October 11, 2021 — Transportation Advisory Board Regular Meeting

Transcript

Captions from City of Boulder YouTube recording.

[0:00] are now recording. gotcha Thank you. Alright, welcome everyone to the October 2021 meeting of transportation Advisory Board, it is six o'clock and I am calling us to order. hold on you know, almost a turn. Sorry tech issues over here um before we get going let's do the thing that I always forget to do in time, which is to have Jenny. Who is helping facilitate this meeting run through our rules for for participating and for how we're going to run this zoom meeting. We do have to public hearings scheduled on the agenda tonight and so. It is going to be one of those things where we'll be relying on the rules and procedures, a little bit more than usual Tony go ahead. Okay, thank you Tina so welcome everyone i'm Johnny guzman and on our zoom tech host tonight. i'm glad you joined us so this meetings have been called to conduct the business with the city of boulder any activities that disrupt delay or otherwise interfere with meeting are prohibited.

[1:06] The time for speaking of asking questions may be limited so during public comment that's limited to three minutes. No person shall speak except when recognized by myself and they'll purchase shall speak for longer than that three minute time allotted. We ask that each person registered to speak of meeting using their real name any person believed to be using the name, other than the one they're commonly known by will not be permitted to speak at the meeting. And just a note if you're on your phone um you'll need to press star six to unmute and star nine to raise your hand. And we also another rule is that no video will be permitted, except for city officials employees and invited speakers, so we ask others to participate by voice only. All be enforcing these rules by meeting, anyone who violates any of the rules. We do have the chat function enabled tonight, and we ask that you use that to communicate with the host of myself so that's Jenny.

[2:02] And we ask that you use that only for technical and online platform related questions also only the host and those designated by the host will be permitted to share their screens during the meeting. Thank you Jenny. appreciate your assistance as always. we're going to move ahead now and consider Approval of the Minutes from the last meeting as the first real order of business tonight. Does anyone have any. Amendments or corrections to the Minutes that were circulated. I will say that meredith and I have had an email exchange, there was an individual during a couple of carry on the nsf P projects last time, who, at the beginning, did not want to was using an alias we didn't really know. But then I let him speak at the by the end of his comments he had identified himself, but it was a brief violation of rules three now i'm listening better this time.

[3:02] But the only correction then would be to try to insert his name, he did identify himself and meredith and are trying to figure out what. how best to spell that name I think it's what we're what we're at but that's the only correction that I have at the moment does anyone have anything else. mark. um I just have one and it's not a direct minute correction. But we had a motion. That is recorded in the Minutes and it reads tab approves the state highway seven East arapahoe road multi use path and transit stops Community environmental process seat, with the ability to provide additional design input during preliminary engineering. And that motion was passed unanimously, the memo that was sent the Council did not note.

[4:03] The qualifier in our motion it just said tab approved the seat period, and while it's not gigantic I think it's important that when we when. I know that staff prefers it when we communicate through counsel or through through staff to counsel rather than going off on her own which we have done in regard to a different seat, the 28th street see. I would appreciate and thank you, it is preferable that our emotions and our thoughts and comments are conveyed to counsel completely and accurately. And I don't think that was done fully in this case so um That is my request.

[5:05] thanks for that mark I hadn't noted that. And I share your concern, I will say there have been other times I have tuned in to see what transportation staffs report to Council was when it's been somewhat can get contentious or a little bit qualified. And in general staff does do a very good and very fair and accurate job, and so this is, you know, an aberration, I would say, from that but i'm glad you caught it and noted it and I agree and i'm sure it was not intentional, this is what Eric has just unmuted to say i'm sure. You can read my mind to Allah jars I think that, whenever. It was entirely unintentional, and so I apologize for that. But I do think it's a point well made so thank you mark. Are there any other corrections additions clarifications on the Minutes from the September meeting.

[6:04] Seeing none, I would like to entertain a motion to approve. Mark so moves. Very good. Ryan has seconded Thank you. Does anyone object. Great, the Minutes are approved, thank you very much. America well we'll sort out in the next day or two whether we can figure out a more proper spelling than just the phonetic spelling of Mr Fisher. Okay, so the next order of business is a so a somber one and a sober one, this is, of course, indigenous peoples day so it's kind of a day of reckoning for a lot of different things. That have gone wrong but, more recently, something has gone very wrong again on the streets of boulder we recently lost another senior to traffic violence on boulder city streets on September 17 did the child was struck and killed while she was in a crosswalk.

[7:10] and apparently had the right away. This is of course a story, we have heard. Too many times. And it has been a particular interest to to me, and I think to this current tab to make sure that they are not counted as numbers but noted, as people, and I wanted to. At least note that hit this has occurred, I don't intend to delve too deeply into it, I understand that traffic investigation crash investigation is ongoing. Of course i'm i'm interested in any updates that Erica or natalie or any staff can shed light on but i'm also aware that we are expecting an update to the safe streets report very soon. Where we are collecting and analyzing data on a much bigger level and not just on a case by case basis and so well, I do want to.

[8:06] discuss some of the particulars of this crash we don't really need to have a an in depth discussion of what went wrong i'm hoping for more of that when we talk about sort of the city wide approach to improving street safety and reducing traffic violence. i'm feeling very. Nice I. just wanted to make note. that both I and then staff. share your grief in the group of the family. And it's very sad because no one should get hit in the crosswalk, not just in the city of boulder but anywhere and having been one of those people myself, I feel it in my heart. And my ankle um, but I think that one of the things that whenever the safe streets report is presented to tab we truly truly want to have your feedback on.

[9:04] What you think we might do differently do better to help the Community because whenever whether or not you're an elderly lady, a young child or anybody walking biking you've been using a scooters etc here in our Community. There you have the right away. And whenever you're in a crosswalk like that you're going with light, etc, and so. just wanted to say that we to share the grief. Do you have any further information of what the movements were I don't even know which crosswalk she was in or which what movement, I know as a right turn on a red light. And I don't know which direction the driver was going. So I know that is it. 26 and zero, and you know as part of this it's one of the things we're trying not to do is to not you know speculate about things, and what the.

[10:09] Traffic investigation occur from the police department and then how bring Robin back in and how you know the conversation and that more focused way after the investigation is taking place. Last time, whenever I was before tab I said I hope that we didn't have to have that conversation again and it saddens me that we do. So i'm not trying to put you on the spot Eric and i'm not asking you to speculate I literally don't know which direction like which which leg of that intersection of what's because there are lights controlling all four and I do you think. it's worth thinking about was this you know entering or exiting a parking lot was it turning on to a major arterial we already know, we need to do more work on arterial so. If there's any light, you can shed at the moment about what the dynamics were that that driver and that pedestrian were encountering at the moment.

[11:08] yeah I don't have it here right in front of me and so whenever Robin comes here, I think that it will be able to shed not only the specific directions. The context of the environment around there but also you know if there was any other. If there were any other factors involved and so it's not appropriate for me to speculate at this moment. Okay. Does any other Member of tab which to say anything at this point. I have. looked through because Erica your your comments at the beginning of this portion said, we always want to hear from tab about what we can do.

[12:01] And I like the verb do. I have spent some time today going through a couple of iterations of the same street support I have the one from May 2016. The Maurice one from 2019 you know flagged a bunch of things, talking about particularly right turn on red. And in the most recent report on page seven, the treatment know right turn on read signs, it was inconclusive and needs further study and yet elsewhere in the report and, as well as in. May 2016 the city pointed to implementing no right turn on read at particular locations where there had been a problem. One of them let's see at calistoga and arapahoe avenue one of them I just pulled out my flag at a different location noted in May 2016 and one of our critical critiques of the safe streets. Analysis and implementation of solutions in the past has been that it is a little bit to whack a mole and a little not systemic enough.

[13:08] And so, when the city is saying right turn on red is evaluated, case by case, but needs further further thinking about to implement. On a bigger scale and yet holds up implementing right turn on reds and particular locations that's pointing to me an inability to apply a systems approach. That, I think the Vision Zero requires, and that is what tab has been saying, that is what other advocates have been saying that is one of the big big lessons learned from divisions you're a movement. Worldwide, and so I don't mean to suggest, I know that investigation on this crash is ongoing I don't mean to suggest it would have changed anything but to the extent we can draw lessons like. Doing when right turn on read here and there, when did the child was killed this intersection are held in Russia was killed at that intersection That was a left turn. We would do better by our citizenry probably to figure out what these intersections have in common and proactively say no right turn on red.

[14:08] And intersections where there is X volumes a day or a peak hours or something like that, instead of just saying we've done it here and we've done it there in reports that are released three years apart. I think that's my only input at the moment, but I do as I say, appreciate your wishing to do as opposed to stopping and and looking at the numbers and thinking about them, because, as you know, in the meantime, our citizens are dying. So your point till about having a systematic approach to all this is definitely one that both natalie and myself have heard believe in strongly and have. directed staff to be able to look at things, I think that when you ever tapped out whenever we present the safe streets report tab.

[15:01] that's one of the fanatics we're going to be looking at and we're looking forward to hearing your feedback about what your observations are around that too. Okay. Thank you. We have a tendency to identify the particular victim, the person who is killed or injured but, of course, when someone is killed there are multiple victims there. there's the whole family and there's things that the people live with, for decades, so it's not just the one. I appreciate Erica you reaching out and letting us know about this and being open to raising this it is. it's good leadership. and return, thank you for your leadership it's greatly appreciate it i'm sure that stuff and tab will be able to work through this and we're diligently together to make the Community safer for all.

[16:05] it's. Okay, if tab has no other comment on this matter, we will move on. Brian go ahead, I see your hand up. Just just thank you i'm just a little small. thing to add on the subject of okay well, what can we do. um. i'm thinking of. The this when a when a baby me is the citizen send something in to inquire boulder stamps very responsive great it's great to be able to access that, as I said, it's been through it. i've heard references before in a response to that to you know five ways to concern is you know this intersection or whatever feels unsafe to me. i've i've heard back well we've looked at the data and there wasn't there's not been a.

[17:04] negative outcome yet at that intersection and I guess, I would just offer on the question of what can we do, what can the city do would say just to be the. These conservative and decide with the the person who's representing the vulnerable you side and the experience of being out there and. and It you know if there's ways, you know if it's sort of could go either way don't don't be too focused on but we don't have the empirical data. To show that something that already because obviously that's a symptom and not a good cause, so this is probably just sort of rudimentary but while we're on, I just wanted to offer that Thank you. Thanks Brian. And we will move on now to the public comments section of the meeting, as I noted earlier, we do have to public hearing items.

[18:01] On the agenda this evening, so one of them is going to be the two and s&p projects that we didn't get to last time and then the other item is. has been requested by Council that we look at the 2504 spruce. concept plan, and so we will have a public hearing on that So if you are a member of the public, and you are here this evening and wanting to speak to either of those items I would ask you to hold your comments for now. But if you are here to speak to tab generally on on other issues, and this would be a great time to raise your hand and we will call on you, I saw Stephen right away, I don't. And this would be your time typically we allow three minutes per speaker I don't see a reason this evening to depart from that. And I will turn it over to Jenny to facilitate the public comments section of the meeting now. yeah Thank you TIM. All right, i'm going to do my. fancy zoom background real quick for this and then i'll unmute you Stephen.

[19:13] So you can you should be able to unmute. me. yeah. yeah this. Another death that intersection. that's been part of tours to cars really it's close. I sort of got involved. In this if years ago and there's a nother elderly female we got killed it folsom and Canyon. And it took almost two years to get partial. Protected left turn signal there. That was what the old. single engineer I forget his name, but the purpose.

[20:00] And the argument was that we can't do that because it's going to really screw up our whole. You know, cars traveling through the city, you know slowing down for 20 seconds, if we do a protected left turn lane and protect the. pedestrians. And the see you know for this one there's a quote from the police officers, which they believe the old they don't believe that motorists that I stopped behind the white line then proceeded to turn right and read. I call bs on that. I cross arapaho daily multiple times and barely ever see a car that's train ride on red stop beyond the stomp line and then proceed through the crosswalk. I see cars turning right or red with their head turned left to look for traffic coming they're not looking for pedestrians.

[21:02] And yes, it's an old lady Okay, who cares it's sort of like you know it's like if this is an eight year old child has to be front page news for a month. To senior citizen. Maybe it's her fault, you know she didn't look that's sort of seems like the attitude that's going on. We desperately need a. Vision Zero engineer that can come in, not just like a past data but look at design. there's a crosswalk there's a right on red that's you know, maybe it's time they're 60% or REX for pedestrians hundred percent were REX for cyclists at rider reds. This is a 17 year old driver in a jeep. who killed somebody has to live with that because we allow this action that's dangerous it's time to take action it's time for tab like 20th 20 his bunny take action, go to city council get it done Thank you.

[22:14] Thank you, Stephen. Stephen. not seen anyone else my hands raised. Neither mine. I do see a few other members of the public and i'm going to guess that you're either just listening in or you want to speak to the SNP or the 25 of course Bruce matter, and so I think we will move along now. and close the public comments. Section. As always, we appreciate the attention and. participation from members of the public, so thank you for coming tonight so we'll go right now into the public hearing for the nsf P projects typically the way this happens is there's a brief staff presentation.

[23:03] about what the issue is what's that what is being asked to do, members of tab will ask clarifying questions and then we will open it up for comment from members of the public, once we close the public hearing then tab will. undergo its deliberations and take action. As requested so Brian knowles is going to be presenting this evening on this go ahead Ryan. Thanks a lot. Everyone, my name is Ryan knows i'm a senior transportation planner and. The transportation transportation and mobility department here at the city of boulder and this evening we are holding a public hearing us to the mentioned on a few an SMP simple projects, and so this is a continuation of the work that we did in September with seven other locations. So we'll just do a quick. Review of the SNP and speed homes and cushions and then i'll get right into the proposals and staff recommendations and then.

[24:09] we'll have some time for tapped as questions before you all open it up for the public hearing. So the NS MPs primary purpose is to reduce vehicle speeds on neighborhood streets so local residential local and collector residential streets in the city of boulder and the purpose, for that is to improve the safety and quality of life in the city's neighborhoods. We view residential streets is shared places and shared spaces, so we want people to feel comfortable walking biking rolling playing, as well as driving. And the nsf supports the goals of the transportation master plan it and is also one way in which we are working to meet our Vision Zero goal of reducing serious injury and fatal crashes to zero.

[25:08] The SMP projects that will be discussing this evening and all projects that originated to the SNP our resident driven, and that means that. folks are reaching out to us and applying for these projects, telling us that they feel that there's a speeding problem and so when we receive an application, which includes a petition we I. look to see if the. street meets the qualifying threshold which is three miles an hour or more over. An 85th percentile speed i'm sorry of three miles an hour or more over the speed limit, and so we do a speed study which collects speed and volume data over a seven day period 24 hours a day. If we find that a street meets that criteria, then we classify the street as a simple or complex project and so simple projects, the projects we're talking about tonight.

[26:08] Around $15,000 are not on critical emergency response routes which are the routes, the fire department uses most often and responding to emergency calls and we expect very little to no traffic diversion to chase and streets. So in addition to the speed study we do to qualify the project, we also do an after evaluation to determine if we were successful in reducing the vehicle speeds on the street, and then the last thing I want to note is we are now designing. Most of our projects to 20 miles an hour and that's because of the 20th plenty. initiative that was mentioned just a moment ago. So I just very quick we we often use the term speed bumps speed humps speed cushion air tangibly, and so I just want to make sure that.

[27:09] we're clear on what we're discussing, especially for this evening, where we are talking about speed homes and also submissions so a speed bump is a. 123 foot wide usually concrete bump that you drive over in a parking lot and they typically require that you stop to almost or you. drive to almost a complete stop before driving over the speed bump well we install on neighborhood streets are referred to a speed humps, and so they are 12 feet wide three and a half inches tall and are engineered to be driven 15 to 20 miles an hour. And so, depending on your vehicle, it may be more comfortable closer to 15 miles an hour or closer to 20 miles an hour and then speed cushions have that same design with one key difference, you can see in the bottom right hand corner.

[28:03] They include two wheel cutouts through the middle of the hump creating three separate cushions and those two we'll cut outs are space for the axle of an emergency vehicle, so we install speed cushions most commonly on. On critical emergency response routes, but we also will consider the installation of them on other streets as well, including. The ones that will talk about tonight. So, as I mentioned in. September on September 13 the board recommended that we move forward with the seven projects that are not highlighted before you, and so we are working on. Moving moving toward installation on those speed hump projects this evening we're going to be discussing South 30 seconds, as well as two separate locations on Lincoln place.

[29:01] Between baseline road and cascade avenue and then between you could have new in college avenue, which was easier to make one line for that in the map here but um. The. reason we did not include these locations last month again was due to a scoring error, with the South 32nd street project which we have since corrected and updated with a new speed study and then Lincoln place we added to the list because of that scoring error. The proper ranking of South 32nd would have fallen lower in the list skipping the to Lincoln place locations, and so we felt it was only fair to bring those proposals to the board as well. So for the South 32nd street, as I said, we updated our.

[30:00] Speed studies so originally we had. Use the speed study from 2019 we took a new one, this past September so last month, we did not find a significant difference between the two speed studies from 2019 and 20 and 2021. Which is pre and post 20 is plenty so the 85th percentile speed is still 27 miles an hour and the average number of speeding vehicles around it up per the nsf guidelines is 100 vehicles per day. And so we are proposing three speed bumps at the locations listed here, and I would note, through our engagement that a majority of the folks we have heard from support the project installation and so that's what we're recommending that. We do. The next location. Is Lincoln place between baseline road and cascade avenue, so this is the southern part of Lincoln place.

[31:07] Just across the street from chautauqua almost. So the 85th percentile speed here when we collected it in 2020 it was 26 miles an hour and again the average number of speeding vehicles rounded up was 100 vehicles per day, the traffic volumes are pretty low, unlike unlike in place overall. So we were. We proposed one speed cushion between baseline and cascade, and the reason we propose the speed cushion as opposed to a speed hump was because of the great on the street, so it is. between six and 7% grade closer to a seven actually a little bit over a 7% grade at the location of where we were proposing the speed hump there's big question sorry. And also because this is a neighborhood green street so Lincoln places Jason to ninth and so it's the alternative routes for cyclists to nine street going North and South, on the hill.

[32:13] Through our engagement, we heard splits support and opposition for the project. One of the things that we heard through the engagement process was that. it's very difficult to drive on Lincoln place when it snows. And so we looked into this issue with our transportation maintenance manager and team and. Lincoln places a conditional snow removal route, which means that the snow is only cleared if it snows eight inches or more, and so, with the grade on the street, and then the addition of a speed cushion. De facto creating even steeper great for that short 12 foot section.

[33:04] We did feel that there would be some real impacts to snow removal and to winter driving, especially for trucks and vehicles going uphill. They would lose momentum when they were slowing to drive over the speed cushion which could cause them to get stuck. And then, our maintenance manager also highlighted that I seem could be an issue as well, and because of the snow not being removed, unless it is over eight inches or more, we felt that this might be. An impact that would. Prove unacceptable to the Community and so at this time we're not recommending the installation of a speed cushion for this stretch or for the stretch between euclid and college.

[34:00] And so. I just want to point out the speed on this section of Lincoln place the 85th percentile speed was actually a little bit lower than it is closer to chautauqua up the Hill, but the great is not quite as steep but still the concerns about I seen and. The last momentum for passenger vehicles on this section of Lincoln place still applies on, and so I. At this time, we are not recommending installing the two speed cushions on these two separate sections of Lincoln place that side, we are planning on developing a new traffic calming proposal and coming back to the board. After holding another neighborhood meeting in the spring. And so the next steps for this evening, of course, will have the public hearing momentarily and then the Board will consider a recommendation.

[35:05] Following that recommendation if we move forward with implementing projects we will evaluate and gather feedback on those projects and then. Should we not move forward with the link in place recommendations or proposals, I should say we will get to work on developing a new traffic calming proposal. That will. Most likely almost certainly be. Horizontal deflection as opposed to vertical deflection because of those issues that I mentioned previously, and so, then we would return to tab in the spring, with that new proposal. Thanks Ryan, I just want to make sure I understand what you just told us about Lincoln so at the moment because of the great of Lincoln you don't recommend proceeding with speed humps or speed cushions anywhere on Lincoln on that's been under consideration.

[36:04] But Lincoln but. Lincoln still qualifies for some kind of speed mitigation it's still in the line and we will do some more thinking over the winter and return to speed mitigation for both of these blocks of Lincoln later or earlier next year. Correct Okay, thank you. i'm all right, I don't see any hands, but I can't see everybody at the moment, any questions for him tab before we turn it over to the public hearing thanks for I appreciate. I don't see any questions oh mark has a question, there you go mark. Would um. I don't see us doing anything other than following. ryan's recommendations to delay. The implementation of speed cushions on Lincoln i'm having said that.

[37:05] And because of budget years and it all makes my head hurt sometimes, so I think about the year we approve the project, the year is designed the years implemented, etc, would we be able to. move a nother simple project up into the link in place slot reserving budgetary money approvals etc for Lincoln place in 2022 and the normal SNP cycle in 2022 and actually do something for one of the other neighborhoods that was. That didn't make the cut that was lower on the list and disappointed that they weren't approved this year. At this point, probably not because we'll run into whether we would have to try to accomplish all that before the next step meeting in November.

[38:06] In order to have you weigh in on another recommendation, which would require developing a design and then having a neighborhood forum. So at this point we're going to be running into other frankly anyway. So I would say, though, we you know can try to do more, next year, and certainly. So I I did I put it in the memo but there was one project that we needed to skip it was I believe number seven 12th street, and the reason was kind of similar to what we just discussed bubbling in place, the greater the street was about 10% which would make installing speed bumps. Somewhat dangerous, to be honest, and so we are looking at. Developing another traffic calming solution for that street.

[39:01] In the intersection of 12 and call mine so that would be something we would be bringing as well to the board of spring. Thank you. Thanks Ryan, I just have one quick question, I know that people on various projects, including on 32nd street, which is the other one we're considering this evening have raised ice and snow removal as an objection for installing a speed hump. And from what you've described right now it's a valid objection or valid concern on Lincoln but not, not so much on the other ones, because the underlying road is not so steep. Growth okay. yeah just want. acknowledged for the record, like we've heard some of these objections and different things, and sometimes you're right, sometimes we don't think it's a problem I do want to acknowledge a letter I forget the gentleman's name but got.

[40:01] A letter this afternoon and then Ryan, a few minutes later, you forwarded it among with along with some other materials I get to that in just a second or when we discuss the the project but. I did want to acknowledge that we've heard from additional people. Material it's not in the memo and we will be attending that to the written materials for this meeting is that correct. let's hope that's correct meredith i'm going to ask about this that the supplemental materials that Ryan email to tab this afternoon around 430 the included in the in the formal packing materials on on city website. Okay. Then I think we should probably move I don't see any other hands up from tab, so I think we should probably go ahead and move to the public hearing on this item. We will typically give people three minutes to speak, if you don't need all three minutes you don't have to take it. But this is your chance if you have input regarding either of these SMP simple project proposals, this would be a great time.

[41:03] to let them, let us know, we have, of course, as I as i've mentioned received all of the written materials that were prepared. And the public hearings and then other emails where were our staff keeps us pretty well informed about what the public and put has been I see one hand up Jenny i'm going to let you handle the public hearing portion, but we can go ahead and get people to three minutes each. yeah sounds great. All right, i'm gonna go ahead and unmute you. Can you hear me. Yes, okay great hi this is Scott macquarie i'm at 140 South 32nd street. Thank you chair Thank you Jenny I just want to i'll be very brief, I just want to express my strong support for this beat humps on South 32nd. We we did spend some time a neighbor night going around and knocking on doors and getting signatures for that support, so I think it's quite overwhelming that there is support for this, it is not unanimous, few things are in the public realm.

[42:06] But I think overall there's there's a lot of support for this in this on this project, so I want to thank Ryan. For all his great work and also thank the city just for continuing to include this in the annual budgets it's a super important program is. I strongly agree with the sentiment on tab in the city staff that the streets are not just for cars it's a shared space, and I think. The neighborhood speed innovation program is one way to sort of interest towards that, so thank you very much, and I hope that tonight tab you will support staffs recommendations for speed ups on our block so that's all thank you. Thank you. Thank you. All right next up, we have sheila sheila i'm gonna go ahead and unmute you. Are you able to. Talk to you, yes, thank you can hear me.

[43:01] Yes, we can. Thanks, this is sheila Murphy i'm an at self 32nd street, and I am. voicing my support for the speed humps we have so many kids on our block that. end up spilling into the street and it's also a big bike route to the local school so every morning and every afternoon there's tons of bikes going by. And so i'm just. adding my support to it, and I thank you for considering our block for the speed Thompson just wanted to. Make sure you heard my support thanks. Thank you sheila. Thanks sheila. Already i'm not seeing anyone else at this time to. me neither Thank you very much, I will go ahead and close the public hearing. After one last scan I don't see any other hands raised so let's just turn it over to tab discussion.

[44:09] As always, I am here if you show your work really well there's a lot of effort that goes into this and the public outreach is partly why we love it, can I just take a straw poll right now. And just with a show of hands members of have if we don't need to discuss a whole lot, then, can you just show whether you're. going to support the the staff recommendation to hold off on Lincoln and go ahead and 32nd what are your leanings right now i'm seeing five hands on a straw poll does anyone have any sort of. input of significance that they want to get into the record for this meeting this evening on on these two projects. Mark go ahead. Just a super quick note of appreciation, as the other speakers have said, an appreciation of Ryan ryan's work and staff working in general on the nsp.

[45:02] Again, I can when I read through the packet read through the recommendations I. am appreciative of both the process which we seem to be honing to you know it's a machine, we only had more money, we could really we could really make this thing. sing for us, you know that's the that's the constraint, but again i'm going to make a case that we need to evaluate taking our success with the NS MP. The objective process, the public involvement, combined with the ability to course correct when necessary, so we haven't been so rigid in our process that. we're unable to see a street light Lincoln were all right, you know we do we we we came public input and in fact it helped guide us to a.

[46:02] course correction, so I think that's it's a process it's a model that can be applied other places and i'm highly appreciative of the citizens input ryan's work staffs work on on this and I think it's a it's a model that we should build on so that's it. Thanks mark. anyone else Ryan. Now we're good, I think the only other thing Oh, how much, would you like to speak. yeah it's it's more word question anything else Ryan. A number of comments, particularly in the 32nd street example, or like well you know that person down the end of the block is experiencing things that me in the middle of the block isn't and. Maybe it should be here or there, or I don't want it in front of my house, because the noise or it should be near the end of the block, so that people will actually stop at the STOP sign, how do we think about placement.

[47:09] So we use best practices that come out of the Institute for transportation engineers magneto puts out some some information on that as well. And really we we get the question often you know, some people ask us about equity in terms of the actual placement of travel common devices and really our goal when we're traffic on the street is to look at. A section of a street and create a speed profile for the entire section so 32nd, for example, the application is for ash to Dartmouth, and so. Really we're trying to we're trying to do the goal is to make sure that at no point between those two streets on South 32nd. Will the speed get very much higher than the design speed, which in this case is 20 miles an hour so.

[48:06] So that's really what we're we're trying to accomplish with most of the traffic calming projects that we developed it's you know it's an interesting process, as many of my colleagues can attest to because there is certainly some some science behind it, but then there is a lot of. Very localized politics as well, and you have to really think about. You know, things that aren't always apparent when you are simply measuring distances between speed bumps, as it were, you know, like, for example. driveway cuts are things that that often come into play, sometimes school bus stops plan to that as well, so just there's things that that come up through the process that we have to account for and make sure that we're not.

[49:01] impeding or making worse. cool Thank you Thank you Ryan, and I figured it was a very much designed type of process, as opposed to they just go this far apart BA BA BA. and know that that's super helpful. I also got the sense in reading all the various people's commentaries in general as usual we've got a hugely wide range of you know attitudinal starting points on all this so it's great that you have you know. Both both both data and some very well established norms for doing this because I think that you know, by and large, once these things are in you don't see the noise that you see beforehand, based on what people don't know. Thanks thanks so much Ryan, I see your hand up. has asked the question, which, which was contagious so so i'm just a if you would would indulge me i'm just understanding also.

[50:06] about how the thinking goes into on the stakeholder or the public input side, and I would expect there's really no easy answer for this, but i'm just sort of curious conceptually when you when you when you think about weighing the different. You know the different perspectives, or maybe different sides, so to speak, do you think, do you think about it in terms of like Okay, if you have a you have a family of five where there's there's I don't know three kids. And or in another, you know, so I guess what i'm wondering is do is every human a vote vote, so to speak, or is it is it voters that you know, or is it sort of like households are the unit and i'm just sort of curious like thinking about how do you how do you start to way. kids into this in a place where you might have you know, maybe, if you sort of look at the unit of household it's like Well, this is sort of. controversial, but if you add, but then it's like well it's a neighbor this got a lot of kids it's actually looks a lot different, and I suspect there's no super easy answer but i'm just curious like conceptually how you think about that in this exercise.

[51:11] yeah that's a great question um, so I would say there's kind of a different there's a few different points at which kids come into the consideration process and the process overall on you know I noticed that. Most of the time when we get comments in favor of traffic calming projects. Many of those comments focus on the. presence of kids in neighborhoods, and so I think you know not, not to say that that's any more important than anyone else's perspective, but I think that's. You know, often a powerful thing to share when you have kids and you say that you're worried about the safety of your kids that's a hard thing to ignore in general. The. So that i've actually gotten the question a few times recently about the petition process and if kids are allowed to sign the petition and i've gotten actually some pushback from some residents on that.

[52:11] Because I have said. And, and you can tell me if i'm wrong because you know it's your program but uh but i've said, you know I mean, I think. kids have as much stake in the safety of the neighborhood street as as an adult and so, if if there are kids that want to sign a petition, you know I think that's that's fair game. You know there's been some there was one question I received about like well what if a petition or were to. Try to stack the petition with kids signatures than it. wouldn't wouldn't it be invalid and I just I don't know I mean. we're not. When we receive up to petition we're not.

[53:00] You know checking the ages of the people who sign it. In general, so I might you know, I think. Most people just aren't going to do that, but. The rain aren't the petition signatures counted by a household by like address. yeah so the requirement is 30% so one signature from 30% of the households in the block. Right requested or. You got three kids in the same family to sign it doesn't count as three it's one one resident. Smoking your 20 signatures so it's. Okay okay. yeah we talked about this last time, a little bit about you know before the next round of approvals consideration that we do want to have another look at our criteria, I remain. uncomfortable with them with you know over over valuing the input of residents, because they are kind of a snapshot in time of this street and we're talking about placing permanent architecture impermanent.

[54:01] Things in in the roadway and I also want to for for streets that are adjacent to public facilities, you know public parks and and and schools and things I do think that more more say should happen. from multiple users of block who don't necessarily live there all the time, so we will have a chance to to come back and revisit some of these considerations we've known all along, we will be learning from this process as we go, but in general, it appears we're pretty. Secure in where it's it's leading us in terms of putting in infrastructure, where its root desired for the most part and necessary, as measured so. I don't want to cut you off boys, but I would like to move this along we don't need to have this discussion right now. If there's no other substantive input on these projects, I would have mark go ahead and I would like to move this to have up. I will get there, I just want to ask this bring ryan's question Ryan Ryan pets question.

[55:03] brings up when will we when is it on our agenda to reevaluate renew modify or an SMP criteria. We were planning on doing that this fall so it's either gonna be next month or December okay. Thank you That was all I wanted this. And and are we doing any more complex project looking at this year are we done for this year. We are currently working on installing the two that we all have gone through already 26th and 25th street and then we're in the middle of the process for pine street maple sentence Bruce, so I will be having another public hearing or meeting rather. Shortly on that. Okay, thank you. Okay, I would like to entertain a motion on staff proposal here.

[56:05] Oh, I don't know if it has specific language to a. Second here. page four of our packet seeking a recommendation from tab to proceed with the installation, the proposed speed hump projects on South 32nd but not linked in place, I believe. Ryan, do you need action from us on both of these probably. I think, just a recommendation on South Africa second. Okay. So moved the recommendation as as written by staff on the screen now I would move that we adopt that. You proceed with the installation of the post.

[57:00] Okay, yes, we have a second. Okay. Thank you, I think that was Ryan, she hired. yep okay does anyone oppose the motion. Seeing none all in favor. scrolling through to make sure I can see you okay it's approved unanimously, thank you very much Ryan, and another, thanks to the. Public who have come tonight and also have given input over the over come to the public meetings written to us written to Ryan it's it's important, it is noted and and it's part of the process, so thank you to the public for being part of it. Great let's move ahead now we have another public hearing item on the agenda next, and this would be. After City Council at their September 28 meeting asked tab. They referred the. concept plan review of 2504 spruce to tab.

[58:05] I will note that in the memo prepared by staff it's suggested that. There was a narrow question about us to look at the secondary street i've listened to the City Council meeting twice that portion of the City Council meeting, I did not hear a limitation per se, I agree that it was probably the most germane part but. In my opinion, City Council referred. Asked tab to weigh in on the concept plan on this project. As before, we will have a brief presentation by city staff and an opportunity for members of tab to ask clarifying questions and then we will. turn it over to the public for public hearing, I think that if the the applicant is on right Jacob, I think, is is the applicant here, I think I see him, I saw him, briefly, and so, if the applicant is not.

[59:16] Already part of whatever the presentation from from staff is intended to be a believer will give the applicant. A chance to weigh in i'm new at this, so you have any guidance would be would be appreciated. But we would like to hear from the applicant if the applicant has something to say to us before opening it up to the public hearing and one of the public hearing will close the public hearing and have staff have tab deliberate and take action on this item, as appropriate. I don't see anyone jumping into admonish me so let's assume that I got that more or less correct. Who will be managing the. The presentation by staff.

[60:01] So, good evening chair and Members the transportation advisory board i'm Jacob Lindsay the director planning development services and i'll just kick off our presentation this evening. First of all, to your correct on Council did not limit the discussion anyway, what you will hear from from my staff tonight, our specific questions about transportation related matters on this. But certainly you're not limited in your input. So, first of all i'd like to introduce my staff that include on edwards Stafford our development review manager for public works. Charles pharaoh our development review manager for planning and interim COMP planning manager, as well as. lame Nick laughlin our senior planner who will be presenting the item this evening, now the last thing that i'll say is this is a unique item, this is a concept plan. being brought before our transportation Advisory Board, which I believe is in fact the first time this has ever happened so congratulations, we are, we are all collectively making history this evening. As you probably are aware boulders code prohibits tab from becoming involved in matters of.

[61:02] land use. With the exception of times that the City Council. Requests your opinion, and this is one of those times, so we are, we are all looking forward to the discussion, as well as your input regarding. This concept plan and with That said, we have a lot of information to convey this evening, and I will end my remarks and turn this over to a clean Alina qualified to present the item this evening. yeah. Great thanks so much Jacob i'm going to share my screen so bear with me. and hopefully you all can see the screen, let me know if you cannot sometimes it takes a little bit to boot it up. So just as a brief overview for this evening that staff is suggesting as part of this discussion is will have a staff presentation and the all important planning context as well as transportation context, which will be talking about.

[62:04] And then, if there's any questions for staff will go ahead and take them then or the applicant. And then public hearing can be held on it there's a primary key issue for tab discussion that we wanted to put forward, because this item had. quite a bit of conversation at planning board and so we'll get into that a little bit further along here, but in terms of concept plan review just. Making sure everybody's aware of how this works it's essentially a development review application and it's early in the process. it's intended to give the applicant comments from the public planning board and City Council and, in this case tab. And the comments are non binding in that there's no formal action taken to approve or deny any kind of application topics considered include bland you circulation and architecture and then of course for tonight.

[63:10] City Council had asked that tab weigh in on the transportation connection. So, then, a little bit of background on where the planning process has been to date, it was reviewed by planning board earlier this month, or rather last month and then Council voted to call it up late last month. And then requested the feedback from tab and then that'll be provided to counsel for their discussion on November 30 of the concept plan and that after that. The assumption is a site review application process, which is based on the feedback that the applicant has received will occur. sometime in the future, and then a decision of approval or denial would be made by planning board and our city council.

[64:01] So the site we're discussing this evenings located mostly along spruce street between fulsome to 26th street and there's a small finger parcel on the South, that you can see there. For our discussion this evening it's it's helpful and instructive to start at the broad planning level of the comprehensive plan in this case the site's. Part of the boulder valley regional Center under the COMP plan that's an area that's defined in the city as one of three regional centers between downtown. University and then this brc and then it's important to note centers are defined in the COMP plan is places with potential for infill and redevelopment and are they tend to be higher intensity. And then, they also provide a wide range of activities so when we look a little bit closer to the boundaries of the brc shown here, you can see it's in the site itself in the northwestern corner. Of the regional Center and there were design guidelines that were adopted for the area where there's a pretty distinct emphasis on pedestrian orientation and to invite walking and a human scale and the guidelines suggest to make theory more pedestrian oriented.

[65:18] That to do that the way to achieve, that is, it should be less dominated by the automobile. So then, because the site location within the BBC and near downtown it's it's pretty unique in that it's surrounded by quite a significant amount of. Services and a variety of uses from retail and office to recreation and schools and so therefore there's a lot of walkable destinations and services nearby the site. As part of the BBC, there was a transportation connections planet tcp that was adopted, as many of you may know, and the intent in the tpc as you'll see on the left is to improve access and mobility through the brc by developing a multimodal grid, among other goals.

[66:06] And the overall transportation connections plan these see on the right, includes the site in that Northwest corner, where you'll see the site is outlined in a light blue when we zoom in, as you can see, on the left and the transportation connections plan. shows. A multiuse path not shown in yellow in a north, south configuration on the site and in east, west secondary street on the South side it's like that shown in purple. And it's that purple connection that we're particularly interested in this evening, although. If there are other considerations that tab would like to discuss we're we're happy and appreciate any comments. So other aspects of the transportation context is that it's also in a transit rich areas you'll know within a quarter to half mile there's dozens of bus stops that serve multiple local and regional buses and it's within a mile.

[67:05] Of the downtown regional best facility and and within a mile of boulder junction regional facility. The site context is also surrounded by on street bike lanes, those are the red lines shown on this plan near designated bike routes. That are shown in blue and then also within easy access to several multi use pads that are shown there in green there's also be cycling cars are nearby. And then the transportation master plans walkable access to identifies areas that have the best access to existing goods and services within walking distance in this just really reiterating the fact that this is such a central area it's highly walkable. And then helpful to understand the built context and it demonstrates the mixer uses that exists in the area and it. Starting at the top, you can see those residential long spruce street there's retail uses to the east and.

[68:03] That includes a grocery store and Deli and several other uses, and this is just in the immediate context, because of course there's a lot more services as you expand out towards 29th street. And then it's across the street from greenleaf park and iron floods mixed use. And then it's important to note the boulder and white rock ditch parallels the site on the West and there's new residential that's being built across the street. The site itself consists of several warehouses and retail buildings with auto repair there's a scooter rental and repair and a furniture store. there's a well known thrift store and fitness gym and so onto this existing site, the applicants proposing to redevelop the property with residential. And that consists of a total of 63 units that would be townhomes as well as apartments and then. you'll see central to the site as a 12 foot or itself most I use path from spruce to Pearl street and then along with an east, west sidewalk connection into the site that PS into the Multi use.

[69:12] The issue that counselor requested and staff actually is requesting feedback on from tab is the need for the secondary access plan line shown within the connections plan that. again shown in purple would if constructed could impact the project. With a number of residential units that could be built along there and, in turn, the number of permanently affordable residential units that could be built, that is an important bowl of the city's. super imposing this transparency of the tcp plan lines over an area of the site, you can see where the plan line shows up on the ground, and so we pulled that out. From the connections plan and superimposed it onto a little bit clearer area, so when you look at the onsite on ground conditions.

[70:07] Of the secondary street that. we'd like some feedback on that, essentially, please into folsom it actually helps to to understand. The context, how it would look essentially. In. on site. So when you look at it towards the south, it shows the approximate location of the plan line, and you can see whether it would connect to folsom. And in that location there's an existing on street bike lane and then that boulder and white rock ditch property on the east side of wholesome and in this location. The ditches not only not on the applicants property but it's separately owned by the ditch company and the ditches open to the sky with trees and vegetation lining the ditch. And then also over, on the other side in this location there's a median along folsom and a turn lane that goes West on to spruce street so, given the context.

[71:07] it's pretty evident that a full movement intersection configuration probably wouldn't be possible and wouldn't be invite advisable, given the strength. The constraints, as well as the proximity to both spruce and pro streets. And so, this is just a quick rendering to demonstrate how the existing contacts would change that would probably necessitate a bridge or covered over the ditch when you implement this secondary plan line again as it terminates fulsome so for this evening's discussion we've prepared. These specific questions and really what it comes down to for us for this plan line is should that secondary street plan line be built in the. As the tcp not the tmp suggests, and knowing that there's challenges and implications, due to the crossing and a right in right out only unwholesome or should it be modified through the process and there is a process that can be.

[72:10] undertaken to remove it from the plan. As a secondary street or should this be modified. into something else, like a multi use path connection instead rather than vehicular and then, finally, is there some other alternative like some sort of loop or something that could be accomplished instead and so with that i'm happy to take any questions. elaine thanks for that um is there anything that the applicant wants to say or add. Or is he just available for other questions in case we have them. On everybody, have you. I think i'll. wait to hear your questions, I think that might be a better use of your time unless you're if you're not familiar with the project, I can fill in but I don't want to assume that.

[73:09] We do our homework here. Alright, but I just wanted to make sure if there was something that you needed to add that you had an opportunity to do so, Tom do you have any questions at this point. Of elaine have anybody Alex go ahead. You have a visualization of what the final question is getting at with the alternative connection might involve a loop to since what that might look like. Sorry, I muted you're muted sorry about that I don't necessarily have something, although we did talk about a little bit at planning board, and let me just share the screen again and maybe. walk through that. One one discussion item was that.

[74:03] Maybe the loop could come in and then go back out something like that, let me get to the concept plan. So conceivably a connection could come in and then just return back out to spruce but that big part of the larger question which is does that actually serve any meaningful purpose coming in. it's important to note also that there's this existing four story, building on the corner that was built not too many years ago that already has. A curb cut and access to the back, so it doesn't necessarily serve a function for access for vehicular access that is so that was part of the discussion that planning board had. Does that help. Because, would it be a one way. Road way through there would it be a two way driveway if.

[75:01] It would be narrower in configuration, in one way, and therefore it would probably help with any concerns about reducing the number of residential units. And that is a concern that Council also shares is trying to ensure we are able to attain residential units and, in particular permanently affordable that's an outgrowth of any residential that's built in the city. Okay, thank you. la yes go ahead. I was just going to say at this point that. To get in to to introduce a right of way road on the site what where the impact comes in, is a direct deduction of area that we can build on. And this being part of DC to zoning we need 1600 square feet of land area per unit so whatever right away that we have to give up immediately deducts from from that.

[76:12] total number of 63 units that we can build, so I did the calculation and if we were to do the original tcp recommendation for across block driveway and I assumed a five foot. tree planting zone on the South side and 18 foot wide Dr mile and a three foot wide canteens on up against the building and that equates to almost 14,000 square feet, which is once you divide that by 1600 it comes to nine units last just so that we're clear on how that works mm hmm. If I could just be devil's advocate on this one. For a bit ah, if the secondary road was already in the plans, it was already sort of one of the constraints that one would expect you to have taken into account when you were figuring out in the first place, how many units would fit.

[77:12] And so it seems a little playing with numbers to me to say, well, to put in what was supposed to be there already according to the rules would actually be a net deduction. Because you're playing by the rules in the first place, you wouldn't be able to build that many Do you understand what i'm saying. Yes, I do perfectly. I don't see that so much as a loss, I see it as not have not building this would be a potential game, but you didn't have that many Marbles to play within the bit in the first place. Well, I think that. When one looks at any property to redevelop the try and maximize its potential. I understand that's what you're here, for I get it. that's that's what we that's the game, we play is trying to. play by the rules and zoning code and do the best we can, for that you know what is, I think you're very unique property in town in terms of its location and proximity to all the services that the land so well.

[78:09] right we. talked about. Mark you're unmuted would you have a question. um So when I look at the aerial view of the proposed development and I look at where the top floor is stripped away. You have parking under underneath to the in the section to the east, the condominium or apartments right so and the and the proposed access if we ignore the tcp is from spruce. is correct yeah. Okay, so. Is it the tcp which, after being four years on tab this is today was my first exposure to that particular set of three initials and that documents like what i've never heard of this so i'm not giving it much weight.

[79:10] And i'm going to in a way, if the tcp is what is determining the number of marbles as Tila said in the beginning i'm not giving it much way but anyway, this this question of a loop. Can loop be created just internally in the parking with access in and out from spruce so it'd be a lollipop of bent lollipop. Rather than some sort of larger loop and is that enough to satisfy the tcp or the other way to phrase, this question is to what do we owe the tcp and is it a in fact that document that creates a requirement, or is it a document that creates a suggestion.

[80:10] So you're that's a fine question and and it sounds kind of open ended I might suggest Edward Stafford if he has any thoughts on that. Generally anything that's an adopted connections plan, such as the tcp that becomes part of the. The overall master plan on the COMP plan becomes a requirement that's why the question is really coming forward on should that plan be amended. To remove that requirement if not, and if that was to remain, then any project application that comes in, would need to accommodate that generally that's also considered to be a public. facility in those connections and so, something that was orchestrated to go through a parking structure or a private parking lot would likely not be seen as qualifying to meet within the current adopted plan of that connection.

[81:04] Thanks Edward and mark mark had just a related question folded in there, and that was if he if they access is more like a lollipop or like a cul de sac, I would say, does that satisfy the to speak. we'd have to take a careful analysis of that it would be hard to say that it. Did satisfy given the tcp has a very clear connection between two points or two streets and so something that's a dead end more or less driveway does not. We would have to really contemplate did that have a public need because, as we build new public infrastructure, of course, that has an ongoing. implication to the city, because it becomes ours to maintain and own in the long term, and so do we want something that is functioning as nothing more than a driveway to a property to become a public facility and so those are things we have to weigh in an analysis. Thank you that's very helpful if I can find out.

[82:01] What and follow on and I, and I. I know the answer to this question, or at least partially, but I want to ask it of you anyway, so that the rest of the Board can hear what I think is the correct response, and that is the adjacent property owners. Have they weighed in with any input on their desire for or against the additional. roadway that would create the loop and fulfill the tcp. They express their opinion about that. yeah actually you bring up a really good point mark. One of the Jason property owners, the one that probably has the largest share of a Jason seed on that friends on the pearl street it used to be a tire store and it's recently been.

[83:00] sort of rehab to become. Medical or not medical marijuana but a recreational marijuana facility it's boulder baked I think and they're expanding and so they've put quite a bit of. Improvements into that building in that site and the the owner of that property said they wouldn't be interested that they have their access into the site. And then the folks that are, on the other side with the the taller four story that I mentioned at the corner of 26th and Pearl they already have access to a rear surface parking lot so. I think I pointed out, it probably wouldn't serve in a meaningful way to have that a parallel access coming in. And they wouldn't. Be necessitated they wouldn't be required to have to. be part of that access unless they redevelop.

[84:04] That makes sense. yeah Thank you and the last thing is just if we didn't create a connection to folsom and the right turn in right turn out exclusive it still requires a bridge and add to the city's bridge inventory. machinations with the ditch company, etc, but it's a it's a bridge that's another street to maintain its another rich to maintain and. That is that all correct. That is correct, and we would even have to do some additional analysis as to whether or not this development project could be required to. negotiate and secure the rights and pay for that bridge, or would it become a future city capital project, given that the ditch itself is in separate fee simple ownership and is not a part of this project, so. Thank you.

[85:01] And can I follow on marks question just now. This would also be true for a strictly multiuse path size, you know pedestrian and bike size bridge as well, it would presumably be less happy bridge, but all the other considerations, you. describe okay. To ask a question of Edward. This is tabs meeting i'm gonna let you sort it out on your own, I want to, I want to hear other members of have any questions first. Because I do have a couple but go ahead Ryan. You want to go first you go first you. know you go ahead. Okay, I think I have two questions, so this is a from, from my perspective, as a commuter by computer. When i'm on a bike. This is i'm heading South on folsom this is getting right into the spot, where we lose the some of the buffering your protection. Where i'm thinking, how do we get this protected like what's the plan here, and so, so this is already a very frenetic area with with bikes.

[86:04] So um I guess it would just want to refer to our our handy dandy dashboard our report on progress metrics the things that transportation department cares about so trying to reduce mode share that's in the red or sorry sorry we're trying to. Excuse me, are trying to reduce a single document cars that's in the red trying to reduce bmt that's in the red, this is 2020 so i'm just wondering. If there's been much thought to how this proposed other proposal will contribute towards the advancement of I guess in particularly most shifting folks out of cars and making it safer to bike unlock. level which is there hasn't been given consideration is there, like any kind of a strategy to advance the important work that I think we're really kind of behind on.

[87:01] that's my first question died a little direct but. Not a lot of time. And I can certainly start in the lane, you may want to chime in to. A degree, it has it's not a specific requirement of an application in this type, however, the background information that elaine supplied in terms of the. location, the location, the services those types of things would be seen as helping to further those goals and inspire it's part of. What the land use planning, what is laid out in the boulder valley comprehensive plan for this area, of course, also this project would be required to meet. The standards for the detached facilities that you see chugging along spruce along that 26 those types of things to encourage. something other than single occupancy vehicle if they were to come through we evaluated for meeting criteria is related to. Travel demand management likely would have a requirement actually for a robust travel demand management program and plan is any project going through the site review process would have that would look at things such as access to.

[88:04] Transit passes access to be cycle access to bicycle parking a variety of things that they would have to be looking at in order to do, encourage that modal split. yeah i'll just jump in if that's all right Ryan as well and. The next step in the process, which is. site review would require approval or denial and the findings for that are based on the site review criteria and the land use code and as part of that site review criteria for circulation and transportation. Reduction in single occupancy vehicle. is one of the criteria that would need to be met in some way or another, and as Edward pointed out the way that we assess that is based on their transportation demand management their tedium plan. got it I don't know if this is, if this is the right part of the process, but I would, I guess, I would offer that that.

[89:04] That makes sense for my I guess my short term would be a bit like a direct from a director standpoint. But if we also have cars, you know there's more traffic in a pretty dense area of cars pulled out, where we have you know major thoroughfare and and your. it's making that landscape less less friendly to bike smoking, I guess that'd be an accident, I guess, I know that's that that'd be pretty important here, so I do I do worry about that um any case, maybe one more question, if I could i'm not sure who, this is the best for but. I know. Where I don't think we're entertaining any any any immediate plans to make folsom into the north, south, you know true. True separated by quarter, but i'm just wondering for folks who might maybe I don't know this is for staff wraps but. is full summer like ultimately if we can get a north, south true by cord or through the city is this fulsome really that.

[90:02] The only candidate or so, such that we should be thinking about if we can get to that point. we're this is this road is accessing that or are there other other candidates, maybe, maybe this is too hard, of a question for now, but I just I think of that as a pretty precious potential quarter or real estate for what hopefully ultimately in north, south South quarter. I defer to my colleagues and transportation. I think that's a larger discussion then we've got today but it's a fine just fine question. So I think the simple answer is this that. tab is seen, and has heard what we can do in the short term, immediate term around fulsome and to try and require something to occur as a direct result of this development, who put it on to the developer it's not in our all of our plans, and so we can't.

[91:07] We can't ask the developer, to take on more than what their portion share things is so i'm really not clear what you're asking for Ryan. Sorry, I maybe I was not coherent I am i'm just wondering if there's any other obvious candidates, besides folsom i'm not i'm not saying we're you know. committing to a plan right now to make folsom a complete you know separated by the way, but i'm asking are there other obvious candidates, besides folsom for that or is or no. I think that's something we want to bring forward to tab to explore, in the context of the tmp and that's outside the parameters of the discussion tonight with regard to this specific development. Okay that's all I have thanks thanks everybody. Thanks Ryan Alex I see your hand up. yeah I think I might be building off around a little bit here, but maybe a little more localized questions.

[92:00] On folsom north of this side we've made some progress or we're making some progress with the implementation, or the conversion of. What are essentially buffered bike lanes into protected this fall and one of the intersections that a. couple of the intersections long they have been interested about and throw out some ideas, one of which is the intersection of fulsome. And spruce just south of that intersection fulsome is four lanes to northbound to southbound and then north of that intersection it's one. And so that pedestrian crossing there's kind of hectic because there's an extra lane, and so one thing i've proposed as we look at. Moving the merge or the northbound merged from two lines down to one or the southbound widening from one lane to to we move that so that itself of that south of spruce so that that had by crossing of cross fulsome at along spruce is a little simpler.

[93:04] yeah the where the crosswalk is on the phone. Alex How would this be part of this project if. It looks like there's some sidewalk work being done so i'd be curious if the work that's being if any work is being done on ramps that be constructed. With a change like that in mind, and similarly at the intersection of spruce and 26 we've put out the Vision Zero innovation program temporary bull bouts if there is permanent sidewalk infrastructure being constructed, could the developer. constructs the sidewalk so that it's a more permanent bowl about. might be first question there then if if they're not responsible for it, could the city provide some sort of cost sharing, so that we build a an intersection with a similar footprint as to what's out there with the Vision Zero innovation improvements.

[94:11] We are limited in terms of what we can require of a development and we have to be able to show that development is causing the need and they're on directly then. Responding to mitigate the situations they've created so if their existing conditions that we're trying to modify or change those really can't be put on to a requirement of a specific development application now That being said, if we are making modifications which we are assured. Our in our plan with adopted some kind of a change, they would be required to build any new infrastructure to meet. What those new standards are again presuming they're adopted, something that we've said, this is now what applies here, so there may be opportunity with the the intersection there at 26 and spruce if that was to be. seen as something that the curve extension was permanent and we had a standard bind it and they were rebuilding it because they were impacting the overall area.

[95:06] But the ability to modify for some which they actually don't have direct friend to john i'm not going to be present in this project. Thanks every. Time in. Yes, well Alex are you done. yeah I guess the intersection of. It looks like there's some sidewalk improvements I know they don't front full somebody looks like they do touch that corner of. or sorry spruce and folsom where that crossing is so. i'd. be interested if that south east corner that intersection could improve some sort of if there's work being done if it could. I think that's ditch property right there so. I think that's the next owner over. Correct okay. All right, hutch.

[96:02] So I wanted to address this issue of this vestigial you know what had been an alleyway in the old days which I gather, is a core piece of the issue and. Personally and conceptually i'm not terribly excited about little stubs of alleyways I think that even even when now anyways continue from block to block there they're essentially use, you know, once a week for a trash truck so it's a massive waste of space, in my view. And I understand there's there's right in the history associated with them, but i've lived in other cities where the alleyways eventually get rethought. and become very important and valuable commercial spaces are wonderful lane way restaurants on them in some downtown's where they they belatedly realize that you know they shouldn't just be occasional.

[97:03] places for trash trucks and maybe for a handful of places deliveries, so I would personally and again this isn't a tab opinion it's a personal opinion. have no regrets not to have a little Stub of a street which does nothing except enable sticking more cars and trash cans back there, and instead habit the habit be more useful to the site, presumably, in exchange for something else, the city wants from it. So. The notation ish viewpoint and i'll insight i'll ask for comment on that after my second point is so I can go on mute again that the second point it's always very important to us. To think about parking and we're not in charge of how much parking gets attached to projects like that, but we're the ones that measure you know how many cars get used how and where.

[98:01] And parking particularly underground parking which i'm not sure if this is or isn't of you know, add some very significant amount of expense to buildings. So I would love to get more detailed commentary from from Ali and highly actually do we have met that it's delightful to see you here. i'd love to get more thinking about parking what is driven by whether their numbers that you have to hit because of a planning construct and where it might be does it have to be ultra convenient high end right underneath people's houses or can it be. In some other part of the site does that get the get the public purpose something so Those are the two areas i'd love any comments back from from my fellow Members, or from. Our visitors. So i'm going to just jump in.

[99:00] and note that. as of right now my recollection is based on this project is there's a small parking reduction requested but. oftentimes we've seen, particularly in these transit rich context or pedestrian and bike rich context that there's support from planning board and counsel to do parking reductions and so to the extent that the applicant could consider that. You know odds are in this particular context it would have some merit, depending on the transportation demand management plan again. I hope that answers your question and I also was just going to while I have the floor, suggest that we take a look at the key issue that we've provided to the board. If there's no other specific questions. I do have some questions I haven't had my turn yet.

[100:00] And one of them was sort of following on the hedges last about the parking. There is glacial but. moving in the right direction to move away from the parking minimums that we have on the books right now to parking maximums Am I correct in assuming that that sort of movement won't happen before. site review for this project, and so it would be another exception to the rule that makes sense in this case, but despite it being a very opportune place to have less parking than we assume in the code it's not going to be assumed that that that's the appropriate is that right. yeah that's probably correct Charles pharaoh may have more information about timing on parking code changes, you know they're on the work plan at some point but Charles do you have anything to add to that. yeah that's right our team will be. Beginning work once again code changes for parking that relate to private property, next year, but they won't be adopted, you know prior to this project advancing so they would be left to contend with what's on the books.

[101:05] Okay um it's good to hear that a reduction in parking would be likely supported by Council and and planning board, and it would definitely be embraced at this board as well. And so that should should be a consideration for the applicants I recognize that you're you're possibly giving away some. imaginary marbles by by building a road that connects to Jason streets here, but maybe we can get you some of those marbles back if you don't have to build dedicated parking. And I would encourage thinking along those lines, I am muted my questions go i'm wondering, I have not listened to the planning board discussion on this item, I have listened to Councils. And i'm surprised that there was not more discussion at least a Council about the fact that this proposal is a net loss of businesses. And a big game of housing, which is something that they want.

[102:03] But why aren't we talking about more mixed use development we keep saying, and all of our planning documents, we want to see a mix of uses. And yet projects, again and again, like this one are very unimaginative about what can be on there and it's it's townhomes and apartments and dedicated parking and. Never shall there be anything you know retail underneath even though over and over again, and the brc they are looking to preserve and enhance the commercial Center. They want to maintain retail potential in these places, so why aren't we talking about mixed use or did it come up and planning board is there a compelling reason to suddenly turn this from entirely commercial. site to an entirely residential site. well. i'll jump in from a staff perspective and maybe it has something to add but. There was a conversation at planning board about the fact that it's essentially a horizontal mix CDs is in this context, in other words just across the street as a.

[103:09] Deli and a grocery store and there's even a fast food restaurant and so to. to your point, a lot of projects in town and we do want mixed use have difficulty leasing spaces out that are smaller retail spaces, so not every project can have a mix of uses per se, with a coffee shop. And so it was discussed a significant amount of retail and office and other types of uses that are. In the context and it probably factors into several hundred thousand maybe close to a million square feet of retail and office in this context, so. One of the things that did come up about this site, however, in that regard, is that there is an existing building that was built in the 19 early 70s and it's kind of a cool building that.

[104:11] We did have an evaluation and architectural inventory completed that indicated that it's kind of a cool and unique style called googly that. Is from sort of late mid century, modern and the recommendation would be moving forward that that particular building read be retained on site. And if it is retained on site, maybe it would make a good opportunity for some non residential uses, however, and this is important to note two is. In the column consideration discussion by Council it was just a very brief discussion, because of course the next conversation is going to be a full concept plan hearing where they consider those types of key issues but. There was actually some suggestions that may be that building become residential as well, and so I think the main emphasis was.

[105:09] that this be a residential site and that it's okay to be a residential side, given the amount of other mixes abuses that are nearby and in fact the COMP plan land use designation for this site is for mixed residential. And then Ali I don't know if you have. anything to add from your perspective on how you chose that it uses. Well, we started out. A lot to be honest, to look at the site as 100% residential and then as as we got into it and staff started to look at the site they recommended. Through a third party that this building on the corner of the Northeast corner of the site be saved, because of its historic significance to the city and.

[106:00] We we came to embrace it as as a as a good part of the site to maintain to keep and so that will remain as commercial. You know if we get to do the project and that will remain as commercial for the long term, and you know internally with the team, we have talked about. How is, how can we, is it possible to have some level of commercial beyond that building as well we're still not sure where we're going to land. And we're waiting for the for your judgment on this issue of the alley as well as counsel on call up on November 30 to understand what the physical. parameters will be for us to design to and at that point then maybe there'll be room for including additional smaller commercial spaces as well. And I don't know elaine I think is absolutely right there's so much commercial nearby but maybe there's room for other spaces that could be used by you know small you know people that need smaller spaces, so will certainly look at that, as a possibility as well.

[107:11] Okay, thank you, I appreciate that and I did see react when I denigrated it as an imaginative. hey I met no offense i'm sure that you will have the capacity to make it beautiful. But I do want to see a striking out in different directions than what we've tried before as a city as a Community, and I am mindful that you know converting this parcel. To all residential makes the crossfit studio and the thrift store unavailable and further away from the neighborhood that flanks the holes, you know site to the north and the West and so it's making in some small degree. Those outlying areas less walkable or you know destinations that are desirable slightly farther away it's it's you know nibbling at the margins, but it's not. it's not so small that we should just assume that it's negligible that's that's all I was trying to get it, I think that is all I have for the questions at the moment.

[108:06] Because we do still have to do the the public hearing. And so elaine you wanted to pull up the list of of what we should be thinking about, but we can't neglect that we have members of the public who may want to weigh in, and this is an appropriate time to open up a public hearing for anyone who wants to speak to tab about this project. And i'm not seeing any hands up. yeah. Oh looks like Kurt has his hand up. yeah, as I say, there's there might be I sprung it on them really quick so. To raise their hands. Okay. But let's just go ahead and open up the public hearing them. sounds great okay i'm gonna go ahead and unmute you now Kurt.

[109:00] Kurt North back thanks for taking my comment, I would just like to suggest that my feeling is that. The the. Motor Vehicle connection on the South side is shown in the tcp is way overkill it's a lot of extra space, a lot of asphalt that would. mean greater heat island effect and more stormwater runoff I think that's completely unnecessary my feeling is that even a multi use path is more than is necessary because there's a biplane on parole, which is so so there's. writing on on spruce is is pretty good it's better now with the with the calming at spruce and 26 my feeling is that. The best thing would be just a pedestrian connection on that South side, all the way between fulsome and 26. there's already in the plans are showing there's already a pedestrian walkway with some gratuitous curves that should be taken out but because over the pedestrian walkway shown.

[110:10] From on the eastern sort of half of the site on that South side and just extending that to the West, I think, would improve the accessibility bond foot go to the site and and across that block. And you know what's involved in actually crossing the ditch I don't know that's concerned, but certainly just a pedestrian bridge is going to be less expensive lists infrastructure to maintain then even a multi use. Through that so my recommendation would be that the tcp be amended to change that connection to just a pedestrian connection if it were five foot connection with.

[111:01] Three foot buffer for example a five foot wide sidewalk there are seven units to. The north of there on that West side and each one could be narrowed by just over a foot and you get the space or, alternatively, the set back on the South side spruce could be reduced in that whole block. Some block of units could be pushed North and it seems like it shouldn't be difficult to get the minimal amount of space, then just for us thanks. Thanks Kurt. All right next up, we have. megan megan i'm going to go ahead and unmute you now. Good evening tab. it's some. it's a pleasure to join you at this meeting tonight I am coming before you to speak about this project as an advocate for housing.

[112:02] And I want to point out that when we take our connections plans our master plans and our COMP plan very seriously in boulder and we don't easily set them aside. But in this case with the transportation connections plan, I want to point out it's it's nearly 20 years old. it's not quite as old as the boulder valley regional Center guidelines which are still in effect they were adopted in 1998 but since 1998 since then we've had the whole redevelopment of 29th street in a way that was quite different. Consistent with the guidelines but represented a real departure from them and then we've had this accelerating housing crisis that we face now. And so I advocate that you eliminate that tcp connection it such a connection. east to west makes a lot of sense and the next block to the east, you can see it as that connection goes in front of good times and then the natural grocer.

[113:06] and on down to the corner there where you've got fedex and the running store, but it really makes no sense in to this project if it's going to be 100% or near 100% residential. Because of the city council, because a new City Council is going to have this project on concept plan for review on November 30 you're really speaking to the Council, because on site review this is unlikely to come back to you, unless the Council makes us special assignment again and. I hope that and but what the Council hears from you is going to be important, and they can tell the staff and the developer. What they should be focusing on what their goals should be as the plan looks forward your ability to impact this plan, as is really edits zenith and so to as Councils, because.

[114:07] ellie and his group have not spent hundreds of thousands of dollars yet on design so i'm hopeful that you will urge the Council to eliminate that tcp connection. But also, I think you know Tila your your comment about parking was very much on on point you can urge the staff and the applicant. Go for aggressive parking reductions, with a good tedium plan here and, finally, I would say, I think that you can comment on the fact comment to counsel on the fact that. Phase one is anticipating 1424 to 2600 square foot units which, by the time they're put up for sale are going to be 2.5 to $3 million dollar units. We don't need more multimillion dollar units in this town, we need more housing.

[115:00] So finally don't forget that, as if if you say we don't need this travel lane you're enabling nine more units on that site, which is very important, but thank you so much, and I just I want to tip my hat to the whole board because. I it's been some time since i've seen a board that is so, mindful thoughtful and focused in your questions and your consideration of the last agenda item and and this one as well, I am really impressed. Thank you. yeah Thank you. I appreciate it. I know I hated to cut him off right when I was getting. minutes. All right, that's all I see Tila. that's all I see as well, thank you Jenny. thanks again people at large, for being here, helping us out.

[116:06] we're going to turn out a tab discussion, I do think it makes sense to at least have some initial reactions to the. Questions that. Staff has asked us to consider. Should that, should the plan be changed. Basically, should, should the secondary street plan sort of be enforced, or should we change the plan, and if we agree that the plan should be changed How should it be changed just kind of I think. The best way to to summarize what the questions are. And i'm going to go straw poll, and again just on whether we agree that. The secondary street plan as plan in the dnc in the ttp. Should it.

[117:00] stay as it is, or should it change can I get a thumbs up keep it just as plan or should there be some change thumbs up thumbs down i'm just asking for a quick straw poll, to see if we need to even talk about what's there I believe some changes necessary mark wants to talk yes. i'm sorry it was just to clarify. I am thumbs down on the internal street I am thumbs up on changing the tcp. IP the question got kind of mixed for me. So. When i'm interested in hearing about, so I am also i'm with you mark and it looks like alex's as well, I can't see Ryan in this view Ryan, is a should it should have. One mark said yeah. Okay excellent, and then I think hutch was also nodding at that okay so that's helpful and then I think we should probably talk about our thoughts about why or what to do and i'm happy to do this in order.

[118:05] If that I think that would probably be the best way to facilitate this discussions anyone want to go first on this. Mark you're already unmuted you want to just go. um, so I think we just answered questions one and two, because the second question is, should the tcp be modified through the process to eliminate the secondary replying so we just said yes to the tcp been modified and then. thumbs down on number one, so the third one, the third question, I do I do i'm. i'm not sure I understand it, should the tcp be modified through the process that changed the secondary street plan line connection to a multi use path okay so thumbs up or thumbs down on multi use use path, instead of the street is that is that the correct question.

[119:03] Now that's um, so I think I think we all agree that. The secondary street plan as envisioned in the tcp is wrong in some way, either in the wrong place or it's been wrong thing or we don't need it, and so this part of the discussion is i'm assuming we will say the tcp should be modified in some way, and I want to hear what you want. How you want that to be modified. Well, do you want to say take it out, all together, we don't need anything make a lollipop connection that only serve those vehicles. Or you say yes, I think that there's some connections as necessary. We should probably convert it to a multi use path, or there needs to be a way to traverse the site. With the motor vehicle or wherever the garbage trucks go and that's why you have to have the tcp be a loop that comes in, from 22nd and up on spruce. And then i'll fun i'm a minute i'll go and i'll try to make it. Alright pompous i'll try to encompass three and four.

[120:02] Okay. and say the tcp should be modified. Through the process so that. There is no multi use path. And a minimal loop connection connecting to spruce only. And that the. That the developer developer will develop a mobile space easy for me to say. Space be used to maximize. A TD em rich plan for. Shared vehicles. Protected bike storage.

[121:01] electric vehicle charging electric bike charging etc that that what we really should be focusing on the tcp here in this particular site is maximizing. tpm usage and minimizing parking and maximizing we should be maximizing residential development and tpm rich features. Okay, thanks mark. I hear that. I have a quick question of staff, based on what mark just said, though. The tcp is really just about site access like how How are people and vehicles moving in and off and connecting the existing street network and what it's like. As opposed to what values can this property be advancing is that fair enough it's more like nuts and bolts, and how how people are getting in and out.

[122:03] yeah I think that's fair I think that's. A pretty accurate portrayal of what the tcp is intending to do with what level of access or. type of facility is should be placed in this location. Okay, and. Given that capsule but, given the Council has asked us. To look at this concept review, I think that marks comments are not out of place at this moment. I just want to caution us from being too married to the proposed language and the strictness of the questions that are on the screen right now, so I think mark what you said was perfectly relevant. i'm just saying in terms of answering the questions that staff haven't have asked, we need to at least tell them what we think about the changes to this tcp as well. Anyone like to weigh in next touch you just unmuted.

[123:03] yeah I sort of said this for so I won't I won't belabor it, but I think it's just really over specifying. How this site gets laid out to say it has to have an alleyway down that side but it's it's it's to me it's car friendly it's not people friendly it's not bicycle friendly it's not really access friendly it might or might not be trash truck friendly. and frankly I don't think we should build the streets just for trash trucks anyway, so I I like the idea of changing the tcp for the site that says there is no need for this secondary access. And then we can say some of Marks goodies that instead of having that tcp condition we really like to see you doing some of these goodies but it's not it's not driven by the tcp it's driven by good, he said, we, as the tab like.

[124:01] Okay, well, I still have you hutch. um. The question three is asking about making make changing it to connect to a multi use path plan and connection instead. What is your feeling about converting some part of this. required roadway street to require multiuse path in the product. I don't like one block or half block or little short bits of multiuse path because they don't go from anywhere they don't go to anywhere. They people don't use them, you know you could do something there that would be an attractant to people if you wanted if that was part of what you were trying to do with that site. But just having a little chunk of useless path to maintain to me doesn't help us. i'd like to pass to have continuity, not be Level one block segments floating out no nowhere.

[125:01] Thank you. Anything else on this. At the moment. Okay Alex or Ryan, would you like a turn. fairy I support modifying the tcp think that the roads overkill think a Maltese path, or even a sidewalk punching through the full summit is. isn't not necessary if you're trying to get to folsom you're probably trying to get to the intersection of folsom and her or the intersection and folsom and spruce to cross and so walking half a block along the East side of folsom I don't see as as necessary so. yeah modify and then I would also be interested and as a board discussing a recommendation to Council about the consideration of trying to get more units more lower cost units on site versus the proposed 16 townhomes if others are interested as well.

[126:01] Okay. Thank you um. yeah that's a that's a good consideration, I think that mark had suggested we maybe after we deal with these questions that staff wants us to think about. see if we can come up with some brief recommendations that we would unanimously wanted them them to consider at this stage, encouraging for this as part of the concept review so thanks for that Ryan, would you like to talk to go. I don't have a lot to add I just i'd agree with that, with mark, I will all agree with mark hutch and Alex said I think those those are great maybe just to firm up. What I was kind of getting out of the question period is on. This is a historic opportunity for tab this week, not every day we get we get to weigh in on like on land use. And you know Mike my question centered on okay so here's a chance for us to look at that dashboard of the report on progress and and our mode or mode shifting plan or safety plan, and I would love to see this be a real signature.

[127:08] or like a showcase like these, right up front of me in the summary of the project, what it what's it going to do how's it going to support those goals, I mean, I think I. tedium is part of it, but I think sort of bigger picture you know it's. it's it's not every day that we have something big that comes across tabs desk and we say Okay, how can this strategically or having this impact, are you know strategic goals so. that's maybe sort of conceptual but i'm in consideration of modifying the tcp I think you know, maybe that's that's the place to add some some thinking on it so that's that's it for me thanks. Great Thank you. Well, you guys be surprised me a little bit, I guess, but maybe it's no surprise, we don't want to build more roadway, so in that sense, I suppose we're a little. Consistent I actually like alleyways as a pedestrian I don't like them as a cyclist much because they're generally unpaved and kind of difficult.

[128:06] But they are a little. kind of secret and they're a good way for people who are really local i'm really walking through the area they do walk along them. And many times it's easier to walk in a group or walk abreast with people along an alleyway than it is on dedicated sidewalks and so, for that reason I was sort of attracted to the idea of having the. The alley the secondary street kind of moved to the southern edge of the the main bulk of the site and have it be a pedestrian access. You know in sort of a more pedestrian ised area i'm definitely less yammer of the the north, south multi use past that's shown in there, I don't think that that's a terribly useful pathway, because it doesn't connect but at the same time as Alex points out. Connecting to folsom doesn't really get you anywhere it's difficult to cross folsom it's a little stressful across folsom there's a media in the middle so you're not supposed to cross folsom.

[129:07] And so there's no particular they are there, once you get to folsom and so, for that reason I would be more interested in. The sort of candy cane shaped or something that enters that connects from 26 to spruce through the site if we think that there needs to be access to parking as opposed to. a cul de SAC or something that is strictly for use by residents, for their private vehicles or you know private parking of their cars, I would prefer to see something that connects at least through the site that feels more like a public street. A quiet and one that doesn't have anything but very slow moving then about depart traffic on it, but that's still allows people on foot coming from spruce or 26 to sort of take a little side cut through. And I I liked.

[130:02] The thinking about how to how to buy you know five or seven feet of sidewalk that that Kurt was talking about. And I thought the same thing could happen for such a roadway if we really reduced you know some of the onsite parking. If you didn't have to dedicate so much the ground to to storing those vehicles, maybe we could come up with something that's a much slower activated street that's not just an ugly back alley. But something that allows people to walk through, and so I would be more in favor of changing the tcp to just change the alignment of the secondary street plan. And something that doesn't remain only interior, to the site, but does connect to from from a point A to Point B on the perimeter of the site, but not the points A and B that are shown. In the tcp It appears that no one when when we were making the tcp appears that no one paid attention to the.

[131:00] The alignment of the ditch right there and that the ditch was taking up most of the front edge along fulsome and presents its own problems, so. that's sort of where I would come out i'm not sure at this stage whether you need a motion we did have a public hearing and so tab can act this evening in the form of a motion if we choose to i'm not sure if staff is meeting that. In order to encourage the applicant to I believe the applicant has to apply to them and the tcp Is that correct. That is correct, it would be part of the site review process itself. And it's really just. intended us feedback and there's no motion that would be required. Of tabitha okay. that's good to know that being said, I would like to hear from my fellow board members about whether you feel like you would like to make a motion or craft emotion, whether on the tcp modification or on.

[132:04] Just to have something and tabs first concept review way in to have it being more. sort of tangible and substantive than just feedback related back from staff to counsel. also curious if any Members want to react to anything that they heard you know, as I was kind of going one by one, to to our thoughts on what to change and how because we definitely weren't completely aligned on on why. Any other. feedback from town trying to see you all. So, so do I guess i'm I appreciate you coming back to staffs list a list of questions and so, and again they. The way the word is a little funky but I vote no one one yes on to no one, three and.

[133:04] And the looping and i'm, for I would vote if required, only. That if there if there for emergency vehicles or some other requirement says, we have to have if we've done if we followed the my first three recommendations 123 that that there has to be some sort of Interior loop then then fine, if required, only so anyway that just to record. My input and I would be. curious if others read those questions the same way, I am and have a similar or different. recommendation. i'm definitely not reading the word loop, the same way that you seem to be reading the word loop so maybe we can have a talk about that. Because I think you've been using loop as a lollipop is a possibility of a loop, but I say it's not a loop if it doesn't connect to some two points on the perimeter.

[134:06] Oh well, that would be a question too. Right yeah what does loop mean here staff. Sorry, looking for the unmute button um. Honestly, it was putting out there and alternative it's not intended as to be something that would direct you, to a certain outcome it's. Literally posing the question are there other alternatives Besides having either a secondary road or a multi use path or eliminating it so it's essentially just presenting or fourth option. So so Okay, then I would say number four is a no for me, so no yes, no, no.

[135:05] And then we then then maybe at some point we can go on to anyone's additions but i'm curious about how the others feel in terms of a specific recommendations staff for their questions. mm hmm. So if I get summarize mark is just saying no don't build any any secondary street. there's nothing that needs to connect but you just put what you needed in order to get I suppose motor vehicles in and out. Even if it's just one spot and one curb cut. Alex do you have a response or. An eye and I, by the way, I say I don't like that, I think that there should be some kind of through street in through connection, other than. Just people driving to to their parking spaces somewhere on site Alex.

[136:03] i'm going to various i'm in agreement with mark and find the the fight that looks like the block is about 500 feet long, which is a hair long, but I think the creating an internal. passage way. might not be all that well known and more of just residential access, and so I see there being more benefit to maximizing the buildable footprint of the site versus sneaking a multiuse path or alleyway between a parking lot and the backside of private residences. Okay um I don't know I mean there are requirements that I don't know them very well, but there are open space requirements per you know unit of housing as well, and so there may well be you know space that's not roadway and still not buildable. And that would to me, be an adequate and appropriate place to have some kind of pedestrian or you know.

[137:03] Smaller non motorized. thoroughfare planned into that and so I don't want our suggestions to say you don't need to do anything just because you don't we don't want you to build a road. I guess that's I could be like an internal. courtyard too, though right. mm hmm it's probably true again. Okay. Ryan. So to your concern if I if I get it right is is simply that that. You want to increase allow there to be. pedestrian at least pedestrian access through somehow through the kind of middle of it don't don't don't block it all off so that it's it's it's this. Is. You can't walk through it. Okay i'm looking for some sensible permeability yes and but not just for the sake of having permeability through to folsom because I agree with Alex that doesn't that's there's almost nowhere on the site that makes sense to that you want to be at dumped out and folsom so.

[138:02] kind to direct people where they would want to go. And are you are you Okay, with just walking accepted as. I am Okay, we just walking access I don't. see the need to put more vehicles, and I agree with the analysis that said, if you put them on full summit will be right in right out only. So every vehicle triple have to be a round trip it to some and around the block at some point. yeah okay I I mean I don't know it seems to me just for my I don't know the right and how to optimize for it, it seems like the developer would have a good a good sense of things like. Are we yeah would that would would would would adding pedestrian access reduce or limit that the bill ability in terms of. Actual housing units i'd be nervous about about limiting limiting in that way, but otherwise I don't I don't know that I feel really strongly I mean I generally think that um yeah listening to one one access point for motor vehicles makes sense.

[139:00] And then. Sure at permeability if that doesn't get in the way of rest, but I don't know if i'm saying like Okay, this has to be that way so. Okay. Alex you want to chime in. Is the site plan showing a sidewalk on that East side and is that something that our team, are you advocating that we go wider than the sidewalk depicted there are that sidewalk be sufficient. On the south side of the site. On the south side of the site oh so the east, west side work. will be on the southern edge. and probably think that would be sufficient. I agree. And I don't see how much verbally or. physically so. Yes. Sorry, I disappeared again. that's okay I. My My votes overlap perfectly with March.

[140:03] I am presuming the developer will want to have people to be able to permeate in and out, I have a hard time thinking that anyone's going to just randomly want to walk through there there's a park across the street. there's a parking lot on one side there's a handful of houses, including commercial areas north of it it's purely commercial South it I don't know where our pedestrians come from and therefore having a having a highly pedestrianised one block size blow area. To me, as a bit too much i'd like to as idea about you know, making sure it's not just some world fortress. But I don't know, I think that tcp is way to create a mechanism for that and it's it's better for Ali and his colleagues to think about how to make sure that their residents can walk in and out because that means somebody else can walk in and out to.

[141:00] Great. Okay. Well what's the feeling of the group about making this a little more official and making emotion, we can but we don't have to mark. No worries. you're still muted. Okay first apology for. Weighing in so heavily on this, but I am going to click send. To um there it goes. Excuse any spelling errors on on on on just a quick motion language that we provide the feedback 1234 I just added number five. And that motion is through excellence and design and innovative key DM and some parking principles, the tab wants to see this project help boulder move forward to reach our tmt goals or move forward help help boulder reach rtmp goals strike move us forward.

[142:23] Okay. Through excellence and design and innovative tedium and some parking principles P l E s. Okay, thank you. you're welcome the principles your power remember. When I know that rule yeah. I would say, instead of the tam wants to see this project help boulder reach rtmp goals, I would probably say. tab supports the concept plan is that the noun appear.

[143:01] Well, I don't know that I support this concept plan is so general that I mean you know, without have a hard time saying it's it's currently in its current status it exhibits excellence in design, I would like it in the future to exhibit excellence in design. edm. it's too early to say that the current concept does. Okay, that helps me understand your language okay. Any thoughts from anyone else. look like maybe we're all typing I don't know. Well, just a good place to codify that's right we're a bit too early to formalize our I think that we have a consensus on on on restricting that number of the vehicle access points to one I got that right.

[144:01] or my over over specifying at this point. I think you're probably correct so. You run into the safety guys. run into the safety guys yeah. alright. i'm working on massaging some of this language but i'm not very good at doing it right in the heat of the moment but. Mark your. hand up if you want to, if you want to break. Sorry. To Erica has her hand up if you want to. Go hi Erica. I can't see your hand up. Oh, thank you. Now, I just wanted to I guess remind tab Members that, in terms of what one might require of the developer.

[145:04] that's what's in code, and so the what's in code, right now, or what you know the level set is what is in the current on you know concept plan and the connections plan, and so I think that is why you know the planning. and development staff, you know, had asked essentially would there be a recommendation or support from tab to pivot from having that and but. The for the developers to consider and so it's trying to I guess frame it in that way because of this point. We have what we have and. Mark don't die, but I agree with you. In terms of in terms of we can do better in the future, but we have what we have right now, and so.

[146:03] I think just trying to really focus in on that, which is why the staff and ask the questions away, they had, and you can express your sentiment, certainly, and you know your. recommendations, but really is trying to look what a pivot might be, if this requirement, you know where to be something different. yeah. That is helpful um. So what I am i'm i'm drafting a reply but i've written something completely new, but I think we're trying to get a consensus of what we want to see but i'm trying to frame it as. answering the questions that staff had asked us to consider on that slide and so i'm trying to say the tab supports amending the tcp. To.

[147:01] support this development of 2504 spruce I hope that's the right address with amendments to eliminate the plan secondary street connection. In an effort to sort of. emphasize other development priorities, and then we can list what other development priorities, we want to see. i've got something written in the way of the male development priorities we'd like to see, I would like to throw out. Okay, so in the past, what we've done when when we were in real life is opened up a Google Doc and then someone shared screen and then we can. All.

[148:00] do that and I miss it doesn't have to be a Google Doc because only one person could. I can share, if you would like to share your screen. Thank you, that would be helpful. I have to do is figure out how to get zoom smaller here we go. So I did just send. replies you can see sort of the language that i'm. Thinking of but i'm also opening a document so that I can just put it up, and we can edit it live here. Okay. Share screen. They appreciate your patience here where's my share screen option.

[149:04] that's good question. There is, I see it, I see it. Yes, you can ask the question of. course do we have a was there or is there a consensus on you know I don't know if this is too descriptive but I Okay, so as far as where the access point is I I don't really like folsom for vehicles. All right, are there other with is there is there other I guess I don't know. thoughts on those. Okay, so reduced vehicle access points and well. let's see allow the goal access to the. site, other than the folsom. Do we care if it's spruce or Pearl or 26th. mardi gras to spruce. I don't know what that. there's there's a rational there's a rational basis for all but basically we don't think folsom makes much sense.

[150:01] I think I go sightseeing sort of elongated east, west, it makes sense to have a central access point on the North or the South and spruces the. West. majors yes when they get to yeah. But doesn't to some extent isn't this kind of up to the developer to figure out how to how to get things, but what we're what we're working on is you know the tcp wants cars to go from 26 to folsom and we're saying bad idea and we actually have articulated a couple different ideas. And I don't think there's any clear consensus to attach attach it to spruce but well. tweet away and on the reduction of vehicle access points or can we just say that we don't want the secondary street connection and that's sufficient. yeah we can, as I say, the staff questions were more limited than what Councils, allowing us to weigh in on and so.

[151:05] i'm. i'm. hearing. i've thrown together some burbage which is tab recommends that the transportation connection plan be modified to remove the secondary street connection and not include a multi use path along the secondary connection or the inclusion of an alternative looped connection. be modified to remove the secondary street connection and not include a multiuse path. yeah along the secondary connection alignment. Okay. Or the inclusion of an alternative loops connection. And that would just exclude all of the alternatives that the staff questions raised, I think. I support that language, because it quite def please answer is all for questions and just does it in a sentence, the way I read what you've proposed.

[152:10] Okay. I would really love for this to be unanimous, but i'm not sure I would vote for this one. It doesn't have to be unanimous that's fine. But I see mark saying it's answering the other questions, but I think that elaine was pretty clear, they were just kind of throwing out other possibilities and trying to introduce other possibilities, so they don't know that those are the only possibilities and again to the extent that. This is just concept review, I don't want to be overly prescriptive and what we're envisioning here. Because the basic question is here's the rules, the Rules say there needs to be an alley built between 26 and folsom can we change that rule and that's yes, we can we would support changing that rule.

[153:03] For what purpose than to exactly where i'm not even sure it's appropriate a concept review. But I do want to also fold in some of the other ideas that we were saying like I want I would love to have some in. some mention of supporting mixed retail you know make more mixed use, and not just residential some of us have said, we want to see more units and more affordable units and to try to. will try to i'm sorry as one you know, I think that can we, I agree, we can weigh in. In the next sentence on tpm on commercial I have a comment on height, but. Okay i'm i'm getting to I think Alex. Alex is simple sentence. Get gets us to. Providing concise feedback that was requested that was requested.

[154:05] And I i'm i'm hoping that it's it's not so prescriptive it's actually answering the questions it's not prohibiting sidewalk design somewhere it's just saying hey. Okay, anyway, so I would propose that yeah I would love to I would concur with you i'd love to see us unanimously agree on alex's sentence and then, and then we go down, and we can add my sentence that I sent a second time or yours regarding mixed use or whatever, but. I would like to see us mail this one down and then be able to move on. Well, well said i'm so the highlighted language I have it roughly right now that's what's on my screen and it's highlighted. Yes.

[155:02] And do you so move, sir. I do. So. view so second Mr mark, thank you, we have emotion on the floor people. Is there any discussion on the motion. I don't know if we need to be more specific, I mean in the in the context of where what we're we're talking about it and what's getting sent to counsel it's not specify which tcp, but do we need to. be more specific about what we're proposing be amended or the sufficiently clear for staffs purposes to report back to the Council. I think this is just fine for our purposes. Okay terrific any any further discussion on the motion, then. i'll entertain a vote on the most oh Alex yeah. So we're gonna do we're gonna. have multiple motions are.

[156:01] very likely, yes, and so I think that's what mark was saying, like we can agree on this language and if there's something else that fits in good, but this is answering the main questions that staff wanted us to touch on this evening so let's just put that to bed for now. Okay. Okay Erica came on camera but she's not unmuted, so I think she's just eating popcorn and watching the show all right. I will entertain a vote on the motion all in favor. 12345 it's unanimously approved good job tab meredith you need me to email this language to you or can you grab it well i'll copy and email it anyway. Okay. i'm, mark you had an idea about. Their their feedback to give counsel and you emailed us more language. revised it was that it was it was what I sent in an email, and I just sent it again with the heading revised.

[157:04] Okay, and I corrected the principal spelling but i'm sure I made some other. So if you could just cut and paste from that onto your screen, that would be super super. I would love to but i'm going to stop sharing just so I can scroll through my windows without y'all seeing all my other stuff. see it. Okay. mark has just added.

[158:02] i'm just going to highlight this and move it down. Alright mark is just added this highlighted language. To excellent and in design innovative TD em. And I would say, applying some parking principles. or the use of some parking principles. Okay, for implementation of some parking principles. And Ryan, maybe we need to use your word showcase here tab supports this project being a showcase. Anyway, I kind of I want us to. Say somehow stretch a little here let's stretch.

[159:09] Ryan go ahead. yeah I. agree permission granted. not sure the right, the right language but just that this you know beyond edm per se, we have we have goals. And tmp goals and. i'm sorry just the last reach rtmp goals. Okay yeah. But yeah totally interested in any way to edit this to make it stronger. Right. um. I would you strive for, for your onsite spaces and don't know how innovative or.

[160:05] Right nothing genius it's just build fear parking spaces, on this side. To even regular old tm. Go back 100 years before cars just. Well, we needed some horse and buggy parking. What about. After applying some parking principles. in parentheses in parentheses, we just say. reduced. Reducing the number of parking spots, reducing the number of parking spaces. um. I would just like to kind of lift those kinds of ideas, afterwards, because that. Is a tm strategy. that's allowing denser and multiple more units with less parking per unit.

[161:04] So just like putting a list of things, we would like to see I think could fit here does that make sense. sure. i'm. drafted something about the housing. With my understanding of the facing of this, I would like. To be considered. The tab encourages Council to consider an increase in the number of residential units included in Phase one of the development by replacing the large scale townhomes with a greater number of smaller apartments. That would support that this is all concept review it's not we can't. say my barely stab at.

[162:01] Okay. sounds like you had that written down and so during you, for the moment, so I can just get a couple of more thoughts in and then i'm going to ask you to repeat that okay Alex cool because we talked about reducing parking requirements. Including more housing units on the site. Mixed use and we're missing a big one missing I. highlight. The overflow yeah but you've just said, the word hate when you think in here. Well um. And this is maybe a question for Ali is based on what i've seen so far, I assume that everything on the site is 35 feet or less Is that correct.

[163:02] that's correct. And is that because you don't think you would survive the process to. To build taller than 35 feet. or something. No, we started out with 35 feet, because that was prescribed in the zoning code. At planning board they actually recognize the value of allowing a fourth floor so they did. Make that as part of their recommendation is to add a fourth floor to free up the volume on on the site to be able to add more units and or Margie this. Well, I would support and again this is up to us to see if we up to us as a board to see if we all agree on this. Given, especially given the height of the building at the south east corner.

[164:05] that's already there. I would support. A recommendation for the use of additional height of fourth floor. To both have more residential units and and in the possibility of first floor commercial. And the relationship to transportation is of course what we discussed at CU south, which is trip reduction and trip I forget the trip reduction in trip. displacement or whatever by people not being able to people being able to walk internal capture that's what I was looking for, but anyway, that that. We would we will, it will be helpful in achieving our tmp goals to have a fourth floor and the possibility at ground level, commercial and additional units.

[165:11] Stoning here allowed fourth floor with support a fifth floor without. Was there 40 foot structure on Pearl and 26 right. Yes, that office building is for stories. it's four stories yet. And the curve roof. elements on top actually break into what could have been a foreigner four and a half floor fifth floor. If it is only supports a bit floored at entertain that on the site. It is possible to modify Heidi the site review process in this location so that's something that we could consider as he advances on through the process. So if if you're always if you're going through site you're going through site review, one way or the other correct.

[166:02] that's correct yes yeah. Okay. So I just threw in allowing taller buildings and our laundry list of things. But. i'm. And this is fun and all the poor live live and work we've just eating up all her time but. We didn't know how long this was going to take. But I do want to wrap it up, I mean we could we could do this for days right we know us um I. The big thing I was realized, we were missing was encouraging designing for to to encourage walking in on sov travel. Yes. wrapping this up liking this. just fine.

[167:01] Okay. Would there be any opposition to specifying. Fewer townhouses more smaller apartments a little more specificity there, my understanding is that phase one of the redevelopment will be the West. portion for that include the the sizable townhomes. I support that. Though it's not just about you know, doing away with that secondary connection and that leaves enough room for the additional 14,000 square feet nine units, but. The composition of the units as. well. Okay. i'm. Including more housing units on site in lieu. Of. Large townhomes.

[168:01] apartment units on site. Well, this is the moneymaker here, we got the you know we have a developer here. You know, none of this is binding, but. we're gonna ask for okay yeah sorry. I was just saying I don't know if we need to specify the type of units because types of units can be whether it's apartment condo townhome you know it's like those definitions can get fuzzy so. Right, I support more housing units on site in lieu of the larger larger. The larger residences on the West side. We don't care where they are. Right now.

[169:00] i'm fine with this as well. yeah okay. Just one just one question for that my colleague, is there anything if you imagined folsom as a. Potential top candidate for a future court or baikal about you know more sell it by quarter is there anything on that were saying about that here, or is it is it more or less we've we've accomplished supporting that as an. option. yeah I think it's pretty clear to because of the ditch and the other property owner, I mean this site doesn't touch folsom it's really near folsom. But, and we could maybe you know, encourage a connection to folsom across the ditch but for a variety of reasons that we've talked about tonight it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to do that for this. I agree okay. Okay, so what I have up on my screen is proposed language that someone's going to take credit for unless there's further modifications or discussions and then I do want to close this off and move on.

[170:07] I want to one thing i'm probably in the minority on this is, I live really close to here there seven grocery stores it's hard to get a few dozen restaurants this that and the other thing. Given a housing crisis, I would encourage us to recommend focus on housing with this area area always being fairly rich as far as mixed use the the types of things that you would want within walking distance I think are pretty readily available in this neighborhood. Okay. Do you want me to take mixed use out, are you going to be okay, if I leave it in. I would be okay with it in because there's a lot of other good stuff here, but I would prefer not. I think that you've made a good case that, even if this particular site is all residential it still counts as an excuse, and I think that's what elaine was getting to about in context it's mixed use.

[171:04] But I would really like to see us getting more creative about having housing over retail or right next to retail or whatever, and then you know they might be doing it anyways with the with that landmark landmark bubble. Building so. You know. But it Council was talking about like Rachel friend asked you know, can we move that building and get it out of the way. They are going to ask landmarks to come back and talk to them about equity concerns about having landmark things stay there, instead of building housing and so you know if if leaving that building where it is and using it as commercial satisfies my inch to. can have more mixed a more innovative things then that's that's I think getting Council some direction about whether it stays or goes, or whether the whole thing gets raised to the ground, so that we can put in. All housing that's it's all very early early days, but I would like to see it as mixed as possible.

[172:08] Okay, living in them. Okay. Does anyone want to propose this perhaps as emotion. I do. tire so moves. got a second. Thank you Ryan seconds they're in cahoots. Any further discussion on the motion language, not as an actual motion. Good team spirit, thank you, I will not entertain a vote on the motion all in favor. Of the proposed second motion language.

[173:02] Excellent Thank you very much it's unanimous, I appreciate it alley, thank you for joining us this probably wasn't terribly fun for you, but. Thank you all very thoughtful discussion bunch of smart people I love it when you come to consensus yeah and appreciate the time. I appreciate your. Time. Thank you, the staff really appreciate it meredith I will forward this document to you. Thank you very much. Okay, well done, that was tabs first feedback on a concept plan good job and live, thank you for waiting so long, we will now move to Item seven staff briefing and tab feedback on the Community mobility planning initiative crossing treatments and I will stop screen sharing. It Thank you. See here, I will get the presentation going.

[174:01] We go. whoops. Surprise okay there we go so yeah thanks for having me tonight i'm going to give just a brief presentation on some pedestrian crossing treatments. And we'll walk through each one individually and then get your feedback at the end and we also have other members of the project team here as well. So our pedestrian crossing treatments really for those we look to our pedestrian crossing treatment installation guidelines to determine. when crossing enhancements are warranted and really what type of treatments, we should include. We do have our own local funding source and, whenever possible, we try to complement that with grants and tonight i'm here to talk about some crossing improvements that are funded through the Community mobility planning and implementation grant that we were awarded by Dr kg.

[175:14] So we're talking about three different locations, as you can see in this map and for fancies we're starting from the South, the first location will talk about is. At aurora and Evans, the second one is on Colorado east of 33rd those are both new pedestrian crossings and then we're also looking to do. Some enhancements to an existing pedestrian crossing up here at 15th and iris, which is the end of the 13th street 13th street neighborhood green street. So just providing a little background around each the aurora and Evans location is right near the bcs is and high peaks schools.

[176:00] This came about as part of joint study that the city did with ptsd on traffic conditions in this area, so this is a T intersection and it's currently uncivilized aurora is here going east, west and Evans tease into it they're both local streets with 20 miles per hour. speed limits and again aurora is the green street, so the attachment to the memo includes a lot more details on this, but. For each of these I did want to just bring up a few highlights of some of the things that we heard from input that we considered. from many of the folks who are here tonight, one question was if we could make this a raised crossing. And aurora is actually a critical emergency response routes and that Ryan had described earlier right and that does limit what we're able to do so, we are not able to do a raised crossing here.

[177:08] It is an SMP complex cord or that's on the list right now. One thing that we did do actually that you can see in this photo is a paint and post version of what will actually be built through this grant so that was installed fairly recently and really emulates what you will see replaced in concrete which i'll show you in just a moment. So this is a bird's eye view of what's being proposed at aurora and Evans here's aurora and here's Evans, we have a signed and marked crosswalk of rural. Markets crosswalk at the STOP sign Evans, with these extensions and upgraded Ada accessible ramps and I do want to point out, these are narrow openings, but they were designed so that two vehicles can cross, at the same time.

[178:07] And this is just another rendering of what we anticipate this looking like again this is aurora, and this is Evans, and this is looking West. The jumping to the second location, this is on Colorado just east of 33rd, as you can see from this photo, this is a an important connection to the CEO East campus, so this is a mid block crossing of Colorado which is minor arterial 40 miles per hour here with a big media and in between. So some of the things that we looked at where there's actually an existing pedestrian crossing to the east, closer to 35th street that operates pretty well, and so this design. It looks very similar to what is out there at that other location.

[179:02] Somebody did ask if we could do a Hawk instead of a an rfp a rectangular rapid flashing beacon, we did look into that. If we think that an rfp is more appropriate here in terms of the guidance in picking and also in terms of having a consistency of treatments in the corner that's a little better for motorists expectation. So again, this is that bird's eye view that aerial view with the various elements that are planned, here we have to signed and marked crosswalks with the rf bs. And ramps with push buttons. These are going to be. There kind of separate so you push one to cross and then because this medium is so long, you would push another button to cross the second side. And then there's a connection to the existing multiuse path that goes along Colorado avenue on the North side.

[180:10] So again, another rendering So you can see what this would look like here's Colorado, and this is kind of looking northeast towards the CEO East campus with various people crossing. So, then, the third location is at 15th and iris This is also a T intersection it's uncivilized it does currently have a pedestrian crossing treatment, as you can see in this photo. there's a pedestrian refuge island in the eastbound direction iris is one lane and it's two lanes in the West found direction, and so this is a location where we had heard that folks don't feel really comfortable crossing on iris at times.

[181:01] So 15 street is a local street 20 miles per hour again it's the end of the neighborhood green street iris is principal arterial with a faster speed limit at 35 miles per hour. So we looked at a crashes that if this area we haven't seen any with bikes or peds they're mostly rear end crashes with vehicles, where one vehicle stops to let someone cross, and then the one behind doesn't stop in time. So, again we had heard from folks in during our Green street and pedestrian plan outreach that they don't feel comfortable crossing here. When we looked at our guidelines an rfp was supported with the tulane section, and we believe that the flashing lights will call more attention to this crossing point and really to cover that cost this grant application was a great opportunity to be able to make this enhancement.

[182:02] Another thing that we're adding here is it's actually a new treatment for us for cyclists that i'll talk about it in just a moment to help folks get to this crossing. We also looked into the potential of extending the median along iris to restrict vehicles from turning left here, and one of the things we were looking at was what kind of risk with her before. Left turn conflict with people crossing and based on the relatively low turning movements and the crossing volumes were anticipating IT staff decided that it did not make sense to extend the median to restrict those movements, but we did look into that. Another thing that we had gotten some input on was can we do some automated detection here like we have in a few locations around the city. and staff we're we're open to that we'd like to actually do a more comprehensive analysis of those to develop some guidelines on where to do that treatment because we want to make sure that if.

[183:12] The yellow lights are going to go on that folks are not just going to jump into traffic before looking to make sure that traffic is actually stopped so we're not ruling it out, but we're not proposing it at this time. So here's our bird's eye view of 15th and iris and so what's highlighted here in purple is that new treatment for cyclists. This is a left turn pocket that will allow cyclists to get over to this West side to get to the crossing. A little further away from traffic so kind of reducing that risk of it and providing a nice generous ramp to connect up to this crossing with the push button for the rfp and again we'll add the rfp to this crossing as well.

[184:07] And, here are some renderings this is looking North along street here and then this is your view looking Southwest along iris what these good. So, in terms of next steps will be finalizing the design, by the end of the year and anticipate going to construction by the middle of next year. And with that we'd love to hear your thoughts and questions on the elements and designs that we've proposed here for these crossings. Thank you, thanks live questions. Mark go ahead. So of course i'm going to ask about the 15th and iris one and, in particular, anyway, I, I am really appreciative of this.

[185:07] This left turn pocket for the cyclist because, as someone that reverses this daily. The current condition is just so ridiculously awful that i'm and I did not imagine what i'm seeing here so i'm looking at this going wow that looks that looks pretty cool and I think that's great the my only question or is that you have one eastbound lane. And to extend the median. To prohibit the. westbound lane turning left you say well it's not really needed, because you don't really have that many cars turning left.

[186:00] So if we don't have that many cars turning left Why not go ahead and do it and and just make it safer for the cyclists if the choice is convenience for the motorist occasionally or safety for the cyclist occasionally. And really no no delta in the east, west traffic so G i'll say. Give it give it to the cyclist in this case would be my my request. I have a lot more thoughts on that point, in particular, but I don't know if he wants to answer mark first or. Let me add on. Your choice live. yeah um yeah I know the way I think and i'll ask you know, maybe mark to to weigh in a little more cuz I know he was looking at this in a lot of detail and I think it's um.

[187:00] yeah it's kind of like, how do you interpret that right minimizing risk versus inconvenience of restricting it, I do believe that there are. There may have been some cyclists turning left out as well, who would be impacted by that potentially, although they could potentially also use this crossing. So yeah I would ask mark to and a little more on some of the thinking there and Tila I don't know if you want to go ahead and add your questions to that and we can come up with a more comprehensive response. But yeah I think it doesn't make sense for me to weigh in if that's okay mark. Because you know natalie you're when you first got this position, this is where I asked us to meet the very first time I don't know if you remember that, but I said let's go look at this particular intersection and we talked about extending the median. And i'll direct people's attention to the right hand picture live that's on your screen here iris looking Southwest.

[188:05] um because you can see, on one side of the intersection is one lane, and on the other side of the intersection it's two lanes and so that means that eastbound travelers drivers. Are in one lane and they're about to get out of the bottleneck. And I bet it's happened multiple times since we've been sitting here tonight, but people speed up and move left in the middle of that and your section to try to pass whoever slowpokes in front of them. Because, then they can go, we don't see that much speed and don't see high speeds too badly and the one block or two blocks further west and the eastbound direction but. After this intersection the speeds, notably pick up for drivers and drivers are looking not at the intersection but beyond the intersection they're making plans for where which lane they're going to take. Their attention is by necessity of because of the engineering and the geometry of this intersection not at the intersection and not at the pedestrian crossing on the close side of the intersection further it's illegal in boulder to change lanes in an intersection.

[189:16] I don't think it's illegal in the state of Colorado, but it is in boulder, and so there is no legal user of the space in that intersection. For the left hand. eastbound traveling vehicle, they should not have moved over at that point that is road space that is only supposed to be used for. Left turning vehicles into 15th street or left turning vehicles out of 53 on the iris and those are as we've noted in the in the data vanishingly few people. And it is not the problem with those left turning vehicles that is discouraging cyclists and pedestrians from crossing here it's the high speed volumes on iris.

[190:02] And those high speeds are exacerbated at exactly this intersection because of the geometry, and for us to not take this opportunity when we're fixing the geometry and messing with it. To discourage bad behavior by drivers right here and to stop them from making their move until after they've crossed through the intersection. would be a mistake and that a crash and a fatal crash hasn't happened here yet. We should be thanking their lucky stars that it hasn't and we should not be waiting for it in fact we've built a green street here and we're encouraging more vulnerable road users to cross at this intersection. it's not just the end of 13th street it's also the beginning of the 16th street bike route. it's a connection for them, this is a connection that's long been needed is underutilized because it's scary to cross iris and by extending the media in there, we would be making it more. Attractive feel safer, we would be encouraging safer driver behavior and it would feel more like the intersections that I am mark and other advocates have pointed out, as much more comfortable to cross.

[191:09] Namely at 10th and Canyon and walnut and folsom where we have restricted left turn movements, we have made dedicated. permeable crossings for more vulnerable road users, and this is an opportunity to do the same thing. I really want us to be rethinking how we're expecting people to behave here and what we're expecting people to. put up with in terms of discomfort and danger in exchange for a couple of cars at peak periods turning left directly onto their block instead of going one block earlier or one block later to make that left hand turn. that's all I have to say on that one.

[192:23] hey sorry about that I got a little kid running around. So, first and foremost thanks for the feedback always appreciative teela mark. I think when we're looking at this specific location we're really looking at the data as well right, we have a lot of locations around town and I totally understand. Some of the first comments about the system rather than the kind of the whack a mole so I totally get that when we do look at the data, though the Attorney movements are so low. Where the risk or the con the potential conflict with a cyclist in a in a in a motorist continued to be low right there's no crashes here that speak to this is a problem where there.

[193:07] Is a you know, a safety problem, we do have other locations in town where there are crashes, and we working and we are working to address those. One interesting thing about the data, and I think that live kind of touched upon upon this is that we have different types of cyclists in the city of boulder. We have those who are concerned. But very interested in cycling and I would probably put myself into that category. I live in broomfield broomfield doesn't have a lot of bicycle facility is I put over 2500 miles on my bike this year to have a better understanding of bicycling in a community that doesn't necessarily have a lot of. Infrastructure boulder has a lot of vehicular cyclists and they're looking at opportunities to act like a vehicle and we saw quite a few people making that northbound left and that westbound left. So in regards to safety and mobility, I totally get you were talking about a local street with very few volumes with less than 10 left turning vehicles.

[194:11] You know per peak hour and most of that is just in the morning in the afternoon and I totally get if it's not really a problem because there's not enough, you know people there can we just restrict it or again we're restricting everyone's mobility as well. So we just. Just not see the need, but Marcus here your hands up and same with you Ryan. Go ahead mark. So I just a quick follow on question and I agree, I totally get and I, I am one of those cyclists that. depending upon the street condition I use my bike in the same way as a car or if if if a condition allows then, if I write it more like a bike but again I do whatever is safest for me.

[195:06] And again, someone that experiences this specific intersection with some with with great frequency and there are times that I actually will use the Cross and and. Before reaching the Multi use path on the North side I make a left into the into the bike lane and ran ride West there's nothing that would prohibit. If we had the island extended to the east there's nothing that prohibits a cyclist as far as I know from accessing the right term the the right automobile lane the the westbound. bike lane or the Multi use path they would have their their choice, depending upon what's cloud in what's safe, etc, they could use any of those is that Is that correct.

[196:00] So they could like they definitely could, if you're on the westbound bicycle lane, you could turn left into the crosswalk and come across you know when you do enter an rfp, it is a requirement that you do push the button right so again it's it's all about. How can you cross the street comfortably and, obviously, like, I was talking about there's different types of cyclists that can use a street. comfortably right and we want to provide those options are data does suggest there's quite a few people that are using you know the street as a vehicular cyclist don't get me wrong. I do want to talk real quick and mark i'm not sure if I answered your question, but to telus points about the eastbound lanes. you're going from one lane to to I think that's entirely valid there because I used to drive through here all the time when coming to work. And I think we can definitely look at doing something that's more striping and potentially some bollards that says hey you got to get past the intersection in your eastbound lane before that that second lane opens up.

[197:07] ran I see you got your hand up. yeah thanks, so I live about 10 blocks from from the the location and cross iris daily with small kids so I know pretty well and I was captivated with Teal and telling because because I thought she did a really, really good job and I, you know, I guess, on the subject of data. What what I think about here is you've got to elementary schools within a very short distance a ball field that early adjacent to it. The whole growing garden complex and North boulder REC Center and then a ton of parks, plus preschools all right around this and it's just kidding just crawling with kids and iris is just this chasm that. You can go down to the light down by 20 seconds fine, but this is you can't really do it here so.

[198:03] I guess, I would just submit that is a pretty pretty important data set that just kind of first principles of the the user, the user destinations there and. guess, I would just I thought I thought to have made a pretty good case so i'd like with the lesson. yeah and one thing, maybe just to note here and I see Alex your hands up to is. we're adding a completely different crossing pedestrian or pedestrian crossing treatments. That have shown to be very effective in in locations, just like this on iris so I know it is very much so different than assigned in mark crossing. And I know, sometimes it's hard to like How is this new pedestrian crossing treatment going to maybe influence cars to be you know yielding more effectively or whatnot but that's also kind of a big highlight here is we are completely changing the.

[199:04] The pedestrian crossing itself regardless if people are turning. Alex. I was hit by a car few blocks east of here last summer. And it was one of the few times i've walked along the street, but it was just I think so unfamiliar for someone exiting one of the driveway is to be expecting anyone walking that they didn't work and. it's very low slow collision absolutely no pain on my part, but end up on the hood of a car. So up and down iris I think we need to change expectations and we shouldn't be catering our infrastructure to the particular. user, but the to brian's family that lives off of iris and needs to get to where they want to go. And this really could serve as a gateway towards what I think will it's our first green street I think i'll always be one of our strongest ones with such a need for a parallel running to broadway where we've prioritized automobiles and transit.

[200:12] And we need to put bike somewhere and 13th street being a pretty natural. place to turn to given how. Straight and connected is along the way, and so just what support the the encouragement from my colleagues on tab that we look at really making this a gateway and changing the tone as you enter this street and explaining why 15th street is different than 14 or 16. This is really a place for for people. And Alex If I could just expand with you on that, do you see that gateway primarily being achieved by restricting vehicle access. or like describe maybe a little bit. kind of. Whether we know greater access for a green street then restricted vehicle access and some greenery planted for you were a car could go today.

[201:10] really changed the environment and the function of the that space. I think that is literally how you showed you prioritize walking and biking and this area at this intersection across the street, right here for people on foot or on bike over. Motor Vehicle travel. It makes the intersection more obvious it makes it more expected you'll find the people we are encouraging their makes it look bigger makes it look different. rains in driver behavior till after they've passed this intersection and no one's no one's really mentioning the connection with the with the bike infrastructure on on 16th street but it's a connector for people. it's serving that way now and we're not seeing crashes, because most sensible people are scared.

[202:01] Crossing iris in any possible way i'm looking at the memo and the goal for this this crossing it's missing a noun i'm not quite sure what the what the noun is but. it's to enhance the existing signed and marks crossing to increase driver yield and compliance and establish a more efficient comfortable something for pedestrians and cyclists, I think the rfp all by itself makes it a lot more visible and will probably. improve yield and compliance i'm thrilled to hear about an rfp we've asked for it for years here, but it this design does not enhance efficiency for a cyclist. It probably enhances their safety, but there are better things we can do that would be better and i'm not asking you to to dig up the whole thing, and you know planetary right now but definitely take this opportunity to change the geometry.

[203:01] throughout the entire intersection and i'm not thinking of it as restricting left turning vehicles i'm thinking of it as. The, the main problem with making this crossing better and more efficient and more direct for cyclists back and forth, is that they can't use that full intersection. it's that they can't cross you know they can't stay on the right hand lane where they're supposed to be in this view looking north. Instead, they have to do this whole kerfuffle and go out of their way and then stop and push a button and then go across and then you know sidetrack right and left where where the heck they were trying to go it's not more efficient it's not better we can do better than this. yeah so T Ly, I definitely appreciate that feedback and kind of elaborating on on your thoughts regarding the whole the whole crossing in the intersection the design and the function and things like that. I can tell you to and i'll be totally transparent, I mean to some degree right we did put together a grant that had a scope right back I think in 2019 and we tried to.

[204:10] We tried to put ourselves. into an opportunity that would allow us to make some improvements here without necessarily being. disregarded out of the scope, because of potential costs right. So we had some things are some constraints that we were looking at to try to get some funding as we didn't have a ton of fun in the do crossings here, and so we tried to be as creative as we could to get some of that funding, so I think. I think you guys, have a lot of great ideas I think staff can look at this further I think we can talk about you know if there are improvements that are going to cost them more money. We can try to I can talk to some of the staff, here, to see if we can get that funding kind of reallocated to this location. Obviously guys are super passionate about this location. most passionate i've seen you about any location that i've talked to you about i'd love to talk to you about other locations, so we don't come, all the way to this point and and suddenly, this is the most important location, the cross the street in boulder.

[205:09] So i'd love to to have some of those proactive conversations. And we could definitely go ahead, I think, mark is going to say something, but. thanks for that yeah I mean. This got presented to Community cycles advocacy committee in July and i've been asking for it to come to tab since then, so it would love to have more proactive and earlier discussions um. But. Interestingly, weird it feels like we're just ships in the night, sometimes on this and just to to have not understood, fundamentally, what was behind the divert the request to look at extending. The intersection in a way that would restrict left turns their. The restricting left turns wasn't the point, but it was to facilitate better travel for their users, that we were encouraging there so i'm just disappointed that, yet this late stage, you guys have had this on paper for three or four months.

[206:04] And we're still understand where i'm thinking you know where we're coming from so thanks natalie. yeah I just want to clarify we're not like at a late stage we're not past. Okay, where we can go back and reconsider that design, we were intentional about coming in October, so. You know, there was work being done between the meeting with Community cycles and now, and so we will as mark said we'll go back and look at what we can do here. And, and we have, through the next couple of months we have until the end of the year to finalize this. Thank you. yeah. I think the only other question that I had was on the 33rd street crossing and i'm just curious why it's like mid block instead of at the intersection what's the thinking behind that. I can answer that one real quick okay natalie so um one of the best places to place a pedestrian crossing treatment is that the location where pedestrians are actually crossing, so it can be very difficult to try to attract pedestrians to a location that's 100 200 feet away.

[207:12] This is a location today i'm not sure if you've seen on Google earth if you've been there in person. But there's an incredible amount of students and just people in general crossing at this location they've already created a path inside the median area, and so this is where everyone's everyone's crossing when we do pedestrian crossing treatment studies we do look. kind of threw a section of the core door to see where people are actually crossing and not a lot of people are crossing at 3030. This is a highly focused crossing, with hundreds of hundreds of pedestrian crossing if his exact location, not just because of the East campus and housing to the to the south, but there's also a bus stops that are right there too. Okay interesting.

[208:00] Thanks, I was very curious um because it, you know it looks like there's no there there and it looks like you're lining up with one apartment complex instead of another one, and I just I couldn't figure out why. Are So is there, like a desire line dug into the the media, and right now, you can see where people have been walking yeah. Thousands of people. that's interesting. Alright cool yeah exactly. Anything else can mark you've unmuted raise your hand look you. yeah. I debated saying this or not, but i'm just gonna go ahead and set. The the crying of being poor that that the extension of the median may be out of budget. That will, and this is not an indictment necessarily of. Erica or natalie because you guys weren't here at the time, but when we spend $450,000 beyond the budget.

[209:06] At broadway and railway in the service of of expediting right hand terms. And, and that money and that complex design, it fails, even to expedite right hand turns for motorists because of the current Program. Anyway, that the crime poor rings hollow and will will ring hollow for me during my tenure on tap. When it comes to. You know I don't know 510 grand of concrete maybe Alex can work me up a bit for another 1520 feet of four foot wide medium, but it does ring hollow with me and.

[210:03] it's It is simply. Very low on my list of reasons, especially for up a project that has been not on our radar for this year, or whatever it's been on our it's it's been on the radar for as for the four years i've been on tap and I think before that so anyway. I had to get that out. yeah and mark you're talking, I know, in very general terms, but also about 15th and iris just the so so you're you're 100% correct I should be more. Careful with my words, I can tell you, like my level of staff we're trying to emphasize every 500 bucks we're spending right So when I think about 10,000 bucks it's not we don't have the money it's you know where are we going to reallocate that. So I sorry if I came off that we report that was not my intention at all so i'll be careful, a bit more with using my my words intentionally about how we can reallocate or allocate funds to better the Community as best we possibly can.

[211:15] Well, and mark it again I don't want it to be an indictment of you and I, and again. The the broadway really project that I use as an example which is this open wound. Is not. You know the cast the cast of characters has changed, and I just. But I have I can't I can't look at a budget I can't look at a project and have it not be. thought about in terms of what we could have done with those funds and we've done something differently so that's that was that was my point I just had to get it off my chest.

[212:03] Thanks mark and mark. i'd like to move this along that we don't have anything else to live. Mark good job and writing so much this year women press broomfield is not fun to write and there's a couple nice places but good job. yeah I just want to say one thing on that because I have always been I grew up being a boy scout i'm an eagle scout you learn civil service and what it means to be part of your community. I didn't write too much in greenfield at first, and I got a new bike and i'm cruising around and don't let everyone know this, but i'm a huge advocate writing the city council. And in broomfield so. alright. Alright, thanks guys. Thank you. Okay, we move now to matters. Matters from staff anything. No matter some stuff this month.

[213:00] Nothing the matter with staff. Okay, the mood matter from the board. um I see a note and I don't know what it means the point tab members to access allies for the curbside management project effective November that sounds soon. So this is more work that Community vitality, is doing. Erica you're you're muted. We wanted every week. i'm like someone tell me what's going on. So anyway. This is work that we're doing to deal with curbside management and so. You know this also is part of the Nam study but in doing this, we have an rfp that gone out and so forth, and we would like to help tab at have Member join us as part of an advisory committee. group, whatever the right terminology is.

[214:01] Okay, and so, working with working with whom. Yes, with transportation staff is leading and Community vitality is supporting the work and so it's the continuation of amps work and that's why they're retaining the access allies may mean. Okay. But it will be focused on curbside management. they're all about their branding. So much was working with them before it was such an Alex before. that's right yeah. And how long do you anticipate this work going on. It should be 18 months. yeah okay. Yes. Well, I unmuted just because. My term is up in March so right that's why I asked wouldn't be just me right. i'm i'm definitely interested in curbside management i'm sure a few of us are anyone want to join in on this Alex you're already part of it right, yes.

[215:05] Do you want to continue doing it, I suppose, as a fair question. I haven't been involved in a while now, I think Ryan took over my. Half of access allies. Oh, I saw you unmute, but we still. can't hear you. Oh yeah and i'm trying to remember where we are, because we did we did do. I became a liaison a few months ago, but I. haven't done anything far as I know, so I don't know what that led to or is how that relates to this forgive me if i've missed. yeah so. I believe, acts as allies for that, for the amps two point O work kind of like a sunset it in a way, and then now they're re engaging that group. For courteous management specifically.

[216:02] Okay well i'm interested mark Alex are either of you interested. Dual to the death know mark does not want to. I don't need it yeah if you will. feel. free to go ahead okay. Well Ryan you're you're already on it right there. If you're happy continuing that's good, and I can just be a backup I guess. Does that work natalie's that. You have in mind okay cool yeah that's so appointed. And now tab Rules of Procedure i'm glad we're getting to this at 940. um. I don't know if you guys have any comments feedback suggestions not ready to talk about it, yet any of those answers are acceptable. They said, this is just coming out of our. yeah talk from the retreat and after the retreat and having something more formalized any thoughts from anybody Ryan you're unmuted.

[217:05] So, oh no. I know mark at least looked at it, because he asked me for. An editable copies. Well, I had. I, it was an aspirational request. Okay. Because I did look at it. I have some thoughts, but i'm really not prepared again to. To anyway, I don't want to comment prematurely. Okay. The only thing that I can think of it i'm not i'm not confident haven't gone back to reread it i'm not confident we were clear on was it's a little unclear when and how tab interfaces with counsel. or reports to counsel or gets to come to Council as official tab members it's just something that came up with a conversation. When I met with Maria and that's not terribly clear and it's it's possible, this is an opportunity to clarify that or maybe not I don't know, but I think that's something that we didn't.

[218:08] Erica and natalie and I hadn't necessarily thought through or articulated maybe there's something in there, that I don't remember working on, but. that's, the only thing I can think a bit maybe not be in there, but i'm happy giving you guys more time to look it over and to get over for a more robust discussion. at a future date we can definitely table this for a little while. john good. Maybe. definitely worth be back if you think it's totally unnecessary we shouldn't be pursuing it as well, so that's that's another valid response, but for now, it looks like we'll just table mini deep discussion on it. I am available to answer questions and. I can talk in the meantime. Yes, Erica. If I may, I just wanted to say thank you very much, you have put yeoman's work into this and you have been really.

[219:01] working very, very hard to carry forward the spirit and sentiment, you heard from tab members and so forth, and I just wanted to thank you very much for. Your service to tab your colleagues, as well as working with staff because it's it's been one of these tough issues but it's been very fruitful and just thank you. yeah it feels like progress yeah thanks thanks Erica you've already thanked me before so it's gratuitous been unnecessary nice of you thanks, but. Well, I just tried to be a bit of a like institutional memory, sometimes, here too, so to try to not let things like this that we have identified as important, you know get forgotten for too long, so i'll keep raising it will get to it. But for now we will move along. We have open bar comment mark wants to talk about NICO pass. My when my notes say.

[220:02] Are you ready to do that now. Where where it matters from the board or. comment Okay, I just wanted, you know we we report as individual board members about the working groups and whatever that that we're on and. So the. The neighborhood ECO pass working group concluded. kind of ignominiously just with without a final meeting and with. allison and Chris. writing a summary report, which I, I sent to you. And so i'm going to give them my report and i'd like. allison and Chris to weigh in and correct anything. But we went along and.

[221:02] I think the the group was working well together, but the the conclusion without any what I would consider to be substantive. Results or changes being made to the neighborhood ECO pass program to me was disappointing and it was surprising that the effort just ended with a with a summary memo without any. Concluding input from the Working Group members and so i'll just restate that the for me, the goal. was to use the sudden and rapid changes caused by. coven to rethink. Reform and make our neighborhood ECO pass program more equitable do a better job of broadening and increasing ridership.

[222:11] Help us reach our tm key goals and to reduce the burden on. The neighborhood ECO pass coordinators, which do incredible amount of work and to be fair to the neighborhoods that don't have some person that gets to spend you know weeks out of the year. Doing neighborhood ECO pass work, and you know and we we, this is the collective we, the city, the transportation department. I think, was able to capitalize on the changes caused by code that if you look at outdoor dining downtown if you there are there are a number of things that that we did. achieve with some political will and help from Council and pushing on we got some things done, and I was hopeful that the neighborhood ECO pass changes could could really happen and and, as I read the memo.

[223:17] I am. i'm disappointed that there was not greater. Effort given to using existing taking taking our existing pool of funds, approximately $250,000 a year that we use to subsidize neighborhood ECO passes. And to use those funds to subsidize existing our TV products that are actually a better value than the neighborhood ECO pass the way it's currently structured. My ride cards mobile ticketing, these are things that exist, these are things that are there now that provide.

[224:01] The same ride at a lower cost than a writer using a neighborhood ECO pass, and so our subsidy dollars would actually go further and allow us to reach a broader range of. boulder residents so anyway that's that's my report that that if you read the memo, and again I would really welcome anyone on staff to. kind of counter this if there aren't real really many there's not much of a change, not much of a. change there and and I never neighborhood ECO passes is is well loved but it doesn't mean that it can't be improved and and and he done it better. Thanks, mark you feel that the memo was like accurate, I mean, does it not go far, because this is a hard problem and.

[225:06] There was no magic solution or. Well, I think the that the. know the memos accurate it pretty pretty much the only thing I would question in the memo is it's been stated that to do some of the things that I and others within the working group and outside the working group suggested. Buying my right card subsidizing my right parts distributing them to different lower income neighborhoods than those that are currently served by neighbor leto passes would require a full time position I i'm not sure how. If we took all the work that goes into managing subsidizing laughing about our current neighborhood ECO pass.

[226:00] If we took that same effort and moved it same number of hours, etc, and again I i'm not making a claim that I know that we could. Make that same effort, but we, it seems to me as possible using some of our current volunteers that hey we could we could make changes and not necessarily incur a full time position to do this and and the memo. states that you know that that that any change beyond what we're doing makes it out that a full time position would be required consuming some large portion of the subsidy okay. We got your. allison listen, you want to. Vote yeah just just just some quick background and i'm just pulled up the you know the application for the whole process and the goals for the working group, and thank you so much mark for your contributions to the working group I really appreciate.

[227:03] All of your conversations throughout the meetings, so the, the purpose of the working group, and this was. Back earlier this year that we established this was to review the past and current structure of the rtb needs the past program and boulder support program and. We really distinguish the difference that this isn't our TV program and the ego past programs are in our TV program and I think that's really important to recognize that. They are transit provider and boulder provides a support programs, so we really do try to distinguish that. And to evaluate inequities and how best to address them so to really reach out to the communities that are not being reached its we did a GIs analysis and share that, with all the coordinators and I think. We did share with you have that the neighborhood ECO past program itself serves. higher income communities and those that have more vehicles so. Part of that was to dress those inequities and we have been working with boulder housing partners to provide those options with mobile ticketing and using some of those additional funds this year.

[228:10] And the other goal of it was to identify a viable options to the current program within the existing rtb fair product so. Again, our today's our transit provider here so working within their program is something that we those those are parameters that we do have. We do have a support program and we do try and get creative with being able to provide transit access for as many Community Members as possible within that Program. as well. i'm happy to answer. Your questions about. yeah yeah. One more point of clarification. Again I don't think anyone. me or anyone else within the working group advocated for some new product that does not exist, we understand our TT is is bigger than bolder bigger than.

[229:06] lots of things and it's a it's a giant old battleship that's very hard to turn and change, and so I don't think there was any advocacy for dreaming up something new, it was for working within the rtb current rgb products and ticketing structure. Right absolutely and it is true that there will not be a significant amount of changes in 2022 and again that is reflective of changes that are going on RD and the current. Fair study that they actually put out an rfp for and are hiring a consultant for so so that's absolutely true that there's not significant changes going in into 2022 in terms of the past programs so so again working working within those parameters. So I know that can be frustrating to hear that there's not significant changes, but that is the case for 2022.

[230:04] Okay, thank you guys. um any other items for open board comment. Okay, we might still do this on time I had one question last time last time we did the seat, and there were a lot of thoughts on East arapahoe and I think Alex and hutch we're going to meet with staff on his has that happened is that still happening. yeah we met a couple weeks ago. Okay i'm filler probably some things that we should have discussed as a board before making a recommendation, and my general feelings are that. The we've moved the goalposts a little bit on what we're going to accomplish with that project i'm sure staff would disagree, which we could have talked about it. it's more of a group but. We can discuss it when it comes back in a few months okay.

[231:05] Okay, thank you. anybody else. Great we're gonna move along feature agenda topics we um we have three sort of their like bridesmaids viciously never brides. Well, the 30th street design planning is still has anyone but broadway really lessons learned and the clay fonz presentation, are still on on deck with some point does anyone have any else that they want to. Add at the end there's no rush whenever we're ready. We can follow through, but the follow up about the fatality at the intersection of Pearl and 26 just having their that on there as an item and again no rush if it's not ready next month just whenever it happens, my understanding of the safe streets report is that smart looking at previous. Data so this will be in a future.

[232:01] Safe streets report, not the upcoming one. So no rush, but I can be good to have it as a line item there. Okay, thank you. So anything else, that you have unmuted yes, I don't know how urgent it is other than. The freshness of the experience but it strikes me, we can probably benefit from thinking about how we approach any future. develop development intervention, like the one we just did. You know, we knew we'd stumble around because it's sort of the first one. But it'd be it'd be interesting to talk about Okay, so what boundaries and constructs do we put on that. And, to some extent, you know how do we, how do we manage the expansion of the boundaries because i'd be wait, we voted unanimously for it but. In the end, our our second piece of that motion was a very generic and non specific piece of bigness.

[233:07] So it's like and it took us quite a while, because you know we're trying to we're trying to claim some territory there, so I do think it's worth talking through. How to contribute to these planning things yeah it might be a relevant thing to think about for our next retreat. You know, as we're as we're feeling out this and and counselors is the first time they referred it to us, you know they might have thoughts. i'm curious to see what their responses to what what comes back to them. So, but thanks so much yeah I think that's that's a valid point we we should Ryan. A comment and a question comment, so I think Ryan knows if I heard correctly said we'll do the the SMP criteria I don't know if that was next month or not, but.

[234:05] I would like to talk about that, and specifically the I mean I guess it's just part of it that. We value, how do we value humans who can. Part of that so you know if that's what my genitals to come back to it. So that was my comment, and then the question on on teacher agenda items. Try to remember Eric I just I don't want to put you on the spot, but I know you've sort of as a principal said, by the time you know the things tab the things we really want from tab is like to. strategic planning and kind of kind of stuff and I don't want to put words in your mouth, but i'm just wondering like kind of in general are there. Is staff planning to come to suggest any kind of I don't know if there's a team P update will do at some point in the coming months, half a year, a year or any big things we should have on our mind like they're coming up, I don't know any near future.

[235:02] So there are a couple things. That. So at the federal level if there ever does become an infrastructure bill. fingers crossed. we'll be looking for some suggestions and guidance about how to maneuver through some of the project and project funding. Similarly, at the state level there's you know the si.is going through a rulemaking process currently about greenhouse gases and so it's still in process in progress and gene sansone had you know shared an update which. Is. happening, so there are those kinds of. thing and literally as we speak we've been trying to start to get together some initial thoughts for you to respond to about a next tmp update and so. there's a lot of work kind of like scurrying around in the background, as we try to teach these things up for you to get your input and.

[236:04] Your you know, suggestions and how what's of interest to you what's of interest to the Community and how we might go about it, I think you know just as an aside. I just wanted to acknowledge you and you know you'd sent an email out to tackle for forget the professor, but now looking at roadway type ology and so forth, so you know that's another piece puzzles that we can look at all so. Okay, so sounds like a minute, maybe it's The next meeting, or the meeting after there'll be a request for. feedback. Similar January and just because you know we're trying to. just give you a half, not even half a Caribbean. cruise to consider so that elite thing for you to chew on a little bit okay okay.

[237:01] Thanks Erica Thank you. Thank you. Well, if there's nothing further I will happily entertain a motion to adjourn. Because I think we're at the end of our agenda. make a moto we're gonna learn thanks Ryan. Oh mark seconds. Sorry, all in favor should we go home, you want to talk about something. else. Oh wait we're already. there. Well, until we meet again for those who are done just before we started marks gonna send around the doodle poll, I think, to see when we would like to get together and not talk about tab but to get together in the flesh and have a beer or something. Okay first rounds on me definitely.

[238:02] For no particular reason. Have a good night people thanks again.