Thread by @shayshinecastle

Moving on to the East Boulder sub community plan discussion. Here's the staff presentation: www-static.bouldercolorado.gov/docs/Item_4-CC…

Area is roughly from the municipal airport to Arapahoe (north-south) and Foothills to 63rd (west-east)

2015 BVCP update identified subcommunity planning process as a way to bridge the gap between city goals and planning process; also to allow for “targeted solutions” for “localized planning,” giving neighbors more input.

Those BVCP goals are: Jobs/housing imbalance, small biz, arts and culture, housing affordability and diversity, design quality, resilience and climate commitment

Kathleen King, Senior Planner, taking this one.

This council in January 2018 annual retreat named it as a priority
This council in January 2019 retreat said East Boulder should be first, bc of the opportunity zone. OK’d five “foundational elements” : Definition, Boundaries, Scope, Schedule, Community Engagement.

Council also set the boundaries for subcommunities in January, the last time we visited this: boulderbeat.news/2019/01/16/bou…

Three teams responsible for subcommunity plan: Production (planning and engagement staff) Planning team (cross-departmental staff to rep their dept. in planning process) Working group (21 community members + planning board member)

Three ways to learn more: Project website (bouldercolorado.gov/planning/east-…), Working group website (bouldercolorado.gov/planning/east-…) and BeHeardBoulder questionnaire (beheardboulder.org)

Three questions to guide the process:
Who is East Boulder?
What does East Boulder want to be?
How do we get there?

Some interesting "who" stats:
1,610 acres in East Boulder
691 parcels
466 residents
16,984 jobs

I'm hoping for some more clarity on the housing/residents. As I mentioned earlier, the staff memo said East Boulder contributes ZERO housing to the city's housing stock.

There are 313 homes in San Lazaro, within the boundaries but outside city limits. That could be the 466 residents referenced above.

Some other interesting stats: 820 biz, 47% of which have 5 or fewer employees
Office space is $19/sq ft; industrial is $17/sq ft. Lower than other places in the city, but vacancy is trending down, putting pressure on rents.

Community members and working group “expressed an appreciation for the gritty” feel of East Boulder.

Lacks pedestrian facilities compared to the rest of the city

Area workers want to live in Boulder but they make too much to qualify for affordable housing
In feedback, desire expressed for a wide range of housing: SF homes to small condos

16,984 jobs; 76% of commuters drive alone

More and more frequent buses needed, plus mobility sharing (B-Cycles, etc.) and first-mile/last-mile connections, plus working with surrounding cities on transit

King is going over the engagement, which was both quantitative (data) and qualitative (hanging out at bus stops, going to Valmont bike park, riding the buses, etc.)

By acreage, east Boulder is 9.7% of the city. But only 1.7% of total parcels.

And the residential population IS just San Lazaro, .4% of city population. But 16.3% of jobs.

The area was historically developed to be industrial, King says, so it's not unusual that there's no housing there.

In response to in-person questions, 61% of ppl said they would live in East Boulder if it had "appropriate" housing. (i.e. affordable)

Online, 38% said yes and 20% said maybe.

Most ppl that were in-person surveyed don't live here today; they commute in for work. Most of the online respondents live here already.

RE: King's earlier statement about the industrial nature of east Boulder: 887 acres are zoned for industrial and biz; about half of the total area.

Very interesting: At engagement events at Flatiron Biz Park 95% said there was enough parking in East Boulder. But only 45% at BCH said there was enough. No one selected the third option: Too much parking. A study found there WAS too much parking at some of the office parks.

I used to work out there. Lots of empty spaces.

(I usually biked, bc I live JUST outside this area, so it was 2.5 miles, close enough to bike and all on the bike path.)

RE: design of the area. There's no "unified aesthetic," King says, both a challenge and opportunity.

There are 2 historic landmarks. King doesn't say what they are; I must have missed it in the packet.

The area ranks low for walkability.

There's not facilities for it, but also no places ppl WANT to walk to.

97% of in-person participants say they feel safe waking in East Boulder, but online 51% said yes; 32% said depends on the time of day and 15% maybe.

King: Ppl said they feel "less safe" after night along the path or walking back to their car after dark. Heard this "a lot" from Ball workers.

40% of East Boulder is in some type of flood area: lots of concern about future development and its impacts.

Less than 5% of the area has tree canopy coverage; city goal is 16%

Staff presentation has some Dif numbers on lease rates for biz than the memo did: $20/sq ft median for office, $17 for R+D/flex space, $14 for industrial.

(Memo had $19 for office, $17 for industrial)

"Significant increase" in rates since 2009, King says. "This is a major topic taking on by the working group" — how to create changes but not gentrify biz out.

City has ~100 public art pieces, King says. 3 are in East Boulder. But lots of arts/culture biz: studios, performance venues, etc.

Very stark Dif in survey responses: 81% online said they don't consider East Boulder a destination for arts and culture, but 84% in-person did. (The in-person was at Boulder Dinner Theatre, King notes.)

I really enjoyed the aesthetics of this staff presentation. Good typography and use of color. A++

I pulled a quote from the memo but now I can't find it. The gist was: East Boulder has a lot of opportunity to help city goals, but it will take a lot of concentrated effort to make sure things actually happen out there.

Now qs from council. Young referencing that there is no affordable housing in the area. How much does the city own?

King: City is the majority land owner in East Boulder. (Valmont City Park, Airport, Boulder Creek Path)

Brockett: They own the most, or they own more than 50%?
King: They own the most land. Not more than 50%

Young want an evaluation of city land in the area and if it would be "appropriate" to use it for housing.

Young referencing the disparity in the arts and culture surveys with online vs. in-person. How do you plan on arriving at consensus without a statistically valid survey?
King: We don't have one planned, but we will if ppl want it. They're very expensive, but we have the budget.

King: We're trying to include users of the area who don't live in Boulder today, who wouldn't be included in a statistically valid survey. But also to combine that with current residents.

King: "We do document everything and apply metrics to what we collect."

Young: Is it typical to include unincorporated parts of the city in subcommunity plans?
King: Yes.

The line for the area runs right down the middle of Arapahoe, King says. There was discussion about moving it, but it tracks with the federal census tract, which is helpful.

Also, the boundary "is serving as our clip area for data" but not for engagement, input, recommendations, etc. "We're thinking of Arapahoe corridor as a corridor and are considering both sides of the street."

Morzel: It seems a little bit, if you were in a neighborhood nearby, you might not think you're being considered and so won't participate ... somehow, that needs to be represented. "It's a little misleading."

Morzel mentioning King's Ridge, which is in Palo Parkway sub community, even though it's on the east side of Foothills.

"That seems to me to be a more natural boundary."

Jones: Why is the chunk out of there?

King: "We were trying to group residential areas with their local commercial center."
Morzel: There's nothing in Palo Park that's commercial.
Meschuk: Those residents go west to Diagonal Plaza or Safeway; that's why the boundary change was made.

Morzel: I was surprised city only has 16% citywide tree canopy.
King: Yes, urban forestry goal is 16%, to maintain our existing canopy.

Small biz is defined as less than 50 employees, King answers Morzel's q.

Morzel wants to seriously look at the airport for housing.
Popular proposal among some city council candidates, I've noticed.

King: Working group is meeting at the airport in September to learn more.

Weaver also wants to extend the boundaries into the neighborhoods south of Arapahoe. "We've made this mistake before."

"We know that something like a big fraction of the jobs are in this sub community; some are just to the west. There are some missing bike connex out here."

Wants a connection plan to get from 55th to Boulder Creek Path.

Improving those connections may entice more ppl to bike, Weaver says.

Also likes the idea of including King's Ridge, etc. bc they drive these roads.

"With this as a regional employment center ... when I think about statistically valid survey ... it's the 17K ppl who work here and what we might do to get their mode shift (away from) driving. If we don't talk to them, we're not going to be able to find out what it will take."

Jones asks that staff work with Chamber and another group (she said it literally 5 sec ago but I forgot) bc they are working on transportation out there.

"This is awesome; this is cool. This sub community plan is on its way to being another model for how the city wants to do public process."

Suggests making annexation part of the subcommunity plan. "What's the approach there?"

San Lazaro is eligible for annexation, per the staff memo.

King: We're engaging those residents. There is interest.

Annexation is a part of subcommuity planning, Meschuk is saying.

"All enclaves will be engaged and looked at during the process."

Jones asks about Valmont Power Plant. That is being decommissioned in 2023-2024, King says. Plans for a solar installment there.

"I have some crazy ideas about what I'd like to do with the building, bc it's cool," King says. City is not considering purchasing.

Jones: No. "We don't want the liability of what's in those ponds."

Weaver: "What's in those ponds and what's in those buildings is not something we want to get involved with at all."

Xcel owns those. Weaver suggests working with them. That should go well.

Jones: We lay out these citywide goals. The q is how is this subcommunty going to manifest and embrace those goals. That's a good model of having each area of the city think about how they'll do that. "All parts of the city have skin in the game."

Brockett arguing for keeping the boundaries as-is. "I would worry about just drawing a line a half-mile or quarter-mile south bc those residential neighborhoods would be cut in two doing that."

If we want to extend it south, could we look at boundaries that capture commercial areas, so the things that are really "participating directly in Arapahoe" and not splitting neighborhoods.

Jones: The census makes sense but...
Brockett: Maybe a little extra fuzzy influence zone around that boundary.
Weaver: I don't want to change a line, but I don't want to lose the input of those folks.

Carlisle asks for statistically valid surveys.
Jones: Can we talk about that. They are useful for specific scenarios. So far, we haven't uncovered the 'what you really need to think about' areas. We want ppl who are in there and what the rest of the city thinks.

Young: "Vast majority of ppl who are here are here for jobs. Idk how you'd do a SVS to all the employees. But it seems really critical to include their input."

Jones: You also mentioned the recycling facilities out there. There's a lot of unique assets in this area. Figuring out how to support and emphasize those uses .... is important.

OK, that's it for sub community planning. Next up: Budget!

@threadreaderapp please unroll. Thank you!