Thread by @shayshinecastle

Good (almost) evening, #Boulder. We've got our city council retreat starting in ~14 min, and I'll be tweeting (some of) it.

Tune in, if you're lame. I mean game.

We've got a Wallach sigh even before we start. Amazing.

I think the first hour is just get-to-know-you stuff for council members. Yawn.

I'll tweet it if anyone reveals something truly shocking about themselves.

Like a sixth toe or a third nipple.

Or only three toes, or six nipples.

I have been listening to Meatloaf all day (RIP). I'm not sure it's put me in the right mood for retreat-tweeting.

If you want to read something useful while council is getting to know one another, I could use some eyes on this. Too exhausted to do a solid copy edit.

boulderbeat.news/2022/01/21/bou…

Actually, this get-to-know-you stuff is pretty interesting. Hearing Yates compare and contrast himself to Speer is.... strangely honest.

Fun fact: Yates is the oldest of 7(!)

Speers' personal mission statement (I think I got it): "To courageously and compassionately empower excellence in people, organizations and communities.”

Benjamin was an extra in Star Trek: The Next Generation! A Klingon dog(?), per Friend (his get-to-know-you buddy). This IS interesting.

Friend, an attorney, worked on the Elian Gonzalez case and Bush v. Gore early in her career.

In Florida, obvs

Mayor Brockett was a music major(!) after switching from physics. He sings!

LOLOL. City manager NRV was in a college a cappella group, Rhythm and Shoes. Iconic.

The most interesting thing Wallach and Folkerts had to say about each other was that they were both, once upon a time, dirtbag climbers.

Winer is a collegiate racquetball champion. And a sax player.

Joseph speaks 5 languages, has lived on 3 continents and has 5 brothers.

(Continents are a construct, but still. This is fun facts time.)

I enjoyed that more than I thought I would. Now onto the real business.

First up:
Council was tasked with taking the high-interest topics and a couple reasonable proposals, given staff challenges. And label it with the appropriate urgency: Do it now, push it to 2023, or hire consultants.

They are doing this in pairs.

The goal is to take the 42 proposed priorities down to a few solid asks, bc staff could only commit to 8-10 with current capacity.

Winer and Mayor Brockett are first up, and they were tasked with Housing.

"Some common themes that we heard were a need for more middle-income housing," Brockett says, and "opportunities for additional, less-expensive housing units and gentle infill."

On their list:
- Change the inclusionary housing fees to be based on sq footage vs. number of units (to incentivize smaller units)
- Possibly raising the income threshold for some of that, with higher appreciation (to attract middle-class buyers)

Given HHS' current capacity, "This does not sound like something that could be tackled right away," Brockett says.

That's what came out of 8 separate council ideas on housing, the single-biggest topic of interest. Two tweaks to an existing program (which staff still can't do right now).

Firnhaber: "As we push developers to do more, sometimes that doesn't work." That's why we haven't gotten much if any middle-income affordable ownership housing. "From a financial standpoint, it doesn't work."

Regarding this council proposal, Firnhaber says, "It seems v similar in scope to the update we did to IH four years ago. That was a one-year process to go through."

Brockett and Winer have more housing suggestions. I retract my previous tweet. I thought they were done.

Next Housing thing:
- Change the per-unit open space requirements for housing, which result in bigger and more expensive units, to a rule that ties to the total *building* footprint.

Planning director David Gehr on the capacity to do this: "It's clear, it's possible. The main thing is about resources and timing."

Next Housing thing
- Removing barriers to creating ADUs and co-ops, including removing the saturation limit (for ADUs, which takes up a lot of staff time to calculate)

"We could take a burden off staff," Brockett says.

Other suggestion as part of that is allowing an external *and* internal ADU *if* they could meet all the requirements (design, parking, etc.)

For co-ops, relaxing some of the rules/fees for starting those.

Folkerts has an additional ADU suggestion: Repeal that law that doesn't allow ADUs to be owned (condo-ized) only rented.

I think that involves some complexity bc it requires splitting lots. Council didn't allow that when they redid ADU rules bc they were afraid of speculating by investors.

"That's a pretty major policy shift," Gehr says. "One of the primary underpinnings of ADUs is that they are accessory to the main dwelling, and that the property is managed as one."

Also to consider: Calculations for occupancy limits

We're gonna talk about occupancy regs later, Brockett promises. But I'd like to see those calculated differently for ADU properties.

Winer's add is: TVAP (Transit Village Area Plan) generally
Bergman: What's the specific ask there?
Brockett: Kicking off Phase 2 of the planning process

Gehr: "In the plan itself, there's a number of steps that are supposed to happen. Phase 1 is pretty much close to being built out, so it's prob time to start thinking about opening up Phase 2. There are some studies that need to be done."

Regarding transportation and utility capacity.
Plus some funding will be needed from the city for public improvements.

Winer: "My vision is we have to do so many things to make a dent in middle-income housing, so whatever little things we can start, not to get overwhelmed, but just to start."

Brockett: The specific ask would be to kick off those studies, and then come back to council with next steps.

Folkerts: I know the developers who own property in there are v interested in starting, and are willing to offer upfront costs.

Gehr: That would typically be part of the financial plan. If there were other ppl that participated, that would certainly be a possibility.

Benjamin: Those financial resources would be mostly geared toward consultants to liberate or accompany the limited staff time, to help in jump starting that.

Gehr: "I find that in the field of planning, consultants require an incredible amount of supervision to help meet community objectives. I think it's much more efficient to have things project managed by a staff member."

We can give specific tasks to consultants, Gehr says.

Gehr: "As the dept gets resources back online again, I think we're gonna be staffed up to be able to do this."

Housing by Winer, cont'd:
- Launch the middle-income down payment assistance program, approved by voters in 2019
boulderbeat.news/2019/02/23/bou…

A "bunch of bankers" helped on this, Yates says.
So you KNOW it's good.

Kidding, obviously. It's got pros and cons, like (almost) everything else in this world.

"There are community members who are solidly in the middle income who are saving up for that down payment," Yates says, "but the goalposts keep moving."

The way the program is currently structured is that the city would give a loan to help with down payments, to be repaid with the sale of the home (which would stay affordable, I think, via appreciation caps).

Yates confirms: Each house would be deed restricted forever. "So not only are we helping that first family. We're helping subsequent families."

Benjamin: Do we have any metrics to measure success? Are we trying to get 10 houses a year? 15? 50? So we can look back in 20 years and see if this is worth it to keep putting $$ and staff time into.

Yates: We set a modest goal of 20 houses per year

"This is not going to solve our middle-income problem. This is just one tool in the toolbox," Yates says. "I think it is a shotgun approach. We need to do this thing AND this thing AND this thing..."

"Idk if we have any middle-income housing in Boulder anymore," Yates says.

For ownership, that's prob mostly true. Market rents are still (somewhat) affordable to *Boulder's* middle class. (Our median income being quite high.)

As expert after expert has told me for the past 10 years, incomes aren't buying these homes. Wealth is.

Firnhaber: "Finding a consultant on this program will be the way to go. It's a relatively new idea, so it's gonna take a little bit of effort to figure out details." (appreciation cap, % of down payment the city will loan, etc.)

Some hashing out of those details right now, but this thread really isn't the place for it. I'll update my 2019 story when appropriate. (Like if/when this ever happens.)

Last Housing ask:
- A queue for all these housing proposals, so staff can get to them when they have time.

Basically, let CC rank all these ideas and that's what order they'll get tackled.

JK, one MORE housing ask from Benjamin and Friend:
- Allow duplexes and triplexes on corner lots in single-family zoning districts. And let nonprofits buy SF homes and convert them to *affordable* duplex or triplexes

That would mean the city, via BHP.

"This was something that would have been better to start 50 years ago, when housing prices were lower," Friend says. "If we don't get started pretty soon, we will not be able to do it in the future."

"We might allow ppl to get into neighborhoods at much lower prices than they would otherwise be able to get into neighborhoods," Benjamin says. "This goes back to declining school enrollments," etc.

Folkerts: I could see this being a condition in the code. If you meet certain requirements, you can have an additional dwelling unit. Corner lots, sure, or by a bus line. That way it's not a whole-cloth zoning change.

Friend: Maybe it could be that the *city* could purchase anywhere and convert from SF to duplex/triplex.

Wallach: Do we have a definition of attainable rather than cheaper than a house?

"Have we done any kind of financial analysis as to what this will get us and where?" Wallach says. We're not going to get these on Mapleton Hill. "It's going to be a Martin Acres, Goss Grove thing."

Also may be some legal issues with letting the city follow rules that aren't available to non-gov't actors. (Converting homes anywhere in the city rather than under certain conditions.) But idk.

(That was my conjecture, btw.)

Firnhaber: When we did some financial analysis a few years ago, we found that it took 5-6 units before it even started to make sense to have an affordable unit. But this isn't talking about deed restriction, so it's dif.

We have not done any financial analysis related to these type of code changes, Firnhaber says.

Yates: I get allowing duplexes/triplexes on corner lots. What's the piece about the city buying and converting lots?

Friend: These are two separate ideas.

"I'm trying to get out ahead of creating a stock of homes that remain more affordable" as prices increase, Friend says.

The way she is explaining that is, how I see it, working in conjunction with existing city programs for affordability. But the piece that's not currently in place is allowing those conversions to multiple units.

Anyway, two separate ideas
- Allow duplexes/triplexes on corner lots in RL-1 zoning districts
- Allow the city to convert SF homes to duplexes/triplexes when it purchases them (perhaps through other affordable housing programs)

Wallach Sigh-O-Meter: 2

"There's no question that 3, $1M triplexes are cheaper than a $1.5M home," Wallach says. "But who are we trying to serve?"

"I'm not sure it's doing anything closer to what we desire to achieve," Wallach says.

Wallach Sigh-O-Meter: 3

Folkerts: Allowing extra units with a tie to a price-capped home is prob not going to move ppl to buy land (not enough profit) but it may entice people who already *own* that land to add that extra unit. That's a gentle way to step into this.

Gehr: "This will be a very big lift."

Both ideas are a big lift, to be clear

That's all for the housing ideas. By my count, we took down 8 unwieldy proposals to 7 solid, specific ideas.

Speer: Of these ideas, "what's going to get us the best results fastest?"

And what can council do. I here that staff is constrained. "We are here not just to dictate the work, but to be part of the work," Speer says.

Yates: These all sound like great programs; we should do all of them. But which gets us the most units fastest?

Suggests that staff come back with *that* analysis and *then* council could prioritize these projects according to that.

More process and study. That'll help.

"Don't look at us as Mr. and Mrs. Tuesday night," Yates says, echoing Speer's point that council can do some of the work. (Or wants to... idk if they actually can.)

Speer: I recognize that you all are experts in how to do this. I'm not looking for a detailed assessments or specific numbers of units. I just want to hear your opinions, as experts, in what is going to get us there fastest.

Benjamin: Cheap, fast, good — you get to pick two. Which two of those do we value, and which two do we have control over?

LMAO Brockett forgot a housing idea AGAIN.
- Reduce minimum parking requirements

That's actually part of an earlier proposal, so we'll fold it in.

I have a list! I'll share it later; Gehr is weighing in on what would create the most housing.

"ADU reform and parking reform are eminently doable and probably can be done without bringing the Comprehensive Plan into the conversation."

Thinking of how we calculate density (with open space requirements) can probably also be done more easily, Gehr says.

"A lot of those were intended to result in a suburban outcome, and we're moving away from a suburban outcome."

Duplexes and triplexes are a big project, Gehr repeats.

Firnhaber agrees with Gehr: ADUs are doable.

The down payment assistance program could be done with a consultant, in the second half of the year.

Changing the inclusionary housing rules is a 9-12 month project, Firnhaber says, but it could be started later in the year.

He thinks the down payment assistance program will have the most impact, at 20 houses per year.

"It's hard to make assumptions about that."

Prob similar in number to what we'll get with ADU changes, but it's accomplishing something dif, Firnhaber says.

Changing inclusionary housing rules will also be significant in terms of impact, according to Firnhaber. It's the "work horse" of our affordable housing program. "It's something that we should try to do."

Gehr: We are nearing the end of the East Boulder subcommunity process. TVAP, we could start in Q3, if you direct us to.

Speer: Does that displace any projects you're already doing or wanted to do? If so, what?

Gehr: "We have so little capacity in the dept right now."
Karl Guiler is working on use tables, community benefit/site review

Some of those things could "go on the shelf," and "frankly it might not be a bad idea," Gehr says.

Bc the way we use land has changed due to the pandemic, Gehr explains. It might make sense to wait and see how that settles.

Firnhaber: There's nothing we can stop doing.

HHS plan for the next 6-9 months "is to simply be able to keep the doors open on what we're doing."

We have 18-20 operational staff. We've lost 6-7 of those, Firnhaber says. We're at 40%. We need to fill those positions and add a couple new ones.

Prioritization of The Things may happen tomorrow.

As Bergman says, it might mean ranking items within a topic or priorities from dif topics against one another.

Firnhaber: This year, we're working on Alpine-Balsam, which is the biggest affordable housing project the city has ever done.

Last year, we did 30Pearl, which *was* the biggest affordable housing project the city had ever done.

We've added 400+ affordable units since the start of the pandemic.

Staff shows up every day, Firnhaber says.

We're breaking for dinner, so here's my running list of council's housing priorities, to be ranked tomorrow:

(Feel free to ping me if I'm wrong)

1.) Inclusionary housing changes (per sq ft, raised income level and $$ you can make on it)

2.) Change various density-limiting requirements by building footprint or something, rather than per unit. Examples: open space and parking

3.) ADUs (remove saturation limit, allow internal and external on one lot)
- Maybe condo-ization, applying occupancy differently

4.) Co-ops (easing licensing requirements and fees)

5.) Middle-income down payment assistance program

6.) Allow duplexes, triplexes on corner lots in RL-1 zoning districts

7.) Allow city to purchase SF homes and convert them into duplexes, triplexes

Think I'm gonna wrap this one and start a new thread for our next topic: Homelessness.

@threadreaderapp please unroll. Thanks!