Planning Commission Work Session October 15, 2019 Water Street Center Form Based Code Members Present: Taneia Dowell, Jody Lahendro, Lyle Solla-Yates, Rory Stolzenberg, Hosea Mitchell, Gary Heaton Members Absent: Lisa Green Staff Present: Missy Creasy, Alex Ikefuna, and Brian Haluska Chair Hosea Mitchell called the meeting to order and confirmed that the outcome for this evening would be feedback on the questions posed in the staff report concerning the Form Based Code. He also noted that there was a desire to talk about affordable housing. He turned the time to Marina Khoury from DPZ Consultants to provide the report. Ms. Khoury provided an overview of the Form Based Code and detailed the proposal provided to the City. Chair Mitchell organized the discussion around the questions outlined in the staff report. 1. Should the 700 block of Graves Street be removed from the regulating plan? Ms. Khoury confirmed that the Graves Street area was part of this Phase. Brian Haluska noted this area was zoned R-2 and not DE which is the current zoning of most of Phase I. Chair Mitchell asked if the question is should this area be addressed now or in Phase III. Mr. Haluska noted that some of the concern has to do with allowable uses in DE that are not allowable in R-2. Ms. Khoury confirmed that retail is not proposed in this area of the city under the proposed code. This led to a discussion to clarify the regulating plan and the framework plan and how each needed to work with the other in the code. Given that clarification, the majority of the Commissioners were okay with this area moving forward for review as T-4 zoning. 2. Should 301 Avon Street be designated T5 or T6? Commissioners Dowell, Heaton, Stolzenberg and Solla Yates were not concerned about this location changing to T-6. Commissioner Lahendro wants to keep it T-5. Mr. Haluska followed up by asking if only the site noted should be increased to T-6 or if there were other sites to consider. There was discussion about other areas but the Commission provided general consensus that staff could look at areas next to the Rail Road as considerations for T-6 and provide a proposal as appropriate. 3. Should the 200 and 300 blocks of Ridge Street be removed from the regulating plan? Mr. Haluska confirmed that these sites are zoned West Main East Corridor with Historic Overlay. Commissioner Lahendro noted that the Ridge Street Historic District is distinctive and he would like the overlay to remain. He noted that BAR reviews should prevail. Commissioner Solla Yates asked about the difference between FBC and Historic Review and Mr. Haluska provided background. The Commission then held a discussion concerning affordable housing. Commissioner Dowell did not think that providing 80% AMI should result in bonuses. Commissioner Solla Yates noted that there should be a way to assist those at lower AMI. Ms. Khoury noted that the proposal will assist in promoting smaller units. 4. Are the current draft regulations regarding open space consistent with the broader goals of the SIA and the City? Discussion began on open space but the Commission moved to a discussion of whether this was the correct time to move forward with the FBC. Ms. Khoury pointed out that the Comprehensive Plan would take about 2 years and though this is not perfect, it is better than what is currently in place. Commissioners expressed concerns about the history of this area and making sure that the proposal review takes that into account. 5. Which bonus height proposal should proceed to the final draft? Following discussion, it was noted that the following would move forward: T-4 requirements from the bottom table and T5 and T6 from the first table. The category for 80% AMI would be eliminated. 6. Should the parking requirements in the SIA be: a. Eliminated b. Eliminated for lots under a certain size c. Reduced d. Similar to those of the Parking Modified Zone Concerning parking, Commissioner Stolzenberg noted that parking requirements could be eliminated, Commissioner Solla Yates noted there should be potential to phase out parking requirements. Commissioner Dowell was okay with reducing some parking mandates. Ms. Khoury noted the possibility of extending the parking modified zone to the rest of the area. There was openness to additional discussion of extension of the parking modified zone. 7. Are there any concerns from the public comments that the Commission would request staff to address? It was noted that a document would need to be available to denote how each of the comments in the packet had been looked at. Mr. Haluska noted that he would work with the consultants to address. Chair Mitchell provided time for members of the public to speak. Cliff Fox – stated he likes the FBC and that it does address ADU. He pointed out a Supreme Court case from 2015 that noted that forcing affordable housing is not lawful Caroline Cetera – 310 Avon – noted that the discussion above was about 310 Avon not 301 Avon. She likes the T-6 option for this parcel. Elaine Poon – Legal Aide – stated there are lots of red flags with this. How do the pieces fit together? This site is the history of urban renewal. 6th Street public housing would be affected. The SIA was established for a grant application. Is the plan even up to date? Ludwig Kuttner – IX – stated that we need more housing in general. Affordable housing is needed with commitment. There is no affordable housing without density. He asked why the R- 1 area does not have increased density. Land is restricted because people don’t want change. Let’s build great stuff here. Commissioner Dowell asked why when there is talk of affordable housing that it is always apartments. Kathy Galvin noted that on Garrett Street there is a 9 story building proposed with no housing units (it was later confirmed that one unit will be present in that building). The Commission asked for data on the number of affordable units and Ms. Creasy noted she would share information recently gathered. Adjourn 7pm.