August 27, 2025 — Housing Advisory Board Regular Meeting

Transcript

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

[0:02] 25? Do you need me to say that all again? Okay, good. All right, so I think we'll just start with a roll call. Karen Clareman is absent today, as is Philip Ogren. Cindy? Hi. Chip? Here. Lauren? Here. Michael? And B, so that means we have a quorum. As far as the agenda… oh, guests, do you want to introduce yourselves? And ML, do you want to say hello as well, just so everybody knows who else is here? Sure. ML Robles, liaison from Planning Board. Hello? Yeah. Thanks for being here. I'm Pam Gibson, I'm on the technical review group. And here to listen today. I'm Lori Call, Associate Vice Chancellor of Local Government and Community Engagement at CU. Chris Ewing, Vice Chancellor for Infrastructure and Resilience at CU.

[1:03] Thanks for being here. Alright, so the plan for this evening We'll approve the minutes. There will be public participation for those of you that are interested in, making public comments. If you have comments specifically about the housing… affordable housing impact fee, the appropriate time for those would be after the presentation, so the presentation, and then, have board will ask clarifying questions, and then you're free to make your comment, so that would be the appropriate time for that. That will have matters from the board, which includes… University of Colorado Boulder Housing Master Plan, Lori and Chris, and then we will have the Affordable Housing Impact Fee for Single Family Additions and Demolitions. And then the CAB Memberly, member, quarterly.

[2:00] update. We'll review the HAB work plan. Go over any matters from the staff, final thoughts, and we plan to adjourn by 9. Right? So, the minutes Tiffany sent those out. For July 23rd, 2025 meeting, did anybody have any comments or corrections? If not, will someone make a motion to approve those? Motion to approve. Awesome. All in favor? Cindy, you know okay with that? Yes. Okay, great. None opposed? So the motion has passed. So now we have time for public participations. Tiffany, is there anybody signed up? I believe you were hoping to make a comment directly related to the impact. True? Okay. Anybody else?

[3:02] We have a few people online, I'm not sure if they want to speak, or… If you're online and you wanted to make a comment not related to the impact fee, can you just make sure to raise your hand? You'll be entrust! Oops. Right. Jay, you want to do the rules? Thank you. So I'll go through the rules very quickly. Alright, so the city has, … Roles for public participation at Sydney Meetings. Are the city engaged with community members?

[4:00] To co-create a vision for productive, meaningful, and inclusive civic conversations, to support the physical and emotional safety for everybody. As well as democracy for people of all ages, identities, experiences, and political perspectives. For more information, you can go to the City of Boulder website. The following examples are rules of decorum found in the Boulder Revised Code and other guidelines. These will be upheld by our chair during this meeting, so we would ask that all remarks and testimony shall be limited to matters related to city business. No participant shall make threats or use other forms of intimidation. Obscenity, racial epithets, and other speech and behavior that disrupts or otherwise impedes the ability to conduct meetings are prohibited, and we do ask that you use the name that you are commonly known by before you are allowed to speak. And currently, only audio testimony is permitted.

[5:01] So… We have, Lynn. You are unmuted, feel free to go ahead and start. Yeah, we've got a housing crisis in this town, and it's largely because of CU. Now, CU's a good thing, but it's too much of a good thing. The Millennium, 930 units rented by the bedroom. What do you think that's gonna do for housing costs in Boulder? You know, high-end. student housing there, with plenty of parking spaces for them, with a subsidy on the floodplain, with all kinds of subsidies for the height limit, for FAR, for… For everything. That's what we do in Boulder. And that's not okay. And I'm doing… you know what I'm doing? I'm going from the protest of my property taxes, to the BOE, to the BAA, to the appeal, to the Colorado Supreme Court, then to the appeal to the Federal Supreme Court, like. I don't have a life myself. I'm 72 years old. I don't want to be fighting my property taxes every minute of the day. I want some peace and quiet myself. Everything I spend, everything, all of my assets, everything is for my kids, for climate change.

[6:13] And I haven't got any… it's not like I'm going off on holiday. It's not like I even get… You know, more than 5 hours of sleep on average a night. It's like just trying to keep up in Boulder. 72 years old, I own my home, I still owe $157,000 on it. The city of Boulder tried to help me out with a retrofit. That's a disaster. Every single thing that they put on my place is a disaster. And it's because I revealed 10 years ago, and got gaslighted by the county. on a retrofit program, when they were forcing one of their vendors to put solar on under adverse conditions, the vendor refused, and they dumped that vendor. And I had been consulting that vendor as part of their program, so I was upset when I found out, and they wouldn't tell me!

[7:03] That they dumped them because they were doing the right thing by refusing to apply solar under adverse conditions. What if I let the county put solar on my place under adverse conditions? Then I'm fighting a lawsuit with them for that for years. What kind of a county do we have to do energy smart programs like this? And then I get Gaslighted 10 years later. with a retrofit program, because I'm affordable. You know, I mean, I qualified for the affordable program, my income's low enough. But they put all this shit on my house that I now have to get rid of, or they can re-fix it. And it's been 10 months, and they still haven't done anything. They haven't even given me a friggin' orientation on the stuff. And their… their contractor, they said, well, the contractor… I mean, I told them, what can you do with the contractor to fix it? Because the contractor did the right thing, they just didn't do it right for me.

[8:01] I didn't want that stuff on my place. I don't want a mini-split in my dining room. I'm not going to turn it on because I don't sit in my dining room, and I don't want to be heated in my dining room and pay for it. Done. Thank you, Lynn. Anybody else, Tiffany? There's no other hands raised. All right, so close public participation and move on to matters from the Board, and we'll start with University of Colorado Boulder Housing Master Plan. Great. Well, thanks for having us tonight. … Are you gonna… I'm gonna share, yes. All right, excellent. Just for a point of clarity, the Millennium Project is not associated with the university, and so it's a private developer. I know that was raised during the comment, so I just wanted to clarify. I do know what I'm doing, I promise. I know. Make a DM. That's right.

[9:10] All right, so, next slide. Tonight, Chris and I just, said a little bit about ourselves, and I can talk, just briefly a little bit more. We'll talk about our overall housing context. We have a new chancellor as of a year ago, and so he has some fairly, aggressive on-campus, housing goals as far as how we provide additional housing for our students, and so we'll talk a little bit about that. Jay also, mentioned you were interested in the, the result of housing pressures and, impacts on, recruitment for… faculty and staff, and so we'll hit on that as well. Also talk about some renovation, that we have underway right now. For those of you familiar with the campus, I don't mean a little bit more, but you can hear a little bit about how we're handling, the, the renovation on our current inventory, and then we've got a couple of projects in the pipeline that include CU South, Lewisville.

[10:21] residents want and Colorado have, and we'll go ahead and get into more detail. Certainly let this be a conversation. We'll walk through things. If you have questions, ask them, and you know, look forward to hearing more about our vision. So with that, I, did, in fact, meet my husband in the dorms, so housing is very near and dear to my heart for lots of different reasons. Cheyenne Arapahoe Hall in 1991. So, Chris also has, really long ties to, the, the, to see you in the local community. You've got two alums here, and… and Chris, I think, has lived in Boulder for, what, 30 years?

[11:00] So, so we know the community, and we also know a lot about seal housing. So, as far as student residency, this is one of the things that folks ask that we address. We have about 37,000 students right now. An estimated, you know, 33,000 are living in Boulder. That's about 28,000 undergraduates and about 4,700 graduates. just for comparison purposes, we've got about 1,300 in Denver. In Broomfield, we have about 976. Longmont and Louisville both have about 800 faculty, staff, and students, so there's… there are populations that are growing in the L-tones as well, and then, you know, kind of an other. And so, we do, you know, as expensive as it is, we do continue to have a lot of students living in Boulder. As, of course, we have for 149 years. Next slide. Current snapshot for, undergraduate housing, we currently have about 8,600 total beds for our undergraduate students, about 7,000 in residence halls, and 977 in the Bear Creek Apartments. For those of you who aren't familiar with those.

[12:19] Williams Village is, of course, the tall towers up of Baseline, and, adjacent to Baseline, directly on Baseline, a little bit farther east? Is Bear Creek? East is, is correct. I, I have no sense of direction. I have no idea which way east is, but I, I, I think that's accurate. So, lower, rise, more individual apartments versus the, the residence halls, which are in Learns Village. Most of our upper division students live off campus, and, and, like, We have 761 apartments for graduate and family housing as well. And I will tell you that the demand, especially for graduate students, is very high. There's a big interest, and they would like to live on campus more.

[13:12] Can I ask you a question? The undergraduate, total number of beds on campus, what percent of the undergraduates set? So, all of our, first-year students, when I was going to school, we called them freshmen, but, because of gender sensitivities, we refer to them as first-year students. All of our, first-year students live on campus, are required to live on campus and do, and, then beyond that, most of them live off campus. Do you have enough housing to fulfill that? That's, that's great. We do have enough housing to, to fulfill all of the… First year, and a few… you know, upper class undergraduate. So, you know, the difference there with our first-year classes, 6,500, thereabouts.

[14:01] So, you know, you can see the delta. We have upper class. My daughter being one of those, is a junior this year. And, I'll just prompt the question, because it comes up a lot, as far as enrollment plans and how that translates. I will tell you that the last couple of years, we've had a smaller, first-year class than the previous year, and so… Last year's class was… so the first year class in 2024 was smaller than in 2023, and we don't have final numbers in yet, but we are projected, targeted, to have a smaller first-year class this year than we did last year. And, we are seeing some enrollment growth, because we're actually doing a better job of keeping students in school. And so instead of dropping out, we are retaining them, and so our overall numbers are a little bit higher. you know, I think we can all agree that's a good thing, that students aren't dropping out of school, but, I want

[15:04] You all to understand that it's a little more sophisticated nuance to see higher enrollment numbers. Some people think, oh my gosh, the university is growing, you know, kind of out of control. Well, the reality is we're growing through retention, we're keeping more students in school, but the first-year classes, are actually decreasing. So, we do have challenges, recruiting, faculty and staff, especially as it relates to housing. So, we have a survey, and it shows that 60% of our faculty and staff indicate that the cost of housing is an important factor. We have about 25% of our staff living in Boulder, we have about 50% of our faculty living in Boulder. And the reality is that most of the folks who do live in Boulder have lived in Boulder for quite some time.

[16:00] And so, it is increasingly difficult for, you know, early in their career professors, for instance, coming out of PhD programs to buy in Boulder, you know, even if they want to stay here. So housing plans, … A couple of trends that we're seeing, it's important to modernize housing. We really want to increase campus housing opportunities for upper-level graduate students. Affordability is a significant issue as it relates to students, and so we're looking at, additional non… first-year student housing, as we're kind of planning for going forward. A lot of that has to do with the fact that graduation rates indicate that the longer students are on campus, the higher graduation rates. And so, you know, if we can keep them close, they're closer to tutors and recreational opportunities and

[17:09] peers, and all kinds of things. And so, you know, sometimes we see as Especially as they move farther away, their, their path toward graduation reduces. We'll talk a little bit more in detail about the housing growth plans that we have, but right now, in the on-campus inventory, there's 2,300 new beds planned over the next 20 years, and 44 to 6,000 new beds over the next 30-plus years. part of, our journey is we have very old residence halls. They, quite frankly, haven't changed a lot since I met my husband in 1991. And, so, we have a process where we're, we're going to be essentially closing for a year the, you know, the current inventory, and then, Chris will be talking a little bit more detail around residence halls that we're building.

[18:05] So that we can essentially, you know, shut down… … I think it's Libby, you can talk a little bit more about it, and then have students live in another location, essentially. Okay, with that, I'll turn it to Chris. Yeah, Michael. Is all the, housing growth you project, would be university housing, or they're including the private, companies that build student housing? So, it does not include the private. So those numbers that you saw are just CU-affiliated housing. We do know that along 28th. Certainly the Millennium will bring, additional inventory. There's discussions around the Dark Horse site, dare I mention it. It's not affiliated with CU, it's not something that we have anything to do with, but, that is, yeah, so… but I do just want to acknowledge that there, there is private… So is there any way of factoring

[19:08] Your… into your planning, the fact that there's quite a bit of this housing being built specifically for our students. Yeah, we absolutely factor it in, right? And we also know that, as of this year, we had 1,800 students on the waitlist for on-campus housing. And so, even with the inventory that's being added, there's still demand. And, you know, a piece of this is, you know, again, a lot of students are living farther and farther away. So, you know, what we're hoping to do is essentially say, hey, student who might be living in Longmont or Louisville. How do we get you closer to campus? And it… in on-campus inventory. One more question. Do you know how many apartments, have been privately built for students, and how many are in the pipeline? You know, I… do you know that? No, that's difficult, because probably a lot of the houses that are being rented, but then you have more and more of these large apartment complexes.

[20:06] You do, and I'll tell you, we don't know that number, but someone at CU does. And someone who's doing the planning and projections, right? And so. you know, we couldn't bring everyone tonight. There's 10,000 employees, and so that would be a full room, but there are folks who monitor that, because if there was an excess of rooms, or an excess of apartments in Boulder, then there wouldn't be a need. I said there's… Providing housing, is that a… a CU subsidy, or is it something you make a little… money on to help run the university? How's that work? You know, it certainly has to pencil, but also, you know, right now, the residence hall, and Chris will talk about it in a minute, but there's a residence hall going up near, 19th and Marine, essentially, and that residence hall

[21:01] You know, I will… I will say, it's not going to be… lower, it's not going to be a lot less expensive than the market, but it'll be at the low end of the market, and that's kind of where we're targeting. Yet, quite frankly, there are very wealthy students, you know that, and we're more concerned about first-generation students and students who might be pushed to, for instance, commute in from Denver or somewhere else, getting them closer to campus. You said that there were 1,800 students, roughly, on the waitlist for housing. What's the profile for those types of students? I assume they're not first-year and freshmen. None of them are first-year students. Yeah, and to be honest, because most students are aware that we don't have a lot of housing for sophomore and junior seniors and grad students. That, that list is… smaller than it probably would be. If we had, you know, if we had another, let's just call it, you know, X number of beds, then I think we would have a larger waitlist. I can't tell you, I don't know what the profile of the students are. I will tell you that many students are looking for less expensive housing, and so that's kind of… that's what we're looking at, is how can we essentially

[22:21] Provide a place where students can afford to live. So, you may have already just answered this, but, … You… we're talking about faculty and STEM. How many employees do you have? You know, I would say ballpark 10,000. That… that looks like a lot of different ways. I mean, it's probably closer to 8,500 Erdine, but, that's kind of the… yeah. And then, … You mentioned that the new housing over near Marine will be at the low end of the market. Are all your different residence halls priced in different ways, or are they across the board the same? Is it on a sliding scale based on income? I'm curious just how it works. So I… and then we can answer this together. So.

[23:14] there are very expensive apartments in Boulder, and that's not what SEM is offering, right? As it turns out, we're offering residence halls that look remarkably like they did in 1991, when I went… was living here myself, and so, they do fall at the lower end of the, the continuum. And, of course, all of those residence halls have dining as well, and so you have to bundle them. A little bit of apples to oranges, and so what you pay for an apartment is different than what you pay in the residence hall, because, of course, you're paying for dining and the other pieces, and so… You know, it's not like… but there is a function at the university. Again, I don't have the numbers off the top of my head, but I've seen them, and you might even remember, you know, how we're stacking up. And the goal is really to provide housing for… to ensure that

[24:07] students, quite frankly, low-income students, can afford to… and stay in school. Thank you. Cindy has a data. Okay. Yes, I have a question. So, I spent several years, as a custodian on campus, and I'm currently back there, back there again, now as a custodian, and, One of the things that, you know, working, you know, non-peak hours, one of the things that, you know, I saw, and a lot of my coworkers saw, were students who were, who were unhoused. And, you know, just living in conference rooms, kind of, you know, hauling their stuff, here and there. And, there were quite a few, and I'm wondering if you know,

[25:02] If you know how many of your students are actually unhoused. So, first of all, thank you for your work at CU. That's really important work, and the reality is. You know, I'll just speak personally, you may have a better line of sight to that population than I do. I know that we… so, you know, the short answer is I don't know how many of our students are unhoused. I don't know that Chris does either. And I'm not sure that that's information that C necessarily captures. But I do know that, we have a basic needs center, we have, we have food, support for students, we also have housing support for students. both, you know, what I would call emergency support as well as longer-term support. And so, there are resources, but I sure am sorry to hear that you've seen, you know, what seems like quite a few. And, you know, I'm happy to connect with you offline if that would be helpful, so that you can share with students that you see who might be, housing insecure, some solutions.

[26:11] That they might consider. I also have a question, about… about staff, because typically, you know, I bought my… my… my mobile home in 2007, when I first started at CU as a custodian, and I bought it for $5,000. And, and so I've been here quite a while, but typically, I'm the only one, on staff, in my areas that… that actually lives in Boulder. And I just wondered, as far as the… Like, even the frontline staff, and essential services, what opportunities are there, for, you know. assistance, from CU at, at finding Finding housing, locally.

[27:05] Yeah, well, I will tell you that, so Boulder Housing Partners, we've actually had a really good, relationship with Boulder Housing Partners, and, we have shared, and actually it's through Chris's team, he's, the facilities team, and so I think, you know, a number of Staff who, you know, might be, income eligible for Boulder Housing Partners. We share with, with, members of the staff. We also share that with graduate, students. Most of our undergraduates, because of the way that BHP, is, structured, are ineligible, but, a number of Graduate students are, and so we've certainly shared that information with them as well. Thank you. I have a question that kind of goes along with that. That's the projected housing growth that you have.

[28:02] Is any of that kind of allocated towards staff and faculty, or is it just students? It's not. I know, I was like, oh, you teed it up perfectly, and so if you don't mind this, that is the absolute perfect segue to CU South, which is a site, you know, really solely focused. Not solely, because there's a potential for graduate students, but the intention was faculty, staff, so I'll turn it to Chris. Yeah, so… Cu South, it's really envisioned as faculty, staff, and as Lori mentioned, some graduate students, but it's really kind of that… that group of our community. timeline right now, the city's going through the flood mitigation project. That's going to take some time. We will be very soon, beginning some more detailed master planning of that site, but we really won't be going in there until, you know, 2027 timeline.

[29:01] So some planning phases coming up. We're looking at, at, how that site might develop. On… the tails of the flood mitigation project. So letting that take… take place, get out in front of that. And we will start… start the planning process in the near future. 2,100 units, you know, so that's envisioned as Again, as Tori mentioned, faculty, staff, some graduate. We don't know quite yet the makeup of those units. Is it, it's a combination, right, at this point? But that's what we'll be fleshing out in the next couple years. And, there is also carve out, and Chris, helped remind me, but I think it's… Is it 5 acres for, essentially, BHP? Are you nodding? You probably know this better than I do. So… So we are looking at… I mean, and we haven't identified the structure of who will live there yet, but certainly lower-income employees are going to be targeted. I mean, first of all.

[30:03] You know, real wealthy employees, probably are going to be living elsewhere, and this is, the perfect site for, you know, really, the whole range of incomes, but more income is going to be an important piece of this. I'll also mention this site… I mean, all of our construction, we really look to sustainable practices. We really want to push the envelope to see South. So, very excited about that. This is one of our upcoming renovations, so Farron Residence Hall was built… I was thinking when it was built, but it was, like, the 1930s or 40s time frame, and it has not… been modernized very much since. So it's the bank of those, was it 1991? Probably very similar, residence halls. So we are in the design, latter part of design right now to,

[31:02] go in and do a full modernization project. And by doing that, we will, go in, update a lot of accessibility, ADA accessibility, what students expect in their residence halls today, updating and, Including, some of those features that will enhance it and bring it up to today's standards, and hopefully breathe another 100 years into the the… that building. One of the main pieces is air conditioning, right? All the students, as they move in, really, He's talking about air conditioning. Is that planned? I wonder if there's gonna be AC. It is, yeah. It is planned. I'll also mention, in tandem with our climate action plan, all of these major renovations are being converted from steam to low-temperature hot water for their heat. That will eventually be heated with our district low-temperature hot water loop as that gets built out in the future. So…

[32:01] Construction started in 2026, there's 374 beds. That might ebb and flow a bit as we make the space more accessible, provide some more communal spaces in there. Next slide, please. This is one of our Clowder buildings, too, by the way. Residence 1, this is the… Lori touched on this, it's down, down near Arapahoe, between Arapahoe and, Marine Street down there, just east of Boulder High. This is under construction right now. It will house approximately 330 students. We're opening next fall, so fall of 2026. It will have, you know, I mentioned the sustainability features, it will have be equipped to be heated through low-temperature hot water when the district loop goes… runs past there. The kitchen as a small dining facility there is all electric, so we are building it to those standards. There will be some other community-serving spaces, amenities in that building on the ground floor.

[33:10] We do know that we have enough… quite a few students that live north of there, kind of north of Arapahoe, that can come down to this… this building for, take part in those amenities. Will that be grad student housing, or will they have undergrads? Long term, it will be upper class, is what's envisioned. Some, I think, grad has come into the conversation as well. The immediate term. will be swing space for Farron Hall, because we're going to have to vacate Farron, and then once we… Farron is done, then this will go to upper class, or possibly some graduate students. Next slide, please. Colorado Avenue, so this is a fairly recent opportunity that's come up. This is with a private developer, so it would be north of Colorado, east of Folsom, west of 28th.

[34:06] Across the street from, from, the engineering center there. So, this would be, On-campus residential community. There will be potential for some retail amenities. All these are details that are being worked out on that ground level. But would be more geared towards upper class, The, design is ongoing, looking to start construction next year, and be open a couple years after that. There is sensitivities that we're aware of to the north, the neighborhood to the north, that we're addressing through design, and … Mitigating some of those concerns, so… more to come on this. Anything you want to add on this one, Lori? No, this is a relatively new project that we're looking at. You'll be maybe familiar with some of the houses of worship along Colorado, and quite frankly, a number of them are kind of rethinking what their model looks like, and how best to serve their constituents, and so some of those areas are under discussion, and then

[35:13] CU already owns a number of homes and sites in that area, and so it's essentially filling it out to make it a little bit more robust. And you mentioned that this is a private developer. Is this different than… like, will it be owned by CU long-term? Long-term. It'll be part of a ground lease. So, they will build their, long-term ground lease. Okay. Yep. Does that mean it'll be more affordable than some of the luxury student housing? Yeah. Yeah, similar to what Lori mentioned earlier, is it needs to hit that… that price point for our students, right? So, that's what we're… it needs to be affordable for our students.

[36:00] … is… I'm not exactly clear on how the private development and the ground lease… condo maybe, but, would the project go through city regulations? It wouldn't be because it would be on CU. property. So, does CU take into consideration the city regulations when they do development? We do. Like, how? you know, I think, … you know, I'm thinking… I'm thinking we… Height is one that we try to, you know, we don't necessarily follow to a T, but we try to be sensitive to. I think parking, you know, as we try to address parking around our new builds. We also, considered the solar fence, and so… The city has, kind of, solar considerations, and so we factor that in, we factor in dark skies, and so there's a lot of other, parameters and guidelines that we use, even though we're a state entity as part of the project.

[37:17] Next slide, please. Louisville, so this is a site in Louisville where the Cinnabar movie theater was located. So, we acquired this property. A year or two ago, we've been in collaboration with the City of Louisville on how to develop that. It's ideal for graduate students, right there on the RTD line. It was really, I think Louisville's excited for that energy and vibrancy that they would bring to that part of the city. That's, you know, timeline. We're looking at there's some planning that needs to happen, but we're looking at, you know, 27, 28, realistically, for those. Similar to others, there would be amenities on the first level, kind of a mixed-use type. That's what's being thought at this time. So, but a lot to come on this as far as design.

[38:10] Do you know, is the plan to be dependent on RTD to transport students to Boulder, or would CU operate its own bus service? So, currently today, there are 70 trips from that site to main campus every day. So, we don't want to replicate that. Nor do we need to. The reality is, you know, we're certainly hoping and encouraging, and everybody, all of employees and all students get Eco Passes. So, you know, I know I bus all the time. And, you know, a lot of people, in fact, Jay and I see each other on the bus a lot. So, you know, I think that the reality is that that's a really easy way to be transported, and, so the vision is graduate students as well as faculty and staff, and I think it'll be a nice complement to what has been a very limited portfolio, especially for faculty and staff, historically. I would encourage you all to apply some pressure on RTD to manage that bus frequency. Before COVID, I spent one year commuting between Denver and Boulder on the Flatiron Flyer, and during peak times, especially between Louisville

[39:19] in Boulder, there is… sometimes you get passed over with a bus, and there's no seating. So that's a relationship I think the university would need to actively manage. We, I have had a couple of conversations with RTD, and you're exactly right. You know, as a big bus fan, I have been concerned about the reduction in, and routes that we've seen, quite frankly, since COVID, that many of them haven't returned. And so, we've had conversations with them about that, as well as a number of other things, and we'll continue to do so, because, you know, we're really looking at that as, you know.

[40:00] a vital piece of the site. So, so you brought this movie complex, right? It did. It's going to be developed under the ground lease model, also. And last question, are you looking for other opportunities to do that using the TOD model? We are. You know, the TOD, it's kind of perfect, right, for… No, it's really great. It's very innovative. Yeah, thank you. We're excited about it. We… the City of Louisville has been wonderful. I presented to their city council, on June 17th, just to give them an update on this project, and you'll appreciate this. I said, and let me be clear, this is not a site for 18-year-olds, this is graduate students, faculty, and staff. Two different council members raised their hand and said, we like 18-year-olds. We really like 18-year-olds, and so I said, God bless you, you have no idea what you're talking about. But, yeah, talk to some of our friends on the Hill, right? But, so anyway, it's a… it's a new concept.

[41:00] I mean, of course, lots of families and staff in particular have lived in Louisville for generations, but, you know, it's new to have a senior facility there, and so we're excited. They're very excited to have us. They're going through a comp planning process right now. We're kind of piggybacking on that to best learn what kind of retail and other aspects they're looking for. Cindy has her hand up. Hi, Cindy! Hi, I was wondering about when you're looking at sites like this, you know, outside of Boulder, or, … or off-campus. Do you have a walkability kind of guide… guidelines or standards that you're trying to follow as far as getting to other amenities, like grocery and, you know, other essential services like that? Yeah, you know, the City of Boulder obviously has this 15-minute neighborhood concept, and so, I think that's kind of a North Star for all of us.

[42:04] And, we are looking at kind of how that… because right now, it's kind of a desert, you know, I don't know if you know exactly where that is, but it's up McCaslin and 36, and it's kind of… there's a hotel, and the whole McCaslin corridor is a little, lightly leveraged at this point. It's in the market for some revitalization, and so we are looking, again, as part of the comp planning process, to determine Where are the gaps? where are the opportunities, and how do we bring those pieces in? So, you know, I think certainly we're looking at that. You know, we want to encourage people to walk, bike, bus. To the extent that they can. Sustainability is one of our Chancellor's top four priorities right now, and so it's a North Star for us, for sure. Thank you. $1.50 hot dog and soda across the street. That's right! I would have taken advantage of that. I love that! I love that so much. So I, I, I, we may have gone a little bit long, and I apologize if that's the case. I did want everybody to know that, so for the last 3 or 4 years, we've had a, a virtual town hall on our housing and infrastructure projects. This year, it's on September 24th.

[43:20] From 4 to 5, you know, I can certainly send it out to Jay, or he can share it with you guys, but, there's information there about registering, and you can hear about all these projects and more. And actually, when you register, you can even submit questions, although hopefully we've answered most of them for you here tonight. Yeah. Sorry, I missed a point on CU South, so it's 2,100 homes, and that would include faculty and staff housing, and so what's the mix? You know, we haven't determined that yet, but the big focus is employee housing. Again, we might… you know, we might have some graduate students there, but really the motivation is employee housing, more that you'd… Yeah, I would say we don't know yet, but we know it'll be a mix, a lot of employee housing. Yeah, it will be a lot of employee housing, and quite frankly, lower income.

[44:12] you know. will be a big focus, in addition to the BHP 5 acres that'll be obviously exclusively, for income eligible. What are you hoping? What are you hoping for unit count on the Kaslin? Ish. Do you remember? I don't remember. I don't remember either. I… Yeah, I'm… I'm sorry, I just don't remember. It's 9 acres, about 9 acres? We'll have retail as part of that as well, and so, I'll make myself a note to… to figure that out. I just, … and I… it… we might not… I… I might not remember it, because we might not have it yet, and that's… It's pretty early. It's pretty early. But, you know, certainly.

[45:00] We are planning, so, you know, a little more detail on that site. no single-family homes, it'll be multi-family homes. We don't know how high yet, but, you know, it'll, it'll, it'll certainly, it'll provide some density, so that we're able to, you know, house more people in that, too. Do you anticipate any single-family or townhome at the CU South stage? I don't think that we would anticipate any single-family homes. Any townhome discussion? I think some townhome. Yeah. Some townhome. Yeah. Yeah, yeah. So, outside of, the BHP property, I'm curious what the interaction is between CU Planning and, the city's housing team, and how you plan to work together as you work through some of these plans, and then also, does the city, outside of the BHP property, does the city fund any of the housing at CU?

[46:05] No. I can answer that one for you. You know, I, I meet with the… more often with Kurt Fernhopper, who's the director, certainly Jay and I have known each other for a long time, and so I think there's, you know, somewhat regular, check-ins, but not frequent. you know, we've known each other for quite a while. Yeah, I don't… Jay can certainly speak to the mission of the city's housing, but I think it's… largely around lower income and, you know, providing housing for those in need, and I think CU looks at it as how do we take care of our students and our populations? And so, I think they're complementary. I don't see it as redundant, and I also don't think that you know, I mean, with the exception of, you know, probably more often staff that would qualify for city housing, you know, subsidized housing, there probably isn't a lot of overlap. I don't… Yep, I agree. We just are very different.

[47:11] Needs. Okay, thank you. Although there is a lot of overlap in terms of the market. Other questions? Well, thank you for your interest. Really appreciate the opportunity to talk to you about our projects. Yeah, thank you. Thank you. Hook yourself for more food. I… I did pretty good damage, as it turns out. I love Flower Child. Love… it's my daughter's favorite. Thank you so much. Thank you. You bet. All right, so… We have a couple DRG members online, might to say hi to them. So we have Renee Gallegos, Shelly Ornsby.

[48:12] Hello! Welcome! Thank you. Yep, you're welcome to show your camera. Nice to see you, Renee. Good to see you too, Jay. Thank you for being here Okay, so… next up, the Affordable Housing Impact Fee for Single Family Additions and Demolitions. And I believe that the… Process here is y'all will do a presentation. We'll have a moment to ask clarifying questions, and then we'll have time for public comment. can have some discussion. True, Jay? Perfect. I took notes, so… At my notes? No.

[49:09] It's color coded. So I'll just start very quickly, and welcome TRG members, so thank you very much. The purpose was really to be able to get as much input as possible from different groups that advise the City. And so, it felt like a good opportunity to sort of join the two groups, and then you actually get to meet each other, so… So the purpose tonight is, to talk about the affordable housing impact fee, and we're calling them single-unit dwellings. not single-family anymore, so we've changed the language. But really, as Sloan's going through this. If you have suggestions for how to communicate this better, or improve, sort of how we're messaging this, that's greatly appreciated, so keep that in mind. That feedback is always very welcome.

[50:02] Do you need help? I'm sorry, I'm gonna share my screen, but I can't remember how to see my notes as I'm sharing, do you remember? I can share it for you. Hi. You just see her on the screen. I got an interview, I'll change it. Yeah, okay. Sure. It does. Did it. I did it. Well, thanks for the introduction.

[51:02] They already gave an overview of the project, but we were here back in February with the consultant to present the Nexus study, and we're here tonight to present the draft ordinance and ask for feedback, and … a recommendation to City Council. So just as an agenda, I'll go through some of the background and, some information on impact fees and the nexus study, talk about some of the engagement we've done, I'll go through the proposed code changes and Cover some of the staff analysis that was in the memo, and then we'll just, end with questions and hopefully a board recommendation. So just to give some background, the need to examine replacement homes and significant additions was identified as a priority in 2023, when the city was updating the inclusionary housing regulations.

[52:08] The issue that was identified is the single-family development in the city often removes a smaller, relatively more affordable home and replaces it with a larger, more expensive home. Same thing with additions. And this type of development is not subject to the city's inclusionary housing standards, so there's this sort of inequity in how residential development is contributing to affordable housing in the community. So a possible impact fee would address those shortcomings or gaps. That currently exists, It would also just help mitigate some of the demand on affordable housing that was identified in the NEXUS study. So this is just an example I shared in the last presentation.

[53:03] in showing how inclusionary housing applies or does not apply. So, the occurrence Inclusionary housing regulations provide a waiver for units that are removed and replaced within 3 years. So, in this example, this was a one property with a single-family home. It was demolished and then subdivided. So, when they redeveloped, the lot in orange received that waiver I just described, and did not contribute at all to affordable housing, didn't pay the cash and leave contribution. The parcel in blue was required to pay And today, if you did the calculations today, it would be approximately $90,000 in cash and lose, so there is a big disparity in terms of replacement homes. Just to provide some background on, the legal requirements for impact fees, impact fees are a one-time charge imposed on developments to offset the cost of a new development.

[54:10] The state law lays out the requirements to impose the fees, most notably the need for a nexus study that establishes the essential nexus between the impact of the development, the amount of the fee, and then how the funds will be spent. There must be a rough proportionality between the fee and the development's impact. And I just want to note that there was a Supreme Court ruling last year, in which there's heightened scrutiny on impact fees, and also an increased potential for litigation. So, in implementing these fees, you just have to be really careful that you're following the analysis in the NEXO study. Is that… am I allowed to interject with questions, or is that…? Whatever works for you?

[55:00] That's… that's a question for you. It's the same. Yeah, I'm just curious, because I do see a strong legal argument that this is a tax that needs to be subject to TABR. Has the city budgeted, has put in corporate a litigation budget to litigate that this is a lawful impact fee when it gets sued? Oh, no, but I will say that… Other impact fees. like, the commercial impact fee for affordable housing has stood since that was adopted. … So, based on our experience, it would not be considered a text, but… We do have city attorneys reviewing this very closely. Yeah, so just to kind of cover, that Nexus study, was done in late 2024. They did that research and analysis services to explore the extent to which these types of projects contribute to the need for affordable housing.

[56:07] Basically, the analysis shows that new or expanded single-unit homes are valued at significantly higher prices than those smaller, older homes. That's not only due to larger living spaces, but also the premium on new construction. And… Their research shows that families and individuals purchasing these new or expanded homes represent households at higher income levels, and then that Component of the community is… has, … Higher personal consumption and spending, which generates additional employment, which is jobs. then there's a need for affordable housing to house those employees at different income levels. So, based on their pro forma analysis, the maximum supported impact fee ranges from $15 per square foot to $23, depending on the development scenario.

[57:08] To cover the community engagement, the city did do a racial equity engagement plan, which was included in the memo. So far the engagement has focused on online tools, email outreach, existing board processes like this one, community meetings, some outreach events, I want to say WhatsApp folders in a week or two, and we'll be there. To present this project. And then in regards to formal public comment, the majority of comments have been received through email or through that Be Heard Bolder platform, so the majority of those were forwarded in the packet. … In terms of the… feedback received. There is essentially a pretty big divide between those that are in favor of the fee and the need to ensure equity and fairness, and also ensure that these types of developments are contributing.

[58:06] And then, a component that's more opposed or cautious of the fee, the main argument being that it will drive up the cost of what is already expensive housing in the community. I just want to mention, too, that in general, there's pretty good support for exemptions for small additions, ADUs, more modestly sized homes, and also the low-grade floor area. Can I ask a question? So… What about replacing an existing modest single-family home with a plex, like a duplex or triplex? So, 3 small houses, or two small, you know, rather than going So, the way, this is written is it would only apply to single-family homes.

[59:00] So, it would fall into the inclusionary housing program. At that point. It would fall into the… One that's already in existence. Or it would fall into this proposed… It would… so essentially, yeah, there's this tool that's inclusionary housing. This would be a different tool, which is impact fees. Right. If you're demoing a home and adding a triplex, you would be responsible for two units under inclusionary housing. You would not be… So we just defer to what's there now. Yeah. Does that make sense? I thought the inclusionary housing, it was exempt if it was under 4 units, or do I have that wrong? It is, but basically, if you are… trying to think through this. If you were removing one unit and doing a duplex. you would be responsible for one unit. If you're removing two units and replacing with two units, you would still receive a waiver for 2 units. So there is an incentive to keep additional units, if that makes sense, but there does continue to be that waiver for under 4 units.

[60:09] So if you can build between a duplex and a triplex, or a fourplex. you're receiving sort of an incentive, because you're not paying an impact fee, and potentially you wouldn't be in the inclusionary housing program, depending on what waiver you receive. So the scenario of removing a single family and putting a triplex, as long as it's 4 or fewer. it would be, exempt from the inclusionary houses? No, because you are adding dwelling units. If you're removing between 2 and 4 dwelling units and replacing between 2 and 4 dwelling units, you're still getting that reiver. We're really trying to address single family through this impact fee, or that's our recommendation, anyways. What if you were doing… 5 or more attached luxury townhomes. Then you would always be paying into inclusionary housing. We don't re… we don't give waivers for that size of development. Yep, so considered a single family unit, or whatever the current terminology is.

[61:08] A townhome. I think, like, the most… the most common thing, and we recommended this recently, was the zoning in transit corridors to allow people to take a single-family home and make it two houses. Would this impact fee affect that proposal? Nope. No. So that's part of the reason for only applying it to single-family, is because we didn't want to disincentivize the creation of duplexes, triplexes, and fourplexes. But it doesn't mean IH doesn't still apply if you're creating a new unit. So we're not… we can't remove that as part of this process. Does that make… does that make sense? It does, but you see that as counterproductive in any way. You're kind of incentivized density and also making people pay it in fact be.

[62:02] For an additional unit. best words, impact fee would not apply, but I each would. But you'd still receive a waiver for one unit, so there is still an incentive. To receive… Receive a waiver for one unit. For whatever was that. Pay cash in lieu for the second unit. Complicated. Yeah. We're trying to keep it simple. Yeah. … So, just moving into the ordinance and staff's recommendations, like I described, it's really two types of residential development. There's the replacement home, where you're demolishing and replacing. I just wanted to note that because of the current IH waivers, the majority of these types of projects are currently exempt from the IH and contributing to affordable housing. And then that second type of development, which is substantial additions, we define that as additions over 500 square feet.

[63:03] … And I just wanted to note that when we were sort of coming up with these code provisions, we tried to take that public comment into consideration and make sure that this was really impacting The right types of developments, making sure that, you know, those more modestly sized films or small editions would be exempt. Also in terms of… the fees, just to Jay's point, trying to keep it simple and consistent with existing impact fees, was really important to make sure We're making it easy for applicants to understand streamlining implementation and, sort of reducing or minimizing the amount of staff resources that would be needed to administer it. Nope. There's my answer. Okay. Here's my answer also. Okay. So in terms of those replacement homes, we're looking at $15 per square foot, that's a flat rate.

[64:07] As with other impact fees, you would receive a credit for the existing, home size or the structures on the site. It wouldn't apply to homes under 2,000 square feet in total area. The area of an accessory dwelling unit would be exempt regardless of size, and it wouldn't apply to renovations. So, say you already have an existing basement that is considered a floor area. If you're renovating it, that would not apply. Sorry, I'm not understanding that second bullet point about the credit. for ML Square Bridge, what? What is that? … That is currently how impact fees work. So, if you are demolishing… say you're demolishing a 1,000 square foot home and building a 3,000 square foot home, you're only responsible for that 2,000 square foot increase. And that has to do with, going back to the legal requirements for impact fees. You can only impose them on the actual impact of development.

[65:11] So, if you would… can you help me with this map? So, if you demolish a 1,000 square foot, and you build a… 2,999 square foot home. you wouldn't have this fee at all? No, so these are two sort of separate concepts, so you would… you see that credit. In terms of whether the impact fee applies or not, you would have to demonstrate that your home is under 2,000 square feet. to be exempt from an impact fee. The new home. The new home, sorry. Okay. Or, yeah, or in terms of additions, it would be with the addition. Okay, so, in terms of additions, same thing, $15 per square foot, a flat rate.

[66:00] You would receive, sort of, a 500 square foot exception or credit that, would be a one-time thing. It wouldn't be cumulative. There is some other… there is a credit currently for other impact fees. I think it's only 200 or 300 square feet, and that just didn't seem appropriate. So we're proposing to increase it just for this impact fee. Same exemption for homes under 2,000 square feet, that would be including the addition. ADUs would be exempt, and same thing, renovations would not be impacted by this, so it would only be the area of the addition, not the renovation. So just to kind of cover some of the stuff, analysis, The Nexus study demonstrated, again, that this type of development generates that additional employment and the demand for affordable housing. One of the things the city, is experiencing is this shed rate, which is the

[67:04] the rate at which homes are being lost from that more attainable, affordable range is being outpaced by more expensive homes. We're trying to address that, or at least ensure that that type of development is Contributing to affordable housing, and also trying to address that built-in incentive, to remove those smaller homes and build larger, expensive homes. So that recommended $15 per square foot rate was found by the consultant to meet our goals, but also ensure that this type of development is not unviable or infeasible. So, this chart was in the memo, but for a 750 square foot addition, the recommended fee would only be about 0.7% of that total project cost. When was this chart put together? When those typical costs per square foot.

[68:02] Is that 2025? I'm, like, horrified that that is becoming a standard, acceptable… We were being… I thought we were being conservative. It is… it is horrifying. Do you think 700's too high or too low? Especially with ADUs. I mean, look at that. You get a 500 square foot unit, and you pay $350,000? nobody can afford an ADU at these kinds of… which is why everybody's going to prefab, or looking at solutions, because if that number is being accepted as this is where it's at. We have to make a big change in our… in our construction industry, but I'm just in shock that that number… I mean, it sounds like if you want to do any construction project in Boulder, you have to hire a lawyer, so… That's probably why it's so high. And I would say it's on the low end, so this is if you're, say, you're at the top of the home?

[69:01] If you don't have any foundation work, if you have foundation work, I would say it's closer to 900. I just have to go back to what we were talking about earlier with this duplex. It seemed like, what's the definition of lot and parcel? Like, when someone wants to tear down a house and put in a duplex, say, you know, along Baseline or South Boulder. Are you making that into multiple lots and parcels? Plexes are usually condoized. Yeah. The assessor was pretty clear, right, when we came out with ADUs and trying to… or even the plexus. It's like, they don't want to… … subdivide. They want to have one parcel, and the units are kind of like most townhouses are. You don't own the land, you… Because the way I read this ordinance, it states, the impact fee shall be charged on the following types of development. Additional floor area. Any person who proposes to add floor area to any lot or parcel shall pay the capital facility impact fee.

[70:12] So, it's just the addition of floor area. So, if I have a 2,000 square foot house, and I want to turn it into a 3,000 Or 4,000 square foot duplex, that's adding 2,000 square feet in floor area. to the lot or parcel, and I think that, according to this language, I think that would… You have to go down to… so that's the definition, and then if you go down to exemptions, it clarifies it only applies to single people. Single-unit dwellings, any floor area in a single… If you go below the… Where the fee is discussed? Yeah. The proposed fee? We can make… we can… we'll make sure that… … To make sure it's clear.

[71:05] But if you are taking a single family and making it a duplex, that you'd fall outside that definition. That was the intent. So it goes to inclusionary housing, but not a new fee. Is that…? It's… I mean, it says the net increase in floor area per housing unit for residential development. Let me get through this. Okay. Yeah, it's okay, then we can, let's talk about the ordinance language. … Okay, so, just wanted to cover that the consultant projected this would result in approximately $1.2 million annually. That's based on an estimate of 30 single-family replacement projects and 20 significant additions. They, this funds would be earmarked for construction, purchase, and maintenance of affordable housing, and as this group knows.

[72:07] Local funds can be leveraged 2 to 3 times by our affordable housing partners with state and federal funds. Also just wanted to cover that there was a racial equity, assessment in the memo. Typically, residents of affordable housing in Boulder are more racially, ethnically, and economically diverse. They also tend to be more diverse in their ability, status. So, the provision of affordable housing is obviously very important in reducing that intergenerational poverty, increasing economic mobility. Really, a tool like this is just important in addressing inequities in our community and meeting our overall affordable housing goals. Just wanted to go through some examples, I hope this is helpful. These are examples I showed before, in our previous presentation, but this is sort of an extreme example, but a 3,000 square foot home was demolished, was replaced with a 8,500 square foot home.

[73:11] This was exempt from inclusionary housing. So if you take that additional 5,500 square feet at $15 per square foot, under a potential impact fee, they'd be responsible for $82,500 for affordable housing. If you're looking at the… substantial addition, type of example, this… was a 3,500 square foot home. They did a cumulative 1,400 square feet in addition. giving a credit that 500 square foot credit, that one-time credit, that would result in 965 square feet times $15. They would be responsible for approximately $14,000 in this example.

[74:02] So really the key issue is just if anyone has any recommendations, modifications to the draft ordinance, … We gave a suggested motion language, I'm happy to bring this up later. Just wanted to point out that, we're scheduled for Planning Board next week, and then headed to Council in October. We are proposing an effective date of January 31st, to give some time to applicants, developers, to sort of plan accordingly, and also get projects that are in that final phase of development into the permit process. Also, it would give staff some time to, prepare materials. We have to, … Create a feed calculator to be used, and so forth. That's based on when someone applies for permit. It would, and it also would, … there would be exemptions for someone who has, like, a site review approval, that kind of thing. But most single-family homes go straight.

[75:03] Could you just say again where the impact fee… These collected would be earmarked towards So it would be similar to the Affordable Housing Fund, which collects the cash in lieu. So it would be… it's just important for an impact fee that it's earmarked specifically for the need that you are imposing the fee for, so it would be for construction. And maintenance of affordable housing. would it make sense, I don't know if it would, I'm thinking aloud, to further your market? Because it seems like those… It seems like we're potentially losing some… So, can we focus on clarifying questions? Because I want to get to the public comment first.

[76:00] Is there a question, or a comment, or both? Only questions. Only questions. Okay, … Using this $15 worth of formula, I'm pretty sure. cash are we generating for affordable housing versus the formula for cash in new IH? So, … it was serendipitous that the cash-in-lie rate for single-family is currently $15.34, so it's very similar. The only difference is that the inclusionary housing program, you wouldn't get a credit for existing square footage, whereas with an impact, you would. Right. And, so the GG&A report recommended a range of Why not go with a higher…? So they didn't recommend a range, they just pointed out in their feasibility analysis that you could go up to $23, but you would have to impose the fee differently based on project type.

[77:04] So you'd have to look at the size of the development and what they're proposing. That's… just would be very difficult, first off, to… to do. It doesn't seem worth… the extra amount of fee that you could impose. Was there any consideration to a sliding fee? Let's say you want to build 20,000 square foot house, like… maybe you pay more. Yeah, I mean, that was discussed, back when we presented the Nexus study. The problem is, The implementation gets much more complicated, and you're already paying a greater fee just … by that additional square footage. So in staff's opinion, it's not… I understand it's complex, but I can't count. What other alternatives have city staff considered for increasing revenue, or increasing revenue for affordable housing? Can I just follow up on Michael's question real quick? Sure. So the other reason for not having, sort of, that,

[78:09] escalating system is that it's not supported by the consultant analysis. So, it would likely be challenged. Sorry? You're trying to walk a line here. And our attorney was very clear. We need to make sure that whatever we're proposing is supported by this document. What other alternatives has city staff considered for increasing revenue for affordable housing? Well, so in terms of this project, it's… It is generating revenue, but that's not really the intent. The intent is to make sure that there's an equity in how you're contributing to affordable housing. the intent was not, how do we go out and find funds for affordable housing back in 2023. I remember this was a Council priority, so Council directed us to do this. So in the last update to the Inclusionary Housing Program in 2022,

[79:14] Staff pointed out that, you know, basically demolitions and replacements were not being… were not contributing to affordable housing in the city. And they felt that that was… they wanted IH to apply to them. We had to make the argument. No, sorry, we cannot apply IH to that circumstance. We would have to do an impact study. So that's why we came back with an impact study two years later. Have any studies been performed on how this proposed legislation, this impact fee, would affect housing prices? That was essentially part of the Nexus study when they did the feasibility analysis, that it would… that type of development would continue to be feasible to do. There is an increase… or there's a decrease in the amount of profit that would be made from a developer.

[80:07] I would just add it's no different than inclusionary housing. So, recognizing that all, anything, any sort of fee on development. Will have an impact on overall prices. Certainly acknowledge that. But in particular, we're looking at single-family homes, as opposed to… Correct. Conducts, or apartment buildings, or whatever. Housing that's already out of reach for most people in Boulder. Was there a feeling that if a home is $3 million, that if it's $3.1 million, it's… You know, still not affordable. you're not really having an impact on affordability, you're just increasing the price. It's already very expensive. Yeah, that is sort of the intent of having that. But I think the problem with that is, like, the person who's selling their cheap $1.5 million home to buy the $3.1 million, they're gonna expect more for… they're gonna expect now $1.6 when they go to sell. So, hold that thought. Do we have any other questions? Yeah, I'm sorry. That's okay. I have one more question for somebody else.

[81:15] Also, when we started, you mentioned the connection between wealth and needing more services and employee… or even, I don't know, employees, they buy more, they do more. Can you make that Can you say that again? I can attempt. It's a very complicated analysis, and I'm not an economist, but essentially the argument is that These updated homes. are being purchased by a different component of the community that has higher spending power. And that spending power results in jobs, and there's a whole analysis about what types of jobs and what their income levels is. And those… employees need to be housed at different, types of housing as well. So their analysis is really just looking at what we define as affordable housing, and what employees would need to live in that income range.

[82:08] Does that answer your question? Okay, that's interesting. And the report gives better examples, so… It is worth reading. It's… it might be a little hard to get through, but I would recommend. Well, I'm imagining if you have a… A big house, a lot of land, you probably have gardeners coming, and you probably have That's one of the examples, yeah. Okay. Butlers. Although I guess, like, is there any… has there been any research into, like, who… I don't know, I'm thinking right now, like, construction workers, right? Like, are those people even living at BHP? Because, like, where do they park their truck, you know, all their equipment, all that stuff? You know, most of those construction workers come in from Longmont and elsewhere, and that's… Like, has that been considered at all? So it's more… it's more of an academic exercise, I would say, so you're not looking at the realities of where a

[83:06] construction workers are living in Boulder. You're looking at data that says Based on employment metrics, this is the amount of construction employees that would need to be housed. No. What is actually being… happening in the City of Boulder, if that makes sense. Yeah, I'd be concerned that makes it a tax. I don't know, that's… that's the argument. Any other questions? I think there's… I do have one. So, a few months ago, we had Kelly Taylor in talking about manufactured housing, and a big thing that came up was, you know, the potential to build more manufactured housing in Boulder by affordable housing. Is there any thought to exempting manufactured housing from an impact fee? Because it could be more than 2,000 square feet if it's a double wide or something. You don't want to discourage that, for example. We want to talk about that.

[84:02] That's potential, I guess, I don't know. I don't know if, like, how you would… use the Nexus study to justify that, but you could look into it. I'm also trying to think, I mean, it's pretty… it's not that common… You're talking about if someone had a single one and made it into a double one? Well, let's say somebody, you know, one of the things we talked about was maybe there could be a manufactured housing portion of Planning Area 3. That would be a significant contributor to affordable for-sale housing in Boulder. You don't want to punish that. if the size of the home, if it's a double wide, for example, exceeds 2,000 feet, so that's my question. That would be an annexation? I see what you're saying, that would be an annexation into the city? And in that case, the IH doesn't apply. This impact fee wouldn't apply. It would be a negotiation between the property owner and the city in terms of what is the level of affordability that's required, how many units at what levels.

[85:03] Just like any other annexation. Cindy, you have a question? Shelly does. Shelly does. Hi, yeah, sorry, but I just had a… I was reading through the impact analysis, and it looks like… it says that… I'm just wondering, big picture, what our other, like, neighboring communities are doing about something like this, and it says just that few other cities do this for single-unit homes. Do we know if there's anyone else in Colorado that's doing a fee like this on single-unit properties? So… There's no great example that matches Boulder's situation, but Aspen has its own form, Telluride at Winter Park, I believe. There are a few… In Denver. Oh, and Denver, too. And they… they've had them… some of them are… been around for quite a while without challenge. And they're single unit, not for developments or subdivisions?

[86:00] That's correct. They are implemented very differently, and so it's very complicated, but yes, it does apply to single-family homes. Okay, and just confirming that 100% of that would go to affordable housing under this proposition? Yes. Correct. Thank you. Any other… yeah, yeah, any other questions? I have one. I'm just curious how, how you call out the exemptions for ADUs and for multiple units, because I think that would be a really big selling point, because it almost seems like I mean, then you can see that you really are promoting affordable housing. Is that in your messaging specifically, or…? Hopefully it came through. But it sounds like we need to work on that a little bit. Yeah, right now we've really just been looking at policy alternatives, so I think once we have an adopted ordinance, we'll certainly be working with planning staff, and planning and development services to sort of incorporate that message into the ADU program.

[87:07] Well, I would say, I mean, we heard that message loud and clear from you guys, planning board, as well as Council in the spring, you know, just concerned that we don't want to be impacting people amongst means that happen to live in a single-family home in Boulder. So I think that's why we came up with that, you know, nothing under 2,000 square feet. And then that first 500 square feet, it also wouldn't apply. And then also an ADU. So, like, if you… even in one of Sloan's examples, if you did demolish a home and replace it with, you know, a 2,500 square foot home, and plus an 800 square foot, KDU, that's a pretty sizable home, and this fee still wouldn't apply. How is that for messaging? Clear as mud. No, I'm just kidding. Any other questions? Otherwise, I think we should open up to public.

[88:01] Yeah, any other questions? Would you like to start? Yeah, what do you want me? Just talk from here? Sure, or you're welcome to come up here, whatever you would prefer. I'll have to turn around, I'll at least come over here where Lori was hanging out. Can I get your names? Robert Ross. R-O-S-S? Yeah. Alright, so… Good evening. I'm here tonight to urge you to reject the proposed impact fee on home additions and demolitions of any size. Our analysis shows this policy is analytically unsound, legally indefensible, and profoundly inequitable. First, the foundation of this fee, the NEXUS study, is built on a speculative theory that is flawed at every step. It incorrectly treats wealth as income, it ignores that high-income spending largely leaks out of our local economy, and it uses a model known to produce inflated numbers.

[89:03] Second, the policy is disconnected from the reality of our city. The study assumes new workers will need housing in Boulder, but we know the reality. More than half of Boulder's low-wage workforce already lives elsewhere. And commutes in. This fee won't house a new workforce, it will simply raise housing costs for everyone, making the problem worse. Third and most critically, this fee is legally indefensible. The Supreme Court, in a unanimous decision that Sheetz v. El Dorado just last year affirmed that fees like this must be directly proportional to a specific impact of an individual project. A fee based on speculative, citywide theory does not meet this strict constitutional test. Adopting it invites costly and likely successful lawsuit against the city. Beyond these fundamental flaws, the city cannot claim to have a mandate from the public on this issue. The staff memo presented tonight notes that after months of outreach, the significant new taxes received formal comments from only 24 people. That number may vary, but that's what was at least in this tonight. For a city of our size, that is not

[90:11] A sign of public consensus? It's a sign of a failed public process. It suggests that a vast majority of Boulder residents have no idea that this new fee is even being considered. Finally, and most importantly, let's talk about fairness. According to the city's own nexus study, this fee will be paid by the owners of about 80 homes per year, I think it was 50 in your presentation tonight, and the staff memo projects collecting $1.2 million. You're asking less than one half of 1% of Boulder's homeowners each year to carry an entire financial burden for a community-wide problem. The staff memo attempts to frame this as an equity issue. To level the playing field with new homes on vacant lots, but that's a false equivalency. True inequity is punishing a tiny fraction of residents. Yeah.

[91:05] for a systemic problem. This isn't a broad solution, it's a narrow, punitive tax on a handful of families who choose to invest in their homes, many of which are part of Boulder's aging housing stock. I urge you to reject this flawed and unfair proposal. Let's pursue an effective and truly equitable solutions like broad-based funding mechanisms that we know work that address our shared goals without targeting a tiny fraction of our residents. Thank you. Thank you. Everybody online? Yes, we do have Mark Farer. Great marked, ready to go. Alright, you're able to hear me? Yep. Alright, thanks. Well, I certainly wasn't intending to comment on this until I just heard the last speaker.

[92:03] … To me, that's this… Flies in the face of… … rationality. the arguments that were just made. This, to me, sounds like a very fair, equitable. Policy. And, contrary to the claim of punishing the rich, essentially. I think this is just asking them to pony up their fair share of helping, deal with out of, sky-high, prices for housing. We need this in spite of the fact that this isn't intended to enrich the Affordable Housing Fund, I think any kind of contribution To that fund is… is helpful, and it seems like the wealthy, who are expanding their… their homes into much larger

[93:09] homes should be asked to bear part of that. So, this sounds like a very fair policy, and I strongly support it. And I would agree with the last speaker that the vast majority of people don't know that this ordinance is being proposed. … And if they did, I think they would support it. This is obviously speculation on both of our ports, but, … I think, again, if people heard this, they would say, yes, let's make people who have quite a bit of wealth contribute to this. Thanks. Thank you. There are no other hints. If there's any… anybody else that wants to speak?

[94:00] Raise your hand. Okay, Lord. First of all, I was told that I was going to be thrown out of this meeting if I asked anything in the QA, like, when are you gonna post this meeting? Because I needed to be somewhere and leave. And she said, oh, you can email, and we're gonna throw you out of the meeting if you raise your hand again. It's insulting to the public. You've got 2, 3 lousy people speaking to you, and you treat them like that, it's lucky you have anyone coming to speak to you. Now, as far as the impact fees, this is nothing. This is absolutely nothing. You know, I go and I fight my taxes at the BOE, at the BAA, up higher, you know, and… It's… it's outrageous that I have to spend my life fighting my taxes. half of, you know, it's a constant problem. I appeal it, and appeal it, and appeal it, and it's… it's just higher, and higher, and higher.

[95:05] And… These arguments that this guy made, Really poor arguments. This inclusionary housing, you get either inclusionary housing, or you get impact fees. You don't get both of them. And inclusionary housing should be 140%, not 25%. That's the problem we have in this community. We aren't… stemming growth, and growing the population, Jay, does not increase affordability. It decreases affordability. Growing the population through LIHTC funds, through everything the Trump administration is doing. Just yesterday, they upped LIHTC funds. This is harmful to this community. Then when LIHTC funds go down because of what's happening at the federal level, then we suffer in sales tax revenue. This is just outrageous, that you're even considering… you know, so I'm opposing this impact fee. You know why? Because it's way too nothing! It's NOTHING! Compared to what it needs to be!

[96:11] Outrageous! How can you even consider… This small amount. At $800 a square foot. 15 bucks? That's crumbs! For the developer to pay. Crumbs. This is disgusting. I'm revolted! You know, I don't usually come to have meetings, because Landmark's Board is happening, but you know one thing, I'm really glad that impact fees were at least being entertained, because of one house that I fought excessively about with Landmarks Board. 1015 Juniper, which was scraped because, oh, it was on the floodplain, and the developer couldn't afford to, you know, build it up in the front, or move it back there, because it was in the So, am I, the public, supposed to pay for the fact that the developer bought a place in the confluence zone? No, the city gave them a $5 million benefit by demolishing the house. I'm glad that at least something that I said, one lousy little person in Boulder, went through to impact fees now.

[97:16] Thank you, Lynn. Point of order. I'd like to recognize staff for the hard work they do to make our government accessible to the public. Speaking of public, anybody else raise their hand? Stand by me… Wait, … We're done with Publix, we have a little time for discussion, yes? What do you want to talk about? Thoughts. Thoughts about this. Thoughts. I think this has been a long time coming.

[98:00] And I'm pleased to see the city is kind of scheduled to consider this and perhaps adopt it. … I… I wish it… I know the goal is not to generate a lot of money for affordable housing, and it's not. I find that a little frustrating. The $1.2 million is gonna… You know, affect the affordability of a couple of units. And, … You know, maybe we're just between a rock and a hard place on that. Because of… The practicality of going for a higher Impact V. I do think this is the right direction, … appreciate a lot of what this gentleman had to say before, but I don't agree that this is going to be a hardship for families. I live in a neighborhood with a lot of scrapes, and those are, you know, investor-developers buying those properties. Yeah, they can afford to pay a little bit more for the public good when they're building luxury housing, is my view.

[99:04] I agree with Michael. I think it seems fair. I think the $15 a square foot seems very reasonable for the families that are building these, new homes or renovations, and I appreciate all the exemptions that are provided. For especially ADUs and homes less than 2,000 square feet. I'm opposed to this, in large part because it generates $1.2 million in revenue, and I know that's the point, but that's such a small amount of money for so many complexities, both in the administration of this, but also Concerning our legal procedures for raising revenue. I… I don't think that the juice is worth the squeeze. And I'm very much in favor of increasing revenue for affordable housing, and I'm mindful that if… and this is my rough estimate, if we were to raise sales tax in the city of Boulder by 0.1%,

[100:12] That would generate approximately $10 million, I believe. And it would go on the ballot, and it would do 10 times as much good for the people, and the public would have a say in the outcome. And I would very much be in favor of voting this proposed legislation down, and instead recommending that City Council put on the ballot A tenth of a penny sales tax increase to fund affordable housing. I just… I don't think this is the appropriate mechanism, and I don't like the idea of taxing homeowners. And I'm mindful, we heard of… from CU today, and basically. the city has very little say on their housing development because of the state, but CU brings in a tremendous amount of people during the day who are here spending money at our shops and our restaurants, and that is a huge opportunity to generate revenue for people

[101:05] who don't live here to pay for affordable housing. So, I think we can do a lot more good for affordable housing in our community through a much more democratic mechanism that aligns with our state's constitution and involves the public. So, that's… that's my proposal. I hear your proposal. But since we're not doing anything about sales tax here, I actually wonder, Sloan, can you just kind of restate The initial intention of this was not to raise revenue. for affordable housing. No. Can you just kind of say that again, what the original intent of this was? Yeah, the original intent was… addressing the type of development that was contributing nothing to affordable housing. The intent wasn't to go in and find funds for affordable housing, it was to create more of a level playing field in how development contributes to affordable housing.

[102:14] So I guess… Chip, could you be in support of this, if you thought about it from that perspective? I understand the academic argument, I just don't think that's the practical reality of how this shakes out. Let's look dollars for cents. I think there's much more legally sound and effective ways to raise more money for affordable housing. I'm also mindful, like… and I haven't heard any of this from you guys, and I don't suspect this is happening, but one thing that I've seen in other communities Is proposals to impose fair housing regulations. or inclusionary housing regulations, similar to the cash-in-lieu that we have in Boulder, that are basically designed to thwart all residential development in the community. That's not true in Boulder, but I'm seeing ballot initiatives being floated around outside of Boulder that have that perceived intent, where they're saying, let's make them pay a 30% IH fee to thwart development. No developer will come here.

[103:17] And build. And then we can keep it our single-family suburban community. And I don't know, I just… I think this could have the impact of thwarting development, and I think a consensus among this board that I've seen is we do want to see denser housing development. I still have concerns about how this would play out, if that would complicate things. And… I don't know, like… when the government raises revenue, it should be to spend it on things that help people. It shouldn't be to… punish someone. And there is just a better way to raise revenue for affordable housing, and that's through sales tax increase.

[104:06] … Counterpoint, if I may? Two very good points, thank you. Sales taxes are, of course, regressive, so there's an inequity issue to consider with that. Sales tax went on the ballot, I think the year was 2002. funnel money into affordable housing. Failed. I'm not saying it would fail again, it wouldn't be a terrible thing to bring it back and give it another try. And I think there's a symbolic aspect of this that's not about punishment, but, you know, we've seen the transformation of our neighborhoods from modest houses to, really, a lot of mansions. And it doesn't… it doesn't seem right to me that someone should be able to build an 8,000 square foot house or a 5,000 square foot house without paying something a little bit to the public good, actually. That seems quite fair to me. Even if it doesn't change the world, it doesn't stop them from doing it, it's like…

[105:04] You're exercising a privilege here, and we're gonna have you pay a token… maybe it's a token amount. to do that, and I don't think that's a bad thing at all, as opposed to just saying, great, build it, cost the neighborhood, do what you want. But I don't see it as punitive, I see it as in true fairness. But arguably, in reply to that. you know, when someone has an expensive piece of property that's marked up by the assessor as such, they're paying increased property tax already compared to their neighbor's smaller home, right? So that… that already exists in our existing tax structure. This, you know, when you build a bigger house, you're gonna pay more in taxes when the assessor comes around and increases the value of your land. So that already exists. through tax laws that were approved through the appropriate constitutional process under Tabor. And, you know, we can talk about academics. I do have concerns that there are conservative legal academic groups out there that would love to throw money at suing the City of Boulder over this sort of thing.

[106:15] you know, set precedent on impact fees in the state, and for $1.2 million, the amount the city's gonna have to spend on defending this, it's just like, what are we doing here? I mean, there's… there is, I think, a lot of nuance to these impact fees. legal nuance. Our Constitution contemplates that when we raise taxes, it has to go on the ballot. But on the other hand, the city has had impact fees for a very long time, and no challenges, so… Yeah, there's… we're allowed to have impact fees. The Colorado Supreme Court has adjudicated this, but it's… there is a fine line, and I have a concern, just in my experience as a lawyer. when you deal with the home, people are much more litigious when it's their house, compared to a commercial real estate developer. I mean, commercial real estate developers bring lawsuits, of course, but people… people are motivated when it's their house. That's been something that I've learned, so…

[107:14] Can I just clarify the sales tax? So there was a countywide sales tax for affordable housing just 2 years ago. So 1B was passed by the voters that generates about $18 million a year, countywide. There'll be another one on this year's ballot for behavioral health. So, you know, and as Michael mentioned, there's a long history of ballot measures specifically for affordable housing that have not been successful. So it's not likely that the city or the county would pursue Another ballot measure, specifically for affordable housing, specifically on the heels of a recently passed one. Well, maybe if they received a recommendation from the Housing Advisory Board, they'd reconsider. So, actual feedback, I would…

[108:02] urge you to move this forward. I think someone… and when I read the memo, I felt the same way. It's a very small sample of public comment so far, but… when this really goes public, I assume there'll be City Council hearing, planning board meetings, and all that. You know, it's going to get on people's radars, and they're going to be able to voice their opinion loud and clear about it, and that could lead to some modifications, it could lead to it being dropped. I think it is, you know, part of the democratic process, but for all the reasons I said. Earlier, I would say, you know, you have a pretty good program here, not perfect. Moving forward, see what happens. One piece of feedback I'd give, and we don't have to go through the language of the statute, is, you know, you've stated the intent is not to impose this impact fee on people who are turning a single-family home into a duplex or a triplex, to make sure that is, in fact, reflected in the statutory. Appreciate that.

[109:05] There's TRG members, specifically? I have a question, and I don't know if you hit on this already, but how will the funds be distributed? Is it similar to… competitively, so, I mean, they'll be in separate funds from the Affordable Housing Fund, but it'll be the same exact process on how it gets distributed. Any other comments from other TRG folks? I feel so silly saying this, what is TRG? I'm sorry. At the technical review group? Yeah. What is it? So we… when, … Developers. respond to your RFP.

[110:00] that there are funds available for affordable projects in town. We review. their request. … figure out how to spend the money. Okay. So they make a recommendation to, our director, who makes the final decision about how affordable housing funds are spent. But it's helpful to have people with expertise, so… Would you like a council-appointed Citizens Advisory Board, or…? I work for the State Division of Housing, so I do that in my own work. The technical review group is appointed by Housing and Human Services. Gotcha. And they advise Housing and Human Services, so they're different than you guys? So that's why HAB is making the recommendation, because that's part of your charger. It's not… Advising City Council is not the purview of TRG. Charlie, did you have something else? No, and I… I… sympathize with your not knowing what TRG is, because I'm fairly new to the group. I assume that we are not in any way voting in this measure. This is just for the Housing Advisory Board members voting?

[111:08] You're correct, yes. But thank you for being here. Yeah! Providing your… your input. Cindy, did you have anything to add? I, I do not. Thank you so much, … For… yeah. But I don't have anything to add. Thank you. Okay. Renee came out on camera. Oh, hi. Hi! I just want to say, I want to express my appreciation to the staff, because, for going through this process, I know that putting together a nexus study and going through the… through the kind of dense information that comes out of it, it is… sometimes feels like an academic exercise, but it is a requirement for the law for these types of impact fees. It becomes a critical piece of our… of the ability to… to levy these types of fees. I think you have been thoughtful.

[112:06] You've taken the feedback that you had from City Council to kind of look at this, sort of… … not a loophole, but where, you know, a period… an area where, the inclusionary housing didn't, ordinances didn't apply, but obviously there… Reflecting the fact that there is a potential impact when you have a single-family home that is… that is demolished and replaced with something that is significantly larger, that is probably not going to be, … it becomes further away from a person who is hoping to live in Boulder and maybe starting off at a more affordable level, and it is for, you know, for a homeowner who may have been here for a while, but who has significant wealth to pay for that type of expansion of the lot, and to take some sort of… To apply some sort of fee to acknowledge that there is an impact on the economy for the construction workers that are there, for the landscaping help that may help, for the coffees that they want, and the restaurants that they want to eat in, and that those folks

[113:11] Who are serving these homeowners, who have significant… more significant amounts of disposable wealth. that… that they, should not be commuting… having to commute in from long distance every day and have an opportunity to live in… in a city where they work as well. I appreciate the analysis. It does feel like it's, you know, a million dollars is not going to… is not going to change the world, but it does, from the TRG perspective, I think there are the amounts of requests that are… that are out there for the limited amount of funds that are available. frequently far exceed the, you know, the demand far exceeds the supply of funds that are available. And so I appreciate the, the, thoughtful analysis that went into trying to find a way to sort of not necessarily look for the revenue, but to acknowledge that the impacts that these are going to have

[114:01] And to try to continue working way through… to use all the levers that are at the city's disposal to think about ways to make it more affordable for, for all of Boulder residents to live here. So, I am familiar with the type of fees that are, like this, that are levied in Denver. And yes, there, there can be some pushback, and they have withheld, stood up to, to kind of legal pressure. I'd be curious if there… I mean, I appreciate all the exemptions that you've… that you have put in there as well, to think about the AD units and AD units… ADU units and the, you know, the size of the homes. I know there were still a sick… there was a… I think one of the pieces that Denver saw, not necessarily the legal challenges were holding up, but there were a lot more, I guess, requests for waivers, and I wonder if there's a process… I'm sorry that I didn't have a chance to go through the entire

[115:00] the legislation as it's put in there, but, is, is… I guess, is there any sort of waiver process? or other exemption process, or do you expect that some residents may come in and say… it's pretty clear where you are exempting, but I do wonder if that's a place where you'll start getting some pushback on individual cases. To have the opportunity to request a waiver, or a hearing or some sort of other, process that may take up staff time. Yeah, I don't anticipate a sort of a discretionary process. I mean, impact fees are pretty straightforward. You… they apply, or they don't. Are you talking about, like, a hard case scenario? Like, someone who comes in and says, we can't necessarily afford this, or what… Type of scenario are you envisioning? I know there were, there was at least a little bit of a carve-out in the Denver… in the, the Denver language that did allow… they would… they could request a waiver if it was denied.

[116:09] Because it was pretty clear within the ordinance that it was not… that it fell within the confines of the ordinance and didn't meet one of the exemptions, that there was still a number of folks that kind of came back and asked for a hearing, a staff hearing to… … there was… I don't know if that was required of the… it's just a requirement of, you know, the whole nexus study legislative process, and whether there has to be levels of, of, appeal, but I… there… that was at least… I know that was built into the Denver process, and there were, I guess, the number of those I saw increase in my time that I was there as well. We'll definitely look into it. Thank you for sharing that. Sure, yeah, but thank you to the staff, for… for all your work on this. I do appreciate it. I appreciate the thoughtful conversation that's happened here.

[117:10] Thank you for the information, Sloan, and I would just say, like, I… Appreciate the considerations and the exemptions. … Bye. I… I agree with quite a few of your points, I don't think I need to say them again, so… Yes, I'll make a motion. … So the motion to… for the Housing Advisory Board recommending that City Council adopt Ordinance 8712, amending Chapter 4-20 fees and Chapter 8-9, Capital Facility Impact Fee by the addition of a new affordable housing impact fee rate for certain single-unit dwelling developments, and setting forth related details.

[118:05] I motion to approve. All in favor? Cindy, how about you? Yes. All opposed? I vote no. So now, I guess that's just on record. Yep. Thank you so much. Yeah, thank you. Thank you. And thank you. Thank you for your time. And any, again, any suggestions for improving how we Present. We can talk about this. Put feedback there now. Very good presentation. Okay. Moving on, my time is it? 10 check?

[119:00] 8 o'clock. All right, so we have the HAB member quarterly update to Council. Pink? Is Philip on the list for tomorrow's Council? Is that what I heard? Did he make it? I haven't heard it. Did make it? I don't know. Okay, okay. Might be able to Google that. Don't they post… do they post that? The list? I think they do. I mean, I think Philip will just tell us. I was gonna say, he'll either do it, or he'll put his name on the list. I mean, I guess a discussion we could have, has he signed up, like, multiple times now and not gotten on? I believe he… I believe that this was his second time, the first time he was on the list, but because they had to… clear chambers a few times, they didn't make it all the way through the list. Which then, I believe, correct me if I'm wrong, I think that prioritizes him for this next time. What I heard, it's randomized, so there's not really nothing anyone can do. Okay. From what I understand is they are trying to… if people were signed up and they didn't get to talk, but they are given priority to get the next…

[120:11] Maybe. Okay. Well, in any case… I mean, maybe, I don't think we necessarily have to talk about him this time, but maybe when he's back, it's… He keeps getting booted down, we have a more structural discussion about it. Is there a better way to communicate with City Council inside the conference? So, Council Clerk, again. Suggested that have communicate in writing to Council. What's the… is… do we email that to the clerk? Do we… is that what we should do? I mean, the purpose was to get in front of Council. To be in front of Council 3 or 4 times a year. Yeah. So, even though… Even though Philip got bumped, like, we are on… on track for that, so, …

[121:02] There's no activity in our community that has sparked public comment before Council that's not necessarily related to Council. That's been my observation. So, I think, one thing we can do today is we can figure out, who… does anybody have any interest in being On deck next, which would be, you know. Are we August? We're August, so, like, December or Jan… January's meeting. Does anybody have interest in… Would you like to? We're signing Michael up. So, we would never forget who we are. So, I think, it seems like what Philip did last time is he kind of created some ideas and brought it

[122:02] to everybody else, and we… And generally, the format has been summarizing what we've talked about, recommended. Or in Philip's case, I think he took the opportunity to speak about something important to him, which is housing-related. I'd like to share an observation I made. I watched the recent public comment at City Council, and they have changed their format so that after everyone speaks. every city council member, I guess they have an opportunity to ask staff questions about certain things people are commenting on. And then they also have 30 seconds each to just kind of openly comment. And there was someone in open comment who said something along the lines of the city needs to create incentives to transform commercial properties into residential, something we've talked about a lot. And multiple city council members were, like, into that, and they want to hear more about that.

[123:01] So I just wanted to share that while we're on this public comment. It seems like that is something that City Council is interested in. So, just to review, this is a few months out. Yes? Yes. And the format has been whoever's presenting drafts a statement for the approval of the entire board. Yes. Okay. feedback, by the way, is just slightly tangential. We had an opportunity to tour a office-to-housing conversion based on what our guest speaker from a few months ago, Gavin, has been doing on Spruce Street. This fall, so… Well under, well under construction. I think it's something we've all collectively been interested in, and then I heard this random guy in the public, I'm like, he needs to come to one of our meetings and comment, because all of City Council's like, yeah, that sounds great, like, can we hear more about that? I was like. Yes, it started. Unbelievable. Okay. Good, good. Okay.

[124:01] … work you. So, Tiffany kindly included the work view, work plan, review, work plan… I have work plan for us to review. So it looks like what we have coming up September, we have an update or presentation about, sorry, about the Boulder Valley Comp Plan. If you're ready for some… for us to look at something for the quarterly update, that's fine. And then we have the Bloomberg Harvard Leadership Initiative. Tripp? So that's first… That's all still confirmed. Okay, great, great. Clarification on that one. Is Bloomberg wrapping up their work with the city, or is it still in the budget? That's what we're trying to present what happens. Charlie's gonna come and tell you the whole story.

[125:02] The whole story. I mean, I should… I'm sorry, I shouldn't say it's done. So, the phase where Bloomberg staff are sort of holding our hands is done. Now it's up to the city to move those ideas forward. Okay. And we have some ideas on how to do that. In October, we have the Manufactured Housing Panel. Cindy, are the folks that you found, are they all confirmed for that panel? We're in the process of confirming them. Is Cindy still on? It's okay. Okay, maybe she stepped away. I believe that she's in the process, or has confirmed with that panel, so that would be great.

[126:01] We'll talk about our November-December HAB meetings. Any other ideas or anything else in particular that we want to put… Did we pick a date for the model tours? Waiting for a confirmation. It'll be… it's going to be that 27th or 28th, so… I believe, last communication I had with Cindy was I gave her the doodle poll results, and she was just gonna confirm with the… except on the host. Yes. Yeah. So there was some talk about maybe doing something on employer-created housing. I told Karen that I would help her with that. Okay. But we discussed maybe… Maybe not this fall. Okay. Not that we completely covered it, but it was definitely touched upon. Yeah. Yeah, it's so fascinating to me how they…

[127:02] can do whatever the heck they want. You mean, like, on a state property? Well, just, like, as an educational and state facility, right? Yeah, no one brought the hotel when they talked about Our planning breaks, but… They did. passed around that a little bit. Yeah, I thought that was really… I thought that was… I thought that was interesting. I mean, that'd be great if they could really do it, but… Yeah, ML's question was spot on. Which one? Well, it is… I mean, it is the state's university, it's not the city of Polar's University. There's these projects across the street, and we want to see… I'm like… And they come here to show courtesy. to the city, but they don't have to. It's interesting. It's interesting. No, I was impressed with the presentation, and it seemed ain't perfect, nobody is, but…

[128:09] They're doing public-private partnerships to build more housing? Great! They're buying dead commercial properties to create graduate student housing, non-transit? Fantastic! Because it's right on the freeway. How tall they go. The one in Louisville? Yeah, because that's… I mean, I think that's… you know, that building also burned in the Marshall Fire, too. I think that's what shut it down initially. Precinct? And, you're talking about the… It's still there. Yeah, I think it burned. It's, it's shut down. Okay, okay, it's back on track. Yes, sir. … … an ADU update? We were talking about January or February, maybe? Yeah. Anything else, or anything… any of these items on the bottom that we want to…

[129:04] Kind of get going on. Still would like to learn about tax. I think it's so relevant. So the land tax value stuff? Or just someone who can talk about tax, you know, and educate us. So, I know… so, Philip talked specifically about land tax… value tax. Karen was talking about expanding to tax policies to create different housing outcomes. So that's sort of along with that, on that thing? Yeah, I'm not sure exactly who would be… I think an overview of tax would be helpful for us to have a foundational knowledge, because revenue generation, you know. I know it's not a tax, but, like, it's an issue that we contemplate, and every, you know, all local government does, in creating revenue.

[130:04] And even if it's not a tax, learning what's not a tax and what is a tax, you know, like, I don't know, that's… I think that's helpful. I think item 1 on your lower page list is related to surplus properties. My understanding is the city is starting to move on potentially disposing of some surplus property, so I'd love to learn more about that. Says who? What's that? Says who. What surplus? Oh, it's a rumor! Wakes me to find out the truth. Did Michael just create it? It's real. It's a real rumor! Well, in addition to that, the county is potentially going to be selling a big plot of land, basically in the middle of Boulder, so it would be my… Interesting to learn more about what maybe is happening with all that. Is that the county that owns that? Well, the county owns, Broadway Autographs. It's for sale, isn't it? It is for sale.

[131:05] They will have top dollar. I'm sure. I mean, look where it is. any piece of property in this town, you know, to say, look where it is. That large of a piece of… That large, okay. In the center of town. Yeah. That is pretty unusual. You know, I would suggest that we had our Boulder Valley Comp Plan update last night at the City Planning Board, and … I guess they're coming. next month? Yep. I think that, that… Hold some space for what focuses have… might be able to bring to that process, you know, for the future, encounters with City Council, because it's… it's a… This is the opportunity, this is the time when we reframe how we want to move forward. And, you know, one of the, …

[132:11] I think, issues that comes up at… through Planning Board. with Boulder Belly Comp Plan is that, It hasn't had enough, enough, … the relationship between Boulder Valley Comp Plan and the zoning has Either been… they look like the same thing. or there is no relationship. And so it's very hard for Planning Board to use Boulder Valley Plan in any specific way. But I think that there is a new… a new outcome from this process that's gonna open up new opportunities, especially with the focus on the 15-minute neighborhoods. How can that be, supported at the big scale? And we looked at the land use

[133:05] math yesterday, talking about how How areas of the city are going to be designated. Very different from what they're at. They're doing it now, and it's going from how many categories of land use are in the BBCP Right now, it's like… A lot? You got the presentation. Well, I know there's four, there's four in the… from… so they greatly… they are, consolidating and, then taking… Putting the specificity into things, I think there's going to be a greater opportunity to get the outcomes we're looking for. Because right now, we keep seeing we're missing the mark, right? We're missing the mark. We're not getting the housing we need. We're not getting, you know, the types of developments that we want. And so I think it'll be a really interesting

[134:06] opportunity for HAB to pick out how can HAB bring some specific things, because one of the things that is being asked is. What are your ideas for specific land use, thinking, and changes, and… … It's… it… They've put forth a very inclusive process for getting input. And I think that would be a good opportunity for HAB. To have, meaningful You know, interactions, rather. it could directly impact how this is all. What's the… what would you see? I'm not. Oh, the comp… they expect to have the draft policy out by the end of next year. It's clipping along. Thank you.

[135:02] next year. But right now, it's coming here in the next month or so, it's going to City Council. There'll be, sort of the place it's at now, which is looking at the land use map and its updates, is circulating right now through, … So would you suggest having Christopher Bank can… a decision like we just had on… I think it's coming. Yeah, the timeline now is September, so you're gonna hear all about it, but I think ML's point is well taken, that you should Reserve some space, create some space, because I think there are topics that Hav is going to want to focus on in the coming months. Got it on my left time at the end. Very exciting. I just listened really good. Pay attention to the numbers. Okay, anything else anybody wanted to add? Holly, happy at work. Holiday happy. August, why not?

[136:04] Okay, so… Well, I guess the last thing I want to do is shout out. I mentioned this to Karen, and I've discussed with you. Yeah. For anyone on our board at ML, I think it would be a good idea to sign up for the City of Boulder hotline, if you're not already on it. It's basically like an email listserv that city staff and city council use to communicate with each other when they're not in council meetings. And it's very informational. A lot of the subjects aren't necessarily about housing, but some of them are, and you get long emails from staff members to council, and long emails from council members. responding and offering their individual perspective. Some of it does have to do with housing, and I think it's just an easy way to stay in the loop on what Council is doing, so I recommend signing up for it. And you won't get spammed too much, because anyone can sign up for it in the public, but only Council and staff can actually send them out.

[137:10] Thank you. Okay, update from Housing Solutions for the Homelessness Subcommittee. It's Chip and I. I'll start, is that okay? So the… so there was the City Council, study session after the clutch report was shared out. So the clutch report, essentially reports that the city has made significant progress in securing housing for vulnerable people, but there's more that we can do, more that we should do. So a few of their, kind of, main recommendations Were to increase efforts towards diversion with, various problem-solving supports and moving on solutions, so diversion stuff.

[138:02] Actively managing the location of engagement events by distributing food and supplies at the day shelter located at Alt Rows. So, All Roads is getting a freshen-up thing happening right now, and it's been functioning as a day shelter where there's services, so why not kind of try and get More people receiving services there. food supplies where they can then also potentially access other services. So that was one of the recommendations from Clutch. … And then prioritizing housing for long-term residents of the city, and then creating short-term solutions for newcomers. I think they use the word newcomers. So, this is where our subcommittee can kind of dive in a little bit deeper and into possible solutions. So, we need… We need short-term… Housing solutions, affordable housing solutions.

[139:05] So, there's, … you know, one of the… one of the versions of that is single-room occupancy stuff, and there's various forms of SROs, and so… again, just kind of diving into that. as an option, a little bit more. There's things that, that are a part of that. We need to continue to meet the life safety standards, though maybe some vacant office space could be converted as an option. We need to consider what is needed to qualify for federal tax credits, because there are definitely some basic requirements to be able to get those tax credits. Of course, we need to consider that those tax credits may not be available in the future, so that's a portion of it, too, and thinking about, funding, maybe we can, consider some other funding options.

[140:01] or, do what we can to create another bridge house. That's been super successful. So there's… so there's a few things, but basically what it boils down to is for the subcommittee to kind of focus energy on, short-term affordable housing options. So, just one comment. When you're talking about short-term, the tax credits are off the table. So, just… So there are… so there are some… there's some nuance to that. And I think that's probably likely true with, … you know, like, single room occupancy. SROs are not eligible. Right, like, basically the tax credits are for apartment buildings, where people sign your loan pieces. And which, of course, there are livability standards… Right. …which make it so that… So what we want to investigate, what I think there's a lot of interest on, is what's that short-term option

[141:04] you know, pod hotel type thing, something that's a step up from a homeless shelter, but is not necessarily long-term, more expensive, more… administratively burdensome housing, you know? And there's… that, like, doesn't exist right now, so is now a good time for me to segue into the budget stuff? Sure, yeah, Chip wanted to share some stuff. Yeah, so a big takeaway from… I'm realizing all government stuff is there's a limited pot of money, and… What? And, in Colorado, you have to ask the voters for approval to raise it, where politicians need to raise it, and they don't Always want to do that. So how do we best delegate our resources? And that was a big theme I took away from this workshop, is, you know, Clutch had all these proposals, and then feedback from a lot of the council members was something along the line of, oh, this all sounds so great, but…

[142:03] when we do budget, we'll keep this in mind, but we have a limited pot of money, and we have to figure out how to spend it. And that's probably the most powerful thing our city council does, is decides how to spend the money and spend on what. So, in that regard, I printed out two pages from the clutch report that I thought were incredibly helpful to look at. Which speak to… the budget, when it specifically comes to housing. They did a lot of, or excuse me, homeless fix issues. And page 44 of the Council Packet and 47, it's two-sided, 44 gives examples of what certain things costs, and then 47 gives a breakdown of how the City of Boulder Spence… It's money on homelessness. And I just wanted to start with 47. I just thought this was really interesting. So, clutch…

[143:05] Sort of broke it up into two broad categories. Health and Safety Response Budget, and Accelerating exits from homelessness Budget. In the health and safety response budget, there's two… two categories. One they called Sustain Emergency Shelter, and I view that largely as providing services to homeless people. And then targeted, unsheltered engagement. And I view that as… In large part, sending… The cops out to remove people from public spaces and provide them with ancillary services in doing so. So if you look at that targeted unsheltered engagement, 3.7 million, roughly, goes to safe and managed public spaces. I think that's police enforcement. And then there's about

[144:06] 600,000 associated with municipal Court Navigators Homeless Outreach Team, be there outreach. The people who go out there around with the police that provide people the ancillary services. when that enforcement's happening. Sustained emergency shelter is a much broader category, but you can see in there, half a million goes to all roads. $19,000 goes to Winter Weather Shelter. There's some other small shelters in there, like The Source and Lodgehagen Ridge. Day Services Operations Center has a relatively large budget, close to, you know, $1.2 in general revenue and $800,000 in state pass-through, so that's big. And then there's also $1.6 million for respite center operations. You know, at that high level, in terms of the services and funding that Boulder's allocating towards

[145:00] Providing services to people who are homeless. Roughly $5.5 million is going to… Services, shelters, things along those lines. And then about $4.3 million is going to enforcement, removing unsheltered people. And I think that's interesting, the word unsheltered. There's a difference between homeless or unhoused, or whatever you want to call it, and unsheltered. Unsheltered person is someone who's sleeping on the creek bath in a tent, whereas, you know, someone who's sleeping at, all roads is not unsheltered, although they may be unhoused or homeless. So, you can see, and if you look at these four buckets, really, like, there's $5.4 million for sheltering, and sustaining sheltering, you know, homelessness services, 4.3 for engaging with unsheltered people, police enforcement, and ancillary services. And then on the bottom, accelerating exits from homelessness. And this is something I think that's, like, very appealing, which is, like, people are homeless, how do we help them not be homeless and sustain on their own? That's very aspirational.

[146:15] relatively small amount of the overall budget. If you look, $9.7 million versus $2.8 million. And what has really stood out to me here on accelerating exits from homelessness is… it's 2.85 for accelerating exits total. 2.75 of that is PSH, permanent supportive housing. So, it's almost entirely PSH, is how we are budgeting homelessness exits. The city allocates $73,000 to transitional housing, bridge house, and then $45,000 to diversion programs at all roads. that is a tiny, tiny sliver of the overall budget, is forms of helping people exit homelessness other than PSH.

[147:08] And… You know, I'll note on the flip side, on 44, It says PSH, Permanent supportive housing, the approximate cost per person is $39,555 a year for PSH. So we're talking roughly $40,000 a year per person in PSH. If you look at, you know, we're spending… 2.75 on PSH, it's not really serving that many people. … Is that number… all housing? Like, the cost of housing, or is it just the services? So, it does have a note in there, and I'm giving you my review of this, like, I'm not 100% certain of everything here. I'm not an expert on this. It does say the cost of PSH

[148:05] is the cost associated with operating these units, and does not account for development. Yeah, so development of PSH is very expensive, and then you'd also need to consider the services associated. So the $40,000 a year is just to operate It's not to build the building. So, and then, just also to keep in mind, the costs on the other side are most likely service-related, operational-related, and not… housing-related, necessarily, so… Right. So, I mean, there's so many things to dig in here. This is a very high level. I think what stood out to me the most is that If we're looking at this big pot of money that's 9, 10, 11, 12 and a half million dollars that the city spends on homelessness. And assuming that's stagnant or it grows slowly, …

[149:01] We're only spending a very, very tiny Percent of that on… transitional housing and rapid resolution. And in particular, I think trans… I think an area for growth is transitional housing. You know, we talk about everyone was… it was before your time, but when Bridge House came, I feel like our entire board was very impressed with that… that model. And moving back to what Karin was saying earlier, I think there's a lot of interest in that. How do we help people exit homelessness? I think that's, like, politically a very popular idea. And, you know, how do we… how do we take this vacant commercial space and make it useful? That could be part of that analysis as well, because it's basically what Bridge House did. And it's just such a small budget of the overall spending. I mean, it's… it's a sliver of it all. It's less than…

[150:03] the budget for two people in PSH is what we spend on transitional housing. And I think transitional housing can serve so many more people. And PSH, and I'm not trying to criticize PSH flat right, but it… it does not seem… based on the limited funds, it does not seem like a sustainable way to broadly address homelessness. just based on how much it costs. You know, a single bedroom. in Boulder cost $1,600 a month, maybe, like, on the cheaper end? So, less than 20 grand a year, so PSH costs twice a market rate room. But that accounts for services as well. Of course. And we're mindful that the people in PSH are in need of services, and it's… that's a valuable thing to provide our community. I think we just need to be mindful that PSH is not the solution when there's hundreds of homeless people.

[151:02] You know, that's not the broad… we can't do that for everyone. That's just not… reality. It's tricky, like, you look at the city of Denver right now, and they've been putting people into hotels for the last few years, and now… now what? Like, you have people in hotels without adequate services, and there's no permanent solutions for them, and so it has to be this very well-thought-out plan. Yeah. And… I think that's why, you know, the nice thing is we do see diversity in how we're spending it, and I think a common theme here is there needs to be There's different services for different types of people and different types of situations. Like, you can't… there's no one answer. PSH is not gonna work for everyone. Also, All Roads is not going to solve homelessness on its own, either. They all play a very important role. I think… Our high-level takeaway was not enough is being invested in transitional housing.

[152:05] And I almost think of that as the idea of You're in all roads. And maybe you need something more stable that you can lock your stuff and get a job and stay there for a few months until you're working or something, you know, to transition out. I don't know if it's that easy to go from all roads to just free market housing, like, overnight. That's a very uncommon… I think, like, Bridge House is… is the example. Right. Yeah. And one of the things that Denver has done, speaking about transitional housing, we call them pellet? Pellet houses? And that was the mayor's… Big push was to get all the unhoused housed. And so what they did is they put up these, …

[153:00] … I don't want to call them developments, but these housing sites. And they're definitely transitional, because when they talk about pellets, you know, we all see pallets that are used to move… to move stuff. They're… they are not permanent housing, but they are individual units, that are intended to be a temporary segue. And I… I've, I've heard that the statistics were… Huge amount of people got housed into these temporary transitional… I haven't kept up. I was attending their meetings for a while and hearing these things, but I don't know where it's gone, but I think the idea of there being that middle ground where you're not in a tent. And you're not in a subsidized apartment. But you're in something that can be, … low cost.

[154:02] And, serve the purpose of, of giving you something so that you can begin to feel, okay, I've got some support, I've got a place. So that might be a program we're looking at. Well, on a very human level, Karin pulled up this, like, word map survey, the city's homelessness survey. And one of the things was, like, why… what's the main reason that people don't want to go into a shelter? And a lot of them said safety. They didn't feel safe. And, you know, when you're in a big room with a bunch of bunk beds, and you're sleeping, you're unprotected, someone could come hurt you, and if you've had trauma in the past, that might invoke it. And I think if, you know, there's a setup, sort of that transitional, it's not a full-blown one-bedroom apartment with a bathroom that meets square footage requirements and all that, your long lease, but you have your private sleeping place with a door that locks, and you can keep your stuff in there while you go out and work, and maybe there's a common bathroom and a common living room area, and it's not the ideal long-term solution, but

[155:06] It's a better transitional place to be from getting off the streets or in the shelter, and then eventually maybe saving up the money to get into housing, or maybe you're on the waitlist for BHP or something, and it's more of an interim thing. And I think that's what we're interested in exploring the most, sort of a… something along the lines of what Bridge House did. And, you know, at $73,000 over a… $12 to $13 million budget, I think that is an area where the city could invest more. Much more. So, I think… unless anybody has any specific questions for Chip and I, I guess… We're just kind of saying. This is the direction that we want to go in the subcommittee.

[156:00] Couple of short questions. Yeah. … Oh, and is the clutch report generally available now? I can forward it… I think it's on the website, yes. Probably on the website, yes. Yeah, I also… I can forward it to you. … I'm not kept up with everything of it. Two, opinion. It's a clutch Report. Did produce some good ideas, it's a good report. What's your fault about that? I think so. I mean, it had helpful information. They compiled this data. I don't know if you can go into just, like, the city's budget and see how they spend money on homelessness. Like, it's in all these different categories, so they kind of consolidated the information in a way that is help that I don't think I'd be able to do on my own. This is from the report. Yes, these are two pages from the report, where they were attachments… I don't know. The packet I got was the City Council packet for the clutch presentation, and those, I think you had 5 points that you introduced at the beginning, Karen. Yeah. Are those the ones you want to focus on for potential areas of recommendation? Yeah, I think really,

[157:16] I don't… the concept of increasing efforts towards diversion, like, that's not something that's really under the purview of HAB or the HAB subcommittee. But I guess I just wanted to share it as that… That was a main point. Was that the first bullet point? It was. I'm repeating that, because I don't think I… Yep, so it was increasing efforts towards diversion. In other words, preventing… But on this budget, you know, they do associate diversion with transitional housing, and they serve similar purposes. I think in terms of the funding, diversion slash reunification is like a social work program they provide at all roads.

[158:00] Where they try to connect people with family to get them, you know, whatever. Whereas transitional housing's… Somewhat, we're trying to divert you out of homelessness by giving you you know, a place to live that's better than a homeless shelter. Yes, so I think, really, the point of the presentation from Clutch, when they were talking about diversion, they were talking about reunification. I think that's right. But to your point, not really a housing thing, but transitional housing is, and I think… Absolutely, absolutely. So the three things, the first one being diversion, the second one being, trying to really Focus the resources at the main resource that we already have. And there's definitely some pushback, some people, some folks from various nonprofits saying, we… our work… our work should be done where the people are, which is downtown. And then the other side of it is, right, but if we do the same work here, where there's also other options, wouldn't that be good? So, but again, I just wanted to share that, as that was one of the main

[159:15] Points, not something that really is us. But the thing that really is us is really kind of looking at the transitional housing. You asked about, kind of, the overall impression about the… you know, it's funny, because when I… when I… one of the things that came up with the clutch report is you know, in this city, this city followed the advice of these consultants, and they had no more homelessness. And I'm like, I can't… I don't know, so does that… because… because everybody… is… is sheltered? Does that really count? And then I think, well, technically, yes, because I mean, I am a Housing First advocate, so I'll say that. I do believe that if somebody has a safe

[160:06] Place to be that then… than other things can be. address, right? So I do believe that. But it also makes me think, okay, but yes, but there's more to that. So I think, Lauren, you said something about Great, so, so… We house, but… But then what? Like, what Denver is dealing with now? Yeah. So, permanent supportive housing, there are these related services, though, so that people can, you know, go on. And I think I saw some statistic, I don't know, about, people being in permanent supportive housing for 10… I don't know what that was, an average of 10… years… oh, that was just a model. That's not a good… never mind, I take that back, scratch up. But my point is. I think you're right, it's like, what next? So, could… is it possible that some of this funding be redirected toward another bridge house?

[161:04] which… houses people and looks forward to the future. So that's… that's the kind of thing that you want to kind of dig into. Yeah, and I think the, you know, when we look at this, it says the cost… the approximate cost per person for an emergency shelter is 3,776, whereas PSH is… more than 10 times expensive, $40,000. And it's just like, how do we bridge that gap where… We can serve more people without… You know, without them being in a homeless shelter for years. But, like, get them in a place that's cheaper than 40 grand a year, that allows them to maybe lock their stuff up, take a hot shower, and go out and get a job, and maybe eventually get into a more sustainable

[162:01] transition out of homelessness. Just keep in mind that some of the people that are in PSH have a lot of other issues that are not going to be solved, and so we're gonna need… They're gonna need mental health services, and there's not a standard answer for everyone, so you're looking at, like, apples to oranges with some of these categories. Well, no, that's why we said there's all these different categories, and it makes sense. There's different ways to address it. We need a homeless shelter, we need PSH. But what I think stood out to me the most is how little… of, like, barely anything we spend on transitional. And if we can expand that, I think that provides a bigger, more useful slice that can serve I love it. I think it's an important… thing to look at. I'm able to help with some of the numbers. So, on page 47, if you add up all the columns. The city is spending roughly… What is it?

[163:01] $12.5 million all in for this whole suite of services. And then on the page 37, or 44, rather. There's this… Total investment gap of $11.2. et cetera, a million, increasing to 13.3. I think I can… mind you, this is just two random pages from the report, so I encourage you to read the whole thing. I wasn't going to just… No, I'm just saying, is that… No, so I guess the context I want to give you is a big part of this presentation and the report was, like. end unsheltered homelessness by 2020. Spending $12 million or something. Like, that was the goal. They're like, the city of Boulder can end unsheltered homelessness, and here's how. And my takeaway was that here's how I spend twice as much money as you already do. It's just how much money we need to spend to do it. So I think that was their opinion, and that's where I was like, it's all about the money. Like, they're basically… showing up, being like, you guys need to spend more money, which Council was like, we love the idea of ending unsheltered homelessness.

[164:06] But we also have roads to pay for, we have affordable housing, we have… you know, it's just like, there's a limited pot of money, and it all boils down to how do we allocate our limited resources during the budget process. Right. So, … comment that I really appreciate you two taking this on as a subcommittee. This is great. … now we can all wade through the clutch report in more detail. And call me out if something I said was wrong, I mean… No, nothing wrong! No, no, I'm just looking for clarification. Like, I don't… I don't… we haven't totally figured out what safe and managed public spaces means. We think it means… police signature. But my point is, we as HAB, have to be very mindful of this reality that frankly, the Council is not going to come up with another $20 million, $12 million. Right. I mean, I'm not… I shouldn't speak for them. So that's just annually. That's reality.

[165:02] And so whatever we come up with has got to be very practical and hard notes. Yeah. Well, right, and that's why I was more like, if we look at this $13 million, how can that $13 be maybe shifted a little bit? you know, prioritize other things. In particular, transitional housing. And when we heard that… when I heard that excitement from Council in response to one public comment on commercial spaces, I was like, Bridge House. You know, that was… that popped into my head, so… Okay, so if there's nothing else, we'll continue on. And our stuff on our own time. … Matters from the staff. I'm shy. What do you want to say? I wanted to share… Beautiful image. Hopefully it works. Recognize that? Hawthorne, yeah. So this is Michael's idea, right? It's on the list, the work plan of converting underutilized parking lots into housing. Is this across from Safeway?

[166:09] This is… Officer Safeway? North Boulder Safeway? 28th Street, Safeway. Between 28th and 30th? Yeah, it's just, it's behind, it's tucked behind. So is it called Jay-Z comment? Should be. Just pick it up with BHP. Is this the one that's behind, the… Like, 24, Power Fitness… Right, so it's… it's that 28 and Foothill, or Mount Foothill, iris, and it's behind that. We should definitely go out and take a look. It's done, it's already been leased up, or they're starting to lease up. They're ahead of the Trammell Crow development, right next to it. Right there. I think they're almost done with construction, hopefully, because I drive through it every day. So that's one. And then, I also wanted to share… How many units is that?

[167:10] I don't remember, sorry. That whole complex, though, is not all BHP. There's… That piece is… It's that one, but that's complex. The development is… Because it's all, like, it's all coming together right now, kind of at the same pace, if you go through there. Right. What do we got here, Jake? So this is the first module that was pulled out of the factory this morning. That's exactly… So that's a great picture. This is the high school students, students who worked on it. Where is this heading? It'll go to Ponderosa, but for now, it's staying just outside the factory in storage. Do they… do they know when they're moving it?

[168:05] So we still have to build the foundations. We just got a permit from the city Friday. And how many permits? So, hopefully mid-September, mid to late September, we'll be able to place the first two bikes. So we'll let you know, and that'll be a much bigger event, because I think it'll be more exciting, because we'll see them arrive on a… on a truck and craned into place, so that'll be fun to watch. … Are these permitted through the state manufactured housing? Modular housing. Modular housing process, so they don't have… the only city permit is the foundation? the foundation, and then the stitching. Anything… any connections that are made on-site, the city has to approve. Otherwise, it all happened. They're getting… this was inspected as it was being built by a third-party inspection service, that is, and doing it on behalf of the state.

[169:06] That's one module, they stack another one on top of it. Yep, that's the… that one's the ground floor, and then the second floor will go on top of it, too. They're, just over 1,100 square feet, 3 bedroom. Wow. Kind of interesting, walking through them, it's weird, it seems like. completely done, but you're in a factory. That's so cool, because that was, like… and these houses still exist in Boulder, but that was, like, the mid-century, post-war house, you know, the 1,000 square feet with 3 bedrooms, 1 bathroom, ranch. Ranch. And… Are they both built? The ground and the top? Are both what? Both modules are built. Yes, we, the first four are mostly done. There's some still next testing, a little bit of testing that has to happen. On the top floor of this unit, and then within 2 weeks, the other two boxes will be done.

[170:00] So, total of 2 units will be installed? Yep, 4 boxes. Lower and upper. And then there is about, … 6 more homes behind it in the factory. are the… Clearly, the homeowners are already existing, right? Yes. They go for sale once they're there, they're for… they've already… And where have the people been living? Hondurasa. And so then the existing, home is still there, and that'll be removed? The existing homes have already been removed. So they're mobile homes that were removed and mostly sent to. the dump. Right. So where are those people displaced to while this is getting built? So those people moved into stick-built homes that have already been built on-site, or they had left the park voluntarily. They weren't displaced by… Their house isn't there anymore.

[171:00] Yeah, so it's going to be staged throughout the park, based on availability of sites. And, … The sites are leased, the buildings are owned, is that correct? The buildings are owned, the land is owned, it's a condominium association. Right. They will own the land and the building. But they own the land in common. with the modular. approach. What is Habitat's role? And what's going on out there. It's obviously very different than their typical model. It's not that… that different. They're just moving their entire operation indoors. Okay. So they… they're the certified manufacturer of the modular homes. They are, okay. They're basically the general contractor. They are responsible for, you know, getting all the permits. Consultants. Pouring the foundations, moving the mods into place.

[172:00] So when you say, we pulled building permits, that's Habitat pulled foundation permit. Okay, got it. Habitat. But it's more of a partnership, because the city is providing the funding For pretty much every unit that's going into Ponderosa. Got it. And then the proceeds of the sales will come back to the city, whereas if… when Habitat starts building homes to go to other sites, then they will be responsible for paying for the materials, and then they will get the proceeds from the sale. Cool. So once they're… once they're available, the buyers Then take out a mortgage, and then the city gets to do the next rounds on that money. Correct. Use that money to fuel it back in. Oh, very interesting. So, how… how is the cost? Relative to… if they went out and bought a module off of a manufactured housing. Ask me when they're done. We don't know how it compares. I'm sorry? We don't know how it compares. Not yet. Well, we haven't finished building.

[173:07] Is it easy to buy, like, a modular home in the free market? They still exist, they still exist. But this is the Golden Valley School District and through Habitat, so it's a different economic model of construction, so I just am curious, it's like, what kind of a… a cost difference. So we hope to save money. We don't know exactly how much. The real benefit is time. So, Habitat has been building one to two homes a year, and with this, they'll be able to build 24 a year. So it's increasing their capacity, and speeding up the production of a housing type that the market is not delivering. Right. Is the Boulder Valley School District program growing to accommodate the capacity? So the students you saw, the… that class has grown by 50% since last year. That's awesome.

[174:13] That was, like, that came through planning board, like. two years ago, right? The Mod Factory. I mean, that went… this whole thing went up pretty quick. I'm glad you think so. Well, we, I, you know, it goes to the planning boarding, like, the next day to pull the building department. We went to that ribbon-cutting… a year ago? Yeah, about a year ago. October. And in the prior year, I think it was at Planning Board. It was more than a year. No, the prior year, so 2 years? No, it was more than that. Just before you were on play. I did the most, because I was there, and I just remember thinking, this is, like.

[175:00] So special. Any other pictures for us? Nope, that's it. Thanks, Jay. We did have, a meeting with, … board clerk. There's going to be a change to the communication between boards and city council. There'll be a biannual communication, starting at the beginning of the year that will replace the traditional letter to Council. They will be asking at the beginning of the year, For a letter… For what the board thinks the Council priorities should be to help them inform the City Council Retreat, a template is being created and will be sent out later this year. And then mid-year, Council will be asking for an update on board work plans. As related to the retreat. We don't have dates or any other information.

[176:02] We're supposed to be getting… having another meeting in… October, for more information regarding that. And then in January, there's going to be a public open house, for all boards and commissions for recruiting purposes. And it is asked that there will be one staff member and one board member, present at the event. I do not have dates or location yet for that. Still a little ways out, but that's good to know. So, those are… that's all the information that I had, and that meeting was… A week and a half ago, so when I have another meeting, I will bring that information. That's really quite awesome, because the boards, and I think you guys do too, struggle with what format do we give them our feedback, and that's going to be the most useful. Yeah. And we kind of… Seems like there needs to be more… And so to have a template? Right, yeah, so they're working on a template… Twice a year? Yeah, should have that by the end of the year. That's… that's really different, and really…

[177:07] Great. Nobody's presented this information to Planning Board. Thank you, Tiffany. I will take it back to us. Yeah, I was gonna say, talk to your secretary, because we were all… I'll take it to ours, and you have to… Don't throw us under the bus. Yeah. Like, that was… we did not get any hardware information. Thank you. Excellent. Okay. Any other… Final thoughts? Comments? If not, then I'll make the motion to adjourn. Quicken. All in favor? A15? Yes. Hi, Cindy! Bye, have a good night! Thanks, Andy.