[00:00:06]
>> ALL RIGHT I AM CALLING TO ORDER THE JULY 11TH.
2022 LAND USE AND SPECIAL STUDIES COMMITTEE MEETING.
WE DO HAVE A QUORUM OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS.
[a. Resolution CC-04-18-22-01]
THE ONLY THING ON OUR AGENDA THIS EVENING IS RESOLUTION CC-04-18-22-01. A RESOLUTION OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARMEL, INDIANA, ADOPTING THE CARMEL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.THIS IS A CONTINUATION OF THE ITEM WE STARTED LAST MONTH. WE WILL START WITH SECTION 4 STREETSCAPE FACILITIES. FINISH THE OVERALL REVIEW OF THE PLAN, AND THEN WE'LL GO BACK TO SECTION 1 AND ADRIAN WILL GIVE A REVIEW OF EACH SECTION AND THAT'S WHERE WE WILL DISCUSS IN PROPOSED CHANGES OR ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS. WITH THAT I WILL TURN IT
FOR THE RECORD, ADRIAN KEALING WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY SERVICES. WE ARE PICKING UP ON SECTION 4 WHICH IS THE STREETSCAPE FACILITIES.
ANYONE WATCHING AT HOME IF YOU HAVEN'T FOUND IT YET THE CARMEL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PROPOSED DRAFT CAN BE FOUND AT CARMELCOMPREHEN CARMELCOMPREHENSIVEPLAN.COM.
I WILL SWITCH TO THE PDF SINCE THEN IS WHAT WE ARE REVIEWING SO FAR. I'M THE DOCUMENT THAT SHOWS THE AND NOTATION WITH THE CARMEL PLANNING NOTES, THE RESULTS OF THOSE MEETING. THE STREETSCAPE FACILITIES SECTION INCLUDES THE BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN PLAN.
IT RECOMMENDS AND PROVIDES A MENU OF INTERCHANGEABLE STREET SIDE COMPONENTS THAT MAY BE UTILIZED TO COMPLIMENT THE STREET TYPEOOLOGIES.
THIS IS BASED ON THE SURROUNDING CONTEXT OF EACH OF THE STREETS. IN TECHION -- SECTION FOUR WE DIVIDED INTO TWO GENERAL CATEGORIES.
THERE'S OFF STREET FACILITIES AND CURBSIDE FACILITIES. THERE ARE SOME DUPLICATIONS OF THINGS THAT COULD GO IN EITHER CATEGORY.
BUT THE MAIN DIFFERENCE IS THE OFF STREET FACILITIES ARE THINGS LOCATED MIND THE CURB LINE.
AND THE CURBSIDE FACILITIES ARE FACILITIES THAT WOULD BE LOCATED WITHIN THE CURB LINES.
BEHIND THE CURB, YOU GENERALLY FIND THINGS LIKE SIDEWALK, MULTIUSE PATHS. STORMWATER PLANTERS, CURB -- WITHIN THE CURB LINE, YOU COULD FIND BICYCLE PARKING, YOU COULD OBVIOUSLY FIND ON STREET PARKING, BUT ALSO DELIVERY OF PICK UP AREAS.
MOBILITY LINES CYCLE TRACKS SUCH AS WE HAVE ON RANGE LINE AND THOSE ARE THE THINGS NEAREST THE STREET TRAVEL LANES. THAT'S THE BASIC SEPARATION BETWEEN THE TWO TYPES OF STREETSCAPES FACILITIES.
ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT TO BEGIN WITH?
>> OKAY. I WILL START WITH THE OFF STREET FACILITIES. THIS GRAPHIC SHOWS A RANGE OF THE DIFFERENT OPTIONS RANGING FROM RESIDENTIAL SIDEWALK, COMMERCIAL SIDEWALK, MULTIUSE PATHS, ENHANCE MULTIUSE PATHS IN AREAS THAT MIGHT REQUIRE A LITTLE WIDER CROSS SECTION. AND THEN THERE'S THE POSSIBILITY FOR BICYCLE PARKING, THAT COULD ALSO OCCUR WITHIN THE CURB LINES IN CERTAIN AREAS.
BUT THOSE ARE GENERALLY MIND THE CURB OFF STREET AND THEN STORMWATER FACILITIES SUCH AS STORMWATER PLANTERS OR BIOSWALES. IN THIS PLAN WE'VE TRIED TO BE TO WIDEN THE RANGE OF THINGS THAT ALL RIGHT OCCUR WITHIN THE STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY.
BUT STREETS CONVEY A LOT OF STORMWATER GENERALLY.
WE WANTED TO BE REALISTIC ABOUT STORMWATER BEING A
[00:05:04]
PART OF STREETSCAPE DESIGN. AS WELL AS BICYCLE PARKING AND SIDEWALKS AND THE OTHER THINGS THAT WE ALREADY TYPICALLY SEE. AND THEN FOLLOWING ALONG THE NEXT PAGES THIS IS A SUMMARY OF THE DIFFERENT -- DIFFERENT STREETSCAPE TYPES THAT WHERE IN THE PREVIOUS GRAPHIC, BUT WITH A LITTLE MORE INFORMATION SUCH AS RECOMMENDED POLICIES LIGHTING, LANDSCAPING AND THAT SORT OF THING.THERE WAS -- THIS GOES ACROSS TWO PAGES AND ONE OF THE DISCUSSION ITEMS FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION WAS THERE WAS PREVIOUS MENTION OF HOA'S AND RESIDENTS BEING RESPONSIBLE FOR SIDEWALKS SNOW CLEARANCE BUT WE DECIDED THAT WE WOULD LEAVE IT SIMPLY AS RESIDENT IS RESPONSIBLE FOR SNOW CLEARANCE.
IT'S NOT ALWAYS CONSISTENT WHEN THERE'S AN HOA INVOLVED OR WHETHER IT'S THEIR RESPONSIBILITY OR NOT TO CLEAR THE SNOW. THAT WAS ONE CHANGE THAT WE MADE IN THIS TABLE FOR OFF STREET FACILITIES.
I SHOULD SAY ALL OF THESE, THIS SECTION ENDS WITH A MAP THAT, THAT LOCATES SOME OF THESE THINGS.
AND WE'LL GET TO THAT. SIMILAR TO THE DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS THERE ARE CHARACTERISTICS OF DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS THAT GO ALONG WITH THE MAP.
SAME WITH STREET TYPOLOGIES AND THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN MAP. THERE'S A MAP THAT GOES ALONG WITH THIS SECTION AS WELL.
IF IT'S OKAY TO MOVE ALONG TO THE CURBSIDE FACILITIES, AGAIN THESE ARE THE THINGS THAT MIGHT APPEAR WITHIN THE CURB LINE AND WE'VE GOT MOBILITY LANE, CYCLE TRACK, THESE ARE BASICALLY ARE THE SAME THING PROTECTED BIKE LANE OF SORTS. BUT IT'S GENERALLY CALLED A CYCLE TRACK WHEN IT'S TWO WAY IN THE SAME -- IN THE SAME SPACE VERSES ONE DIRECTION.
AND THEN ON STREET PARKING AND THEN BICYCLE/SCOOTER PARKING THAT MIGHT OCCUR WITHIN THE CURB LINE.
THERE WERE TO THE MOBILITY LANE AND CYCLE TRACK, DURING THE PLANNING COMMISSION DISCUSSION WE ADDED THE PHRASE AND OTHER FORMS OF MICRO MOBILITY SO WE COULD BE GENERAL IN TERMS OF THINGS THAT WE MIGHT NOT EVEN TECHNOLOGIES OR DEVICES OR THINGS OR TYPES OF WHEELS THAT WE MAY NOT KNOW ABOUT YET.
AND THEN THERE ARE ADDITIONAL CURBSIDE FACILITIES SUCH AS BUS STOPS, DELIVERY PICK UP AND LOADING ZONE. CURB EXTENSIONS AND PARKLETS. THESE ARE AGAIN I MENTIONED WE'RE TRYING TO BE MORE INCLUSIVE WHEN IT COMES TO THINGS THAT COULD OCCUR WITHIN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY.
I THINK I'VE MENTIONED SEVERAL TIMES THE DELIVERY AND PICKUP LOADING ZONES YOU KNOW 20 YEARS AGO WE JUST TALKED ABOUT COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENTS HAVING TRUCKLOADING ZONE. NOW WE'VE GOT AMAZON DELIVERIES. UBER DRIVERS AND LYFT DRIVERS DROPPING PEOPLE OFF. WE HAVE A LOT MORE DELIVERY AND LOADING GOING ON AT THE CURB.
WE WANT TO BE REALISTIC AND INCLUDE THOSE IN DISCUSSIONS. SIMILAR TO WHAT IN THE LAST MEETING, I TALKED ABOUT THERE ARE CERTAIN TYPES OF FACILITIES ON THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN.
THE MAP ITSELF ONLY SHOWS CERTAIN TYPES, OF STREETS, SIMILAR TO THIS WE'RE NOT MAPPING ANY PICKUP AND DELIVERY ZONES OR CURB EXTENSIONS.
OR BUS STOPS. WE'RE JUST SIMPLY CREATING SOME STANDARDS AND GUIDANCE FOR WHERE THOSE THINGS MIGHT OCCUR. AND THEN SIMILAR TO THE OFF STREET FACILITIES, WE HAVE A SUMMARY TABLE AND THIS HIGHLIGHT SHOWS WHERE WE'VE ADDED THE PHRASE ABOUT OTHER
[00:10:01]
FORMS OF MICRO MOBILITY. BUT, AGAIN, IT ALSO HAS RECOMMENDED POLICIES REGARDING EACH OF THE TYPES OF CURBSIDE FACILITIES. AND THEN HERE ON THE SECOND PAGE, UNDER DELIVERY AND PICK UP ZONES IT PREVIOUSLY HAD SOME SPECIFICITY ON TIMES OF USE SINCE IT'S A RECOMMENDED POLICY AND WE KNOW WE HAVE CITY CODES THAT ADDRESS MORE SPECIFIC SITUATIONS, WE WENT MORE GENERAL WITH THE RECOMMENDED POLICY FOR PICK UP AND DELIVERY ZONES. AND THEN THIS THE TABLE JUST KEEPS GOING. THESE CURB EXTENSIONS AND PARKLETS. THIS IS THE MAP THAT GOES ALONG WITH SECTION FOUR. I WILL ZOOM IN TO MAKE IT EASIER TO READ. STARTING WITH THE LEGEND I MENTIONED WE HAVE REGIONAL TRAILS OR STATE-DESIGNATED TRAILS LISTED ON HERE. WE PUT THOSE TO KEEP THEM IN THE FOREFRONT OF OUR MIND WHEN DEVELOPMENTS COME THROUGH. WE LOOK AT THE MAPS TO MAKE SURE WE'RE NOT HINDERING ANYTHING.ON A MORE LOCAL LEVEL WE LISTED MULTIUSE PATH.
CYCLE TRACKS, GREENWAYS, AND SIDEWALKS.
AND THEN THERE'S SOME INSTANCES OF NEW TERRAIN SO TO SPEAK FOR EACH OF THOSE TYPES.
AS MENTIONED WE HAVEN'T PUT ANYTHING LIKE BUS STOPS OR PICK UP AND DELIVERY ZONES ON HERE.
THOSE ARE SPECIFIC DETAILS. REGARDING THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DISCUSSION WE -- ITS MOSTLY FOR THIS MAP, IT WAS FOR VISUAL INTEREST CREATING MORE CONTRAST TO MAKE THE PARKS SHOW UP IN A DARKER GREEN ADJUST WITH THE LEGEND, ADDED THE REGIONAL TRAILS TO THE LEGEND BECAUSE YOU CAN SEE THEM ON THE MAP BUT THE ICON THAT GOES NEXT TO THEM MIGHT NOT MEAN ANYTHING TO SOMEONE LOOKING AT IT UNLESS YOU ZOOM IN.
THAT'S THE MOBILITY AND PEDESTRIAN PLAN MAP.
THERE'S ONE MORE MAP THAT >> COUNCILOR GREEN HAS A
I DON'T KNOW ABOUT PEOPLE IN OTHER DISTRICTS.
JUST PEOPLE IN MY DISTRICT. THEY SEE THE RED LINE THERE AND THEY GET A LITTLE BIT QUEASY.
YOU HAVE GATED COMMUNITIES ALONG THAT CORRIDOR.
KIND OF HYPOTHETICALLY, HOW WOULD THAT EFFECT THE GATED
COMMUNITIES? >> YOU KNOW WHERE THERE'S NOT A LOT OF SPACE. THEY GOT WALLS, AND NOW
WE'RE GOING TO DO WHAT? >> THESE ROUTES REGIONAL ROUTES HAVE BEEN DESIGNATED BY THE STATE.
IF THESE WERE AREAS WHERE THERE WAS ALREADY GOOD CONNECTIVITY, THE PATH EXISTS THERE ALONG 106 STREET FOR INSTANCE, AND I KNOW THAT --
>> THERE'S DEFINITELY. I'M TALKING WEST OF SPRING
HILL. >> YOU KNOW, SPECIFICALLY MY DISTRICT BETWEEN TOWN ROAD AND SPRING MILL RIGHT THERE.
IS THERE YOU'RE SAYING THE STATE HAS ALREADY SAID
SOMETHING IS GOING IN HERE? >> THE STATE HAS ALREADY SIGNED IT AS A ROUTE. BUT THAT DOESN'T NECESSARILY -- THAT DOESN'T PRESCRIBE ANY WIDENING OR IMPROVEMENT. THAT'S JUST -- THERE ARE TWO DESIGNATED ROUTES REGIONALLY ACROSS -- THEY ARE MORE THAN THAT ACROSS THE STATE. TWO OF THEM THAT INTERSECT IN CARMEL. THE STATE HAS THE STATE FEEL IN DESIGNATING THESE THAT THE INFRASTRUCTURE IS ADEQUATE TO DESIGNATE THOSE. THIS DOESN'T PROVIDE ANY -- OR REQUIRE ANY ADDITIONAL WIDENING OR RIGHT-OF-WAY OR ANYTHING. BUT WE THOUGHT IT WAS A GOOD IDEA TO INCLUDE THEM ON THE MAP JUST SO WE'RE AWARE WHEN
[00:15:07]
IF THERE'S AN AREA WHERE THE INFRASTRUCTURE IS LACKING, THAT MIGHT BE A PRIORITY TO GET THE PATH IN TO MAKE THOSE CONNECTIONS. THIS DESIGNATION DOES NOT INDICATE ANY WIDENING OR ADDITIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE.>> I JUST -- I KNOW, YOU KNOW, THIS IS ONLY GUIDELINES AND MEANS VERY LITTLE.
BUT THE IDEA IS THE CITY COUNCIL WILL VOTE ON THIS AND IT'S KIND OF AN EXPRESS INTENT ON WHAT WE PLAN ON DOING. AND I KNOW THERE'S GOING TO PEOPLE ALONG THAT CORRIDOR SAYING COUNCIL YOU VOTED BECAUSE YOU EXPRESSED THAT YOU HAVE THE INTENT ON FILLING IN THE RED LINES. THAT MEANS SOMETHING -- SOMEONE HAS TO TAKE SOMETHING.
YOU KNOW, IN ORDER TO MOVE THE WALL FROM WHETHER IT'S WHOEVER IT IS. WHETHER SUMMERLAKES OR LAURLRIDGE. THEY PUT UP BARRIERS BECAUSE THERE'S SUCH A TIGHT PATH. IF YOU WILL TRY TO INCREASE THOSE, SOMEONE WILL HAVE TO LOSE SOME PROPERTY.
>> I THINK YOUR QUESTION MAY BE COULD BE THE SAME CASE IF THAT'S DESIGNATED FOR A MULTIUSE PATH.
THE INTENT WOULD BE TO HAVE MULTIUSE PATH.
IF THERE'S NOT SPACE FOR MULTIUSE PATH IN THE IDEAL CROSS SECTION THAT WE LIKE TO GET, THEN THOSE SITE SPECIFIC DESIGNS CAN BE ADAPTED TO THE CONDITIONS, UTILITIES WALLS, GRADING, WHATEVER IT IS FOR THAT MULTIUSE PATH. WHETHER OR NOT THIS REGIONAL TRAIL IS INDICATED ON THE MAP DOESN'T MEAN WE WILL REQUIRE MORE THAN WHAT WE WOULD REQUIRE OF ANOTHER
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR. THE QUESTION ABOUT THE MOBILITY LANE AND CYCLE TRACKS.
FIRST OFF, JUST -- I HAVE TO QUESTION TO CLARIFY BEFORE HAND. THOSE DON'T HAVE TO BE PROTECTED. I KNOW IN THE ILLUSTRATION YOU HAVE PROTECTED LANE OR CYCLE PATH BUT THAT DESIGNATION WHEN YOU HAVE THAT BROWN DOTTED LINE, DOES THAT REFER TO ANY TYPE OF BIKE LANE WHETHER PROTECTED
DESCRIPTION HERE. >> IT SAYS THERE RECOMMENDED
IT'S RECOMMENDED TO BE PROTECTED FOR EITHER.
WE FOUND OVER YOU KNOW SINCE BICYCLE LANES HAVE BEEN MORE AND MORE PREVALENT OVER THE 10 TO 20 YEARS? . YOU GET MORE ACTIVE PARTICIPATION IF THERE'S SOME TYPE OF PARTICIPATION RATHER THAN THE PAINTED LINE ON THE STREET.
>> OKAY. THAT LEADS ME TO A QUESTION THERE. WE HAVE THE -- I WILL CALL IT AN EXPERIMENT WITH THE PROTECTIVE LANES.
AND I THINK SOME OF US HAVE MAYBE SEEN THE RESULTS ARE MIXED BECAUSE THAT BRINGS IT UP YOU HAVE PROPOSE PROTECTED LANES THROUGHOUT THE CITY.
WHERE YOU HAVE MULTIUSE PATH AND THE LANE NEXT TO IT, AS I UNDERSTAND, THERE'S THREE TYPES OF CYCLIST THAT WILL BE USING THE ROADS. YOU HAVE THOSE WHO FEEL COMFORTABLE USING PATHS. THOSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO USE PROT PROTECTIVE LANE.
THOSE IN WANT TO RIDE IN THE MIDDLE OF THE STREET WHICH THEY ARE ALLOWED TO DO BY STATE LAW.
WE SEE ON RANGELINE THERE'S MANY CYCLIST, SAY, WHO ARE VERY ACTIVE WHO FORGO AND THE PROTECTED LANE TO USE THE SINGLE LANE AND RANGE LINE ROAD WHICH THEY ARE ALLOWED TO BY LAW. WHAT NUMBER OF USERS ARE WANTING THIS PROTECTIVE LANE? SOMETIMES JUST MY ANECDOTAL WE'RE IN THE PATH OR RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE STREET. THAT LANE THAT USER ISN'T AS
PLENTIFUL AS THE OTHER TWO? >> I DON'T KNOW THAT WE -- I
[00:20:01]
HAVEN'T SEEN ANY COUNTS OR IF WE'VE DONE COUNT ON THAT PARTICULAR CYCLE TRACK. IT MIGHT BE BEING USED MORE NOW WITH THE MONAN CONSTRUCTION.KEEP IN MIND THE MONAN IS CLOSE BY AND PARALLEL.
IT'S AND RUNS FOR A LONGER STRETCH OF CONNECTIVITY THERE. IT MAY BE THAT CYCLE TRACK BEING SO CLOSE TO THE MONAN MIGHT GET LESS USE THAN OTHERS BUT I DON'T -- TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION OVERALL. I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S A NUMBER THAT WE'RE TARGETING OR PROPOSING FOR ANY TYPE OF USER. WE JUST WANT TO PROVIDE
B, IT'S NOT FULLY CONNECTED OR HASN'T BEEN FULLY CONNECTED WHICH WOULD CHANGE THE RIDERSHIP.
I THINK TO YOUR QUESTION WHICH RIDERS -- IF YOU LOOK AT WHO USES IT TODAY. I THINK IT'S PROBABLY THE B AND THE C RIDERS. RIDERS THAT ARE TRYING TO GET COMFORTABLE WITH RIDING IN CARMEL OR PARENTS WITH KIDS WHEREAS THE A RIDERS THAT YOU KNOW, USE THE STREET. THEY PROBABLY RIDE IT TOO.
FOR MYSELF, IT'S KIND OF AWKWARD IF YOU ARE GOING SOUTHBOUND ON RANGE LINE TO GET INTO THAT -- INTO THAT LANE -- I MEAN WITHOUT DOING THE CROSSWALKS AND THE ROUNDABOUT. IT DOESN'T WORK FOR MY STYLE. GOING NORTH BOUND IT WORK JUST AS EASILY, YOU GET IN AND OUT OF IT EASILY ENOUGH WHERE YOU KNOW AND IT'S NICE TO HAVE A PROTECTED LANE.
THE INDUSTRY STANDARD IS PROTECTED TODAY.
FOR NOSE B AND C RIDERS, IF IT'S NOT PROTECTED, THEY ARE NOT GOING TO USE IT. THEY ARE RIDING IN THE STREET JUST HAPPENS TO BE A GREEN PAINTED LANE.
NOT A PROTECTED LANE. NOT ALL VEHICLES RESPECT THAT. AND VEHICLES PARK IN IT.
LOADING AND UNLOADING OCCURS IN THE BIKE LANE BECAUSE IT'S OUT OF THE VEHICLE LANE.
WE NEVER DONE A COUNT, THOUGH ON THIS TO SEE HOW MANY USERS WE GET ON WHAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE?
>> NOT THAT I KNOW OF. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?
>> I WAS GOING TO SAY SOME EVIDENCE THAT IT DIDN'T WORK AS WELL AS WE WOULD HAVE LIKED IT.
IT'S A MULTIUSE PATHWAY. IT'S NOT THAT SAME SORT OF DIVIDED PROTECTED PIPELINE. I LOVE HAVING A DESIGN DIMENSION FOR THE PARK THAT'S IN HERE.
I HAVE A MEDIA TRACKER FOR CARMEL.
IT PICKS UP THAT OTHER CARMEL.
AND IT HAS BATTLES WITH PARKLETS FOR A LONG WHILE.
IT'S BEEN KIND OF COMECAL TO READ.
IF SOMEONE WANTED TO PUT A PARKLET OUT IN FRONT OF A BUSINESS -- IF SOMEONE WANTED TO PUT SOMETHING OUT THERE DO WE HAVE A PROCESS IN PLACE NOW? IF THEY WANTED TO DO A TEMPORARY ONE FOR FALL.
PATIO SEATING OR SUMMER DINING?
>> I DON'T KNOW THAT WE HAVE SOMETHING SPECIFIC FOR THAT.
SINCE IT'S IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY IT WOULD BE BPW AND ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT DISCUSSION FOR SURE.
>> WE'RE ADJUSTING OUR POLICIES TO ADDRESS THAT.
DURING COVID WE LET A LOT OF THINGS GO.
THE RESULTS WERE MORE EXPERIMENTAL.
WE REALLY DO FEEL LIKE WE NEED TO TIGHTEN THAT UP.
IT WILL BE AN ONLINE APPLICATION AS PART OF THE TEMPORARY USE. BUT THEY WILL BE REVIEW.
ADLS FEE AND REVIEW. IF IT'S IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY, IT WILL ALSO HAVE TO GO THROUGH BOARD OF WORKS.
WE FEEL LIKE THE AESTHETICS PART OF IT REALLY NEED TO BE ADDRESSED. WE'RE ALMOST THERE.
>> CAN YOU SEND THAT AROUND WHEN YOU GET IT?
[00:25:04]
I WOULD LOVE TO SEE IT. THERE'S A DIFFERENT OF THE TEMPORARY PIECE. THEY USE PUBLIC FACILITIESVERSES I WANT TO BUILD ONE. >> SPECIALIZED.
IS MUCH MORE SPECIALIZED THAN JUST THE NORMAL
TEMPORARY USE. >> THAT'S GREAT.
THANK YOU FOR THAT. >> ANYONE ELSE?
THIS OTHER MAP ASSOCIATED WITH THIS SECTION IS STRAIGHT TRANSFERRED STRAIT FROM THE EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THE BICYCLE PEDESTRIAN LOOP MAP.
THIS IS UPDATED GRAPHICALLY TO FIT IN WITH THIS FORMAT.
WE ADJUSTED THE PARKS COLORS FOR VISIBILITY.
BUT IF YOU -- THIS WAS THE BEGINNING OF WHAT WE KNOW AS THE CARMEL ACCESS BIKE WAY. YOU'VE SEEN THE SIGNS AND THE VARIOUS LOOPS AROUND TOWN WITH LOW STRESS RESIDENTIAL STREET DIRECTIONS FOR FOLKS WHO WANT TO TAKE A RIDE AROUND THE CITY.
THIS TRANSFERS STRAIGHT FROM THE C-3 PLAN.
AND THAT'S IT FOR SECTION 4. >> ADRIAN, IF YOU COULD JUST BACK UP FOR A SECOND. YOU WERE JUST TALKING ABOUT THE NEIGHBORHOODS BEING INCORPORATED IN THE LOOP.
I REMEMBER SOMEONE AT PLAN COMMISSION I BELIEVE PLAN COMMISSION SPOKE OUT AGAINST THE NEED FOR A BICYCLING IN NEIGHBORHOODS. I LOVE TO RIDE THROUGH OUR NEIGHBORHOODS. IS THAT INCORPORATING THE NEIGHBORHOODS IN THIS LOOP? IS THAT WHAT YOU WERE
SAYING? >> THESE LOOPS ARE ALREADY HAVE SIGNAGE AND IN SOME CASES, THEY HAVE EMBLEMS IN THE ASPHALT -- YOU'VE SEEN DIFFERENT COLORS OF ARROWS THOUGHING WHICH DIRECTION. THOSE ARE ALREADY INCORPORATED IN ALL OF THESE LOOP INSTANCES.
WE ARE MOVING ON TO 5. >>> SECTION 5 IS SIMPLY A PLACE HOLDER FOR SUBAREA PLANS.
THERE ARE SEVERAL IN THE EXISTING C-3 PLAN AND WE'RE NOT PROPOSING TO CHANGE THOSE AS PART OF THIS PROCESS. BUT WE IN TERMS OF BUILDING THE DOCUMENT AND THE WEB SITE, WE WANTED TO ALLOW A PLACE FOR THOSE TO COME THROUGH.
>> ALL RIGHT. WE'LL GO BACK TO SECTION ONE. IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FOR THAT PARTICULAR SECTION, THAT WILL BE THE
TIME TO DISCUSS. >> SECTION 1 IS POLICY GOALS AND OBJECTIVES. THIS -- THERE ARE 8 DIFFERENT POLICY GOALS AND OBJECTIVES, MANY OF WHICH ALL BUT ONE TRANSFERRED DIRECTLY OVER THE POLICY GOALS CAME FROM THE C-3 PLAN.
THE ONE NEW ONE WAS -- IS THE MOBILITY -- WHAT'S IT? IMPROVEMENT MOBILITY OPTIONS AND FUNCTIONALITY.
THAT ONE IS A NEW ONE. CERTAINLY THE OBJECTIVES AMONG ALL OF THESE HAVE BEEN WITH REFRESHED AND REVISED BASED ON ALL OF THE CHANGES THAT HAVE TAKEN PLACE SINCE THE BEGINNING OF THE DRAFTING OF THE C-3 PLAN IN 2006 AND THROUGH ITS ADOPTION IN 2009.
WE'VE GOT MORE THAN A DECADE UNDER OUR BELTS WITH EXPERIENCE OF DEVELOPMENT AND HOW THINGS HAVE CHANGED BOTH IN CARMEL AND IN THE WORLD, REALLY.
TECHNOLOGY AND SORTS. I WILL START WITH -- I WILL
[00:30:04]
JUST DO A VERY BRIEF TOUCH ON EACH OF THE SECTION, EACH OF THE EIGHT SECTIONS AND THEN THERE WERE FOR THE LAST MEETING, THERE WERE A FEW THINGS THAT WERE DISCUSSED AMONG EACH OF THOSE. AND I CAN TOUCH ON THOSE AS WELL. MANAGE COMMUNITY FORUM.THAT -- THIS POLICY GOAL IS POINTS OUT HOW WE SHAPE THE BE BUILT SNIECHLT IN TERMS OF NEIGHBORHOOD IDENTITY AND UNIQUE DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS AND TOUCHES ON CONNECTIVITY OF NEIGHBORHOODS. SHAPING THE EDGES OF THE DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS, AS WELL AS THE BUILDING ARCHITECTURE AND AESTHETICS IN PUBLIC SPACES.
WE -- IN THE LAST MEETING THERE WERE I DON'T BELIEVE THERE WERE ANY SUGGESTED CHANGES.
ALTHOUGH THERE WERE A COUPLE OF CHANGES -- OR A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS REGARDING HOW WE PLAN TO ENGAGE STAKEHOLDERS AND EDUCATE STAKEHOLDERS, AND I THINK THAT WAS IT.
THAT WAS IT FOR 1.1. THIS OBJECTIVE CROSSES A COUPLE OF PAGES. MADAM CHAIR?
>> JUST FOR FUN, BECAUSE IT WILL COME UP AT SOME POINT IN TIME. WE TALKED ABOUT AN E-MAIL WE GOT FROM AN CONSTITUENT. WE CAME UP WITH FOUR OR FIVE POINTS. CAN WE BOUNCE THROUGH THE
POINTS THAT WE TALKED ABOUT? >> YES.
I THINK -- >> THEY ARE NOT ALL HERE.
WE MIGHT AS WELL KNOCK IT OUT.
IT'S THE ONE E-MAIL. THERE WERE THERE WERE SEVERAL QUESTIONS BUT I WILL TRY TO ADDRESS THEM A FEW OF THEM TOGETHER. THERE'S A QUESTION ABOUT RECURRING THEME ABOUT HOW WE MAY BE INFRINGING UPON SINGLE FAMILY, THE LIFESTYLE AND THE DESIRES OF SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTS AND YOU KNOW, THAT -- THAT'S NOT THE INTENT. WE HAVE A LOT OF SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTS IN CARMEL. SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES.
IN FACT, MORE THAN 70% OF OUR LAND IN CARMEL THAT THE ZONED IS ZONED STRICTLY FOR A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES.
WE DON'T TAKE THAT LIGHTLY. THERE'S LOTS OF DIFFERENT TYPES OF SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES, AND WE UNDERSTAND THAT SOME OF THE CONFLICTS MAY BE AT SOME OF THE EDGES OF THOSE AREAS. BUT THERE'S WE HAVE NO INTENTION OR -- THIS PLAN DOESN'T -- IS NOT INTENDED TO INFRINGE UPON OR GET RID OF SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES AS THE WHOLE. THAT'S -- THAT'S A HOUSING TYPE THAT EXISTS AND WILL CONTINUE TO EXIST.
AND WE WILL DEVELOP ADDITIONAL SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES. WE'RE TRYING TO MANAGE AS BEST WE CAN THE EDGES OF THOSE AREAS.
AND THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF DISCUSSION OF THAT IN THE PLAN TO HELP ADDRESS WHAT HAPPENS AT THE EDGES.
THE MOST DISCUSSION WAS IF CORRIDOR DISCUSSIONS.
THOSE ARE FOUND ON THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN MAP.
OR THE DEVELOPMENT PATTERN MAP.
AND IN THE DEVELOPMENT PATTERN SECTION AND THROUGHOUT THE DISCUSSION WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION WE REMOVED SEVERAL PROPOSED TYPICAL CORRIDORS, WHICH TO
[00:35:03]
RECAP WHAT THOSE -- THOSE ARE INTENDED -- LET ME SHOW THE MAP. TO BE CONTEXT SENSITIVE -- THERE WE GO. THESE ARE THE ORANGE DOTS.THEY RECOGNIZE THEY WERE AT AN EDGE.
THERE'S SOME KIND OF INTENSITY OR CONDITION THAT MAY WARRANT A LITTLE BIT OF A DIFFERENT THINKING.
146TH STREET IS AN EXAMPLE. IT'S NO LONGER A RURAL TWO-LANE STREET, COUNTRY ROAD, THAT IT ONCE WAS WHEN PART OF THE MILE SQUARE GRID AND BEFORE IT CROSSED 31.
THE COUNTY IS CONTINUING TO WIDEN THE STREET.
SIMPLY HAVING NEW SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES THERE MIGHT NOT BE -- MIGHT NOT BE THE DESIRABLE DEVELOPMENT FOR SOMEONE THAT'S THAT MAY WANT TO DEVELOP RIGHT ALONG THAT STREET. BUT MAIN STREET IS ANOTHER EXAMPLE BETWEEN OLD MERIDIAN AND KEYSTONE.
THERE'S A COUPLE OF NORTH-SOUTH CORRIDORS ALONG COLLEGE AVENUE AND PENNSYLVANIA PARKWAY.
BUT THOSE ARE INTENDED TO BE CONTEXT SENSITIVE.
IT'S BASED VERY MUCH ON WHAT IS ADJACENT TO IT.
IT IT ALLOWS MORE FLEXIBILITY IN TERMS OF WHAT COULD GO WITHIN THE CORRIDOR TO ALLEVIATE SOME OF THOSE CONDITIONS AND PROVIDE FLEXIBILITY AND TRANSITION. THAT WAS ONE OF THE MOST DISCUSSED ITEMS AT THE THE WAY TO HELP IDENTIFY THE EDGES AND ADDRESS THE CONTEXT OF THOSE EDGES.
THERE WERE OTHER QUESTIONS REGARDING YOU KNOW REQUIRING SUBDIVISION OR NEIGHBORHOOD AMENITIES, THAT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE REQUIRED NECESSARILY IN TERMS OF WHAT THE SPECIFIC AMENITIES HAVE BEEN.
BECAUSE EACH TYPE OF NEIGHBORHOOD YOU KNOW, USED 20 YEARS AGO THERE MIGHT BE A POOL AND TENNIS COURT INCLUDED WITH THE SUBDIVISION.
AND THAT'S WHAT THE DEVELOPERS MARKET SEEM TO DESIRE. BUT YOU KNOW NOW WE'RE BUILDING TOWN HOMES, WE MIGHT BE BUILDING SMALLER LOTS. WE'RE BUILDING RESIDENTIAL OPTIONS NEAR THE MONAN. A LOT OF THOSE AMENITIES ARE KIND OF BUILT IN INTO THE LOCATION OF THE AREA RATHER THAN OUT FURTHER WHERE THERE MIGHT NOT BE AS MANY CITY AMENITIES NEARBY. WE NEVER REGULATED WHICH TYPES OF AMENITIES. WE DO HAVE OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS IN OUR UDO. AND WE WILL CONTINUE TO HAVE OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS. WE'LL KEEP TRYING TO PUSH FOR AMENITIES THAT MIGHT NOT BE THE TYPICAL OR THE SWIMMING POOL OR SOME OF THE THINGS THAT NEIGHBORHOODS HAVE DESIRED IN THE PAST. THERE'S A QUESTION ABOUT REDUCING LIGHT -- RIGHT ADJACENT TO RESIDENTIAL.
WE TALKED A LOT DURING THIS PROCESS ABOUT THE DIFFERENT BETWEEN A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN BEING A GENERAL GUIDE AND SETTING POLICY RATHER THAN A REGULATORY DOCUMENT SUCH AS THE UDO, BY THE ZONING ORDINANCE.
[00:40:01]
THERE ARE SEVERAL UDO DISTRICTS THAT DO REQUIRE THE BUILDING HEIGHT TO BE REDUCED NEXT TO RESIDENTIAL.WE FEEL LIKE THAT'S -- THOSE SPECIFICS ARE BETTER SUITED
AN ORDINANCE SITUATION. >> MADAM CHAIR, REAL QUICK IF I CAN INTERRUPT. ONE TOPIC THAT KEPT GETTING REPEATED IN THE E-MAIL HOW TO PROTECT THE CITIZENS FROM SOMETHING. AND YOU JUST MADE THAT POINT. THIS IS NOT ZONING.
THIS IS A WIDE REACHING DOCUMENT.
ZONING IS WHERE THE SPECIFIC -- WHAT THEY ARE ASKING FOR IS PROTECTIONS COMES FROM.
THAT'S NOT THE LIFE OF THE DOCUMENT.
>> FINALLY DENSITY IS NOT MENTIONED IN THIS DOCUMENT.
WE DON'T FEEL LIKE DENSITY, WHILE IT'S A -- IT'S MATH EQUATION, UNITS PER ACRE. THAT DOESN'T NECESSARILY INDICATE WHAT THE CHARACTER OF ANYTHING IS.
YOU CAN HAVE A TEN-ACRE LOT WITH TEN HOMES ON IT BUT THAT DOESN'T NECESSARILY MEAN THAT EACH HOME WILL HAVE ONE ACRE OF LAND. YOU CAN ALSO PUT TEN HOMES ON EIGHTH ACRE LOTS ON A SMALL PORTION OF A STREET BUT THE DENSITY IS THE SAME WHETHER IN TERMS OF UNITS PER ACRE. WE'VE TRIED TO FOCUS MORE ON THE CHARACTER DESCRIPTIONS -- I WILL JUST PICK -- I WILL JUST PICK ONE.
IT ADDRESSES THE STREETS AND THEN WHAT TYPES OF STREETSCAPE FACILITIES OPEN SPACES, PARKING AND GENERAL USE CATEGORIES. WE FEEL LIKE THAT DENSITY IN THE CONTEXT OF A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ISN'T DESCRIPTIVE. WE DO HAVE DENSITY STANDARDS IN THE UDO THAT HAVE THOSE MAXIMUMS.
DID I MISS ANYTHING? >> IS THAT ALL YOU WANT
>> COUNCILOR GREEN? >> FLIP TO PAGE 40 ON THERE.
>> WITH THE LITTLE CHART. THERE YOU GO.
TIEING A COUPLE OF THINGS TOGETHER.
THE LACK OF PROTECTION OR PERCEIVED PROTECTIONS YOU KNOW FOR FAMILY HOUSING, YOU KNOW, IT'S KIND OF YOU KNOW, CONCERN ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU SEE THE ESTATE SECTION THERE. IT'S AN ESTATE SECTION.
IT'S NOT JUST ON THE EDGES. IT'S THE DEFINITE PERCEPTION. AND PUD'S BEING APPROVED AND KIND OF BLOWING THROUGH WHATEVER THIS IS GUIDELINE PLAN THAT WE HAVE THAT HAS NO MEAN WHATSOEVER.
AND THE ZONING LAWS AND I THINK THAT'S WHAT THEIR CONCERN IS. EVEN IF WE PUT PROTECTIONS IN THERE HAS EVERYONE SAYING THIS MEANS NOTHING.
IT HAS NO LEGAL STANDING. IF YOU WANT TO TAKE IN.
I ALWAYS HATE WHEN THE CITY COUNCIL SPENDING LOTS OF HOURS ON SOMETHING THAT MEANS NOTHING.
I MEAN WE PASS LAWS OFTEN THAT WE ALL KNOW MEAN NOTHING. JUST POLITICAL STUFF.
WHY ARE WE SPENDING SO MUCH TIME ON APPROVING SOMETHING
THAT MEANS NOTHING? >> I WOULDN'T AGREE THAT IT MEANS NOTHING. BUT I ALSO D DON'T THINK THS IS THE DOCUMENT THAT IS INTENDED TO PROTECT.
IT'S CERTAINLY ISN'T INTENDED TO YOU KNOW DAMAGE -- THIS IS AN OFFENSE DOCUMENT.
ZONING IS MORE DEFENSE. THIS VISIONARY.
THIS IS WHERE WE WANT TO GO. THIS IS WHAT WE WANT TO SEE.
THERE'S T TONS OF RESIDENTIAL REINFORCEMENT IN THIS PLAN. IF YOU LOOK AT THE MAP IT'S ALL RESIDENTIAL. WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE GENERAL POLICIES THERE'S NOTHING THAT SAID LET'S TRANSFORM OUR NEIGHBORHOODS INTO MIXED USE DISTRICTS.
[00:45:02]
IT'S ALL VERY STRATEGICALLY PLOTTED ON HERE.THIS IS THE PLAN -- THIS IS ESSENTIALLY THE SAME PLAN.
IF YOU LOOK AT THE LAND USE MAP OF CARMEL FROM 1985, IT'S ESSENTIALLY THE SAME THING.
WHEN YOU THINK OF THE TAXES GENERATED FROM THE 31 CORRIDOR AND THE CENTRAL AREA I MEAN IT HELPS KEEP OUR RESIDENTIAL TAXES LOW. THIS IS DOING ALL THE RIGHT THINGS TO PROTECT OUR NEIGHBORHOODS.
I MEAN THERE'S ALWAYS GOING TO BE POINTS OF FRICTION WHERE ALONG A MAIN STREET WHERE THERE'S THE FORCES OF COMMERCIAL ARE TRYING TO ENCROACH.
THIS HELPS SET WHAT THE TONE FOR THAT IS AND WHEN THAT CAN OCCUR, BUT I MEAN IT'S -- WHICH IS VERY MEANINGFUL TO ME. AND HOPEFULLY IT'S A TOOL THAT YOU ALL CAN USE WHEN THOSE DECISIONS ARE ASKED TO BE MADE. WHEN THE ZONING ORDINANCE IS ASKED TO BE CHANGE. WHEN A PUD WHICH IS ALLOWED BY ZONING AND BY LAW, REACHES YOU.
I MEAN IT'S NOT MEANINGLESS. >> I KNOW.
BUT IT'S A STANDARD. THAT'S WHAT I'M GETTING AT.
IT'S A STANDARD. IT'S A STANDARD WHEN SOMEONE ELSE SAYS ITS MEANS NOTHING. IT'S STANDARD THAT'S SUPPOSED TO HOLD US ALL ACCOUNTABLE.
IN EIGHT OR NINE MONTHS WHEN PEOPLE START KNOCKING ON DOORS IN MY DISTRICT, AND THERE'S THREE AT-LARGE MEMBERS, I ASSUME WILL DO THAT.
THEY HAVE TO EXPLAIN WHAT THEY APPROVED AND HOW THEY HAVE BEEN ENACTING THIS. APPROVING POD'S.
YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT THREATENING FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AREAS. BUT IT'S SUDDENLY TAKING A ONE HOUSE PER ACRE AREA AND SAYING, ALL RIGHT, WE WILL PUT IN 30 TOWN HOMES IN 20 CONDOS.
THAT COULD BE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL.
BUT IT'S NOT FAMILY RESIDENTIAL IN THE ESTATES.
THAT'S WHAT CONCERNS ACROSS THE BOARD.
I CAN'T SPEAK FOR MILES' DISTRICT.
WHEN I HAD THAT PIECE. THEY WERE VERY AGAINST INCREASING DENSITY IN THAT SPECIFIC AREA.
THERE'S OTHER PLACES, YOU KNOW, THAT'S KIND OF THE CONCERN WHERE THEY BRING IN DENSITY AND YOU KNOW IT'S THE E-MAIL LIKE -- I'M NOT SURE IF I SAW THE E-MAIL OR RECENTLY. YOU KNOW, BUT IT'S MORE SYMPTOMIC. YOU KNOW ESPECIALLY IN THAT AREA ABOUT THE CONCERNS ABOUT DENSITY AND INCREASING DENSITY. YOU KNOW, IN THAT SPECIFIC
>> JUST REMIND IT'S ABOUT CHARACTER.
NOT DENSITY. >> IT'S ABOUT CHARACTER.
AND WE ALL KNOW WHAT WE LIKE IN THAT -- IN THE ESTATES AREA. AND IF A TOWN HOME PROJECT DOESN'T FIT THE CHARACTER, THEN THAT'S AN EASY ONE.
UNLESS IT GETS APPROVED BY THE COUNCIL.
THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE'VE DEALT IN COUNCILS BEFORE US.
YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD, I REMEMBER WHEN MY PARENTS BUILT IN THE EARLY 80S. THERE WAS NOTHING REALLY ON THE WEST SIDE. VERY FEW DEVELOPMENTS, PEOPLE THOUGHT WE WERE CRAZY.
WE LIVED ON THE EAST SIDE. THEY ACTED LIKE WE WERE PITCHING UP OUR HORSES TO WAGONS AND HEADING OUT TO THE WILD WEST. AND I THINK THE CITY HAS DONE A GOOD JOB OF KIND OF KEEPING THE CHARACTER, BUT YET, MY NEIGHBORHOOD IS JUST NORTH OF YOURS AND IT'S HIGH DENSITY NEIGHBORHOOD STILL FITS THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. IT BLENDS WITH IT.
THE COUNCIL HAS TO MAKE THOSE DECISIONS AS THEY COME TO US. COUNCILOR AASEN?
>> MAYBE BUILDING ON WHAT COUNCILOR GREEN WAS SAYING.
HE'S A LAWYER, BY THE WAY, THAT WE'RE SPEAKING OUT OF BOTH SIDES OF THE MOUTH WHEN HE SAY IN GUIDANCE DOCUMENT.
IT DOESN'T IMPACT ZONING, BUT IT DOES.
AND THE WAY IT IMPACTS IT, IT ENCOURAGES DEVELOPERS LOOKING AT THIS TO SAY THIS IS WHERE I WILL LOOK FOR A PUD. THIS IS WHERE I WILL LOOK FOR VARIANCE OR A REZONE. IT DOES TO SOME EXTENT DRIVE POLICY EVEN IF IT'S NOT A POLICY DOCUMENT.
I THINK THAT'S THE DISCOMFORT OF SOME PEOPLE WHO HAVE WRITTEN TO US AT LEAST SOME OF US ON COUNCIL AS WELL. I LIKE AND I WILL REMEMBER YOUR COMMENT. THIS AN OFFENSIVE DOCUMENT ZONING THE DEFENSIVE. WELL, WHAT'S THE DIFFERENT BETWEEN OFFENSIVE AND DEFENSIVE.
WE'RE MORE ON OFFENSE THAN DEFENSE WHEN WE LOOK AT THE VARIANCES AS WELL. I APPRECIATE SOME OF THE TYPICAL CORRIDORS WHICH ARE REALLY KIND OF LINED UP AS
[00:50:06]
BEING MIX -- HIGH DENSITY MIXED USE.WERE TAKEN OUT OF YOUR DISTRICT THROUGH THE ESTATES AREA. THEY STILL GO THROUGH THE HEART OF COLLEGE AND THEY ARE THE ENTIRE 146TH STREET CORRIDOR. AND I DO UNDERSTAND THAT 146TH STREET IS IN SOME TRANSITION BUT I DO NOT SUPPORT THAT WE NEED HIGH DENSITY ALL THE WAY ALONG IT FROM BOONE COUNTY TO THE WHITE RIVER.
I DO HAVE SOME CONCERNS WITH THE TYPICAL CORRIDOR DESIGNATION ALL THE WAY ACROSS 146TH STREET AND THROUGH HOME PLACE. UNDERSTANDING IT'S NOT A ZONING DOCUMENT. BUT IT GIVES THE GAME PLAN TO DEVELOPERS. THE LAST THING I WILL SAY AND AGAIN COUNCILOR GREEN HAS SAID THIS ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS. WHAT'S OUR TARGET DENSITY.
THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT WOULD SAY WE'RE FINE AT 100,000 OR 105,000. DO WE NEED MORE DENSITY? DO WE WANT IT. I THINK THE ARGUMENT IS WE NEED MORE TAX REVENUE IS RIDICULOUS.
WE DON'T NEED TO GROW FOR MORE TAX REVENUE.
I THINK WHAT IS NOT IN THIS DOCUMENT IS WHAT IS OUR TARGET GROWTH? IS IT 110? 150,000. IT CHANGES HOW THE POLICY IS ENACTED. AND THESE ARE MORE RHETORICAL QUESTIONS DIRECTOR.
AND I THINK THE OTHER IMPORTANT TAKE AWAY HERE IS THIS IS THE EXECUTIVE BODY OR AT LEAST THE GOVERNING BODY THAT DECIDES THE FIT AND THE BALANCE BETWEEN OFFENSE AND DEFENSE. THAT'S ANOTHER IMPORTANT POINT TO MAKE IS AS WE GO FORWARD THAT WE ARE I THINK PROBABLY DRIVES MORE THAN THE DOCUMENT.
WHO ARE THE PEOPLE UP HERE THAT MAKE THE OFFENSE VERSES DEFENSE DECISIONS. THANK YOU.
>> MADAM CHAIR? >> JUST TO COMMENT ON THAT A LITTLE BIT. I THINK I'M ONE OF THE PEOPLE THAT CAN. ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION I WAS A DRIVING FORCES OF THE CORRIDORS GOING AWAY.
JUST -- WHAT SOME OF THE THINGS YOU SAID IS PERFECT EXAMPLE OF WHY THEY SHOULD HAVE GONE AWAY.
THERE WASN'T A GOOD COMMUNICATION AND UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT WE VERY TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH WITH IT. ONE OF THEM THE DEFINITION DOESN'T CALL FOR HIGH DENSITY.
THAT'S NOT THE DEFINITION OF TYPICAL CORRIDOR.
IT'S MORE WHAT WE USED TO CALL SPECIAL STUDIES.
IT COULD BE ADAPTIVE. WHICH I DIDN'T AGREE WITH IT BEING ADAPTIVE THROUGH MAIN STREET ON THE EAST SIDE.
116TH ON THE WEST SIDE. 126TH ON THE EAST SIDE.
WE TOOK THOSE OUT. I ACTUALLY SAID AT PLANNING COMMISSION I'M NOT SURE COLLEGE WOULD SURVIVE COUNCIL. I'M NOT SURE IT'S NEEDED THERE EITHER. THAT WAS A PERFECT EXAMPLE SAYING THAT IT IS CALLING FOR HIGHER DENSITY.
THAT'S NOT THE DEFINITION. IS THAT NOT CORRECTS? THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS IT WENT AWAY.
THE LACK OF UNDERSTANDING AND COMMUNICATION TO THE PUBLIC. WE DIDN'T COME UP WITH A GOOD EXPLANATION FOR IT. I THINK THAT'S THE REASON IT GOT TAKEN OUT IN MOST PLACED.
THAT'S THE BEST EXPLANATION, YES.
>> COUNCILOR HANNA? >> COULD YOU GO TO PAGE 37 AND WALK THROUGH THE SPECIFIC CHARACTERISTICS.
HIGH DENSITY MAY NOT BE THE CORRECT TERM.
BUT IT'S HIGHER THAN ADJACENT.
IF YOU WERE JUST SORT OF WALK THROUGH THOSE.
>> THE PDF WAS GOING SLOW. I WILL GO TO THE WEB SITE VERSION THAT SEEMS TO BE WORKING NOW.
I WILL GO AHEAD AND READ IT. PRIMARY EAST WEST THAT CAN
[00:55:02]
PROVIDE DETECTIVE TO COMMUNITY ASSETS THROUGHOUT THE CITY. CORRIDORS BASED ON ADJACENT PATTERNS AND SERVE AS TRANSITIONS BETWEEN PLACES.THEY ALLOW EXPANDED HOUSING OPTION AND LIMITED COMMERCIAL AS LONG AS THEY ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE CHARACTER OF ADJACENT PATTERNS.
THE CHARACTERISTICS A LOT OF THESE ARE BASED ON THE AADJACENT PATTERN. TYPICAL BLOCK SIZE 1.8 TO 5 ACRES BASED ON THE DEVELOPMENT PATTERN.
THE TYPICAL LOT SIZE WHERE POSSIBLE AUTOMATIC LOT SPLITS FOR LOTS ALONG THE CORRIDOR IF THE RESULTING LOTS ARE CREATED WITHIN 20% OF THE TYPICAL LOT SIZE OF ADJACENT DEVELOPMENT PATTERN.
THIS GOES TO FLEXIBILITY 20% GREATER THAN ADJACENT DEVELOPMENT PATTERN AND LOT COVERAGE.
ONE STORY GREATER THAN THE ADJACENT DEVELOPMENT PATTERN AND MAXIMUM HEIGHT. THE BUILDING FRONTAGES ARE BASED ON THE DEVELOPMENT PATTERN PLUS STOREFRONTS AND GARDENS IF THAT FITS IN. ALL EXCEPT BIOSWALES.
BIOSWALES ARE GENERALLY ONLY IN THE ESTATE AND NEIGHBORHOOD AREAS. OPEN SPACES BASED ON THE DEVELOPMENT PATTEN PARKING TO THE SUED OR REAR OF BUILDING. GENERAL USE CASS GORYS PERMITTED BASED ON THE ADJACENT DEVELOPMENT PATTERN PLUS LIMITED SERVING RETAIL COMMERCIAL BUILT CONSISTENT WITH THE ADJACENT CHARACTER AS OTHERWISE DESCRIBED.
>> COUNSELOR FINKAM? CAN YOU SAY WHY YOU BOTHER WITH LOT SIZE? THEY ARE SO VARIABLE.
I THINK -- THEY ARE ALMOST MEANINGLESS.
BECAUSE THEY ARE SO WIDE. IF WE ARE NOT BOTHERING WITH DENSITY. WHY ARE WE BOTHERING WITH
IT? >> WE TRIED TO CAPTURE AND ACKNOWLEDGE THE EXISTING CONDITIONS.
FOR INSTANCE, WE RECEIVED A LOT OF COMMENTS ABOUT WEST NEIGHBORHOODS AN EIGHTH TO FIVE-PLUS ACRES.
THAT INCLUDES WEST CLAY. THERE ARE OF COURSE SOME SMALL LOTS IN THE AREA. AS WELL AS LARGER LOTS.
THIS WAS PART OF THE -- COULD BE A WIDE RANGE. WE INCLUDED IT AS A DESCRIPTION. BUTS STATES ARE TYPICAL FIVE-PLUS ACRES. THAT'S NOT TYPICAL?
>> YEAH. THAT ONE I BELIEVE WE STARTED WITH ANOTHER -- WITH A RANGE.
AND THEN GOT A LOT OF FEEDBACK THAT IT WANTED TO STAY AS FIVE-PLUS ACRES. THAT WAS ONE THAT WE'VE
DECIDED. >> WAS IT ACCURATE OR NOT?
>> WE TRY TO DO IDEAL EXISTING CONDITIONS.
OTHERWISE I FEEL LIKE WIPE OUT THE WHOLE COLUMN.
BECAUSE IT'S MEANINGLESS. AND JUST LIKE SOME OF THE TYPICAL BILLING COVERAGES ALL VARIES THEN 50 TO 90.
25 TO 50. THOSE ARE BIG RANGES; RIGHT? 20 TO 55. I FEEL LIKE THOSE ARE KIND OF NOT HELPFUL. BUT THAT'S MY PERSONAL FEEDBACK. URBAN PROMENADE IS BAD EXAMPLE BECAUSE IT'S SMALL. LIKE 40 TO 100 TYPICAL BUILDING COVERAGE. THERE'S SUCH A BIG RANGE.
THERE'S NOT A GUIDE AT THAT POINT.
IT'S LIKE ANYTHING GOES. COUNCILOR AASEN?
>> THANK YOU. I HAVE A FEW COMMENTS HERE.
[01:00:02]
MAYBE YOU CAN RESPOND TO THIS.I THINK IN THIS DOCUMENT WE ARE FOCUSSING A LOT ON HOUSES AND COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT.
THIS ALSO LEADS TO DESIGN FOR CARS AND PEDESTRIANS.
IT'S NOT JUST RESIDENTIAL BUILDING DOCUMENT.
AND FOR THAT PERSPECTIVE TYPICAL CORRIDORS PRIMARY EAST AND WEST NORTH-SOUTH ROUTES THAT DEFINITELY APPLIES TO THE ROADS MENTIONED THERE.
I UNDERSTAND THE CONCERNS WHEN IT TALKS ABOUT THE COMMERCIAL BEING MIXED IN, WHICH IS PART OF THE REASON THAT I AGREE WITH PLANNING COMMISSION TAKING OUT 1267TH STREET AS THE TYPICAL CORRIDOR.
BECAUSE WHILE IT MET THE PRIMARY EAST WEST ROUTE FOR THAT DISTINCTION COMMERCIAL IS LIMITED.
THERE DIDN'T SEEM TO BE OPPORTUNITIES THAT YOU WOULD WANT TO ADD COMMERCIAL. TO QUELL THAT FEAR, YOU JUST TOOK THAT OUT. BUT I WOULD ARGUE THAT COLLEGE ALREADY MEETS THE DEFINITION OF A TYPICAL CORRIDOR; WOULD YOU AGREE? THERE'S -- IS IT TYPICAL NORTH-SOUTH ROUTE WITH COMMERCIAL IN THERE, IF THE TRANSITION BETWEEN DIFFERENT NEIGHBORHOODS -- I DON'T THINK YOU WOULD TURN COLLEGE INTO A TYPICAL CORRIDOR.
IT'S ALREADY A TYPICAL CORRIDOR; AM I CORRECT?
>> TO SOME EXTENT YES. THERE'S THAT CORNER AT 106TH HAD SOME DIFFERENT USES IN COMMERCIAL.
>> THERE'S I CAN NAME PROBABLY LIKE FIVE OR TEN DIFFERENT BUSINESSES THAT ARE LOCATED ALONG COLLEGE AS COMMERCIAL. THERE'S THE GEARO PLACE.
IT'S SPECIAL AND RESIDENTIAL MIXED IN THERE.
AND WE'RE -- WE JUST APPROVED EXPANDING THE STREET FOR MORE TRAFFIC TO MAKE IT A NORTH SOUTH ROUTE.
AND TO PUT A ROUNDABOUT IT AT 106TH.
IT SEEMS LIKE WE TREAT IT LIKE THAT REGARDLESS OF WHAT WE CALL IT. THAT'S BEEN THE CHARACTER OF THE STREET. .
>> ARE YOU ASKING WHETHER WE NEED TO SHOW IT SINCE IT ALREADY -- SHOW IT AS TYPICAL CORRIDOR BECAUSE IT IS OR STRENGTHENING THE ARGUMENT.
>> I THINK IT'S ALREADY A TYPICAL CORRIDOR.
IF WE TOOK IT OUT WE WOULD BE SAYING WE WILL -- WHAT ELSE WOULD WE CALL THAT? IT'S A TYPICAL CORRIDOR
>> COUNCILOR GREEN? >> I AGREE WITH COUNCILOR AASEN. IN FULL AGREEMENT OF TAKING TYPICAL CORRIDOR OUT FOR COLLEGE.
NO. I THOUGHT YOU SAID SINCE IT'S A TYPICAL CORRIDOR. WHY HAVE IT LISTED AS
TYPICAL CORRIDOR. >> BECAUSE SIT A TYPICAL CORRIDOR. I AGREE WITH YOUR ASSESSMENT ABOUT THE 106TH AND COLLEGE ROUNDABOUT.
ONCE YOU DRIVE SOUTH, AND YOU GET PAST THE GARDEN, AND I MEAN IT'S ALL RESIDENTIAL. YOU KNOW, AND THEN WHEN YOU ARE GOING 106TH NORTH. THERE'S NO SIDEWALKS.
THERE'S NO ANYTHING. I MEAN IT'S A TIGHT FIT; RIGHT? AND WE'VE LOOKED AT PUTTING IN SIDEWALKS. BUT WE HAVE TO BUY UP HOMES.
IS IT FEASIBLE TO EVEN PUT SIDEWALKS ALONG 106TH.
WE ARE TELLING THE HOMES ALONG COLLEGE NORTH OF 106TH, IT'S A MATTER OF TIME BEFORE PEOPLE ALREADY KNOCK ON THE DOORS ASKING TO BUY THEIR HOMES.
IT'S NOT A FREE FOR ALL. BASICALLY THE CITY IS ACKNOWLEDGING, YEAH, WE NEED TO BUY UP THE HOMES.
THERE'S NO ROOM RIGHT THERE. FROM 106TH NORTH.
THE BOULEVARD IS 106TH. AND THE BOULEVARD IS JUST TAKING UP KIND OF RESIDENTIAL AREA.
IF THE IDEA IS TYPICAL CORRIDOR IS KIND OF LIKE YOU SAID FOR 126TH THERE'S NO ROOM FOR COMMERCIAL DEVELOP.
. WHY HAVE TYPICAL CORRIDOR FOR 126TH ON THE EAST SIDE WHEN THERE'S NO ROOM FOR COMMERCIAL. THERE'S PARTS WHERE THERE'S NO ROOM FOR COMMERCIAL UNLESS YOU TAKE OUT
NEIGHBORHOODS. >> THAT'S MY CONCERN.
THAT BASICALLY YOU ARE TELLING NEIGHBORHOODS THAT ALL RIGHT. THEY ALREADY BELIEVE, YOU KNOW, I MEAN IT'S THE CITY'S PLAN ON GETTING RID OF THE HOMES. ALL THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING HOME AND PUTTING IN ALL KINDS OF CONDOS AND TOWN HOMES AND MIXED USE EVENTUALLY.
[01:05:03]
THAT'S THEIR FEAR. AND BY US SAYING YEAH, WE WILL TURN COLLEGE INTO TYPICAL CORRIDOR, WE'RE JUST KIND OF CONFIRMING THAT FEAR.IT'S KIND OF INNETTABLE; RIGHT?
>> ANY THE END I WILL TRY TO LOOK COLLEGE TAKEN OFF THE TYPICAL CORRIDOR LIST. I DON'T SEE YOU KNOW ESPECIALLY 106TH NORTH TO 111TH.
OR 106 TO 116TH. THERE'S JUST NOTHING THERE.
UNLESS YOU WILL TAKE OUT HOMES.
106TH NORTH TO 116TH. HOW WOULD TYPICAL CORRIDOR.
IF THAT BECOME A TYPICAL CORRIDOR.
THAT WOULD CHANGE THE HOMES ALONG THOSE STREETS.
NORTH OF 111TH. A LOT OF THE RIGHT-OF-WAY EXISTS TO WIDEN. YOU HAVE CENTRAL PARK.
YOU HAVE APPLEWOOD. YOU HAVE THE CYNTEX DEVELOPMENT. WATER WORLD.
THERE'S RIGHT-OF-WAY THERE. HOW ELSE WILL IT TRANSFORM? I THINK CENTRAL PARK IS THE TYPE OF AMENITY SERVICE THAT SHOULD BE CONSIDERED PART OF THE -- IF A TYPICAL CORRIDOR IS GOING ALLOW FOR CONVENIENCES FOR RESIDENTS NEARBY, I MEAN, CENTRAL PARK IS JUST PERFECT FOR THAT, TOO. IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE A COFFEE SHOP. IT CAN BE A SCHOOL, YOU KNOW IT CAN BE SOMETHING ELSE TOO.
SOUTH OVER 111TH, THERE'S A LOT OF INVESTOR-OWNED HOMES THAT ARE ZONED FOR DUPLEX NOW.
THE ZONING IN THE HOME PLACE AREA, IS WAY DIFFERENT THAN IN THE ELSE STATES AREA. BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF INVESTOR-OWNED PROPERTY IN THERE, PROBABLY IS ONLY A MATTER OF TIME. AND IF WE'RE NOT COMMUNICATING THAT THROUGH THE CORRIDOR, CHARACTERIZATION OR WE'RE PROBABLY NOT BEING HONEST ABOUT IT TO THE PUBLIC. I MEAN, YOU COULD SAY THAT ABOUT REALLY ANY OF THE DOOR DOORS THAT WERE TAKEN OFF.
IF ANY OF THEM WERE POSTER CHILD FOR WHAT A CORRIDOR SHOULD LOOK LIKE. COLLEGE SHOULD BE RIGHT UP
>> MY LOGIC WAS IF WE TREATED OTHER PEOPLES FEARS AND TOOK IT OFF. WHY WOULD WE NOT RESPECT THE FEAR OF THE PEOPLE ON THAT STREET AND DO THE SAME THING. I'M 106TH AND COLLEGE WILL REDEVELOP. THAT'S A FACT OF LIFE.
THERE'S NOTHING THAT WILL STOP THAT ON PLANET EARTH.
IT WILL REDEVELOP INTO SOMETHING IN THE ROUNDABOUT EVENTUALLY. THE HOMES NORTH OF THERE I HAVE KNOWN -- IF IT'S NOT BUY-IN FROM THE PEOPLE LIVING THERE I'M NOT INTERESTED.
IF THERE IS THEN GO FOR IT. MY ARGUMENT IT MAY GO AWAY AT COUNCIL WAS WHAT YOU SAID.
WE LOOKED AT THE FEARS OF THE PEOPLE WEST AND THE EAST SIDE. THAT'S WHY WE TOOK IT OUT.
IF THE PEOPLE ARE TELLING US THE SAME THING THEN WE SHOULD PROBABLY DO THE SAME THING.
>> THAT'S ALL I WAS SAYING. >> COMMISSIONER HANNON.
>> I THINK FEAR IS PROBABLY NOT A WORD.
CONCERN WOULD BE A BETTER WORD.
I WOULD DISAGREE WITH THAT COUNCILOR AASEN.
YOU NEED TO DRIVE OR WALK UP COLLEGE -- BETWEEN 116TH AND DOWN TO 96TH. I AGREE.
I'M CONCERNED ABILITY -- ABOUT MAKING THAT
TYPICAL CORRIDOR. >> ANYONE ELSE?
>> LET ME GO BACK TO MY PDF AND SEE IF IT'S AWAKE YET.
IT DOESN'T APPEAR TO BE. I WILL GO TO THE THIS PDF.
DOESN'T HAVE THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S MARKINGS ON IT.
[01:10:02]
BUT IT'S IT'S THE SAME DOCUMENT WITHOUT THE EDITS SHOWN. I BELIEVE WE WERE IN 1.1 AND MOVING ALONG TO 1.2 POTENTIALLY.WHICH IS ENHANCE ECONOMIC VITALITY.
THESE OBJECTIVINGS VERY ATTENDED WRITTEN TO ATTRACT INVESTMENT IN THE COMMUNITY. FROM BOTH RESIDENTS AND EMPLOYERS, AND THEIR OBJECTIVES RELATING COMMUNICATION AND TECHNOLOGY, INFRASTRUCTURE, WALKABLE FORM AND REGIONAL AND LOCAL AMENITIES.
AND I DON'T BELIEVE THERE WERE ANY QUESTIONS OR DISCUSSION IN THE LAST MEETING REGARDING THIS.
IFTH INNING JUMPS OUT, I WILL MOVE ON TO 1.3.
>> YES. >> I DON'T KNOW THAT WE HAVE TO GO BACK AND DO EACH SUBSECTION LIKE WE DID BEFORE. YOU KIND OF GAVE AN OVERVIEW. IF YOU WANT TO DISCUSS MORE IN SECTION ONE, LET ME KNOW. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM COMMITTEE OR COUNCIL FROM SECTION ONE.
IF NOT WE WILL MOVE ON TO TWO.
>> I WILL MENTION THERE WAS ONE IN SECTION 1.5 THERE WAS REQUEST TO CHANGE THE WORD REQUIRE TO ENCOURAGE.
AND 1.5.7, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT -- 1.5.7 REQUIRES SERVICE PARKING. SUGGESTED TO ENCOURAGE SERVICE PARKING TO BE LOCATED AT THE REAR SIDE.
>> RIGHT. >> THAT I WAS COUNCILOR
>> I DON'T HAVE THE MARKED UP VERSION.
ON 1-3-2. IT SHOULD BE DEVELOPMENT PRESSURES IMMEDIATE OR PRESSURE MEETS BUT NOT
PRETTY MEET. >> I HAD CIRCLED THAT.
DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS, I WILL -- I WILL GO OVER A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT WE TALKED ABOUT DURING THE LAST MEETING AND THEN OPEN IT UP FOR ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION ON DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS. IN THE GATEWAY PATTERN, THERE WAS A REQUEST TO SWITCH OUT -- TAKE OUT PHOTOS OF -- THERE'S A COUPLE OF EXAMPLES OF DEVELOPMENTS ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF 9 6TH STREET.
AND WHILE WE THINK THAT YOU KNOW THAT COULD BE A CHARACTER IN THIS GATEWAY PATTERN, WE ARE OPEN TO SWITCHING OUT AND HAVE A COUPLE OF IDEAS FOR SWITCHING OUT ONE OF THOSE PHOTOS.
THOSE WERE USED AS A JUST TO GIVEN A IDEA WHAT IT WAS
IN MANY OF THE PATTERN. WE HAVE CARMEL EXAMPLES BUT WE ALSO HAVE OTHER ASPIRATIONAL EXAMPLES FROM OHER AREAS AND MAYBE THE SOUTH SIDE OF 96 STREET IS TOO CLOSE AND MAYBE POSES CONFUSION.
AS TO WHERE THESE OR WHY WE USED THESE WHEN THEY ARE JUST ACROSS THE BOUNDARY FROM CARMEL.
WE'VE GOT ANOTHER EXAMPLE OR TWO THAT WE CAN SWITCH IN.
AND THEN THE OTHER DISCUSSION ITEM WAS THE MONAN GREENWAY PATTERN. IT WAS SUGGESTED THAT TREE PRESERVATION SPECIFICALLY BE INCLUDED.
INTENT WAS CONSERVATION AREAS WOULD HAVE -- IF THAT WAS INTENT PART OF THE CONSERVATION AREA BEING LISTED AS OPEN SPACE. WE -- TO BE MORE DESCRIPTIVE
[01:15:05]
WE CAN ADD TREE PRESERVATION AREAS AS WELL.>> COUNCILOR FINKAM? >> SO WALK ME THROUGH WHEN I LOOK AT COMPARISON BETWEEN WHITE RIVER AND THE EAST NEIGH NEIGHBORHOOD.
THAT'S EASIER. WHEN I LOOK AT THE MAX HEIGHT IT'S 2 AND A HALF STORY.
THE WHITE RIVER CAN BE MAX OF THREE ALONG THE RIVER.
WALK ME THROUGH THAT RATIONALE.
I'M REALLY NOT IN SUPPORT OF THAT.
I WANT THAT AS MUCH OF A NATURAL AREA AS POSSIBLE.
>> I BELIEVE -- IT SEEMS LIKE WE GET MORE DENSE ALONG
THE RIVER. >> I BELIEVE I DON'T HAVE THAT INFORMATION IN FRONT OF ME.
I BELIEVE PART OF THAT WAS DRIVEN BY THE COUNTER PRAIRIE AND WHITE RIVER PLAN INFORMATION.
>> CAN'T THEY COME THROUGH WITH ZONING REQUEST AND WE CHANGE THAT. OTHERWISE THE OVER ALL AREA.
THEN WE SEE THREE STORIES. THAT DOESN'T MATCH.
SAME THING TWO GREATER DEVELOPMENT PATTERN WITH THE FOLLOWING EXCEPTIONS MAX ALONG THE RIVER.
THIS WHOLE THING WOULD BE THREE ALONG THE RIVER.
I DON'T I DON'T UNDERSTAND THAT.
IF THEY WANT TO MAKE A ZONING REQUEST, THAT'S JUST LIKE THE WEST SIDE THAT WE SEE.
THIS TYPICAL CHARACTER. BUT THEN SOMEONE ELSE CAN COME AND COUNCIL CAN SUPPORT IT.
I DON'T LIKE THE LANGUAGE IN THIS AT ALL.
>> IS THERE A MAXIMUM HEIGHT OR LANGUAGE THAT
YOU -- WOULD PREFER? >> PERSONALLY TWO.
I CAN'T MAKE A MOTION. I'M NOT ON THIS COMMITTEE.
COUNCILOR FINKAM, CAN I COMMENT ON WHAT YOU SAID? I TEND TO BE ON PLANNING COMMISSION SO LONG.
I DON'T LIKE STORIES. I PREFER HEIGHT.
LIKE YOU CAN BUILD A TWO-STORY HOME.
YOU CAN GET THREE STORIES IN 35 FOFEET IN A BUILDING.
I WOULD PREFER A HEIGHT RATHER THAN STORIES.
>> WE WOULD HAVE TO DO THAT FOR ALL OF THEM.
I AGREE WITH YOU. >> IF YOU WANT TO TAKE A OUT. THAT'S SOMETHING WE WILL HAVE TO CHANGE FOR ALL OF THEM.
>> CAN WE GIVE THAT DISCUSSION? STORIES JUST DOESN'T REALLY TELL THE STORY.
NO PUNT INTENDED. >> MAXIMUM HEIGHT IS END ZONING. IF WE'RE DEALING WITH
CHARACTER STORIES SHOULD BE. >> WE WOULD REFER BACK TO UDO IF SOMETHING CAME THROUGH.
THAT DOES HAVE MAXIMUM HEIGHT.
>> WHY KEEP IT IN HERE? >> WE CAN'T GO BACK AND FORTH. IT DOESN'T MEAN.
IT'S NOT ZONING. BUT TRYING TO BE CHARACTER.
>> IT'S CHARACTER. AS FOR THE WHITE RIVER.
IF WE'RE TRYING TO DO OUR BEST TO PROTECT THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOODS, THEN TWO STORIES THAT'S GENERALLY THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
IF THE WHITE RIVER HAS THE POTENTIAL TO BE SOMETHING A LITTLE BIT MORE THAT'S NOT EFFECTING A NEIGHBORHOOD DIRECTLY, PERHAPS THAT ADDITIONAL STORY ISN'T A BAD THING. I DON'T THINK THAT ANYBODY IS SITTING HERE THINKS THREE STORIES WILL BE THE PREVAILING CHARACTER ALONG THERE.
BUT TO HAVE THAT RANGE AND THAT OPPORTUNITY, SOMETIMES GOING VERTICAL ALLOWS MORE OF THE GROUND TO BE PRESERVED TOO. AND SO I WOULD HOPE WE COULD KEEP IT IN. I UNDERSTAND YOUR CONCERN.
>> I WILL MOVE TO TAKE IT DOWN.
I DON'T WANT IT. I UNDERSTAND YOUR POINT ABOUT THE GROUND COVER. AND APPRECIATE THAT.
I DON'T WANT THE HEIGHT ALONG THE RIVER.
YOU SET A PRECEDENT. ALL THE BUILDINGS WILL SET A PRECEDENT FOR FUTURE LAND DEVELOPMENT AT THE VERY
[01:20:02]
LEAST IT SHOULDN'T REFERENCE ALONG THE RIVER.WE'VE GOT MILES FURTHER SOUTH OF IT.
>> IT'S NOT RESIDENTIAL OR GREEN SPACE SNOW.
I WANT TO KEEP IT AS NATURAL AS POSSIBLE.
>> I THINK I HAD OTHER QUESTION.
GIVE ME A SECOND. IT HAS COMMERCIAL AS GENERAL USE CATEGORY. WE'RE REALLY TALKING NEIGHBORHOOD. JUST KEEP IT GENERAL.
>> THANK SHALL I MOVE ON TO SECTION
3? >> THIS IS THE STREET TYPOLOGY SECTION. SIMILAR TO DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS. WE HAVE A SERIES OF STREET TYPE DESCRIPTIONS WITH CORRESPONDING MAP.
AND GENERALLY WE'VE GOT ONE PAGE PER DESCRIPTION.
MINIMUM STANDARD AND EXAMPLE OF WHERE IF ADDITIONAL STREETSCAPE FACILITIES FIT THE CONTEXT IT MIGHT REQUIRE LARGER RIGHT-OF-WAY. WE'VE GOT THE RANGE OF RIGHT-OF-WAY, NUMBER OF LANES, MEDIANS, STREET TREES AND ALL THE INFORMATION ON ONE PAGE FOR EACH STREET
TYPE. >> I WILL JUST KIND OF SCROLL THROUGH THESE. AND THEN THERE'S THE MAP.
AND CONSERVATION CORRIDORS LISTED ON THE MAP.
THAT'S A DIRECT TRANSFER FROM THE C-3 PLAN.
>> MADAM CHAIR? >> WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE TO CHANGE THE COLOR, THE CONSERVATION CORRIDOR FROM THE TAN OF THE NEIGHBORHOODS TO LIKE A GREEN OR SOMETHING SO IT STANDS OUT ON THE MAP. THE FIRST COUPLE OF TIMES I HAD A HARD TIME FIGURING OUT WHERE THEY START OR STOP.
IF WE COULD MAKE THEM STAND OUT, IT WOULD BE BETTER.
>> YOU ARE REFERENCING THE MAP ON PDF?
>> THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN, YES.
>> THEY BLEND IN WITH THE NEIGHBORHOODS.
A LIGHT GREEN OR SOMETHING WOULD BE AWESOME.
WE'LL EXPLORE THAT. ANYTHING ELSE FOR SECTION 3?
>> OKAY. THEN WE'RE BACK TO SECTION FOUR WHERE WE STARTED THIS EVENING.
THE STREETSCAPE FACILITIES. >> ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS
[01:25:20]
ANY PROPOSED CHANGES FROM THE COMMITTEOVER -- THE COMMITTEE OVER ALL. DO YOU WANT BREAK HERE AND RECONVENE ON AUGUST 8TH TO MAKE CHANGES?>> IS THAT WHAT YOU WOULD LIKE?
>> MADAM CHAIR, I WILL PROBABLY HAVE A COUPLE OF REQUEST. I WANT TO CONFIRM THEM.
YOU KNOW, ONE OF THEM TYPICAL CORRIDOR FOR COLLEGE. BUT I WANT DO MORE RESEARCH
IN THAT AREA. >> AS LONG AS WE HAVE A
I CAN FOLLOW UP RECENTLY THE LAST FEW WEEKS MAKE SURE THEIR QUESTIONS HAVE BEEN ADDRESSED.
>> ALL RIGHT. I THINK THAT'S THE PLAN.
WE'LL BREAK NOW. AND THEN GATHER MORE INFORMATION MEET AGAIN ON AUGUST 8TH AT 5:00.
BUT WE SHOULD HAVE A QUORUM. >> ALL RIGHT.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.