[0:17] Planning Commission Chair: If you want a second one, you can have one. All right, we'll call a meeting to order. This is a planning commission meeting along with a city council work session regarding zoning code and the comp plan. Call yours to order. [0:35] Mayor: We'll go ahead and call a city council work session to order. [0:38] Planning Commission Chair: Okay. And with us tonight is staff along with a consultant HKGI to discuss some alternatives and ideas. Right Tony? Regarding the midcycle comp plan and the 2050 comp plan, an update. What you're looking for is some consensus between the commission and the council regarding some of these ideas and topics you're going to talk about. [1:00] Tony Wippler (Staff): Absolutely. [1:02] Planning Commission Chair: We'll turn it over to you and then we'll have questions later. [1:04] Tony Wippler (Staff): Absolutely. [1:06] Planning Commission Chair: All right. Thank you. [1:08] Tony Wippler (Staff): Uh first and foremost, thank you all for attending. I know it's sometimes difficult to get everybody in a room together, so I do appreciate that. Um, I think first and foremost we want to maybe do some introductions of our consultants who are with us this evening. We have Rita Trap and Beth Richmond from HKGI here. Um, they've worked with us on a number of different projects over the years and we're glad to have them back to help us with the zoning code update. Uh, we also have Paul Amdats and hopefully I said that correctly. Um he is assisting us with some public relations things and helping us with messaging and um public outreach and making sure that messaging is appropriate for what we're trying to mention. HKGI is here. Uh we entered into a professional services agreement with them about a year ago specifically for the zoning code update. Um at that time it was envisioned that the zoning code update would be part of the our midcycle comprehensive plan amendment that we had been working on for the last handful of years is what it feels like. Um however um that midcycle plan has kind of been put on pause for a couple reasons. One is the Met Council will be issuing the system statements for all the communities in the metropolitan area for the 2050 comprehensive plan. Those should be issued within a week or two. Um and that essentially kicks off the 2050 comprehensive plan 10-year cycle. Um, so what we're proposing now is to kind of take a different approach. We'll use that midcycle comprehensive plan that we've been working on and have done a lot of good work with that midcycle comprehensive plan and use that as the foundation for that 2050 update. Um but with that said, we do need to also work towards the zoning portion of um the process, if you will. The main reason for that is that we are using some ARPA funds for that process and we need to have those expended by end of next year. Um, so we can get a lot of the work done um, for that zoning code. There will likely be some minor changes that will need to happen based off of the 2050 comprehensive plan. So, there will be some additional zoning updates that will be required likely um, after we get approval of that 2050 plan. Um, like I said, that will all be part of that foundation for that plan. Um, as you'll recall, we did do a vision statement. Um, we had a lot of conversation between council and planning commission about a year and a half ago. Uh, regarding the vision statement, we have a draft vision statement which I did include in the packet which basically says Farmington is a welcoming city where people and community are valued, traditions are celebrated, our natural resources are treasured, and businesses have vibrant opportunities. We are bold in pursuing opportunities and investments that support high-quality sustainable growth alongside complete and connected communities. That vision statement is key to not only the 2050 plan, but also to the zoning code update. That couple sentences right there literally will be that foundation that we work off of. So everything that we do as far as that 2050 comp plan and the zoning code update should be with that in mind. So um as I'd mentioned, Beth and Reed are here. uh they will kind of go through uh the process uh of what we're looking to do for the zoning code update. Um and I will fill in as necessary. So I'll turn it over to them. They do have a quick presentation to go through. [5:39] Rita Trap (HKGI): Great. It's even quicker now. Tony took some of my thunder. That's okay. I'm glad. Um so we were going to talk a little bit about project project overview and background. Um I think Tony covered a lot of it. So, I might stop at a couple of slides. Um, and but we really want to talk this evening about uh what we are thinking about for public outreach and strategy just to connect with you, make sure it makes sense, see if there's other opportunities that you think we should be considering. Uh, looking at the actual updates themselves. We don't have recommended updates. We are at the beginning of the process. This meeting is our typical kind of kickoff meeting to a zoning code update where we make sure that we're hearing from you about the things that are important that we talk about any policy ideas that we already know will be things that will be need to be discussed so that we have a good foundation moving forward. Um and so we'll talk through those and then have discussion. Um I am not going to focus too much on certain type certain slides that Tony kind of covered but um really just to make sure we have a good foundation. The project is focused on updating title 10, which is zoning specifically. Um it's really targeting specific areas. There was a full review done in 2020. Um and there's some elements that was discuss that were discussed in 2020 that weren't implemented. And so we're going to revisit those and see if there's some value in incorporating those. Um an example, I think there was a discussion at the time about whether or not to do uses in a table format instead of a list format. That's something that we'll probably be moving forward during this update cycle. Um we are also looking at just making sure that we're updating the structure. There's some um clarity that can be um improved with the way that the code is structured. Um also some modernization of uses um streamlining and making sure any of your procedures follow your current practice. So we are just going through our typical update process though we know that it was recently done. So, uh there's definitely already from our analysis there's less that necessarily we would do um as part of this update process. Tony talks about the background uh and so we know um that we will be focusing on applying the vision that was discussed and really setting the stage. Uh one thing that's nice for me doesn't always happen is I was involved in the comprehensive plan amendment. So, even though we're pausing that, I know what we were intending to do, which helps me uh look at how we structure this zoning code update. And my goal is, I promise it will not I can't promise it'll happen exactly, is that we try and identify everything we can to change now um so that the changes are limited on the back end. So, we're trying to make sure that we make changes to districts that we know need to happen to reflect the discussion that we've had and to best set the stage. So the changes at the back end of the comprehensive plan process maybe are more about reszoning or slight tweaks as opposed to wholesale changes and discussions that need to happen. We talked about this schedule. Beth was going to talk a little bit about schedule. [8:28] Beth Richmond (HKGI): Uh yeah, so uh this project is going to take us a while. So, we started uh with staff this summer uh for phase one kind of kicking off understanding where staff is at with some of the uh issues that they've identified that they would like to focus on with this update. Um obviously, we're kind of bringing this through uh ending phase one here and then um starting uh figuring out the approach, making sure that we've identified all the areas that we're going to be focusing on and then starting this fall with the draft updates themselves. Um so that'll take us through kind of spring of next year. Um, and then we'll work through the adoption process kind of late spring, early summer. So, this will kind of concurrently go with the 2050 comprehensive plan update. Um, so we will be doing some things kind of uh in concert with both of those projects at the same time. [9:29] Rita Trap (HKGI): And I think that'll actually be great because as of right now, we don't really know where the direction is on the regional policy and how it applies to you. Um, so we'll know more in a couple of weeks and that will be helpful for us because hopefully we can set the stage and understand any impacts that those have and in and inform this process and again try and do the best we can to use the funds efficiently and effectively um in a meaningful manner. [9:56] Beth Richmond (HKGI): Um so the first thing we wanted to really touch on tonight was the public outreach strategy. Um, so we are planning to have different opportunities for public input at every phase of the project. Um, but would like to get the feedback tonight from all of you as far as if this, uh, if there are other opportunities that we can, um, capitalize on. So, um, phase one, uh, generally what we do is post some kind of basic information, general content on the city's website. You know, here's the project, this is what a zoning code is, this is the schedule that we we'll be working off of. Uh, and then the plan would be to provide the contact information for staff so that anybody that's on the website that sees this and has questions or comments, um, that they're able to reach out to staff and talk with all of them. Um, at this point, there wouldn't be, uh, specific questions, uh, that we would be asking on the website. This is really just, uh, to inform everyone that this project is occurring. Um so then phase two uh what we are looking for is to really get input from uh the people who use the code the most um to understand where there may be opportunities for uh improvement of the code. Uh so this would be uh a meeting with stakeholders typically that's uh developers, designers, other professionals who are working on um different plans, different developments within the city um who who are used to using the code, who've seen it, uh who've experienced uh just working through that process. Um and asking them where are the areas for improvement that you've seen, where can the city uh you know clarify things, make things uh easier to understand, simpler process, all of that. Uh phase three, this is when we'll actually be starting to have draft code updates. Uh and so at that point, that's when we'd really like to uh talk with some of the uh the downtown stakeholders. We are anticipating that there will be a change uh coming out of that um midcycle comprehensive plan discussions with the downtown area, the downtown district. And so, uh, it's been identified as we've talked with staff that there would really, we'd like to have a meeting with downtown property owners, um, business owners to talk about those potential changes and get their feedback and, uh, help them to understand kind of where the city's coming from and what's what's going on and what the city is proposing. Uh, as there's, uh, additional drafts of the code itself, uh, we would be proposing to present that on the city's website itself. Uh and then that would be available for public review for anyone who wants to take a spin through the draft language and provide comments. Um so with all of that, we would hope that as many people as possible are are able to read the actual language and and react to it and give us that input. Uh and then with phase four, that's the adoption process. There's a public hearing that would go along with that. Um so with that, this is our fairly typical process as far as what we do for outreach. Um, every city's a little bit different with the stakeholders that we identify for those meetings. Um, but those are the stakeholders that we've identified as we've talked with staff. Um, so are there thoughts, questions with with any of this process? [12:53] Council Member Josh: Probably a question for Tony or Deanna, but feel free to pop in. So the system updates we're looking for from the Met Council, you know, kind of for my understanding, maybe others, what specific system update components are going to be most impactful to guiding what we do? [13:25] Tony Wippler (Staff): Well, the system statement itself lists all the requirements that the city has to come into compliance with. So, it provides us all the information as far as potential um population, employment, um affordable housing requirements, all of that is part of that system statement and it informs us if we want to have a plan get approved by the med council. It informs us what we have to meet as far as those requirements. Um it also deals with our infrastructure, sewer in particular, um extensions, MUSA, um development staging, all of that comes into play with that system statement. Um because we have to especially with the Musa and development staging, we really have to look at that and make a determination as far as what we can designate um not only from a land use perspective but from a timing perspective for development to meet the numbers that the Met Council provides us. Um that's the biggest part of this puzzle if you will and that's what it is. it becomes a puzzle that we have to try to to solve. Um, and hopefully with what we've already done, we're well on our way to doing that. But unfortunately, like Rita said, until we get that system statement, we really don't have those numbers. So, we don't really know what that will look like as of yet. Um, but we we feel good about where we're at. [15:14] Rita Trap (HKGI): Yes. I think that the work that we did is a good starting point. I the one thing that's always in the back of my mind is that they are making changes relative to densities and requirements and number of units that are required and that part we still don't know exactly. We have a general sense of it and that might we know it will be higher. Correct. If I was going to anticipate an area where we will have to come back and have farther further discussion, it may be along those lines of where is the land being designated in different areas. It the density number, the minimum threshold density number has increased again, which means your current land use categories don't match what potentially needs to happen. And so those are things that we know will have to happen. But until that comes out, while we have some general senses of things, we like to have the actual document in hand that is for every they do one for every single community. That's what we like to know and see so that we can make sure we understand how they're thinking because they um preliminary some preliminary numbers are out there and it's really been just in the last just today we learned or yesterday we just learned and we're like oh wow look at the differences between the communities and um so that's some things we're digging into a little bit. [16:21] Tony Wippler (Staff): I also think it's important to point out though that you know your company as well as our staff has been involved in some early meetings just to kind of get ahead of it. And so this is this is a typical process. This is what happens every 10 years and Met Council provides this direction if you will that each community then needs to adhere to. But this there's nothing unique about this process. It is, you know, just the standard thing and we're prepared to um make those tweaks as necessary to make sure that we can come into alignment with what the council will require. [17:07] Council Member Josh: Okay. Nothing right now. [17:24] Rita Trap (HKGI): Great. So, it sounds like the proposed public engagement strategy at least initially. Yes, sir. [17:45] Council Member Dirk: And I was going to ask this later and I want to keep this high level, but you did mention the downtown and the businesses and meeting with them. And if we stay with the downtown overlay district as we did in the midcycle that expands it, you know, out to all the way to Elm to three and then south to Ash, I believe. I have a slide on that. Yeah. Just just let me get to my slide. My question is and and for phase two, you know, you're going to meet with you mentioned the business people. Once we have an idea of what we're what you all think is the appropriate policy direction, but there's there's a number of residents and when they see or hear that their property is going to be reszoned or possibly reszoned with an overlay district of business, they don't necessarily understand it and some of them don't like it. So then when you get to phase four, then all of a sudden you get people at the public hearing that we're explaining to every one of us. And Tony and I have talked about this in the past because this this has been cyclical as we talked about. We did this once and then we brought it back and now we're looking at expanding it again. So what I was wondering some of those outreach programs, could they be neighborhood meetings with— [18:52] Tony Wippler (Staff): That's absolutely what we're looking to do. [18:59] Rita Trap (HKGI): Um, I would also venture to guess that, um, if you'll recall with the midcycle, we were also looking at the Flag Staff Avenue corridor and also doing some additional outreach and meetings. [19:12] Council Member Dirk: Similar to the downtown with with them as well. But yes, they would it would be a neighborhood type meeting. I don't want to forget the residents because they're as impacted as the businesses downtown, too. So, all right. Thank you. [19:22] Council Member Josh: No, thank you for the reminder. Yes, Mr. Sure. If I if you don't mind me adding here, um I think this would be especially noteworthy as it comes to our level of engagement that I think the average person doesn't understand that Met Council ultimately sets the the guard rails and then we have to determine our policy within those guard rails. For example, R1, we go three homes per acre. Met council is coming out with direction of the last number I heard was 4.2 two and I've heard that it could go north of that. So when they start talking about reducing road width and increasing density without even getting into accessory dwellings, those are all things that come from the Met Council that we have to try to um fit and shape our community in knowing that there are certain legislative limits as to what we can say yes or no to. And and I think like very high level every public engagement we have needs to have that clearly stated that we may not ever have control over your neighbor coming in and saying I'm going to buy the lot, tear the house down and put a forplex in there and there's nothing you can do to stop that. Like that's outside of local purview. And so as we wait for the Met Council to provide their direction and backfill the information so that we can make our decisions that know that ours are always going to be predicated on the Met Council first. [20:47] Rita Trap (HKGI): I hear I definitely hear what you're saying and it's interesting as I think through a zoning code process that's simultaneously happening with the comp plan process and you may see us weave and unweave certain elements because the zoning is uh very property based and correct um maybe more complex to under to talk about those elements whereas the comp plan is really the opportunity to say the things that you were talking about. So we we're I just want to be upfront that I feel like we're going to be trying to put out enough information for it to make sense but not too much that it gets really confusing because we are doing two things simultaneously. Um but you're you're right in term it also is helpful for me and I think for staff to hear that you want to acknowledge it in that way because every city in my experience is different. Sometimes we try to ignore the fact that the Met Council exists and we just do we do what we do and we kind of talk about it like this is our vision and sometimes we want to acknowledge that and so it's good to kind of know where you're thinking about it like you know there are limits this is this is what we have to work with and um I think we don't totally understand some of those things yet of where our guard rails are um we have a general sense of what they've been talking about but I don't actually know yet how they're interp interpreting their their policy that they set forth in their policy plan. So, these are all great discussions. This is what we're hoping for tonight because we're going to start working through these things and it's helpful to know how to present the information, what we should include, who should be included. Um, and you're absolutely right, residents need to be included. How we kind of fit that together, we'll have to look at. Um, I don't anticipate I we have to do the full GIS analysis. Just so you know, I was not anticipating a lot of reszoning as part of this process because without the comp plan being in place with that new downtown area that we talked about, we can't reszone people into it because it doesn't exist and so then we would be out of compliance. So most likely most of this process will be setting the stage for the district to get created with the idea that the reasonzoning would have to happen after the process. So, I don't think we were we're quite clear on that yet. Or maybe that was on a slide in like three or four slides and I would have said that. [22:55] Beth Richmond (HKGI): Any other thoughts on public engagement? Because we definitely this is a great time for us to add in places or people or thoughts. All right. If you have more, we can come back to it. [23:13] Rita Trap (HKGI): Um, so the vision, I think Tony, you said you included the the vision in your packet. Um so this is the vision that we are working from even for this zoning code update process. You know this is the foundational element that we are working for. Any of our zoning code update processes um hearken back to the comprehensive plan as the starting indicator of what we should be looking at and doing. So that is what we're doing with this process as well. Um we do want to talk about the downtown um because the downtown is the area that through that comprehensive plan amendment um discussion that we had that we knew the most potential change would happen. Um I just wanted to kind of frame back uh I don't think everybody in the here was part of that discussion. So just to try and lay the groundwork of what we talked about during that process. Um so in that amendment that we were working on the idea was that uh you have a a specific downtown area. um you have a vision for that area that really looks at as a mixeduse district. We worked on the wording with you about what should be included. Is it kind of you know obviously it was commercial and residential. We had a little discussion about small-cale manufacturing or not. Um, one of the discussions that we came in one of these work sessions was two iterations ago, um, there was an idea, um, that it should extend and that it should extend all the way to Highway 3, a portion of it. My understanding is that that went away because it was really hard to implement and it resulted in, for example, residential homes being considered non-conforming because they weren't businesses. Um during that time I brought up the strategy that we've been using a lot in our mixeduse districts and on our downtowns that recognizes that existing homes are conforming. It's just that we don't want you to create new single family homes. Like if you're a single family home, that's great. Live there, but at such time that you would want to sell or redevelop that we would see it intensifying in use to some other type of residential or some commercial business. And that gave you a strategy that was different than in the past of how you could show the area that you really wanted to have as a mixeduse downtown that you haven't been able to really show on your maps today. Um, so really the intention is that this district is is tweaking what you already have today and expanding its geography a little bit. So supporting the mixes of uses in the area. When we were in that process, we established um I think it was 12 to 65 units an acre which was based on the project you already recently had. Um and really trying to provide flexibility for property owners. And I think that's the message that's going to be important even for residential property owners that it's about providing them maximum flexibility for what they want to see. It doesn't mean they have to leave. It doesn't mean that they have to change. They can be there. Um but there that these are kind of where we're headed into the future. Uh so this is the description that we have currently for the land use category. Um certainly because we haven't adopted this, we can always revisit this now or in the um comprehensive plan update process. Um you can see in the dark colored um red on the screen where the downtown mixeduse area where we had identified that to be. Um this is what we had proposed as of late last year. Um it is not in place today. Um, so this is kind of where we're aiming towards and where we're going to be kind of working on designing a downtown district that can work on a zoning perspective that implements this land use category. [26:39] Beth Richmond (HKGI): Um, so currently you have uh two existing zoning districts primarily in downtown. You can see on this map that it's not only those. Um, there's also some residential districts or other districts that are shown. The intent would be ultimately in my mind that the comprehensive plan and the zoning would actually have the same geography. So we would have a downtown district land use category and a downtown zoning district and they're the same that we wouldn't have this difference. That's a little bit confusing. U right now you have a residential downtown district u which really is recognizing the historical pattern of residential areas adjacent to downtown. It allows single unit, two-unit and multi-unit. Um, it's really talking about creating infill and redevelopment of the mix of housing types. And so that is the brownish color. I always have to check because computer screens and TV screens don't always match. Um, and then the downtown business is really focused on the general commercial or higher density residential units uses for the downtown area. Um, and that's the reddish color. Um, so as you can kind of see if you—Oh, that's right. We put them side by side so you can have them. uh that you can see that there's a difference in the where it is all extent extending. So again, I wasn't envisioning I don't think we can actually reszone as part of this process, but we can create the district and have that discussion and really set the foundation so that when the district uh that land use category is adopted, then you can go back and work through that resoning process. Um let's see. Potential updates adjusting the B2 which is the downtown district um to include additional downtown uses and then the RD will remain but it'll probably shrink inside. So that's the residential downtown district. You also have a downtown commercial overlay district. We're going to have a whole section on overlays in a second. But um in our mind, potentially if we do a downtown district, we could potentially go away from having a downtown district and an overlays district, which is easier for property owners and it's definitely easier for staff where you don't have to remember to look at both districts. Uh that overlay district is mostly about design. Uh and so if we have one district, you can bring those elements together into one base district and every all the information someone needs is there. And you can even do nuances based on type of use. We could have standards that are for commercial buildings but not for residential buildings. That's all possible to do within the district. So that's where we are thinking of heading with the downtown district. Um we are before we go on to the overlay districts. I like given the time it feels better to pause and talk about each topic as we kind of go through it instead of going through. [29:22] Rita Trap (HKGI): Are there questions, concerns? Did I not explain something? Is there any additional thoughts Jared Tony Diana that you have that I didn't cover? I thought you did a fantastic—any concerns about that idea. [29:40] Council Member Nick: No, I just have one basic question. Is it probably mostly because I haven't had dinner and my brain ain't working right? Um, say I'm a, you know, we're talking about Elm there between, you know, that we're we're extending the zoning district and I'm homeowner A that's in a single, you know, single family residential today. In this new system, it is only relevant to redevelopment of the property, right? Not sale of existing. So, if I want to sell my house to someone else that wants to move into this house, it is totally fine for them to do that, right? [30:19] Rita Trap (HKGI): Yes. It will remain a house until an opportunistic developer comes along and manages correct however many properties he wants to orchestrate along there and redevelop nature. Right. [30:39] Council Member Nick: Right? This is more the other way that you're concerned about is forcing a homeowner to tell them you can't sell your house anymore, right? Unless it's to someone that wants to build a business here because that's— [30:46] Rita Trap (HKGI): right? The concern also is when you say something is non-conforming, then there are restrictions on how they can improve their property. You're only able to do things that um replace, you know, repair. You can't enhance it. If you wanted to make it bigger, you can't technically make it bigger because it's non-conforming. So, we like to try and eliminate as many of those non-conforming so that people aren't restricted because we don't want people to have houses in the district that they can't improve and therefore it degrades because they don't feel like they can improve it and they're stuck. So, that's the reason we want to create a district where those things can continue until it makes sense in the marketplace um and they can still improve their in their houses. [31:47] Council Member Josh: That's beautiful. Thank you. I don't want to get like necessarily get in the weeds here, but I just want to I want to make an observation and a comment from a very high level. You know, as we look at the next 20, 30, 40 years of downtown and we think of like how do we hold on to um our our what is now, right? How do we hold on to the residents? You know, the residents that are there multigenerational like there's a lot of establishment that's in downtown. And as I look at that map, I start to think of like, you know, the Adinas, the Richfields who are by age much further along and and you see where their mixed use, their um commercial happens and it's it's on arterials, right? So it would, as an example here, it would be on like Third Street. It would be Elm. You could make an argument that up in, you know, up past Main Street, to the north of Elm, that's already kind of naturally happened. Um, where I start to get a little nervous is I think we have a lot of alleys. And so something to be cognizant of is as we're looking at adding this overlay or changing this, is there hasn't been thought about to we just say, okay, it's Third Street. Well, if those properties start turning over in the next decade or so and and you start to move in businesses, now you're going to have different or additions to the infrastructure. You're going to have different layers of traffic. Uh you're going to have commercial trash service like things that law of unintended consequences. And so I just want to be cognizant that as we look at this, my brain says arterials, yes, makes sense. But what happens when you have the dry cleaner that's on Fourth Street? That's just it it falls into the planning. It it it works, but it's just it's a very obscure and almost like there's no continuity to it. It's not Sim City. I know it's not a perfect scenario and we can put everything in the exact right place, but I just want to make sure that we don't lose sight of what the unintended consequences could be of some of those developing over a decade from now. Um because land doesn't typ or property doesn't typically turn over every two or three years. It turns over every seven to nine years. So, it's a it's a very long game that we're starting here. If that makes sense. [34:20] Planning Commission Chair: Yeah. I mean, if you had to to had to go over to redesign, I think you'd start at the center and you work out and you wouldn't set it up this way where you have houses in between where you could sell a house or two and build some commercial and then you got houses on all the sides of it. [34:40] Council Member Dirk: That that and that's the comments that you hear at the public hearing, especially when you talk about the non-conforming. Yeah. You know, they get they get a little concerned and I I I guess I understand that. [34:58] Council Member Josh: Yeah. There's some character to like you look at 50th in France. There's some character to like the—there's a couple of houses but then there's the bodega or there's the you know there's a small taco shop or the the burger joint and there's a few more houses. Like that's part of the character of it. You know it's you can kind of move your way around. Um but just not pigeon holing ourselves. Do you also think that that's where the overlay becomes important too when we're talking about designing to specification that if we're looking at this from a district standpoint the goal is to have continuity in it visually so that when we when we are in spotted cow phase where most things are one color and then we have spots of other colors that we still see some level of consistency and continuity because we've taken that step with the overlay that it—yes—I mean it's It's messy. It It development never happens the way that we necessarily desire for it to. To your point, it'd be great to start here and then just move. But in the middle, you're going to have a property that's kind of like there that somebody wants to sell and another person wants to redevelop. [36:29] Council Member Holly: to in my mind that's the purpose of the overlay is to ensure that it's more visually and pleasing and connected and it doesn't always make sense right away and you're not always going to make everybody happy but if we're being intentional enough about the overall feel and the look then that's I mean that's the—if the intention is to grow the the district that's the best that we can do at that point. [36:56] Council Member Josh: Yeah. the, you know, the design standards or the covenants, however we want to call them, um, as those are further defined and or changed over time and just trying to keep some continuity across and and not having a lot of variations or or variances and deviations so that you don't have that outlier because I mean, truth be told, when you go down, you know, second, third, and fourth, there's not a whole lot of lot depth there either. So, It looks good here, but then there becomes the how do you actually do it, right? How do you take that one house out that doesn't even have room to put a 20 by 24 garage in there and then you're going to turn around and take the house out and put a dentist in there? Like, how do you even can we even achieve the goal in which we're trying to achieve? Because you're going to have too much lock coverage. You're not going to have sufficient parking spaces, conflict with further code. So again, I I I preface that because I don't want to get in the weeds, but I I I know you guys do an incredible job getting into the weeds as I see this. I just want to make sure that we're paying attention to all of those additional layers so that we don't end up in big issues down the line. [38:02] Tony Wippler (Staff): Yeah. Um you can look at it one of two ways. You can keep it separate as an overlay or you can just kind of transition the overlay into the ex into the district itself. Um we actually did that with our industrial park um design standards. There was an overlay at one point. Over time, we moved all of that into the actual district itself. Um, I actually prefer that better than having a separate overlay. Um, for one main reason, for ease of finding the information. Um, when a developer calls, you don't want to have to bounce between one code and the other code, and it things can get lost in translation. Um, it's just easier from that aspect to have it in one location. You can still have all the same design standards, um, all of that. It's just in a different format. [38:59] Beth Richmond (HKGI): So, we're thinking about usability of of the code. And it's one thing when these guys live in the code every single day and they always know to go look at that overlay district. It's a completely other story when you have a property owner that's doing trying to do their own due diligence from a code perspective and not even knowing that there is an overlay district that exists. So you're actually able to accomplish—both accomplishes the same thing. But you provide higher usability for that average user by having it all in one location where they don't—these kind of codes are not—it's not second nature to—it is to you guys but it's not second nature to most people. And so if they are looking in one area they don't often think to go look at others. [40:17] Rita Trap (HKGI): collectively, I think we've all talked—all of the things that have been brought up and they were even brought up a year ago like these are the things we need to be thinking about and really spending time on this district. Um, and then we feel like it would be beneficial to have it all in one place. If it helps, we do have a map that zooms in and shows you kind of the complexity of the overlay district. Meaning that there's a lot of different types of uses and it incorporates probably areas that if we went back today, you would be like, h there's not really a lot of applicability to the overlay district to these residential properties. So, you know, this is a at a high level, does it make sense to examine it? We may come back to you and say, "Me, we did this, but we still want to have the overlay district for this reason." This is kind of a we're trying to identify what are the things that we want to dig into, and this is one of the ones that we want to think about. You can see what the topics are. Um, building material and design, awning, awnings and canopies, parking area, screening and fencing. We may decide, why do we have screening and fencing in this area? we should just put the screening and fencing and screening and fencing and there's different ways to do it. So those are the things that we need to examine as we look at the district holistically and try and figure out what makes the most sense. One, how is it going to be easiest for everybody to find the information that they need because that's always the challenge of codes is people don't know what they're not finding. Uh and so trying to figure out what is the easiest way to have people locate the information that they need. So, it sounds like it makes sense to everybody that we will look at this. I think also just kind of to reiterate the idea of um since we aren't going to be doing the resoning necessarily, we want to think through every—all of this and also revisit when we get through the comprehensive plan in the actual comprehensive plan. Um, you know, is this really the extent of downtown that we want to have now? will have the benefit that we didn't have the last time we talked about it of this is what the district will be and based on that who should actually have that land use category. So that's information we didn't have a year ago when we were talking about the downtown district that we'll actually have when we talk about it the next time and just confirm these are the properties that we really want to apply it to. We know that we're going to have to reszone those. We're going to go through the comprehensive plan process and say hey we're reguiding you. that kind of effort will be done as part of that process as well. [43:10] Beth Richmond (HKGI): N doesn't on a screen. Sometimes that happens. the dark maroon like around Elm Street that is the downtown and then the uh red I believe is a commercial district the kind of general commercial district that's up on three um also on the west side of Elm. Are those the two maroon colors you're talking about? [43:30] Council Member Nick: Yeah and and I will point out I think the last time we got together for a joint session I may have pointed this out. We as a city accomplished a really big um problem parcel on third and Elm with the Emory. So amazing. It's I I think it's just revitalized downtown. I do think, and this is where, if I heard you correctly, and I know that we talked about this last time, Rita, you know, we do want to provide land, in my opinion, we do want to provide landowner flexibility, but I also think that it would be wise of this body to guide certain areas like the area, which is currently occupied by the school and other businesses in a way that complements what we're doing downtown. So, I mean, for me, I probably support more of a restrictive use in that area. Um, or not a restrictive use, a tighter definition. So, when you say that, we would like to see something on the south side—no, no, on the on the north side. On the north side where the the charter school—where—Great. I mean, for for me, and I think others that I've talked with, maybe even others in this room, you know, the idea of kind of having a mixeduse housing, retail type of vibrant mixeduse community, if there was to be a redevelopment of that whole area at some point in time, would to me feel very complimentary to everything else we're doing or support the business district. Um, and it would be nice to see if there's controls around that. Okay. To a certain extent, but maybe we can't really— [45:10] Deanna Kuennen (Administrator): And controls in that in which way? Like the types of uses that could go in that area. Yeah. And that's where I know state law probably gets into that part of it of how how tightly we can define our districts and zones because I think the state does have kind of a say over that or the Met Council certainly might or our own comp plan would kind of define that but kind of more of a I think we'd want to zone it to what we believe or we'd want the land use to be what we believe it might be. I think to just to interject, I know that when we were talking about this previously, um there was a time where our downtown had quite a few vacancies and that was a concern and then a lot of those vacancies got filled with um more public or or like churches and service type of uses, which you know filled those vacant spaces so they're not vacant anymore. But then it eliminated the space for traditional retail. And so we did have a conversation about that and and it is, you know, I mean, it's obviously going to be something that can be discussed and examined through this process and the comp plan update. Um, but we do have um public and uses in our downtown and we have to understand how that all works together. So we have a library, we have a city hall, we have a community center, we have a school. Now, if we take into account Great Oaks and and how how can can you know I think we've been talked about this—you can't zone out uses but like how do you how do you incorporate and how do you respect the fact that we do have some uses but ideally we would love to have more traditional retail and maybe not have all the vacant spaces be filled with you know services or you know more public kind of uses. So we did talk about that I know as a group and just kind of explore it and that is I mean we we recognize that there's a desire to see more retail and those traditional commercial uses and the expansion of the downtown also allows us to kind of account for that and have have both but there I mean I remember specifically us talking about this about a year ago And just that the desire of what we want to see and then the realities of how do you zone it and not get yourself in trouble by, you know, getting into trying to zone some of those specific things that we can't. [48:03] Beth Richmond (HKGI): Other thoughts about downtown because we were going to talk about the overlay districts, the other overlay districts as well. No late night. It's not the end, it's the beginning. So I will. Thanks. Uh so the second district that we wanted to talk about as far as overlays go is the highway three district. Um so this is the entire area in the kind of that blue dashed uh color. So again, this is a district that is strictly dealing with design standards. It's not specifying uses or anything like that. Um, and the highway 3 talks about building materials. It talks about building design. Uh, and then it also adds in some standards for signage and exterior commercial lighting. Those are kind of the big topics that are covered in the Highway 3 overlay. Uh, as you look at that map, you can see that in within that overlay district, there are quite a few different zoning districts, um, quite a few different uses. And so, uh, in talking with staff, you know, it seems like this overlay is really doing what an overlay is meant to do, which is kind of create that consistency within an area where there is lots of different uses, lots of different districts, but you want that kind of overall appearance, overall feel of this entire corridor um to be something that's similar. Um, staff and we hadn't anticipated a lot of changes to this um, but we did want to just mention that this is an existing overlay um, and something that we're we'll take a look at. and it's the most recent one that we've adopted. So, it is within the last six years, so relatively new. [49:49] Rita Trap (HKGI): And then I'll put Tony on the hot seat for this one. Uh, so we did want to talk about the Spruce Street overlay as well. So, that's the area in that green dash uh boundary. Uh, so Tony, we we'd like some history on this one just to explain kind of how we got where we are. [50:05] Tony Wippler (Staff): You weren't around, Tony. You weren't around. I I actually was not around for when this originally started. Um Wow. This stems from the spruce street master plan that was adopted back in 20 or yeah 2003. Um the overlay was essentially developed about a 6 months after uh the approval of that. So in ' 04ish time frame. Um, and if you'll recall, there were very prescriptive development standards. Um, very unique descriptive standards for that district. Um, there was a lot of conversation, a lot of discussion on it. Um, it took a long time for that to get fleshed out. Um, and really what we want to look at this time around is to really look at that overlay, see if it's still—if all of that is still what we want. Um, from a design standpoint. Obviously, it's 23 years old. Um, we haven't seen a whole lot of development out in that area for a a litany of reasons. Um I still think that we want to have an overlay in this area because this area is very critical um commercial component for uh this community. So I do feel that standards are necessary in my opinion. Um but with that said, I do think we should at least review them and see if they're still what we envision for that area. [51:46] Beth Richmond (HKGI): Correct. Um, because right now you've got two different zoning districts that are included. So the Spruce Street mixeduse zoning district, they're on the eastern side and then the mixeduse commercial industrial is kind of toward the west. So if you want the overlay, is this—is this the right boundary that exists today or are there other properties that should be included or removed? [52:07] Council Member Josh: it it might be—might make sense to apply it other places as well. Um yeah, like it's going to get really interesting because we've seen Eureka's update—and which I imagine you all have seen it, right? Eureka's comp plan update and wanting to put industrial across the entire northern boundary. I've heard seen it. So, Pilot Knob inevitably is going to get extended all the way down to um the city boundary. So, I think at a minimum we should consider having an overlay for pilot knob because we're going to have county setbacks and you're going to have, you know, county standards for um write in, write out, etc., etc. Um, knowing that we're dealing with larger parcels there, it makes it a lot easier because you're not putting that overlay into multiple parcels. It's landing on one landowner for the most part. Um, but I think that we definitely should put it some level of an overlay on Pilot Knob to preserve any development and maintain that continuity because we don't know what that is going to look like, not only from a long-term perspective, but from a time frame. Um, but you could reasonably end up with the Vita Island. I mean, how far—how far on either side are you envisioning? I mean, if you take what County Road is 44T road width and then you go another what is their setback? Is it—it's 100 feet from center line? Is there ement from center line? [54:10] Rita Trap (HKGI): Usually it's 50. So 100 foot right away. [54:16] Tony Wippler (Staff): Tony is your question more—is the plot to the west of pilot knob supposed to be included or—that is part of it. Yes. [54:36] Council Member Josh: Yeah. I mean—I mean I think you'd literally kind of create an overlay now for pilot knob knowing that there's going to be something there. Yeah. you know, just to kind of have a place marker there. Can I test your memory? I guess I remember that discussion. I do. Yeah. Is—was—the was the intent of the overlay basically to have a second downtown? Was that the whole motivation for—Say it again. Was the intent of the overlay to make it look like a second downtown, an extension of downtown? Yeah, it was walkability. You walk through there, it looks just like what downtown used to be. had, you know, the planner at the time had intersections that had benches and fountains and things like that. Yes, that's exactly. So, the intent was city center walkability type thing through street was going to be extended which it now is getting closer and you know all that. So, and I agree that I think the west side—I think have any of that property there ought to at least be included and whether it's modified or not it was pretty grandiose at the time. might start with the building things, but—that's a good planner can look at that and say it's not relevant anymore or we should keep these things. But—that was more motivation of the question is do you want to continue to make it look like a downtown? Is that still the vision of what that area is 20 years later? [55:42] Deanna Kuennen (Administrator): Well, and should never city center look like, right? Obviously ripped it all up out here. One of one of the things that we had discussed as we were reflecting back on the vision statement was that the way that you create a connected community is to create these overlays that make sense. So that when people are in different areas as our community continues to grow, they still have sections of small town feel in them. So, if we're going to put together, you know, some of these areas as as we're looking at them from a zoning perspective, then to me, now to the extent that it's in here, does it need to be like that? I'm I'm not going to get into that. But, do we want to have something that provides some continuity and some direction for what that looks like? I think so because that's what brings back this idea and this feeling that even though we're growing, there is still this connected feeling. There's this community within the larger city. There's this feeling like you're you're part of the thing, whatever that thing is. [56:56] Council Member Josh: Um I don't whether you call it a second downtown or whether you call it a you know a quaint um commercial mixed use you know area or whatever it is I I guess I'm I'm all in favor of that. I can add on to it. I think the where my head goes is if you look at Egan as one of the examples they designed this concept of Egan is villages and there's they're strategically placed throughout the city to be a collection of villages that comprises Egan and they try to make the concept of a village be consistent throughout the city. So that's where I'm going with that is if that's what we created this overlay for was let's take a downtown and make it over here too and if we start doing that all over the city, what does that standard look like? So whatever you did here seems like it was what your assumption of what you wanted downtown to look like and do you repeat that standard throughout other parts of the city? Right. And this is not just the spruce overlay. This is the village overlay. Right. Right. I think if there are questions—the answer to both is yes—is that it was whether it's too much—I mean there's a lot of smart planners in the room I think they can come back and say it should be here not there—um but I I I think the intent was to make it look real nice and I I think that's to answer your question—that's what you want in a community I would think. [58:29] Council Member Nick: I personally love the idea of it and having that like kind of unique look to a city center whatever that means to you but like that just kind of distinct look and it's like I'll say it in the space of this room—like I really miss the red block outside and the trees right like it is—it was a little charm element of the city that I I miss and understand why we did but and as far as Josh I you know knowing what you just said but even I mean pilot no almost extended a few hundred feet to the south until it got delayed a little bit but it's going to be at some point and I think yes I think part of that on the west side should look similar. [58:54] Council Member Josh: If not, you're going to have some opposing types of things going on out there, which I don't know if we want to—this time. Branded to the west of that now. It's going to be real different for a while. Well, that's that goes back to, you know, when we talked or when we met last year, we said, let's make sure with flag staff we don't make the mistakes that were made with pilot knob. Not necessarily mistake isn't the best word to use, but there were opportunities that were missed by not preserving that corridor and the setbacks. To Nick's point, I love the overlay because it allows this area for us to apply a standard to say, you know, here is this going to be all low, you know, single level mixed retail and stuff—probably not. You already have CDA multi, you know, or high higher density. Um, we have the rye with higher density, but it would be fascinating to incorporate that extension of downtown by putting some type of a standard in there that there will be retail under high density to to create that little, like Nick said, like that village feeling so that there is the walkability. You can get there, but at the same time, it is its own little area. [1:00:13] Council Member Holly: Well, and I'd like to see that as pockets as as much as possible when we're looking at the overall comprehensive plan, right? That where where we are evaluating these opportunities and areas for future commercial growth that we're also considering something similar or more consistent in those spaces as well. The other piece why it ties together is like the size of the overlay—is then typically you align it to the concept of how big is a city center. Usually, if you're going all the way from Bachmann west of Pilot Knob. Is that really a walkable space? I mean, you're talking about over a mile across at that point. [1:00:54] Council Member Josh: I think the long way is the limit of some what a walkable city means, right? Like I mean, the long way to answer the question about does the overlay boundary need to change? My initial reaction is no asterric the addition of the pilot knob addition to it. you know, like cuz it's not going to get any bigger. You're you have the Vermillion River now. You have, you know, town homes to the south of that. You're not going to compass VA. I think the boundary is fine where it's at and just relook at do we want to change the standards to make it more of a little pocketed—I know you keep using Nick's word village—to it. the hesitation I get with seeing this—why I'm sorry there's a lot of credits here but like—it seems if you have that concept in mind as your design concept of why the overlay exists but then you have this giant monolith of a block of land someone comes in with a large scale development you're going to make them fit a city you know a walkable city design standard when they're a giant manufacturing facility basically right like it would look silly and like defeats the purpose right so— [1:01:58] Council Member Holly: absent—I I don't disagree with you, but I think absent additional proposed uses in our comp plan, then yes, that situation you're you're asking for it. And so the two are going to kind of over—they're going to work with themselves, right? If we don't have—if all of our stuff is just egg long term and we don't have a a future land use tied to it, they're going to come to the stuff that currently has a land use, seek variance, and it's going to blow up the whole idea of having the overland place. So, if we can put some proposed uses out there, pull in our overlays and hold tight to them because we want that identity, we want that continuity, I think that's a best case scenario if naturally occurring development falls in line with it. [1:03:01] Rita Trap (HKGI): So, just to summarize, what I'm hearing is a re-examination of Spruce Street or the idea of an overlay district that would be applied in different areas of the community to create those mixeduse nodes, the walkable. What is the design aesthetic in those different node areas? It may be in this area because you already have the spruce street mixed use. Maybe—maybe the no—this particular one shrinks to just that mixeduse area and we look at how it—as it overlays in other places. It's a the grander re-examination of all of the areas and trying to identify where those should be. Is that right? That's kind of what I hear. Like what I'm hearing you say is like we want mixeduse areas, potentially vertical mixed use. I don't know if that's realistic or not, but we can at least do the design element and make it possible to have those—the walkability, the attractive look, making sure people can move through those areas and that that's something we should look at overall. Um, and that there's a difference between just highway commercial autoorientedness and these places where you're hoping that people will have a mixture of commercial, residential, and be able to feel like it's a place. We're trying to create little places throughout the community. Is that right? [1:04:08] Council Member Josh: Yeah. which is okay. Just one last point—if I was—uh like I think having the industrial word on there is probably what leaves it open to be city part that has any industrial component. That's why I was wondering if it's just the spruce street mixeduse area which is the one color and maybe we need to redefine where that—we're not going to call it the spruce street overlay. It's going to have a different name. Where is that actually applied? [1:04:28] Council Member Josh: Right. Because again, I'm trying not to get in the weeds here, but from the 10,000 foot view, zoning is weeds, so we're good. If we could go back to like the—go back to the mid 80s to early 90s, everything north of 195th ended up 95% residential because there was no preservation of the mixed use. There was no identity. So, it became all one with stones that said, "Oh, this one is Nelson Hills, right?" like they kind of became developments, but it—it—it's all residential and there's just that very tight little pocket on pilot knob. So everybody works their way towards that, but what's the argument that we hear? They leave the community, spend their money elsewhere because it's too far. So, as we looked to Flagstaff in our conversation last year, if Flagstaff has the same type of highway 3 corridor and we know that Flagstaff and 195th is—it's going to be some, you know, core intersection, we create that overlay there so that we have the intended future land use designated so that we don't sit here and go, "God, we're beggars." So, someone comes in and says, "I want to drop industrial right there." and we go, "All right, scratch the overlay. We need it. We have to have the development and then we lose all of our continuity." That's the—like ideal thing that you want to have—is you want to have that well-definfined long-term plan in our comp plan, have the overlays that exist to where we reasonably think that natural development is going to occur. apply the the standards and hold to them the best you can so that we maintain that integrity long term and it doesn't become a redevelopment nightmare. you know, it's—agree. [1:06:22] Council Member Nick: You know, where we put houses up to the road, you know, reserve some of that on each side and then there's plenty of room for houses behind it, right? and and more transition areas first and then housing after that, single family, but certain—certain types of housing will work, right? So, I think we're all in agreement on that and that's what we need to do and and overlays can help do some of the design standards for these areas. Yeah. And you're right, adhere to them. Stick to them. Absolutely. Okay. [1:06:58] Beth Richmond (HKGI): All right. Uh so that was—that was most of our update discussion. Uh we just wanted to touch on quickly too that we will be making some technical updates. Uh these are primarily based on input from staff as well as uh what we found as we audited the existing code language today. Um so you can see kind of an example of uh the different types of issues that uh we've identified down below there. Um but the primary topic areas that we'll be looking at for these more technical updates are land use procedures. Um talking about conditional use permits, um planning developments and how all of those are reviewed. Um use specific standards. Uh we've talked a little bit about accessory structures, electric vehicles, and community solar garden uh as uses that are meeting some standards or needing to revisit the existing standards. Uh and then uh looking at some landscaping diversity, uh standards as well to make sure that people are planting more than just one type of vegetation within a development. So, um, all of these updates, these technical ones are really meant again for ease of use of the code. Um, maybe to make sure that the code is complying with state requirements, uh, case law, those kinds of things. They're less policy based. Um, we'll—we'll keep you updated with those changes, but we're not expecting a lot of, um, necessarily input from all of you just because this is really just to make the code work better. [1:08:29] Beth Richmond (HKGI): Um, the last one I want to touch on is the code reorganization. Um, so we've kind of mentioned that a little bit tonight. Uh, again trying to make this code more usable for not only the people who use it day in day out, um, but for the people who maybe just have a question about their property, um, and just want to find out that one specific thing that applies to them. Um, so today in title 10, there are six chapters. Uh, we would be proposing to kind of break those out a little bit further to hopefully make each chapter make a little bit more sense as people are reading through and trying to understand where the regulations are that they're looking for. Um so we're proposing 11 chapters give or take. It might change based on how we end up doing the zoning districts. Um but the idea would be to group like topics together. Uh and then make sure that the elements that are at the top of the code are the things that more people are probably going to use uh more frequently. So as you get down below it gets more technical things like procedures and enforcement that most likely staff is going to be looking at and not a whole lot of other people uh will be. So, uh, questions on any of that. [1:09:29] Council Member Nick: What were you thinking about for CUP process? What's changing that? Oh, that's a good question. You're going to test my memory. Uh, that was one that I believe staff brought up. That's okay. We can talk about a long night. Forget it. Forget I asked. Tonyy's just laughing in the background. Saturday. That's okay. Yeah, we'll talk about some other things. [1:10:00] Rita Trap (HKGI): So, I think with that—uh that's kind of the—No, I was thinking like the CUP was like reflecting what you actually do versus—But it's okay. We'll get back to you. You're going to see—I guess though the message is you will actually see all of these changes. It's just we won't have to have policy discussions on them necessarily. Um so all the changes ultimately have to go through the planning commission and the council. It's just we want to talk about the things that are higher level where we need to set the vision for us to implement as opposed to fixing things that are not working well. I would think on the use specific standards you probably would provide some input because those are specific in terms of that element but a lot of the other things were either trying to reflect what you're already doing. Sometimes the codes get disjointed from what you actually do and what it says you do. Um, and then fixing things that just haven't been working. Right. That is all we have. It's not more than 10 minutes. Sorry. Any other topics? He was joking with me beforehand. Any other things that you're concerned about? Things that you want to make sure that we know as we enter through this process. Our typical process is to meet with you at the beginning and then kind of dig in and do the work and then check back in with the planning commission andor both bodies u when we have kind of more of those policy check-ins of this is what we're thinking is pretty refined. Are we making sense? So we might not see you for a little bit while we try and do the work with Tony and Jared and Diana. [1:11:22] Council Member Nick: One more I guess history question because it predates me if it was six years ago. Um the the intent of the the overlay on three. Was it to encourage or prevent something? I mean, what which specific thing were we trying to prevent? [1:11:38] Council Member Dirk: You want me to answer that? Um, my go—I think—I think one, two, three of us were here. Hopefully four is here. Um, I think a lot of us would like to see bigger chunks of that being redeveloped and just so there's some kind of continuity in the redevelopment and and so that it's—how do I say this—done so that it really helps service the residents of this community and you know three is a a lot of cars go up and down three I think it can be the commercial areas I know there's some good ones out there and you know if we can continue to expand it but to me continuity and redevelopment. And I don't know if staff has anything more. Correct me on that if that's not right. [1:12:24] Tony Wippler (Staff): No, that that's pretty correct. Uh that whole corridor is a mismatch of right a bunch of different things. Um the intent is to try to um like Derk said, make some continuity out there because right now there really isn't any. um and to provide some higher level of aesthetics for the development itself. Um highway 3 is a uh highway 3 is the entrance to this or a ent a major entrance in and out of this community. Um and anything we can do to assist that um redevelopment and make it even more visually pleasing I think is something that we want to strive for. [1:13:20] Council Member Nick: I guess the piece I'm maybe not under, but we didn't—we haven't effectively really reszoned any of it though, right? So that's why I'm kind of—so a little lost is like it seems like we have Yeah. [1:13:35] Council Member Josh: Correct. You have to do one to come at the other, right? So it's like we told you you couldn't build this way, but we also weren't letting you build that way yet. Or like—we aren't letting you build yet there yet. But am I misinterpreting something there? Correct me if I'm wrong, Tony, but when Adam pitched this in 2019 and we did the Highway 3 corridor study which resulted in the plan, it was to provide a baseline for the next multiple decades to come. And the general idea was to have—we, you know, we—we—know it's always been an arterial, you know, 17,000 vehicles a day or 19,000 whenever they go through there. um to try and have more of an identity to other communities, right? So that ideally right now everything faces in. They wanted them to try and face out with like backage or frontage roads. Give that base plan so that as naturally occurring development and redevelopment occurred that we would start to grow this thing out in 40 years from now it would be done and it would look great. They also knew that MDOT was doing their study from 160th all the way down to just south of 50 shortly thereafter and that was part of their greater area transportation. One of the most difficult things in this whole process is like—there were significant changes in the transportation plan over the last two decades just entrances getting cut off and and trying to more streamline it. Um the hard part is like we the city—the city never had a plan to say we're going to go in and start purchasing properties as they become available so that we can turn around and further right dictate it. Right? So you're trying to create this plan for the private market to come in and ultimately spend that money. And then you see what happens with like the old gas station that turned into five different businesses and it's it's like the new um third and right. So you trying to figure out like what can we do? How do we reasonably achieve it? And how do you promote it outside of the community as redevelopment opportunities? And it just the plan's there, the idea is there, there's things there, but not a whole lot has happened outside of—not a whole lot. Well, because so sorry. Uh it just seems like we haven't enabled the development because even if we wanted to go purchase the land and do things to it, we'd still have to reszone it first with an idea of what which parts should be commercial. Correct. So—correct. It seems like we've done all these things to anticipate growth but not enabled the growth. I think it was—well I think it was well intentioned but the—all that dirt fill in the—specifics of that but I think it was well intentioned and there hasn't been a very clear plan on how we would like to achieve it. Is that fair? [1:16:20] Tony Wippler (Staff): It is. Yeah. I mean it was we wanted to do something. I mean it's too important of a corridor. [1:16:33] Planning Commission Chair: Has the council—have—has anybody seen the state's plan for three—just the bullet points? [1:16:40] Council Member Dirk: I—I—attended that meeting and they really did cut off a number of entrances to our businesses—at least the existing businesses. That was concerning. I I thought and I you know I commented on it and I've mentioned this to Tony. They they said there isn't much traffic on three. I said, "Well, you know, I've been driving it a little more now in the last four or five years, and there is traffic on three, and I I was, you know, a little concerned. I don't know. Maybe staff has seen the the state's plan for that. I don't know. [1:17:15] Tony Wippler (Staff): Uh I think they've just come out with a final version of it. I think John has—John and I have briefly seen it. Um and it—I don't want to call it—it's basically suggestions is what it is. Um, it's not really laying out, Mindot's not looking to do any of these improvements. Um, it is literally laying out what options could be at various intersections. Yeah. So, to be honest, I don't know what good that plan really is—there. No, sorry. Go ahead. No. Well, you finish and then I have a different but similar question. [1:17:51] Council Member Josh: I think the general my takeaway going back to 19 when Adam first embarked on this—was like the most realistic area where we could start to see some level of redevelopment was going to be north of Elm, south of the 66 roundabout, specifically on the west side. Sure. And start—some of it started with the east side when Carbonis was taken down and Holiday was built and the Ninth Street backage road was talked about it all—like we kept putting the place marker in the long-term CIP because it—like we saw it happening. But the general feeling was like—there was going to be something happening on the west side because you had a greater setback. There were some older properties and that allowed for the continuity of three to move from four lanes to two, keep it four lanes going into what would be a future roundabout, but that that development would probably happen before anything else. Um, and that there would be spots, you know, going down south of Elm that would just happen as properties became available. But again, one of the biggest things that we're going to run into is kind of the point that I made about the downtown zoning is it's just the raw lot size. They're so shallow that 10 properties become available. We have the perfect plan and we're three years down the line. Who's going to buy them and do something with them when you don't have means of egress? You don't have capacity for sufficient parking spaces. Like there's going to have to be some significant consolidation over time, but that's all going to be driven on properties becoming available. And there have not been a lot that have transacted in the last five or six years. Very few that have turned over. So I don't—there's a lot there, but I I don't really know what the solution is other than, you know, do we—do we—start—I mean, do we start resoning? Do we start putting some—some—you know, different uses in there to see if that spurns development and maybe gets people excited about wanting to transact because now their property is going to be worth more. And I don't know, but it always felt like the northwest corner—like across from Cobblestone—um was going to kind of be the area. [1:20:20] Planning Commission Chair: There's other areas along three too that you could do that. um a little further south on the east side. South on the east side actually, you know, I mean, you got there was renderings that were done of that. I remember that. Yeah, there were. Yeah. You know, there's some nice looking buildings that—Yeah, there were renderings and you know, you got to get the developer here to buy the the property and build the building and—Right. and then the store owners to do that. [1:20:34] Council Member Dirk: Right. Well, and but to your point, is the developer going to come and look at it if the zoning doesn't give any indication that we would be—palatable to that particular kind of change? which actually—and—and I think the question is probably answered already in previous discussion, but my question was if there was a lot of focus on the highway 3 overlay, had there ever been discussion about the perceived misstep on Pilot Knob and whether or not there should have been an overlay looking at least from the commercial area going north when you're talking about the entrance to the city, right? So, as we're looking at that particular area, has—was—that not a discussion because of the orientation of the homes or because of the lot size or just because it didn't come up? Um, because you have that little pocket up there and then that's it. And if we're looking at three and we're looking at some of these other areas, are we purposefully leaving out the very northern boundary on Pilot Knob? I was it left out for other or good reason that I'm not aware of? [1:21:47] Council Member Nick: I mean, because they're not as old, but they're definitely aging properties up there, right? And there are a lot of people that I know—because I know them. Um, who moved into that area before Pilot Knob was as busy as it is, right? and are not necessarily excited about the property that directly abotss pilot knob anymore because it is heavily trafficked and you know is that—is that—another area where we should be—just at least—not forgetting— [1:22:32] Council Member Josh: I I think you could make the statement about any arterial we have when we made the generic statement that all of our arterial should have some amount of commercial availability—right right—we've said that our approach to giving that optionality is what we've done with your downtown proposal, right? Where it's the—for the term already, but is that how you zone all of those things so that you don't have to flip it out if you're not improving your, you know, if you want to, if you're a homeowner, you want to sell your house, so be it. But you also have the option that if someone wants to buy your house and flip it commercial, they have that option as well. and let—let's—just there and the market will decide whether it becomes a development point or not. But right now, we're kind of actively prohibiting it by leaving it with the zoning we're at now. [1:23:10] Tony Wippler (Staff): And what I would maybe suggest is um maybe this is a a conversation that we start to have with the 2050 comprehensive plan because you're not going to want to reszone anything without it, like Rita said, without it being, you know, part of that comprehensive plan. So maybe that's—so I'm not thinking about what tomorrow, right? So I mean maybe that's—maybe—that's where we start looking at that more specifically the highway three the the pilot knob—um flag staff looking at that—um and seeing how that can work not only with the system statement but just overall from just a a land use perspective. [1:23:56] Council Member Josh: I I think it's a great point that Nick made earlier about the overlays and if we can—as we move towards this, you know, the the 2050 plan, put some defined overlays in place as they become our place markers, right? They're—they're—going to be there and then naturally occurring developments going to happen and we can start to, you know, I don't want to look at the entire city and say we've got 40% of it, 45% undeveloped. Let's define now what it's all going to be, but let's at least put those overlays in place, start to apply some minimum standards so that as it does occur, we can fine-tune them and we have that certain level of preservation in there so that we don't sit and wait in redevelopment for 30 years. [1:24:35] Planning Commission Chair: Yeah. You know, that's what we're looking at is the redevelopment aspect of it. You know, the new growth, the pilot knob, the flag staff, the 50s that we can deal with today. Yeah. And the other stuff we're I think we're putting it on the plan for future councils, future commissions to deal with. And I—that's got to be our best best plan going forward. I like it. I like it. Tony, did we answer what you wanted us—more than enough to go on for now? Okay. I know we—we—jump—we jumped to the the compound the map. You know, I know we and I mentioned to you before I expected that to happen. [1:25:12] Rita Trap (HKGI): Well, they're intertwined. Yeah, they are. They're intertwined. So they're going to inform each other. So they're it's inevit inevitably going to happen in this discussion. Yeah, the process is a little different than doing previous comp plans where we get the map done, then we do the detail. A little different this time around. Now you want to do the zoning ordinance and then go dar at the plan. Right. But there's a lot of consistency. I mean, in the—the—time that we spent, the two years that we spent on the comp plan amendment, I mean, to kind of formulate what that community vision is and then the conversation that we're having today there there's a ton of consistency. This isn't—um—it's not a—Yeah, we're not taking a hard left turn or anything. [1:26:16] Tony Wippler (Staff): And so the message we're—the message I'm taking away, I can't speak for these guys, is that um we're on the right track and we understand the importance of the um the corridors and trying to take advantage of the limited opportunities that we do have. understanding the need for redevelopment, the need to preserve and protect the the more of the green field areas so that they when they do develop, as they do develop, that they're within the vision of what the body has. And so, I mean, it's easy to, you're right, everybody wants to jump to the math and kind of get into that because that's the stuff people can relate to and understand. Um, which is also a good thing that you know HKGI is helping us on the comp plan piece and you know so it it—and I like how you said it earlier Rita is that we'll you know there'll be this weaving effect where you know kind of in and out as we're doing the comp plan versus the zoning code and it will you know naturally any of these conversations inform either one of the plans. [1:27:03] Rita Trap (HKGI): The consistency is good. Every time we get together, you know, I hear things that I, you know, never thought of that and ideas of of where we got to reszone or or what this should look like in the future. And I think that's helpful for the commission at least. And, you know, I think we can continue to get together and talk about these things. I know we got some time to have them do their work, but—yeah, more ideas talk about. [1:27:49] Planning Commission Chair: That was my question of maybe Tony and staff is like—this is valable valuable for me to hear to have these joint sessions. Is this something we're going to be doing along in this process and continue to do it? Um or are we going to be working independently from here on out? No, there will be opportunity to meet—jointly. Yeah. I think at those key points to make sure everybody's still in alignment. Um, so it won't be—I mean the planning commission will be doing a lot of the planning commission work but at those key junctures that you know we need to make sure everybody's still in alignment that will come together and then also as we kick off that comp plan update again. So with the fact that those are working simultaneously um you guys may get to spend a lot more time together than you're used to. [1:28:26] Council Member Josh: something to consider and and I'm going to go back to the whole law of unintended consequences, right? You think about the amount of development and the types of development we've had in the last six, seven years, right? Got large town home developments, we got villas, we've got, you know, our our aging in place. They're very different. They're not traditional R1's, right? We got a few of them, too. But um as we go through our public engagement portion, I think it would be very important to engage not only the developers but encourage their residents to come in and ask them specifically things like what's different now than what maybe you anticipated when you moved in? What are limitations to you wanting to move throughout the community? Like hear it from their perspective. you know, we have multif family, large town hall, villas, like they're very different types of developments and they're going to have their own unique perspectives. And I think it would be interesting to really learn from the people that have spent the money to move in and buy the thing how we can better embrace um improvements as we continue to to build out the community. Um because they're going to know best. I mean, those that are living in the townhouse are going to be the first one to tell you like here's what I can and cannot do or here's what I underestimated when I moved into the development, whether it's egress, you know, right away, whatever it may be. Um, I think there's way more value in that than just, you know, Tom Phil the name comes in and says, "Here's what you should do or should not be doing." listening specifically to like what's happened, what development has occurred, and how we can continue to improve that. Um because I go back to like when we were talking, I think it goes back to like 1819 when we were first talking about the um Fairill Fairill and North Creek and the development was set and then all of a sudden they changed their plan because they thought they were going to have this mix of different lot sizes and then they completely switched because the one size was selling. Okay, great. But when that density happened, now you have two stall garages. You have no sideyard setbacks. You have no place for the boats, the the things. And then we also don't have the code that supports zoning for the storage and the placement and the parking. And it's like it keeps creating these dependencies that it would have been nice to go back and say, how do we try and preempt a lot of that? I think by engaging those newer residents in those developments, we're going to learn a lot from them that will help us further guide um in the most reasonable way that we can and well-intentioned way we can. [1:31:10] Deanna Kuennen (Administrator): And I think we're very fortunate that we have such a um engaged city council and planning commission who is looking out for the best interests of the community. um going through a comp plan process, going through a zoning code process, you're never going to be able to predict and solve everything. And so we can get caught up in the trying to address every possible question and every possible scenario and that can bog everything down and we'll never be able to come up with every single thing. But having that vision and collectively working towards that and bringing in the tools and the resources that we have is the best thing that we can be doing. And you know, just continuing to to be working towards that vision statement and never expecting that we're going to have every single answer for every single use because who knows what's going to happen five or 10 years from now. [1:32:15] Planning Commission Chair: Yeah, Dian, I was going to say you you make a really good point there and you know, mayor, you're your thoughts are good. I mean, we have a lot of good people that show up for for our engagement, but of course, we all like being engaged with the government probably more than the residents do. My guess though, um, excuse me, and I'm basing this on my son who recently moved to a higher density area in California, is especially if we're being pressured to move to higher density and then looking at some of our new properties, those people are going to be logically looking for how can I take my bike to get a coffee or walk my dog or walk my kids to get a coffee or a sandwich or whatever. I think it's probably the low hanging fruit that we'd probably guess or how close are we to a park. And I think this group of all of us is actually doing I think a pretty good job of trying to be thoughtful to make sure we create that opportunity. The only thing we can't do is um you know contact the owner of Chipotle and say build tomorrow or pick your favorite restaurant. But I think we're setting the stage to do the right stuff. That'd be my guess. [1:33:30] Council Member Dirk: Yeah, there there are a lot of obscurities as you go through the community from the boundaries to the some of the street layouts and it just it it's very trying sometimes and we're you know trying to work our way through that redevelopment and you know try to not create issues for councils and commissions 20 years from now having to deal with God why didn't they think you know had they only done this right try to get in front of as much of it as we—And so—the planning is your legacy. [1:34:07] Mayor: Anything else you want to discuss? I don't close on that quote. You can't talk. Yeah, it's a pretty good. Well, we appreciate you guys meeting. We were always productive and informative and I love the dialogue and um once or twice a year. I still think It it could be more, but I understand, you know, logistics of it. But, um, we're always here to to meet and chat and do the things because we're both working for the the same thing and that's the betterment of the community as a whole. So, let us know how we can be helpful and effective. [1:34:46] Tony Wippler (Staff): Appreciate—Appreciate Tony setting up. Rita and Beth, thank you for your presentation. Happy to be here. Thanks. Good discussion. [1:34:57] Planning Commission Chair: Yeah, we look forward to hearing from you in the future. So, Tony, you have anything else? I have nothing sir. Commission have anything else? I'll remind the commissioners our next regular meeting is October 14th. With that, I'd look for a motion to adjourn. Motion. Is there a second? I'll second. Motion second. All in favor say I. I. We're officially adjourned. Thank you. [1:35:15] Mayor: I need a motion to adjourn. Second. All in favor? I. We're adjourned as well.