May 16, 2023 — Planning Board Regular Meeting

Transcript

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

[0:00] The 2 things that oh, thank you for the recording and the 2 things that should not be spoken to right now are the New Vista High School proposed Site Development. That's for for the to replace the existing building at 700 Twentieth Street, and then our other public hearing. Item: that you should not speak to right now. It's 5405 spine road. Sorry. Got a kid on the background. Anything else You're welcome to speak to now. But please do not speak to Spyro or new this to at this time, and if you would like to comment during public participation now about anything else. Please raise your hand, and we'll call on you, and we'd love to hear from you all right. Each person will have 3 min, so first up. We have Lynn Seagull. Please go ahead, Lynn. You have 3 min. Can someone else we can hear you? Can someone else go before me? Can I do you last? Sorry you're the only hand raised, Lynn. These are your 3 min.

[1:06] What I wanted to say here is that you need to balance Jobs housing, and, as Mark knows, I wish I could ask. I wish this could be more iterative because I need to ask what the term is for that special kind of parking where you share the parking. There's a name for it, and I know Mark knows it, and he could say it right now, but he can't talk during my time, even if I offer him the time. This is so sad, so sad, that it's not iterative, because we're all working together here, and that's the way we expand and grow is by learning from each other. So it's sad. But the kind of parking for example, at the 300 square foot 2206 pearl! That that situation it would be solved very easily with truly multi-generate multi-generational cooperative housing and I don't mean come standard communal co-OP housing, hippie type, housing I mean serious housing, mainstream housing for people with 3 bedrooms with 4 bedrooms, with whatever size communal household you want

[2:19] or cooperative is better term like a kibbutz, just something that's cooperative. It's so much it energy efficient. It's so much more, you know, less dry. Wall. but there's plenty of private space. Anything that you design in boulder of new build should be designed around this kind of a model, having plenty of storage, since there's going to be different families, and maybe there's going to be families with singles, with grandparents, with all generations to take care of each other's, kids to take care of each other's parking and to take care of each Other's driving needs. One person would need to have

[3:01] the giant Amazon vans that they drive all over these days, you know, instead of each household having one, it's so much more practical. And when you're living cooperative cooperatively, you naturally manage the parking and manage the commuting and manage what cars you have between yourselves. Otherwise you're paying some other guy a bunch of money at the 300 square feet 22 and 6 pearl, you know it's like very sad when that happens, and the other thing is, we need services, and the more services we have, Of course, the more the housing we're going to need to to pick up for that, because it's low income. So so we need to balance jobs housing, because otherwise it's a constant cycle of despair Done.

[4:01] Madam Chair. I'm just going to respond to Lynn real quick. The term is some which stands for shared. unbundled. managed. and paid in reference to parking. So the city advocates for some shared, unbundled managing paid. and I think she might also be referring to tandem parking spaces where 2 cars, park and like nose to end. And then you have to manage who's coming in? And who's going out? I'm not sure if that's what Lynn was talking about, but it might be. Thank you, thanks for coming in, and there are no other hands raised. and I just wanted to quickly make a plug for a community engagement opportunity tomorrow night for the Boulder Junction phase 2 project it's at the Junkyard Social Club People who are interested in the future that neighborhood can stop by between 4 and 6

[5:00] over to you. Chair. Thank you all right. That concludes our general public participation. Minutes for approval. So I think April Fourth. We didn't have any big comments on Laura. I saw that you had some pretty extensive comments on March 20 first. Are you hoping to hear back on some of those questions before we move to approval. Should we push those to a later date? Or how are you feeling, Laura? Well, my thank you for asking Lisa. My big question was just that the notes don't seem to capture the general comments that we are often offered an opportunity to make general comments that are not a response to a specific key issue that staff have outlined. And it looks like from what Devon had said over email that there may be some discussion happening on staffs and about what is appropriate to include in the notes and what is not. And so, if it is not in appropriate to include general comments in the notes.

[6:01] It's good to know that, so that we can manage our comments appropriately, and i'd love to hear about it, and I see that Brand Brad has his hand up. Brad, go ahead. I'd be happy to elaborate during matters on this, although I can also tell you very quickly that we we appreciate those comments. We're gonna have some internal conversation about that. We we haven't had the chance to just given that the the timeframe. But we will plan to do that, or we have plans to do that, and we'll be happy to report down to that. Huh! A future planning for me. So my instinct, then Laura and I mean someone else speak up. Whether it's staff or a planning board member is to kind of put a PIN in March twenty-first, just to kind of see where that calls out, and if we end up adding some stuff back in or not, or whatever, and then and then to go ahead and approve. April Fourth. I support your suggestion, Lisa.

[7:00] Okay, great. I would entertain a motion. I will move that we approve the Is it? April fourth, April Fourth Meeting minutes. my second All right. So moved by Laura and sected by Mark. although i'll do a roll call. Vote Mark. Sorry, bye. Oh, Laura, I ml Hi and Georgie and Kurt. Yes. all right, unanimously proved by. And I say I as well. So you know it's approved by Board Members presence all right, and I think our next order is 2. Call ups and forgive me. Do I usually describe what these are, or is that something that Staff does?

[8:09] I believe that you would normally do that? Okay, cool, then let me look at my notes, and I will. I just had a moment where I was like, what what do I do? Okay. So the first potential call up is a final plot to replat a 6.7, 8 acre property into 3 lots and 2 outlets. The lots are described, and not going to read all of the description of that, because it just gets a little bit particular. But these are would be used for storm, water, detention, and water quality and drainage purposes. The replay includes a dedication of Hibiscus Avenue and Hawthorne rights of way in new easements and the repat is consistent with the conditions of approval associated with our Uk L Your 2021 0 0 37 for the diagonal plaza Redevelopment! Has everyone had the chance to Look at that Call up, and would anyone like to call that up.

[9:05] I see that you have a question or comment. Yeah, I just have a question I was trying to understand about out lots. and Wikipedia says that outlaw is a lot that can't possibly be built, on which doesn't seem to be quite the case. Here is there a legal distinction between a lot and an outlaw. I can't speak to the legal terminology, but we we do not typically see development on out lots. There's 2 outlots associated with the diagonal plaza development. So out Lot a is actually going to be the common open space for the development with no structures. And then outlaw B would actually be the stormwater detention. a a. And so why are these separate lots? Slot slash outlots as opposed to just part of the other lots?

[10:01] It's typical on a development, particularly of this size, that if there's a number of different lots that might be in different ownership, that an outlaw would be created for the open space, so that it basically gets a homeowners association or common ownership interest gets created to to maintain that out lot Same goes for like stormwater detention facilities. Okay, Great. that that's all I have. I don't. I have no interest in calling this up. That was a great question. Thank you, Kurt: I learned some stuff there, too. Anyone else have any questions or comments, or desire to call up this item kind of scrolling back and forth looking for folks all right, seeing none. Our next potential call up is a site review amendment to amend the Orchard, Pd to expand the property at 1,576 Hawthorne Avenue to include adjacent common area. So I was fortunate to get a little background on this one from staff, which you probably also saw in the packet.

[11:04] My understanding of it is that this was originally a common area described as going to be a play area that was owned by the H. A, and it's at the end of the ped. and was never kind of given Proper access are properly developed. So, in order to get there, people would have to walk down various paths that go across yards to get there. There are now fences in the way, and it's kind of this weird, isolated parcel of land. and that all parties involved on the applicant who's interested in taking over part of it. And the houa is more than happy to deed it over. and and the ideas that it'll basically just function, as it already is, which is sort of like a larger backyard staff, feel free to correct me. If I miss described anything and same question, Does anyone have any questions about this, or an interest in calling this item up mark?

[12:00] Oh, I I I' my real hand versus my virtual hand, so should I keep going. So it part of I'm going to call this up. and that may not be a popular thing, and it might be a bit surprising. But i'm going to call it up. and i'm going to tell everyone why, and I I think this is important. I I value what public and community property rings to our collective lives. I am also greatly concerned by the privatization of public and communal spaces. and this transference of public and communal spaces property lands, happens and is kind of under siege on a scale both large and small all the time.

[13:00] and I know, and I know this is a very small thing. But here's here, and my 5 reasons for calling this up. This is an example. I'll be a small. a privatization of public and community space. It is a case of slow, secondly, is a case of slow and quiet adverse concession that we are facilitating. One might say that there is no adversity here. I counter that there is. but it is a typical in that. It is the children, the kids who didn't get to use this space, and the kids that won't get to use this space and that don't have a particular voice in this matter. Third consensus among neighbors is not a reason. is not a reason, nor is it enough to justify a decision. I can't simply agree with my neighbors and say we Won't. Let Green Cars park on the street.

[14:00] Consensus does not make a decision, right or moral or legal. Fourth staff's. Memo is, I find, insufficient in addressing, and, in fact does not show at all the way. Fences, buildings, signage, have created barriers to what was originally proposed as a public space and a communal asset of this kind of innovate his little property. Again, it's adversely possessing of a community asset. Yeah. we should not be in the habit of glossing over failures to meet approved plans simply because of the passage of time and the erosion of people's expectations. so I may ultimately may vote to approve this change. but I will not make that vote without additional information.

[15:03] gathering examination and consideration by this board and staff. So those are my reasons for calling it up. Thanks, Mark and staff. Forgive me for not remembering, or any other member of the Board feel free to answer this question as well. But do we need a second, or can any one of us can call this up right? And then it goes to discussion. My right. it's it's any one board member great, and so do we now hear from staff, or ask questions, or what what our next procedural moves you. You can't ask questions, but otherwise i'll just schedule it for a public hearing. I believe, within the next 60 days her I know that you haven't gotten the chance to speak Yet Would you like to speak now and then. Yeah, First of all, thank you, Mark, for that. Very articulate the description, and I share some of your concerns. I don't know where I would come down, but I certainly I had some of those same calls. One thing that a. As staff is bearing this i'd like to understand.

[16:15] If incorporating this into the lot, the the existing lot 6 would then change the amount of billable floor area on Lot 6 under the compatible development rules. So that's just something that could be hopefully addressed in the manual. Thank you. That's a great question, Kurt: Thank you, Brad. I see your hand is up. Yeah, and I was just gonna remind the Board that now that it's called up, you know, any substantive discussion would be reserved for that. The call them hearing. That makes sense. All right, folks that will. This has been called up, and it sounds to me like we should move on and hopefully that'll make it on to the scheduled challenge that sometime in the next 60 or so days.

[17:01] So thank you. And looking back at my little outline, I made myself. Mark went off my outline. That's okay. That's good for me. all right, and we're moving on, I believe. Now to our public hearing items, the first of which is a review and common. Our proposed site Development plan for New Vista High School, and this is a bit of an unusual opportunity for us to pride feedback because of Bbsd's status as kind of a sovereign entity, and i'm sure Staff will speak to that in their presentation. so Staff feel free to take it away if you are ready. Alright, Wonderful. Shannon, you're pretty muted. Something funny. Let me scoot up a little closer here. Can you hear me any better. That is clear. Yes, thank you. Okay, wonderful. I will try to speak up. I do have a soft voice, so I get in trouble with that good evening, for you can just get my presentation already.

[18:09] Hello! So for tonight's discussion i'll be presenting a unique item as you mentioned, for the Board to review and comment on this is for the proposed site Development Plan for New Vista High School. proposing to replace the existing school building at 700 and Twentieth Street I forgot to introduce myself. My name is Shannon Muller. I'm with the planning department for the City of Boulder. I'll briefly cover the information in staff's Memo, including the purpose of this review, the feedback received to date Existing Site Conditions surrounding context and History. Description of the proposal and some key issues for discussion. So the purpose of this item is for the planning Board to review and comment on the Site Development Plan to replace the existing New Vista high school with a new building. and this is consistent with the Colorado revised statutes under 2,232 124, which is listed on this slide.

[19:06] This State law requires the Board of Education of the School District to submit a site development plan for review and comment to the planning commission or governing body of a municipality prior to construction. This means that this particular review is not is being done. Pursuant to this State statute, and it's not being done through the city's typical processes. State Law Doesn't provide any further description of the review process or any specific review criteria for the review and comment. So Staff has approached this review similar to what we would do for a concept Plan review. So the memo in the board packet and this slide include the typical concept plan, review and comment guidelines that are pulled from Section 9 to 13 G items, one through 8. So generally Staff has focused the memo in this presentation on policy considerations

[20:04] in the Boulder, Vol. Holder Valley. Comprehensive plan, because it establishes the vision for boulder. as would be as you'd be familiar with in our typical concept plan. Review, and comment. No approval or denial is being taken tonight on the project the Board can review and comment on the proposal, but it's not a decision making body on the item. The School District Isn't required to undergo a site review process. and it's not subject to our typical city land use code or processes, because the construction, remodeling, and renovation is permitted through the State of Colorado and not through the city. So this review and comment outlined here is done pursuant to state statutes. As I mentioned, so there are no mail-s or signed postings required, but there have been public input opportunities as the

[21:02] process to construct a new school facility has been ongoing for a few years in november 2,022, but is approved Oops. Excuse me, Voters approved bond Measure 5 a. Which included some specific language regarding replacing the 7 year old New Vista High School with a modern energy efficient building. and in 2,021 and 2,022. The school district held design advisory team meetings with opportunities for public comment on the design of the project. and it's at its meeting on May third of this year. The Landmarks Board also provided the statement on this slide regarding the proposal, encouraging documentation of the buildings and referencing historic preservation steps. comments which are included in the Board packet under attachment fee.

[22:01] So now that we've gone through the purpose of the item and feedback received. Today we'll move to the site and surrounding context. This is a 12 and a half acre property located northwest of the intersection of Broadway and Baseline. It contains the existing Yugista High school building, parking lot and recreational fields. The underlying BBC land use designation is primarily public which reflects the current high school use. There is a small bit of land designated high density residential in one area of this site. Since this has been part of the school property for many decades. It's not clear why there's another designation on the site, but the site is primarily designated public, which would be the appropriate designation. The zoning on the property is our H. 5 residential high 5, and in this zoning public schools are allowed by rights.

[23:01] The property is adjacent to Twentieth Street, Baseline Road, and Broadway. 1 point of access to the site exists from Baseline into the existing parking area south of the building. The primary building entrance fronts on Twentieth Street, and there are various sports, fields, and courts on the property. The high point of the site is located at the southwest corner, and it slopes down toward Broadway. It's been developed for about 70 years as a school. There are some mature trees on the site, and there are views of the flat irons visible across the property. New Vista High School currently serves about 330 students in grades 9 through 12. It was originally opened in 1,954 as baseline in your high school to start the use of the growing community. Post World War Ii. The building was designed by prominent boulder architect, James M. Hunter, with a later addition by Hobert Wagner, between 1,955 and 1,964,

[24:01] and there's additional historical information and images in attachment d. To the stack minimum the surrounding areas characterized by a mix of uses. To the east, across Broadway is the University of Colorado, main campus to the southeast. There's a condo and apartment buildings and fire station number 2 to the south there are single-family detached homes, and to the west and north there are a mix of apartment buildings duplexes and condos. The site is served by a number of nearby transit routes primarily running on Broadway and Baseline, or the site. These include many routes including the 204 to 25 skip bound AV one. but it's wire. The lion's wire, the city's parking parks shuttle to chat with. and the hop dish of t with shuttle offered on concert nights there's an on street, Bike lane that exists on the north side of Baseline Road, and there's a multi-use path present along Broadway.

[25:05] There's a primarily detached sidewalk along base ride Baseline, and then, and an attached sidewalk on twentieth the city's transportation master plan to pick a plan multi-use path connection across the northern edge of the subject property. It's shown in a dashed green line. It's a little difficult to see if you can see my I'm. Following it along the edge. There the low stress street walk and bike network plan in the transportation master Plan also to pick a bike lane along baseline with a preference for a buffered bike line. So now that we've talked about the site context and a bit of history, we'll move to tonight's proposal. So this is a proposal for a replacement of the existing building with a new approximately 74,000 square foot, two-story building The school district has determined that the existing building is no longer able to serve the needs of the high school population.

[26:06] The replacement building is to be located next to the existing building and following completion of the new building, the existing building would be demolished. The proposed building design has 2 wings connected at a Blake angle. It includes spaces such as an auditorium, dining area lab fitness and art studio spaces, classrooms and offices and outdoor patio learning spaces. A parking area with about 115 spaces would be located at the southwest corner of the property. and a new one-way pick up and drop off Lane. Access would be provided from baseline roads. and it would exit on to Twentieth Street. whereas currently pick ups and drop offs for the site or down curbside along twentieth and baseline. parking for bikes, would include 52 bike parking spaces in front of the building. along with areas for seeding and picnic tables, and the design includes maintaining the sports field at the rear of the property

[27:07] and adding a relocated basketball court. The proposal would generally maintain the existing sidewalk conditions, including the primarily detached walk along baseline and the attached walk along. The The proposal is a two-story building, as I mentioned it's. The design is clad with a mix of cmu the year metal panels and aluminum storefront. Systems. So lastly, i'll move to the key issues for discussion. so as noted earlier, the memo in the packet and this presentation are based on the typical concept, plan, review, and comment guidelines in 9 to 13 She, and in particular, the policy considerations in the Boulder Valley Compr. So the first key issue from for the Board to discuss is whether the proposal is overall consistent with the goals, objectives, and recommendations of the

[28:06] staff identified the Bpcp policies and items that might be relevant to the proposal, and i'll go through those next. So I tried to group these into different groupings Overall Staff found that the proposal for a land use of the school on the site. and continued use of the site as a school is supported by both the primary underlying designation of public on the land use map. and by policy 2.10, preservation and support of residential neighborhoods where the school has been a part of the neighborhood for about so many years in relation to deconstruction of the existing building in support of policy. 2.2, 7 staff strongly recommends that the buildings be documented prior to deconstruction as noted in the historic preservation. It's, comments. historic photographs in social history could be integrated into an interactive exhibit as part of a new school. Additionally, in support of policy. 4.0. 9 staff recommends diverting building materials from the landfill

[29:12] that could be reused, donated, or recycled, consistent with some of the city's adopted policies and ordinances in relation to accessibility and transportation for the site. The uptapes to the site provides the opportunity to improve the physical design of the site for people complete missing Links plan accessibility to schools and address access and traffic challenges that are often associated with schools in a coordinated manner. The proposal provides for a new building and site design that will address many accessibility challenges that are inherent with older buildings. and it incorporates a new drop off, and Pickup Lane, that's intended to alleviate on street congestion. Staff also recommends that the transportation improvements and considerations listed in the memo. Under the

[30:02] item 9, 2 13 G. Item, 5 incorporated into the proposal. including incorporating the multi-use pup connection at the north end of this site. updating the sidewalks along twentieth a baseline to meet current standards. ensuring the best pull out, stop on baseline, meets current Rtd standards, and ensuring that site access is meet the city's designing construction standards in terms of the environment as a new building on an existing internal site that will serve the community for multiple decades. The site provides a great opportunity to provide an environmentally sensitive and energy efficient design. The new school building is intended to be an energy efficient design. So this is consistent with policy. 4.0 8, and the design will provide you landscaping and trees on the site consistent with policy. 2.3, 8. Staff recommends the proposal, and corporate street trees consistent with the city's typical minimum requirements along the street right away

[31:06] to support a high quality public realm. and reduce the urban Heat Island effect as much as possible. and should, in the outdoor lighting be provided. Staff recommend it be dark sky, compliant. and lastly, in terms of the design of this site. The updated site and building design present the opportunity for the proposal to provide an enhanced design, as it relates to the neighborhood context, public around and overall building design the staff. The site's relationship to the public realm is apparent in the design which creates a more defined entry point and a front gathering space, and could be further enhanced with the transportation improvements mentioned earlier. While the proposed building materials are typical for a public facility of this nature staff recommends the materials be further refined by incorporating authentic and human-scale materials rather than a primarily Cmu. That's proposed

[32:05] moving on to the second key issue the second key issue is a procedural option relating to making a formal motion on the item. If the Board wishes to provide a formal letter to the School District Board of Directors. In addition to providing verbal feedback at this hearing tonight. the Board could make a motion for Staff to draft a letter to the Board of Directors incorporating the city's comments and any specific requested changes. There is no requirement for the board to make a motion on this item. The Board can provide feedback to the school district who is here tonight in the typical virtual and comment global format during the hearing. the Board does have the option to direct Staff to draft a formal letter, and could make specific requests if it wishes to do so. So that concludes my presentation. The Bbsd staff and design team is here, and we'll also have a presentation, and will also be available for questions.

[33:09] Laurel. I see that your hand is raised. Yes, apologies for jumping in here. I think it might also be helpful to make sure that there's any disclosures or anything before we continue too far on any that I would do and didn't. Yeah, I mentioned to say it earlier. So apologies for that. But just before we continue on. thank you for calling me accountable laurel. Yes, I don't have any disclosures particular to this project before we proceed. Perhaps it's been a little while since we've done disclosures. Lurel. Could you remind us, I I know. Obviously, if we do share a relationship would be one. But I think there's also something about how close you live your property. Yeah, if you look at that top of mind, would you mind sharing that again? Yeah, sure, if you live within the 600 normal 600 feet of notification it. It's helpful to disclose that if you have any fiduciary duties or any other sort of conflict of interest. If you're unsure, you're welcome to share, and I can walk you through

[34:09] any sort of potential issues there. Wonderful! Thank you, Laurel. Any such concerns or potential concerns to disclose. Okay, seeing none. Let's move on to questions for staff. Please raise your hand if you have any. Laura, I think I saw your hand to go first. Go ahead. This might be more appropriately addressed to the applicant. But I was wondering about the the shuttle service to Chautauqua, and whether that would be able to continue during construction and deconstruction. Am I correct in thinking that this is the place where people park on weekends and holidays to try to get a shuttle to Chautauqua? That's my understanding. I think the I think the representative is able is is able to address that

[35:02] when they have chance to talk. Okay, thank you, Shannon. And, By the way, thank you for your presentation. Very informative. Really appreciate it. And I have another question for staff. So this bond measure that we passed, and this will relate to a question I ask of the applicant later, but the bond measure that was passed by city boulder are those funds allocated in such a way that they can only be used in must be used for this usage. That is what they must be used for. They are approved, for it must be used for the snubus to site, and that was kind of how it was structured. Or would those funds potentially be usable elsewhere? And I'll, i'll ask what i'm talking about later in I'm. Not even sure. My idea is a good one. I'm just curious about the legalities of the bond measure. So my understanding is the bond measure. What that was passed was related specifically to Bbsd. So the city would have no bearing, and and how that's used. It would be

[36:04] okay cool. I'll. I'll ask again when we when we get to the applicant. All right. Any other questions for staff at this time looking back and forth and feel free to. Oh, Kurt, I think I just saw your hand go ahead. I just have one process question. So the Crs 2232, 1, 24, one. A talks about the planning commission or governing body may request a public hearing before the Board of Education relating to the proposed site, location, or site development. So I just want to confirm that that would be an option to us. You talked about potentially sending a letter, but it seems like this is slightly different. So I just wanna understand the the what what is involved with that.

[37:01] Yeah, yeah, that's my understanding that that is an option as well, or feel free to jump in if i'm misunderstanding anything. I don't believe that that was an option that staff is recommending at this time, but it could certainly be one that we could talk about. And if you wanted to pursue that yeah. maybe maybe we can tag team here a little bit. That that certainly is an option under State law. We have approached this in in the spirit of cooperation and coordination with one of our you know, fellow local government entities in here. Really, I don't think the School Board anticipates that, and they are not quite the same design. Review Board, of course, that either council or planning board is so yeah. has been anticipated mostly at the staff level. But but that is an option. We don't tend to see that state just doesn't matter

[38:07] All right. Any further questions for staff. All right, let's move on to the applicant. Presentation, please. I think that will be from Chris Stopenhagen. Is that right? Yeah. Good evening, anybody. I'm. Chris stopping. And I'm: the executive director of bond planning and construction. And really, quick, do you mean to go right into the presentation or address the questions that then brought up. I would say presentation first, and then maybe circle back to any questions that are already addressed in the presentation at the end. You got you just a moment here. I'll pull everything up

[39:07] all right. Thanks for having us put together. Presentation just to kind of go over. And Shannon, Thank you. You covered some of this. But just to give you guys a little bit more detail of the working groups and the design summary of how we came to this project. So it was really back in the good old days of 2020, late, 2020 when working group was established to discuss and recommend on the following options. There was an intent in the bond for the like. The prior bond that we move forward and address the scope of work and budget that really involved kind of renovating, updating spaces we really found, and digging into that that the other option we have is to expand scope to correct efficiencies, and moderate modernize the school in the new construction, to replace the existing facility. What is our other option.

[40:01] So the members that made up this committee were school leadership teachers, students, parents, and community members, and an architecture team that came together and met in a timeline basically late, 2020 through February, where they made recommendations. So a project, history and overview was analyzed. Current site. conditions and restrictions were were analyzed, Vision and goal setting was set, and we reviewed an overall timeline of what this looked like. So recommendations were made in February of 21 to the Board of Education. Little background in the existing addition. The Shannon pointed out where it's located Baseline and Broadway. We did do traffic studies and an overall site. Study like I said. So. How traffic moves, what the restrictions of the current side are, what the views the flat irons contain. How we preserve this with the community and keep that, you know, engagement and historical aspect with the building

[41:06] we had site deficiencies that were identified throughout. We have a structural issues create that create hazards, asphalt deterioration. And really, the way it's set up now is, we have a bit of a bottleneck that occurs a lot on the site. So water infiltration issues are prominent around the building perimeter. We have structural elements that are cracking groundwater. This causing structural issues along the west edge of the building. And you see this inside the building, these these defects, so significant structural issues. including sagging on the floor, separation and break into an exterior. We have single panel, pain windows. It's not a very energy efficient building being that it's age, and with several additions that have been added to it. We have poor lighting quality. We have aging mechanical systems that will be costly to replace. If we were to renovate. And we have numerous Ada issues that we need to be addressed.

[42:09] Additional injury, deficiencies existing space that we, you know, this is designed as a as baseline middle school. Back in the fifties. The spaces Don't allow really, for the desired program needs or modern educational programming. We have STEM programs that are in existing locker rooms. We have space use for locker rooms. It's really storage right now. So this led to the visioning. What what is this look like for the future in the Istanbul Rally school district to keep providing optimal learning environments for the students. So we started with what's important the the school last for Student Choice. It's got alternative and unique programs for learning opportunities. It'll last for an elevation and collaboration in ways traditional schools, Don't and align with a lot of really modern day curriculum.

[43:01] The building originally was designed for a middle school, so it's not equipped for the program needs, and we want it to be future ready. We have deep ties to the integration with community, and we went all under that. So in the design we do have a space designated for display to honor that history and the community ties that exist. and the school embraces equity. So the design and include, so I includes universal access to facilities, public transit pass, and spaces and seeding throughout. So our options and considerations through all this really student impact, safety and sustainability and longevity. So again, go back to our options, overview. Proceed with your original Boscope, go through extensive renovation plus the original scope of work, a new building on the current site or new building on a new site.

[44:03] We developed a matrix really to analyze this. So option one to proceed with the original scope. We have the least upfront cost investment on that ongoing operations, and maintenance is the most costly. The impact of students is the greatest, and we don't really accomplish maintaining our meeting educational goals. And so health, safety and sustainability really doesn't check a box there, and we have the least building life expectancy. doing extensive resin renovation. Then we have a lot of impact to students potentially relocating them. Within this. We also have a lot of discuss this statement that has to occur. That would be in multiple phases. creating an additional health and safety hazards. We increase our building life, expect to see slightly by this option. The building on the current site checks really all the boxes, and we have a very similar cost to the extensive renovation by putting a new building in there on the current site so really excel, and meeting the educational goals health, safety, and sustainability checks the boxes.

[45:10] the new building on a new site. We just didn't have a site really designated for that, and then we lose that connection to the community that it really hurts important to the surrounding neighborhood. So sustainability design focus so much like boulder. We have green building principles that we've adopted. The board is adopted to all our, you know, but new building projects, and in updating in renovation projects. So some highlights of this design, specifically, I wanted to point out is. we have a condensing gas boiler that's 94% efficient. And in our energy recovery rt use that are designed to this. our lighting power is 40 to 60%, less than 21 energy code minimums. Our design is approximately 26% better than code baseline. For annual energy costs

[46:01] right like pollution. Reduction is a key focus, and we will remain dark side Compliant water use. Reduction is key in this we have to of landscaping, and what that water use looks like throughout the building has been taken into account. We have advanced energy metering designed into the building. and our focus is on campus safety, maintaining views through campus, and of course, views of flat irons that will be maintained. And with that I will open it up to your discussion and questions. Thanks. Thank you so much, folks. Please raise your hand. If you've got questions I have some, but i'll I'll see what comes up from other people first. Amel, I think I just saw your hand go up. Go ahead. and you are muted. Ml: I did that earlier in a meeting I and with myself, and instead, I muted myself sorry. Thank you, Chris, for your presentation. I appreciate the

[47:06] the input. There. So i'm gonna just ask one of my many questions to get started here. You briefly talked about that you presented it to the Board of Education. What was their response? Approval of of going forward with the new building. So of the of the options it was that option Number 3. It's the right it it addresses. The student needs to keep people safe throughout. It keeps us from displacing the students because they can stay in the existing as it is, and the the cost analysis of extensive renovation and the health and safety risks just didn't provide adequate savings for us to explore that further. Great Thank you for that. I I will ask my further questions after the rest of the board has chance.

[48:02] Great. Thank you, Ml: Kurt: please go ahead. Okay. Yeah. Just one question. You mentioned congestion on the site which I assume you mean motor vehicle congestion we're talking about. There there is. There is motor. Be open congestion. There's also, you know, with Chicago that that relationship or is important to us in the building with with them, and that will be maintained that that shuttle will remain in in use and and have access to that. but that in particular my understanding is, it makes a U turn inside the site to come in, and so not only that, but deliveries and things of that sort. Provide a little bit of just site congestion. Yes. and so we feel good. Sorry. Go ahead. We feel the new design allows for much better flow through the site, and also takes into account what that queue backup will look like. how we routed it through there. So we have additional parking spaces. We have additional pathway through that as far as the length that it kind of curves through for drop- and buses so we do feel we've addressed through traffic studies that's going to decrease.

[49:13] And so what transportation demand management strategies do you use to deal with that congestion? What transportation demand management strategies? Do you use to deal with that congestion currently. I guess. Can you elaborate on that? So I, the the city has a large suite of Tdm. Strategies that we advocate for. And you know, developers. We require most developers to use a variety of strategies in in a variety of situations. especially if parking is constrained, and so on. And so maybe the answer is none. which is certainly that's an answer. But you know

[50:01] ideally, we try to limit. We. We try to reduce the amount of in the city we try to reduce the amount of vehicle use. And so, and especially if there's a congestion problem, it seems like the first step rather than adding more parking might be to address it using Tdm strategies. But I think I got the answer that I need for now, and I don't know what you saying, and maybe congestion is the wrong word. It's. It's really kind of just the restrictions that the current site has. And so I think that just with the flow and stuff, and we do have. you know, busting. We encourage public transportation. We did hire an outside consultant for traffic studies in this to analyze what's the best use of the site and everything? So No, no, i'm asking you your question specifically that we we are. We have a lot of analysis on this. Okay? Well, maybe i'll follow up on that later. Thank you.

[51:02] And we do have consultants here that could maybe speak more to this if if you'd like us to do a follow up to your question. Thank you, Kurt: we'll circle back to that, too. Mark, please go ahead. Yeah, i'm gonna follow on Kurt some purch questions. I'm gonna try to keep them the kind of easy answers and then save comments for comment time. So the total number of students expected at this site in most years is what we currently have 330, and we're kind of maintaining that right now. We do feel that, you know. You know new building may attract others to the the programs that novice. It does offer. But 330, I think, is where we're we're holding right now and then approximate number of teachers and staff combined. I'd have to revisit that mark honestly, and get back to you.

[52:12] Okay. All right. When I read I I think the total number of proposed parking spaces was 1 57 but I I I had to do some calculating and estimating or reading of the plans. and so the total number of bike spaces I I saw. This 26 is that way off base, or what? What is that number? Do you know we have 115, I believe, is what it was parking spaces, and I can double check that math and the bike spaces. We do have additional that a Bbsd is providing on the north side as well. Total number. I will need to confirm.

[53:01] Okay. And so I i'm referring to the future condition not currently on on bike and car spaces. Hmm. Yeah. Okay. So okay. Anyway, I I was looking at the plans. It's best I could calculate it's 26, and that seemed hopefully, I I I was hoping I wasn't, adding that up right Okay. in your comments about energy efficiency. You talked about a 94% efficient condensing boiler. Did you evaluate or consider? Or are you still considering something like what was done at Casey with the ground source he popped. That was evaluated early on, and the it it's really cost prohibitive for what we have. The money allocated through the bond for

[54:00] Okay. all right. Does Bbsd charge for parking for students at any site? Nothing. I'm aware of now. Okay. And so, then, if you don't charge students. You certainly don't charge your faculty and staff. I would. So parking passes for them. Yeah. Okay. Okay, that that's all my questions for now, thank you. Thank you, Mark, Laura, Go ahead. I will have some very nice and appreciative comments to make when we get to general discussion. So I just want to start with that and say, I think you guys are doing a lot of things that are really wonderful to work with the community. Get input, evaluate your options really appreciate that. So I think I heard you say that the answer to my previous question about the Chautauqua shuttle is that that service will not get interrupted, and that you'll be able to maintain that even during construction and deconstruction

[55:10] correct, we we break, we're scheduled to break ground this summer, and we've. We've talked with them that they will maintain that access through next year as well. And so what we we don't have planned out right now is really what the access looks like, we should. We shouldn't have any interruptions at all, even in the 2025 as long as schedule is maintained. it'll just transfer over to what the new side is we have in my understanding, is it's it really end of May that that starts. And so we should have all the site we're completed by the end of 2,025. But right now there's no interruption scheduled. That is really wonderful. That's such a a beautiful contribution to the community. So thank you so much for that. That's really wonderful to hear. I think I heard either in your presentation or in Shannon's presentation somebody gave a figure that was something like 56 bicycle parking spaces.

[56:04] Did I hear that right? I Don't know, Shannon? If that was in your presentation. counted. I believe it was 28 by cracks for a total of 56 spaces. Since you can get 2 bikes of each. Okay, thank you. I I thought I heard that from somebody so 28 bike racks and an assumption that each bike rack can have a a bike on either side. So 56 bicycle parking spaces. Okay, Thank you. Those were my questions for now. Thank you so much, Laura Amel, Would you like to ask another question on all of one as Well. why go ahead before me? At least, if you haven't spoken yet. sure I may, I may have a little interactor here. So, Chris, I'd love to hear. I really appreciate that kind of slide that you showed the conceptualization, and so on. And thank you for the information on there being 330 students at New Vesta.

[57:02] I was just curious how Bbsd took into account facilities, planning with enrollment, declines and and kind of how that inform the decision to revamp this building, and and you know how that fits in more broadly if it's Yeah, yeah, and we we continue to evaluate the enrollment decline. We've we've really found that, you know. Here, there's there's a strong desire for for this program. It is. It is, you know, programming within the school. and that with that. When we look at our 5 year projections, we don't see a huge increase, but we see what we're projecting as a as maintaining with a slight increase in plot. 5 years is what we're showing. and so really just maintaining that again, health and safety in a, in a, in a sustainable building, you know, going forward for that. miss, how this is evaluated, and so, as you can see, it was done over 3 years, and there was a lot of support for this as part of the bottom measure as far as when we looked at, and we and we did look at, do we look at other options for new. This stuff

[58:08] are there other schools and stuff? And so the the resounding support was for a new building or upgraded building. To maintain this site because of that community connection, was also a big proponent of this. Oh, that's very helpful. Thank you, Ml: Go ahead. Thank you, Lisa Chris. I have a number of questions that are around the making a modern energy efficient building. So i'll put you out. I'll just go through my list, starting with the parking situation. So I understand you have 150 parking spaces, and 4 Ev. Would. Is that number? Could that number be increased the it it, it can. Yes, in fact, we've got extensive discussions. We're putting in additional

[59:07] infrastructure to expand on that, as that as that growth happens and the need in the demand increases. and parallel to that. Would there be any on 5 options for e bike charging? I think that we absolutely have the infrastructure for that, and that would be something that, in my opinion, be added easily with what we have dedicated there. So I I don't see that there would be any prohibitive measures that keep us from having any bikes? Right? That's that's what we're looking towards as well is, is, how do we increase those possibilities? So you spoke about your energy efficient strategies being built to the Bbsd Green Building. I i'm not familiar with that. But

[60:04] how would they, or or how they relate to like some pretty high standards like the Casino standard or neat platinum. So it's it's really what what our sustainability. our green building practices are are really trying to achieve practices that align with lead gold in in our buildings. So how do we? How do we get close to that, too. to get the designation itself and have that is, is, you know, sometimes costly. But everything that we do in design and implementation is to meet those standards. and is that the highest standards you would seek. That's currently what the board is adopted is legal standards, and that's what what's written into our our green building practices. Would they consider a higher standard?

[61:00] I would I? I I guess I couldn't speak on behalf of the board. And what in in changing that policy really at this point I could. I actually got the document up, and well, just referring back to the you know, to the title of the Bond Modern Energy efficient building it. It didn't set a standard, but there are some pretty achievable pretty high standards out there, and new vista and the type of curriculum it gets. I think it would just be so pertinent for that building to to show off and it and it could, by adopting oh. a more stringent and higher standard that can be reflected in such a way that it becomes a teaching tool. and we continue to analyze every every that we can through design. We just had our 50% CD review, and there was a lot of comments and feedback based on that review. And so we are continuing to evaluate and refine design

[62:08] for those standards. You know what the green building of Ebsd entails. But is that actually deconstruction? Yeah, we we anything to be recycled? We use repurposed. I mean, we we evaluate. That is, is any kind of building practice that we go into. Okay of a big that has to go into it. So you know the contaminating things and kind of evaluate that is, is going to be part of the process as well. And last question. You've seen the Landmarks Board Recommendation is

[63:02] the projects goal to follow their recommendation. their recommendation being that there will be a teaching component about the existing school, the historical importance and documentation of the existing school. Absolutely. We we even have a a space we've we've evaluated a few different spaces within the school. We've landed on one that has a lot of community access potential, and after hours access for performances near the auditorium we're still in the developmental phases what that looks like a dumbest in the past, though where we do wanna memorialize the the history throughout and have that be interactive and display as much of that that history and and connection that this building has had for many years decades. Yeah, I appreciate hearing the intentions that the project is moving forward with. Thank you.

[64:04] Thank you, Kurt, I think you said you might have some more questions not to put you on the spot, and anyone else who'd like to raise their hand again. Go ahead, Kurt. Yeah. Thanks. First of all, I want to follow up on Lisa's question about the enrollment. You talked about 5 year projection. Do you have enrollment projections further out, based on current elementary enrollment or anything like that. Yeah, I mean, we see we we do really projections on on all our schools and areas of the district and stuff, and there is a long range planning committee that addresses this, and they meet regularly on what enrollment looks like. And and there's there's pockets right where we have, you know, really where we're producting more growth, which is out east. And then we have other areas that are declining, and some of that we feel it could be attributed to some, you know, programming. So we have other aspects of the bomb bond that we're really trying to emphasize as far as

[65:09] career pathways, current technical education upgrades and really new vista in in what it offers is kind of unique in itself. And so it is its own little niche High school, I think, and program that is, is very popular, and we hope that it continues that, and we do feel that with a better facility and a better one. I guess areas to meet program means that that's going to sustain in that area. Okay. thank you the next question getting back to the question about parking so the O, how did you determine the 1 15? I think you said 1 15 is the your department spaces that you're proposing.

[66:01] Is that based on it parking generation standards, or how how did you come up with that number? It's really. How do we? How do we maximize the site? Really? And and again, if if Gardner is here and he wants to jump in on this, he can probably speak to a lot more of the specifics, if you guys allow it. But it it's really. How do we? We want to reduce the amount of pavement, but really provide enough access for everybody and for the community to to utilize that, because there are people that come again for Chatauqua, there's a lot of events and performances that happen with a new vista. And so how do we maximize that area? While also kind of reducing our footprint of of of of asphalt within this. Okay? Well, yeah, if there's any more follow up that we could have on that, that would be great. But while I've got you, one final question

[67:06] has on this site, or any other site, Has Bbsd ever considered, or is it even allowed to provide onsite housing, for example, for for the teachers their staff. I don't think that's been considered. I think that's a that's a pretty big site constraint, typically with just programmatic. We have to offer, and with the 12 acres that we have here. We're we're kind of at that. That that maximum what we have for you know the school and and programmatically what we can provide. So I don't think that's a policy the Board has adopted at this point. but, as far as you know, there are no pro conditions like at the State level on some doing something like that. I'm: not aware of any. I don't know. Okay.

[68:01] All right. Before I move to public participation, unless staff or another playing board member corrects me, I think, as the chair I could invite Gardener or someone else, if they wanted to speak to some of Kirk's questions, or someone else's from the applicant team, feel free to address us at this time, if you'd like. and while we wait on that, Also, if any Board members have any further questions for the applicant feel free to raise your hand. I I just wanted to say, I think, that Chris is pretty adequately addressed. That parking question I don't have much more to add to that question. If there's more specific, some I can. More specific questions I can try to answer those on the parking, but I think that Chris is pretty adequately responded. So far cool. Thank you, Gardner, for entertaining me, calling on you Kirch or Mark, or anyone else. Is there anything specific you'd like to attempt to put to gardener, or can we move forward? Well, sorry if I can just follow up on that. So I I guess i'm still not clear how you came up with this 1 15 number is that based on some

[69:05] some sort of standards like from it? E. Or is it just sort of what you were able to fit in? Sure? No, it's not just what we're able to fit in, and it's it's not based, I don't believe, on the it standards. However, we did take a look at the size of the school. The number of students, this being a high school only about a quarter of those students are going to be even of an age that they can drive. And so we also looked at the number of staff, and so early on the project. We evaluated the students, as well as the number of staff, and worked with Bbsd and our project manager to determine what we thought would be the appropriate number of spaces based on that. Thank you, Mark. I see your hand rates as well. Thanks. How many spaces exist! How many parking spaces exist today at at the school! I'm sorry I wish I had that number in my head, but it is less than half of what is current what we are proposing. It's a significantly smaller parking lot.

[70:09] And do you happen to know the number of bike parking spaces at the current school. I'm sorry I do not know the like face spaces, but that is also significantly less than what we were providing at the new school. Okay, having not been to new vista in recent years in the morning. Does anyone have any anecdotal information in terms of the degree of fullness of the current parking lot. Bike racks overflowing the bike racks under utilized anyone. Have any sort of anecdotal sort of gee last time I was there I saw this. Yup: okay, alright, Thank you.

[71:02] All right, Thank you. Members of the Planning Board any further questions before we move on to the public participation portion. I'm. Looking for hands. Speak up. If i'm not calling on you. It means I can't see you all right. In that case we're going to move to public participation for this hearing item only if you are an attendee, and would like to speak to this item, please raise your hand. And then, Vivian, I believe we'll be running the public participation, and we'll have about 3 min per speaker. So I don't see any hands. Lisa. Yeah, i'm also not seeing any. So I don't want to call people up by name in case you don't want me to. But if you were to speak to this. Please look for your little hand symbol and go ahead and click it in the next 10 to 15 s. Yeah, before we move on to

[72:02] no hands. I think we can move on alright, we'll move forward. So the next part part is a planning board deliberation, and I just want to say again that this is sort of being run like a concept. Review, however, with the proviso that Bbsc. Will not then be coming back for actual formal approval. So this is kind of our chance to share our feedback and thoughts and feelings, maybe even recommendations. But but the Bsd is a sovereign entity who kinda to a large extent gets to do what they want. So if you have things you would like to share with the folks we have from the applicant, please go ahead and raise your hand. We have nothing to share. I thanks for sure. Okay, Laura, go ahead. I'll go first. I just want to thank Bbsd. Again. I know that you are required to come and ask us what we think, but really appreciate you being here, your presentation answering all of our questions, and I think you can tell. This board is concerned with things like

[73:10] reducing traffic and parking, and see single vehicle occupancy, trips. planning for the future of electrification for both cars and bikes, energy, efficiency and design. You know I really really appreciate it. My background is, i'm, a facilitator. So I really appreciated seeing what you did with your working group that had parents and teachers and staff and students thinking about what your school needs for the future really appreciated you sharing your decision, making matrix. Your logic is compelling of why you chose to rebuild rather than renovate. So I I don't really have a lot of feedback for you other than to say Thank you for being here, and I think Job well done, and I think that you know this school is a great asset to the community. And clearly you care about your relationship with the community. And just thanks again for for being you and for being here, and good luck with with your new project.

[74:04] Thank you, Laura Kurt. I see your hand up. Thank you. First of all, i'll say that I attended Baseline Junior high for 3 years. growing up on the hill for seventh, eighth, and ninth grade. So I know the building very well inside and out. and I know the site, and I know so to the bike to Bike route down Cascade. which is what I took every day from to see extremely well. and I appreciate the design of the of the building. I think that it would, you know. To it it it looks nice. It would do well. I appreciate the energy, efficiency aspects that you're incorporating. It would be nice. As Mark mentioned. It would be nice

[75:02] if there were a way to do grounds or seat bump as opposed to gas, fired Keating. But maybe that's not possible. So I really I do appreciate a lot about it. I have big concerns, though, about the site layout. That is my biggest concern, and I think that this is largely driven by your desire to keep the existing school and then and build the new school, you know, Jason to it while retaining service in the existing school. and then deconstruct the existing school. But to me the very parking forward this site design to me feels extremely suburban. It feels very much auto-centric.

[76:00] It does not feel it. All appealing for people walking and biking from the neighborhood, which hopefully. A lot of people will do as I did to baseline it. The the the on site connections, especially for pedestrians to me feel inadequate. But but the biggest to me the biggest concern is just having this large building set way back from the streets from twentieth and from baseline in behind a really very large see of. As for parking. so I have. I have a lot of concerns about that. I think there are a lot of that which is what we're supposed to be looking at in this review. There are a lot of Bbcp policies that

[77:06] really indicate that that is not the way we want things to be built again. I understand that that the the in the short term for you it's important to be able to to keep students in the onsite throughout the construction process. but as playing board. We also need to think about the full hopefully. 70 year course of this building. and i'm concerned about 70 years of very parking forward design, so i'll go quickly through the B. Of the complaint policies that I think are related. It's just one way, so 2, 41, C says projects should relate positively to public streets. sidewalks, paths, and natural features.

[78:01] buildings and landscaped areas. Not parking lots should present a well designed face to the public realm. 241 E projects should provide a complete network of vehicular bicycle and pedestrian connections, both internal to the project and connecting to adjacent property streets and paths 241. If the primary focus of any site should be quality site design parking should play a subordinate role to site and building design, and not jeopardize open space or other opportunities on the property. Parking should be integrated between or within buildings and be contact in dense. The placement of parking should be behind and to the sides of buildings, or in structures rather than in large street facing lots.

[79:07] And yeah, I i'll skip some of these. But then 8, 11 specifically talks about schools. The city and county will work with the school district to consider transportation impacts when planning for school sites and facilities. and 8 12, the city and county will work with the school district to develop safe and convenient pedestrian bicycle and transit access for students to existing and new schools. New school facilities will be located, so that school age children have the opportunity to arrive safely on their own. So I I I would love to see greater consideration of how do we design a site and a program

[80:00] that really encourages as many people as possible, as many students hopefully also tackling and a staff, although that I realize is more difficult to walked to school, to bike, to school, to take, to skip or the other buses to school. and I think that there are the opportunities here. As Staff Memo said, You know there are a lot of opportunities. but the focus in the staff memo is on the opportunities rather than clearly, seeing that we have that we have taken up those opportunities, and so I think that there's room for improvement in terms of the site designed to really make a a a straightforward pedestrian centric site design. perhaps with the existing, I mean. The design of the building itself, I think, is great internally, but it's lay out on the site, I think, is

[81:08] problematic. The one last thing i'll say about that is, it seems like. from what I can tell from the site design, there's a lot of sort of UN programmed grassy space out in front. which you know can be great, but in it dryer, hotter, dryer world. I'm. Concerned about having large expanses of turf that are not out of it are not being used as efficiently as they could, and I feel like he's he's big opening. Yeah, maybe you know, kids will set up there and stuff. But to me it doesn't feel like a very efficient use of the amount of water that will be required.

[82:05] I will stop there. Thank you. Thank you, Kurt. Thank you for those thorough comments, Mark, and then Ml. Well. to Hertz said, everything I want to say, and did it better, and so it might seem like i'm just piling on, so I I don't want you to feel like that. But I I want to reinforce his comments about the parking forward, parking centric design. and I I actually spent so just addressing that roughly that I I took the Pdf. And did got a little measurement tool out, and there is about. But my calculations. I could be wrong, but I I I think i'm pretty close. There is about 1,200 square feet. dedicated to

[83:04] like facilities of one or another, and I I was pretty generous in in my area Calculations Around the the bike parking there are 32,000 square feet. so approximately 30 times 25 to 30 times the area dedicated to car parking. And so and so not only is there a lot of it, as Kirk says, there is, it's it's not particularly well placed, and it's it's a very parking forward. Suburban sort of feel very much like the the high school I went to, and very different from, you know, when you double parking from a current site. without increasing the number of students or faculty or staff you are in, and and you're not charging for that parking.

[84:04] You are creating an induced demand by making it easier fun or better, less problematic, to arrive via a car. You are, in fact, creating an an an induced demand. So I I I caution against that in in your design. and you know new vista is an innovative school, and I I support move this to as a concept in practice, and I I know kids and I have close relationships with adults. Now that graduated from New Vista, New Vista was a a very important part of their lives and success as as young adults and critical to them as as teenagers. and and I think that the design of a new school for a high school like New vista

[85:02] warrants a really forward look. You know a design that is about where where you want to be for those students and for our future community members, and and and the and the current design is kind of backward, autocentric, suburban sort of sort of view. And but yet the world is changing, and I, and when I visit schools I have Grandkids and I visit the elementary and and middle schools, and so forth. The the one common thing I see is because and this is school choice, and we're not here to debate school choice. But I see these incredibly long queues of parents dropping off their kids, and just what you describe. And so your your design

[86:04] might ameliorate some of that up that long queuing, but it does it by making more room for them. or versus providing better facilities for parents to feel comfortable that their kid can take their bike or their eb. I can get to school without having to drive them. and and and you know, and and if if you go to many schools this you have, you have 2 things happening simultaneously. You have bike racks where it's difficult for kids to park their bike because they're so full simultaneously. You have parents struggling to get their their car and to drop off their kids that for whatever reason they might look too far away. They might not feel safe. are are driving their kid to school. And so we've kind of deconstructed typical bus infrastructure, and we've we've we're starting to accommodate this

[87:07] commuter Drop off of of kids, and and it really should be the inverse. So I I I hope you know, and we're. We are like. you know, seeking. You know we're just. We're just advisory. We have no decision making role or whatever. But if you were coming to us with a commercial development, and you were subject to us, I I think, to our our thoughts, or on a site Review. Don't think that we wouldn't be harsh on me. It would if we would, we would be. And and these are the kind of comments we give to to people as they come to us for concept review. and then come back to us for real site review. So, anyway, I just hope that you continue to work on your design for a better look for the students in the in the future of a. Of Bbsd and

[88:04] in Boulder. That's it. Thank you. Mark Ml. And then, Georgie. Thank you, Lisa. So I, Parky. I think i'll say one more. One more and different thing about the parking. my understanding from this need to the Input. Into how you arrived where you arrived. Understand that it's significantly more than what's there now, etc. I would just encourage there to be a process whereby you end up with right size parking based on the actual need. And so I I am not a transportation specialist, but I would think that there would be some means and methods given.

[89:06] Obviously, Boulder Valley School district has access to data from all of their sites. Let's get the parking right size. and secondarily. in case it isn't right size in case it is too big, and in case the future comes as we expect it to come. plan for all the lessons. What happens to that parking lot? If suddenly, not suddenly but slowly. You know the boiling pot of water on the thing, on the still. the need for parking diminishes. How? What? What happens to that area that has had the big investment? If you are in that, can use asphalt rather than previous painting. how can that become repurposed?

[90:00] I think that if you look nationally and globally. the plan for parking to become obsolete is out there. so I would encourage the school. the new vista, Older Valley School district in his policies. to think about parking right size it, and time for all for lessons. I think that that will be here sooner than we imagine, and we got to speak on capital investment in the parking lot. and the second thing i'll say, and I've already said it, but I didn't say it. Just one more time is AIM for the highest standard in so far as energy efficiency lead, Gold is legal. It's not platinum. It's not perceived house. There are much more robust standards, and it would be again, I think, a boon to the population that you vista is serving

[91:01] to really come forth with some great leading edge strategies for how this building and add the word resilient to your energy, efficient strategies. This this is the future. We're educating the future and resilient buildings, not just energy, efficient buildings, not just energies that you believe use less. But how are they going to perform in a future climate that is shifting. So both of the things I'm. Putting on off the lessons in parking and highest standard, and include resilient in in the way the building actually gets constructed, and functions. I think, would be brilliant considerations for this project. I am in full support. I love the strategy of

[92:00] you know how you build a new building and keep Don't disrupt the to the population. I was there when we had a church burn down. and we were there for a same baseline. It it acted as a church. So we we go into the into the auditorium for services there. So you know schools have a a big role to play in the community, and I really appreciate that you doing it that you're bringing forward this design in this new school. with the idea that it will be continuously in use throughout the process. I think that that is a really important feature of what you're proposing. I just am encouraging you to to take it a step further, and think we're in the 20 first century, and there are some different things that should be on the table. Thank you so much. I appreciate your time with us today, and I and I know you don't have to take any of our input. you don't You're not legally required. But I I hope that this provides for.

[93:04] Thank you. Thank you so much, Ml: Georgie. And then i'll call him myself. Yeah, thank you. Just to just a few comments. I'll try to keep it short. Because why not? As it relates to what Ml. Set about building efficiency. I think to me that hits home more than anything else. I i'm, i'm very supportive of your entire plan. Given that the structure is 70 year old today that you're replacing. and a lot of our schools are of similar age and our aging and and our long-term facilities. That would be my area of encouragement would just be to to to focus on as much as you what what you can do for the planning of a facility that might have a another 70 year life. and how meaningful that would be to the Dvsd community if we were really to use that as an example of of how far you could take it.

[94:04] as it relates to parking. I'm going to have a slightly different take than my colleagues. I I think that I, a. As a parent with 2 kids in Bbsc. Myself. I understand how oh, how complex and how busy our lives are as parents, and a and and how challenging it can be. I I think, that the process that you went through with parents and architects working through this, and trying to design the best facility that work for everybody resonates with me, so I I I don't profess to be any ex more expert than all the people that you had involved in this process, including the teachers and students and parents. And so, if that was indeed the outcome, then i'm supportive of that. The other reason i'm supportive of that parking is we talked about. I think Laura brought up the Chatauqua shuttle, and the idea that you've got the space. and you're using it for other community benefits specifically in in the case of the talk with shuttle as an area where the community can benefit from that and take some pressure

[95:08] off of the Chautauqua area. And so I don't have any further comments beyond that. But I appreciate you coming to us, and and that at least listening to our input Thank you. Thank you, Georgie. All right, so i'll try to be brief. My comments echo a lot of what we've heard. So I agree. Investments in a long lost, lasting building that can serve you this time, or any other use in the future, I think. is great, and then anything to do with energy efficiency. you know, smart energy, use energy, generation, and so on on site. I think you know you're probably thinking about this, but I would look at those investments as things that could and should actually save you a lot of money over time. I don't think energy is going to be getting any cheaper anytime soon unless we get a really weird breakthrough which we have been trying to do for a long time. So yeah, so just kind of scoping that and making sure you're looking at savings over time for the district and for facilities and operations, as well as that up for cost.

[96:16] I I also don't love the parking right on the street front. I it may be unavoidable because of the way you need to use the building, but I also know that long-range planning is is looking at closing other low schools and other locations. They're not talking about that yet, but that's where we're going and based on the size of your student body. I I wonder about relocating there, and I know you're far along inside planning, so that may be a bit of a pipe dream. But ideally, I would love to see a beautiful building that was more on that pedestrian walkway and kind of provided a nice street front and parking pushed back. And then what else was I going to say? I appreciated your attention to enrollment, and I think new Vesta does provide a pretty unique service. But I think kind of just tracking that over. Time is really important, which I know you're thinking about

[97:03] this one. I'm not sure you'll need, because ranges keep getting longer, but looking at partners and options for doing integrated ev charging on sites. You know we're gonna see more and more ev vehicles, and people may want to charge at work, or may only have the option to charge it work if they live in multi-family, and don't have another option. So since, especially because there is so much parking proposed, which is quite a bit of working. I would love to see that some of that, you know, is is a accommodating Pv. And then, finally, I appreciate the the desires I heard it to continue to partner with, to talk on Park, to Park. I think that's a really nice relationship, and and it just works really well kind of in the more off season for New this, so that that the parking is still used, and and I think there is a pretty high usage during the summer, and it's quite convenient, and people kinda hit it, maybe even after going up and realizing they can't Park. It's the first why you hit. So I think that could be a nice usage. And again thank you for coming in front of us. We know we don't have a binding authority here, and

[98:02] we hope we've given you some useful stuff and look forward to seeing how it moves forward. Any other planning board members who have anything further to add. All right, I'm going to suggest that we go ahead and take a 10 min break and come back at 7, 53, and we'll move on to our next item. Thank you. Thank you

[107:49] all right. You're at 7 53, and I think people are rejoining us

[108:01] her, do you have a question to the matter at hand or another question? Yeah, i'm sorry. I just wanted to follow up on the last item. So I think Staff will be writing a letter to the the To Pbsd. Is that how that is coming down? And then, if if that's correct, I was just wondering. Would we get a chance to see that letter before it went out permanently? Yeah. So that was an option that staff presented in the presentation. If the planning Board wishes to make a motion to direct Staff to write a letter. this specific request. we can certainly do that. I think that motion would need to come from planning board if you wish to do so. Thank you for bringing that up. Kurt. Good good catch and good point. Shannon. Were there other options proposed? Or was that kind of the

[109:03] mechanism? So the the options were to simply provide the the feedback, as you've done tonight. Kind of the typical concept, plan, review and comment kind of verbal feedback. and that's all that's required. If you choose to have Staff write a letter, we would need to know kind of what are the things we should put in the letter. Specific requests. I'm such a good day. So in that case you could make a motion directing us to right. That. Okay. Thank you, Shannon. I think we're still waiting on Ml. So if anyone should wish to make such a motion i'll, I'll ask that. We maybe wait 1 one or 2 more minutes, Laura, did you have something to add? Oh, I wanted to make a comment about that, but I think maybe we should wait for Ml. To get back. And so she's included in the discussion. I think that's a good idea. Thank you, Lisa, and thank you. Card for bringing it up.

[110:00] Yeah, and not to call her out because i'm i'm not infrequently a little late. If i'm not running a meeting, but i'll probably give her like another minute or 2. No, if not, we'll start discussion hopefully. She can join us. Her. Were you born in Boulder. I was not born in Boulder. I was born in Illinois, but my family moved here when I was 4, so I actually attended kindergarten for 3 days in all in Illinois, and then all the rest of my schooling until I went off to grad school with kindergarten through grad school. Wow: okay, kindergarten through college, through undergrad. Okay, wow. So

[111:11] pretty good. If we're keeping score. Yes, I was born in Boulder. All right. Have we got Emma back? Yes, welcome, Amel. So, Ml: we had a question kind of still right toward the end of break, or possibly out of break. Kurt pointed out in the memo that we have the option to both provide review. Thank you for putting that slide up. Provide you and comic feedback directly to the applicant, as we did on the prior item. and that there was. and and I think maybe this is a little unclear, and or, as i'm interpreting it, and I think that's what you're asking about for to make a motion to like, actually drop a letter or do something similar. So Kurt spoke to that second option of B. And then I think Laura had some thoughts to add, so, Laura, go ahead.

[112:06] Thank you, Lisa. So I personally don't feel particularly compelled to write a letter to Bvsd. I think that our verbal comments we're thorough. I think they were listening. I'm sure they will be reflected in the notes that will come out of this meeting. I'm not sure that us writing a letter would provide any additional heft or weight or incentive for them to follow our recommendations. which I think we're clear. I don't think there's a lack of clarity. I also think we didn't necessarily have consensus on all of the different items that we talked about the way that we would need to if we were putting conditions on a site review. And so I i'm just imagining the process of trying to direct staff and tell them what to put in. That letter could get long and complicated, and i'm not sure that it would actually have much of an impact on the the project, so I I probably would not be inclined to do that, although if my fellow Board members want to do that, of course I will participate.

[113:03] Thank you, Laura. A further comment to the letter idea. Kurt, Did you feel strong enough that you wanted to make a motion to see if such a motion would be upheld or anything further. Yeah, I will move that we request for direct, I guess, Staff to draft a letter to the Bbsd. Board of Directors to be signed by the city manager, incorporating the staff memory, and and requesting proposed. Thank you, Kurt. Is there a second I second, that second from Mark my inclination, unless Well, now, now, we can talk if we want to right. Are we also free to just move, to vote. or do we have to talk? I I think it's good to have.

[114:02] Yeah, all right. You've got 5 min for everybody. Go ahead, Mark Lisa, According to our last. It's just not according to the rules of the motion making you read the thing again, and then it becomes owned by the and then we have our conversation. I I don't know if we follow that. That's enough question. I I heard read it into the record, but i'm happy to restate it. So yeah, i'll. I'll read it more formally to the record again. So we had a motion from Kurt Nord back a motion to direct staff to draft a letter to the Boulder Valley School District Board of Directors, to be signed by the city manager, incorporating the staff me to random and recruit, requesting proposed changes. We have not yet stated exactly what we'd like it to include, but the next part is including. This motion was then seconded by Mark Mcintyre and I'm. Giving us a limited amount of time. I'm. Just due to the hour to speak to this, and then also to think about how we might draft it if it were to be carried.

[115:01] Mark, you have the floor first, and laurel calling you second. I'm sorry. Just a point of order, though, Lisa. I feel like the motion is incomplete, because it says, requesting proposed changes, and we don't yet know what those changes are, so i'm not sure how we can speak to the motion without knowing what those changes are. That's a great question. So I I think. where i'm at, and I guess we could maybe do thumbs on this. I'm. Curious whether of the planning Board Members presence. And let me see, are we in even number? I think we are? I think we are 6, so we could be hungry. But i'd i'd be curious to see without silencing any discussion to this motion before we get into thinking about what the proposed changes are. I'd like to know whether we have a majority. We even want to do a letter planning board and our staff, if anyone has a recommendation and kind of how to handle that. I I kind of like to do thumbs. so i'm gonna ask, and i'll kind of scroll back and forth, so keep put your thumb up and keep it up

[116:07] or down. If you would like to do a letter. I'm. Just curious if we have a lot of people who want to do it all right, I see. and sorry I've got to scroll. I see Georgie, Ml. Laura and myself down. That is, for against 2 procedurally. I want to recognize that I I don't want to do the motion processing correctly. However, it seems like we don't have enough people or even interested in sending a letter. So I I don't fully. I I personally am maybe my bias still to a point of spending a whole lot of time talking about what goes in a letter we don't want to do. Brad. I did want to just make sure you do need to close out the vote, not motion with the vote unless the original motion maker. Okay. I I also take Laura's point. That it's sort of like an including dot.at the moment. I suppose we could still vote on it.

[117:05] So then, okay, we, I think we have gotten a little twisted in our mechanics of motion making in, and then we're fresh off of some new instruction. But the way it would, I think it would go would be we. The motion is made. It's seconded the chair restates the motion. The motion maker would speak to the motion, and then anyone wouldn't make any proposed amendments, and I have one to be made, and so the the thumbs about procedurally, I think, is slightly out of order, and i'm not trying to delay this. I I can read the writing here. However, I think that a a possible amendment might change a vote. So anyway, I I would propose

[118:03] that Kurt speak to his motion. and then. if anyone has an amendment they make it. and then we can call the vote at at any time. Okay, so. And again, I want to be careful in laurel. I saw your hand up so you may have some further feedback or other. Stuff me as well. I i'm wondering if perhaps and again I want to do it procedurally, correctly. But if we need the motion reintroduced with some content after the including I was going to make an amendment, for I was going to make an amendment, for I was going to make it. Okay. So, Kar are. Are you? Does that work for you to next here from mark on on what he would propose as an amendment to add in that dot area. Yes, but if I can just speak briefly on it, I I just feel like. So there may I? I certainly was guilty of using a bunch of target in what I was talking about in this discussion, in which I think Staff is completely comfortable with, but i'm not sure how comfortable

[119:13] the the the representatives from the Bsd work, and so my my notion is that there are but it it. Thinking of this similar to a concept review in a concept review, the the the sense of the board gets written up, and in some places there's consensus, and in some places, you know, there's some there's not consensus, and that all gets captured. and I just thought having the having the opportunity for staff with potentially input from the board to write this up and maybe make it a little, You know, more a little clearer than when I was talking.

[120:01] or what other people. Perhaps we're talking, and and a little more, you know this is written out in text, I think, would just help to clarify it for the for Pbsd, and you know they can do with it as they see it. But it just seems like a an effective way to to help convey a lot of the concepts that we were putting out there. So that was my fault. Thank you for that, Kurt. I'm, mark if You'd like to add that amendment to the motion that's currently on the floor. Please do so. I I I want to speak to the motion first, and I will say that I concur with current. And and here it is. DVD: Well, not being required as a courtesy to us. came and sought our input and as a courtesy to them I thought all of our comments were well considered.

[121:00] We spent time reading the packet, and our comments, I think, are are well considered and worthy of distribution to a broader audience. Pbsd is a big organization much bigger than the and the 2 folks that presented to us tonight, and answered our questions, and I think that it is a a perfectly task. Is Staff is perfectly well tasked to writing a summarizing letter. incorporating our thoughts as they do at concept review, so my amendment would be rather than saying. incorporating the staff memorandum and requesting proposed changes. I would move

[122:03] to strike. requesting proposed changes, including. and after the word and and summarizing and noting the board's input on the future school design. My understanding is now that I've made a motion to amend. I need a second for that to go any further. Do we have what I say? And I have a second alright, second from Kurt. I'm going to read it back in. And and, mark if you could listen carefully and make sure that I jotted down your words correctly. So we have sorry, Laurel, your hand is still up. Did you have a further? Okay.

[123:00] So a motion originally made by Kurt, amended and seconded by Mark, and then amended by Mark, and seconded by Kurt. We have a motion direct staff to draft a letter to the Boulder Valley School District Board of Directors, to be signed by the city manager and corporate and staff memorandum and summarizing and noting the board's input on the future. Oh, my school design. Okay. thank you. And so on this motion. I will now do a roll call. Vote. Lisa. Can we speak? Can we speak to it? Have discussion? I? I will just say briefly, Mark, I like your amendment, and it sounds like what this would do is basically take the staff memo and the summary of what we talked about tonight, which would be in the meeting notes, and we'll have the opportunity to edit or amend our comments and make sure that they're accurately captured, and those 2 things would be compiled.

[124:04] And since, and the main purpose of doing that is so that it gets to a wider audience and make sure that the Boulder Valley School District Board of Directors sees it. Is that is that what i'm hearing? I see a thumbs up from Mark. I think, for me that is much less fraught. I think it adds a little bit of extra work for staff, but it's basically taking products that they're going to produce anyway, and packaging it up and sending it to the Bbsd Board of Directors. which you know can't hurt. So I would actually not be opposed to that. And that's all i'm gonna say Thank you, Laura. Further discussion. Ml: Go ahead and then curt. Yes. thank you. Mark for that clarification or that amendment.

[125:01] It keeps it simple rather than trying to identify every single thing that anybody said, and and broad enough. It's like the notes of the meeting and the are just packaged up. I think that is a not just simple way of doing it, but it's also very respectful way of doing it respectable. Everybody's time and energy. We've said what we have to say, and if that can be captured in a letter, and it will go to that to the Board for the process that is outlined. I would also support that with your amendment. Thank you, Amel and Kurt. Yeah. And I just wanted to thank Mark for clarifying my not well conceived motion. That was sort of the intent of what I had originally, but didn't stay right. So thank you.

[126:00] Further discussion to this motion. looking back and forth just to make sure you don't miss anybody. Oh, yes, please, Laura, go ahead. Just procedurally. I think that even though we have 3 6 members present tonight, we need 4 to pass any planning board member measures that ready to see Laurel nodding. Yeah, that's correct. I was going to say that if if it was. Thank you for that clarification, Laura. All right. I will go ahead and call a roll call. Vote. Then on the motion in front of sure she Yes, yeah. Laura. Sure. Why not? Yes. perfect. Yes. Mark Ml. Yes. And maybe she said this under discussion. I'm fine with it as long as we don't get into editing this thing. I just, I think. Yeah.

[127:05] 5 of that. But I don't want to be editing it. So. Yes. all right. We have wrapped up that item, then, I believe, unless anyone has other any other further pursuits. And thank you again, Kurt: for catching that and bringing it forward. Okay, we're moving on to our next public hearing. Item, this is for 5,405 Spine Road. and you've all had the chance to read that, and staff will speak to that link before we get into this item. Has everyone had the chance to look at this? And does anyone have any disclosures live within 600 feet secretly on the whole site. Okay, great. All right. So i'd like to go ahead and invite Staff to speak. All right, Thank you.

[128:01] Can everyone see my screen songs, Notes. Okay. So good evening Planning Board members. We will be discussing the 5405 Spine Road, proposed rezoning. So this is public hearing and consideration of a request to rezone a 1.0, one acre parcel located at 5405 spine road and adjacent rights of way currently zoned industrial general to business community, 2 for consistency with the Boulder Valley comprehensive plan and the Gun Barrel Community Center plan. This application is reviewed under application. L. You are 2,022 0 0 0 5 7 now. So for location. The site is located at the northwest corner of spine, and look out roads, and is occupied by an existing 14,643 square foot building, constructed in 1,982. That is how the variety of industrial and office uses over the past 40 years.

[129:05] The building currently contains an office. Use. There's a surface parking lot with 39 existing spaces, no bike parking, and several existing mature trees. The site is located within the boundaries of the gun Barrel Community Center plan. also known as the Gcp. The Gcc. Is a future land use and transportation plan for the entire gun barrel Commercial area initiated in a public process by the city in 2,002 through public participation. The plan established the vision for redevelopment in much of the gundra of commercial and office area, with the goal of emphasizing urban development patterns with a diverse mix of vibrant uses. The plan provides for the plan provides direction for viewing future public improvements and private sector development proposals in the area and redevelopment direction for individual landowners. The Gcp. Identifies the site for community retail.

[130:01] the community retail definition and the Gun Braille Community Center plan notes. The uses in this area will be easily accessible by automobile and cater to the convenient shopping of household goods. In addition, the plan recommends a community business comprehensive plan. Landy's designation for the site. as you can see here. The Pdc. Was updated, following adoption of the Gcc Bbcp Gcc and the current landy designation for the site is community. Business. Community. Business is defined as areas that are the focal point for commercial activities serving a sub community or a collection of neighborhoods. They are designated to serve the daily convenience, shopping, and personal service needs of nearby residents and workers, and support the goal of walkable communities. The existing zoning on the site is industrial, general, or Ig. Which is defined as general industrial areas where a right, a wide range of light industrial uses, including research and manufacturing operations

[131:06] and service. Industrial uses are located. Residential uses and other complementary uses may be allowed in appropriate locations. By definition as You see, most of the uses allowed in the Zone district are industrial. So for the surrounding context on the site there is highlighted in yellow. and this is just a Google Earth screenshot, just because it's very convenient for showing all the different businesses that exist there. The immediate surroundings are primarily industrial, but retail uses are nearby, along with some new residential uses. Since adoption of the Gcc. Several properties have been rezoned consistent with the adopted land. These designations that had been implemented based on the Gcc. So here, just highlighted in yellow, are all properties that have been rezoned in the last 10 years following adoption of the Gcp, so 63, 33 lookout road

[132:04] was rezoned from Ig. To BC. 2 and developed to the Hampton in hotel. with approval for 3 office or retail buildings Aligning Lookout Road. The hotel is approved in 2,008, and is complete and operational. 66 85 Gun Park Road, which is now the gunbrell town center that was rezoned to be r one. and that development is approved in 2,012, and now contains king supers and a variety of other neighborhood, serving retail and restaurant uses 54, 60 spine road, which was originally approved as the Alexand. but it's now, I believe, known as the Apex. That's an 8.6 parcel located one block north of the site that was rezoned to our H. 5, and that was reason not only to provide supporting residential uses in proximity to the Gunbrella Town center, but also to enable residential development in close proximity

[133:00] to what was originally the proposed rtv rail stop and the light industrial area directly to the west. Since that time the planned Rtd. Stop has been relocated to the west of 60 Third Street. but the new rtd stuff remains within a quarter mile. and visual bus stops are located the intersection of lookout and spine roads. 66, 55 lookout road, which is a 100 and a 100% permanently affordable apartment project was approved in 2,013 and 5,400 spine road, which is the the Pink B C. 2 site immediately to the east of the project site was rezoned from Ig to B. C, 2 and 2,014, and it's been redeveloped as a mix of office and retail uses. So the key issue for discussion tonight. It's whether the rezoning quest it re re rezoning request is consistent with the re required review criteria for rezoning.

[134:01] So the criteria for rezoning are found in Section 919 E. Of the boulder revised code. They say that the city council shall grant the rezoning application only if the proposed rezoning is consistent with the policies and goals of the boulder. Really comprehensive plan. and for an application not incidental to a general revision of the zoning map meets one of the following criteria: so first I will discuss the underlined portion, which is consistency with the Boulder Valley comprehensive plan. So in terms of consistency with the Bvcp staff, finds that the proposed rezoning is on balance consistent with the BBC goals and policies. particularly policy. 2.1, 9 neighborhood centers, which supports evolution of these centers to become mixed. These places, in accordance with area planning efforts policy. 2.0, 9 neighborhoods as building blocks policy, 2.2, 4 commitment to a walkable and accessible city and policy, 5.0, one revitalizing commercial and industrial areas.

[135:02] Additional information about the consistency with the Boulder Valley Comprehensive plan is found in the Staff Memo. So, finding that it is consistent with the BBC. The proposal still needs to meet one of the review criteria listed here. In this case they are consistent with criterion; one which is that the proposed rezoning is necessary to come to compliance with the Boulder Valley Comprehensive planned land use map. So just to reiterate what was data before the current Bald Valley Comprehensive plan. Landy's designation for the site is community business, and that was adopted. Following adoption of the gun Barrel Community Center plan. the proposed zoning of business community. 2 or BC. 2 is defined as business areas containing retail centers serving a number of neighborhoods where retail type stores predominate. This zone district is considered to be consistent with the landing destination of community business, where the industrial general Zone district is not

[136:15] so in terms of the review process. rezoning applications are quasi-judicial Planning Board makes a recommendation of city council, and then ultimately city council will have to approve the ordinance that Rezones the area written notice was sent to property owners within 600 feet. Notice was also posted on the property, and staff has not received any comments or questions on the proposed rezoning. So the conclusion and recommendation is that Staff finds the proposed rezoning application meets the rezoning criteria of Section 919 E. And finds the proposed rezoning request to be in compliance with the Boulder Valley comprehensive plan and the Gun Barrel Community Center plan. Therefore, Staff recommends the planning Board recommend approval of the rezoning proposed under case Number L. You are 202-20-0057 to city council incorporating the staff and random the above review criteria checklist. As findings of fact

[137:10] suggested motion language would be to recommend a city Council Approval of the application to rezone 1.0. One acres of land located at 5405 Spine road from Industrial General Zone District to the business community, to some district. And now i'm happy to answer any questions. Great. Thank you so much, Chandler. Let's go ahead and ask any questions. And, Laura, I see your hand up. Go ahead. Thank you, Chandler, for a very informative and persuasive presentation. As always, your logic is clear and compelling. So thank you for that. You make our job easy. I do have one question just for my own curiosity. I guess 2 related questions. It said in the memo that the the applicant actually proposes to build a private school on this site which is consistent with the BC. To zoning Nope. I have no problem with that, but i'm just curious. There's a brewery like I immediately across the streets facing this property is that allowed.

[138:12] I thought there were restrictions on having schools next to businesses that serve alcohol or having businesses that serve alcohol. Next to schools. That's a good question. I think that since the brewery was there first they would be allowed to stay. I don't think you I don't think You can't build a school near a brewery, but you can't build a brewery near a school. Oh, interesting! Is this meant to be a school for children or for adults. you know the application did not specify, so I believe it's School for Children. I believe it's a private elementary school. but they did not include any project plans, and, as far as I know, based on the application materials they are planning on reusing the existing building and not making any changes to the site or changes that they could just make through a building permit by right?

[139:01] Okay, it's probably less problematic than a high school across from a brewery. I don't think that 5 year olds are going to be headed across the street. But, anyway, okay, thank you. I just. I was just curious. Thank you so much or less awesome? No, no, don't do that, children, Mark, go ahead in the BC. 2. So is a school, a use by right? Yes, so so for them to go remodel, etc. would not require. They would not be required to undergo no or side of you unless they they are eligible for voluntary site Review. If they wanted any modifications to the zoning code. Right? Well let's just so at since they're building, since we think they're building some sort of school that they put a bike rack in. That's all.

[140:00] Okay. Thank you. Mark. Ml: Go ahead. Thank you. Visa. So, Chandler, I have 2 questions, so is the site currently vacant. No, I believe there's a it's an office use for a Garden Supply Company. So this business is going to be displaced by this action. I believe so. I believe the property would be sold and a new use would take place. Okay, Was there any conversation about accommodating the displaced business. No. I mean in general, with rezoning where there's not an Associated site, review, or any sort of project plans that are proposed as part of it.

[141:02] We're just looking at the rezoning criteria. and in terms of the rezoning criteria, it's a pretty clear cut case of B C 2 is consistent with the underlying land use designation. Ig: is not okay. That's it. That's my question. Thank you so much. Jen. Thank you. Amel. Other questions for Staff. Please raise hands. You have further questions for Staff. I think we'll probably have some for the applicant, too. All right. Next up, I believe, is the applicant's presentation.

[142:01] We have someone from the applicant is planning to present today. Can you hear me? Yes, yes, Steven, Thank you. Yeah, Hi. This is Steven Ecker and I'm here on behalf of the applicant. I'm. An architect with Caddis collaborative couple of things I wanted to say just in full disclosure. So watershed school is the applicant, and they are a middle school through high school one a couple of things that came up in the discussion, one really interesting thing with the liquor laws. So the State statute actually describes public and parochial schools as having to follow the 500 foot rule, not private schools. It's actually excluded in the State law, and it's kind of interesting. You guys can look that up and dig into it. But and

[143:01] Chandler's right. They were already there, so we can't stop the brewery. and it's of no concern to the school itself. So vars as excited to have this make this zoning change. It's consistent with the Boulder Valley Comp plan, and it seems pretty straightforward. and the existing building is vacant in the existing tenant has moved out. That was arrow grow so. They are no longer in the property or interested, so no one will be displaced at this time. and that's really the short of it. We they intend not to add on or change the building, but they would occupy the existing building, and of course renovate it for their needs.

[144:02] And we're excited to provide a walkable community service. and you know, potentially residents in that neighborhood with would attend the school their kids. And that's I think, that. So all we really have to say just again, just it seems pretty clear Cut that it's, you know. You guys even have it on the map on your map as this zone existing. And so we're. We're just following through with the older valley. Comprehensive plan. Thank you. But if you have any questions, feel free to to ask me any great. Thank you, Stephen. Members of the Planning Board Questions correct. Please go ahead. Just a question for my curiosity. Did you consider rezoning? Is PC. One rather than BC: 2: I'm: just curious. Why, you

[145:02] Yeah, we chose PC: 2 just because that's what literally is on the the the revised map that the the the cover has a plan is hoping for, and that 5,400 is P. 2, and then the other property that Chandler talked about. That's done. The other end of the block is also PC. 2. So to be consistent with the will of R. Like Comp. Plan that does teach show that whole section is BC: 2. That's what we thought was appropriate. Okay, I thought that the Comp plan just shows the area. CD: that's correct. Well, that's the local plan. But if you like, in our application, I actually downloaded it from the city's website, and it had that whole area shown as as that zone. But no, we didn't look at Vc. One. We just looked at PC: 2:

[146:03] Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Kurt: Other questions for the applicant. I'm not seeing any scrolling back and forth just to make sure i'm not missing any. All right, seeing none. We'll move on to public comment to this item only, and. Vivian, do we still have you? Yes, hi, Vivian, if you could run public and Vivian, I can't hear you, but maybe it's a me issue. How about now? I think that works for whatever reason great. So we just have one member from the public. Lin, please raise your hand if you'd like to speak.

[147:04] no hand raised back to you, you Lynn, last call, if you'd like to speak. This is your opportunity all right. Public comment is closed. Let's move to planning board deliberation and comments. Would anyone like to speak to this side. Laura? Yes, please go ahead. you know I think it was either Chandler or the applicant, or both who said, this is basically a slam dunk based on the you know, Bbcp recommendations. So I would be happy to make a motion if there is no other comment from planning board not to try to close out other comment. I see Ml's hand, Amel, were you going to see something similar? Would you like to comment on to the item, though I'm. In agreement. I would second the motion that Laura would make. I agree that there it follows everything to a. D.

[148:02] All right. Great i'm, Laura, if you would like to make such a motion, I feel free to do so. I think you have a second who is ready and waiting. Thank you, Chandler. Could you put the recommended motion language back up, and i'm happy to read it. and Lisa can, and Ml. Can Second and Lisa can restate. I move to recommend the City Council. Oh, sorry I move to recommend to City council approval of the application to Rezone. 1.0, one acres of land located at 5, 405 Spine road from the Industrial General Zone District to business community to thank you. I'm sorry, Chili, Would you mind putting it up One more time I got her? I'm right. Thank you. Sorry I forgot they had to say it again. All right. So we have a motion from board. Member Laura Kaplan, seconded by Ml. Robbels, to recommend

[149:05] to City Council approval of the application to Rezone. 1.0, one acres of land located at 5,405 Spine road from the Industrial General or Ig Zone district to business community to or BC. 2. I'll now take a roll call. Vote on this. Well, no, it do. We have any discussion. What? I didn't Give us time for last time. Anybody. Okay. seeing no hands or further discussion from planning board members, I will now call roll, call, vote Laura. Yes. Amel. Yes. hurt. Yes. Mark. Yes. Georgie and myself. Lisa Smith also votes. Yes. motion passes all right. I think that concludes our public hearing items for this evening, which means that we are on

[150:04] to matters from the board, planning director and or city attorney Anything we'll do a debriefing calendar check after. But any matters from planning board to start. and what? Oh, yes, Laura, please go ahead. So I did want to follow up on that question about whether planning board notes that are limited to only our comments on the key items that Staff bring forward, or whether general comments are are generally going to be included in those notes like, I think, tonight we only did general comments for the Bbsd project. So if I don't know if there's anything further on that I know, Brad, you said that staff are looking into it, and that we'll hear more in the future. But I don't know if there's anything else you wanted to add tonight, and then I have one other item after that. Yeah, thank you. I I really don't have anything more to add.

[151:04] and that certainly don't have a definitive answer. So we we will get back to you on that. Okay, thanks. I I appreciate it. It's just good to know what to expect. I certainly don't want to be giving devin feedback of hey? You left this out. If there's a really good reason why those shouldn't be in the notes in the first place, so it's good for us all to get on the same page. So thank you. We look. I look forward to hearing more. When Staff have had a chance to think more about that. I do think that if the only thing that legal staff thinks should be recorded in planning board meeting notes is our response to the key questions that makes the key questions a lot more important to get to get those framed in a way that let us say what we want to say to the applicant. So you know, if we can't, if we can't do general comments or add anything that that becomes a little bit more fraught. it might be my favorite word tonight. So again, looking forward to getting staff input on that, I did have one other thing I wanted to raise and, Lisa, I apologize for not giving you a heads up about this. Nothing big. It's an information request. If Staff are able to give us some more information, I find that I have a whole in my knowledge

[152:16] around Boulder's height, limitation. I understand what it is that it is 55 feet, and that that is, you know, subject to site, review, that we only go up to 55 feet under certain circumstances in these certain processes. But I would really love to have more information about what was the ballot measure that was passed by citizens? And when was it passed, and what was sort of the contemporaneous discussion around that? Because I feel like I don't really understand the intent or the motivation. Some folks have said. you know, people wanted to cap it at 55 feet, and then city council at the time, ratcheted it down to 35 feet in most zones, with the understanding that it could go back up to 55 feet. If the Site review, criteria were met, which I have always interpreted in general, as

[153:01] we are inclined to grant site, Review. Height, modification requests as long as it meets the criteria. It's generally compatible with the neighborhood, and we get the community benefit out of it that we are seeking. I think other folks have expressed to me. That their thought was 55 feet should be a very special exemption. It should not be sort of a default. That As long as we get our community benefit. We're generally inclined to do it, and I don't really understand, like what was put to the voters. And what was the discussion at that time. I think I would really like to understand that community conversation a bit better if staff are able to kind of go back in the archives and share with us. What was that ballot measure, maybe? What were the editorials that were written about it like? What what was that discussion? Yeah, we'll be. We'll be happy to follow up on that. hey? That it there? There might be an opportunity to do that in the form of more from memo than the discussion, but we will kind of parse that out, and and see what makes the most sense.

[154:03] That would be totally fine, and I appreciate any information you can provide 3 Thanks. hey? Thank you, Laura, for those questions before I move on to Georgie. Does that wrap up your questions for? Okay, Great Georgia, Go ahead. My My question was really or matter was really more of some some planning for the group. I thought John Garrison's send off was was a. Was a was a great opportunity for us all to get together. I'd like to us to consider putting something like that together again in maybe the early fall. I just kind of wanted to put it out there. We can get devin support in putting calendaring something for our group if everyone wants to do something like that again. But I found that the very nice to facilitate our relationships across the board and staff, so just want to put that out there

[155:00] and let me use that opportunity. And and Brad, I' I've been putting you on the spot, or Devin, or anyone else, but I know we got to the chance to talk with Sarah as chair and vice chair that you had mentioned, that there's continuing effort at the city, of trying to figure out how to bring back board meetings, including planning board in person at least some of the time, or maybe a hybrid model. And I'd. I'd wonder if there happened to be any updates on that or when it. I know there's some staffing issues and technology issues. But just curious if we how that's going. Yeah, there are 3 things. One was training and technology, and that actually has happened recently. I think, Devin, you forget that. But the other 2 likes of the stool that we still need to solve our staffing, doing hybrid. It requires essentially an additional staff person for us to manage that successfully. and security. We do not have a security protocol in place in the same way that

[156:08] Council does. And those are things that we're trying to be responsive to staff. feedback and city policy on that. So it is going to be a little while yet. We are as eager as anybody to get back to live meetings with hybrid options, which is now the city's commitment. but we don't have a timeline for that yet at this point portion great. Thank you, Brad. And then hopefully that wasn't too off topic, Georgie, but especially as somebody who at the last one, it could not make the last meeting. I I I'd love for there to be more informal social gatherings. you know, provided city budget and so on, will allow, or even if if we're allowed to get together as long as we don't talk about that, you know, planning board matters. It'd be great to see folks from time to time. I would love that mark. Go ahead. Yeah, Brad, When you said. Security. Were you referring to physical security

[157:04] for board members and staff? Should we have in-person meetings, or were you talking about like zoom technological security? What what security or you refer to in in person? Primarily that context. And and so for it's like have. because smaller number. not quasi-judicial, less controversial don't have a it was, it's been determined They don't have a a security requirement. Is that Yeah, I I can't speak to the needs of other departments or other staff. This is a city wide conversation. We haven't yet. Yet so it's. It's still an emerging question. The city manager's office is identified as one of huh

[158:02] a priority among all of the departments and and leadership in your leadership. a variety of employed wellness. topics, and these range from oh, you know. safety. workplace, safety, but also things like perky regulate. You know. employee parking things like that. So it's a wide range of things, and this is something that I need to take up in the context of that conversation. But we just haven't gotten to that point. Okay, thank you. Great. Any other comment to what Georgie mentioned, or other questions for staff i'll. I'll agree that with George's statement it it would be nice to pencil. Listen for a and and adding devin. If you can do something that would be really awesome. I I think that it is a good opportunity to

[159:10] yeah get to know each other and have conversations. Kurt: I see your hand up as well. Yeah, I just wanted to agree and thank you, George, for the recommending that I think that it's so important to talk to each other in person. So thank you Great. Well, hopefully, we can find sometimes, I think early falls probably smart, because trying to schedule things over the summer is always a a mess, but I think fall should be good. great. all right. So debrief. So first I want to say, oh, oh, sorry, Laura, go ahead. Sorry I just wanted to put in a plug. If anybody's interested. This weekend on Sunday from 10 to 12 is a walk with council, and I think it's Council members, Spear and Weiner and folkirts, and the topic is Wildfire Prevention, and they're gonna walk around the from the Shanahan Ridge trail

[160:07] where the end car fire was, and talk about like how that was ecologically functioning, and community concerns and things like that. It sounds really interesting, and I I might go if I can make time for that. But I thought that's also another opportunity for us to. You know the folks who want to go to informally chat and learn something. Maybe so. If folks are interested in that. that that is great, Laura. Thank you for let me know. I live right down here you can see 2 Burns cars from my house. So. Marshall, in that one oh, 3, actually, there's an older one. But anyway, that sounds like a great talk, and i'll. I'll just also offer for any planning board members or staff. as things continue to normalize and staffing normalizes. That's a great one. But there used to be lots of like walk and talks, you know, like seeing sites of there being developed, that it come through planning board. I think the city arborist used to do cool walks and talk about our trees that are like listed for Colorado, and so on. And so i'm hesitant to add to

[161:04] to upload. I'm not sure if the since they fall under under Devon's heading. But if there is, for example, a web page or something where those sorts of opportunities are are gathered, and where people can kind of go to it'd be nice to, maybe periodically, have that link shared with us, so we know ways to engage with our elected and with staff outside of these formal meetings. So thank you for bringing that one for it. That's really cool. Okay, let me any other hands. I almost couple are off. Okay, so i'll. I'll use a little time to talk to you brief. So thank you. Everyone so much for letting me share the meeting while there is out, and I really appreciate your patience and thank you, Kurt, for catching that chance to send a letter and providing emotion. And And for Mark Mark, thank you so much for bringing forward, I I think, a very lovely amendment, and for your commitment to procedure. I think we hopefully got to a good, a good result there. And

[162:01] yeah, I think I I I don't think I can claim credit for it. I'm also excited about. We're more ending. But I think that had more to do with what was on the agenda than myself. But i'm i'm pleased that we'll probably end a bit before 9. Okay, Any Any other meeting debriefs or calendar checks. Let me ask Devin. Would you mind stating I know I asked you about it. But when will Council recess the this year? Kind of one or the I know we don't have a meeting on the 20 third of May. And then I think Council recess is like end of June. Correct? Yeah, let me pull it up here for you really fast. This can just be useful for. Not that, you know. They want to a need to plan your life around planning board, but depending on plans for the summer, sometimes Nice to just see when that longer recess will be So we're waiting. Oh, sorry. Go ahead. Oh, sorry. Yeah. So the recess for planning board specifically is going to be about the from June 20 ninth until July eighteenth.

[163:05] Thank you, Devin, and I believe that is reflected in the planning Board calendar as well folks, so that most recently Devin sent out. You can like, See where that is. It may or may not be notated as such. But if you kind of count where we have meetings, and Don't Council recess will show up on there as well. And, Laura, you had a comment. I was just gonna say nice job, Lisa sharing the meeting. Thank you so much. Great job for your first meeting chair, Job and I second your very insightful comments about Kurt's motion and Mark's amendment to that. I realized that I nearly scuttled it by suggesting we don't need to send a letter and mark. I think that was a very elegant solution of how we could get around the problem of having to build consensus on what goes in the letter. I'm just nice job all around, and and thank you to my colleagues for insisting on correct procedure. And it worked. Hey? It worked. Thank you, Laura. All right. Any final comments before I adjourned. All right. Thanks. Everybody. And again I don't think we have a meeting next week on the twenty-threerd consult your calendar to confirm anything I say, and i'll see you guys, in a couple of weeks.

[164:09] Thanks, Lisa. Bye.