Planning Commission Work Session   9/21/2021

hmm

Do we have a quorum of planning commissioners?

You do have a quorum.

Council, do we have a full body?

Thank you.

Who's kicking us off?

I believe so.

Thank you.

I will now hand it off to Ron for a bit.

The image to the left, you can see a unit over a garage all the way up to higher intensity residential where you get into more of the urban residential building type.

Next slide, please.

So thanks Ron.

And I'll turn it over to Code Studio.

And so something that we will be considering in the ordinance rewrite is potentially reducing parking requirements for these affordable units to help control some of those construction costs.

And I'll turn it back over to Kochis to yell.

So the way those buildings are masked, that'll be something that we're going to be talking about in the zoning ordinance rewrite of how to control those in a way that allows them to be built and provide that affordable housing, but allows it to be done in a context sensitive way.

And with that, I will turn it back over to Jenny.

I believe he's in the attendee list.

Thanks, Jenny.

With that, I hand it off to you, Lyle.

Can I get a thumbs up, thumbs down on a break?

I don't think we need a break.

Let's start with Mr. Mitchell.

Can you talk a little bit about how we protect against getting around the loophole, the affordability loophole, using subdivisions?

I believe he's on the call and I'll let him.

Lee just parked.

Yeah, so I'm going to let Lee introduce himself and let him have an opportunity to answer first and then I'll add anything to the pen.

But we're not certain what we can do right this minute and it will probably take us a little bit to get that research done.

Robertson if she's got some thoughts or guidance or not.

So I think through some combination of updated subdivision regulations and creative measures under the zoning ordinance, I think you can, I think there's a lot of possibilities but I don't think we're ready to rule anything out or rule anything specifically in tonight.

Okay, so I think what you're doing is counseling patients that we think we can do this, but it may have to happen at the zoning level.

we can do if not to achieve perfectly the recommendations to get very close to what is being recommended.

If I have time, I'd like to ask another question.

One, please.

Why it's not more intentional and what your game plan is on that for Ron and for Danny, please.

That's not off the table, but at this point we're thinking that the affordability is just baked into everything that we do for each of the land use categories.

So your strategy is to make it more implicit than more, for lack of a better term, in your face.

so that we're including affordability at every land use category that includes residential development has been our approach.

Some of the neighborhoods that are not sensitive areas.

Yeah.

Mr. Chair, I yield.

Mr. Habbat, questions and comments.

Like can one lot, one over get a different designation as we're doing the rezoning process or how does that happen?

So we're keeping the door open for both of those things.

Thanks.

Mr. LeHundro, comments and questions?

ADC historic and conservation districts, they must maintain the contributing status of the existing historic structures.

Ron, did you have thoughts on that?

So I think that language would certainly begin to benefit that end that we've been discussing.

with those proposed for general residential in sensitive areas.

So there you go ahead, Jamie.

Lee, is there anything else you would add?

And so, yes, it's fair to say we should look at some of those issues when we get to the zoning for sure.

Or perhaps he could speak to that in a bit.

Jenny, I just promoted him.

Thank you.

Mr. Cash?

I'm done.

Mr. Cash, please unmute your mic.

I don't see him in the panel.

I think he's still in the attendee.

And if he can hear us, Mr. Cash, I'm going to try to promote you one more time.

He didn't like my question at all.

Well, we'd be happy to follow up with any further comments from Philip.

There might be a technical issue that we're having.

That seems fine.

Thank you, Lauv.

Mr. Cash, can you hear us?

Please unmute your mic.

As I noted, we're happy to follow up with him on that question, if not during the meeting, by email or otherwise.

Russell, questions and comments.

Are we talking about tools to protect historic resources in all of those areas or only the ones that are that are ADC?

We're not thinking about getting rid of that, but I think weaving in the story of protection of historic structures more explicitly in these language classifications is something we can certainly do.

Although I would note for those, sorry to interrupt you Liz, for those that are eligible but not listed, that's something we haven't discussed yet, how that, so I would just say that was one qualification.

And so that's all for me.

That is a really key aspect here as well.

And Mr. Stolzenberg, questions and comments.

which obviously gets you more units beyond that third but what is the top end or is there a top end envisioned or is it kind of unspecified for now which means we might cut it off at five or does it mean we might cut it off at eight depending on what we can get?

So that's why we're not giving that sort of upper end right now.

Can you provide some insight on why there rather than maybe the more connected places that are on the same transit routes and in the same general area?

Yeah, Ron, would you like to speak to that?

So we're definitely open to taking a closer look at that in a direction.

that you know it's really just right there like a five minute walk away and it's a great site that we could definitely make more use of.

How will that work?

I'd like to invite Ron or Lee to respond to that.

So that's something that we'll look closely at from a zoning district by zoning district level to determine what that building envelope looks like for a house size structure.

Thank you.

How will the 2.5 metric work in those areas that are taller?

I guess, again, with Leo Rama, would one of you like to speak to that?

If people have ideas about where those are, that would also be helpful.

So that's just to add on to what we said.

Questions and comments from council, please.

Biazon that she's not going to have this monstrosity in her backyard?

additional setback, step back and other tools like that that allowed you to create a more respectful height transition would be employed.

Yes, we're still going to be able

So there will still be some tension, but we'll make certain that people have drawings and examples that they can look at so that we can understand how to balance those before we adopt the zoning.

One that slopes away from the street.

So that we can have a walkout floor out the backside that in essence sits mostly, you know, below ground from the street so that the perceived height from the street is less than the full two and two.

So thank you.

Back to you.

So I appreciate those comments from the commissioner.

But I guess those are just thoughts I have right now.

Sorry, can I ask one clarifying question about those comments?

Definitely.

So I guess, Michael, maybe we can start with you and see what your thought is, but I'd welcome input from others who have mentioned the expansion of the sensitive area concept.

Well, I mean, my thought would be if there's utility in exploring expanding both those approaches to more areas throughout the city.

Okay, thanks.

But in reality, we've created an outcome where single-family zoning is what we get.

Thanks for clarifying.

But I just think we have to be very mindful about about what it may mean.

Can you be more specific about this?

And not that we allow someone to build with the intention of those things benefiting the community and the way that we're talking about here, but it not actually occurring.

Just ask us to be mindful of what we're doing with that district and make sure that we protect the low-income community in that district.

I think I understand.

Mr. Chair, I think I understand.

If I could ask, Mayor Walker, do you see that as kind of being like X-specific or generally applying to kind of all of the big like commercial sites like the Scrapyard and like 29?

Be honest about how much control we actually have there and just make sure that what we intend to happen in an area that has been predominantly Black and low income, that is changing rapidly, that we don't make decisions that don't do what we are saying that we desire to do.

And I was just trying to highlight the point that there's a whole other aspect around this beyond general residential that could provide a lot of units for this community and meet some of those demands.

Mr. Mitchell, do you have anything you'd like to add?

Thank you, Mr. Bob.

Commissioner Mitchell had his hand up.

I think he will.

The overlay needs to be in the thing.

Thank you.

Is that allowed to share?

Please.

I guess, Ron, is that accurate with your understanding as well?

So I think that's a good clarification.

It's no residence-sized building.

We may be looking at a difference.

I think that's something we kind of touched on through the presentation.

And so I just wanted to express that concern that with single family residences on both sides would be out of place.

Russell, comments and questions?

Thanks.

Mr. Stolzenberg, questions and comments?

I don't think that's a reasonable way to make land use policy.

or is this a plan that forgets them?

can do that and it will do that if implemented in the way it's described.

Why do we want to keep it?

Ron, did you have anything you'd want to add to that?

No, I think that's well covered and hit on all the points that we've been talking about for medium intensity residential.

Did I respond to your question then, Lyle?

I was concerned about that.

Yeah, thank you for checking.

Sort of last call on commissioner and counselor comments or otherwise I'd like to take a short break and then go to public comment.

What kinds of things give a half a story?

It's truth or a half of the floor covered on a flat roof building.

How about a basement that's partly above ground?

It's a flat roof and it literally covers half of the floor below it.

Does it matter how pitched the roof is?

Yes, there would typically be a range and on the flat roof there would be a location for where the the open portion is meaning if we want that to appear to be shorter from the street then that additional piece would have to be to the rear they could do an outdoor deck or something on the front side but it would be to the rear

Is it fair to say that this is one of those things where we're going to have to draft the zoning ordinance before we see exactly what we're thinking about?

So I do expect council mention that there will be a, there'll be a step for that.

In my mind, yes.

Both the aerial extent and the descriptions.

Thank you.

Sorry, can you unmute there?

So I'd ask for that.

It will look simpler five years from now than an overlay would.

So that's my point.

So I understand it might, I think it potentially gets a bit lost because we're not putting out a specific number as we discussed with, I think Mr. Stolzenberg or someone else.

So we just need to make sure the public understands that the OLA is going to happen.

But fundamentally, if it operates as an overlay, it will be in one place in the ordinance, and the base district will be in another.

I totally agree.

I don't, I'm not saying we should, you know, wipe that off the map necessarily.

As long as it lives and breathes in the underlying document, then it's cool.

Russell.

But maybe there's something to what we're calling it.

We're working through the nomenclature now.

Counselor Hill, please.

I'm not sure if I'm the only one, but.

It may not have a mandate but it will have a bonus option that will be appealing if it doesn't have a mandate.

There's just a lot of questions around this process.

Does that help?

If you're thinking of the cultural ones, yes.

That's sort of what I thought.

That you weren't ignoring what was built around it.

Those are all you know kind of different things that we'll have to talk about.

Yes, okay.

Thank you.

And I believe we are back.

Who is our first speaker, please?

You have two minutes.

So thank you.

And next.

John, you're on with the Planning Commission.

You have two minutes.

All right, that's it.

Next, please.

You have two minutes.

Next, please.

William, you're on with the Planning Commission.

Appreciate that.

Next, please.

John, you're on with the Planning Commission.

Yes.

Next, please.

Josh, you're on the Planning Commission.

Next, please.

You have two minutes.

Please unmute.

Kaki, are you with us?

Joe, can we come back to her, please?

You have two minutes.

Next, please.

You have two minutes.

Is that mute?

I'll defer to you, Chair.

Please unmute.

Thank you very much for your time.

Next, please.

Kaki, if you hear us, we'll be on with you.

Thank you.

Next, please.

Are you there?

Thank you.

I appreciate your time.

Very technical question, so staff could probably deal with it better than we could.

Next, please.

You have two minutes.

you know he's winning right now it is not it is not the it is not the people that are not afford not available don't have the ability to to purchase land to purchase homes those are the people that are continuously losing right now so when you talk about starting a war the war this war is already happening and I just would like the Commission to be cognizant of that fact thank you thank you and let's please leave individual names out of this let's focus on the problems here next please

You have two minutes.

Thank you very much.

Thank you, sir.

And next, please.

Brandon, you're on with the Planning Commission.

Next please.

You have two minutes.

We want to build housing elsewhere to bring those rents down to keep those rents affordable.

And next, please.

You have two minutes.

Thank you.

Next, please.

You have two minutes.

So thank you so much.

And next, please.

Catherine, you're old at the Planning Commission.

So I look forward to your leadership on this issue and to City Council's subsequent leadership in creating a bold plan that will meet the needs of our city.

Thank you.

Next, please.

You have two minutes.

Ultimately, you may reveal that we are all environmental fools, but ultimately, nobody will fool Mother Nature.

Next, please.

You have two minutes.

Okay, can everybody hear me?

Thank you.

Next, please.

You have two minutes.

I think that's something where we can turn what's really going to be a terrible liability into an asset, and I hope that there's more focus on that going forward.

Thank you.