Loading...
2 - Approval of May 28, 2002 MinutesCITY OF BOULDER PLANNING BOARD SUMMARY MINUTES May 28, 2002 Council Chambers Room, Municipal Building 1777 Broadway, 5:30 p.m. The following are the minutes of the May 28, 2002 city of Boulder Planning Board meeting. A permanent set of these minutes is kept in Central Records, and a verbatim tape recording of the meeting is maintained for a period of seven yeazs in Central Records (telephone: 303-441-3043). BOARD PRESENT: Macon Cowles Thom Krueger, Vice Chair Simon Mole Tina Nielsen, Chair Alan O'Hashi Beth Pommer BOARD ABSENT: John Spitzer STAFF PRESENT: David Gehr, Assistant City Attorney Mary Lovrien, Board Secretary Peter Pollock, Planning Director 1. CALL TO ORDER Chair T. Nielsen declared a quorum at 5:45 p.m., and the following business was conducted. 2. DISCUSSION OF DISPOSITIONS, PLANNING BOARD CALL-UPS The Board had no comments on the wetland permit for Boulder Auto Park, Lots 2 and 4A, located at 5995 Arapahoe Avenue. 3. ACTION ITEM A. Continuation of consideration of an amendment to Title 9, Land Use Regulations to reduce the residential open space requirements in the RB-D (Regional Business Developing) zoning district. P. Pollock said that at its May 16, 2002 meeting the Board approved a motion to amend the open space requirements for the RB-D zoning district, and this meeting was to approve final language in the ordinance. He explained to the Board, however, that some members of the Gunbarrel Community Association met with the City Manager and the Mayor to discuss planning issues in Gunbarrel. He distributed a letter from the Association requesting that a cross-function task force be implemented consisting of the city, developer and residents. He said that the Council Agenda Committee agreed that some dialogue would be useful with people in Gunbarrel before S:\plan\pb-items~minutes\020528min City of Boulder Planning Board Minutes May 28, 2002 Page 2 proceeding further with the RB-D zoning issue, and he suggested some Planning Board members and County Land Use involvement. He explained that there appears to be a lack of understanding about the concept plans that have been brought forward in the Gunbarre] community, and the Board's engagement in the discussions could lead to a more successful outcome. D. Gehr outlined the options for the Board: 1) approve the motion and leave it in the hands of the Council Agenda Committee in terms of when the item would be reviewed by City Council; 2) table the motion until the Planning Board is ready to review; or 3) to continue the item to a date certain. T. Krueger and S. Mole suggested that the Boazd follow through on its recommendation of approval to City Council, and then let the Council make its decision whether to set the issue aside. M. Cowles added that the approved motion should move forward because the Board has reviewed this issue with the Gunbarrel community and given it careful consideration to how both private and public open space would provide areas that would make the retail and community work well. A. O'Hashi said that he listened to the discussion of this item at the City Council meeting and was concemed aUout whether a change in the open space requirements would change the character of the entire zone. He said that one of the drawbacks of acting too quickly. on the open space reduction is that it would presuppose what the outcome will be in terms of the density. T. Nielsen said she was in favor of defemng this decision because if the Board is being asked to engage in a process, it is difficult to participate if a decision has already been made. B. Pommer said that she opposed the earlier motion because she was concerned about unintended consequences and this still is a concern; also an approval by the Board would defeat an effort to help educate the Gunbarrel community about the issues. MOTION: On a motion by A. O'Hashi, seconded by T. Nielsen, the Planning Board tabled its consideration of an amendment to Title 9, Land Use Regulations, to reduce the residential open space requirements in the RB-D (Regional Business Developing) zoning district (4-2; S. Mole and T. Krueger opposed, and J. Spitzer was absent). M. Cowles said that he thinks that having an extended dialogue with the developer and the Gunbarrel community to develop a consensus would help ensure a very good project. Both M. Cowles and A. O'Hashi volunteered to work with the task force. 4. ADJOURNMENT: The Planning Board adjoumed the meeting at 6:10 p.m. S:\plan\pb-items~minutes\020528min