsing because they lies above that. So it's. And so, you know, I know what you can get the land for. You can build a product that's affordable to $140,000 income household. The thing that amazes me is that there's actually people who are janitors and service workers. how they're making life work in San Jose and these cities so. But why we have so much homelessness. But one thing, other thing I wanted to. Highlight is the there's a so when I say Ab is Assembly Bill Sv. As a Senate Bill Senate Bill 35 was passed a few years ago. It's a streamlined review bill which I've I've seen this having a huge impact statewide. All the affordable housing developers have jumped on it. So if you come in the door with a a development proposal that has a certain level of affordability, and it varies by what the income level is, or if it's senior housing

[41:06] you can qualify for the provision of which basically says. Make your application consistent with the current zoning. You can receive a 60 or 90 day, depend on the scale of your development review and approval from the jurisdiction. They have to give you a determination in 60 days or 90 days. The determination piece that you don't meet the requirements. or but they have to sell, tell you something, and it cannot be a discretionary review process. You can have a design review board meeting if you want, but that cannot be the decision the decision is to be ministerial, made by staff and it has to be based on objective standards in place at the time that the application was made. So huge movement in California to take design guidelines, which I think maybe people has these kinds of design. Guidelines, if I remember correct, is it consistent with neighborhood character? 5 people could debate until 3 in the morning, which I think Planning board did when I was there. And has to be made objective. Anyone could read the standard, know what it is, design a building to meet that standard and get approval.

[42:16] I think that's one of the things that gets back to like. Be clear about what your vision, what you want put in place the zoning to actually make it possible and make it happen. And then when people come in with the thing that you said you wanted building buildings? so you know. Yeah, if someone comes in and says, I want to to build a 40 story tower in a place that you said, it's gonna be a school. Well, okay, then there should be a process to have a debate about whether that's consistent with your vision. But they come in to build town homes in a place that you said you want to see townhomes.

[43:01] Why would they have to go through and year long or 2 year long, review and approval process they should as well, but is actually added my much more pro Housing City Council, and did a lot last year, and we hope to do a lot of one this year. Yeah, there's a bunch of jurisdictions that that are pro housing that have been doing work to sort of create housing outcomes. yeah. even when you're pro housing, and you got the right zone in place. Creating units that are affordable to very low income households is gonna require a stack of money. So

[44:02] there, you know, there's some fantastic developers, and there's you know, City San Jose. I think it's been doing a great job city of Oakland's been doing a great job. Berkeley, I mean, if you go to Berkeley now, you'd be like, I mean. this is Berkeley. There's praise there. Building, housing. Yeah. Next to the park station next to the park station. That's been there for 25 years or no longer. 50 years. Anyway. So there's been a there's been, I think, one of the things in this round of house element updates in the Bay area that was really impressive to see was this strong Yimby voice. People were showing up at council meetings and saying, We need housing. We want housing. Not that there weren't strong meeting voices as well. But I there was not a meeting. I went to where there was not an equally strong. mostly young sort of set of voices, saying.

[45:03] I want to live here, and, like the housing costs, are out of control. Now. The only solution is more housing. So there was. you know, and and even communities, you know Half Moon Bay, which is part of the Bay area. But you, you know, it's a rural on the ocean lot of egg housing challenges, and you know, and a lot and a pretty significant old school population who was like, Yeah, we need more housing, like people can't believe what homes are selling for and so there's just sort of people kind of reached the point of being kind of set up and even, I mean, I've heard fairly conservative. Council members sort of say, okay, but the States telling cause I'm so tired of, like we do all this work, we rezone. And then the project comes in, and the room is full of people yelling at us not to approve it like we need this like we winter. We haven't a whole 3 year long. Study does just like understand, like, why we need this. And now people are upset that it's getting built. So when they they can say alright. We can't

[46:12] state law since we have to approve it. It's kind of a relief. Are there enough State laws at this point to take a year off, because momentum going to implement everything that's been passed is is still a huge effort ahead of California. Right? Yeah. I mean, I just briefly looked before coming over. We work with me back to do some reason laws every year and do webinar state law requirements. 2023 State laws was 25 pages, and that was like somebody having recovered about 50 different State laws that have been passed in 2023 related to housing.

[47:06] and some of them are great, and some of them like. I don't know why we're doing this, but It's kind of fashionable to put your name on a piece of housing legislation. But and there's this, there's it's happening so quickly, like there's, I think there's about 5 different definitions of what a major transit stop is across different bills. So when someone says, Well, Major, transfer stop, and like which which bill are referring to because I need to look up what a major transit stop is by definition for that bill versus another bill. So it also they did some clean up. But I think there's just sort of it's just such a set of prices in the sense of like, we need to fix things. but the challenges like it takes 5 to 10 years to know whether that bill you pass actually resulted in housing. because even if I say you can build it. But okay, I've got to go figure out what it is. I want to build and need to find the money, and I need to find the architect. So the building plans I'd still have to go get out and get it permanent.

[48:11] That doesn't happen over time. So that's why I think 80 uses. It's high. I mean, it's I mean. Still, I mean, even if you said him. Here in City of Boulder anyone can build an adu in the Hi. Maybe you'll see 1% of single family home properties, but maybe that'd be a high number like, so it doesn't happen overnight, like how many people are sitting at home. Most people are looking to make a big change in their home. But you know, but some people are. But even if you decide you want to do, it's gonna take you all.

[49:06] So it's just been really great and We can talk about it all day. Go ahead for oh, well, I mean, I don't know. You guys have questions, too, or well, one of the things that surfaces for me all the time is like I would love. Both have more people in it and fewer cars, and, like I have this fantasy that maybe there's a density at which the intensity of car traffic just naturally has to give way to room for people and structures built for people. And I'm just kinda curious like, are there any examples in California like recent ones where increased density has has corresponded with less intensity of car traffic.

[50:04] And and is that is that a goal that's explicit, or is that I mean, it's hard to break it down. I think one of the one of the big changes that's been put in place in California is is to stop measuring by level of service and measure by vehicle Miles traveled when you do a development. So for a number of years, there was kind of this perverse thing where, like, okay, you're gonna build a big building. Yeah, it's gonna generate traffic. And then you say, okay, for environmental reasons, you can't build that big building right there in the heart of downtown because it's traffic and big traffic course. Now you measure it. Based on how many vehicle miles travel is the development going to create. So that logically, if it's a hundred unit development out in a green field where you can't go anywhere without getting your car. You're gonna have a higher Bmt than if it's the same development downtown where people could walk and take transit. Because you're not gonna build a hundred, you know, building. And no one's going to ever get in the car from that building ever like it's going to generate traffic. So. but it's gonna turn a hell lot less traffic than if it were out in the middle of the green fields.

[51:02] So it actually is a much more consistent with the intent of environmental law to say that we should measure vehicle miles traveled not the level of service or traffic congestion at that intersection. I think that's that was years and years in terms of the number of cars. Yeah. But but if that shift that seems like really useful, so like, think about terms of miles travel. And if you look at the Bay area, most of the traffic, particularly coming out of the pandemic, and people are starting to go back to the office like the traffic is people who can't live close to work, and they're driving. It's an hour each way like that creates a hell of a lot of traffic. If you're able to put those folks closer. Yeah, they still might get in a car. But they're not going to be driving for an hour. People that grow up in New York licenses. It's not something you do. And so another. Another question I have for you. Has to do with

[52:07] density as well. When I think about boulders hasn't crisis in particular. I I'm always seeing it through this lens of under utilize housing. So one demographic trend that you mentioned is really rich people who just wanna buy a big house in a city that they like to visit, and it stays empty large portions of the year that that seems like a much smaller percentage than the other demographic trend which is people aging in place and large houses that make you had a family before. Right now, there's 2 people living in a 3,000 square foot home. And so like one of the ways I like to think about that is just like empty bedrooms. How many empty bedrooms are there in boulder? And there's a lot and so it's interesting because the people often the people who live in those nearly empty. Hu homes are like folders full, you know we. And meanwhile that demographic is like empty. Those neighborhoods are like literally emptying out of people. And so I'm just curious like, is there is this part of the conversation in California, and like is, what's being, what are they doing to address like under utilization.

[53:21] So there's a number of issues one. Sometimes people want to downsize, but because there aren't a lot of housing options and choices like. where am I gonna go like. So they stay in their oversized home because there's not a great option for them to move to the track. Some communities Santa Cruz comes to mind and put in place programs that provide financial support for seniors to build an adu that they will then move into and then rent out their home, so it becomes sort of a become generation thing for them. They can age in place, stay on the property, design what they're what they want, their green idiot to be

[54:04] and you know, maybe you can be 12 or square feet. So it's not like it's like a tiny home. So that's another interesting option. there are home share programs. I'd I'd say most people aren't really excited about having roommates. Some people are depends sort of their personality like. there are some good successful function programs that connect exactly. That's sort of older. They've got rooms. They income want the income. They actually want company. Helps sort of pair them with people who are looking for housing. Might be formally homeless, or others that you know our workforce. I'd say that's that doesn't fit everyone's desire on a housing situation. This is like a very niche thing if you don't really promote it like in a big way.

[55:00] So there's different approaches to us. But you know. I think it's been particularly challenging the rise interest rates. If you're I know your situation. If you're an older resident. But Doesn't she feel like you can take the money your house, and afford to buy the thing that you want? Particularly now. But you're not going to give up your 3 to go and buy something at 8. So that's also put a damper on people ability within the house market. I'd love to see better data around this, too, like just just to have like an overlay of population growth versus finish square. But housing growth, you know, like II can't imagine that. The amount of square footage of housing is like they're like, it's like going this way right? It's like, No, I just mean, like total square footage of of finished housing. I would. I would think that there's actually plenty of housing. The number of people

[56:21] I'm doing work with steamboats rings with their housing strategy, you know, like their home surprises went through the ceiling during the pandemic, and it's mostly people doing second all purchases so like, you know. And so they're I mean, you look at the mountain towns. I was shocked actually, when I look at some of the numbers like Breckenridge fail aspen like 75, 80% of their year-round housing stock that serves their local workforce and population is deep restricted like. So you're looking at a situation where basically 100% of the homes that serve a local population restricted so that people can afford to live there because the global wealth that's driving.

[57:00] Oh, price increases like makes it unaffordable even to doctors, you know, like they can't afford. Like. if you move to steamboat and you're making 200,000 $250,000 a year. You kind of have an expectation of the home you're going to be able to buy and live in. You can't afford the F. So anyway, it's let's probably go back to your comment. So think the they just mentioned this. You know, we have a lot of people are maybe not too motivated to have roommates. but if you could developed some kind of a model for years, it evolved building it, but in the footprint of your home. So we did. Great, I mean, it's so much less expensive to do that. I don't know what that's like. Lack of a narrative around

[58:02] like when we talk about wealth disparity, it's always in terms of dollars and cents. And we don't really have the data. Or maybe we just don't talk about it this way. But in terms of like, how much space to be occupied feels like like, if we had the right kind of data, you know, like that that the House Bill, the State bill that got troun slash last year. Penn has a section about data collection. It seems like whoever's in charge could make sure the right kind of data gets collected. So you could make that narrative. Can all add a little bit with actual data. Can I add onto that? So the other whole issue about household size declining house size, increasing over time. But it was interesting. The biggest pushback last year to governors legislation to reform land use was, we don't have the infrastructure capacity.

[59:00] So to me, I don't know. II have a hard time. Believe with that those 2 trends leaving both the local communities. Man heard that. So, David, do you have any closing comments? And I have one more sorry. Well, so did did that issue come up in California, I mean, did the jurisdictions yell, or we don't have the infrastructure to handle this increase capacity, and therefore you yeah, do it. Yes, they said that in the States said to your plan, anyway. I mean in the housing, only you have to have a a, a, area where you talk about infrastructure capacity, sort of non market constraints on housing. And you identify that you have to have programs that says what you can to address that. So to do that and I mean, this is where some of the stuff started getting a little absurd. Here I did some work on the Monterey fence where the State Water Board has a water moratorium place.

[60:02] and they were told, tell us we're gonna put 10,000 new years of housing. But you know, the thing was the same was. Yeah, honestly, what's playing out is there's people who are like don't want to solve the water problem because that's the way they want to. So the States like, well, now, through your element, tell us what you're doing to create that desolation plan as you can do it. Just have to have the clinical world to do it, anyway. So that's great. So the last thing I would just if you could share just a little bit about the Pre group plans, particularly for policy side. But then, helping to create tools for homeowners who want to develop 80 use? So our jurisdictions are tend to be our our client. But we build sort of robust websites with sort of

[61:01] the little short, short video stories of people who built 8 Us. What their experience was, their decision, so it might be for their adult child who autistic, and they want to double, live close by, or for their agent parents, or for the local worker, because they want to contribute to solving the housing problem. But then, as a whole, as a workbook to help people go through sort of what they should be thinking about, the questions they should ask at each step of the process on my calculator. We got money from the Chan Zuckerberg Foundation to make available throughout the entire State in California, to so on large and get on. And so I'm thinking of like a internal adu. That's this size, or into thinking about a deep touch that's 2 bedrooms and what not baths, and it's populated with local construction per spur. But construction costs. and you can calculate out if you plan, rent it like the rental stream will be, what's your cost if you have borrowing costs, and that sort of tells you what the payoff period will be. so you can make an informed decision, because I can sort of play around like.

[62:06] what if I make it smaller? What if I made a bigger and then sort of. And then there's a number of pre approved plans, for there's sure 2 categories. Well, 3. There's prefab plans which are essentially already pre approved. So any prefab. and California at least has to be gone through a Federal hub review process or a State Hcd process to show that some fine with billing codes but then we've also set up for local jurisdictions to do pre-approvals and sort of put stuff up on plans gallery that says it's pre approved for the building code. So that's going to get a permit for the site renewal and then there's even standard plans, because even if it's not pre approved, it is an off the shelf plan rather than custom design plan. You're gonna save $10,000 and 3 months of to 6 months of custom design work. So it's just sort of a way to help people find something that's gonna meet their needs. Understanding. That means vary quite a bit. So

[63:07] we built an initial site for the center, which is a sort of separate nonprofit that supports 16 jurisdictions across, and happens in other counties as sort of a trusted, go to homeowners to understand permitting process and what's possible and what's not possible. What's the losses they can do? And then access resources happen, and some specialty loan products which has been super successful. So yeah, we built this plans gallery. And we're in the beta of a of a new version which basically allow any jurisdiction to sort of sign on, and sort of have a back end where they review 500 different plans and say, this one, we will meets our our requirements in our jurisdiction, and then someone go and say, and it'll pop up and populate for plans that have been selected by the city.

[64:00] continue continues to own, to plan and sort of helps generate, you know, business for the architect helps jurisdictions, connect home owners with the resources they need and helps homeowners sort of get through the process. But one of the big challenges like, Okay, yeah, they'll need you like. you know, some people have done development. Most people have talked and open up your zoning code and try to figure out what the hell it says that what I can do or not doing my property. Good luck! So sort of helping jurisdiction sort of brace like they're expecting people to do. Happy to send you some links to things and also links to Ben this weekend. And so a lot of jurisdictions are deficit. They're doing the same thing. They have free, approved daily plans, and even some accounting as pre approved daily plans. Now for the last 3 months. Yeah, one of the things that

[65:09] when we first started like a lot of jurisdictions are doing this thing where they hey? One? They hire one architect to do 3 or 4 plans. and nobody uses them because there there's just the needs of what people are looking for are so varied like the likelihood that someone's gonna say, that's the thing. That's what I want. My backyard. That's where we have to a bunch of jurisdictions that have pre approved plans. We put on the gallery, but our whole thing is like we can have a gallery. That's 1,000 plans. and you can. It should be like an Etsy for 80 years, like I could say, I'm interested in one bedroom. It needs to be accessible. It needs to have wash, and dryer needs to maximize storage, or, you know, sort of different factors. And there's 20 plans to do that. It's pretty approved. Is that kind of just like, based on the footprint that you're allowed to use. So it's pre approving. Officials tend not to like that term?

[66:05] Yeah, because everything still has to come in for approval. But it's basically been reviewed for compliance with building code. So the building envelope needs building code requirements. Yeah, so different jurisdictions have different rules about how much you can. If it's pre approved, plan, how much you can change before it loses its pre approval. Status. I mean, understand? I mean, Philly's officials are. Their job is to make sure that people don't build things that are going to kill people. So you know, and it gets complicated in California. Most places like, you know, soils, conditions, seismic slope. All these things have to be factored into when things sort of wind and things sort of that have to inform the engineering of the building below. So saying, that's here's a pre approved plan. Go, put in your backyard.

[67:00] Building officials are like. Hmm! Let me see that, please, before you could go do that. But again, my attitude has been like just a standard plan and off the shelf plan even itself to go through building review like it's gonna save you $1,000 a time. Other places call for proposal from local architects, and sort of they'll post their designs up and connect them with home owners. Let's move. reconnect, and keep up

[68:08] almost a cautionary now but few years before the legislation hyperdrive. It's actually a section on boulder from the oh, yeah. And that's look at the very first chapter. Good! Read but it sobering. That's everything about housing. So let's have a head for David Driscoll. That's I think he's gonna stick around and celebration everywhere. Well, now. meeting to order.

[69:02] I don't know the outgoing in every respect. Dirty bamboo is present. We are Julianne Ramsey, we also have president, our our great staff, Tiffany Bowler and Jason met, and our planning board liaison capital so we are now official meeting agenda review. We'll be approving our middle minutes next. We have already had our public presentation. Matters from the board. We've already had our David Driscoll presentation, but they'll continue to be here, and we might be able to. We'll get some more expertise run out of them. We have a decision item to discuss our 2024 letters of City Council stating our priorities for the retreat section on matters and staff debrief. The meeting do a calendar checks both the

[70:08] since so with that we need to approve our minutes from January 24, anyway. 2420 24. It's confusing. And then do I have a motion to free those minutes. So, Danny, give me a second here, all in favor if it's approved unanimously. With that I think we need to get our letter up the bridge of the Awards. I trust everyone that's when they're over, because you have the fact that it's fine. And we're ready to put some finishing touches on this and

[71:01] obstacle approval, sending it to council. everyone ready. Number one. So was replacing terrier. We do not so counsel. We do interview. Most of the interviews have already happened. There's a final interview. Actually, tomorrow. my counsel on March twenty-first. It's gonna make the official make people 6 applicants.

[72:02] We will have a new member the next meeting. Yes. I don't see karen will also be reappoint them oop. I'll just know, too. My God! I review the letter, and some of that. It's still letter. I thought it was great. I usually don't say that with that suggestion, but it's great to the point. Hit all the main things that we I discussed. I feel comfortable with it. Bank. Everybody gave input especially helpful some editing suggestions correction that we should probably make right away. It's remind us what that was. You can make that fixed. It was actually an addition.

[73:04] So it's in Section 2. J, okay. sorry. I meant to move that over before the meeting. Pull it up. You talk about it something else. While I do that. I know. I just wanted to mention I did send out a summary of the housing summit, Jay and others. It was really excellent regional housing summit in January. And if you'd like to see background materials, I do have a digital version of all the Powerpoints and Presentations. Okay, forward it to me, and there's lots of high quality data you can read about

[74:00] as I mentioned in the summary that I can be a little sobering. But there is some real potential for progress, with some of the new funding sources back the community to collaborating and setting housing goals before so could be seeing some significant progress, but also have paper copies that they just have to glance at it. The last one of those was in 2,017. It was when. So it didn't exist before that and that's when every jurisdiction in Boulder County basically

[75:00] committed to the 12% goal and so this was really a recognition that, you know, that was a while ago. We have all new elected officials throughout the entire county. And so it's sort of recommitting to that goal and bring it to the port front, particularly after the passage of the county. I'll measure one be provided you know that additional funding. So our our in I do have the text what you sent in front of me. If you wanna just read it, I just added it. It just felt like if we were talking about parking requirements. It seems like that

[76:03] reduce or eliminate lot area per dwelling unit calculations in all capitalized zones. current density limits remaining effectively prohibit, replacing a single family home with a duplex or other multiplex seem clear, make intent clarification when you say all zones. Did you mean all residential zones or well with the with the zoning? Correct me if I'm wrong, anybody but but the recent zoning for affordable housing stuff that changed on January first, January first. Some of the zones, some of the zoning.

[77:00] How am I trying to say that was was reduced or eliminated. but not all. So there's still a large portion where you technically can do a duplex or multiplex. But when you do the math you can't right. You'd need a much bigger lot to be able to build a duplex so carefully. so soj, feel like it doesn't need to say in all zones that's sufficient. Say, reduce or eliminate lot area for calculations period. Oh, yeah, I cause II did say that. And then I edit it. And I said to say in all zones, because I wanted to acknowledge that some did get changed in January first. How about if we start something like

[78:04] explore viable means to reduce, eliminate, or provide enhanced flexibility and lot area for dwelling calculations. And and also the designations. People like that because you have to slow down. So, Danny, you're just trying to provide a little bit more flexibility in case it's not feasible to actually reduce or eliminate them all zones. Right? Capture what we're saying to which is that, you know there's a lot of ways to get at it. But we need to try to look at how to get at it and to do it throughout all zoom. Is that not implied with the phrase areas for additional have research and discussion? Maybe. Actually, that's but other ideas worth investigating.

[79:09] It's it seems. II don't know if you put it that way. It's just. It's a little more news. So it's saying, Hey, you know, we'd like you to keep exposing all this right. But that's that's my suggestion. So it's not remotely aware of saying, Hey, you know. cause I guess, like to probably change it with that. The big part of that to me is just the notion of, you know our enhanced flexibility, because, you know, we're not necessarily just saying, reduce or eliminate. But if there was a enhanced flexibility, so, for example. are you adding more density per watt, or whatever are you? Are you increasing that for local housing, for deep, restricted housing, whatever it may be, right? in which case you stand on. That's not a flat out reduction. But if you do certain types of housing.

[80:02] we'll be more flexible. And how we do that. I think that's that's crucial. So does that capture. Yeah, I mean, I think we could keep reduce, eliminate. But I'd I'd probably say, oh. explore all needs to reduce eliminate or enhanced flexibility, density, calculations in all zones. Alright sorry. Start again. Sheep. I think it's reduce, eliminate, or enhance flexibility. Or yeah, yeah. I think, Danny, you had started with explore ways to reduce, eliminate or enhance. Flexibility

[81:01] means ways. either one or ways to reduce event, revised flexibility. flexibility. Yeah, enhance flexibility or wait. thanks to enhance flexibility, reduce or eliminate

[82:00] per dwell and unit per dwell and unit calculations. There we go rather than it works, for, like clear what we're reducing are limiting there for dwelling unit calculations. the that Terry's already doing, that restrictions

[83:06] still not making sense. To me it sounds like we're reducing. be reducing something else. Is it restrictions? I would just enhance flexibility in one unit. That's the calculations. Oh, yeah, that's yeah. Oh, sure. he's got it reducing. Okay, cool.

[84:05] Everyone's okay. Removing the outer homes. Tiny. which is so plans here. So I actually. But we didn't talk about it. It's a group that was worth putting it out there. People did do 2 sessions on homelessness just in the last one month. and they have kind of already passed on. This option seems not getting any traction. so makes any sense to make a recommendation about it. I. Also. I'm very curious about this angle and technique for dealing with transitional homelessness. I'm curious to see how it's playing out in Denver, where they're really doing this at scale.

[85:09] Seems like there's some successes. But having been in the city a lot in the last week. There's still a lot of visible homelessness. usual places, and the city budget is struggling with the amount of money it costs to implement. like kind of transitional sanction campground and pallet homes. so I think the jury is really out, and it doesn't mean you couldn't recommend. Let's do a pilot program as opposed to Mayor Johnson in Denver, doing it sweeping way almost wholesale. But I was persuaded that we should pull back on this one based on political reality as much as anything else. I'm happy with it. Help other people. When

[86:01] I think it puts taking that out, puts more emphasis on that prior bullet point, which I think is something that we've talked a lot about, and maybe have some. So promise to adapt the viewers. So I'm I'm okay with it. Then, yeah, see the rationale. So was a tiny village small group of phones. I think the home says you should be. Have a minute anything else. So I added, Michael signature line, and then listening, everybody else fit on one page or 2 pages. So we all just sign over our names. I would actually like to read it.

[87:01] Just make sure we're not fumbling on any point. It's it's like a page. Yes, the whole thing. one missing middle housing, eg. For self flexes, town homes and single family houses affordable. Are you wanting real time? I just wanted to hear it, and then, you know, take notes and we'll talk about it when I'm done. That's is that okay? Missing middle housing, eg. 4 saleplexes, town homes and single family homes affordable. Where can we find land? Another resource to create more housing for middle income people? So other reason for student money

[88:07] areas for additional have research and discussion Bullet Point airport. Resume conversion of the airport which is known as Edu and airport jargon into a mixed income neighborhood with affordable home ownership opportunities like holiday, but in larger scale. Second, bullet planning reserve, huge potential housing development, 40 to 60% affordable required is a lot in the planning reserve just northeast of city limits. City owns substantial proportion of this reserve area, next fully compliant updown date 2025. Having this embrace and aligned with new policies, such as zoning for affordable housing. Allowing for more to use. I think it should be a comment. There's only over portable housing. Comma live, or more a use comma duplexes and triplexes on lots. Currently. So for single family only question mark. Next bullet convert, parking to mixed use, examine policies to incentivize the conversion of privately owned under user parking, parentheses and apple supplies, boulder and prem

[89:11] to housing, slash mixed use. Look at incentives, zoning changes and tax policies to second subject area, mitigating high cost barriers to building affordable housing recently constructed affordable housing projects reportedly cost 600,000 to 700,000 per door. In addition to the high cost of construction, the costly nature of the housing market, Highland costs present a huge barrier, creating affordable and technical housing. App will explore ways to reduce the total cost. Examples could include deed restrictions, ground leases reduced, permitting slash fees, expedite processing, allowing more densely permitting smaller units, studio units, etc. Other ideas worth investigating include bullet point, reduce or eliminate parking requirements, parking minimums at the expense of or actively discourage production, more housing, additional funding and affordable housing impact fee for the demolition replacement with new homes. In addition to seeing a certain square footage, eg. 2,000 square feet.

[90:18] Next bullet mix. You see developments. When the city develops a site for its own use. Cg and library Rec centers, etc. Consider a mix of uses, including housing. This can amount to a land contribution toward building affordable house surplus, public slash, institutionally owned buildings and properties, consider surplus land owned by public agencies, schools, faith organizations for affordable housing free pathways, allowing this to per quickly and at low cost. Subject area number 3. Traditional housing or portion of the unhouse community, almost as most American communities. humanitarian needs of the unhouse and adjacent issues of degraded public space and safety will not be solved in a broad stroke. A possible start could be portion of the population

[91:11] most able to help themselves gain shelter. Meanwhile, plan for more permanent housing and advanced social services. Bullet point, adaptive use for use of vacant underused office buildings as an alternative to encampments, looking to making it easier to reason with vacant buildings for dorm hospital life, transitional housing streamline code approvals, if we truly, and the rest of it's for the play. So thank you for your patience, I thought, might be valuable to hear that loud and make sure we're well same page, and not making any big mistakes like leaving it come out alright. So any other thoughts. How you heard it. Well, Michael, the version that you read from didn't have current new addition area requirements, explore ways to enhance flexibility per dwelling unit density calculations in all zones. Currently, current density limits effectively prohibit replacing a single family or other both.

[92:15] Okay, that's a whole trotter master plan that could just be II. My sentiment is actually kind of the inverse of yours. Of like. It's it's a good letter to send to council as priorities that they can work on this year, but as a as like a master plan of what both their needs for housing and what have should be working on it. To me. It feels like it falls a little short of a lot of things that you know, that are longer range than just like, do we want

[93:05] to to raise up to the level of city council, to to read in a letter from us this this spring. So anyways I am. So that reason I don't. I don't feel like I need to debate the the points of the letter. What might be missing from it in terms of really good point, and it's kind of interesting. I mean. these are effectively recommendations. Yeah. But we're also saying, they're items for study. Yeah, we need to do. You know, some of these things. They're aspirational if you go. I don't know. II think you create 10 things that, hey? If we can do 3 things right. But they're 10 great ideas, right? Great ideas, tools. I need this concept that you know. Hopefully, some of them can get implemented somewhere, and they'll help you want to suggest any

[94:04] amendments, divisions, changes. Are you okay with this? I'm okay with it. That's. I think, for a very great point. I think. in all the years that have been here, and we always have that challenge of alright and keep it to couple of pages and stuff like that. They actually listen to us with what things are we've losing by keeping it as as a direct as it is so like, II want to study the economics of land markets and think about ways to invert it somehow, so that we can have a healthy land market. But that's not appropriate for a letter to the city Council. It's like, it's like a big idea that that is like needs people thinking about it as a possible way of thinking about how to how to make a major adjustment to this thing that this market that's not working correctly.

[95:12] You're talking about like taxing the land is over. I'm actually not talking about that I'm just talking about like this is big issue that doesn't fit into a letter as a as a a lot of people don't know that if you have a vacant piece of land. the actual dollars you pay in taxes are way more than if the building sold. No, like crazy amounts a lot. But you have a vacant 8,000 square foot lot, residential, commercial. Whatever you want to be. the dollars you pay of that 8,000 square foot lot. If there's nothing on it versus 1,000 square foot home, it's like more than double your ratio 4 times as much

[96:07] logic behind it. But that's just a reality that my last bit of real world knowledge to send out to the other board here very long discussion with the county planning department about what qualifies as a house to make this partial property not vacant. And it was Case anybody's wondering foundation. No, doesn't have to be cross, basically slab on grade. And the house that's that's probably kitchen bathroom

[97:02] to be commercial. It's always that higher, higher ratio. Oh, so. And I'm structured. I even went to the mobile, tiny home trailer. No, that doesn't count. That doesn't. That doesn't bring it down. I'll stop there but 4 times, Danny. That's really what it is. I didn't calculate it. Oh, jeez the index point 7 2 5 or point 2 9 ownership planner.

[98:01] pull over yourself to make a motion. all in favor of adopting this letter and sending it on accounts. We'll say Hi and I know we'll add that in all the letters to counsel probably been 5 or 6 from at this point. This is the best one without question. It's got hidden suggestions in there which are nice suggestion. And it's it's really good. great! Only 2 or 4 meetings. Thank you.

[99:18] I don't know if you guys were here. But do you remember the lawyer to counsel that was really actually attacking counsel, telling them that they were like. Okay. okay, before we go into management staff. But actually, I'd like to ask Laura if she would like to discuss something that I might ask you. That outside

[100:01] set me outside. I think we can go on to the next item, 6, and matters from staff. take it away. J. So just really 2 things. Next meeting we have. We invited Brian. Ross Burt, who's the executive director of Housing, Colorado. come and go and update on the legislative session. So this should be really interesting. also welcome our 2 new members. Hopefully, they can make it hopefully returning member and then what else was I gonna say? Oh, so Michael mentioned earlier. Be interested to hear more about the planning reserve. So the baseline Urban Services study has started. Since you hired a consultant. I think I talked about that last time there was a a site tour last week a week before, where a bunch of staff went out and drove around, walked around which I had never actually done. I've only seen it from or from at this foreign parking lot.

[101:07] but we walked halfway down 30 acres, that housing human services zones, and it's a really nice piece of property, nice and flat it above the this escarpment that drops down so couple 100 feet. no, they were closed. They're close. No, no, they were just they just weren't open. But if you haven't been out there I would highly recommend it. Mostly dirt roads are all dirt roads, really? But there are a lot of single family homes which I was little surprised to see. So it's it is a bit carved up. Company, or what group or whatever. Remember. do not. It's a big firm. I can't remember their name.

[102:05] That's where is anybody from out of town, you know. yeah, this is so, basically the the big open parcels, which is the way I think most people think of the one they think of the planning reserve, or they're all city owned. I guess that there's some pretty large single family homes out there. So I think, aggregating those parcels might be a bit challenging, and then I think it might take longer than a lot of people think it fine. huge opportunities out there. And like I said, the the escarpment that's on the edge of the planning reserve is nice and flat. and then the rip at the edge. Just kind of drops off and all that lamb to the north. It's all open space. So it's gonna be pretty impressive. And then that drainage goes towards Boulder Reservoir. Is that? That's all. Boulder Valley branch. Yep.

[103:03] So yeah, I have some interesting maps. If you work guys wanna look at them shows what it looks like on your parcels. Supplying reserve included the Service Building for Service Building. There's more on that side of the street than you know you think about until you get in there and drive around 23 pro, I'd say more one. And then the bus sizes are 8 acres of. And there's some industrial stuff that that landscape company still out there is still Denver.

[104:11] When's that study supposed to be done this year? I would hope so shouldn't take that long right? Is that the idea? And if we have enough services to potentially expand on it. looking at the cost scenarios of just, you know, pure numbers, you know, potentially how dense that development could be. So they're gonna ballpark, the price of infrastructure utilities, all that everything except it's gonna be pretty. so

[105:00] I got an idea. Every year we've done a tour. It's a lot of fun usually biking around boulder looking at affordable housing. What if we should do a reserve tour? Another annual curriculum trip? Go out the Longmont and look at the tiny home village. One built for veterans, desk. loop those 2 together. depending on how ambitious you were. We could go and get some affordable housing and self pull that we know that never makes it into the bike tool. Okay for us. It'd be spring field trip oops. That's a list. Anything else, Jake. Anything else people are curious about. Oh, yes. in May. I wanted to see if we could shift to the fifth Wednesday instead of the fourth because of scheduling. I'll be out of town for the

[106:04] or readable by himself. I think. Okay, yeah. No. 20 would be the 20 ninth of May. which is the week of Memorial Day. I'm sorry you want to ship the date to I think it would be good. I think I'm even Pendleton was 16, so it's a good range works for me. It's fine for me. you know, like May fifteenth

[107:01] branch. David, how's your account? So are you guys staying on fifteenth, fifteenth, fifteenth of May? Yeah, and interested doing our field trip before then. Just follow whether we work as survivor. we're going to be driving right? So like, is he a concern? What's that? Is he the concern? For biked, or maybe oh, okay. I thought I thought you were talking about going up to Lama in the Reserve and South boulder. We can pick it at Xp, let's put that the agenda. Hmm. so so we're okay with the fifteenth of May.

[108:03] I have another adjustment. I'm not going to be available for the April meeting. You guys could always go on without me. Tiffany will be here day. The April meeting is 20, fourth. they're keeping the 20, April 20, fourth. and the Fred. I can't do the seventeenth but third, first. great any other questions for Jay, or there any other issues with anyone on the Board would like to raise before we go to debrief with the meeting. You just do a quick vote on changing the main meeting.

[109:03] Yes, do I hear a motion to change our main meeting to Wednesday, May fifteenth. I move to Michael everything that Michael says. May fifteenth, all in favor. Great last quote. yeah, you can miss that. Don't know. Yeah. being debrief we had a form with one absence. See everybody here. We had one public commenter. If we approved our meetings from minutes from January 20 fourth we had an excellent presentation and discussion with David Driscoll about housing innovation on West Coast, and how it applied here also, during his expertise for working in boulder for 8 years. We reviewed and approved our

[110:07] priorities letter to counsel which I'll look forward to them, I guess. Tomorrow. And then we'll be considering that at their march. Retreat. they give us an overview of what's happening at the planning reserve based on a recent tour. and we really wanna wish Terry pomo as well, and say, listen a whole lot. anything else. Before I ask for a motion to adjourn? Very. We have some motion to adjourn alright. I move that we adjourn my second anyone that in favor of a journey productive meeting.

[111:03] you know. Stuff we we started at the council chambers right. with a whole bunch of people, and everybody's in person, and we went to the.