Item 2 01.23.2020 PB Summary minutes
CITY OF BOULDER
PLANNING BOARD ACTION MINUTES
January 23, 2020
1777 Broadway, Council Chambers
A permanent set of these minutes and a tape recording (maintained for a period of seven years) are
retained in Central Records (telephone: 303-441-3043). Minutes and streaming audio are also available
on the web at: http://www.bouldercolorado.gov/
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT:
Bryan Bowen, Chair
David Ensign
John Gerstle
Lupita Montoya
Sarah Silver
Peter Vitale
Harmon Zuckerman
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT:
None
STAFF PRESENT:
Hella Pannewig, Assistant City Attorney
Cindy Spence, Administrative Specialist III
Chris Meschuk, Interim Planning Director / Assistant City Manager
1. CALL TO ORDER
Chair, B. Bowen, declared a quorum at 6:03 p.m. and the following business was conducted.
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
On a motion by D. Ensign and seconded by H. Zuckerman the Planning Board voted 7-0 to
approve the November 21, 2019 and December 5, 2019 minutes as amended.
3. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
No one spoke.
4. DISCUSSION OF DISPOSITIONS, PLANNING BOARD CALL-UPS / CONTINUATIONS
No items to discuss
5. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS
A. AGENDA TITLE: Public hearing and consideration of a recommendation to city council
regarding amendments to the medium density overlay zone.
Staff Presentation:
C. Meschuk presented the item to the board.
01.23.2020 PB Draft Minutes Page 1 of 3
Board Questions:
C. Meschuk answered questions from the board.
Public Hearing:
1) Lisa Spalding, representing the University Hill Neighborhood Association, spoke in opposition
of the eliminating the Overlay Zone, tabling the item, and proposed an amendment to the
Overlay Zone that would allow flexibility to the developer to build a triplex on the parcel in
question and in exchange the third unit would be permanently affordable. She also proposed that
the three other properties meet the same requirement if they choose to build. She suggested the
cash-in-lieu for the affordable unit could be invested in affordable housing for the neighborhood.
Board Comments:
• D. Ensign said he could not understand the sense of urgency surrounding the Overlay Zone
when it was passed back in 1995 and he was leaning toward eliminating it. He said that it does
not currently make a huge impact. He said the proposal by the Neighborhood Association would
create a lot of work and overlay to apply to one property and questioned if it would be fair. It
could create more complexity. The RM-2 zone appears to be the correct zoning and will be
minimal in terms of neighborhood character.
• P. Vitale said that while he feels for how the student housing issue is being handled, eliminating
the Overlay Zone would create more clarity. He would be in favor.
• S. Silver said she supports how the Neighborhood Association wants to work with city, but she
was not sure if their proposal would be possible to apply to only one or four parcel owners. She
clarified that no design guidelines for this neighborhood have ever transpired. Generally, she was
supportive to eliminate the Overlay Zone.
• B. Bowen said that any complexity within the Code which does not yield a result which is
needed should go away. The concerns of the Neighborhood Association should be addressed
however he said they should not be tied to this item and they may need to go to the state in order
to address any rent control issues. He would be in support of eliminating the Overlay Zone.
• H. Zuckerman agreed and was in support. He said the language was clear to approve as is.
• L. Montoya agreed. She said that less complexity would be better but would like to find a way
for the Neighborhood Association to move forward and to have afford housing in this area.
• J. Gerstle said the original objective of the Overlay Zone has not been met which were to put in
place architectural guidelines that would ensure preservation of neighborhood character. If the
Overlay were eliminated, then we would not be meeting that objection from 1995. He said he
would like to simplify the Code; however, it would seem premature to eliminate the Overlay
Zone if the objective were not met. He liked the Neighborhood Association’s suggestion. He
encouraged staff to investigate the Neighborhood Association’s suggestion and come up with a
proposal for affordable housing in area. He would not support eliminating the Overlay Zone.
• P. Vitale said that now there is a need for more housing types. While we may not know what
was happening when the Overlay Zone was put in place in 1995, currently we know what the
reality is. By removing the Overlay Zone, it could provide a few more homes now. The student
housing issue is a bigger conversation.
• J. Gerstle disputed that the housing has been a big topic for 45-50 years, not just today.
• D. Ensign said that while we do have college students living in the city, perhaps it is not a
zoning issue and the university is a great asset to the city.
01.23.2020 PB Draft Minutes Page 2 of 3
• H. Zuckerman said that the past City Councils did not pass or put any weight on passing design
guidelines for this area.
• L. Montoya said the original intent of the Overlay Zone does not apply any more. The original
improvements are minimal.
Motion:
On a motion by H. Zuckerman seconded by B. Bowen the Planning Board voted 6-1 (J. Gerstle
opposed) to recommend to city council elimination of the medium density overlay zone from the
University Hill area.
6. MATTERS FROM THE PLANNING BOARD, PLANNING DIRECTOR, AND CITY
ATTORNEY
A. City Council proposed moving their meetings from Tuesdays to Thursdays
Staff Comments:
• C. Meschuk informed the board this proposal will not be moving forward. Planning board
meetings will remain on Thursday evenings.
B. Benefits for Boards and Commission Members
Staff Comments:
• C. Meschuk polled the board members if they would prefer to continue to receive an ECO pass,
if they would prefer to receive a pass to the Recreation Center, or an option to choose.
C. Gender Workshop & Training for Planning Board
Staff Comments:
• C. Meschuk informed the board that a vendor has been found. Staff will set up a date shortly.
7. DEBRIEF MEETING/CALENDAR CHECK
8. ADJOURNMENT
The Planning Board adjourned the meeting at 7:27 p.m.
APPROVED BY
___________________
Board Chair
___________________
DATE
01.23.2020 PB Draft Minutes Page 3 of 3