order our uh October 16th, 2025 special meeting of the plan commission. And we'll start with a roll call from director Tuttle. >> Okay. Alderfield >> here. >> Alder Glenn >> here. >> Alder Ugar >> here. Uh, Commissioner Bosine is running a few minutes late. Commissioner Hec >> here. >> Commissioner McCill >> here. >> Commissioner Sanders is excused. Commissioner Soulheim >> here. >> And alternate Wasnooki >> present. >> Uh, Chair Gnam >> here. >> All right. >> All right. Thanks. Um, our first item is our time for public comment for items not on the formal agenda tonight. Um, did we have any registrants for this item? All right. Um, so we'll move to disclosures and recusals. Do any members of the plan commission have disclosures or recusals um as required under the city's ethics code to make uh regarding tonight's agenda. Right. Uh so uh thanks none of those. Um just a reminder, our next meeting is this coming Monday. And I think um I got my agenda a couple hours ago, so we'll be ready for that. Um and then uh two meetings in November on the 3rd and the 17th. Um and those will all be at 5:30 and virtual meetings. Can every is everybody hearing? Okay, I can't tell how close to get to the mic. All right, so we will come to our special items of business. Um just a note, um I know we have um some folks attending. All the items on our agenda tonight areformational for the planning commission for discussion and and learning. We're not going to take any action on items. Um and so there won't won't be motions or or voting tonight. So we're here to learn. Um so I think we will start with um uh item two on our agenda which is legisar 9350 and that is the Madison Metropolitan School District building for the future um update for us and we'll welcome um our guests. Thanks. All right. Um I'll just introduce our guests really briefly and then um let them take over. So tonight we're joined by a number of folks from the administration with the school district including Dr. Joe Gothard and uh our superintendent and Cindy Green who is our assistant superintendent for strategy and innovation. Um and our uh guests here tonight are a number of other folks with the school district that I'll let uh Cindy and others introduce. Um over the course of this past year, we've been working with folks from the school district to uh better connect our work around long range planning and how the developments that we're seeing as a plan commission and as a department will impact the school district. Um particularly in helping understand where those projects are, when they're coming online, so that the school district can appropriately plan for how those will feed into the different schools in the uh school district system. As you know from our most recent meetings as well, we've started to see some of the school uh renovation reconstruction projects that were part of the school district's referendum last year uh coming through for their land use approvals. So, we're going to hear more from uh Cindy and the superintendent tonight about how the district is planning for the future. And then uh the staff the planning division posted a couple of slides just for background reference related to our comprehensive plan and some of the considerations for the long-term planning around schools from that policy document and we're happy to answer questions over the course of the discussion um if there are any about that. So I'll turn it over to the two of you. >> Great. Thank you very much Chair Gnam, members of the commission and director Tuttle. It is indeed an honor to be here uh with all of you tonight. been able to meet several of you throughout uh this process of working together and I can't say enough about the work of Megan and her entire team uh who have provided us so much guidance and direction but most importantly collaboration uh so we know that we're not in this work alone and and we really appreciate it on behalf of our board of education and our school district. I'm going to set just a brief context for why this work uh is so important. Uh to to give you just a bit of background, I began in May of 2024, but I'm no stranger to Madison, having been born and raised here and working for 20 years in the school district before leaving for 11 and and very proudly coming back uh to lead my home uh city and school district. And let's go back to 1971. 1971 is a pretty important year. It's the year I was born. Uh but more importantly there's some important milestones that I think are important for us to un in order for us to understand the future helpful for us to understand the past. Madison from 1970 to 2020 grew by 100,000 people. Now that's an important number because it's projected that Madison is set to grow by 100,000 people again but in 25 years not 50. So the sense of urgency that I have is a little bit different based on those numbers. But the other pieces are, and I was reminded this week, the newspaper this week had both Westtown and Easttown had birthdays. Um, I don't know if you caught that in the paper. I didn't know that that was right at the time I was born that they were built because growing up, those were kind of the boundaries of the city. Uh, there wasn't much beyond them other than fields and farm fields for that matter. And now we know that our city is far surpassed those areas and our growing populace is is stretching far beyond. Building for the future for us is understanding what the district boundaries are. And when we mention district boundaries that means whose land is our whose land is Madison's and MMSDs, whose land is Middleton's, Verona, Oregon, Sun Prairie, the other districts that that touch ours. We have to understand what our boundaries are. And there are some areas outside of Madison or inside of Madison that don't belong to that municipality's school district. So that's a it's a complicated process that we make sure the land is uh gathering the proper taxes and going to the rightful school district. Um some other things that I'll share with you in terms of the past that are important. Madison in 1971 I think I mentioned had 34,000 students. We now have 26,000. So at the time again um our schools were filled and there haven't been too many new schools built since that time. A few new elementary on the far west side, some smaller um middle schools built in the middle of the city and a charter school built on Fish Hatchery Road in that time. But it's not as though we weren't prepared for uh the number of students. But again, we're no we're not near 34,000 today. We're again more like 26,000. And that does include four-year-old kindergarten as well, which is really important. That wasn't part of the 34,000 uh back in the day in the previous day. Um I did find that in n there two areas that Cindy Green, my colleague, is going to to share a little bit more detail, but I want to give some background to it. I did find the Spreer neighborhood plan from 1998. That plan has had six amendments since that time. And in that original plan, Spreer Road being on the far east side, Grand View Commons, and some other developments. I don't know them by name. I apologize for that. But there are two areas identified in that area as being future school sites and that was as early as 1998. Uh today they still sit. One of them is a park. Northstar Park I believe is one of them. The other is adjacent to Door Creek Church off of Spreer Road. 20 acres a large hilly um wooded semi-wooded u uh parcel of land right now. And that neighborhood is completely just about built out. uh you know there may be space there for projects but I I don't know the details for those. So we missed I believe we missed an important opportunity to establish a school neighborhood in that community and building for the future is my commitment to work with the city and others to make sure we don't miss these opportunities as we move forward and our city continues to stretch. Um we also own uh 8 acres of land in Acacia Ridge on the far west side. Cindy will share that with you as well to give you an idea of how quickly these um decisions are happening or these these uh projects are happening. The Midweight Meadows um project or development on the west side near Hawks Landing um already has houses built and it wasn't until our June board of education meeting that we declared an attendance area so that homeowners knew where their children would go if they had children where they would go to school. And I don't want us to to make decisions like that. I want us to be informed. I want us to be in collaboration with the city, with developers, with prospective buyers, uh, so they can truly view Madison as not only a destination city to live, but a destination city for their children to attend school as well. It's incredibly important to all of us. So, our work building for the future is truly to do just that. We have to imagine what Madison is going to look like 5, 10, 15, 20 years from now and make sure that the decisions we make today are going to equip us uh to provide the best education possible in into the future. And the history of Madison and MMSD goes back quite a bit. Um in fact, it was 1838 not far from here on the corner of King and Dodie Street where there's a one schoolhouse, one bedroom or one room schoolhouse. Louisa Brighten was the first teacher there. she had 12 students in in that. So, you know, the school district, it was here before the Capitol dome as we know it today was here and Madison has certainly grown and developed a long ways since 1838 and the school district has been a prominent part of that. Um, so again, our commitment is to uh to be the best partners that we possibly can. Uh we know that Madison is a destination city right now and it is our goal, it is our aspiration, it is our vision for our school district to also be part of the destination uh for this community to be a place where people want to live, they want to work and they want to learn. So I'm going to turn it over to my colleague Cindy Green. Cindy is our assistant superintendent for strategy and innovation. Uh she is helping to organize uh so many of our teams in this work and our external partners as well. We also have a number of our staff here with us tonight as well and this work would not be possible without their incredible support. So I will turn it over to Cindy. >> Thank you. Quick logistical question. Should I move the mic over here? >> Perfect. Thank you. Good evening. Oh, should I move it a little? Is this good? Okay. Good evening everybody. Um, thank you Dr. Gathered and um I just can't say enough about how we're really excited to be here. I know this is for onlyformational purposes, but the collaboration that we have had so far with the city and really with um uh Megan's office has been uh so vital to our current work and to our own plans for planning for the future. Uh we thought it was important just to provide a little context. Dr. Gothard already shared a little of this, but just a kind of who we are as a school district. So, we serve almost 26,000 students, over 6,200 staff, and then you can see uh a little bit of our racial and demographic uh breakdown here. Um 18% of our students are black or African-American, 7% Asian. We have 47% of our student population that come from economically disadvantaged households. 27% of our students are English learners, 39% white, and about 16% of our students receive uh special education services or have an IEP. So, we have a very diverse uh school system, both students and staff. Dr. Gothther talked about this also, but for us, we have not um done work like this before where we've really been intentional about making sure that our schools are set up for the future set up for the growth that is happening both within Madison and surrounding. We know the city has a plan over the next 5 years to have 15,000 housing units. We need to ensure that the schools are equipped to receive all those families that move into those homes and over the next 25 years that 100,000 people that are coming. We want to ensure that our schools and our system is ready for all of these wonderful human beings that are be coming to Madison and uh into MMSD. So, a little bit of uh the work that we're doing right now was a referenda that was just passed in 2024 for facilities, 570 57 million referenda. And we wanted to just show some of this has already come forward. Some of this you might know, but we wanted to show the 10 schools that are part of the current referenda. We wanted to uh let you know that these schools were identified because of their critical need, usually plumbing or HVAC needs, but also just for regular wear and tear. The second thing is we were very intentional about ensuring that geographically we focused on schools that were across our entire city. So you can see on this map here and they're they're titled by phases. So we are in phase one right now. You may be familiar with Blackhawk and Gumpers and Sherman and Shabbaz that are phase one that has probably come forth before for some approvals. Uh we have phase two that includes Cherokee Heights Middle School on the west side. We've got uh Toki and Orchard Ridge Middle School which is a paired middle school. Um in the memorial attendance area we have Senate Middle School which is over in the lfallet attendance area. And then we have phase three which will most likely be uh renovations for Anana and Crestwood that are both on the west side. So we were super intentional about ensuring that while uh these are have great needs, we also wanted to ensure that it was balanced across our four attendance areas. This is a little bit of just our project schedule that we thought was important to show. Um we are going to have new buildings and this is kind of the phased approach. So, we are going to uh break ground for our phase one about March of uh this 2026. So, we're really excited about that. Phase two, you can see, starts coming in right behind that. And then phase three with a close out around the middle of 2029. So, over the next few years, we will have eight brand new schools and then two renovated schools. within that the city and the planning team has been so um essential in helping us think about the developments that are going to be growing and developing in those areas so we can really think about our capacities. We know that with uh some of these uh schools that we're building, they're in the backyards of new developments. And so for us, it was really important to understand what might be coming around and how we can really think about planning for future enrollment and ensuring that our schools are going to be able to uh support the students and the families that are moving into those areas. We thought it was great to just show some beautiful pictures of a few of the uh first phase. So you can see right here, here is Shabbaz and Sherman. Here's where you can see from the northeast corner. Pretty fabulous, huh? Uh here's our Gumpers right on the north side. Gumpers and Blackhawk. Now I want to jump into more of our future planning. So this is happening right now. Started uh work go through 29. In addition to that, uh we know that we have schools that are already at capacity or over capacity. And so in addition to thinking about the buildings that are being built or renovated, we wanted to uh better understand what was happening across our entire city and be able to plan for that. So with that, we uh had two bus tours. And I want to call this out because without the collaboration and the partnership that we have with Megan and her team, we really would not be able to do some of the planning we're doing now. So, uh, we had bus tours, uh, uh, we had a few others join us as well, and it was really informative for us. We started to see buildings coming up in the front yard of some of our schools, Hawthorne Elementary School, far west side, as Dr. Gothard already mentioned, and we're like, what is going on? And so uh the collaboration with uh the planning team uh was having us drive around the entire city, having us share a little bit about what's happening within our schools, but even more so learning about all of the developments that will be coming up or have been approved that we need to know about so that we can really begin to think about how are we going to ensure students have classrooms? How are we going to ensure we have space for that? So, um the the partnership um has been and will continue to be a vital part of our work at MMSD. And so, our building for the future plan has some really key goals that I wanted to just share. Um Dr. Gothard mentioned this and and uh if everyone doesn't know this, the MMSD boundary is different than the city's uh boundaries, right? So, we're in Fitsburg, we're in Verona, we are over in Manona, we're in these other places. And so for us, we first wanted to better understand what is going on with our district boundary, how some of the surrounding school districts actually uh come into uh the Madison area as well. So, we're doing an assessment of that. And then we're starting to look at all of our attendance areas. I mentioned Hawthorne before, but I could tell you across our entire city, we have schools that based on their current attendance area, either uh students pass by two other elementary schools to get to their school, or we have schools where we already had to make changes and move uh some of our 4K students into another building because we ran out of space. And so what we're doing right now is doing an assessment of all of our attendance areas to better understand current state and with the developments that will be happening in the next 5 to 10 years. What potential attendance area uh lines and boundaries might we need to change? We also want to do a a better job of evaluating our current programs and options and really understand what families, current families and future families want for their child's experiences. Are there things that we're not providing yet that families want and how do we uh learn what that is and begin to build that into our building for the future plan? We've been working with an external consulting group that does this and over the next two years I'll share a little bit more of what's going to happen. And because of that, we have two plots of land that Dr. Gothard already mentioned, but we own a plot of land on Acacia Ridge. And if you're familiar with the far west side, you'll know that not only is a Kaitra Ridge uh starting to uh complete their builds, but there's two other huge developments right after that. And so for us right now, we have to think about what school might we put on this plot of land. One of the closest eles is Gillespie and they are at capacity. We have Toki Orchard Ridge that I just shared that's going to be built, but we want to not have to make reactionary decisions. We want to be very thoughtful. So as families are buying homes, they know exactly what school or schools their students will be attending. So we want to really think about this particular area. And then as Dr. Gothard already talked about, we own 21 acres on Spreer Road. Uh Alder Fields might know this well, but uh schools currently that uh feed into that specific area could be Kennedy, which we have uh which is over capacity. Shank uh which is also at capacity and has developments happening literally in its front yard. And then we have Senate and White Horse as middle schools. And Senate again will be a new build. So we want to make sure we're planning accordingly for that. And White Horse also is at a point where uh they are getting to capacity. So thinking about uh what Dr. Gothard said, the first plan was many many years ago and now we have an opportunity to be very thoughtful about not just what school might go there, but ensuring we're accommodating the neighborhoods that are there. And so part of our boundary review looks like this. It's a very iterative process. and we just wanted to share a little bit of what's going to be going on within the school district over the next few years. And again, we're um partnering and better uh planning together is going to be really important for us. Uh so it's data driven, it's transparent where it's very collaborative with our community, with our families, with our staff. It's going to be a very iterative process and at the end of the day we're hoping it's going to be uh informative for people so that everyone at least is aware of what is going on and has an opportunity to provide input as we make final decisions. So what does that look like? Here's our timeline. This is over the next two years. We've learned across the country, many school districts have done this in a very short timeline. And we wanted to ensure that we take our time and we wanted to ensure we had a year's worth of opportunities for input from our families and from our community before we make any recommended changes. So, we're still in this very um kind of blue all the way over to the left where we're just in data collection phases. the um uh Megan, Kevin, Brian, the team has been amazing in getting us as many plans as possible to know about the developments that are happening in the next five to 10 years. We are uh collecting, we just had our enrollment for third Friday. Uh all of this information will feed into some of the initial scenario planning where we'll start to actually look at that data, look at our student forecasts and see both in terms of where students are and the capacities of our schools what might need to change. And then we're going to spend an entire year, so this kind of uh pretty like teal sea green, whatever seafoam green, whatever color you want to call it. February uh of this uh 2026 through January of 27, we are going to do a ton of community input sessions, community forums, go out to uh the different communities, which is really where uh partnership will be important uh to uh share with families what the data is telling us, what the scenarios might look like in terms of where changes need to happen and get their input before we go to our board of education in approximately February. February of 2027 with a final set of recommendations. That final set of recommendations might look like changes to attendance area. That final set of recommendations may and probably will say that we absolutely need to build schools on these two plots of lands due to the development. And that final set of recommendations may have things that are more programmatic. Um uh we hear from families that they would like more language immersion programs or STEM schools. So, we don't know what those recommendations will be, but that will be that recommendation. And then our thought is that any uh recommendations that our board of education would approve would begin as early as the 2728 school year for us, but could be multiple years of implementation depending on what those changes are. So for us the reason why we thought it was really important to uh have this opportunity to be in front of all of you is just one uh as it was opened it's information sharing but for us the partnership for all of us to work together both in learning what's happening across the city that impacts our schools but also to understand what's happening with our schools that may impact the city. We have a QR code here, no pressure, but it is our new community newsletter that really provides updates on what is happening within the school district. So, we didn't want to miss that opportunity. Dr. Gothard, I'll turn it back to you to see if there's anything else you want to add. >> No, thank you. Thank you very much, Cindy. As as you can see, we put a lot of thought into this and I hope you're hearing a theme of partnership. We can't do this alone. We don't want to do this alone. I think when um partners do work in isolation, it ends up with outcomes that all of us spend time on trying to make better and optimize. I want to avoid that. And right away, I talk with the mayor a lot. I talk with a lot of city partners a lot. There are a lot of really good ideas that uh that we have uh in our various entities and in which we work that I think if we come together we can truly find some shared um understanding and and make some shared decisions that we're all really proud of in the end. Uh so with that we'll stand for any questions that you might have and just once again thank you Alder Fields and Alder Ugar joined us on on some bus trips and certainly city staff uh were with us as too. And it it's a lot of fun. I don't get to get on yellow buses every day and it certainly is fun to do with community partners as well. >> Thanks. Um I think before we do questions, I think there were a couple comments that you guys had to share, Megan. Is that right? Or >> uh I'll just note that um thank you for the presentation. Um and also thank you for noting the work that our teams have been doing to collaborate around this. Um, I also just want to note that Kevin Fergau and Brian Grady, who are two of the principal planners in our planning division, have been a major part of all this work in terms of helping share data and information about development activity, about how it relates to long range planning, some of the things that we've been thinking about in terms of long-range planning through our comp plan and other area plans. So, they're both here tonight as well. Um if you have any questions about the policy level or any of the development activity as it relates to the stuff that the school district shared with us tonight um happy to have the two of them join in the discussion. So >> thanks Hec. >> Thank you and thanks for the presentation. It looks like a great effort. uh maybe a multi-part question for I heard you both reference homeowners and engaging with prospective homeowners in neighborhoods and I keep thinking what about renters and families that rent. Do you have uh some ideas about outreach to those folks as you're doing community engagement? And probably you've talked with city planning who have really done a great job I think in recent years with reaching out to I'll call them under reppresented communities in community engagement processes. Do you know by the way do you know how many how many students are uh coming from families that rent versus own homes. Maybe you have a guess. I don't know. Yeah, Commissioner, these are wonderful callouts and I I think our work with MGT. We can likely get down to that grain size and and learn more about that. Your idea about engaging more with renters is an important one as we look around and know what's being built in the city. I I think it's a it's a wonderful um reminder for us to not forget about the high number of renters we have in the city. And we have been not caught. We have been in a few circumstances where um we have reached out to property managers or their point people to begin this relationship. So it's going to be one that we're going to to build and expand. >> Great. >> Uh Alder Glenn, sorry I caught you first. There's time for everyone. Um, so mine's not I'm so short that I never think I'm going to be able to get in the mic. Um, mine isn't so much a question, but you're building two new schools in my area. Gumpers Blackhawk is an 18 directly. My son went there and you're right, it's been full and we're building maybe two big developments happening over there. A few have already happened. Um, and I just recently learned of the Shabbaz, which is another soft place in my heart of the neighborhood. Um, the plan, I just want to say like the plans and what I've heard from my area with people with like this new school that Gumpers gets to have. I don't have It's interesting. Uh, district 18 has uh a quick trip and then four elementaryaries. Those are the it's otherwise it's all residential, but so like it's what are my schools doing? what's gonna happen and what are you gonna do? So, everyone has been really excited and I've had really great feedback with some of the community leaders over there on what the school looks like and the design. Um, so I just want to I'm really glad I know you didn't choose it because I I know you chose it because of data. I'm just glad the data flushed out that it's that first. So, I just want to say thanks and it's I'm excited to see this come to fruition and Shabbaz is such a need for that place that is an alternative school that is like a staple of Madison. When you think you a lot of people don't even know about Capitol High or some of the other ones that have happened, everyone knows Shabbaz. And so to give it and Sherman Middle a facelift, I think it's in a new building is going to be great. So, I just want to say thanks. I would just say thank you and we're really looking forward to partnering with you and working closely together, but thank you. And >> Alder Glenn, we'll make sure we get dates out to everyone, but March 20th, we'll have an official groundbreaking. We'd love to have you join us. So, we'll make sure we get that date out to everyone. Okay, >> you >> Thank you. Uh, thank you, Dr. Gothard and Cindy. Appreciate all that information. Now, I mentioned this uh privately, but I certainly enjoyed the opportunity to join you and and your staff for the bus tour. We learned a lot. uh one of the places that your planning and and Madison's planning intersects is especially as we look at uh our area plans that are uh proceeding along is the area of transportation and uh you know we hear in our engagement aspects about people concerned about their ability to get to a bus or to walk or so forth and I assume you're looking as part of this process uh at transportation impacts and busing and so forth. I wonder if you could just talk a little bit about that part of your process. >> We we can certainly uh share a bit. I'll have Scott Chak, our uh assistant superintendent for building services and facilities talk about this as well. He oversees transportation. Um I think a few things that we are uh reflecting on now. Um, MMSD is our policy right now is our walk zone is 1.5 miles. Uh, so anyone who lives outside of 1.5 miles from their point of school uh, receives transportation. But there are also some routes and some pathways that are hazardous in the city. And some of this is that our city continues to change. what wasn't a hazardous route 10, 15, sometimes even five years ago now has multiple businesses, intersections, different uh you know, just different traffic flow. So, it's something that Scott and his team are looking at all the time, but it will certainly play a role in the future. And Scott, if you could maybe even share some of the local work we're doing right now with with Compers Blackhawk. >> Yeah, so we are constantly reviewing the the hazardous walk zones. Um, as as Dr. got alluded, they change almost yearly at times, whether construction or traffic patterns or or developments. So, we continue to monitor those every year to make sure that we're making sure our students are safe and we also work with the schools for attendance. You know, are there challenges in certain areas that there is a barrier, right? So, we have worked with the city partners as well for traffic to kind of talk about we have symptoms or areas such as uh Trader Road and can we look at RFBS and can we put them here and kind of working as a collaborative unit. So, we're doing a lot of that. Every month we meet uh talking about traffic patterns and what is changing, what we may have to change at our systems to accommodate that type of growth. Uh for Blackhawk Compers, uh a couple days ago we had a public input session talking about what the traffic patterns might shift at Blackhawk Gumpers and some of the things our residents talked about as Wyoming Way, right? there's there's kind of a an increase of commercial traffic through that area and you know we'll start to have those conversations with our traffic partners at the city and and say maybe we need to put some some speed bumps in here or some RFBs to really indicate what's happening um because there is change right and and some of that changes as we modify our our school programming our extension and our outreach we also want to make sure our community members internally and externally are communicating so we are constantly updating you know not only our buildings but also how our traffic patterns our bus capacity ities, you know, making sure our students aren't riding in the bus for an hour, right? We're always trying to get them in that less than 40 minutes, 45 minutes. It's a tough part of their day, right? So, we want to make sure they're there safely. So, we are constantly evolving. Every every summer, we evaluate all of our routes and then right away at the beginning of the year, we do assess how they're performing with traffic pattern changes and how the the city may change from summer to fall. As we know, things transition. So, really evaluating how those points show up. And then you know there's a lot of times I'm taking walks out, our staff's taking walks out and just observing like what is happening at a site when a parents bring something up. We go physically watch to make sure we are we are seeing what they might see as well. >> Well, thank you. That's helpful. I had to ask a question because uh just before this meeting we had a southwest area plan update and and uh certain amount of conversation about how dangerous Shrader Road is, not just for students but for residents and so forth. And I I had heard that uh that would be one of the places as a hazardous location that you'd be looking at. >> Yeah, we're actively working on we're we're reached out to Dean County Sheriff now to do an assessment to what that is and then that'll come forward. >> Thank you. Thank you very much. >> I will just add one sorry I will just add one uh component is we just completed a survey uh with families to get their input around what is most important to them as we think about our building for the future plan. And uh one of the uh things that rose to the top for the families was walkability uh proximity to neighborhood schools. And as I mentioned before, we have some families that have to bypass one or two schools based on our current attendance areas. So that is uh something in addition that we're really wanting to pay attention to and in whatever ways is possible ensure that uh some of those adjustments happen. >> Thank you, Sydney. Thank you. One final thing I'll just add because I I happen to know that there are a couple of under couple underway. Um Scott mentioned the review of unusually hazardous transportation uh conditions. So the school district is working also in collaboration with the transportation engineering division. I'm sure the the folks that are on the transportation commission know this well. uh but to put together specific plans for safe routes to schools um and to come up with action plans for how to help address the specific concerns around I think a couple dozen of our schools citywide. >> Um Alderfield I'll and then Alder Figure. All right. >> Thank you. This stuff is really important and one of the main ways that a lot of families interact with local government. Um, so I really appreciate you taking the time to come before us. I wanted to ask about the unusually hazardous transportation planning process and check if whether the far east side of Milwaukee or far east Milwaukee street around the family shelter is on the list for evaluation. >> Yeah, we we've started that evaluation process and and some of the stuff that's changed over the past year. City's done a great job of really reducing the traffic in that HIN, >> especially as you move eastward towards Stoen Road. It's it's more challenge towards Wallbridge, >> right? as you start to push out past uh what I call radar hill, you know, head out eastward where the traffic has slowed down. There are some RFBs that have been put into place and it has been reduced as far as a traffic pattern. So, we continue to monitor that though just as development starts to happen. We will continue to monitor that. But currently, it's the city's been doing a great job of kind of controlling that pattern and as that starts to, you know, as we know as it crosses the interstate, you know, that pattern will change. So, we'll continue to monitor that every year. >> Sure. and that bridge being an especially a pain point for a lot of families. Um, and then just a comment that I'm eager to be a partner in getting more input from families next year and parts of my district that I think whose voice would be really valuable here, especially as they send their kids to one of the more overcrowded parts of the um, school district system. So, please keep me in mind. Thank you. >> We will. We will. We will. Thank you. >> Figureo, thank you. Um, public announcement to not take John Nolan. So, it only took me 40 minutes to get here >> and I live in Madison. But anyhow, um, two questions and one is a follow up for for John, but I was listening on the way here and you mentioned you were pointing out to the phases that the schools are. How many phases are we talking about >> for the current referendum 24? There's three phases. >> So, those are in phase two are at what what step of the process. >> Scott, you want to? >> Yeah. So, phase one is getting to the construction document phase. just finishing up that phase two has kicked off for our internal staffs for our school members. We'll start doing public outreach right around January to really understand what the community needs and all the information around phase 2 schools with their kickoff planning to be breaking ground early of 27. >> Okay. >> And then finishing and starting school of 28 and phase three will start in 20 28 and finish up in 29. And when the are all the schools that we are converting are they all community are they all intended to be community schools? >> Most of them are community schools. Yes. >> Yes. And then for um like I had two in my district Cherokee and Toki Toki Boulevard. So um when you do that kind of engagement will there be kind of um you know we've been talking a lot like in the middle middle reach area about an extension of the library. Do you see um any additional collaboration with the city and MSD just like we did internally for the imagination center where we collaborate later between parks and the library? Is that something that you guys will also explore on how to maybe incorporate city services within the schools like libraries? >> That's a potential. Yeah, sure. >> Yeah. And I I think that's that's what it was because we were discussing that at the at the area plan also earlier today. Um yeah. So then the outreach starts in January, you thinking? >> Right around January phase two. Yes. For the community. >> And when you do those kind of outreach, I mean I'm sure you will do that, but if it will be possible, you know, like um Derek also has schools there and I think some of the people mentioned if you can reach out directly to us so we can try to promote um those services that'd be great. Yeah, absolutely. That'd be wonderful. >> Yep. Thank you. >> Alder Glenn, go ahead. >> Oh, someone else asked. >> Nope. >> Someone else. I'm so sorry. I didn't see either point at you. No, go ahead. You I already talked. >> Oh, no. I was just telling Darren he he'd be next. That was what that was. Alder Glen. >> Okay. Um, you mentioned when you were doing your intro a little tidbit on something. I don't know if you want to dig into it, but you said it first. So you said there's schools in districts and you looked at plans like there might be schools in Middleton or Verona or this or that that should be ours and maybe that's our list. What did you find? >> There are um Alder Glenn, there are a lot of um parcels in Madison that don't have I'm sorry. There are a lot of parcels between Madison and other municipalities that don't have a declared school district yet. So, we have to ensure that we have an agreement with both districts about whose school district land that is. And that's a process that's underway for us, has been for some time as Madison has grown and stretched and we've developed. Um, so we're in the process right now of just making sure uh that these are Madison Metropolitan School District proper parcels. >> Thank you. >> One of the things I'll just add on to that um if there are any more questions about this for Brian Grady who's here. Um, one of the things that Brian's team leads is, uh, all of our long-term kind of city boundary changes. We call those intergovernmental agreements or cooperative plans depending on the circumstances. And it doesn't always, um, mean that as the city's boundary changes, the school district's boundary will change uh, commensurate with those. So, I think those are some of the things that the school district has flagged to look into as part of their boundary review. I would just say that's why this partnership and this collaboration is so important because of the things we've been able to accomplish together um that I don't think would have been as smooth or happened as quickly. So, I know I've said it a couple times, but I will echo again with the team. It's been great. >> Commissioner Wnooki, go ahead. >> Thank you. Thank you for the presentation. Um I have a question because I've heard you mention a couple of the the schools that are at capacity right now. um you know knowing that we know by within 10 years we're going to have more people over the age of 65 in this country than under the age of 18 and so more households does not necessarily mean more children. Um where do you see that or how do you see that affect you know the schools that are at capacity now or or where is that going to go you know in in a decade or so? Do you have a a thought on that? >> Yeah, a few things. I mean you're right about the demographic shifts that we're seeing. Um, I also don't know that Madison can be looked at as the same demographics as when when you look at it from an aggregate just in terms of who's moving here and for what. Um, Alder Ugar and I are talked about this on our last trip too. You know, we need there to be good um homeowner turnover as well. And and right now that is a problem. People are being stuck in where they're at. Great. Except for it'd also be great to open up some homes that families can afford and they can have children. The one difference we have is with the number of people coming this way, we have a larger multiplier than many many municipalities in the state. And we know that just from the state demographic maps that we've looked at, the projections over the next 40 years. Um Dayne County and Madison end up being about the only community that's going to continue to grow. I think the other thing to point out is Shank Elementary is one listed as being at capacity. Now at capacity is more than just the physical space and the number of children. At Shank Elementary, we've also increased DLI. So we have Spanish and English language classes side by side. We have four-year-old kindergarten. Yes. At Shank, we have four-year-old kindergarten. And we have reduced class sizes. So those are three factors right there that we've invested in. And when we do that, we use space far differently than those buildings were designed for. So some of this too is is um disciplining ourselves to think outside of what's typically been a capacity study on your school buildings because we use them so differently. Um in addition to we want to you were asking about community elements in the school. Scott and his team know and our community has said it out loud. Any way that we can we're trying to create inviting community spaces in our schools as well. And that could be for household goods that are donated to families. That could be for food pantries. That could be for laundry. Many of our new schools are going to have laundry rooms so that families have resources uh right in their children's school. >> I would just I would just add a little to what Dr. Gothard said in terms of educational standards. The way we use space is not the same that we used when these schools were built. And so in order to actually meet the needs of our students, we have to make adjustments to the space. And then the second is uh our work with MGT that I talked about earlier is also helping us do that forecasting to understand in terms of all of the developments that will be happening what will that mean in terms of the number of students that we might see and so those two things together I think are uh really important for us to plan for the future. >> Great. Thank you for that clarification. It was helpful. >> Thanks Alder Figoko. remember my question you mentioned about there's schools where kids pass schools to get to other schools just like Allied which is the I don't know how many I mean I've been here for 30 years so it's been at least for me 30 years that that situation is happening there so when you're when these new schools are being built and the planning for the schools are being built are we kind of prioritizing those kind of situations where the kids are literally boss so far from home while you have schools like Cherokee to right there on the way to get to um Memorial High School. Like that's just it still doesn't make any sense to me. But and in addition to that, the burden of having um in specifically for the Allied community where you have one side of the street being Verona and the other one being um Madison and the kids then get boss all the way to I mean Fishburg and the kids get boss to Verona. So are those issues that are being so long stand in our community and really don't don't help build communities are prioritized in this planning. >> Well, I I would say that from uh the perspective of what we know now in the survey that we just uh had returned that came up in terms of what families want. I think what the data will tell us with our work with MGT and these different scenarios that we need to look at to see where changes happen will will be part of that. We're trying to develop what we would call guiding principles or kind of our guard rails of what is going to be most important that we want to ensure we prioritize during that. And so as soon as uh some of that data comes back and we're able to see uh the things that you've already named, we will definitely be looking into that. The one piece we don't have control over is the split of the Madison schools and the Verona schools specific to Allied at least yet. >> I do I do think it's fair to mention that we do have 1500 students this year who opted to open and roll out of Madison out of the Madison Metropolitan School District around 400 in. Uh, so a net loss of, you know, over 10,000 students. And I would imagine many of them are on those boundaries where they're very close to, you know, their neighbors across the street may very well go to another school district. There's three or four districts I can think of that, you know, we have streets just like that that are adjoining. >> Thank you. >> Um, super either one of you, um, is there collaboration amongst the regional districts at all? Are there topics that you get together and talk about on a regular basis with the I >> surrounding districts? >> We certainly collaborate but honestly I'd call more competition >> when it comes to students. I mean our our revenue is based on the number of students and the categorical aid in which they bring in. So it is competitive and it might not be outwardly openly overtly competitive but we want to make sure you know that we that all the students that live in Madison attend our schools. Um but we do collaborate around a variety of topics. uh land swaps being one of them. Um you know that it ends up being a legal activity but it starts with superintendents and sometimes board members and district staff communicating with one another. >> Thanks. Um I had one other question and um and this uh I used to think about this a lot more than I did because now my children are in their 20s. So, um, but I think one of the issues that I recall is that there would be, um, kids who because of parents changing jobs during the school year would go to one, two, or multiple school schools during a school year. And every time that transition happens, the relationships are lost. It's not a good situation. And I'm just wondering for purposes of this conversation, are there any pl are there any um planning strategies that would help inform um that kind of um maybe minimizing that kind of um having to jump around for the kids? I yes I would say one we have an internal um policy for internal transfers and we've been uh really examining that and paying attention to that to minimize and allow families to stay at the school of entry versus having to change. So, so that's one thing. And then, uh, we have recently, um, started to meet with some other individuals, uh, in the city in terms of planning to start to think about other ways to, uh, prioritize families, especially families with like housing insecurity and how can we work together to ensure that those families, if the school is the place that they want to stay, that we're able to work together on that. So just another area where we're really collaborating with the city >> and I'd say that our commitment is to remove barriers. Sometimes the barrier is transportation to get to a new school. Sometimes the barrier is the new school where a student doesn't feel comfortable there and wants to remain, you know, at the school they started in. So we we try to value individual children and families as best we can to remove barriers for their success. >> Thanks, Alder Glenn. >> I I agree. I as a parent who lied about their address for their child to go to a certain school for years. I remember when they told me that that was gone and that he's been at Gumpers and uh and then Blackhawk and just wherever I live they want him to stay. So I remember when that was removed and it was like such a relief because parents had been doing it for years to be able to pick a school. Um, one of the questions I have is what what is the history behind some of those things like with Allied Drive or schools that are far? I mean, we all learned about covenants and we've all over the years learned about redlinining and things. Is there anything that was connected to the way things were divided that was a little nefarious? I I don't have the history in a manner that I could share it with you in in a way that would provide a lot of context. Um, you know, I have been in Madison a long time. I was the principal at Toki Middle School once upon a time, 20 years ago now. Um, so I I can tell you that children in Alli Drive bus to their schools and there's options, there's choices and when you look at it on a map, it doesn't make a whole lot of sense. They are far distances as far out of the community. And that's one more thing that we really want to analyze and look at um with our work with MGT and and see if there are recommendations that could better serve children. Thank you. I think this has been a great discussion. I appreciate all of your time and preparation. This is very helpful deck. And um Alder Free Role, the timelines that you asked about are in the deck. So if you ever go in the Oh, Darren took care of you. All right. Very good. Um but if you needed to show that to somebody or refer to it. So thank you so much. >> Thank you all so much for having us. >> All right. So, I think we're going to keep moving along because this is a pretty full agenda. Um, our second our next item is um legisar 9355 and that's an update on our curb management framework from schools to streets. So for this item um we'll be talk we'll continue part of our theme of our conversation from the last topic about transportation and we have our principal transportation planner Liz Ken here who's going to give us an update on this project that is being led by the city's department of transportation. >> Welcome Liz. Thanks >> oh. >> All right. Good evening everyone. Um, as Megan mentioned, I'm Liz Callen, transportation planner with the City of Madison Department of Transportation, and I'm excited to give you all an introduction to our curb management program. So, just to sort of set the stage, um, you know, the street right away is amongst the most valuable land in our city and it's also amongst the largest land area we have in our city. We also expect a lot out of that space. So we think about deliveries, we think about dining in some cases, we think about access. So we think about how are people getting in and out of the development along a street. And then of course we're also thinking of all the mobility activities that happen in that right ofway. Um there's also a lot happening at the curb and increasingly so. We've also learned that if we don't intentionally manage the curb, it doesn't work well um for many people and sometimes it doesn't work well for anyone. So, we have examples in some of the images here, things like delivery drivers being parked in one of our protected bike lanes. We have issues sometimes with emergency vehicles not being able to access where they need to access. We have things like double parking. We have complexities with construction, both private development and our own projects in some cases. We have ADA concerns with access and mobility. And then we also just have general safety of some of the chaos that occurs at the curb, especially with the many differing and even increasing number of uses that we're seeing at the curb. So, what we're hoping to do with curb management is really be more intentional about how we're allocating the use of the curb space. We want to do that in a way that aligns with our existing initiatives like complete green streets, vision zero, and we also want to think about how are we optimizing that space to serve not only a variety of users but also the differing uses even different parts of the day, different times of the week, things like that. Um, we also want to of course better integrate land use with transportation needs at the curb and keeping in mind our city goals throughout the process. So, what does that mean? When I mentioned integrating land use with transportation needs, um I think it can mean a lot of things and we're still in the very early phases of this process, but right now we're thinking about how the use of the curb impacts infill development on the transportation system. So impacts of infill development on the transportation system. So things like access limitations during construction, what what are the impacts of that and how can we maybe align that better with the needs of both the development and the users of that curb. We also know that we have a lot more demand for curb space, plain and simple. So we have a lot more deliveries happening. We have a lot more things like ride share. We also have a a lot of multimodal users and a lot of changing needs in our transportation landscape as well as just changing uses and more innovative transportation kind of treatments that we're looking at in the city and that we're already using. Um we're thinking about dynamic uses and then we're just thinking about how can we accommodate more curb uses and how can we better match that again with our land uses. Um, so to do that, we're really thinking about curve management as not something that we do once and we're done with it. We're thinking about something that really we're going to be integrating into our different work processes, work streams, and in some cases doing some planning and some policy updates, but also having it be something that's very much ongoing. So, as it relates probably mostly to this group, um, we're thinking about things like development review. How are we integrating the curb use changes that might be needed based on a proposed development in that development review process? How is that being looked at? Um is it being look being looked at in a consistent way or is it being looked at more in an ad hoc way? How can we be more consistent and proactive about that? when um a project is going through the development review process, when we do street reconstructions, how are we taking advantage of that investment to really revamp the use of the curb and some of the like heavier lift things that we can do to improve the curb management that's happening. Um, we're also thinking about our area plans and um, we don't have a definitive plan for area plans as far as curb management just yet, but we're very much working through how we might integrate curb management recommendations in our area plan process. Um, and then um, just thinking about curb management um, experiment opportunities with this project. So, we're we're going to be embarking on a planning process, but we're also going to be trying to do some experiments in the near term and a little bit more about sort of why, you know, we we're we're hearing why we need to do some curb management in Madison. And so, I've kind of talked about a lot of this already, but of course, we have our grow a majorly growing population, housing development. Um again we're having a change in travel behavior, a lot of increased deliveries happening. Um we are having a shift in our parking policies. So something to make sure that we're um planning appropriately for that. Um and again some of the other things I mentioned um including events and visitors. I don't think I mentioned that but that's certainly an important one. um as well as those what are sometimes referred to as critical access needs which include need um access for people um with disabilities and also things like emergency vehicles and things like that. So what am I actually talking about when I'm talking about the curb? So our complete green streets guide starts to define this and so a big effort in our curb management program and planning process is going to be kind of taking that what we have in the complete green streets guide to the next step. So the complete green streets guide defines the flex zone and the travel way and the walkway. Um and so what we're looking at is mostly included in what would be called the flex zone. And so within this image that you can see here, you can see how there are different uses actually right out in front of this building um different curb uses within that flex zone. So just within um you know a few dozen feet here, we have a terrace, we have a bus stop, we have a loading zone, we have 2hour metered parking, um we also you can see we have seating as part of that bus stop. Um and so that is just one example of where we have several different uses happening within a pretty small segment. Um and so what curb management would do is look at a segment like this and say is this the right mix of uses and is this the right way to implement those uses? Um and so like is that the right location for the loading zone? Should it always be a loading zone? Is that the right location for metered parking? You know, what does that look like? And so that's just kind of giving you a little bit of a snapshot of what we are talking about when we're talking about the curb. Again, just thinking about some of those different curb functions. This is just a list of um most of them that we actually already have here in the city for the most part and thinking about how are we going to integrate that into our curb management process. Um and then our outcomes. So we are thinking about again how are we being more efficient in utilizing that very valuable space of our rideway. Are we ensuring equity and accessibility? Are we thinking about small businesses and general economic vitality? How are we thinking about sustainability and mobility goals? Um and then also are there opportunities for data and technology to inform and improve the way we're doing curb management? So, where are we right now with this process and what is next? So, we um earlier this year, we were awarded a $500,000 carbon reduction planning grant, which is actually a federal grant administered by WIST to undertake a curb management action plan. So we are currently in the process of developing the scope for that and we have established an internal advisory group to really collect information from our subject matter experts in all of the different areas that touch curb management and try to understand what the challenges are right now. Um so what are people seeing at the curb that needs to be addressed? And then um within that group we've really met with each individual kind of subject matter expert to identify both the challenges and also some opportunities for improvement. We also are drafting kind of a curb management framework which is really again like this outline that's really a precursor to a larger curve management action plan that will sort of help us define our scope and the different areas we want to focus on. So we are actually in the midst of finalizing that now. We will be sharing that yet this fall. Um we are also working as I mentioned on the scope of work for our action plan which those two things are very closely tied together. Um we intend to release a request for qualifications for that curve management action plan. Um and have a consultant on board by early 2026 to start developing that action plan. Um, and so we, as I mentioned, would like to do some smaller things, experimental projects or maybe even some small applications during our planning time frame. Um, but also we'll have some longer term recommendations in that plan um, to move forward beyond as something as I mentioned that we continuously do, not something that we just do once and that we're done with. So again, I am Liz. Stephanie couldn't be here tonight. she's under the weather, but I am more than happy to take questions and or um kind of follow up if there's anything I specifically am not able to answer tonight. Thanks. I don't think we have registrants for this item. Um so, uh does does anyone in the commission have questions for planner Kayn? Uh why don't we start with Alder Fig Cole? We'll go to the left. >> Yeah, >> I want to be honest. They they >> Oh, all right. Thanks. Yeah, it's hard with no with no Zoom. I'm all spoiled. All right. >> I almost take it, but >> Alderfield, you win the you win the first question. >> You all have the same question and then it's >> maybe um thank you very much for the presentation. I'm really interested in where this goes. Um, I'm curious if there are initial thoughts about the whether a curb management plan and recommendations or perhaps even a policy might um apply to locations within the city at some level of granularity or if it would be flexible enough, high level enough that it could be applied anywhere. And I'm asking because parts of the city have changed so much over the last 10 years and I'm wondering if this is something that we need to update on some interval. >> Yeah, absolutely. I think in some cases both are true. So I think in some cases there will be some recommendations andor policy implications that will reflect things across the city. So things that we'll be looking at will include things like just general parking um policies across the city. Um anywhere that there's any kind of parking restriction, we might be evaluating is that how we want to implement this parking restriction. Um, but I think you're right that certain areas of the city definitely have more demand for curb space than others. So that's something where we probably will be doing some smaller kind of district level planning. Um, things like downtown or like the Willie Street neighborhood or different um commercial districts where we know we have a lot of demand. Um, and then some of the areas where there's less demand, thinking more about like the residential parking policies, are we is that, you know, is that working? Um, things like that. So, I think it's a little bit of both, but I do think we'll do some specific districts um that will be a little bit more granular than some of the broader policies that might impact um kind of a citywide or or almost citywide perspective. I know there's some areas in the city where we don't have really any parking restrictions at all and that that may be appropriate for the most part. >> Sure, makes sense. And the alignment of the timeline with the downtown plan is not lost on I think most of us. So, thank you for that. >> Alder, >> thank you chair and thank you for all that information. And I I did note uh earlier in your presentation that you had uh pointed out the connection of curb management and redevelopment which in some cases is what's driving greater density and our accommodation of a greater population. And uh it it seems that it's it to our benefit as a city in curb management to encourage as much uh accommodation within a redevelopment uh as possible because if it doesn't then it's going to inflict a bigger problem on the public right of way outside that redevelopment. And I'm wondering if out of this process will there will be some um format or protocols so that for instance when a potential development comes before a DAT meeting where uh plans are still highly fluid um compared to by the time we might see it at the plan commission level. If at that early stage we can be encouraging to developers to say we really want you to consider this this and this uh as part of the curb management uh within the development as opposed to the public right away. >> Yeah, I think definitely looking at development review is has come up as a priority for this effort and I think you know it's a I think it'll be a balancing act to understand you know how much should be covered by the private sector and in within a development and how much should be kind of put on our our ride of way and I think the big thing that we are interested in understanding um that we don't really have much data on is the utilization and the capacity of our curb parking space. So, we have a really good understanding of of what the total kind of curb um on street parking looks like and and when we have different restrictions, what those are and where those are and things like that. And we can even get a little bit of capacity information, but we also don't know a lot. So, I think a big part of this effort is going to be data collection. I think different parts of the city are going to be different. So there's obviously already a lot of parts of the city that are really already constricted by any on street parking availability at any time, right? Um and so in those cases when a developer might come in and might propose very very limited parking within their development. Um you know making sure there's an understanding of the limited curb space and you know the implications for that development. I'm not sure. I I don't think I can speak to that, but just understanding what the the curb sort of market is for for their potential residents and how that might impact them. And I know that's been an ongoing consideration with um things like our resident permit parking program and things like that. So, um, I think having that exact conversation that you're talking about at development review is something that we're we're specifically talking about and adding that into kind of the work stream for a development review process and and how exactly we might do that I think will be part of this effort. Just a followup. Do we have any statistics at this point that's uh let's suppose we have a block that's got a uh 50 residents or office people or whatever it may be and we know it's going to be redevelopment and then that same parcel it's going to be 200 people instead of 50 people. Um, do we are there statistics that tell us that means we're going to have an increase in this many deliveries and this many drop offs and those kinds of things that can help us contemplate what the impact would be. >> Yeah. So, that's actually some of the expertise we're hoping to get from a consultant who has experience doing curve management work in other cities. Um, it definitely has has become something I don't want to say it's quite ubiquitous, but it really is something that is very common now that at least a lot of cities are embarking on this. Um, and so there is now kind of this growing universe of curb management consultants and technology and data collection and also thinking about um, you know, some of the metrics you talked about and how to measure things like that. And so that is something we're hoping to kind of get a better feel for. Um, and also just some of the tools that other cities are using to combat, you know, some of those, you know, pinch points and how do we try to manage that more, especially with things like, you know, Amazon deliveries where you've got just Amazon trucks all over the place. Is there a way that we can even concentrate, you know, drop off zones and things like that? I know that is something some cities are doing. They have different kind of like loading hubs where they can actually kind of distribute things and maybe have lowcarbon last mile and things like that where the trucks kind of go to one hub and then um like a cargo bike takes packages to their final destination, things like that. Um so that's just a couple of examples of some of the things that are being talked about at kind of a nationwide level of cities like Madison. >> Thank you. Thank you. And thank you, chair. >> And I'll just add based on what Liz shared, um, in response to both of your questions, Alder, I'm really hopeful for this work that, um, it can help us establish that higher level framework and maybe then some options for how we make decisions in specific circumstances. And I think you asked some questions about you know what can we expect for um to see as some of the demands for service for different types of whether it's number of people or or type of development. Um I think the other thing that I hope that this will help us explore is what is our expectation for what the public realm can do and will do in certain circumstances. Um, I think we have the ability to make some choices at a policy level to say, for example, in places in the city where we've said we don't have any minimum parking and maybe it is okay for us to see development that is providing little or no parking. You know, what are our expectations for what that means for how the curb will serve that part of our community? Um, and how we balance those those choices. Um, the other thing that I think about, um, and I'm hopeful this will touch on is the relationship to our transportation demand management policy. And I think a lot of the things that we could see as being um, uses of the curb are things that we might try to encourage or would want people to participate in um, through that TDM process in order to help reduce the actual demand for trips at their individual development location. Um, so I think there's a potential that these things can go hand inand. We'll still have things to resolve at the individual development level, um, undoubtedly, but I'm hopeful that it will help give us some better guidance on policy choices when we see those projects. >> Thanks, Commissioner. >> Thank you. Uh, I'm not sure if I could still squeeze a question out of this. Maybe just a comment because you've done a great job of answering the other questions. Particularly when you answered Alder Field's question, I felt a little bit better about my concern that this isn't really focusing much on uh the the the uh vehicle storage aspect. And I know you're focusing on interesting areas of the city where there are mixed development or big apartment buildings etc. And I would just encourage uh uh some focus on that gnarly vehicle storage problem even in Alder Fields district and uh you know the whole conundrum about what people expect versus what they really should expect. Uh I I I I think that's a huge part of the problem that needs to be tackled and so I wouldn't minimize it. I maybe you aren't. >> Yeah, I absolutely hear that comment and I'm very familiar with the expectation of on street free vehicle storage that you know thinking about how can we start to kind of have that thought process evolve I think is is is part of this effort. >> Yeah, I guess I'm impatient because I >> figur did you have question? Um yeah so I think the first question was answered by and Derek's um answer is this going to be a standalone policy or are we going to re are we going to update the complete green streets um policy? >> Yes. Yes. So we we so how we're seeing this move forward is actually in multiple different kind of paths. So we do see some policy updates probably that will be needed. So, we'll probably have some ordinances that will probably we'll have some recommendations on how we think an ordinance could be improved. We also will probably have some updates to complete green street specifically. I think with that, we're thinking specifically about adding some new curb management focused treatments that might be considered when we're doing things like redesigns and potentially some of the maintenance projects, but mostly redesigns because um right now it's just very vague. So, right now, Complete Green Streets talks about things like loading um but it is it it is not um very precise in what it recommends. it just sort of talks about considering loading and things like that. So, thinking about introducing some of those different treatments that we know are out there and we know could work well into that guide specifically so when designers are working on a project, they can actually have more of a toolkit to kind of pull from and say, "Okay, does this actually fit here?" Um, and then um I think in addition to what you mentioned, also some different planning related things. So with our action plan, we'll have recommendations that'll kind of go in those different paths. >> So look like something like complete green streets today where it takes the different areas of the city and applies different types of suggestions or um tools for those areas. And uh when you said earlier about um parking I think yeah parking policy changes um yeah what's what do you mean by that? >> I I don't want to get into any details preliminarily but just thinking about some of the citywide ordinances related to to parking related to things like overnight parking or the residential parking permit program. I think this effort will evaluate those and see if there's opportunities to make those better um and better just kind of work in align with the intentionality we want to bring to curb management and also just as we get a better understanding of our cur curb utilization and our curb capacity and are those policies working with what we have well I think that's kind of the big questions we have >> yeah I mean some of the few complaints we I on my district is about those blanket policies that we have for for parking. I know that there are um areas of high restriction, but then we have these other blanket things that don't make any sense on smaller neighborhoods or um other areas. So, um I know I had talked to Stephanie about it a couple of times, but I wasn't sure if there was any movement on looking at that policy, but it sounds like there is. >> Yes. Yeah, that'll definitely be part of this. And I don't I I think some of that too won't necessarily have to wait until the entire planning process is done. I think some of that will also happen throughout. >> Thank you. >> Chris's hand first. Sure. >> Uh Commissioner Male. >> Thanks. Uh I hope I'm not touching on one of those things you didn't want to get into yet, but I know one of the things you're thinking about is um a lot of new apartment buildings uh residents aren't allowed to get residential parking passes. uh simple question that is just occurring to me is where that decision happens is that a conditional use or does it happen through a different process? >> So I believe that is through our residential permit parking program. So essentially there's an ordinance that makes any development built I believe after 2016 um maybe it's even a little earlier than that but I think it's around 2016 um apartment buildings built after that date residents within those buildings are actually not allowed to apply for residential parking permits. So that is one of the things that I think we'll be evaluating and if that still makes sense and if we were to change that, do we have the capacity to handle that change? I think that's the question that we um certainly will be spending some time looking into >> I'm I'm not even sure if you can answer this. It might be more for planning, but I you mentioned there are there's a growing uh industry of parking consultants. Um can you imagine that we would get to the point where when a development comes forward to plan commission currently we have a trafficked impact report I think it's called where they guesstimate using highly scientific uh techniques you know how much traffic's going to be on this street could we potentially have a parking impact report for every development over a certain size might be cool Yeah, that's certainly something we can explore. I think when we're thinking about how do we how do we better plan for curb needs when we have a development coming. I think that's certainly >> and and currently the developer pays for a trafficked impact report. Uh I don't know if developers would need to be required, but that's something to think about. >> All right. Well, thank you Liz. appreciate. >> Thank you. >> Yeah. Questions. >> Yeah. I appreciate all the excitement. I'm just as excited about curbs as you all are, believe it or not. >> Thank you >> very much. >> It's a very planner and plan commissioner thing to say that you're excited about a curb. Yeah. >> Thank you, Liz. >> There's a curb your enthusiasm joke in there somewhere, but I don't It's uh that might just be all it is. >> Your enthusiasm. >> Yes, for sure. All right, we will go to our uh our next item which is legisar 90360 and that is um discussion of the urban design commission code update and we'll start with a um staff presentation. So as she's making her way up here I'll just briefly introduce um Jessica Vaugh who is our urban design commission secretary. Uh she's a planner that works within our development review section. Um, some of you may know Jessica if you've followed the work of the Urban Design Commission. Um, so she's going to walk us through just a really brief background on what the Urban Design Code um is for those who might be unfamiliar and a little bit about how it works today and then tee up a couple discussion topics that we would like to get your feedback um on as Jess is leading a project to help us reinvision this part of our code and development review process. Welcome. >> Well, I'll start out by saying I can't believe technology is working for me. I was shocked that it actually worked. So, um, hi. Uh, thank you for taking the time this evening. I'm looking forward to getting some feedback and exploring some of these, uh, Urban Design Commission related discussion items with this group this evening. Um, so I'm going to jump right in. Um, just a quick overview of this evening's discussion items and presentation. First and foremost, I wanted to spend our time this evening focusing on uh the discussion about the working relationship between the urban design commission and the plan commission to make sure that the plan commission is getting what they need from the urban design commission. So, are the types of recommendations that we're forwarding on to this group um helpful? And if not, what can we do to make them more so helpful for you? And then uh time permitting, I would like to cover a few um other questions which are these next two items that are related to the urban design code update project. But in thinking about how we approach and move through our discussion this evening, I wanted to um let you choose your own adventure. We can either move through the presentation completely or we can kind of take one question at a time. I don't know how much time we have to work with, but I I know we were planning for a short time frame. So, I'll leave it up to you guys how you want to do it if you want me to just move right through or if we want to stop as we go. >> Yeah, I think we I think we allotted an hour for this discussion item or we estimated an hour. So I think um maybe if you want to go through your presentation then we'll have time for public comment and then questions. >> Okay, we can do it that way for sure. Great. Okay, so first and foremost without further ado, um how does the UDC and the plan commission work together? Um UDC and plan commission work together in the review of certain projects. These are typically conditional uses which include projects in our downtown core and urban mixeduse zoning districts, plan multi-use sites. So these are our larger scale retail centers. So thinking about east town mall, west town mall areas um some residential building complexes, plan developments and then referrals um that come to both the UDC from um common council, some from plan commission, some from other BCC's, alers staff that also go to the plan commission. In all of these cases, the UDC is an advisory body. So they're making a recommendation to the plan commission um that may or may not include findings andor conditions of approval. So the first question this evening is really related to the UDC recommendations. Um these are the questions that we can come back to you but just keep them in the back of your mind. Um really what types of design related recommendations are most helpful? Um and do you have any requests for how the UDC's recommendations should be made? Are there items missing? Are there things that should be included? Um things that shouldn't be included. Are they clear? Um do you have a a good understanding of what we're saying? So, just coming back to that and then shifting gears a little bit uh to the UDC code update project. I see a couple familiar faces in the room that were involved in these discussions previously. Um and so we'll be in touch uh here again shortly. Um this was a project for those of you that weren't involved. This was a project that was started in 2022 with discussions between the UDC staff and other stakeholder groups to identify project goals and outline a project approach. While the project goals today remain applicable from those initial discussions, the project approach has shifted a little to take a step back from where we were, which was kind of in the midst of drafting some code and some ordinance language. Um to take that step back and explore and identify key design principles or concepts. Um this is getting really at the question of what elements of design do we care about or should we care about? um and that these concepts will ultimately serve as a guiding tool for updating the existing design guidelines and requirements in the code and then identifying and exploring key areas of interest. So this is really the question of where should design be regulated. Both of these uh discussion items are on the docket for this evening but there is a third question that we'll be exploring later in the process and in the year which is the topic of um exploring ways to u improve the city's design review process. So, um, coming back to the questions for this evening, identifying those key urban design concepts. Um, so this is kind of like the what matters to you, right? What should we care about when we're thinking about design? Um, what shouldn't we care about? Because sometimes it's easier to articulate what we don't want than it is to explore what we do want. Um, are there certain design concepts that we want as required versus guided? Um so just kind of thinking through these questions but because we all have a different level of understanding when it comes to design. Um I did this exercise myself and with the staff steering committee and a few time a few themes that started to emerge were including those uh related to context elements. So these are designing with a sensitivity to concept encouraging those design elements that create an active streetscape and then the finer design detail elements. So things like building materials, building colors, um articulation and details, and ornamentation and building design. I like to think about these three things as layers um that overlap with each other with the broadest being that context layer. And then as you zoom in to that finest um layer, you're really looking at those um building design details. So looking at like maybe it's brick patterns, maybe it's window patterns and sizes, maybe it's colors, those types of things. But to provide a little bit more um shape to these things, um designing with a sensitivity to context means that a building's design, mass and scale, its location, the way it addresses a street or hold a street corner is taken into consideration. Um these are things like responding to a site's topography. So maybe that's stepping down a hillside versus popping a building on top of it or flattening a site to create a buildable buildable area. incorporating setbacks or stepbacks to maintain a build to line um or even using similar um appearing materials and detailing or if there's a particular flavor in a built environment um or a neighborhood and just being respectful of that. Um active streetscape design elements was another theme that kind of started to emerge. Um this is really the idea of how private development interfaces with the public realm or the street in terms of creating an active streetscape. So identifying what those elements really are. This is things like minimizing building setbacks or using building modulation and articulation um to reduce mass and scale using higher level of glazing or design quality in those first three floors. Locating active building entries along the street and then incorporating landscape. Whoops. There we go. There's technology not working for me. Along the street where I see where are we? There we go. along the street to create that se separated pedestrian pathway or other amenities to keep keep the human scale of the development. And then last but not least was that really dialed in zoomed in uh design detail elements. So this is really looking at those finer grid details that are associated with particular architectural styles. Things like u maintaining true stylistic detailing. So if an art it's an art deco building, you're using art deco type of design and detailing. If it's a craftsman, you're using details that are specific to and unique to that type of building. Um, so thinking about simple simplicity in designs and detailing, not using too many things, too much articulation. Um, um, thinking about utilizing design details that also help to break down mass and scale. So things like canopies, awnings, building textures, material textures, or colors, right? So that brings us to the second question, which is what are the city's urban design goals? Right? what matters to you? Um are there things that we should be looking at? Are there things that we shouldn't be looking at? Um are there things that we want to influence versus don't want to influence? And should certain things be required versus guided? So thinking the difference between the musts and the shells and the shoulds. Um which brings us to our last question, our third one. Um and I think this one's important, too. And I like the way these two work together because I think it's they pair well. um because when you think about what you want to influence, you also need to think about where you want to influence that. So this is identifying those key areas of interest. And again, this is one where um I like to ask the question about the where do we not want to influence design? Like where should there should not be a design review required versus the where should a design review be required? Like what are those important areas? And so I did this exercise with um of course myself but again with the staff steering committee and it was really interesting to see how many of the same responses came back to me. Um generally I was able to group responses into two buckets. These two buckets included areas where the urban design commission would review a project on some scale and then areas where projects would not require urban design commission review. And so the currently within the UDC purview is on the left and currently outside is on the right. Um so again just really interesting to see what what was in in play there and what the most common responses were. And then kind of flipping that question again is the areas that we shouldn't be focusing on. Um again the two buckets areas that we're currently within the UDC's purview where we maybe don't want to have an urban design review and then areas that are currently outside of the purview where we also are identifying as design review is not as an important of a tool that we need. Um the interesting thing is I wanted to share this map because it starts to pull all of that information together. Um what this shows is the areas where influence was um preferred. Um areas where influence was where we didn't think we needed to influence design. Um the light blue which I can you see that on your screen cuz it's not very good outline but the light blue is the urban design districts and then um we looked at industrial areas seemed to be kind of the hot topic. That was the most popular response I got of areas that we did not want to ident influence design. And so just really looking at the generalized future land use map to see where our futuristically planned urban areas are. So they're going to remain urban in perpetuity. Um and how all of those things align with our current urban design districts, which I thought was pretty interesting. And so that brings us to our last question is what areas of design do we what areas of the city do we want to influence design? So like thinking about that is that citywide is that specific areas targeted? is that particular zone districts and then what areas maybe we don't want to influence design. Um but that's that's what I have for you this evening. >> Thanks. Um we'll uh have public comment and then um we'll probably have questions for you so don't go far. >> Okay. Okay. Um we have one public speaker tonight on this. Uh Bill Connors representing Smart Growth of Greater Medicine. um registered neither in support nor opposed but wishing to share comments. >> Sure. Go ahead. >> Hi everyone. I'm Bill Connors. I'm the executive director of Smart Growth Greater Madison. Thanks very much for the opportunity to speak with you. I hope you had a chance to see the email I sent to PC comments yesterday afternoon identifying four um things that we would we would like very much for you the plan commission to communicate to uh to planning staff here about this project. Um and the first one is that um is about um the scope whether the scope of what the UDC reviews should be expanded to include things like where buildings are placed on the development site, how that affects um circulation of pedestrians or bicycles or or automobiles or other vehicles within the site. Currently, that's not within the purview of the of the UDC, but the UDC's when we were talking about the 1.0 project that went on earlier, the the outcome of that was the UDC was recommending that the their statute their ordinance be amended to give them that authority. Um, we urge you to not not endorse that idea. Um second about um residential building complexes. That's a that's a like an apartment complex that is more than one principal building on a single parcel. Those are required by current ordinance to go to the UDC for a um for advice to give advice to the plan commission. Um those are I I suspect the lion share of the new housing units that are being produced in Madison are these residential building complexes. So what you do with them has a big influence on the the uh the the supply and cost of housing in in uh in Madison. And um you know there currently are no clear design standards for the for the UDC to apply. There's standards for you all to to approve like a conditional use permit and some of those include some vague references to making sure that the that the proposed development fits the the you know the intended I I I would have to pull it up. It's number eight. Let me pull it up here so I got the right uh the right wording. >> If you want I could Oh, you've got it. >> Yeah. Yeah. So um it is uh the creates an environment of sustained aesthetic desiraability compatible with existing or intended character of the area. So that's a that's a very general vague kind of standard. It's not it's not at all what design standards look like in the zoning code. Um and so as a consequence when the UDC gets those it's kind of like a free-for-all. Um, so we think either in the zoning code or in the UDC's part of the zoning code, there ought to be specific design standards that they can apply when they're reviewing a uh residential building um complex. >> Bill, if you could um I'm not Yeah. Okay. Right. So, there were two there were two other points. One more minute. >> And I hope you saw those in my uh in my email and uh I'll wrap it up there. Thank you. Oh, thanks Bill. >> That's all our speakers for tonight. Chair, >> thanks. Um, questions from the commission and I think since we're not doing a a vote, you can direct them to the registrant or to uh Jessica. So, Commissioner, >> I did not get Bill's email. >> Yeah, I don't know if I did either. >> And so, I would ask Bill to list his other two comments. Uh, >> if if that's okay. >> Yeah, >> we'll make sure. >> Okay. Yeah. Yeah, >> it's a copy of that. >> Thanks. >> I'm sorry that you didn't receive that. I just sent it to PC comments and didn't comment didn't copy the rest of the of the commissioners on that. So the third one was about the the current process where there the UDC is the advisory body and they have a whole host of comments about the advice they're giving and it's so extensive and there's so many different things that they think they want to change in the in the project that they give you the plan commission initial advice which isn't a concept that's anywhere in the zoning code that um that that generally, yeah, this this works with us. Um but send it back to us and we'll work it over some more after you get done. Um and and so that process really isn't anywhere in the in the zoning code, but it's a it's the it's a very common practice. So they ask you, they they recommend to you to you for you the plan commission to put it in your your conditions for of approval to send it back to them to the UDC to be the final approving body on the on the project even though in the ordinances they're not the final approving body. So we urge you not to do that anymore. Um so that's not that was point number three. Um, and point number four, um, we think we would very much appreciate if you, the plan commission, would communicate to the UDC, we need you, the UDC, to focus on specific standards and give us advice on specific standards. And if you're going to go way off and and look and look at other things, we're not going to pay any attention to that. We're going to focus on your standards. and we would appreciate very much if you would communicate that to the UDC and that that would become the practice of the plan commission. Thank you. >> And apologies to the commissioners and to Bill. Um it looks like we have somehow posted a comment from last week's agenda on this item. So I think Kevin went to fix that. So did you have another question? Okay. Other questions from the commission? are are we're not answering Jessica's questions. We're asking questions. Uh >> we're happy for both. >> Yeah, I do think I do think just um sharing items of feedback is well within scope of this conversation because I think we're being asked for that. Yeah, >> I did that other question related back up just to help conversation a little bit. >> Yeah. >> Um and I guess we can we should start from there, right? So I think the the tiein is that UDC is an advisory body to the plan commission, right? In certain cases. Um, a lot of those cases happen to be where um, we're looking at conditional uses and the and the UDC is using different standards than the plan commission is. The plan commission is using those conditional use standards. In particular, standard number eight is the one that you guys probably function in the most when you're working with urban design commission projects. Um, we're looking at like when we're looking at the DCUMX projects, we're looking through the eyes of the downtown urban design guidelines which are informing our review. Um, when we're looking at residential building complexes, there are specific requirements in the zoning code that the UDC look at the building designs and aesthetics as well as the landscape plans. Um, so any recommendations that we're forwarding to you as a body are based in the building design and aesthetics and the landscape plans. Um, as it relates to what else do we talk about? Plan developments is another one. We're the UDC's advisory to the plan commission and those have their own unique standards for approval that the plan commission functions in but also that the urban design commission will function in and the recommendation that they're making to this body is based in those approval criteria. Where it gets a little wonky is referrals unless the referring agency is really specific on what they want the UDC to review and make comment on. Um I don't know this if this will help. I I'm thinking about the situations when UDC is is uh a deciding body. >> Those are again uh urban design districts, residential building complex review. No. >> No. >> That's like conditional use. Uh and so and also things like the downtown design guidelines, their advisory. No. >> Yeah. So, where the commission functions as an approving body is always in the districts. Those are our bread and butter. Um, we're an approving body in any one of the eight urban design districts that are located throughout the city. Um, we are also an improving body in the downtown core and urban mixed use, but those are for projects of uh less than six stories. I believe anything over six stories we become advisory. >> But again, we're using the downtown urban design guidelines as our review parameters for those. So, so just one quick thought. Uh it's not as if uh in in some areas that may not be in one of those prescribed situations. Uh sometimes landmarks will be reviewing something in a historic district. Uh so maybe there's just a little bit more of the city that that is reviewed by somebody that has more expertise maybe in design than planned commissioners on average. Uh but okay. So I guess my question is is this effort including any revamping of urban design district uh language ordinance because they're so you know different ages and concerns and things. >> Yes, absolutely. Um, and I'm excited about that part, although just thinking about it is daunting. But, um, I think that's the whole pretense of taking that step back and instead of going directly to code language, we're taking that step back and we're asking the question of what is it about design that we want to be regulating? >> Makes sense. >> You know, what do we care about and what do we think affects the like pedestrian environment? What affects the built environment? what are those design elements or principles that we want to use as a basis to rewrite our code? And so that's what this process is really about and that's what that question is when I ask what are the city's urban design goals? That's what that question is targeting is trying to kind of figure that out. What are those key concepts that we want to use as a stepping point to start rewriting our code? Because until you know the what, you kind of don't know the how, right? You got to know what you're regulating to figure out how you're going to regulate it. >> So answer those bigger questions to assist you in redoing not just urban design districts, but making decisions about the rest of the city that you may or may not want to include. Now it makes sense. Okay. >> And I do think that's a big question. So, um I know in a lot of the work that Jess and others were working on before I arrived here, we did start to explore some of those questions about um whether we want to dig in beyond just kind of updating the code to reflect current practices if we wanted to start to dig in in future phases to updating the language of districts, the boundaries of districts. Um, and I think there is just a broader question that has come up in this is like are there some things that we just care about on a baseline level regardless of where you are in the city um inside a district or not? >> Sure. Lazin um sorry just for a context who are who are you asking the questions to >> the plan commission as a body >> and and is it broader than the plan commission? >> Yes. Yes. So I'll be having a very similar discussion with the urban design commission. Um the project also has a internal staff steering committee that's made up of a representative from multiple agencies um that participate in the development review process or that have recently updated their codes and policies that impact development. Um and then also the general public. We're going to be rolling out some um website updates where we'll have an interactive map, a survey um and some other other interactive things going on there. And then I'm also will be reaching out to uh stakeholder groups that were participating in the uh previous uh discussions. So there'll be a press press release probably next week with some more information. So be on the lookout for that. Commissioner Soulheim, you've been quiet tonight, so you can go next if you had comments. >> Thank you. Um, you just mentioned stakeholder groups, which was actually going to be my question. Are you will you be working with, you know, the various architects, consultants that present and I may suggest perhaps provide an opportunity for them to provide anonymous feedback in that process. >> Yep. We very much so worked very closely with them on an anonymous survey and the survey responses from the first round of public outreach were actually really really good. Um I was really happy with an over 20% uh survey result and so we'll be reaching back out to those folks um that use our process most frequently um because those I think are the best suited to talk about our process right and its flaws and what could potentially improve. Um but also just engaging neighborhood associations and um like DMI came to mind, the chamber um smart growth. Um but if you have others that you think um please do share those because I would obviously want to get the biggest breadth of participation as we can. I >> have one follow please. >> Yeah. Um, also in I'm still thinking about, you know, what we'd want to prioritize in terms of pedestrian experience and things, but I guess generally I lean towards items that are more objective. And um I know having gone through you know the process myself it has been a while but um parts of urban design districts where you know I talked about setbacks and building heights and you can see okay this b you know we're trying to create a boulevard here and consistency and that was very understandable and easy to plan for ahead of time but the subjectivity when it gets to materials and you're hearing something at one meeting and then something different at the next meeting is very difficult to track and to plan for um in advance. So I guess keeping that in mind as to how we keep some of those recommendations um you know as concise as possible would would be helpful. >> Yeah, I think that's just to respond really quickly to that that is kind of the whole discussion about like achieving that perfect balance between predictability and flexibility, right? And it's there's that continuum where you predictability to be 100% predictable you have to it's a requirement and there's no flexibility but to be completely flexible there's there's no predictability and there's a lot of subjectivity and so it's it's one of those things that we're very aware of and it's something that I think once we get a better sense of the like what and the where I think we'll have a better sense of how we're going to and how we're going to want to regulate those things. Yeah. And and just to add to that, I do think that that is one of the things that when um the team was updating me on the work that had been done a couple of years ago, we clearly heard that um we want more predictability and also we don't want everything to be kind of written down. Uh we want there to be flexibility. And so I think part of this exploration is asking some questions about like what do we care about the most from the perspective of like making sure that we're influencing development in a way that's consistent with our plans and our community vision helps us reinforce our transportation and other kinds of goals. Um so that we can decide like are we being prescriptive or flexible or are we just not saying anything about that and it's not part of our review process in the future. Alderfield. >> Thank you. Um, outside of the downtown, I'm curious about your understanding of what the urban design commissioners bring when considering what design they'd like to see in a project where there aren't necessarily written guidelines that are set out in ordinance or an adopted plan. What do they use when formulating their feedback? So I think often times we revert back to guidelines and standards that we're used to seeing, right? And I think that as designers there's general practices and and best practices that they also revert to. Um anytime you're looking at building aesthetics, right? You're looking at context. Um you're looking at um scale and massing. You're looking at um materials and and maintaining some level of detailing but also maintaining some level of simplicity. Right. And so I think that they're they're using um their professional expertise um to do those things. >> Um I so thank you for that. I do think it would be helpful to write that down in some fashion or to provide something that is a little more guiding just kind of on this theme. um on the scale and massing in a couple of UDC meetings that I've watched or projects that I've followed I have thought that it's been more helpful when elements are recommended as part of design that help break up scale and massing without actually affecting the literal size of the building or the number of residential housing units in the building for example. So strategies that don't affect it the the density I think are more what I'm interested in seeing at least speaking for myself. Um and the primary reason is that we have the zoning code to hash out where and what degree of density is appropriate and I would rather rely on that as our tool for doing so. Um, and so defining more narrowly where UDC's feedback outside of the scope of the zoning code, I think would be a really big improvement. >> Yeah. And I think, you know, part of really looking at what's on the books today and looking at how much has changed since the 1970s, which is when the first district was adopted, and what is it and looking at the the breadth of difference, right, between district 1 and district 8. Um, I think there's gaps for sure. Um, and I think this project is is exciting and it's absolutely necessary to fill those gaps and to make sure we're aligning not only our urban design um, sections of the code with our zoning sections, but also with other code sections that have been in policies, frankly, that have been more recent, too, like complete green streets for sure, >> or the TOD overlay even. Um, cuz right now those things absolutely do not align and there's definite gaps. I see how that contributes to some of the conflict absolutely play out in certain projects. Thank you. >> I'll do gear. I'll >> thank you. Thank you, chair. Uh along the the same line of uh concern that uh older Fields just mentioned, I'm hoping that we can avoid uh conflicts between especially some of the more recent things that we've done with regard to the zoning code and other aspects of encouraging housing and so forth. So that uh in the areas of size and massing that we don't end up uh with a conflict that's difficult for the commission for instance and looking at uh at the new setback requirements that we've just put forward on what UDC may recommend as being more aesthetically pleasant or more consistent. But I can think of things outside those regular design elements too. You know, uh we're placing a lot more emphasis on uh storm water management and an efficient and cost-effective storm water management system and how it's placed on a particular piece of property and so forth might uh produce a different result than what would be considered optimal from other design standards. uh what we just discussed about with with curb management may lead to uh different design concepts than UDC might based on an historical approach might consider. So that's a very vague comment. It's just that I hope that we can avoid some of those conflicts that make it more difficult for us to arrive at quality decisions. >> Yeah, absolutely. And I I think part of this process is really sitting down with those agencies individually. I know we've been working in a group setting. Um but my next step is really sitting down with them individually to really tackle those questions and really making sure we're identifying the where things should be regulated in the code. Should it sit in in parking and the curb management or should it sit in a design district? Should it sit in the zoning code or should it sit in the urban design district? Right? And so it's just like really identifying where there's overlaps, where there's gaps, and then what code should it be in is is I think the big big question. >> I even think, you know, last year uh after I guess a year or two of involvement, the council approved a new sustainability plan. And that might recommend when we get down to the details of materials and so forth, a somewhat different direction than again might be proposed based on more traditional standards for what's aesthetically appropriate. >> Thank you, Chair. >> Thank Thanks, Al. Commissioner Rick, >> I I'm I'm sort of just throwing out some random things. I'm thinking about a project on West Washington that wasn't so long ago where I don't maybe it was a conditional use but plan commission was had a decision to make based on UDC's input. Do we like the garage here or like this or this brick work like this? And it's like what? I don't know. I don't care. Uh why did that end up in our lap? And if I hope that >> the chamered corner, wasn't it? Yes. They were talking about this the other day. The masonry building with the garage door. >> Yeah, it was. >> Was it the masonry building with the garage door? So, that one was I think two years ago now or was it a year ago? Um, that one was an Alder referral to the urban design commission. And in that case, um, that's an Alder's district. And he had asked the urban design commission to do a review based on the MFandia plan. um and that had some design guidelines that were intended to create a new urban design district. And so we were using those design guidelines and requirements in that plan as our basis and our tool for providing an advisory recommendation to the plan commission. And it came down to the garage door height and that it was like recessed a little bit and then it had some ornamentation and detailing to make it not look like a garage door. Um yeah, that was a tricky one. >> I hope those kinds of things don't come forward often. So, so could you share like in that case um are those the kinds of things that you would like um the code to spell out how to deal with? Are those things that you would like just the UDC to deal with on their own? Like >> in many ways UDC I mean as long as it's not me. >> Okay. So, you just want fewer like design decisions to have to come to the plan commission. Okay. I I that's that's just one person's opinion >> and I would say I think and I was thinking you were maybe talking about a different project um because there was within the last maybe year or so there was an issue where there was a project it's only happened once in all of my time with the city so you know happily this is not a frequent occurrence but there was a situation where UDC was reviewing it for one part of the code and landmarks commission was reviewing something for another part of the code and they came to based on their their standards they came to different conclusions So I remember that was also one where plan commission was given an this is these are the two things that are happen in in that case UDC was advisory and landmarks was an approving body for their their piece. So the there was kind of a path that you had to take but that was one where there was a bit of a a conflict as well. >> That was the big one. >> And then just a couple of questions about UDC process. um when the conditions and recommended changes in a conditional use are listed in the staff report, my impression is that uh UDC actually doesn't vote on each of those. It's sort of like somebody suggests it and nobody says no. So they just it becomes a condition. There's not usually voting on those, right? >> It's a motion of the body. So they do vote on them. Um, and the thing with UDC is it's a a collective it's a collective motion, but they do a lot of friendly amendments. And the friendly amendments are up to the motion maker with whether or not they want to incorporate them. Um, they don't take a a formal vote, but if it's a friendly amendment, they get incorporated into the formal motion, which um they vote on and then it gets passed on to the plan commission. >> Nobody viferously complains, then it ends up in >> Yep. Essentially. Um but there is like the the approval and the thumbs up from the motion maker on the friendlies. Um in an event of an unfriendly amendment um they do need to actually take a take a vote >> on it. Um but it gets sent to the plan commission right as an advisory recommendation and then it's up to the plan commission to evaluate that recommendation and whether they want to heed it, change it, adopt it, ignore it. >> Okay. Uh one other just a thought. Uh I've been in many UDC meetings or watched them I guess and I guess I I hear things often that are not in the purview of UDC in my opinion where people have opin I think colors folks opinions of the project and I guess I would encourage those situations to to uh be called out a little bit. You know, somebody might say, "Oh, this is an affordable housing project. It is awesome." It's like not your purview. I mean, maybe we do that, too. I don't know. But, uh, I think it it's, uh, something that whoever's running the meeting, maybe. I don't know. Or staff needs to kind of jump in and say, "Not not really pertinent." >> Yeah. And we I I do do that on some meetings. That's a full-time job. Um, but it's also it's also one of those things too where it's like, you know, when they start their commentary with, I know this isn't in our purview, but I'm going to say it anyway. There's there's little I could do to stop that. Um, but at least they recognize it in in their in their commentary, too. So, I do think though some of that relates to making decisions about the future of what's in the code. And I do appreciate folks saying like maybe there's things that we can spell out more and just be more clear about like what are we looking at, what are we not. And I think that can also help bring some structure sometimes to some of these conversations where maybe the things that we're guiding them to look at are not worded very well. And so there can be some interpretation about like how expansive is the landscaping plan or you know um sometimes as as Jess noted they're working in and they are reviewing projects in areas where they have like pretty detailed guidelines and then they might look at the next project and not have that same structure. And so unlike for you all when you're looking at a conditional use you're always looking at the same standards. Um it might just vary for them. And so making some decisions about giving structure and or or giving standards might help with some of that. >> One more random question. Uh uh Bill Bill mentioned in public comment that the majority of developments are residential building complexes. That didn't seem uh >> No, I I wish I had my statistics available to me. Um >> seem correct to me. Yeah, we only see a handful of res residential building complexes annually. Um, it's a small smaller percentage than one would think about all of the projects that go to UDC. Um, I want to say we review I want to say it's roughly 120 projects. That's what we've I've been tracking the last couple years. Maybe last year was just under 100. Um, but the percentage is like a handful. I think it's between five and 10. >> I don't want to minimize this concern, but I just wanted to make sure I understood this. >> Yeah. I know that residential building complex is what I'll say for lack of a better term a thorn in my side. Um because we don't have specific guidelines or requirements that we're using. We're told by the zoning code that we have to review them. Um and we have to look at the building design and the landscape plan. And so when we're looking at criteria that you guys are using, we we have criteria 8. And so we look we look to that which talks about context and it talks about maintaining an environment of sustained aesthetic desiraability and it's like what does that mean? And so it's like that's kind of the framework that we have today to work in and we know that that's not good enough. >> And uh what would you think of uh you know only if over six stories do do you review a residential building complex or something like that? >> I don't know how special they are. I mean I get that there are some design considerations but >> and I think anything's on the table right as part of the discussion. >> I mean we have talked specifically about um again thinking about like some in some ways our code points at the UDC looking at a certain type of project because of how this code has evolved over time. the residential building complexes are one type of project that we have asked that question like does it make sense that just because it's a collection of multiple buildings on a property we should be looking at it or could we say what is what do we care about when we see a collection of buildings on a project like maybe that one of them is oriented to the street to help us reinforce you know our our public realm goals maybe we can write some of those things down and then better define like when do we need to look at them or look at an individual building within them. So, it's a it's a really good question. >> And the only other thing I would add, an interesting piece of how all of these puzzle pieces fit together in in the zoning code, which is chapter 28, which um both the plan commission and staff are dealing uh zoning staff are dealing with. Uh commercial building forms and mixeduse buildings have many prescriptive standards. Residential buildings on the other hand, very few. And so there is a lot more I guess gray area or more subjectivity in the residential than there are in the commercial where it's uh very clear of what's expected for that development. So it's just an interesting difference between how different building types are handled with the the different codes. >> Commissioner Gill, you're good. >> All right, Commissioner. Um, I just want to I would be in favor of removing residential building complexes from UDC review if just if we're providing input. I'll throw that out there. A lot of them um just tend to be also on the edges currently of our community and it almost becomes like it should be suburban design commission and not urban design commission. It seems like a difficult thing to evaluate. I remember some that we've had that were very much on the edge of town and you know talking about parking it's like well I understand why they need that here. Um so I think that would be easy one on my part. There are some uh smaller residential building complexes that have gone through closer to downtown, but I agree that it's wasn't that valuable to go through the process. >> Thanks. Any parting comments? So, I I would just um >> revisit the other questions about the what and the where. >> Yeah, we have a little more time because I I I think we haven't really touched on those and I would be really interested in the commission's feedback on some of those things. >> I did have a there was a question of, you know, do we want to regulate throughout the entire city? Um my inclination was no. if there are specific things like setbacks and you know pedestrian access or things that we want to focus on, it seems like that would be a better fit in the zoning code for the zoning districts. Um rather than applying a citywide design code. >> Agreed. I think we should get all our design guidelines from Next Door. We'll make sure to put that in the official minutes. I >> I think we can leave that out of the I don't I think that might have been in justest. Um >> and like I guess it's almost like a a fundamental question of what when you ask about what are we focusing on. I think of it as like the pedestrian experience walking by a building or the overall design and and you know maybe it's both ideally but um I I guess I would when we talk about like materials and things that are appropriate in design the pedestrian experience I would focus on and this may be in there currently you know it's been a hot minute since I looked at some of these but thinking about you know brick to a certain level at the pedestrian level and then a certain material but not you not at the commission getting into details like color or we don't want that specific metal sighting, but being more general about materials in a certain area because of the pedestrian experience or durability. >> Yeah, that's a really good point. Like what is it that we're trying to affect, right? Yeah. >> I have a this is an uninformed question, so I want to just preface it with that. is when we build a new building, is there an expected life of that building? And do we require materials to support that expected life of the building? Is that something that we've codified? >> A really great question. It makes me think of um this book that I had to read in grad school and it was about the life of a building. Uh because buildings really do have a lifespan, right? Um, we would like them for sustainability reasons to be over that 50-year mark. Um, but it really just depends on the quality of the craftsmanship and and what has endured throughout its lifetime whether or not it can sustain something beyond that 50-year mark. Um, but I think everything that we put in the ground today, we should be really thinking that that's going to be there for at least 50 years, if not longer. >> Yeah. I mean, it just seems like that that does inform a lot of the aspects of design that would be preferable and not preferable because and maybe not use asbestous, >> right? Yeah. Well, it becomes a question of how do you create timeless architecture, >> right? Something that when you look at it in 2075, do you not look at it and say, "Oh, that was built in 2025, you know, and and >> be a lot of those." >> And we do it today too with buildings that were built 50 years ago, too. were like, "Oh, that was built in the '90s or that." >> And in some ways that is that's we've talked about that a lot that in some ways that's actually like you can see a building and know, "Oh, that was built in 1925 because all the buildings looked at the same in 1925, so they're recognizable." Um, >> over one is our >> it's our 2025 version. Yeah, exactly. Um, but no, I think that's a really good question, Emily. And I think this this question at least has come up for me sometimes when we talk about that standard that we have about a a sustained aesthetic what is it a sustained aesthetic >> desiraability >> desiraability. And I think that question could mean a lot of different things to a lot of different people. Is that about making sure that it's timeless and that it is durable and enduring or is that about making sure that it's exceptional and unique? you know, like I think people could interpret that question a lot of different ways. And so conversations like this can be helpful for us to kind of narrow in what we mean by those questions and better define them or if it's not timeless because we recognize that it's a limited like you know limited use building, what what are the materials going to do when they end up in the landfill and is there something that we need to think about in that respect as well? I mean, I you know, >> this this reminds me of a problematic portion of our ordinance where you grant two stories for exceptional design. >> What does that mean? >> Have we thought about changing that standard? >> I think as Jess said, we're we're kind of like gathering feedback that will help us. I think anything's on the table at this point. >> Having a thought about urban design districts. Uh I'm thinking about UD8, you know, East Wash and everything and others. A lot of them are aspir they're they're expressing aspirational design values because there's that original when they were designed UD8 came into existence when there was nothing on East Washington really. I mean, it was about what do we want it to be rather than uh I I'm and I'm thinking of some other urban design districts where there originally wasn't a lot of activity. And in that sense, I think they functioned well, but now that when areas become mature, maybe they don't need that anymore. I I don't know. >> Uh >> I think that was some of the comments that Jess heard too from some folks. So, it's interesting in some of the areas where we thought design should be continuing to be influenced or be influenced, um, a lot of those areas started to look like areas that were ripe for redevelopment versus areas that there really weren't wasn't a lot of potential for redevelopment or new development to occur. So, I thought I I noticed that right away when I started plunking dots on a map. I was like, "Oh, um, these areas look like they're they're really ripe for redevelopment." Um, for sure. When you were talking about the downtown review, it was like under six stories. >> Mhm. >> Approval. >> Yeah. There's a a tiered review practice there. So, there's the administrative level that like minor changes to exteriors of buildings and things like that or small additions. um that can be reviewed at a staff level and then there's below six stories where the UDC is an approving body and then there's above six stories where we're an advisory body to the plan commission >> and that's um that's because of the change that we made earlier this year to what is a conditional use. And so, um, in the case that in those districts when a project is a conditional use, um, which now is building seven stories and greater, uh, the UDC advises you and when it's a permitted use, um, they make those decisions. They're an approving body on those projects. >> Okay. But that's also an interesting circumstance where we do have pretty robust um or I would say like a a robust starting place for regulating design through the the um zoning code. So things like where do building entrances go, how much of the facade, you know, some limits on materials primarily thinking about durability of those materials um and where they can be placed on a building's facade. Um, and then that kind of pairs with the design guidelines for where there's a little bit more open-ended questions. Um, but not every part of the city has the same level of specificity in the zoning code. So, I think about something you said earlier where I think if some of these things are really important to us citywide, it I think either the zoning code or a an urban design code that applies more broadly could be a place where some of those standards could just be kind of automatic. Um, and then I think the question about Jess has been doing a good job of not um, pulling us in this direction, but I think a future part of this discussion is based on what we want to do, who's doing it or how are we doing it, right? Some of it could be zoning code, kind of thinking about that permitted use pathway versus some of it could be more of a discretionary review process. >> Commissioner Mahill. Um, one thing I'm really interested in in urban design is walkable design. Um, I can think of plenty along East Wash that um, maybe well-intentioned don't feel super like pedestrian oriented to me for any number of ways. Um, and I would like to see us do better at that, but I I don't know that Urban Design Commission is the right place to do that. So, I'm wrestling with that in my head. Like I would want to see those parameters laid out that to to some of Bill Connor's comments like I don't want arbitrary opinions about what's walkable and what's not. But I really would love to see that part of urban design represented better. >> I'm wondering too um just to get a better sense of of your perspective on Eastwash, is it the length of the buildings >> or is it like actual streetscape? Is it like the sidewalk, the trees, the >> It's just the area I'm most familiar with. That's what comes to mind. But there's, you know, I like the parking garage entrance to festival or like I I live back up against Union Corners and the front feels pretty good. The sides and back are pretty terrible. Things like that that just I think we could be giving better thought to. >> Sure. That's helpful. >> Yeah. >> Okay. decide to add if we're going to pick on East Wash, uh the depth of the terrace area, whatever you call it, it it's quite deep with but these tiered levels. Nobody uses those. Uh pedestrians can't use them that maybe somebody that goes into a random commercial place goes in it, but uh a lot of wasted space in terms of pedestrian experience, I think. But that's more like a urban design 8 critique I guess. But yeah, if those were spelled out maybe generally in the for the whole city even. >> And for that one that that was a result of a specific recommendation that came out of the plan. I don't if you remembered but the deep setback one of the things was to have a double allay of trees. Um and that was part of the when the plan was done that was part of the the vision that was then later codified was the background on that particular setback issue. I think that um perspective about getting more into how we look at how private development, you know, the buildings interface with the public realm and how that reinforces the goals that we have for walkability, you know, safety, things like that is a really important observation and is definitely one of the things that we've been talking about. Um, you know, Jess mentioned talking to other agencies about how our codes intersect and where certain things could or should be looked at. Um, but I think there's also things like what we were just talking about curb management, we mentioned complete green streets. And so I think we've been kind of thinking about as the city gets clearer about things like complete green streets and how we expect different streets to function, what does that mean for how the buildings meet those streets to make sure that those streets are doing what we're hoping that they're doing or that people are experiencing them in the way that we're hoping they're experiencing them. Um, sometimes it's hard to think about how they directly influence one another, but we certainly all have the experience of knowing we've walked down a street before and felt like, "Wow, this doesn't feel right," you know, or a place where we really felt comfortable and like we were invited to be there. And so some of this exercise has been kind of stepping back and thinking like so what made me feel that way or just like what was that place so that we can kind of study like what what are we seeing as some of the elements there about how those places intersect. So, >> I sense that we're winding down a little bit, but I know these are big questions, right? And some probably deserve a little bit more thought than we're we're able to accomplish tonight. Um, the project is ongoing, right? So, I welcome feedback and participation. Even if you want to reach out to me directly, uh we can schedule a call and we can talk more in depth um about these questions, any one of them. Um happy to do that. Yeah. So Jess mentioned a little bit ago that um in the next week there will be a refresh to this project's website. So um there will be opportunities for people to share feedback with us. Um I I think when we ask questions like what do you care about about urban design? I think a lot of people's uh heads might go blank. Like I was noticing your expressions, Commissioner Bazine, like you're asking me. Um, and I do think that that's a natural reaction for a lot of people. I think urban design is not a language that a lot of people have. And so I think Jess is trying to kind of help put together a few tools that allow people to share their thoughts about kind of what comes to mind when they think about experiencing a place so that we can help be a little bit of a bridge to saying what that means. Um, and then also I think opportunities for all of you to share your feedback as well as people who are not necessarily the designers or interested in providing design comments but much more in the weeds on the technical aspects. Definitely welcome more feedback as well. >> I'm I'm if I may uh I'm going to I mean there's a lot of stuff here and after I think about this I think I could summarize my thoughts and say less subjectivity. I realize you can't get rid of entirely, but I don't really have concerns about regulating a lot of the city, I guess. But but it has to be more objective if if the community wants to, you know, thinks we should regulate, you know, every building in Madison. I mean, we should think about it. I'm not interested in that. But it's more important to me to not have as much subjectivity, although you can't really escape it entirely. >> Alderfield, >> thank you. Um to expand on Commissioner Hex's last point, one of the reasons that I really appreciate um other policies that we have that guide city decisions such as streets reconstruction projects through complete green streets is that we're then not asking approving bodies to make decisions in a gray area informed by a really strong emotional response that we're hearing in at the front end of a public meeting. but rather because we've had a level-headed discussion beforehand that resulted in some agreed upon rules, expectations, and then we can use those for our decisions. And so that's one of the reasons I think that less subjectivity is really important from this process. >> I think too in having the conversation if it helps cuz I know it's overwhelming. Um, it was easy for me to think of like three places that I absolutely love and like why I love them. So, >> or just three buildings. >> Yep. And they don't even have to be in Madison. It's like, you know, they could be anywhere. >> Fisherman's Warf in San Francisco. >> That's a great place. It's a great place. Yeah. So, anyway, that's what I have for the commission this evening. Feel free to reach out. I love it when people send me places because it's always like, "Oh, I love that place, too." Um, yeah, I think the more the better on this topic in terms of exploring the what and the the where. Um, so, thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. All right. Should we go to our last item which is um legisar 90365 um and uh area plans generalized future land use categories and this is an update on a topic we've discussed a couple times. So >> I see that everybody has their computer. So unless you want me to put the slides on the screen I'll just talk from here. Um, I'll start us off on this one and and Kevin and Brian are both here if you have an interest in or if they have an interest in participating. But um at one of our meetings in August, we shared with you that we were considering some approaches in our upcoming southeast and southwest area plans that would help us uh provide a little bit more transparency and clarity about how to move some of our area plan level uh future land use recommendations to implementation specifically through the development review process and through our zoning codes. So we talked about the low medium residential category uh future land use category and the general commercial and employment categories. So based on the feedback that you shared with us at the last meeting and some more internal discussion including among agencies um the team is uh really working through putting together those area plan recommendations right now um using some approaches that I wanted to share with you and and kind of circle back to that discussion. So starting with the discussion about the low medium residential future land use category. Um when we were reflecting on the conversation with the plan commission from a couple of months ago, I think one of the things that we heard was some general agreement that we had an opportunity to increase transparency and improve the predictability about what these future land use recommendations mean. Um, at the same time though, we heard some concern particularly with the idea, one of the options of potentially removing the escalator clause as we've now started referring to it. Um, this sort of consideration of allowing uh a greater intensity of development in some areas of the lowmedium residential um as effectively reducing density for some locations. um and just a general interest overall in our land use framework promoting more intense future development opportunity. So after discussing that um we've come up with what we're recommending as our approach right now with a recognition that we're trying to balance both kind of the current needs to um put together area plans and and address some of the concerns that we that we all have about this future land use category in particular with the sort of long-term big picture look at how we apply changes in our future land use framework across the city particularly to areas of the city that are not actively being planned today. So the slides that we shared with you outline um what our recommended approach is. So the first is that we are recommending doing a concurrent update to our comprehensive plans future land use residential future land use framework when we adopt the southeast and southwest area plans that would create a new land use category called MR1. So this would be essentially an explicit land use category that reflects the level of development intensity that could have been allowed in a place that used the escalator clause for LMR. We also um are recommending updating the table to allow for some additional building forms in the LR and LMR future land use categories. So this achieves a couple things. One is that in the LR areas, this actually helps our future land use recommendations more accurately reflect some of the zoning code changes we've made in the past couple of years to allow more housing type choices citywide. And it also addresses one of the things that we've seen as a factor driving people to ask to use the LMR escalator clause, which is um oftentimes the the large multif family building is something that um while density or height might be factors that a project could fit well within our LMR sort of future land use, um oftentimes we see the building form being one of the drivers of people asking to use that escalator clause. So, we want to make some updates to the different types of building forms that could be allowed in some of these residential categories. So, the chart that was on the third slide that's in your packet shows how we would recommend that medium residential future land use category kind of fitting into the middle of that chart of residential future land uses. So then coming back to the area plan process, the area plan teams are evaluating opportunities to recommend changes to the future land use map for a whole host of reasons including where we could allow housing and where we could allow more intense housing in the future. And so as part of that process, evaluating places where we could map this new MR1 category much more explicitly with a mapping of that escalator clause. I'm sorry. With the mapping of that new land use category, um we're proposing then that we no longer use the escalator clause in LMR areas. Um in the kind of subsequent development review process, we proposed using this approach for the southeast and southwest area plans that are underway now. Um we have two more area plans that will be starting in late 26. the north and near uh north and near west area plans and running through 27. So we would use a similar approach for those plans. We'll we will be doing the downtown plan during that time too, but I don't think that we have a lot of future land use recommendations that fall in this category that would be affected by this um for the downtown plan. Um, at the time in 28 when we do our interim update to our comprehensive plan, I think we've mentioned that that's a time when we often look at the future land use map and make changes to it. Um, we would look at all of the areas of the city that are recommended for LMR and ask could we map this new MR1 category into some of those places? and if so, update that map um as part of a city-wide process and then at that point kind of say the escalator clause is done. Um we would update our uh comp plan language to remove that um at that time. So that's how we're proposing that we will start to phase out that escalator clause but also phase in some more intense future land use recommendations that we also heard that you were interested in. Uh the employment in general commercial is a little bit different issue. Um for this one we're not proposing any changes to how we would uh frame the future land use categories themselves. Instead, what the teams are doing and what you'll see in the upcoming area plan uh future land use maps is that um we're taking a close look at areas of the city that are in these two future land use categories and asking if a mixeduse land use category is appropriate or if if housing really could be appropriate in some of these areas. And if the answer is yes or if we think that that we could recommend that we will be recommending some type of uh mixeduse future land use designation as part of that process. Separate from that, uh we want to work collaboratively with you all uh and the zoning team to review the zoning districts that we use to implement the general commercial and employment future land use recommendations and think about whether through some changes to the uses that are allowed or um whether we kind of have a gap in the districts that we need to implement these plan recommendations that we could address that on the zoning code side of things so that we actually have districts that better align with the future land use recommendations. Specifically, thinking about some of those places where housing wouldn't be a permitted use, even as a conditional use. So, that's how we're proposing to address that one. And for now, what you'll see is the teams trying to take more of a concerted approach at looking at uh the future land use recommendations for opportunities for mixed use. So, um, so with that, I will just put in a quick plug that, um, happy to take feedback, answer questions about that. Um, we are anticipating that we will roll out some draft maps for the area plans that are underway next week that will are embracing these two approaches. Um, so I think any kind of adjustments that we might need to make, we'll make throughout the kind of iterations of this planning process. Uh but also wanted to plug for you all that we will be having some public meetings next week if you're interested in hearing more about those area plans. >> Thanks Megan questions. you mentioned in with regard to this I think the second two items we at the interim plan update we will be asking about you know what parts of the city maybe will get MR1 uh that aren't part of a new plan who are you who would we be asking >> as part of our I like that that question has come up twice tonight. Who are we asking this question to? Um so as part of our engagement process that we go through to do an interim plan update. So that would include conversations with the plan commission um and conversations you know soliciting some input and sharing ideas about future land use recommendations that we would make as part of a community engagement process. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Uh one more question. Go ahead Nicole. Your turn. Okay. I this is something I should know already, but I'm looking at MR1 in that table. >> If I'm uh wanting to develop a threestory building with 30 units per acre, >> is there anything different between choosing LMR or MR1? It it fits in both as long as the land use is MR1. Are there like maybe some design related things that are different? Uh how do you choose which one you want? >> I think in that case um well so when we're talking about these as future land use recommendations, these would be things that we are recommending at the kind of citywide at a land a planning level. And so one of the big differences comes in the building forms. And so I think this change is also helping us get a little bit closer to the original intent of the LMR district which was kind of like middle missing middle housing scale. >> Um so if we think that three stories 30 units per acre but in a large multif family building is an appropriate development form we would be mapping that medium residential one district. where if we're thinking more like you know kind of small apartment houses um that might kind of show up in the same way we would be mapping that >> mostly differences in building form potentially. >> Yeah. I mean the the MR could allow a much bigger scale but in that explicit example it would be the building form >> because I was thinking about does this accomplish what we've been thinking about in the escalator clause and all of that and Okay >> and and building form was like I said earlier was one of the biggest things that we saw in that. Yeah. >> But it would be allowing large forms courtyard buildings up to four stories and up to 70 units an acre. So there is there is a bump certainly the the the MR1 here is the what the escalator cause would achieve is kind of what that is. So it's the the accelerated LMR as it stands in the the current planer. >> Thank you chair. Um I'd like to carry on a conversation that we started in the review earlier this afternoon on the southwest area plan and that's about transitions. So I think what I'm hearing and just looking for validation of my understanding the exclusion of escalation in LMR would disappear with the introduction for LMR within the southwest area or presume the southeast area as of the adoption of those plans. and for areas outside of them until such time as as you indicated in here perhaps with the 2028 comprehensive plan review. If uh in any other dis area um including those already with an area plan, if there is an LMR, the escalator clause would remain effective until that future change in those and possible designation. >> That's correct. >> That'd be correct. >> Okay. I I'm just thinking forward to an impending opportunity for me to enjoy certain amount of controversy again. I mean, we did we did talk about this. We talked about this quite extensively internally. Um, and landed on a phased approach for a couple of reasons, acknowledging that it it doesn't resolve all of our concerns right away. Um, and it, you know, it will make for some interesting conversations that the DRPI team will have with applicants, too. You know, how old is your area plan? But the the main reason why we didn't want to get rid of it right away is a we heard your concerns that in areas of the city where we haven't gone through an exercise of applying MR1, we didn't want to remove that potential. Um and we we totally understand that we can't remap the whole city today. So I think >> well I would I would think it would take a lot I mean as we saw in this review earlier today on the southwest airplane there was obviously a great deal of thought uh that went into designating those couple of MR1 suggestions and to do that for the whole city I think would be pretty dramatic effort but thank you. Thank you chair. >> Thanks Commissioner Solen. >> Thanks um just following up on the commercial and employment section that you discussed. So I think what I'm hearing is that those areas will be further evaluated. Anything that seems like it would be reasonable to have residential would be a mixeduse category and therefore those that remain really are best to not have residential and the language in the corresponding zoning. Okay, that is a has been a concern of mine of just wanting to remove any ambiguity for, you know, someone that may be looking at parcels that are commercial and just having real clarity of what to expect in terms of our review. Yeah, it's a really important element and I think when we start to think about how we'll implement that on the zoning code side, um we'll need to look at we we were talking about this a little bit earlier with the alders um about the area plans too, but we'll need to look at the districts that first of all I think the districts that already apply to areas of the city that are recommended for commercial or general employment in the future because we may find that there's a wide wide range of districts that actually apply today. And so some of this could come from making map changes. Um, but some of it then could come from, okay, so the districts that are mapped in those areas, what are the things that are allowed in each of them? And do we want to kind of make some very specific changes to those? The question that came up this afternoon was, is that for all residential uses, right? like community- based residential situations, emergency housing situations, kind of asking some of those questions and we'll need to get into that at the individual zoning district level. Um I think there could be a world where you know we have another zoning district um as much as we don't like to say that um just to help us implement this. >> Field, >> thank you. um on the proposal for a new lowmedium residential category. I think that that is a great move and I I appreciate all the thought that went into it, but I think the the middle ground of one fewer story, slightly less density, but the building forms that seem to be the reason, the driving factor for the higher category makes a lot of sense. So I appreciate that and also that it can add some of the certainty that we were missing in that we are missing under current rules for some of the more important long-term capacity planning. >> All right. Well, thank you for the questions and the feedback. Um, again, stay tuned for the area plans coming out next week. Um, and we look forward to, uh, I think we actually have it on our radar to bring the area plan presentations to you at your December meeting, one of your December meetings. So, >> would that include a draft map? >> Yes. So, the draft uh, future land use maps will be shared at the meetings next week and will be available online publicly next week. Um, and then we'll discuss both of those things with you in December. Is there a day next week? >> Yes. The um Southeast Area Plan is having uh two meetings next week. They're having um an in-person public meeting on Tuesday at 6:00 p.m. at Bri. There's also a noon virtual option that same day, and then they'll have a virtual meeting on November 4th. For Southwest, they will be having a an in-person public meeting on Thursday the 23rd in the evening at Chavez Elementary, and then they have virtual meetings um on October 29th and 30th. >> Great. Um does anyone have any member announcements, communications, or business items to share? All right. Hearing hearing none. Megan, you have time for a secretar's report. Although you also have time Monday for secretar's report. >> Yes, I don't need to belabor it. I was planning to share the area plan meetings with you. So, >> all right. Very good. >> We'll see you next Monday. >> All right. Um and there there is uh as always a list of kind of a reminder of the upcoming items um for the next couple meetings. So, um would anyone like to move to adjourn? >> So, moved. >> Thanks. Thank you. Thank you. Uh, thank you. >> Opposition to that motion hearing. None. We'll stand adjourned. >> Sure. We can email you. >> Yeah. >> Something really. >> I'm wearing all kinds of things. I didn't know what a podium >> but according to Google it's >> I don't have the whole time I wanted to be like I can't design anything.