Map / Planning Board / ← 2025-09-16 · 2025-10-07 →
Planning Board · regular
9-30-25 Planning Board Meeting
- Date
- Series
- regular
- Status
- past
- Sources
- YouTube, via the Woven archive; YouTube's automatic captions
Agenda
No agenda items read for this meeting.
Excerpts by topic
AI-read · unreviewed41 mentions; quotes verbatim from the captions or agenda, chosen by a model, unchecked by a personConcerns that they had were obviously flooding, because there's a floodplain pretty much on the majority of this property
The RMX2 zoning allows 10 units per acre, with a density bonus for affordable housing
So overall, we're providing 34% affordable units, as I mentioned, going a little bit above 10 per acre
And I know staff also suggested they were comfortable with this approach to affordable housing
I think there'd have to be a compelling reason and some sort of benefit
LSC did our trip generation letter, and I believe there's some TDM strategies in there
the 50-foot easement was important to the upcoming capital projects of the South Boulder Creek Flood Mitigation Phase 2
It didn't really fit, given our stormwater requirements and mitigating the floodplain
a shrinking supply of land for people who want small livestock, horses, or farm businesses
I have a couple of concerns about the proposed changes to the annexation agreement
concerns about the specific way in which relief from affordable housing provisions is being proposed
Question 3, is the project generally compatible with the goals, et cetera, of the BVCP?
I will encourage the annexation agreement to discourage the square foot increase
everything's draining right to those homes. That's where the floodplain is
to redevelop approximately 7.96 acres of an existing 9.86-acre site at 2952 Baseline Road
tonight's public hearing is about the site and use review at 2952 Baseline Road
Our site and use review to redevelop approximately 7.96 acres of the existing 9.86 acre site at 2952 Baseline Road
The BVCP land use designation for the site is split between community business on the northwest corner and mixed-use business
The property is not individually landmarked or located in a historic district
Including a bicycle share and longboard program that will be available to both residents and employees
In cases of prolonged vacancy, spaces may be converted to residential uses to maintain vibrancy and activity in the area
And that would be subject to call-up by Planning Board
Do we know how many bonus affordable units this height measure would provide?
But that's not to be confused with our new TDM ordinance, which has not gone into effect
but we still do have site review criteria that address parking
we eliminated minimum parking requirements, which means we can't
that transition from the student housing element into this commercial site where we have more housing
in the form-based code for really great, you know, first floor, street-facing public spaces
On the student housing side along 36, we did some other moves that are pretty interesting to me
It's very low carbon use. It's all made out of wood from a structural standpoint
so it alters where the street trees can go
That means it has a place to plug in, or that means that it is on the ground
I would assume their rents are pretty reasonable, given the nature of the plaza
Is there vacancy, or is everything 100% occupied currently?
let's design a building that uses about 65% less energy than a traditional new building
That concrete could be really ripe for some murals
they love this project because it alleviates their long-standing desires for more student housing elsewhere
I think it also fully satisfies the vision of community business and mixed-use business that we have in the BVCP
one around the e-bikes and cargo bikes, and one around asking for an active use
The TDM requirements, because we're operating under subjective TDM requirements
and the second is the site review for 1844 Folsom