Nov 08, 2023 Planning and Zoning

[00:00:04]

OKAY, SO 4:03 CALLING THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING FOR WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 8TH TO ORDER.

[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).]

[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 VACANT BOB HARRIS, III MARY NORTON IAN SHARP ]

PRESENT. CAROLE MANDINO.

HERE. MARCHELL CAMP IS EXCUSED.

BOB HARRIS.

PRESENT. MARY NORTON.

PRESENT. AND IAN SHARP IS NOT HERE.

THE NEXT ITEM IS PUBLIC COMMENT.

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 ON THAT DAY, DUE TO OPEN MEETING LAWS. WE CANNOT DISCUSS OR ACT ON ITEMS PRESENTED DURING THIS PORTION.

TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION ON AN ITEM THAT IS ON THE AGENDA, PLEASE WAIT FOR ME TO CALL FOR PUBLIC COMMENT AT THE TIME THAT ITEM IS HEARD.

IS THERE ANYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT? OKAY. THANK YOU.

NEXT, WE NEED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES FROM OUR LAST MEETING, WHICH WAS OCTOBER 25TH, 2023.

[4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Approval of the minutes from the regular meeting on Wednesday, October 25, 2023.]

WHAT'S THE DATE? 25TH. 25TH, 2023.

I'LL SECOND IT. THANK YOU.

ANY DISCUSSION ON THAT ITEM? OKAY. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION, PLEASE SAY AYE.

AYE. AYE.

ALL THOSE OPPOSED? SO THAT PASSES APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES.

AND WE HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING ON TEXT AMENDMENT F

[A. PZ-23-00135: City's request for a Zoning Code Text Amendment to modify the standards and definition of Neighborhood & Regional Meeting Facilities. STAFF RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends the Planning and Zoning Commission, in accordance with this report, find that the required findings of the Zoning Code have been met, and that the Planning and Zoning Commission make a recommendation to the City Council for approval of the Zoning Code Text Amendment.]

LET'S JUST STATE FOR THE RECORD THAT IAN HAS JOINED US.

YOU'RE GOOD. AND I THINK THE FIRST ITEM UP IS THE ZONING CODE AMENDMENT FOR MEETING FACILITIES.

RIGHT. THAT'S FIRST ON THE AGENDA.

OKAY. SO THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN AND COMMISSIONERS, TIFFANY ANTOL, ZONING CODE MANAGER, CITY OF FLAGSTAFF.

ON OCTOBER 25TH, WE HELD A WORK SESSION ON THESE PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENTS.

I KNOW WE HAVE SOME FRESH FACES FROM THAT WORK SESSION.

SO IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS ON THESE, LET ME KNOW.

I'M GOING TO GO BACK OVER THE WHAT THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT IS.

OH JUST ONE SECOND I DID MAKE AN ANNOUNCEMENT THAT WE WERE HEARING THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE TEXT AMENDMENT, THE OPEN SPACE TERMINOLOGY.

SO IF YOU PREFER TO, WE CAN GO TO THE DISCUSSION ITEMS THAT'S LISTED AS OUR FIRST ITEM.

ARE YOU LOOKING AT? OH, WAIT. I'M SORRY.

I'M LOOKING. YEAH.

I'M. GOD, I'M SORRY.

OKAY. NEVER MIND.

CARRY ON. SO THE FIRST AMENDMENT THAT'S UP IS IN REGARDS TO MEETING FACILITIES, NEIGHBORHOOD AND REGIONAL. THIS INCLUDES MODIFICATIONS TO OUR SPECIFIC TO USE SECTION.

RIGHT NOW MEETING FACILITIES ARE IDENTIFIED AND DEFINED AS PUBLIC AND PRIVATE.

AND THEN IN OUR CODE THEY'RE FURTHER BROKEN DOWN INTO NEIGHBORHOOD AND REGIONAL NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING FACILITIES ARE REALLY INTENDED TO PROVIDE LOCAL SERVICES DIRECTLY TO THE RESIDENTS OF SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS.

MORE LIKE A COMMUNITY NEIGHBORHOOD, LIKE A COMMUNITY CENTER.

YOU CAN THINK OF THE MURDOCK CENTER AND SOUTH SIDE.

THAT'S MORE OF A NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING FACILITY, WHERE A REGIONAL MEETING FACILITY IS MORE INTENDED TO SERVE THE ENTIRE CITY AND POTENTIALLY THE SURROUNDING REGION.

WHEN WE WERE WORKING ON THE NAH CASE, ONE OF THE PROPOSED USES THEY HAD ORIGINALLY COME UP WITH WAS A CONFERENCE FACILITY, AND THERE IS NOWHERE IN THE ZONING CODE THAT SPECIFICALLY CALLS OUT CONFERENCE FACILITY.

THE EXISTING DEFINITION FOR MEETING FACILITIES SPECIFICALLY EXCLUDES CONFERENCE FACILITIES THROUGH THE SPECIFIC PLAN FOR NAH.

WE MADE AN AMENDMENT TO THAT DEFINITION, SO I KNEW THAT THIS WAS A FURTHER CLEANUP WE WOULD NEED TO MAKE.

THE SEPARATION WAS SORT OF ANTIQUATED IN TERMS OF MEETING FACILITIES.

ORIGINALLY, PLACES OF WORSHIP FELL UNDER MEETING FACILITIES.

SO THE WAY THAT WE WERE SEPARATING THEM WAS THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE THAT THE SITE WOULD OCCUPY.

SO IF YOU WERE GREATER THAN 250 OCCUPANCY, YOU WERE REGIONAL, AND IF YOU WERE LESS THAN 250, YOU WERE NEIGHBORHOOD.

HOWEVER, THERE WAS STILL A POSSIBILITY TO APPLY FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT IF YOU WANTED TO EXCEED 250 AS A NEIGHBORHOOD FACILITY.

[00:05:06]

AND THEN IF YOU WERE GOING TO ALSO SERVE ALCOHOL, THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN THAT PUTS YOU INTO A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT.

SO IN TERMS OF LAND USE, WHETHER OR NOT YOU SELL ALCOHOL IS NOT SO MUCH OF A LAND USE DECISION.

BUT I GUESS IT'S SORT OF A DECISION ON OR A FEELING ON WHETHER OR NOT THAT'S COMPATIBLE WITH AN EXISTING NEIGHBORHOOD.

THIS PARTICULAR AMENDMENT PROPOSES TO SEPARATE THE TWO USES AND CREATE TWO SEPARATE DEFINITIONS.

SO IT'S REALLY CLEAR WHAT BECOMES REGIONAL AND WHAT BECOMES NEIGHBORHOOD.

SO HERE YOU SEE A NEIGHBORHOOD DEFINITION.

WHAT MAKES IT REALLY CLEAR THAT IT'S REALLY MORE OF A NONPROFIT TYPE USE.

THE REGIONAL FACILITY BECOMES MORE OF A COMMERCIAL TYPE USE.

AND IN ALIGNMENT WITH THAT MEETING FACILITIES, NEIGHBORHOOD BECOMES A PERMITTED USE AND ALL OF THE RESIDENTIAL ZONES, MEETING FACILITIES, REGIONAL IS A PERMITTED USE AND ALL OF THE COMMERCIAL ZONES.

HOWEVER, THOSE COMMERCIAL ZONES STILL ALLOW THE NEIGHBORHOOD AS WELL.

SO IF THERE'S NOT ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT, I'LL RUN THROUGH THE FINDINGS THAT THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT NEEDS TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES OF THE GENERAL PLAN.

THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT WILL NOT BE DETRIMENTAL TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST, AND THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT IS INTERNALLY CONSISTENT.

SO RUNNING THROUGH THESE POLICIES, GRABBING SOME POLICIES FROM THE REGIONAL PLAN, PROMOTE REINVESTMENT AT THE NEIGHBORHOOD SCALE TO INCLUDE INFILL OF VACANT PARCELS, REDEVELOPMENT OF UNDERUTILIZED PROPERTIES, AESTHETIC IMPROVEMENTS TO PUBLIC SPACES, REMODELING OF EXISTING BUILDINGS AND STREETSCAPES, MAINTAINING SELECTED APPROPRIATE OPEN SPACE AND PROGRAMS FOR THE BENEFIT AND IMPROVEMENT OF LOCAL RESIDENTS.

ALSO, POLICY 1.6 ESTABLISH GREATER FLEXIBILITY IN DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND PROCESSES TO ASSIST DEVELOPERS IN OVERCOMING CHALLENGES POSED BY REDEVELOPMENT AND INFILL SITES. SO THIS IS REALLY MORE JUST THAT NEIGHBORHOOD COMPONENT AND THEN PROVIDE A VARIETY OF HOUSING TYPES THROUGHOUT THE CITY AND REGION, INCLUDING RENTAL OPTIONS. SO THE IDEA HERE IS MEETING FACILITIES JUST SEPARATING OUT NEIGHBORHOOD AND REGIONAL. THERE'S NOT A LOT OF VERY SPECIFIC FINDINGS IN THE REGIONAL PLAN THAT CALL OUT THAT THIS TYPE OF DETAILED USE OR VERY SPECIFIC TO THAT DETAILED USE.

THE AMENDMENT PROVISIONS ARE NOT ANTICIPATED, TO BE DETRIMENTAL TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST, HEALTH, SAFETY, CONVENIENCE OR WELFARE.

THE PROPOSED PROVISIONS ARE INTENDED TO PROVIDE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS THAT ARE COMPATIBLE, AND I'VE ADDED IN THE WRONG THINGS HERE.

I'VE GOT SO MANY DIFFERENT PRESENTATIONS GOING ON, AND THE AMENDMENT IS INTERNALLY CONSISTENT AND UTILIZES THE EXISTING FORMAT AND DOESN'T CONFLICT WITH OTHER ZONING CODE PROVISIONS. WITH THAT, LET'S SEE, I DO ACTUALLY HAVE THE RIGHT RECOMMENDATION.

SO STAFF RECOMMENDS THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL.

THE IDEA IS, IS THIS WOULD MOVE TO PUBLIC HEARING ON NOVEMBER 21ST.

ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON THIS? WELL, THEN WE'RE PROBABLY READY FOR ANY DISCUSSION AMONG OURSELVES.

OR ARE WE READY FOR A MOTION? I DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS BASED ON OUR WORK SESSION THE LAST TIME.

DO YOU WANT ME TO GO AHEAD AND MAKE A MOTION? THAT'D BE GREAT. OKAY.

I MOVE FOR PZ-23-00135.

THE CITY'S REQUEST FOR A ZONING CODE AMENDMENT TO MODIFY THE STANDARDS, AND THE DEFINITION OF NEIGHBORHOOD AND REGIONAL MEETING FACILITIES THAT WE RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL.

THIS ZONING CODE TEXT AMENDMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH STAFF REPORT AND THE FINDINGS.

SECOND. THANK YOU.

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? OKAY, THEN. ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION, PLEASE SAY AYE.

AYE. AYE. AYE.

ALL THOSE OPPOSED? SO THAT PASSES ON TO THE NEXT.

[B. PZ-23-00137: City’s request for a Zoning Code Text Amendment to change the minimum parcel size in the Manufactured Home (MH) zone from 5 acres to 4,000 square feet as well as add minimum lot width and depth standards. STAFF RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends the Planning and Zoning Commission, in accordance with this report, find that the required findings of the Zoning Code have been met, and that the Planning and Zoning Commission make a recommendation to the City Council for approval of the Zoning Code Text Amendment.]

CURRENTLY THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE AND OUR MANUFACTURED HOME ZONE IS FIVE ACRES.

WHEN WE CURRENTLY HAVE LOTS OF SUBDIVISIONS THAT HAVE LOTS 4000FT² AND UP.

SO THAT'S A PROBLEM.

THAT FIVE ACRES WAS MEANT TO BE SPECIFIC TO A MOBILE HOME PARK OR A MANUFACTURED HOME PARK, WHICH IS MORE THE CORRECT TERMINOLOGY.

[00:10:06]

THIS IS MORE IN ALIGNMENT WITH THE OTHER RESIDENTIAL ZONING CATEGORIES.

THIS CAME UP RECENTLY.

WE HAD A PERSON WHO HAS A LARGER LOT IN A MANUFACTURED HOME SUBDIVISION.

THEY WANTED TO SPLIT THAT LOT.

THEY WOULD HAVE BEEN ABLE TO USING THE 4000FT² BUT NOT THE FIVE ACRES.

SO TRYING NOT TO MAKE THEM GET A VARIANCE.

THIS WILL HELP SUPPORT THAT.

THEY SEEM TO HAVE DISAPPEARED AND SO MAYBE THEY'LL COME BACK WHEN THEY SEE THIS IS DONE.

BUT THERE ARE STILL A NUMBER OF LARGER PARCELS THAT SURROUND SOME OF THESE SUBDIVISIONS WHERE THERE'S DEFINITELY SOME POSSIBILITY FOR INFILL.

SO THIS WILL CREATE THAT.

THIS DOES ALSO CREATE MINIMUM LOT WIDTH IN DEPTH STANDARDS.

THESE STANDARDS ARE PULLED DIRECTLY BACK OUT OF THE FORMER LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.

AND THIS IS WHAT WE WERE APPLYING BEFORE AND WE'RE JUST MOVING IT FORWARD.

IN ADDITION, WE ARE MODIFYING THE STANDARDS FOR MANUFACTURED HOME PARK BECAUSE WHILE WE'RE LOOKING AT IT, WHY DO WE NEED FIVE ACRES FOR A MANUFACTURED HOME PARK? OUR MOST RECENT IS ACTUALLY TWO AND A HALF ACRES.

WE DON'T HAVE A LARGE ACREAGE STANDARD.

A MANUFACTURED HOME PARK IS ESSENTIALLY THE SAME AS A MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT.

IT'S NUMBER OF UNITS ON THE SAME PARCEL OF LAND.

THERE IS A DENSITY STANDARD WITHIN THE ZONING CATEGORY THAT SETS THE NUMBER OF UNITS PER ACRE.

SO WE WOULD JUST ASSUME IF YOU WANTED TO HAVE A THREE UNIT MANUFACTURED HOME PARK, YOU COULD DO THAT.

SO THIS CHANGES THAT STANDARD AS WELL.

AND JUST BASICALLY MAKES THE DENSITY OF THE ZONE WHAT YOU NEED TO MEET FOR A MANUFACTURED HOME PARK.

FINDINGS. LET'S SEE IF I GOT IT RIGHT.

I DID GET IT RIGHT. [LAUGHTER] ESSENTIALLY, THIS IS ABOUT CREATING GREATER FLEXIBILITY IN DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS.

IT'S ABOUT UNIFORMITY.

IT'S ABOUT TREATING OUR MANUFACTURED HOME ZONES SIMILAR TO ALL OF THE OTHER RESIDENTIAL ZONES.

SO THIS IS ABSOLUTELY SUPPORTED.

IT HELPS PROVIDE THAT VARIETY OF HOUSING TYPES IN THE CITY AS WELL.

WE'RE NOT THERE'S NOT ANY ANTICIPATED DETRIMENT TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST, HEALTH, SAFETY, CONVENIENCE OR WELFARE.

AGAIN, THE MH ZONE IS RELATIVELY SMALL AND RARE WITHIN THE CITY.

IT IS THE AREAS THAT ARE LEFT UNDEVELOPED ARE RELATIVELY SMALL IN NATURE.

SO EVEN IF WE WERE TO SEE MORE INFILL DEVELOPMENT, THEY WOULD BE SMALLER DEVELOPMENTS OVER TIME.

BUT CERTAINLY WE COULD SEE MAYBE REUSE OF SOME PROPERTIES THAT HAVE BEEN VACATED.

SO WE DO HAVE A MANUFACTURED HOME PARK IN PLAZA VIEJA, FOR EXAMPLE, THAT'S BEEN VACATED.

AND I KNOW THAT THAT PROPERTY OWNER OVER TIME HAS LOOKED FOR POSSIBILITIES.

AND HOPEFULLY THESE WILL ENTICE THEM TO MAYBE USE THEIR EXISTING ENTITLEMENTS.

AS WELL THE AMENDMENT IS INTERNALLY CONSISTENT, AND IT'S MEANT TO MAKE CREATE A BETTER UNIFORMITY BETWEEN ALL OF OUR RESIDENTIAL ZONES.

AND LASTLY, THE RECOMMENDATION IS THAT YOU FORWARD THIS TO THE CITY COUNCIL WITH A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL.

OKAY. THANK YOU.

ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION? I'D JUST LIKE TO SAY THANK YOU FOR CATCHING THAT AND MAKING THAT CHANGE.

I WAS FINDING IT VERY DIFFICULT TO DO AN INFILL LOT LAST YEAR AND A MOBILE HOME ZONED AREA, AND THAT'S CERTAINLY MORE IN ALIGNMENT WITH THE STANDARDS.

AND I'D LIKE TO MAKE A COMMENT, JUST THAT I THINK THIS GOES TO, YOU KNOW, MAYBE BETTER AFFORDABLE HOUSING IF WE CAN INFILL AND PUT IN MORE MANUFACTURED HOMES TO BE AFFORDABLE.

I AGREE. YEAH.

OKAY. DO WE HAVE A MOTION FOR THIS? I'LL MAKE A MOTION FOR PZ-23- 00137 FOR A TEXT AMENDMENT TO CHANGE THE MINIMUM PARCEL SIZE OF MANUFACTURED HOME ZONE.

SUBJECT TO THE FINDINGS. THANK YOU.

SUBJECT TO THE FINDINGS, IS THAT IT? THAT'S ALL I NEED TO SAY.

OKAY. I'M JUST LOOKING FOR MORE.

OKAY. THANK YOU.

DO WE HAVE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND.

THANK YOU. NO FURTHER DISCUSSION.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION, PLEASE SAY AYE.

AYE. AYE.

ALL THOSE OPPOSED? THAT MOTION PASSES.

THANK YOU. AND NOW ON TO PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS.

[C. PZ-22-00223: City’s request for a Zoning Code Text Amendment to modify the existing Planning Residential Development (PRD) standards. STAFF RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends the Planning and Zoning Commission, in accordance with this report, find that the required findings of the Zoning Code have been met, and that the Planning and Zoning Commission make a recommendation to the City Council for approval of the Zoning Code Text Amendment.]

[00:15:05]

THIS ONE IS A BIT MORE COMPLICATED, SO I'LL TRY NOT TO BORE THOSE THAT GOT TO HEAR THIS BEFORE.

BUT ESSENTIALLY, OUR PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS HAVE BEEN AROUND FOR QUITE SOME TIME IN OUR ZONING CODE.

AND IT GRANTS SOME ADMINISTRATIVE AUTHORITIES AND IT HAS SOME ADMINISTRATIVE AUTHORITIES FOR CERTAIN DEVELOPMENTS IN RESIDENTIAL ZONES.

AND THEN ON TOP OF IT, IT ALSO IS A TOOL WE USE IN SUBDIVISIONS.

SO THAT JUST FURTHER COMPLICATES THE WHOLE SUBJECT EVEN MORE.

SO THIS PROPOSED AMENDMENT INCLUDES A REVISION TO THE PRD STANDARDS.

IT INCLUDES A MODIFICATION TO OUR CIVIC SPACE AND COMMON OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS, AS WELL AS GENERAL HOUSEKEEPING CHANGES TO MAKE BOTH THE RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL USE TABLES AND DEFINITIONS MORE FRIENDLY FOR STAFF AND THE PUBLIC.

THE PRD STANDARDS CURRENTLY REQUIRE THAT A DEVELOPMENT PROJECT MEET THE STANDARDS OF THE TRANSECT ZONES BY APPLYING THE RELEVANT BUILDING PLACEMENT AND FORM STANDARDS, INCLUDING BUILDING HEIGHT, SETBACKS, ETCETERA, THAT IN PARENTHESES IS DIRECTLY PULLED FROM THE ZONING CODE.

AND REQUIRE THE USE OF SPECIFIC BUILDING TYPES AS PERMITTED BASED ON THE CONVENTIONAL ZONING CATEGORY.

SO THERE'S A TABLE AND THE CODE UNDER PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT NOW.

AND WHAT IT WILL TELL YOU IS IN THE RURAL RESIDENTIAL YOU CAN USE THESE FIVE TRANSECT BUILDING TYPES.

SO FOR EXAMPLE, UNDER RR RURAL RESIDENTIAL IT LISTS SINGLE FAMILY.

IT LISTS A SINGLE FAMILY HOME, A SINGLE FAMILY COTTAGE, A SINGLE FAMILY ESTATE HOME.

BUT IN THE RURAL RESIDENTIAL ZONE, MULTI FAMILY DEVELOPMENT IS PERMITTED.

SO YOU CAN DO MULTI FAMILY AS LONG AS YOU USE THOSE BUILDING TYPES.

SO YOU CAN DO MULTI FAMILY BASICALLY YOU CAN DO LOTS OF INDIVIDUAL SINGLE FAMILY HOMES ON ONE PARCEL.

IN OTHER ZONES THE BUILDINGS ALLOWED GROW IN SORT OF INTENSITY BASED ON THAT ZONING DISTRICT.

RIGHT. SO IN THE MR OR THE HR ZONE, YOU'RE GOING TO SEE MORE OF THE THE MULTIFAMILY BUILDING PERMIT BUILDING TYPES ALLOWED.

THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT DETACHES THE USE OF THE TRANSECT ZONE STANDARDS WITH THE PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, AND REQUIRES THAT ALL PERMITTED RESIDENTIAL USES USE THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS OF THE CONVENTIONAL ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH THEY'RE LOCATED.

I'M GOING TO EXPLAIN WHY THIS IS A REALLY GOOD THING IN A MINUTE.

THE PRD WILL BE UTILIZED ONLY FOR IF THIS AMENDMENT IS APPROVED, THE PRD WOULD ONLY BE USED FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF NEW SUBDIVISIONS.

SO THAT OTHER FANTASTICAL LITTLE MAGICAL TOOL THAT WE'RE USING WOULD, POOF, GO AWAY.

AND WE WOULD ONLY USE THIS FOR SUBDIVISIONS.

THESE TYPES OF SUBDIVISIONS ARE WHAT ARE KNOWN AS CLUSTERING, DEVELOPMENT OR CONSERVATION BASED DESIGN IS THE FANCY PLANNING TERM WE LIKE TO USE.

WHAT THAT DOES IS IT ALLOWS YOU TO TAKE SO RURAL RESIDENTIAL FOR EXAMPLE, IS ONE ACRE MINIMUM.

AND YOU'VE SEEN THESE SUBDIVISIONS COME THROUGH.

IT HAS A ONE ACRE MINIMUM, BUT YOU'LL SEE A 6000 SQUARE FOOT LOT IN THE RR ZONE.

SO WHAT DO WE DO? WE TAKE THE DENSITY OF THE RURAL RESIDENTIAL.

SO SAY YOU HAVE 30 ACRES.

WE TAKE THAT 30 ACRES AND WE MIGHT GIVE YOU 36,000 SQUARE FOOT LOTS, AND THE REMAINDER OF THE SITE REMAINS OPEN SPACE, SO THIS HELPS YOU MEET YOUR MINIMUM DENSITIES.

IT HELPS PRESERVE RESOURCES ON THE SITE.

YOU MIGHT HAVE SOME TOPOGRAPHIC FEATURES OR A DRAINAGE THAT MIGHT MAKE THAT TIGHT, THAT SITE TIGHT, AND YOU WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO DEVELOP ALL OF THOSE UNITS IN A WAY, IF YOU HAD CREATED THEM ALL AS ONE ACRE LOTS, OR IF YOU CREATED THEM ALL AS ONE ACRE LOTS, YOU'RE PROBABLY CREATING SOME LOTS THAT HAVE SOME TRUE DEFICIENCIES AND MIGHT BE REALLY TOUGH TO BUILD.

OKAY. SO I'M GOING TO JUMP INTO THE OPEN SPACES FIRST.

IN GOING THROUGH THIS PROCESS, WE HAVE A HANDFUL OF DEVELOPERS WHO USE THIS THE PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT OPTION ON THE REGULAR.

THIS TOOL HAS ALWAYS BEEN IN THE CODE.

IT WAS IN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE BEFORE IT WAS CALLED A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT.

IT WAS TRANSFERRED.

IT WAS SORT OF CONVERTED UNDER THE NEW ZONING CODE.

I CALL IT NEW, BUT IT'S NOT NEW ANYMORE.

THAT'S 2011 IS NOT NEW.

BUT IN 2011, WHEN WE ADOPTED THE NEW ZONING CODE, WE TOOK THOSE SEPARATE STANDARDS AND WE THEN BASICALLY COMBINED IT WITH THE TRANSECT ZONES. WE WANTED TO HAVE A WAY TO SPREAD THAT TRANSECT ZONE DEVELOPMENT OUTSIDE OF JUST THE DOWNTOWN REGULATING PLAN AREA.

[00:20:11]

YOU'VE GOT TO PRESERVE 15% OF THE SITE AS COMMON SPACE.

AND BUT WHAT HAPPENS IS A LOT OF TIMES THESE SUBDIVISIONS INCLUDE MORE THAN 50 UNITS.

SO IT'S KICKING IN THIS ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENT OF CIVIC SPACE.

CIVIC SPACE IS AN ADDITIONAL 5% YOU NEED TO PRESERVE.

SO NOW YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT 20% PRESERVATION.

YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT RESOURCE PRESERVATION ON TOP OF IT.

AND SO WE'RE GETTING TO THIS PLACE WHERE WE'RE MAKING IT REALLY TOUGH TO MEET THE MINIMUM DENSITIES, ESPECIALLY WHEN WE'RE WORKING WITH SINGLE FAMILY AND THE MR OR THE HR ZONES.

ONE OF THE REQUESTS THAT WE HAD WAS TO SEPARATE THAT OUT, TO REALLY FOCUS ON THAT COMMON SPACE AND TO NOT FOCUS ON THE CIVIC SPACE.

AND WE, AS PLANNERS TYPICALLY TEND TO AGREE, PUTTING CIVIC SPACE THAT'S OPEN TO THE PUBLIC INSIDE THE MIDDLE OF A PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT CAN BE A LITTLE BIT TRICKY.

SO OUR RECOMMENDATION HERE IS TO REMOVE THE REQUIREMENT OF THAT ADDITIONAL 5% CIVIC SPACE, LEAVE CIVIC SPACE TO COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS.

SO IF YOU'RE DOING MIXED USE OR COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT, YOU'RE GOING TO FALL UNDER THAT CIVIC SPACE.

IF YOU'RE DOING 100% RESIDENTIAL, YOU'RE GOING TO FALL INTO THAT COMMON SPACE.

NEXT UP IS.

NEXT UP IS MODIFYING USES WITHIN THE RESIDENTIAL ZONES.

SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I TALKED ABOUT RIGHT IS MULTIFAMILY IS A PERMITTED USE IN THE RR.

THE ER THE R1 ZONES.

THOSE ARE TYPICALLY ZONES THAT MOST PEOPLE AFFILIATE WITH SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT.

HOWEVER, MULTIFAMILY IS ALLOWED IF YOU USE THE PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT GETS YOU TO USE THE TRANSECT ZONE STANDARDS.

TRANSECT ZONE STANDARDS ARE CALIBRATED FOR AN URBAN ENVIRONMENT.

THEY REQUIRE HOUSES TO BE LOCATED MUCH CLOSER TO THE STREET.

THEY GENERALLY HAVE MUCH SMALLER SIDEWALKS.

THEY HAVE LIMITED FORM AND FUNCTION OF BUILDINGS.

SO, THERE'S A MAXIMUM WIDTH OF THE BUILDING FORM ITSELF.

IT DOESN'T GET SO MUCH INTO THE DESIGN OF WHAT THAT BUILDING LOOKS LIKE, BUT IT HAS LIKE BULK AND MASS.

SO THAT'S A REALLY INTERESTING DYNAMIC SOMETIMES TO TAKE THOSE STANDARDS AND FIT IT INTO EITHER A VERY SUBURBAN OR RURAL ENVIRONMENT.

ON THE OPPOSITE END IN THE MR MEDIUM DENSITY AND HIGH-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ZONES.

IF YOU WANT TO BUILD A SINGLE-FAMILY HOME ON A 6000 SQUARE FOOT LOT, YOU'RE USING THE TRANSECT ZONE STANDARDS.

SO, WE'LL TAKE A LOOK AT WHAT THIS LOOKS LIKE.

YOU BOUGHT A LOT IN SUNNYSIDE.

IT'S IN THE MR ZONE.

YOU WOULD LIKE TO BUILD A SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING.

INSTEAD OF USING THE MR DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, YOU'RE GOING TO USE A TRANSECT ZONE S TANDARDS.

IN SOME ZONES, THERE ARE TWO SETS OF TRANSECT STANDARDS.

THERE'S AN N.1.

THERE'S AN N.2.

AND ONES ARE WHAT'S APPLIED TO THE DOWNTOWN REGULATING PLAN, N.2 IS WHAT WE WOULD APPLY TO NEW DEVELOPMENT.

THERE IS ACTUALLY NOBODY IN THE TWO ZONES, BUT THOSE ARE THE STANDARDS WE USE WHEN BASICALLY OPERATING OUTSIDE OF THE CALIBRATED IN ONE AREA.

SO, N.1S ARE SUPPOSED TO BE CALIBRATED SPECIFICALLY FOR THIS DOWNTOWN AREA, WHETHER THEY ARE OR NOT.

THAT'S ANOTHER DISCUSSION FOR A DIFFERENT DAY.

BUT SO, WE TYPICALLY USE THE N.2 STANDARDS.

SO, HERE'S AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT THE DIFFERENCE ARE BETWEEN THESE STANDARDS.

AND LET ME BE REALLY HONEST IS WE CALL OUT BUILDING HEIGHT.

AS A STANDARD YOU WOULD USE.

AND YOU CAN SEE THE DIFFERENTIAL HERE BETWEEN BUILDING HEIGHT FROM THE MR ZONE TO THE T4N.2.

WE DON'T ADVERTISE THIS A LOT.

THE PROBLEM HERE IS WE'RE CREATING A UNIFORMITY ISSUE.

SO, WHEN YOU GO TO DEVELOP A PROPERTY, THE EXPECTATION IS, IS THAT EVERYBODY IN THE SAME ZONE IS USING THE SAME STANDARDS.

BUT IF YOU'RE BUILDING A SINGLE-FAMILY HOME IN THE MR OR THE T4N.2 ZONE, YOU'RE USING THESE T4N.2 STANDARDS.

BUT IF YOU BUILD A DUPLEX IN THE MR OR THE HR ZONE, YOU'RE USING THE MASTER STANDARDS.

THERE'S SOME THERE'S A LITTLE BIT OF A BREAKDOWN IN WHAT'S HAPPENING.

SO, WHAT WE'RE SUGGESTING IS, IS THAT THE USE TABLE BE CHANGED.

MULTIFAMILY IS STILL PERMITTED IN THE R-1 OR ER AND RR.

THERE'S A FOOTNOTE THAT SAYS NOTHING LARGER THAN A DUPLEX BUILDING.

SO THAT MATCHES WHAT WE ALREADY DO BASED ON THE FORM-BASED CODE.

WE'RE JUST NOT USING THE SETBACKS AND BUILDING HEIGHTS OF THE FORM-BASED CODE.

[00:25:05]

YOU CAN DO SINGLE-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT, BUT YOU'RE GOING TO USE THE STANDARDS UNDERLYING.

I HAVE AN EXAMPLE PROJECT HERE.

THIS IS A, I HATE USING THIS EXAMPLE BECAUSE I ACTUALLY REALLY, REALLY LOVE THIS PROJECT.

THIS IS HOUSING SOLUTIONS.

THIS WAS IN SUNNYSIDE.

THIS IS A TRIPLEX.

IT WENT THROUGH A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT.

IT'S ACTUALLY LOCATED IN THE COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL ZONE.

BUT THE POINT OF WHAT I'M TRYING TO SHOW IS YOU CAN SEE HOW MUCH FURTHER THIS BUILDING GOT MOVED FORWARD TO THE STREET.

AND YOU CAN SEE THE LOT COVERAGE DIFFERENTIAL.

THE BULK AND MASSING ARE BIGGER, BUT THE HOMES NEXT TO IT ARE OLDER IN NATURE.

AND IF SOMEBODY WERE GOING TO BUILD A NEWER HOME TODAY, IT PROBABLY WOULD BE BIGGER IN SCALE AS WELL.

SO, IT DOES LOOK PROPORTIONALLY IN THE PICTURE, MUCH DIFFERENT THAN AND THAT'S NOT THE INTENTION HERE.

THE INTENTION IS JUST TO SHOW YOU LIKE LOT COVERAGE REALLY CHANGES.

IT MOVES THAT BUILDING MUCH CLOSER TO THE STREET.

IT'S A DIFFERENT PATTERN AND IT'S WITHIN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

SO, WHAT YOU CAN END UP WITH IS DIFFERENT PROJECTS MEETING DIFFERENT STANDARDS.

NEXT UP WE.

WE DO SOME OTHER CLEANUP IN THE RESIDENTIAL ZONES, WE CLEAN UP THAT ALTERNATIVE LOT AREA LOT WITH LOT DEPTH, LOT COVERAGE, LANGUAGE AND WHAT CAN BE APPROVED WITH SUBDIVISION PLATS.

WE CLEAN UP THAT ONE SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING UNIT OR ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT IS ALLOWED PER LOT OR PARCEL UNLESS APPROVED WITH A PRD.

WE JUST TAKE OUT THAT THAT LANGUAGE, THAT COMMON SPACE IS REQUIRED SPECIFICALLY FOR MULTIFAMILY DWELLINGS AND NOT ALL OF THE USES WITHIN THE MR HR ZONE.

SO AGAIN, REQUIRING A 15% COMMON SPACE ON A SINGLE-FAMILY HOME LOT.

PROBABLY NOT NECESSARY.

WE ALSO MODIFY THE COMMERCIAL ZONE TABLE TO MATCH.

RIGHT NOW, THE RESIDENTIAL TABLE AND THE COMMERCIAL TABLE DON'T MATCH RIGHT NOW.

WHEN THERE'S A USE IT SAYS SINGLE FAMILY.

IT'LL SAY IT'S PERMITTED SLASH PRD RIGHT.

SO, IT'LL TELL YOU IN ONE INSTANCE IT'S PERMITTED.

IN ONE INSTANCE IT'S A PRD.

IN THE COMMERCIAL TABLE, IT'S COMPLETELY DIFFERENT.

PLAN RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IS A LISTED USE.

AND THEN IT TELLS YOU IT'S PERMITTED ACROSS THE BOARD.

AND THEN THERE'S A WHOLE OTHER SERIES OF FOOTNOTES.

WE'RE JUST TRYING TO CLEAN UP THE TABLES AND MAKE THEM MATCH.

SUPER CONFUSING AT THIS POINT.

WHAT IS ALLOWED, WHEN AND WHERE? THE OTHER THING WE'RE TRYING TO CLEAN UP IN THE TABLE IS LISTING MULTIPLE OPTIONS WITHIN THE SAME LINE OF A USE.

SO, WE'RE TRYING TO NOT SAY THIS IS EITHER PERMITTED OR CONDITIONAL IN THE SAME USE.

WE'RE SEPARATING OUT THOSE USES AND EXPLAINING WHEN SOMETHING IS PERMITTED.

WHEN SOMETHING IS A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT.

ALSO, WE'RE GETTING RID OF A SEPARATE PROVISION IN THE CODE CALLED CLUSTER DWELLING, WHICH IS BASICALLY THE SAME PRINCIPLE OF THE PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT.

IT ONLY APPLIES TO THE ER AND THE RR ZONES AND IS MUCH STRICTER.

NOBODY HAS USED THIS PROVISION IN OVER A DECADE.

SO, WE'RE IN LIGHT OF THE CODE NEEDING A DIET, WE'RE JUST GOING TO STRIP THIS OUT.

EVERYBODY'S GOING TO GO FOR THE PRD OPTION BECAUSE IT'S MUCH MORE FLEXIBLE AND USABLE.

WE UPDATE COMMON SPACE REQUIREMENTS.

BUT THE BIG THING THAT REALLY CHANGES WITH THE PRD IN TERMS OF SUBDIVISIONS, RIGHT? SO, THIS PROCESS IS STILL GOING TO ALLOW YOU TO HAVE ALTERNATIVE LOT SIZES.

SO, IF YOU'VE GOT A ONE ACRE MINIMUM OR YOU'VE GOT A 6000 SQUARE FOOT MINIMUM, THIS WILL STILL ALLOW YOU TO CREATE LOTS THAT ARE 2500 SQUARE FOOT IN SIZE.

IF YOU CAN MAKE THAT WORK.

WE DON'T HAVE A LOT OF FOLKS THAT DO THAT.

3000 IS ABOUT THE MINIMUM IN TERMS OF LOT SIZE THAT I SEE, UNLESS YOU'RE DOING A TOWNHOME.

BUT THE IDEA HERE IS, IS THAT WE'RE GETTING THE SAME IDEAS AND PRINCIPLES THAT WE ARE GETTING OUT OF THE TRANSECT CODE, WHICH IS TRADITIONAL NEIGHBORHOOD DESIGN ELEMENTS, BUT WE'RE DOING IT IN A MENU THAT DEVELOPERS CAN THEN PICK AND CHOOSE FROM.

SO THEY CAN FIGURE OUT WHAT WORKS BEST FOR THEIR SITE.

BY DOING THIS.

IT ALSO ALLOWS US TO THROW IN SOME INCENTIVES FOR SOME OTHER DETAILS IN TERMS OF HOUSING, THINGS THAT WE CAN'T TYPICALLY REQUIRE.

SO, WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO SEE IN THIS LIST IS A MIX OF THINGS THAT ARE REALLY CODE REQUIREMENTS, AS WELL AS SOME INCENTIVES TO THROW IN THERE TO TRY TO MAKE, TO TRY TO GET THE HOUSING THAT WE'RE DESIRING IN OUR COMMUNITY.

SO BASICALLY, THE DEVELOPER IS GOING TO NEED TO COME UP WITH ENOUGH ELECTED DESIGN ELEMENTS TO CREATE TO BASICALLY MEET FIVE POINTS.

THE POINT VALUES ARE BASED.

BASICALLY, THEY'RE ROUGHLY BASED ON WHAT THE COST OR THE DIFFICULTY IS OF THAT PARTICULAR DESIGN ELEMENT.

THE DEVELOPER HAS THAT ABILITY TO ELECT THOSE THEMSELVES.

[00:30:04]

SO, THE PLANNING DIRECTOR WOULD HAVE THAT ABILITY TO SAY, YEAH, YOU'RE MEETING THAT DESIGN ELEMENT, YOU'RE MEETING THE INTENT OF WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR.

AND THEN EACH SUBDIVISION PLAT WOULD INCLUDE AN AGREEMENT FOR HOW THOSE DESIGN ELEMENTS WILL BE IMPLEMENTED.

A PLAT IS NOT REALLY AS A REGULATING DOCUMENT AS SOME OTHER DISCRETIONARY ITEMS. SO HAVING A SEPARATE AGREEMENT WILL MAKE IT REALLY CLEAR ON WHAT IS ANTICIPATED AND EXPECTED, AND THEN WE CAN AMEND THAT AGREEMENT AS NECESSARY.

THE IDEA OF DOING THIS IS A WAY TO SORT OF INCORPORATE THESE TRADITIONAL NEIGHBORHOOD DESIGN ELEMENTS, AS WELL AS ENCOURAGE DIFFERENT TYPES OF HOUSING. SO, A SUBDIVISION THAT INCLUDES THE PROVISION OF AT LEAST 10% ALL RESIDENTIAL AFFORDABLE UNITS.

FIVE POINTS. YOU'RE DONE.

YOU DON'T HAVE TO DO ANYTHING ELSE.

YOU CAN CREATE WHATEVER SIZE LOTS YOU WANT AS LONG AS YOUR DENSITY REMAINS THE SAME.

ALWAYS. WE'RE NOT CHANGING DENSITY.

ONE OF THE BIG THINGS WE'VE ALWAYS TRIED TO GET IS A STREET NETWORK THAT INCLUDES ALLEYS.

WHEN YOU DO A STREET NETWORK THAT INCLUDES ALLEYS, IT'S A GRID SYSTEM.

THAT'S A REALLY URBAN TYPE OF STREET NETWORK.

IT'S REALLY GREAT FOR BIKES AND PEDS.

IT'S REALLY HARD TO DO ON FLAGSTAFF.

WE'RE NOT FLAT.

YOU KNOW, GENERALLY WHEN YOU NEED TO DO THIS, TRYING TO WORK AROUND TREE RESOURCES, YOU KNOW, IT'LL MAKE YOU STAY UP AT NIGHT AND CRY A LITTLE BIT.

YEAH. SO, I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THAT.

IF THERE WAS A LOT OF DIVISION THAT WENT FOR THE ALLEY, AND I DON'T KNOW IF I ASKED THIS LAST TIME, WHO TAKES CARE OF THE ALLEYS? LIKE SNOW REMOVAL.

BECAUSE YOU TALK ABOUT GARAGES BEING IN THE BACK.

SO IF THE ALLEYS ARE DEDICATED TO THE CITY, THEN THE CITY MAINTAINS THOSE ALLEYS.

100% OF RESIDENTIAL UNITS ARE ALL ELECTRIC AGAIN, SO WE HAVE A HOUSING CRISIS.

WE HAVE A CLIMATE CRISIS, EMERGENCY, CRISIS, EMERGENCY.

THEY BOTH MEAN THE SAME THING.

SO, IF YOU GO THESE ALL ELECTRIC THREE POINTS, THERE'S ALSO ANOTHER INCENTIVE IN THE CODE.

IF YOU GO ALL ELECTRIC, YOU CAN ALSO GET SOME DENSITY BONUSES AS WELL.

SO, THEY'RE PIGGYBACKING OFF OF EACH OTHER.

THESE POINTS HAVE BEEN CALIBRATED WITH OUR HOUSING AND SUSTAINABILITY DIVISIONS AS WELL.

IF YOU CAN KEEP THE AVERAGE DWELLING UNITS NO LARGER THAN 1800 SQUARE FEET, SMALLER HOMES DON'T ALWAYS EQUATE TO SMALLER PRICES, BUT IT'S A STEP IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION.

A STREET NETWORK THAT CONNECTS AT RIGHT ANGLES TO THE GREATEST EXTENT FEASIBLE.

AGAIN, TRYING TO BE CREATIVE AND TRYING TO GET THE BEST STREET NETWORK.

BUT MAYBE IT'S NOT A PERFECT GRID.

SO, IF WE CAN KEEP THOSE BLOCKS LESS THAN 600FT IN LENGTH, THAT WORKS WELL FOR BIKES AND PEDS.

WE'RE CREATING A BETTER STREET NETWORK FOR OUR COMMUNITY, ESPECIALLY AS WE MOVE INTO THE FUTURE.

SIGNIFICANT TRAFFIC CALMING MEASURES RIGHT NOW.

TECHNICALLY, IF YOU DO A STREET OVER 600FT, YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO DO TRAFFIC CALMING MEASURES.

I THINK SOMETIMES WE'RE SUCCESSFUL AT GETTING THAT DETACHED GARAGES LOCATED BEHIND THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE ON AT LEAST 50% OF THE LOTS WITHIN THE SUBDIVISION. THIS IS A BIG TRADITIONAL NEIGHBORHOOD DESIGN THAT TYPICAL SUBURBAN DESIGN, THE SNOUT HOUSE, YOU KNOW, GARAGE DOOR DOMINATED DESIGN IS SORT OF THE WAVE OF THE PAST.

THE WAVE OF THE FUTURE IS GOING WAY, WAY BACK IN THE PAST TO WHEN PEOPLE HAD DETACHED GARAGES.

PEOPLE LIKE TO SHOVEL MORE, I GUESS WITH LONGER GARAGES, LONGER DRIVEWAYS.

I'M ONE OF THOSE PEOPLE.

ALL RESIDENTIAL UNITS WITHIN THE SUBDIVISION INCLUDE A MINIMUM 80 SQUARE FOOT FRONT ENTRY FEATURE.

THIS IS VERY MUCH TRADITIONAL NEIGHBORHOOD DESIGN.

IT'S JANE JACOBS, IT'S EYES ON THE STREET.

IT'S TRYING TO ACTIVATE PEOPLE TO USE THE FRONT OF THEIR HOUSE, NOT ONLY THE BACK OF THEIR HOUSE.

RIGHT. THE MORE PEOPLE THAT ENGAGE AT THE FRONT OF THEIR HOUSE, THE MORE LIKELY YOU ARE TO MEET YOUR NEIGHBORS AS THEY WALK BY AND THE LIKE.

THE SUBDIVISION INCORPORATES A COMBINATION OF SINGLE FAMILY, DUPLEX OR MULTIFAMILY UNITS.

THIS IS MY DREAM RIGHT HERE.

SOMEDAY I'M GOING TO I'M GOING TO SEE THIS HAPPEN.

IT'S GOING TO, IT'S GOING TO.

IT CAN TOTALLY HAPPEN.

SO, THIS WOULD BE AN AMAZING THING TO SEE A DEVELOPER COME IN AND REALLY HAVE THAT TRUE MIX.

AND THIS IS WHAT THE MISSING MIDDLE THAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR, RIGHT.

IT'S LIKE WE WANT THE DENSITY.

WE WANT THAT GENTLE DENSITY.

IT'S WE EITHER GO BIG OR WE GO SMALL.

THE PROVISION OF RECREATIONAL AMENITIES WITHIN A PARK OR COMMON SPACE AREA, THESE TYPICALLY AREN'T TOO HARD TO GET.

I MEAN, MOST DEVELOPERS ARE WANTING TO ADD THESE TYPES OF FEATURES.

AT LEAST 50% OF THE REQUIRED RESOURCES ARE MAINTAINED WITHIN A COMMON SPACE.

I'D LIKE TO GET MOST OF THE TREE RESOURCES AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE, OFF THE LOTS AND ONTO COMMON SPACES WITHIN A DEVELOPMENT.

[00:35:07]

IT'S TOUGH. AND THEN FRONT SETBACKS LESS THAN 15FT AGAIN TRYING TO GET TO THAT MORE PROXIMITY RELATION OF HOUSES TO THE STREETS AND SO FORTH.

ATTACHED STREET FACING GARAGES LESS THAN 50% WIDTH.

SO, IF YOU CAN'T DO DETACHED, YOU CAN'T MOVE IT TO THE BACK.

IF IT'S GOT TO BE ON THE FRONT, IT'S TRYING TO MAKE IT LESS THAN 50% OF THE FRONT FACADE.

WE'VE BEEN FAIRLY SUCCESSFUL IN DOING THAT, AND YOU'LL SEE THAT IN MOST OF THE PLOTS YOU'RE ALREADY SEEING WITH PRD SUBDIVISION, CCNRS AND SETBACK STANDARDS DO NOT PROHIBIT ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS.

THIS WAS ONE OF THE COMPLAINTS THAT WE'D GOTTEN OVER TIME.

PONDEROSA TRAILS, FOR EXAMPLE, IN THEIR CCNRS, THEY PROHIBIT ADUS.

THAT'S A HUGE DEVELOPMENT THAT WE'RE REALLY MISSING OUT ON.

A MINIMUM OF 15% OF ALL SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING LOTS INCLUDE REQUIREMENTS FOR ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS.

SO AGAIN, EVEN TAKING YOU EVEN FURTHER, THE POINT RATIO GOES UP AS YOU ADD MORE UNITS WITH ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS.

I DON'T KNOW HOW THAT COULDN'T BE ENTICING TO A DEVELOPER, BUT HEY, I'M WRONG EVERY DAY AND THEN THE SUBDIVISION EXCEEDS THE MINIMUM DENSITY, SO GIVING YOU POINTS FOR BEATING YOUR MINIMUM.

THAT WOULD BE AWESOME IF WE COULD START MEETING THE MINIMUM.

DENSITIES AND SUBDIVISION INCLUDE ENHANCED PEDESTRIAN ENVIRONMENTS, INCLUDING OUTDOOR SEATING AREAS OR LARGER LANDSCAPE AREAS TRYING TO MAKE THE ENVIRONMENT MORE COMFORTABLE.

SO, THESE ARE THOSE DESIGN ELEMENTS.

WHEN WE DISCUSSED THIS LAST TIME, WE TALKED ABOUT DOING CATEGORIES.

AND SO, I DID DRAFT AN ALTERNATIVE THAT I'M GOING TO PULL UP OF WHILE YOU'RE PULLING THAT UP.

THE ONE ABOUT THE.

THE ONE ABOUT LOCATING THE ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES OUTSIDE OF THE.

HOUSING OUTSIDE OF THE COMMON SPACE.

TO ME, THAT'S KIND OF CONCERNING BECAUSE THEN.

HOW DO I SAY THIS? WE'RE TAKING OUT THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT AND WE'RE GOING TO PUT IN A NON-NATURAL ENVIRONMENT BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE GOING TO BE PLANTING TREES ON THEIR LOTS TO MAKE UP THAT DIFFERENCE OF IT.

THE TREES THAT WERE REMOVED.

SO, IT DOESN'T USUALLY MEAN THAT ALL OF THE TREES GO.

I MEAN IF YOU LOOK AT SUBDIVISIONS, I MEAN UNIVERSITY HEIGHTS IS A PERFECT EXAMPLE.

YOU WOULD THINK THAT THEY WERE IN THE RESOURCE PROTECTION OVERLAY, BUT THEY'RE NOT.

UM, YOU KNOW, TREES DON'T NECESSARILY.

TREES USUALLY COME WITH A HIGH VALUE.

SO, I CAN REMEMBER IN TIMBER SKY GOING THROUGH AND MARKING EVERY TREE WITH A DEVELOPER AND THEN HAVING A LOT OWNER COME IN AND LIKE, YOU'VE GOT TO SAVE THIS TREE.

AND I MEAN PEOPLE TREES EQUAL VALUE TO THE HOME.

AND I WOULD SAY MOST DEVELOPERS AREN'T WANTING TO COME IN AND CLEAR CUT.

WHAT I WILL TELL YOU THOUGH IS, IS THAT THERE OUR RESOURCE PROTECTION STANDARDS ARE PRETTY HIGH.

SO, WE GET CREATIVE ON PROTECTING RESOURCES.

A BUILDING IS NOT MEANT TO ENCROACH MORE THAN 20% ON A TREE CANOPY.

CAN I SAY THAT? THAT'S PERFECT ALL THE TIME.

NO. WE DO OUR BEST.

WE TRY TO WORK WITH DEVELOPERS.

WE DO TRY TO SAVE AS MANY TREES AS POSSIBLE, BUT SOMETIMES YOU END UP IN SITUATIONS WHERE THE TREE IS JUST TOO DARN CLOSE TO THE HOUSE, AND THE PROPERTY OWNER WANTS TO TAKE IT OUT.

I CAN UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT I'M YOU'RE GIVING POINTS FOR THEM ALMOST TOO CLEAR CUT.

SO THAT'S KIND OF A CONCERN TO ME OF GIVING.

AND THE DEVELOPER POINTS FOR ALMOST CLEAR CUTTING.

AND THEN THEY STILL HAVE TO PRESERVE 50% OF THE TOTAL TREE RESOURCES ON THE PROPERTY.

SO, IT'S JUST ABOUT PRESERVING THEM IN A MORE CONCENTRATED AREA RATHER THAN THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE DEVELOPMENT.

I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT I THINK THAT THAT'S NOT GOOD IN OUR COMMUNITY.

OKAY. I JUST WANTED TO ADD ON TO THAT.

I CAN EXPLAIN THAT, LIKE IN MY COMMUNITY, WHICH WAS JUST COMPLETED ABOUT FIVE, SIX YEARS AGO, AND WHERE THERE WAS TREE RESOURCES AND A LOT OF THAT WERE SAVED.

HOW MANY OF THE NATURAL TREES THAT ARE CLOSE TO BUILDINGS AND CLOSE TO THE BUILDING ENVELOPE AREA END UP DYING LATER? SO, YOU KNOW, I'M ALMOST NOW IN FAVOR OF THESE CLUSTERS OF TREES BEING SAVED BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT GOING TO BE DISTURBED DURING CONSTRUCTION, AND THEN IT BECOMES THE PROPERTY OWNER'S RESPONSIBILITY TO HAVE THAT TREE REMOVED.

AND IT CAN BE VERY EXPENSIVE.

RIGHT. YEAH. WE HAD TO REMOVE SEVERAL OF THOSE.

[00:40:03]

I CAN'T DECIDE FOR YOU WHAT WHAT'S RIGHT.

THIS IS WHAT STAFF WOULD PROPOSE.

WE WOULD FIND THIS TO WORK BETTER IN TERMS OF CLUSTERING THOSE RESOURCES RATHER THAN SPREADING THEM THROUGHOUT.

MY COMMENT ON THAT IS JUST THAT I FEEL LIKE IN THE CASES I'VE SEEN AND THE TIME I'VE BEEN ON THE COMMISSION.

UM, PEOPLE DON'T REMOVE TREES.

AND LIKE I AGREE WITH WHAT YOU SAY ABOUT DEVELOPERS TEND TO SEE A VALUE IN KEEPING TREES, AND THAT SEEMS TO BE THE WAY IT ACTUALLY WORKS OUT.

SO, I DO FIND THIS REASONABLE.

IT'S FUNNY BECAUSE WHEN IF YOU READ THE REGIONAL PLAN NOW IT TALKS ABOUT SOME OF THE MORE OR THE HIGHER DESIRED NEIGHBORHOODS IN TERMS OF LANDSCAPING.

DO YOU KNOW WHAT COMES UP IN SURVEYS AS THE MOST DESIRABLE NEIGHBORHOOD? WHAT WOULD BE YOUR GUESS IN TERMS OF LANDSCAPING? RIGHT OVER HERE, COCONINO ESTATES.

AND WHAT IS THE TREE SOURCE THAT YOU SEE? IT'S THE PLANTED LANDSCAPE TREES THAT PEOPLE PREFER.

NOW THEY'RE MATURE.

RIGHT. AND THEY'RE GORGEOUS AND THEY'RE BEAUTIFUL, BUT IT'S NOT THE PONDEROSA.

IT'S THE LANDSCAPE TREES THAT PEOPLE REALLY PREFER.

SO, IT'S AN ODD JUXTAPOSITION, RIGHT? I MEAN, THERE'S ALSO FIRE AND ALL OF THOSE OTHER THINGS THAT COME WITH LIVING IN AND AROUND TREES.

I THINK IT'LL BECOME A GREATER CONVERSATION AS WE MOVE THROUGH THIS.

AND WE'VE EXPERIENCED A LOT OF FIRES IN THE PAST.

I THINK ALSO PLACING PONDEROSA VERY CLOSE TO HOMES INCREASES THAT FIRE HAZARD AND GETTING BUT MAINTAINING THAT RESOURCE RIGHT, BUT NOT CLOSE TO HOMES.

OKAY. SO HERE IS THE ALTERNATIVE WHICH IS GROUPING THESE INTO CATEGORIES.

I'M GOING TO TELL YOU, AT THE END OF THE DAY, I WAS LIKE, YEAH, I KIND OF LIKE THIS.

AND THEN I FIGURED OUT WHAT THE PROBLEM WAS, AND I DECIDED I DIDN'T LIKE IT.

BUT IT IS HERE FOR YOU TO LOOK AT.

SO, THE IDEA IS HERE IS, IS THAT WE PUSH WE PUSH ALL OF THESE SAME DESIGN ELEMENTS INTO FOUR CATEGORIES.

AND THEY ARE STREET DESIGN, BASICALLY HOUSING, WHICH IS AFFORDABLE HOUSING, HOME DESIGN AND AMENITIES.

THE ISSUE BECOMES I CAN'T REALLY FORCE YOU CAN'T REALLY FORCE DEVELOPERS INTO THESE HOUSING ITEMS, RIGHT? WE CAN'T REQUIRE SOMEBODY TO ELECT AFFORDABLE HOUSING OPTIONS.

MOST OF THESE ARE THE REAL HEAVY INCENTIVES THAT WE'RE TRYING TO GET OUT OF THESE DESIGN FEATURES.

THESE AREN'T REALLY EXISTING CODE ELEMENTS, RIGHT? WE DON'T, WE CAN'T MAKE YOU REQUIRE ADUS.

YOU HAVE EVERY RIGHT AS A DEVELOPER TO PUT IN YOUR CODE, WHICH YOU LIKE.

SO, THE WAY I COULD BREAK DOWN THIS CATEGORY WAS TO REQUIRE ONE ELEMENT OUT OF STREET DESIGN, ONE ELEMENT OUT OF HOME DESIGN, AND ONE ELEMENT OUT OF AMENITIES.

IF YOU DO THAT, EVERY DEVELOPER IS GOING TO FOREGO THE HOUSING SECTION.

THE OTHER PROBLEM IS, IS IT TAKES AWAY THE WHOLE POINT VALUE BECAUSE WE HAVE SOME ITEMS THAT ARE FOUR-POINT, LIKE A STREET LOADED ALLEY.

IF YOU HAVE TO PICK FROM EVERY CATEGORY, YOU WON'T PICK THAT FOUR-POINT ITEM.

IT BASICALLY BECOMES A TWO-POINT ITEM.

SO, ANYTHING THAT WAS RATED FOR THREE, BASICALLY EVERYTHING GOES DOWN TO A TWO OR A ONE.

SO, AT THE END OF THE DAY, THAT'S WHERE I ENDED UP.

IF THIS IS WHAT YOU STILL PREFER, IF YOU THINK THIS IS THE BETTER OPTION, THEN WE CAN GO FORWARD WITH THAT.

AND. BUT THAT WAS WHERE I SORT OF RAN INTO.

I ACTUALLY LOVED IT AT FIRST BECAUSE I WAS LIKE, OH, LOOK AT, LOOK AT, LOOK AT THIS.

IT REALLY SHINES WHAT IT IS WE'RE TRYING TO DO.

BUT THEN I REALIZED IT MIGHT PUSH US IN A WAY OR PUSH A DEVELOPER AWAY FROM THE OPTIONS.

I WOULD BE MORE EXCITED IF THEY DID TAKE.

BUT THERE YOU GO.

THERE'S THE $0.02 ON THAT ONE.

I KIND OF CAME TO SOME OF THE SAME CONCLUSIONS THAT YOU DID WHEN I FIRST OPENED IT UP.

I'M LIKE, OH, THIS IS GREAT, AND I LOVE SEEING THE CATEGORIES BECAUSE IT REALLY ILLUMINATED WHAT SOME OF THESE GOALS ARE.

THAT REALLY WOULD MAKE A GREAT DEVELOPMENT.

YOU KNOW, STREET DESIGN, HOUSING, HOME DESIGN AND AMENITIES.

ONE THING I WANTED TO ASK, JUST FOR CLARIFICATION.

SO UP IN NUMBER ONE OF YOUR DOCUMENT HERE WHERE YOU TALK ABOUT AT LEAST ONE DESIGN ELEMENT SHALL BE PROVIDED IN EACH OF EACH OF THE.

AND YOU ONLY HAVE THREE CATEGORIES THERE.

WAS IT SUPPOSED TO HAVE FOUR OR YOU WERE LEAVING IT THAT WAY? SO, YOU'RE LEAVING OUT THE HOUSING BECAUSE WE CAN'T REQUIRE ANY OF THOSE.

[00:45:03]

MY ONLY AS I WENT THROUGH IT TOO, AND STARTED LOOKING AT THE POINT VALUES AND HOW WE WOULD GET THERE.

I THINK THE ONLY SOLUTION POTENTIALLY TO UTILIZING SOMETHING LIKE THIS IS TO INCREASE THE TOTAL NUMBER OF POINTS. SO, I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S I MEAN, I HAVE TO DEFER TO YOU WHETHER THAT'S A REALISTIC EXPECTATION.

SO, WHAT I WILL TELL YOU THAT I END UP DOING, I ENDED UP DOING, AND IT'S IN THE ACTUAL DRAFT DOCUMENT, IS I REDUCED ONE OF THE POINTS ON ONE OF THE DESIGN ELEMENTS, AND IT WAS ON THE FRONT PORCHES.

SO THAT WAS A TWO.

AND I TOOK IT BACK TO A ONE HOPING THAT WE COULD GET MORE INCENTIVES.

I WILL TELL YOU; I WALK A FINE LINE ON THIS ONE.

MY ULTIMATE GOAL IS TO NOT END UP IN A PLACE WHERE DEVELOPERS FIND THIS UNUSABLE, AND WE END UP IN THE PROP 207 REALM.

SO, I MEAN, I THINK THE COMMENT THAT I'VE HAD SO FAR IS, IS THAT WE WANT TO BE ABLE TO DO WHAT WE'VE ALREADY BEEN DOING, AND I'M TRYING TO GET THERE TOO, BUT ALSO ENCOURAGE CREATIVITY AND ENCOURAGE, ENCOURAGE STAFF TO SAY, HEY, DID YOU CONSIDER THIS? AND TO REALLY SHOW WHAT IT IS WE'RE PROMOTING, BECAUSE IT WON'T ALWAYS BE THESE SAME DEVELOPERS THAT WE'RE WORKING WITH, AND THEY'LL ALWAYS BE NEW PEOPLE COMING IN AND SOMEBODY SOMEDAY IS GOING TO COME IN AND WANT TO DO SOMETHING REALLY ORIGINAL.

AND I CAN'T WAIT FOR THAT DAY.

SO. WAIT, I'M ALREADY THERE.

WELL, I WOULD IMAGINE THAT THE REASON THAT THEY PICK A PRD AND USE THOSE IS BECAUSE THERE IS SOME FORM THAT MAKES IT EASIER.

YES. SO, I AGREE WITH TRYING TO CREATE SOME EQUITY ACROSS THE WAY THAT THEY WOULD GO ABOUT CHOOSING THE WAY THAT THEY WOULD USE THEIR ZONING STANDARDS.

I CAN SEE WHY YOU WOULD GET PUSHBACK, BUT THAT DOESN'T NECESSARILY MEAN THAT THAT'S NOT THE WAY TO GO ON THIS.

AGREED. SO THAT'S WHY I'M SAYING, LIKE, I'M ON BATED BREATH, LIKE I'M TRYING TO PUSH THE ENVELOPE, BUT I'M ALSO TRYING TO BE AS CAUTIOUS AS POSSIBLE.

I THINK AT THE END OF THE DAY, IF WE FIGURE OUT THAT THIS IS WORKING OR NOT WORKING, WE COME BACK AND WE MAKE CHANGES.

YOU KNOW WHETHER IT'S WE GET PROP 207 COME BACK AND WE SAY, OKAY, WELL, WHAT IS IT THAT'S NOT WORKING AND WHAT CAN WE FIX? I MEAN, I WOULD LOVE TO BE ABLE TO PREEMPTIVELY HAVE FIGURED THAT ALL OUT AND COME BACK.

COME IN WITH THE MAGIC POTION.

BUT, YOU KNOW, WE DO THE BEST WE CAN.

BECAUSE WHEN YOU'RE ALLOWED TO BUILD SOMETHING OF THIS DENSITY WITHIN AN RR ZONE, I MEAN.

THERE'S SOMETHING THERE THAT NEEDS TO GIVE A LITTLE FROM THE DEVELOPMENT STANDPOINT FROM THE DEVELOPER STANDPOINT, AND THERE COULD BE A LOT OF RR LAND NOW AVAILABLE.

RIGHT. AND I THINK IT'S ALSO REALLY IMPORTANT FOR DEVELOPERS TO UNDERSTAND TOO, THAT WHILE SUBDIVISIONS ARE BY RIGHT, THEY'RE STILL ASKING FOR SPECIAL PRIVILEGES, SORT OF LIKE VARIANCES FROM STANDARDS.

AND THAT DOES MAKE THEIR PLAT SORT OF VULNERABLE WHEN YOU ASK FOR DEVIATIONS FROM THE REGULAR STANDARDS.

THAT'S ONE OF THE PLACES WHERE A PLAT CAN ACTUALLY BE DENIED.

SO YEAH, BUT THIS IS THIS TRICK, RIGHT? BECAUSE IT'S THIS HAS ALREADY BEEN IN OUR CODE.

WE ALREADY HAVE THESE STANDARDS.

I THINK WE HAVE TO KIND OF HONOR SORT OF WHERE WE'VE BEEN AND WHERE WE'RE GOING TO GO BUT TRY TO ENCOURAGE AS MUCH NEWNESS AS POSSIBLE.

SO, WHAT COULD BE THE OH MY GOSH.

IT WAS IN MY HEAD A MINUTE AGO.

THE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES OF.

ANY OF THIS, BUT.

YOU KNOW, BETWEEN.

I DON'T WANT TO USE THE WORD CLUSTERING CATEGORIZING AND SEPARATELY OR.

ALL OF THIS ALTOGETHER.

I THINK THE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES COULD BE GETTING SUBDIVISIONS THAT ARE JUST THE SAME.

I MEAN, I DON'T SEE WHERE.

I MEAN, WE'VE LOOKED AT A COUPLE OF SUBDIVISIONS THAT HAVE GONE THROUGH.

RIGHT. YOU LOOKED AT ONE THE OTHER DAY.

IT WOULD HAVE MET THE POINTS.

I THINK THE IDEA HERE IS TO ENCOURAGE SOMETHING BEYOND WHAT WE'VE ALREADY DONE.

SO, THE WORST IS WE STAY STATUS QUO.

I WAS GOING TO SAY, LIKE OUR SUBDIVISIONS NOW TEND TO BE VERY SIMILAR AS IS.

SO, I FEEL LIKE.

THIS CODE AMENDMENT GIVES US MORE TOOLS AND MORE OPTIONS FOR DEVELOPERS TO USE THAT COULD RESULT IN MORE VARIETY IS OUR HOPE.

[00:50:10]

RIGHT. SO, PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, ALL OF THESE GOALS AND POLICIES.

AND I WON'T READ THEM ALL TO YOU, BUT THEY TALK ABOUT REDUCING GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS, INTEGRATING OPEN SPACE QUALITIES INTO THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT, DEVELOPING LAND USE REGULATIONS, PROMOTING LAND USE PATTERNS THAT INCREASE ENERGY EFFICIENCY, ENCOURAGE CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT RIGHT THERE TO PRESERVE OPEN SPACE.

VIEWSHEDS, I MEAN, OF ALL OF THE TEXT AMENDMENTS, THIS ONE SPECIFICALLY CALLED OUT.

SO, ALL OF THESE DESIGN FEATURES ARE MEANT TO REFLECT SPECIFIC POLICIES.

AND I THINK YOU CAN TIE EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM THAT'S IN THERE INTO A POLICY IN THE REGIONAL PLAN.

I HONESTLY, THIS IS THE ONE WHERE I COULDN'T FIND A POLICY THAT WOULDN'T SUPPORT THIS PARTICULAR TEXT AMENDMENT.

UH, IT'S NOT EXPECTED OR ANTICIPATED TO BE DETRIMENTAL TO PUBLIC INTEREST.

I DON'T KNOW THAT I WOULD EVER BRING ANYTHING TO YOU.

THAT WOULD BE. BUT.

AND THEN LASTLY, IT IS INTERNALLY CONSISTENT AND IN FACT, IS GOING TO MAKE THE CODE MORE CONSISTENT.

SO, WE'LL HAVE TABLES THAT MATCH.

WE'LL HAVE MORE READABLE, UNDERSTANDABLE TABLES.

THAT WILL BE THE THAT WILL BE A GOOD GOAL FOR ALL OF US USING THIS TOOL ON A REGULAR BASIS.

SO, WITH THAT, WE'RE LOOKING FOR A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL.

STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THE EXISTING, NOT THE CATEGORIZED, EVEN THOUGH I LOVE THE CATEGORIES BECAUSE IT REALLY CALLS IT OUT AND BRIGHTENS IT UP.

BUT I THINK THE ORIGINAL OPTIONS TO PULL FROM ARE GOING TO BE OUR BEST BET AT THIS POINT.

AND WHEN THIS GOES TO COUNCIL WITH OUR RECOMMENDATION, WHATEVER THAT MAY BE, WILL THEY HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE AWARE OF THIS ALTERNATIVE LIST THAT WAS PREPARED OR ARE YOU? I CAN ABSOLUTELY DO THAT IF YOU WOULD LIKE ME TO HAVE THAT CONVERSATION WITH THEM.

I MEAN, CLEARLY, I WANT TO GO OVER WHAT SO OF ALL OF THE CONVERSATIONS I'VE HAD SO FAR ON ALL OF THESE TEXT AMENDMENTS, THIS HAS BEEN THE MOST ENGAGING.

THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION HAS REALLY HAD THE BEST FEEDBACK AND THE BEST COMMENTS.

AND SO OF COURSE, I WANT TO CAPTURE THAT FOR COUNCIL.

AND WE CAN TALK ABOUT HOW WE WENT THROUGH THAT EXERCISE AND WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE.

AND I DON'T HAVE ANY ISSUES DOING THE SAME THING FOR YOU THAT I'VE DONE WITH THEM AND, AND HOW WE, WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT AND HOW WE GOT TO THE CONCLUSIONS WE DID.

JUST FEEL THEY WOULD HAVE PERHAPS EVEN MORE INPUT ON EVALUATING THE REGULAR STANDARDIZED LIST AND THE CATEGORIZED LIST.

THEN MAYBE WE WOULD, AND THAT MAYBE THEY WOULD HAVE MORE DIRECTION FOR YOU OR FEEL MORE CONFIDENT IN MOVING FORWARD ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.

BUT I DON'T KNOW IF THAT MEANS THAT WE, YOU KNOW, MAKE OUR MOTION WITH THE RECOMMENDATION THAT COUNCIL ALSO CONSIDER OR REVIEW THE ALTERNATIVE LIST. I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU WANT TO HANDLE THAT.

I DON'T KNOW IF YOU NECESSARILY NEED TO PUT IT IN THE MOTION PER SE, BUT I CAN MAKE SURE BASED ON YOUR DIRECTION THAT I COVER THAT ALTERNATIVE THE SAME WAY I DID FOR YOU WITH THEM. YEAH, I LIKE THE IDEA OF DOING THAT AS JUST KIND OF A DESCRIPTION OF THE PROCESS THAT WE WENT THROUGH IN DISCUSSING IT, TOO.

YEAH. I FIND THAT THAT THE FIRST LIST, THE ORIGINAL LIST WOULD BE REALLY STRAIGHTFORWARD AND REALLY EASY TO UNDERSTAND.

I THINK IT'S A REALLY STRONG ADDITION TO THE CODE AND AMENDMENT TO THE CODE.

AND, AND I CAN KIND OF I LIKE THE IDEA FIRST OF THE CATEGORIZATION, BECAUSE MY MIND WANTS TO CATEGORIZE THINGS, KIND OF A MENTAL THING. BUT ACTUALLY, I REALLY ONCE YOU JUST GET INTO IT, IT'S LIKE, YEAH, I CAN REALLY SEE UNFORESEEN CONSEQUENCES, YOU KNOW, EVEN PLACES WHERE SOMETHING COULD BE CONSIDERED MORE MAY BE A LITTLE BIT IN THIS CATEGORY AND NOT TOTALLY IN THIS CATEGORY.

SO, I LIKE I THINK THAT ORIGINAL LIST IS I MEAN, I TOTALLY GET IT JUST READING THROUGH.

I THINK IT'S REALLY EASY TO UNDERSTAND.

PERFECT. IF THERE'S NOT ANY MORE DISCUSSION.

I CAN MAKE A MOTION HERE.

I WILL MOVE THAT PZ-2200223, BE FORWARDED TO CITY COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL, HAVING MET THE FINDINGS.

SO, THAT'S MY MOTION.

ANY SECONDS? I'LL SECOND IT.

OKAY. THANK YOU.

ANYTHING ELSE IN THE LAST MINUTE? THOUGHTS? OKAY.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION, PLEASE SAY AYE.

AYE. AYE. ALL THOSE OPPOSED? OKAY. THAT PASSES.

THANK YOU. NICELY PRESENTED.

[00:55:01]

IT'S SO GREAT TO HAVE A GROUP TO WORK WITH, TO COME IN AND GET PUSHED IN DIFFERENT AND THINK ABOUT THINGS IN DIFFERENT WAYS.

AND I REALLY, TRULY, HONESTLY SAY IT THAT YOU HAD THE BEST COMMENTARY AND FEEDBACK OF ALL OF THE PLACES I'VE BEEN.

SO I REALLY, REALLY, REALLY APPRECIATE IT.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

OKAY. SO THAT CONCLUDES OUR PUBLIC MEETING.

[6. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS TO/FROM COMMISSION MEMBERS]

YOU THINK WE'LL HAVE ANOTHER ONE BEFORE THANKSGIVING? I THINK WE'LL CANCEL THE MEETING ON THE WEDNESDAY BEFORE THANKSGIVING.

I DON'T THINK WE HAVE ANYTHING ON THE AGENDA RIGHT NOW, AND I DON'T LIKE TO HAVE.

PUBLIC MEETINGS WHEN I KNOW PEOPLE ARE TRYING TO GET PLACES AND THE PUBLIC.

YEAH, OKAY, SO WE'LL CANCEL THAT ONE.

I'LL SEND A NOTIFICATION OUT.

AND DO YOU HAVE A COMMISSION PARTY PLANNED? ALEX. WASN'T LAST YEAR'S GOOD ENOUGH FOR YOU GUYS? I'LL BEGIN WORK ON THAT.

RIGHT. ALEX. INVITE WHO? DR.. MARTINEZ. ALEX.

MARTINEZ. OH, HE KEPT WANTING US TO HAVE A PARTY.

SO. I SHOULD INVITE ALL THE OLD COMMISSIONERS FROM 2020 ON.

THAT MISSED OUT ON EVERYTHING.

OKAY, WELL, IF THAT'S IT, THEN WE'RE ADJOURNED.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.