2026-09-29 - Planning Board

00:13Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Good evening, everybody, and welcome to this September 29th meeting of the City of Boulder Planning Board.

00:20Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): I am this year's chair of the planning board, Laura Kaplan. We'll just do a brief introduction of the board members. So starting all the way to my right viewers left board member Mark McIntyre, followed by board member Kurt Nordback.

00:32Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Our Vice Chair, Claudia Hansen-Thiem, To my left, viewer's right, Mason Roberts and Max Lord.

00:42Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Board & And do we have ml online?

00:44Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Yes, we do have ml on online. I'm just noticing we have a bit of feedback. If everybody in the room could make sure that your volume.

00:51Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): Zoom on your laptops is turned all the way down so that we don't end up with a feedback loop.

00:56Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): That'd be great.

00:57Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): And also, if you're on Zoom, you need to be muted on the Zoom. I learned that the hard way.

01:02Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): Microphones need to be muted as well as having your volume down.

01:06Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Thank you.

01:07Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Okay, and you said we do have board member ML Robles online.

01:11Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): Yes, she… I'm not sure if she's joined,

01:15Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): She's in the attendee list, she needs to accept the panelist invitation.

01:19Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Okay, so we'll be joined by ML shortly.

01:23Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): We do still have somebody, with some feedback, so if everybody could just check your microphones and your Zoom mic.

01:31Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): One more time, both on your computer and on your Zoom.

01:34Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Hopefully that will get rid of the echo.

01:40Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Okay, so this meeting is now called to order. We have two items on the agenda tonight. There's one public hearing item, and this is about the project at the intersection of Balsam and Broadway, where the Boulder Medical Center is. And then we will have an informational item later in the meeting.

01:56Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): About a vacation of right-of-way for the portion of the Bernoulli Boulevard, adjacent to 3200 Airport Road.

02:05Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): So, we will start the meeting, as we always do, with general public participation. This is open comment, where any member of the public can speak to the board about matters under our jurisdiction, except for tonight's public hearing item. Public comment on that item will come later during that hearing. Okay, so if you want to talk to us about anything else.

02:22Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Now is the time and I will go ahead and turn the meeting over to staff to run the public participation. And is Vivian with us tonight or will that be you?

02:30Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, City of Boulder: I am. I'm here. Can you hear me?

02:33Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Wonderful, we can, Vivian, thank you. I'll turn it over to you.

02:36Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, City of Boulder: Great, and I see that ML has just joined as well.

02:40Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, City of Boulder: Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, Good evening, everybody. Thank you, members of the public who are joining us here tonight. My name is Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, and I'll just lead you through some of these rules of public participation.

02:51Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, City of Boulder: First off, wanted to share that the city has engaged With community members to co-create this vision for productive, meaningful, and inclusive civic conversations.

03:00Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, City of Boulder: And this vision supports physical and emotional safety for community members, staff, and board members, as well as democracy for people of all ages, identities, lived experiences, and political perspectives. And we have a lot more information about the Productive Atmospheres vision on our website.

03:15Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, City of Boulder: So tonight, I'll share some examples of rules of decorum that are found in the Boulder Revised Code, and other guidelines that support this vision, and these will be upheld during this meeting.

03:24Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, City of Boulder: All remarks and testimony shall be limited to matters related to city business. No participant shall make threats or use other forms of intimidation against any person. Obscenity, racial epithets, and other speech and behavior that disrupts or otherwise impedes the ability to conduct the meeting are prohibited.

03:41Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, City of Boulder: And we ask that all participants in the open comment or public hearing later in the agenda

03:46Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, City of Boulder: Please introduce yourself by your first and last name.

03:49Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, City of Boulder: Next slide, please.

03:51Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, City of Boulder: If you are joining us online, we will take, open comment, public hearing comments from, participants joining us in the room and also online. If you're online, you can let us know you'd like to speak by raising your virtual hand, finding it at the bottom. If you're joining by phone, you can dial star 9, and it will raise a virtual hand next to your name. You can also get to the raise hand button, through the reactions button.

04:16Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, City of Boulder: Also a reminder, and I see people already using the Q&A,

04:21Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, City of Boulder: button in the appropriate way, so we ask if you have questions about the platform, sound, timing, please, you can ask those questions through the Q&A function, but we ask that we don't have conversations about content through the Q&A function. You'll have time to share your

04:37Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, City of Boulder: comments, when we open up, the public hearing and open comment. So for this next portion of the meeting, like Chair Laura Kaplan mentioned, you are welcome to speak to the board about, anything not related to the public hearing item.

04:54Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, City of Boulder: For tonight, as that will be later on in the agenda.

04:58Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, City of Boulder: So maybe we can start in the room.

05:01Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, City of Boulder: Thomas, anybody in the room signed up.

05:04Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): Yeah, thank you, Vivian. We do have an audience tonight, but I believe everyone is here for the public hearing. We didn't have any sign-ups for the open comment.

05:11Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): But if you're here for the public hearing and haven't.

05:14Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): yet signed up, I'd invite you to do so at the sign-up sheet.

05:17Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): On the left side of the room now.

05:19Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): And with that, we can move to online participants for open comment.

05:24Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, City of Boulder: Great, I do see one hand again for the open comment. Ryan Carroll, you have three minutes. Please go ahead.

05:34Ryan Kehrl: Hi, can the board hear me?

05:37Ryan Kehrl: So I recall when Alpine Balsam was announced, and I recall the same disclaimer about the emotional safety and the community engagement.

05:45Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): Ryan, I do ask that you save this comment for the public view later on.

05:50Ryan Kehrl: This is the period of the tour.

05:53Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): Any items?

05:53Ryan Kehrl: Any items that aren't.

05:54Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): Sagitta.

05:57Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, City of Boulder: Sorry, Ryan, I just muted you because of the feedback, but I think, the… the point that Thomas was making is that it seems like your comment is related to the public hearing item, is that correct?

06:08Ryan Kehrl: I believe so. Yes, Boulder Medical Center is what I'd like to comment for.

06:12Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Yes, we will have…

06:13Ryan Kehrl: public.

06:13Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Comment about during the hearing, a little bit later in the agenda. This open comment period is for everything else except for the Boulder Medical Center project.

06:22Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): You'll get a special time later in the evening for that project.

06:28Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, City of Boulder: Yeah, and we just… for people who aren't… don't attend these meetings that often, we have this, this portion of the meeting available to community members, just to be able to speak directly to planning board members about any other topics on your mind that may not be on the agenda. But the agenda items will come later.

06:49Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, City of Boulder: Great, I don't see any other hands, and thank you, community members, for being here with us again.

06:55Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, City of Boulder: Over to you, Chair.

06:58Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Thank you.

06:59Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Okay, have we fixed our feedback problem, or are people still hearing the feedback?

07:04Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Or Echo.

07:06Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Okay, I'm seeing ml is giving the high sign that it's… the audio is good online. Okay, and it seems pretty good here in the room. All right, we will go on with our agenda.

07:14Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): So with that, we close the open comment period and move on on our agenda. So that was item two, public participation. Item three, approval of minutes. We have none tonight. Item four, call up items. We have none tonight, which brings us to the public hearing.

07:30Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): And I know that our staff member, Chandler Von Skock, will go through all the different steps of the public hearing tonight, so I'm going to read the title of the item into the record, and then make just a couple comments before I turn it over to Chandler to start the staff presentation.

07:46Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): So the title of this item is a Concept Plan Review for the proposed redevelopment of the Boulder Medical Center properties at 2750 Broadway, 1233 Balsam Avenue, and 1310 Balsam Avenue.

08:00Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): The proposed development includes a 4-story multifamily building on the 2750 Broadway site containing 160 units, a 3-story multifamily building on the 1233 Balsam site with 30 units, and a 3-story multifamily building at the 1310 Balsam site with 33 units.

08:20Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): The proposal would require a rezoning of the 2750 Broadway site from Business Transitional 2, or BT2, to Business Community 2, BC2.

08:30Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): The proposal would also require a height modification to allow for the buildings to exceed the 35-foot height limit. This is reviewed under case number LUR2026-00007.

08:44Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): That's a mouthful. So with that in the record, I'm going to turn it over to Chandler in just a second here, but I do want to emphasize

08:51Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): For folks who don't come to Planning Board regularly.

08:54Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): that this is a concept review. There is no decision being made tonight. We're not approving or denying the project. This is an early opportunity for the planning board and staff to look at the project in its early stages and give feedback before any final site review plan is submitted for approval or denial.

09:11Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): So we'll just be giving our individual feedback as a board.

09:16Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): To the applicant.

09:18Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): And our feedback has to be based on the code criteria by which we judge projects, and that's legal criteria in the code.

09:27Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): It will be, when it comes back for, site review, a quasi-judicial decision that we are making, in which we are acting as judges. And so, it's not about our personal opinions, our likes, our dislikes, our sympathies, it's about the code and how we apply the code.

09:41Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): There's some discretion in that, but we do have to stick to the code.

09:45Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): I do also want to make clear that this project tonight, this is not the city's property. The city is not the applicant making a proposal. We are reacting to a proposal brought to us by a private property owner, which is the Boulder Medical Center.

10:00Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): So with that, I'd like to ask board members for a disclosure of any conflict of interest or ex parte communications about this project. An ex parte communication means board members have had discussions about the project outside of the hearing room.

10:16Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Kurt.

10:17Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): I don't have an ex parte disclosure, but I did have a question for Deshauna.

10:22Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Of.

10:23Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): what are, regarding what our rules are, or guidelines for the disclosure about living in proximity to a particular development. I believe that the threshold is 600 feet.

10:36Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): I wanted to confirm. That is correct. 600 feet is the measurement of the code for notification purposes.

10:42Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): For notification. Okay. Well, I think in the past, we've had some sort of a, at least, guideline about whether, board members who live closer than a particular

10:53Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): limit, to a development should consider whether there's a conflict of interest. But in any case, I live at least 1,200 feet away, so I'm in the neighborhood, but I'm not that close, so I just wanted to disclose that, and make sure that there's no concerns about that.

11:14Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): None from the city attorney's office, but it's never improper to err on the side of caution.

11:18Speaker 4 (Board & Commissions): in full transparency, so thank you. Yep, thank you.

11:22Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Thank you, Kurt. And Deshawna, do you want to introduce yourself for folks who don't know you?

11:27Board & Commissions: you.

11:27Speaker 4 (Board & Commissions): Sure, my name is Deshauna Sasweta, and I'm here today representing the city attorney's office. Thank you. Thank you, Deshauna.

11:33Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Shauna. Any other potential conflicts of interest or ex parte communications to disclose?

11:40Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Okay, seeing none, I will turn it over to Chandler to start the staff presentation, which will be followed by a presentation from the applicant, and then followed by the public hearing, and there will be some board member Q&A in between those steps.

11:54Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Over to you, Chandler.

11:57Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): All right, thank you, Laura.

11:59Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Good evening, Planning Board members. Yes, today I'll be presenting the…

12:03Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): A concept plan review for 2750 Broadway.

12:07Board & Commissions: This is review.

12:07Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Viewed under case number LUR 2026-0007.

12:11Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): My name's Chandler Van Scott, Principal Planner with Planning and Development Services.

12:16Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): So just briefly, what the purpose of concept plan is, as you mentioned, is really just to review a general development plan prior to submittal of a formal development review application.

12:26Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): This is an opportunity to give the applicant comments from the public, city staff, and planning board early in the process, and as you mentioned, no formal action is taken tonight, so there will be no approval or denial of the application, really just a discussion.

12:43Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): In terms of public notification, written notice was sent to property owners within 600 feet of the subject site. Notice was also posted on the property. Staff received several phone calls and written comments from neighboring property owners asking for additional information.

12:55Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): and expressing concerns about the proposed project. Primary concerns expressed by residents include traffic, parking impacts, noise, and building scale.

13:03Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): There were also a slew of additional comments that came in, today, but those were.

13:10Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): less than 24 hours before the hearing, so those are not included in the public record, but I'm sure you all saw those.

13:18Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): So, the project site is located in North Boulder, just north of the Ideal Market and Community Plaza shopping centers. It's comprised of 3 separate parcels currently owned by Boulder Medical Center.

13:28Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): The primary parcel located at the northeast corner of Broadway and Balsam, is 2750 Broadway.

13:34Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): This contains the existing Boulder Medical Center building and associated parking.

13:40Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): The Boulder Medical… I'm sorry, the Boulder Medical Center, a 3-story…

13:46Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Building sits on there. Sorry, I'm… Having, mouse issues.

13:53Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Okay.

13:54Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Boulder Medical Center is a 3-story structure, which has been in this location for over 75 years.

13:59Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): The other two parcels.

14:01Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): The 1233 Balsam site north of the Medical Center and the 1310 Balsam site, which is east of the Medical Center across 13th Street, currently contains surface parking areas for physicians, patients, and staff.

14:12Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): The site lies in close proximity to the adjacent Ideal Community Plaza Neighborhood Center, the developing civic and residential uses across Broadway at the Alpine Balsam site.

14:21Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): North Boulder Park, which is about a 3-minute walk to the west, North Boulder Recreation Center, just to the north, and downtown Boulder, which is about a 20-minute walk to the south.

14:36Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): The site is surrounded to the south and west by a mix of commercial and high-density residential uses, with the Boulder Western City Campus, or Alpine Balsam site, currently under construction.

14:46Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): There's some high-density housing immediately adjacent to the site on the north and east, with primarily low to medium density housing east of 14th Street and north of Balsam Avenue.

14:56Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): The 2750 Broadway site is impacted by both the 500-year and 100-year floodplains.

15:02Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): As such, the new multi-uni… the new multi-family housing structure proposed would need to be raised 2 feet above the entire building footprint's highest base flood elevation.

15:11Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Likewise, parking for a multifamily structure.

15:14Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Board & And the flood zone would have to be provided above grade and to within 18 inches below the base flood elevation.

15:22Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): In terms of transportation connections.

15:26Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Primary vehicle access to all of the sites is off of Balsam and 13th Street by way of Broadway.

15:32Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Board & The project sites are adjacent to several alternative transportation routes, such as major bus routes on Broadway.

15:39Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): On-street bike lanes on Balsam and 13th, and a low-stress bike network on Alpine Avenue.

15:48Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): So the BVCP land use designation for the site is, per the 2025 updated Boulder Valley Comp Plan, is Community Hub.

15:56Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): The site review criteria require that the proposed project is consistent with the BVCP land use map, and on balance with the goals and policies of the BVCP.

16:05Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Board & Particularly those that address the built environment.

16:08Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): The 1233 Balsam and 1310 Balsam sites, are both designated as Neighborhood 2.

16:17Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): So, for Community Hub.

16:19Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Per the new comp plan.

16:22Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Community hubs are intended to be vibrant mixed-use centers, that bring together a variety of uses, with a strong mix of multi-unit housing and residential mixed-use buildings, standalone commercial buildings, outdoor gathering areas. Speaker 13 : These are designed for convenience and connection, and are intended to offer places that may draw people from across the community.

16:41Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Why it matters. They help bring people together.

16:45Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): I'm not gonna read all of these. There's a lot more words in the new comp plan than there were in the old comp plan, and I'm still getting used to summarizing them for everyone for the land use designation, so.

16:55Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): But it's intended to allow for community members to live close to goods and services, find opportunities to connect with others, and reduce reliance on vehicles. Primary uses include multi-unit group living and commercial retail, as well as personal services, food and beverage.

17:08Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Moderately to highly dense areas that can include a mix of building types, range of building heights.

17:14Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): They want active street frontages, pedestrian-friendly building facades. The public realm along frontages should accommodate spillover space for community activity.

17:25Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Public gathering spaces are encouraged.

17:28Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Design strives to incorporate robust urban canopy and other natural infrastructure.

17:33Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): In terms of mobility and transportation, these areas are designed for convenient, safe, and comfortable connections. Speaker 13 : Streets provide greater protection for walking, bicycling, and micromobility with frequent transit access.

17:45Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Robust walking and biking infrastructure, and curbside supports loading zones, micromobility, bicycle facilities, etc.

17:53Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Neighborhood 2.

17:55Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): is defined as primarily residential neighborhoods that feature a mix of denser housing types and larger buildings. Thoughtfully integrated commercial and other non-residential uses are generally concentrated near transit services.

18:06Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): These areas provide opportunities for people to live close to jobs, schools, parks, shops, and other mobility options.

18:15Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Primary uses include residential attached units.

18:19Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Multi-unit and group living.

18:21Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Board & Buildings are generally medium or high intensity in scale.

18:25Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Building forms accommodate up to 5 stories and create a high-quality urban street frontage.

18:30Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Board & Overall site design emphasizes efficient land use while maintaining a comfortable pedestrian scale.

18:37Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Structures may occupy large portions of their lots with limited setbacks and shared open spaces.

18:43Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Transit-supportive infrastructure is integral to the street network.

18:49Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): These areas prioritize safe multimodal access to jobs, homes, etc. Curbsides are intended to be actively managed, and shared, unbundled, and managed parking is preferred.

19:00Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): So, the existing zoning for the project site is Business Transitional 2, or BT2 for the 2750 Broadway site, and Residential High 2, or RH2, for the 1233 and 1310 Balsam sites.

19:12Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): The applicant is requesting rezoning of the 2750 Broadway site from BT2 to BC2, as Laura mentioned. BC2 is defined as business areas containing retail centers serving a number of neighborhoods where retail-type stores predominate.

19:26Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): It should be noted that the applicant would also be requesting a land use code change to expand the business community areas subject to special use restrictions.

19:35Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): per Appendix N of the Boulder Revised Code.

19:38Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): They're asking to expand this area to include the 2750 Broadway site. It should be noted that attached residential uses are allowed by right in the BC2 zone district in areas that are not designated in the Appendix N.

19:52Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): But once, for areas within Appendix N, ground floor residential does require a use review.

20:00Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Further…

20:02Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): BC2 outside of Appendix N has an FAR or floor area ratio of 1.5, and if it is included in Appendix N, that would allow them to have a FAR or floor area ratio of 2.0.

20:19Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): So just to talk a little bit more about the use review process for residential uses in the BC2 zone.

20:25Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): So if the code change were to happen and Appendix N were to be expanded to include the subject site, they would be required to go through a use review for the proposed residential use. The use review process does include an additional criterion beyond the standard use review criteria, which says that in addition to meeting the use review criteria.

20:44Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): The applicant shall demonstrate that the use on the ground floor.

20:47Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): as applicable, will not adversely affect the intended function and character of the area as a neighborhood-serving business area where retail-type stores predominate on the ground floor. In determining whether this is met, the reviewing authority shall consider the location and design of the proposed use and the existing and approved uses on the lot or parcel in the area.

21:05Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Board & So we can, discuss that further later in the meeting.

21:09Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): These are just some aerial shots of the subject site. This one is looking north.

21:14Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): So you have the Alpine Balsam site on the left, and the ideal shopping center, to the south.

21:21Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): This one's looking from the west, to the east, so you've got the Alpine Balsam site there, and you can see the Boulder Medical Center.

21:28Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): There in the background, and then one more, just looking from the north, to the south.

21:35Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): So, to jump into the proposed project.

21:38Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): The proposed project would entail demolition of the Boulder Medical Center building at 2750 Broadway, redevelopment of that site and the adjacent BMC-owned parcels at 1233 and 1310 Balsam Avenue, with 3 new residential buildings, including a total of 223 attached residential units.

21:55Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): A height modification would be requested to allow the buildings to exceed the 35-foot height limit.

22:01Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): So I'll just go, kind of, site by site now. So the 2750 Broadway.

22:06Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): site, as proposed, would include a 4-story, 55-foot-tall building with 160 units, with a mix of 1, 2, and 3 bedrooms.

22:15Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): It'd be about 180,385 square feet, so just about exactly a 2.0 FAR.

22:21Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): The building would provide 160 vehicular car, vehicular parking spaces, 320 BART… 320 bike parking spaces.

22:31Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Access to the parking garage would be from the southeast corner of the building off of 13th Street.

22:36Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): And the proposal would include 35,097 square feet of open space, which is, above the 20% minimum, which is required.

22:45Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Board & So these are just elevations.

22:47Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): The top two are essentially the two halves of the north-facing elevation that would face Balsam Avenue.

22:53Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Board & And the bottom one is the east elevation facing Broadway, or I guess it's west, actually.

23:00Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): So, for the 1233 Balsam site, this would be a 3-story, 39-foot-tall building. This would include 30 units, and a mix of studio, 1 and 2 bedrooms.

23:10Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): This building would be 23,806 square feet, which.

23:14Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): like the previous one, is basically right at 1.07 FAR, which is the maximum for the zone.

23:21Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): This would include 30 car parking spaces, so 1 per unit, 63 bike parking spaces. Access to the garage would be taken off the alley from Balsam, and this would provide 9,666 square feet of open space, which again is, greater than the minimum 20% required.

23:38Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): This is the elevation of the building as seen from Balsam Avenue.

23:44Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): The building at 1310 Balsam would be a 3-story, 49-foot building. It would include 33 units, and 1, 2, and 3 bedroom configurations.

23:53Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Again, it would be right at the 1.07 FAR. Again, it would have one car parking space per unit, so 33 spaces, 68 bike parking spaces. Access would be from 13th Street.

24:05Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): And 17,000, roughly, square feet of open space.

24:10Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): So these are just renderings showing kind of the overall project. This is looking south on Broadway.

24:17Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): This is looking north on Broadway, past the ideal market to where the building would be seen behind that.

24:24Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): This is looking west on Balsam Avenue.

24:30Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): And so I'll jump into key issues. There are 3 key issues that were mentioned in the memo, which we can talk about tonight, and then space for any other issues identified by the board.

24:41Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): The first issue, the first key issue is whether the proposed rezoning.

24:45Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): from BT2 to BC2 is consistent with the rezoning criteria found in Section 9219E of the Boulder Revised Code.

24:52Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): In this case, the criterion that they would likely be, using would be that the applicant demonstrates by clear and convincing evidence that the proposed rezoning is necessary to come into compliance with the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan map.

25:09Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Overall, staff finds that the proposed rezoning would likely comply with criteria in 9219E1.

25:16Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Board & In that the existing BT2 zoning is defined as transitional business areas, which generally buffer a residential area from a major street, primarily used for commercial and complementary residential uses.

25:27Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): The BT2 use standards allow for many of the uses anticipated in the community hub land use designation. However, the intensity is quite low, allowing only for a 0.5 FAR and requiring 600 square feet of open space per dwelling unit.

25:40Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): These intensity standards do not really support local business activity in dense housing and walkable distances to surrounding residential areas, as anticipated by the community hub land use designation.

25:51Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Further, the BC2 zone district, which is defined as business areas containing retail centers serving a number of neighborhoods where retail-type stores predominate, already applies to many of the areas designated as community hub within the BVCP.

26:04Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): And has both a broader range of allowable uses, as well as a much higher allowable intensity, particularly business areas subject to special use restrictions in Appendix N, which has a maximum FAR of 2.0.

26:17Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Key issue number two is whether the proposed concept plan is consistent with the BVCP land use map and on balance with the goals and policies of the BVCP, particularly those that address the built environment.

26:27Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): As a reminder.

26:29Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): The site review criteria state that in applying this, the approving authority shall consistently interpret and apply this criterion, and consider whether the goal or policy is intended to be applied to individual development projects, or to guide city policy decisions, such as regulatory actions.

26:44Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): The BVCP does not prioritize goals and policies, and no project must satisfy one particular goal or policy, or all of them.

26:52Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Board & Key takeaways from this discussion.

26:54Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): would be whether Planning Board finds that the project complies with the BVCP goals and policies that address the built environment, whether there are any which the board finds the project either consistent or inconsistent.

27:05Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): And then in terms of how this criterion will be applied during site review.

27:10Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Or, I'm sorry, also just general site review criteria, are acceptable in this discussion as well.

27:16Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): So, staff finds that the project as currently shown appears largely consistent with the Community Hub and Neighborhood 2 land use designations, helps to achieve many of the goals listed under those land use class definitions.

27:27Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): However, as noted in the concept review criteria analysis in the memo, revisions to the plan may be necessary at time of site review to achieve consistency with certain elements of Policy 37, Design Excellence for All Projects, as well as related site review criteria.

27:44Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): So 2750 Broadway, as a high-density residential project in a major corridor near the ideal and community plazas, would support a number of the goals listed under the HUBS class, including those listed here, which I will not read all of.

27:57Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Further, the proposed building would be consistent with the community hub land use designation, that it would support a strong mix of multi-unit housing and residential mixed-use buildings, with standalone commercial buildings and outdoor gathering areas within the greater community hub area adjacent to the site.

28:14Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): The proposed Balsam Avenue buildings would also support the Neighborhood 2 goal to provide opportunities for more people to live close to jobs, schools, parks, shops, and mobility options, while adding to the mix of denser housing types and larger buildings within the neighborhood.

28:30Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): So, moving forward, the objectives of the future land use strategy and design of the built environment goals found on pages 78 to 81 of the 2025 Boulder Valley Comp Plan.

28:41Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): The following BVCP policies addressing the built environment and other BVCP goals and policies may be used to evaluate the project during site review, and should be taken into strong consideration. These include the community character and evolution, design excellence for all projects, and energy and resource-efficient building design.

28:59Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): It's also worth noting here, as I mentioned in the memo, that the project site is also subject to the Alpine Balsam Area Plan.

29:06Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): The 2750 Broadway site is identified as an urban frontage, and the 1233 and 1310 Balsam sites are identified as residential frontages.

29:18Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): The urban frontage is designed fairly broad, or, defined fairly broadly.

29:25Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): As a long Broadway, develop a pedestrian-friendly urban frontage with buildings located close to generous pedestrian walkways, landscape zones able to sustain large, mature trees.

29:34Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Amenity zones for street furniture, wayfinding and public art, and building frontages zones that encourage uses to spill out and engage the street. So mostly kind of design-related, definition there. And there are no established definitions for either residential or flexible frontages, as shown in the built form map, so we have to kind of… Speaker 1 : Guess what those mean.

29:54Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): For key issue number 3 is whether the planning board has feedback for the applicant on the conceptual site plan and building design. This is where the site review criteria will come in handy for the discussion.

30:06Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Staff has identified several issues with the current design, which will need to be addressed prior to a site review submittal.

30:11Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): While the project achieves a high level of design quality, staff has expressed concerns regarding the scale and massing of certain portions of the buildings, particularly the 2750 Broadway building.

30:22Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): The design and usability of the open space for that building as well, and proposed site access and circulation.

30:28Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Many of these comments are outlined in the memo, as well as the staff DRC review comments, which were included as an attachment.

30:35Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): So considerations for this portion of the discussion would just be the access, building siting orientation, location usability of open space, public realm interface, parking and circulation, as well as building materials, building mass and scale, and consistency with the character of the surrounding area.

30:53Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): These I won't read all of right now, but these are essentially all of the additional criteria that apply to buildings requesting a height modification, which you all are fairly familiar with.

31:02Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): I'm happy to come back to these as needed, but these all relate to various aspects of building design intended to make sure that the higher building fits in with the surrounding area and proposes adequate open space and breaking down of mass.

31:20Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Key issue number 4 is kind of a placeholder for any other key issues you guys may wish to discuss.

31:26Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): So next steps for this application would be following this hearing, it will go to Council for call-up consideration.

31:32Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Council may vote to call this item up for a hearing to provide additional feedback if they wish. The applicant can also request a call-up if they would like one.

31:40Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): The applicant will then either proceed with submitting development review applications, or may submit a second concept review application. Site review application and the rezoning application would both require a public hearing, with the site review requiring a final decision by Planning Board, and the rezoning requiring a recommendation by Planning Board.

31:59Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): I'm now happy to answer any questions. Thank you.

32:02Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Thank you for that presentation, Chandler. Very thorough, as always. So now's the time for questions from board members. I'll try to make eye contact with everybody, but let's try to get through this, efficiently. So, who's got questions? Ready to go?

32:16Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Kurt, and then Claudia.

32:21Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Thanks for that presentation. One quick question, which is about the floodplain map that you showed earlier.

32:27Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): There's been pretty significant flood changes, or flood mitigation work done at Alpine Balsam, and I'm wondering if you know in what way that might or might not change the floodplain map going forward.

32:42Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): and what the implications might be for then for the building and the design.

32:47Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): I don't think it will change the floodplain for this site, but I'm not 100% positive about that. I would have to look into that and get back to you.

32:59Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): OK. Yeah, probably not from my standpoint. Maybe not worth getting back to us about that. Obviously it'll be a while before this comes back to us for site review if it does and maybe by that time there will be more information. So thank you.

33:17Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Thank you, Kurt. Claudia and then ML.

33:22Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Okay, I'm gonna start with some questions about process.

33:25Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): So we have 3 different parcels here in this concept review.

33:30Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): If these are presented, again, as a package of 3 for site review, will each of these parcels have to meet our.

33:37Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): full range of site review criteria, or will we be looking at the site as a whole when we're looking at site review criteria?

33:46Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): I think you would look at the project as a whole, but each parcel individually would be expected to meet the site review criteria.

33:52Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): But I mean, for example, if we have… we have site review criteria around height modifications, for example, would each of the buildings need to meet those criteria separately? Would we be looking at the site as a whole, even though it's over… spread over 3 parcels?

34:08Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): Oh, I see.

34:10Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): No, so, like, in terms of the open space requirements and stuff, I think that would… you could apply that to the project as a whole, rather than each individual part.

34:18Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): Okay, thank you. And then, do the smaller parcels.

34:23Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): Do they meet the threshold for site review if they were to be submitted separately? Like, if the applicant were to come back and say, we want to do this piece by piece?

34:33Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): I think they're eligible because of the number of units, but I don't believe that it's mandatory constantly.

34:38Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): But to get that 1.07 FAR, they do need to go through site review, is that correct?

34:44Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): In RH2, yes. In RH2, okay, thank you.

34:50Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): Okay. Okay, if I go on. I have a few more here. Does, does above-ground parking count towards FAR in BC2 and or RH2?

35:03Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Not if… no, not if it's entirely within the… It does not. Okay, okay.

35:08Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): Thank you. I know we had some issue with that last week.

35:12Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): And it's different across zones.

35:14Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): Could you talk a bit more about what locations are currently in Appendix N, and why… why and how they were chosen?

35:24Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): Why… sorry, I didn't catch the last part. Why and how certain locations have ended up in Appendix N.

35:29Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): Yes.

35:30Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): And this might be actually helpful for me to…

35:35Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Share my screen again,

35:38Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): If I could colloquy, I have a general question about what was the purpose of Appendix N?

35:44Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Board & That was… that was my… my question was.

35:48Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Asking for a primer on the relationship of Appendix N to the use tables and citations.

35:52Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): review criteria.

35:54Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): Bravo, let's do Appendix N right now.

35:59Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Yeah, so I'm not an expert. It was adopted in 2019, and I know that, Council directed us to apply it to specific areas of the city.

36:07Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): The idea was generally to kind of protect and encourage ground floor retail, but also to identify areas in the city where they felt like a higher intensity than regular BC2 was allowable.

36:20Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): So this map that I'm showing you here, so this cross-hatching that's over this BC2, that represents Appendix N.

36:28Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Or the area subject to special use restrictions. So this is the project site, this BT2 site right to the north.

36:35Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): So…

36:37Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): I just looked at this, and basically where it's applied is the North Boulder, the Ideal Market Center, the Williams Village area.

36:46Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Down to the south… It's applied to the…

36:54Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Oh, there we go. Yep, so down here, that's Williams Village, and the, Shopping center, across from that.

37:03Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): the 50… or this is, Meadows Shopping Center here.

37:08Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Up here is the 55th and Arapaho, like, the stamp area was applied there, and then…

37:13Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Board & It was applied to a specific portion of the Pearl Street Corridor.

37:21Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Up here, even though the rest of this is also Zone BC.

37:26Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): So…

37:29Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Yeah, I would have to go back and, like, reread the adoption ordinance to know more about the intent, but I know that it was… Speaker 5 : Generally, because BC2… standard BC2 allows ground floor residential, by right.

37:42Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): So I think there was maybe some concern that there was, getting to be too much of that in some of the shopping centers that we hold near and dear, so they passed that to require the use review. Speaker 5 : And also to try to encourage additional, intensity in those areas with the extra FAR.

38:03Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Meaning… that

38:08Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): the intent of Appendix N in relation to this site.

38:13Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): is To encourage… Ground floor retail, and…

38:21Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): the application… the concept review before us is asking for an exception to Appendix N.

38:29Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): So that there is not a requirement for ground floor retail. Do I have that right?

38:35Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Well, they'd be asking for a use review, so it's not an exception to Appendix N, but it would be… Speaker 2 : The additional property.

38:41Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): It would undergo a use review. Yep.

38:44Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): Here.

38:46Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): to dis… so that they were not required to have ground-level retail. Correct.

38:54Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): And can I ask a quick colloquy? And I know you're not an… you… 2019's ordinance is not your area of expertise, but was there some sense of…

39:03Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): the extra intensity was made to compensate for the requirement of ground floor retail, like.

39:10Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): We're requiring you to give ground floor retail, and in exchange, we'll give you some extra intensity. Or are those two things separate?

39:16Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): I…

39:17Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): I can't really comment, I don't know. I'm sorry. Okay, just, just curious. That…

39:23Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Yeah, okay, thank you. And Kurt.

39:27Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): And the only difference between regular BC2 and BC2 featured in Appendix N is the FAR limit or are there other?

39:36Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): It's the FAR limit, and there's a variety of uses that are identified, where if, the use is on the ground floor, or is more than 10% of the overall development, then you have to go through a use review.

39:47Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): And so a lot of… it's residential, there's several other uses aside from residential that require use review to put on the ground floor. Yeah. Yeah.

39:56Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Thanks.

40:00Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Claudia, were you done with your questions?

40:01Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): I do have two more if we're done with,

40:04Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Appendix N. Go ahead, and then we'll go to ml and then to Mark. Okay.

40:07Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): So, these buildings are asking for height modification.

40:11Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): And our criteria for evaluating height modification emphasize preserving and taking advantage of mountain views. And so, my question is about

40:22Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): how the Alpine Balsam project, is going to impact that on these sites. So we've done a site review there, there's more building that's coming there, those are large buildings. How do we take account for that? How should the applicant account for that as they start to think about preserving views? So those…

40:40Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): That criteria, I believe, is really focused on preserving views from the site.

40:46Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): So… and it's more about the design of the buildings on the site, preserving mountain views for inhabitants of the site. So…

40:54Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): We don't normally take into account existing buildings surrounding the site when we're… Sure.

41:00Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): I guess what I'm getting at is there's a situation right now with ongoing construction where there may be very good views right now from that site, but there may not be 5 years from now, right? And we anticipate that because of a site review and filed applications. That's a good.

41:16Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): question. I mean, I think when they submitted for site review, they would have to show…

41:21Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): What the views are from the site now, and essentially… or…

41:25Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): I guess what you're asking is whether they would have to show what they will be when that construction is complete.

41:30Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): will we be evaluating if we look at this criteria down the road?

41:34Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): You know, I'm not ex… I'm not entirely sure how we would… how we would deal with that, but

41:38Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): we would essentially ask them to demonstrate that, to the best of their ability, they're preserving whatever views of the mountains they have as part of the building.

41:47Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): I just want to bookmark that. And then finally, I had a question about, site circulation and parking access. So, in the memo already, staff is suggesting

41:58Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): relocating the parking garage entrance away from 13th Street because of the Green Street designation there, right? So, that's an active bikeway.

42:07Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): But also, the DCS wants us to do access to properties from the lowest level of street, right? And I assume that's also 13th Street. Yes. So, if we get to site review with this, what… what wins out, right? Does the Green Street

42:22Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): have any standing, at that point in the review? Is there a pathway to making an exception to the DCS to say, actually, you shouldn't be on that lowest

42:33Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): Lowest level of street. Speaker 2 : There, there is a.

42:36Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): pathway, to asking for, a variance to the DCS. They would have to show that it essentially makes more sense from a transportation engineering perspective to take it off of Balsam.

42:47Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Board & I… I don't know that the Green Street… designation…

42:54Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): makes that a requirement, that they can't take access off of that.

42:58Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): I think that would just be something that we'd have to evaluate with Transportation Engineering when it came in for site review. But there is a way for them to ask for an access off of Balsam, or a way for them to try to argue that access needs to be taken off of 13th after all.

43:11Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Okay, thanks.

43:12Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Can I colloquy on that? Yes. Thanks. Yeah, so my understanding is the DCS basically says.

43:21Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Anything in the Dcs can be varied by the city engineer. Is that.

43:26Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): more or less what it says. That's my understanding as well. I don't want to say that's 100% true, because I'm not a DCS expert, but I believe that is true. Okay, but…

43:35Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): I'm trying to understand then if a project comes to us.

43:40Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Say it's at site review.

43:41Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Or even now, as we're evaluating it in concept.

43:45Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): And we say, oh, yeah, you know, a certain thing makes sense. It makes… it would make sense to us to vary the DCS because of

43:58Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Board & a particularity like the neighborhood Green Street, but

44:03Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Board & the city engineer hasn't approved that like what happens? How how does that get resolved? Because

44:11Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Board & you know, we don't have a mechanism in the site review criteria, for example, for varying the DCS. Yeah.

44:17Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Board & I mean, typically we would only bring it forward with a recommendation of approval if

44:22Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Our engineering staff had decided that whatever the variance they were asking for, if that's what we were bringing forward, was acceptable.

44:31Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): So, for you guys to change that, it would have to either be based on, like, the site access standards or the site review criteria.

44:39Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): But the DCS kind of modification process usually happens during the site review process, where our engineers would say, yes, we think that

44:47Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): this is supportable.

44:49Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): And once they got to that level, we would then bring the overall package forward with a recommendation of approval.

44:57Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Okay, thank you. Does that… okay.

45:00Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Thank you, Kurt. And for folks who are not familiar with DCS, that's the City's Design and Construction Standards for Roads and Streets. ML, and then Mark.

45:09ml robles . PB: Thank you. Thank you for your presentation, Chandler. I have one question.

45:16ml robles . PB: So, understanding the context, I'm just wanting to clarify, I think you and the applicant state that the existing building is, I think you say, 50 feet?

45:27ml robles . PB: But it's actually a stepped building.

45:30ml robles . PB: So, I'm curious, what percent of the actual, of the existing building is actually above 35 feet?

45:39Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): I would probably defer to the applicant to answer that. I'm… I'm not sure. I mean, there is… the majority of the building, I think, is one to two stories, and then there's the kind of middle section, which is the three-story building.

45:51Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): There's also a lot of grade on the site, which is probably why the building's measured at that height, but I assume the applicant will also be talking about the grade on the site as well.

46:01ml robles . PB: Okay, so I'll just ask the applicant what percent is… is above the 35 feet, which is by right.

46:09ml robles . PB: Thank you.

46:10Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Thank you, Ml. Mark.

46:19Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): Would res… we're at a concept review, we're not voting on anything, we're not deciding anything, we're not recommending anything to Council.

46:27Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): Would rezoning come before us as a legislative matter?

46:32Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): and advice to Council.

46:34Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): Prior to site review.

46:37Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): That's kind of up to the applicant. They could come in with a rezoning request prior to site review.

46:44Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Board & Or they could bring it in as a package concurrent with Site Review.

46:50Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): and Same thing with the… use review, 4

46:58Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): lack of compliance with Appendix N,

47:02Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): Could that happen in advance of a site review?

47:07Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): Would that be a separate event, or is that another potentially simultaneous event with site review, rezoning, use review, all of those wrapped up into one event?

47:20Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): This review would probably have to come in with the site review, because we would want to see the actual project that they're proposing with the ground floor residential.

47:29Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): So, I think the use review and site review will be concurrent no matter what. The rezoning could come before or with those two. And same with…

47:39Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): You know, the code change, we don't really have…

47:43Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Board & a process for, folks asking for changes to the land use code. Like, anyone can ask for one.

47:51Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): But that too could theoretically come before. Like, they could ask for the rezoning and the Appendix N change independently, or they could bring it in with the site and use review.

48:02Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Okay. That's probably not helpful, but yeah.

48:05Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): That's it for me.

48:06Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): Board & Thank you, Mark. Mason.

48:15Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): I think I really only have one remaining question that hasn't been asked yet.

48:19Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): And I was wondering how the garages are counted.

48:24Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): For a story, I was trying to read, but got a little bit lost. My understanding is that anything with 2 feet over grade is considered a story. Do garages fit within that?

48:34Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Yes, above-grade garages would be considered a story.

48:39Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): And I saw some buildings being listed as being one story shorter than I would expect, unless I'm reading things incorrectly. Like, for instance.

48:48Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): Let me find that.

48:53Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): I think it was 1310.

48:55Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): Wouldn't that really be a four-story building?

49:00Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): I don't think so, I think…

49:06Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Yeah, 1310 is a 3-story building, with…

49:10Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Board & Just gabled roofs in the third story, so it kind of appears a little bit taller on the third story.

49:19Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): Great. That was my last question.

49:22Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Thank you.

49:24Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Max, just checking in, anything for me at this point? You good? Okay, I have just a couple.

49:29Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): So, Chandler, just to confirm, I think the title of the ordinance that created Appendix N is to preserve commercial retail uses by restricting other ground floor uses in the Business Community 1 and Business Community 2 zoning districts. Is that the correct title?

49:47Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Yes, I believe you. Okay.

49:49Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Just want to get that into the record.

49:53Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): And then this idea of, Can you help me understand the logic of applying for a BC2 zoning designation?

50:01Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): and a map change to the Appendix N to be included in this ordinance preserving commercial retail uses by restricting other ground floor uses in these districts.

50:12Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): And then asking for a use review so that you don't have to have ground floor retail.

50:18Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): What led to that logic that this is the best zoning, rather than, say, for example, a high-density residential, since that's the project that seems to be brought forward as a high-density residential project?

50:29Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Board & For just this one building at 2750.

50:32Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): I would… I'd probably defer to the applicant, but I think overall.

50:36Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): the fact that there's existing BC2 zoning immediately to the south, so it's kind of an… in terms of, like, the spot zoning question, it's more of a natural extension of existing zoning in the area.

50:47Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): And is also consistent with the same land use that applies to the shopping center.

50:54Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): But I really think it comes down to the FAR, right? I think the applicant would like the 2.0 FAR.

51:01Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): And could you remind us if they tried to get a higher density residential designation?

51:06Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Is that guided by FAR, or is that guided by open space, or what guides…

51:12Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): It depends on the zone, that they were asking for, but.

51:17Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Like, for example, if they were asking for something like RH5, say?

51:23Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): RH5 is, both FAR and open space based, but I think it has a 1.67 FAR?

51:32Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Board & Yeah, the BC2 zone has, I think, Other than.

51:37Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): some of the Alpine Balsam zones has the highest allowable FAR of any of our zone districts.

51:45Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Okay, thank you, that's helpful.

51:48Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Also, just to get into the record, I asked a legal question on email, which is.

51:54Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): what are the criteria that guide our decision, or our recommendation, or our comments about the map change to Appendix N?

52:04Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Given that that's not part of site review technically, but it's coming in with a site review. I asked whether that is quasi-judicial or legislative, and what criteria should guide our decision-making or our comments tonight. Deshauna, do you want to repeat your advice, just so we get it into the record?

52:21Speaker 4 (Board & Commissions): Sure, one moment please.

52:30Speaker 4 (Board & Commissions): In response to the inquiry, I wrote to the planning board that the requested change

52:36Speaker 4 (Board & Commissions): to Appendix N requires a code update, which is legislative in nature, and therefore discretionary council action.

52:44Speaker 4 (Board & Commissions): Where Planning Board can make a recommendation about whether the requested change is in the best interest of the city.

52:50Speaker 4 (Board & Commissions): I refer to the best interest of the city, generally, because the code does not contain criteria for processing a request to change Appendix N.

53:02Speaker 4 (Board & Commissions): This request from BMC represents the first time this has been posed to the City since adoption of Appendix N in 2019.

53:11Speaker 4 (Board & Commissions): However, because the requested code change arises from a specific property and a specific application, one could argue that the Appendix N matter is mixed, both legislative and quasi-judicial.

53:24Speaker 4 (Board & Commissions): And it would be safest to approach it as a quasi-judicial matter, given that it is arising from a site-specific application.

53:34Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Okay, so we should treat everything that's before us tonight as potentially quasi-judicial to be on the safe side.

53:39Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): And, there are no criteria, per se, in the code that guide this decision about Appendix N, that's just what's in the best interest of the city.

53:48Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Right. Okay, great.

53:50Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): They would essentially have to make an argument for why they think that we should expand Appendix N, and then it would be up to you and City Council to determine if you bought the argument.

54:00Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Thank you.

54:01Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Just a couple more quick questions. What is the total length of the north elevation of that building at 2750 Broadway, the primary building?

54:09Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): I would defer to the applicant for the exact length, but I believe it's… 400 and something feet.

54:17Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Okay, right around 400. I think I saw 396 on one of the drawings, but right around 400.

54:23Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Board & Great, thank you.

54:26Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): And the open space, is each building's open space private to the residents of those buildings, or is it shared amongst the three buildings?

54:35Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Or should I ask the applicant that? Yeah, I think you would…

54:38Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): I think you would ask the applicant that. I don't know that there's a way that we can, require it to be…

54:43Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Open to all of the residents of all the buildings.

54:49Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): We can't require it, but can we consider it when we consider the criteria about the open space serving the needs of the residents?

54:56Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Yes!

54:57Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Thank you. And then, same question about the amenity facilities at the main common building, and whether those are intended to be open to all residents of the three buildings, or just the main building. And maybe I'll ask the applicant that question.

55:09Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Okay, so that's a heads up to the applicant. All right, that's all my questions. Any more questions for staff?

55:14Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Right. Hearing none, the next step in our process is a presentation by the applicant team.

55:19Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): After which, the board will have an opportunity to ask a few more questions, and then comes time for the public hearing. So, that is when we will ask members of the public up to the podium or online to speak for 3 minutes each about this particular project.

55:41Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Board & Followed by a short break for those of us who will need a break.

55:44Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): And then we will come back for, the board's comments on the project.

55:51Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): Mason, your mic is on.

56:01Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Pardon me, could you please turn on your microphone? There's a little button on the gray base there. There we go. Am I live?

56:08Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Okay. Good evening, members of the Planning Board.

56:11Speaker 9 (Board & Commissions): I'm Donna Baisden, the CEO of Boulder Medical Center, with our primary office location at 2750 Broadway here in Boulder.

56:21Speaker 9 (Board & Commissions): Thank you for this opportunity to express Boulder Medical Center's request for support of this concept plan review, acknowledging that rezoning of our property site will likely be needed in the future, as identified in the recently adopted Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan.

56:39Speaker 9 (Board & Commissions): Since 1949, Boulder Medical Center has served as a local, independent, wholly physician-owned, multi-specialty medical group practice. Our original clinic at 2750 Broadway continues to operate today as our largest clinical, clinic location.

56:59Speaker 9 (Board & Commissions): Being entirely owned by local practicing physicians, we do not rely on venture capital or corporate funding.

57:10Speaker 9 (Board & Commissions): Allowing us to focus solely on serving our community's healthcare needs.

57:16Speaker 9 (Board & Commissions): As we look to the future, we are committed to maintaining a strong presence in Central Boulder, and to preserving our identity as an independent, physician-owned medical group, so that we can continue to serve Boulder for generations to come.

57:33Speaker 9 (Board & Commissions): Now, our 2750 Broadway property has served Boulder Medical Center and this community well for decades.

57:40Speaker 9 (Board & Commissions): But our current facility is approaching the end of its useful life.

57:45Speaker 9 (Board & Commissions): We're now operating at maximum capacity, and we have need to modernize our facilities.

57:52Speaker 9 (Board & Commissions): Through diligent study and evaluation, engaging local experts to include Adrian Sofer, who you will hear from tonight, we have concluded that attempting to replace this facility in place is simply not feasible.

58:07Speaker 9 (Board & Commissions): As we plan for the future of Boulder Medical Center service to Boulder, we have two important goals.

58:14Speaker 9 (Board & Commissions): To find a responsible next chapter for this property.

58:18Speaker 9 (Board & Commissions): And to position Boulder Medical Center to reinvest in modern facilities here in Central Boulder so that we can continue to serve this community as an independent medical group.

58:31Speaker 9 (Board & Commissions): The concept plan and associated rezoning that we're discussing tonight is vital.

58:37Speaker 9 (Board & Commissions): To making this possible.

58:39Speaker 9 (Board & Commissions): The development community recognizes the need for more attainable housing in Boulder, and Boulder Medical Center needs to harvest the equity in the 2750 Broadway site in order to afford to reinvest in facilities here in Boulder, such that we remain local.

58:59Speaker 9 (Board & Commissions): and positioned to provide the highest quality, compassionate care to this community.

59:05Speaker 9 (Board & Commissions): We recognize that development of a property with this history deserves thoughtful consideration, and we appreciate the opportunity to have this conversation with you tonight. With that, I will turn the presentation over to Adrian, who will walk us through the concept plan.

59:23Speaker 9 (Board & Commissions): Thank you, Miss Basin.

59:28Speaker 9 (Board & Commissions): Boulder Medical Center has to move. That's not in question. It's in the 100 year and the five year.

59:33Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): 500-year floodplain, and its entry is at a very low point on the site, and is well into that floodplain elevation, so that as a critical facility, it can't stay here, it can't improve itself, because to improve it, we'd have to flood-proof it.

59:50Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): And to do so, we'd have to raise it up to 2 feet above the 100-year floodplain, or 1 foot above the 500-year.

59:58Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Board & And that's just not…

1:00:01Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): viable and realistic to do, for reasons I'll get into, but not least of which is the entry is actually a full story below the floodplain protection elevation.

1:00:12Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): So, let's see…

1:00:16Board & Commissions: you.

1:00:18Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): It's not changing, Thomas, I don't know why.

1:00:32Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Excuse me, board, but… Okay.

1:00:37Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Thank you.

1:00:40Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): We have to maximize the value of the land in order to have the money for the medical center to afford to buy land in… somewhere else in Central Boulder, and to build a new facility. That's just not in question, including.

1:00:53Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Board & This in BC2 was part of, really, why we did the original land use map change in the community change request.

1:00:59Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): And Appendix N is critical to this too, not least of which is because it adds a .5 FAR, which is 33% of what the zoning would otherwise allow in the BC2.

1:01:10Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): That goes well beyond what might be allowed in the 10% of the first floor of any commercial district. It also allows for housing. The BC2 allows for increased housing, which we need to take advantage of on this site.

1:01:24Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Previously, it was transitional business zoning and land use, and this board made the change in the comp plan update. The medical center actually probably predated the original land use on the site. It's been there for 77 years, and

1:01:39Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Probably when somebody came by and decided what land use should we adopt for this part of town, or for this particular site, since we are doing a new land use map, they said, well, it's a medical center, we'll make it transitional business. That's great, but the medical center has to move.

1:01:52Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): So there is actually another potential.

1:01:55Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): criteria that we could apply for, but staff is not necessarily supporting, which is that things change. The medical center having to go, it's an opportunity to allow for dense housing adjacent to a commercial center, a neighborhood center which

1:02:11Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Board & The comp plan specifically allows us and supports doing with the land use map change that was already implemented.

1:02:19Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): So we're asking to change from a .5 FAR or a .9 with site review, essentially, to.

1:02:27Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): the BC2 zone to provide more housing and support.

1:02:31Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Bmc. With the rezoning.

1:02:34Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): And that matches what's allowable in the medical center itself, and allows significant market rate multifamily housing adjacent to not just the shopping center, but to

1:02:47Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): the western campus of the city. I'm happy to address a little more on Appendix M, but I don't want to take my limited time right now, and we'll come back to it.

1:02:55Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): So we have 3 sites, as you know. We are fundamentally not going to talk about, unless you ask questions, the two outlying sites, the one to the north and the one to the east, which are not asking for rezoning.

1:03:07Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): But, we are going to focus more on the principal site, which I think is the main consideration here tonight, and that is asking for rezoning. So, I'm jumping back into the floodplain, which is very significantly impacting the site, not just as a medical center, but for housing, because housing

1:03:27Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Board & requires that you be 2 feet above, well, the base flood elevation at any given point where the base flood elevation touches the building. But likewise, the parking has to follow the angle of the floodplain. Anywhere that the floodplain touches a parking area, you cannot be lower than 18 inches

1:03:47Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Board & below that base flood elevation, otherwise your car floats. That's…

1:03:52Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Board & You can't do parking underground in a housing… in a housing project.

1:03:57Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Board & So this is showing that base flood elevation both in plan and in section, and so we have to keep our parking above that base flood elevation, or I should say, no more than 18 inches below the base flood elevation because of what I just mentioned.

1:04:12Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Board & When you blow that up, and you look at, say, that… this is that section, which is the Broadways on the left there, you not only have to keep the parking above, you have to keep the housing and any habitable areas 2 feet above that base flood elevation.

1:04:27Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Flood protection elevation, excuse me. And so, that top of the building, the top

1:04:34Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Board & That first floor, which is the northwest corner of the site.

1:04:38Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): has to meet that 2 feet above the 100-year floodplain, and you have to maintain that elevation across the entire building. So even though, as you move eastward, you're a full floor above the flood, you still have to keep that same elevation of 2 feet above the highest point where the flood hits the building.

1:04:58Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Steve Fehr , And that becomes the lowest habitable level, and that's 10 feet above the sidewalk on the southeast corner.

1:05:06Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Board & Likewise, as I said, the parking has to follow it, but then the building, as it is essentially then surrounding a parking structure, the first floor wraps.

1:05:17Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Board & that parking so it's not visible from Broadway, from Balsam, or from 13th Street, and so we essentially have 3 stories built above a parking structure. So, as you, as you look at it.

1:05:30Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Board & I just want to go over quickly what this means in terms of dimensions. You cannot do parking in the site without… in the city without meeting the standards for parking altogether, which is…

1:05:41Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): giving you a total depth of that parking to get one car per unit of 120 feet of depth on the site. That leaves you 26 to 32 feet if you include the outdoor private open space that we have for each unit. Board & That's what's wrapping that parking structure. So we essentially have

1:05:59Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): In that, in that regard, 65% of the first floor, the habitable area of the first floor, 65% of it is parking.

1:06:08Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): And we wrapped that with 22,000 square feet of residential and commons areas.

1:06:14Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Board & So, fundamentally, we take that and say, alright, here's our three-story building on top of a parking structure. But when you say, let's take that first floor and open up some of it so we have some outdoor space.

1:06:26Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Fundamentally, you're removing housing 4 times 4 units to get some Open space along that.

1:06:34Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Balsam Frontage. When right across the street.

1:06:37Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Just to the west, you've got a whole lot of open space that the city is providing.

1:06:43Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): So…

1:06:44Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): We felt like it makes more sense to say, let's take that and treat that area as serving a high-density housing zone, which is immediately adjacent to a neighborhood shopping center.

1:06:57Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Board & We're placing our pedestrian and common building access at the northwest corner, and a secondary pedestrian access off of 13th.

1:07:04Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): and placed all of our commons area and, support, sort of public-facing spaces along Broadway. Speaker 1 : And then we are highly supported by transit as well as bike access, and while 13th Street is a bike route.

1:07:21Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Balsam, as a… What is it?

1:07:24Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): What's it called?

1:07:26Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): No, the, the bike lane.

1:07:29Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): it's a buffered bike lane, so I'm not sure that 13th Street is a bigger bike access lane than Balsam, so we can talk about that. Bike access to parking is shown in the two locations that I've noted, and then Park, parking access and service is from the southeast corner. Again, we can talk about that as you wish.

1:07:49Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Pedestrian access is from, as I said, the north, residential access is from the northwest corner, and then we access internal courtyard, internal walkways, as well as we provide stoops all along Balsam.

1:08:03Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): and for the entries to units along 13th Street, and from those stoops, there's direct access from the exterior to units that are on the lowest level floor elevation.

1:08:17Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): We put, all the…

1:08:20Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): residential courtyards on the second floor, so they get the most light facing south, and provide additional open space for interior common spaces. We have 3 different kinds of courtyard uses, active, quiet, and one for kids, and so we can get into all of this. I believe we have our landscape architect online somewhere.

1:08:40Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Board & And I also want to mention something about the site review criteria that staff has pointed to, that larger floor plate buildings and projects with multiple buildings have a variety of forms and heights. So.

1:08:52Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Board & I want to just point to this building across the street from this site.

1:08:56Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): And it makes me wonder, what determines visual mass and scale? Along Broadway, this is a shorter building, but I would posit that it might actually be more impactful visually than what we're doing on the Balsam Street side. This is a project we did on Canyon.

1:09:14Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): And when you look at mass and scale, it's the way the building meets the sky, even though this building has one height. All of those

1:09:22Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): portions of the building are at the same height, but the fact that they step in and out change the way it appears.

1:09:28Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): to passers-by, and a pedestrian scale is also created by how the ground floor creates entries, and the way we use materials and changes along the facade to create visual interest, both as you move past in a car, a bike, and a pedestrian.

1:09:44Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): And likewise, we're showing here in some of these diagrams how we've broken down the mass. This is along Balsam, and we've done a lot of studies about how this could work and provide visual interest and pedestrian-friendly environment along the way.

1:09:59Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): I don't know… I got a minute and a half, wow, okay.

1:10:03Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Board & So I just, moving through these, this has got the… this is the, the south side, showing similarly the setbacks from that, south property line, and some additional views, which you all have in your packet. I am not particularly talking about the other two sites, but if you have questions, we'll do our best to answer them.

1:10:21Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Board & As I think this was what was probably of most interest to the people in the room.

1:10:26Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Board & And I'll stop there.

1:10:28Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Thank you.

1:10:32Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Board & Thank you so much to the applicant team.

1:10:34Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): All right!

1:10:35Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Board & Time for questions from board members. We'll try to do this efficiently as well. Who's got some?

1:10:45Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): ml.

1:10:48ml robles . PB: I just have that follow-up from staff. Thank you, Adrian, for your presentation. So do we know, what percent of the existing building is actually above the 35-foot, height?

1:11:03Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): No.

1:11:04Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): First of all, it's a four-story building, and the way the city measures heights, it's one height for one building. It's measured 25 feet away from the low point of the building. The low point of the building, as you know, is the…

1:11:18Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): southeast corner of the building, and so it's impossible for me to say without going and measuring each section of the building, and 25 feet away from each section of the building, what each section of the building might be. But as far as the city measures it, Chandler can clarify if I haven't.

1:11:35ml robles . PB: So the… so the, but the entire building is not four stories.

1:11:40Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): From the city's perspective, and the way that it measures heights, it's a four-story building, and I can't really… I haven't got any more information than that.

1:11:47ml robles . PB: Okay, okay, we just saw a photograph of it, and it clearly steps, so it's not all one big mess, but thank you for your explanation.

1:11:58Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Thank you, ML.

1:12:00Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Mark.

1:12:03Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): Thank you, Adrian, for your presentation.

1:12:08Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): In your presentation, I noticed a little clip from…

1:12:13Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): the prior BVCP. So will you be,

1:12:21Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): Board & applying under the most recent site review criteria, and the up 2025 updated BBCP.

1:12:32Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): Yes. Yes to both, okay.

1:12:38Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): The garage entrance.

1:12:40Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): Have… I assume you've been on site a lot.

1:12:45Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): That garage entrance is really close to the loading dock of Ideal Market, and it seems like

1:12:56Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): A huge potential conflict with the giant semis that I watch back into that dock.

1:13:04Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): Bob Borer, day and night, since I traversed that street.

1:13:09Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): 20 sometimes a week or more. So, anyway, do you have any, thoughts on the conflict with Ideals Loading Dock? Yeah, I…

1:13:18Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): We do, and I don't know if we have a problem yet. Well, I'm sure get into it with staff and determine whether they're concerned. I mean, if you look at Ideal's loading dot versus Ideal's entry on 13th Street. Speaker 1 : I think you'll find we're a little further away, but that doesn't mean it's necessarily solving the question you're pointing to.

1:13:38Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): I think the challenge of getting parking into this site has everything to do with

1:13:43Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Board & not just the category of the street, but the floodplain.

1:13:46Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Board & And… and, if we try and enter on Balsam.

1:13:52Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): I can't imagine the city wouldn't have problems with taking an entry off of Balsam either. Not just because it isn't the lowest category street, but because Balsam is also a major bike route. To say nothing, it's a higher category street because there's more cars on it. So, I think we're going to have to work through that, but it's a very fair question. Okay.

1:14:12Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): So, given that you will

1:14:16Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): My understanding is, you will be applying

1:14:21Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): As one project for the three sites.

1:14:25Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): How are the three sites?

1:14:28Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): If I was a resident in any one of those three sites.

1:14:31Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): How would I, what would be my relationship to the other two buildings?

1:14:37Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): We don't know yet. It will depend upon the buyer, and one of the reasons we are applying for rezoning

1:14:45Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): In the near term.

1:14:46Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Board & And in fact, we already have applied for rezoning, but

1:14:49Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): That's a whole other discussion point.

1:14:52Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Is because in order to finalize a purchase agreement between the medical center and a buyer, and Donna can correct me if I'm not answering this correctly, they need to know what potential density is on this site. So, that buyer will have everything to do with

1:15:10Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): the use… the, the, the, we actually designed the property to the north to be potentially the affordable housing contribution for the rest of the site, and the property to the east to be potentially

1:15:21Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): condominiumized. But whether or not the buyer will choose to do that, whether or not the buyer will spin off the two other properties, we don't know yet. So I think that it is not inconceivable that that will all be resolved at site review, but they may want to come back and

1:15:37Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): do another concept review. I don't know the answer to your question because of not being sure who the buyer is yet.

1:15:43Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Okay.

1:15:45Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): The, one more. The south elevation of the building faces the back of, of the, ideal marketplace and other shops there.

1:15:57Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): What's the dimension between the back wall of ideal market and your facade?

1:16:06Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): I have.

1:16:07Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): my dimension people sitting here. Okay.

1:16:21Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): It varies, but probably at the tightest, about 20 feet. Okay.

1:16:26Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): And so… I assume that that counts towards your open space percentage.

1:16:33Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): Yes, a good portion of it. Okay.

1:16:40Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): And on the ground, if I was to walk between the two buildings in that gap.

1:16:48Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): To my north, would be… The garage, is that right?

1:16:54Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): Correct. Okay.

1:16:58Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): Is that open space there, that 20 feet,

1:17:04Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): It doesn't really seem particularly usable.

1:17:07Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): for much of anything, or… nor is it particularly desirable to be in that space, other than maybe on a really hot day in the summer, it might be.

1:17:17Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): Cool. So… Is that… Is that 20 feet, roughly?

1:17:25Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): the Minimum gap between those two.

1:17:30Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): buildings, given that it's a garage on the first floor. What I'm getting to is, could you have more usable open space other places if

1:17:41Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): You were actually minimized that gap because it's not a great open space.

1:17:48Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): one way or the other. Yeah, I mean…

1:17:51Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): it would be hard to imagine that this planning board would not come back and say, if I did that, that isn't that gap too small? And the other part of it is that there is an easement in there for, I believe it's a…

1:18:05Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): storm sewer easement between the… it's actually running between the buildings, the building to the south, and under the building to the south, where the property line jogs. So…

1:18:17Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): Is that Goose Creek undergrounded there? No, I wouldn't.

1:18:21Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Venture to say. Okay.

1:18:23Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): I don't think you can put Goose Creek in a pipe, personally, but I think that there's… there is some form of storm sewer work. I think it's storm sewer.

1:18:33Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Beyond that, wherever we don't have that easement, we're planting trees and trying to improve it as best we can, but it's limited because of that easement.

1:18:43Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): Okay.

1:18:44Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): All right, thank you.

1:18:46Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Thank you, Mark. Who's next?

1:18:51Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Kurt.

1:18:54Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Thanks. I, was trying to follow your explanation about the flood elevations. It's a little much for my little brain. But the question that it prompted was, you mentioned you have to maintain the same flood protection elevation, right, throughout the whole building.

1:19:15Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Did I'm sure you considered breaking the building up into multiple buildings so that you could vary that?

1:19:24Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): The problem is going to be the parking.

1:19:26Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Board & If you break up the building, you have to break up the parking, too, and then…

1:19:30Board & Commissions: that.

1:19:31Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): it gets very complicated very quickly. To say nothing of the impact that that has on access and entry points.

1:19:40Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Board & We did consider it. It it frankly, it just

1:19:44Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): creates way more problems, when you… because that parking has to follow that plane, and then it becomes that whole first floor.

1:19:54Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): I can go back to the slide if it helps.

1:19:57Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Oh, I'm sure I still wouldn't understand it.

1:20:00Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Thank you.

1:20:02Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Thank you, Kurt. Anyone else ready to go? Claudia.

1:20:07Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): So I have a question that might build a little bit on Mark's here indirectly. I have been…

1:20:13Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): Speaker 10 : looking at the required setbacks in the code for the zoning that you have here that you're requesting, so…

1:20:20Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): BC2 requires a 20-foot front yard setback. RH2 requires a 25-foot setback.

1:20:26Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): And those may not be particularly consistent with these new land use designations that we have in the BVCP. Do you anticipate, asking for any setback modifications as part of site review? I was going to ask about rear yard, but I've heard your answer to that.

1:20:42Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Almost certainly. I mean, that is one of the reasons you do site review, is we… is to make a better site plan work, and often that entails

1:20:49Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Board & adjusting the setbacks from what the buy-right setback would be.

1:20:54Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): So are we seeing in your current drawings any adjustments to setbacks, or are we seeing by-right code?

1:21:02Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): I'm… I'm sure we're seeing adjustments. The rear yard is, in fact, 13th Street. Actually, it's… there's… it's a side yard to the street on Balsam. It's a…

1:21:11Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): forgotten how you count rear yards when you have streets on three sides, so it might actually be 25 feet there, and I don't remember what we have.

1:21:22Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): It's bound to be less than 25 feet.

1:21:25Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): Okay, I may come back to that.

1:21:28Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): We can probably get that for you. Okay.

1:21:30Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): It just, it may be relevant to my comments later. So just to flag that.

1:21:34Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): Just a couple of clarifying questions. Speaker 10 : I'm also a little spatially challenged here with the elevation changes.

1:21:41Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): When you're looking at the courtyards that you're proposing for that main building on 2750 Broadway, how many floors of building are above those courtyards, right? Three. Okay, so if I'm in the courtyard, I am seeing three floors presenting around me as walls, is that correct? Correct. Okay.

1:22:01Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): colloquy on that. So… The… of the three courtyards.

1:22:05Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): 2… are open on the south. One is actually a four-sided Courtyard. Correct.

1:22:16Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): Okay, and then I had one more question about parking. So, what you're presenting right now is exactly one parking space per unit, correct? Yes. Okay. And that suggests to me it's not necessarily following SUMP principles, right? So…

1:22:32Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): It's also not necessarily not. Not necessarily not.

1:22:34Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): Not, okay. But I do notice that in Neighborhood 2, this new designation, we do have a preference for parking that is consistent with some principles. If we… if we asked you to demonstrate that at the time of site review, do you have a plan? Right.

1:22:49Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Well, I don't have a plan, but we will.

1:22:53Board & Commissions: Okay.

1:22:58Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Thank you. Mason.

1:23:03Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): So there's been some discussion around the use review and the, the,

1:23:09Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): Desire for… or the code says about having a corner commercial or flex space.

1:23:15Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): I'm sorry, I'm having a hard time hearing you. Sorry.

1:23:17Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): In the use review, if I understand it correctly, there's a preference for having commercial space.

1:23:23Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): Mixed in for this zoning, what was your considerations there? And do you foresee having any of that?

1:23:31Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): No.

1:23:32Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): But of course we don't have an

1:23:34Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): a buyer yet, and that might change, but we are not showing that, because we don't believe it's particularly supportable in this location. And I try to give a fairly…

1:23:44Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Board & substantial explanation of that in the written statement, which you may have noticed, but if you look at the street face today for this shopping center along Broadway, there is no street-facing commercial.

1:23:56Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): The closest thing we have to street-facing commercial is a

1:23:59Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): One car deep parking lot adjacent to the pharmacy, plus their trash.

1:24:04Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Board & So, the continuation of any street-facing commercial has to take into consideration all the parking that's in front of it before you get to the street.

1:24:12Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): We did not feel that it was in keeping with the criterion established that it not undermine the street-facing commercial that's already there.

1:24:20Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Likewise, along Alpine today, there is a, I believe…

1:24:26Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Salon and Community Plaza, but that's the only street-facing commercial along Alpine.

1:24:35Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): And then, of course, there's that Truck.

1:24:40Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Loading zone, and access to parking.

1:24:43Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): I believe there is street-facing commercial on 13th Street, how well it's been supported and viable, and it's all also a full story up from grade. I don't believe that you would say that we are undermining the ability to continue… for that to function and have any continuity

1:25:01Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): being broken up as it is by the parking lot access and the truck access along from, from, from, from Alpine.

1:25:10Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): Going north.

1:25:11Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): Yep, makes a whole lot of sense, thank you. And I… I didn't see this explicitly stated. I feel like I know the answer to this question, but I'm gonna ask it anyway.

1:25:19Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): Do you know if site review will be filed by BMC or by the buyers?

1:25:24Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): I missed the last part of your question.

1:25:26Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): review be filed by BMC or the buyers?

1:25:30Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): I…

1:25:31Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): We expect it'll be some joint thing, because usually buyers don't want to buy until they've got something approved.

1:25:39Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): But I don't know the answer to that, so we'll have to wait and see.

1:25:45Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Thank you, Mason. Anyone else? Questions for the applicant? I've got a couple, but I want to…

1:25:51Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): See if anybody else… okay, just a couple for me.

1:25:55Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): The open space… From the three buildings, are you intended for that to be shared or per building?

1:26:01Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Again, in terms of the operation of it, that'll be dependent upon the buyer. In terms of the land use code, you can't share open space between zones. So the open space requirement in the RH2 is different from the open space requirement in the BC2 or the BT1 or whatever.

1:26:19Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): But, if the buyer sets it up such that it is all shared functionally.

1:26:26Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): That'd be great. I don't know the answer yet.

1:26:28Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): That's interesting. Chandler, can you comment on that? I know we've had split-zoned sites before. Is that true, that if it's one site review, but it's split-zoned, that the open space can't be shared between zones?

1:26:43Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Yes, that's good.

1:26:44Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): In terms of the calculations, you have to meet the open space requirement in each zone separately.

1:26:49Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): That's correct. Yeah, each site is evaluated based on the zone district in which it lies.

1:26:54Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Okay, so that's for the calculation of the percentage of open space, but for the functionality, for example, to meet the site review criteria, so for example, the courtyard, we're not requiring that each of these buildings have its own courtyard, but we're presuming that the site will meet the criteria. But if the courtyard is not shared amongst the three buildings.

1:27:13Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Is that something that we can consider in our… looking at the criteria?

1:27:16Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Board & That would be taken into consideration. I mean, usually, if we have multiple buildings in a site review.

1:27:21Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): And they're asking us to look at open space cumulatively. It's assumed that the open space is open to residents of all the buildings, so when they're different properties, then yeah, we would have to, I guess, start getting into kind of the management aspect of the open space.

1:27:36Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Okay, thank you for that clarification.

1:27:42Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): And then, just… just a comment.

1:27:46Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): about splitting the building in two. It sounds like the primary reason why you don't want to split the 2750 in two is because of the parking challenges.

1:27:55Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): It's… it's certainly… Board & the biggest obstacle to it, it's not the only one.

1:28:00Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): in terms of operation of the building and access into the entries.

1:28:05Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): It would be… And.

1:28:09Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): The… the… realistically, the only place where you could walk directly into the front door of this building without a gray change is at the northwest corner of the site, because of the way the flood

1:28:21Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): elevations work. You can always find a way to get into a building without steps, but That's

1:28:29Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): the way in for a reason, and it's because of the floodplain and handicap accessibility.

1:28:37Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): And I know you can get into a building another way. You can put in lifts, you could put in ramps, and you're doing it at the West Campus, but look at the size of that ramp to get into that building, and how much permeability do you have on that building getting past that ramp? Okay, thank you.

1:28:52Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): I think I will stop there for now.

1:28:54Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Any last questions for the applicant?

1:28:57Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Okay, I think I saw Claudia's hands first, and then we'll go back to Kurt.

1:29:01ml robles . PB: And I had my hand up as well. Thanks.

1:29:03Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Thank you, ml, you'll be after Kurt. I'll be.

1:29:06Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): short, I hope. This is just one I forgot previously. On the topic of the use review, the zoning request, etc, did you consider any of the mixed-use zones? I'm looking in particular at something like MU4, which has a fairly high FAR. Yeah, we did consider it.

1:29:22Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Board & To be frank, what we… what…

1:29:27Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Board & what the city went through to get Mu. 4. We couldn't go through here to get it approved. In other words.

1:29:32Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): The process to get MU4 just struck us as…

1:29:36Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): really cumbersome. We weren't gonna do a…

1:29:39Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Board & area plan. We have a existing land use already identified with a land use map change. It made more sense to avoid any any consideration or

1:29:51Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): what's another word for finger pointing? Any accusation that we were spot zoning, it just made more sense to go after the BC2.

1:29:59Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Board & And by the way, just if you want to ask a question about Appendix N, I can say something about it.

1:30:04Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): I actually wanted to ask staff for a little clarification. Is there a special process to get MU4? Because it does exist across the street on Broadway.

1:30:12Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Yes, there is a special process. There's an additional, set of rezoning criteria, subsection F.

1:30:21Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): So there's additional trip reduction requirements, there's, additional infrastructure stuff. It is, quite a bit more.

1:30:29Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): Okay, just for my own edification, if at some point this evening we could get that code reference, I'd love to look that up later. Sure. Thanks.

1:30:41Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Thanks, this is a little bit of a follow-up of the question… the discussion that you had with Laura, and maybe you were already answering this, but my question is, you put your primary west side pedestrian entrance at that northwest corner. Is that solely based on grade, then?

1:30:59Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Because it… it doesn't seem like a lot of people are going to want to be either going to the Northwest or coming from the Northwest.

1:31:08Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Well, the question I have is, where are they going to or coming from? I mean, fundamentally, the most obvious place to go to and come from is either A.

1:31:16Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Downtown. B, the shopping center. C, parking.

1:31:21Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): D. Bus.

1:31:23Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Or your bike.

1:31:24Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Board & And Access to the parking is also off that same Commons area, so…

1:31:30Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Getting to the lobby in that northwest corner of the site gives you access to the parking, because you're just outside that wall separating the commons area from the parking. Access to the shopping center, I would go that route probably more readily than I would take the 13th Street path, particularly since you're going through the lobby as opposed to going

1:31:50Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Past the loading dock.

1:31:51Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Every unit on the ground floor does have a stoop and entry directly onto Balsam, so they would not necessarily have to go through the lobby, but…

1:32:00Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): I'm not so sure there's a better place to put the entry. Do you have a suggestion?

1:32:05Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Well, my suggestion would be the southwest corner, because that's closer to the bus stop. It… sorry, yeah, the southwest corner. But the… my question for you at this point is, what would the ramifications of that be? You've got a gray drop of…

1:32:22Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): 4 or 5 feet?

1:32:24Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): To make that work.

1:32:26Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Grade drops significantly going to the south, even on the west side of the site.

1:32:31Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Okay, thank you.

1:32:34Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Thank you, Kurt. ML.

1:32:39ml robles . PB: Thank you. So what I, am looking at is the bigger context part of the community hub. Can you talk about how you see

1:32:51ml robles . PB: this contributing to a vibrant mixed-use center that brings together homes, shops, restaurants. It seems like it's kind of an insular building, so if you can speak to the community hub.

1:33:03ml robles . PB: relationship, that'd be great.

1:33:05Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Sure. I think if… maybe I should bring up the floodplain map, if I may.

1:33:13Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Let's see here…

1:33:29Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Okay, I'm sorry it takes a moment, because it's right at the beginning.

1:33:34Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): here.

1:33:36Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): As you can see, Ideal Shopping Center is…

1:33:40Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Board & completely in the floodplain.

1:33:42Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): And… If you're thinking about where else you're going to get housing.

1:33:46Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): in this shopping center, in this BC2 zone, you have the, the.

1:33:52Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Board & You have Ideal in BC2, and you have Colony Shopping Center or Community Plaza.

1:33:59Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Board & In order to do housing, which we're trying to get more housing adjacent to, directly in, or in relationship to these neighborhood centers, which is why, not just to get more

1:34:11Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Streetfront commercial, but why we put an additional .5 FAR in Appendix N.

1:34:18Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Board & it's going to be very hard to get them on those sites without tearing those buildings down. Now, you may tear those buildings down, you may choose to landmark them, I don't know, but the easiest place, knowing that

1:34:29Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): the medical center

1:34:31Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): has to leave. The easiest place to get that higher density housing in relation to the shopping center is right here on this site.

1:34:40ml robles . PB: So, I'm hearing…

1:34:42Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Anyway, and that helps to bring people to this neighborhood hub.

1:34:47ml robles . PB: So, so,

1:34:49ml robles . PB: I'm hearing you say, in relation… to me, it looks like the building is just adjacent to the community center, and it's not really interacting with it, with the rest of the…

1:34:59ml robles . PB: Retail.

1:35:01ml robles . PB: Yeah. And commercial. Are there… is there intended to be some, communication between the residential, other than going out to Broadway to the street, or out to 13th to the street?

1:35:14Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Well.

1:35:15ml robles . PB: Is there any integration?

1:35:18Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Board & They're separate properties. They're… if you… and I know you're aware that the backside of Ideal Market is essentially

1:35:26Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): A backdoor.

1:35:27Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Board & There's no communication that is immediately available to this project to make.

1:35:34Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): So, I don't know what we could possibly do, other than buy Ideal Market.

1:35:39ml robles . PB: No, I understand your answer. Thank you.

1:35:44Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Thank you, ML. Last call for questions for the applicant team.

1:35:49Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Seeing none, we've been going for a little over an hour and a half, and I think some of us, probably in the audience as well, could use a short bio break before we go to open, public comment during this hearing.

1:36:01Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): So, let's take 5. Let's come back at 7.42.

1:36:06Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): 742. We'll be back.

1:36:22Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): You don't have to move.

1:36:23Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): I don't want to interrupt your break.

1:36:25Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): What's up? I'm with 1201 Balsam HOA. Okay. And our HOA manager.

1:36:32Speaker 11 (Board & Commissions): sent Package that we worked up with our concerns. Can you have it directly to you?

1:36:40Board & Commissions: Address, we were supposed to… To get it on the record.

1:36:44Board & Commissions: I just…

1:36:45Speaker 11 (Board & Commissions): I just wanted to make sure I still can.

1:36:47Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): When do they send it? Yesterday or Sunday?

1:36:51Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): If they sent it… so we got a ton of, comments yesterday that were…

1:36:57Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Board & Not within the 24-hour… No, you… I'm not worried about the time.

1:42:40Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Okay, welcome back everyone. We're gonna reconvene.

1:42:44Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Board & One minute late, 7.43.

1:42:46Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): So we are now at the time of the public hearing when we will take public comment, and I think we may have considerable interest from the public tonight. Could we try to get a count of the number of people who want to speak tonight? So if you are online, and you'd like to speak to this hearing item, could you please raise your virtual hand?

1:43:08Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Board & If you could please raise your virtual hand if you'd like to speak tonight, if you're in the Zoom meeting.

1:43:14Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Board & And Thomas, how many folks do we have signed up in the room?

1:43:18Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): We have 5 signed up in the room, and I did give another call during the break for individuals in the room to sign up, and I think this is everyone. Okay.

1:43:28Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): And we have about 5 or 6 hands coming up online.

1:43:32Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Is that everyone who'd like to speak who's in the online meeting?

1:43:42Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Anybody else in the online meeting who'd like to speak to this item, please go ahead and put up your virtual hand.

1:43:49Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Okay, so that's… that's about 10 or 11 people total. That is less than 15. Our rules do account for if we have 15 or more people signed up, then the time per speaker would be reduced to 2 minutes per speaker, and that's to respect everyone's time, because if we have

1:44:06Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): 20 people signed up at 3 minutes each, that's an hour of public comment. If we have 40 people signed up at 3 minutes each, that's 2 hours. So, but it looks like we do have less than 15, so each speaker will get 3 minutes to speak.

1:44:18Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): And so with that, I'll go ahead and turn it over to Thomas from City of Boulder staff to manage the public hearing. Thomas Remke, thank you so much. Thank you.

1:44:27Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): Thank you, Chair Kaplan. Yeah, we'll go ahead and begin with in-person participants. First up, we have Kathy Eisnogle, and then you'll be followed by David Paranka.

1:44:37Speaker 4 (Board & Commissions): Madam Chair, before the members of the public begin speaking, I believe this is the time the Board should advise the members of the public that they would, it would be, necessary to disclose any conflict or compensation or relationship associated with the application tonight.

1:44:54Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Thank you for that reminder, Dashana. So, for everyone who's speaking tonight, whether in person or online, if you have some kind of relationship to the project that is a financial relationship or a familial relationship, such as you work for the applicant team, or you own property that is next to the development area.

1:45:12Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Board & Please do just let us know, so that we understand your relationship to the project.

1:45:15Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Thank you so much.

1:45:20Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Okay, my name's Kathy Eisnogle. I live at 2964.

1:45:26Speaker 9 (Board & Commissions): 35 13th Street. I've been in that community for about.

1:45:30Speaker 12 (Board & Commissions): you You know,

1:45:33Speaker 12 (Board & Commissions): 14 years, and I'm a, major user of Bola Medical Center, and I was just explaining, I came in with a big pitch to say, whatever you do, please make sure we retain that level of medical services in the area, and I'm very pleased to hear that there is consideration for doing that.

1:45:52Speaker 12 (Board & Commissions): So that greatly shortens my, list. With respect to your comments on 13th versus Balsam, I would just like to point out from my personal experience there.

1:46:06Speaker 12 (Board & Commissions): that there's a huge difference between those two streets at that particular intersection, because, Balsam is primarily a car street.

1:46:17Speaker 12 (Board & Commissions): It is… even though it's got a bike lane on it, it's a very narrow bike lane, and I don't think bike riders… I almost never see bike riders. They will go up to Cedar Street to…

1:46:29Speaker 12 (Board & Commissions): you know, ride across if they can, because it's too hard, and there's also the roundabouts that are, you know, along the street. It's a car street.

1:46:38Speaker 12 (Board & Commissions): Whereas 13th Street is a bike and pedestrian street, and that's largely because you can't really drive very far north to south on 13th. You can go south, but if you start going north, you bump into the cul-de-sac.

1:46:55Speaker 12 (Board & Commissions): And so it's heavily biked and

1:47:00Speaker 12 (Board & Commissions): Kids going to Casey, going down that street, are…

1:47:04Speaker 12 (Board & Commissions): You know, there's just a huge number of kids, so… so that's…

1:47:09Speaker 12 (Board & Commissions): you know, as someone who lives in that area, pay attention to that difference in your consideration. I don't know how that impacts, you know, which is better to put a car out onto. It would certainly be easier to turn out onto 13th Street than it would be to turn onto Balsam, but you can go between the lights, so…

1:47:31Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): Thank you. Next up, we have David Paranka, and after that, we'll have, Steve.

1:47:37Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): Steve LeBlanc.

1:47:42Speaker 11 (Board & Commissions): Hi, I'm David Paranka. I'm an owner of one of the condo units at 1201 Balsam, and I'm also speaking for the HOA of the other 15 owners there.

1:47:54Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): So 1201 Balsam, we will be impacted both on the east side by the 1233 building and on the south side by the 2750.

1:48:03Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): Broadway building.

1:48:04Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): And,

1:48:06Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): We've, expressed some concerns and questions in a written form, which Chandler already has as part of the record.

1:48:13Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): Board & But I thought I'd emphasize a few of our concerns.

1:48:17Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): We'd actually like to have The entrance, the vehicle parking garage entrance to the 1233 building

1:48:27Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): Consider, relocating it away from the alleyway, because the alley is already fairly busy.

1:48:34Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): And…

1:48:37Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): Board & The 1201 building will be separated from the 1233 building by that alleyway, which is actually quite narrow. It's much, much more narrow than a conventional street would be.

1:48:50Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): And that brings me to my second point, which is,

1:48:54Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): Sometimes buildings can have, quite noisy HVAC equipment, and we'd, like some consideration given to making sure the HVAC equipment doesn't sit on the west side of the 1233 Balsam, Balsam project.

1:49:13Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): Board & point 3 out of 4 here is we'd like to make sure that in consider, and when considering considering excuse me.

1:49:22Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): The, building height, exemptions that they consider the solar access to our building.

1:49:30Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): And then finally,

1:49:33Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): One of the points we made was we wanted the 2750 Broadway to have setbacks on the upper two stories.

1:49:41Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): And, what I saw in the architectural rendering

1:49:46Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): for the northwest corner of the 2750 building is exactly what we're concerned about, because basically there, they showed on both the west and the north faces of that building, is you've got basically a sheer wall going up 4 stories, and

1:50:06Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): That will just be… Kind of an unpleasant design element to.

1:50:14Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): To… to… I don't know, it doesn't really fit with the existing neighborhood, I'm trying to say. Okay, thanks.

1:50:24Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): Thank you. Next up we have Steve and after that we'll have Laurel Herndon.

1:50:30Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): Good evening. My name is Steve LeBlanc.

1:50:32Speaker 9 (Board & Commissions): Board & For 48 years I have owned.

1:50:35Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): One of the owners of the ideal market which has been talked about a lot tonight.

1:50:41Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): One of the things I'd like to bring up is.

1:50:45Speaker 14 (Board & Commissions): In 2023, planning board.

1:50:50Speaker 14 (Board & Commissions): Water Resource Board and City Council all approved a flood mitigation plan for the area. I don't know if any of you were on the board in 2023, but it was unanimously approved by Planning Board, 8 to 1, by the City Council. So there's a lot of interest in

1:51:10Speaker 14 (Board & Commissions): Finally doing something about the flooding.

1:51:15Speaker 14 (Board & Commissions): As you all know, the

1:51:17Speaker 14 (Board & Commissions): Culvert on the west… on the north side of the hospital, or New Alpine Balsam, is huge.

1:51:25Speaker 14 (Board & Commissions): I don't know if you know it.

1:51:27Speaker 14 (Board & Commissions): It ends at Broadway and goes into the 36-inch pipe, which goes underneath Broadway and behind the two buildings.

1:51:35Speaker 14 (Board & Commissions): But they put a 20-inch restrictor on it.

1:51:38Speaker 14 (Board & Commissions): Board & Don't know why. Well, so as not to take too much water.

1:51:43Speaker 14 (Board & Commissions): Board & But we need to do something there, because that water's going to overflow

1:51:47Speaker 14 (Board & Commissions): I did hire a flood engineer, we met with the city.

1:51:50Speaker 14 (Board & Commissions): Board & They assured me that by Fema rules and regulations they're not allowed to make

1:51:56Speaker 14 (Board & Commissions): Board & any changes to flood designations below that will still be in the 100 year flood zone, but we won't be upgraded into high hazard zone, for instance.

1:52:07Speaker 14 (Board & Commissions): But one of the ideas I've had

1:52:09Speaker 14 (Board & Commissions): Board & that I'd like you to think about tonight is the idea of working with this project and doing

1:52:16Speaker 14 (Board & Commissions): The new flood culvert goes… aims right at this building.

1:52:22Speaker 14 (Board & Commissions): Originally, the flood plan that was approved

1:52:26Speaker 14 (Board & Commissions): Board & showed it going down Broadway and underground culvert down Alpine.

1:52:33Speaker 14 (Board & Commissions): Board & Good luck. The city has put so much stuff in the street. I don't know how they're going to do that, but it would be a pretty simple fix to go underneath Broadway.

1:52:42Speaker 14 (Board & Commissions): and go underground, on the property, And…

1:52:48Speaker 14 (Board & Commissions): Finally, take the 100-year floodplain out of the whole area.

1:52:52Speaker 14 (Board & Commissions): Board & Which affects about 500… that would take about 550 homes and properties out of the 100-year flood zone. And also.

1:53:02Speaker 14 (Board & Commissions): Board & during a time of a major flood, Broadway will be unaccessible because all that water is going to be going over

1:53:10Speaker 14 (Board & Commissions): The because it the 20 inch pipe will handle a small percentage of it.

1:53:18Speaker 14 (Board & Commissions): So that… That's kind of what I was hoping that you might think about that, because once

1:53:24Speaker 14 (Board & Commissions): I think the Alpine's gonna be difficult.

1:53:27Speaker 14 (Board & Commissions): To achieve. They, there was a budget put out and it was on Alpine. It was budgeted for $1.2 million to carry the project.

1:53:40Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): Thank you, sir. Your three minutes are over.

1:53:43Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): Thank you. Thank you.

1:53:45Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): Next up, we have Laurel Herndon, and after that, we'll have our final in-person speaker, Nancy Peter.

1:53:52Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Hello planning board members and city staff. My name is Laurel Herndon. I'm the executive director.

1:53:58Speaker 4 (Board & Commissions): of the Immigrant Legal Center of Boulder County. I do have a relationship with the medical center. I've loved their doctors for over.

1:54:05Speaker 15 (Board & Commissions): 35 years, that's where we take our family.

1:54:08Speaker 15 (Board & Commissions): So, our business is at 948 North Street. We provide legal services on a non-profit and sliding scale basis to immigrants who are among the most vulnerable in our community.

1:54:23Speaker 15 (Board & Commissions): Over the past 21 years, we have served 7,300 unique clients, including 1,553 who live in the city of Boulder.

1:54:33Speaker 15 (Board & Commissions): And with our DACAs, I think everybody knows what DACA is, we've had an opportunity to do a bit of a longitudinal study, because we have seen them every 18 months since 2012.

1:54:47Speaker 15 (Board & Commissions): And each year, fewer and fewer of our DACAs have remained in Boulder because they can no longer afford to live here.

1:54:56Speaker 15 (Board & Commissions): These young people grew up here, they went to our schools, they are the best of the best, but we are losing them because of the lack of affordable housing.

1:55:07Speaker 15 (Board & Commissions): The Boulder Medical Center campus is the perfect place for such housing, with accessible transportation and close-in shopping. Some of us are excited that the neighborhood is sure to see a new restaurant at the Bregberg site.

1:55:21Speaker 15 (Board & Commissions): Clearly, ground floor retail makes no sense along Balsam for the exact reason suggested, because it's frontage right into garbage receptacles and no other… no other shopping there.

1:55:38Speaker 15 (Board & Commissions): But finally, I'd like to say, the Boulder Medical Center, an independent physician group, this is a miracle in today's world. Please help them maximize their revenue so that they can continue to serve all of us, corporate-free. Thanks.

1:56:00Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): Thank you to all our in-person participants for joining us tonight. And with that, I'm gonna pass it over to Vivian to manage our…

1:56:07Board & Commissions: Do we have one more, Thomas?

1:56:10Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): Oh, yes, we do. I'm sorry about that.

1:56:13Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): Next up, we have… Nancy? Yes. Yes, Nancy Peter. Sorry, I got one step ahead of myself. Okay, that's okay.

1:56:20Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): Hi, I'm Nancy Peter. I've been a Boulder resident, for over 40 years, and always lived within.

1:56:27Speaker 16 (Board & Commissions): a mile of this project in different places. And I just wanted to bring up some of my concerns.

1:56:34Speaker 16 (Board & Commissions): One is that I think that the… that you should reduce the mass and the scale of the project. I know that tonight you're saying that it's four stories. It does not appear… it sure appears in all the drawings I've seen that what you're going to build now is going to be a lot larger.

1:56:54Speaker 16 (Board & Commissions): I think.

1:56:57Speaker 16 (Board & Commissions): that you should vary the roof heights and setbacks instead of being continuous and a continuous wall along Broadway and Balsam.

1:57:07Speaker 16 (Board & Commissions): I think it is important to preserve the views.

1:57:11Speaker 16 (Board & Commissions): The site currently offers views of Flatirons and Sanitas, and I think that maybe you could create openings that, would protect sight lines.

1:57:20Speaker 16 (Board & Commissions): Daylight and pedestrian connections.

1:57:26Speaker 16 (Board & Commissions): Design for the neighborhood… design for the neighborhood, and not just for the returns, the money piece of it. The conceptual architecture prioritizes rentable space over neighborhood character.

1:57:43Speaker 16 (Board & Commissions): Public space and community impacts.

1:57:46Speaker 16 (Board & Commissions): I think,

1:57:50Speaker 16 (Board & Commissions): We should… you should build needed housing. More luxury one-bedroom apartments will not address Boulder's missing middle shortage of housing. And without attainable family-sized homes to grow into, the project risks worsening the problem.

1:58:08Speaker 16 (Board & Commissions): I also think that it's important to protect neighborhood services.

1:58:14Speaker 16 (Board & Commissions): Losing urgent care, medical services, and essential shops would undermine the walkable 15-minute neighborhood this development should support.

1:58:22Speaker 16 (Board & Commissions): Rezoning should preserve or replace them with comparable, accessible community benefits.

1:58:30Speaker 16 (Board & Commissions): And I do understand that they said, that they're gonna relocate, but I…

1:58:36Speaker 16 (Board & Commissions): I would… I can't imagine where you're gonna find a spot.

1:58:40Speaker 16 (Board & Commissions): In that neighborhood, and within all these neighborhoods.

1:58:44Speaker 16 (Board & Commissions): And then, I think you should address the imbalance. Rezoning would create substantial value for the developer with little clear community benefit. Approval should require enforceable public benefits that justify the added development rights.

1:59:03Speaker 16 (Board & Commissions): Thank you.

1:59:06Speaker 16 (Board & Commissions): Thank you.

1:59:11Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Thank you to all of our folks here in the chambers. I do want to say we have the same rule as Council about not applauding or booing, but you can do jazz hands to give silent approval if you would like.

1:59:22Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Thank you so much.

1:59:23Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): And thank you, everyone, for being here. And with that, I'll pass it over to Vivian to start with our online participants. And just a reminder to our folks online, if you do plan to speak, please go ahead and

1:59:34Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): Raise your hands so that we have a good idea of how many people intend to speak.

1:59:39Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, City of Boulder: Thank you, Thomas, and thank you, those community members joining us online. Appreciate you also raising your hand in advance so that we could have, an idea of the total number of people. 4, 5, 6, 7, it looks like we have 8 people, who wish to speak.

1:59:57Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, City of Boulder: And I'll just follow you in the order that your hand was

2:00:00Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, City of Boulder: raised. So first we have George Pincus, followed by Donna, and just a reminder to introduce yourself with your first and last name, and, explain any relationship you might have to the project. Please go ahead, George.

2:00:20Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, City of Boulder: You should be able to speak, George. You may have to unmute yourself on your end.

2:00:28George Pincus: Good evening, my name is George Pincus. I live in Old North Boulder. I have no relationship to the project.

2:00:33George Pincus: I'm speaking this evening in opposition to this upzoning.

2:00:36George Pincus: I have 3 points to make. Number 1,

2:00:39George Pincus: There's a failure to demonstrate a justification for this rezoning in the context of the comprehensive plan.

2:00:44George Pincus: The applicant cannot demonstrate that the required justification for this change, because the existing… because the BC2 zoning presents a false choice.

2:00:53George Pincus: Contrary to the applicant's assertion, the site's existing B2 zoning already permits a transition away from single-use medical towards residential mixed use.

2:01:03George Pincus: The push for the BC2 is not a prerequisite for achieving the comp plan's housing goals. It's clearly driven by a desire to maximize FAR.

2:01:11George Pincus: In short, the developer's trying to jam more density into an area that already permits residential development.

2:01:17George Pincus: Just not enough to satisfy the applicant's development pro forma. The applicant admitted in its own presentation that its motivation is economic. It wants a return on its equity so it can take that money and build elsewhere. That's not a compelling reason to upzone the site where the existing zoning already permits residential use. Number two, this is an incompatible use with the neighborhood.

2:01:37George Pincus: Proposed BC2 zoning is fundamentally incompatible with established neighborhoods. This site borders RH2 and single-family homes to the new ones and west to the west, and my neighborhood of Old North Boulder to the east.

2:01:50George Pincus: Introducing a massive building block, height and bulk permitted under BC2, would create an abrupt, jarring transition, resulting in severe shadowing and canyon effects along both Broadway and Balsam Avenue.

2:02:03George Pincus: This directly contradicts the comp plan's mandate to protect established neighborhoods' character through gentle step-down transition.

2:02:10George Pincus: Foreman Massing is not in character for this neighborhood.

2:02:13George Pincus: Third.

2:02:14George Pincus: Traffic and infrastructure impacts. The infrastructure and traffic studies for 2750 Broadway cannot be viewed in a vacuum.

2:02:21George Pincus: Right across the street, the city's building the massive Alpine Boston redevelopment.

2:02:25George Pincus: Approving an intense BC2 density at the medical center simultaneously will create unmitigated and cumulative traffic impacts on both Broadway and Boston corridors.

2:02:34George Pincus: Further, remember, this is a daytime use, so you're replacing staggered medical office during 9 to 5 with 24 congestion, 24-hour, 7-day-a-week congestion with a high-density mixed-use development.

2:02:47George Pincus: Did anyone read the traffic study?

2:02:49George Pincus: For those reasons, this is a completely incompatible use, it is not compatible with the site plan, and I'm to your approving this proposal. Thank you.

2:03:01Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, City of Boulder: Thank you for being here tonight. Next we have Donna. Please introduce yourself by your full name and then followed by Joe Ann. Please go ahead, Donna.

2:03:10Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): And if I could just jump in briefly, to the gentleman in the front row, could I ask you to please turn off the microphone in front here, just so we don't get any interference from the room? Thank you so much. Back to you, Vivian, and it sounds like Donna is next.

2:03:22Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, City of Boulder: Yes, please go ahead, Donna, you should be able to speak.

2:03:37Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, City of Boulder: Donna, can you just try speaking? It looks like you're unmuted.

2:03:48Donna: Try one more time. Can you hear me now? Can you hear me now? Yeah.

2:03:51Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, City of Boulder: Yep.

2:03:52Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, City of Boulder: There's a little bit of feedback. Let's try again. Go ahead.

2:03:57Donna: Are we still getting an echo? Still getting an echo?

2:04:01Donna: A little bit.

2:04:01Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, City of Boulder: A little bit of an echo. Do you have a…

2:04:06Donna: Oh, you know, that's…

2:04:08Donna: I don't have a headphone set up here. Sorry. Let me see. What can I do? You know, if you don't mind, I'll just turn off the audio and just wave at me if you need me to. I mean, I'll turn off my speaker so that should eliminate the echo.

2:04:22Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): It sounds better now. Thank you, Donna, you sound fine. Go ahead.

2:04:25Donna: That took care of it.

2:04:27Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, City of Boulder: Yeah, that's okay. Go ahead.

2:04:29Donna: Okay, good, good. I'll just, if you don't mind, I'll just speak, and then just wave if there's any issue.

2:04:33Donna: And hopefully that'll save us from the echo. Good evening, my name is Donna Waters, and I live in Pinebrook Hills.

2:04:40Donna: I just wanted to say I completely support BMC's goal to build a modern, state-of-the-art facility that's going to better serve our community.

2:04:50Donna: That said, I do want to ensure that Northwest Boulder both retains accessible care.

2:04:56Donna: And also maintains its neighborhood character. And I think this is especially urgent given the… given the cumulative infrastructure impacts hitting our area, like the Alpine Balsam project directly across the street with 200 housing units.

2:05:12Donna: And the North Broadway complex at Iris, another 100 units. I feel like simultaneously approving another high-density project.

2:05:22Donna: Here, we'll significantly compound traffic and local parking and emergency access routes.

2:05:29Donna: So, instead of an immediate blanket approval, I urge the board to work collaboratively with BMC through a City of Boulder Development Agreement.

2:05:39Donna: I think the city could potentially delay a final… the final high-density approvals on the east side of Broadway until baseline infrastructure impacts from these other projects are assessed.

2:05:51Donna: So we really know, you know, what we're signing on to. Concurrently, a conditional rezoning can give BMC the financial certainty that they need to secure their new site, so they know that they're going to be able to get the money out of their property.

2:06:07Donna: But it's… it would be a contingency. So that would be while contractually ensuring that, you know, vital medical services would be safely anchored nearby in the North Broadway corridor.

2:06:19Donna: Thank you. Thank you.

2:06:23Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, City of Boulder: We'll move on now to Joanne, followed by Lindsay Wilson. Please go ahead, Joanne.

2:06:36Jo Anne Baumgartner PT: Hello?

2:06:37Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, City of Boulder: Yes, we can hear you.

2:06:39Jo Anne Baumgartner PT: Okay, perfect, thank you. I'm Joia Baumgartner, and I've been a Newlands resident for over 40 years.

2:06:47Jo Anne Baumgartner PT: And I do need to disclose that my spouse is a former Boulder Medical Center partner, now retired, and currently we have no connection with the Boulder Medical Center.

2:07:01Jo Anne Baumgartner PT: Other than using physicians there as our private doctors. And I appreciate the details and time everyone has put into this proposal.

2:07:12Jo Anne Baumgartner PT: My concern is that the proposal to change the use code is based on schematics that we're seeing, but the buyer is not actually bound by those schematics we're seeing. So I want to urge caution that way.

2:07:30Jo Anne Baumgartner PT: I also want to say I support.

2:07:33Jo Anne Baumgartner PT: Fully looking at what would be used on the other properties, the parking lots adjacent to this main property, and would sup…

2:07:43Jo Anne Baumgartner PT: having affordable

2:07:46Jo Anne Baumgartner PT: Housing in an area that is actually served by transient and services that are appropriate, and not just

2:07:59Jo Anne Baumgartner PT: purchasing credits to put it somewhere else. I feel like I appreciated ML's comments about.

2:08:10Jo Anne Baumgartner PT: How we are not necessarily this…

2:08:14Jo Anne Baumgartner PT: as proposed, is not integrating into the neighborhood whatsoever. I would love to see more, discussion around that.

2:08:25Jo Anne Baumgartner PT: The other thing I'd like to bring up is, I don't know if anyone has ever been to the Tennyson and 44th neighborhood in Denver, but when you look at housing projects and high-density apartments that have been done there, and the wall.

2:08:43Jo Anne Baumgartner PT: that has, dramatically changed the character of that neighborhood, I would be very disappointed.

2:08:52Jo Anne Baumgartner PT: And sad, to see that happen to our very walkable, very community-based neighborhood here. And so I appreciate everyone's time, and thank you for listening.

2:09:07Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, City of Boulder: Thank you.

2:09:08Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, City of Boulder: Next we have Lindsay Wilson, followed by Sara Lincoln. Please go ahead, Lindsay.

2:09:16Lindsay Wilson: Hi, can you hear me?

2:09:18Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, City of Boulder: Yes.

2:09:19Lindsay Wilson: Okay. So I own the property on the corner of Balsam and 13th, and, you know, I think my comments are… have been echoed by many other people, and just wanted to add some emphasis to those.

2:09:33Lindsay Wilson: You know, I'm not necessarily opposed to redevelopment, but just feel like this

2:09:40Lindsay Wilson: this, development does not fit the neighborhood, and it's just really too massive. There's just no transition from the neighborhood just north, or sorry, yeah, to the north, and, you know, this four-story wall that goes right up to the street.

2:09:58Lindsay Wilson: So, in terms of the zoning and the height of the building, you know, I would…

2:10:03Lindsay Wilson: you know, I would just hope that some more consideration could go into, you know, the height restrictions and, you know, allowing that, that variance, and then, you know, maybe it could be more of a

2:10:17Lindsay Wilson: A further setback, and stepped up versus just a wall all the way across.

2:10:24Lindsay Wilson: I think it's less of a problem on Broadway that's already a commercial corridor. But right there, just butting up against the neighborhood to the north, it just doesn't feel like it fits with the neighborhood.

2:10:34Lindsay Wilson: The other concern is just the parking and what that might do to the neighborhood. You know, I heard that it's just one parking spot per unit.

2:10:43Lindsay Wilson: I suspect in many cases, more than one person with a car will be in many of those units, so what does that mean for the parking in the neighborhood and the traffic?

2:10:51Lindsay Wilson: So that's also quite concerning. So I just wanted to… to echo comments of others, I guess.

2:10:58Lindsay Wilson: ensure that, Those are taken to heart.

2:11:06Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, City of Boulder: Thank you.

2:11:07Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, City of Boulder: Next up, we have Sarah Lincoln, followed by, somebody joining us by phone. Please go ahead, Sarah.

2:11:15Sarah Lincoln: Hi, can you hear me?

2:11:16Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, City of Boulder: Yes.

2:11:17Sarah Lincoln: Excellent.

2:11:18Sarah Lincoln: So good evening, I'm Sarah Lincoln, I live in the Newlands, here in Boulder, very close to the proposed development.

2:11:25Sarah Lincoln: And I want to start by saying that I understand Boulder needs more housing, and honestly, after listening to the discussion tonight, I get much more clearly why Boulder Medical Center needs to relocate. The floodplain constraints are clearly significant. There's very real challenges.

2:11:42Sarah Lincoln: But I'll say that the fact that Boulder Medical Center needs to move does not necessarily mean that this particular proposal is the right answer for the property.

2:11:52Sarah Lincoln: So there are 4 concerns I want to raise. The first is which

2:11:57Sarah Lincoln: This is not a mod… this is a giant development, right? This is not a modest development. This proposal requires both rezoning, height modification, and the scale and intensity exceed what is currently allowed. So, more than 200 new households. What does that mean?

2:12:16Sarah Lincoln: Additional residents, cars, visitors, deliveries, rideshares.

2:12:22Sarah Lincoln: Daily trips in an area that's immediately adjacent to residential neighborhoods.

2:12:27Sarah Lincoln: And I think a lot of people have noted this tonight, but most importantly, that just the cumulative impact of this development and alpine balsam, it just cannot be ignored. You know, the directly across the street.

2:12:40Sarah Lincoln: Alpine Balsam is already adding more than 200 new homes, along with substantial civic uses. So, now we're considering an additional 223 units across the street, so that's more than 400 new homes.

2:12:53Sarah Lincoln: Concentrated in a very small area.

2:12:56Sarah Lincoln: So we need to consider those two developments together for traffic, parking, pedestrian safety, infrastructure, the neighborhoods, etc.

2:13:07Sarah Lincoln: I also think we just need to separate Boulder Medical Center's need to relocate from the question of what it should… what should replace it, excuse me.

2:13:15Sarah Lincoln: So I hear that… I hear the case that medical center needs to move. I accept that, but there need… and the need to maximize the value of this property to finance the relocation should not by itself determine

2:13:27Sarah Lincoln: How much additional density the city grants it. So those are just two different questions. So I hope we can do that and differentiate between them.

2:13:36Sarah Lincoln: And finally, I'll say, and this is from the heart, this is not an argument against housing. I really feel strongly about this. It's really an argument for responsible planning. This would be a major… this would be a really permanent change to the neighborhood. So, I urge you.

2:13:51Sarah Lincoln: Just to rethink this proposal in its current form, and make sure what replaces BMC really reflects.

2:13:58Sarah Lincoln: the capacity and the residential character of the surrounding area.

2:14:04Sarah Lincoln: Thank you so much.

2:14:07Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, City of Boulder: Thank you. Okay, so next we have a community member who is joining us by phone and also raised their hand. And then we have, to close us out, Will Torr, followed by Ryan Carroll and Karen Hollweg. Please go ahead.

2:14:24Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, City of Boulder: If you are joining us by telephone, then raise your hand.

2:14:29Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, City of Boulder: And please start by introducing yourself.

2:14:38Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, City of Boulder: You may have to unmute yourself on your end from your phone.

2:14:49Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, City of Boulder: We'll give a few more seconds. If it's not working, we can come back to you.

2:14:57Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, City of Boulder: All right, let's come back to the community member joining by phone. We'll move on to Will Toror. Apologies if I mispronounced that, but please go ahead and introduce yourself.

2:15:13Will Toor: Hi, my name is Will Toor, and I live on 10th Street in Newlands, a few blocks from this project. I've been here in the neighborhood for a little over 27 years now, and wanted to say that I strongly support the project. While I am

2:15:29Will Toor: Boulder County: quite sad to see the Boulder Medical Center move. It's been a great service in the neighborhood, and one I was very much looking forward to using as I age into Medicare. I understand why they need to move, and I think that the proposed use on the site is a very good use for

2:15:49Will Toor: Boulder, For that site, you know, Boulder faces an enormous deficit in housing. We have tens of thousands of people a day commuting into town, and that is the primary source of our traffic problems, as opposed to folks living in the community.

2:16:07Will Toor: It's also, I think, a… creates sort of real struggles for many people who have to do long commutes just to live their daily lives. So I think the city will benefit in many ways from more housing in this neighborhood. It's also, I think, just a great location for housing. It's within walking distance of multiple

2:16:29Will Toor: Schools, walking distance of downtown.

2:16:32Will Toor: Walking distance of the recreation center and of open space. It's on our major north-south bicycle corridor. It's got great transit access with

2:16:41Will Toor: the skip on Broadway, and we're being only about a 15-minute walk from Bel…

2:16:48Will Toor: Only about a 15-minute walk from the downtown transit station.

2:16:53Will Toor: My only real concern with what I've seen to date is with the amount of parking. I believe that this is likely over-parked for this location, given

2:17:05Will Toor: sort of the great bicycle and pedestrian and transit access. I think this would be a very good location for a more car-light development, and would urge the developer to think about a parking ratio of lower than

2:17:18Will Toor: Boulder, Northern Ireland, one car per unit, and that if we're able to move to a lower parking ratio, it may be possible to fit more housing upon the site. And what Boulder really needs is not more cars, but more housing for the

2:17:33Will Toor: you know, many, many people who currently commute into our community. Finally, I would say, just as someone who's lived in this neighborhood for

2:17:43Will Toor: you know, going on 3 decades now, one of the things that has been really striking has been the aging of our neighborhood, and I think that actually having more small units in the neighborhood that may fit the lifestyle

2:17:57Will Toor: of younger residents could really help to bring some additional vitality to our neighborhood, which I think would be a real plus. So, thank you, and good luck with your deliberations.

2:18:10Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, City of Boulder: Thank you. Next up, we have Ryan Carroll, followed by Karen Hollweg, and also, I would, ask if you are planning to speak, please go ahead and raise your virtual hand so that, it shows up in the queue. Please go ahead, Ryan.

2:18:35Ryan Kehrl: Y'all hear me?

2:18:36Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, City of Boulder: Yes.

2:18:37Ryan Kehrl: Yes. Okay, awesome. My name is Ryan Carroll. I live at 6 and Balsam. I'm a mechanical engineer with 13 years in infrastructure hardening and risk management.

2:18:46Ryan Kehrl: I am asking you to deny this rezoning.

2:18:49Ryan Kehrl: One question.

2:18:50Ryan Kehrl: For this group, is how are we going to evacuate all of these people?

2:18:55Ryan Kehrl: People talked about parking. Parking is a very non-emotional description for capacity for traffic.

2:19:02Ryan Kehrl: This spring, the Goat Trail fire put everyone west of Broadway under an evacuation warning in the middle of the night.

2:19:08Ryan Kehrl: Broadway was on the edge of that zone. Since I've lived here, we've added the Academy.

2:19:15Ryan Kehrl: Then Alpine Balsam, now this, up to 223 more households on the same corridors, through the same crossings, around the same roundabouts on Balsam.

2:19:24Ryan Kehrl: Each one of those was reviewed on its own, but no one has added them all up.

2:19:28Ryan Kehrl: And I still have not been shown an evacuation map. I saw traffic slides tonight that showed bike lanes and other micromobility solutions I've never heard of.

2:19:38Ryan Kehrl: Not one of them showed an evacuation route.

2:19:40Ryan Kehrl: The slide documenting key issue number 2 gives 9 reasons that this project fits. Not one of them is around life safety.

2:19:49Ryan Kehrl: Right now, the BMC is empty.

2:19:52Ryan Kehrl: After approving a rezoning like this, that would be 400 more people in jeopardy, using the same infrastructure that we've had since I've lived here to evacuate.

2:20:02Ryan Kehrl: Rough assumptions are fine for parking. It looks like the one-to-one has been placed here. They are not fine for evacuation.

2:20:09Ryan Kehrl: So I am asking, will anyone on this board tonight own this question?

2:20:14Ryan Kehrl: Not the staff, not the applicant, one of you.

2:20:19Ryan Kehrl: Put it in a motion, no rezoning on this corridor until an independent evacuation study is on the table.

2:20:25Ryan Kehrl: This was requested in 2024 by the Boulder ODM.

2:20:29Ryan Kehrl: If no one owns it tonight, the record will show the question was asked, and nobody took it.

2:20:35Ryan Kehrl: Deny this rezoning. Once these buildings are here, you cannot take them back. Thank you for your time tonight.

2:20:42Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, City of Boulder: Thank you.

2:20:44Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, City of Boulder: Next, we have Karen Hollweg, followed by Sandra. Please go ahead, Karen.

2:20:55Karen Hollweg: Can you hear me now?

2:20:58Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, City of Boulder: Yes.

2:21:01Karen Hollweg: My name is Karen Hollweg. I have no relationship to the project. I am a board member of Plan Boulder.

2:21:10Karen Hollweg: Mr. Sofer stated that street-facing commercial retail was not supportable.

2:21:17Karen Hollweg: Our question is, are more apartments supportable?

2:21:25Karen Hollweg: Plan Boulder has been listing the… all the housing units that are in the pipeline for over a year now.

2:21:34Karen Hollweg: And if you count just the apartments, there are over 20,000 apartments in the pipeline. This list has been validated by planning staff.

2:21:44Karen Hollweg: And that would lead Boulder to a population that exceeds the state demographer's 2045 projected population for Boulder.

2:21:53Karen Hollweg: So we have many questions.

2:21:56Karen Hollweg: How many more new apartments do we need, and who will use them?

2:22:00Karen Hollweg: How many of the recently built units are empty?

2:22:03Karen Hollweg: What's the overall vacancy rate for City of Boulder apartments now?

2:22:08Karen Hollweg: Where will all the traffic go?

2:22:11Karen Hollweg: What will be the impact on air quality?

2:22:15Karen Hollweg: And with all the housing units in the pipeline, and the disappearance of the Arapaho Glacier, as reported in the Daily Camera last week.

2:22:23Karen Hollweg: And the Colorado River changes, given the negotiations that are going on, plus drought and climate change, are you sure there will be enough water for the anticipated increase in population?

2:22:37Karen Hollweg: The Boulder Valley Comp Plan in Policy 82 says the City supports increasing the housing supply by promoting housing types and price points that are more affordable, including middle housing types and middle-income housing.

2:22:55Karen Hollweg: I think there are a lot of questions that need to be answered before this project goes forward. Thank you.

2:23:02Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, City of Boulder: Thank you.

2:23:03Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, City of Boulder: Next we have Sandra, and please introduce yourself with your first and last name, and if anyone else is, hoping to speak, please go ahead and also raise your hand at this time. Please go ahead, Sandra.

2:23:20Sandra: Can you hear me now?

2:23:23Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, City of Boulder: Yes.

2:23:24Sandra: Oh, great. Okay, I was the one on the iPhone who wasn't able to get my iPhone working right to speak. So.

2:23:33Sandra: I am not going to be as articulate in my words as some of the other people who have spoken, because I just found out about this last night, and really what I would ask is that

2:23:45Sandra: There's no forward movement on this until the neighborhood.

2:23:50Sandra: is more fully informed about this. I'm going to guess that 99% of the people who live in a very large circle around this area know absolutely nothing about these plans, and it is… it is kind of shocking the scale and scope of the change, and the…

2:24:07Sandra: The loss of the medical center, and it not being replaced with other similar amenities, and the move to, like, an incredibly dense and.

2:24:19Sandra: and large facility, and I'm still trying to absorb and learn about it, and come up with what, like, my questions and feedback are in a deeper way, and I have got to think that many, many people who live around this area… I live

2:24:36Sandra: Off of, I live off of Elder, and…

2:24:40Sandra: 15th Street, and so this is, like, where I spend such a big portion of my life, and

2:24:46Sandra: I'm really concerned about change going forward without the community being able to give feedback on this and absorb and ask thoughtful questions and make sure that our ideas and concerns are taken into account. It seems like a lot of decisions, by the time

2:25:05Sandra: The public really is aware of something.

2:25:08Sandra: The train is out of the station and it is so hard to at that point give.

2:25:13Sandra: any meaningful feedback that can actually be addressed. Just, like, a minor version of that is the fact that I emailed last night with feedback, and that, oh, I'm in the 24-hour window, so it doesn't even get taken into consideration. That just is an example of, like.

2:25:33Sandra: Average neighborhood residents not really getting to.

2:25:38Sandra: engage the way they want to, which is, like, calmly and thoughtfully, and I really appreciate everybody's time tonight, and I hope that you give the community a chance to be a part of the community process. Thank you.

2:25:53Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, City of Boulder: Sandra, before you mute yourself, can you just share your full name? We didn't.

2:25:59Sandra: Sure. Sandra Snyder.

2:26:01Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, City of Boulder: Thank you.

2:26:02Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, City of Boulder: Okay, we have one more community member who's raised their hand.

2:26:07Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, City of Boulder: Listed as S. Moores Levitt, but please go ahead and introduce yourself with your first and last name.

2:26:15smoresleavitt: Hi, my name is Catherine Levitt.

2:26:18smoresleavitt: I live, close to the neighborhood.

2:26:22smoresleavitt: That's being proposed to be developed. I've been in Boulder since 1997.

2:26:28smoresleavitt: And I can share that I drive around quite a lot for my job, and my observation daily is that our streets in Boulder are truly frenetic.

2:26:40smoresleavitt: There is no other way to describe it, and I would invite everyone on Council to spend a day making loops around the town to see that for yourself.

2:26:51smoresleavitt: Car accidents are on the rise.

2:26:53smoresleavitt: Pedestrian car accidents are on the rise.

2:26:57smoresleavitt: Car bike accidents are on the rise.

2:27:00smoresleavitt: So, to say that… The residents in this development will be walking downtown.

2:27:08smoresleavitt: Is a simplification.

2:27:10smoresleavitt: They will have cars.

2:27:12smoresleavitt: And they will be adding to our load of crowding that is already at a maximum.

2:27:19smoresleavitt: Thank you.

2:27:21Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, City of Boulder: Thank you.

2:27:23Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, City of Boulder: I do not see any other hands raised. I'll give folks a couple seconds.

2:27:29Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, City of Boulder: In case anybody reconsiders, wants to share their thoughts.

2:27:34Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, City of Boulder: Will Misko, please go ahead.

2:27:41Will Misko: Hey there, I just felt inspired to echo, Sandra's comments earlier, and George at the beginning. I'm in a similar neighborhood of Old North Boulder, and was kind of shocked to see the scale of the development.

2:28:00Will Misko: At this point of review,

2:28:04Will Misko: I would have expected that there's more of a community involvement for something that brings…

2:28:13Will Misko: 200 new units to this area.

2:28:19Will Misko: I think housing is important.

2:28:21Will Misko: And… there's a place for… You know, new community members.

2:28:27Will Misko: And I also think that.

2:28:30Will Misko: Blending with the current neighborhood.

2:28:33Will Misko: Doesn't exist in the plans that… that I see, so… just wanted to echo some of the comments that were made earlier.

2:28:42Will Misko: Thank you.

2:28:44Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, City of Boulder: Thank you.

2:28:47Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, City of Boulder: Alrighty, I don't see any other hands raised.

2:28:50Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, City of Boulder: And.

2:28:52Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, City of Boulder: Give it a couple moments.

2:28:56Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, City of Boulder: I think we can close the public hearing portion, or the community input, part of it, at least.

2:29:03Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, City of Boulder: Back over to you, Chair.

2:29:07Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Thank you so much, Vivian, and I want to thank every member of the public who showed up tonight, either online or in person, to share your thoughts and your concerns and your experiences with the Planning Board tonight.

2:29:20Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): We're gonna go to planning board comments. I want to reiterate that this is a concept review. It is a chance for early input from staff and from this board

2:29:33Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Potentially from Council if they call it up, and also for the community to learn about the project and give some early input. There are no decisions being made tonight.

2:29:41Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): There's no approval, no denial, no promises or guarantees. What we do give is some, perhaps praise for elements of the project that we like and would hope to see retained in a site review to come forward in the future.

2:29:55Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): And any red flags that we see where we think the project may not be compatible with the criteria that we are supposed to use to judge this project when it does come back for a decision.

2:30:06Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): So that's what we will be doing tonight. I'm going to take my prerogative as chair just to say a few things to kind of level the playing field here, because

2:30:14Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Okay.

2:30:19Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Yes, I will do that. Okay, thank you, Kurt. Kurt's just reminding me of a process that we will give the applicant an opportunity to respond to anything that they hear in public comment that they would like to respond to.

2:30:28Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): But I just want to say a few things, like I said, to level the playing field. There are things that all of the development community knows, that council and planning board knows, that staff knows, but may not be common knowledge amongst community members, and I like to bring that into the hearing room.

2:30:42Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): So first, I want to remind everybody that we are the planning board, not the city council, even though we do get to sit up here in chambers. We are not elected officials, we are a board that is appointed by City Council, and we are volunteers. We're all residents of Boulder, like you, and our job is to try to.

2:30:59Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): fairly apply the code, and listen to community, and listen to the developers, and try to make sure that what happens in Boulder is in the best interest of the city, as represented by the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan and by our city code.

2:31:12Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): One thing I want people to know is, with regard to affordable housing, the city does have affordable housing requirements for every single development that comes before us, whether it's commercial or whether it's residential. But we are required by state law to offer developers a choice in how to meet that affordable housing requirement.

2:31:30Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): We cannot, by state law, require them to build affordable housing on-site. It's simply not an option that's available to us. Some developers will choose to do that. Some developers will choose to provide land in lieu of doing that. Some will provide what's called cash in lieu. Basically, they will pay a certain set amount into our affordable housing fund.

2:31:49Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): that is then used to fund affordable housing development around the city. You can go to the city's affordable housing website, there's a dashboard, is what they call it, that shows a heat map of where all of that affordable housing is being built. It's maybe a little bit invisible if you look at it on a project-by-project basis, but it is happening around the city.

2:32:07Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Second thing I want to say is around the height limit. This property is in a higher intensity part of the city, where they are entitled to build up to 55 feet if they meet the requirements of the code.

2:32:19Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): The site review process is the process by which we say, okay, you may go up to 55 feet, but you have to meet certain design requirements, certain access and circulation criteria, certain open space requirements. This is the process by which we assure that the tallest and most intense buildings are better buildings.

2:32:37Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): And that 55 height limit was set by the people of Boulder in a public vote. It is in our city charter. We can't change it, council can't change it, developers can't change it. That 55-foot height limit is the maximum for properties subject to the jurisdiction of the City of Boulder.

2:32:53Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Site uses.

2:32:55Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): And I'm not going to comment about this particular site, but I will say this comes up many times. I think it's important for people to know that on private property, the city cannot compel a property owner to maintain a certain use, or to rent to a certain tenant or set of tenants.

2:33:09Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): we simply can't compel that. So if a property owner decides that they are going to no longer have a certain use or a certain tenant, that is their opportunity, that's their choice. All that we can do is apply the building code if they want to rebuild something.

2:33:24Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): And then I'll just say for parking, the city no longer has parking minimums, and so they… developers do have to meet access and circulation criteria that's in that code that I mentioned. They do have to do a traffic study, and they do have to develop what's called a transportation demand management plan.

2:33:40Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): To encourage and enable alternative transportation like biking and walking and micromobility and riding the bus, but we cannot compel them to build or not build any particular amount of parking.

2:33:52Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Okay, so, with that said, I am going to have all of the other members of Planning Board give their comments on this project, in our deliberation. So, Chandler, if you could please pull up those key questions for us.

2:34:06Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): And typically the way we do this is we just go board member by board member, go ahead and answer all of the questions, rather than going question by question.

2:34:14Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): 4 rounds will take longer if we do it. Each board member one question at a time, unless somebody objects and has a different plan.

2:34:22Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): Madam Chair, we would like to give the applicant that chance. Yes, absolutely.

2:34:25Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Absolutely. And before we do that, we're going to give the applicant a chance to respond to anything I just said, or anything in public comment that you would like to respond to.

2:34:33Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Thank you, both Kurt and Claudia, for that reminder.

2:34:44Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Adrian, if you could turn your mic on. Got it. Thank you.

2:34:47Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Thank you, board members. A number of things may not have been apparent, but we're making significant improvements to the bike lane along Balsam, as required by the Transportation Master Plan. So, though I do understand that you may decide that it's better to have car access off of Balsam.

2:35:04Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): we'll work with whatever. The unit mix will be determined at a future date. I can't really speak to whether they're going to be more smaller units, but the FAR limits the total square footage, so less parking will not mean that we're going to get more square footage for the building, because

2:35:21Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Parking does not count towards the square footage.

2:35:26Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Board & Conditional rezoning came up. I believe that the council will not do a conditional rezoning, because the city attorney's office will have to be a legislative act, and you can't do a conditional legislative act, so…

2:35:40Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): I'm sure the city attorney can comment on that. The buyer being bound by this, well, buyer is bound by the site review, so when we get back here with site review and a buyer submits a site review, you'll certainly be able to bind them plenty.

2:35:57Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): The current site, however walkable we think this area is, the current site is not walkable today. As a medical center, you don't even have a sidewalk along Broadway that really addresses the building, to say nothing of walking along Balsam or 13th.

2:36:12Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Board & It is 4-story at 13th and Balsam. There was concern about that. We heard that, and I don't know, well, the building does vary in depth and height.

2:36:22Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Board & So, we didn't make it clear enough, and I appreciate comments to do better on that and make certain that we make it apparent.

2:36:30Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): I will just say one other thing that actually came from the city attorney's comments earlier on, that appendix and adoption being quasi-judicial, that might be true, but if it is quasi-judicial, what is the criteria you're applying? Because I don't believe it exists.

2:36:45Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Which then might make it legislative, so we'd love to know. Thank you.

2:36:54Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Could you please turn that mic off again? Yeah, thank you.

2:36:58Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Okay.

2:37:00Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): I think what I heard from the City Attorney's Office is that, Adrian, you are correct. There are no criteria in the code about the Appendix N map, and including properties in that, and we were instructed to think about what's in the best interests of the city. Speaker 1 : And I would assume applying the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan.

2:37:19Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Okay.

2:37:20Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Okay.

2:37:21Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Thank you. All right, it is now time for board member comments in response to the four questions. Is everybody okay with answering all four questions in one go?

2:37:30Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Hoping to make this efficient. Chandler, if you could pull up those questions for us.

2:37:36Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): That is beautiful! Where is that?

2:37:39Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Patagonia, the real Patagonia, not just the company.

2:37:45Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Okay, these are our four key issues for discussion. I'm going to give all board members one shot to answer this, and then if we want to respond to anything we heard from each other, we can have a second shot, okay?

2:37:58Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): So, who would like to kick us off? Mason.

2:38:06Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): Let's see here. Stop me if I'm going on too long here, please.

2:38:11Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): Key issue number one, I support the rezoning, and I find it consistent with 9219E.

2:38:18Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): I'm gonna treat dependents in a little separately.

2:38:22Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): But first, BBCP consistency. The site is close to a textbook, 15-minute neighborhood, which is one of the central ideas of the new comprehensive plan. Within a few minutes walk of residence.

2:38:35Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): Within a few minutes walk, residents would have a grocery store, North Boulder Park, North Boulder Rec Center, the new Civic Campus.

2:38:43Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): Major bus routes, bike lanes, etc.

2:38:46Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): In Policy 29,

2:38:48Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): Also asks us to encourage places where daily needs are met within 15 minutes on foot. Putting more homes here is how we make that real for more people.

2:38:58Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): I think this project could make a good argument for two of the criterion. Criterion E1 was mostly focused on tonight, which I agree with. The 2025 BBCP designates the site as Community Hub, which calls for dense, multi-unit housing within walking distance of neighborhood services.

2:39:15Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): The BT2 caps the site… the, caps the site at a .5 FAR, or .9 through site review, and requires 600 square feet of open space per unit.

2:39:28Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): That can't deliver the land use the plan now calls for.

2:39:31Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): Board & So, I believe this criteria is met. I also think that it could be met under E5, change circumstances, cross Broadway.

2:39:39Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): The development across Broadway, the former hospital site being redeveloped.

2:39:44Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): The new maps and focus of the BBCP, I think those changes make it in the public interest to recognize the site's new character and encourage its redevelopment.

2:39:54Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): On Appendix N,

2:39:57Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): I find the applicant has a reasonable case that the ground floor residential here won't undermine a neighborhood-serving business area where retail-type stores predominate.

2:40:07Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): We heard tonight, that neither shopping center has retail-facing Broadway, Ideal presents a mostly blank wall and a trash enclosure, and Community Plaza presents a deep parking lot.

2:40:19Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): Neither center has retail-facing balsam.

2:40:22Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): And on 13th Street, Ideal's loading and service drive separates the site from the commercial activity.

2:40:29Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): So I think the retail function of this hub is oriented inward into the south.

2:40:33Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): So housing on this block supports that commercial activity rather than competing with it.

2:40:38Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): Alright, number 2.

2:40:41Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): I already covered the 15-minute neighborhood portion, but I think there's four other policies and more before that. I think they're very strong that support this project. Policy 26, Compact Urban Form.

2:40:53Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): The plan directs growth towards infill and redevelopment inside the city.

2:40:58Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): The site is fully urbanized, and it's the kind of site this policy is meant for. Policy 27, integrated land use and transportation. The plan supports higher activity near multimodal corridors and transit.

2:41:10Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): Everyone knows that Broadway is one of City's primary transit corridors, with a bus stop at this property's corner, so concentrating housing here aligns land use with the transportation investments we've already made.

2:41:21Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): Policy 55, support for redevelopment. The plan encourages redevelopment that advances our housing goals, economic vitality, social connection, and sustainability.

2:41:29Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): Policy 82, Housing Diversity and Supply.

2:41:33Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): The plan calls for an increased housing supply across the types and price points, so people can stay in or join the community as their needs change. The mix here, from studios to 3-bedroom units, contributes to that, I believe, strongly.

2:41:48Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): I do want to build on questions Claudia raised. There's two things here on parking. Neighborhood 2 states a preference for unbundled, structured, and shared parking.

2:41:58Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): Which we heard a plan will be developed for, and Policy 78 treats curb space and parking as shared, limited public resources that should support a complete multimodal system.

2:42:09Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): One space per unit, all bundled with rent, doesn't reflect either of those policies, so I'm hoping to see that when it comes back for site review.

2:42:18Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): Number 3, site plan and building design.

2:42:23Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): I'm not gonna speak to 1233 and 1310 Balsam. I think that those are likely of being in good shape. I will look forward to hearing more details there. On 2750 on Broadway.

2:42:35Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): as drawn, I think one could go either direction on whether or not the site review criteria is met yet.

2:42:41Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): And I'd like to see 3, at least 3 things addressed. Sump, already spoke to that, the sum principles.

2:42:48Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): Reduce parking. Given how close the site is to groceries, parks, recreation, and transit, I'd like to see less parking. That would better meet Policy 78, and the site review goal of lowering vehicle miles traveled.

2:43:01Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): It would also free ground… potentially free ground floor space that could help with other design issues staff raises.

2:43:09Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): And then access… Speaker 5 : The site circulation diagrams, sheet G0.07 shows the only route to the mains building long-term bike room as a private walk from the Broadway sidewalk next to the bus stop along the south property line.

2:43:25Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): Broadway has no bike facility, while Balsam and 13th both do.

2:43:30Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): A resident arriving by bike on either of those streets would have to walk their bike along Broadway to get home.

2:43:35Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): As staff noted in the DRC comment number 22, I'd like to see the bike room and its interests reoriented to Balsamer 13.

2:43:43Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): Yeah.

2:43:45Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): And I think that's all my comments.

2:43:47Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Thank you, Mason. Who's next?

2:43:51Board & Commissions: Mark.

2:43:54Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): I want to follow Mason, because I concur with so much of what he had to say about questions 1 and 2.

2:44:05Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): Key Issues 1 and 2, and I… I'm going to focus

2:44:10Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): My comments on design feedback for the applicant, about the concept plan and the building design.

2:44:18Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): And I'm not an architect, but I have thoughts.

2:44:23Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): But before I get into those, I want to say to all of those in the public who wrote us and commented on, the desire to keep Boulder Medical Center, I want to acknowledge that.

2:44:39Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): This is a great institution. Speaker 1 : I have four generations of family living here in town that have all been treated there, and so, anyway, I want to acknowledge that, and… but the hope, that they, reappear, better than ever in a more appropriate site.

2:44:59Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): So, getting on to, the design issues. This is a complex, concept review, and I don't want my comments interpreted to be harsh.

2:45:12Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): But I think the applicant deserves our best and most concise input.

2:45:17Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): So that at site review, There are no surprises in the entitlement process.

2:45:23Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): Or that the surprises are pleasant.

2:45:26Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): I want to also acknowledge that the applicant's presentation, had a positive effect on my thoughts.

2:45:34Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): that I had developed over the weekend and coming into today.

2:45:38Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): The design.

2:45:42Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): Seems to reuse a limited vocabulary that has become prevalent.

2:45:49Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): In the new construction we see in Boulder.

2:45:53Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): And I'd like to see an expansion of that. When we have a site, like Boulder Medical Center, and we're going to replace it.

2:46:03Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): Board & There there is a it's not in the code, but there is a

2:46:08Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): in the BDCP, there is an expectation of design excellence, and I'm not seeing that

2:46:18Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): in the concept plans. I know this is a concept plan, and these are not fully rendered drawings, but, something that I have a bugaboo about, and it's a design element.

2:46:29Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): That is roof forms, either gabled or flat roofs, that top out without any overhangs, any caps, any definition. And…

2:46:41Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): These buildings are right next to two shopping centers that have some of the most interesting roof forms in the Front Range.

2:46:49Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): And so, I think that, there is a deficiency there. I also… As far as the… conceptual site plan.

2:47:04Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): I appreciate the fact that there are 1, 2, and 3 bedroom units.

2:47:08Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): I would wonder if there is any other sort.

2:47:12Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): of multi-family housing, be it a mix of townhouses reflecting what is going on at Alpine Balsam. Anyway.

2:47:21Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): an even broader mix type of units that could provide Boulder Medical Center with their equity, and still, and provide something other than a large block

2:47:34Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): Long face apartments that, we are seeing a lot of, Going in right now.

2:47:43Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): So,

2:47:48Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): I know that the purpose statement in site review is not a criterion, but I do think it's worth examining 9-2-14A

2:48:01Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): Item 6 and 7, I'm not going to read all of them, and I'm not just reading a little bit just to, I'm just trying to be brief.

2:48:09Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): 6 states, buildings exemplify high-quality, enduring architecture with facades that are simple and human-scale.

2:48:18Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): Buildings provide pedestrian interest.

2:48:22Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): 7 says.

2:48:25Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): Buildings are compatible in form and massing with the surrounding area and preserve and take advantage of prominent views from the site and adjacent public spaces, and provide high-quality open space that provides relief to the additional height and intensity of the project and the surrounding area.

2:48:45Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): what I see in the concept review does not fulfill this, statement of purpose in our site review.

2:48:54Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): Finally, BVCP Policy 37, Design Excellence. I quote.

2:49:01Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): The City expects urban development and public places to be designed and built to achieve high standards of excellence.

2:49:08Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): New public and private projects should respond to and enhance Boulder's unique sense of place, including its natural resources and ecosystems.

2:49:19Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): architectural character, and significant historic and cultural resources. Again, I,

2:49:27Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): Board & not… I don't find that the concept plan as presented, fully, fulfills that… that…

2:49:36Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): goal of the BVCP. So, I will… this'll be something I'll be asking our chair and Deshauna Chandler about in a moment, is I would like us to refer this to the Design Advisory Board, but there's not really a process

2:49:52Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): I looked through the code for how we… do we vote to refer it? Do we… how do we do that? But we… we… we can do it.

2:50:01Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): But it's just exactly how. So I would like this to go to the Design Advisory Board.

2:50:08Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): So, those are my comments.

2:50:11Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Thank you, Mark.

2:50:12Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): I'm gonna let the other board members respond before we answer this question of should we refer it, and if so, how? And I don't know if Chandler or Deshawn, if you already know the answer of the how.

2:50:24Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Board & But I'll give you time to think about that while the rest of the board members comment.

2:50:29Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Okay. All right. Who's next? Max.

2:50:32Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Yeah, I have a quick question.

2:50:34Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): for the City Attorney's Office.

2:50:36Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): First, if that's okay. Hey, Deshaun.

2:50:40Speaker 17 (Board & Commissions): So, this has just been coming up a lot lately, and I suppose I've been pondering on it, but…

2:50:47Speaker 17 (Board & Commissions): Ought we to, when we are weighing out criteria.

2:50:52Speaker 17 (Board & Commissions): View the financial prosperity of the seller.

2:50:56Speaker 17 (Board & Commissions): In our deliberation.

2:51:01Speaker 17 (Board & Commissions): Whether we like that body, group, or individual or not.

2:51:06Speaker 17 (Board & Commissions): I think I know the answer to this, but I just want to get it.

2:51:11Speaker 4 (Board & Commissions): It's if it's not part of the criteria, it's not to be considered by the board. I mean, it's a real world circumstance, but it's beyond the scope of what the board's here to do.

2:51:22Speaker 17 (Board & Commissions): Yeah, that's what I would have thought.

2:51:25Speaker 17 (Board & Commissions): So… I understand, I suppose, why the public would oftentimes mention the property owner when they are going through this, but I think it's a discourtesy when the applicant does, and I think it's a discourtesy to ourselves when we engage with it.

2:51:43Speaker 17 (Board & Commissions): And that we need to do better because this is a fire that would be better starved than met. And that we simply need to say at the beginning that we will not be… that we will be closing our ears when it comes up. You know, there are plenty of properties on… in this town that I'm very fond of.

2:51:58Speaker 17 (Board & Commissions): But when the beginning of a application is merely the nature of the seller, or the need of the seller, it clouds our vision and wastes our time, and we ought better ignore it.

2:52:11Speaker 17 (Board & Commissions): So, just want to put that in… Plain language.

2:52:15Speaker 17 (Board & Commissions): Is the proposed rezoning

2:52:18Speaker 17 (Board & Commissions): consistent with the rezoning criteria, I would say yes, that it is, and it certainly would do well to catch up to the community hub, and I think that this is a fine way to do it. Is the proposed concept plan consistent with the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan?

2:52:33Speaker 17 (Board & Commissions): similar to Mason, I would say that density near a market is actually very important. You know, we, of course, want shops to sell bread, but you can't sell bread when nobody lives there, and this area is, of course, on a transit corridor, and it also is…

2:52:49Speaker 17 (Board & Commissions): In.

2:52:50Speaker 17 (Board & Commissions): in walking distance of many simple amenities, so I do believe that

2:52:55Speaker 17 (Board & Commissions): housing simply for the purpose of housing does meet many of the policies that have already been cited, and I won't belabor that point. But…

2:53:03Speaker 17 (Board & Commissions): And beyond that, I think that avoiding

2:53:06Speaker 17 (Board & Commissions): oversaturating the retail that is already there would also be advisable in this location, so I would… I would support.

2:53:16Speaker 17 (Board & Commissions): allowing for exclusively residential, but similar to Mark, what I would…

2:53:20Speaker 17 (Board & Commissions): mostly not support is an abysmal design, really, and I thought that Mark would cover this before I did, but of course, at a concept review, we understand the limitations that… how much time can we do when we're still getting feedback, but that also is our only time to say the things that we are looking for.

2:53:39Speaker 17 (Board & Commissions): And I think that the community.

2:53:42Speaker 17 (Board & Commissions): has every right to be looking at the plan view and seeing with, what, 400 by 55 feet, so some 22,000 square feet. Essentially a half acre of vertical gray that they're trying to come to odds with. And it seems that the answer

2:53:59Speaker 17 (Board & Commissions): that why can't we break this into two buildings? It would be quite difficult. I find… I find that to be an insufficient answer to what is, once again, very plain language in the code. It is when we are asking to build to the very

2:54:12Speaker 17 (Board & Commissions): corner of all three-dimensional spaces, I think that some concessions can be made so that the public realm is a little bit more enjoyable, and that is not something that I'm witnessing within this project, and that I would look for in a future site review. And I think that that would be it for me for right now.

2:54:29Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Thank you, Max.

2:54:31Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Looking to my right at Kurt and Claudia. Kurt.

2:54:37Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Thank you. First of all, to respond to Mark's question, well, I guess we can hear from Deshauna, but I think that we can recommend.

2:54:44Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Can you speak into the mic? Sorry. Thank you.

2:54:47Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): I think we can recommend to city council that they

2:54:51Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Bill Miller, refer it to Dab. I don't think we can refer it to Dab, but we'll wait on that. Okay, so to answer the questions. 1st of all, yes, question number one. I find the rezoning to BC. 2 consistent with the rezoning criteria.

2:55:07Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Board & rezoning of 2750 Broadway to BC2, including it in the areas subject to special use restrictions, and exempting it from the ground floor retail makes sense.

2:55:19Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Board & It's adjacent to to. It's adjacent to 2 shopping centers. We don't need more retail here.

2:55:25Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Board & It would not adversely affect the intended function and character of the area as a neighborhood serving business area.

2:55:34Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Board & where retail type stores predominate on the ground floor, which is the criterion.

2:55:40Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): And the description of the community hub is, community hubs are vibrant, mixed-use centers that bring together homes, shops, restaurants, services, offices, and community spaces. These places have a strong mix of multi-unit housing.

2:55:56Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): and residential mixed-use buildings with stand-alone commercial buildings and outdoor gathering areas. So, if you look at the entirety of this property, Ideal Plaza, Colony Market, that is exactly what is described in the description of Community Hub.

2:56:16Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): And without the housing, it doesn't meet the description of Community Hub, so I think it's actually

2:56:22Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): adding significant amount of housing is necessary to make this a successful community hub, and as Max referred to, it would actually benefit the existing businesses to have more, just more customers nearby.

2:56:36Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): So I strongly support that.

2:56:39Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): I won't…

2:56:41Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Board & give detailed answer on number 2. I think Mason did an amazing job on that, and also Max referred nicely to that.

2:56:52Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): In terms of the site review criteria, yeah, I… we have a…

2:57:01Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): guideline, I guess you could say, about the length of buildings along, public ways, and the guideline is 200 feet, no more than 200 feet.

2:57:13Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Board & and we heard that this is in order to get the the height exemption.

2:57:19Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): And, we heard that this is almost 400 feet.

2:57:23Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): And I really think that that is not consistent with the…

2:57:30Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Board & intent of that guideline. And so I think that breaking it up along in the in the East West dimension approximately at the middle would would benefit things tremendously.

2:57:45Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): I think that that could potentially then also allow for access off of Balsam, which I know is problematic, but in fact, I think it would be a much better place to provide motor vehicle access.

2:58:02Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): As has been mentioned.

2:58:05Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): The 13th Street is a neighborhood green street. There's a lot of bicycle traffic on there. There's also a lot of bicycle traffic on Balsam. I spent, I don't know how many years, 20 years, riding back and forth on Balsam every day, because I live by North Boulder Park, and I worked out in Flatiron Park.

2:58:24Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): And I would ride it every day, and there's tons of people biking on Balsam, but not as many as on 13th. Moreover, I think that it would be… make it much easier in terms of

2:58:36Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): motor vehicle access to get to Broadway if you're coming out directly onto Balsam. If you're coming out onto 13th, then everybody coming in and out has to navigate one of the two four-way stops, either at Alpine or Balsam, and those already are

2:58:54Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): problematic. The one at Alpine is particularly problematic, just because it's weird geometry.

2:58:59Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): And so, I know that it's gonna be hard, but I think that that would benefit things tremendously.

2:59:08Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): I also, think that actually breaking up the building would provide you a

2:59:17Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): a real opportunity in terms of the design to meet some of the concerns that you've heard from Mark and Max and others. One of the site review criteria is

2:59:28Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): simple detailing is incorporated into the facades to create visual interest without making the facade overly complicated. When I look at the facade as it's currently rendered, it is overly complicated, it is very busy, and I think partly that was done because it's such a long facade.

2:59:48Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): And by breaking it into two, either… either literally or sort of perceptive… perceptually.

2:59:57Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): You could have two buildings… two of… what would appear as two buildings with much simpler facades, but they were significantly different in

3:00:07Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): you know, their character, their detailing, their color, their materiality, all kinds of things, and I think that that would provide a, a much cleaner and, and less.

3:00:23Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): less overwhelming sort of face to the neighborhood, and would be more consistent with the site review criteria. So, those things, in my view, kind of go together, the breaking up of the massing, and then also simplifying the detailing on each part.

3:00:47Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Board & I will talk briefly about the two… I'll call them the parking lot buildings.

3:00:55Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): I… I have two thoughts on those. One is that

3:01:00Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): I… I don't know how other people would feel, but I actually think that some of the other RH zones might be more consistent with N2 than RH2. RH2, as we've seen, has a base FAR of 0.67, an FAR with

3:01:18Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): through site review of 1.07, that's still… that's a low FAR.

3:01:23Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Board & And pretty, pretty large setbacks, 25 foot front front setback.

3:01:30Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Board & And I think that there may be other

3:01:33Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): RH zones or other zones that potentially would be more consistent with N2 the character, the idea of N2 than RH2.

3:01:49Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): You may not want to go there, I totally understand it, but that's… that was just my thought. I also think, especially if you stick with RH2, I would strongly urge you to request a setback reduction on the streets for both of those buildings.

3:02:12Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): The Alpine Balsam Plan refers to setbacks being consistent with the prevailing setback of similar housing types on the block, but there is no similar housing type on the block.

3:02:25Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Board & But if there were, I mean, these are more intense than what is there, and so it would be reasonable to assume that it would be a smaller setback.

3:02:34Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): And importantly, the point, really, that I'm getting to is that would then provide more space on the, sort of, the backside against the other… the existing buildings there.

3:02:48Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): And potentially provide more usable open space. I don't really see much in the way of usable open space on those sites.

3:02:56Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): But if you could move them closer to the street, reduce the front setback, and provide a really usable back space, I think that that could be beneficial.

3:03:17Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Oh, one final very, very detail. The rendering shows a very large corner radius at the northwest corner of 13th and Balsam. My guess is that that is not…

3:03:30Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): That was just an error. But,

3:03:32Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): that would not be very consistent with the neighborhood Green Street and the safety of people biking and walking on there. I think that that was just an error, but I just wanted to call that out. So, those are the last of my comments. Thank you.

3:03:48Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Thank you, Kurt. We'll go to ML and then Claudia.

3:03:52ml robles . PB: Thank you. So I'll say a little overview first.

3:03:59ml robles . PB: So the applicant is showing us the challenges that the floodplain and zoning create in trying to maximize the site density.

3:04:07ml robles . PB: We've heard them talk of this goal for maximum FAR towards securing a buyer for the property.

3:04:12ml robles . PB: In order to achieve this, they're proposing a variety of zoning and land use code changes to arrive at a 2.0 FAR, the highest in the city, to create market rate housing, which we have seen does not help meet our greatest housing goals of middle income or middle affordable housing.

3:04:32ml robles . PB: So, basically, lots of zoning and code manipulation to maximize housing, which is not solving the specific housing needs that we have identified.

3:04:42ml robles . PB: I'll keep my responses to the three key issues, concept, big picture level.

3:04:49ml robles . PB: So, let me see here, regards to the rezoning.

3:04:56ml robles . PB: I find the proposed project's scale

3:05:00ml robles . PB: Including the proposed 2.0 FAR, gained through requesting a number of zoning changes, plus land use code changes to expand the business community area subject to special use restrictions, in addition to the height modification, to be excessive.

3:05:18ml robles . PB: I do not believe that the applicant demonstrated clear and convincing evidence that the proposed rezoning to BC2 with additional FAR per Appendix N is necessary to comply with BVCP. That's basically the question we're answering here.

3:05:37ml robles . PB: Do we need to do this to meet the BBCP?

3:05:40ml robles . PB: mary ellen: Nor do I think that the zoning is in the public interest, as this is a neighborhood with one-story commercial and various three-story apartment condos, townhouses.

3:05:51ml robles . PB: Leading to single-unit residence. All of this is on the brink of massive change due to alpine balsam and the upcoming city offices being populated.

3:06:01ml robles . PB: M. I do not believe that it's in the public interest to redevelop this site with this level of density and intensity.

3:06:09ml robles . PB: Second key issue.

3:06:12ml robles . PB: Consistent with the Boulder Valley Comp Plan.

3:06:16ml robles . PB: So the BDCP Community Hub holds the promise for creating vibrant mixed-use centers.

3:06:24ml robles . PB: What history shows in this context, this neighborhood, is that the newer upscale condos and townhouses in the vicinity are mostly vacant. The older apartments and condos seem to have continuous residents.

3:06:40ml robles . PB: And the colony and ideal market areas are in flux.

3:06:44ml robles . PB: As the neighborhoods attest, there's a lot going on here, and installing this very high-density housing as proposed will not contribute to creating community as envisioned in the BVCP.

3:06:58ml robles . PB: The sheer scale of this proposal, with not a nod to the commercial area, does not support vibrant integration or contribution to a community.

3:07:10ml robles . PB: Number 3.

3:07:12ml robles . PB: Specifically about the…

3:07:14ml robles . PB: concept and the building. I generally don't make specific comments about, the architecture, and I won't hear.

3:07:22ml robles . PB: ml But I would suggest that you retain the buy-right process of the two sites on Balsam without height modification. The neighbors have spoken volumes. Listen to them.

3:07:35ml robles . PB: These sites transitioned to single unit houses.

3:07:40ml robles . PB: mary ellen: So, I would focus the Broadway site on deeply embodying the community hub vision of an active, vibrant center that will be attractive to visitors and residents alike. It might be

3:07:54ml robles . PB: Providing just a component, the housing, to the commercial, but there should be a relationship between the two.

3:08:01ml robles . PB: The BBCP proposes this new land use designation, Community Hub, to activate our city values in a bold new way by integrating uses and creating inviting experiences.

3:08:15ml robles . PB: As architects and planners, you have a remarkable opportunity to make something beautiful, inviting, and upholding community, not only to embody the BDCP, but also to honor the decades of medical services this site has provided to our community.

3:08:33ml robles . PB: It has been a deeply loved and contributing member of our community for decades, and one hopes that that legacy might influence how this site moves forward.

3:08:46ml robles . PB: Thank you.

3:08:48Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Thank you, ML.

3:08:50Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Claudia.

3:08:56Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): Okay, I've been listening and thinking and rewriting, and I'll start by saying.

3:09:00Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): I think that high-intensity residential development in this location is absolutely consistent.

3:09:07Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): With the BVCP Community Hub and Neighborhood 2 designations, both in terms of their built form and the mobility expectations that we now have attached to those land use types.

3:09:19Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): And I also want to remind folks that this neighborhood and commercial center developed and thrived for many decades, in large part around a working hospital, right? A very intense

3:09:32Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): land use.

3:09:34Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): And the community spaces and services that make this neighborhood loved.

3:09:39Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): rely on having an activated core, and I think that means people.

3:09:44Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): If BC2 is indeed the best zoning to get high-intensity housing here, it sounds like you've considered and passed on NU4, which might have been my suggestion.

3:09:55Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): But if BC2 is the way to go, I am favorable towards inclusion in Appendix N and a use review to let go of that ground floor commercial. There's a lot of retail and office space to the south.

3:10:08Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): And we're seeing a reduced need and demand for commercial space citywide.

3:10:13Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): Valerie Watson, So adding residential here helps to support the existing community hub uses.

3:10:17Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): And I think adding commercial space, on the contrary, could in fact harm the vitality of the neighborhood center.

3:10:25Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): Okay, so those two things said, there is a caveat, and I think some of my colleagues have been pointing to this.

3:10:30Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): high FAR, that 2.0 that you are wanting the use review to facilitate.

3:10:36Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): does seem to be contributing to some of the design issues that you're hearing flagged, and which could become sticking points at site review. So, I would say being favorable to ground floor housing.

3:10:48Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): shouldn't necessarily be interpreted as blindly favorable towards maximizing FAR. So I think if you want to get to 2.0 while meeting site and building design criteria on this

3:10:59Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): Flood impacted site, you do have a heavy lift.

3:11:03Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): So a couple of things that I'm concerned about in terms of site design that are called out in the staff memo.

3:11:09Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): First is that location of car and bike parking access. Speaker 13 : Right? It makes no sense to have primary bike access on Broadway. I think that's relatively easy to solve, you might already be working on it. I think a bigger issue is that major garage entrance on 13th Street, which is a Green Street bikeway.

3:11:29Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): I'd like to see that, if not corrected, at least heavily mitigated at the time of site review, even if you still need to locate things like back-of-house operations on that side.

3:11:39Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): Both the community hub and the N2 land uses emphasize safe and comfortable mobility for pedestrians and bikes, and so we're really going to want to see that in site design.

3:11:50Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): Point two here, open space in the courtyards, especially at 2750 Broadway, the large building. As staff points out, they don't look like they currently meet the standard that we're going to have for height modifications.

3:12:03Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): And as you're working on modifying those, I think it's not just important to pay attention to the dimensions of those, right? Like, do you get the… do you get the width that we require in the criteria?

3:12:14Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): But also think about things like, what it means to have southern exposure when the building's back on to the back of house at Ideal Shops, right? What kinds of views are actually going to exist from this site in the long term?

3:12:30Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): If the Alpine Balsam property is built out according to plan.

3:12:34Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): But anyway, please come back to us with a plan for high-quality open spaces, particularly in that largest building.

3:12:42Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): Some folks have mentioned facade length and articulation, and I think that is likely to be an issue at Site Review. We have a history of being sticklers for those kinds of things.

3:12:52Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): And I think some of those issues could be corrected in conjunction with problem solving around open space design, or moving the parking entrance, if you consider that.

3:13:04Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): And then a couple of additional points, and I think I'm following Kurt here,

3:13:10Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): pretty closely. I also see a conflict between the setback requirements of BC2 that you're showing in these plans, and the descriptions of activated urban street frontages in the community hubs and Neighborhood 2. And so, if you are.

3:13:29Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): interested in talking about setback modifications at the time of site review. I think you could use those to create those stronger frontages that we want.

3:13:38Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): You could also, you know, move that open space that's currently in front yard setbacks, or what I'm calling front yard, I'm talking about Balsam, right? I'm not sure where the city is going to define your front yards and side yards, etc. But taking some of that space, and moving it to portions of your properties where it's a little less decorative.

3:13:57Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): And a bit more useful to building residents, right? So I think you could actually apply that principle to all of these proposed buildings.

3:14:06Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): changing those setbacks and use that space to expand the courtyards or create open spaces that are more buffered from streets and traffic. And I actually think the courtyard you're showing now at

3:14:17Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): at the site on 13th Street is actually a pretty good model for this, and it could really be an exceptional courtyard with a little more space to breathe, right? But creating that sort of space, as opposed to these more decorative setbacks.

3:14:34Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Thank you, Claudia. Okay, I go last as chair.

3:14:38Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): So, and I want to say that I have changed my mind about several things throughout this hearing, which I'm happy to do, but it has made my comments a little less, coherent as a group, so bear with me.

3:14:51Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): So, first of all, I just want to say, again, acknowledge everything in the concept review could change, especially since you're still looking for a buyer, but the comments will be based on what's before us.

3:15:01Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): So, I agree with staff that, BT2 is not an appropriate land use designation for a community hub, and that rezoning is necessary to come into compliance with our current BVCP land use map.

3:15:14Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Shopping centers like this are exactly where we want more density, so I do support the rezoning to BC2.

3:15:20Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Question number two, is the proposed concept plan consistent with the BVCP land use map and on balance with the goals and policies of the BVCP? I agree. I think on balance it is. That's not going to be an issue for me if this comes back while I'm still on the board.

3:15:36Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Board & Question 3. Does Planning Board have feedback for the applicant on the conceptual site plan and building design? Like my colleagues, this is where most of my comments lie.

3:15:47Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): So, I don't have any issues with the buildings on… that are addressed on Balsam, the two smaller buildings that Kurt called the parking lot buildings. I do think I would support what Kurt and Claudia are talking about with moving the setback, if that is requested, so that you have more usable open space in a… in a chunk.

3:16:04Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Rather than dividing it up.

3:16:08Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): For the building at 2750 Broadway, I'd really like to emphasize all of the staff comments, Chandler, that were very well done on pages 23 and 24 of the packet.

3:16:18Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): for the Broadway building.

3:16:21Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): You do have largely uniform roof forms and heights, although I do appreciate that you have some, you know, balconies and some, step back… well, not step backs, but, facade variation.

3:16:33Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): I actually like those design elements, but for a 400-foot-long building, I don't think that's enough. I do think that you need, changes in

3:16:42Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): roof form and height, as Mark emphasized.

3:16:44Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): And for me, please do not just simply raise up a 6-inch parapet or something similar to that. Don't add to parapet height to try to meet this criterion. Extra height is not what we're looking for. We are looking for actual change in roof form or building height, the roof of the building, not a decorative element like a parapet.

3:17:05Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Whether that's a gabled roof, or a slanted roof, or a wavy roof to echo the architecture in the area, the roof itself should change a bit.

3:17:15Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): And I would also strongly urge you to break up that 400-foot building into two buildings. I know it creates

3:17:22Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): more work for you, but if you didn't have such a large site, you would be building smaller buildings with smaller garages anyway, so count yourself lucky that you have enough room to do two of those, and I'd strongly encourage you to do two really cool ones.

3:17:39Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): I don't see any programmatic reason why it needs to be one large building. I do understand the flood plain challenges and the parking challenges, but I think…

3:17:47Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): This is not like… we did approve a 400 long foot building for Fraser Meadows because of their programming, because they have seniors, that it would be much more difficult for them to access all of their

3:17:59Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): services throughout the complex. I would like to see that as very exceptional, and not that we start routinely approving 400-foot-long buildings facing a public street.

3:18:10Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): I don't think that that honors the spirit of the code there, and I think it's stronger than a guideline. Kurt, you called it a guideline. I think in the code it's called factors that can be considered

3:18:22Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): in determining whether the project meets the overall overarching criterion, and I think it's a factor we should strongly consider.

3:18:29Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): I also agree with my colleagues who talked about the courtyard or outdoor landscape garden requirement, which should… is in the code, should not be above the first floor of the building.

3:18:41Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Again, I think we grant exceptions to that only when the site really, really… you can really show that it's not possible on the site to do something that's closer to ground level.

3:18:51Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): I think there's a lot of reasons for that. And for this site in particular, we talked about whether the outdoor open space amenities would be shared between the three buildings. I would encourage you to try to include that programmatic element if you don't have one courtyard for each of the buildings that you are requesting a height modification for.

3:19:08Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): I think those residents need quality, usable open space, and if that open space is elevated on the second floor of your building, it's highly unlikely that the future buyer or owner of those buildings is going to allow access, keycard access, to other people. But something ground level, it's much more likely it could be a shared element.

3:19:28Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): the taking advantage of mountain views from common spaces.

3:19:31Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): you know, this relates to potentially a courtyard design, and by the way, splitting up the buildings could give you some ground-level open space to make that courtyard, and potentially some additional rooftop decks. And if you vary the building height, you could also get in more rooftop decks. So, you know, it all kind of works together. I agree with Claudia that it's going to be really hard for you to get

3:19:51Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): up to 2 FAR on this site, with all the different elements you need to include. I am supportive of the Appendix N map change and the exemption, through use review, if that came forward. I'm gonna say reluctantly.

3:20:07Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Not because I don't think that this site… I think this site should have high-density residential, being so close to the shopping center. This is one of the most intense places in the city where we want this residential, and as Kurt pointed out, this actually makes the mix, that it doesn't currently exist there, there's no residential there.

3:20:23Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): I don't think you need ground floor retail in this building. I think it would be redundant with what's already there in that shopping center, and potentially not be viable for lots of different reasons. But I really don't love how convoluted this is, that in order to get the best use for this site, according to the BVCP, we're making the applicant and the city go through

3:20:42Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): a… a…

3:20:43Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): zoning change and, ordinance change to the code, plus a use review. Like, I would put this forward for staff to strongly consider as one of the implementation items for our BVCP, that if we want BC2,

3:20:57Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): To be able to serve this function of high-density residential, let's make that part of the code, rather than something that has to be done through a three-step, very…

3:21:05Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): unorthodox process.

3:21:08Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): I support all the staff comments regarding access and circulation.

3:21:13Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): And that's all of my comments, which leaves us…

3:21:16Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): with two things. One is I want to give board members a chance to respond to anything that you heard from other board members, especially board members that went after you, because I think it's useful to the applicant to hear if you strongly supported or strongly disagreed with something that you heard.

3:21:31Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): So if you think there's something else useful you want to say in response, I want to give you a chance to do that. And then finally, we need to address Mark's question about referring to DAB and how we might try to help make that happen.

3:21:42Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): If that is the will of the board. So first, any response to what other board members have said?

3:21:48Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Claudia.

3:21:49Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): I would like to, on the record, directly respond to one of your comments, Laura, because I anticipate we will be at odds about this in site review, and we have been in the past. This is the issue of…

3:22:00Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): ground-level courtyards, when we're working on height modifications. And there are some… there's criteria in the code, there are things that we should be considering, right, if one of these courtyards meets our standards.

3:22:14Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): And… This is a problematic site to meet a lot of those.

3:22:21Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): Kind of criteria that we would check off what makes a functional courtyard, because we ask for things like southern exposure.

3:22:27Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): Right? We ask for views, if they're available. This particular site.

3:22:33Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): backs on the south side into the back of a commercial building. And so, if you were to do a strict reading of this criteria and put a courtyard on the ground level facing south in this building, it would be looking

3:22:49Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): directly at the cinder block backs of the, Ideal Market Shopping Center, which I don't think is a…

3:22:58Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): a particularly good thing for residents of that building. It's not particularly functional.

3:23:03Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): There's also an issue with if you were to open things up to views, well, that puts you potentially opening up a courtyard to the west, right, where you have the high-traffic corridor of Broadway. So I think there are some site constraints here that, in my mind.

3:23:20Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): push us towards some more flexibility when we are evaluating that courtyard at the time of site review.

3:23:25Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): And I want to flag that potential.

3:23:28Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): Going forward.

3:23:31Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): I just want to say I agree with everything that you just said, and I don't think we would be at odds over any of those things. I just want to emphasize… the applicant has a lot to juggle here, and they have a lot of options for how they think about

3:23:44Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): if they do split up the two buildings, how to use that space between buildings. It could be used for access, it could be used for a courtyard, it could happen on the west, or on the north side, or the south side. Like, there's various things that they could do, so I'm just putting it out there for something for them to consider, but I assure you that if I am still on the board when this comes back, I will be reasonable about that.

3:24:04Board & Commissions: Okay, Mark.

3:24:07Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): Board & I want to concur with Claudia in regard to the open space.

3:24:11Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): And I want to address your comment about.

3:24:15Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): The 400-foot wall, and using

3:24:21Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): Frazier, as an example, not a criteria, anything else, But fulfilling the goal, we…

3:24:29Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): We don't want giant, long walls.

3:24:33Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): Because we want individual buildings, we want visual

3:24:38Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): differentiation. And I think, for me, Frazier would accomplish that.

3:24:45Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): by what… To a person walking on the street were two different buildings connected.

3:24:53Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): Board & But they were 2 different buildings. So I think we can achieve

3:24:58Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): the visual separation that the code desires without actually separating the buildings down to the ground. That is my interpretation of fulfilling

3:25:13Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): Board & that, part… that desire in the code, so that we don't have great big long walls.

3:25:20Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): That can be done with actual building separation, and it can be done visually, if done correctly.

3:25:28Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): Without separating the buildings.

3:25:34Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Thank you, Mark. I might want to respond to that, but let's let other people jump in. Kurt.

3:25:39Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): I just wanted to make one other very minor comment that I forgot earlier. I really appreciate that you added a kid zone as one of your open space areas. We do a really bad job, I think, of providing kid space in our new developments in the city.

3:25:55Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Board & And I think it's really to our detriment, it's certainly to the detriment of our children, and so I really appreciate that, and I hope that that continues, however this goes forward, so thank you for that.

3:26:07Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Thank you, Kurt.

3:26:08Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): More comments? Max?

3:26:12Speaker 17 (Board & Commissions): Yeah, I guess in the… in terms of the courtyard, I think just to…

3:26:16Speaker 17 (Board & Commissions): revisit. We… all of us did kind of mention the fact that a more shared courtyard may not be applicable via the zoning standards, but might move towards a more sophisticated design for the general project, too. So even if

3:26:31Speaker 17 (Board & Commissions): when we're weighing out whether it has, you know, southern exposure. Just the fact that it's able to be interacted with with a greater amount of community is worth weighing out in that.

3:26:40Speaker 17 (Board & Commissions): Kind of complex, confounding variables.

3:26:45Speaker 17 (Board & Commissions): And then I just wanted to revisit the roof lines, because it's another thing that's been coming up a lot lately, and all of us kind of touched on it, and…

3:26:54Speaker 17 (Board & Commissions): I believe the applicant's words were, it's about where the roof meets the sky. But something cool about Boulder is it's also where the sky meets the roof. It's one of the, you know, you can actually be standing above all of these buildings, and that's one of the cool things about the ideal market, is you can pick out the wiggly line. And I think when we're looking for design excellence, we're not…

3:27:13Speaker 17 (Board & Commissions): Simply looking for a perspective view.

3:27:18Speaker 17 (Board & Commissions): at a 45 degree angle that enhances all the architectural drama, and oftentimes that's what we're subjected to as this board. We also have to weigh out

3:27:26Speaker 17 (Board & Commissions): how it looks from every direction, and I think that that's why a common thread that you're hearing through this is simply a desire for more pitches at its simplest, you know? Just a little bit less blocky goes a long way.

3:27:41Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Thank you.

3:27:43Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Okay, I'm not seeing any other board members trying to get in here. I just want to respond to the 200-foot-long building length. I'll just point out that there are two provisions in that code. One is that if a building is more than 120 feet in length.

3:27:57Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): We encourage it to look visually as two distinct buildings.

3:28:01Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): perceptually, and if it's more than 200 feet, we encourage it to be actually broken up for real site permeability, not just visual differentiation. And they're not hard and fast. We changed the code so that those are not black and white, they are factors to consider. So, Mark, you and I might consider them differently, and I think that's important for applicants to hear.

3:28:21Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Okay.

3:28:22Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): I want to thank the board members for your considered comments. We do need to address the DAB question.

3:28:29Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Mark?

3:28:31Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): So I've been looking in the code.

3:28:34Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): And, it's a poor substitute, but the city website for the Design Advisory Board

3:28:41Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): is not… I can't find it in the code, but it… the city's website says

3:28:46Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): It talks about downtown non-historic interface area, blah blah blah. It says, in addition, a project may be required

3:28:56Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): To be reviewed by DAB, if it was referred to DAB by the City Manager, comma, City Council, or Planning Board.

3:29:08Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): So pretty definitive there. Thank you.

3:29:10Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Thank you, Mark. Let's look to staff or the city attorney. Tell us about referring a project to DAB.

3:29:16Speaker 4 (Board & Commissions): So Mark is correct. The code section, to be specific, is 2-3-18, subsection E, and the Planning Board is empowered to make this recommendation. To do so, we are recommending the Board pass a motion.

3:29:31Speaker 4 (Board & Commissions): With some specificity indicating what you would like DAB to focus on and review, just to give DAB some guidance about where the concerns are coming from, and where they should aim their focus, and to read from subsection E, the purpose of such review, DAB.

3:29:46Speaker 4 (Board & Commissions): is to encourage thoughtful, well-established biaductors.

3:29:50Speaker 4 (Board & Commissions): designed, thoughtful, excuse me, it's a long night, well-designed development projects that are sensitive to the existing character of an area or the character established by adopted design guidelines or plans for the area, and I quote this to the board as a starting point.

3:30:06Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Thank you so much, Dashana.

3:30:09Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): So, it sounds like we would need a motion from the board, and Mark, I'm sure you're prepared to make that motion.

3:30:16Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): And I would like to recommend that… and Deshauna, thank you for pointing us to… we should tell DAB what we want them to focus on.

3:30:24Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): My suggestion would be.

3:30:26Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): asking DAB to focus on the items that were identified in the staff memo.

3:30:30Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): as potential site review criteria deficiencies, in terms of the design, in terms of the access and circulation.

3:30:37Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): And in light of Planning Board's comments tonight.

3:30:41Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): But, I don't know, Chandler, if you have a… you reached for your mic, so… I was…

3:30:47Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Just anticipating a possible question, but no, I think that's fine. I think the more specific you can get in terms of site review criteria with DAB, the better they do. So that works for me, but I'm open to other.

3:30:57Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Do we want to take a minute and think about… take a break, maybe, so that we can think about…

3:31:03Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): What specific criteria we might want to ask DAB to focus on?

3:31:06ml robles . PB: I have a question.

3:31:08Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): ML has a question. Go ahead, ML.

3:31:11ml robles . PB: So… I think… and I could have understood incorrectly, but I think I understood, the applicant.

3:31:21ml robles . PB: to imply that This may or may not be…

3:31:28ml robles . PB: What an eventual buyer of the property brings forth to a site review.

3:31:34ml robles . PB: So, I'm not… sure… That we should be,

3:31:43ml robles . PB: getting Deb to give input with… when… when… and maybe I misunderstood, but it seems to me like this might not be the project that comes forward to site plan, that that will depend on who buys the property.

3:31:58Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): I can that is an excellent point. Ml Chandler, if you want to.

3:32:01Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): The way we usually, do DAB referrals is we'll wait till they come in for site review, and then we'll even usually issue one round of staff comments.

3:32:10Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): And then after we issue a round of staff comments, we'll schedule them for DAB. So it will be the final site review design that will have already been kind of parsed over once. But if you want to specify that you're referring it to DAB at time of site review, that would also… that's fine.

3:32:27Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Excellent point by ML and excellent clarification by Chandler. Thank you so much. Before we do this.

3:32:34Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): I think this is an appropriate time to ask the applicant if they would like to comment on anything that they heard from us, or on this idea of referral to DAB before we go into motion making.

3:32:45Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): And, just for the record, we love to hear from our applicants, and it is great grist for the mill for us to consider, but we are not asking for permission. Never.

3:32:58Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Thank you.

3:33:00Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Board Chair and board members. We have no problem with going to DAB, we agree it really shouldn't happen until

3:33:08Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Board & we get that first round of comments, we're happy to do it. To do it now, I think, is premature, though, and certainly before we have a chance to discuss rezoning.

3:33:18Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): So, that said…

3:33:21Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Board & We appreciate all the comments made, and we certainly will take them to heart. I do want to address one thing, if I may, Board Member Lord.

3:33:29Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): What the seller needs, may not be relevant, and maybe we shouldn't be

3:33:39Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Board & burdening with his board with that, but the seller is

3:33:42Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Board & a major community benefit.

3:33:45Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): And we need to be able to.

3:33:47Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Board & In terms of this application, and coming to you with a concept review.

3:33:52Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Board & We need to

3:33:54Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Board & And in my mind, consider Board & That community benefit. Whether this board considers it or not, certainly when we go to City Council for rezoning, it will be considered.

3:34:03Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Board & So we apologize if we in any way affronted you by bringing all of that up.

3:34:09Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Board & In terms of Balsam as an access point, we would certainly look at it. Whether it's two buildings or the appearance of two buildings, I hope you'll be open to

3:34:18Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Board & When we return, we'll do whatever we can. The open space issue is a huge one for us, how we can bring a sizable open space, given the level of open space we're showing.

3:34:29Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Board & I don't doubt that there's a possibility with breaking it up, we can do some level of open space on the ground level.

3:34:35Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Board & how much and how much we retain the upper level of Galton spaces, I think we're going to have to retain them, otherwise they just won't meet the standards and still have a building.

3:34:43Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Board & Given the floodplain issues and getting the parking in. Whether we can do less parking or not, I think is also up to the buyer and their lenders, who we have heard from many times on our projects. If we don't have at least one car per unit, we don't get a loan. So…

3:34:58Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Board & But altogether, I think the comments are helpful, and we'll certainly take them to heart. I don't know if…

3:35:04Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): The space that has anything more to add, but…

3:35:10Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Thank you so much.

3:35:12Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): All right.

3:35:13Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Mark, are you ready to make a motion, or do you need time?

3:35:18Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): It is your prerogative to make a motion.

3:35:24Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): Board & I move to refer this application to the Design Advisory Board.

3:35:29Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): With emphasis on the site review criteria as noted by staff.

3:35:35Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): and comments from the Planning Board regarding site and building design from the September 29th, 2026 Planning Board meeting.

3:35:44Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): At the time appropriate, as determined by the applicant and staff.

3:35:55Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): I'll second.

3:35:59Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): I have just one comment for staff or question. Is it appropriate to say as determined by the applicant and staff, or would that timing be determined by staff alone? Probably be easier.

3:36:09Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Just to say, by staff.

3:36:11Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): We'll confer with them, but,

3:36:14Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Can I make that friendly amendment that we strike by the applicant and staff, and just say, by staff? Sure.

3:36:21Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): Well, I only… I'm… I hesitate just a wee bit, because

3:36:28Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): It's the applicant that brings the knowledge Of when they have.

3:36:35Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): Reached a state of… design certainty, That…

3:36:44Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): the review by DAB would be most.

3:36:47Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): helpful and applicable.

3:36:50Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): That, that is not… something… Staff's just going to go and ask them.

3:36:56Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): So, it might simplify it, but it kind of takes away.

3:37:02Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): We always do it at the same time. Huh? It's always after one round of comments when they resubmit their second review.

3:37:07Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): We'll just go staff, then. That's fine. Okay.

3:37:12Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Okay, and, Chandler, is that level of specificity, do you think that gives DAB enough guidance?

3:37:18Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Yeah.

3:37:19Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Yep, we can work on that. Thanks. Okay.

3:37:23Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): All right, we have a motion and a second, with a friendly amendment to the wording. Mark, do you want to send that to Thomas so he can put it on the screen?

3:37:31Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Yep.

3:37:36Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): I'm.

3:37:37Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): Okay.

3:37:38Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): I'll put it… Thomas, in the chat, or in, as an email?

3:37:46Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): That's…

3:37:50Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): Okay.

3:37:55Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): If I may go out of order.

3:37:57Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): We always ask the motion maker and the second to speak to the motion. Since Mark is busy sending the motion language to Thomas, Mason, do you want to speak to the motion?

3:38:06Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): I think it's actually already all been said, so…

3:38:11Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Mark, are you gonna wanna speak to the motion?

3:38:14Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): I have.

3:38:15Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Anybody want to comment on the motion before we vote?

3:38:18Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): I would like to see the motion again.

3:38:21Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Thanks.

3:38:22Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Fair enough.

3:38:24Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): I'd really like to see it for the first time!

3:38:28Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): Would it be rude to call the…

3:38:31Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): question. Let's let let's let Kurt see the moments that he makes emotion.

3:38:36Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Let's let Kurt look at the language, and while Kurt's looking at the language, does anybody else want to comment on this?

3:38:45Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): I'm just going through the protocol. Okay.

3:38:49Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): So I could imagine, citing specific site review criteria, but it sounds like maybe that's not necessary, so… That's fine.

3:38:58Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): We could be here for a while if we did that.

3:39:02Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): I would say my only concern is that we're asking them to refer to our conversation from tonight, but we just noted that the site redesign could be significantly different.

3:39:12Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): But I… I assume that staff will.

3:39:15ml robles . PB: Right.

3:39:16Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Adapt as needed, if the site review design is significantly different.

3:39:24Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): I'm just… this motion refers to our comments from tonight, the September 29th meeting, but the site design that comes back could be significantly different than what we commented upon tonight, so I assume that you'll adapt as appropriate? Yes.

3:39:38Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Okay. Yep. Do we need to make any kind of amendment to this to say… to acknowledge that the site design could be different?

3:39:46Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): No. Okay, alright. We got it.

3:39:49Speaker 17 (Board & Commissions): And if I may… and also, I think it's Design Advisory Board's role, like, we don't need to overstep our… our ability or our role as the planning board to tell them what to work on designing. You know, I have faith in their ability to operate without us.

3:40:04Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): It's true, but they do tend to have very specific and focused conversations based on what elements of the project we ask them to look at, but I think

3:40:11Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Yeah.

3:40:13Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): I'm… I'm comfortable with this language, if other folks are.

3:40:17Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Alright, any other comments before we vote? We'll start with ml.

3:40:28ml robles . PB: Couldn't get my microphone unmuted. Yes.

3:40:31Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Thank you. Mark.

3:40:33Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Yes. Kurt? Yes. Claudia? Yes. Mason? Yep. Max? Yes. And I'm a yes, that's unanimous.

3:40:41Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): I believe our business is concluded with this project. I want to say thank you very much to the applicant team. Thank you sincerely to staff. Thank you to every member of the public who came out tonight, who gave us your comments, either online or by email or in person tonight. We really appreciate you.

3:40:56Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): And thank you to my fellow board members for your considered.

3:40:59Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Consideration of this project.

3:41:02Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): All right, that concludes this agenda item, and we go back to our agenda. We are on matters from the Planning Board, Planning Director, and City Attorney. We do have one informational item.

3:41:13Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): As noted on the agenda and in the packet, and I believe, as usual.

3:41:19Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Informational items are for information only, and if we have any questions, we should contact the staff member who's listed in the memo.

3:41:26Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Board & and I do believe that this one is going to council this week on Thursday.

3:41:31Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Board & Is that correct?

3:41:33Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): This is the, introduction, first reading, and consideration of a motion to order published by title only, Ordinance 8783, vacating and authorizing the City Manager to execute a deed of vacation for a portion of the Bernoulli Boulevard right-of-way.

3:41:48Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): generally located adjacent to 3200 Airport Road, LUR202600027. I believe it is, yeah.

3:41:55Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): I think it is on Council's agenda for Thursday.

3:41:59Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Okay, with that, that was our one matters item on the agenda. I will ask any matters additionally from the Planning Director.

3:42:07Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Thank you. So Brad Mueller, Planning and Development Services Director. Nothing for me, just to thank you for.

3:42:13Speaker 18 (Board & Commissions): Making the full… Four meeting run in September. Congratulations.

3:42:18Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Thank you, Brad, and to staff as well.

3:42:21Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Other matters from staff?

3:42:25Speaker 18 (Board & Commissions): Charles has indicated none. He's online if you didn't know.

3:42:28Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): As indicated, none. Matters from City Attorney's Office?

3:42:32Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Nothing from me, thank you. Thank you. Thomas, any kind of calendar check, or anything from you?

3:42:40Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): Just that we have a…

3:42:44Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): Another, one more meeting in our streak here on October 6th, and then a week off.

3:42:51Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Thank you, and just a note from me that I will be either absent or remote at the next meeting, and we will have the honor of being chaired by our Vice Chair, Claudia.

3:43:02Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Any other matters from the board? Kurt?

3:43:06Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): I have a question. As you are sure are well aware, data centers have become a big issue across the country, actually, and certainly locally.

3:43:16Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): As far as I know, we don't have any specific new regulations about data centers, but I think the county has, and some of the adjoining municipalities have.

3:43:28Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Has there been any consideration to revisiting our… regulation of data centers.

3:43:35Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Board & for considering how to deal with one if one should happen to apply here.

3:43:40Speaker 18 (Board & Commissions): Yes, we…

3:43:43Speaker 18 (Board & Commissions): We do try to keep all land use trends on our radar, and we've been, kind of.

3:43:51Speaker 18 (Board & Commissions): you know, in the background doing research on that, Charles Carl team,

3:44:00Speaker 18 (Board & Commissions): The code as it currently reads right now actually does not accommodate data centers, even the old…

3:44:07Speaker 18 (Board & Commissions): Call center ones, that's kind of a…

3:44:10Speaker 18 (Board & Commissions): Result of a change that was made in the code a couple years ago, classifying…

3:44:16Speaker 18 (Board & Commissions): Your typical historic data center, call center type of thing is an office.

3:44:21Speaker 18 (Board & Commissions): So, we've,

3:44:24Speaker 18 (Board & Commissions): Determined, at least preliminarily, if something came in, we wouldn't have code to address it, which would mean…

3:44:31Speaker 18 (Board & Commissions): essentially not directly allowed, or there would have to be an interpretation of the scope on it, but it is on our radar. We've got active

3:44:39Speaker 18 (Board & Commissions): Research, we're hoping to come to conclusion on that.

3:44:45Speaker 18 (Board & Commissions): February, March, with some guidance from City Manager's Office.

3:44:53Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Sounds good. Thank you.

3:44:56Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Thank you. Any other matters from the board? Seeing none, we are adjourned at 9.45pm. Thank you, everybody. Good night.