Thread by @shayshinecastle

Moving quickly onto tonight's public hearing: A 5-year extension of outdoor dining. In case you need another reminder, we're NOT talking about the West Pearl closure tonight. That's for later.

documents.bouldercolorado.gov/WebLink/DocVie…

This has been running since early in the pandemic. boulderbeat.news/2020/05/23/bou…

But it's been kinda hodge-podge: Lots of dif types of infrastructure, restaurants taking over lots of space and not always leaving room for pedestrians or folks with mobility devices.

So the city is doing new, standard rules for everyone.

The current program expiring Aug. 31, 2022
This will be Sept. 1, 2002 - Oct. 31, 2027

Council last discussed April 19
boulderbeat.news/2022/04/23/bou…

Here are the new rules:
1.) “Metal planter boxes capable of holding approximately 1⁄2 cubic yard of soil and/or plants and reflective markers are required for infrastructure placed adjacent to active traffic for safety purpose” Or other materials certified by crash testing

2.) Hard fences or railing required for alcohol service — min of 3 ft high, max of 4 ft

3.) Cap of 500 sq ft per restaurant and 1,000 sq ft total on public right-of-way

4.) Restaurants may have to remove and store outdoor dining infrastructure for city-permitted events; no more than 10 days per month

What council has to decide tonight is how much subsidy to give biz in this program. ARPA $$ is being used for this — council OK'd $250K, and CAGID (the downtown parking district) kicked in $50K

Only biz who spent $$ on outdoor dining during the pandemic an apply for subsidies

Here's what the fees are without subsidies:

Council is also deciding whether the city should buy infrastructure (tables, chairs, walls, etc.) in bulk and lease them to participants, or just do a list of approved stuff and the restaurants themselves buy them.

This is all tied up with the subsidies, because which option determines how much things cost.

Option A
- Restaurants buy own infrastructure
- One-year permit fee for use of Right-Of-Way: $18.76/sq ft on the mall; $13.13/sq ft off
- Subsidies of up to $2,500
- Restaurants responsible for installation and storage

Option B
- City buys infrastructure in bulk
- Same permit fee for use of right-of-way
- $16.25/sf on mall and $21.87/sq ft Off Mall fee for infrastructure; a 50% discount
- City will install and store infrastructure

Option C (only for private property)
- Restaurants purchase, install and store infrastructure
- Subsidy of up to $2,500 available
- No annual cost to restaurants (because they don't need a permit for the right-of-way)

One other super interesting thing from staff notes... they tried to use Boulder's new racial equity tool.

Every dept is supposed to be doing this for all budget decisions, new programs, city policies, etc. but most don't seem to be using it.

Anyway, they tried to assess the outdoor dining program using it but it turns out that Boulder is too white.

“Given the demographics of Boulder, we lack adequate input from people of color," staff wrote. "Input was gained from stakeholders that primarily represent a White demographic."

For reference, the City of Boulder is:
- 79% White
- 10% Hispanic or Latinx
- 6% Asian
- 3% two or more races

"This leads us to a broader question that outdoor dining alone cannot address — how do we make the City of Boulder more inclusive?" staff wrote to council.

They suggested that Boulder "speak to other communities who have implemented outdoor dining programs, particularly communities that have a larger demographic of people of color" to determine racial equity implications.

If you are guessing that my headline on this story is, "Boulder's too white to use its racial equity tool," you're gosh darn right it is.

I do want to note that I've received feedback in the past from PoC that they hate this framing of "Boulder's so white" because it ignores that they are here and part of Boulder. That is a super important perspective to include.

We may hear more on this later, though it's not really the major decision/discussion point. Just something that jumped out at me.

Wallach: Why are we charging more for this on the mall vs. off? Does data support that?

Cris Jones, director of Community Vitality: Those revocable permit fees were established long before outdoor dining. We're just using the existing ones.

Edward Stafford: That's been in city ordinance for many years, because "it was presumed there was a higher value for that land on the bricks than elsewhere." Its set upon market rate leases. It hasn't been evaluated or changed in many years.

Wallach: "Lease rates are one thing. Profitability is another."

Sigh-O-Meter: 1

Some of these fees seem arbitrary, Wallach says. "Where does it all come from?"

Stafford: The application fees are based on estimates of staff time, to get to cost recovery. That policy was set in 1994. Lease fees for public ROW is based on lease rates.

Stafford: We are looking at our fees in the next couple of years, but that's a big job. Again, these are all pre-established fees.

Revocable permits are issued for 3 years; lease of outdoor dining infrastructure will match that, says city attorney Sandra Llanes.

Any lease 3 years or greater needs to go through council, so this will not require that (which adds a bit of time).

Jones: It will let us check in on how things are going, too. Hopefully at that 3-year mark, we can check in and possibly extend the program.

The pilot itself is a 5-year program, but again, longer leases need council approval. So that would be a lot of red tape.

Folkerts: 4-ft opaque fences are pretty tall when you're seated. I'm not sure that adds to the streetscape.

Jones: Alcohol licenses require a 3-ft barrier. We proposed a 4-ft max. We could revise that down; "we just wanted to provide some level of flexibility."

Only 1 person signed up for public hearing. Guess this isn't the hot ticket I thought it might be.

Benjamin: "I'm uncomfortable with an idea that we're investing in, that biz are investing in, can kinda just go away" and sunset.

Wants a check-in at the 2-yr mark to "make it permanent" if it's working. "Idk that we need 5 years to totally determine" that.

Also has an issue that places that don't want to continue with "official" outdoor dining program have to take down their stuff by Aug. 31 of this year.

"It's an odd time to tell people to pull the rug out," Benjamin says, bc it will still be nice out.

The end of the current program is tied to liquor laws and emergency orders, which are state-level, Jones said. So it's not really in the city's control. Even if the emergency orders extend, restaurants have to go through the state liquor process all over again.

Llanes: "There's an equity issue as well. There are a lot of folks doing work to get in compliance with our code. Then you would have a group of folks who continue doing what their doing and basically get a free pass."

It's a big administrative headache, Mishawn Cook says. Some locations are taking up more room than they will be allowed, which could keep participating restaurants from rightfully taking THEIR space when the new program starts Sept. 1

Speer on the lack of a robust racial equity assessment: It feels a little uncomfortable to me that we didn't get enough feedback from PoC. I'm coming from this perspective that if we're not making a positive step, we're possibly continuing harm.

How can we try to get a sense of racial equity, Speer asks. Is it the people eating outside? I do appreciate the attempt to use it, but it makes me uncomfortable that we didn't get much from it.

Jones: There is other work going on where this tool will work better, including a look at economic vitality.

"In the nature of trying to stand up a program in really short order, it does make it challenging to have a broad, widely inclusive public engagement process."

We can still reach out to people, Jones said, and we will. "We still can continue to listen, but in using the tool right now in this rapid format, it did not provide us with that."

Speer: This is something to check in on when we do that.

Motion to approve the 5-year extension, with a 2-year check-in to make it permanent (not a pilot) if things are going well.

Unanimous vote on that. Outdoor dining will continue.

@threadreaderapp please unroll. Thanks!