I don't really report much on these bc they're kinda boring.
But like most boring things in city gov't, they still matter.
LOL Weaver q to Nagle about a group she's on: Have you heard anything?
No, she says. "I could have missed an email for sure."
Weaver: I haven't heard anything about it at all, "so I would question if that's a real thing."
I was right the first time; this is a really boring discussion.
one interesting thing when making appointments is seeing which council members plan to return. 5 of their terms are up in November: Wallach, Weaver, Young, Nagle, Swetlik.
So far, Weaver said he and Young will probably not be here.
Nagle speaking to that, too. She didn't *explicitly* say she's not returning but did say "I don't want to step up for anything."
Of course, not entirely different from the past. She often cites her long working hours as a reason she doesn't sign up for more stuff.
OK, we're doing another quick check-in on council's homework. I don't remember what exactly it was, but I think it was warm-and-fuzzy feelings stuff.
Not much of a check-in. Bergman just making sure council member did their homework.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Howdy, #Boulder. Got the bandwidth for a city council study session? Maybe not; don't worry, I save these threads, so you can read it whenever you're ready.
Tonight is all about planning for the 2021 retreat, so it should be pretty mellow. Boards/commissions are also giving their feedback, which always has the potential for blowback from council. They've been pretty harsh in years past.
Another big issue (always) is traffic. Transportation study projects a 1,542 reduction in daily vehicle trips (91 more in the morning rush hour but 93 less in the evening rush hour; less throughout the day) when this changes from primarily retail.
Forgot to say the retail on-site will be a marketplace, a la Avanti or Rosetta Hall, called Marketplace @ 29th.
And there will be below-market commercial space
Staff is recommending that council approve the project, with conditions. Planning Board's conditions were: submission of more detailed plans related to outdoor lighting, paying for employee eco-passes, utilities, landscaping, shadow analysis, etc.
OK, Macy's. This got moved from Dec. 1 bc not all the council members were here, and a tie vote may have meant a disapproval of the project (and potentially a lawsuit) boulderbeat.news/2020/12/03/abs…
A tie vote is definitely a possibility. Planning Board OK'd it 4-3.
Reminder on what's being proposed:
1900 28th Street
Adaptive reuse and redesign
11,746 sq ft addition plus outdoor space, landscaping and public amenities
Want to increase building height from 38 feet to 51 feet (two to three stories)
This project went significantly over budget, mostly due to land costs. But apologies; I don't know the final numbers! It's been. along time since I reported on this.
Thanks to Wallach for asking cost info: $675 per sq ft, says Adam Goldstone. $20M in construction costs ... that doesn't include what the city paid for land, which I believe is what put them over budget.