January 16, 2024 — Planning Board Regular Meeting

Transcript

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

[0:00] Okay. Oh. Sorry, that took a while. Alright, hello. Hello, team. Hello. Okay. So, I wanna do a couple of things first. We have a rule or a rule here where if we have more than 16 speakers on, an item, everyone will get 2 min instead of 3. So before we start anything, I'd like to get a show of hands of both online and in person who's here to speak about the public hearing item, the concept review. Please just raise your hand. Okay, and also online, you guys. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 1011, 1213, 14. Is anyone online? Okay, so everyone will have 2 min when we get there. Plan accordingly. Alright, but right now we're going to talk about we're gonna have public participation, which are folks who want to talk about anything except.

[1:02] The public hearing item. If anyone wants to speak. Is anyone signed up? Okay. Well, we still have some hands up, I think, from the previous ask. So I would ask that people maybe raise their hands if Only if right now only if you wish to speak for this open comment part of the meeting. Just give it a couple seconds. Alright, excellent. Nobody for public participation. Oh, there are. Never mind. A few online. There are actually a couple of hands. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Yes, okay, we'll start with George Kraft, followed by Lynn Siegel. Yeah. Georgia, have 3 min. Please go ahead. Finally got the on mute. This is just general comments. I had a comment about the. Williams Village development. Specifically. Sorry, George, George. We're gonna be speaking about that during the public hearing, comment period.

[2:09] I certainly will. So if you don't mind holding off on your comment. Thank you. That's correct. Yeah. Thank you, George. Look forward to hearing from you later. Okay, Lindsay, please go ahead. You have 3 min. Pop of the agenda is Gaza. That's your most important thing that you as a planning board can be thinking about. Because if we have Continued. Involvement in that situation, we are going to be depleted of funds in reparations until Doomsday. If unless we get bombed first by Iran in protest so the best thing that you can do as a planning board is recommend a city council to get out of Gaza in the occupation. And. And yesterday, 75 years ago, actually. And be on the right side of history and do it.

[3:06] And do it soon. Because you haven't got anything to plan for, otherwise. Nothing. A big, fat, nothing. Not the, Williams village thing, nothing. Now, as far as weather vein, This is the most obscene. Example of a development. That I've ever come before. And I watched this come about when it was water view first. And it's just appalling that we're getting more and more of this. And it's just like a little Dense microcity. It's Jared Polis's wet dream. And we don't need that in Boulder. We've got enough. Densification. All over the place without making it. That isn't actually, you know, it's not, it's not densification.

[4:01] There was nothing there. There's still nothing there. It's anchored on a brew pub, remember? So what do we need with things like that? And a garage in every unit. You know just add a couple lanes to Rapaho. No problem. No, the all of these developments. And all the wealth inequity. The wealth inequity just causes more homelessness and we haven't got the money for it. 6 million bucks to clean up the trash and everything else and you can watch City Council's gonna entertain it for 6 for 3 h and that isn't going to be enough. They could take 3 years and they can never solve it. Mike Johnston can't solve it. New York can't solve it. San Francisco can't solve it. But you know what? The way you solve it is you tell developers, no. And you tell him, no, at the planning board. You tell him, no, height, height increases. You tell him no parking relaxations. That's what you do. You say you learn how to say no.

[5:03] You go to school to learn. No, no, no. That's the only way. And everything you have to tell everybody else to do it too because the homeless will go from one town to the next and they'll propagate to Boulder and we'll just be doing nothing but paint a hundred $1,000 for each one. Thank you, Lynn. Thank you, Lynn. Thank you, Lynn. Please wrap it up. Per year. Thank you. Okay, that concludes the open comments section over to you, Chairwoman. Okay, thank you. Apparently we have a comment. A question about timing. We've got number of call up items to go through. My guess is we'll get through the pretty quickly. So whoever asked the question, I believe will probably start on the public hearing item by about 6 30. But we won't get to public comment about that until probably 7 15 or 7 30 so just be aware. Alright, approval of minutes. Does someone mind make a motion on the minutes for November? 20 first.

[6:02] So moved. I move that we approve the minutes from November 20 first. Second. Okay, I was not there so. Mark. Yes. Yes. Curt. Yes. Ml and George. Yes. Yes. Okay, great. Lisa? Is Lisa there? Did I see her? Okay, I thought you would let her in. Okay. Planning board minutes from December fifth. Anyone wanna make a motion? I move that we approve the minutes from December fifth. Second, great. Mark? Yes. Curt? Yes. Yes. Yes. And George. Alright, passes planning board minutes from December nineteenth. Anyone wanna?

[7:01] I'll second. Oops. Sorry, Kirk. I move that we move the minutes from December nineteenth. By second. Go to ML. Mark. Yes. I was absent. Yes. Yes. Yes, George. Okay, Sarah is a yes and so that passes. Okay, now we have discussion of dispositions and call ups and continuations. Call up item final plot to subdivide the property at 1937 upland avenue to create 3 lots lot one is 19 one that 1919,575 square feet lot 2 is 9,724 square feet and lap 3 is 7,881 square feet. Adam subdivision case number tech, 202-20-0006. The preliminary plot was approved through case number L you are, 2,022 0 0 0 3. This application is subject to potential call-up. On or before January sixteenth, 2024. Does anyone have questions for staff or does anyone want to call it up?

[8:02] Okay, next call up item. 2105 Mapleton Avenue nonconforming use review LUR, 202-30-0047 nonconforming use review for a 201 square foot addition to the attached dwelling unit at 2,105 Mapleton Avenue including updated landscaping and architectural improvements. The call-up period expires on January, sixteenth, 2,024. Questions for staff. And we want to call it up. Oh wait, Lord, ML, you have your hand up. Thank you, Sarah. Yes, I just have a question for staff on this. I'm curious about, So the requested. Or the required off street parking for 21, 3 in Mapleton. Is not on the 21 all 3 Mableton property. Am I reading that correct when it's on the adjacent property? No, that is incorrect. And apologies if that was not, conveyed correctly, but, they are on the same property.

[9:04] These, this duplex has been condoned out. So there's only one property here. Oh, so the property line has more. To do with it being. Duplex condos, condos. Correct. It's not an official. Correct, yes. It's not in the official property line. On one piece of land. Got it. Okay. Thank you. Yeah. I was thinking how did that happen? I'd like to know that little workaround. Thank you. I don't intend to call it up. Okay, all right, we'll move on to call. Ida, call up item C, stream wetland and water body map revision WET, 202-30-0019. Gabhard ISP mapping revision. The call up period expires on January sixteenth, 2024. Questions, comments? Call ups? Nope, okay. Call up item D, standard wetland permit WET, 202-30-0014 driveway culvert replacement at 8 5 5 0 and 8 6 0 0.

[10:06] VALment the call up. Replacement at 8 5 5 0 and 8 6 0 0, 5, 5, 0 and 8, 6 0 0, Valmont. The call up period expires on January sixteenth, 2020 Questions, comments, call-ups? I told you, I told you, Edward, I get you out of here. Call up item e standard wetland permit WET 202-30-0020 Chapman drive trailhead. And pedestrian bridge. The call-up period expires on Jan. Oh shoot, January sixth, 1620, 24. Yes, go ahead. So I, yeah, I have few questions about this. There's, as I understand it, there's 2 main portions to this project. One is the bridge, which is the extension of the, And then the other one is the significant changes to the working area. And the reconfiguration and the. Walk ways up and so on. Is that that's correct?

[11:06] In terms of the turnaround and the trailer parking. That the motivation for that is to provide for horse trailers and hand cycles is that. Let me double check. In it primarily just indicates improvement to the access there. I don't see a specific type of user that it's been. Designed for according to the application. Okay, well the description talked primarily about horse trainers and this trailer parking area. So. And maybe this is more of a question for OSMP. I don't know if anybody.

[12:05] Is available for that, but really my question comes down to this is a significant amount of work with a significant amount of I think Earth moving and regrading and disturbance of existing. Land even though A lot of it is on the former house site there. So it's Kind of disturbed. It was disturbed at one time, but I think it's largely re growing. And I just, I have questions. How much demand there actually is for. Course trailer parking there or in cycle parking there. So in the context of wetlands. We have in 9 9 3 E there's this criterion about minimization that says Yeah, Applicants should demonstrate that the activity is designed and located.

[13:00] To minimize direct or indirect impacts to the adjacent wetland. Stream or water body. And. Well, I think we're going to be getting training and what this means. But my interpretation of that is minimize sort of. Bellancing the values. The benefits that might be coming from this and If the benefits are minimal. Then I have questions about the wetland impacts that are resulting from that. So. I don't know if you have the way we look at it typically if you look in their well and report. Section, 8.0 talks about their alternative analysis. So we look to see, was that a robust analysis looking at options would help mitigate the impacts and then of course also within that looking at. First medicating direct impacts to the wetland water body versus the better and outer buffers, which in this case.

[14:02] Primeri impacts are to the buffers and there are no permanent impacts to the wetland itself. Right. So in the. In the, alternatives, I guess it was, we talked about the no build. Option which as it should and the no build option says well We didn't build then we wouldn't get this. Trailer parking but that is not really Just having the trailer parking is not beneficial if it's not actually used. So I guess. I would like to call this up. It's been called up. So. I have additional questions and since it's been called up. It might be good. Yeah, I'm sure you'll have to pose my questions so that. You can. Further when we when you do come back before us you can be prepared with. I have a completely different take on this, but I was about to call it up as well.

[15:05] So. Keep you from talking, but that's fine. Okay. And you should probably send your comments by email as well just to reiterate them. Alright, we will move on to the final call. Thank you, Edward. Final call-up item, a standard wetland permit WET, 202-30-0021. Saw Hill saw hill ponds improvements the call up period expires on January 2620 24. Any questions, comments? Guys on the online. No, alright. We're not calling that up. Edward, go home. Thank you. Have a nice evening. Okay, we are now getting to the public hearing, section of our meeting. The public hearing item tonight, agenda title. Concept review proposal to redevelop the 448,668 square foot site at 2952 baseline road with a mixed use development consisting of residential commercial hotel and restaurant uses.

[16:13] The existing buildings on site would be demolished and replaced with 6 new 4 to 5 story buildings containing retail, restaurant, and hotel uses as well as approximately 610 new dwelling units. And a mix of structured and underground parking. The unit type mix would include market rate units and student housing units reviewed under case number LUR, 202-30-0038. Before Chandler the staff person starts I do wanna just go through if anyone has a conflict of interest. No, I can see ML. I can't see George. George, if you have a conflict of interest, just say yes or no. Nope. Okay, excellent. Nope.

[17:01] Alright, so Chandler. Who's home with the cold? And some sick children, please take it away. Alright, thank you. Just to check you guys are seeing the presentation. You're not seeing my notes. So far we're seeing the presentation, yeah. Excellent. Okay. Good evening, planning board members. I'm Chandler Mstock principal planner and planning development services and this presentation is for the concept plan review at 2952. Baseline road. So presentation highlights very briefly. I'll go over the concept plan and purpose, public notification procedures. The planning context. Project background, summary of the proposed project and we'll finish with key issues. So the concept plan. Review process purpose, times 2 allow planning work to review the general development plan including land uses, arrangement of those uses general circulation patterns, methods of encouraging alternative transportation.

[18:12] Architectural characteristics, environmental preservation. etc. And it is intended to give the applicant comments from the public, city staff, and planning board early in the process prior to submital of a formal cyber view application, no formal action. Which is approval or denial is required on this application. So in terms of public notification. Written notice was sent to property owners than 600 feet of the subject site. Notice was posted on the property as well. Initially received comments and questions from several neighboring property owners and residents. Expressing concerns, those, the primary concerns of those opposed include traffic and safety issues loss of existing commercial space particularly the dark horse and the overall scale and density of the project.

[19:03] And, the majority of written comments, which largely were sent directly to planning board in the last 72 h express support for the proposal. So the approximately 9.5 9 acre project. I encompasses the triangular area located east of highway 36 south of baseline road in west of thirtieth street and excludes the baseline crossing site on the northwest corner of the site. And the McDonald's site. The BBCP or Boulder Valley comprehensive plan land use doesn'tation is split between mixed use business. Or MUB and community business or CB. To find in chapter 3 of the 2010 V rally comprehensive plan as follows. So I'll just kind of paraphrase the community business designation. Our vocal points for commercial activity serving a sub community or a collection of neighborhoods.

[20:00] I'm attendant to serve daily convenience shopping and personal service needs of nearby residents and support walkable communities. A mixed use business. Development may be appropriate and will be encouraged in some business areas. Generally, you supplies to area around 20 ninth street as well as North Boulder Village Center. The commercial areas near Williams village and other partials around Pearl Street, 20 eighth and thirtieth street. And this consists generally a business or residential uses. Housing in public uses supporting housing will be encouraged and may be required. This map shows the overall, split between the 2 landings designation. So as you can see, the majority of the site, the eastern portion of the site is designated MUB. The BBCbcp land use designation for the eastern portion of the site was changed from CB to MUB during the 2,000 older value comprehensive plan update. But the site has never been rezoned to reflect the MUB designation. So zoning districts intended to implement the MDB designation typically include BMS and the MU zones.

[21:02] So MU 1, 2, 3 or 4. Further the Williams village center is identified in the Boulder Valley comprehensive plan as a neighborhood center and I'll get more into that later in the presentation. So in terms of zoning, the site is currently zone business community 2 or BC 2. Jason to be one zoning to the north across baseline public zoning to the east across 30 earth which is where Williams village is located to the west across highway 36 lies the 2,700 baseline site which is also zone BC 2. As well as base mark, and the Martin acres neighborhood, which is zoned RL one. The BC 2 zoning district is defined as business areas containing retail. Centers serving a number of neighborhoods where retail type stores predominant, predominate. The project side is also located in a business community area. Subject to special use restrictions. Appendix and of the land use code and I will get into that as well a little bit later in the presentation.

[22:04] So this slide shows, an aerial map showing some of the surrounding, context. To the east across thirtieth street. As the University of Colorado Williams Village dormitory complex. Which contains the 12 store, 12 story Darling and Stern's buildings and the 6 story bear creek apartment buildings. Across baseline roads the north are a variety of retail service and office uses putting a gas station and beauty salon mortuary in a medical office building. To the northeast of the intersection of baseline and thirtieth street lies the baseline subdivision, which is a single family neighborhood that has existed since the early 19 sixties. Us. 36 runs along the eastern boundary of the site across which lies the Martin Acres neighborhood. Aside from the CU buildings, all the existing buildings surrounding the site are generally one to 3 stories in the height. So this aerial image shows the existing site. The site currently contains 5 existing one to 3 story buildings containing a variety of retail and restaurant businesses.

[23:06] Including sprouts, the dark horse, saloon, cosmos pizza, liquor store, a bank, and several other restaurants. I'm not including the hotel. There's about 65,000 square feet of commercial space currently on the site. There's a Conoco gas station on the northeast corner of the site off Baseline Road. And on the south corner of the site is the Boulder broker in, legal nonconforming hotel use. Both the dark horse and the broker end have been in this location since 1974. However, the property is not individually landmarked or located in a historic district. Although it is eligible as noted in the staff memo. In terms of the existing site access. Not including the baseline crossing or McDonald's sites. There are currently 9 existing access points to the site. There are 4 curb cuts on baseline road, 5 curve cuts along thirtieth street. Of the 4 existing access points on baseline road, only one which is located between baseline crossing and McDonald's shown there in green on the top of the screen.

[24:05] As full movement turn access. What the remainder being right in right out only. Similarly, the existing access points on thirtieth street are also right in right out only with the exception of the excess serving cosmos pizza building. With only a single drive while providing access to westbound lanes on baseline the current access configuration severely limits opportunities for westbound travel from the site. With you turns on either thirtieth street or at the signaled intersection of thirtieth and baseline being required for the majority of exit points from the site. So the site. Much of the site is affected by the regulatory flood plane. Including the 100 year flood plane, the conveyance zone and small portions of high hazard zone. I can get I can respond to Kurt asked a question earlier about floodplain, which I can respond to later.

[25:00] So now jumping to the proposed project, as noted in the title, the proposal is for a mixed use development consisting of 610 attached residential units. Of those 285 would be student housing and 325 would be non-student units. That comprises roughly 82% of the overall. And they are proposing roughly 69,382 square feet of ground floor commercial, which is about 8% of the floor area. A 76,530 square foot hotel use. Or 6% and about 7,796 square feet of restaurant use. So as shown here, the there are 6 4 to 5 story buildings proposed ranging from 43,000 square feet to 267,000 square feet in size. For a net FAR of about 1.9. A new L-shaped right of way or street to break down the existing super block.

[26:03] And a mix of At grade parks, plazas, landscape setbacks and rooftop decks. It is worth noting that as part of the zoning for affordable housing code changes, which were adopted by council on October, 2023 and went into effect on January first of this year. Intensity standards in the BC 2 zone district were revised. So that the 1,600 square feet of lot area per dwelling unit. Requirement was replaced with a 1.5 FAR. And a 15% open space per lot requirement. Up to a 2.0 FAR is permitted in designated neighborhood centers of which this is one. Therefore the proposed is consistent with existing BC 2 intensity standards. The proposed project includes, development of the site with a mix of attached presidential, commercial and hotel uses. Totaling approximately 725,989 square feet implore area. Under the current proposal, and this is shown here on the land use map diagram.

[27:09] Buildings A and B are proposed as a mix of ground floor commercial with residential units above. Buildings C and F are proposed as entirely residential, non-student. And building D is proposed as a hotel use with an attached ground floor restaurant and commercial uses above. And building E is proposed to be entirely student housing. So these are just some artistic renderings provided with the application, showing. I'm just sort of the basic architectural idea and some of the landscaping. And these are reference images. Also provided with the application. The application includes several reference images to illustrate the proposed projects architectural intent, but does not provide a specific informational materials. And, staff's comments under concept review criteria in the memo, provide some site review considerations that we have.

[28:04] Notify the application of So a summary of required modifications as we understand them at this time. The proposed modifications, the land use code would include. A parking reduction, as yet, of undetermined size. Height modification to allow for 55 foot buildings where 35 feet is the maximum by rate height. Modification to the maximum number of stories to allow for foreign bi-story buildings where 3 is the maximum number of stories. And modification to access standards to allow for more than one access point per property. For the height modification request, community benefit regulations would apply. So bonus floor area is used to determine the required number of bonus units. Above the 25% inclusionary housing requirement and that's based on the amount of floor area that exists. The third story so all the floor area and the fourth and fifth stories and this results in additional required permanently affordable units or, cash and low as the case may be.

[29:07] So key issues for discussion and these are also outlined in the staff memo. I'm key issue. I will just jump to the slides to save time. So key issue one is the proposed concept plan generally compatible with the goals, objectives, and recommendations of the Balder Valley Comprehensive Plan. These are some considerations for that discussion that we can come back to once the discussion begins. Again, it is a neighborhood center is listed in the Boulder Valley comprehensive plan. Worth noting is that BC 2 conditional use standards require a use review if ground floor residential area. Exceeds 10% of the total floor area. This is the primary criterion used. In that use review process, which we can also come back to and discuss. Kissue number 2 does planning board have feedback for the applicant on the conceptual site plan and building design?

[30:05] Here are some key takeaways. From the discussion, which we will be able to use and which are also, listed in the staff memorandum. Key issue number 3 is the proposed building height to 55 feet in general proportion to the height of existing buildings in the area and the proposed or projected heights of buildings in the area. And, key issue number 4. Will be, any other, key issues or. Topics of discussion that the planning board decides to come up with and this is a building height context map showing height of existing buildings in the surrounding area. And I have a ton of pictures from, within the site, illustrating the surrounding context, but I figured we would probably get to those during discussion. So that is all for now. Thank you. Thank you, Chandler. Before we get to questions for Chandler, clarifying questions, if you came in after the meeting started and you intend to speak on this topic.

[31:02] Sign up over here. You'll have to, everyone will have 2 min. Alright, who has questions for Chandler? Go ahead, start. If I get to them, Jennifer, I had several questions that I sent. You. Oh, thank you. The first one is about the Really the access points, but particularly. The access points onto baseline and whether any of those. Under the city standards and policies. Could be signalized. Yes, and we were able to get, some feedback from Edward on that answer and The answer is yes, it's a possibility. There's a lot to take into consideration and it would be based on I'm largely on the final project plans that came in during site review as well as the traffic study that they provided at that time. There's also spacing considerations. Traffic queuing, etc, but it is possible.

[32:07] To provide potentially one signalized. Intersection between. . 36 and thirtieth street Okay, sounds good. My next question is also about transportation. Really, and it's about the fact that in the proposal, some of the streets or at least one of the streets depending on 30 plus 5 is public and then there are a couple of other sections that are private. And I'm trying to understand how from the city's perspective, how do you view the weather, weather streets should be private or public. What are the trade offs? What are? Staff preferences, I guess. Yeah. In general, the city prefers public streets. There are standard in the land use code for when we do require dedication of right of way.

[33:04] We also have to consider the subdivision standards. So right now we don't really know. The extent to which they're planning to subdivide the site, but oftentimes right of way is required to provide the necessary frontage for subdivided lots. There's also maintenance. Requirements. So the city has standards for right of way and for emergency access and things like that. So typically, requiring, right of way dedication allows us to. Ensure that maintenance and access and all those things meet our standards. So we, didn't really get into a in depth review, of. All the individual streets shown on this concept plan. And kind of discussing whether or not they would be public or private, but. In general, I think that it's, it's safe to say that we prefer right away to be dedicated and to be public and that that will likely be the case on this site.

[34:03] Okay, great. Thank you. That's helpful. Okay, let me just, keep going. Just, Chandler, will you take down the building height context map so I can see the other 2 board members, if they have questions. Absolutely. Thank you. Go ahead, please. Okay. The next question is about the extent of the Williams Village Center in the Boulder Valley comp plan when it talks about the neighborhood centers, it just has. And is there anything to clarify? What the actual extent are of the intended extent are of the Williams village center. Yeah, so I looked into that and I wasn't able to find anything specific that delineated the exact boundaries. Yeah. My take on it after looking at all the other designated. Or designated neighborhood centers in the comp plan.

[35:00] And how they're. Shown and how they're titled. Is that, all of these areas that are listed as neighborhood centers were already essentially developed as commercial. Prior to you know, very early on most most of them in the seventies. So they're listed as names that they're commonly known by like base more. Williams Village. Fagonal Plaza, University Hill District, etc. So and then looking at the zoning map, which largely corresponds like BC 2 or MMU zoning is generally applied to all the areas that are shown as neighborhood centers. It seems to me that the way that the dots are basically intended to represent, kind of well known commercial areas. And all the properties that are included within the whatever they're named. So like base mar doesn't have. Doesn't specify the exact addresses, there's multiple parcels in base mar, but the zoning kind of applies to the whole trapping center.

[36:05] So. And from what I can tell, it seems that it was just kind of intended to. Apply to the sites as we know them. If that makes sense. Okay, so your conclusion is that it would apply to the entire triangle. Okay. That's correct. Okay, which includes this site plus diagonal crossing plus McDonald's. Yes. Okay. Please line that diagonal. Sorry, baseline. Yeah, baseline. Yeah, I knew I knew what you meant. You know. Oh, okay. And then last question. No, I'll hold off on the last question after I talk to the. After I ask the application. Thanks. Alright, I'm gonna go ahead and go to the folks who are online. George and then ML. Mine should be quick. I, Chandler, quick question for you regarding.

[37:04] When, when you have that, when you have that building height context map up. And you were talking us through the presentation basically outside of the parcels. That are the CU dormitories and apartments. Everything is roughly one in 3 store one to 3 stories that abuts the site. Is that correct? Yes, aside from Williams village. Okay. And Williams village just to just to refresh my memory. Williams Village is see you land so When those were built and the way those are set up is Boulder has no control over the height of those buildings, correct? That is correct. Okay, alright, that's all I wanted. Thanks. Thanks, George. Thank you, Sarah. Excuse me. I have a number of questions.

[38:02] So just to talk briefly about the zoning Chandler, my understanding is according to the Boulder Belly Plan land use it's an MUB. But that was never rezoned, so it remains a BC 2. That's correct. And BC 2 zoning is predominantly retail. Yes, it's predominantly, it's intended to. Be predominantly retail and just to be kind of neighborhood serving retail and personal service uses. Okay. Great. Thank you for that. So do we know, I think that there the question came ahead of time for you as well. The proposed uses and score footage. How did the proposed uses and score footage compared to those being displaced? So are we getting more less or the same amount of services that are currently provided in this proposal? Do we know?

[39:02] Yeah, so I can, I mean, I'm sure that the applicant is going to discuss that in detail, but. Okay. Based on our numbers, the existing amount of commercial space on the site is about 66,000 square feet. And all told, they'll be providing upwards of 75,000 square feet. So it would be actually more commercial space than it's currently on the site. Okay. Sure. Hey, can I? I'll, on that. Earlier you said it was 65 or 66,000 not including the broker. Is that what you said? No, I think it's it's just 66,000. So the broker has a hotel, which isn't retail. Is it that's about the same size as the new hotel that they're proposing? So the hotel replacement will be about one to one.

[40:01] I see. So you're only talking about the non hotel space. Okay. Thank you. Correct. Go ahead, Emma. Thanks. So a code wide or zoning lies. The hotel use. It was kind of confusing because some of the information was old and I think the ordinance to the use table changed things in the inner. No. So just to clarify, the is the hotel use? Now allowed given Do the use table change or has that not happened? That has not happened and that's something I was able to speak with the applicant about. And I'm sure that they'll address as well. Okay. In their presentation, but Yeah, hotels are currently. Prohibited in BC 2. And according to the applicant, it's really kind of a They're putting it out there as a potential kind of third phase. Addition to the site if. You know, the use table or the zoning has changed, between now and when that phase happens, which would likely not be for quite a while.

[41:08] Got it. Thank you. Last question. The staff noted that the proposed site access is not consistent with code requirements. Did the applicant have a response to that? Yes, and I'm sure they'll discuss that as well, but I think, in general so we can allow more than one access point but it has to basically be justified through a traffic study during the site review process, so they have to ask formally for an exception. To the design and construction standards. They didn't really get into, you know, whether they were going to be asking for that or not. And as I mentioned before, the concept plan didn't really show. The final subdivision layout. So when we were looking at it, we were looking at it as one big site essentially with, 7 access points or whatever, but. Theoretically, if they were to subdivide the site so that each of those buildings sat on its own lot.

[42:07] Oh. Then each of those lots could have its own independent access point. So the access is definitely something that will require a lot more analysis and kind of details during site review to figure out. But yes, currently, if it is one site, just looking at it kind of at face value. Currently it doesn't meet access to and the proposal has shown also does not meet access standards. Okay. Alright, thanks, ML. Mark? No, sorry. Oh, Laura, sorry. Thank you. Thank you. Hi Chandler. Great presentation. Thanks. Thank you so much. Could you pull back up the diagram of the site as the applicant wants to build it? The proposed site plan. Yes. I have just a couple of questions that, hoping you could point out some things on that diagram. Sure.

[43:03] Does this work or do you wanna pick your one? That one will work. That's good. So in the packet, it noted that some of the open space was rooftop decks and I want to make sure that I'm understanding and I'm reading this correctly which of these green spaces are rooftop decks and which ones are not, which ones are ground level? Could you particularly point out the ones that are ground level and not? Elevated. Yes, and some of them you can't really see. Actually, let, let me go to, Just a full overhead. There we go. Even better. Thank you. Yes. So. I'm not sure. Can you see my mouse? Okay, so yeah, so this is rooftop. Down here building D upside down L. That's a plaza. That's ground level. Over here I'm building D. This is rooftop. And then the whole area between building D and building E is shown as a kind of park slash plaza area.

[44:08] Yeah. And then, building E here, which is a student housing. All these areas that are kind of in the. Elbows. Okay. I guess crooks of the building or bends in the building these triangle spaces where the elbows yeah with the multi-use path going through all of these are at grade. And then the 2 that have the, brown surrounding them, those are both rooftop. So I think that's indicating kind of railings. And then, yeah, I mean, the rest is essentially kind of landscape setbacks, surrounding the buildings. Thank you, that's very helpful. And then. I think this diagram will work for my next question as well. So in the memo, it talks about staff feels that there are height transitions that are needed. Can you point out if you have thought about this in this level of specific geographic detail where you think those height transitions are needed, which edges would need to come down.

[45:09] Yeah, I mean generally I think the. Staff feels that a long baseline so the building frontages that are directly facing one and 2 story buildings across the street. So kind of the the northeast corner of building A. Building C. I'm basically just creating a slightly lower elevation along baseline. Okay, so specifically along baseline. Was that the only area that staff had a thought about making a transition of height. Yes, I think so. I mean, the transition criteria, kind of speak to surrounding neighborhoods. So generally, You know, it's on the border of the site that is closest to those surrounding neighborhoods.

[46:06] So, yes, along baseline really is mainly I think where we were. Thinking of. Okay, and your mouse was on that building that's kind of behind the baseline crossing shopping center. I'm assuming that that's not an area since it's behind a shopping center that you would need high transition or were you including that? No, I mean we didn't specify I think in general staff just felt that the mass seemed a bit big. Considering. The immediate kind of context across the street to the north. So I think we would. Right. You know, we didn't specify in our comments exactly which buildings we thought needed to come down. I don't think we usually get into that level of detail and concept plan, but. I think in general the thought was where there are existing one or 2 story buildings to make buildings adjacent to those spots. Kind of transition to that scale. Okay, thank you. And I'll have some thoughts about those later, but I'll save them for comments.

[47:04] Next question, how tall is that retaining wall on US 36 and that ramp? That's right behind the the edge of the property there. Yeah, so, now I can show some of the pictures that I got. So. It's not, I'm not exactly sure. Precisely how tall it is, but think it's about 25 to 30 feet at its tallest point. And it gradually goes up, so I'm going to show some pictures here to illustrate. So this is looking from Cafe Mexico with the retaining all shown there. So you can see right there the retaining walls above the first floor. This is also looking basically from the. Based on crossing parking lot. The whole site is so on the western portion of the site is Basically below the grade of the highway for the entire time. So this is looking from the dark horse essentially right where the highway starts to go up. So there it's only probably 8 feet or so.

[48:07] This is all the way back by the broker in, but even there you can see there's an existing kind of retaining wall and then a berm and then the path and then another berm and then the road. This is showing looking across the street looking across baseline to the south. So that's the tallest point of the retaining wall that you can see there where the very large berm is. You can see it's almost level with the top of Mexico. Which is a 2 story building. So. The applicant may have specific numbers. I'm not sure if they've measured it or not, but just based on you know, visual data, I would say that it's 25, possibly 30 feet tall. Thank you. That's perfect. I love the images. Thank you. Yup. That's so helpful. I did do a site visit, but maybe not everybody was able to do that. This is my neighborhood by the way like I this is place I know well so it's good to have the visuals.

[49:04] Yep. Thank you. And my last question, if I may, for Chandler. So on page 1 82 of the packet, you have a statement that says staff encourages the applicant to rethink the project in terms of the maximum number of units that could be provided. Because of a bunch of factors. Some of those factors I get, but I had questions about, you talk about meeting city access and transportation standards and flood plain development requirements. Can you explain a little bit why city access and transportation standards and flood plain development requirements would, in staff's opinion, require fewer units of residential. I think, you know, the general feeling among staff was that with the detail that we've been given. The project seemed to be. Trying to fit quite a bit into the existing space and that as shown The number of access points that they are saying that they need to serve these buildings, which are predominantly residential.

[50:07] Would be very difficult for us to accommodate. We had concerns about, you know, traffic impacts. Safety impacts. Blood plane, etc, they would they'd be required to get a both a clomer and a loomer, and redirect the flood plane, which they have thought about and which I'm sure they're going to talk about in their presentation as well. But really the feeling was just that it seemed like this was. Not, not 10 pounds in a 5 pound sack. But maybe, 7 pounds on a 5 pound sack. So, the way that was. Okay. I guess I shouldn't have phrase it that way in terms of number of units, but basically just saying that Overall. If this number of access points are required to serve a development of the size that the development should likely be smaller because the existing street and infrastructure surrounding the site.

[51:01] Currently would not be able to handle. That type of access configuration. Okay, thank you. It's good to know your rationale on that. Appreciate it. That's the end of my questions. Hmm. Hi, Chandler. I'm gonna follow up with Kurt's questions about private and public streets. It seems as though I'm clear and with all the advantages of having public streets and dedicated city right of way. So if there's not future. Issues with like you say maintenance access, etc. So I'm all about that. However, we have some recent examples of both where I think a private street. Was able to be designed. Much more creatively and with. I think better a better product in terms of. Helping us try to reach some transportation and climate goals.

[52:07] And I'm referring to. What I think is a private street and the applicant can probably correct me here if I'm wrong. 30 fourth street between Meredith and Bluff. It's a street I like to use as an example. Often as really kind of a new and very different sort of street cross-section. It's just south of so. That's a private street. I believe is that. Correct, Chandler or applicant. I'm not sure. Okay, anyway, let me let me get to the heart of the question. Do we ever allow variation from the DCS? For a street. That would eventually, can we negotiate variation from the DCS? For a street cross section.

[53:07] That wouldn't meet the DCS but would eventually become a public street. I believe that we can. I would probably like to follow up with engineering and get you a written response. And I apologize if it looks like I'm rolling my eyes or something. I have 2 screens right now. Yeah. One is just above the other one. Okay. So I have I'm looking up at my big screen which has other information on it. Okay. I interpreted it as the usual response I get when I ask questions, but not from you, but for everyone. Okay. So I can, so, I believe that we can make modification to the DCS. If you don't mind, I would just like to read. Edwards response to the overall question about whether we decide. If we prefer a new street to be public or private. So there are several issues. Look at when considering if it is a public street or private drive.

[54:04] The first is to look at the subdivision standards in 9 1212 that prohibit private streets. Next is to look at the function to determine if it is a street or a driveway. This, this includes is the frontage needed to meet law standards. Does it serve multiple parcels under different ownership? Does it provide connections to other properties or streets? Does it provide through access to users beyond the lots served? Treat offs relate to ownership, operations and maintenance. When there's a private street, the city has limited or no operations or maintenance responsibility but also limited to no control over how it is operated. And the condition. When it serves what appears to be a public need that creates public expectations of the city that we may not be able to meet. Reasons for development have private streets include building to a lesser standard than the city requires for public street, which lowers initial cost but tends to create costs and problems in the longer term. If it is a private driveway, we want it constructed to appear as such, including using drive cuts rather than intersections.

[55:00] So it sounds like, I mean, that was really just more, an answer to whether we want it to be public or private. And in this case, I think with all those considerations, like I said before, we want it to be public. As far as modifications to the DCS standards to allow for, you know, more, creative street layout or something. That I would want to follow up with engineering and get you a response later on because I'm not sure of the answer. So it is possible to modify the DCS. We've done it in the past. You know, I think there needs to be a level of comfort in meeting the site review criteria. I think from a transportation safety perspective, you know, there needs to be a level of comfort, but it's possible. So the follow on question to that is similar in the sense of. We hear we have a proposed development. That has seemingly obvious access issues and people have asked about these access issues. So but the developer doesn't control. Access on on baseline or on thirtieth and the developer can't say I'm going to build a signalized intersection at 20 at the equivalent of 20 ninth street.

[56:15] So, but the developer says, gee. Under site review criteria and with approval I can do X number of units have X number of people here have X trip count. Where does where does the city and how do we negotiate? Prior to site review. An agreement. To create a signalized intersection. And at whose expense and you know how do we go about this because there's a little bit of a chicken or the egg thing here between creating a signalized intersection. And providing good access. For an appropriate number of units and we can't. We don't want to.

[57:01] Restrict a housing supply based on. Kind of a unfortunate condition. On the current street. So there is, a city CIP project. That's planning, crossing improvements on baseline this year. So there would be an opportunity for the applicant or the developer to reach out and get involved in those discussions. Whether we prefer it to be after they've submitted for site review or prior to site review. I can't really say, but I would imagine that we, we would at least start having that discussion with them. Prior to site review, if necessary. And I think ultimately, it's really gonna depend on the traffic impact study that's submitted as part of the site review that is gonna dictate whether or not we'd signalize that intersection, whether or not the impacts would justify it. So I think that'll probably be our best first glimpse into, what that might look like.

[58:04] Alright, thank you. Alright, applicant. You'll have 15 min. Oh, you're not Bill. I'm sorry. And can you guys run the clock for me so I can see it? And please give your name and etc. Okay. Okay. Oh, and I can at least start to save time. I don't have a lot of visual requests. This is truly hybrid. Like you're here and you're online. And I'll start by at least introducing myself since I'm not Bill.

[59:01] Okay. Yeah, no, I'm, I'm waiting for, yeah, I had that was at 0 before. I just don't wanna start the clock, that's working. Yeah. Okay. Sure. Yes. Okay.

[60:06] Yeah, Are you ready? I'm ready. Let's start the time. Bill and I are gonna split the 15 min, so I'll try to keep it brief. I will say one thing just. I'm sorry, my name is Andy Bush and I'm with Morgan Creek Ventures and I'll tell you a little bit more about us as I use my 4, 5 min, but, and I am gonna say one thing about access since there's been so much discussion. We've developed a dozen buildings in Boulder Junction as part of it at thirtieth in Pearl. And, and I think it's important to realize that that whole area is really served by 2 public access points. So as we get into site review and discussion, we'll obviously go into the detail of that and the transportation studies and making sure that we support those access points. Thank you for hearing us tonight as part of it and we didn't play a numbers game to try and get people out, but we did get people ask people to talk if they wanted to and so there will be people who talk about it and obviously the majority of letters that you got in support came in from people who think it's a good idea.

[61:04] Mostly I think we just wanted to get your input tonight and we want to hear what staff has to say. I'd love to hear what folks in the neighborhood have to say. And in the reason I wanted to slide up is because I want people to think about what is it we're talking about. I mean, it's really a an old 70 shopping center that's 100% paved and impervious. And just think about that and look up every once in a while while we talk and kind of keep that in mind as part of it. I want to talk about 4 things and I'll do it in 4 min. Hopefully one is the Williams family who owns. The center and they're really 3 generations here in Boulder. Not only did they develop this shopping center, but they've made significant donations to see you. They actually develop Martin Acres and the things called the Park East neighborhood as part of it and they built in gun barrel and their desire is kind of as a legacy, see the redevelopment of the shopping center.

[62:00] So I think we're really lucky to have. A local family and local ownership that wants to see the transition and in this as a family legacy. Our team. Morgan Creek Ventures is a. Urban infill developer focused on sustainability and urbanism. I founded it 23 years ago here in Boulder. I lived here for 50 and Bill and I have done a dozen. I'm all electric, highly sustainable. Buildings that produce about 40 or 50% of their own power. I think it's the largest kind of sustainable portfolio. And we focus on urban infilt. And so I think we understand urban context and scale and it's worth mentioning that however many pounds of whatever we're putting in whatever bag the FIr we're putting in whatever bag the SIR we're proposing is 1.9. The FAR out on what's being done, at thirtieth and or 20 eighth and diagonal is about 1.8.

[63:01] Boulder junction in that neighborhood is about the same. So what we're really talking about is kind of trying to urbanize those. And the way that we've been talking about doing them and have done very successfully, I think, here. So put in context kind of FAR and bounds and bags and stuff as part of it. I think from a landscape standpoint, We've done very urban infill projects and bills show some diagrams about landscape and trying to look at what's on the ground plane and what we're trying to move up. And how we're trying to transition things, but we'll, exceed city standards and create great streets and great plazas and great courtyards. As part of it. Is this a good location for housing? Retail that serves the neighborhood and community. I can't think of one that's any better with the exception of the fact that. It's surrounded by having 36 on one side and as we talked about with those big elevation changes it creates. Some issues and we've got an arterial street on the other side. And 150 foot towers on the other side and it does transition to a single family neighborhood but that transition is largely made through the student rental of those single family units.

[64:14] On the northeast corner of that intersection. And so I think the real question is one of mix and scale and I think we've demonstrated and hopefully will demonstrate that we can create the kind of scale and transitions and I think some of the comments that Chandler and others have made about looking at baseline and the transition on baseline. I think we're open to and the same thing we want to really vibrant retail area. The question is, can we create retail that's compact enough that it's successful those 2 neighborhood centers haven't done so great over the last 15 or 20 years but I think we can do something really cool. Those 2 neighborhood centers haven't done so great over the last 1520 years, but I think we can do something really cool. I don't want to do more than is appropriate, but we talked about I think 75 or 80,000 square feet, there may be a couple opportunities to do a little bit more. And finally, I'll talk about the elephant or the dark horse in the room. The dark horse has been there for a long time and the Williams family has had a 40 year relationship with them in the ownership group as part of it.

[65:09] And we have a memorandum of understanding that really talks about the fact that You know, this is a 40 year relationship and it's been a collaborative one and the reality is the family's been subsidizing them for 15 or 20 years and I think we're open to looking at a new site and trying to find a Dark Horse 2.0 that evolves at the right scale and the right size. And I've been involved in building things that you could actually move the significant components and catalog them and recreate them and it wouldn't be the same thing it would be different. But, you know, there's nostalgia. I kinda remember, and potters and I love the blue note. I don't know if a lot of people even remember the blue note but things transition and change and I'd like to see is greater transition here. I'll pass out the memorandum of understanding while Bill's setting up. And I'd be glad at some point during your question answer to read it into the record so that everyone is going to talk tonight can understand it too.

[66:02] Instead of waiting to find out about when they get it online later. But it took me 2 and a half minutes to read so I wasn't gonna take up. Right, Bill, just so you know, you're at 8 56. Alright, so I'm the urban planning side of this. The site is a parking lot. There's absolutely no, provision made for anybody on foot or on bike or any kind of old mode unless you drove there. So it's a broken part of our urban fabric as a community. I'm Bill Holli, Covering Architecture. Sorry about that. So, Trying to make the technology work. So there's the site. Chandler already talked about it. One thing to note is that we have thousands of students walking through the site every day. That is an energy that is hard to find and it's pretty cool. And if we can use it to make a really functioning neighborhood, that'd be great. But right now, they're either walking through a parking lot or a long 36. It's not a very pleasant experience.

[67:03] Which is doubly made challenging because it is really, really well served by all modes. Bike lanes, bus. And this is one of the components neighborhood centers where we're in the BBCP where it talks about it really should have great alt mode service. It's great right up to the site. It's like the opposite problem that we normally have. Normally we can make the site great but then tied to anything. The site's terrible and it ties to everything. So it's something we can fix. We start with this. This is an completely asphalted site with some buildings in the middle is the opposite of what you want from an urban form standpoint and across the country you start to see people reclaim these areas. We did a diagonal plaza together as a community. And that was also a neighborhood center. That was about 1.8 FAR. It was 55 feet. So it's very similar to what's being proposed here in terms of the the of the urban fabric maybe is a good way to look at it. The streets have been a big topic of conversation. Please ask about them. The blue one is proposed to be public. The other street accesses are not important. We want to meet the transportation requirements and work with what your recommendations are, what transportation needs to keep the site safe.

[68:06] For example, like this one that's already existing up here, perhaps that's emergency vehicle only. It doesn't have public access. You know, there's things that we can do like that to reduce this number down to just the streets and the drives needed to serve the parcel. So please let's talk about what the right thing to do is. And we don't have any alternative motives, we want to satisfy. Transportation staff. Once you have the street layout we've broken down and Chandler said we've broken down the city grid the super block into something that's walkable permeable we can make out their space in it we want to bring the blue the buildings up to the street to make those outdoor rooms and plazas and urban places that people find really welcoming and inviting. About, really nice. Nice neighborhoods and communities. And then we surround that by open space. I'll talk more about that later in the interest of time. And the parking is entirely contained within the buildings. We will also have to have parking underneath the student building, but none of its its surface except for a very small amount on the north side of the site up here.

[69:02] Up here, which is a buying the new sprouts. So there's a bit of parking there predominantly to allow the flood to be made, remain unchanged, but also to give some public parking there. Everything else is hidden so that the urban fabric is preserved. And that leaves us with this sort of fine grid, which is what you want to see. It's really interesting. Look at the grid of the of the finished product here, the streets in the sidewalks and the urban places and then compare that to what's north across the street. So what's North has to change to eventually to make this a really good neighborhood. So we want that to be the beginning of that part of that pattern that we need for the for the property. And what it does is it takes this. Which looks small and asphalted in inhumane. And turns it into something that's. Much more attractive that you can actually picture yourself standing in. And it's interesting because when you actually put in the streets you start to see the scale of the 10 acres. Until then, it just feels like a parking lot. Which is really interesting. So, this is another thing.

[70:03] So I talked about the students moving through the site. The southern, the bottom of the page that diagonal rust line is the, is the point of access right now. So the students would leave Williams Village Towers and the six-story building to the south of it. It come along this path right walking right along the retaining wall on 36. And then go underneath the underpass and to to the university or they walk right through the parking lot, which they do and it's not awesome. But we want to propose to utilize that energy. It's really, really difficult as we know in a mixed and non mischief project, even in the mixed use project, to create traffic on the street at all times a day. Just hard to do. Students are awesome because they don't have classes for me to have 5. They have classes at various times in the day, so they're active. As a group all the time. Or maybe they're active after 11. But the point is they're active all the time, right? Because they're different schedules. So you always have that those people on the street is a great base. For community. So by running it as alternate multi use path through the site, which is the zigzag line above.

[71:04] We get to have those students on the site supporting the the uses. And this comes back to those uses that we talked about. So the what we really. What we found is that this site, if you know it well, it has struggled to keep people in business here. There are a few uses that are heaven there a long time, the dark horse, which you'll see from the letter has had has been paying half rent for a long time. And they're a month-to-month lease. So please ask us about the dark horses a lot that has gone into trying to keep them on the site. At all. Let alone with the redevelopment. So, but the other businesses have turned over historically and have struggled and funder performed. The reason for that is the only reason you come to this site is if you get in your car and drive here. There is no reason to come any other. There's no like incidental traffic. There's no foot track. Nobody lives here. All the students that have meal plans so they don't populate the restaurants. So we need to bring people to the site to keep this commercial healthy. So what we did was we said, okay, let's concentrate all the commercial on this street right here with a dark horse and pink at the end.

[72:03] And And by the way, there's other restaurants planned. We would want to keep all of them, including the Dairy Queen even. If possible, and they would just be in the blue. But dark horse is special. So we identified it at the end of this plaza as a special use in pink. That's where we love it to go. And this street gets all the energy of that of all the new users on the site. But that's not critical. We just thought that could better support this commercial because it struggled so much. We did this option after talking with planning, or with planning staff and hearing the community. This is also possible. This could be the commercial on the site if the staff, the community and planning board feels that this is more appropriate. The benefit is that there's more. What could be the commercial? The in the blue. Okay. So the difference is we would we would change some of these spots from yellow, you know, from this potential hotel and and some of the residential to the blue. And that would create more commercial on site. Essentially most of the first 4 would be commercial. The downside would be maybe there isn't enough financial support for those.

[73:04] The upside would be it's more in line with the comp plan with the neighborhood, neighborhood center. So I think we're open to either. Would love your feedback on what makes more sense. Just wanted to throw that out. Also, as Chandler mentioned, the architecture we're not set on, we know it has to have a great first floor first 12 to 14 feet. You think it should be modern. We'd love to hear your thoughts on style. The same is true for landscape. In these pictures, we've shown 2 different kinds. One is really geometric. That kind of matches the geometric streets and the buildings. The other kind is much more sinuous and that's kind of what we showed in the open space plan. So it's a juxtaposition of kind of the natural versus the urban. Again, your thoughts on that would be very helpful along with staffs and neighbors and everybody else's. You've seen as we've kind of you've looked through architectural character sketches really the intent is not to show building. Architecture we haven't designed it yet it's really just to explain that this is a very different place than what's there now.

[74:00] And you've seen some of this place making and other projects around Boulder. That's the intent. And these little caught plazas like you can see here, these little, these urban places. Are really great place for the community to interact and the people that go back and forth and meet each other and develop that community. It's all skip right to height. This is not horizontally correct, but it is vertically to scale. So the street, 36, 5 lane highway, 25 feet about tall, 20 to 30 feet at the retaining wall. Our proposal in the middle and then the towers on the right and that's literally the way it lines up across the site. So keep in mind that the site review criteria have us look at what's around. The neighborhood center says we're supposed to transition. Diagnal plaza, it's all 55 feet and it's transitioning down to what's around it. The opposite is true here. We're actually transitioning up to the towers. Transitioning up to the bulk and mass of the 5 lane highway that's 30 feet above the ground. And our site is here in blue. So red is above 55 feet. Blue is 55 feet.

[75:05] Remember the entire east side of 36 as you head north is all 55 foot tall students. Student buildings and everything to the north is zoned right now. 30, about 35 to 40 feet by right. I have like 2 slides to get through. That's okay. I'll be very quick. We can talk more about any of this stuff in questions. The flood came up. So we have designed, I can talk more about this really briefly. We've designed the street plan not about just about urban place making but also about the flood. So you can see that the streets follow very closely the way the flood currently moves through the site. So it doesn't require much grating to modify that just a little bit so it fits outside of the buildings. This is showing the 100. Your flood plan, which is the regulatory start. For a flood plane. The open space There was some question about what was above ground and what was at grade. The bright green is at grade, the dark green is above ground. There is a new site review criteria that we're all just learning. Cipher few criteria, but there's a new one that says. If you're in an area where there's views.

[76:05] You it is strongly suggested that you put at least some open space up in the air so that the residents can and the users of the community can. Take advantage of those views. So we are reading the site review criteria to require us to move. Some of the site, open space up. And then, oh boy. Now, lastly, parking, there's some street parking. The orange is the hidden parking inside the building. There would be other parking. Under the student. This is important. I think I only have one more after this. The light blue and the medium blue are the first chunk of work that's phase one and phase 2. It all happened at the same time. Purple is future. So the idea was all of the commercial that's currently on site would be preserved. We'd add to it a little bit. Go from 65,000 to 75 or 80,000 of commercial or if you choose. But there's hotel on the site. We know it's allowed, but if the planning board council really strongly desired it, we've up spot for it.

[77:05] If you don't desire it, it could be dealt with in the third phase of purple. We have to come back for another site review amendment to do any way. So there's plenty of time to figure that out. And then lastly, that's it. Thanks, Bill. Okay, we'll take, clarifying questions from the board members. Can you take down that slide so I can see ML and George? Waiting for that to come if you came in late and you haven't and you want to speak you have to sign up. If you came in late and you haven't and you want to speak, you have to sign up over at that table and you'll when we get to comments. Okay. Who has questions clarifying questions for Bill? Oh, glad you got those extra 2 min. Okay. I was like, we're so close. I will. Thank you and your colleague. Say again. Andy, Bill and Andy, thank you for that presentation.

[78:03] Very informative. Appreciate it. Have just a couple of questions. Sure. So in the applicant's statement, you talk about an amphitheater. And you also talk about having food trucks, markets, or events in the parking area. Can you show us where the empitheater is and talk about that a little bit, what your intentions are there and also talk about. How you envision that parking space by sprouts would function for food trucks, markets or events. Just give me a second here. Okay, so. This area right here that sits. Between the student housing and this potential dark horse location is really important to us. There was visioning done at the outset by the owner. They've been working on this for a long time. They own it. They wanted to be really special. By the way, the very first thing that they said when we walked in was we have to figure out how to keep a dark course on site somehow.

[79:00] So, I mean, this is not an afterthought. So we decided that this amphitheater could be the kind of the nexus of the community, like this community heart and it sits right here. It, we, located it right where the flood way is, no water went over that during the big rain, but it is on paper floodway. So need to be open anyway. So the idea is we can put the dark horse there, we can make food trucks there, it could be outdoor events and concerts, kind of like the Belly up in Aspen, you know, that kind of thing. The student housing across the way is really cool because again, students are there all the time. At least some students are in their common space at all times. So that first floor could be that common space that students have and then that whole area would be charged. Sort of at all hours of the day is the idea. And so this is a little bit of a rendering looking into that. There's no building design yet at all. It's just this idea that there's this plaza with catenary lighting, places for food trucks, all that kind of stuff. So that answers that part and then briefly your other question. Which is up here. Again the area this area here is it's not a ton of parking it's a little bit of parking like the idea that if you think you might be able to park there, you'll drive there and then you can't so you park in the garage.

[80:12] But since it could be designed almost like a It could be closed off and you could do farmers markets and events and food trucks there, sprouts being more of a community market, it would be something that they could sponsor and support and be right on baseline so everybody could see this community event. So that's the idea. And again, it's early, so we're open to thoughts, concepts, you know, good idea, bad idea, other ideas. Okay, thank you. I have just one more. You take that down just so I can see our other colleagues. Yeah. So in the packet, it, it said that staff, to see our other colleagues. So in the packet, it, it said that staff encouraged you folks, the applicant, to provide additional information on what discussions, if any, have been had with existing tenants regarding possible retention or relocation to new space within the project. You talked about that a little bit. I just wanted to invite you to talk about it more if you have more.

[81:03] Thank you. And I think, you know, this is. I was talking to somebody the other day and they said, this is a chess game, right? Not a checkers game because there's also the dimension of time here. We've got existing tenants. We've got master leases. We've got lots of different users. And we have to build this in over a period of time and it's realistic. It's that folks are gonna have to close and reopen or shuffle and move. And it's not easy because I've tried to do it before so I don't want to suggest that it's an easy thing to do. But the ownership is open to having all of the tenants that are there. Ultimately be there in the long run. There really isn't a bad tenant in there. That doesn't have some relationship to students, you know, for whether it's very queen or Mo's or the barbecue place or sprouts or the dark horse. Our preliminary discussions with sprouts have been that they're willing to close for 2 years if they can move and be over on the corner.

[82:07] And I think the owner of that mass release may talk as part of the public comment. The dark horse we've also said, you know, we'd love to find that our course doesn't need to be the size that it is. They couldn't sustain that from a rent standpoint. And they don't really utilize that most of the time, but part of putting them on that plaza space and the outdoor as they do during games and other stuff. Have big spillover potential requirements that they'd love to have in more of a semi public space. So We've looked at timing, we're looking at their different needs for kind of next generation of business. And there's no reason and we would love to have all of the tenants stay there. There's a practical reality that probably all of them won't. And because I don't want to come up and and say all this is gonna happen. And Dave, who owns the dark courses, 7 years old, he's my age or a little bit older.

[83:01] So there's also generations of businesses here that just You know, you have to transition ownership to the next team in your business to make some of these businesses go on. But I think the most important point is. We're open to that. And I think if. Folks from sprout so the dark course are tonight and talk or if not in future communications. You know, this is a conversation and it's one that is a chess game, but it's an interesting chess game because all of those, you know, I wish we could buy McDonald's, that's probably the only one I'd close. But we don't have McDonald's. So the rest of them we think could be really good fit. And again, if it comes to the point in public comment or something. Feel free to read the MOU with the Dark Course, cause I know a lot of people. I've been talking about save the dark horse. I think the Williams family has done more to save the dark horse. In the last 15 or 20 years than any group and they're still excited about trying to do that. Okay, thank you. Ml.

[84:02] Thank you so much. So I've got. A number of questions for the applicant. Let me see where. So you got 2 kinds of residences that you're creating. One is for students and one is for market rate. How many students, when I look at the score footage, they were about the same square footage. And you were providing one parking space per unit. In your parking. Layer or parking proposal. So my question is How many students do you see per unit? That's so. Loaded question. First of all, I don't, you know, we've said, hey, this is residential score footage.

[85:01] This is student square footage. This is market rate. I don't think we've done the math. To figure out or done the design to figure out exactly this many beds or exactly this many units. So that's one of the things we want to ask you about. It's likely to be Say 3 in 4 bed student units just because that works pretty well. That's people like the pair up and triples and quads and things like that, but it wouldn't be exclusively that. And, you know, the idea for parking. In terms of asking how many parking spaces per unit. Originally we had this idea that the parking garage was going to be the parking. We were going to have a fairly substantial parking reduction and that we were going to share that residential commercial parking in the parking garage because you can do this daytime night time shift, right? The residents typically park in the evening and night hours. The commercial parks during the day so you can overlap that parking. But the reality is when we really got into the student housing to understand that what you have is not so much a car use problem, but you have a car storage problem. Students show up with cars and then they they leave them somewhere. So that's why I said I'm fairly comfortable saying we will need to do subsurface parking for car storage for the students under the student housing building.

[86:16] Right. So I, I think you've answered my number one. Question here which is out of those 285 student units you could potentially have enacted 3. Per unit. You couldn't. We potentially have 855. Students living in those buildings, right? 3. Yeah, that's probably. Times 200 so that's a lot of a lot of people on the site so that's just one of my questions. Following up with that is.

[87:01] So if we end up with 855 students and. However many residents based on the regular apartments. And I think from the numbers that I, that we got earlier, the amount of services that currently exist on the site, you're proposing more, but it's not like double or triple. It's just I don't remember what percentage more. So my question is, How You're adding over a thousand people to the site. As residents. How are the services that will support? Where will the services that will support this so that it doesn't become a car dependent development? Yeah. Right now we've got the amount of services. And there's no additional residence, right? Right now there aren't any residential on site.

[88:07] Yeah. So we're bringing in a significant number of people. And not adding. You know, that many more services. Am I to understand from the conversation we've had that those number of additional residents on the site. Might make this economically viable for the businesses that have been struggling on that side. And so. Anyway, I think you understand my question. Yeah, I do. And I can, and I can be brief. Yeah, I think that you're, you have to know in the head, you know, we've done Steel Yards, we've done, you know, 30, we've done some other developments and what we found is it's surprisingly hard to support commercial with just the units on the site. No matter how many units you put on. So we are I'll just say I am nervous that if we increase beyond say that 75 80,000 square foot level of commercial that they would be supported even with the additional units on site. That said, we did. It might be possible to do that. And I think that's a question that we would ask you to take up and give us your feedback on.

[89:08] So this was the original proposal that we submitted. And this is the 75, 77,000. So I think 77,000 square feet of commercial, which is shown here. But this is an alternate that we worked up after talking with staff. It shows, you know, a good bit more commercial and this is probably in the 120,000 square foot range and I'm guessing so please don't quote me on that number but if this feels more appropriate to planning board, then I think we would explore that pretty hard. To figure out how to get that kind of commercial on the site and how to. To find users that would make that financially viable. So, and I'll stop the share so you can everybody can see each other. But, yeah, I think that's that's feedback that we would really like. And then lastly, I do think I feel better about supporting the commercial when it's more concentrated. So I think that's the trade-off. Do we want a commercial that we're sure is going to be viable, do we want more commercial, that might be a little harder to support.

[90:02] But open to your thoughts. Okay, thank you for that clarification answer. I think I have one more question. Phasing. So you're proposing 3 phases on the project. And so my question is it looks like It looks like you will deconstruct. Only per phase and the rest of the site will continue functioning during phases. And it looks like number one phase is You build a student housing before any of the commercial. Is that correct? I'm gonna turn it over to Andy. The intention is that phase one and 2 are a bit more. Simultaneous than that, but I'll pull up the phasing. Hmm. And I would start by saying we don't totally know yet. But the to do. Phase one.

[91:03] And to do any of this, I'm sorry, to do any of this, we probably have to take sprouts building down. So that would be the first thing to be taken down. And then we would start on the main roadways because we'd need the main roadway to baseline and we'd need the we have to do all the flood work as part of the first phase so that park would be part of the first phase, the main roadway coming down and the piece across in front of baseline for all of the floodwork. And then really the idea is to build a student housing and the second phase at the same time. And to be building sprouts so that it could open 2 years later about the same time the student housing would open. So the real phase that's really being talked about in the future is the purple phase. We've talked, we've called them phase 3. It's really more parcel identification almost than anything else, but the intent is to do phase one and 2 simultaneously.

[92:02] Thank you. And I would be remiss, I should add that stat a lot of this is very technical and staff will have a lot to say about how it's phased and what part it goes in. So I should defer a lot of that to staff as we go through the process. Thank you. So much. Those are my questions for now. Thank you. Okay, and I just have one question. What's your guarantee that it's actually gonna be some student housing and some market housing? On student housing. I mean, is it possible that you'll end up saying, you know what, we're just gonna make it all student housing. Wow, that's a great question. And I'm like, as you say that I'm ripping through the code in my head to figure out what could be put in the development agreement to require that. So I will say this. We don't have any problem with you putting something in development agreement to require that. So I think I just defer to Charles. And I think we're open to trying to address that as part of the cyber development agreement. So I think we could do it there because we've done kind of similar things before, whether it's affordable. We did the first pilot affordable commercial. Project over at thirtieth and Perl and we did that through the development agreement.

[93:00] So I don't see why we couldn't do this through the development agreement also. And Charles was looking at. Lauren, in case there was a legal question. I think it's ultimately more of a legal question. Yeah. We'd wanna look into it once we're writing up the development agreement and see what's, under our code. Okay, great. And is the, presumed market rate housing rentals. I don't think that's known yet. We have discussed. Some for sale, but I we don't have an answer to that question. Alright, thank you. As any other last questions? Oh, go ahead, Curt. No, thanks. My first question is about the flood. So you're moving the flood. Or the I don't know what how to call it. Where the water goes. You're moving it a little bit, right, to avoid that building. F it appears. Yes.

[94:04] I don't know if we can bring. Closing too many windows. Okay, that should pop. Yep. Right. So I was a little confused by this because it's seems like the diagrams, the colors are the same on the left and the right. But you're just showing they are the same because they're both the current. Yeah, that's right. Okay. So are you is there anything that shows what the that the post build like conveyance zone would be. Not yet, just because we haven't talked to staff about it, but the intention is that the the location and the amount of water at each property line would not change. So the only thing that's changing is on the site. It's not changing the flow up or downstream at all. And all it's doing is really moving that north south channel this one. Here it's moving it slightly to the east. So the intention on this slide was just to show that it's it was designed to be very similar and just was slight regrading that that can be.

[95:04] I don't even wanna say re channelized because we're talking like 2 or 3 feet of difference here. That has been brought up by staff. I'm pointing a channeler who's at home. So sorry. Has been brought up by staff and I think that would be one of the first follow up sets of meetings is to work through that. The project cannot come back to planning board until a clomer has been approved by the city. So the city would have to sign off on the change. Before we can either even see you again. And I should mention that Charlie from JVA did do the sections to show that we could do it essentially with those street sections. That we've identified. So there's Ben Plimary Engineering done on all. Okay. And did you consider, I'm definitely not a flood expert, so I don't know what is possible. And this is the question that I didn't ask. Did you consider rerouting it so that the that north south flow would go all the way up the baseline?

[96:01] And not not create this open area, the what you're using as an open area for parking. Yeah, I think that if the feedback from planning board is it would be better to bring the building to the what you're using as an open area for parking. Yeah, I think that if the feedback from planning board is it would be better to bring the building to the street. Yeah, I think that if the feedback from planning board is, yeah, I think that if the feedback from planning board is it would be better to bring the building to the street, and we will work with Sounds good. I lost my question, so go to somebody else. I think you're it. No, I don't. Sorry. I thought you already passed. Go ahead, Mark. Okay. Although I don't think it will be long. On in your in the packet. You have a radius. An aerial view with a radius showing some transportation corridors. And bus stops, etc. There are 2. Proposed RTD stations. Who, who is proposing that is that RDD or you or or what?

[97:09] And are those for real? I'm just curious about those. Those are straight off the city transportation map, so I should defer to staff on that. And if staff, if it's helpful, I can share that slide quick. And that may be like a pre COVID. Transportation master plan in need of an update. Anyway, I don't know. Yeah, I think they're just straight out of the, transportation master plan. Alright. In your market housing. Yes. Do you think would do you have a Target AM I or put it in a more real term, what an adjunct professor. And see you be able to afford a one bedroom in your market rate housing with 30%. Of their income going to rent.

[98:02] So I would be lying if I told you how much an adjunct professor at C you made. A surprisingly small amount, but anyway, I have taught there in a while. Okay. So, the, intent from the very beginning of the conversations, the intent was to create a really diverse group of economic. Well, a diverse economic group of residents and so you know we don't have like I said we haven't designed any of this we don't know what they are but it's pretty important to the health of the neighborhood to have lower like workforce housing. I think there would also be like, you know, for lack of a better way to describe it like the penthouse unit. So the idea is that there's a strata and that folks of varying economic backgrounds would be able to live there. When you look at that many units and having that absorbed into the market, there's a reality there. If you just brought in to the market, there's a reality there. If you just brought on a bunch of high in units, it's going to take a really, really long time to get them leased up initially.

[99:01] So the obvious market is to you employees. And that has been discussed a lot. So the the intent would be to get CU employees in there, but I would be it would not be accurate to say that's a hundred percent of the market rate units. Okay. Last question. Do you have a rough percentage of open space. That is linear. Especially along 36 or along the streets versus nonlinear plaza. Gathering area amphitheater sort of percentage. It's a great question. You're just trying to look at like what is occupiable space versus what is more passively tree long and things like that. It's a good question. And I, I don't. I probably should, but I would say that based on past projects and what we're seeing here, you know, I would say that probably 50% of the open space is in plaza areas. 25% is linear and 25% is up in the air and that's a really really rough number.

[100:05] But again, your thoughts on that would be helpful as we move forward. Okay, that's it. Your final questions. Yeah, I think I just had one more question, which is about the design of that. The student building, I think it's building. The one that goes all over. So that shows a number of or none, it shows 2 ground level open space areas on the west side southwest side along the highway. What was your thinking in putting them there and do you? Think that that would actually be. Pleasant space or would it be better to have them more internal? That's another really interesting question. So the broker in is on the site right now and it's about 1520 feet below the highway and it's got that pool area back there and that actually is a pretty pleasant space to be.

[101:02] To the point where it's being kind of utilized as a like a club to some extent. So people like it. The other thing that's along that is not just the highway, but it's also that bike path, which is the primary circulation for the Williams Towers in the in the 6 story buildings that I don't know the name of to the South to get to see you. So the idea was, students like to be around students and the idea that you could be in those open spaces and be connected to this string of movement back and forth. Seems really attractive to students. And also, you know, students by virtue of the fact that they're not going to be there for more than 3 or 4 years and they're Kind of. It's a phrase, it's too. Too loud you're too old. They seem to like the energy. So the folks that we talked to that specialize in it, which is not me, feel like that would be a really energizing thing for the student housing. So. That's what we've thought about so far. Thank you. Alright, thank you guys very much. I'm gonna make an executive decision. We'll take a 5 min break. When we come back, we'll start public comment.

[102:08] Again, if you haven't signed up, sign up over there and you'll each have 2 min to speak. Thank you. We'll be back. I don't have a time is it here. We'll be back at 7 53. Okay.

[109:40] Okay, our, planning professor, Bill Shutkin is here and some of you may be his students. So, welcome to. City Planning 101. If you're students of Bill Shutkins, raise your hands. Only 10, a couple. All right. Okay, folks.

[110:04] So just we have, lots of people signed up and at least 56 people listening online. I don't know how many hands are up online. So this is could be a very long evening. I want you just to remind you that what we're discussing here in then we have to discuss amongst ourselves, but we're not voting on anything tonight. We're not making any decisions tonight. All we're doing is giving feedback. To the applicant on the proposal that's in front of us. And how we are how we see it vis-a-vis the code and the Boulder Valley comp plan. So we're not voting on anything tonight. Alright, so the first speaker is going to be Ken Farmer. And you will have 2 min, Mr. Farmer. Thanks for, thanks for letting us come up here and give comment. I'm gonna try to avoid.

[111:04] Speaking too fast and going into auction mode. I live in Southwest, Martin Acres. I bark, I bicycle into this area all the time. So I've, I've been to have probably half the retail facilities here. I love the idea of mixed use. I love the idea of affordable housing. And I love the idea of revitalization. I have some serious concerns about this. Proposal. One is that it's, it's a net reduction. In the land dedicated to local, serving businesses. And admittedly the existing The existing retail doesn't optimize. It isn't well optimized for using the land either, but of course this isn't the only possibility. What we looked at today. Having local local serving business is essential for people to walk bike and bus. Rather than drive everywhere. It's essential as a part of our vision. And I think is essential if we're going to enter into meaningful conversations about reducing parking requirements.

[112:06] Cause if we get rid of all the local serving business, then we're all just going to be driving everywhere and we're going to need all those parking spots. I'm very concerned that a lot of the commercial space doesn't appear to happen until phase 2 and 3. I'm concerned it may never actually emerge. The second category of concerns is that we might see this turn into almost no affordable housing or commercial space. Boulder doesn't really need a whole lot more luxury housing. I think every luxury housing unit that we add at this point just takes us deeper into a hole. We really need that housing for a single school teacher or the child, something that he or she can afford. And we don't really need more luxury boutique, high-end retail where you buy a $700 winter shell. You know, we really need a affordable retail. Sorry, I'm so sorry. Your 2 min are up.

[113:05] It goes very fast, so I'll just make one quick start. Finish your last final statement. The most important is highway noise. Residents along along Moorhead. You know, deal with a tremendous amount of noise. It's extremely unhealthy. We know about that. These tall buildings are going to reflect a lot more noise back. And I think that we should have a very serious noise study. Great. Thank you very much. Okay, next if I'm. Pronouncing this correctly, Okay, Losek. Hi, my name is Guy. I am a researcher assistant at CU Boulder. I heard about the project a few months ago and I'm here to voice my concerns. Regarding the restriction of that course to build student housing. So let me first make it clear. since, before I live with my wife, rent represented 50% of my income.

[114:05] So I do see the value in affordable housing. However, I just wanna make sure that in this project, the housing will remain affordable. Also. When looking at the project, I believe the. Replacement of our course by student housing. Does not serve the student community. Why affordable housing is vital, engaging with the local community is also important to us. That course is a place where you find both undergraduate, graduate students, but also non-students. It's a place for everyone. This unique place for the people in Boulder and I would be really sad to see it go. I mean, international, sorry, I'm an international student and I know a lot of us don't go out as much as American students. I'm guessing because we might not have the same budget. Yet, we are far from off. And we need to make friends to connect with the community. Dark cost is a place to do so. It is close to campus. For those who don't have a car and it is affordable. I'm in other places do you know in Boulder where you can get a burger and a beer for under $10?

[115:10] Please keep this place alive. This keep it affordable. And I believe it is important for students and it's important for everyone. Thank you. Thank you. Have a either. Oh, and I'm sorry, I should ask each of you to actually introduce yourselves when you speak. I'm also a guys to see you and I live, Around, thirtieth in Colorado, and I kind of want to voice my concerns about Dark Horse and the affordability of housing. For Billies, as we know, is a huge problem in Boulder and I'm a little concerned that most of the hasn't gone up has ultimately ended up as. These luxury apartments which as a grad student is never kind of in our budget range. Combined with the fact that dark horse is kind of the only walkable place to go to a bar in that entire kind of quadrant of town.

[116:08] And without replacing that. There's not really great transportation options to get to anywhere else. Like downtown Pearl Street is not really that well accessible from like the Williamsville area. So with that in mind, like our course is the only place that grad students who live in that area can go for a drink and hang out and socialize. And I just don't see how this new proposal kind of enables that, felt like the gathering space, the fact that it was said that dark horse is not usually full. In my experience, when I usually go with friends in the evenings, it's usually always packed except for a few select areas there. So. I'd like to voice my concern to kind of save the dark course. Thank you. Thank you. Alright, next is. Michael Grayson?

[117:01] Remember, please introduce yourself and you'll have 2 min. Hi, my name is, Dr. Michael Grayson. I've lived, I work it see you and I make a surprisingly little amount of money. I've lived in this area for 7 years. And I've used it, use this commercial area a lot and to me what this looks a lot like is the. Kind of the gentrification of. The area I live in and it looks a lot like. The types of things that I wouldn't be able to afford and. The plan proposed doesn't really look like. Anything similar to, I guess, what it currently looks like. But Yeah, I'm mostly worried about the I wouldn't say this is like a cultural center, but you're still when you're if you get rid of these commercial businesses that have existed for 40 years. That's still a large amount of cultural erosion that's occurring. In that area. And it's an area I care about, so I wanted to voice my answer.

[118:05] Thank you, Dr. Grayson. Next is Carol Krovchuk. Hello, do you hear me? Good. Okay, my name is Kiril Kraftchuk. And, I wanna start with Dark Horse is a historic restaurant and bar built in 1,975 and it serves as a non-traditional third space for every age group to sit down and have a good time. With their friends and family. It's a melting pot of bolder culture with visitor ranging from team sports enthusiast to hardcore outdoor explorers to quiet older resident families. It is undoubtedly one of the most historical NRC bars. In all of Colorado. You know, I've traveled around the world a good amount and it's sincere still astound to be with its intricate beauty. Regarding the proposal, if there exists a solution where dark courses present is preserved while the rest of the block is redeveloped, it could be a compromise.

[119:08] However, the presented material made it seem like the goal that goal is an afterthought. And the, promise to move Dark Horse as a sort of an appeasement. So I remain skeptical to that solution. I think the dark horse utilizes its internal space to the maximum. It's packed even on weekdays. Moving dark horse, modifying its contents. In my view, it's the same as getting rid of it in the sense. Another angle of this issue is the height of the proposed buildings. I find it hard to justify. Modifying the height to 55 feet. What is the point? Of the standard if we don't follow it? If we keep allowing this boulder residents will no longer enjoy beautiful foothills and flat irons. To summarize, I am pro deconstruction of dilapidated seventies buildings, but I am anti-destruction of historical and cultural heritage and thus dark horse.

[120:02] I did not believe that moving dark horse will work or maybe not even happen. And I do think that we should continue following the standard for the hide cap. If such compromises can be achieved, This proposal can be justified. Thank you. Thank you. Perfect. Perfect timing. Yeah. Ben Herman or Herman? Bye, my name is Ben Herman. So first I'd like to address some of the restaurant space. So the plan calls for only 7,796 square foot space total. I did some calculations just the building that has Karelis and Cosmos is approximately 8,250 square foot this does not include the dark horse restaurant space on the east side of the sprouts with Mo's barbecue dairy queen or the dining areas in the broker in and the Conoco station. Additionally, none of it is slated until the final phase of the development. We might be reminded of the Promise Low-income Senior Housing that was to be built off of 30 third in Arapaho is a late phase of the luxury academy senior housing the low income housing was completely canceled by the developers after the plans were approved and after they started construction of the

[121:10] luxury sensor. Developers promise concessions but rarely deliver on them. We stand to lose all of the restaurants based in a crucial junction in town if we let plan proceed as is. Commercial space, primarily a grocery stores plan through phase 2 and 3, however converting commercial space. To restaurant space in a multi-story building is expensive to do post construction. Dedicated restaurant space should be guaranteed in the first phase and more of it and the plot with the dark horse should remain unchanged. According to the plans, the entirety of the student housing building is contained within the darkhorse slot and parking lot. This building should be removed. Or at least reduced to the only in the existing dark horse parking lot. This would reduce the overall number of units and traffic considerations. However, if more units are absolutely required, some of the buildings next to Willville could have even higher than 55 feet, given that the Darley Towers are 150 feet.

[122:02] However, they're asked it to the plan that are good such as apartments above a grocery store. That is a great idea. But the dark horse serves as a meeting point for the entirety of the south side of town and is walkable within minutes to the highest density of students at Bear Creek, the student apartments long, 20 eighth and thirtieth. And the neighbourhood's baseline sub Martin acres which are also very high student populations. We're playing that prides itself on increasing walkability. They do not take into account severe decrease of walkability that the loss of a family friendly restaurant bar and community meeting point would bring to that side of town. Great, thank you. Sage Sherman. Alright, hello there and thank you members of the plan. Hello there. My name is Dr. S. Sherman and I'm a postdoctoral associate at CU Boulder. We want to thank you for having us be able to voice our concerns during this meeting. One of the things that I want to mention is we bring up a lot of concerns and compliments about the Boulder Valley.

[123:05] Comprehensive plan. However, I want to bring up maybe some of the goals and objectives of the Boulder County sustainability plan and whether or not we meet the objectives of that plan and Boulder's assessment of trying to reach carbon neutrality. The ambitious development of new projects obviously can create More. Problems and issues when it comes to trying to address some of those concerns and one of those concerns that I could potentially point toward too is the deconstruction and dissolution of Sprout's farmers market, which can be a resource that helps chapter 5 of supporting local food and agriculture, where Sprouts Market actually gets many of its food and produce items from local Colorado farmers. And I have skeptic. I'm a little skeptical about the retail spaces in the commercial areas that are going to move into the area and whether or not they're going to actually be able to meet some of the objectives that are outlined by the Boulder County Sustainability Plan.

[124:07] And so I just wanna keep it a little bit briefer, but I think that greater consideration and more due diligence into future planning for whatever this zoning project would be. Would I keep the sustainability plan in greater detail? Thank you very much. Matthew Jensen. Thank you very much, Matthew Jensen, Boulder High School graduate. And a Boulder chamber ambassador and a graduate of leadership fellows program with the community foundation. I believe that our task here is to keep Boulder weird. Keep it unique. Keep it special and keep it with that. Special identity that I grew up with. And that we all remember. Change is inevitable. I think it's important that we embrace change.

[125:05] We accept it and that as community leaders. That we adapt to those community needs. Initially, I was here to just talk about the dark horse and wanted to save the dark horse. So many amazing memories there but after seeing this plan I have some serious concerns. In other areas. So much of this community has already changed. It's been homogenized. The character has been removed from it. It just doesn't feel different. It doesn't feel the same as it did as the boulder that I that I knew that I grew up in. Some serious concerns about no parking there. If you've driven there now with the amount of housing that they're currently exists, it's awful to drive there. I couldn't even imagine. Going to a basketball game or a football game and having to deal with that. And if you think that an adjunct professor is going to live there, I think we're out of our mind. I think the people that are going to end up living there are rich kids that their parents from California are Texas buy them properties there.

[126:06] I think you mentioned that the businesses are struggling there and it's hard to start and keep a business going in this community. Those businesses have been there for over 20 years and they are still and continue to thrive. I would ask that the city, highly. Recommend that the applicant give some sort of historical designation to to the dark horse. We have to keep Boulder weird, we have to keep it funky. Have to keep with the character. Alright, next. Is a Gregory Cats. Kate, sorry. First, like I said, the applicant clearly cares. Sorry. Sorry. My name's Gregory Kates.

[127:01] First like to say the applicant clearly cares about Boulder, Andy. But. You say that Dark Horse can't pay the rent, but you want to put in commercial housing that's going to be less affordable. Doesn't make any sense. Sorry. Boulder is an incredible place. Where people for all walks of life diverse people can come together. And experience. A weird artistic town. That loves just opening its community and it the reason it's so colorful. And has so much personality is because of its local businesses. The dark horse has been here for decades. And it is one of the pillars in that colorful personnel. You it cannot be taken down and it has to be preserved historically. I have many concerns about moving it to a more commercialized space. It's not the same building. It doesn't have the same character. And this is a seventys mall and I think we all want affordable housing, but I don't think this is affordable.

[128:09] See it as affordable. I think who's going to live there with? At least estimations for other buildings. The Williams family has around 1,800 a month. It's gonna be rich kids. It's gonna be no adjunct professors. It's gonna be luxury apartments. Which is something the builder does not need. That you guys. Thank you. Don't be on. That was pretty good. Thank you. Please just remember to introduce yourself. My name is Hunter. I have been living in Boulder for about 20 years and I've been living in Boulder for about 20 years and I've been living in Martin Acres. For about 12. So this is my community. And we all have the dark horse. I've been going there for 20 years. Along with the Williams family and Realistically, I mean, if it wasn't for them, it still wouldn't be open.

[129:08] So they love that place just as much as we all do. And I know they want to see it continue in. A new place where it can flourish. But, realistically, as a community in Boulder, we have a huge problem like in Martin Acres, my neighborhood is a lot of people living together that can't afford housing right behind me there is 12 people living in one house and a co-OP because We need more housing in Boulder. This is been a problem here for a long time and this area is it's just a parking lot it needs to be updated. There's I've walked through it a bunch of times. I ride my bike through there all the time. My girlfriend and I both shop at Sprouts, but It's a lot of unused space that could really be updated.

[130:03] When you're driving into Boulder, this is the first thing you're coming into. And even those pictures that were brought up show showing the space and showing the retaining wall. There were police in the parking lot. I mean, that is a common thing there because It is not a properly used space and I think this is a great opportunity. For a really wonderful family to do an amazing thing with the space that has needed an update for a long time. And there's already massive buildings right there. If you look, there's Spanish towers across from 20 seventh. There's also multiple story apartments. It's not really going outside of what already exists. Thank you for the time. Thank you. Adam Perry. Adam Perry. Second, let him know who's up. Oh, okay. Yeah. Alright.

[131:04] In young, I cannot pronounce your last name and after 8, 8 and it will be curt. Dag. Close, okay. Let's get my notes here. My name is A. I'm a Denver and Boulder native. I am here today to earnestly plead against the proposed plan for Williams Village too. Not only are the proposed Williams village plans completely exploitative of their student demographic, it supposedly accommodates within I mean, as we all know, very unaffordable, $2,000 plus monthly price tag, which typically goes with housing in Boulder, well beyond any student's reasonable price range. But the plan also proposes tearing down long-standing pillars of the community that provide invaluable services to the Boulder community, including grocery stores, restaurants, and most specifically.

[132:00] The world's famous star course. Aside from being the only bar in Boulder with the dam. The dark course has been a cornerstone of the city for decades and is one of the few remaining icons. Reminding the city of its original draw of creativity and community. It serves all corners of the community from being a college hotspot to a family restaurant. To sports bar to cultural landmark. I have known people to come back to Boulder after decades just to visit the dark horse. I've seen long lost friends and family members reunited. And on more than one occasion, have witnessed people make their first friend there after moving into town. These are the things that matter in the community. That I believe as representatives of the city of Boulder you must take into consideration. The fact is the dark course does more for the community and student population of Boulder than exploited to student housing ever could. It's called World Famous because of its immense reputation and to tear up down would be a travesty to the community and the world at large. Thank you. Alright, Kurt and then after Kurt is. David Daniel Henderson.

[133:06] My name is Kurt Dagaford and I'm here to voice my objection to the development proposal that would demolish or relocate the dark horse in favor of new development. I'm a local. I've been coming to the dark horse since I was a student in high school. I tended to see you Boulder and made many, many memories within its walls. And although I have since moved out of the city, I still regularly visit Boulder to patronize the dark horse. My story is not unique. Dark Horse is more than just a restaurant and bar, more than just an old building. It is a community. For me and many others, the dark horse holds a special place in our hearts. Is it a place for families and friends to gather? A place to celebrate life's highs and commiserate its slows. A place that is welcoming and accessible to all, regardless of wealth, skin color, religion, or creed. It is one of the few remaining, portable establishments left in Boulder. Well, much of the city has been redeveloped to cater to a wealthier and upscale clientele, the Dark Horse has remained a pillar of the community, a place for everyone.

[134:04] I understand the desire to modernize and revitalize the location and do not object to this in concept. But newer is not always better and it is critically important to consider the impact of new development, especially as it impacts a well-loved and long-standing pillar of the community. Demolishing the dark horse would represent an incredible loss. It is irreplaceable. It is historic. Relocating the door course is also problematic. The building as it stands today and how it has stood for decades has a life of its own, a soul. Moving, it would remove the very essence of what makes it special. I also worry about a bait and switch in which the original intent to relocate the dark horse is abandoned entirely in favor of something else. There's a well-known history of broken promises in bolder development. I implore the board to reject this development proposal. But the Dark Horse Day. Thank you for my time. Thank you. All right, David Henderson and next will be Chad Henderson.

[135:06] Good evening, Daniel Henderson. I'm a B, er native. I graduated from CU twice. I left and came back like so many of us do. I consider myself a Philly well off resident Boulder and our course is and has been and will be my favorite restaurant. You all know. It's a special place. My wife and I took our wedding photos there. So I won't speak too much on that. I think that we've heard a theme tonight. It's that affordability is sort of the word. That goes around. And I'm sure, don't come these meetings a lot, but that it's a city wide problem. I saw you nod, when an earlier person said dark horse last person to get a burger in a beer for $10. That remains true. I have a really great melting pot type reference here that this the place where everybody from students to grad students to families too.

[136:10] More well off individuals can come and do and i worry that with the proposed development that will change. I think that the applicant represents themselves well with, as being well-meaning. I'd like to hear a plan for how can. The affordability of this area be preserved because I think there is a lot to be said for cramming a lot of cheap. Money earning space. Into this. Little spot. It's not a destination for a lot of people. As we said, there's cars and parking lots that you have to intend to come here. So, I think in general I'm in favor of trying to find a way to maybe focus the proposal on The broker area as not phase 3, maybe the phase one.

[137:11] Chad Henderson and then, Louis Louis Lacroix. Hello, my name is Chad Anderson. To start, I've been angry about the development of boulders. It's about 2,012. I was born and raised here. The hospital I was born is gone or rather moved in the building has been empty and derelict since. The University Hill has been practically gutted well before the hotels were designed to replace it and there's really not a space left in this town as we've been saying is affordable and accessible. It's fantastic to try to develop more housing to put more places in this town for people to afford to live, but it's not going to be how it works. I even keep hearing student housing for this proposal. Student housing is itself unaffordable in this town. I spent several hours today trying to look for an apartment that I could afford. That's less than $2,200 and I still can't really find that, let alone with the access that I need in space, the access to windows, the access to my job, which I've worked at for almost 10 years, I still barely make enough to put myself outside of affordable housing AMR or AMI for this town.

[138:14] So I am in a dead zone in so far as I'm too wealthy to get housing help here and I'm far too poor to afford the housing to be here. This plan I don't think will address any of that, I think, adding 1,000 people to an already horribly done intersection won't work. We all know the issues with Colorado and thirtieth just north of it, regardless of the fact that an intersection has been updated there. I've still almost been hit multiple times by cars and bikes alike from that development. This town has long since had great aspirations for the development that it can do and failed to achieve it often by not listening to the residents in their concerns. On top of that, of course, we all want the dark horse itself to say as everyone has so aptly said here and especially that should be taken into account.

[139:04] Clearly the international recognition that is getting not just from people like my brother and I that are born and raised in the neighborhood and love to keep doing. Going there and experiencing it for as long as we stay in this town. Thank you. So, I've lived in Boulder since 1970. I help decorate the dark horse. It is a great bar. This building is way, way too massive for the spot. It's a BC 2 and an MU B. Zoning and they're asking for 4 and 5. Height 4 and 5 levels of a height and they're talking about sterns and darling they were not even subject to the city height limit. That has nothing to do with how high that does buildings should be. They have said in their proposal that they're going to pay cash in lieu, which is a stupid position that the city has anyway.

[140:10] And that they are not going to be affordable housing units there. And how much ever the Williams family may be a lovely family. They're not doing this for the good of the city of Boulder. They're doing it to make money. You're gonna make a lot of money. There are no affordable units that are going to be there. The hot the biggest apartment that they're talking about is 791 square feet there is no way a family could ever live in there It's ridiculous. And then on top of that, the thirtieth and baseline intersection, there's only 2 ways out of that whole. Property baseline intersection is one of the most dangerous intersections right now for bicycles and pedestrians or more accidents there than almost any other intersection in the city of Boulder. There's an intersection at 20 eighth and baseline, one at thirtieth in baseline, and you're talking about putting another one on baseline.

[141:07] It the traffic concept is it will not work. Hiding, what did you say something? He said something about making hidden parking. How are people going to go to commercial businesses if the parking is in? I it's a terrible massive place that does not belong in BC 2 housing area Thank you very much. Anna, Anna, Malara, Whitman. And, and then it'll be. Cherub Felknor. I think I miss pronouncing that. Hello, my name is Anna Malar Whitman and I'm here to echo and speak on the importance of trying to keep the dark horse. Now I do apologize seeing as I don't know the planner layout very well. But, myself and many of my friends, Smoppachar with me today, echo the same sentiment.

[142:06] I have seen the shift in Boulder's culture. I've lived in Boulder my whole life and every year I see that more gentrification is occurring. That have subsequently led to the destruction of Boulder hard marks such as the beloved St in Copeland that we lost a couple of years ago. Removing those hallmarks takes away part of what it means to be a citizen, student, or tourist resident in Boulder. The dark horse is one of those staples. The unique environment, the impressive decor and antiques that hang in the dark horse is what true many of us in. It is one of the last remaining things in Boulder that makes me feel like and how it was when I was growing up. As a younger person, I can absolutely sympathize with the fact that we do need affordable housing in this city and in this town. Absolutely. However, we are demolishing a huge part of the community by getting rid of the dark course and other surrounding businesses which are equally, are equally important.

[143:05] So thank you for your time. Thank you. Jarab Feltenor and then Adam. Caro, I think, is next. Jacob Felkmore. Thank you guys for giving all of us opportunity to speak today. I won't believe the labor of the point much more. My, you know, oh people here have really hit a home about what the dark horse means to this community. So I'll kind of talk about my personal experience with it. I'm a third generation, so you, B, my grandparents moved here as graduate students in, the late fifties actually. Early sixties they bought a house. Affordability of housing is obviously a problem in and you know. I also believe that this, proposal will turn more into luxury apartments as opposed to affordable housing.

[144:07] Going back to the dark horse, my dad worked there when he was a student. He went off and became an accountant and then returned to the dark horse as he revented the school to become a teacher in his community. This place is, it's been a third place for, you know, members of this community. For me, I have my home, my work and the dark course, Boulder. I want to continue to echo the, you know. The sentiment from everyone. That we need to keep older, weird. We need to keep older, character, that our course is that place for me and so many other people. There are countless countless occasions that I've, gone to the dark horse for, you know, from sporting events to celebrating birthdays to celebrating new jobs. You know, this place is all. The final thing I'll say is I urge you guys to. Consider who showed up tonight. You know, I think. I think part of your responsibility is to reflect the.

[145:09] You know, the best wishes of the community you serve. And, I mean, I think I've counted. One, maybe objection from the community tonight. I know we haven't gotten to everybody, but I urge you to please reflect the wishes of the community who showed up. Thank you, thank you. Adam Laura, Adam. 805 twentieth Okay. My name is. I am here today just as a community member. I've only been in Boulder 5 years. I've only been in Boulder 5 years. I'm an undergrad student at CU. I just kinda wanted to share my experience when I bring people to people who are here to see me or see my friends, like my family asked friends from, where else I've lived. They never peak the hill on 36 and see Boulder for the first time. It's like, wow, look at Willville.

[146:04] It's, never the first thought in their mind. So adding more of Willville. I don't see as a benefit to the community because it detracts from the mountains in the view and the culture that we have here. I, when I bring this up to my friends, in classes and at work. No one, no one's excited. No one's like, thank God the dark course is going away. It is not reflected well in the community. A lot of people haven't heard about this, but I mean. There were a lot of people here. I don't I don't know what your turnout is normally, but it seems pretty large. So I think that speaks volumes. And I just, I. I feel like a lot of the community and people that I talk to and deal with, which are students, which make up a majority of the community don't feel positively about this. It's rather a heartbreaking conversation to have that we are at this point in city planning where we are thinking about tearing down the dark horse and adding more Willville, which no one is generally happy to see when they look at Boulder first time.

[147:04] Thank you. Louisa or Louise, L. And then thank you. And then next will be. Paul Whiteside. Hello, my name is Louisa Ensor and I'm a first year student at CU Boulder. I'm studying engineering and engineering honors program and I live in Willville currently. Along with many other people here, I do not want the restaurant to be demolished. My mother and I went there from when I've just been born. It's a place where people gather. It's a place where people come together and. Heard more about each other and I think tearing it down is Something that you're just going to lose the community there and people are going to eventually have to move. Because of that. But in the event that this doesn't go through and we instead said build some things.

[148:05] Sorry, don't be, you're doing fine. I come to the conclusion that there are some safety concerns. As a student who lives in student housing currently. I notice on the plan that there are rooftops. On student housing and that is an issue. Right now, all rooftops and SU Boulder are closed due to the event that students unfortunately have been throwing themselves off rooftops. So then I question, where are you sending these students to, you know, do outdoor activities. Are you sending them back to the original Williams village? Along with that, where are students who have meal plans going to go? Are they, again, those 800 students or however many we were talking, where are they going to go get their meals? Where where are they going to go? And one other concern I noticed was everybody was saying going through the parking lot is unsafe and while I do agree with that the main concern here is that there are unfortunately many homeless people and people that like to take advantage of students walking home, especially in the night.

[149:09] And I question with all the benches I see in the proposed plan, what are we going to do for safety of students trying to get back to the dorms or they're, housing. Thank you. Thank you. Paul White side. Who will be followed by Thomas Sigler? Please go ahead. Sorry. This is a really kind of an interesting situation that the family and the developers are in with a dark horse. This business has been struggling really for quite a long time. The owner is 70 years old. And is in. A position that they are. Going to have a difficult time trying to transition this to a new to a new to a new group of people that may be related to them.

[150:01] There are certain financial realities here that are greatly affecting the situation. This is something that the family would love to be able to try to continue. But the the ownership at this point, we've got an agreement with them and it's been had long conversations with them. They are right now trying to figure out how they will sustain this company in this business and this restaurant going forward themselves. There's quite a bit of value in all of the interior. Improvements there and that those improvements could very well help. Is the intention is that those may be sold in order to help the family. Going forward and you know and help their legacy but at this point in time There are large challenges. We don't want anybody to get the wrong impression here that this is something that can easily be transited straight into another property.

[151:02] It will be developed on the on the premises. So there are challenges here. We want everybody to know that. And that the Tobans couldn't be here tonight to discuss this themselves, but it is their intention to Try to transition potentially out of this business at some point in their future. We want to keep it along for around now another 2, 3, 4 years potentially if we can keep going and continue to subsidize the business. Okay, thank you. I just wanna ask. What is your relationship to the? One. I am assisting the the development team. I am part of the development team. Thank you for us. Okay. Thomas Sigler, and then, Destin Woods. Hello, I'm Thomas Sigler. I live off of thirtieth and Colorado currently and I want to speak mostly.

[152:04] On the fact that Dark Horse is a great place to get food. And is one of the few places nearby that I can get food that's not just a low wage quick access. Honestly, barely sub par. Many chain sort of place to get food. There's also the barbecue place that is in that corner and also Giannos, which is the Italian place. Those are also very good places to get food that is not. A $10 hastily made under a warmmer sort of fast food. These having a variety of places to eat and ways to eat are very important places. I really enjoy being able to sit down and eat at a place and not just be shuffled out so that some other person can come in and. Get a as previously stated, a hastily sloped together sandwich. Also in that shopping center is Game Force, which is a very important place for digital archiving and keeping our digital history alive and safe and well.

[153:14] They do a lot of work on. Refurbishing and making available older forms of electronics. For future generations to continue to enjoy. Much of our digital history is being lost actively because people are not taking time to Preserve it and keep it safe and we need to be preserving our digital and physical histories equally so that we can keep those. Items alive for future generations to build off of and to enjoy also. Thank you. Next is Destin Woods and after Destin will be going to folks who are online and at that point, Amanda.

[154:01] Will be, someone will be taking over from calling names. Go ahead, please, Destin. Hi, my name is Destin Woods. I work as a robotics technician for CU. And I would also like to echo my sentiment for the dark horse, but also, the unique architecture based on a quick Google search will not fit with anything in the architectural portfolio of Morgan Creek Ventures or Coburn. I actually have some friends that live at timber apartments, which is by some office building that they designed that was originally supposed to be a new Twitter. Headquarters now X and Elon Musk all that jazz. And I know for a fact that those apartments are not nearly affordable. And studio, mind you, that is. Maybe 650 square feet is 1,800 a month at my current salary the max I could afford is like 1352. So the fact that they think that this is going to be affordable housing with the architecture that they have planned is a ridiculous idea and not to mention who is going to manage said architecture or said building as well in terms of leasing and such.

[155:09] I also used to work for, let's say, the boogie man 4 star realty. If we want to say exploiting students for housing costs and everything, who's going to manage that? Are we gonna give it over to them? Are we gonna give it over to Boulder property management as well who has many houses that are barely up to code. So I would like to know what the plan is for affordable housing within such luxurious architecture, affordable housing within such luxurious architecture, not to mention trying to even move the dark horse into such luxurious architecture, not to mention trying to even move the dark horse into something like that, which will also now bump up their prices as well, not to mention trying to even move the dark horse into something like that, which will also now bump up their prices as well. I just don as well as the, sentiment of moving the students. Over here versus having a bunch of resident housing in the middle and then students over here, why would you not put the students next to the students when there's already a buff bus line where they would like to go and use and take to campus.

[156:04] I fail to see how that is a good plan. Thank you. Thank you. Alright, Thomas and Amanda, please take over from here. Yeah, thank you. We're actually gonna have Vivian, help us, excuse me, on Zoom. Vivian. Yeah, so, have 11, members from the public online who have their hands raised. Just want to ask others who plan to speak to go ahead and raise their hand as well. So we have a good idea of the numbers. And I'll introduce people in order that I see and let you know who's next. So you can get ready. And remember you have 2 min. I will call on you but please also introduce yourself. So we'll start with Kim and Harmon followed by M. Fox. Please go ahead, Kim. Hello, hi, I'm Kim and Harmon and you can hear me. Yes. Yes. Yes.

[157:00] Okay, good. So, I just wanna say that you in all of their presentation, totally ignored the entire. Martin Acres development, which the Williams family, developed. We are reliant on that center. Because we have no grocery store left in base mar. We will become a food desert when sprouts goes away. We walk from Martin acres over there. There are a whole bunch of people more than students that use that and you are totally neglecting a huge population. It's obvious it's just completely student centered and it's it's not a reality. Martin Acres is it's not a reality. Martin Acres is full of people who work, as well as students that need that. Center. So anyway, I just wanted to talk to that. I also want to talk about page 224 on some of your staff comments that's saying based on the metrics provided.

[158:00] I'm saying that the concept review application. Which you note contains several inconsistencies. And the current proposal is primarily a residential project. Such a percentage breakdown is arguably inconsistent with the intent of both the CB and the MUB land use designations and clearly inconsistent with the desired characterizations of neighborhood centers as outlined in the Boulder Valley comprehensive plan. And then on page 177 regarding use. Such a percentage breakdown is arguably inconsistent with the intent of both the CB and the MUB land use designation and is clearly inconsistent with the desired characteristics of neighborhood centers as outlined in Boulder Valley Comprehension Plan. I'm also dismayed by the 0 onsite affordable housing. I understand the rationale of cash in lieu, leveraging collected money with additional grants, etc. But the foundational concept. To the inclusionary housing is exactly that affordable housing included in development alongside market rate units.

[159:06] But okay. Thank you, Kevin. Please, please wrap it up with the final song. My final thought is by always shipping off affordable units elsewhere, Boulder actually practices exclusionary zoning. Thank you. Thank you. So next step we have M. Fox followed by George Kraft. Let's go ahead and and introduce yourself with your first and last name. Hi, my name is M. Fox and I spent a couple of years living at the Kensington apartment voting right across baseline. Despite it being said earlier that you can only access the dark horse and the other built businesses there by car. That was one of my favorite walks in all of Boulder. The dark course is an iconic part of Boulder and as stated it's eligible to be a historic landmark this year and it holds a significant meaning for Boulder residents past and present. On the other hand, the proposed plans lack personality and will further destroy what little history and character Boulder has left.

[160:03] Moving forward with these plans will leave the neighborhood a bland cookie cutter, luxury housing nothingness that will not fulfill the needs or capture the hearts of Boulders residents the way that the Places like the dark course can't. I was paying about 1,400 for a one bedroom apartment at Kensington and there's no way that those units aren't going to be even more expensive than that. As stated earlier, there are thousands of people who walk through the, dark course development area daily and to them it is a place of community building. The deep meaning that that place holds to the community will not be the same if you tear down the historic building that has become so iconic and its relocation cannot even be guaranteed. This would be a major loss to Boulder's identity as a city. This is not even to mention ruining even more views in the area by allowing a building height increase. This proposal suggests changing so many rules to make it happen and it's not for the benefit of the people. Thank you very much.

[161:02] Thank you. And next we have George craft followed by David Tarto. Please go ahead George. Hi, my name is George Kraft. I live in Basel, but I've lived here for over 40 years. I don't represent any organization, just my family and me. I think the Williams Village development is a terrible idea for several reasons, including impact on neighborhood, crime, parking, traffic, flood control and the merchants. Baseline sub is a, area of single family homes occupied by families and students. One will, the East was built, it was a significant impact on the neighborhood. Traffic surged. The time increased. Parking became a nightmare because Parking at the new buildings was inadequate. And too expensive for the students. Donald tenor of the neighborhood changed. The placement of another development of high density dwellings.

[162:03] Across from this neighborhood will exacerbate the problem. Just by having parking on site. Likely to encourage the same problems that currently exist. Traffic will also be a problem. Bass line road is already very busy. 30 a street to the south of baseline. Is busy with bus resident and commercial traffic. There's simply no way to safely and conveniently move. Hundreds of residents. 855 students. How many cars? There's really no way to get that traffic in and out of that corner. I'm not a hydrological engineer. But I don't think I have to be one to realize the flood playing diagram is wishful thinking. Anyone who is here in 2013 realizes the Bear Creek and Skunk Creek are disasters waiting to happen. Placing a series of hard buildings and the flood plain is just a bad idea. And I know this is a high hazard area as well.

[163:05] The people in our neighborhood. Mother's nearby and their students appreciate a summer's night tree to Derry Queen. A fine dinner at Curlies, a great sandwich at Mo's. Pizza at Cosmos or getting their food from sprouts. And of course the dark horse. There's no substitute. George, you've just you've come to the end the 2 min. You could just wrap up I just to finish so I sang I really think it's a mistake to allow this development it'll present danger and traffic flood control. They will change a quiet and peaceful neighborhood into a nightmare like thirtieth in Pearl and other commercial areas. Okay, thank you, George. Sorry to cut you off, but I just wanna be there everybody else. Hmm. Thank you for being. And next we have David Parto followed by Scott. Twitter, please go ahead David and please introduce yourself.

[164:01] Yes. Yes. Hi, can you hear me? Thank you. My name is David Parto and I first moved to Boulder in 2,012. I actually worked 2 jobs. To make rent at the time, which was a laughably small $650 a month for my room with 5 roommates in a house. But I worked at the Whole Foods at 20 ninth and Pearl and during the day stocking the produce department and then at night I would go bartend at Rubens which has since closed but many folks remember it for it's great. Belgian beer selection. I eventually had to leave Boulder because I couldn't afford to live there anymore. There wasn't enough housing and I was getting old enough that I didn't want to live in a house with 4 roommates. That was something that I didn't want to do anymore. So I moved down to Denver and that's actually where I'm calling you in from. I make it up to Boulder all the time. I love visiting the Dark Horse. But the reality is that I was forced out of Boulder as were most of my friends who I made when I first arrived in Boulder because there was not enough housing in Boulder.

[165:14] Housing prices went up massively every single year. My friends who bought a house. For half a million dollars in 2014 their house is now worth 1.2 5 million they could never afford to buy their house The most important thing that Boulder needs is more housing. And so any way that can happen. Is incredibly valuable. I've always dreamed of being able to move back to Boulder. And the idea of there being new housing units sounds awesome to me. Whether the dark horse will be the same if it moves should maybe the plan be changed to allow the existing dark horse to stay. That's up for debate, but to me the housing element while retaining all that business that's already there would be incredible.

[166:01] Thank you for your time. Thank you, David. Thank you for sticking to the time. And next we have Scott Wittered followed by Mike Marsh. Let's go ahead, Scott. You've done mute yourself. Yes, we can hear you. Yes. Please go ahead. Hello? Okay, great. Hey, I'm Scott Woodard. I'm the managing partner of Fit Properties that owns the I've been a Boulder resident since 1975. I actually worked in the gas station on the corner of the summer in 1976 when the Albertsons was where Sprouts is now. In 1,985 we purchased that building. It was wheels roller rink. We turned it into a pulse fitness center. Boulders Coast nightclub the first Boulder Rock Club 25 h fitness was in there for 10 years. Sprouts has been there for 15 years. I'm a developer in town. I've been discussing redeveloping this project with the Williams family for almost 35 years.

[167:06] And it's very complicated project with a lot of moving pieces. And I think this team has the skills and experience to be able to handle those issues. Right now we have a lot of safety issues on the property. We have numerous pedestrian and auto conflicts. The North side of sprouts is constantly an icing problem in the winter because the roof drains across the driveway. And we have drainage problems throughout the entire site. It's an old inefficient design. With rundown buildings and obviously mostly impermeable surfaces for parking. This plan, I think, is one of the best uses for this site. And the location for multifamily couldn't be better anywhere else. I think I'm excited about this team and their proposal for Williams Village too. I hope you can help them along with their project and guide them to a successful conclusion. Thanks for your time tonight.

[168:09] Thank you, Scott. Next, we have Mike March followed by Paula Moseley. Please go ahead, Mike. Good evening. I wish more board members lived in this area so they would know the lived day-to-day as we do. Currently westbound baseline traffic at rush hour stopped at the 20 eighth street light already backs up past 20 ninth and thirtieth streets at rush hours. The 20 eighth street intersection handles tons of in and out commuter traffic because that's where they get on and off the highway plus local neighborhood traffic. If you add a traffic light at 20 ninth street feeding even more cars into this mess you'll have multi-directional backups on top of backups. I can send photos of the baseline backups to you. I'm hearing lots of nice but non-binding and probably empty promises from the developers.

[169:05] I urge the board to require the zoning prescribed retail moving the dark course, etc. in phase one. And then allow the unusual exception uses of housing and hotel in later phases. Neighborhoods serving benefits are all in phase 3. Developers make the least money on retail and they'll drop it like a hot potato. We've seen over and over this stuff gets dropped in the final faces and you'll have no recourse then. This is land zoned as retail. Last, we can't sleep with our windows open in summer because of the adjacent deafening Highway 36 noise at 75 miles per hour and we don't have air conditioning. The World Health Organization ranks traffic noise second among environmental threats to public health after air pollution. Currently half the highway noise disperses north towards Fraser Meadows. But now you are considering 55 foot high hard surface buildings on the north side of US. 36.

[170:05] Powering above the highway that will reflect the sound directly back to Martin Acres to the south. It's basic acoustics. We'll get a double dose of already deafening highway noise. Is the city's goal to destroy Martin Acres? If not, please limit these buildings to the height of the elevated highway and no higher. Thank you. Thank you, Mike. Next up, we have Paula Mosley followed by Ron Dupu. Hi, I'm Paula Mosley. I live in Martin Acres as well. Sorry, get my notes. So. I thought there were going to be more speakers. The community. This was mentioned over and over the evening. However, it appears that this refers to a whole new community, one that prioritizes is the new residence and disregard the existing neighborhoods that are supported by our existing retail center.

[171:16] Preserve existing if the entire site is to be demolished that does not sound like preserving. It sounds like replacing and substituting with an inward focus. Rather than the way that the current retail and services support existing neighborhoods. Calling the current center a strip mall. Is a bit insulting. It was that was in some of the documentation. It's not what you see on Wadsworth, you know, where you've got pawn shops and tattoo parlors and stuff. Our Williams village doesn't meet the stereotype of a strip mall. Is it in need of beautification? Yes, in need of a facelift. Yes. Updating, yes. Green areas, yes.

[172:01] Shade trees, yes. Any decent designer or architect can create something good from a cleared demolished site, but a great design team can build something good that works with and honors what already exists. I also question the notion that pushing retail right up to the street makes it more inviting. Looking at baseline crossing, for example. The only folks I see out front of those businesses are people waiting for the bus. People don't want to eat lunch outdoors a few feet from baseline or any other busy road. I do not support changing zoning or allowing modifications to the height limits. Thank you. Thank you, Paula. Next up, we have Bron Deue followed by Daniel Howard. Please go ahead wrong.

[173:00] You've done mute yourself wrong. Sorry. Hi, I'm Ron De Pew. I've lived in Martin Makers for over 40 years. 2952 baseline is zone BC 2 defined by code section 9 dot 5 dot 2 as neighborhood serving retail serving a number of neighborhoods. Staff note the current site complies with that code requirement. What is proposed won't just 8% will be retail for 80% will be extremely high density unaffordable housing and 66% a hotel page 173 of your packet says that hotels are not an allowed use in BTVC 2 zoning Allotting just 8% of the property for neighborhood serving retail and zoning that city law says should be all or nearly all retail. Is not compliant with the zoning per chapter 9. Second, the the retail is slated for the very last phase of the development final phases of a project is where items, final phases of a project is where items tend to get dropped.

[174:01] We regularly see developers claim the project is where items tend to get dropped. We regularly see developers claim the project went over budget and final phase retail just where items tend to get dropped. We regularly see developers claim the project went over budget and final phase retail just want pencil. Note the developers words, the current retail and restaurant uses will be retained when possible when possible is a loose phrase, telegraphing that it won't happen. Developer of the former daily camera building at eleventh and borough pearl for instance promised a community theater in order to get the project approved, but never actually built the theater. 3 11 Mapleton developer promised offsite affordable housing at the former Fujah flower site. That never happened either. 8% retail is way too little and the developer will probably drop even that small bit in the final phase. I expect that sprouts will be dropped. Rather than relocated. What's clear from the examples I site is that the city doesn't have any way of enforcing promises that developers make in order to get their permits. Please deny this proposal. Will require at least 50% retail restaurants and services in phase 1 2 and 3 since those are the purposes of this property per code section 9.

[175:04] Thank you. Thank you. Thank you so much. Just letting everyone know we have 5 more people waiting to speak. If you haven't raised your hand yet, please do so so that we know to call on you. So next up we have Daniel Howard followed by Lisa Harris. Please go ahead, Daniel. Yes, Benny, Dana Howard, other in South Boulder. I would like to voice my support for the development as available by community along 36 the current excess of the peripheral for car parking is inherently unfriendly and hostile to bikers and fellow pedestrians. The current design addresses this increase a much premier destination. Reminds me of my own living quarters in college is in a mixed use setting where I had too much ice cream for the shops below my apartment and my mixed use residential address. This mixed use, proposal provides improved walkability and clearly aligns with the current Boulder Valley Company as a plan. Nonetheless, my primary feedback for developers involves parking intensity. I highly support the intention of the request of a parking reduction department.

[176:04] Particularly to reduce crowd dependency. Before I realize this alongside ideally affordable housing, I would encourage a costly very expensive underground parking, which can be 20,000 to $50,000 per spot. We decoupled from any rental housing costs. But the president chooses to be current dependent, they should not have to pay for car parking bottled into event. Our parking should be charged separate from rent and when formulating the specific parking supply to provide, this economic nuance should be considered. And finalizing the built parking design and associated request of parking reduction. All in all, I mean excited for Dark Course Tuperial, 2.0 with an amphitheater. The Dark Course was the first establishment I visited this evening I first survived in Boulder. However, the experience was soured by the current excessive parking provider that provides truck driving. I would be excited to be a potential future resident in one of these Baltimore units. This way is a person who chooses to live car free. I will gain the freedom to walk less than a thousand feet by the grocery store and Iconic third place institution of dark horse, among many other community centric meeting places within the proposed development. Thank you for your time, consideration.

[177:01] Thank you, Daniel. Next we have Lisa Harris, followed by Cecilia Gears. Please go ahead. Hi, my name is Lisa Harris. I'm a Boulder Community Hospital baby and I am a lifetime resident. I live in Martin Acres with many of my neighbors along with a thousands of students that live in Willville in the Berwick Apartments, we shop at those stores. I realize at high-end maximum density housing creates maximum developer profits. But 2952 baseline zoning code and comp plan neighborhood center designations are quite clear. This site is for neighborhood serving retail, which allows residents to walk and bike more and drive less. We want to support the city's climate action goals. Help us help you. But this project takes us in the opposite direction, driving ever farther distances for everyday needs. South Boulder has very limited shopping and this project removes even more of it. Why do reasonable resident needs for basic, necessary walkable retail always take a back seat to developer profits.

[178:02] Online purchasing doesn't fulfill all needs, nor should it. It doesn't support local businesses, nor should it. We need to support our local businesses. We need to make room for local retail. And it creates this creates longer consumer tailpipes. The comp plan directs neighborhood centers to have, quote, buildings at scale and intensity lower than downtown. Downtown's height limit is 38 feet. 2952 baseline purposes a solid wall of 6 55 foot high buildings directly on the opposite side of Martinakers. To put this in context. All of Martin Acres is roughly 1,300 housing units. So in this proposal with 610 housing units, it's roughly half of Martin Nakers neighborhood population wise. Going onto a road that already operates at a crawl at many points of the day. Staff, you comment in your packet on page 177. Quote. Further, the the current proposal does little to achieve a transition in scale to surrounding uses in neighborhoods with the majority of the building frontages going 5 stories.

[179:06] Yep, that's problem. Thank you for your time. Thank you, Lisa. Next up, we have Cetilia Gears followed by Lynn Siegel. Please go ahead Cecilia. You have 2 min. My name is Cecilia Guru. I'm a resident at the South East End. Of, Martin Acres, 2 blocks from. Table Mesa. I shop once a week in the shopping in the 50 2952 baseline locations. Sprouts is the place where I get most of my groceries. I like eating at Mose. I am very happy that there is a zone where I can do retail shopping in my neighborhood. My concerns about this proposal are the increase of traffic that it will bring. The potential loss of retail. I'm very concerned about the big emphasis on student housing.

[180:06] And the the fact that we really need affordable housing in this city and that's not. At all being addressed or if it's being addressed it was merely a passing mention. Of diverse groups in the residential units. I really recommend that there be no zoning change. I recommend that there be no modification to height. And, I really recommend that this Proposal not go forward without massive reorientation from students to afford affordable housing within the city of Boulder. Thank you for hearing my concerns. Thank you, Selia. Lynn Siegel, you're next followed by Hunter Miller. Just go ahead, Len you 2 min.

[181:00] Just when I think I'm so smart. Boy. And You know, I wonder how this even came. Before this board this way. It's, it's So, long that these same problems keep on happening. How is it that I know the developer needs to make their money and everything but The community benefits side of this and neighborhood centers. And the value of the retail and commercial, you know, where's the hardwood? Hardware store. Where's the pharmacy? I mean we lost the pharmacy right at wherewide. Where I live by Alpine Balsam. The neighborhood. Centers need to be. And this is the perfect opportunity. Because this is surrounded by high intensity student housing.

[182:01] And look at what we have at millennium, 950 student bedrooms. At the millennium. The millennium should have been landmarked like the dark horse, and I mean the dark horse should certainly stay too. It's just so remarkable to be in a university town and get educated like at this planning board meeting. It just reminds me. Of everything, all the history of this and what needs to happen. And that that we shouldn't have these long meetings. It should be very clear what you can do. There should be zoning. For the hardware store. And that's what you have to have there. And that's what Bill Holliki has to put in there if he wants to develop it. Save all the time. Thanks for your listening.

[183:01] Thank you, Lynn. Next step we have Hunter Miller followed by Rosemary Higurdy. Please go ahead Hunter. Yes. Can you hear me? Hi, my name is Hunter Miller. I live at Foot Hills in Table Mesa. I work at Ball Aerospace as a spacecraft systems engineer. I went to school here at CU starting in 2012. My dad went to see you here as well. He graduated in 1986 and used to go to the dark horse all the time. We still meet there on a regular basis. I mean the dark horse spans multiple generations. It's pretty wild. I am all for the points that other people are making with the regards to housing, updating old properties, etc. But look around. I mean, we lost the wallrus, Boulder Cafe, Sturts in Copeland. Cosmos, potentially another one. Beau is on the hill. I mean, what's next? I don't know, like the sink? Do Shambi T house? If those places were on hard times, we'd come up with other solutions.

[184:03] Change is inevitable. I get that. But we have to draw the line somewhere. And that line is the world famous dark course. Thanks. Thank you, Hunter. Next to a Rosemary Hagerty followed by Nick Aguileta. Go ahead, Rosemary. Thanks. Hi, thanks for letting me speak tonight. I just agreed with so much of what people were speaking about opposing this plan. I have real big concerns about traffic on baseline. I don't know if any of you have the displeasure of being on baseline already. In rush hour traffic. It's a nightmare. It's super scary. And I can't imagine even considering or adding another light on 20 ninth street which is just gonna increase more pollution from having more cars idling. I'm really, really concerned about the high end luxury student housing. Sometimes I wonder if, boulder of city is has any benefit left for the citizens of Boulder or if it should just be called planning board for CU, a boulder because that seems like that's all we're turned into is a planning board for new CU, high end luxury student housing.

[185:23] I also wondering is anybody keeping track of how much housing there now is? There's been so many more projects going on and what what the phase of housing is. I really agree that I wish Boulder would just let go of the payment in Looe program. I think it's been such a huge mistake for this town and that it has really dealt with no affordable housing or very little affordable housing being. Built because of that. I don't really care about the dark core, so that's 1 one thing that, you know, I.

[186:05] Yeah. I did find it very ironic when people just kept saying the owner is 70 years old and it's just like like oh my god that's so old like Like, really? I just really, really beg that you guys consider this. I, we want a neighborhood center. We don't want another CU, student housing center. Thank you very much. Thank you, Rosemary. We have 2 more people waiting to speak. Nicaragua, followed by Brent Fontana. Please go ahead, Nick. Hi, both are playing board. My name is Nika Gilera. Thank you. I'm ready. Or I wanted to speak in support of the redevelopment. Boulder urgently needs more housing and mixed use developments. I've been here for almost 3 years, fall into the lower spectrum of income and Boulder. And I know that we absolutely need to increase our housing supply at large. At the same time as we're providing more affordable housing in the city and this development is part of that.

[187:04] We can't oppose the development and more housing to allow more people to live here in Boulder. I know that this isn't the purpose of the meeting, but I would really love to see like the abolition of parking minimums and the continued strengthening of our abolition of parking minimums and the continued strengthening of our bus and transportation network so that it's safe and easy for our bus and transportation network so that it's safe and easy for people to get around without a car. People don't need to come with cars and people don't need to come with parking please do everything you can to further reduce the parking at this site or decouple the cost of parking from housing construction costs. Or rental cost rather. I'm so tired of seeing excessive empty parking lots in Boulder and throughout the country. That does nothing to create a character and liveability in a neighborhood place. We really need to build our community for people, not for private cars. I'm really happy to see the plans to reduce the number of car engine. It points around the site to make it safe for people walking and biking. I rely heavily on their bicycle to get around Boulder after an acquired disability. I'm really sad that sprouts will be closed due to redevelopment as I live in Table Mesa and regularly shop there.

[188:07] But I'm also happy to hear you all talking about the importance of. You know including in your grocery store including new developments. I think everything everybody's comment speaks the need. For more housing in Boulder, a more affordable housing and also more affordable business development. And for that, we need more space at large. People and for businesses and for human subject places. Once again, really glad that this is the plan. In discussion here in Boulder. Thank you. Thank you, Nick. Next we have Brent Fontana followed by Dorothy Cohen and those are the 2 last speakers. We have on the on the list. If others would like to speak, please go ahead and raise your hand. Please go ahead, Brent. Hello, my name is Brent Fontana. I'm a 30 year resident of Boulder and the father of 4 bolder natives.

[189:02] We all live in South Boulder. And I think one of the strengths of our community is not so much what you sometimes see reflected in planning board discussions, which is strong opposition or strong support for any one plan, but deep rational debates about the viability and use of our neighborhoods. And in South Boulder, what we've repeatedly experienced is developers coming in, identifying BC to permitted and zoned land and trying to get abatements to develop it in other ways. We would simply like to see those parcels developed as intended for the use of the residents. I don't think anyone's opposed to development. People understand the need for more housing, people understand the need for future development, but they simply doesn't seem to be any attempt by developers to actually develop the sites as zoned. And most of the rational debate within the community around it is centered on that. I think I've heard lots of great points tonight about walkability, about access to multiple different types of transport and travel, about access to use, but I simply don't understand why repeatedly over and over in South Boulder.

[190:03] We saw the 2,700 baseline. Now we're seeing it on the other side of the freeway and every single BC 2 zone piece of property seems to be ripe for dense development and know if little mind is paid towards the actual intent to use and don't of the community surrounding it. So please pay attention to that original zoning. Thank you for the time. Thank you, Brent. Next step we have, Dorothy Cohen. She's the final speaker with the with her hand raised. She's go ahead working for 2 months. My name is Dorothy Cohen and I live in Martin Acres. The Voulder Valley comp plan identified at 2952 baseline as a neighborhood center described the follow in addition to serving as neighborhood gathering places. These centers also provide goods and services for the day-to-day needs of nearby residents, workers, and students. Neighborhood centers should include a mix of locally serving retail. The anchors such as grocery stores, personal services, hair salons, etc.

[191:08] 2952 is identified as. Neighborhood Center providing serving residents. I currently shop at Sprouts and my friend who is here and got tired of waiting left. She also, shops its sprouts. The students use it. I don't know, Corelli's is a neighborhood gathering place. And I don't know how long Corelli's has been there, the dark horse, which is almost a historic marker. I moved here in 74 and that's the year. That, the dark course started. The city is trying to have more folks. Drive less for carbon footprint and climate change. By removing sprouts, they illuminate grocery stores within walking distance of the residents. I think the 15 min rule of a walkable neighborhood needs to be looked at more carefully. The city needs to look at zoning.

[192:02] And keep businesses that serve neighborhoods by not getting rid of. The barbecue pizza, Karelis, and the dark horse. And force people to drive more. I do not think we need to boutique student housing within a mile of each other. The city needs to enforce the comp plan and also I reiterate what people have said about traffic. I often stop at sprouts on my way home. And traffic is pretty bad there and it's gonna be worse if they have another stop light there. Thank you. Thank you, Dorothy. We have. I believe it's make on calls. Please go ahead and introduce yourself. Good evening planning board. My name is Makon Coles and I live. At seventeenth in Mapleton. What we've got here is a struggling neighborhood center. We all cherish our neighbourhood centres or 8 of them in Boulder. And the reason we do is because they're good examples of being the center of the commercial center of 15 min neighborhoods serve the needs of residents that are nearby and people can walk and bike.

[193:17] To those commercial centres to serve the eat at the restaurants and patronize the grocery stores. What we've got here is a struggling neighborhood center. Badly in need of renovation. I it's it's a little bit stunning for me to see so many people speaking forcefully about preserving the parking lot, which is what this most of this site, this 10 acre site is about. But what this development. Promises to do is actually strengthen the neighborhood center by adding slot somewhat about 10% to the commercial space that is there. And then adding to this already a 15 min neighborhood adding 610 units. The walk score is very high for this area and the bike score is 2 and yet traversing the site, walking through it is just such a problem.

[194:19] Folks, if you look at retail around our town everywhere it is struggling. And we we need to do things that will strengthen neighborhood centers like this. And I think the the plan that is proposed here to provide more housing for people like Dave who works at Whole Foods and was driven from our town by the inability to find any housing. We need to seize this opportunity. Add that housing and strengthen the center. Thank you. Thank you so much. Okay. Yeah. Okay, thank you very much. Are we done? Alright, awesome. Thank you all very much and we appreciate all the input.

[195:02] If you guys are okay, I'm not gonna take a break. Is that all right? Okay. Alright, so, cause we have, Chandler who's sick and George and ML who are sick. So trying to get this so they get to bed at a reasonable hour. Alright, so staff has suggested that we have 4, key questions. I'm wondering, if at least briefly we can put those questions up on the screen and then we'll take them down again. As we go through each one. Okay. Everything. Let me pull it up for you. Just put up, I think just put up, I think you did one at a time, right? Chandler, so just put up the first one and we'll go through that. Yep. Thank you. Well, he's doing that. I think what we'll do is we'll go through each question.

[196:00] I'll just go down the line. And then if people have comments, they want to respond to something anyone on the panel said we can respond. But just as a reminder as a concept review this is our opportunity to get feedback to raise concerns to talk about what we think is awesome or less than awesome. And, when it comes back. Down the road for site review, they'll be the opportunity to, to explore some of the questions, some of the issues. A more deeply. Okay, key issue number one. Is the proposed concept plan generally compatible with the goals, objectives, and recommendations of the Boulder Valley Comp plan. Alright, Chandler, take that down. Oh, considerations. neighborhood centers economic social cultural opportunities pedestrian friendly and welcoming environments and mixed use places that strive to accomplish the guiding principles of neighborhood centers. Alright, Chandler, take that down and then we can, I don't mean to be just rushing, but we, it.

[197:05] We have been here for a while. Okay. Yep. Figure out how to take it down. Yeah. Alright. Thank you. Okay. I'll, folks online. I will come to you last. I'm just gonna go down the line here already. Mark. Okay, so I'm gonna make some more general comments, but I guess they align with the key question number one. And the answer to does the project aligned with BVCP goals for neighborhood centers. I think that The answer is certainly yes.

[198:01] However, I find. The. Now my turn to comment. George was that? Yeah the, what, what I struggle with is what I struggle with at many concept reviews, and that is the in this case. The applicant has come to us and expressed a great desire to receive our input. And to potentially modify. The concept based on our input. But they've come with a plan that's thin enough. So then that. It plays into a lot of community fears. And it. It's hard sometimes to. Actually comment on it because of the thinness and lack.

[199:02] Of design to respond to. So. In terms of neighborhood centers on the application on page 2 and 9. The applicant says. They propose and want to build a vibrant. Fully functioning neighborhood. And I love that. I am support of rehabilitating acres of asphalt and soulless parking. Into a vibrant neighborhood center. But, I think that the tension there with, with this application. Is such that it doesn't feel like what's put before us. Is will realize that particular. Aspiration. And this is a, an application. That as I read through staff's comments.

[200:00] It is the I am most. Aligned with staff's comments of any application. Our concept review that's come before us. So in terms of neighbourhood centers and. What this could be, I think, take a close look at, I'm sure you have, but I continue to. Support staff's comments about the size massing. And overall. Design and access. So. Neighborhood Center, yes, but this is a this is a tough one and the again the concept review seems thin and playing to some some fears that the community has. Great. Thank you, Lisa. It is late. It is late. I'll try to be brief. I think generally, yes, this is compatible with the goals and objectives of the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan.

[201:02] I do have the same concern that has been mentioned about the purpose of a neighborhood center being to support the community with retail and neighborhood serving uses and services. So I appreciate the applicant asking us, do we prefer to have more retail on the ground floor? For me, the answer is clearly yes. I understand that that poses some challenges with the economics because retail does tend to struggle and this is something we're trying to balance. That people want 15 min neighborhoods, they want walkability, they want the restaurants and the shops and the gas stations and the things that they need close to home. And we don't have the density often close to home. And we don't have the density often to support those things. And so I very much appreciate that this concept tries to support those things. And so I very much appreciate that this concept tries to do both things. And so I very much appreciate that this concept tries to do both. It tries to be a win-win and give us some housing as well as neighborhood serving, uses on the ground floor. And then those people who live above can help be customers for those businesses. So generally I think this is a great concept and yes, to more retail on the ground floor.

[202:00] Okay. You guys are so quick. So there are multiple layers of the, right? There's the goals and objectives, the policies. There's the land use designations, the policies, there's the land use designations and then there's the land use designations and then there's the neighborhood centers. Pulling in the same direction, sometimes in conflict and I feel like they are. In this particular case. I think that they're a lot of the policies, of the Vola Bella comp plan that this is completely aligned with in terms of providing greater additional housing, reducing impervious, impervious surface. Improving. Economic vitality. The applicant team listed a bunch of these in the application and I think I agree with.

[203:00] With many if not all of those. In terms of the land use, so it's split between CB and, and, B, CB is listed as being primarily. Business which in the if you look at the part of this plan that is has the CB land use. That little western corner that is not business. It's not, it's, completely residential. So There's. There's that. On the other hand, and you be talks about a significant amount of housing. And so I think, and that's what is being proposed. And I think that that is consistent in terms of the neighborhood centers I agree with what what Laura and Mark talked about that they do need to be neighborhood serving they need to provide a significant amount of I guess, yeah, I will say a significant amount of commercial neighborhood serving commercial.

[204:07] So I think it's very important that we not lose any commercial, any commercial space. That we provide at least as much as we currently have and preferably more as Laura pointed out the economics are difficult these days. People keep, you know, ordering off of Amazon. That we all do and that hurts our neighborhood stores and so that's the reality that we're in. As far as it, we want to have the local commercial, but we don't always have The land use structure and the behaviors in order to support it. So, so overall I would feel, I feel that it does. Support. It is in alignment with the V. Providing as much commercial as. Is feasible and and perhaps without the hotel. Which is not really a neighborhood serving loose.

[205:12] Okay, I'm gonna go to ML and then George and then me. Thank you, Sarah. So key issue number one, the BVCP is our guiding document and as such As such, this identifies the neighborhood center with plenty of direction for accomplishing this. As proposed, this project does not meet the intent nor guidance for a neighborhood center. Staff has done a really great job of pointing out the deficiencies, so I won't go into them. Furthermore, the land use of MEB has not been rezoned and the existing zoning of BC 2 zoning establishes this is predominant retail as well. So I If we look at the BBC P as the sort of guiding.

[206:06] Guiding document and the zoning is the supporting document. I think both of these point to this having a stronger commercial and retail base than is being proposed with this project. So I think that it needs to be The applicant should take a closer look at what the BVCP. And the BC 2 zoning are asking for Thank you. ML, George. Wow, and, was very eloquent in what she said. And I second that I'm gonna start my comments, try to try to keep them relatively brief. At at at a more of a 30,000 foot level. Which is while I respect the applicant and what they're proposing here. To me.

[207:01] Coming in with this application maxing out every level of density on the site. Is a strategy and I think Chandler said it best of 7 pound or 10 pound, pound bag. And, you know, it forces us to comment on something. That is so outrageously outsized. That we whittle down to the 6 pounds in the 5 pound bag instead of starting where we should. Which is with BC 2. And how this site is zoned and how it should interact with the community. So, I also want, we haven't had the opportunity to thank, the public for coming out. And heard the public loud and clear as it relates to how many people value what's there today. Understand that change is inevitable. But want something that respects where Boulder was and where it's going and doesn't destroy their community along the way.

[208:07] Of the people we heard only a handful. We're for the project of which, to actually work for the developer. In public common. So, just, some things to reflect on. I agree with ML that I don't believe this, works with the BBC plan. As Sbc 2 is stated. I'm not opposed to housing here. Not opposed to redevelopment here. But I think it needs to be predominantly neighborhood serving commercial. I do not agree that retail is not profitable. It's just the fact that what's been proposed is the what dream of profitability for the owners and developers of this site. And we need to step back as the planning board and look at it from community holistic perspective and look at what it was intended for.

[209:03] And try to honor that use in the neighborhoods that exist there. Thank you. Okay, so I'll come to you. So I'm going to agree with, everything ML said, and almost everything George said, little uncomfortable with the wet dream thing, but, first channel did an amazing job of highlighting the, the very specific. Bbcp and code challenges of what has been proposed. I think his framing it is I think you said 7 pounds in a 5 pound bag is exactly the problem. It's just it's like on steroids. And the I think the what I'd like to I won't be here, but when you come back with your actual site plan. I would suggest that it be a smaller development. With more retail neighborhood serving retail. And that maybe one way to deal with the economic challenges of retail is to propose smaller plates so that instead of 7,000 square foot spaces you have 1,500 square foot spaces and you can have a lot of smaller neighborhood serving retail options that way.

[210:26] I'm, I also, So the BVCP. Is pretty clear that about these transition zones and that are near existing neighborhoods and encouraging low and medium density residential uses such as single family housing row homes and a variety of flats. You've only proposed flats. And I, I sure there are reasons for that, but I'd like you to try to think about. Some additional housing types. Especially if you're moving into the transition zones and the other I want to reiterate something that, One of the members of the community said I like Lisa whose name last name I can't remember she pointed out that the BC zone density is supposed to be lower than the downtown density and yet that's not what you've proposed.

[211:19] Take it off steroids. Add some more commercial space. Look to see if you can add some additional, housing, different housing types. And I will of course eventually talk about needing more green space and even some free range trees. Okay, go ahead. Thank you. I just wanted to add one other sentence to my comments touching on something that Kurt mentioned, I think, and that is the hotel, which the applicant also asked about that you were proposing a hotel if that is something that planning board and city council would support and I would say based on Chandler's analysis, a hotel here would be extremely difficult to achieve.

[212:02] And I don't know that it is something that we're particularly trying to make happen in this particular neighborhood. It's not a neighborhood serving use. So I would not. Go out of my way to put a hotel on this site. Okay, thank you. Alright, next is a key question number 2, which I'll just read, which is the book does the board have feedback on the conceptual site plan and building design. And this time I'll work backwards. George, let's start with you. Sure. Chandler, are you still with us? Sorry, can, can you put that up on the screen real quick? Thank you. Yeah. Okay, hold on. I think I covered that in issue number one. I believe that the conceptual design design was put forth as a strategy to maximize the site and I think the developer needs to go back.

[213:12] And look at. Our comments and really massively revise it. To more accommodate what this should be as far as BC 2 goes I don't know, other comments. Alright, thanks George. Chandler, if you can remember how to take that down so we can see ML. Thank you. Ml, you're next. Thank you. Okay, so. Okay, I believe that the staff has provided good input on the site and building design issues that need addressing, including access, permeability and scale. I will add, that I would not support residential on the ground floor of any buildings facing baseline or thirtieth street.

[214:03] The specific input. I would be interested in seeing a range of basic services that can support the neighborhood so that the project does not become a car dependent development. I would also say that any parking reduction, especially for students, have a good option for the car storing reality. Lastly, you refer to this as an urban development. I'm not sure this has to density for that. And especially that such a significant amount of tenants will be students. Students are transient and they're generally not here in summers and holidays. That's not a stable population for businesses that operate year round. And I think if we look at this site and the base mar site. There's a lot of student population that impacts the way those businesses can function. So given the BVCP and zoning. It would seem to me that your target population might better be focused on working folks. And not on students.

[215:06] I think that would help bring stability to the businesses. And create. A base for a neighborhood. Neighborhood center. Regarding the whole plan like I say take a look at what the staff has to say. I think they did a great job. And there is a lot of wiggle room for provided so I would Consider who who you will be housing. And how they can contribute to the. Neighborhood center. Intent of the S. Hey, thanks, ML. Thanks. I have a number of specific comments. First of all, I wanna call out something that Sarah mentioned, which is about Trying to. Make use of smaller units for the commercial, which I think is a great idea. I always like to see more smaller spaces rather than fewer larger spaces.

[216:10] We talked a little bit about the street sections. I think to the narrower and more pedestrian friendly streets that you can make the better. I think that there are some great examples in Vola Junction. The north, section Spark area. I think those are fabulous streets. Mark already mentioned those. And so I think that that should be the goal. Minimizing the curb cuts and access, I think the staff talked about. Certainly there is a and access off of the parking lot on the along. Broadway, along baseline, the little small. Parking lot that you have there. That seems unnecessary. It seems like that access could just come off of that street A. And there's also, it looks like there was a parking.

[217:07] An underground parking access to a big building building A off of thirtieth street and it seems like that should come off of a lower Street basically also street A. To minimize the number of, curb cuts on baseline and, in terms of the heights, I'll talk about the, the next question is about the 55 foot height, but in general I think that Kind of echoing what some of the other people have said. There does need to be more variation in. The height and the intensity. I think, you know, it's pretty much consistent. Or and 5 stories. Across the whole the whole development and A little more variation. Or interest and, just to, to provide to make it less.

[218:09] Of a solid wall I think would be appropriate. It would come at the cost of housing units and I'm always wanted to be in support of more housing. But I think that It's, it's pretty clear that if we want to have a successful and beautiful development, we need to have a little more articulation. In the height. I will disagree with ML about the type of housing. I think that this is an ideal place for student housing. It is just across 2 streets from CU and so providing student at least a significant amount of student housing there. I think is completely appropriate. Like what ML said about having commercial on a long baseline. I think that that is appropriate.

[219:03] I don't know that. The on the ground floor. I don't know that. It needs to be all commercial all the way along thirtieth because on the other side, certainly on the Willville side, there's no commercial along the street, but along along baseline I think that that would be Great. And I think that is it. Thanks, Laura. Site design is not my forte, so I'm not going to say much here other than to say I think staff made some great comments and I didn't see anything in there that I disagreed with except when we'll get to the height at the next question, the question of height and transitions. I'll have something to say. And I do also generally agree that this is a great location for student housing as well as non-student housing. I like that you included a mix in there to provide what ML is asking for, which is, you know, a stable population for the long term, any housing you put here is more customers for the businesses, right?

[220:03] Whether it's part of the year or all the year. But I think it's great to have that mix and being so close to see you is super important. So and I will second the comments of my colleagues as well as staff. Okay. So, you know, we're, we're being asked to comment on. 5 4 5 brown blocks that are 4 or 5 stories tall. You know, it's really hard to comment. On the design of that other than the say yeah in these more articulation. And it does it feels It, you know, even to a guy that loves housing and loves density and likes urban. An urban feel. It feels, you know, it feels massive. And I think again, when confronted with.

[221:00] This thinness of design is hard. It's hard to say anything other than. Gee, it's, I understand the community's concerns and fears about the scale of the development. And I'll just make a general comment on some design. Things that feel like are going on in Boulder, and that is buildings without tops. That you go up for or 5 floors. And it kind of disappears into a thin line. And the building doesn't have a cap. It doesn't, it doesn't, feel like a cake. But that has a top and a bottom. It goes up and it just ends. So I would urge you to, in your designs. To make the building have the top and the bottom and the middle and have it feel. Like something. I think that the other thing that I see is gratuitous material changes. You have no materials. You have the Pinterest board of possible things. Not many of those images.

[222:00] Look like housing. They look more like commercial office buildings and less like housing than what I would. Hope and and and hope that the community feels like. Which leads into my comments about the site design and open space. A lot of that open space. Is linear associated with the path. Next to Highway 36. And the community has talked about. Noise levels from 36 and and really that is not a space I think it's great to have trees along the path. I think there needs to be more connection from the path. Into the site because if you What's shown, I counted one or 2 connections into the site from the path. And they kind of fritter away and again, this is concept review. I understand, but it doesn't feel like a great connection from the path. Into the site. And counting that as Open space, fine. But when you have roof open space, linear open space next to the street.

[223:10] And it seems like a minimization. Of community open space within the site that if I come down out of my building and I'm I'm in the courtyard I want to greet my friends or have a lunch outside or whatever. It doesn't feel like there's enough of that. So, then the final. Thing is, you know, I'll I don't want to denigrate the dark horse or sprouts or anything else, but it is a terrible sea of assphalt. And, and what you're proposing is an improvement. But that doesn't. Relieve you of the responsibility of design. Excellence and making that place. Feel like home for the people that are living there. I'm all for residential uses there, both student.

[224:07] And. But I really want it to feel like some place that is identifiable as home versus. Storage for people. Thanks, Mark. So I'll bounce off of Mark's comments about, green space. Really totally inadequate in the design that you've offered. I think he talked about it with great. Effect. I agree with Almost everything I've heard from, my colleagues. One thing we heard from neighbors was the concern about having tall buildings along 36 that would bounce sound over into Martin Acres. And, I'm not a sound engineer, but I think that that's something for, applicants and staff to be concerned about.

[225:06] And I wouldn't want to stay in a hotel or live in an apartment building that was right up against 36 if I didn't have to. And so I'm wondering if it's. Worth thinking about. Moving. This of course. Throw out everything you have right now, but to think about moving your parking garage. To be against 36. And having some sort of. Covering that would hide the parking garage from 36 much the way we approve that for the new buildings at Ball Aerospace. And then. So you're instead of putting people against 36, you're putting cars against 36 and it could also be lower maybe not bounce off so much sound to Martin acres. And then you'd have a different configuration. Opportunity in the space that's left. That may not that may not make any sense.

[226:03] I'm not an architect but I'm just trying to think about ways to open up space. Make how the housing of the residential that you're thinking of building along there. Something that's more appealing to people, you're not having people live up against the freeway. And I'll just reiterate what Mark said. It's really hard to comment on Lego buildings, which is what you're asking us to comment on. And. I understand that you don't want to go too far down the road before coming and coming to staff for concept review and input and coming to us for concept review and input. But we almost don't know what responding to. And that's really, really challenging. So those are my comments. All right, we'll go to, I thought that Sarah's suggestion of moving the parking to along 36.

[227:05] If it's possible, which may not. But if it were, I think it'd be great. I think that's fantastic idea. And ordinarily we say, oh, well, you can't have an exposed parking garage, right? It's got to be wrapped. Well, if it's on 36, decide on 36 does not have to be wrapped with anything, right? So. Whether it would work or not, I don't know, but I just wanna raise that. And one other thing is I'm looking at ML. In terms of concept site plan and building design, this is not human scaled, which I know is one of Ml's concerns about development in town. This isn't human scaled, at least not as it's proposed at 55, mostly 55 feet across the way with very great density, small amounts of open space. So, please put, please do what you can to put, humans back into the overall design.

[228:00] Okay, question number 3 is, broadly is the proposed height of 55 feet in general proportion to the height of existing buildings and the proposed or projected heights of approved buildings in the area. And I'm wondering. Chandler, if you can actually bring up, you had had 4 sub questions. Oh. Do you remember that in, in the, you know the ones I'm talking about. Yep, hold on one sec there after all these pictures. Oh, wait. There you go. Okay. I think under if I read the proposal correctly under Hi, you had 4 sort of sub questions. Are these them? Okay, yes. That's, yeah, you do that. They just look, they're really long on a slide. Okay. Okay, so. Does the board find that the building heights are compatible with the character of the area?

[229:00] Are the buildings form massing and length design to a human scale. If the board finds the building height is not compatible with the height of buildings in the surrounding area is the project near enough to an area of redevelopment where higher intensity of use and similar building height is anticipated to justify the increased building height. Does the project preserve and take advantage of prominent mountain views from public spaces? And if there are prominent mountain views from the site, usable open spaces on the site are elevated common areas of the building are located in designed to allow users of the site access to such views. So those are sort of the boundary, not boundaries, but. A framework for us to. Tackle this particular question. You know. Those are taken from the site of your criteria just as an aside. Okay, great. That's very helpful. Thank you. Before we have the discussion, can I ask a question?

[230:01] So Chandler, I'm sorry I I didn't, or maybe Charles knows the answer to this. I'm sorry, I didn't queue this up ahead of time, but. When we were doing the new site review criteria and I assume this project is coming in under the new site review criteria. Correct. Talked about where would height modifications be appropriate and we did not as I recall include a specific distance to another building of similar height. Where did we land on that? What does it say in the new site review criteria? There isn't a requirement that has a distance requirement or any kind of saturation requirement for high modifications. They're considered individually. Considered individually and what is what are our goal posts or what are our goal posts or what are our goal posts or what are our guidelines that say when it' which are again, extracted from the site review criteria. Right, so we don't actually, we don't have to determine these now, but they're good framing for our thinking. Yeah, that was our hope. Okay, great. If you don't mind Chandler taking this down so we can see our colleagues, thank you.

[231:05] I'll start with Mark this time and we'll work our way. Over. Okay. I'm not. The site layout. As far as it goes doesn't seem to take advantage of any view corridors as far as I can tell. And it answers the same question in terms of. Building height. I'm not afraid of 55 feet. I don't think the community should be afraid of 55 feet. We have a 55 foot height limit. It's not 35 feet. 55 feet with the right community benefit. But given what we've been presented, which of these the blocky Lego like buildings in the current layout. Design taking advantage of views and that speaks to it goes back to the open spaces that ideally you would have.

[232:05] Building layouts that create meaningful open spaces that also incorporate views. So. That's what I have to say about this question. Okay, thank you, Laura. Or Lisa. You can call me Leonardo. I don't care. So I also am not afraid of 55 feet. I think it's important for the community to understand. The height limit that we refer to as the height limit in BC 2 is the by right height limit. That means that the developer can build that without going through any special process without asking for any special permission without meeting any extra criteria and they can just do it. But in this zone, it is appropriate to go up to 55 feet if they go through the site review process and we determine the site review process and we determine by our criteria that that is appropriate to go through the site review process and we determine by our criteria that that is appropriate for that site. So they're not breaking any rules, they're not getting any special exemption, they're going through the process that the city has determined is the appropriate process to get up to 55 feet, which is allowed at this site.

[233:06] So I just wanna make sure people understand that because most people don't. I didn't 2 years ago. So, 55 feet I think is appropriate. This is a site that is surrounded by really tall buildings that are part of the CU campus that do not have to obey the height limit because they're part of CU. So they don't have to obey the 55 feet. That's why you have those super tall. Buildings in Willville One. So that's on one side of the project. The other the boundary to the West is an elevated highway, so I'm not really worried about. Compatibility with that and also to the what is that. If you head towards Mexico, what direction is that north to the north? I think that's north. It's heading north, heading north. Again, your this is an off ramp from 36. So it's not that it's not typical neighborhood centers are actually adjacent to single family residential and then we're concerned about single family residential and then we're concerned about transitioning down to that.

[234:02] This whole site is bounded either by an elevated highway and off-ramp from an elevated highway, a major arterial 5 lane road that has a turning lane in the center that separates it from commercial right across the street. And then there's residential that's kind of cadicorder, but not actually adjacent in any way. Yeah, and that's basically the whole site. It's not adjacent to anything that for me would prevent it from going up high. I do agree with what staff said in the packet. Which is that it doesn't abide by some of our criteria in terms of the length of building frontages and variation of roof lines. As Kurt pointed out, it needs more variability. But in general, I'm not afraid of 55 feet on this site. I'm not especially concerned about the transition zones over on adjacent to baseline again because that's a 5 lane. Highway, not a highway, but a 5 lane arterial road. So, so yeah, I think with some sensitive design and, and make this actually something that people think is a attractive and that they.

[235:04] Feel is a nice place to be. I'm not concerned about the height or the transition zones, frankly. Cool. I agree with a lot of that. I think certainly a maximum height of 55 feet is appropriate here given the proximity to Willville and Bear Creek departments and we haven't mentioned the new North Hall and whatever the One is there on the east side of Willville, which are. 6 or 7 stories at least. Across baseline, there was mentioned that, oh, well, there's one to 3 story. Buildings there, but that's PT one zone and that is almost certainly going to change. It's certainly not a residential neighborhood. Directly across baseline so that I don't think should be of a concern to the Northeast. Is residential, but the even if this were built right to the corner at 55 feet, the dominant presence.

[236:03] From that neighborhood to the northeast would be Williams Village One. That would be what you would see when you looked up in the sky. And so, and also right on the corner, even that is not actually single family, it's RM 2. So I'm not concerned about that as I mentioned before. I do think that there needs to be. Articulation just to provide greater interest. And, some just. To make for better architecture, frankly. Ml. Thank you. So I'm gonna take a holistic approach here. I don't think height is a separate item from the entirety of the project. And if we were getting what the BVCP and zoning set up. I would certainly consider a height modification beyond the one to 3 story context to support this. I am not afraid of 55.

[237:15] Yeah. But high buildings either. But I think that As this project stands. The project is not meeting the basic intent of a neighborhood center. So I Wouldn't see a reason to support an added hype. We're not getting what we need and what we want what our zoning is set up for. So to me that's a, that's a broader look at hype. I think if we're getting what we want. For if our if we believe our comp plan and our zoning. Were correct. In Identify what should be where in the city. And this was doing that. By all means, I, I think this is a great place to have 55 foot height, but I, and I don't think it's supporting the basic intent.

[238:00] That our Planning. Tools have identified for this site. Thank you, George. Yeah, I think, said kind of exactly what I was thinking. In a much more elegant way than I could, say it. I also agreed with Mark. And sort of this the general massing and stare stepping and a number of my colleagues. The one area I, I disagree with is, I'd like to point out is that we don't control Cu's zoning. And I don't think that it should necessarily be taken in as the city of Boulder and what we choose to do with our zoning, we should be taking in CU buildings as context. To the backdrop of our city because we have no control over what they do as far as what they do with their buildings.

[239:01] And by allowing this site to go up to 55 feet. We create yet another tent poll in the city to maximize that 55 feet because now we have a context in the city. That in this area that people will leverage down the road. And so I think we need to be cognizant of that. As it relates to if we look at the context of just the city of boulder outside of cu that exists there it's all one to 3 story buildings. The developer also hasn't provided. Any elevations, any site lines. We're looking at flat plans angled towards, 12 story buildings. Conveniently. And so it's very difficult, I think for me to judge whether or not 55 feet is appropriate and where on the site. My gut is it probably is under the right circumstances. In select areas, but I think, as I'm, I'll put it best that I, and I'll leave it back.

[240:05] Thanks. Thanks. And I will throw my hat in with ML and George. In fact, I had written here. I don't think city code based development should should use non-city code compliant developments to justify hide modifications. So we were on the same page on that. That being said, I agree with Kurt that, there, it's been said before we need different articulation of heights in this area. I think the requirements for transition, suggestions for transitions towards the lower. Lower density neighborhood. Might be the right place to do it. And one thing I just wanna, I want to swing back for a moment to the conceptual site plan. The the length of these buildings. Some of these buildings are quite big and that building that's the wraps around the proposed parking garage. Feels like a fortress or it looks like a fortress. I don't know whether it would feel like one.

[241:03] There's no permeability there and so I just wanted to bring that back up. I had written it in the wrong box. Okay. Yes, please. Sorry, just one enhancement. I just wanna say, you know, I think that we rejected the tent poll idea as Charles said. We didn't, we didn't say that. If you're within X number of feet of a tall building, you get to be tall. There's no rule like that. So for me, it's not so much about is this. Going to be a new tent poll or is it near a tent poll? It's more about is this site appropriate for higher intensity and height? And you know, where in the city would we build taller? Where would we do 55 feet if we were trying to plan that? And right along major arterials. Baseline is the major east-west arterial in South Boulder. We use it all the time as people said that's why it's so busy. Right? It's right by an elevated highway. It's got a major grocery store in it. It's as making Coles said, it's hugely walkable, it's hugely viable.

[242:02] We have just invested an awful lot in infrastructure, in underpasses, in pedestrian crosses, crossings and bike enhancements in this area. This is the place where you want intensity. This is the place where you want height, regardless of how tall the buildings next door are and also its location quite close to campus. And it is actually pretty close to the bus line to get to downtown if you get on to Broadway. So for me, regardless of what else is around it, for me it's more about like do I need to be sensitive to something that's a single family neighborhood that's right adjacent. And as we discussed, it's kind of ringed by arterials and highways and stuff like that. So that's, I'll wrap there. Go ahead, George. Early. Just one comment on 10 polls. I mean. Half the board used the justification of the buildings next door to it. Being 120 feet. And so you can call it whatever you want. But the fact of the matter is, when these things come up in planning board, the first thing someone references is the 55 foot building down the street from that building as context.

[243:05] And context is, I believe, context is in the code. As it relates to what we have to evaluate. And what I meant by Temple is exactly that. Contextually, Boulder outside of CU is one to 3 stories. So call the temple call context. But I don't think that's rejected from. From what's in what's written in the code. I think context is in there. Alright, we will go to the last, question, which is other key issues, that are identified by the board. So I'll start over here. George, I'm going to start with you. When I throw up the questions for us. Yeah. Chandler. There, there are no questions. Just anything you guys want to talk about or identify. It's the other key issues. Yeah. Oh. No, I think I've said enough. Thank you.

[244:06] Okay, ML. Thank you, Sarah. And thank you, Chandler, for putting this question up there. I have 3, other issues that I would like to put on the table. One has already been spoken about, but I'll reiterate it because it didn't come up in our key questions. And that is the project is subject to historic preservation. Review. This could result in landmark designation eligibility. And I think that this needs to happen prior to the use in site review and I don't know. You know where that Should shouldn't land, but. I don't think that the project should. Should come back for use or site review. With the potential for piece of the site to be landmarked and

[245:00] Taken into another purview. So anyway, point number one, number 2. The applicant has talked about the project needing to be phased. And I think we have. They're talking about a 2 year. Process. Of deconstruction and construction. And I would just point out that the phasing should include keeping vital services operable. During the the construction time so we don't have this massive vacancy, lack of service or declining service and kind of lose a vital connection for the community. To have its service needs met. So I think phasing needs to be very carefully thought through and how things might continue to function. As a service center during the construction project. Process. And lastly, you know, this project highlights the deep issues that come out of updating.

[246:11] Long standing sites. We have a crisis with the portable housing and a lack of affordable commerce. If the Williams family truly intend to make a difference. With developing to sight. I suggest a deep rethink. On how to provide what our city needs on this site. Thank you. Thanks. I think, brought up 2 of the important or the The hot button, I guess, issues, one relating to the dark horse. You're well aware that this is a contentious issue. I Based on my understanding of the historic reservation code. The dark course would not be. Eligible for for landmarking there are criteria in terms of historic significance, architectural significance and environmental significance.

[247:17] And I don't think that it meets any of those 3. There's also, there's preserving the building, but that's different from preserving. The actual business, right? I think what people. Absolutely love. And cherish and treasure. Is the combination of that building that so many of us have seen so much of and and really love and the business in it. And we can preserve, preserve the building. But we can't preserve the interior, we can't preserve the business. That said, I think that it might be a wise decision for the applicant to try to come up with a design that.

[248:05] Keeps the dark course building where it is and as it is and works around it I think that might. Might smooth the way for future approvals. And both at planning board and at council when this comes up. So, you know, how possible that is, I don't know, but I think it's. That sort of a political decision. But it's something to think about. I think ML also raise the question of the phasing. Obviously, as an applicant, you want to minimize the amount of time that businesses are out of. Are now operating right and you're not getting revenue but I think it'll be key to try to especially keep the the sprouts. Closed as short a time as possible to minimize the amount of time. Before it can reopen because that's a crucial neighborhood.

[249:07] And contributes to the walkability. Hello, the last additional point I have is about That parking space on baseline, which is continued to bother me, the parking area just on the north side, which again is motivated by flood considerations, I think. But We try very hard to avoid having. Parking in front of buildings. On streets. And. I don't know if there are alternatives that you can come up with. I mean, certainly one would be if it were just a permanent. Food, food, cart, food truck. Pod, I think that that would be fantastic. That would be very field very different from just the general parking lot. I realize that it would benefit this the sprouts or whatever.

[250:03] Whatever grocery store goes in there if it were just a regular parking lot. But, but to the extent that we can make that a a lively place, a community place. A hopefully a greener place than just a parking lot. I think that would be great. Laura. Thank you. I do want to address a couple of things that the community brought up and I recognize that most people have had to leave because it's very late and people have had to leave because it's very late and people have things to do but maybe some folks will watch this. On when they have time. And for the folks who are still here, thank you for still being here. Both online and in person. So the dark horse, I just want to reiterate what Kurt said is that. Even if we did, use the Historic Preservation Act to preserve that building, it would just be the exterior of the building that we can preserve. We cannot preserve the interior using that statute. We cannot mandate that the Williams family continue to rent to the current tenant and we cannot mandate that the current Tenant the person who runs the dark horse that family that they continue to do that indefinitely we can we have no control over any of that right we cannot tell a private property owner who they have to rent to and we cannot tell a business you must remain open because the community loves you.

[251:19] People have the right to make choices with their property and with their businesses. So the only thing that we could preserve through historic preservation is the exterior of the building. That's it. And the question of is that does it have the historic significance? Does it meet the criteria? I don't know. That's for the landmarks board to determine. I agree with ML. That's not our purview and I strongly encourage staff to figure out a way. I know that there's some challenges with sequencing. And with landmarking ahead of a development proposal that need to be worked through and it's much more complex than we have time to talk about tonight. But I strongly feel that that is not planning boards per view to tell an applicant that they need to plan mark their property without the landmarks board having determined that they would be willing.

[252:03] To to landmark over the objection of the property owner, because that would be essentially what we're doing if we tell them that they have to apply for landmarking. So for me, that's a very serious, very serious action for the city to take. And I'm very interested to hear from staff how we're going to sequence that and do that so that the landmarks board. Has their proper say and that the applicant gets due process in front of the landmarks board if we are in fact considering historic preservation of that building. That said, I know that people love the dark horse and I appreciate that the applicant is trying to work with the owner to preserve that use, not just the building, but the use and make sure that that community amenity continues to be around if possible, right? If possible. So that's my thoughts on the dark horse. And then the other one I wanted to just mention is the affordability aspect, which of course everybody here cares about. You know, we all see that Boulder is becoming less and less affordable over time. That, you know, people who have.

[253:01] Very important jobs, but that don't make huge amounts of money, get squeezed out of Boulder. And so we are interested in affordable housing. I just want to make sure people understand because again, I didn't understand any of this 2 years ago. State law requires that the city Give developers choices. We cannot mandate you must build affordable housing right here. We simply can't do that. What we can do is through our inclusionary housing program, say either. You build and currently it's 25% either you build 25% of these units affordable on site. Or you contribute what's called cash in lieu or you can give us land of the equivalent value so that we can build it somewhere else. Most developers right now choose to do the cash and loo option and we, the planning board and the city council have no control over that. The state says we have to give them that option, right? That's the program that we have. So anybody who's concerned about affordable housing, I do encourage you to go to the cities inclusionary housing website.

[254:00] There's a really good website there that will show you where we are building that affordable housing, what we are doing with that developer money. I think people think We just give developers a pass and they don't have to build the affordable housing and it never gets built. Well, it is getting built. It's just getting built in different places around the city. And we can actually, as one person mentioned, Leverage that money and get federal money and build even more than if we had it on site. So the program is working even though it's not always very visible. So again, I appreciate that the applicant is willing to do what we require them to do and contribute to that affordable housing program. So those are my comments. Thank you. Okay. I wanted at the time when we had a whole bunch of people in the room, I wanted to thank them for coming because I could tell that there were a lot of first time speakers here. And that was exciting. To me, I, I don't remember exactly when it was, but I knew I was service as hell the first time I came and spoke before a board or counselor, whatever.

[255:00] So it was it was great to see everyone come out and it was, you know. It was understandable. To come out about your favorite spot. And Andy, you know, maybe as as a I'm an older guy here been here a long time I remember Tom's tavern I remember the blue note I remember Fred's Juanita's varieties. They're places that were I had meaningful events at and so To the point, we don't have a mechanism. Not just planning board, not council. Government doesn't have really have a mechanism for preserving beloved businesses. So as sad as it may seem. I think what's being proposed here tonight is to try to reincorporate. Some version of the dark horse is actually noble because as you say you don't have to do that. There is, there is no law, there is no code. So I think that, noble and admirable effort and I, and I, feel like a sincere and I hope you continue to.

[256:13] Work towards that. The only other thing I'm gonna say is that I would really welcome, I think the community once. If it's done right, would really welcome a true neighborhood center here. And I think that, whether it's 4 or 5 stories, whether the an FAR of 1.8 or 1.9. That is not so much the question as. Can it be designed in such a way that after 2 years of missing their favorite spots and suffering through stuff, people go, oh. This is actually really great. You know, yeah, I wanna go shop at the new sprouts. This is really great. And I want to eat at Karelli's in their new location with their new interior. That sounds great. And the community. There are lots of things that have been developed and redeveloped. That ultimately the community grows to love.

[257:16] And, and I hope this, this is one of those places, but it, it will require a bunch more, design work to I think. From what I've heard tonight to convince this board that what you've got. Plans for is is really will make a a beloved neighborhood center. Great. Thanks. So, the only thing I'll, the 2 things I'll bring up, one is again those sound issues and how, how you, lay out the, what the layout ultimately is and how to reduce sound bouncing into other neighborhoods. And I think we kind of skipped over the challenge at the parking challenges that you're gonna have the the parking challenges that you're gonna have, the more units you have, the more bedrooms you have, the more units you have, the more bedrooms you have, the more parking you're going to have the more units you have, the more bedrooms you have, the more parking you're going to require.

[258:09] And while you can push down some Make a request for some parking reduction. You're setting yourself up for a pretty large request. And maybe, again, bringing it, bringing down the scale for a bit would make it will be helpful. And my final comment is, I'm clearly going to have to go eat at the dark horse. I have I have never gone to the dark horse. So I am, I am going to have to go to the dark horse. Alright, that is Right now? Okay, so that is, that completes our public hearing. Do we normally, do you guys normally have an opportunity to respond? Okay, come on, and before as you get, Lisa is going to be joining us for matters.

[259:01] So keep a lookout for her on online. Okay, I'll just say a few things. So, first of all, I think we've been here a few times and you've hopefully seen that when we ask questions, we mean those is real questions. So this was extremely helpful, the feedback that we got. And so I think there's clear direction on a number of topics that's Very, very useful. The other thing I would say is that I totally hear maybe the wish for more. Concept plan has crept up into a higher and higher and higher level of design over the years, but this is a local family and a local business. And there isn't a national development fund to pay for an incredible amount of design at this stage. And the intent was to come with the original, you know, it comply with the original attendant concept plan and literally asked the questions before a bunch of decisions were made so that you can tell us. Hey, you know, you guys are, I'll take it on myself. Hey, Bill, you're wrong. Think about this. And so then that can actually be changed. So, it's really great feedback.

[260:00] Really appreciate all that. I will point out one thing because of all that we heard about the dark horse. I first set Foot and Boulder in 1,991 the first restaurant I ever went into was a dark horse. I've loved it since then. The first meeting that we had with the owner. The question was, we have a problem with the dark horse, we need to save it. The family's been subsidizing it for 15 years. The owner is 70. Is not going to be running it for another 15 years. So we got to figure something out. And that, you guys got a letter from both parties saying we gotta figure something out committing to each other to do that. So, I hope the neighbor can hear that. It's the intent to figure something out here. Other than that, Thank you. And you have anything else to add? I first came to Boulder as a climber at 16. And first place I went to the dark was to the dark, but I can tell you about the rest of the night. I'm only 64. But no, I mean, thank you for the input.

[261:05] It's concept plan has become as we've done concept plan and site review. It's become this really kind of awkward dance or just difficult dialogue in that you're trying to get enough feedback to go the next step and at the same time you're not getting enough information to always give the right feedback. And so I appreciate the fact that you've spent the time. I mean, this is 4 h of your life or something that you spent time to give us the feedback you could based on what we gave you. I feel like we heard you and I feel like we got a lot of good input and we can come back with some really good stuff for site review that I think. We'll take that into account and. Provide the kind of place. And my goal is to make this be neighborhood center in Boulder that people say, well, when we define neighborhood center. Go to Williams Village. That's what it is. To do it like that. And, Great. Thank you. Just lastly, usually we ask questions if anything was unclear, but I've been kind of going through taking notes and I think you all were very clear.

[262:03] So I don't think I have any questions. Okay, great. Thank you all very much. We will now turn to matters. Is Lisa online? Okay. Lisa Smith. Hello, hello. Yes, we can hear you. Hello, I personally make sure that my Can you hear me? Excellent. So I let Sarah and a couple staff members know, but because it's been really challenging to get consistent. Childcare on Tuesday evenings. I'm gonna be stepping down from planning board. So wanted to say a big thank you to all the planning board members. And to staff and to everyone who comes before us whether members of the public or otherwise it's been a wonderful, what is it, almost 4 years now I think, Sarah. Yes. And yeah, but unfortunately it just. Wasn't able to kind of consistently be as you saw because I have been missing meetings and not able to share when Sarah is out and so on and so it's just been kind of a adjustable nightmare.

[263:05] So I'm sorry to step down. And I'll miss all of you and I wanted to be sure to say it this way before I send a more formal broader email and I'd really hope to be there. Tonight in person, one to attend the meeting and 2 to make this announcement in person, but as a symptom of the overall problem that didn't happen. So yeah, that's that's where I'm at and. Thanks for making the time at the end of a long meeting. Well, Well, Lisa, thank you for letting us know. I'm sure everyone has something they want to say. I will just say you're managing to get out of being chair. Just in time. I think you timed it that way. Alright, I'll let everyone make a comment. Well, I'll just say you will be missed and I've certainly enjoyed serving with you, but you know the I think we all understand whether it's children or elderly parents or whatever it might be, life has a way of interrupting intense hours of volunteer service.

[264:06] That extend late into the night. So anyway, everything is understood and we wish you the best. I second everything that Mark said and Lisa, I am so sorry to see you go. It has been a pleasure to serve with you and you bring a really unique perspective to the board that I don't think any of the rest of us could ever replicate. So it is a loss to see you go and I'm so sorry but completely understand and wish you all the best in everything that you have on your plate right now. Not tonight, but but sometime soon. I wanted to warn Sarah. I didn't know she'd never been there. And you're going to come to the dark horse, right? Have a beer. Yeah. Watch out for the bathroom doors, Sarah. Take a moment. Yeah. Okay, good, good to know. Good to know. Yeah, I totally agree. We'll really miss you and but I think it's admirable that you manage to. Get through. 4 years with this kind of. You know, with a lot of these challenges.

[265:02] So thank you for doing that and thank you for your service. And, sorry to see you go. MO. Yeah. Gosh, Lisa, I was just getting used to having sharing a hoard with you again. Oh wow, well I do hope that our paths cross. Again, because. You know, you have a really good perspective on things and I'm always appreciated that. So thank you and I hope you enjoy your time with your little guy. Yeah. Yeah. I'll, I'll echo the same and just say, oh man. I really, sorry to see you go. Really, really appreciate your perspective and it will be messed and, thank you for your service to Boulder over the past 4 years. At least I'm pretty sure Brad and staff might want to say something.

[266:02] Yeah, thank you for the opportunity and. Really, on behalf of the department, we, to, Lisa very much appreciate your. Service to the community first of all. Hope we say often enough to all of you that we recognize that you're doing this. As a volunteer effort and that it does take a fair amount of effort and time and and commitment that's really representative of your love for the community. And we know Lisa, you have that and that you've. Had that in various roles and capacities with the city and I have no doubt. As I think I dropped a quick note to that you will remain very engaged with the community over the years. So I suspect we'll continue to see you, but. But thank you for that service and also just very sorry to see you go for all the reasons that others have said that you have provided a really unique and important voice and I'm quite sure we won't be able to replicate that, but, we'll do our best so

[267:07] Yeah, thanks so much for your service, Lisa. The last 4 years you have definitely affected the outcome of a lot of important projects, Lisa. The last 4 years, you have definitely, affected the outcome of a lot of important projects and particularly through the outcome of a lot of important projects and particularly through the COVID era when all this was so challenging. And particularly through the COVID era when all this was so challenging. So thank you very much for spending the time that you were able to spend with us and look forward to other corners of the community. Maybe at the dark horse. It's gonna be running running again. Anyone else before we let least go to bed? Good. Yeah. Yeah, I just wanna say thank you so much, Lisa. I didn't get to work with you very well, but it was very, you can hear me. Yeah, okay. It was really great to work with you and I wish you the best. And I, look forward to working with you in different ways in the future. So Laura, I mean Lisa. I was call, I call Laura Lisa earlier. Lisa, I'm gonna urge you to, conclude this meeting for us and.

[268:02] Are there, I'm sorry, are the matters from staff? But nothing for me, Fred. I was just gonna say that we are starting the new year with plenty to bring you it will be a full year and I appreciate that you've all been managing kind of discussions about the schedule. Here in the first few months as well. understanding the desire to move the one item tonight that I think was good foresight. So appreciate that one. I think so. I and accommodations from everybody, but we're gonna work hard this year to space out the calendar to the best of our ability and always appreciate and recognize everybody's flexibility. But in reviewing the work plan for the whole department this year. And getting that finalized, it is, it is going to continue to be a full one. So. Thank you in advance for all your work in that regard. And you know, it's just dawned on me while we're talking about, Lisa's departure.

[269:01] So council is going to be making appointments on March 20 first. So we won't be. Down a board member for too long. And then I think last day of service for our current outgoing board members is, So that's gonna be March 30 first of this year. So we'll have you through the month of March. Just so you know, I'm, I've already sent dates that I won't be here in March. Okay. Okay. Yeah, just a quick question. So being down on board member, I assume means that doesn't change anything in terms of we still need 4 votes to be able to pass anything. So that makes attendance a little more complicated, but bring it, we'll do it. Lisa, was this your last meeting? Yeah. Okay, so.

[270:00] Yes, yeah, yeah, again, I had hoped to attend in person, but that didn't pay out though. Okay. Yeah. I'm after that. Great. So we definitely have to take you out for a beer or a coffee or dinner or whatever your Alright, Lisa, adjourn the meeting for us. Well, thank you all for your hard work. Sorry, I wasn't part of it this evening. I'm glad I've gotten to serve with all of you for so long and some of you for not as long, but it's been wonderful. And I hereby adjourn this meeting. Alright. Thanks, Lisa. Yeah, thanks.