>> ALL RIGHT. WE CAN START WHENEVER YOU'RE READY.
[00:00:03]
>> I'LL CALL THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING FOR WEDNESDAY,
[1. CALL TO ORDER NOTICE OF OPTION TO RECESS INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION Pursuant to A.R.S. §38-431.02, notice is hereby given to the members of the Commission and to the general public that, at this work session, the Commission may vote to go into executive session, which will not be open to the public, for legal advice and discussion with the Commission’s attorneys for legal advice on any item listed on the following agenda, pursuant to A.R.S. §38-431.03(A)(3).]
OCTOBER 11TH, 2023 TO ORDER.CAN WE HAVE THE ROLL CALL, PLEASE?
[2. ROLL CALL NOTE: One or more Commission Members may be in attendance telephonically or by other technological means. MARIE JONES, CHAIR CAROLE MANDINO, VICE CHAIR MARCHELL CAMP DR. RICARDO GUTHRIE BOB HARRIS, III MARY NORTON IAN SHARP ]
DR. RICARDO GUTHRIE IS NOT HERE.
>> AT THIS TIME, ANY MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC MAY ADDRESS THE COMMISSION ON ANY SUBJECT WITHIN THEIR JURISDICTION THAT IS NOT SCHEDULED BEFORE THE COMMISSION TODAY.
DUE TO OPEN MEETING LAWS, THE COMMISSION CANNOT DISCUSS OR ACT ON ITEMS PRESENTED.
NOW DURING THIS PORTION OF THE AGENDA TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION ON AN ITEM THAT IS ON THE AGENDA, PLEASE WAIT FOR THE CHAIR TO CALL THE PUBLIC COMMENT AT THE TIME THAT ITEM IS HEARD.
>> THANK YOU. THE FIRST ITEM HERE IS THE APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FROM OUR LAST MEETING,
[4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Approval of the minutes from the regular meeting on Wednesday, September 13, 2023.]
WHICH WAS SEPTEMBER, THIS ONE DOESN'T HAVE A DATE ON IT, 13TH.THEN THIS IS THE ONE FROM BEFORE.
YES. CAN WE HAVE A MOTION TO OR ANY DISCUSSION ON THAT OR AN EMOTION.
>> I'M TOLD THAT WE HAVE 30 MINUTES ON THE DEBATE, SEPTEMBER 13TH 2023.
>> ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? OKAY. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION, PLEASE SAY AYE.
>> ALL THOSE OPPOSED? THAT ITEM PASSES.
WE HAVE ONE ITEM ON THE AGENDA TODAY.
[A. Case No. PZ-23-00130: Request for a work session with the Planning and Zoning Commission to discuss the City's proposed amendment to the Zoning Code to modify Open Space Terminology. STAFF RECOMMENDED ACTION: This will be presented as a work session. No action from Commission will be taken on this item.]
THIS IS A WORK SESSION FOR A PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING CODE TO MODIFY OPEN SPACE TERMINOLOGY TESTS.THANK YOU. CHAIR, VICE CHAIR AND COMMISSION.
BETHAN HENG, I'M ONE OF THE PLANNERS WITH THE CITY OF FLAGSTAFF AND I HAVE TIFFANY ANTOL, ZONING CODE MANAGER HERE WITH ME AS WELL.
TONIGHT THE ITEM BEFORE YOU FOR THIS WORK SESSION IS FOR THE OPEN SPACE TERMINOLOGY TEXT AMENDMENT.
THE REASON WHY YOU'RE SEEING THIS TEXT AMENDMENTS TONIGHT IS BECAUSE WE'D LIKE TO INTRODUCE IT TO YOU BECAUSE TWO WEEKS FROM NOW WE'LL BE COMING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING AND WITH THAT, LET'S GET INTO THE PRESENTATION.
A LITTLE BIT OF AN INTRODUCTION.
WITHIN THE FLAGSTAFF ZONING CODE, WE HAVE THREE CURRENT OPEN SPACE DEFINITIONS.
THESE THREE DEFINITIONS ARE OPEN SPACE, COMMON OPEN SPACE, AND PRIVATE OPEN SPACE.
NOW THE REASON WHY YOU'RE SEEING THIS TONIGHT IS BECAUSE WITHIN THE FLAGSTAFF ZONING CODE, THESE THREE TERMS ARE USED INTERCHANGEABLY INCONSISTENTLY, UNFORTUNATELY, AS OPEN SPACE.
WHAT WE'RE HOPING FOR TONIGHT IS TO INTRODUCE THIS TOPIC FOR YOU OR REVIEW JUST TO ADD SOME CONSISTENCY TO THE FLAGSTAFF ZONING CODE.
AS MENTIONED, THE TERM OPEN SPACE IS USED INTERCHANGEABLY WITHIN THE ZONING CODE, ALTHOUGH THERE ARE THREE DIFFERENT DEFINITIONS.
NOW THIS IS A POTENTIAL CAUSE FOR CONFUSION BECAUSE OWNERSHIP AND MAINTENANCE OF THE DIFFERENT TYPES OF OPEN SPACE FALL ON TWO DIFFERENT PARTIES.
THERE ARE VERY SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR COMMON OPEN SPACE AND PRIVATE OPEN SPACE, WHICH FALLS TO PLANNING AND ZONING'S PURVIEW, WHEREAS OPEN SPACE FALLS WITHIN PROSE'S PURVIEW.
I HAVE HERE ON THIS SLIDE A TABLE THAT BREAKS DOWN EACH OF THE THREE DIFFERENT DEFINITIONS AND EACH OF THE SECTIONS OF THIS TABLE COMES SPECIFICALLY FROM THOSE DEFINITIONS.
STARTING WITH AREA SPECIFICATION FOR OPEN SPACE, THIS IS UNDEVELOPED SPACE OR AREA, WHEREAS COMMON OPEN SPACE REFERS TO OPEN SPACE WITHIN A DEVELOPMENT.
PRIVATE OPEN SPACE REFERS TO OPEN SPACE OR PRIVATE SPACE WITH EACH UNIT.
AS FOR THE PURPOSE, OPEN SPACE IS TO MAINTAIN OR ENHANCE THE CONSERVATION OF
[00:05:01]
NATURAL OR SCENIC RESOURCES WHILE COMMON OPEN SPACE IS PURPOSE FOR THE USE AND ENJOYMENT OF ALL OWNERS AND OCCUPANTS, SO IT'S SHARED WITHIN A DEVELOPMENT.FOR PRIVATE OPEN SPACE, THE DEFINITION LISTS OUT VERY SPECIFIC USE IS, FOR EXAMPLE, OPEN YARD AREAS, PATIOS, DECKS, AND BALCONIES.
ESSENTIALLY THE PURPOSE OF PRIVATE OPEN SPACE IS FOR PERSONAL USE.
NOW GOING ON TO PURVIEW, OPEN SPACE FALLS TO PROSE'S PURVIEW AND BECAUSE COMMON OPEN SPACE AND PRIVATE OPEN SPACE DEALS WITH DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS THAT FALLS TO PLANNING AND ZONING IS PURVIEW.
I HAVE IN THE NEXT FEW SLIDES EXAMPLES OF EACH OF THE THREE DEFINITIONS.
STARTING OFF WITH COMMON OPEN SPACE, I'VE HIGHLIGHTED AND UNDERLINED EACH OF THE DEFINITIONS THAT ARE ESSENTIAL ASPECTS OF IT TO GET AN IDEA OF WHAT EXACTLY EACH OF THE DEFINITION IS FOCUSING ON.
BUT FOR COMMON OPEN SPACE, IT'S WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT AND IT'S FOR THE USE AND ENJOYMENT OF ALL OWNERS AND OCCUPANTS.
IT'S SHARED AND IT DOESN'T FALL TO ONE SPECIFIC PRIVATE OWNER.
I HAVE HERE TWO EXAMPLES, PRESIDIO IN THE PINES AND BUTTERFIELD APARTMENTS ON SOLIERE AVENUE.
TWO VERY DIFFERENT TYPES OF DEVELOPMENTS.
ONE IS A SUBDIVISION AND ONE IS A MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT BUT AS YOU CAN SEE HERE IN THE EXAMPLES SHOWN ON THE SCREEN, WE HAVE COMMON OPEN SPACE WITHIN EACH OF THOSE THAT I'VE SHARED.
THE SECOND EXAMPLE IS PRIVATE OPEN SPACE.
THE IMPORTANT ASPECT OF THIS DEFINITION IS THAT IT'S REQUIRED WITH EACH UNIT.
THEN AS MENTIONED BEFORE, IT LISTS EXAMPLES, SO OUTDOOR YARD AREAS, PATIOS, DECKS, BALCONIES AND I HAVE HERE ON SCREEN AN EXAMPLE.
IT'S ASPEN PLACE THAT SAWMILL.
IF YOU LOOK AT THE PICTURE, YOU CAN SEE BALCONY SPACES FOR EACH OF THE UNITS.
THAT'S CONSIDERED PRIVATE SPACE OR PRIVATE OPEN SPACE.
ANOTHER EXAMPLE THAT'S NOT HERE VISUALLY ON THE SCREEN, COULD BE SUBDIVISIONS.
WITHIN SUBDIVISIONS ARE LOTS AND OFTENTIMES WHAT'S COMMON IS FOR EACH OF THOSE LOTS TO HAVE PRIVATE YARDS.
THOSE WOULD ALSO BE CONSIDERED PRIVATE OPEN SPACE.
THE LAST EXAMPLE IS OPEN SPACE.
NOW THIS IS USUALLY WHAT PEOPLE THINK OF WHEN THEY THINK OF OPEN SPACE.
IT'S UNDEVELOPED SPACE OR AREA CHARACTERIZED BY GREAT NATURAL SCENIC BEAUTY AND REALLY THE PURPOSE OF IT IS TO MAINTAIN OR ENHANCE THE CONSERVATION OF NATURAL OR SCENIC RESOURCES.
ON SCREEN HERE WE'VE GOT OBSERVATORY MESA, THE NATURAL AREA, AND PICTURE CANYON NATURAL AND CULTURAL PRESERVE.
IN THIS PRESENTATION, I ALSO HAVE A FEW EXAMPLES OF WHERE THIS INCONSISTENCY HAPPENS IN THE FLAGSTAFF ZONING CODE.
THE FIRST EXAMPLE OF WHICH COMES FROM THE BUILDING FORM AND PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS.
NOW WITHIN THIS SECTION OF CODE, THERE'S A FOOTNOTE AND IT STARTS WITH COMMON OPEN SPACE, AND IT REFERS TO COMMON OPEN SPACE, BUT AS YOU READ THROUGH THE FOOTNOTE, IT THEN REFERS TO OPEN SPACE.
NOW, THIS IS POTENTIALLY PROBLEMATIC BECAUSE FOR US AS PLANNERS, A COMMON PRACTICE THAT WE DO IS WE'LL GO TO THE DEFINITION SECTION OF THE FLAGSTAFF ZONING CODE AND WE'LL LOOK THROUGH WHAT THE DEFINITION DEFINES FOR EACH OF THESE TERMS AND THEN WE'LL INTERPRET THE CODE AS REQUIRED.
NOW THIS IS PROBLEMATIC BECAUSE IT REFERS TO COMMON OPEN SPACE, WHICH REFERS TO DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS BUT THEN IT GOES ON TO REFER TO OPEN SPACE.
WHICH IF WE LOOK AT THE DEFINITION, IT TALKS ABOUT THE OPEN SPACE FROM THE PROSE'S PURVIEW.
THIS IS UNDER MISCELLANEOUS REQUIREMENTS OF MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AND HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ZONES.
IN THAT SECTION OF THE CODE, THERE IS A REQUIREMENT FOR OPEN SPACE.
IT REFERS TO OPEN SPACE FIRST AND THEN AS YOU READ THROUGH THE TABLE, IT REFERS TO COMMON OPEN SPACE AGAIN BUT THEN IT SWITCHES TO OPEN SPACE, AND THEN IT SWITCHES OVER TO PRIVATE OPEN SPACE.
HERE'S THE THING, IT VERY WELL MAY BE TALKING ABOUT PRIVATE OPEN SPACE OR OPEN SPACE, BUT BECAUSE THROUGHOUT THE FLAGSTAFF ZONING CODE, THERE'S AN INCONSISTENCY OF TERMS AND HOW THEY'RE BEING USED.
IT'S HARD FOR US AS PLANNERS TO MAKE THAT DETERMINATION HERE.
THEN MY LAST EXAMPLE HERE IS UNDER AFFORDABLE HOUSING INCENTIVES.
THIS HAS TO DO WITH PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, WHICH AS WE KNOW, WILL EITHER FALL TO COMMON OPEN SPACE OR
[00:10:01]
PRIVATE OPEN SPACE BUT AS WE'RE READING THROUGH THIS SECTION OF THE FLAGSTAFF ZONING CODE, IT REFERS TO OPEN SPACE.SO WE JUST WANT TO CLARIFY THROUGHOUT THE FLAGSTAFF HAVE ZONING CODE, WHICH OPEN SPACE WE'RE EXACTLY TALKING ABOUT.
STAFF FEELS THAT IT'S IMPORTANT TO MENTION THAT, THIS TEXT AMENDMENT WAS ALSO BROUGHT TO PROSE OR OPEN SPACE COMMISSION.
ON JUNE 26TH, THIS OPEN SPACE TERMINOLOGY TEXT AMENDMENT WAS INTRODUCED TO PROSE AS AN INFORMATIONAL ITEM SO WE JUST INTRODUCED THIS PROPOSAL.
ON SEPTEMBER 25TH, THE DRAFTED OPEN SPACE TERMINOLOGY TEXT AMENDMENT WAS ALSO BROUGHT TO PROSE FOR REVIEW.
NOW PROSE RESPONDED THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO ADD A NEW DEFINITION WHICH IS "LEGALLY DESIGNATED OPEN SPACE" TO THE FLAGSTAFF ZONING CODE.
HOWEVER, WITH ALL DUE RESPECT TO THE PROSE COMMISSION, ADDING THIS DEFINITION TO OUR FLAGSTAFF ZONING CODE WOULD NOT ESSENTIALLY IMPLEMENT ANYTHING BECAUSE THE TERMINOLOGY, "LEGALLY DESIGNATED OPEN SPACE" IS NOT USED IN THE FLAGSTAFF ZONING CODES.
ESSENTIALLY WHAT WE'D BE DOING IS WE'LL BE ADDING A NEW DEFINITION TO THE DEFINITION SECTION OF THE ZONING CODE, BUT IT WOULDN'T EXACTLY ENACT ANYTHING.
WITH THAT STAFF PROPOSAL IS TO RENAME THE TERMS. WE'LL KEEP OPEN SPACE AS OPEN SPACE, AND THEN WE WILL RENAME COMMON OPEN SPACE TO JUST COMMON SPACE, SO WE'LL CLARIFY THE AMBIGUITY THERE.
THEN WE'LL ALSO RENAME PRIVATE OPEN SPACE TO PRIVATE SPACE.
THEN ONCE WE'VE RENAMED THE TERMS, WE WILL REPLACE THE TERMS THROUGHOUT THE FLAGSTAFF ZONING CODE WITH A NEW TERMINOLOGY AS APPROPRIATE.
WITH THAT, THAT IS THE END OF MY PRESENTATION.
WE'LL OPEN UP TO QUESTIONS AND DISCUSSION AT THIS POINT.
[BACKGROUND] I HAVE ONE TO START.
COMMON SPACE, IT SEEMS LIKE THAT COULD ALSO REFER TO A CLUBHOUSE OR SOMETHING.
HOW IS THAT REFERRED TO AS OPPOSED TO COMMON SPACE FOR OUTSIDE SPACE?
>> I'LL TRY MY BEST TO ANSWER THIS.
IN COMMON SPACE AND THE FLAGSTAFF ZONING CODE REFERS TO A SPECIFIC TYPE OF USERS DESIGNATED THAT'S IT'S PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARD.
>> I THINK THIS IS WHERE YOU CAN HELP ME HERE.
>> THE DEFINITIONS THEMSELVES ARE NOT CHANGING, JUST THE TERMINOLOGY.
WE DID MAKE A SMALL CHANGE TO PRIVATE OPEN SPACE JUST TO CLARIFY WHAT'S ALL INCLUDED, BUT THE COMMON OPEN SPACE DEFINITION DOES NOT CHANGE, JUST THE TERM THAT WE'RE CALLING.
INSTEAD OF CALLING IT COMMON OPEN SPACE, WE'RE JUST GOING TO CALL IT COMMON SPACE.
BUT HOW WE TREAT IT AND HOW WE MANAGE IT REMAINS THE SAME.
THOSE ARE AREAS WITHIN A DEVELOPMENT INTENDED OR RESERVED FOR THE ENJOYMENT OF ALL OWNERS AND OCCUPANTS.
MOST LIKELY THESE DAYS WE AREN'T GETTING CLUBHOUSES.
WE SEE CLUBHOUSES MORE FREQUENTLY IN APARTMENT COMPLEXES THAN WE DO IN SUB-DIVISIONS, BUT THEY WOULD BE PART OF THAT COMMON SPACE.
IT COULD INCLUDE BOTH INDOOR, AND OUTDOOR.
IT'S NOT MEANT TO JUST BE EXCLUSIVE TO OUTDOOR AREAS.
>> DOES A CODE THOUGH, IS IT REQUIRING A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF OPEN SPACE AS OPPOSED TO JUST COMMON SPACE COMBINED?
>> THE ZONING CODE IN THE MR AND THE HR ZONING DISTRICTS, THAT'S OUR MEDIUM DENSITY, AND HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, AND ANY PROJECT THAT USES THE PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT OPTION ARE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE 15% COMMON OPEN SPACE AREAS.
A CLUBHOUSE COULD BE INCLUDED IN THAT AREA.
IT WOULDN'T BE ALL OF THE 15%.
SOMETIMES THAT 15% IS SIGNIFICANT ACREAGE.
TIMBER SKY IS A FAIRLY GOOD EXAMPLE.
THEY HAVE ABOUT 10 ACRES OF OPEN SPACE AREA.
IN THAT PARTICULAR DEVELOPMENT, THE AREAS THAT TRULY REMAIN OPEN AND
[00:15:01]
UNDEVELOPED WERE ACTUALLY PUT IN THE PUBLIC OPEN SPACE ZONE, BUT THEY CONTRIBUTE TOWARDS THEIR COMMON SPACE REQUIREMENT.THEN AREAS THAT WERE DESIGNATED FOR A MORE AMENITY SPACE WERE PUT IN A DIFFERENT ZONING CATEGORY AS WELL TO ACCOMMODATE THAT, BUT IT INCLUDES THE MIX OF ALL OF THOSE FEATURES.
[OVERLAPPING] IT INCLUDES AMENITY SPACE WITHIN A DEVELOPMENT, AS WELL AS OPEN AREAS.
>> I'M SORRY. I MIGHT BE MISSING SOMETHING HERE, BUT I'M JUST WONDERING THOUGH, IF THERE IS A DEVELOPMENT, AND IT REQUIRES COMMON SPACE.
DOES ANY OF THAT HAVE TO BE OPEN SPACE? OR IT COULD BE INDOOR SPACE OR COULD BE.
IT'S RESOURCE PROTECTION, PASSIVE AND ACTIVE RECREATION, GARDENS, LANDSCAPE AREAS.
TECHNICALLY, YOUR LANDSCAPE BUFFERS, GET COUNTED TOWARDS YOUR COMMON OPEN SPACE.
IF YOUR RESOURCE PROTECTION AREAS GET COUNTED TOWARDS YOUR COMMON OPEN SPACE, YOU CAN DOUBLE UP.
IT CAN ALSO END UP BEING RESOURCE PROTECTION, POSSIBLY DETENTION RETENTION, COMMON OPEN SPACE LANDSCAPE AREAS.
A LOT OF THOSE THINGS OVERLAP EACH OTHER WITHIN A DEVELOPMENT.
BECAUSE REMEMBER, 15% OF THE GROSS AREA OF ANY DEVELOPMENT SITE HAS TO MEET THAT COMMON OPEN SPACE.
SO WE DEFINITELY ALLOW DEVELOPMENT TO OVERLAP WITH MULTI FEATURES, INCLUDING THOSE AMENITY SPACE, KNOWING THAT THE AMENITIES WILL NOT OCCUPY GENERALLY THE ENTIRE 15% REQUIRED.
BUT THERE ISN'T A PERCENTAGE THAT HAS TO BE COMPLETELY UNTOUCHED OR UNDEVELOPED.
>> THANK YOU. I'M ASSUMING THAT WE GET INTO SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT ABOUT WHY THE OPEN SPACE COMMISSION WANTED TO HAVE THAT DESIGNATION BECAUSE THAT'S INTERESTING TO KNOW MORE ABOUT.
[OVERLAPPING] THAT'S ALL I HAVE.
>> MY QUESTION HAS TO DO WITH SOMETHING YOU SAID ABOUT OPEN SPACE BEING UNDER THE PROSE PURVIEW, AND MY QUESTION GOES BACK TO WHEN WE DESIGNATED THE AREA NORTH OF FOREST.
DIDN'T WE DESIGNATE THAT AS OPEN SPACE.
LIKE HALF A YEAR AGO, OR A YEAR AGO?
>> WHITE SIR? PARCEL THAT WE TALKED ABOUT? NOW.
>> UP ABOVE FOREST, ACROSS FROM THE CANCER CENTER, THE SKIN CANCER AREA, AND WOULD PROSE BE THE [OVERLAPPING].
>> THEY'RE USUALLY THE MANAGING AGENCY OF THOSE PROPERTIES. [NOISE]
>> BUT IT WOULD STILL COME BEFORE PLANNING AND ZONING.
>> IF YOU WERE TO REZONE A PROPERTY TO PUBLIC OPEN SPACE, WHICH IS ALSO A ZONING CATEGORY, AND WE'RE NOT CHANGING THAT DEFINITION OR TERMINOLOGY.
I THINK ONE OF THE OTHER WAYS TO THINK ABOUT THIS IS OPEN SPACE IS A LISTED USE IN THE PUBLIC OPEN SPACES ZONE.
COMMON OPEN SPACE AND PRIVATE OPEN SPACE OR DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS LIKE A SETBACK. DOES THAT HELP? OPEN SPACES THEY USE LIKE MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL IS A USE.
BUT THEN THERE ARE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS THAT ARE REQUIRED OF DEVELOPMENTS LIKE SETBACKS AND LOT COVERAGE AND OPEN SPACE.
>> AND THAT I UNDERSTAND BUT MY QUESTION WAS, IF SOMETHING LIKE THE AREA THAT WE DESIGNATED, DID WE DESIGNATE THAT AS PUBLIC OPEN SPACE? IS THAT WHAT WE DID?
>> WE REZONED IT. AND SO THAT WOULD STILL COME TO PLANNING AND ZONING, NOT TO PROSE.
>> ANY REZONING WOULD COME TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, AND CITY COUNCIL.
WHAT WE MEAN IS THAT THOSE PROPERTIES THEY HAVE MANAGEMENT PLANS, AND THEY'RE MANAGED OUT OF THE PROSE DEPARTMENT.
SO OUR OPEN SPACE DIVISION MANAGES ALL OF THOSE OPEN SPACE PROPERTIES.
>> OKAY. THANK YOU FOR THAT EXPLANATION. I APPRECIATE IT.
THAT SEGUES INTO WHAT I WAS GOING TO ASK WHEN YOU'RE TALKING OPEN SPACE AND IT'S BASICALLY PUBLIC OPEN SPACE.
THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THOSE IS WHAT WE TALK ABOUT DESIGNATED OPEN SPACE.
>> THE ZONING DISTRICT IS CALLED PUBLIC OPEN SPACE.
UNDER THE POS ZONE, THERE ARE LISTED USES.
[00:20:01]
THE LISTED USE IS OPEN SPACE.>> SO WHEN A DEVELOPMENT LEAVES A PARCEL OPEN AND I'M THINKING OF THE PARCEL THAT WE REZONED UP ALONG SCHWEITZER CANYON FOR THOSE TOWNHOMES AND WHERE THE URBAN FLOODPLAIN WAS CHANGED AND ALL THAT, THEY WERE GOING TO DESIGNATE OR THEY WERE GOING TO LEAVE SOMETHING IS OPEN SPACE AND THAT WAS GOING TO BE DESIGNATED AS OPEN SPACE.
THAT WAS GOING BE UNDER PROS OR DOES THAT JUST GET LEFT AS OPEN SPACE FOR THEM TO TAKE CARE OF WITHIN THEIR DEVELOPMENT?
>> SO IS THERE A FIRM DEFINITION BETWEEN THOSE TWO? LIKE WHEN OPEN SPACE GETS LEFT IN THE DEVELOPMENT FOR THE DEVELOPMENT TO CONTINUE TO CARE FOR VERSUS WHEN IT GETS DESIGNATED AS OPEN SPACE AND PROSE TAKES IT OVER TO MANAGE.
>> CORRECT. REMEMBER, OPEN SPACE IS A LISTED USE OF THE LAND AND FOR THE MOST PART, THE CITY IS OWNING THOSE LANDS, FOR THE MOST PART.
> LIKE FOR INSTANCE, THAT PARCEL ON SCHWEITZER HAVE TO BE TAKEN CARE OF BY THE CITY? NO?
>> NO. THEN THERE'S THE COMMON SPACE WERE COMMON OPEN SPACE NOW, WHICH IS THEY HAVE TO KEEP 15% OF THE OVERALL DEVELOPMENT SPACE AS AMENITY SPACE FOR THE COMMUNITY OR THE DEVELOPMENT ITSELF AND THAT'S MANAGED BY THE PRIVATE PROPERTY OWNER.
PROSE DOES NOT WANT TO MANAGE THOSE SMALLER SPACES.
WE COULDN'T AFFORD IT. [LAUGHTER]
>> EXACTLY. THAT HELPS THIS WHOLE OPEN SPACE THINK WE REALLY HAVE GOTTEN INTO THE WEEDS ON, IN OBVIOUSLY AN OPEN SPACE BECAUSE WE UPDATED OUR STRATEGIC PLAN AND WE LOOKED AT THESE DEFINITIONS IN OUR DIFFERENT DEFINITIONS WERE SOMEWHAT DIFFERENT THAN YOUR DEFINITIONS.
IT'S GOOD TO SEE THAT THERE'S SOME CLARITY HAPPENING AND I CAN EVEN SEE THAT MAYBE IN THE FUTURE US ON OPEN SPACES OR IN PROSE MAY ALSO NEED TO TWEAK ONE OF OUR DEFINITIONS.
SO FOR INSTANCE, JUST TO BACK IT UP, AS I MENTIONED, WE HAVE DESIGNATED OPEN SPACE, WHICH IS WHAT PROSE TAKES CARE OF, LIKE MACMILLAN OBSERVATORY MESA, THINGS LIKE THAT.
THEN WE WERE CALLING DEDICATED OPEN SPACE.
WHAT YOU'RE NOW CALLING PRIVATE OPEN SPACE OR PRIVATE SPACE.
I AGREE WITH YOUR TERM PRIVATE OPEN SPACE BECAUSE THAT WHOLE DESIGNATED VERSUS DEDICATED, WE ALL GET IT CONFUSED.
SO MY RECOMMENDATION BACK TO PROSE WHEN ARE BACK TO OPEN SPACES, WHEN WE GET TO DO A REVISION IS THAT MAYBE WE CHANGE OUR DEDICATED OPEN SPACE TO PRIVATE OPEN SPACE JUST SO THAT WE ALL ARE ON THE SAME PAGE LATER ON.
THEN WE CALLED COMMON OPEN SPACE, WHAT YOU CALLED COMMON OPEN SPACE.
SO THAT ONE BECOMES NICE AND CLEAR.
THE REASONING THAT THE OPEN SPACES COMMISSION, AFTER WE REVIEWED THIS LAST MONTH THAT WE WANTED OR WE HOPE TO HAVE A DEFINITION ADDED INTO THE CODE OR THE DEFINITIONS WITHIN THE CODE ABOUT DESIGNATED OPEN SPACE IS BECAUSE WE'RE TRYING TO CONTINUE TO ADVOCATE AND PROMOTE FOR MAYBE DEVELOPERS TO FIRST OF ALL UNDERSTAND WHAT THAT IS AND MAYBE CONSIDER THAT WHEN THERE'S OPPORTUNITY WITHIN A DEVELOPMENT.
BECAUSE OF ONE OF OUR TARGETED AREAS IN OUR STRATEGIC PLAN IS SO MUCH OF THE PROPERTY THAT'S SOUTH OF THE 40, THERE WILL BE DEVELOPED WHERE THERE'S SO MUCH OF AN OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE SOME OPEN SPACE, YET DESIGNATED OPEN SPACE THAT WE JUST WANT TO CONTINUE TO REMIND EVERYONE OF WHAT THAT DEFINITION IS AND THAT THERE IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE THAT POTENTIALLY AND THAT'S JUST ALL PART OF OUR STRATEGIES AND OUR STRATEGIC PLANS.
THAT WAS THE REASONING BEHIND THAT.
I KNOW WE CAN'T ASK FOR DESIGNATED OPEN SPACE AND SOME DEVELOPMENTS.
WE WOULDN'T WANT TO BECAUSE OF THOSE LITTLE PIECES.
BUT THERE COULD BE OPPORTUNITIES FOR LITTLE SMALL PARCELS THAT WE WOULD WANT THOSE.
>> I THINK A GOOD COOPERATIVE EFFORT WOULD BE LOOKING AT HOW WE CAN INCENTIVIZE GETTING THOSE LARGER OPEN SPACE AREAS, PLACES THAT WE KNOW ARE DESIRABLE, THAT ARE HARD FOR US TO OBTAIN BASED ON FINANCING AND ALL OF THOSE THINGS.
FUNDING, IT SEEMS LIKE A GOOD THING TO DO WOULD BE TO LOOK AT POTENTIAL INCENTIVES TO ACQUIRE THAT AS WE WORK WITH DEVELOPERS, AS THEY GO THROUGH REZONING CASES AND HAVING VERY STRONG CORE POLICIES THAT HELP US AS STAFF WORK WITH DEVELOPERS AS WE MOVE FORWARD.
BUT IT'S REALLY HARD TO FORCE CERTAIN THINGS.
[00:25:01]
IT'S REALLY HARD TO REQUIRE, BUT INCENTIVIZING IS A GREAT WAY TO WORK WITH OUR DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY.>> I THINK MAYBE THE START OF THAT WAS AT LEAST ADDING A DEFINITION TO THE CODE VERBIAGE TO START TO GET THAT UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT IT IS OUT THERE.
IT'S JUST IT WOULD BE ADDING A DEFINITION THAT DOESN'T RELATE TO ANY PARTICULAR PORTION OF THE ZONING CODE AND SHE NEEDS TO GO ON A DIET.
SHE'S A LITTLE THICK RIGHT NOW.
I THINK IT'S A GOOD CONVERSATION AND WE PROBABLY NEED TO VET OUT THOSE OPEN SPACE USES AND MAYBE THAT'S A GOOD CONVERSATION FOR BETHANY TO COME BACK TO THE OPEN SPACES COMMISSION AND WE CAN START WORKING ON A SEPARATE TEXT AMENDMENT.
WE'RE GOING TO BE RUNNING A LOT OF THEM THROUGH YOU.
YOU'RE GOING TO SEE LOTS OF LITTLE AMENDMENTS, BUT I MEAN, MAYBE THIS IS ONE WE CAN CONTINUE TO WORK ON WITH THE OPEN SPACES COMMISSION AND COME BACK AND FIGURE OUT HOW TO WORK INCENTIVE-WISE, HOW TO GET THOSE TERMINOLOGIES YOU'RE LOOKING FOR BEST IMPLEMENTED THROUGHOUT THE CODE.
>> WHEN YOU'RE TALKING OPEN SPACE, JUST THOSE TWO WORDS, OPEN SPACE WITHIN THE NEW CODE DEFINITIONS.
YOU'RE REALLY REFERRING TO THAT ZONING, PUBLIC OPEN SPACE.
HOW WERE YOU THINKING OF OPEN SPACE?
>> PUBLIC OPEN SPACE IS THE NAME OF A ZONING DISTRICT.
JUST LIKE MEDIUM-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL WE HAVE, SORRY.
PUBLIC OPEN SPACE IS THE NAME OF A ZONING DISTRICT, JUST LIKE SO THAT'S THE POS ZONE.
THEN THERE'S THE PUBLIC FACILITIES ZONE.
THOSE ARE OUR PUBLIC AND OPEN SPACE ZONES.
THE PUBLIC FACILITY AND THEN THE PUBLIC OPEN SPACE ZONE.
THOSE ARE THE NAMES OF AN ACTUAL ZONING DISTRICT LIKE THE MEDIUM-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ZONE OR THE HIGH-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ZONE.
UNDER EACH ZONING CATEGORY, THERE ARE LISTED USES, MULTIFAMILY, APART, OUR DWELLINGS IS A LISTED USE.
EVERY USE WE HAVE IN THE CODE HAS A DEFINITION THAT GOES ALONG WITH IT.
THAT'S HOW WE IMPLEMENT THE CODE, IS THE USE OF THAT DEFINITION IN TERMS OF THAT USE.
SO FOR EVERY USE THAT'S LISTED IN THE CODE WE HAVE THE DEFINITION FOR.
>> SO WILL YOU MAINTAIN A DEFINITION IN YOUR EYES OF OPEN SPACE? JUST THOSE TWO WORDS, I GUESS IS WHAT I'M GETTING AT.
>> YES, THERE'S A DEFINITION IN THE CODE NOW.
THE DEFINITION REMAINS THE SAME.
IT DOES NOT CHANGE BASED ON THIS AMENDMENT.
>> BUT THAT GOES BACK TO MY QUESTION BECAUSE TO ME THAT'S PUBLIC OPEN SPACE.
THE DEFINITION THERE SEEMS IT'S MORE LIKE PUBLIC OPEN SPACE.
>> UNDERSTOOD. BUT IT COULD BE OPEN TO BOTH.
SO IT IS POSSIBLE TO HAVE AN OPEN SPACE AREA THAT COULD BE PRIVATELY OWNED.
>> WOULD THAT BE SOMETHING LIKE THIS IS ON A DIFFERENT SCALE OUTSIDE THE CITY? BUT WE HAVE METEOR CRATER WHICH IS PRIVATELY OWNED. I DON'T KNOW HOW. [LAUGHTER]
>> I'M GOING TO SHOW YOU A MAP.
DO YOU MIND IF I DO THIS? I'M GOING TO SEE IF I CAN.
>> THAT'S WHY WE'RE WORKING ON THE AMENDMENT.
[LAUGHTER] I MEAN, YOUR CONFUSION IS ACTUALLY HELPFUL I THINK FOR STAFF TO SEE WHERE THINGS GET MIXED UP IN PEOPLE'S HEADS AND HOW WE CAN TRY AND CLARIFY AND SIMPLIFY, SKINNY UP.
>> I WOULD HATE TO SAY, FOR EXAMPLE, LOWELL OBSERVATORY HAS A LOT OF OPEN SPACE AREAS AROUND IT AND WE RECOGNIZE IT ALMOST AS OPEN SPACE BECAUSE WE ALSO HAVE OBSERVATORY MESA THAT THE CITY HAS OWNERSHIP OF.
THEIR PROPERTY INTERRELATES WITH OUR OPEN SPACE.
THAT COULD CERTAINLY BE IN THE FUTURE AS LOWELL OBSERVATORY LOOKS AT THEIR POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT OF THEIR SITE.
THEY ALSO HAVE CERTAIN DEED RESTRICTIONS.
SO WHEN THE GOVERNMENT GAVE LOWELL OBSERVATORY THAT LAND, IT WAS ALLOTTED FOR SPECIFIC USES, ONLY OBSERVATORY USES.
I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'VE HEARD ANY OF THIS CONVERSATION OR LISTENED TO IT.
THAT'S A POTENTIAL OF LAND THAT COULD FALL UNDER THE OPEN SPACE ZONE WITH THE USE OF OPEN SPACE.
THERE ISN'T A REQUIREMENT RIGHT NOW ON THAT DEFINITION THAT IT BE PUBLICLY OWNED, EVEN THOUGH THE ZONING CATEGORY IS CALLED PUBLIC OPEN SPACE.
FOR EXAMPLE, THE OTHER ZONING DISTRICT CALLED PUBLIC FACILITY, NAH, FOR EXAMPLE, HAD 30 ACRES THAT WERE PROPOSED TO BE ZONED PUBLIC FACILITY BECAUSE THAT WAS
[00:30:03]
THE ZONING CATEGORY AND THE USES THAT WORKED BEST WITH THEIR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT FOR THAT SITE WHICH IS REALLY JUST AN OPEN SPACE PARK AMENITY.PUBLIC FACILITY IS GENERALLY WHAT WE REZONE PROPERTIES TO THAT ARE ACTIVE AMENITY PARKS THAT ARE MORE THAN PASSIVE RECREATION BECAUSE THEN WE CAN GET INTO THAT WHOLE WHAT'S PASSIVE RECREATION VERSUS ACTIVE RECREATION, WHAT'S REALLY OPEN SPACE VERSUS WHAT'S A PARK.
THAT'S A BIG LONG CONVERSATION AS WELL.
BUT I WOULD POINT OUT, AND I'M NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO PULL UP THE ZONING MAP FOR YOU, BUT IN TIMBER SKY, THERE IS A SIGNIFICANT PORTION OF WHAT WAS COMMON SPACE IN THEIR DEVELOPMENT THAT THEY SET ASIDE AS OPEN SPACE.
IT ALSO INCLUDES THE FOOT'S TRAIL.
IT MADE SENSE TO MAKE IT MORE PUBLICLY ACCESSIBLE, BUT IT'S PRIVATELY OWNED AND IT FALLS WITHIN THAT POS ZONE.
THE USE OF THE PROPERTY IS TECHNICALLY OPEN SPACE, BUT AGAIN, IT'S OWNED BY A HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION.
YOU ARE LIKELY ONLY GOING TO SEE THAT IN LARGE MASTER PLAN COMMUNITIES.
YOU'RE NOT GOING TO SEE IT ON THE SMALLER DEVELOPMENT SITES.
BUT IT'S A GREAT WAY TO ALSO BE ABLE TO GET OPEN SPACE FOR COMMUNITY THAT THEN THE CITY IS ALSO RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTAINING AND TAKING CARE OF AS WELL, WHICH IS ALSO ONE OF THE EXCITING BURDENS OF HAVING OPEN SPACE.
>> WHEN YOU'RE TALKING OPEN SPACE IN THIS CONTEXT, IT IS ALL FOR WITHIN A DEVELOPMENT?
>> OKAY. SO WHAT IF THE DETERMINATION WAS WE HAVE DESIGNATED OPEN SPACE WHICH IS CITY OWNED AND MANAGED AND THEN WE HAVE DEVELOPMENT OPEN SPACE.
THEN THAT TELLS US THAT IT'S OPEN SPACE WITHIN A DEVELOPMENT AND IT'S PART OF THAT DEVELOPMENT.
>> IF YOU WOULD LIKE US TO GO BACK AND REDO THE TEXT AMENDMENT BECAUSE THAT MAKES MORE SENSE, WE CAN DO THAT.
COMMON SPACE AND PRIVATE SPACE THAT WE FELT CONFIDENT MOVING FORWARD BECAUSE THE OPEN SPACES COMMISSION AGREED WITH THAT.
IT WAS KEEPING THE TERMINOLOGY CLOSE ENOUGH.
I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'VE SEEN THE TEXT AMENDMENT.
IT'S A LOT OF WORK TO GO THROUGH AND CHANGE THAT TERMINOLOGY.
WE'RE HAPPY TO DO IT IF THAT'S WHAT MAKES SENSE.
I THINK THE IMPORTANT THING TO UNDERSTAND IS ONE IS A USE, A LAND USE, WHILE ONE IS A DEVELOPMENT STANDARD.
CALLING IT A DEVELOPMENT ORIENTED OPEN SPACE COULD ALSO BE CONFUSING.
WE'RE TRYING TO GET TO A TERMINOLOGY THAT'S MUCH MORE LIKE LOT COVERAGE OR SETBACK, COMMON SPACE WE THOUGHT WAS MORE IN ALIGNMENT WITH DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, BUT WE'LL TAKE WHATEVER FEEDBACK YOU WANT AND AMEND THE CODE ACCORDINGLY.
>> JUST FIGURED SINCE IT WAS A WORK SESSION FOR US TO HASH OVER, IF THERE WAS IDEAS THAT CAME FORWARD AND IT MADE SENSE.
>> WE'LL GO BACK TO THE OPEN SPACES COMMISSION AND RUN THAT BACK THROUGH.
WE WOULD LOVE TO GET THE TERMINOLOGY THAT YOU WANT.
I MEAN, THAT'S DEFINITELY WHAT THIS IS FOR.
GET THE TERMINOLOGY YOU WANT, BUT WE JUST GO BACK TO GROUND ZERO TO START OVER ON THE TEXT AMENDMENT.
>> TIFFANY, DOES THERE HAPPEN TO HAVE A SLIDE THAT HAS THE PROPOSED DEFINITIONS OR IS IT JUST THE CURRENT?
>> THE TEXT AMENDMENT ON THE AGENDA WEBSITE? SEE HOW FAST I CAN PULL IT UP.
>> THE LANGUAGE, WHO IS IT MOSTLY WRITTEN FOR?
>> FOR THE MOST PART, IT'S STAFF AND THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY.
BASICALLY, THIS REQUEST CAME FROM SUSTAINABILITY BECAUSE OPEN SPACES USED TO BE A PROGRAM RUN BY OUR SUSTAINABILITY DIVISION.
SO THAT'S WHERE THE ORIGINAL REQUEST FOR THE TEXT AMENDMENT CAME FROM, WAS THE DIVISION THAT WAS RUNNING OUR OPEN SPACE BECAUSE PLANNING STAFF SO FREQUENTLY GETS UP AND SAYS, THE OPEN SPACE REQUIRED IN THIS DEVELOPMENT AND IT GETS CONFUSED IN THE COMMUNITY.
THEY ASKED US TO CHANGE THAT TERMINOLOGY ABOUT SIX YEARS AGO.
IT'S THE NUMBER 1 ITEM ON OUR LIST OF THINGS TO CHANGE.
THAT'S WHERE IT ORIGINATED FROM.
NOW OPEN SPACE HAS MOVED UNDER PARKS AND REC.
PARKS AND REC WAS FORMERLY PART OF PUBLIC WORKS.
BUT IT MOVED AROUND, THAT'S WHY IN THE SIX YEARS SINCE THE REQUEST WAS MADE EVERYTHING HAS CHANGED.
[00:35:04]
SO WE TOOK IT TO THE OPEN SPACES COMMISSION TO SORT OF FIGURE OUT WHAT THAT PREFERRED TERMINOLOGY WAS.>> THE REASON WHY I ASKED MY QUESTION WAS IF JOE BLOW OFF THE STREET COMES IN AND SAYS, WHY, I DON'T KNOW THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN COMMON SPACE AND, LET'S SEE WHAT WE'RE GOING TO CALL IT, PRIVATE SPACE, COMMON SPACE AND PRIVATE SPACE, OR OPEN SPACE AND PRIVATE SPACE.
WHAT I'M TRYING TO SEE, IS IT LESS CONFUSING TO THE PUBLIC RATHER THAN JUST DEVELOPERS AND CITY STAFF? BUT PUBLIC MIGHT COME INTO THIS AND NOT UNDERSTAND ALL THE TERMINOLOGY AS WELL AND THAT'S COMING BACK TO WHAT MARY IS TALKING ABOUT. [OVERLAPPING]
>> IF THERE IS BETTER TERMINOLOGY, WE JUST WEREN'T GOING TO THE ORIGINATING GROUP THAT WAS REQUESTING THIS CHANGE.
IT ACTUALLY DOESN'T BOTHER PLANNING STAFF ALL THAT MUCH.
[LAUGHTER] BUT WE KNOW THAT WE'RE BOTHERING OTHER PEOPLE, SO WE WERE TRYING TO FIGURE THAT OUT AND TRYING TO WORK AND APPEASE OUR PARTNERS.
THAT'S WHY WE REACHED OUT TO GET A GO-AHEAD ON THE TERMINOLOGY WITH THE OPEN SPACES COMMISSION.
BUT IF YOU FEEL THAT THAT TERMINOLOGY IS NOT THE APPROPRIATE TERMINOLOGY, WE'LL MAKE THE CHANGES, WE'LL JUST GO BACK.
>> I THINK A LOT OF OPEN SPACES COMMISSION IS NEWER.
SO WHEREVER THIS GENERATED ORIGINALLY, I'M GUESSING THEY'RE MAYBE NOT MAYBE ONE OR TWO IF THAT LEFT ON THE COMMISSION.
WHAT I ALSO FIND JUST OUT FROM WHAT KAREN WAS SAYING TOO, WHEN YOU'RE OUT IN THE GENERAL PUBLIC, EVERYBODY THROWS AROUND THE TERM OPEN SPACE AND THAT CAN MEAN NATIONAL FOREST TO JUST UNDEVELOPED LAND, TO WHATEVER.
THAT'S JUST SUCH A LOOSE TERM AND I CAN SEE THE NEED TO NARROW THAT FOR ALL OF THESE INTERNAL USAGES.
THAT'S WHY I THINK I CAN RUN THIS PASSED OPEN SPACES COMMISSION NEXT MEETING OR YOU WOULD PROBABLY SEND IT BACK TO THEM BEFORE THAT BECAUSE WE MEET AT THE END OF THE MONTH.
BUT I WOULD GUESS THAT CALLING THIS DEVELOPMENT OPEN SPACE FOR YOUR USAGE VERSUS DESIGNATED OPEN SPACE THAT GETS DEDICATED TO THE KITS CITY VERSUS THAT LOOSE OLD TERM OPEN SPACE. [OVERLAPPING]
>> YOU NEED TO COME UP WITH TWO TERMS THOUGH, BECAUSE WE HAVE ONE THAT IS COMMON WITHIN A DEVELOPMENT AND ONE THAT IS EXCLUSIVE TO EACH UNIT.
>> I STILL THINK COMMON SPACE AND PRIVATE SPACE ARE GOOD TO GO.
I THINK IT'S JUST THAT LOOSE CATCH-ALL OPEN SPACE TERM.
>> SO IF WE CREATE A NEW DEFINITION CALLED DEVELOPMENT OPEN SPACE, IT'S LIKE THE SAME ISSUE WITH LEGALLY DEFINED OPEN SPACE.
IT NEEDS TO REFER BACK TO SOMETHING IN THE CODE.
SO WE ONLY DEFINED TERMS IN THE ZONING CODE THAT WE USE SOMEWHERE ELSE IN THE ZONING CODE, IF THAT MAKES SENSE.
>> WHAT IF IT WAS SOMETHING LIKE COMMON DEVELOPMENT SPACE, INSTEAD IT JUST COMMON SPACE? COMMON DEVELOPMENT SPACE AND PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT SPACE.
>> IT IS ENTIRELY UP TO THE COMMISSION AND WHAT YOU FEEL IS APPROPRIATE.
I THINK AS LONG AS IT'S A DEFINED TERM, WE AS STAFF WILL FIGURE IT OUT.
SO YOU TELL US WHAT YOU THINK IS BEST AND THEN WE'LL MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT.
>> I THINK WHEN YOU GET INTO WORKING WITH DEVELOPERS AND THEY'RE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THEY'RE DOING WITH YARDS AND PATIOS AND LITTLE POCKET PARKS AND GARDENS, I THINK YOU STILL NEED THOSE PRIVATE SPACE, COMMON SPACE FOR THEIR USAGES.
I SEE THAT NEED. I'VE SEEN THAT NEED.
>> ARE YOU TALKING MAINLY JUST ABOUT THE USAGE, THE LAND USE?
>> NOT NECESSARILY HOW IT'S USED. NO.
>> WELL, I THINK THIS DISCUSSION ILLUSTRATES YOUR CONFUSION BECAUSE I'M CONFUSED LIKE CRAZY RIGHT NOW.
I THINK IF WE BOIL IT DOWN TO WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO DO, YOU'RE JUST TRYING TO RENAME TWO THINGS.
YOU'RE JUST TRYING TO GO DOWN FROM COMMON OPEN SPACE, JUST TO COMMENT SPACE, PRIVATE OPEN SPACE TO PRIVATE SPACE.
I DON'T SEE THE NEED TO ADD THE WORD DEVELOPMENT TO ANY OF THIS.
[00:40:02]
I THINK THAT CONFUSES THINGS.I GUESS THE ONE QUESTION I HAVE IN ALL THIS IS, WHAT DO OTHER MUNICIPALITIES DO IN THIS SITUATION? BECAUSE THIS COMES UP EVERYWHERE.
>> THEY USUALLY USE THE TERM OPEN SPACE.
>> THEY PROBABLY ALSO DON'T HAVE A CITY THAT HAS DESIGNATED OPEN SPACE THAT THEY OWN.
HOW DO THEY DIFFERENTIATE THAT? [OVERLAPPING]
>> A LOT OF CITIES DO, PHOENIX, SCOTTSDALE, A LOT OF THEM ON LARGE MUNICIPAL OPEN SPACE AREAS.
IT'S BEEN A VERY SENSITIVE TOPIC AND CONCERN.
I THINK FOR AS LONG AS I LIVED IN FLAGSTAFF, WE HAVE WANTED TO TALK ABOUT WHAT'S LEGALLY DESIGNATED OPEN SPACE.
WHAT DOES OPEN SPACE ACTUALLY CONSIST OF? IS IT PASSIVE? IS IT ACTIVE? BUT I THINK OVERALL WHAT YOU HAVE TO RECOGNIZE, AND MAYBE THIS IS A GOOD CONVERSATION AS WELL FOR THE UPCOMING REGIONAL PLAN AND DEFINING WHAT THOSE LAND USES ARE AND MAYBE THERE'S A MORE APPROPRIATE LOCATION THERE, I THINK THAT ULTIMATELY THE TOOL FOR THE ZONING CODE IS TO IMPLEMENT DEVELOPMENT AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND WE HAVE CERTAIN PERMITTED USES AND HOW WE APPLY DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS TO THOSE PERMITTED USES.
THAT'S OUR PRIMARY FUNCTION WITH THE ZONING CODE.
BECAUSE IT'S THIS GREAT PLACE.
IT'S LIKE THIS, IT'S THIS LAW, IT'S THIS LIBRARY, IT'S GOT ALL OF THESE DEFINITIONS IN IT.
BUT IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT TO DEFINE TERMS THAT ARE USED IN THE ZONING CODE AND NOT JUST AT BECAUSE THERE ARE, RIGHT NOW I'M FINDING LOTS OF DEFINITIONS OF THINGS WE DON'T ACTUALLY EMPLOY IN THE CODE, SO THERE'S LOTS OF CLEAN-UP WE'RE GOING TO NEED TO DO ANYWAY, BUT IT MAKES IT HARD.
I THINK CAN BE EVEN MORE CONFUSING THE PUBLIC TO INCLUDE DEFINITIONS THAT AREN'T NORMAL TERMS USED ELSEWHERE IN THE CODE FOR ENFORCEMENT.
>> QUESTION. IN YOUR USAGE, IS OPEN SPACE THE BROAD TERM, AND COMMON SPACE AND PRIVATE SPACE ARE YOUR ONLY TWO SUB-TERMS? IS OPEN SPACE YOUR LOOSE TERM, OR ARE YOU LEAVING THAT AS AN UNDEVELOPED PIECE?
>> THERE REALLY ISN'T A TERM AND THEN A SUB-TERM.
THEY'RE REALLY TWO SEPARATE THINGS.
BECAUSE OPEN SPACE IS A LAND USE AND COMMON OPEN SPACE IS A DEVELOPMENT STANDARD.
SO IT'S A STANDARD YOU APPLY TO A DEVELOPMENT PROJECT.
THEY'RE COMPLETELY ACTUALLY UNRELATED TO ONE ANOTHER.
THEY ARE JUST DIFFERENT THINGS.
IT'S THE AREA IN WHICH A DEVELOPED BURDEN NEEDS TO LEAVE OPEN.
[LAUGHTER] IT'S AN IDEA AND IF THERE'S A BETTER NAME FOR IT, THEN COMMON SPACE, WE'RE ALL IN.
>> THAT'S, TO ME, IF I WAS NOT AT THIS MEETING AND NOT HEARING THIS AND JUST HEARING COMMON SPACE, I'D BE CONFUSED.
SO I THINK IT WOULD BE GOOD TO HAVE THAT COMMON DEVELOPMENT, OPEN SPACE OR SPACE, AND PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT SPACE BECAUSE THAT DEFINES IT FOR ME, THEN I'M NOT HEARING COMMON SPACE, WELL, COMMON SPACE WOULD BE, I WOULD MIX THAT TERM UP WITH OPEN SPACE.
I CAN SEE THAT THE TWO COULD BE INTERCHANGEABLE.
IF IT'S NOT, I THINK PUTTING THAT COMMON DEVELOPMENT SPACE IN THERE WOULD, FOR ME BEFORE THIS MEETING AND FOR THE GENERAL PUBLIC, BE MORE DEFINED.
>> RESPECTFULLY, I DON'T AGREE WITH THAT BECAUSE I LIKE THE SIMPLICITY OF JUST CALLING IT COMMON SPACE.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS IN THIS CASE.
IN OTHER WORDS, IT'S ALL ABOUT DEVELOPMENT, THAT SEEMS LIKE IT'S UNDERSTOOD.
IT'S SOMEBODY WITHIN THEIR, WHATEVER THEY'RE DEVELOPING THEY WANT, THEN THERE ARE GOING TO BE REAL SPECIFIC STANDARDS FOR WHAT COST SPACE THAT'S COMMON TO THE WHOLE COMPLEX OR SPACE THAT'S PRIVATE.
I LIKE THE SIMPLICITY OF THAT.
I FEEL LIKE IT'S REDUNDANT TO SAY DEVELOPMENT BECAUSE IT'S JUST ADDING A DIFFERENT THING.
I THOUGHT WHAT THE CONCERN WAS THAT YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT MARION.
I'M CONFUSED TOO [LAUGHTER] BUT I THOUGHT THAT WHAT YOU WERE REFERRING TO MORE WAS JUST SOMETHING THAT WAS TALKING ABOUT THE USE.
LIKE WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT A LAND USE AND YOU WANT TO INDICATE WHETHER WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT OPEN SPACE, YOU'RE GOING TO BE TALKING ABOUT SOMETHING THAT'S LIKE A PARK OR SOMETHING THAT'S,
[00:45:01]
THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT YOU WERE REFERRING TO.>> TO ME IT WOULD HELP WHEN A NEW DEVELOPMENT COMES IN AND THEY SEND A LETTER OUT TO THE HOUSING NEARBY AND THEY HAVE MEETINGS THAT THE PUBLIC UNDERSTAND THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN JUST COMMON SPACE, AND OPEN SPACE, BECAUSE I THINK, TO ME, IT'S ALMOST REDUNDANT THOSE TERMS UNLESS YOU PUT THAT DEVELOPMENT IN THERE.
>> WE WOULD NOT BE ADVERTISING THAT PARTICULAR DEVELOPMENT STANDARD UNLESS SOMEBODY WAS ASKING FOR A VARIANCE.
FOR EXAMPLE, WHEN WE SEND A LEGAL NOTICE OUT, YOU'RE REZONING YOUR PROPERTY FROM RURAL RESIDENTIAL TO HIGH-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, WE KEEP IT THAT SIMPLE.
WE DON'T GO THROUGH ALL OF THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS.
BUT A STAFF SUMMARY WOULD ALSO EXPLAIN TO YOU WHAT COMMON SPACE IS AND DEFINE THE TERM.
>> IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF LAKE MARY ROAD.
LET'S TALK ABOUT THE, WHATEVER IT, IS IT TOWNHOUSES, APARTMENTS, WHATEVER THEY ARE.
I THINK THEY HAVE, LET'S SAY COMMON SPACE, CORRECT?
>> I KNOW THAT THERE WAS A LOT OF COMMUNITY ISSUES AND SOME OF THOSE HAD TO DO WITH THE COMMON SPACE.
IS THAT RIGHT? I'M I WRONG ON THAT?
>> I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH THE CASE ENOUGH.
>> I THINK YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE CIVIC SPACE REQUIREMENT.
>> NOW, WE'VE GOT ANOTHER, CIVIC SPACE REQUIREMENT.
>> REQUIRED TO PROVIDE 5% CIVIC SPACE, WHICH IS SPACE THAT IS ACCESSIBLE TO THE PUBLIC, NOT JUST THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE IN THE DEVELOPMENT, WHEREAS COMMON SPACE IS TYPICALLY JUST FOR THE PEOPLE IN THE DEVELOPMENT.
THERE WAS SOME CONCERN BECAUSE WE'RE LOOKING FOR AMENITY SPACE THAT COULD BE USED BY THE PUBLIC, AND THAT PROJECT HAD SOME CHALLENGES WITH THE OVERHEAD POWER LINES AND NOT BEING ABLE TO CONSTRUCT IT RIGHT UPFRONT BY THE ROAD, WHICH IS THE PERFECT PLACE TO PUT CIVIC SPACE.
I THINK MAYBE THAT'S WHERE, AND YOU'RE GOING TO SEE THAT AMENDMENT IN TWO WEEKS.
>> WAS CIVIC SPACE, WAS THAT A DEVELOPMENT STANDARD OR LAND USE CATEGORY?
>> THAT IS ALSO A DEVELOPMENT STANDARD.
>> BECAUSE I THINK THERE WAS THEN CIVIC SPACE THAT WAS PUT INTO THE APARTMENT BUILDING THAT'S GOING ON BUTLER IN FOUR STREET, IS THAT CORRECT? IS THERE A CIVIC SPACE IN THAT?
>> ANY DEVELOPMENT THAT'S OVER 50 RESIDENTIAL UNITS REQUIRES CIVIC SPACE, AND CIVIC SPACE IS REQUIRED TO BE OPEN TO THE PUBLIC.
THERE IS ANOTHER LITTLE TRICKY PIECE, AND THE CODE WHERE IT SAYS WHERE CIVIC SPACE AND OPEN SPACE ARE BOTH REQUIRED, THEY SHOULD BE COMBINED TOGETHER.
BUT IT'S IN AN ODD PLACE IN THE CODE THAT YOU WOULD NEVER KNOW TO LOOK FOR IT AND ONLY RECENTLY FOUND IT.
WE'RE FIXING ALL OF THAT IN AN UPCOMING AMENDMENT.
CIVIC SPACE IS GOING TO BE SPECIFIC TO COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT.
COMMON SPACE WILL BE SPECIFIC TO RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT.
REQUIRING A RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT TO HAVE A COMMUNITY SPACE THAT IS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC IS FRAUGHT WITH PROBLEMS.
>> IF YOU WERE ADDING THE WORD DEVELOPMENT IN TO THE STANDARD, WHEN IT FOLLOWS THAT YOU'D WANT TO HAVE TO SAY THEN CIVIC OR DEVELOP CIVIC DEVELOPMENT SPACE OR WOULDN'T WANT TO BE CONSISTENT? AS I FEEL LIKE THAT'S [OVERLAPPING].
>> THAT GETS MORE AND MORE ASSURED.
>> SURE. YOU GUYS YOU ALL DECIDE WHAT THE BEST TERMINOLOGY IS AND WE'LL MAKE THAT CHANGE AND WE'LL FIGURE OUT HOW TO GET IT DONE.
CIVIC SPACE IS REALLY A DIFFERENT THING.
>> YOU SAID IS SPECIFIC TO COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT.
>> CIVIC SPACE IN AN UPCOMING AMENDMENT YOU'LL SEE WILL BE SPECIFIC TO COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT,
[00:50:01]
AND COMMON SPACE WILL BE SPECIFIC TO RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT.RIGHT NOW, COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT IS ONLY REQUIRED OVER A CERTAIN SIZE, 20,000 SQUARE FEET IS REQUIRED TO PROVIDE CIVIC SPACE, AND THAT'S 5% OF THE SITE.
WE ARE IN A HOUSING EMERGENCY.
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS OVER 50% THAT ARE EITHER PRD IN THE HR ZONE OR THE MR ZONE ARE THEN REQUIRED TO PROVIDE 15% OPEN SPACE WITH AN ADDITIONAL 5% CIVIC SPACE.
THAT'S 20% OF THE GROSS AREA THAT NOW HAS TO BE SET ASIDE FOR AMENITY SPACE.
IN AREAS WHERE WE'RE PUSHING THAT ALSO HAVE THEN RESOURCE PROTECTION STANDARDS.
PRESERVING 50% OF THE TREES WHILE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT YOU ONLY HAVE TO PRESERVE 30%.
CLEARLY YOU'RE STARTING TO SEE WHERE MAYBE WE'RE ENDING UP ON A HOUSING CRISIS, AND WHY WE'RE NOT ABLE TO ACCOMPLISH DENSITIES WHERE WE'RE LOOKING TO UNDER OUR EXISTING CODE.
THOSE ARE UPCOMING. THEY'RE COMING FOR YOU.
WE THOUGHT THIS WAS THE EASY ONE [LAUGHTER].
>> BACK TO YOUR USE OF THE WORD OPEN SPACE.
BY CLEANING UP THIS DEFINITION OF PRIVATE SPACE AND COMMON SPACE, DOES THAT IN ESSENCE MEAN THAT YOU WILL USE THE WORD OPEN SPACE LESS?
>> JUST HOW I'M UNDERSTANDING, OPEN SPACE IN YOUR USAGE AT THIS POINT IS BOTH COMMON SPACE AND PRIVATE SPACE?
>> IF YOU HEAR A STAFF MEMBER USE OPEN SPACE AND REFERENCE TO A DEVELOPMENT PROJECT, YOU HAVE FULL PERMISSION TO COME UP AND TAP THEM ON THE HEAD AND SAY YOU'RE WRONG.
>> WE DON'T WANT YOU TO USE OPEN SPACE.
WE WANT YOU TO SAY, OTHERWISE I WANT THEM TO USE DEVELOPMENT OPEN SPACE [LAUGHTER]. YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN?
>> I AGREE THIS IS DEFINITELY GOING TO BE A STAFF RETRAINING, AND STAFF IS GOING TO HAVE TO BE ON THEIR TOES TO REMEMBER, IT MEANS CHANGING STAFF REPORT TEMPLATES.
IT MEANS CHANGING PRESENTATION TEMPLATES.
WE'RE DEFINITELY GOING TO BE ON THE HOOK FOR THIS ONE.
TO ME, AND I KNOW WHEN I SPEAK PARTIALLY ON BEHALF OF OPEN SPACES, I STILL THINK IT'S GOOD TO SAY THAT WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE IS DEVELOPMENT OPEN SPACE, IN YOUR SUBCATEGORIES.
THEN WE'RE TALKING DESIGNATED OPEN SPACE, WHICH IS TRULY GIVEN TO THE CITY AS A DEVELOPED, OWNED OPEN SPACE.
>> I THINK WE'RE PROPOSING THE SAME THING, BUT JUST BY ELIMINATING THE WORD OPEN, WE'RE DIVORCING THE TWO.
>> OPEN SPACE GETS TO KEEP THAT TERM OPEN SPACE AND WE'RE NOT ALLOWED TO USE IT ANYMORE.
I'LL GET A LITTLE SHARP COLOR OR SOMETHING FOR STAFF THAT WE GET TO ZAP EACH OTHER WHENEVER WE SAY [LAUGHTER] THAT TERMINOLOGY.
>> IT'S LIKE THOSE NO BARK COLORS.
>> MY CONCERN ACTUALLY, AGAIN STAFF IS COMING TO YOU AT THEIR BEST EFFORT.
PERSONALLY, I GET A LITTLE CONCERNED WITH THE IDEA OF DEVELOPMENT BECAUSE THEN IT'S THERE COULD BE SITUATIONS WHERE THEY'RE NOT PROPOSING IMPROVEMENTS IN THAT COMMON SPACE, BUT IT'S CALLED COMMON DEVELOPMENT SPACE.
DOES THAT GET CONFUSING IF I JUST WANT TO LEAVE THIS AREA UNDEVELOPED AS TREES AND GRASS AND ROCKS OR WHATEVER.
>> I LIKED THIS LIMIT, THE SYMMETRY.
THAT SYMMETRY OF SAYING YOU HAVE THIS SPACE AND IT MIGHT BE IN A COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT, IT MIGHT BE IN A RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, IT'S IN A DEVELOPMENT.
WHAT IS IT? WELL, MAYBE IT'S PRIVATE SPACE, MAYBE IT'S COMMON SPACE, MAYBE IT'S CIVIC SPACE.
JUST DROPPING OPEN OUT MAKES A LOT OF SENSE TO ME.
BUT THIS DISCUSSION HELPS YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT THE CONCERN WAS.
>> I HATE TO GIVE MORE IDEAS, BUT I MEAN, IT COULD BE AMENITY SPACE, COMMON AMENITIES SPACE, PRIVATE AMENITIES SPACE.
BUT THEN THERE IS AN ASSUMPTION THAT THERE'S LIKE WHAT ALEX IS SAYING.
THE TERM COMMON SPACE LEAVES IT MORE FLEXIBLE.
IT CAN INCLUDE BOTH AMENITIES AND IT CAN INCLUDE OPEN AREAS WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT, WHICH IS HOW WE'VE APPLIED THAT 15% TO THOSE DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS.
[00:55:05]
THERE WAS THOUGHT ABOUT MAKING IT MORE, CALLING IT MORE AMENITY SPACE, BUT THEN THE COMMUNITY HAS AN EXPECTATION THAT ALL OF THAT SPACE WILL BE FULL OF AMENITIES.THE DEVELOPMENT THAT'S GOING IN ON IS IT PLAZA WAS MULTIFAMILY AND THEY COULDN'T DEVELOP A BIG SECTION BECAUSE IT WAS VERY TREAT, AND THEY LEFT THAT UNDEVELOPED OR THEY'RE LEAVING IT UNDEVELOPED.
THAT WOULD NOW BE JUST CALLED COMMON SPACE.
>> SHARING IN THEIR DEVELOPMENT IT'S PROBABLY CALLED NOTHING BECAUSE THEY WEREN'T REQUIRED.
I THINK PLAZA IS A MIXED USE PROJECT.
IT'S NOT REQUIRED TO PROVIDE. NO.
>> I THINK THE ONE SHE'S TALKING ABOUT IS THE CONDOS.
>> [OVERLAPPING] THIS IS THE ONE. THERE'S TOO MANY PROJECTS THAT.
>> IT'S MULTIFAMILY AND THAT AREA IS SET ASIDE AS COMMON SPACE.
IT'S ALSO STEEP SLOPES AND TREE RESOURCES SET ASIDE.
[OVERLAPPING] THAT'S A PERFECT EXAMPLE OF WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT [OVERLAPPING] BY JUST LEAVING IT NATURAL AND STILL BEING ABLE TO SAY THAT'S COMMON SPACE.
>> TYPICALLY YOUR LANDSCAPE BUFFERS AS WELL SO MOST PROPERTIES HAVE LANDSCAPE BUFFERS, THAT GETS INCLUDED AS WELL.
>> I THINK IN THE DEFINITIONS THERE HAS TO BE, MAYBE WE DON'T SAY COMMON DEVELOPMENT SPACE, BUT IT SAYS FOR DEVELOPMENTS, COMMON SPACE AND PRIVATE SPACE.
AN OPEN SPACE IS NOT NECESSARILY FOR DEVELOPMENTS.
>> WHAT IS COMMON OPEN SPACE NOW IS PROPOSED TO BE COMMON SPACE AND THE DEFINITION IS THE MINIMUM AMOUNT OF SPACE OR AREA WITHIN A DEVELOPMENT INTENDED OR RESERVED FOR THE FOLLOWING.
THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING IS THE DEFINITION MAKES IT SPECIFIC THAT IT'S FOR THE DEVELOPMENT. SORRY.
>> IT HELPS TO KNOW THAT OPEN SPACE IS NOT GOING TO REALLY BE YOUR TERM ANYMORE.
I DON'T THINK IT NEGATES OPEN SPACE COMMISSION WANTING A DEFINITION OF DESIGNATED OPEN SPACE TO START TO GET THAT OUT THERE.
>> OR TO FIGURE OUT A WAY TO INCENTIVIZE DEVELOPERS CONTRIBUTING TOWARDS THE OPEN SPACE PROGRAM.
>> THOSE ARE THE CURRENT AND THE HIGHLIGHTED AREAS ARE WHAT YOU'RE PROPOSING TO TAKE. I AM SORRY.
>> I WAS JUST HIGHLIGHTING THE FACT THAT IT'S SPECIFIC TO A DEVELOPMENT AND SPECIFIC TO A UNIT RIGHT NOW.
THOSE ARE NOT CHANGING WITHIN THE DEFINITION.
I'M FINE KEEPING THE TERMS KNOWING THAT THE DEFINITION WILL BE SEEN WITHIN A DEVELOPMENT WITH EACH UNIT.
SHOULD THAT BE SAYING EACH UNIT WITHIN A DEVELOPMENT OR EACH UNIT WITHIN THE PRIVATE?
>> WE CAN ADD THAT FOR EACH UNIT.
>> UNDER THE PRIVATE, THE MINIMUM AMOUNT OF PRIVATE OPEN AREA REQUIRED WITH EACH UNIT COULD BE CONFUSING IF YOU'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT IT WITHIN A DEVELOPMENT.
>> I SEE WHY YOU WANT ADD THE WORD DEVELOPMENT BACK IN.
>> THE REVISED VERSION OF THIS DEFINITION BECOMES PRIVATE SPACE.
THE MINIMUM AMOUNT OF PRIVATE ON ENCLOSED AREA REQUIRED PER DWELLING UNIT PROVIDED AS COVERED AND UNCOVERED OUTDOOR YARD AREAS, PATIOS, PORCHES, DECKS, AND BALCONIES, BUT EXCLUDING STAIRS AND LANDINGS.
WE MADE IT REALLY CLEAR IT WAS PER DWELLING UNIT, BUT WE COULD PUT PER DWELLING UNIT OR A LOT WITHIN A DEVELOPMENT OR SUBDIVISION AND JUST MAKE THAT DEFINITION MORE CLEAR.
WHAT THE BIG CHANGE TO THIS DEFINITION AS
[01:00:01]
PREVIOUSLY SETBACKS WERE NOT INCLUDED AS PART OF YOUR PRIVATE OPEN SPACE, WHICH IS PROBLEMATIC BECAUSE IT WAS ALLOWED FOR COMMON, BUT IT WASN'T ALLOWED FOR PRIVATE.THAT MEANS MOST OF YOUR BACKYARD COULDN'T BE CONSIDERED PRIVATE OPEN SPACE.
>> THIS IS QUESTION I WAS GOING TO ASK AFTER OUR MEETING.
I HAVE A NEIGHBOR WHO'S BUILDING A SECOND HOME BEHIND THEIR HOME IN THEIR BACKYARD.
WILL THIS PERTAIN TO THAT, HOW MUCH THEY HAVE TO HAVE FOR THE OPEN SPACE ON A PRIVATE BUILD?
>> THE ONLY DEVELOPMENTS THAT RIGHT NOW ARE REQUIRED TO HAVE PRIVATE SPACE ARE THOSE THAT DEVELOP UNDER THE TRANSECT ZONES.
THAT'S THE ONLY PLACE THAT THAT PARTICULAR DEVELOPMENT STANDARD IS FOUND.
THEN THERE'S ALSO REFERENCE TO IT AS PART OF MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT, BUT THERE ISN'T A PERCENTAGE LIKE AS AN EXACT STANDARD THAT HAS TO BE PROVIDED.
THAT'S THE OTHER ONE PLACE IN THE CODE THAT I KNOW OF THAT PRIVATE OPEN SPACE IS MENTIONED.
IF YOU'RE BUILDING IN THE TRANSECT ZONE OR YOU'RE USING THE TRANSECT STANDARDS AS PART OF A PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, THEN CURRENTLY THERE COULD BE A REQUIREMENT FOR PRIVATE SPACE.
BUT IF YOU'RE IN THE R1 ZONE AND YOU'RE BUILDING, YOU HAVE A LOT COVERAGE REQUIREMENT.
THERE'S ONLY SO MUCH OF THE LOT THAT YOU CAN COVER WITH DEVELOPMENT.
R1 IS 35% OF THE LOT IS WHAT YOU CAN COVER.
IF THAT SECOND UNIT IS AN ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT, IT IS SPECIFICALLY NOT INCLUDED IN LOT COVERAGE SO THAT WE CAN AGAIN INCENTIVIZE ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS.
>> I GUESS THERE'S NO OTHER COMMENT ON THIS.
THEN THAT'S ALL YOU NEED FROM US, IS JUST THIS FEEDBACK.
>> ARE YOU GOOD WITH ADDING THE PROVISIONS TO THE PRIVATE SPACE, MAKING IT CLEAR THAT IT'S EACH LOT OR UNIT WITHIN A DEVELOPMENT? YOU'RE GOOD WITH THAT? THEN I THINK WE'RE GOOD WITH JUST LEAVING IT AS COMMON SPACE.
>> ALL OTHER PLANE OPEN SPACE WORDS ARE STRICKEN, RIGHT? [LAUGHTER]
>> WELL, OPEN SPACE IS STILL THERE AS A LISTED USE, BUT IT'S ONLY FOUND UNDER THE PUBLIC OPEN SPACE ZONE.
IT'S VERY RARE THAT WE USE THAT TERMINOLOGY.
>> THAT WAS INTENSE. [LAUGHTER] THAT'S OUR ONLY ITEM HERE TODAY.
UNLESS THERE'S ANYTHING TO THE STAFF OR FROM THE STAFF. ANYTHING?
>> NOTHING. THANK YOU. WELL, THAT FINISHES OUR WORK TONIGHT. WE CAN BE ADJOURNED.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.