Open Space Advisory Board Minutes 2021 02 10 REVISED

Home Browse Search

type campuses. Anneliese asked if any potential tenants had pulled out recently. Geoff answered they have had inquiries, but no agreements. G. David asked if there is a total number of square feet of development below which the project would no longer be viable. Geoff answered that there was. H. Helen asked whether the city or the developer would be responsible for remediation of open space land. Rob answered that the current dedication is for land that was never developed, so he was not anticipating a major need for remediation. Nathan agreed. I. Helen asked about the proposal's "native" vs "private" landscape zone designation. She asked for some clarification about this distinction. Rob said that the development would have address different types of landscaping and PPLAB would be asked to consult on this. They wouldn't apply to open space land, but could apply to soft surface trails on non -open space land. J. Laura asked about the pond in the northeastern part of the land commenting that the proposal includes a circle of tall buildings around it. Rob said there would be a small easement around the pond. He said the proposal's map is simply conceptual and the actual buildings would be determined during the plat discussion. K. Charles asked about other ponds on the property, Geoff said these are storm water detention ponds. L. Anneliese and Jessamine asked about historical, environmental, and wildlife studies. Jordan said there haven't been any such studies on the land. M. Jessamine asked for more information about clustering the buildings. She asked whether the current Conceptual Site Plan reflected the clustering concept. Geoff and Jordan answered no, the current Conceptual Site Plan is shown without clustering. N. Helen commented that there have been many public comments asking for wildlife or habitat studies. She asked what sort of studies are actually required by law before development projects like this. Rob answered that there is no formal requirement by the City for such studies. Rob added that the developer's proposal does include a habitat plan within its sustainability plan. Jordan said these kinds of studies are complicated, but that there would be surveys before building would begin. Helen asked whether the results of these surveys would be shared with the public and did not receive an answer. O. Ember received 40 public comments emails within the last 24 hours. These comments did not make the packet because the packet was posted a week ago, but she was able to share all of the emails with board members over email. Recent comments will be included in the March meetings packet under the February Minutes. X. Jessamine opened the discussion to the public. A. Stephanie Rowe and Sherry Sommer 631 Westville & 910 S Palisade. They asked the board to delay taking action tonight. They want a more thorough discussion and to see OSAB work proactively rather than being forced to make a reactive decision. They wanted to know whether the developer has done much to optimize preservation. They wanted to know whether OSAB consider animals such as prairie dogs a natural feature of the land. They want to avoid the sprawl of Broomfield. They want to see undisturbed open space at the site. B. Tamar Krantz 691 West Street. Ms. Krantz agreed with Stephanie Rowe. She was surprised to see that the new proposal had reduced the building square footage, but had a similar footprint. She would like to see more clustering. She would like OSAB to hold off on a decision until wildlife surveys were done. C. Beth McQuie 972 St. Andrews Lane. Ms. McQuie commented that it seems irresponsible to vote on this without time to consider and for studies to be done. She pointed out that there is no guarantee from the developer that there would be clustering. She added that landscaping is not the same as open space and that small clusters that fragment the landscape are not good habitat. D. Cyndi Bedell 622 W. Willow Street. Ms. Bedell said that an OSAB vote tonight would be premature before the board has a chance to digest the public's comments and thought a wildlife survey should be done first. She is against lethal control of prairie dogs, particularly using poison. She would like to see the City try to purchase the land for open space. She is very concerned about the projected daily car trips for the land. E. John Leary (did not give an address). Mr. Leary asked about the emails sent to OSAB. He pointed out that Planning Commission letters can be received up to a few days before a meeting and still make it into