Thread by @CHThiem

Boulder Planning Board thread incoming...approving mid-term updates to the Comp Plan, S. Boulder Creek upstream analysis, transportation design and construction standards, and that tedious year-end letter-by-committee to City Council on tap. I have my knitting standing by.

Public participation: Kurt Nordback here repping Community Cycles. They have been through the transportation and constructions standards w their typical rigor. I love these humans.

David Takahashi has a story about a struggle to develop an affordable ADU and solar carport. City regulations penalize projects that take the right direction on climate.

Tom Volckhausen is repping Indian Peaks Sierra Club, which sent a letter to PB supporting dense(r) infill housing. Calls out single-family zoning and parking minimums.

Donna George has a comment on notice for meetings. Thinks there should have been public outreach about this meeting, since the Comp Plan is on the agenda. Also, what's the rush, people are too busy/overwhelmed right now.

She's also upset about a land use change in Gunbarrel, which I assume she'll speak on at greater length later.

Lisa Spaulding speaking for PLAN-Boulder on Planning Board's year-end report. I'm gonna call this empty talk. Mostly just a way of saying 'we're here, we're listening'.

Michael Williamson, who owns a cannabis business, is asking for land use changes that would allow him to operate in a warehouse space that's apparently off-limits for production now.

Macon Cowles is back to steer the year-end letter. Housing, housing, housing. We're not doing enough for the missing middle. He clearly listened to discussion at the last meeting - is responding to PB members' comments individually.

As a former CC member, urging specifics and goals in the letter. But surely he knows they'll be ignored anyway?

Lynn Segal continues to be upset about mediated participation. There are people on this board who wouldn't recognize her on the street and that's not ok.

I saw Lynn while on a walkabout last week. All is not lost.

David Adamson will die on the hill that is a North St. Ecovillage, except I hope someone actually lets him build it before that happens. Really, everyone, its way past time to give the guy his pilot project.

Alex Hyde-Wright is also here to advocate for affordable and infill housing. ADUs, duplexes, triplexes. Reduce parking minimums. And build density for transit on Broadway - so many missed opportunities now.

I didn't write anything for tonight, but this is a good public comment party and I'm feeling regretsy.

Carol Dreselly has a big house w/ADU, and that has been part of her affordability strategy. The city ordered her to stop renting additional bedrooms in her home. Meanwhile homes around her are scraped w/abandon.

Let's update the Comp Plan! Moving on to input on mid-term changes to the holy text.

There are a few proposed modifications to the land use map. Largest parcels here have to do w clarifying water service vis-a-vis the Blue Line. Not major land use changes.

We'll look at these one at a time. First proposal kicks off phase 2A of Transit Village. This is *west* of 30th between Valmont and Mapleton. Its proposed to be mixed-use business.

Second proposal changes land uses at Alpine-Balsam to reflect plans approved in 2019. This will become high-density residential and mixed-use business.

Mt. Hope Church on S. Broadway requested its land use be changed *away* from low-density residential, but there was push-back so that won't happen.

6500 Odell Place in Gunbarrel is recommended for high-density residential (currently mixed-use industrial). There's a neighborhood fight here too, but apparently not enough to derail it thus far. BHP is involved, IIRC.

Enough land use. There are also some policy and text changes proposed. Vision Zero, the 2019 TMP, 15% affordable housing goal, and the Homeless Strategy to be added.

Sarah Silver diving in with questions. Pointing out differences between Comp Plan land use and city zoning land use. BMS, which would underlie much of Transit Village Phase 2A, has a lot of restrictions on housing.

If only there was some way the city could change what it allows in different zoning districts. bouldercolorado.gov/city-council/u…

Lisa Smith: What will be done to offset light industrial land uses along 30th? Staff: Phase 2B of Transit Village (E. of railroad tracks) maintains a lot of this land use.

Public hearing time. Donna George is back and wants to pool time with family members though it's not allowed tonight. She's going to get seven minutes.

It will be a lecture on the Gunbarrel Center plan, and how apartments at 6500 Odell are not allowed. Though she's friendlier to live-work units and home ownership opportunities.

But mostly, it seems she's not a fan of BHP projects.

Laura Sheinbaum from BHP gets to follow this. Reviewing high demand for affordable apartments.

BHP is under contract to buy 6500 Odell but will not close sale w/out land use change. They will bank the site and conduct community process before developing.

David Adamson is back. Bob Yates urged him to pursue his project via Comp Plan updates. But he's learned - so sadly - that nothing meaningful can happen in these updates. There's no way to get anything done.

We're in a deliberation cul-de-sac on a few Blue Line-adjacent properties, and whether allowing them city water and sewer will invite bigger houses than are already there.

Harmon Zuckerman is disappointed rezoning at Mt. Hope Church won't go forward. Greenbrier/Broadway is an accessible gateway location to S. Boulder, good transit.

Also has some concerns about industrial land loss, e.g. at Odell Place. Plants a seed: Perhaps a future Comp Plan policy needs to protect types of industrial land use beyond light industrial?

John Gerstle on Odell Place housing: What is the point of a plan if we can change it so easily?

Zuckerman: Gunbarrel Center plan calls for a mix of housing and light industrial, and Odell does provide the housing.

Sarah Silver wants to put in some light industrial land use protections along with whatever is approved tonight. Like in surrounding properties? Or little set-asides?

Process is for the little people, right?

Peter Vitale: We get to this point with industrial land use every time it comes up. We have no data. And if we don't solve the housing problem, industrial tenants will leave anyway.

Lupita Montoya: Can we get Council to put light industrial study on the work plan, get some data?

Montoya was also excited about the Mt. Hope site. Mentioned her son and friends wanted an In-n-Out Burger there. Bold.

All of the land use changes are approved. There was a separate vote on Odell Place requested by Gerstle, who was the sole vote against.

Oh, but here's a juicy tidbit in the next set of proposals. It looked like a routine approval of recent open space acquisitions. But it includes our old friend Hogan-Pancost.

The Hogan-Pancost property is to be added to the Comp Plan as 'Open Space - Acquired'. That's pretty permanent.

Planning Board is tinkering with language in Comp Plan policy 2.21, which aims to protect 'light industrial' land uses. Proposal to strike the word 'light'. City staff squirms: Without study? Board: We didn't study the original language either.

I'm confused. I thought we *wanted* to add housing and mix uses in industrial areas. Planning Board is apparently *not* confused about this, but this word change is still taking forEVER.

South Boulder Creek upstream analysis report. John Gerstle looks alive.

Good lord, our three CU-affiliate members are recusing for this discussion too, even though its not about annexation.

City staff have prepared animations of flood detention scenarios, which are some of the most informative graphics I've seen on this project. They're supposed to be online - I'll look for links.

Summary: Upstream option is more expensive and with overall higher environmental impacts than Variant 1 (which City Council approved). And they can't mitigate neighborhood flooding w/out engineered structures on open space.

Next topic: transportation construction/design standards. A few echoes of Community Cycles' comments on sidewalks. But that's it.

And finally, the year-end letter. I'm not sure if I have the patience to tweet this. There will be a third and final draft after whatever is decided tonight.

South Boulder Creek flood model videos here: bouldercolorado.gov/flood/south-bo…

Several members referring back to Macon Cowles' and others' comments. John Gerstle: "This is our letter, not the public's letter".

Sarah Silver cautions against loading city staff work plans next year. Let them finish open projects instead of pushing on new ones. Members of the public who want more should contact City Council.

Lupita Montoya (who is sounding like an awesome writing coach): "I don't like platitudes. I don't like fussy words."

David Ensign really wants work on parking maximums in 2021. Silver thinks it's happening regardless, must we mention it?

Disagreement on including middle-income housing in priorities. Lupita Montoya: We don't have a robust *low-income* housing policy. If we did, we'd see white people living in trailer parks and not just Latino people.

There is agreement on needing tools to create middle income housing (these exist for low-income housing, can disagree on whether they're used enough).

Hey, does anyone remember Weaver's and Yates' Middle Income Down Payment Assistance Program? No? bouldercolorado.gov/homeownership

Meeting's adjourned, btw. @threadreaderapp please unroll. And thank you.