Transcript

0:00:27Commissioner, are you ready? Yes, thank you. Thank you so much. And we're recording. And take public comment or open it up for public comment one by one. Do you have an opinion? You're gonna look to me or us. I think let's go. Or as follows. We need to add a position for the information technology appropriation IT 11 in the general fund. This is position 2195 with a budget of 193, 368 dollars. 1, 205, 942 dollars. That the sheriff's office did realize that those positions were removed incorrectly. We did go back to when the commissioner is originally approved of the positions, and they were not term positions and should have never been removed from the budget. Departments did eliminate some of those positions as well or make additional changes. And so we do have additional reductions based on that feedback from the departments. So we'll start with the general fund.

0:07:44For 2026. Okay, questions. Number four. The Boulder County Sheriff's Office is requesting a one - time amendment of 79, 374, 000 from the general fund and the information technology appropriation, IT11. By fund balance. General fund balance, so it would be a bunch of amendment we would use general consults. Good morning, Commissioners. Carrie Weinheimer under Sheriff. Thank you. And I just wanted to have an understanding of the description here is helpful to understand what and when this. This is a response vehicle. It's a patrol vehicle. Great, thank you. Okay. Thank you, Cary under Sheriff. What are greater for snow plowing and road maintenance for 450, 000 dollars and a distributor truck for asphalt maintenance for 450, 000 dollars Both of these vehicles have reached the end of their service life and require replacement to maintain safe and effective road maintenance operations. Fund 111 does have sufficient fund balance to cover this request. Okay, I actually do have a question on this one. Sure. When the write - up indicating that it has reached the end of their service life, that seems like an event that can be anticipated because we know how long the service life is. Why was this not brought forward in the 2026 budget.

0:18:08That amendment, we would not be authorizing expenditure of the fund until we have that intergovernmental agreement in place or would just by authorizing this budget amendment put the appropriation available for expenditure. Services sales tax fund under the emergency services SUT general appropriation EST1. Venting expenditures in 2025. This was specifically related to the allocation for the city of Longmont. The city of Longwet will be proposing using these funds for the 105 Emory Street land acquisition, but it is still subject to board approval. All right, thank you. Any questions? So thanks so much. I do, but I'm looking to see if there's somebody from housing. Just because the carry forward of funds, that makes sense to me, but I would like some more information about. What the change is, because that to me is more of the question of the change for the BOC to discuss versus a carry forward of funds that we've already approved through the AHT.

0:22:51And so we will go back to. Request number one. Which is budget corrections. Are we running for a motion or do we have some discussion and deliberation? I guess we'll put a motion on the table. Commissioner Stolzman. I'll move approval of request one. Okay, we have a motion in a second. And I will call for a vote all in favor. Aye. Aye. Okay, thank you. Request number two, the negative budget amendment that reflects the VSEP program. Five is the sheriff's office general. Very forward. We have approval of request six. Second. You need discussion. Equipment replacement for public works. I have a motion. I think the second one is for the paved ones. So I think both of them are for, well, I think they both address summer operation and the first one is both for summer and winter operation.

0:29:54We would be able to just do it ahead of the next quarter and hear what you're asking for. I mean, that's a reasonable request. We created this procedure of saying we were only going to do quarterly amendments. And I suppose since we created this procedure, we can change the procedure. We're having some serious conference at the microphone and Commissioner Louchedimian. I just had a quick question. I don't know if Rachel Gadeck is with public works team. There's somebody that has their hand up online. Yes, she is. Rachel, it looks like you're coming to the rescue. You can unmute yourself, please. Okay. Can you. Hear me now? You're very, very quiet. You may need to get closer to your microphone. Expensive pieces of equipment, how long does it take to procure a new motor grader and distributor truck. We are anticipating that for the motor grader, it's going to take about six months. So that's why we wanted to put this in now so we would be prepared for hopefully we receive snow in the fall. In winter, patching that we could possibly procure within about two months that will help us with our asphalt chip seal program throughout the summer. Okay, well thank you Rachel. That helps me a lot. Commissioners do either of you have any questions for

0:32:41Rachel? I don't have additional questions. Perry Rachel, but the information that you shared is really helpful to me. Okay. All right, thank you. So we do still have a motion in a second and may have a vote all in favor. Aye. So you can go back to your boss, Rachel, and say. Thank you all for your time. I appreciate it. You're very welcome. Number eight wastewater treatment facility upgrades. We have a motion. Move approval of request eight. And then I would like some discussion. Suggestion and if it folks feel like was captured in the previous dialogue is sufficient, that's great. I'll move approval with the additional detail as recommended by Commissioner Louced. Second. Okay, we have a motion in a second, any additional discussion on this motion. Thank you. I just want to make sure that that's clear that this is two steps in regards to the approval that we're giving right now.

0:35:25Okay. And I saw a head nodding. Boulders planning office, Brad Mueller and Chris Johnson and our long range plan are Hannah Hipley. And that window was from March 3rd till April 6. For further consideration of the plan as does planning commission on June 17, city council and board accounting commissioners have meetings later in June on the 25th. Edited version of the current plan. And that's perhaps one of the biggest changes between the two plans. This was intentional as there are some goals in mind going into the plan, which were to simplify the plan, making it easier to read and understand, remove redundancy in repetitiveness, use more straightforward language in hopes that the plan would be clearer and ultimately that more people would be able to engage with it. Part of this effort, including making the big details on how things may be accomplished. And setting the content in the plan at the right level for a comprehensive plan, having it set direction and giving us guidance without being overly rigid or limiting in how ideas might come to life.

0:42:20Did in a strong local food systems from farms to markets. They are asking for neighborhoods that are more functional where residents can access goods and services more easily. Include some small adjustments to area three redesignating proper three at the edge of Boulder. Some of those support. Are in response, pardon me, to community change requests. And these planning area maps, the planning areas map is coordinates with policies in the comprehensive plan starting and policy five. And this is really what supports that idea of a compact community surrounded by open world lands, the planning area is map results. Or is probably the biggest piece of the BBCP that influences our built environment. The draft plan also in chapter four is where we dive into the future land use strategy and where we see a rather significant change from the current plan, the land use designations in the map have been reimagined from the previous plan or the current plan. And the strategy now simplifies the variance designations that were in the plan before. And the new designations are centered around these different themes of neighborhoods, hubs, systems, and then some special purpose lands. Within each one of these designations, the plan describes each of them in sort of a systematic way, talking about what these are, what can be expected there, why these designations matter,

0:48:36including some ideas about uses, the approach for mobility in those areas, et cetera. And so here is the updated future land use map. It's designed to show the overall framework for growth and change across the Boulder Valley reflecting the community vision in the principles we just discussed, rather than focusing on individual parcels, it highlights neighborhood scale patterns and how different parts of the community might connect. The map is meant to guide decisions providing some clarity for future development and remain flexible as our needs and priorities evolve over time. So the map in the policies, of course, are connected. So the map might describe sort of rural land preservation areas or planning areas for rural preservation. And these are linked to policies in the plan, such as rawly on preservation, which is policy 23, the efficient use of land in the development in area three. So again, the various pieces really do need to be looked at as the maps and the policies that connect to them.

0:51:02Or local food comes from. That concludes my presentation about the plan. That you might recommend for refinement or revision. In that concludes your presentation, that really does know. Okay, thank you. I do have a question before you start hearing from the commissioners. And that is whether you are looking, as you pointed out, the policies, some of them are written in terms of the city, will, or the city believes, some are written, the city and county. Are you looking for input from the county commissioners on those policies that really strictly apply to the city. I think at this point in time we're interested in hearing the commissioner's broad feedback about the plan. I think what I would ultimately keep in mind is upon adoption. You'll really only be considering the policies where it says city and county. So I'll leave that up to you. I think we're interested in hearing what you have to say. Okay, well, I just thought, you know, for just sort of expectations here this afternoon. So, well, the way you framed your questions, they're quite broad. It looks like perhaps you're not really looking for policy by policy, but I think maybe each of us approached reading this thing a little bit different. So we'll just see how the conversation goes. And I would invite my fellow

0:53:46commissioners to kick us off. Sure, thank you. Thanks, Hannah. Thanks for the presentation. There's a lot of work encompassed in what you just shared with us and the document that was attached in the packet for today. And so I have, I think before I go into specific questions, if that's okay, I'll just share a little of what I was looking for. There won't be a surprise because I've been talking about it in the other meetings that we've had so far was just to understand where the focus of agriculture might be in this plan, both for the city, just to kind of give broad feedback on, but also for the county where it talks about city and county. And I did see that show up in a couple of places, but I do have some other kind of curiosities to make sure that I understand what that means maybe in the language here. And the other piece was just around housing and how, what piece of housing is focused on what's included in here. And there's a lot of information in there. One of the specific items I was talking about, I just, I didn't see it, but I glanced through the 64 pages. I didn't read line by line for most of it. Just to understand, talks about kind of just housing stock and opening

0:54:59of housing stock and housing opportunities, things like that. But I didn't say articulated in there. What our backyard cottages or accessory drawing units. And so it was just a curiosity understanding the state legislation and certainly for city boulder. And that opportunities. And if I missed it, I apologize. And that's why we're in conversation to help each other. Um, so that was one of the other pieces. And then I did have, um, a couple, um, maybe connected to the fourth bullet point. There was a couple of pieces in maybe what's aspirational, but also what's going to guide the action in actual, actually some suggestions of language. And so if that is more of an email me event, let me know. Um, but those are just a couple of pieces that I was looking for and happy to talk through them. If we want to do that and kind of seeing maybe what other folks are thinking about or what sections of the document we want to talk about unless we want to go section by section.

0:55:58Thanks. I mean, given, given as much as it's been whittled down and congratulations on that, uh, the, I don't, I don't think we want to go section by section here. Um, I did not come with specific language changes. I came really with more general observations, but if you have, um, maybe what we ought to do is really just go, you know, Commissioner Louched, you mean just provide all your comments. Um, because we're not, you know, we're just three kind of functioning as three people here. Giving, giving feedback. I don't, I don't know that we necessarily have to align completely at this point. You know, I think you ought to just hear what our reactions are. And certainly be receptive to some discussion between us. Sure. And that sounds right. I just what I read in the packet, maybe it was individual feedback just to hear and then have some discussion. So I'm happy to go into that, Michelle, a couple of pieces in regards to agriculture. I think what's missing for me and I'm thinking about COVID, but certainly any other time, um, when we think about agriculture as a how are we not self - sufficient, but community is sufficient. And there's got to be a better word. And the more qualified for me than me to put that terminal edge in there. But

0:57:26that is something that I was, I didn't see captured in here if that is a belief. And I got an opportunity to go with the environmental affinity group from community foundation and some folks from front range last week to do a tour at esoterra. And that is Cydia Boulder land. And so just hearing, um, some of the numbers and the data to be able to really create that market. And I feel like the board's had some of that conversation on our side of the county. But I didn't see if that is a belief. When we think about our land use. And again, there's some different sections in here around agriculture. So that's what, that's the piece that I was looking, um, looking for. And then on page 68, and I'll have to get to the page cause I'm just looking at my nodes. There is some comment around, oh, not 68. Shoot. Was doing two things at the same time. There's a section in here around workforce. And what I was looking for and curious about was entrepreneurship. And that might be inherently part of the section of hubs where you have innovation. But from an economic development standpoint, um, entrepreneurship and small businesses, such a big part of our region's economy. So that's the other thing I was looking for. Manufactured housing was noted

0:58:57in here. And I can look for pages if it's helpful. But y'all probably know this document front and back. Um, modular construction's not talked about. I was just curious about that from even thinking about the boulder hub and what that commitment is manufactured housing is kind of described as affordable housing. So that was a curiosity. Backyard cottages. Um. And then on page 42, there's the section that starts in hubs class. And so in the presentation, how did that helped me understand what I, what I heard is differently. And just designations. And so it was more of a curiosity around what do we know about those different hubs classes. If like, what is current right now in Boulder? Is it X percent for community hubs regional versus the innovation production thinking about this questions that are in the document a few places on focus on racial equity, the questions of whose burden, who benefits that are also in your document. So that was another, um, just kind of a question with that help us understand and be able to talk about also what's in the document around accountability. Let me see here. You talked about that language on the city and county and I heard you commissioner, maybe talk about it as well. And that was one of the pieces that I just beginning to,

1:00:22when I was reading through it without the presentation, but I think what I heard you say captures that. And then the section, let me see here if I can find it because I didn't mark that one down. It was in the question around. Um, page 55 future land use equity assessment. And it's paragraph. Are you referring to the PDF pagination or the draft word document pagination? Oh, thank you. I pause. I'm in the link that was in the memoir that's a PDF and it's 64 pages. So if I'm in the wrong document, this would be a great time to. And I just think the one more piece of information you need for us to be able to catch up is that the PDF pages, the like two pages per page of the actual PDF. So the numbering, were you talking about the PDF page or like the number on the page. I'm looking at the.

1:01:25I'm looking at the PDF at the top of my computer screen versus the bottom of each page in the document. Oh. Okay. I apologize. I wasn't looking at the. Smaller numbers. Are you all okay? Do you want me to? Okay. Well, would you say the page number again? Yeah. So when I'm looking at what maybe you're looking at, it's 108. But on the PDF, it's page 55 of 64. And the paragraph that I was looking at was I think really important information around the risks of displacement rising rents, et cetera. And what wasn't clear to me is just where in this document does it give? How are we going to solve those? What is the commitment to fix those versus. And maybe it is meant to just be aspirational, but I think that's one of the things I was looking for. It's like through this process can these entities make a commitment. So that was one, one of them. And then the other piece. And I'll look on the page and let one on my fellow commissioners chime in. And then I can come back later after I find the right page in regards to some of the language that was in on kind of the equity steps. I don't know how else to explain it, but I'll find the page. So thanks for listening.

1:02:53I think before we just proceed here, um, Hannah or KJ, did you have any questions clarifications? And I'm happy to open the floor for dialoguing back and forth. Um, yeah, I think I have a question and maybe some follow - ups that could be helpful. And KJ probably has additions to that. Um, let's start off maybe with questions. You mentioned this concept of community, um, agriculture being community sufficient. And I just wanted to ask how you've heard that explained and what that means to folks when they're using that term. Yeah. And that's not anybody's term. It's just the only term I could come up with on the fly. And then what I was trying to parallel was we talk about self - sufficiency. And so if I need to take care of myself, that right, that if our community in a space like or a situation or circumstance like COVID, we would not have been able to in Boulder County with like two percent of our local produce We would not have been able to, if we would have been cut off or an extended amount of time with the agricultural production and the market that we do not yet support local agriculture. So that's, that's the parallel to community sufficiency. But so is it the idea that we are able to feed ourselves with

1:04:14what we grow locally. I think that's one way to look at it. And what I'm trying to get to is in a land use code with agriculture and with rural preservation and all the pieces. How would we get to a point where we could really sustain ourselves as a part of the region. Through our agriculture? It's a great question and I don't think where the BVCP is drafted right now elevates that as a goal. I agree. Yeah. Thank you. Uh, so Christopher Johnson, I'm the comprehensive planning manager for the city of Boulder. Yeah. I don't think that the at least the comprehensive point doesn't explicitly state that as a particular goal, but there are a number of policies that are new to the plan or sort of expand upon the role of agriculture within the community more so than the current plan. So I don't think it would prevent us from getting to that point, but it doesn't, it doesn't necessarily identify that as a, as a goal. So there are a number of policies, um, starting around policy number 91 that speaks to local food production and increasing access to local food production. Um, agriculture not only in the county and unincorporated areas and some of our open space lands, but also urban agriculture.

1:05:37So how do we continue to support those kinds of activities within the city itself? Uh, and then a couple of policies that then continue on 93 speaks more about building out some additional infrastructure that supports the local food system. So cold storage, uh, transportation, you know, how do we, how do we make sure that we get food from the farm to the market, you know, and provide those opportunities for people to then access it. So I do think that there are, um, some policies that are really reflective of this, um, what we've heard from the community. And we've heard quite a bit of input around this idea of not only supporting local agriculture, but really building that up and emphasizing that as part of who we are. And so we've tried to introduce policies around that. Um, there's some additional sort of more descriptive language in that two - page spread called the future of food systems that maybe goes into a little bit more kind of tangible detail about what that looks like in the future. If you felt really strongly about, um, trying to identify, uh, or at least moving towards more community sufficiency in terms of food production, I would say that's probably the place where that would, would fall in that future of food systems. Um, kind of description. That's a

1:06:50goal in the future that we're trying to work towards. Great. I think we might benefit from a little discussion on that point. And, um, is it listening to Commissioner Lochine's comments and concerns, it really did bring up for me. Is self - reliance actually a goal that we want to put in the plan. I think, uh, I think it does fall under the category of aspirational. But maybe not. Achievable, you know, recognizing that we produce a tremendous amount of, um, really lovely, uh, food organic food. You know, we have some small scale, you know, chickens. And pigs and sheep that I see that maybe produce milk for cheese and whatnot. But, you know, but we're not, we're not a complete and self - sustaining self - reliant independent food system here. And, uh, so, I mean, I thought the policies in here were, were very good and very nice. And I think they do reflect what our values are. Um, I guess, uh, I mean, I think it is a question whether we actually want to write a plan that has an aspiration where you're not really equipped to work towards. So, um, you know, it's like that's the, that's the tension of, you know, do we put things in that we don't think we can do? And maybe you weren't suggesting that we try

1:08:40to achieve. Self - reliance or independence or buy that vote. So I don't know. For, for me on this point. In a moment, I'm going to frame some things on my comments that will just maybe explain how I frame thinking about this, that then you'll say, Oh, now I know what she was talking about. But just responding to this without that framing, I think it would be good to bolster like some of the language around the circular economy policy. I think that was policy 52 and including some of the things that are essential needs like the food, um, and water and things like that. I think that the way to tie 52 and 91 a little bit together with a thread. I think the piece that's missing for me, um, to be able to completely address the conversation today is some of the comprehensive view of this question, which is like, you know, if we were to be completely self - sufficient with food, it would take a certain amount of land area and it would take a certain amount of water. And so if that is the goal, what amount of land area and water is necessary to achieve that goal. And we then may realize we couldn't kind of work commissioner leavey maybe like ahead of the class. Like we may not be

1:09:59able to accomplish the goal with the constraints of land and water that we have and growing days and other things like that. So then that may lead us to set a different goal to say like, well, right now, like commissioner louchedimine said it's less than two percent And so maybe like in our first triade, maybe we want to get to 30 percent which still feels like a really tough challenge, but I can't say 30 percent today because I have no idea how much land and water that would take to get to be able to set the goal just yet, but I like the idea of improving our, uh, circular economy and tying this concept that you've raised commissioner loachement into 52 and 91 and seeing if we could bolster it a little bit. Great. Yeah.

1:10:46And just to be clear, I wasn't, I wasn't trying to get us to be individual sufficient people. But when I think about the opportunity of communal and what that means. And what I'm really into the entire document and all of the aspirational language around racial equity and equity and work with native peoples and all the different things that kind of go throughout the entire document, it gets me to a place of like, what would this area through this plan look like if we really thought about everybody together and the benefits. And it's still, um, you know, whatever language we use and circular economy, I think that's a great, I'll look at that item 52. I think if we could, as you described both through the language, um, and I was just asking for additional language or maybe stronger language. I think we're, we're similar places, but that to me is part of if we're going to be aspirational, might we think about the entire community and what we really need as a region and food.

1:11:43I just still believe housing and food is going to be right at the very top of everybody's wishlist. Were there any other, um, policies that you wanted to focus on. Um, not policies. I had a different, um, kind of language piece on page or on the item 59. Or page 59, excuse me. So I'm happy to hear other policy. Yeah. I think my pages are just organized so differently. I have no idea what, what is the topic. Um, I can wait on mine. Let's hear from others on policies and we'll stay there. Yeah. That's fine. Thank you. Yeah. Commissioner Stolzman take it away. Thank you. Um, so one question I can't answer when I'm sort of looking at the balance, um. For the new, um, I think we're calling them classes. Just one second. I had just switched to that other page. Yeah. So the future land use classes and designations. And I'm looking at the map. What I'm trying to understand is both an economic analysis of what that mix of classes and designation yields, but also a fiscal analysis from the governmental perspective.

1:13:03So it's not clear to me the cost of or benefit of making the shifts. So for way of example, um, I think that there is a trade - off for the economy. Like if I think if I own a sandwich shop, I need a certain number of customers a day to come by sandwiches for it to be viable and thriving and pay my employees and buy all the supplies and those types of things. And so what's not clear is like the trade - off between 15 minute neighborhoods and the hubs with regard to what that does for the economic conditions. And I'm just using that as like a example, but I think you can have the same question about like water and egress and transportation and things like that. And so for example, would it be better for the local economy to improve transit to the hubs from neighborhoods versus creating 15 minute neighborhoods and then have more competition among further flung commercial establishments, question mark? I can't answer that. Looking at this. And it's just not, so some of the capacity issues, it's hard for me to understand, like how many, like what debt population density of humans does it take to satisfy a hub? Like you have to have a certain number of people working there to be eating lunch, to be enjoying

1:14:26a nightlife and things like that. There's this section on nightlife. Like what is the critical mass of people to make a successful nightlife? And then is there either job density or housing density to accomplish that? And so some of it is very, um. High level where I can't, I just can't capture like what densities are being proposed in these areas. And I do think as planners you likely know what those things are, but I just can't look at it and know that. And so it's just not clear the economic effect and also the fiscal effect to the governmental entity. So like with a hub, the certain cost of operating it. There's a certain cost to the transit to provide that level of transit. There's a certain cost for fire services and water services and things like that. And so does the hub generate enough, um, fiscal capacity with our current tax structure to support that?

1:15:21Or does this require that we innovate and have it completely different taxing structure? I just, none of that is clear to me that, that the, that we have, it's just not obvious to me that we have the ability to realize the vision. And so I'm just trying to understand where that could be pulled in and how we could understand if this is the right mix, um, to support all of the different things that we have. So similar kind of thinking, um, on that topic and then also like, I think you can extend it to the open space or the rural lands or the green ways of like, okay, in open space section, um, and I would bolster some of the language around, uh, restoring native ecosystems and things like that. And using some of the language from both the city's open space program and the county's open space program, some of the voter approved language of the purposes. What's the right balance of agricultural land versus restoring native ecosystems? What's the right amount of, um, trails per person so that people's quality of life is excellent. What's the right amount of this, that, and the other. So I have those same similar types of capacity questions in the different types of land use to understand if this new map strikes the right balance. So if

1:16:32we have this expanded, uh, densification in the neighborhood zones and in the hub zones, like do we then have enough, uh, open space to serve that. And I just, I can't draw those conclusions to know if it's the right balance of the different designations of land use. So that's, um, those are just some like overarching thoughts that I have when looking at it that kind of apply throughout. And then I think once we could answer those completely, then understanding that would help me understand the transit section. To see if there are other amendments in that section that would be needed. And then I have some super specific comments. Like those were just like so overarching general. I think that it would cause a lot of community relief and eliminate prior conflicts if we simply would, um, designate the twin links areas that are owned by Boulder County Housing Authority in the school district as open space. So I would do that. I think if we were able to put in some, uh, maximum heights and densities with these future land use classes and designations, it would create some community relief and understanding. I think one, like one thing, it's hard for people to understand because it's not like this many units per acre, three stories.

1:17:55This mini units per acre two stories. I think it's hard for people to know what to expect. And so I wonder if we could add some of that specificity in, um, and still create the flexibility you're trying to create in the innovation you're trying to create, but give people a bit more information about what they could expect in the future. And then, um, council member walleyek, I think has asked some questions around like airport and future and growth and housing and things like that. And I have some also just wonderings and I'm not exactly sure how they fit in the conversation or not. Maybe it's an implementation. Maybe it's something else. But something that has come up for me over time understanding county assets and like county needs in the long run is just what the long - term community vision is for our court and for our jail. They're both really important facilities that provide us service to the community and they're complicated facilities.

1:18:54And in many places, they're combined so that you don't have a transportation issue between the jail and the court. And in our county, they're separated. And at some point the buildings will either need significant rehabilitation or new buildings. Like at some point in the future. And I think of comprehensive planning is like 50 year, 100 year planning. So it seems relevant to have a conversation about what location we think as a community would be appropriate for a combined jail court. And when I think about that, that's a pretty hard question to answer because most people don't want to have a jail moved near them. That's not super popular, even though we all probably can recognize the importance of a facility. So I wonder if boulder is looking at, um, turning the airport into a neighborhood with housing and things like that. If we would want to look at moving the JL and swapping basically like jail court space, um, planning reserve space, um, where people currently are not. And so it's just a big question.

1:19:54And it might be a terrible idea and everyone watching might think that this is the worst thing they've ever heard. And I would love that feedback and any other feedback, but I just think it's a big question mark for me is like, what is the future of the jail when it needs to be rebuilt? And do we just leave it alone and build it right where it is? Perhaps. But if a whole neighborhood is being built at the airport, would that be the appropriate time to build a neighborhood where the jail is also question mark. Um, and so I don't know where that fits into this conversation. If it fits into this conversation at all. Another one I have is on this knight economy concept similar to the first question. It's just really around the population density necessary to make that successful. Like you can, you can use some of these planning tables that exist.

1:20:46I've used them for. I'm sure you guys use them much more often that just kind of show how many visitors you need to make certain different types of things successful. And so it's not clear to me that what's proposed from the land use designations would actually support this night economy concept. Like it just doesn't, I was not able to conclude that from what's provided. And then my last and probably unexciting area, um, you guys are going to say, yeah, we knew she was going to say that. Um, would just be, I think if we go through and look at some of the, some of the areas we could bolster, um, environmental and climate language, because some of these changes really are to address the worst effects of climate change, whether they're in the floodway section or in the hub section, like where we're putting people near to transit where we're addressing some of our issues that we have regarding. Both mitigating climate change and also both and preparing for climate change. And I just don't think it's drawn out as clearly as it should be that we are going to have over 200 high fire risk days. We are going to have, um, hotter days.

1:21:54We, so I think just drawing in climate and environment. And some of the sections more clearly, it seems like that's what was driving a lot of the policies, but it doesn't seem to just like point out to people where we're headed and what we need to prepare for. So I would, um, bring that to the forefront a bit more. Thank you. So did I see your hand go up? Well, it was just a question actually for a commissioner stolezman. If we want to have a little discussion on what you said. And if you want to get your input in there too, we can talk about what I was going to suggest is similar procedure. Maybe see if KJ and Hannah want to draw out any of these, get some clarification. And then we can see what we might want to explore. Do you. Think about them? Yeah. Maybe just a couple, a couple of thoughts or a couple of questions. Um. Not surprised that yes, some additional analysis. And, um, uh, it would be helpful to better understand a few of these things. And the, the tension and I guess the challenge, of course, that we have is that we're attempting to establish a document that provides a vision, but yet it is intentionally not, um, really specific as far as establishing clear sort of

1:23:23goals. So we were cautious about, you know, entering a goal that says we will, you know, as an example, uh, produce year would be, um, part of that is, is because we don't actually have the analysis. We haven't had the time or the, um, expertise to bring on experts to help us, you know, actually determine many of those things. And so part of this is really establishing a roadmap for us for how do we move forward? How do we learn those things as we continue? So that as we implement the plan and move towards that vision, we, we do the analysis. We make those decisions based on that information at that time. I recognize that does create some ambiguity and it can be challenging to make decisions and make some determinations around, you know, around some of these things without, um, without a lot of that really detailed information. And so we attempt to provide as much as we know today, um, but then also will in future steps. Of course, dive into these, some of these topics in much, much greater detail and develop some of those clear metrics and the analysis to, um, make choices about how we then ultimately implement this through zoning code changes or new programs, new services, things like that. Um, the other thing I'll just maybe quickly touch

1:24:40on is, um, the kind of the concept around the land use map. And perhaps what may appear to be some tension between the hub classes and this idea of 15 minute neighborhoods as well. Um, the, the proposed land use map and sort of this reduction of going from 26 individual designations down to 12, um, what is in the proposal. Much of that work was really consolidation of a number of designations that were really just the same thing, but slightly different flavor. And so the land use map, um, as a whole doesn't really, I would, I would say that it does not propose a significantly different arrangement of uses as exists today or what the current map is currently proposing. It does it in a different way. You know, uses fewer classes that have, um, a wider range of things that can happen within them. But broadly speaking, the commercial nodes that we know about today at table mesa and base mar and ideal market, those, those are not really changing. And we're really the land use map is intended to reinforce those, um, those areas.

1:25:51And actually broaden some of the activity because you're exactly right that there's a certain amount of body heat and population density to make those places thrive. What we're proposing through the land use map and through those hub classes is that the opportunity for some additional residential to be incorporated into what are today very strictly commercial zones. So part of this is trying to open up greater opportunity for that sort of synergy of uses to happen. Um, and then as far as 15 minute neighborhoods goes, um, we really see those hubs as kind of serving as those, those initial nodes to serve that sort of 15 minute radius around them. I do think over time that's going to probably change a little bit and there might be new nodes that start to crop up based on, um, again, based on demand. No one's going to open a business if they don't think there'll be enough demand to sell whatever goods or service that they're providing. Right.

1:26:48I wish every person would run a business case before they open it, unfortunately. That's not been my experience. Well, that's true. That's very true. So I think over time, you know, the Land use map is intended too initially really emphasize. And, um, support those existing commercial nodes that are out there today, but then also allow for this more organic type of, um, uh, sort of commercial note or more embedded neighborhood locations to happen over time. We, we fully expect it's not going to happen overnight. There's going to need to be zoning code changes and other things that are going to have to happen before any of that would even be allowed. Um, but then over time over a five, 10, 20 year period, there may start to be some of these things that we hope are really complimentary and synergistic with those existing hubs as opposed to pulling away from them. Um, so that's where I would, um, I guess address some of those questions around the, around the land use map. And certainly I can come back and answer a few more about other topics. I think the one thing that I do want to add to that is just the twin lakes question.

1:27:53And we've talked about this a number of times. What, what do the future land use designations mean in area two. Um, and I think that's currently in the map designated as one of the neighborhoods. And those designations really apply. Um, under the future instance where something like where those properties annex to the city of Boulder in redevelop, um, so it's hard to respond to those questions for, or the folks out there, you know, asking for that to be designated as open space. Um, because the open space designation reflects open space properties as they exist, places we have an interest or others might already have an interest. And it doesn't neither the current zoning nor the current designation or the proposed designation really would preclude an entity. From buying those four open space in the time between now and should some future owner when an annex to the city of Boulder. So under the scheme that we have now, it doesn't fit into open space. I think I may have, I think maybe I just used the run category. I'll say parks to make it fit better. I think that it would create certainty for the community if they knew that our intention was to turn it into a park. And so I think if I were to look, if you're saying on annexation, I think

1:29:19that that's what people would want. I think making it clear that I believe what people in the general vicinity of those properties have made it clear that they want is daunt to have those parcels developed. So. I'm just saying as one individual in reviewing this and I get that there's going to be lots of different opinions on this particular point. I think it would create clarity and comfort for folks if we identified it. And the way that they envision it. Yeah. And I'll just add to that just briefly. So, um, a couple of thoughts is that. Open lands and those types of particularly HOA properties or that are in communal ownership. Some of those outlaws and types of things. Those are, those are certainly encouraged and allowed within that neighborhood one category. Um, I think where we have some, just some caution around projecting what the future of those properties really is, is that they are not owned or controlled by a public entity or an HOA. They're owned by the school district and the housing authority. And so we're not aware of what their future intentions are for those properties. If there is an agreement between the improvement district and those properties as two, you know, actually protecting those in the future for parks, absolutely. We would change the map. It's just that we

1:30:37didn't get consent from all of these homeowners about neighborhood one and neighborhood too. Like this isn't about consent of private property owners. Like we're making a community vision. So I'm just sharing my opinion, which is probably going to be unpopular. So you can stop trying to convince me because I won't change my mind. And they likely also won't either. But I'm just, I think it's a visionary document. Like we don't go through and ask every parcel owner to consent to the future vision. And many of them would not consent to these neighborhood ones and twos and hubs. And so like, we don't ask for consent. That's not the point of the document. I think the appropriate vision is to make it be a park. Everyone else will likely disagree with me. But I do think that that's what we should do. I think you would have a few people endorse that plan. Um, commissioner, let you mean, did you were wanting to have a little discussion here? Oh, yeah, thank you. It was a minute ago. I was like, what was that? Um, it was around the herbs. And I'm hearing some similar questions. The question I was, I was actually trying to get your attention earlier just to understand where you were in the document when you were talking about the nighttime hubs. Just

1:31:44so I could catch up to that part. Some of the questions that you had were similar just in regards to, I was trying to understand where, where are those types of hubs considered already current in Boulder. There was one picture talked about that was the downtown boulder that was talked about as the 15 minute neighborhood or that's just the way it fell into the PDF version of the document. Um, so that was just the curiosity. Knight economy is in 25 of the PDF, which is 49 of the document. Thank you. It's number 60 just to give a lot of numbers there for everyone. Following along. Oh, on the policy. Thank you. And so it's just by policy numbers, probably the easiest way because we, we can go. So I was making, I may have called it a, um. Class. I think that's what we're calling the new areas, but I was referring to the policy number 60 around the night economy. Got it. Thank you.

1:32:40So I think some of the questions you were asking about, um, you know, the land use map and what that really means in terms of, you know, it, it, it suggests a certain amount of economic activity. In order to really fully realize that together with the concept of, uh, the, um, what are we calling those commercial. Community regional hubs. It's, it's suggesting a certain amount of commercial activity that I don't, we don't know whether the population is capable of sustaining. I mean, that's, I think that's sort of maybe the, the underlying question. And I don't know. I mean, um, I think that is kind of an interesting thing to wonder about. It doesn't bother me that there is a vision of what our community might look like. But I also. Think that what might be missing and I can address this when I make my comments is that like, what is, a reference to working with the State demographer, um, to understand what the, what the population growth might be what the age distribution might be. And while I don't know, it might be in here. And I overlooked it. I don't know whether there's anything in here that says, so what are we seeing like in 20 years in terms of the size, the population of our community. Um, are we looking for additional

1:34:35economic activity. Um, there's been so much conversation over the last, you know, 30 years that I've been involved in these conversations about the fact that we have too many jobs in boulder. And so, you know, what, is there some vision of what that right balance is and where we're heading? Do we, do we envision some sort of a static future state for Boulder? And if so, what would that look like? Uh, but I think that's what maybe some of Commissioner Stolzman's questions and comments were bringing up for me here. Just with respect to Twin Lakes, you know, we have had some conversation about it. We had some community members come in and ask us to, um, put that open space designation on it. That was not accepted by the other parties that need to buy into it. Um, I know we've heard from our open space department that they do not believe those properties actually have, you know, sufficient qualities as open space for us to use hopes based sales tax money on it. Um, they have been, they have not been developed in all these years. And, um, they, actually the house bill 101 from this session, uh, housing authority to bypass zoning and just go right to development. Those three parcels are not, um, would not be affected by that bill. So that

1:36:23would still have to go through the Landry's process. It's unincorporated Boulder County right now. You know, et cetera, et cetera. So while I don't expect that status of those properties to change anytime soon, um, for me. Um. I would. Not want to take them off the table. For possible. Future development. With. A horrible housing. And I know that. Won't. Earn me any friends. In the Twin Lakes neighborhood. But, but I. Think that, you know. They should just remain the way. They are. It's just one commissioner's. Thought. I was going to go back to the point on the night economy. Which is policy 60. Page 25 of the PDF. And it's, I don't know what the other one is because my screen is too big. The only piece that I was curious about in here, if I look at where it says, uh, the first sentence, city supports the vibrant nighttime economy that expands access to job services was missing for me. There's transportation. And amenities.

1:37:38Because for workers, that is a continual conversation about you. Like you can have me work until two in the morning. How do I get home? So just a question and you all have been more, you know, you've been in a lot of those conversations, but that would be just a curiosity. That's a great one. That's a good ad. Thank you. Well, maybe I'll go ahead and chime in. With some of my thoughts about, um, about the draft plan. Just starting. You know, as a general matter, the vision that is reflected in it, I, you know, I think that's, um, I think it's a good vision. I don't have a quarrel with it. And then the community values that are reflected before that. Um, I mean, I think they are, I think they are very good representations of the values of our community. And I'm really happy I live in a community that whose values are reflected there. Like, wow, that's where I live. Aren't I lucky? Um, so that made me, that, that I really loved that line, which it makes me very happy to see. I think where all of this starts to break down for me, unfortunately, is that the way I read the policies is, you know, there's a list. And you stay right at the outset that they are not prioritized.

1:39:22And their aspirational. And I did have a hard time reconciling some of them that I think compete with one another. And I don't know which would take priority. And you've said that this document isn't going to help us with that. And so then I don't actually know whether if we're trying to implement this through land use changes or through any other kind of decision that we might make, um, are we going to achieve the values that our community that you have really beautifully articulated here? Um, so this is where I have trouble with the way, you know, with the way that was done. And, um. And a lot of this is going to come down to implementation. And that's where, you know, the community primarily, the city of Boulder is really going to have going to struggle with, well, what did we mean when we said, you know, we want a vibrant nighttime economy, for instance. And maybe that's the wrong one to pick. But, um, you know, and that comes into conflict with, it's not actually going to, but maybe it comes into conflict with nights preserving dark skies or, you know, quiet times for the birds to come out or something like that.

1:40:49You know, we're like, uh - oh. We said we want a vibrant nighttime economy. But what's the effect of that going to be? So, so I just, I think there needs to be some stronger sense of how conflicts are going to be resolved among competing values and priorities that are reflected in here. I want, I did want to go through a couple of. Policy or sort of one by one with just some questions that they left me with. Policy number eight. And I'm just going to use the policy numbers because they don't change regardless of the page number. So, you know, we've struggled a little bit with languages changes that have come to us in what is area three. Where isn't over intensive. And this just says that the county will refer applications to the city of the proposed activity could be deemed over intensive.

1:42:05I don't know what that is. And I think it would really help, um, if we could do that because we've, we've had differing interpretations of what's over intensive. And I think that is so key to the whole schema of the area one, two, three. Concept that we could really use some help in understanding that. And the terminology of, um, urban development is also part of that home area one, two, three. Designation. And what is urban. Is it a density? Is it a use. I don't know what it is. I mean, I think I know what it is. It's like pornography. I remember when you see it. It's not pornographic. But I know it when I see it kind of thing. Um, and, you know, and we, we, we faced us with the, um. Proposed five lot subdivision at, I think it was 63rd in Iwat Road. Maybe I've got the wrong intersection. Where we turned it down. On a two to one vote. And, um, you know, I think it turned on is that, is that urban development and non - corporate border county or not. And I don't, I guess I don't really know.

1:43:33So I think we could use some help there. And I think a comprehensive plan is how that kind of thing ought to be achieved. I think. So getting policy 22 on open space preservation and stewardship. Refers in two places to open space. Value. And as I read all of the. Policies that relate to open space, I couldn't lean. What we mean by that. When we, this, this is one of those that refers to the city and the county. But what, how would we articulate what that is? Cause we have conflicts overuses. And should there be trials. Should there not be trails? Should trails be open to bicycles? Should they be open to e. - bikes? And I think we need. A stronger statement about what these values are here. So that we know. And, uh, and I think this is where the, the effort towards brevity is not going to serve as well. Because you get 10 people in a room to read this and they would all come up with a different idea of, of what the value of open space is. Some would say it's for recreation. Some would say it's for habitat preservation. Some would say, you know, it's for view corridor protection. So I think that it. Would really help. To get some more. Flesh on that. Commissioner

1:45:33leave you just in the comments I had made. I had mentioned adding some language about the, um, specifically what the voters had approved in the various taxes. And I was thinking in that section. But so I just wanted to say I support what you're, the concept you're in a kind of ties into the concept. Right. Thanks. Um. Policy 28. On inclusive diverse and welcoming community. I. Guess. I guess what is so, um. So, you know, this is an expression of values. We want to foster a diverse inclusive in welcoming community. Um, policies and programs support equitable access to, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. And I didn't know whether that access meant like transportation access or, um, having the financial means to have access. I just didn't know what that meant. So what are, what are we actually trying to say with this policy. I have a lot of thoughts about the 15 minute neighborhood concept. And what you said a moment ago when I spoused Michelle. Ochiman really helped me understand that a whole lot better. And I appreciate that.

1:47:04Uh, but I guess I think. That this is going to become, you know, maybe. A point of contention in this document. Unnecessarily so. Because. As I read it, I. Think a lot of people are thinking, Oh my goodness, we're going to have a little commercial nodes within a 15 minute walk of every residential area. And there goes, there goes my nice quiet neighborhood. And I don't think that's actually what's going to happen. And I, and as you've explained it, I don't think that's what the vision is. But I think that's what it conjures up. And, you know, we, we know. Um, that. It does take a certain concentration of population to support a business. And we've seen some of these efforts towards having, um. Uh, having like areas zoned out or planned out that would have a little retail node right in the middle of them. We've seen them fail. And, um. A house that I formally owned, uh, on Shanahan Ridge was one of those though. It was laid out by, um, by Stain. Where my. House was, was supposed to be a little retail thing. And, um. And there's a, there is a monosaury school there. But the rest of it never got built. And eventually my house and four others got planted in there. And they're kind of in a

1:48:56funky. Configuration on a weird little road. That it always looks like it looked like my house like was the parking lot for the condos, you know, it's just like, it was a beautiful idea and it didn't work. So I just don't know really whether this is a realistic thing and the way that's described as having things like, you know, they would support medical services and gyms and things like that. Like, you know, that's just not the way we do health care anymore, unfortunately. So I think, I think explaining what you were saying, KJ about, about. Maybe the future small scale hubs might emerge. In some certain areas. Might be helpful to a more realistic vision. Of this. Let's see. I know that. We got a lot of email about. The fact that the water supply section doesn't do enough to. Recognize the impact of climate change on water. And I, uh, endorse, um, I endorse that. Those concerns. Um, I also, um, although I've never been one that. Supported any sort of a hard population cap, uh, in any way. Um. But I do think we have to think about. How many people, this community can actually. Support. With water with the, you know, the library. And the trails and parks and things that we have. And what, what

1:50:55are we trying to reflect overall. Here in terms of the aspirational. You know, development of our community. I mean, I had some questions about things that says the city does that I don't think the city does. It says that the city supports access to affordable commercial space. I don't think the city does that. And I don't think the city does what policy fifty six as it does. Um, encouraging an appropriate mix of retail. But I mean, that's not that important. That's just editorializing on the city. Maybe. Unfairly. I. Mean, I. D be very interested to. Know on policy 59 where it says that this city supports the visitor economy while ensuring the benefits flow back to the community. I don't, I'd love to know how the city does that. I mean. I realized I said generates a lot of sales tax. And maybe that's what that's referring to. Policy 67. You know, we're starting, commercial activity and residential areas. And I mean, I think this is where I'm wondering how this actually would become reflected. In, you know, in zoning at Landyas Code.

1:52:41Amendments. That's, that's going to help to get worked out. And the municipal airport policy 76. I didn't know. The very last sentence. It says the city will coordinate. With the county to provide consistent regulations where possible. I had. No idea. What that was about. So. You don't have to give me. An answer. To that. But just, you know, maybe just read. It and tell me. But that's. About. So I just have much to say about your land use classes and designations and the future land use map because I really saw all of that as really being a city. Primarily and what you're going to do and how it's, um, how it's going to be implemented through any kind of zoning. Commitments. And I've been following a little bit of the hotline on that. And I think there is now a competition between consume member wallock and spear and Benjamin for who can write the longest, hideous.

1:54:13Hotline posts. And so I'm just enjoying. The entertainment. So, but I, but I do think really all in all the questions just is like. Do we actually. Have the ability to support the amount of commer. Activity. That seems to be envisioned. Here. And it's not a problem. If we can't. It just means it. Won't happen. Right. But. Then we have a, then we kind of have a fish in that. I actually won't happen. Um, I think that ties into what I was talking about with the fiscal analysis because the reason it matters is that then if you've put your transit designated areas and your density areas and certain areas, you don't have enough funding to provide services to realize that. So, I mean, that's ties into what I was talking about a bit, I think.

1:55:04So yeah, so that's what I took from it. Um, I, I do want to go back to where I began though. I do think that I think there's some really beautiful visions and values in here. And I think, um, I think you got, you're really activate it. A lot of community through this. In ways that have never been activated before. And in the sessions that I attended, um, you know, I heard and saw people that I have not seen at these kinds of events. And so I really congratulate and applaud you for being able to do that. Here. Thank you. Thanks. Good afternoon. Um. Brad Mueller. Planning and development services director for the city. I wondered if maybe I could take just a few minutes, um, not to provide a defense of some of those comments. And we so very much appreciate all the comments. I know. Uh, Hannah and KJ are taking notes like crazy. And I'm making mental notes. Um, but I wanted to maybe speak to a couple of the bigger themes if you didn't mind me taking five minutes to do that. Um, one is a common aspect of comprehensive plans I've worked on maybe five now. And, um, in variably somewhere along the way, people make an observation along the ways, the type of, well, the comprehensive plan

1:56:39can say anything anybody wants it to make. And sometimes then they reference the Bible, which I'm not sure is always appropriate, but that you can have it say anything you want. And my response to that is that, well, sure. It has conflicting values in it, right? Or competing values, not conflicting, competing values, because we as human beings embody competing values. And part of the challenge is to acknowledge that two things can be true at the same time and that in a specific implementation is where you have to make those, those points of discernment of, well, which one is the more relevant one in this case, which one's relevant at this point in history. And I've really tried to encourage folks to, um, live with that discomfort of the fact that there can be competing values, um, in a document that's like this and designed to be aspirational. It does not have other types of polys, for example, that are clearly not in the community's values like making this the absurd example, this key capital of, you know, the country, that type of thing. And that gets a little bit to another point that I appreciate from the commissioners of how do we manage prioritization? And one of the challenges just administratively of document like this as you have to create a list, right? And some

1:58:03things at the top of the list and people kind of give that priority. One of the beautiful things that we're going to be able to do with this one that hasn't been able to be done in the past is to have it live on the website in a way that really shows, um, priorities doesn't reflect or imply priorities because it'll, it'll be by topic, people can sort them by, by geography, topic, uh, those types of thing as well. So we hope to get some of that bias that's just inherent in lists and such out of the document through that as well. And then, uh, finally one of the things that, uh, we deeply appreciate, and I know the team and I, and others struggle constantly with what is the right elevation for a comprehensive plan to be aspirational, but not, you know, cliffy kind of meaninglessness, but also not trying to figure out all the answers. So the what, not the how. And, um, one of the things we've started talking about as an organization is the development of a citywide strategic plan. This is one of Nurya's goals for the organization. And that is a design to pull out these goals or at least relevant ones for the next four years and develop a citywide work plan that, or citywide strategic planning, excuse me,

1:59:30that begins to implement. And then we've also really, uh, asked ourselves, and I know this is true with our counterparts too, about really the true importance of the budget, the CIP and the individual land use, um, decisions that come your way. And that really gets back to my earliest points that that's where things actually happen and taking those values and saying, well, in this instance, these are the ones that apply. And because of that, I think the decisions should be X, Y, and Z. And it reminds me a little bit of a land use law class I had in grad school where the professor pointed out that at the time it gets to the quasi judicial decision making when you all make a decision about that. Things like compatibility or compatible because you say they are at that point. And we as staff could only do so much in providing analysis, but at the end of the day, you're making a judgment about whether this case, this geography at this point in time, given these circumstances is something like compatible or whether there's enough for that. So that's a little bit of the philosophy that we've brought to. Certainly the feedback that you shared that will work hard to incorporate, but just wanted to kind of give some of those philosophical thoughts. Yeah, thank you.

2:00:52Um, very helpful. I do want to, I understand that, um. You know, that we're going to have sort of competing values or values that may apply differently in different instances. Um, my comment though, about the, um, the open space, um, healthy ecosystems, uh, open space preservation stewardship. It is really that I don't even know what the value is. That's that you're, that is in here. So I don't, I don't even know, you know, what, how that would be. How you would even look to it and get guidance. It's almost, it's just too vague, I think for me. Um, well, and my further agreement with your comments on the point and your comments here is that in other jurisdictions often the comprehensive plan is simply visionary, but in both the county and the city and other jurisdictions in our county that also use comprehensive plants, it's been incorporated into the land use codes. So it is different in that we actually refer to consistency in our land use decision. And so it actually then does become code and not just visionary. So it is a little bit more complicated than the typical experience in other jurisdictions. Yeah. Yeah. And this one really, it works very, very differently. So it's going to have different language. Yeah.

2:02:21Um. Our thoughts, comments. And do we want to try to, uh, answer the questions. Um, I mean, I think we've sort of done that a little bit here, but, but, um, we, we might circle back just to make sure we don't leave a lot of things hanging here at the end. Sure. Yeah. I was, and I was just kind of in a spirit of we've had a little bit of discussion after each one of us had spoke. And I was trying to make sure I wrote down the right note about what you were talking about commissioner living on number eight and number 22. I thought those were great points. And I agree with what you were saying. So I just wanted to just for staff, um, if they were curious about if it's one individual commissioner or if somebody else was supporting this comments that Commissioner Levy made on those items. And then on the policy 28 was another one that you had talked about.

2:03:14And I, I was. Thought I was there. Do an analysis of the city to sort of understand percentage of the city is within a 15 minute distance of those six out of nine. There's a whole range of things that they evaluate. And their approach was also a little bit broader. Then ultimately what came out of that assembly discussion in that they were looking at how far you could get on a bicycle in 15 minutes as an example. The assemblies challenge in some of the recommendations that came out of that. Exercise was they wanted to focus more on pedestrians. So how far could you walk or roll if you're in a wheelchair within 15 minutes? So it's a much smaller distance. They did a great job at helping us define what are sort of the essential elements. There were four that they identified that would constitute a 15 minute neighborhood. And then there were a number of other supplemental things. And so I think one of the challenges around 15 minute neighborhoods is that it is a concept. And I think there are some jurisdictions that maybe are, I would say, more proactive and particularly within green field development. You can see a lot of really proactive sort of prescriptive as you were explaining, Claire. We're going to identify this block as the mixed

2:06:06use center. And then there's sort of radiating densities of residential housing around it. In Baldur, where we don't have, you know, everything's built out and this is more of an existing urban structure where these things are going to happen more organically. The city is not anticipating that we will somehow proactively create these things. It's just like, this is going to happen through community through entrepreneurship, through people making these things happen. Now we can support that by making sure that there are recreation facilities or community centers or other types of land uses that support these kinds of things and make sure that the zoning allows for these and potentially support them if they're an actual city facility. But for the most part, this is going to be sort of the private sector and private development making these things happen a little bit more organically outside of the hubs themselves. The hubs would be a little bit more discreet in terms of the zoning allowances and other things. Where and and the existing commercial activity that are already in those locations. So it's maybe a little bit different. I think a lot of community members sort of automatically think that we're going to be inventing these things or creating them somewhere. And that's not really the intention there. It's really the community that's going to drive a

2:07:24lot of this. Yeah, that's great. Go ahead. Well, and you had asked about first and main, they didn't comment on that yet. And I don't know if everybody knows what that is, but I was thinking of first and made more as a hub. So I would be interested to understand what the staff's interpretation of that is also. Because I think that that's a hub. Not a 15 minute neighborhood. And what was just described? Like it's one thing to say we want to have 15 minute bike sheds that within a 15 minute bike shed, everyone has access to a park like that. I would not have made any comments about. But the way it's written is it essentially would allow for someone to rezone any parcel to commercial, which then creates competition for your commercial hubs.

2:08:07And so then you'll have potentially excess vacancy in what you're trying to make as hubs. And then your hubs will not be successful. And then you'll have to have transit service in neighborhoods that currently don't have commercial needs because there's not enough activity. And then you have an incompatible land uses. So that's more what I think the comments that are coming in or about is that you, because of the way that commercial property is valued, and I'll be super interested to see what the people of the city of Boulder decide to do with vacancy, if anything, and the city council decides to do, if anything. But the by just saying anyone can do anything anywhere. Are you undermining the success of your hub areas is the question that I was trying to raise? Like, are you making it so that your hubs will then have nothing. Yeah. I had one other item on, um, policy 77. And that one's housing and supportive services. And it's just the way that it reads where it says the city and county encourage the development and preservation of stable.

2:09:09And then it goes into affordable housing, et cetera. For me, the way that I talk about housing is encouraging either renovation or rehabilitation. Preservation and development. The development in my mind, given all of the climate crises that we're in from a resource level and all the things we were talking about already about water, et cetera. Infill is still a real huge opportunity. Um, that I don't think it's focused enough. So it's just, just a kind of a curiosity because I don't, and I don't think the county encourages development. So it's just the way that it reads with city and counting together. And up to the interpreter of the reading, I'm guessing. Yeah, that one at 77 is quite a long sentence, which gets us to the city and county encouraging. Housing that addresses unique needs of people with physical or mental or behavioral health is disabling conditions. It's not housing in general. I think it's housing for those specific populations. Yeah. The title being housing and supportive services. Some clarity there might be helpful. Yeah.

2:10:27We can look at that. Are you meaning encouraging stable accessible affordable housing alongside. Place - based surfaces? I don't know. But yeah, I mean, the county doesn't. Do that. It could potentially be worked just a little bit. So maybe it's just helpful to share one interpretation. That's helpful. Before we move off the 15 minute neighborhood completely, I take that there, you know, there may be, certain things that, like a community may say, we do want a park within 15 minutes, uh, walking distance. Um, of everybody. Or, you know, a transit stop. Um, of some sort within a 15 minute walk. And those are just sort of like appropriate, like level of service things. Um, I think of them that way. You know, and I, I think. What commissioner Stolzman has kind of. Posited as maybe, you know, what could happen. I don't, you know, it's like take it to its logical extreme. And this is what could happen. I don't know if it will, but, but I think it, I think that is a real question about, um, diffusing. Like commercial activity likes to be close to other commercial activity, you know? And so again, I guess I just go back to the, whether it's realistic. And, you know, groceries were specifically identified as a thing that really should be available within 15 minutes walk

2:12:23of everyone. And we just know that if you, you know, the small grocery stores, the only way they can succeed is by charging very, very high prices and having not very much selection, which is fine. You know, some people may like that and they can have it, but it's not going to be a way people get there everyday needs taken care of. That's all. So. We could see whether there's just used the points that are up on the screen to see if there's anything else that we want to say about this. And I want to make sure Hannah has a chance to tell us, you know, whether you do need some more direction or have some more questions, but do, do we feel that it aligns with previous direction that we have given to staff in the past. I mean, I'm happy to start again. I mean, you all have done a really significant amount of work. And all the different feedback and the input. And you talked in the report about this real first time focus on racial equity. And that is learnings. And I saw them incorporated in, in this draft.

2:13:45And I think that's great. So, um, and I chaired kind of one of the, a few of the pieces that I felt like were missing a little bit in just in some of it might just be strengthening of language. So I feel like for me, I'm at bullet point one. I think it aligns with previous direction. Great. Can we check in, do you feel like we need to go through these bullets and answer more questions? I feel like we gave a lot of feedback that I think these were like general prompts. I mean, I'm not, I'm happy to go through them again, but I do think we gave a lot of feedback. I thought we did too. I just, I just didn't, if there were dangling, you know, questions that are just dangling, I just want to make sure that we didn't leave them dangling.

2:14:28The only thing I have left dangling from my seat and like my notes and all of that is just, I didn't share my appreciation. And I think Hannah's done a fantastic job of getting us the documents early, like making it much more readable, making it much more understandable. Like it's like going in a very good direction. And I think you've done a fantastic job to this point, Hannah. And we have some more public comment to take and more input to receive and modifications. But to this point, I'm just, uh, I admire your professionalism and how well you've done and all of the work you've done to get us the information we need. Thank you. And I wonder if we're not going to go through the bullet points. There was just one item that was still pending that I had mentioned at the beginning. So this might be the time because I think it's connected to bullet point four, if that works for folks. And it's in the section, um, it's not a policy. It's called focusing on equity at the pretty close to the end.

2:15:22It's right at the end of chapter five. I just found it. So it's a page 116 of the, if you're looking at the pages. In other words, it's 59 of the 64 PDF version. And the questions at the end, it's asking about members to consider questions like the third bullet point. And this is similar to something we just talked about. I just, the curiosity for me was that question should be broken up into two. And it might be what we're talking with the folks that gave those ideas because is trust being built through accountability to me is its own question. And I think we'd also have the question to get to the rest of like that would not be enough for a question is how does accountability occur. What does that mean? Um, I don't want to make assumptions about what that question was really trying to get at. But to me, that is one question. And then the second question would be about ongoing relationships with historically excluded and to represent a communities. So just a suggestion, um, again, just from the way I'm reading it. And if we really want to get the answers, it might be helpful to break those out. That was the last item I had. Well, before I close this out, uh, Hannah, KJ, is there anything else you

2:16:45needed from us. Um. There were two, maybe two really quick things. Um, the you had made some, some comments, Commissioner Levy about, um, uh, better definitions around new urban development and overintensive rural development, things like that. There are some new definitions in the glossary that speak to that. There's also a definition for open space purposes, which ties back to. I think Commissioner Stolzman referenced basically the charter purposes that were identified in your, um, in the taxes established for open space. So there are some definitions there. I do think, um, I think it's a great point that maybe we need to better highlight, um, that's where some of that information lives in the plan today. A lot of that content is actually embedded within the policy. So it's a bit more of a direct reference. So that's something that we can take a look at. Um, you know, to make sure that we're, we're capturing that.

2:17:48But, um, your point is, is very well taken. And we recognize that that's one of those things that you will have to wrestle with through the implementation. And ultimately weighing those values and understanding, you know, how do you make that determination for those things? Um, the last thing I was going to mention was Commissioner Lochimin, one of your earliest questions was around specific references to modular housing or ADUs. Um, manufactured housing there. Um, there is, I think there is a policy on manufactured housing. So okay, good. I'm remembering that correctly. So the policy around manufactured housing. I don't know if I can pull the number off the top of my head. Thank you. 68. Uh, and more broadly speaking, the really the intent of those, those new neighborhood classifications is to broaden the variety and types of housing. And the other policies specific to that.

2:18:41So you're correct that we don't, um, we don't call out ADUs or some of those other types of housing specifically. But the intention of course is that all those types of, um, uh, sort of alternative housing types that are that we don't see as often are inclusive and encouraged. Um, you know, through the plan. Thank you. And I apologize. 68 was the workforce when I was talking earlier. I page 68. And then we're like, Oh, that can't be right. And then I couldn't put together with policy. But the 80 is the one that you were just referencing on manufactured housing. So great. Um, and I hear the piece around kind of this broad, just saying, and it's in here. We support housing type diversity of housing types. And as a commissioner sitting here at the dais, when I'm going back to the comp plan and saying, here's what I can reference to support the land use code of older county. I mean, so I think.

2:19:40And I would just say from city of Boulder to really think about, again, Boulder mod and what commitment that is, but also the opportunity that that is, and it might be, I don't know where that would address any kind of zoning. And I'm thinking about like HOAs and covenants that say it's got to be a specific type of home. And those types of things that I know the state legislation has been working on. But, um, but I would, I would just at least consider that. I hear what you're saying for sure. And again, I think for given more recent state legislation and the accessory dwelling unit at peace, I don't see how it couldn't be helpful. Um, to have it actually included in the language somewhere. So just, uh, that's my lobbying. I'm done. That's great. Thank you. So. Um, Hannah, did you get what you needed. I think so. Thank you. Okay. Anything left unsaid? No, thank you everybody. I'm related to work. Thank you so much. And, um, we'll see you again soon.

2:20:57So that does conclude the, uh, meeting agenda for the day. And so we are adjourned.