November 21, 2023 — Planning Board Regular Meeting

Transcript

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

[0:00] No. Twenty-first, 2,023 city of Boulder planning board meeting. Are we recording? We are recording. Okay, we are recording. Very good. all right. We will begin with Amanda or Vivian doing the little city discussion regarding behavior for public speaking, and then we'll go on to public comment. Yes, certainly. Thank you for. Oh, that's a little loud. Sorry. Alright. I'm just gonna share us. I guess I can just read these from here. and I'm sharing them online. I don't. I don't know what you're seeing there, but I have them pulled up. Thank you, Vivian. alright. So for our public participation at city meetings this evening. The city has engaged with community members to Co. Create a vision for productive, meaningful, and inclusive civic conversations. This vision supports physical and emotional safety for community members, staff and board and commission members

[1:05] as well as democracy. For people of all ages, identities lived experiences and political perspectives. For more information about this vision and the community engagement processes, you can visit our website. So the following are examples of rules of decorum found in the boulder revised code and other guidelines that support this vision. These will be upheld during this meeting all remarks and testimony shall be limited to matters related to city business. No participant shall make threats or use other forms of intimidation against any person. obscenity, racial epithets, and other speech and behaviour that disrupts or otherwise impedes the ability to conduct the meeting are prohibited. and participants are required to identify themselves, using the name they are commonly known by, and individuals must display their whole name before being allowed to speak online. Ignore that last sentence, please. You are allowed to participate here in person with us as well.

[2:02] We're in the Zoom Webinar format for those that are joining us virtual when it is your turn to speak or your opportunities to provide public testimony this evening. You can use the raise hand function in zoom. There is a little icon there to let you know about the Re. You can hover over the reactions to find the raise hand button. I don't think anyone's on the phone with us this evening. not so far. That's correct. And that's those are our rules for this evening. Thank you. Back to you. Okay, thank you. The we've called to order the second item of business is public participation. This is a chance for any community member to speak on any topic other than our 2 public hearing items tonight. So are there any members of the public that have signed up to speak during public participation, either in person or online.

[3:09] here in person, but great online. We have one hand raised. I'm not sure about in person. Typically, we go. We proceed first with the in-person participants. We don't have anyone here in person, Vivian. So you can go ahead and go online. Okay, great. So, Lynn Siegel has her hand raised and, Lind, you will have 3 min to speak during open comment. Do you have the timer on your end. Amanda? Or should I keep time? If you have a timer that you can share that would be great. I don't have it to share, but I'll just keep it and let you know when you have 30 s to go. Please go ahead, Lynn.

[4:00] Yeah. The link isn't on where it's supposed to be. So that's probably why no one else is here, except that I'm usually the only one, anyway. But you might want to get the link in the correct place on the calendar. I had to go to boards and commissions and find it. I was getting desperate and stuff, anyway. The most important issue that you have before you believe it or not is Israel Palestine and Gaza? And I'll tell you why. It's a direct relationship to the planning board, because this is all a placation of Israel with oil, and our country is going down, and it's going down fast economically. And the planning board is very concerned with the economics of how boulder grows and how we develop and we're gonna crash if we don't do something about Gaza. and this is just get educated on it. You know. It's 35 years that I've been studying the issue and it takes a while to understand all of these regions. The west bank, east, Jerusalem go in heights and

[5:08] and and Gaza but this is a violation of resolution. 1, 41, and resolution 2, 42. And it's it's a genocide. And it's it's just unspeakable. What's happening there? Half of the kids. Half of the people that have been killed are kids at. Not that it matters. It happens on the Israeli side, too, but it's a very disproportional fight, and it shouldn't be a fight at all, because we have world laws, and they are called the United Nations Security Council Resolutions, 141 and 2 42, and they've gotta be faced up to or you're not gonna have anything you're not gonna be able to be subsidizing the developers like I'm always complaining about because there aren't gonna be any funds for anybody at all, ever anymore. So please make some statement to the City Council for us to get out of Gaza. We need to spend an end, the occupation.

[6:13] We need to send that message to the Council and then have the Council send it to the to, you know, the President, to to the people that are in charge of our country, if we have a country anymore, and and the way things are going, it's not looking good at all. So let's change things and make it right and do right by the Palestinians. So that we can have a city to even complain about. I've got 70 16 s. Yeah. So so those are the issues that that you can't. You can't do anything with something you don't have, so get out of Gaza and the occupation. Now, now bye, thanks, thank you. Thank you, Lynn.

[7:02] We have a few other members from the public who are here with us tonight. but their hands are not raised, so I will over to you. Chair. Okay. thank you that closes the public participation. Item we do have a set of minutes to approve. This would be the minutes from our October seventeenth, 2,023 meeting. Does anyone have did anyone submit any changes or corrections. or are we ready to approve? Okay. all right. I entertain a motion to approve the minutes. Have a question. Do we need 4 to approve? Because I was not at this meeting. So I need to abstain. Good call. Kirk. Yeah, you need 4 to approve any. So we'll just defer that to the next meeting. Okay. so approval of the October seventeenth minutes are deferred to our next meeting. We have no call ups

[8:07] or dispositions or continuations, so we'll move on to our public hearing items the first one agenda. Item 5. A. Is the public hearing consideration of a use review to allow for the is it Yarrow, Jarro? Jarro Jarrow. Jero, Jero, like Arrow? Yep. okay. Who's that's Chandler to replace the former Harmony Preschool 39, 90 Fifteenth Street, within the residential estate re zoning district. The proposal includes a request for a 25% parking reduction to allow for 6 parking spaces for 8

[9:02] would otherwise be required. This is reviewed under case number LUR. 2023, dash 0, 0 0 2 5, and so we'll begin with Chandler and the staff presentation and then we'll go to any comments the applicant wants to make, then do the public hearing, and then to board deliberation. So. Chandler, when you're ready, take it away. Yes, thank you. or the folks viewing online. It appears that I need permission to share my screen says that screen sharing has been disabled. Give me a second. Here we go. Got it. Okay.

[10:02] okay. are the, are the folks on? Are the folks online? Seeing the presentation view? They are okay. Thank you. And good evening planning board members. as you just mentioned. This is public hearing and consideration. The Use Review Request at 39 90 Fifteenth Street. So this is again a public hearing and request for consideration of a used review to allow for the Jarrow Montessori Elementary School to replace the former Harmony Preschool at 39 90 Fifteenth Street within the residential estate zoning district. The proposal includes a request as well for a 25% parking reduction to allow for 6 parking spaces where 8 spaces would otherwise be required, and this is being reviewed under case number LUR. 2023, dash 0, 0 2 5 in terms of public notification.

[11:02] Written notice was sent to property owners than 600 feet. The notice was posted on the property. A staff has received comments from 3 neighbors who expressed concerns related to potential traffic and parking impacts. And one neighbor who wrote in support of the proposal. Again, the primary concerns included potential traffic and parking impacts so as far as the location the approximately point 3 acre project site is located in North Boulder, on the southeast corner of Fifteenth Street and Quince Avenue the subject site is adjacent to low density. Residential uses on the south and east. There's a church across Quince Avenue to the North 8 Unit Condominium complex. Immediately to the west, across Fifteenth Street. and further to the west, along Quince Avenue are the nomad playhouse and the Lucky's Market shopping center at the hillside shops. The area to the northeast

[12:01] and northwest of the site are loaded central as well, and, as you can see on this map. The existing main, Jarrow Montessori Campus Is roughly point 4 miles away to the southwest of the project site. These are some photos of the existing site. The first shows the existing 2 story building and parking area seen from Fifteenth Street, looking east. And the image on the lower right hand corner is a view of the site from Quince Avenue, looking west, and you can kind of see a little bit of the playground, which is a fenced off, and a car park there, and what it? What is proposed to be the pickup and drop off area off of Quince Avenue? So, in terms of the comprehensive plan land use designation. The site is designated low density Residential or Lr. It's the most prevalent land use designation in the city

[13:05] uncovering primarily single family, home neighborhoods, including historic in Post World War. 2 neighborhoods uses, consist predominantly. A single family, detached units at a density of 2 to 6 dwelling units per acre. as shown above, the site is zoned. is located within the residential estate zoning District This is defined in Section 952 of the land use code as single family, detached residential dwelling units at low to very low densities. Private elementary school uses are allowed in the rezone district, if approved through use. Review and parking for non residential uses in the zone is required at a ratio of one space per 300 square feet of floor area. So the proposed project, as described above, the applicant is requesting a use review to allow the Jero Montessori School to operate a new private elementary school use. In the former Harmony Preschool Building at 39 90 Fifteenth Street.

[14:12] No changes to the existing building are proposed, and the school would operate at the same capacity as the previous preschool use, which allowed for a maximum of 30 students. The hours of operation are proposed to be from 7 30 am. To 5 30 Pm. Monday through Friday. But the actual school hours of operation and the drop off occur at between 8 and 8 30 am. With pickup at 3 30 Pm. As I mentioned before, they are requesting a 25% parking reduction to allow for 6 off street parking spaces where 8 are required. So this proposal has one stripe space which is shown here on the Site plan. Currently, there are 5 stripe spaces on the lot. But it turned out there is actually room to stripe one more space that meets city standards.

[15:03] So in terms of process the former Harmony preschool use was approved through special review in 1992 subsequently expanded through a use review in 1994 to allow for 30 students and 4 full time staff members. A use review was then approved in 2,001 to allow for a second story. Addition to the building, no increase in the number of students and a 38% parking reduction to allow for 5 on-site parking spaces where 8 spaces were required because the proposed private elementary school use is considered a change in use from the previously approved preschool use, which is now a day care center in the land use code. A new use review is required because the private elementary school use is a non residential use in a residential zone district. The Use Review requires a review and a final decision by the Planning Board at a public hearing.

[16:03] and since the time of the original approval of the Harmony Preschool. The land use code has been changed. and so that now the maximum parking reduction that can be requested through the use review process is 25%. Therefore the applicant is proposing to add an additional parking space to stay within the allowable 25%. Parking reduction and it should be noted here that outside of the use review process a up to a 25% parking reduction is usually an administrative review process. So there are 2 key issues for discussion tonight. The first is is the proposed project consistent with the Use Review criteria of Section 9, 2, 15, of the land use code, including findings related to the use being reasonably compatible with and having minimal negative impact on the use of nearby properties. And the second key issue is, does the proposed project meet the parking reduction criteria of the land use code section 9, 9, 6 f. 3,

[17:02] you so in terms of key issue number one here is, my analysis of the user view criteria. So in terms of consistency with zoning, a private elementary school use, as I mentioned is allowed in the re zone pursuant to user view approval. The use or the proposal would allow. The existing Jero Montessori School, which is, serve the neighborhood and greater boulder community for nearly 60 years from its main campus, which again, is approximately point 4 miles to the southeast to provide a satellite location for elementary school students age 6 to 12, which would thereby expand the educational opportunities for local families. and would, the proposal, would reduce adverse impacts to the surrounding uses, and that the proposed elementary school is anticipated to have less traffic parking and time of operation impacts in comparison with the previous preschool use. and therefore we find that it does provide a direct service or convenience to, and reduces adverse impacts to the surrounding uses or neighborhood

[18:05] in terms of compatibility with the surrounding area. The previous preschool operated in this location for nearly 30 years. No change to the number of students which is 30 or staff just for our proposed, and no changes to the existing building are proposed. and the site will also remain the same, except for the addition of an On street vehicular parking space, and the addition of new bike racks. New signage will also be provided in the proposed pickup and drop off area on the south side of Quince Avenue to improve traffic safety, and prevent parking in the right of way. So overall the use will be more compatible with the surrounding area. In terms of infrastructure. No new infrastructure is required to serve the proposed use. In terms of impacts to the character of the area. Again, this site has been a school for nearly 30 years. Plus, because no physical changes to the existing building are proposed. There will be no visual impacts to the existing neighborhood character, and because Jarrow Montessori has been an established part of the neighborhood fabric for nearly 60 years.

[19:08] The organization is well equipped to ensure that the operating characteristics of the proposed use are in keeping with the established protocols that have served the neighborhood for multiple generations. And there's no conversion of dwelling users to non residential uses proposed. So overall. Staff finds that the proposal does meet all the applicable use review criteria in terms of key issue number 2, which is whether it meets the parking reduction criteria so the the primary criterion that needs to be met is that they need to demonstrate that the parking needs of the use will be adequately served through on street or off street parking. So again, the proposal includes 6, all 3 parking spaces, which is a 25% reduction, which is typically an administrative review. The previous use had 5 spaces. So the proposal is adding off street parking, and will also add a minimum of 5 bicycle parking spaces, spaces as well as new signage for the pickup, and drop off 3 and Quince Avenue

[20:08] based on the applicant's written statement and parking plan. It's estimated that around 55 of the 2022 student population live within a mile of the subject site and are already routinely walking or biking to school. So that's anticipated to reduce the need for vehicular drop-off parking plan also includes an improved car line procedure for pickup and drop off which is where basically, parents drive up and a staff member meets them at the pickup area, escorts the child into the building, and the parent drives away. So there's no parking required on the part of parents for pick up or drop off. Typically 2 teachers and one administrator are on site each day. Who may or may not need parking. But if so, it's a maximum of 3 spaces that will be used.

[21:01] Also several of the students currently enrolled at mandatory have siblings that will be continuing to attend the Jarrow main campus. So in those instances. there can basically be dropped off at the main campus and then escorted to this campus by a parent or staff member, if need be, which also further reduces the amount of traffic on the site as well as parking needs for pickup and drop off. So Staff finds overall that this criterion has been met. They've also provided an acceptable proposal for an alternate modes of transportation program. We find that their parking plan meets this requirement and the conditions of approval outlined in the staff memo do require compliance with the parking plan as a condition of approval. So overall staff finds that they do meet the parking reduction criteria as well as the use for view criteria.

[22:01] Therefore staff is recommending that the planning board approve the application in the form of the following motion, which I won't read, but which we can come back to if you guys agree with Staff's findings. And now I'm happy to take any questions. Thank you. Thank you, Chandler. So now is the time for clarifying questions from the board. Anything for Chandler. I'm help. Thank you. Hi Chandler. So I have a couple of questions. Is the Harmony School still active. I don't know if they're active overall, but they are no longer active at this site. Oh, okay. And so I'm just curious about the concerns of public concerns, about the traffic and the parking. If that school has been in existence

[23:08] with the same proposed level of staff and students and one additional parking space. I was just trying to understand what significant, if any change might happen with the new set up. And it sounds like the Harmony School hasn't been gone that long. Is that correct? That's that's correct. I think they stopped last year, and I mean my understanding, and I can. I'm sure the applicant would be happy to discuss this as well. But my understanding is that since it was a pre school that and they didn't have a a car line procedure essentially where kids were being escorted into the building. that parents were actually having to park and bring children into the building. so I think it. It caused some traffic and congestion issues.

[24:01] Whereas these are. These kids are of an older age range, so many of them will be walking or biking, and there's also the improved car line procedure where parents no longer have to park when they're doing, pick up and drop off. Thank you. So much hurt. Thanks. Just 2 quick questions, one, the 5 bicycle parking places that they're proposing. That's with the requirement. Is that correct? That's the requirement and the and the condition just has a minimum of so they can provide more. But that's that's how many they're required to provide. Okay, sounds good, and then in the staff proposal proposed conditions. There's a there's a condition that they add signage that says it's some mutecd compliance sign. Pick up and drop off. Only no parking is that legally binding?

[25:01] Maybe this is a question. I mean, it's that's a good question. II mean requirement to provide. The signage is legally binding, but I don't know that the but the signage that we could arrest somebody if they were parking there we can do our normal. So when we do these conditions, the applicant is agreeing as part of accepting this and using the space to follow the conditions that we've laid out so we can enforce it as far as a condition of this approval. Right? My! My question was about, could a police officer come along and arrest somebody or have a car towed ticket? Right? Sorry. I think the normal course of action and I don't know for sure would more likely to be to ask the person to move along rather than ticket them. But if they aren't following the

[26:01] the private properties guidelines on them, then that that's a good question. I'd have to look into it. Okay. but I think the procedure would be to ask them to move. Yeah, okay, thank you. I have a floor. You. So okay, I have a follow line question in regard to on street parking. II find this section of North Boulder with the street cross-sections. Quince is very wide. No curb and gutter. Fifteenth Street is narrow. sometimes curve, sometimes gutter, sometimes not. It's it's it's kind of a mixed bag and I The first question is for maybe this, probably for Chandler is parking. Allowed on both sides of Fifteenth Street, or is it signed? No parking on either side of Fifteenth.

[27:00] I don't think there's on street parking on I on either side of Fifteenth. I know there is on Quince. II was there today, and I should have looked I didn't. And then on Quince there is legal parking on on both sides outside of the temporary speed speed, calming traffic, calming devices that we have up there. But parking is allowed. Along the full length of quince, I believe, do you, Chandler? Do you agree with that? Yes, that's true. So I would think I think it's a interesting point that does a planning board action actually create a no parking zone for the pickup and drop off area. So so our action can actually create and a a no parking zone within an area that would normally

[28:02] half parking. I'm all for it. I just, I'm just clarifying that yeah apologies. I'm reading another other staff members thoughts on this. But I think you know, it's not part of our traffic management plan. We don't have it as like a no parking zone, but I think there could be an instance where the person is violating the terms of our development agreement. They're not following the sign. So there, it's possible. Again, it's something that I haven't researched in the pickup and drop off area. They'll they'll obey the signs. And and the city will do what's necessary to help enforce that. Okay? Any other? Any other questions? Okay, I think now, is time for the applicant. If you have presentation or just comments, you're welcome to come up and

[29:04] speak to us. There is a yeah, it is 15 min. Excuse me for 10, 15. Thank you. Okay, my my name is Harmon Zilkerman, and I'm representing the applicant. I'm a a private attorney at fresco joiner, Goodman Greenstein, South boulder, 47 50 table mesa. Drive it's kind of a thrill to be here, guys, because I've not ever stood at this this podium in years to speak to you. And I've been on the other side of that dais, and I don't think I think the only time I've address planning board since going off the board and 21 was virtual. So it's neat to be in council chambers. I need to see everybody who's new. I've not served with any one of you. So it's a it's cool. I didn't know that Kurt was such a law and order Guy and one of rest people. But that scares me a bit about what's gonna happen tonight. But I hope? Alright. Well, we're we're mostly a walking bike group, so

[30:13] that that I don't have a prepared presentation, and neither. And and we don't have a Powerpoint the reason for that is that we've been working for multiple months with Mr. Von Scott, who I really hope is gonna feel better. He didn't sound well, so, Chandler, hope you you feel better soon. But we've been working together with city staff. not just in planning, but also in transportation engineering. Right away services to make sure that, you know we bring this project as proposed, into compliance. We've had a a it's been long but not really that long by, you know any kind of reasonable standard. I think my my clients wish that had been faster. But I explained to them that this is actually gone pretty well. And and and we think that that as condition, the application

[31:05] does meet the criteria for approval. We're willing to accept all the conditions. I would only add one thing, you know, I saw in Chandler's presentation that most of the the students. Age range was 6 to 12, and the operational plan that we submitted in our resubmitter talked about fourth to sixth graders. So really looking at a more independent, older walk to school group of people. So that's really all I have to say, except Thank you and and I want to introduce Debbie sent off Langford, who is the principal of Jarrow. She's gonna come up and and talk to you a little bit about the school. and then the the folks sitting behind Debbie are all parents from Jarrow. They have signed up for public comment, and and can take their 3 min each. But given that we have 15 min. If you would like. We can just run right through everybody and try to keep it within the 15 min you've allotted.

[32:03] We'll we'll just follow normal procedure you applicant can speak of as long as you like up to the 15, and then we'll take public comment, and they can take up to 3. But if they choose to speak for 2 or whatever, that's fine, too. Okay, so thanks a lot. Yeah. And welcome. Welcome to this side of the Diaz Harmon. Yeah, it feels good. Nice to see you guys. I'm a little jealous. You're you're getting to do this job. But I am scratching my public service, itch and serving on Osb. T. As a trustee. So I get to sit in your seat once a month. Well, maybe we'll ask you to stay for the next thing. But anyway well, thank you. Thank you. Harmon. Well, good evening, members of the Board and the city staff. Thank you for having us here tonight. My name is Debbie, sent off Langford, and, as Harmon said, I have the privilege of being the principal of Gerald Montessori School. The main campus is located at 3,900 Orange Court in Boulder.

[33:02] I want to thank you all for taking the time to consider our proposal today. I also want to offer appreciation to the staff, most especially Chandler, our case Planner, for being so collegial and responsive and for encapsulating and helping us fine tune our application. We are fully in agreement with the staff recommendation and the proposed conditions for those of you who are not familiar with our school. Jarrow has been located in North Boulder for 58 of its 60 years. Joe has served hundreds of children over the years, many of whom are now sending their children to the school. This year we are celebrating our sixtieth anniversary, and we are so proud to be located in this vibrant part of the city. We hope you will approve our use review so that we can begin operating the special new classroom space for our students. Our main campus is approximately a 7 min walk 2, 3, 9, 9, 0 Fifteenth Street. The satellite location, which is the subject of tonight's hearing.

[34:01] The main campus is surrounded by residential properties. I am pleased to say we have an excellent relationship with the surrounding neighbors, and with no complaints about student behavior or loud noises. We are fortunate to be in a neighborhood setting, and know that the families view us as a vital community resource. The vast majority of all our families walk or bike to school, and those who drive participate in our tried-and-true carpool system that moves cars along quickly so as not to block traffic. We ensure our parents follow the good neighbor rules hence about the parking, when they should just be dropping off and we have had no complaints from neighbors. As long as we've been in the area, we expect that things will be no different. At this new property. Jarrow currently serves 170 children. 120 are between the ages of 18 months and age, 5 approximately 50 between the ages of first and sixth grade. Though our main campus is 3 acres. We have reached the limit of our allowable building space to provide added support for our neurodiverse learners and to meet the specialized requirements for a toddler and early childhood population

[35:13] which are regulated by strict licensing guidelines. As more and more preschools have closed post pandemic parents are facing a great deal of stress there are fewer and fewer toddler and early childhood education providers in the neighbourhood, and, yes, Harmony did close now shut down their business when we bought the property. As a consequence, Jarrow did open a third tie of the room last year to accommodate this growing need, using our last available classroom space when Harmony Preschool posted stores. They were keen on Gerald buying the building, and felt heartened that we would continue to serve children, which Harmony did for 30 years in analyzing whether to buy the property, the Board concluded that the additional space met several important needs. First, it would alleviate congestion on our main campus, second, accommodate the expanding toddler and early childhood programs, and, lastly, would establish a dedicated space for our fourth through sixth graders.

[36:09] Currently we have over a hundred 50 children on our wait list as outlined on page 16 of our proposal between the ages of 18 months and 4 years. we unfortunately won't be able to accept many of these children and illustrates the needs for these vital services in our community. We hope that by creating a satellite location we can fill the void left by the closure of Harmony Preschool. I want to thank you all for your time and interest in Gerrow and my team and I are here to answer any questions you might have. So thank you. Great thanks very much, very. Moving little talk. So now is the time for any questions of the applicant. Okay, ml. yes, I do have a question. And thank you. That was a great.

[37:03] great overview of your intentions. So you mentioned many times that the population, the students. I'll because they're older, they will be walking and biking. So the question I'm wondering about you have 5 bike spots. Is that enough? Well, honestly. we can actually put in 20 bike racks. I think what we're doing is we can assess the need as soon as we understand how many children bike. We have many bike racks at the main site. And so that's an easy. There's so much space there. So to put those in will not be a problem perfect. I certainly do encourage our children to bike and walk. Umhm. That's what I was looking for. If there's a an opportunity to right size it based on the use. Yes, perfect. Yeah, thank you so much. Anybody else. Curtis, would you like to sing? Okay, well, we're all about right sizing the bike racks. And so we are all about the bike racks. So we're there with you.

[38:12] Okay, alright, now comes the time for the public participation, and Amanda's got some slips for me here. First up is Jessica. Query, okay, creepy welcome. Thank you. Good evening, members of planning board. I'm Jessica Creebi, 3 70 Auburn Street boulder, 80305. If it matters. I'm a proud parent of a Jero elementary student, and in just 18 months she will be transitioning to the new school building.

[39:04] and I couldn't be more thrilled. The new space is a significant step forward in meeting the needs of our students and the broader community. In addition to being a parent, I also have the privilege of serving as the chair of the Board of Trustees. I want to express the Board's wholehearted support for the recommendations put forth by the dedicated staff, and Chandler. having a first hand understanding of the increasing number of applicants to our school, I can attest that when the opportunity arose with Harmony, it was a chance for us to not only enhance the learning environment for our older students. but also to extend the benefits of a Montessori education to neighboring families. I believe that the decision you're making tonight will have a positive impact, not just on our current students, but on the future generations that will pass through the doors of Jero.

[40:06] Thank you for your attention and support, as we strive to provide the best possible educational experience for our children and the community at large. Great, thank you, Jessica. Okay. next next up is Justin gold. Hi, everyone. First of all. Thank you. I know that being here tonight, and it's not convenient for anyone. I've been the boulder community for 24 years. I the founder of Justin's, which is a nut butter company here, and I love this community. We chose to raise a family in this community. and I can't believe I'm saying this, but I have 2 children. Well, that I believe. But I have 2 children who started at Jero when they were 18 months, and one has been there for 10 years, and one's been there for 9 years.

[41:00] We love institution. We love Montessori. Montessori is really special to us, because it's self directed learning. So my children get to kind of direct their days. Achieve a lot of independence with that said both of them would be at this new elementary kind of lower elementary house. And I just really love the idea of creating a special creative place for the older children in the Montessori school to co-creative and habitat their own way, to be away from the little kids, to grow up together in their own community of 30 students. I think it's a wonderful place to have it separated to create growth, independence and learning. And I'm here basically just to support Jeroen for you guys. So thank you. Great. Thank you. Justin. Love your peanut butter, Justin. Thanks for being here. Okay. Next up we have Megan and Megan. Yeah, Raj.

[42:08] little short. Good evening. Thank you all for allowing us to come here today. I am Megan Rao. This proposal impacts me in multiple ways. I am the mother of 2 children that are at Jero. I am a mother of a child who's formerly former Marie, actually, and was there when it closed suddenly on us in March talked about that for a bit, and how grateful we are to have Jero in our lives. And I live one block away, so I can see from from Harmony and our new Jero property, so I can stand on the corner of my property at Fifteenth and Redwood, and see well, formerly see Harmony. And now see Jarrow so very intimately aware of. You cannot park on that block of fifteenth, both sides. But you can on the north side. So speaking as a mother. Oh, and also, since I live one block away, I am squarely in the walk and or bike to school, and we also walk or bike across Broadway to get to the Jarrow campus.

[43:09] So, as a mother it was not an easy feat for me to find a preschool for my my children. We were on wait lists for months. I was a little bit frantic and then we secured a spot at harm me, and we were so grateful to find a place. My youngest was still too young at the time. But my! My 3 year old started there. We were delighted. and we were devastated when it closed along with every other parent there, because they had all faced the same journey, trying to get their children into a preschool and when one closes and it's the middle of the school year, and you know you're about to go stack up on wait lists again. It is a stressful experience. We were some of the lucky ones. We not only got a good spot for both of our children, but that spot was at Jero and our children have flourished since they have been there. It is the

[44:01] warmest and most enriching environment that I could have dreamed of for them. And sometimes, when life gives you lemons, you make lemonade, and I feel like we are just flowing in the lemonade right now as a family. And so we are just so grateful that actually Jarrow bought Harmony so more spaces could be available to to other preschoolers, so that they might have the chance that a Jarrow experience as well. And then, just as a neighbor, you know, when I, when we actually moved in a couple just 2 years ago and we were telling people, oh, our neighbors were, gonna send our kids to that school, and they're like, Oh, that cute little yellow house like how fun that's been there forever! It's a staple in the neighborhood. So I was almost surprised to hear that anyone would think otherwise cause it's been there for so long. So we have found it. A pure joy to be in that neighborhood, to have a preschool part of the community and to be part of the Jero community. So we hope that can continue on. Thank you. Great. Thank you very much. Next up we have. Emily Wrecker.

[45:07] Hello! My name is Emily Wrecker. I have been a Jero parent since 2018, and I have served on the board of trustees since 2020, and I currently have a 4 year old at the school. My family lives in North Boulder within a mile of Jero, and I'm very excited that the school had the good fortune to purchase an additional building with such close proximity to the main campus as a parent to 2 young children. I am well aware of the need for more early childhood school options within Boulder. By making use of this additional building for the upper elementary children. Jero's main campus will have more flexibility to have additional space for younger classrooms and neurodivergent learners. Jero has been a pillar of our community for 60 years, and I look forward to supporting the school through this next chapter. So thank you for your consideration.

[46:06] Great. Thank you, Emily Amanda. Do we have anyone online? Yes, we do. We have Collie Kim. Collie, you have 3 min. Please go ahead. Hi, my name's Colleague Kim, and I am a Gerald parent, a Gerald Alumni, and a member of the Board of Trustees, and I feel great. very grateful to have found Jarro and got to attend there myself, and have great memories of the upper elementary program. and I hope to be able to send our son there and our daughter eventually, and I think that this building, this new additional building, would be a wonderful opportunity for the older elementary students to

[47:01] have a little bit more freedom from the main campus, and it would also allow for some additional space for those toddler and preschool classrooms that are so needed. We have a toddler that will be starting next year, and I know those spaces are really hard to come by. So we're very proud of the community that we're a part of. And we really hope that this can move forward so that we can send our children to the upper elementary program at the new campus. Thank you. Thank you. Col. yeah, thank you for joining us online. There are no other hands raised. Chair. So back over to you. Okay. thank you very much. now, so we'll close the public comment period, and we'll move to board deliberations and eventually a motion. So any any follow up questions that didn't get answered, or we can start

[48:01] deliberating to go. Okay, alright. So given the seeming a a a agreement on this. Do we want to move to a motion and then and then have have our any discussion. Once we have a motion on the table. Is anyone gonna okay, Laura Laura. I am very happy to move, to approve. Use. Review number LUR. 2023, dash 0, 0 0 0 2 5, incorporating the staff Member memorandum, including its attachments as findings of fact and subject to the recommended conditions of approval. I will second that we have a motion and a second and would you like to speak to your motion? I'll just say that I thought Chandler and the staff Memo did a really great job outlining why this project meets all of the conditions of approval. I had no concerns whatsoever, and this seems like a wonderful reuse of an existing space that will actually reduce impacts upon the community. Wh. Whatever impacts there might have been from traffic and parking and provide an extremely needed service with

[49:20] moving. Some of the older students to this campus, where they can have their own community, as was described by one of our commenters, and making space on the main campus for other urgent community needs, including filling the the gaps that were left when Harmony closed. So I thank all the public commenters for helping us understand the import of this, and I thank Staff for their memo, and and I was convinced that this project meets all of our criteria dots, all the eyes crosses all the t's, and I'm happy to support it. Great thanks, Laura. Ml, you seconded I did. I do Yes, I think it is. I just love it when we get to see a project come before us

[50:05] that give so much back to the community. So thank you for leaping on this this location and making it work, and it's like so many things are are conspiring to make it a success. I'm thrilled for you all, and I'm very happy to support. Yeah, I totally totally agree with my colleagues or Nml. Dero has been a long time community institution, a tremendous benefit to the to boulder and and I. Certainly we hear all the time about the desperate need for additional preschool spots in the in the community, and and more broadly, and so I think it's incredibly important that we be able to provide those. So I'm I'm grateful to be to be able to support this proposal.

[51:08] And I'll conclude simply by saying that while my kids did did not go to Jero, they went to Alia. but the importance of the right preschool for the right kid is just. It's just phenomenal and anyway, it's a we're lucky as a community to have Joe and Alia and and some of the other schools that accommodate different types of learning. different types of being, and are just, you know, good members of the community and and so I. Now I have an 8 and 10 year old grandkids, and so thinking, and they go to public schools. But but my son ended up going to September school. not so much from neuro divergency, but just

[52:01] didn't like, did not like boulder high. But the the idea of schools that accommodate different styles of learning and different learners, and to take the 10 and the the fourth through sixth graders and give them their kind of their space. And as I toured the the building today. I opened the gate and peeked in and looked around. And stuff, anyway, it seemed like, that will be a great little community for those kids of those age as they grow more independent and ride their bikes to school with, you know, without their parents and so forth. So anyway, I think it's a welcome addition to the community, and glad you glad you made that purchase and look forward to approving this application. So Yup. Yup. sorry. One more quick comment. I just want to thank the Jero president and board for being so enthusiastically accepting of Staff's suggestions and conditions. You make our job very easy. So thank you.

[53:02] So. okay, we'll take a vote. And this is a roll call vote, I believe. Okay. is it? Yeah. Okay. Alright. Kurt. Yes. Oh, we. I'm sorry. We need to read the motion. Sorry. Read the read, read the motion again. Actually, Laura. Okay, alright. Okay, thank you. Alright. So we are about to vote on a motion to approve. Use review number LUR. 2023, 0, 0, 0 0 0 2 5, incorporating the staff memorandum, including its attachments, as finding a fact and subject to all the recommended conditions of approval. Okay, now we can vote. Yes. And ml. yes. Laura, yes. and I'm a yes, too. Congratulations.

[54:01] Thank you very much. Ii think that. We were really moved by your personal comments. I could see it. And so we felt that and we appreciate it. Thank you. Okay, we're at 7. do we want to take a quick 5 min break or just ready to go. Because I don't think this next items gonna be super long. Take 5. Okay, we are. Gonna take 5. Amand, is that? Okay? Okay. okay.

[63:39] like, folder on. Okay. So we're back in order we're gonna move on to agenda. Item 5 B, public hearing consideration of the following related to Boulder Junction phase, 2. Implementation number one, Boulder Valley comprehensive plan, land use map changes.

[64:02] So we'll begin with staff presentation. Great. Thank you. Chair and hello planning board. Christopher Johnson. Comprehensive planning manager. I'm just gonna provide a really quick introductory remark, and then I'll pass it out to Chris Wranglos to give the presentation. But I did just wanna say, thank you, and we're excited to be here. As you will remember. We went through the process to approve amendments to the transit village area plan with this body back in September, and then, think it was September. Maybe it was August August, and then City Council in September. And we're excited to be here because this really is The initiation of the implementation of those amendments and of that of of those changes. So the what you'll see tonight is is really a a fairly straightforward routine update to the Boulder Valley comprehensive land use map

[65:00] so that that'd be comes into alignment with the amendments that we made to the Transit village area plan. However, it is it? It really, you know, marks the start of the implementation work that we have going forward. And there's a number of things that will be beginning and starting to work on next year as we see this area, you know, change and redevelop over time. So just wanted to say those words and thank you. For all the work that you did a few months ago, and we're looking forward to the discussion tonight. Thanks. Thanks. Kj. Good evening. Planning board members. My name is Chris Franglos. I'm a senior planner in comprehensive planning. and, as Kj. Said, it's only been about 2 months now, since the phase 2 amendment for Boulder Junction was approved by City Council, and 3 since the planning board last saw the item. and I'm excited to bring forward the first implementation step, which is changes to the Bbcp land. Use app quick rundown of the objectives. This evening, following a staff presentation, we'll have time for clarifying questions. We'll hold a public hearing and then finally, planning board will deliberate and take action to approve or reject the proposed changes to the Bbcp land use map.

[66:08] We have one key question for planning board to consider, and that is using the criteria that's established in the Bbcp. Does planning board support the changes to the Bvcp Land use map to align it with the amended transit village area plan. and, as Kj. Mentioned, this is a project that the planning board should be familiar with, as the Tbap phase 2 amendment was recently considered and approved by the plenty more. Just 3 months ago, in city Council 2 months ago, however, for a quick refresher, we will start with a brief overview of the phase 2 project and as a reminder, the original Transit village area plan that sets forth the vision for Boulder Junction was adopted back in 2,007, and over the past year. The phase 2 project set out to analyze the existing 2,007 area plan to learn more about the outcomes in phase one, and make recommendations for necessary amendments to better meet current community needs for the phase 2 area.

[67:05] and as a result in in partnership with the community, including local businesses and property owners, staff developed a tbap phase, 2. Amendment. The phase, 2 amendment focuses on land use, transportation connections and urban design and character. However, to night we will be focused on the land use section. and during the phase 2 Project City staff engaged with a broad contingent of stakeholders in the community and in a variety of formats throughout our engagement process 3 key elements or key themes were identified as areas for improvement within that land use. Section the first is expanding flexibility for housing and a greater mix of uses than what was originally envisioned in the original area plan. Recognizing and supporting the existing light industrial service uses, and finally, to include more opportunities for green spaces and gathering spaces and just taking a look back at some recent actions. On August 20 s the planning board held a public hearing, and moved to approve the phase. 2 amendment. and on September 20 First City Council held the public hearing, and also moved to approve the amendment as well.

[68:10] And now that the amendment has been approved, Staff has immediately moved into the implementation of Phase 2. And as a first step towards that implementation in the purpose of this agenda. Item, the Bbcp land use map needs to be updated to reflect the approved land use changes in the phase. 2 amendment. So we'll start with those land use changes that were approved in the amendment. And this map shows the land Use plan that was recently approved. The amendment focuses, mixed use transit, oriented development or mudod to the north, near the future rail station site and the south, where changes anticipated to occur earlier in the redevelopment cycle mixed use, industrial or mui is applied along the old Pearl Street area, where many light industrial and service uses currently exist, and where a more eclectic interaction of uses and structures is envisioned in the future.

[69:02] and finally parks, urban. Other, or PKUO. Is applied to the city, owned parcels along Goose Creek, Greenway. hopefully, that provides some brief but helpful context. And now we'll move into the Bbcp land. Use map Updates or changes. So here we see the existing Bvcp Land use map for the phase, 2 area and uses include light industrial community, industrial and open space other designations. And here are the Bbcp land use map changes. Staff is proposing to align with the Landy's plan approved in the phase 2 amendment. and, as I mentioned previously uses, include mixed use transit, oriented development, mixed use industrial and parks, urban and other. And if we take a look at the criteria that's established in the Boulder Valley comprehensive plan we have guidance on. When map changes can occur, and, as defined, the land use map changes may occur at any time concurrent with adoption or amendment of an area plan, and does require approval both by the planning board and by city council.

[70:08] and to be eligible for a land use map, change the proposed change must meet the following criteria, and I'll attempt to summarize and not read this verbatim on balance. The proposed change need to be needs to be consistent with the policies and overall intent of the Bvcp. Would not have significant cross jurisdictional impacts would not materially affect the land use and growth projections does not materially affect the adequacy or availability of urban facilities and services would not materially affect the adopted capital improvement program or cip, and finally, would not affect any area, 2 or 3 boundaries, and we'll use these criteria moving forward in the presentation to help establish the outcome. So first the first criteria to be considered is, if the proposed change is on balance, consistent with the policies and overall intent of the comprehensive plan and tvap, as is the case with all of our area plants, is intended to implement the policies of the Bvcp at the local level. and the phase 2 amendment offers myriad of opportunities to move Dvcp policies towards action and implementation

[71:14] proposed. Land use changes will enable the implementation of key Bvcb policies shown on the slide. Second criteria is the proposed change would not have significant cross jurisdictional impacts and city staff has coordinated planning efforts with outside agencies. There are no identified cross jurisdictional impacts that the proposed land use map changes that cannot be accommodated. Moving on to the third criteria, the proposed change would not materially affect the land use and growth projections that are the basis of the BBC. P. And the phase 2 amendment does include changes to the previously assumed land uses and does result in an increase in housing units and population that is greater than the 2015 Bbcp. Projections. However, the overall growth does not materially affect the basis of the comprehensive plan is consistent with Bbcp policies, and is within the capacity of established or planned

[72:14] municipal services and capital improvements moving on to the fourth does not materially affect the adequacy of availability, of urban facilities and services, and just to know that these changes are anticipated to result in gradual redevelopment over a 20 year horizon, and will not materially affect the availability of facilities or services and redevelopment will be accommodated through increased revenues associated with additional growth and development that will ultimately fund urban facilities and services in the area. So, in other words, development will be expected to pay its own way, which is in line with BBC. Policy, 1.2 2. The fifth criteria would not materially affect the adopted capital improvements program

[73:02] in future supportive capital improvement projects that would support the envisioned mixed use neighborhoods in phase 2 may be necessary and will for be further analyzed in the future implementation steps. However, the proposed land use map changes before the board this evening would not materially affect the currently adopted cip. Moving on to the sixth and final criteria. To consider would not affect any area 2 or area 3 boundaries, and this one's pretty simple. All of the land use changes that are proposed here are in area one. Thus in the area, 2 or 3 properties would not be affected. Quick note on public process. We did send a 30 day notice of the proposed changes. And that was mailed to all property owners in the phase 2 area as well as a 30 day. Notice was also mailed. All property owners within a 600 foot radius of any proposed land use map changes and staff received really minimal input, mostly just general questions about next steps.

[74:05] Speaking of next steps. Here's what the next steps look like. For the continued implementation of this project staff will be looking to update zoning and regulations to guide redevelopment. Late in 2,024. We'll identify major infrastructure needs, explore district sustainability opportunities and develop phasing and funding plans. And finally, it will be evaluating the existing general improvement districts and programs to support mobility, local businesses, arts, and culture in the area. and with that the recommended motion before the Board this evening is a motion to approve the proposed changes to the Dbcp Land use map for the phase 2 area of Boulder Junction. and I will leave the criteria on the screen, as I think it could help facilitate the conversation, we can come back to it. We just wanted to provide that as a resource for the board, as they deliberate and take action. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Clarifying questions for staff in regard to the map changes.

[75:09] And Mel. Thank you for that presentation. You said something that I am not sure I completely understood about the housing growth being outside beyond. Can you restate that? And then I have a question relative to that and the proposed land use. Sure. So every major update to the Boulder Valley comprehensive plan, we do growth projections. And so the last time that we did growth projections was in 2,015 and so anytime we make a land use decision. We are looking back at what those growth projections were, and part of our criteria here is, does not materially affect the land, use growth projections that were the basis of the comprehensive plan. And with this, what we see here is that it does not materially affect the land, use growth projections. We certainly have the availability of urban facilities and services in the area as well as I as I had mentioned,

[76:10] as development reoccurs or redevelopment happens, then they would ultimately be responsible for adding to any of those urban facilities or services that would be needed before redevelopment could occur. So the growth of housing in this area this is beyond what was anticipated is that that's correct? Correct? So my question is, then, MUTO. D. Visit. because that's like a that's big. That's a big use. does it? Is there a way to manage the percent of housing relative to other uses in that in that kind of a zone? Given that, you know we're given where we're at relative to our projections, or is that is, is there a mechanism within that zoning that directs

[77:07] the housing use versus the other uses. Well, we're not. We haven't established zoning for the area. I mean use for the land use. because we don't have a to d and zoning at this point. That's correct. Yeah. Turn my mic on. Yeah, I think your question is, how you know, how might we in the future guide the different types of uses, because the Mutod land use as a category is so broad and flexible. Ultimately, that would, you know, use is regulated through the zoning code and through the zone districts. And so ultimately, the zone districts that would be applied to these particular areas, or there might be new districts that are developed. Those will have the descriptions about the types of uses that are are are specifically allowed. You know, we generally you know, we generally kind of shy away, I'd say, from setting any really hard boundaries as to percentages or the types of uses

[78:09] and and and only because the you know, market changes. And there's there's a number of other factors that go into that. And so we wanna be cautious about creating, too, strict of of regulations and too many too many guardrails. So we wanna make sure we maintain some flexibility. We can certainly create incentives and other types of tools so that we can encourage the types of uses that we wanna see but rather than and then being really specific about you know, really identifying or specifying a percentage of use. I think we'd probably shy away from that, and maybe just to build on on Chris's comment on the overall projections that are within the comprehensive plan and sort of how this fits in. You know, as as we develop those projections, we're looking at at future growth and development within housing and within employment across the entire city. So those you know the the change or the the anticipated level of change over a a 20 to 30 year time frame, which is really kind of the horizon of the comprehensive plan. It's a it's a fairly large number. And so it every sort of individual project or individual land use changes

[79:18] generally don't materially affect. And don't you know, radically change the the projections that we've made. The good news is is that we're, you know, we'll be starting the next major update to the comprehensive plan. And then in another year in 2025. So we'll be revisiting a lot of those projections and updating those to be more consistent. Cause 2015 was was quite a long time ago, and and a lot of things have changed since then. Great a lot of information. Thank you for for both of you. Answering the question and helping understand how that might move forward. I think the particular zoning that gets applied is going to be an important piece.

[80:04] Kirk. Sorry this isn't really a question, but it's a follow-up to what you were saying. I was confused also. little bit, by that criterion. Actually, I was confused by a number of these criteria. But the way I was thinking about it was. have had this. These land uses, these proposed land uses been in the land use map when we adopted the current comprehensive plan. would the Bvcp look any different other than the land use map? And my conclusion was no so based on that it. It's affecting the land use and growth projections. But it's not affecting the comprehensive plan, was my judgment is how I analyze that just if that's any help.

[81:03] and before I call on you, I just want to follow on to that. So I've been listening this, and hadn't thought about these particular concerns. But the Bpc. P. When it gives projections. My understanding would be that, in fact, we have fallen behind the projections for residential growth in terms of city population has declined for the last 3 years in a row. And so. if we are. if if our prior projections have our prior projections been proven slightly wrong on the negative side in the Bvc. Projection. So, in fact. gee, we've approved MUTO. D. Land use. and we might have a lot of housing. But we are not at, or even or exceeding Bvc current Bvc projections. Is that is that correct?

[82:05] Yes, that's correct. Laura. Thanks again for that presentation. Chris. My question is related to something that didn't come up in the presentation, but was in our packet that there was like a cleanup on that parks open space, other that was approved by the open space and mountain parks board of trustees. Could you just explain that a little bit? I wasn't sure I entirely understood it. And just wanna make sure that I'm with you. gentlemen. Yeah, so essentially our our oso designation along that ditch corridor that you saw W. Was really the result of a mapping error that occurred back in the late 19 seventies. Fat markers. A lot of our oso issues throughout the city are are those fat marker issues? But also, you know, part of the criteria in the Boulder Valley. Compliance for any kind of open space related land use decisions. We have to get approval from Osb.

[83:04] on that decision. And so our open space non park staff did a pretty thorough analysis on those parcels, and the overall quality of the open space that was along that stretch of of OS so, and what they found was that there is really not any sort of qualities that our open Space Mountain Parks department is interested in and preserving. The reality is that they're ditched, lined, concrete, lined ditches right now. And so essentially, our, our open space staff doesn't see any real value in continuing to to use that land use designation and combined with the technical errors that we see as a result, the fat marker. This was just a simple cleanup and opportunity for us to go and and change that land, use to make it more accurately reflected of the existing conditions that are there now versus prior. And and I'm sorry. What was it previously, and what is it now? Previously? It was oso. And right now it. It's a bit of all 3 of the land use designations that we have before you. So it's a little bit up MU. To DA little bit of mixed. Use industrial, and there's a very small sliver along Goose Creek corridor. That will be tk, uo.

[84:14] okay, okay, thank you. That's very helpful. Appreciate that correct on the topic of open space. There's also this little tiny sliver of Osdr. And my recollection from our previous discussion was that it was something about a site line restriction. Can you remind us what the deal is with that scenic easement correct. There's an existing scenic easement of Osdr. We just wanted to update that map to accurately reflect that easement. It was another mapping there that we ran across. And what do we know what the history of that scenic easement is? Or so it's not a material question. So you can just say no. Well, I we we do sort of it. We we went back and back and forth with our open space staff about that, and tried to dig into the into the history and and worked with the real estate staff over there, and Osmp and you know, from what we can tell. There we think it was actually part of when the

[85:19] Foothills, Parkway and Pearl Parkway interchange was developed. There had, I believe, previously been a scenic easement in that area, and as part of that part of that reconstruction really reconfiguration of that whole interchange that was moved onto that parcel of land. So as you're coming down off of the interchange, there is intended to be a scenic view corridor, down, down Pearl Parkway. But whether or not it it, you know, serves its purpose very well, I think that's hard to hard to say. But it does exist, and and it was, you know, certainly a a requested change and cleanup, item that that open space wanted to maintain

[86:00] for now. thank you. okay, alright. I have one last one and I try to never miss an opportunity to discuss are green ways and the kind of mixed bag of authorities that control them and so forth. So in this particular case, the goose that's that's Goose Creek. Greenway that runs through there. And we're changing the designation to Pk. UO. Is on the land use map. Does the land use map, change a fact? Who is responsible for and manages that? What I consider to be a quite important you know both recreational commuting. It's a it's a boulder zone for a screen waste. That's an important one, and so does the land use map, change, affect? Who? Under whose control that is managed?

[87:08] And and can you tell me who that would be? Yeah, the the land use map change will not change the current maintenance regime. And and over oversight of the Greenways we. We fully recognize that there is you know a a number of different overlays of who's responsible for for what? it is. It is an area of current discussion between different departments, of trying to work out a better system to be able to manage those more effectively. We we on the planning and development services side. Are starting to actually explore some of our wetland regulations and the relationship of those within greenways. And so, as part of some of that kind of internal policy review. We intend to have, you know some of those questions net, or have some of those conversations next year to begin to try to untangle that a little bit. But as far as the land use map change goes there. There would be no change to the current regime as it stands today.

[88:11] Okay, thank you. Okay, any more. And all questions. Okay, we'll move on to the public hearing. And I don't see anyone here in the room. And I, Laura is sharing her screen with me here, and I see one participant online. Correct? This would be the time for the public to raise their hand if they wish to speak for this item. Okay. no hands raised back to you, mark. Okay, thank you. And okay, I will close the public hearing now, and we'll move on to board. Deliberation

[89:01] and again, this is seems to be a another item that it doesn't seem to be particularly contentious. We can have any discussion we want, we can move right to a motion. Is there any discussion before we move on to a motion? Okay. Alright. I love to entertain a motion. Anyone, can I have it printed out here if someone wants to. So oh, it's up there. Okay, yeah. I move to approve the proposed changes to the BVCP. Land, use map for the phase, 2 area of Boulder Junction. Second. okay, we've moved and seconded. Kurt, do you wanna speak to your motion? No, okay. Laura, do you want to speak to your second? Just a big thank you again to staff for all of your hard work on this and for helping to reconcile and move us into the next implementation phase. Always good to get updates and thank you again.

[90:11] Okay. that ends our deliberation. And we'll we'll now take a vote. Okay, I'm gonna go this side first. Yes. Ml. yes. Eric, yes. and I'm a yes, too great. Thank you very much. Okay, that concludes. Item 5 B. And we now move on to matters matters from the board director and city attorney. Hi, Brad! Hello! I'm happy to start if you'd like, please. So Brad Mueller, director of Planning and development services. Thank you for a successful second hybrid meeting. So we appreciate the transition we're making into that and and all the good work around that.

[91:07] I wanted to point out one kind of aspect of that last item in the map and the and the land use map in particular. One of the things among all the work that was done for. That that I appreciate was an effort of staff to really keep things simple and straightforward. and and I think I think you saw evidence of that. And I just highlight that because that's been a theme that we've been carrying out this year and are gonna continue to carry out in the next couple of years, as we recognize that there is a lot of built-in complexity into both process and procedure and and even codes. I think I relayed to you all sometime earlier in the year. But I'll remind you that back in February, when we met with the Council as their retreat. one of the things that they did which was described for us as being the first time ever. I don't know if that's absolutely true, but what they did was say, we appreciate that you've been undertaking these efforts over the last couple of years for process improvement.

[92:09] But we wanna empower you to do more, and that's to take a look at the code and see if there are things embedded in the code that are procedural, that add time and process when maybe they don't need to anymore. Maybe there are things that were designed as a good, sturdy sturdy guard rail, but are now managed through other ways or or handled in in other ways. So we've taking that to heart. We've been beginning to accumulate a series of those types of potential code items and code amendments and are planning to bring that forward to you and to council late in the first quarter to fulfill that commitment to them. We also anticipate a second bucket of items, probably later in the year, that our clean up kind of code changes. These are the things that

[93:02] we find, as we administer, the code that are duplicative or contradictory or just, poor wording that confuse people, those types of things not controversial per se, or not even substantive or policy, but just just administration of the code. So that's that's one of the things we're undertaking. Just as part of our overall operational excellence values in the city and in the department. and I bring that up to you by way of introducing also the fact that we are going through our work planning efforts that we undertake every year citywide. And then, of course, as a department we look at what work plan items we anticipate are needed and possible to do next year those that are in line with council priorities, with the comprehensive plan. with other strategies and and priorities as they've been identified in various plans and and documents. So we're going through that process right now, couple that I wanna highlight for you because, you'll see many of these, or some of these

[94:08] that are kind of rising to the top, especially early in the year. are a review and potential revision of parking regulations that was actually teed up a couple of years ago, and then put on the shelf with Covid. This will be a restart of that, but also a comprehensive review. And this really at the direction of, or at the request of council, I should say to look very holistically at that, and look at whether some of our tools, such as the neighborhood parking plan. could be used as mechanisms to facilitate alternatives for for certain types of Bill. And that's one just one idea, and we'll bring many more forward as part of that. And I'm sure study sessions as well. But that's gonna be a big one for next year. Another is embodied energy. We are wrapping up an update to the energy code.

[95:03] Think is coming to you all. Don't quote me on that. We'll fuzzy on that item. But one step beyond that, actually, many steps beyond that, it's it's rather innovative, is the idea of looking at embodied energy as part of the construction process, and how that could be managed, incentivized, regulated. Those types of things as well. and that has to do with how much energy goes into the construction materials, transportation of materials, those types of things we also are going to see primarily out of comprehensive planning. A review of right now we're just casually calling all things downtown. But our department is functioning as the umbrella traffic control air traffic control. However, you want to see that of what we've estimated are about 12 different planning processes that are either already underway in the downtown or need to be underway in the downtown, or plan to be

[96:03] involved in the town and the downtown. So you'll you'll see bits and pieces of that in the next year as well. And then I think we also, just for fun or having a site criteria 2. Some of the things that came out of that test effort as well. So that's just a sampling of some of the work plan items, some of those you'll touch, others less so. But just to give you an idea of kind of where we're going and and what we're seeing for for next year. We're gonna be busy again, so that'll keep us keep us occupied one fun thing that's hanging out there, too. That's gonna be taking a fair amount of our time, and already is is monitoring and reacting and providing input where it's asked regarding State law land use potential legislation, as you know, that all kind of came up last session and ultimately didn't pass in the big. large package that was envisioned. But we know that there'll be multiple smaller packages

[97:05] proposed and and work through the State, so we hope to maintain a seat at that table, to try to influence that in a positive way that aligns with boulders values. That is my update. But I'm happy to answer any questions. Thanks, that's helpful. There's some exciting projects, and I'm super excited to to see them come along related to parking. II was just on a call today that was talking about some of the possible statewide land use changes and what it sounds like one of the bills that's going to be run is going to relate to parking at this point. It doesn't sound like anybody knows what is going to. what what that's going to entail. But it's possible that the State law could get ahead of us and in terms of parking.

[98:01] And so it's just something to watch really carefully and maybe keep keep ourselves flexible in anticipation of what might be coming there. Yeah, we very much will. The early things we've seen both from last year and to the degree that they're starting to get cycled and recycled this year is that we probably are out ahead of that actually, in terms of our minimums and allowances. but you never know right? And and so we will keep an eye on that, most of it. And kg, you were in those conversations, too. I think most of it really was around transit transit corridors when we got to the parking. It's my recollection which again is not changes. Things evolve. It sounds right. 80 Us was the other. Yeah, that came around as part of that, too. Thank you. But it's a good point. And it really that demonstrates how it evolves day to day, month to month, especially once the session starts, and last year was a bit of a scramble for us. You know there were a lot of meetings that were being asked last minute and

[99:03] big policy questions with little time to really think about or react to it. So we're a little more prepared this time and and kind of making space for it. Precisely because of that. You have my thanks, too, for that update, Brad, that's all very exciting stuff. looking forward to seeing it all come through as Curt said. I have a question about the work plan in terms of does in the past. As I understand it, they did not do it last year. But Council has requested a letter of input from the different boards and commissions about what we might suggest for work plan items. And my impression is that that has gotten that process has gotten quite overwhelming, that you have, you know, 9 Council members that all have items that they might wanna see in the work plan. And then you have. I don't know how many tens of boards and commissions that also provide suggestions. So my question is, is there any rumor or thought, or inkling of having us provide a letter of recommendation this year, or is that not not something that is anticipated?

[100:12] So there's always rumors right? Can you contribute to those rumors tonight, Brad? So, backing up a little bit for context. When the Council, 2 years ago in January, went through their retreat process that was envisioned at the time as a 2 year effort. So that was kind of set up with them, and with their agreement to to set up 2 year, which meant last year in in January, February, February. I guess it was when they met. It was really positioned as a continuation of those items that they had determined. This year will obviously be at the start of any 2 year cycle if that is maintained. And it's really an open question with the number of new board for Council members that are coming on that and this is not rumor. It's fact that we just don't know, because that's a conversation that's gonna be teed up with the new incoming council members and and the existing council members.

[101:09] We are hoping, or I should say the city manager's office is hoping to bring a a structured format to the discussion of council priorities, such that it's more about alignment of big goals that are already identified in the sustainability, equity, and resilience framework, as well as the Comp plan which, of course, is adopted policy and a strategic plan that the city is developing. That kind of fills the gap between the comprehensive plan and the individual work items that are done on a year by year basis to give them really a forum to kind of make decisions for priorities at a macro conceptual level, and then and then staff will fill in the actual work items that would fulfill those things. But that's all kind of a work in progress. And and I bring that up because in that context, the idea of letters about very specific kind of action things or even the council members themselves, kind of putting it forward in that format may may not be as relevant as it was.

[102:15] but we'll see. Thank you. It's helpful to know how those discussions are evolving. Appreciate that, Brad? One other question. Do we? Do you imagine that the for the time being, the changes to the use. Table and standards are now done. or are you seeing yet another stage? Yeah. Yes. And and even as I was saying that I was remembering. I hope it's used tables there. There were some things that came out of the council meeting. that we're kind of one step further. That Council wanted that Council spoke to as possible amendments, and realized that to try to do that on the spot in this year. in this time frame really wasn't appropriate, so we had committed to a 2 point. O, but there won't be

[103:07] unfamiliar enhancements is about the best way I could characterize that I can get you more specifics. I'll just say that I'm remembering that, too. And I think that was use tables. And in particular, councilmember folkerts had had some specific, very specific things that she wanted to look at, and the discussion was that feels more like a phase 2 or a next step item. And so they kind of put it in that bucket and didn't approve it that night with council, but said that they wanted to come back to it okay with what she was proposing. Wasn't that zoning for affordable housing? Oh, maybe it was okay. I realized there was something in the back of my head, telling me I was saying the wrong thing. So it was zoning for free. That's what you'll see. You're right. Thanks for that correction. So use use tables, maybe does tables, at least, for now. Yeah, thanks.

[104:01] I'm just glad that I'm not the only one whose memory gets fuzzy the minute I walk out of it's like, Wait, use tables, or which zone, for I will say, too, that part of the reason for that. well, I'm sure there's a reason that I'm just not remembering things, but beyond that it it has something to do with the fact that we just had an awful lot of work program items, and it was really nice to be able to speak with council at this last meeting, where we did bring their last priority forward for consideration, to recognize that the items that they had identified which was really 5 out of 10 that they had identified Fell into our department. We were able to bring forward to them before, you know, before the change in in the Council which was their request. And so Staff has worked really, really hard, and that's across the board and all the divisions to be able to try to meet that expectation. And

[105:00] and now we're tired. So you guys did amazing work getting all that done, because 9 months ago, like only a tiny bit of it was done. And I was like, there's no way that they're gonna get it all done, and you got it all done. It was amazing, so great work behind the scenes before leading up to that 9 months ago. You're right. I mean, there was even the mayor said he had. He had doubts that that actually is gonna happen. So it's not well, thank you for all the great work, you guys are. Well. the the teams. They did an amazing job. seconded and and please convey the appreciation of the planning board for all that the planning department has has done for the city in this last 2 year cycle and I hope that you have a wonderful holiday and an opportunity to rest. Absolutely. Okay. I have a question. And and my question, may you might say, well, that's actually like a big agenda item next year. But could you give me just

[106:04] a super high level view of the Bvcp update? Who is who is really responsible and will manage that process? Is that the planning department. And is that when does that begin? And when would it conclude? Mr. Chair, that is a really big guide, and we can give you a quick overview, including the timeline. We're gonna be working on it immediately. Essentially, yeah. So first question about responsibility that falls to us and me in particular, and everybody around me. But it it will, you know, ultimately be a a very broad effort involving multiple departments. City attorneys. Office. other divisions within P. And Ds, so it's it's a big, all hands on deck. Kind of effort. We're spending a lot of time next year doing a lot of policy, research and pre-work getting the engagement strategy developed

[107:07] and and all of the scoping understanding. If we are going to need consultant assistance on certain aspects. So getting that organized so that we can make appropriate budget requests. And and that type of thing through through next year the anticipation is that we will formally launch the project at the beginning of 2025 it will likely take somewhere in the neighborhood of probably about 15 to 18 months to really kind of develop. Do all of the outreach and engagement develop. The policies actually begin to, you know, develop the document itself. And we have a lot of ideas as to does it continue to be a physical document? Does it take more of an online or interactive form. So there's a lot of questions around. Kind of what does the future of this look like? And then it it requires a 4 body review. So planning board, City Council, the Board of County Commissioners and the the County Planning Commission.

[108:08] So all 4 boards need to review and approve the document to be to be a adopted informally. That process in and of itself probably will take 4 or so months. You know. We'll we'll we'll be looking to try to host some joint hearings and other kinds of things, so we can be efficient with that time. But ultimately all 4 bodies need to need to adopt the plan. II will add that, thanks to emerging AI, almost no staff involvement is required. So it's actually gonna be pretty simple. No, in all seriousness. We've been working on figuring out what the right resources are for that and getting that teed up. Both from a budget standpoint and an organizational standpoint within Christopher's division. But also recognizing the cross departmental pieces of it to trust division. All we're getting everybody kind of ramped up for that, including conversations with the county, which, of course, is a big piece of that with the 4 Body Review.

[109:08] We can recirculate a memo that we provided to council in May. That kind of lays out that timeline. It would be good to familiar for the Board to familiarize themselves with that next year, as Kj. Alluded to is, is going to be a lot of behind the scenes work, but we'll, I imagine, be bringing the board along for some of those key elements, so that when we do the outward facing parts in 2025, you're armed and ready for you know that information. So can can we recirculate that? Memo, yeah, we can. Yeah, we can send the memo around. And II would anticipate that towards the end of next year we'll have some study sessions with you and with council to bring you up to speed on. You know what more specifically what the schedule is, what the engagement strategy looks like all of all of that. So okay, as a follow-on question, again, feel free to say, that's that's like 2 big

[110:02] for the time right now. The fore body review, as as some one was on the outside. For a long time, and would follow this, I thought, oh, this is this joint effort between the city and the county, and but yet, as I sit here tonight. I have yet to encounter that I can remember anything where we have been involved in something that wasn't just strictly within the confines of the city, and we used the Bbcp as as a guiding document for processes, for approvals, denials whatever within the city so. and the county seems to do much of their own thing. Anyway, I is it? Is it a question. do we? Should we have a four-body approval? And should it should it just be a city document like so many? I we don't.

[111:03] We don't seek county approval for the transportation master plan. They might provide feedback, but we don't hold it up for them to approve. So I'm not. I'm not dissing the county. Yeah, but no, I would. Actually, I appreciate the question. And I think that's probably a good thing for us to anticipate as part of our public conversation about this. My response to that is that from a regulatory standpoint, which is really what you're doing through quasi-judicial decision making it is absolutely appropriate and actually only legal, that we be contemplating things within city limits and the county and unincorporated limits. That is not to say, though, that they that the Conference of Plan beyond its its initiation and update every time Doesn't transcend the 2 departments so, or the 2 jurisdictions. Rather. So we get referrals, for example, from the county, and and they make comment about things that are on the city fringe, and

[112:04] vice versa. We also just do practical coordination. Operations and such. But the most important thing in my mind is that the valley I would submit. All jurisdictions have concluded that there is a community of interest that transcends any one jurisdiction. And I would submit, for example, it's very much in the city's interest and aligned with its values. To make sure that. you know, 500 feet beyond the city limits. There's not a urban standalone urban village created with urban services paid for with the metropolitan district, and. you know, built completely as if it were the city, but happens to be literally just next door. Outside of its jurisdiction there are places, and and I could give you a dozen examples of where that happens all the time up and down the Front range is throughout the country.

[113:01] So I think part of the legacy, which will be a 50 year legacy if it gets adopted in the year we anticipate of the joint comprehensive plan is its ability to transcend what I would. characterizes as kind of parochial interests, and really look beyond any one jurisdictional's interest to embody joint values, such as maintaining community separators. directing urban development to urban centers preserving special places as designated often through open space. And those are the things that really are the outcome of the comprehensive joint, comprehensive plan. not not joint decision making on individual items within jurisdictional boundaries. That's a great answer. Thank you. Somebody record that for future open space.

[114:04] one other question on the PVC P. Update, this will be a an update where, in least in theory, everything is on the table, right? There's nothing. I mean, there will be political limits, but not a interim update is my understanding. I frankly don't quite understand the distinction. But yeah, it's it's a full on. Yeah. And and it turns out that citizens once invited to a conversation don't really make that distinction, anyway. So we will. We will be hearing all voices and all opinions. But yeah, by design. This is, I don't know. What do we call that major as opposed to a minor minor. There you go. Thank you. Okay. I think that that's it. Okay. as chair. I always think we should have a motion to adjourn. So moved.

[115:06] Sec. Okay, alright. Then, without without any objection from staff. Then we are adjourned. Thanks, everybody.