Start Position
Mayor Fullmer opened the joint work session at 6:02 PM. Councilmember Flake gave the invocation and led the Pledge of Allegiance. Due to the logistics of having a Planning Commission quorum, items 2.3, 2.2, the Special Planning Commission Session, and item 2.1 were held in the before-mentioned order.     2.      JOint Work Session and Public hearingS 2.1  DISCUSSION – Lakefront – Boardwalk Park Community Development Director Morgan Brim will lead a discussion on the Lakefront Boardwalk Park.
Mayor Fullmer proceeded to item 2.3 Public Hearing Zoning text Amendment (Ordinance 2022-19). She then called for a motion to open the public hearing.
Motion: COUNCILMEMBER RASMUSSEN MOVED TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 6:05 PM. COUNCILMEMBER FLAKE SECONDED THE MOTION. MAYOR FULLMER, COUNCILMEMBERS FLAKE, RASMUSSEN, AND SIFUENTES VOTED YES. COUNCILMEMBER WELSH WAS EXCUSED. THE MOTION CARRIED WITH ONE ABSENT.
Mr. Brim gave a brief overview of the text amendment requests.He then turned the time over to Pete Evans with Flagborough.
Mr. Evans reviewed the text amendments.
Text Amendment Item #1 - Uses General Requirements 3.08.010 In Table: 3.08.010(1) Uses by District:
Councilmember Sifuentes asked for further details on items a and b of this amendment. Mr. Evans gave an example of wrapping the parking structure with townhomes. There was a discussion about the single-household attached product. Chair Jenkins expressed concern with mixed-use zones having mostly residential. The discussion continued. City Attorney Jayme explained that permitted uses with approval from the council would be obligated to permit the use. Conditional uses are still permitted but with conditions. There was a discussion about permitted and conditional uses.
Text Amendment Item #2 - Prohibited Uses 3.08.010.04
Text Amendment Item #3 - Building Standards 3.10.020 In Table 3.10.020(1)(3) – Street Façade Requirements:   Mr. Evans reviewed the different types of transparency. There was a discussion about transparency/glazing. Nate Hutchinson with Flagborough and Matt Beaton with Nelson Architects participated in the discussion. Chair Jenkins expressed concern with the downtown being more residential than commercial. Mr. Brim summarized that they would allow 60 percent transparency for retail and 35 percent for residential. There was a discussion about retail and residential.
Mr. Evans reviewed the reasons for changing d. Demise lines. There was a discussion about the building styles and heights.
Text Amendment Item #4 - Building Standards 3.10.040 Section 3.10.040:   Mr. Beaton explained that they were trying to provide variety with different types of stoops on the ground level. A discussion ensued.
Text Amendment Item #5 - Structures in Open Space Section 3.12.030 Open Space Types   Mr. Evans showed examples of covered open spaces. Mr. Brim suggested that they could create a list of amenities for pedestrians, restaurants, eateries, etc.. A discussion ensued.
Text Amendment Item #6 - Building Materials Section 3.10.50 Building Standards Additional Design & Mix   Mr. Evans reviewed the recommended changes. A discussion ensued.
Text Amendment Item #7 - Fencing 3.12.10 Open Space General Requirements   Mr. Evans reviewed the recommended changes. Mr. Brim explained that staff had changed it to a site plan process rather than City Planner approval. Mr. Evans explained that they had plans for the Promenade area and would like to add aquatic use as a permitted use. There was a brief discussion about the site plan process.
Text Amendment Item #8 - Temporary Parking 3.14.010 Landscape General Requirements   There was a discussion about temporary parking, landscaping, and timing.
Text Amendment Item #9 - Tree Branch Height 3.14.030 Street Trees and Streetscape Design   There was a brief discussion about the wording in this section.
Text Amendment Item #10 - Parking Study 3.16.010.9 Parking   There was a discussion about requirements for the parking study. The consensus was for staff to work with the developers to come up with a solution.
Mayor Fullmer called for public comments.
Resident Daria Evans, living in The Villas subdivision, expressed concern about tower heights and not being able to see the lake. Mr. Evans replied that they had not designed most of the buildings but the building they were working on would be four (4) stories. He added that there was no maximum height. Ms. Evans asked who would be responsible for paying for the use of electrical vehicle charging stations. Mr. Brim replied that it would be the vehicle owner’s responsibility. Ms. Evans asked about ADA compliance for the stoops, if the development would be family oriented or urban professional, and how many townhomes would be built in Blocks 5 and 6. Mr. Evans replied that there were no townhomes in Blocks 5 and 6, but there would be about 450 apartments. Ms. Evans asked about the milestones in the parking evaluation schedule. Mr. Hutchinson explained that they were reducing density in the requested amendments. Mr. Evans explained that accessibility to the units with stoops would be from the back of the building. Mr. Hutchinson also explained that they wanted the downtown area to be a place for everyone: families and professionals alike.
Mayor Fullmer called for further public comment. Hearing none, she called for a motion to close the public hearing.
Motion: COUNCILMEMBER RASMUSSEN MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 7:42 PM. COUNCILMEMBER FLAKE SECONDED THE MOTION. MAYOR FULLMER, COUNCILMEMBERS FLAKE, RASMUSSEN, AND SIFUENTES VOTED YES. COUNCILMEMBER WELSH WAS EXCUSED. THE MOTION CARRIED WITH ONE ABSENT.
Mayor Fullmer proceeded to item 2.2 PUBLIC HEARING – Zoning Text Amendment (Ordinance 2022-18)     PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL SESSION
Mayor Fullmer called for a motion to open the public hearing.
Motion: COUNCILMEMBER FLAKE MOVED TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 7:44 PM. COUNCILMEMBER SIFUENTES SECONDED THE MOTION. MAYOR FULLMER, COUNCILMEMBERS FLAKE, RASMUSSEN, AND SIFUENTES VOTED YES. COUNCILMEMBER WELSH WAS EXCUSED. THE MOTION CARRIED WITH ONE ABSENT.
Mr. Brim gave a brief overview of the recommended amendments to the Zoning Code for accessory dwelling units.
Mayor Fullmer asked about Section 9. Mr. Brim replied that the unit did not have to be connected to the house. There was a brief discussion about utilities.
Mayor Fullmer called for public comments.
Resident Daria Evans living in The Villas subdivision asked if this was just for new construction or if it was also for existing homes. Mr. Brim replied, yes to both.
Mayor Fullmer called for additional comments. Hearing none, she called for a motion to close the public hearing.
Motion: COUNCILMEMBER SIFUENTES MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 7:49 PM. COUNCILMEMBER RASMUSSEN SECONDED THE MOTION. MAYOR FULLMER, COUNCILMEMBERS FLAKE, RASMUSSEN, AND SIFUENTES VOTED YES. COUNCILMEMBER WELSH WAS EXCUSED. THE MOTION CARRIED WITH ONE ABSENT.
Mayor Fullmer turned the time over to the Planning Commission Chair Bryce Brady to open the Planning Commission’s Special Session.   2.3  PUBLIC HEARING – Zoning Text Amendment (Ordinance 2022-19) The City Council and Planning Commission will hold a joint public hearing to receive public comment regarding proposed zoning text amendments to modify the District Use Table, change the street façade requirements, modify the parking study section, and change other minor aesthetic requirements of the Downtown Vineyard Special Purpose Zoning District.
Chair Brady opened the special session at 7:49 PM.     3.      Business Items 3.1  Discussion and Action - Zoning Text Amendment (Ordinance 2022-18) The Planning Commission will consider and discuss the proposed zoning text amendments to Section 15.34.060 Accessory Dwelling Units. The zoning text amendment would allow accessory dwelling units to be located within a detached accessory structure. The Planning Commission will consider and discuss a recommendation to the City Council.
Chair Brady called for questions. Hearing none, he called for a motion.
Motion: COMMISSIONER BOWN MOVED TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF ORDINANCE 2022-18 ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS. COMMISSIONER ANDERSON SECONDED THE MOTION. ROLL CALL WENT AS FOLLOWS: CHAIR BRADY, ALTERNATE COMMISSIONERS ANDERSON AND BOWN VOTED YES. COMMISSIONERS BLACKBURN, BRAMWELL, GUDMUNDSON, AND JENKINS WERE EXCUSED. THE MOTION CARRIED WITH FOUR ABSENT.   3.2  Discussion and Action - Zoning Text Amendment (Ordinance 2022-19) The Planning Commission will consider and discuss the proposed zoning text amendments to modify the District Use Table, change the street façade requirements, modify the parking study section, and change other minor aesthetic requirements of the Downtown Vineyard Special Purpose Zoning District. The Planning Commission will consider and discuss a recommendation to the City Council.
Chair Brady turned the time over the Mr. Brim.
Mr. Brim read the suggested amendments: 1.      3.08.010(1) Use section: a.      Single-household detached uses are to be listed as a conditional use in the Downtown Station, Downtown Mixed-Use, Village General, and Lakefront Commercial districts with a limit of five (5) percent of total units. b.      Single-household attached uses are to be listed as a conditional use in the Downtown Station, Downtown Mixed-Use, and Lakefront Commercial Districts with a limit of five (5) percent total units. 2.      3.10.020(1)(1) Street Façade Requirements: a.      Minimum Ground Story Transparency shall be 35 percent for residential uses and 60 percent for commercial uses. 3.      3.10.040 Entrance Types a.      Provide an exception to stoops and porch requirements for buildings containing a paseo or courtyard. The requirements in the current code will remain as a default standard. A discussion ensued. 4.      3.12.030 Open Space Type: a.      Add language to the plaza and open space area sections that spaces in excess of the requirements will require site plan approval for non-residential structures.
Chair Brady called for a motion.
Motion: COMMISSIONER BOWN MOVE TO RECOMMEND ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE 2022-19 DOWNTOWN VINEYARD SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICT AS MENTIONED IN THE RECORD WITH THE CONDITIONS AND SUGGESTED AMENDMENTS. COMMISSIONER ANDERSON SECONDED THE MOTION. ROLL CALL WENT AS FOLLOWS: CHAIR BRADY, ALTERNATE COMMISSIONERS ANDERSON AND BOWN VOTED YES. COMMISSIONERS BLACKBURN, BRAMWELL, GUDMUNDSON, AND JENKINS WERE EXCUSED. THE MOTION CARRIED WITH FOUR ABSENT.
MayorFullmerreopenedtheworksessionat 7:55 PM.
Mr. Brim gave a brief overview of the Waterfront Master Plan process. He then turned the time over to Susie Petheram and Will Linscott with FFKR Architects.
Ms. Petheram explained that they would be focusing on the area known as the North Waterfront Area. She said that there were seven (7) proposed areas that they would be discussing today. She said that the project would start around the north end by the reclamation pond going to the south promenade. She mentioned that the lake road design was still under consideration. She turned the time over to Mr. Linscott.
Mr. Linscott reviewed each of the seven (7) areas:
a. Boardwalk, Viewing platform, and Trail – where the retention pond is located now
b. North Beach Plaza, Terraces, and Pavilion
c. North Beach Mall – Promenade and Waterfront Connection
d. Boardwalk Park
e. Enhanced Tree Grove
f. Stormwater Garden and Memorial Grove – South Beach Access
g. Streetscape and Trail Enhancements
Mayor Fullmer asked about the timeline and the feedback they wanted to see. Ms. Petheram replied that they would like to see initial reactions, from the council to the programing and their priorities in these areas.
There was a discussion about the wetlands and the projects that could be done. Mr. Brim mentioned that there were grant funds that needed to be used by December 2023. The consensus was to send FFKR their ideas within the next two weeks. The discussion continued.   2.2  PUBLIC HEARING – Zoning Text Amendment (Ordinance 2022-18) The City Council and Planning Commission will hold a joint public hearing to receive comments regarding proposed zoning text amendments to Section 15.34.060 Accessory Dwelling Units. The zoning text amendment would allow accessory dwelling units to be located within a detached accessory structure.
The City Council took a break at 8:30 PM. The meeting resumed at 8:40 PM.     CITY COUNCIL REGULAR SESSION
Mayor Fullmer opened the regular session at 8:40 PM.     4.      Public Comments
Mayor Fullmer called for public comments.
Ms. Evans thanked staff for the 4-way stop at the intersection near Trailside Elementary. She stated that she appreciated the Utah County Sheriffs for watching the area. She also asked to have stop lights at Vineyard Loop Road and 400 North. Mr. Ghandour replied that the signal for 400 North and Main was out for bid. He explained that it should take about five (5) months to install the lights once the bid was approved. There was a discussion about the process for installing traffic calming measures in the city. Ms. Evans expressed concern about children’s safety crossing streets. Mr. Ghandour explained that he was working with a consultant on safe routes to schools. The discussion continued.
Mayor Fullmer called for further public comments. Hearing none, she closed the public comments session. 5.      Mayor and COUNCILMEMBERS’ REPORTS/DISCLOSURES/RECUSALS
Councilmember Sifuentes reported that the Boo-a-Palooza event was well attended. She gave an update on the Orem School District proposition. She said that she was working with Orem and the city’s state legislature on how this would affect Vineyard.     6.      STAFF, COMMISSION, and committee REPORTS 6.1
City Manager Ezra Nair tuned the time over to the new Planning Technician Rachel Stevens who introduced herself. Mr. Nair reported that the road striping was continuing and that they would be striping the crosswalk at the intersection near the Trailside Elementary. He mentioned that there would be two open houses for the Central Corridor Master Plan on November 3; one at the Edgewater Clubhouse and one at the Utah Valley Homebuilders Association building. He also mentioned that staff  would be working on job audits for the market and organizational study.     7.      CONSENT ITEMS 7.1  Approval of the October 12, 2022, City Council Meeting Minutes
Mayor Fullmer called for a motion.
Motion: COUNCILMEMBER RASMUSSEN MOVED TO APPROVE CONSENT ITEM 7.1. COUNCILMEMBER FLAKE SECONDED THE MOTION. MAYOR FULLMER, COUNCILMEMBERS FLAKE, RASMUSSEN, AND SIFUENTES VOTED YES. COUNCILMEMBER WELSH WAS EXCUSED. THE MOTION CARRIED WITH ONE ABSENT.     8.      Appointments 8.1  Youth Council Executive Committee With the advice and consent of the City Council, Mayor Fullmer will appoint members to the Youth Council Executive Committee.
Mayor Fullmer read the names of the Youth Council Executive Committee and called for a motion. The names were: Youth Mayor - Alexa Dadson; Recorder - McKensey Scott; Youth City Manager - vacant; Meeting and Elections Chair - Shean Gudmundson; Service Chair - Natalie Welsh; Activity Chair - vacant; Beautification Chair - Ashlyn May.
Motion: COUNCILMEMBER FLAKE MOVED TO APPROVE THE APPOINTMENTS AS PRESENTED. COUNCILMEMBER SIFUENTES SECONDED THE MOTION. MAYOR FULLMER, COUNCILMEMBERS FLAKE, RASMUSSEN, AND SIFUENTES VOTED YES. COUNCILMEMBER WELSH WAS EXCUSED. THE MOTION CARRIED WITH ONE ABSENT.   9.      Presentations/recognitions/awards no items were submitted.     10.  BUSINESS ITEMS 10.1       Discussion and Action - Zoning Text Amendment (Ordinance 2022-18) The City Council will discuss the proposed zoning text amendments to Section 15.34.060 Accessory Dwelling Units. The zoning text amendment would allow accessory dwelling units to be located within a detached accessory structure. The mayor and City Council will act to adopt (or deny) this request by ordinance.
Mayor Fullmer called for further comments or questions. Hearing none, she called for a motion.
Motion: COUNCILMEMBER SIFUENTES MOVED TO ADOPT ORDINANCE 2022-18 ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS. COUNCILMEMBER RASMUSSEN SECONDED THE MOTION. ROLL CALL WENT AS FOLLOWS: MAYOR FULLMER, COUNCILMEMBERS FLAKE, RASMUSSEN, AND SIFUENTES VOTED YES. COUNCILMEMBER WELSH WAS EXCUSED. THE MOTION CARRIED WITH ONE ABSENT.   10.2       Discussion and Action - Zoning Text Amendment (Ordinance 2022-19) The City Council will discuss the proposed zoning text amendments to modify the District Use Table, change the street façade requirements, modify the parking study section, and change other minor aesthetic requirements of the Special Purpose Zoning District. The mayor and City Council will act to adopt (or deny) this request by ordinance.
Mayor Fullmer added additional stipulations. 1.      Demise lines requirements are not applicable to buildings over six stories. A discussion ensued.   2.      Building materials being conditional. Mr. Evans mentioned that they had already added the architectural metal panels to the ordinance.
Parking study – Mr. Blakesley explained that he had put together some language for the parking study. He read the language.
Mr. Brim stated that under the “Uses” during the Planning Commission Special Session he had listed the single-household detached as a conditional use. He said that the developers would prefer a five (5) percent cap and keep the use permitted. Mr. Evans explained that the cap would meet the original code and keep the character of the area.
Mr. Hutchinson said that if they both agreed with the first consultant then they could agree to use the same consultant moving forward. A discussion ensued about the length of time to use the consultants.
Mayor Fullmer asked for clarification on the green space for the temporary parking lot. Mr. Brim clarified that it was 25 percent for 7 years.
The discussion continued about the parking study.
Mayor Fullmer called for a motion.
3.16.010.9 Parking Study The parking study shall be completed by a qualified professional with demonstrated experience in conducting parking studies (a “parking expert”). The parking expert and the criteria for the parking study shall be established jointly by the city and the developer. If the city and developer cannot agree on a parking expert or the criteria for the parking study, then the dispute shall be resolved as follows: the city and the developer shall each nominate a Parking expert within thirty (30) days from the date of a request for a parking study. The two parking experts shall consult and select a third parking expert to conduct the parking study. The selected parking expert shall conduct the parking study using criteria he or she develops following consultation with the city and the developer, which study shall be used to establish new parking requirements. To avoid the need to re-select a parking expert, the process of selecting a parking expert shall not occur more frequently than at seven-year intervals.
Motion: COUNCILMEMBER FLAKE MOVED TO ADOPT ORDINANCE 2022-19 DOWNTOWN VINEYARD SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICT, WITH THE FOLLOWING MODIFICATIONS AS STATED IN THE RECORD: 1.      3.08.010(1) Use section: a.      Single-household detached uses are to be listed as a permitted use in the Downtown Station, Downtown Mixed-Use, Village General, and Lakefront Commercial districts with a limit of five (5) percent of total units per district. b.      Single-household attached uses are to be listed as a permitted use in the Downtown Station, Downtown Mixed-Use, and Lakefront Commercial Districts with a limit of five (5) percent total units per district. 2.      3.10.020(1)(3) Street Façade Requirements: a.      Minimum Ground Story Transparency shall be 35 percent for residential uses and 60 percent for commercial uses. 3.      3.10.040 Entrance Types a.      Provide an exception to stoops and porch requirements for buildings containing a paseo or courtyard. The requirements in the current code will remain as a default standard. 4.      3.12.030 Open Space Type: a.      Add language to the plaza and open space area sections that spaces in excess of the requirements will require site plan approval for non-residential structures. 5.      3.16.010(9) Minimum Vehicular Parking The parking study shall be completed by a qualified professional with demonstrated experience in conducting parking studies (a “parking expert”). The parking expert and the criteria for the parking study shall be established jointly by the city and the developer. If the city and developer cannot agree on a parking expert or the criteria for the parking study, then the dispute shall be resolved as follows: the city and the developer shall each nominate a Parking expert within thirty (30) days from the date of a request for a parking study. The two parking experts shall consult and select a third parking expert to conduct the parking study. The selected parking expert shall conduct the parking study using criteria he or she develops following consultation with the city and the developer, which study shall be used to establish new parking requirements. To avoid the need to re-select a parking expert, the process of selecting a parking expert shall not occur more frequently than at seven-year intervals.   COUNCILMEMBER RASMUSSEN SECONDED THE MOTION. ROLL CALL WENT AS FOLLOWS: MAYOR FULLMER, COUNCILMEMBERS FLAKE, RASMUSSEN, AND SIFUENTES VOTED YES. COUNCILMEMBER WELSH WAS EXCUSED. THE MOTION CARRIED WITH ONE ABSENT.   11.  CLOSED SESSION No closed session was held.     12.  ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Fullmer called for a motion to adjourn the meeting.
Motion: COUNCILMEMBER FLAKE MOVED TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 9:13 PM. COUNCILMEMBER SIFUENTES SECONDED THE MOTION. MAYOR FULLMER, COUNCILMEMBERS FLAKE, RASMUSSEN, AND SIFUENTES VOTED YES. COUNCILMEMBER WELSH WAS EXCUSED. THE MOTION CARRIED WITH ONE ABSENT.     MINUTES APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL ON:   November 9, 2022                                                                      MINUTES APPROVED BY PLANNING COMMISSION ON: December 7, 2022   CERTIFIED CORRECT BY:      Pamela Spencer, CIty Recorder
We're rolling. 00:00:00
Alright, it is October 26, 2022 and I'd like to open our joint vineyard. 00:00:02
City Council and Planning Commission meeting. 00:00:10
The time is 603. Please remember to silence your cell phones. 00:00:12
And we'll go ahead and. 00:00:17
Get started. We'll have an invitation by Tyson. He'll lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance as well. 00:00:19
Alright, Heavenly Father, we give you thanks for this day, this opportunity we have together, together. 00:00:29
Deal with the concerns and needs of our fair city mean, I said. Blessings will be upon all of those who serve. 00:00:34
Especially would seek a blessing upon our emergency. 00:00:40
Officials are policemen or firemen. 00:00:44
And our medical people who care for us. We thank you, Father, for the moisture that has fallen. 00:00:47
As we greatly needed. 00:00:53
Yes, said blessed weapon, All those in need and we say stupid Jesus Christ. Amen. Please stand. 00:00:55
I pledge allegiance through the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands. 00:01:05
One nation under God. 00:01:12
Indivisible with liberty and justice for all. Thank you. 00:01:14
Alright. 00:01:20
To this time, we're going to be switching a few of our discussion items. 00:01:22
So and we'll put 2.12 point three or two point one, 2.2 and 2.3 in reverse. So we'll start out with our public hearing Zoning Text 00:01:27
Amendment Ordinance 2022, Dash 19. 00:01:33
And the City Council and Planning Commission are going to both be talking about this. Morgan's going to kick us off. And so Morgan 00:01:40
will just let you start and turn the time over. 00:01:44
Yeah, and well, that's a good idea to open it first. So I'll need a motion to open a public hearing. 00:01:49
So moved by Amber. 00:01:55
Second, Second by ties, all in favor, aye? 00:01:58
Hi. 00:02:01
All right. 00:02:02
You're now in a public hearing. Great. Thank you. Madam Mayor. Former. I've got lots of public comments on. Thank you. 00:02:03
So I'll, I'll, I'll review just really quickly. So the applicant for the downtown Flag Borough that's a. 00:02:09
That is Flagship and Woodbury combined. 00:02:16
And they are applying for several text amendments to our downtown vendor, Special Purpose District. 00:02:20
And I just wanna wanna explain that they'll get into the the meat of those. 00:02:26
And now, as we know, we spent the last 7-8 years planning and designing our downtown, especially within the last three years, 00:02:30
getting a much higher level detail. 00:02:35
We anticipated as projects came in. 00:02:41
It being our special purpose zoning district, being a form based code, meaning that it's very prescriptive, it has. 00:02:44
A lot of dimensional requirements for like windows and entryways, porches and whatnot, and you know, landscaping, open spaces. 00:02:51
We we kind of anticipated that the first projects would help guide us to so that we could do further modifications and and and be 00:03:00
able to implement the plan that was put that was put put in place by by Jeff Speck. 00:03:06
And so these these are amendments to that they are not increasing density or anything like that. They're simply allowing us to 00:03:13
modify some of the architectural standards and also gets into some of the. 00:03:20
The requirements for a parking study and so there, there's a few changes there as well. So without any further ado, I'd like to 00:03:27
turn this over to I think it's Pete. Great. And we'll go from there. Thank you. 00:03:32
Is it? Is it? 00:03:43
Easier for. 00:03:44
Me to plug in. 00:03:46
I think cash is going to be able to. 00:03:48
OK. 00:03:50
Great. 00:03:52
Um, so appreciate the opportunity. 00:03:53
To visit with you about this tonight and as Morgan said. 00:03:56
We we, we kind of always knew that as we designed our first set of buildings and and even. 00:04:00
Beyond that, there will be some constraints and. 00:04:05
Just executional items that we run into that will need to fine tune. 00:04:08
From from a really broad form based code. 00:04:13
Some of those we've captured here tonight, we've tried to capture all of them so that you know we're not coming back over and over 00:04:16
again. 00:04:19
As we design other styles of buildings, we may run into other. 00:04:22
Architectural issues that that will. 00:04:26
Need to talk about as well, but I think this is a a pretty good summary as we've laid out blocks what we call blocks 5:00 and 00:04:29
6:00. 00:04:33
Down on the West End of the Promenade. 00:04:36
And and designing buildings worked with staff and really appreciate. 00:04:39
Their time and effort in in not only working through these but then also. 00:04:42
The process that we line out as we go through, as we submit. 00:04:46
Before these first set of buildings and. 00:04:50
And the the complications that come with submitting. 00:04:52
The first two buildings of many buildings in a large scale master plan. 00:04:56
And how? 00:05:00
That interacts with the code that would that really anticipated kind of 1 building at a time. 00:05:02
Type of building, which is what most most codes are geared for. 00:05:08
And so with that, if we can go to the next slide, cash. 00:05:11
And so the. 00:05:15
I I try to break these up into sections of the code and we'll just kind of go through the summary of. 00:05:17
What they ask is and the code change and then I can talk a little bit about why we're asking for the change and then hopefully in 00:05:24
some of these were examples would help illustrate the point. We have some examples in here as well. 00:05:31
So the first one is to modify the downtown station district. 00:05:38
Table the use table. 00:05:41
So there there's a table in the in the code. 00:05:43
That winds out what we what each district area. 00:05:46
Is is permitted and not permitted to do as far as building types? 00:05:50
We'd like to add to the downtown station district use table. 00:05:54
Single household attached as a permitted use, so those would be like townhomes. 00:06:00
We we have, for example, an area in. 00:06:06
One of the more dense blocks in in what we call block one where we're looking at. 00:06:08
Like a a rose style brownstone walk up, a product that we think would be really complementary. 00:06:14
To some of the more dense, taller buildings on that block. Currently we're not allowed to do a A. 00:06:21
A townhome product like this. A single family attached product. 00:06:27
Similarly on the downtown mixed-use. 00:06:31
And then in the lakefront commercial district. 00:06:34
We'd like to add single household attached. 00:06:39
Has permitted these ones with an asterisk. 00:06:41
The asterisks would say that the the permitted use would be limited. 00:06:44
To 5% or less of the overall units in that district. 00:06:48
So that we're still keeping the intent of the density that the city is expecting. 00:06:52
But we're allowing the flexibility. 00:06:57
For the additional product types. 00:06:59
In the downtown mixed-use district, single household detached as a permitted use with an asterisk so. 00:07:02
That would be in addition to the the single family or single household attached townhomes. 00:07:07
We could have it actually like a single family detached home. 00:07:14
We had a situation that I can show you an example of. 00:07:17
Where we had two paseos coming together in a Plaza. 00:07:20
And the urban planners and said, hey, this would be a great place. 00:07:23
For like a live work unit just to create some activity on this Plaza. 00:07:27
And keep keep that activity. 00:07:31
And going. 00:07:33
But you know, the code didn't allow for that use even with like a live work unit where we would have. 00:07:35
Like a a you know, an an attorney or an accountant or. 00:07:41
And you know, retail or small retail? 00:07:45
To take on the 1st floor with with residential above. 00:07:48
On a detached building, we wouldn't be able to do that. 00:07:52
Again, these these later ones would be within Asterisk so that we're still keeping to the purpose and intent. 00:07:54
Of the density that was planned for these areas. 00:08:01
But adding in this additional product type that would allow for a little more flexibility on the uses. 00:08:03
Village General, District. Amend the table to include single household detached as permitted with an asterisk. 00:08:09
And lakefront commercial similarly? 00:08:16
Detached with an asterisks. 00:08:19
Um. 00:08:23
Any any questions on those? 00:08:25
Any questions? No. 00:08:30
Planning Commission. 00:08:32
Yeah. 00:08:34
OK. 00:08:36
Are you sure? 00:08:36
Could you explain? 00:08:40
Because I. 00:08:43
I appreciate the. 00:08:44
All of the ones with the abstract. Could you explain maybe? 00:08:45
How many we're looking at with A&B because. 00:08:48
Like we just explain it a little bit more. Yeah, so, so A&B, those ones would be so for example. 00:08:51
In the downtown station and the downtown mixed-use area. 00:08:57
Where we're planning, for example, a parking structure. 00:09:01
And we're planning to wrap that parking structure with townhomes, you know, single, family, single. 00:09:04
Single. 00:09:10
Household. 00:09:11
Attached townhomes to hide that. 00:09:12
Parking structure. 00:09:14
Then you know the those would be kind of more the. 00:09:16
Complementary uses. 00:09:19
So we're we're not anticipating. 00:09:20
Like a townhome development, standalone townhome development per se. 00:09:23
It would be a complementary use that would. 00:09:26
Wrap parking structures, for example, or. 00:09:30
Have like a standalone. 00:09:33
Like a few higher end brownstone units on a Plaza and a paseo. 00:09:35
Something like that. So you know we we would anticipate those to still be less than 5% but. 00:09:40
Those felt like in those more dense districts, they didn't. 00:09:46
Really need to be limited because those areas are gonna want to be more dense anyway. 00:09:49
Yeah, yeah. I mean, if if there's a concern, we'd be happy to. 00:09:55
Cap it at 5%. 00:09:59
But I I don't. 00:10:00
I don't foresee us getting to 5%. 00:10:02
There, those those blocks are gonna be more dense. 00:10:05
Umm. 00:10:08
I would like advice from planning if we feel that an asterisk would be. 00:10:09
Faster if we're OK without it. 00:10:13
And we're we're, we're fine either way. I mean the the thought was that's a less dense product type being being proposed in that 00:10:19
in that district. 00:10:23
And so we know kind of increasing density is typically the more controversial thing. And so I, you know if they're proposing a 00:10:27
less dense type from a staff standpoint we we don't, we don't really have any issues with it. So either either way we could add it 00:10:31
if you wanted. 00:10:36
No, it's fine. Thank you. 00:10:40
Morgan, while you're up there. 00:10:41
Question on I I get that. 00:10:43
Reducing densities typically less controversial. 00:10:46
However. 00:10:49
We're designing a downtown here. 00:10:50
And if it just becomes a clone of everything that's already South of the connector, that is a concern of mine. 00:10:52
If it loses that downtown feel or what we were going for. 00:10:59
And becomes just more of. 00:11:03
Yeah, Yeah. I mean our own product that that already exists the our feeling is that it provides kind of a complimentary and it 00:11:05
provides like like some some some variety that you would see and. 00:11:10
It's something that was more of an organic downtown that had that had grown up as opposed to just like community accountability 00:11:15
and real townhomes or something like that like adding those specific product types in the line for that I think would provide some 00:11:20
interest in some variation. 00:11:24
But yeah, we we could add the 5%. It just doesn't. Yeah, I mean I guess the the concern, I just wanna the concern I just wanna 00:11:30
voice is that. 00:11:33
Most mixed areas that we have zoned. 00:11:37
Are not mixed and they are just residential. 00:11:40
And if this just becomes another. 00:11:43
Essentially residential area. That's a major concern to me, yeah. 00:11:45
Yeah, that's an easy out. Like I said, I I think in those blocks we didn't put the asterisks because we don't, we don't anticipate 00:11:51
even coming close on that, but happy to. 00:11:54
Put the cap on just so that everybody's on the same page can Anthony, you felt like the 5%? 00:11:58
Answered your question and. 00:12:03
Satisfied you? Yeah, I think so. But even with the 5%, I I would just want to make sure that we capture the essence of what a 00:12:05
downtown is that we're trying to build and it doesn't just become. 00:12:09
You know extend. 00:12:15
Everything that's already built NA little bit more that it is something that unique that we that we're preparing for. Did you 00:12:16
wanna capture that essence with adding verbiage or were you feeling comfortable with that probably captures that but that that's 00:12:21
just I mean that's my overarching feedback on any of these changes is there's a lot of work that's gone into this downtown zoning 00:12:26
code and I want to make sure that the. 00:12:31
Minor modifications, fine, but the essence of it, so yeah, we we totally agree. So if you go to the the next slide here, this is 00:12:37
kind of an example of. 00:12:41
Where we had two paseos coming together and there's a little Plaza in the back like a a little conjunction of those that red 00:12:45
squares where the urban planners. 00:12:50
But hey, this could be a really cool, like standalone. 00:12:55
Single family, if you go to the next slide, here's some concepts of that, so you can see kind of that single family. 00:12:58
House tucked back on that Plaza. 00:13:04
But still surrounded by, you know, kind of the character and nature of the density that. 00:13:06
We were talking about in the urban environment. 00:13:10
So. 00:13:13
So if you go to the next one, it shows a little more clearly. 00:13:14
So that that's kind of like a you know plan is like a live work. 00:13:17
Unit with some kind of a, you know, public area on the main floor with the residential on the top floor. 00:13:20
They go to the next slide. 00:13:27
Another another variation of what that could look like. 00:13:29
And then finally the next one. 00:13:32
You know, just kind of showing. 00:13:35
Different variations of of what that condition. The next slide shows a more of a retail condition. 00:13:37
That you could have there where you could have, you know, kind of a. 00:13:42
One of the other. 00:13:46
Items in the code is that there there aren't any single story buildings. 00:13:49
And so, you know, we've asked them to modify that so that we could have. 00:13:52
Um, single story buildings on approval. We could ask for approval for single story buildings instead of having the not not 00:13:57
permitted. 00:14:01
Because there will be some retail users. 00:14:05
Like little coffee shop stands or. 00:14:07
Apple Store for example. 00:14:10
That want their own single level building and and you know. 00:14:12
We we think you know. 00:14:17
To provide that flexibility is important and not have it be permitted necessarily, but have it be permittable. 00:14:18
Are you proposing that as a conditional use or no? As a permittable use, so it's a permitted use? You say upon approval? What are 00:14:26
the standards you would apply to that? 00:14:30
Well, it would have to be a site plan that we proposed to. 00:14:36
Planning Commission and City Council. 00:14:40
OK. 00:14:41
I guess I'm not opposed to that. I just want to make sure the Council and the Planning Commission understands that. 00:14:43
If it's permitted with approval, legally it's a permitted use. 00:14:48
And so if they submit an application that complies with the ordinance. 00:14:52
Would be obligated to. 00:14:56
To permit that. 00:14:58
Just curious, so if we made it under a conditional use, we wouldn't be obligated? 00:15:05
You're still obligated, but you're allowed to apply standards and. 00:15:10
Modifying the site plan according to those standards. This would be something in between. 00:15:15
And I would view it as a permitted use as that term is used in state law. 00:15:20
And and we just. 00:15:26
For the record, we'd be OK changing that to a conditional use, I think. 00:15:27
I think what you're describing, Jamie, on the conditional use process is probably more what we were envisioning anyway. 00:15:31
And and I please don't take my comment as negative or or saying that it's a bad idea. I just want to make sure it's understood 00:15:37
what it means. No, I think legally when you approve the ordinance that process I think. 00:15:42
The conditional use process was kind of what we were envisioning, where we would come in with a proposal. 00:15:48
The the idea on my part was just not have it be unpermitted. 00:15:53
OK. 00:15:58
And then Marty, the difference, just so you understand it is. 00:15:59
If. 00:16:02
If they give it some structure here, but it requires approval, it just means they have to create the site plan. 00:16:03
That complies with what the code calls for. 00:16:10
And if they create that kind of site plan, then the city would be obligated to approve it. 00:16:13
If it's a conditional use, then you can. 00:16:17
Um mitigated a little bit by Orion and the site requiring parking. 00:16:21
Limiting noise, doing those kinds of things so that that fit with the city standards, but. 00:16:27
You still, at the end of the day, if you accommodate those factors, you still will. 00:16:32
Approve the use, so I guess what I'm. 00:16:38
Saying is, make sure you're comfortable with. 00:16:41
A single story use in some circumstances because that's what you're approving to allow. 00:16:44
OK. Any questions? 00:16:51
What do we, I guess is that. 00:16:53
Do we need to make that decision? Are you guys? Do you feel comfortable just leaving it as I put a conditional use for a 00:16:55
stipulation? 00:16:59
For commentary. Thank you. 00:17:03
Any other comments on that? 00:17:05
No. 00:17:07
OK, thanks. So next, next one, item number two would be. 00:17:08
To remove the taxi cab. 00:17:13
Designation as a prohibited use. 00:17:16
And this is this is again, not us envisioning running a taxi cab operation. 00:17:18
In Town Center. But but we do think that in the future there will probably be really creative. 00:17:24
Ride sharing and car car sharing and things like that. 00:17:30
And then we want to be able to have the flexibility. 00:17:35
To be able to implement some of those programs without technically. 00:17:38
Running afoul of the. 00:17:43
Taxicab provision in the code. 00:17:44
Well, and I wonder, does taxicab kind of get rid of Ubers or other things like that? 00:17:47
You know. 00:17:53
That would make it less profitable. 00:17:54
To. 00:17:55
OK. 00:17:56
Any comments on that one? 00:17:57
Yeah. 00:17:59
OK. 00:18:00
The next one is is building standards. 00:18:02
So the request here is to modify the minimum ground story transparency. 00:18:05
What what it says in the code right now is minimum ground story transparency measured between 0 and 10 feet above grade. 00:18:11
And will be 60% and we're asking to modify that to 40 and. 00:18:18
I think we probably ought to have a discussion on whether. 00:18:21
40 is still too high. 00:18:25
And I will show you some examples here and and talk about the reason why we're asking for this. The next, the next one there is 00:18:27
just the single story building that we just talked about. 00:18:33
And then? 00:18:38
The minimum ground floor height. So let's go through these one by one. So minimum ground story transparency if you'll go 2 slides 00:18:41
down please. 00:18:45
So this is showing a a rendering of a building where the ground story, ground story transparency. 00:18:50
There's 37.8 glazing. 00:18:57
Percent glazing. 00:19:00
So 37.8% of the first floor of that building is glass. 00:19:01
It's a lot of glass. 00:19:05
The next one down is 45.4. 00:19:07
And so you can see it this this probably this condition. 00:19:10
In the code was anticipating. 00:19:15
1st floor retail basically everywhere. 00:19:19
And that's just not a condition. We have first floor retail in some selected areas. 00:19:22
In a lot of the buildings we have. 00:19:26
1st floor residential with stoop conditions and porches. 00:19:30
And some really cool pedestrian activity. 00:19:33
Oriented buildings that are going to really activate our streets and paseos. 00:19:37
But a lot of those are not really conducive to having full glass along the front of your unit. 00:19:41
As you're on a paseo or a walkway or street. 00:19:46
And there's a lot of people walking by. 00:19:49
Um, so reducing that glazing requirement would allow us to? 00:19:52
The we think more architecturally appropriate. 00:19:56
On the 1st floor with the buildings giving given the building use. 00:19:59
And the unit types on that first floor. 00:20:04
I think we'd still be. 00:20:07
I think fine having some sort of a. 00:20:09
Requirement on. 00:20:11
Areas where we have either a retail or a public use. So in other words where we have a lobby, a common area lobby or a you know, a 00:20:13
corner retail area which we're planning several in. 00:20:19
Where we expect there to be a little restaurant or a fitness center. 00:20:25
Or something like that we can. 00:20:29
Add more glazing in those areas, but where they're gonna be residential units. 00:20:31
That much glass with that much pedestrian traffic out in front. 00:20:36
Is not architecturally appropriate. 00:20:41
So your top one is 37% correct. 00:20:46
Yeah, so you can see how much glass. 00:20:51
That is on that first floor, you know, as you're walking down that street. 00:20:53
Most of what you would see would be. 00:20:57
Floor to ceiling windows. 00:21:00
Yeah, sure. Another another reason for this is sustainability. 00:21:03
And as we've talked to it, we're trying to do a lot of sustainable things in the community and obviously. 00:21:06
The heating and cooling standpoint standpoint, the more glass you have the more problematic it is to. 00:21:11
To achieve some of those sustainable standards we're trying to achieve. So that's another part of that. 00:21:17
Is this divided by use or is it an overall percentage along your projects? The code currently doesn't discriminate between uses, 00:21:23
it's just the ground floor. 00:21:27
Between 0 and 10 feet. 00:21:33
Hmm. And again I that that makes sense where you have. 00:21:36
A retail on the main floor and it's a storefront condition. 00:21:40
And you've got glass doors. That all works. 00:21:44
And if those are are those are housing units? 00:21:47
On the first floor. 00:21:50
You don't want the whole front of your unit to be glass. 00:21:51
Well, I'm sorry. 00:21:55
Yeah, you know you're gonna do this. You cannot be quiet. You can't be quiet. But another thing is there's we've activated this 00:21:57
from working with Jeff Speck to get people in these units out into these areas. 00:22:03
So most multifamily projects you see. 00:22:09
Are accessed from a corridor in the back. 00:22:12
And that keeps limited activity out on the street and pedestrians. And what makes the place feel more safe is more pedestrians out 00:22:15
on the street. 00:22:18
So what we've done here? 00:22:22
Is. 00:22:24
All of these units here on the main level are accessed from this main level here, so there is no back corridor for the main floor 00:22:25
units. 00:22:28
Which is very unique. And so part of that too is you're going to have doors there. 00:22:33
And having glass doors there. 00:22:36
Like Pete said, with this extremely pedestrian friendly area and then everything is glass, you can just walk down that street and 00:22:38
look and. 00:22:42
In every bedrooms and. 00:22:46
All sorts of different things of those units. So a lot of that's privacy for those units. 00:22:48
Morgan, are there codes that discriminate between uses on glazing where you could say X amount of percentage for frontage for 00:22:52
storefronts and this amount of percentage for? 00:22:57
Residential uses. 00:23:03
Yeah yeah you you you could take condition it with that. 00:23:09
So if you wanted more for the for the retailer, you could you could break out the the use type. 00:23:13
And that and that. That's a pretty easy site plan review. 00:23:18
Hmm, so. 00:23:21
So that might be something I wanna keep the the 60 on retail and then you know 40 on residential or whatever that number is. Yeah, 00:23:22
37 and and Matt beaten with. 00:23:27
Nelson Architects is on Zoom and so you know what, Matt, I don't know if you can. 00:23:34
Here is if you have anything you want to add. 00:23:39
Yeah. Thanks. Can you hear me? Yes. 00:23:43
Yeah this is good discussion everything. I think dividing it up between uses is really far idea. I think maybe there's a way to 00:23:46
condition the type the code so that. 00:23:51
The percentage is tied to the specific use. 00:23:57
Yeah. I think, I think you said early on that even 40% maybe too high and we have three very large windows at the ground floor. 00:24:01
About the largest. 00:24:10
Condition. 00:24:13
Kind of running about 45%. 00:24:14
I mean, I think this vision maybe some areas of residential architecture where it would be a little less than 20%, maybe 35%. 00:24:17
So. 00:24:25
I don't know what that number is or wants to be that they've 40% probably did that. 00:24:25
60% residential use. 00:24:32
Is there anything you can see? I'm having trouble seeing what's actually on the screen, but I think. 00:24:35
The right hand side of that. 00:24:39
Image. 00:24:42
In any space. 00:24:45
So. 00:24:48
Where we are being sensitive to years ago. 00:24:49
You know, retail space or a space or a leasing office. 00:24:52
And fully glazed and, you know, super visible and locally to the street. 00:24:56
And then when we get back to the. 00:25:02
Residential units, we really want a little bit of little market. 00:25:04
I think 40 percent, 3540% of the. 00:25:09
Kind of benchmark for that. So I think that's pretty smart idea for you. 00:25:12
Find a way to divide that. 00:25:16
Percentage based on these? 00:25:18
So Matt, on the. 00:25:22
Kind of orange area that you've outlined. 00:25:24
And that's like 37.8 so if we said 35 on residential and. 00:25:27
Well, I mean the what what we have right now I think. 00:25:32
On the lobby and future retail area is 45. 00:25:36
I mean, do you? 00:25:40
Is 45 plus only because we're including all that regional space in it. So yeah, residential I think it's closer. 00:25:43
Yeah. And so are, I guess my question is on the retail area is 60. 00:25:51
An OK number on the retail area. 00:25:57
I didn't get that. I mean, I wouldn't. I wouldn't wanna do anything less than that probably for retail, OK? 00:26:01
Kind of a man. 00:26:07
So 35 and 60. 00:26:12
Yeah. 00:26:15
OK. Council, Planning Commission to guys have any questions or thoughts on that? Just one comment here for me. It's not so much 00:26:17
about the percent of glass. Again, I think we knew this when we were going in that that's a high amount and almost. 00:26:23
Forcing that to be ground level retail, that was very clear that that was the intent. 00:26:30
So again, just to my concern or caution is that we're shifting away from the original intent that we're getting. 00:26:35
More of a residential neighborhood feel than the. 00:26:42
Downtown feel with with bottom floor retail so. 00:26:46
Is that the comment I want to make, is that, OK, so Anthony what you're what you're saying is because we put the 60% it forces 00:26:49
retail and doesn't allow residential and Morgan would you say the code speaks to Anthony Anthony's comment that way that 60% 00:26:55
designates that? 00:27:00
And that we're moving away from the use that we hoped for. 00:27:06
Yeah, I mean and that and that that that's one of the the main things like signifiers for for retail that that kind of urban. 00:27:10
Tree farm retail is the magic glass. I think maintaining the 60% kind of in our planner world like that that would definitely have 00:27:16
the appearance of of a retail storefront. And then the residential, the the 35% you know make makes a lot of sense. I mean because 00:27:23
I think you're taking the aggregate. So we would do the calculation based off of like that full frontage for the the residential. 00:27:30
But we we feel like that that would trait that parents the 60% is the real storefront window kind of design. 00:27:38
What I'm wondering, did we decide on 60%? 00:27:46
Kind of trying to force that 60% of that main floor would be retail. So we're looking at one building. 00:27:48
No I so so the this so the intent was. 00:27:54
On the so the 16% was just blanket. 00:27:59
But there there are. 00:28:02
Specific areas in the code that have to be first floor retail. 00:28:03
So along along Market Street. 00:28:07
Along some areas of the promenade. 00:28:10
So in those areas, there's those, those have to be first floor retail. 00:28:12
And I think the glazing requirement May is logical and makes sense for those. 00:28:16
The problem is that. 00:28:20
We didn't differentiate between. 00:28:22
Retail and residential and I understand what Anthony is saying is that. 00:28:24
And if we just if we just keep it all 60 then. 00:28:28
Every main floor of every building in here will be retail, but it's that's not realistic. 00:28:31
And so. 00:28:36
You know, realistically we've consolidated first floor retail in the areas where they make sense. 00:28:37
And the other areas that are going to be residential on the main floor need to have an architectural condition that's conducive to 00:28:43
residential. 00:28:46
Yeah. So I I understand that and I think, I think all I'm calling out is. 00:28:50
With a change like this, I think we need to understand and accept that we are almost certain to not get retail anywhere other than 00:28:54
where it's required. Yeah, I we're OK with that. And I think that's that's true and not true. I mean. 00:29:00
You're you're right. I mean you won't be mandated to have, you know kind of like. 00:29:07
Are almost almost like functionally mandated to have retail on the main floor, right? Even though you're not legally mandated to 00:29:12
have retail on the main floor? 00:29:16
But I think the way that we're designing this is to have future retail in areas where we think they make a lot of sense. So for 00:29:20
example, in this building in particular. 00:29:25
On the corner, that's on the promenade. 00:29:29
And a paseo coming out that we think's gonna have. 00:29:32
Really high pedestrian activity. 00:29:35
We're putting our fitness center there, but we're also designing in grease traps. 00:29:37
So that we can have turn that into a restaurant. 00:29:41
In the future, if that makes sense. 00:29:43
So I think, I think we're trying to future proof. 00:29:46
The development in a way that provides for as much retail as we can. 00:29:49
But. 00:29:53
You know. 00:29:54
Also modifying it so that we're putting retail. 00:29:56
We're mandating the retail condition. 00:29:59
Where the code says that we're required to have retail. 00:30:02
Deserves those those three main districts and then provides that architectural distinction in areas where you'll you'll have that 00:31:06
true mixed-use where it's not required. 00:31:10
Any other comments on that? 00:31:19
And. 00:31:23
I think maybe something to consider when you're looking over this is if you wanted to say a reduction of blazing that maybe you 00:31:24
say we're hoping to see X amount of retail in this area, maybe that's where you would take your conversation. 00:31:30
And. 00:31:37
And the upcoming conversation, OK. 00:31:38
Any other comments? 00:31:41
No. 00:31:43
OK. 00:31:43
Next. 00:31:44
And. 00:31:45
So in in Section D, in in D, if you go back to that text, Amendment #3. Thanks. 00:31:47
So Dee was demise lines. 00:31:52
So in the code right now, there's a requirement that to break up the linear span of buildings so that they. 00:31:55
There's not too long of a run. 00:32:01
With one look. 00:32:04
So every 200 feet there needs to be a demising break in the building facade so that it looks like another building. 00:32:05
And you have that you know that architectural. 00:32:14
Variability and variety as you walk down that street. 00:32:17
And we're we're asking them to limit that to six stories in height. 00:32:21
So we had a building. 00:32:27
Greater than six stories in height. 00:32:29
And we wouldn't want to artificially break up those Dumayas lines on a on what we would call a tower. 00:32:31
Because it just looks artificial and. 00:32:39
And. 00:32:42
You know, like a forced condition. 00:32:43
Where with the tower. 00:32:45
You're more looking at, you know, kind of more glass. 00:32:47
More architectural styling. 00:32:51
And and not necessarily relying on the demising breakup of the the facade to create a really interesting building. 00:32:53
And. 00:33:06
This, this game, this was Jeff Speck's idea like. 00:33:07
We talked about Boston, for example, how Boston has on the lower buildings. 00:33:10
The brownstone type look that they get broken up every few 100 feet, but then they still have large. 00:33:15
Large glass towers and are mixed in that and I can't remember who made the club, I don't know if it was. 00:33:21
Planning Commission last week someone said, yeah, it's kind of like trying to create a tower and it looks like New York, NY and 00:33:26
Las Vegas where you have one building that tries to make it look like 6, you know? 00:33:30
And that was a good image for me on that. But this this idea came from Jeff Speck because we've been looking at building taller 00:33:36
buildings, trying to break those up. It's just. 00:33:40
Try hard to make those look like different buildings. 00:33:45
In a tower setting. 00:33:49
And make it look good. 00:33:51
Can you do it? 00:33:53
Any comments on that? 00:33:57
No. 00:33:59
OK, let's go to the next one. 00:34:00
Next slide. 00:34:04
So on on. 00:34:07
These these sections really have to do with their residential conditions as they meet. 00:34:09
The street. 00:34:14
And. 00:34:15
Looking at different ways that we do Stoops and porches. 00:34:18
And and again, transparency. 00:34:22
So A through D are basically removing. 00:34:24
Requirements for stoop and porch sizes. 00:34:28
And and transparencies. Matt, I don't know if you wanna speak to this a little bit. 00:34:31
Maybe we lost now. 00:34:43
So Ohh, go ahead. 00:34:45
Yes. 00:34:49
Yeah, I I feel like you know there's there's we're trying to provide a variety of kind of ground level conditions and. 00:34:52
Grand model. 00:34:59
And. 00:35:01
Part part of. 00:35:02
So we're talking about spying. We're also talking about kind of height. I think there's some. 00:35:05
Flower. 00:35:09
You know what we're trying to do on the ground floor of Building 5 and Six in particular, again, when they were talking about 00:35:10
elevating the interior corridor. 00:35:14
To promote. 00:35:19
Activity on the street and and. 00:35:21
Activate the streets around. 00:35:23
Have people be able to use the street. 00:35:25
And how do you? 00:35:28
The suits. 00:35:30
Or you can do. 00:35:32
Are really kind of everyone's front door and so we're trying to provide the wide variety of conditions along there. 00:35:33
Sizes and the skin. 00:35:41
Right. 00:35:43
Or kind of. 00:35:44
International requirements and high requirements were exposed to restrictive. 00:35:45
We're going to have. 00:35:50
Grant accessible entrances on the ground floor. 00:35:51
That means, you know, they're not going to be kind of talk about the grade. They'll be right back grade. 00:35:54
Which kind of was a? 00:35:59
I think everyone. 00:36:04
Is the first born indeed. 00:36:07
1st. 00:36:09
Yeah. 00:36:11
Yep. 00:36:12
So, yeah. So I think that's kind of what I think we want to talk about is. 00:36:14
You know. 00:36:18
Very sensible entry on the ground for for us to. 00:36:20
It's not coming up. You're you're you're being able to. 00:36:24
Like. 00:36:28
Rule right of your unit for 12 people. 00:36:29
So she's gonna. 00:36:35
Why it's 13 to 24 with that? 00:36:36
Some imagery. 00:36:39
So. 00:36:41
Conditions that were that were dying. 00:36:43
You'll be able to see. 00:36:48
We're trying to accomplish. 00:36:51
There we go. 00:36:54
Somewhere in there or somewhere. 00:37:00
Well, she he he doesn't see him on Zoom yet. 00:37:04
I I don't think. 00:37:08
I don't think Pam has the latest version. 00:37:11
And. 00:37:14
You need to refresh what you're looking at. I think you've got like a. 00:37:15
Older version of it. 00:37:19
This is the one I received at 519. 00:37:26
OK, so mount. Mount. Well, she's refreshing that we're we're looking at your slides. 00:37:28
OK. So you just kind of travel through those slides? 00:37:34
Because the. 00:37:38
All the the various conditions, so I mean I guess. 00:37:39
And even within within block five and six, we have some. 00:37:42
Like 1-6 is all on the ground. All that rolling conditions with Corvette. 00:37:47
I guess so. 00:37:53
They have their own place. 00:37:55
You know. 00:37:58
Conditioner. 00:37:59
Correctly word. 00:38:01
And verify and hanging around all condition. Hmm. 00:38:02
And then? 00:38:06
No. 00:38:10
And you had final three or do you have another one, right? 00:38:13
We have a little more variety where. 00:38:16
But we do have students because you can get in here from the back. So that we pulled this up. 00:38:18
Again, exactly right here we have kind of a point guard condition. 00:38:23
Where you're you're, this is probably more in line with. 00:38:27
We have a very tall kind of floor floor. 00:38:33
For. 00:38:35
From having grade. 00:38:36
Or. 00:38:39
We don't have 12 feet all the time. It's all. It's all. 00:38:40
9:00. 00:38:43
We're asking for just a little bit of relief on that if we can have a range of nine. 00:38:45
It really allows for that variety. 00:38:51
And we're we're going after, please. 00:38:54
And Matt, can you speak a little bit just to the the size requirements on the porches and Stoops? 00:38:58
And the transparency requirements on the front. 00:39:03
Yeah. So again, the transparency, I mean, this is a residential condition we don't really want to have. 00:39:08
You know, all glaze and necessary full glazing. 00:39:16
A little bit of privacy. 00:39:23
So you kind of like a traditional city like Boston or New York where? 00:39:24
Patient. 00:39:31
Smaller windows today. 00:39:33
If you're on the street here. 00:39:34
Kind of a little bit of a. 00:39:37
Of a break my line so that that you back up one. 00:39:39
You know, I guess that's a good example right here. 00:39:43
So this is not a fully glazed front. 00:39:46
So this is back to that kind of 30 and 35%? 00:39:49
Transparency that we're talking about before, you really don't want to have any border entrances in this year. 00:39:53
Yarn for people living on the ground floor to. 00:39:59
Exposed to people on the street and then the size requirements. 00:40:02
I can't remember. Can you help me out? Yeah, so that. 00:40:08
Yeah, we had a We had a minimum stoop in porch size that we were really bumping into. 00:40:13
And on designing these first two blocks, where? 00:40:19
We had some work, more creative, really interesting scoop and porch concepts that just didn't fit. 00:40:22
And within the code and so. 00:40:28
The request was to remove the minimum sizes for Stoops and porches. 00:40:30
Right. 00:40:36
Or you can see here like right when. 00:40:37
3. 00:40:41
I'm Craig. 00:40:44
On the code. 00:40:45
Understood. Parts of it just to be able to provide you and pushing forward that kind of variety. 00:40:47
You know, when you come out of your course, maybe there's more like 3 foot landing and some steps down, but then it kind of breaks 00:40:52
out into a side. 00:40:56
But. 00:41:04
I think it's just a matter of. 00:41:05
Not only have a right to prescription code to allow for more variety. 00:41:07
And not be so kind of kind of a. 00:41:12
Imagine. 00:41:17
And another another reason for the porch condition on the inside of the courtyards. You know this. Here we're talking Paseo. 00:41:19
Yeah, the backside of the building is in that kind of common courtyard area and we talked about. 00:41:26
The larger those portraits, those private porches become, eats more into that kind of. 00:41:33
Public private courtyard that that all the residents have to share and so, like the residents on the main level, get an extra few 00:41:38
feet. 00:41:41
But then it reduces the amount of overall private space that that overall building has. So if you're on the second level, you're 00:41:45
just kind of out of luck. 00:41:49
So having some private porches on the interior condition. 00:41:53
Of those courtyards. But then. 00:41:57
Having more, having larger private space for all of the residents in there, so the courtyards in these areas will be key card 00:41:59
access. 00:42:03
So this is where they'll have kind of. 00:42:06
It'll be public to whoever lives in their building, but. 00:42:09
But private from all these public vassals and everywhere else that we want all this activity on, so that there is some place to go 00:42:13
and have a little BBQ for example. 00:42:17
You know, a little more private area to let your kids go around and feel like you can be in your unit looking out your window. 00:42:21
But not out in the parcels are on the Promenade for example and we think it's important that those. 00:42:28
Those those courtyard areas can be a little bit larger as part of the logic behind that porch area too. 00:42:32
Any questions or comments on? 00:42:42
Porches Stoops. 00:42:44
Just a thought. 00:42:46
Umm. 00:42:49
The reason for that back in the day? 00:42:51
Because we don't want postage stamp. 00:42:55
Horses. 00:42:59
Where? 00:43:01
You put a chair in, you're done. 00:43:01
We want this to look like a livable space instead of a inner city. 00:43:05
Squash. 00:43:09
I I'm fine with providing you flexibility as long as we don't revert. 00:43:12
To the standard. 00:43:18
Cheap version hmm of this. 00:43:20
I see some of your arguments. 00:43:24
OK. 00:43:25
But I'm scared to death. 00:43:26
From past experience of what we get. 00:43:29
So. 00:43:33
I'm willing to go for flexibility, Morgan. 00:43:34
But I want some guarantees. 00:43:37
Where architecture? 00:43:39
Allows it. 00:43:41
And the situation allows for it. 00:43:44
If I. 00:43:47
Bought one of those apartments. I want more than one chair on my damn patio. 00:43:48
Hmm. OK. 00:43:52
Understand we need traffic in the front. 00:43:55
But I still want that open appearance. 00:43:58
That welcoming et cetera. 00:44:02
That's very important to this place. 00:44:04
OK. 00:44:07
So I guess I'm cautionary tale. 00:44:09
I trust you, but I don't trust you. Hmm. 00:44:12
Morgan and just as we talk about this, is there anything that we could do to? 00:44:16
And words, methods to alleviate the concerns that Tyson is feeling. Or should we continue and think about that and navigate that 00:44:22
as we get into our council discussion? 00:44:26
Yeah, I mean I I think part of it too is Bronson if you guys have the the the schematics that show kind of the front yard area 00:44:33
they I think that that was part of it too is. 00:44:38
Yeah. If you don't, if you don't have the Stoops, then it provides like a front yard area. It provides more area where neighbors 00:44:44
would be outside and and they're, you know it, it provides kind of that at a place where you can have social gathering. It's a 00:44:49
little bit stuck concept is kind of dated. Yeah, it is. OK. I understand that. 00:44:55
But I want us to come up with. 00:45:02
A situation that provides the same thing in centuries past. 00:45:05
That astute provided I understand. 00:45:10
Still doesn't work for me. What about the concepts that you're talking about and replacing it with that is, is that outlined in 00:45:13
our current plan? 00:45:17
That says hey, we're replacing it with XY and Z. 00:45:22
Yeah, I think we could say maybe we say that there's a that there. 00:45:25
If there's not a minimum size in the porch area, if it's on a paseo, a larger paseo, or a courtyard example where it backs enough. 00:45:29
Because I think what we're trying to get at is the same thing here. And so having some language in there that talks about. 00:45:36
You know there there is a minimum port size unless you're on a paseo or a courtyard for example, so that. 00:45:42
And then there's some variety in the ability of the scoops that because this is a really good plan that we've submitted here to to 00:45:48
see. But once again, this is 2 buildings of an awful lot of buildings and so keeping that. 00:45:54
Keeping that language and protection in there, I think we're OK with because that's our intent. So I think talking about maybe. 00:46:02
Having if there's courtyards or paseos with those buildings being submitted that those, then those porch requirements can go away 00:46:08
so that we're not just. 00:46:11
Because I it's kind of back to Anthony's point of we gotta make sure we're creating this intent of this urban downtown that we're 00:46:15
all trying to create. And I think the buildings were submitting are we don't want you to feel like we're trying to submit these 00:46:21
buildings and then change and revert back to you know stuff that's been done in the past that that no one really loves. 00:46:27
I agree with your. 00:46:35
Approach, Yeah. 00:46:37
I'm just concerned that we continue to have some. 00:46:39
I would get it in the code that way. Yeah. Yeah. Would that would that work, you guys? Like, if there's courtyards? And yeah, 00:46:43
Matt, Matt, what were you gonna say? 00:46:47
You can do that. 00:46:53
Accident which is the left hand. 00:46:55
You know we are trying to keep the scale. If you look around the perimeter Public St. 00:46:59
Because the every unit recess is back. 00:47:06
And push it forward so we have a public street, so. 00:47:08
They're much larger. 00:47:16
Ohh, you're on the street. 00:47:19
Thank you. 00:47:21
So we can add that in. 00:47:25
When you're facing. 00:47:29
For Harvard. 00:47:32
Before I send it. 00:47:38
You see, we don't really have to recess in there. 00:47:39
So when you have covered, kind of come out, but the idea is that the courtyard is really hard, so you're sharing a yard maybe. 00:47:42
You know, eight or nine different families and units, but it's really belongs to the residents. 00:47:52
Ownership. 00:47:58
We don't have. 00:48:01
Baseline and really reactions to. 00:48:09
Wasn't. 00:48:11
Street furniture. 00:48:14
I think there is some level of. 00:48:18
Happiness gives a sensibility. 00:48:20
OK. 00:48:26
That makes sense. Yep. Let's go to the next one. OK. Any questions? 00:48:27
No. 00:48:31
OK. And were were there any questions on the? 00:48:37
Minimum ground floor height. 00:48:40
Growing to 9 to 12 feet instead of 12 feet. 00:48:43
I think Matt explained that pretty well, but. 00:48:46
Wanted to make sure we didn't. 00:48:48
Move on from that if you had questions, we're good. 00:48:50
OK. 00:48:52
OK. 00:48:54
Um. 00:48:58
Yeah, I think. 00:49:02
Speaks. 00:49:04
I think we are a #5. Yep, structure is an open space. 00:49:05
So in the structures in the open space. 00:49:09
Section of the code. 00:49:13
There were there. There are limits to how much of the open space. 00:49:15
In courtyards and plazas. 00:49:20
And paseos can be covered with structures. 00:49:23
And. 00:49:27
And as we've as we as we've started landscape planning on some of those those. 00:49:28
Some of those areas want to have more cover than others and So what we're asking for is, is a site plan. 00:49:34
Approval process instead of a strict. 00:49:41
Restriction. 00:49:44
On some of those percentages, so that we can look at that. 00:49:46
On a case by case basis. 00:49:49
Any comments or questions on that? 00:49:53
Yeah, we've got some examples like on. 00:49:57
Here where you can see the. 00:50:00
That pavilion would cover, you know, a greater percentage of. 00:50:02
What would be termed as a a little Plaza there? 00:50:06
But it's in the middle of. 00:50:10
Yeah, that's the Transit Plaza. 00:50:12
And so the idea there would be to have a pavilion in the transit Plaza that could be a resting area or. 00:50:14
Maybe a future commercial standalone restaurant type of thing? 00:50:21
Um. 00:50:25
But. 00:50:26
You know right now would would probably run afoul of the. 00:50:27
Restrictions on covered area. 00:50:30
So just move that to a a case by case site plan. 00:50:33
Basis as we're planning these different open space areas to be approved. 00:50:37
At that time. 00:50:42
OK. 00:50:43
Questions. So Morgan, do we want to provide a list of approved? 00:50:45
Or just leave it up to. 00:50:49
Yeah, you you could. And so I mean, it could be a, you know, we could list it as. 00:50:53
Amenities for pedestrians. 00:50:58
A restaurant, 80 eateries. I mean there we or, you know, structure for variety shade. 00:51:02
Yeah, if you want we we we can definitely do that. It is kind of a concern like they try to get like an additional residential or 00:51:10
something. 00:51:13
I just. 00:51:16
You said non resident. 00:51:17
Yeah, yeah. 00:51:19
Yeah. 00:51:20
I. 00:51:21
I'm fine again. Flexibility is good. We're planning. 00:51:22
A big open space. That's nothing there, right? And we don't know a lot of what's going to happen. 00:51:26
Today. 00:51:32
So. 00:51:34
I'm more than happy to be flexible. 00:51:34
I just want to be flexible. 00:51:37
What did Ronald Reagan Reagan say? Yeah, yeah. 00:51:39
You know. 00:51:44
Yeah, I think the ideas are great. OK? 00:51:47
And. 00:51:50
I do think we're, in some instances we've bound your creativity. 00:51:50
And doing this. 00:51:55
I'm OK with loosening those. 00:51:56
With some. 00:51:59
Guarantee the guardrails. OK. Yeah. Thank you. OK. 00:52:01
Work on what? 00:52:05
Right. 00:52:07
All right. 00:52:09
They were just sitting on non residential, yeah. 00:52:12
Um, OK text Amendment number? 00:52:16
6. 00:52:20
Because. 00:52:21
Let me just get there on my computer. So this is section 3.10.50. 00:52:23
And this has to do This section has to do with building materials and building siding. 00:52:29
So the the 1st. 00:52:35
Request is right now Architectural metal panel. 00:52:36
Is in the secondary material list for architectural exteriors. 00:52:40
We'd ask to move it to the primary. 00:52:45
Material list, but we think there's a lot of and there's percentages in the code. 00:52:47
Of what can be worked but. 00:52:52
As architectural metal panels expand and become more versatile, they're becoming a larger component of the exterior facade. 00:52:54
So if you look at the next slide cache, this is a. 00:53:02
This is the wood looking metal panel facade. 00:53:05
And for Nichiha. 00:53:08
And you know, you you would think that was wood, but it's actually metal. 00:53:10
And so you know, as as metal panels become. 00:53:14
In greater use on exterior cladding. 00:53:19
We think that it just makes more sense to move that from a secondary. 00:53:22
Accent material in the code to a primary. 00:53:25
Beyond the primary facade material list. 00:53:28
Any questions on that one? 00:53:32
OK, um C is the add fiber cement as as optionally available shutter material. If you go 2 slides down cache you'll see. 00:53:34
Some examples of fiber cement shutters. 00:53:43
And the fiber cement shutters. 00:53:45
Are. 00:53:48
More durable than more wood looking. 00:53:49
There there is requirements in the code that you can't have what we call fault shutters. 00:53:52
If we put shutters on the building, they have to actually look like they would work. 00:53:56
For the window. 00:53:59
So you know they'll still be architecturally true. 00:54:01
But we should. 00:54:04
We we think that. 00:54:06
That that provides some optionality there with a really durable good product. 00:54:08
They could match them elevations. 00:54:12
Um, subsection 3. 00:54:16
Let's see. 00:54:20
The This is having to do with exterior balconies. 00:54:21
On buildings, removing both the size and the requirement for at least 25%. 00:54:25
Of the units. 00:54:30
And within those two areas they have balconies. 00:54:31
The reason for that is that this is just another one of those conditions that face you were talking about where. 00:54:34
We're kind of artificially forcing an architectural condition that. 00:54:40
May or may not match with the building style. 00:54:43
That's being developed. 00:54:46
So you know, as you could see from. 00:54:48
Blocks 5:00 and 6:00. 00:54:51
We included balconies where we thought they would be really advantageous along the pedestrian corridors and the courtyards. We 00:54:52
took them off on the street conditions. 00:54:57
Most of the ground floor has a stoop or a porch condition. 00:55:02
And so, you know, we're still creating that porous really active. 00:55:05
Environment without forcing. 00:55:09
A condition with porches where they wouldn't make sense. 00:55:12
That's right. 00:55:19
OK. On the next one we just this was just a clean up item where? 00:55:19
That said, 50% of the small single family dwellings will have porches, but we don't have any small lot single family dwellings. 00:55:23
In the master plan so that that was just a clean up item. 00:55:31
Subsection 7 has to do with waste containers. 00:55:34
Where it says that they'll be located below ground and where we would like to add the. 00:55:37
The. 00:55:43
Ending to that when feasible, there's a lot of times when below Gray or or underground. 00:55:44
Trash facilities and other facilities just aren't feasible, especially with the water table. 00:55:50
Um, so where? Where it's not feasible. Then we would revert back to the current code. 00:55:56
Which makes sure that the containers are out of public view and the minimum from 10 feet from the property line and screen, with 00:56:02
landscaping so still keeping all of those protections on trash and waste. 00:56:07
Containment. 00:56:13
But recognizing that most of the time the trash containment and collection will be above grade. 00:56:15
And we'll need to, you know, look at. 00:56:22
Screening it from that standpoint. 00:56:24
And for example, in these buildings we just submitted, you'll see there's a trash room, there's a compactor in there, it's covered 00:56:27
and ventilated. So it's completely inside the building. And we've got valet trash for the residents there. So they'll go by and 00:56:32
pick all their trash up and put it there, but and trash shoots built into the building. So it's, I mean it's all very organized, 00:56:37
but it's not underground. 00:56:41
Yeah, and and we think. 00:56:46
It's for sustainability reasons to keeping it out of the groundwater, yeah. 00:56:49
Any questions? Yeah. 00:56:57
OK. 00:56:59
Subsection 9 has to do with the amenity requirements currently in the. 00:57:00
Code, there's a. There's a requirement that amenities are. 00:57:04
Completed. There's a list of amenities. 00:57:08
In the code with kind of a. 00:57:10
A radius saying within a certain radius these amenities. 00:57:13
You know a certain number of these amenities must be completed and another. 00:57:16
A radius, A larger radius, certain amenities must be completed. This this again just goes back to just adding some flexibility 00:57:21
and. 00:57:25
The recognition that some of these amenities. 00:57:30
In a master plan, large scale master plan are going to be. 00:57:33
In other buildings or in other areas that are adjacent. 00:57:36
And so. 00:57:40
Changing it to say that as long as they're planned. 00:57:42
Uh. 00:57:45
In an upcoming development phase. 00:57:46
And a bond is posted. 00:57:48
That. 00:57:50
That particular building would still be able to get a certificate of occupancy. 00:57:51
If if the particular. 00:57:56
Amenities in that one were not met. 00:57:58
I guess I just wanna clarify. 00:58:06
And I'm. 00:58:10
I don't mean to. I don't want to be insensitive when I say this, but sure, I think that. 00:58:11
What we're trying to avoid is things like. 00:58:16
You know if we, if we believe in amenities coming that it's not going to be extremely delayed like maybe a park or two that we've 00:58:18
experienced, right? 00:58:22
So, yes, so we so we added in here the the amenity the bond wouldn't be for more than 12 months. 00:58:26
And Marian, do you think that's? 00:58:34
Alright. 00:58:36
That's 12 years before he changed. Yeah, hard, hard to hear. 00:58:41
Or they wanted 12 months so they said 12 years and I ohh 12 months. 00:58:47
Yeah. 00:58:50
And I I think to him Jimmy might be able to speak to this but with with with amenities and and certain. 00:58:53
Certain improvements to sites. 00:58:59
I believe the state code requires cities to allow for for bonding. 00:59:02
And so and so we've dealt with that a lot with open space and landscaping where they bond with winters come in, there might be 00:59:08
like certainties like that especially with COVID and all the. 00:59:12
And we still have, we still do have you know just just issues with getting material and stuff shipped so. 00:59:18
And yeah, we're we're totally comfortable with family. We kind of already practiced that with our development process. 00:59:26
Thank you. 00:59:34
Any comments, questions? 00:59:35
No. 00:59:38
Right, so if we can skip down. 00:59:40
Through the next set of slides, these are those were just kind of examples on the. 00:59:43
Portion Paseo Conditions Section Item number 7. 00:59:47
Is fencing. 00:59:51
Right now, there there are. 00:59:52
There there are areas in the code where they line out different types of open spaces and. 00:59:56
Have different fencing restrictions on different types of open spaces. 01:00:01
Ohh, what we'd like to do is modify the pension requirements to apply to the existing fencing requirements. 01:00:06
Where they can't really be fenced. 01:00:12
To the north Promenade of the Lake Promenade in Geneva Park. 01:00:14
And but open space is defined by 3.12. 01:00:18
30 and 3.1250. 01:00:22
So that those ones in between which are. 01:00:25
Um. 01:00:27
Courtyards and plazas and paseos. 01:00:28
To allow for fencing as part of the development plan. 01:00:31
UM, which would be submitted to the city planner. 01:00:35
So in other words, some of these. 01:00:38
Courtyards, if you go to the the next thanks the next slide, this will illustrate that. So in some of these courtyards they're 01:00:41
they're really incorporated into a building, they're interior to a building. 01:00:47
And we feel like it's important to be able to provide some security. 01:00:52
And some access control to those courtyards. 01:00:56
Our thought is to have those courtyards be open to anybody who lives in the community through some sort of controlled access. 01:00:59
But to be able to to control that access from, you know, just kind of the the. 01:01:06
Maybe, you know people that are on the promenade that came in on the train and they're wandering through and looking at Paseo so 01:01:13
that there is some level of security on those interior courtyards. 01:01:17
The paseo would stay open. Yeah, so. 01:01:24
Yeah. So the paseos, they open and and there's conditions. Again this would be on a on a site plan. 01:01:27
Races. 01:01:32
But just providing that flexibility to be able to propose it and and in certain areas where we think that it makes sense. 01:01:34
For example, in some of these buildings, they're more of a U shape. 01:01:40
And the courtyard opens up onto a paseo. 01:01:43
And some of those courtyards are gonna be more porous and more, you know, kind of semi public. 01:01:46
And so fencing. 01:01:50
Part of that might make sense, but all of it might not make sense. 01:01:52
On these interior ones, where you're where you're literally like. 01:01:56
The courtyard within a building, we think that those make a lot more sense to have more access control. 01:01:59
Any questions on those? 01:02:06
Ohh yeah. 01:02:13
Sorry, just a matter of clarification. We actually changed that from city planner to site plan process. 01:02:17
And so it it'll be part of the site plan process of the Planning Commission approves, right? 01:02:24
Morgan didn't want that kind of responsibility. 01:02:30
Fancy. 01:02:34
We know. 01:02:35
And then and then in the in the open space, we'd like to propose adding an aquatic. 01:02:37
Use as it permitted. Use as subject to site plan review and approval. 01:02:42
And in the. 01:02:47
In the open space promenade area. 01:02:48
Long as we have water, Ohh what is? Can you give us any idea what that means? Yeah, so So the idea would be kind of a resort style 01:02:54
swimming pool, Aquatic Center. 01:02:58
And we've had some discussions with staff but haven't had a lot with either Planning Commission or staff because. 01:03:05
Right now it's not a permitted use, so. 01:03:11
Adding it as a permitted use would allow us to we we've been working on some plans that. 01:03:13
We think could really add. 01:03:18
And. 01:03:20
To to the promenade area and really activate that area. 01:03:21
And we'd love to have, you know, further discussions on that with some concepts that we have and some ideas on. 01:03:24
How do we do that with? 01:03:30
The city and the other residents of the city and residents of the downtown area, and how does that all work together? 01:03:32
I think there there's a variety of structures there that. 01:03:38
We've seen work in in other locations that we can talk through and. 01:03:41
And look at that as an option in that open space area. 01:03:45
Morgan. 01:03:49
Does the site plan review? 01:03:50
Process as written here. Just go through the Planning Commission. 01:03:52
I I believe so. I I I I can look back at the the administrative I. 01:03:59
I understand he's my guess is it will also come through the FDA. So there will be a joint. Yeah. So we'll still see it as a board, 01:04:04
but yeah and I well and also anything that that's public open space, our practice is to bring it to the City Council because 01:04:10
you're the board over anything that that's public. And so it'll it'll go to you kind of for your preliminary approval and then it 01:04:16
goes for the like the official plan, but you'd be able to change it then. Alright. 01:04:21
Yeah. Any questions or comments on that? 01:04:28
That's good. OK, Section 8, item number 8 deals with temporary. 01:04:32
Uses. 01:04:37
And and the the temporary uses didn't specifically. I mean temporary parking probably would have fit in temporary uses but instead 01:04:38
of trying to shoehorn it in we. 01:04:43
Decided to be better just to line it out so that we can talk about what the city is comfortable with and what works from a 01:04:49
development standpoint. 01:04:52
So the the. 01:04:56
Request here, kind of midway down is. 01:04:58
For temporary parking lots. 01:05:01
Um. 01:05:03
The applicant or developer would not be required to submit a parking lot landscape plan. 01:05:04
That it's that's in compliance with this section and this section is. 01:05:10
The current city code. 01:05:13
For this area, that has to do with permanent parking lots. 01:05:15
Rather, temporary parking lots would be submitted on a simplified temporary landscaping plan. 01:05:18
Showing proposed landscape locations. 01:05:24
And buffering for approval by the city planner. 01:05:27
And and then the temporary parking lot. 01:05:30
Would need to be removed and developed and the additionally developed property would need to conform. 01:05:32
To those permanent requirements within seven years of a CEO for the building that's asking for the temporary parking lot. 01:05:39
And service. 01:05:46
Seven years. 01:05:49
Because the the idea was. 01:05:50
Building. 01:05:52
You know, surface parking. I mean, some places are gonna come in with structure parking right away, but places like this. 01:05:53
Like the block five or six that are pushed kind of further back away from the train station and it was to phase it in and as they 01:05:58
come in to do the infill development, build out the site, then they would convert that either to either to a structure parking or 01:06:03
or to to a building. 01:06:08
And. 01:06:14
And so one thing that Planning Commission talked about in their work session and their last meeting was that if they do that, if 01:06:15
the parking lot is to remain surface, so if it doesn't get upgraded to I think we. 01:06:21
From the actual code, the ordinance I I put a few things like if it's a building, a parking structure or open space. So that's 01:06:27
always a benefit. So if it's not one of those three things, if it stays as a surface parking lot, then there will be a requirement 01:06:33
to meet the code plus 25%. 01:06:38
Of of what the code is so that yeah no no, no, no, no bigger so. 01:06:45
You can speak right, right. Ohh, yeah, yeah, yeah. And so and so it it it so it kind of in a way it's. 01:06:51
Like the the city benefits by getting even more landscape landscape than they would have got. And it kind of. 01:06:59
And our punishment? Yeah, that penalizes them for for waiting too long and and for keeping it surface parking lot. 01:07:05
Because we, I mean, I think it's everyone's best interest to not have a lot of surface parking, so. 01:07:11
So what was the rationale for seven years? 01:07:17
Buildings on top of those are next to etcetera. So it's just it's just so that we're not. 01:07:51
Putting a bunch of money in that were tearing all out to redo something here in the next little while. 01:07:56
But it's still, I mean for our, for us since we're going to be leasing these units and selling these units now. 01:08:00
It's it's not going to look like Utah's parking lot out here. I mean no offense to them and they're great. They're great people. 01:08:05
But but we're, I mean it's still going to have to be from our perspective a livable area and and so it's not just going to be. 01:08:12
It's it's still gonna have some landscaping, it's just not quite to this to the level of the long term plan for the whole site. 01:08:19
Hmm. 01:08:26
And the idea behind the 20%, like Morgan was saying, I think, I think there was a comment by Anthony Van, I can't remember. 01:08:27
Who brought it up during the working session is. 01:08:33
If we wait 7-7 years and then. 01:08:35
You put in code then. 01:08:37
We would have had more growth. 01:08:39
During those seven years, had you done it initially? 01:08:42
And so. 01:08:45
If we if we add 25% more to the landscaping requirements at that point, then we're kind of getting where we should have been. 01:08:46
Had that growth been able to come in? 01:08:53
Baby trees. 01:08:58
Any comments or questions on that? 01:09:01
OK. 01:09:04
The next one is is text #9, which is tree branch height. 01:09:07
This is this is just a clarification or or actually a change. 01:09:12
On the minimum, clear branch height as as it applies to the code. 01:09:17
So our. 01:09:22
Our request is that we remove them the clear branch height. 01:09:24
When it's. 01:09:29
Used for privacy screening adjacent to buildings. 01:09:30
So where we have. 01:09:33
Windows and large windows along pedestrian corridors. 01:09:34
And you know, a lot of times we like to to put kind of a more columnar or bushy. 01:09:38
Plant in front of those windows to provide some privacy screening. 01:09:44
The the code right now requires a. 01:09:47
Clear branch right there would make us limp those trees up and basically expose that window. 01:09:50
Well, a lot of that too is like at the end of a public St. for example, you have Windows. 01:09:55
And if you don't put something there, a tree for example. 01:10:00
The headlights. Headlights shine right into their units, so you'll always want to put something there so that you know, like at 01:10:05
the end of the square about, for example. 01:10:08
Whatever's on the other side of that, they're not going to want headlights just shining in their. 01:10:13
Non-stop. 01:10:16
Very limited times we'll be using this, but. 01:10:18
It's important when it's informant. 01:10:21
Any questions on that one? 01:10:25
Um. 01:10:27
I would prefer a warning. 01:10:29
Where? 01:10:33
Rather than taking Thank you. 01:10:34
Rather than taking away. 01:10:38
The purpose of that? 01:10:40
Was that we implement. 01:10:43
When? 01:10:45
Trees or bushes are used for screening. 01:10:46
There is an exception. 01:10:51
So I I think that's, I mean that's what we try to do here is that we say minimum clearance height applies to trees. 01:10:53
Not used for privacy screening adjacent to buildings, so so it's kind of a double negative but. 01:11:00
100. 01:11:09
So it's the trees along a walkway. We would still be lined up. And that's the idea. You're not smacking your head on it. And then 01:11:13
you're parks and yeah, yeah, yeah, the screening stuff, right, next windows and. 01:11:18
Portraits. OK, good. 01:11:24
Any other comments online? 01:11:28
10 is a a parking study. 01:11:31
So when we. 01:11:33
When we were going through the downtown code. 01:11:36
And looking at how to handle parking. 01:11:39
And there were. There was. 01:11:42
A lot of discussion about. 01:11:43
What parking was appropriate? How much parking would be appropriate in the future? 01:11:45
What types of uses would would be there in the future and how to accommodate for those? 01:11:50
The. 01:11:55
The conclusion was that. 01:11:56
There would be an option for either the city or the developer. 01:11:58
To do a parking study, to reevaluate that parking at certain milestones in the future as the project built out. 01:12:02
And and then that study. 01:12:10
Would Uh. 01:12:13
Then inform the city planner and city engineer. 01:12:15
On the ability to change the parking. 01:12:18
And requirements in the code. 01:12:21
What we'd like to change it to is more of an objective standard. 01:12:23
To where we have a qualified. 01:12:26
Expert and and traffic engineer. 01:12:29
Who would do those same? Do that study at those same milestones optionally. 01:12:32
Either the city or the. 01:12:37
Developer could ask for that study to be done. 01:12:39
And we would. 01:12:41
We would recommend 3 qualified traffic engineers. The city would pick one. 01:12:43
And the conclusions of that study would then become. 01:12:49
The table the parking table for the code. 01:12:52
And so that it would be an objective standard instead of. 01:12:55
A subjective standard. 01:12:58
Or cause the the way the code currently reads is we do this study and then Morgan basically whatever Morgan decides goes. So if 01:13:00
Morgan comes back and says you know what this study says you need. 01:13:05
More parking, but I don't like parking, so I'm just going to say there's no parking required. 01:13:10
The way the current code is written is that's the way it would work. 01:13:15
So we just thought having. 01:13:18
With and we've dealt with this in other cities where you go spend 150,000 on a parking study that's one of the best you know and 01:13:20
they study all this stuff and then they take it and. 01:13:24
It's like well. 01:13:28
You know, I don't know about this or that. You couldn't do fences, so we couldn't depart. Yeah, that is, Yeah. As long as as 01:13:30
Morgan's here, I think we're comfortable. It's just what's gonna happen. And you know, 10 years of Morgan's the governor by, 01:13:34
Morgan's the governor by then and cash is the Lieutenant governor by then. And we don't know who we're dealing with. So this is 01:13:39
just something for the future to. 01:13:44
Have something objective in the code that knows what we can fall back on. 01:13:49
And. 01:13:54
Like playing devil's advocate. 01:13:56
You know what? If we genuinely don't like the study, I like having a little bit of flexibility. 01:13:58
You know what I mean? I what? What wouldn't you like about this study? Well, I mean. 01:14:04
As you know, parking is a huge issue here in menu. We have a lot of concerned citizens. I had a citizen call me today or yesterday 01:14:09
with concerns about what our, our, what our minimum requirements are on this. 01:14:15
And I just. 01:14:21
I I'm really cautious anytime we're talking about parking and honestly Morgan, I would love for you to explain. 01:14:23
Maybe a little bit of. 01:14:30
Of how? 01:14:32
Perkins plan to work with even with this chart below. 01:14:33
Umm. 01:14:38
Yeah. Thank you. 01:14:40
The so there's this was one of those and this is actually a very unique requirement that we put in place a a few years ago 2020. 01:14:42
And what what I really love about about this the standard. 01:14:51
Is that it's it's like a legitimate way of right sizing the parking because the city we don't want. 01:14:54
Way more parking than than what's needed because from an economic development standpoint we're losing potentially on you know 01:14:59
offices and and and you know just open space and that kind of stuff and and parking spaces are very expensive. So the developers 01:15:06
also don't want to build more structure parking to do think 12 to $20,000 per per parking stall. I mean it can be very expensive. 01:15:13
And so this is a a very unique compromise and I actually haven't seen this in any other city. So as it builds out what it provides 01:15:20
is as we hit 500 units which we will for those first two Billings. 01:15:25
Getting a a a parking consultant that can analyze real world conditions right on the site and say OK what is the actual parking 01:15:31
need and and they they would do an in depth analysis that the engineering planner from the staff side would would review and then 01:15:37
it has other thresholds 1500. So then it provides kind of another 1000 units to come on board. Then we study it again and then if 01:15:43
we need to reduce or increase depending on the parking study it allows us to the right size the parking requirements all the way 01:15:49
up to. 01:15:55
5000 units. 01:16:01
And so it's actually a a really great ordinance and I. 01:16:02
You know unfortunately we we don't have that in place for some of the others, but I I think this would if this was in place, I 01:16:06
want to resolve a lot of those those issues that we're having now. 01:16:11
Well, the one thing, so to kind of to to your point ohh and and also I apologize. 01:16:17
Get dividends to the city in the future. 01:16:53
And so for kind of from that aspect, it helps the transit obviously helps the mixing of uses because you're able to capture. 01:16:56
Trip. So if someone lives there they they can they can walk to, you know if there's a theater or entertainment they have a job 01:17:03
there, retail, grocery store. So it provides a lot of those options. Someone driving there is able to to drive once park and 01:17:09
they're able to hit many uses And so that's kind of like like like capturing trips instead of having to drive to you know to 01:17:14
Smiths. 01:17:19
And then you drive to the school, and then you drive to, you know, go. 01:17:25
Get coffee with your friends. You're able to to park once and do a lot of that, and so because of the overall design makes the 01:17:30
uses, it helps to reduce the overall parking requirement. 01:17:35
And and kind of kind of you to your point too if the city doesn't agree with it, one thing that that you could put in here and I'd 01:17:41
like to hear kind of what name he think of us too is. 01:17:46
I I wouldn't necessarily want to want to put the the responsibility specifically on the the city planner and the city engineer to 01:17:53
say we we disagree with this. You know you need to have X number of spaces per per unit. 1 way to resolve that is allowing the 01:17:59
city to Commission someone else to to review that parking study. 01:18:06
And I I I think that's something that you could easily build in because then you're having 2 qualified professionals. 01:18:13
You know you you get your study done and then if the city disagrees with it this city planner city engineer review and they go, we 01:18:19
just think it's. 01:18:23
You know, they're like there's some flaws in that. We could Commission someone to to to review that. 01:18:27
You know that that might be a possibility. I'd like to hear you. 01:18:35
And additionally, just to add to that, I think one thing to. 01:18:39
Recognize what this is that. 01:18:43
Whatever the speed table is, that's the minimum required parking. And so if the city decided. 01:18:45
You know what? We don't like the study. We want more parking. 01:18:50
Then the city is more than welcome to contribute. The residents can all agree, hey, we're going to contribute additional tax 01:18:53
resources to increasing the parking in that area. We can fund another level of a parking structure, however, however you see fit. 01:19:00
I like the idea of having flexibility in the sense that. 01:19:09
I'm sure whoever we hire. 01:19:14
Would be great, but I have seen studies come out, be it traffic studies or parking studies, where people disagree with the 01:19:17
results. 01:19:20
And so I don't want to be tied down to one study if it comes back and it just doesn't seem to reflect what the needs are. 01:19:23
From my from the public's perspective, Even so, I don't. 01:19:30
I just want to be able to protect the city. 01:19:34
If something comes out. 01:19:38
I don't want to just be tied down. 01:19:40
So yeah, and I think. 01:19:42
Like, if this was the City Council that we were dealing with and this was the staff we were dealing with in the future, I think 01:19:45
we'd be like, yeah, sure, we can agree that I think the concern with the way it's written now. 01:19:49
And just not know it like. 01:19:54
Not knowing what the future, who you're dealing with in the future where the Council is not reasonable and they say. 01:19:57
Don't we want 10,000 parking stalls per unit in here? 01:20:04
What you say, you say ohh well. 01:20:08
That's not what any study anywhere says or anyone recommends. And that's not, and that's millions of dollars, but that's that's 01:20:10
what you get a few people in the future to say. I think that's kind of more of the concern. 01:20:15
I think also one thing that this really does. 01:20:21
And somebody pointed this out, I think it was on council, councillors, Planning Commission, that the places you have problems in 01:20:24
the city right now. 01:20:28
Are parking areas that are not professionally managed? 01:20:32
And I think what this does is this really makes it critical to us to get parking right. 01:20:34
To make sure that we're not, that we are building ample parking because. 01:20:40
The biggest, the biggest risk that we'll have in the future on this project is we're gonna own a lot of this, most of this. 01:20:44
And if parking doesn't work, no one's gonna want to live there. It's gonna be a nightmare for everyone to go in and out of that. 01:20:50
So we have, I mean. 01:20:53
Getting parking right will be no more important for anyone than ourselves. 01:20:56
Because a lot of the other areas too, that you're seeing problems with parking, it's where people have just sold everything and 01:21:00
left. 01:21:03
And I and I think. 01:21:07
I think that this. 01:21:08
Helps us in the future where like right now we're all just kind of saying we think it's this, but in the future when there's. 01:21:10
You know, we're talking about doing buying a bunch of like. 01:21:16
Two or three hundred cars that people share, they live in the community. They can just use it anytime. 01:21:19
Because, like you use your car about 5% of the time. 01:21:23
And so if we can, if we can, use that more proactively in the community. 01:21:27
Like, there's a lot of these things that are going to be happening with automated cars in the future, and we just don't want to. 01:21:31
We don't want to commit hundreds of millions of dollars of parking because that's the problem with this is it's not just surface 01:21:36
park sales. You're going to be building all these structures that the FDA actually has reimbursing. So it's good for both of us to 01:21:40
make sure we get it right and I think. 01:21:45
I think the way this is written it makes it very objective. 01:21:49
Now maybe there's a 10% something there that. 01:21:53
But you know, if the study comes back and you disagree by 10%, up or down. 01:21:55
Then, you know, I think maybe we'd be open to, we can adjust that, like if it says you need 1000 stalls and you're like, no, we 01:22:00
need 1100 stalls. 01:22:04
You know, but I think the concern is if we get a study back and Morgan just says. 01:22:08
No. 01:22:12
I don't want 10 times that amount of parking. 01:22:13
Or I want no parking. 01:22:16
I mean right now. 01:22:18
So we're like cream build these buildings and we're gonna just. 01:22:19
What do you think you know? 01:22:22
Um. 01:22:23
I think that's why we we like this more objective standard. 01:22:24
And I think I would be comfortable if we added in some kind of leniency with. 01:22:28
You know, 15%. 01:22:33
Something to that extent because I. 01:22:35
I just. 01:22:38
I feel like you explained it well. I think it's it's a fair concern because you don't know who you will be working with. 01:22:40
But I also think it's a fair concern that there might be things happening within the city that we want to try to. 01:22:45
Sex. And I don't want to have my hands tied. Yeah. And I. And it's not just who we're working with, it's what the conditions are 01:22:51
at the time, I mean. 01:22:54
10 years ago. There's a lot of things happening now that you couldn't have imagined 10 years ago. 01:22:59
And 10 years from now there's gonna be things that. 01:23:04
We don't foresee right now and so. 01:23:06
You know, we we want to be able to make sure that we're objective, but then at the same time. 01:23:09
I understand the concern of. 01:23:13
Hey, we we've seen studies by consultants in the past that. 01:23:15
The developer hired and they were really one sided. 01:23:18
That's why we were saying, look, we'll, we'll provide. 01:23:21
You know 3 or 4 qualified individuals and you pick. 01:23:23
The expert that you want to do the study, and we'll both live by the conclusions. Morgan, were you suggesting that in the current 01:23:28
code how it's written to be changed? That instead of having it be to assist you to review it? 01:23:33
That you would have another consultant review it. So it'd be 1 consultant that we picked that they paid for the study and then 01:23:40
another consultant to tag team with them. 01:23:45
And I mean this provides more and more expertise than it maybe it provides just more like a sense of kind of security to the city 01:24:21
that that they have more eyeballs on it, OK. And then how did they come to a decision? 01:24:27
Rock paper scissors. 01:24:33
So. 01:24:36
Come up with an idea and they work together. And you guys felt comfortable with that kind of a plan? Yeah. I mean, so I think 01:24:38
we're gonna just kind of brainstorming here. We we don't really talk about that part of it. But I mean, we we'd be OK with that. 01:24:43
We're just trying to get to something objective. 01:24:47
That everybody's comfortable with with these future conditions, I think. 01:24:53
I'm sorry to interrupt you. I kind of feel like that gives you the leeway that you're talking about where you're saying, hey, 01:24:57
we're having struggles on this side, we'll go ahead and bring in our own expert and we come to the middle ground. Gotcha. Why 01:25:02
don't we reverse it where the city picks the three and then the developer selects from that list. 01:25:07
Or maybe we three decide now we pick some of the best parking consultants in the world. I think the concern there is I think 01:25:14
you're talking about a horizon that's. 01:25:18
You know you're looking at. 01:25:22
Maybe doing these studies once city personnel changes. 01:25:24
You're gonna have. 01:25:28
A different group of. 01:25:29
Parking experts in the state to draw from. 01:25:31
What I find interesting about this too is so there's this conversation that's say we pick them, say they come up with a study. 01:25:37
And then we have to adhere to that study according to how the code is written. 01:25:44
Where this other one that Morgan suggested is that say they picked somebody and then we wanted somebody and it's two people going 01:25:51
together to make a compromise. 01:25:55
I feel like. 01:25:59
I don't know which one gives you more comfort. One has two consultants and one you get to pick your consultant from the beginning. 01:26:00
So I like the idea of. 01:26:03
We pick one and you pick one and then maybe they work together. 01:26:07
I don't know. 01:26:11
And then I don't know I that doesn't call me skeptical because I I, you know my world is dispute resolution and. 01:26:11
What? 01:26:20
Well, that's well, that's why if I want a lot of parking, I'm gonna hire the guy from Houston, and if I don't want much, I'm gonna 01:26:21
go to Portland. 01:26:24
So. 01:26:29
I I think we ought to have. 01:26:30
I don't, I think. 01:26:34
I guess what I'm saying is, in my view, it's impractical to have two. 01:26:37
Experts work together. 01:26:41
What if we take them? They're experts because you want their judgment. 01:26:43
And. 01:26:47
They are going to reach different conclusions that. 01:26:48
They will. 01:26:51
Jamie, what if we pick them together as a compromise? If we can't come to the table, is there a way that? 01:26:52
The our City Council and the developing partner and we pick them together and we agree on the consultant. Yeah. And I think, well, 01:26:57
there's two things to consider. One is who's the consultant? 01:27:01
And the other is what criteria are you giving them to do their parking? 01:27:06
Study. So we need to add that as we determine the scope together and the criteria. 01:27:10
In this, yeah, I would. I mean, I. 01:27:17
Yeah, we pick them now and we can decide like I just think. 01:27:20
Right. There's been there's parking consultants event like big firms have been around for a long time and taking them now and 01:27:23
agreeing on that I just the concern is like you said. 01:27:27
The other thing is we're both incentivized by hundreds of millions of dollars to make sure we do this right because the city right 01:27:32
now to pay for all this money. 01:27:35
So. 01:27:39
What do you guys think about adding wording that said, we will determine the criterion scope together and then we'll agree on the 01:27:40
consultant together between our two teams? 01:27:45
I think, yeah. 01:27:50
And and then there's no then there, then we both agreed on the console. So whatever they say is the is the determination. 01:27:52
Say that again. So we would pick the consultant together, we would determine the criteria in the scope together, and then we would 01:28:00
accept the results. 01:28:04
Like you would do if you went into a study together and you've all joined in together. 01:28:09
So and then just on the. 01:28:14
Who's on the list? And I understand Jamie's concern like you, you put, you know, you codify a consultant. 01:28:16
In here on the approved list, and then they're not around in five years. 01:28:24
And. 01:28:28
Could we? 01:28:29
Put three of them in there now and then. 01:28:31
Yeah, put language in there that. 01:28:34
One of one or more of those are no longer. 01:28:35
Yeah, out of business. Are we picking her study? 01:28:39
Tonight, yeah. 01:28:42
Can you you could put that in your solicitation like the city and you guys together can write a solicitation of what you want? 01:28:43
And you could. You could. 01:28:51
Have it limited to three, but you could also. 01:28:52
Open it up on the cities thing and say any parking expert that wants to participate in. 01:28:55
And put together a proposal on this, they could, I guess, right? 01:29:01
Unless there's a reason you want to limit other than no, just for just from. I mean it's quicker. Yeah. Yeah, I mean yeah, right. 01:29:04
I mean then you don't have 100 you have going three guess. Alright P process right. 01:29:10
I just. I don't know if we need to take more time on this. I just don't. I wanna get it right. I don't wanna just feel like we're 01:29:17
having to rush for a decision right this second. 01:29:21
You mean we're talking this is in the future? 01:29:26
I just. 01:29:30
It's a big deal, in my opinion. We're talking about millions of dollars. We're talking about working well together and we're 01:29:31
talking about like you said. 01:29:35
We're going to get these consultants from and how it's going to pan out. I just. 01:29:38
I just don't. I'm not in any rush to make a decision without feeling comfortable about it. So I think we're going to have to carry 01:29:43
on this conversation into our City Council meeting and we'll go back to that comment now. And we'll just reserve this comment for 01:29:48
the public. We have to get to another meeting and we only have our Planning Commission for a select amount of time. 01:29:53
Working studies, OK. 01:30:29
Well, in this. 01:30:31
This will go into the Planning Commission in a minute and then it'll come into the council. So we can even have that conversation. 01:30:32
OK, let's just make sure that like more Planning Commission gets through the meeting. 01:30:37
Alright. 01:30:44
I hope you all know that I've been calling for public comment this entire time, but if you haven't, if there are any comments, 01:30:46
please come to the podium, State your name and. 01:30:50
Make your comments down. 01:30:56
It's probably hard when I'm like looking at the audience, looking at the Planning Commission, calling out the council, apologize, 01:31:03
I thought you were just asking the the Commission, so thank you for this opportunity, Daria Evans. 01:31:09
Resident of Vineyard, I just have a couple questions. 01:31:16
About. 01:31:20
These two amendments ohh thank you Mr. Hansey for. 01:31:22
Emailing me the proposals ahead of time. I appreciate that. I really liked reading it. 01:31:25
And. 01:31:30
The start with the the 88AUS. 01:31:34
Ohh, that's not open yet. OK, OK. 01:31:39
Then I'll just go to what we've been talking. 01:31:42
But I've been listening to here. 01:31:44
It talked about the tower heights. It says the heights are unlimited. 01:31:45
What does that mean? How tall are they going to be? 01:31:50
From my understanding you guys on that. 01:31:55
So you may want to just stand up and answer some of these questions if you want to. 01:31:57
Excuse me, sorry. So Pete Evans, so we we haven't designed. 01:32:02
Most of the buildings in the. 01:32:07
In the. 01:32:09
Town Center area. The two that we're getting ready to submit are four stories, but there will be taller buildings. 01:32:10
OK, but. 01:32:16
Like you said, the Skype. I mean, there's an IMAX. No, there there there. There's no maximum height in the downtown center area. 01:32:17
Like it could be 100, could be 100 stories tall. 01:32:22
OK. When we're going through the paths, we're not going to see the lake at all. 01:32:28
Well. 01:32:32
I mean the building. 01:32:33
It'll be a tower, so it won't block the entire lake. 01:32:34
Well, OK. 01:32:37
But but that is a good question and it's not something that's being determined in tonight's discussion. But there is no Max 01:32:39
height. Yeah figure. 01:32:43
It talks about having EV stations. 01:32:49
Who is going to operate and maintain those electrical charging stations? 01:32:52
Hmm. 01:32:58
For vehicles. 01:32:59
Yeah, it depends. I mean the city is is looking at adding some EV stations. We looked at at grants, we know there's a lot of 01:33:03
interest in that. So we we thought about kind of that low hanging fruit, possibly trying to get some here. 01:33:09
And then as as a downtown takes off, if it's if it's in the street of public St. most likely it would be like that the city would 01:33:15
would oversee it if it's on private property. 01:33:21
Then it would be the the private developer. We we, we have them now in the lakefront at the Town Center. So that's the HOA that 01:33:26
manages theirs, that's in their parking lot. And then Divine has I believe too and they their apartment management group manages 01:33:32
theirs. OK, so then So what you're saying is the city will not operate and maintain them. They will be taken over by private 01:33:38
entities. 01:33:44
Am I am I saying that correctly? It it depends if it's in the the public right of way or if it's on if it's in the private 01:33:51
development so. 01:33:55
Public right away, being in like a city street, then most likely. I mean this isn't things that have been absolutely determined. 01:33:59
The city would need to like flush out those exact details, but typically if it's in the public right of way then it would be city 01:34:04
infrastructure the city would maintain if it's in like a private parking lot or or a garage and it would be maintained by the, you 01:34:09
know, the the developer. 01:34:14
If it's on the public right away. 01:34:21
Who's going to pay for that charging for that vehicle? Is the city gonna pay for it if I'm gonna be paying for someone else's 01:34:23
beautiful? 01:34:26
Typically they they they have advisors like a credit card there's something it's a you you'd you'd pull up and then you you'd pay 01:34:31
for the you know whatever the rate. And we we've we've interviewed a couple companies that that do it and they have different 01:34:37
different ways of doing it. So the city is able to basically set what what that rate is. 01:34:44
Yeah, I have an idea really quick. Can somebody go back to all of the amendments? There was an executive list of amendments. 01:34:50
Did you have an executive list of them amendments? It was the first slide. 01:34:59
It had all of the different changes. 01:35:06
I was just the users. Well, what what I was thinking is due to the timing for the Planning Commission to get through these things, 01:35:10
if you wanted to talk about any of the changes in the amendments that we talked about. 01:35:16
During this portion, we can answer those questions and then if you have additional questions about the Town Center, we'll take 01:35:22
them during our council meeting. And so we'll divide your comments up just to get through this small portion. Can we do that? 01:35:29
Ohh OK, OK. 01:35:35
Unless you have any questions about what's going to be decided on the amendments. 01:35:38
Just about the facade. 01:35:44
The suits and things that that would be right now, yes. 01:35:45
Some of these things don't look very ADA compliant. 01:35:50
OK. Yeah. 01:35:54
You know. 01:35:56
I think it's great. Everything wants to be walkable, but there are people in the community that I live in. 01:35:57
That if there isn't a handicapped parking space, they won't be able to access any of these amenities. 01:36:04
I know people that cannot access the Riverwoods because. 01:36:11
The parking is so far away. 01:36:14
That they can't get to the bit, the venue. 01:36:16
They just are very limited and I just. 01:36:20
I can't see it being a vibrant community for people who are. 01:36:24
Older. 01:36:28
And I don't know what your your total vision is for. 01:36:29
Vineyard. 01:36:33
I don't know if it's really family oriented or if it's just urban professional. 01:36:34
But the way that this is going. 01:36:39
And. 01:36:40
I've just. 01:36:42
Kind of concerned because. 01:36:43
I wanted to be more of a family oriented. 01:36:45
And. 01:36:47
That's just my thought on that and. 01:36:49
Walk five and six. How many? 01:36:53
Townhomes, are you wanting to put in? Can you give me a number if there are any townhomes? 01:36:56
Well, that's what. 01:37:03
When you were doing that with that thoughts one and two, then yeah, that was an example. He come to the microphone, please. 01:37:04
Call. 01:37:11
So, so blacks five and six don't include any single family townhomes they do include. 01:37:13
Attached like apartment style units. OK, how many units and I think we're. 01:37:18
Four or four, 54150, OK and then? 01:37:24
When there was talking about. 01:37:28
The parking? Hmm, it's that crossed out or two 3000 and it said And 5000. 01:37:30
So you're adding 2000 more. Well, we're just adding another milestone at which the parking could be reevaluated. 01:37:38
So you're not we're we're not adding additional. 01:37:45
No, there's there's no additional units added to the project. We just. 01:37:49
Added another level of milestone where the parking could be reevaluated. OK, and so. 01:37:53
Boy, I was reading it sounded like you were adding. Yeah. Yeah. No, the only thing we've done tonight with any of these things 01:37:59
here is reduce density in areas that has more density than than is currently existing. We're giving us the optionality to that. 01:38:05
None of these, none of these, none of these here that we've come to talk. That was all done like the height, etcetera. That was 01:38:11
all done years ago. And that's just right by the train station itself. That's not the whole time. So it's not like. 01:38:17
You're gonna have. 01:38:24
Ten story buildings everywhere down there and then just real quick on the accessibility, because that is important. 01:38:25
I mean, what what we've shown today is a lot of stoop and porch conditions. 01:38:32
Those units have. 01:38:36
Have accessibility from the back. 01:38:38
So, so those units even though they they are front loaded, they're also rear loaded on an on a threshold entryway. So all of the 01:38:40
buildings that we're designing are meet the fair housing requirements for accessibility. Thank you very much. I just say one last 01:38:46
thing, one thing you said too is. 01:38:52
We want this downtown area to be a place for everyone. 01:38:59
We want it to be a place for everyone, no matter their socioeconomic status, no matter their age, no matter their race or gender. 01:39:02
We think this place downtown can be a really incredible place and needs to be designed with everybody in mind. 01:39:08
We're not designing this saying ohh we want this type of attendant we want. 01:39:14
We want everyone to be down there. We want. 01:39:19
Young people like yourself and. 01:39:22
People like myself there as well, OK? 01:39:24
Alright, well, thank you. Thank you. 01:39:27
OK. 01:39:29
And any other comments? 01:39:30
OK, I need a motion to go out of the public hearing. 01:39:32
So move down to second. 01:39:36
Sacrifice on favor? Aye, Alright. There is no action on this. We will move on to. 01:39:38
Hold on. 01:39:46
Alright. 01:39:47
No, we're going to move on to our lakefront for Walk Park. 01:39:54
2.3. 01:40:00
That's why I loved it you. 01:40:01
Yeah. 01:40:03
Ohh, we don't need it. We just need it for the public hearing. Let's do the 2.2, OK? I just wanted to get the Planning Commission 01:40:07
through our staff as possible, so. 01:40:11
OK, yes, we're open public hearing zoning text amendment Ordinance 22. 01:40:16
20/22/18. 01:40:22
And this is to talk about the accessory dwelling units. 01:40:24
Should we? 01:40:29
Just real quick. 01:40:34
Mayor Weird Anthony who was the one that had a time constraint has gone already. We we stopped three members unemployment 01:40:35
Commission.