 Call the meeting to order This is the popular planning commission for August 26th For our agenda the first thing we do is approve the agenda They want in favor We'll say we'll say it's fine Deemed deemed approved Comission the chairs the next item first off congratulations Marcella our newest member so you definitely earned your spot by Getting yourself caught up before joining So welcome aboard. We're definitely happy to have you and also have a seventh Seat, so to make forums easier Can we hear something about your background and it's great. It's a great idea Sure. Introduce yourself. Sure We can introduce ourselves. Two. That might be helpful. Yeah Okay. Yeah, my name is Marcella Dent. I'm I've been in Montpelier for two and a half years now Five and I'm from Anchorage, Alaska originally And I moved here for grad school and I'm a I'm a master student at EBM in the natural resources Program and I work for the agency of natural resources I work I base I support the lawyers and the planners in the central office, so I worked for Leslie This I have a lot to learn and I'm really excited But it took to learn it all and to learn from you, but this seems like a good seems like a great opportunity for me to Apply some of the things that I've been learning in my master's program and then also through working at ANR What's your master's in? It's a master of natural resources. Oh, I see. Yeah, man. I said my focus is I sort of tried to get a focus of Public administration and natural resources like those are the two parallel tracks of classes that I took My thesis study is about collaborative natural resources at a really large scale landscape scale Is it really comfortable? Just because Can we I mean the one in the other room is handling the server Just seem loud Well, let's remember to turn it back on it's better So, yeah, we can go around the table R.m. Cassandra and any commission for maybe almost a year and a half, but I still feel like I'm learning a lot And I work at the Vermont housing and conservation board I'm Kirby Keaton. I've been on the planning commission for three years. It's Yeah, time's flying And I work the Department of Taxes as a policy attorney I'm Barbara Connery. I'm an architect and I practiced in Montpelier for about 30 years and then I taught it for Montec So as in the sustainability program and I've been on the planning commission for six years Something five or six Seems like a long time Hi, I'm Aaron Kosicki. I've been on the planning committee for commission for about a year Right now. I'm a lawyer for the Secretary of State's office planning mission for nine months three days That's great So for the nameplate Mike will get you one. It'll probably be a meeting or two before that happens You don't you don't need to Did he get you a binder with Organs? No, yeah, but since he's on vacation, I'm sure that was just it was just last week. So Yeah Okay, that's great. The Organs is a real page turner. So, yeah, I can't wait. But it's better to have it in hard copy So Marcella reported Earlier to me I thought I'd share with everyone That it seems that the city council Looked at the bathhouse hydro therapy facility issue and seems inclined to Do as the landowners are asking and to change the zoning boundary, but that hasn't been done officially yet It'll be done the next time they're approving some suggestions for coming from us Which I think some of them are on their way through Mike on the way to city council to do that So what's coming on? What's coming to us, but you remember the issue we looked at last time and we decided not to act on it Yeah, and it went to city council this last week. Yeah It seems like they are inclined to make that No, it's I think it's the my understanding is that we we did some Zoning updates stuff Couple months ago still hasn't gone to them. I guess not. Yeah So when it when that gets to them don't make don't make this change Okay, that means I guess they stuff could happen though So I guess it's not that stone but I guess we should expect that boundary change is going to happen That's that's it for me so we can go into general business and we have no members the public here So it seems like no comments from the public tonight And then the next thing is to review the minutes from our last meeting everyone could take a look Kate Stephenson She was It was selling that parcel No, she's not from VCFA. So I mean we could just say Kate Representing the the perspective owner. Yeah, I was actually confused by that. I thought that she did say she was representing VCFA No, no Representing the group that is thinking about developing. Okay Makes sense So we wanted to amend that to say From the perspective fire It's a divide a developer. All right Second paragraph should just be changed as well something to see if 18 Developing Yeah You could say that the BCFA is identifying the parcel but they're not actually Developing so what's what's their mission? To amend under Six under six where it says your proposal from Kate Stephenson She's identified in the second sentence Kate from VCFA we should change that to say Kate from the perspective developer From and then in the next Paragraph where it says the BCA and VCFA team it should say the VCFA development team Or maybe just the development team because a VCFA is just selling the parcel. Yeah, right You just have to identify the parcel, but I think Okay, so to delete VCFA that I replace it with development right to delete VCFA from the previous paragraph Okay We the second. Oh, I would move that we prove the agenda of with Approve the minutes with All in favor of The motion Okay The agenda is approved with or the other minutes rather approved Moving on on the agenda So we have the recommendation to the city council for the appointment of a Central Vermont Regional Planning Commission Board of Directors Representative This is to take my place so that I'm freed up to focus more on chair duties the next meeting will be the second Tuesday of September there so It's coming up now Previously Stephanie Smith had mentioned some interest I don't know if Marcelo this is something you'd be interested in But throw that out there for you to think about I don't know if you've heard a description of what this Okay, so what it means to be the representative is that you go and vote for Machiaveur With the Regional Planning Commission, so you'd be a voting member of the Regional Planning Commission And you would have an opportunity if you wanted to if you had the time to serve on one of the subcommittees for the Regional Planning Commission the Regional Planning Commission's Tasked a lot of things under state law It's mostly There's no way I'm able to describe this in a way in which they would approve From my perspective they approve town plans from other municipalities in the county basically it's it's more or less this county central Vermont and They they approve energy plans and other things you know when we go to make our town plan We're going to have to put it before the Regional Planning Commission. There's a regional plan itself Which incorporates all the municipalities in central Vermont and so they want to make sure that our plans do not conflict with their But as a representative Machiaveur has a say in what the regional plan is You know The only Montpelier specific thing really happening is we were working our own city plan Which is going to which is going to go through the process there, too I mean, but of course you wouldn't be alone or any the representative wouldn't have a lot to do with that It would be Mike and all of us in that process and and the only other thing is We are currently developing out toward Berry Street and a lot of the stuff is happening Montpelier is going there out that way and the reason in the regional plan currently doesn't have Montpelier developing out there So that's sort of a just an issue that's that's out there right now Other than that, it's the meetings every second Tuesday Of the month mostly involve a Presentation from someone for about an hour someone from the state usually Either about economic development or energy or some other planning So you just learn about random stuff and you get to participate in some of the kind of County-wide planning that's going on So that's something you can think about we know Stephanie could also be thinking about it And so I think with that we can just push this item off and figure it out next time is the does the Person that we're recommending need to be from this group Or it needs to be one of us And I don't I don't think that I don't think it's required Oh, but I would think that we would want that because we want to work that's been kind of the tradition So that we have a link between regional planning commission and this commission that makes it okay And it's really we're quite a bit different than the other towns that are represented in the region So they tend to be smaller towns and villages and things so I think it's good for us to Have an active voice from the planning commission. Yeah, okay And yeah, I mean, you know, everyone's gonna have their own take my take is that yeah the regional planning commission is actually it provides a lot of services to and Maupilier Has more resources and we kind of have our own services So we don't use the regional planning commission that way So I'm just kind of so a lot of my attitude there is a Lot of this is for the other municipalities. So I'm just kind of there to like observe You're really selling this one for me What's it so low It really a lot of it is just the presentations Public service department recently put on a really good one, you know and and Margot. Yeah, she's great. Yeah Okay, so we'll put that off For next time and hopefully vote and figure it out our next meeting is It will be the night before The next regional planning commission meeting which so we do get an appointment then then Maybe we could do something like That person will be official exceed you that they have to be approved through the city council So I'll still I'll still go to that meeting that maybe the other person could the new person could attend with me or something to just To meet the staff the regional plan So here's something I sell on it the regional planning commission staff are really really great really competent That's a lot of planners and they have a lot of information and knowledge And Bonnie who's the director is really really great at navigating politics and also being just really A competent at planning so okay, so we'll move on to the to the main thing for tonight, which It's up to us how long we want to spend here But we could definitely potentially get out earlier and that's to discuss the boundary for the design review district and as a reminder of this will be we We have an idea of what we think the regulations are going to say We're still going to get another shot at those when they come back from the historic preservation committee But what we need to decide what we think the Foundry will be the founder will be there will be public input on this So this is basically we're deciding that's what our starting point is going to be And with that we have the maps that Mike left for us And we have one We have one map the one on the left has the zoning districts in the various colors Those are the different neighborhoods under our zoning We have design control, which is the black barrier kind of boundary around the outside Throughout the downtown area you see there and then the one the left has a national Historic district, which is in a red boundary, which is slightly larger, but not completely overlapping the black It is hard and we can get up and go over there and then on the on the right here we have We also zoning on that map and we hit but we have the design We have the current design control district It's just the dark black, which is the same as the other map But then the different thing is that instead of the national register on the right map We have the designated downtown, which is it's filled in Which is really hard to see from here But as a reminder from last time the smallest we can get really is the designated downtown and then We have the current design control and National register as all possibilities as things that we want to take as templates You can also create something new There's the argument there's an argument for making it line up with the zoning neighborhoods. That's why that's on the maps and there's also you know the question of where we start with is going to Determine how the public responds and so if we start small then the public may not Acknowledge it very much. We may not give as much feedback because a lot of people will see that they're You know residents is left out of the Designated downtown for instance, but we if we start small we can't get larger later Yeah, I mean I feel that way I feel like it would be it would be hard to grow it I mean we could get feedback where people say they want to be included, but I don't think that's really likely So really what we're doing focusing on is the extent of the design control district and just Determining what criteria? We want to use Whether it matches the register district Mm-hmm, that's just zoning neighborhoods or matches Designated Let's You have the the College of Fine Arts Is currently under design control, but it's off on an island of design control. Is that something we want to keep? This must be nationalized Did I understand from last time correctly that these This was included in design control not because they're historic building But because they're the first thing you see when you come into town I think so, but at the same time a lot of those are state buildings that are not going to have to comply We have surprised that those show up actually Within our design control district shouldn't those be blanked out Along with the state No, that's right, but the state has this is also excluded so any of those Civic for Governmental properties we really can't include anyway, right there. I mean, it's okay if they're in the Valerie But there but we just gonna know that there's gonna be they're gonna be exempt well, you know and the other thing that would be useful to have is the extent of the Capital complex because it's not just the state house. It's a whole capital complex that we don't Yeah, it runs between Taylor Street To Governor Davis and then What's the street that's Tara's street Way to the water Is it include Baldwin Street Yeah Both sides of Baldwin Street. Yeah, it runs all the way to the southern edge of Tara's Street There's there's some non-government buildings There's there's some non-government buildings I think they would be subject to the other All right, so but then also we have what she's not designated The area beyond they Appropriate for this but it's part of our destiny at downtown, so I This Yeah, sorry that line which unfortunately looks a lot like But does it actually I guess it does it go all the way up? No, it just if you were to extend out Tara's Street Link it up to where Does the state own the forest behind there though Let's isn't that part of Hubbard Park For a portion of it is Well, the only thing is the tower Sort of questions like what function Register What does it mean when it do and most the same question for the Disney at downtown because of our Status as a what's it for local government when I'm certified certified local government All the benefits that flow from that mean that we have to have design control for that as a downtown So, yeah, we have no choice that's that's the minimum that's we can't exclude any of that Right there is sure doesn't isn't really regulatory on us at all as far as I understand it's just has to do with You know how people have reported on surveys and how you know federally of what's considered historic parts So it's it's based. I mean it does seem based on some Qualitative right, you know work and identify to identify what's a story, but there's no downside risk Same thing in the design control is what we currently are regularly being but we're not held to follow that either, right? But if we deviate I think we do need to be able to justify why we're suggesting something different From what from the status quo right now? Like like basically got that dark black line is like that's the status for right now That's what's being regulated this way So if we if we change it, we just need to know what our reasons are well I guess just for conversation starters discussion starter. I mean, is there any reason we can't take out? this parcel and then Is it I don't understand why we have national lighting there? I guess I mean there are some historic properties on here, but They're not even No, they're not so we can reduce the design control district by Those properties particularly national light and the other property actually we don't have we have jurisdiction over the high school Because that's a civic So we lose pretty much all of this area between the state and Civic so many there's no it seems like there's a lot of justification for Taking that portion out. It's not probably if you know if it's not historic properties But does that then allow us to expand? certainly in favor of Getting rid of doesn't that just makes sense This quarter Does the design do we have enough review in the zoning for the Western Gateway That would take care of any issues that might come up or this area out here the two state buildings and then there's the high school Just sit there So Design control and one side and so With respect to the Western Gateway question Figure 215 list the uses that are permitted or conditional in the Western Gateway district drive-through facilities and drive-in establishments are Perhibited except as specifically authorized by figure 215 and in figure 2 That's the zoning Just looking at whether the Western Gateway is protected enough without So I assume that it was extended there before because Sure He's not gonna apply the most of it which actually I think eliminates any concern We would have over regulation and what few parcels are included though since it's a gateway And we do want to make sure that whatever control we can have We have the design review Look at it So what parcels are those like is there some There's a green mount power. Is that Is That's the liquor just the liquor building at the end next to that is the old GMP building to the state now Leases I think all of it next to that is labor and then next to that is the high school So wait you're saying they're leasing this but not. I don't know if they own it, but I know they're occupying the building I don't know under what arrangement. Oh, I think I still I've seen some GMP trucks But I don't know if they're really operating out of there at all anymore Well, I'm not doing much right now so at some point I'll get Just lost my spot Plus the part of the current design controlled it also overlaps with national register I'm not in favor of been launching it that much but So another way to put it would be yeah All day black that's not Then the red would be removed This has to stay in there because it's Yeah, I guess it doesn't I guess Yeah, the other side of Berry Street All the way down In response to your question about permitted uses in the Western Gateway those are lodging retail sales and service car wash and fueling station Various commercial development Industrial development a smattering of public assembly permitted uses Institutional So there are quite a few permit use. Yeah, yeah, it's it's pretty expensive, but it's clearly I mean in the sort of preamble language it says I encourage the ongoing use of this Detroit for office governmental and civic uses as well as development of a mixed use of new space of new Uses to support a vibrant campus and village setting and national life and an attractive gateway with uses that support downtown Protects significant views of the State House is when enters the city and enhance pedestrian connections between the district of downtown there's a bunch of conditional uses as well, but Again, they're also more centered around bit of industrial and commercial development but in terms of where the development can actually happen it would have to be on National Life's Hill Yeah, it would change though Maybe we could take out this At least take out the Resonantial Marthgild Street portion I should also know I know this is going to impact our discussion at all But the specific design review guidelines for the district The contemplated being both the district and that there's a design control overlay to it as well And the zoning regs as written That would have I'm just saying we have to make that change to the zoning regs if we were to take it out right because they assume the design review over Yeah, yeah, I don't think housing Conditional uses For for the Western Gateway That was discussed on the bridges concept was developing housing up here on the National Life Campus from here So multi-family we don't want to exclude that but we also might want Design review is not strictly for historic as we talked about last The non-historic part Do we have some sort of a survey that tells us how many properties are within any given district The parcel line should be on this right right, but I just like I'm just like a rock just like a rock I didn't I don't bring that but yeah Version I was thinking about that one, but I mean that's sort of a broader question, which is It might be hopeful to sort of Understand how many properties we impact within any given Stoning just The current part was that there's seven or eight there in Western Gateway, but that could quickly change its national life started so dividing Yeah, sure Right now, then what about That sounds like that plus that this little weird label looks like a death in a shot of savings to have some say in what's done there That's the story this is telling me We want to control VCFA and savings more than other places But save it the rest of savings is not play devil's advocate if he The destiny of downtown is going to be included that we are regulating very straight up to this far Anyways this starts to get us close to this neighborhood, so I mean if you There was a desire to link those It's there. I think we have to link them. I mean What did you think earlier you said something about College Street? I just I'm just pointing out how If you were just I mean come in out of the blue visit Montpelier and this is the various neighborhoods College streets one you would probably put and your top lists of historic looking Neighborhoods and yeah, it's yeah, it's evaded regulation And that's not me trying to make the case for like extending it to college trees, but I'm really saying is that like If you apply that logic to some of these others, I mean, yeah, why is Area around Scrivener Place and the middle school Storm when Yeah Yeah, that big one Yeah, that's the one on the corner of J. Okay. Yeah Yeah, so that's Those are good. Yeah, and they're flanking Main Street So Main Street as a as an artery that we're protecting on both sides With design review sort of make sense. Okay. Yeah, I think yeah, that seems to be the logic of having that so that part Okay, so I guess the question is design review Beyond this there's not much of it, but there's a little bit of design review beyond All right, because the continuation of J is North Street. Yeah So Shouldn't split a parcel Yeah Yeah Registered yeah Start saying well, there are a lot of you know, this these are historic buildings, so they should be reviewed Somebody's gonna find it on the start buildings They're already not yeah And then on the crosses the mental health Washington mental health over here and that's It's okay Someone's been there a lot here seems like they're parts of my back here. So yes We want to start from the position of saying that it is unfair for design review to go down the center of the road Design control the river side is more visible Oh, no, it wasn't that you designated But over here is very visible if you're coming across the grand street This side you these I see what you're saying further up and it is within this door Call So we're saying already that we need to add This again, it's just this side of the street No, and it's all this too So so they don't match the design Design review does take both sides very sweet here Yeah, yeah, I design review that break on St. Paul Street. Yeah It's pretty straight Yeah, that's right. I'm one part side of the same phone and then it abruptly stops. So it's also only half the length Yeah, I'm not saying why those Wait, which ones these Right here Yeah, all of that's in them. I think this might be Maybe a church on the other side not in St. Paul. Oh, this is the church on St. Paul. Yeah, it's not Yeah, it's not included. But on the other side is the funeral home is one of these. Oh, you're right And then there's a few residential back there And on this side Special score That are being used He'd be saying that some buildings that are being used for non-residential purposes on St. Paul and St. Paul. Yeah just a few buildings off This side I think there's a compelling argument to make up our entire suggestion based on zoning Neighborhoods And basically I conclude the three one here and that leaves out the kind of iffy stuff we're talking about but Urban core all three urban core And then the three one up here but not taking I don't think we want to take that piece out Just because it's it's mixed that's mixed right now Because within that section on school street is the social security building Not the entire zone there's right okay, so that's Just that one property here great Yeah, yeah, and the green one next to it is also not Basically what we did with this is that we're taking it on Bear Street, but I don't know why the zoning So if you just took that green one out, oh yeah, the one orange property that We have seven three and seven six the same colors Because they're all seven. It's just that they have different Yeah, that's what it seems like I'm just I'm bringing that up to point out. We wanted to divide my neighbor Have to oh Right my name part of seven sixes part of each of those is in the desert downtown, right? So we did it by neighborhood. We have to include all of both That is The national story about is pretty similar to what I think the historic So that takes you right up to their design review to match the historic district East I find it a little hard just by having the section of savings and by the way It doesn't fit with what seems like the rationale for the rest of stuff around but isn't that district that tracks with the property that's owned by The college right that's the college's own parcel, right? I Would just I don't know this but I would assume the reason why that boundary was drawn the way that it was when it was because there was recognition that There would be better chance at asserting jurisdiction of the review board over that parcel as opposed to remainder of You know savings pasture I Guess given what the What city council is doing with that zoning change that boundary change that we discussed at last meeting I Don't know that those zoning batteries are even really that relevant to it That change shows us that it's not gonna be we'll just one owner anymore though fair enough. Yeah, that's one thing Yeah, but I potentially but wait the property is not sold. Yeah, right But I think that's again, there's probably a recognition that that's probably more primed for development and the remainder of the pasture which I Think is probably tracking with reality So please Think of some of the criteria one of which would be to have Design review and compass both sides of particular streets um potentially to neighborhood boundaries in general What about our I mean the justification for continuing it up east state Up to the colleges that that's That's an important artery in the city. Do we have a sense of how the neighborhood boundaries have been established? Yeah, that was when we read of the zoning Mike mostly did a detailed look at the entire city and Kind of hand-tailored those neighborhoods to to match like as As a cohesive neighborhood that makes sense. They were similar density and property Parcel sizes so that the idea was to create a grouping of properties that had That fell within the designated lot size. Yeah, to make more of them Okay, conforming so Mike did all that work Yeah There hasn't been any real grumbling about it. Well The zoning is now disowning right right there were changes and there there was an additional zone All right, so it's been vetted then It's vetted and it's not arbitrary This change this was changed to Because it's actually bigger than I thought it was that's the only area that's 24,000. Yeah, it was a compromise between 17 and 30 So we're kind of ignoring that yeah We need to Consider what are the values of people of design review? For the city as a whole Why is it important to include certain areas agreed? my understanding from Anything That's one thing A lot of things under the current version of it. Yeah, it's it's a lot of it is just suggestions Because the current one's pretty vague which if it's vague it means they can't enforce much So on the one hand It's going to be a little stricter now Although there's also some built-in parts for administrative You know administrative approval to make certain things quick. So there's like both sides of that like stricter, but also easier in some ways But yeah, I think The way I see it is yeah, we're about to we're about to make it a bit stricter So with that in mind like Where is it appropriate? It's not all about historic though And I think that and I think the commercial type development I think The city as a whole I think has more of an investment or more of an interest in when that happens. So that's why I think it makes sense to keep the western Gateway I won't touch these from right now, but in the urban core where there's more commercial stuff Keeping keeping that and design review makes sense to me because you're more much more likely to get development that everyone has an interest in how it is and What things are more likely to be focal points in the city Just just a just a dovetail of what Kirby just said The draft design review standards that we've been doing There's a specific section regarding the western gateway district and it Requires things like the site development shall provide visual protection of gateways minimum setbacks will be established to reach development parcel from the main roadways to retain natural terrain They also want new development to For clustering of development on site to maximize the preservation of open areas So there's a specific I mean The historic preservation committee has done some Pretty detailed thought on specifically the western gateway They clearly assumed it would be within the boundary that we're considered And what was the other there was another one too because the special area it says western gateway rivered front. Okay So they assume riverfront, which is not In its entirety I mean if something's not in design review, it's not as if the city doesn't have any oversight over design Right entirely It's just certain features that are more more carefully considered Just just the redx basically Right. Yeah, but I mean there are some what I would consider design I guess features No, the zoning is what takes effect there is not designed for review So wait the the design review committee doesn't have any jurisdiction outside of the Overlay district, right? Right. That's our kind. That's right right so Yeah, Erin is Making the case that it's not like it's without protection. Right. Yeah I just wanted to um Yeah, I mean to me it's like very Right, like you're talking about the gateway. Sorry vendor out to do You know sort of to me. It's like protecting the most special Which is not necessarily doing on the eastern gateway because We're talking about design review On the eastern gateway. Yeah Oh, but I guess I want a riverfront, which is yeah, but I guess I don't think I think most people enter in I guess the The western gateway is the main Yeah, but one most of our development potential is along the eastern gateway Riverfront any is anyone in favor of including all of the all of river Riverfront district. Where is that design review? It's big it's here and out here and all the way like all all which would be so that would be a big expansion If we included the entire thing so it's just Just want to do look at my straw whole thing like for a second time like People want to consider that the Doesn't the downtime. It doesn't a downtime district that Comes out No, a little more Well, we just we've beaten up a little bit. It comes it comes to here. We're gonna do this much of it And where is that? Uh, granite street The bridge and so on both sides of berry street Um, I see there Raise your hand if you would entertain the idea of including this No more Including We have a justification that's strong enough because it's a gateway and if we want to focus on visibility well, yeah, I'm Okay, if we want to focus on areas that are likely to be developed frankly along the river Well, let's take the prime example in that area right now the bar hill Right and that that was developed without any it was And also the So, okay, so we'll set that aside for now Who's uh, tends to favor keeping this island in the vcfa Park It looks the only bar was interested in that so So I think I'm thinking we're not going to include that so now I'm asking like what about this So I I do think that the That's sort of the main like sort of the traditional like college quad area It's like I'm pretty significant You know, it's kind of it's sort of the east side anchor of town. I feel like You know that quad's pretty important obviously the main building is pretty important And there are a number of pretty big residential structures like right or I think sort of bring it I feel like are pretty significant that I I mean just personally I can see why you would want design review authority To ensure that that's preserved in a certain way Sort of the 40 thing though is that you know, it kind of That area sort of bleeds a little bit of the college street Area and that's not including design review. It's sort of a tough sell at that point, but And aren't we limited in the college district? Yeah, I kind of that's why I that's something I was gonna wonder I think it's kind of the main Building is sort of out. Well, those are all basically what's included. There are all almost all college-owned buildings not quite All Thank goodness vcfa is seems to be doing pretty well So I just don't know what we have what we can actually say about that Yeah, we can keep it in design review. Why wouldn't we be able to tell the college like what the college would have to go through design review? I vaguely remember Mike saying something about that as well that that was sort of the main There's limitations. It might have been an exemption for the college itself for that too. Yeah I don't know to the extent of what that exemption is, but that's what I remember. I don't think about The third exam, but we shouldn't know why you didn't include it then. Yeah, because if Isn't that new The new Visiting it's yeah, it's actually it's nice Oh that glass with the glass. Yeah, it's gotta be in there. It's the best part of campus. Yeah, what did you call it? This is the best part of campus If you want to be on So keep it is that what I'm hearing? Well, I think there's sort of I mean you're thinking for really What we do we don't want to do is We sort of have a certain amount of like Institutional buy in But the status quo for lack of a better term. I mean if it's already there. Yeah, you know absent some Significant reason Not change not change it I mean it could be open. The question is why we already have I mean the review authority exists already The why from a policy perspective would be We're identifying that as a as a landmark Visible piece But that's that that reason does not that policy reason does not apply to this line back here Except that debates already happened when this binary was set before and The outcome of that debate was was that it's going to be part of was that the I'm assuming that I'm sure they do Yeah, I mean you're assuming that designer view is de facto positive in all cases. No, I'm not no I certainly know I am delimited to claim. I'm not making that argument Like what I'm saying is is that we have a set of boundaries that has already been better. It's already gone through a certain process So to me that becomes a pretty compelling baseline for what we should use as boundaries And if they're going if we're going to make any change to these boundaries There ought to be some very clear reason for why we would do that This is the counter that this is this like what we're going through Is the chance to Totally shake it up and I agree and I think it's fine to have the debate as well to keep it the question is is why It does impact saving street. So I think, you know, the So that does the idea of keeping it into some of your view It helps to protect saving street So no matter who owns that property whether it's this I mean, I'm sure it was drawn that way because that's the college-owned property but Even if someone else owned it it would still be A reason to keep it with me to protect saving street whereas these wouldn't need to be included because once this is mixed in right That's far enough away. There's you know, not other residential properties For me it's the potential for it to have commercial development similar to over here would be maybe a reason to have it But to favor some residences that don't have to subject themselves regulations so that they're Benefiting from an externality of their neighboring like I don't like that idea If it's because it could be red commercial development That's why I mean, you know, if there were going to be more residences, no But because it potentially developed for commercial It's called college pasture, which is yeah, is it's neighborhood designation I mean to me if bcfa is selling that parcel it's it's currently for sale. It's a big argument At least come back. So Right because isn't this the parcel that they're selling basically Not up that far. Oh, okay. Just in I think alignment with that Neighborhood change They were buying a parcel that was zoned in three places They're not proposing development from the top zone. Right. That's right, but they are For those two Here's something to think about when you're thinking about like where these boundaries are set and why Some things are included in some art. So under the proposed site specific standards for alterations in additions to Historic buildings Historic buildings are defined as any buildings listed or determined eligible for the state register or national register of historic places Or d locally significant by the historic preservation commission They are they those are subject to a long list of requirements. However, non historic buildings Shall respect and be compatible with existing patterns and setbacks found around adjacent buildings Then there's also the new design building standards. So the question really becomes is if those If those properties next on saving street are not part are not defined as historic buildings There's not much that having design control district Late on top of it would change anything. That's the street realm street in downtown all and everywhere too Right, which I think is something that we had to think about when we look at these But I think what the the college property sort of represents is a new building An opportunity for new buildings which would subject those to the new building standards. So I think we should think about like If this existing buildings It really comes down to a store versus non historic designation It's in terms of what really Is applied to those when they're doing alterations or changes But if it's in the design review district and it's new construction All these requirements apply Joe it just has to be compatible if it's new construction, but not within historic district Then it does not have to obviously have historic aspects to it, but it has to be Compatible development, which If that parcel If the college sells that parcel No, it just says it says new building standards This section applies to the development of new buildings within the design review overly district. It makes it doesn't make any reference to historic district Okay, so but the historic then overlays that and in the historic new buildings in the historic district have more Requirements than new buildings in the design review, but not historic district Which is where we're talking about the end there We're talking about design review and historic both think the same district Right, but the person we're talking about right now is is not in the historic and Is not in is currently in design review, but not in the historic district And is available for commercial development, particularly in the riverfront I think I thought that this I mean being in design control means that it's it's also in control for historic. No, this is This is well, this is the national but it's not regulatory for us. I think our our historic preservation rights No, we just have if that's what what erin was saying is that there are two Two sort of districts so as As defined in these proposed rags The proposed rags haven't Yeah being the same No, there are set there are some It is for design There were design review district part of the design review district is historic part of the design review district is not historic My understanding is those rags Imagine the same district, but the historic applies if your particular building property is deemed historic That's correct within the national register district, right? So that parcel is not within the national register district, right? I think it's deemed historic just by the survey where we're contributing not contributing Yeah, but those are only the ones that are contained within the red Those are the ones Yeah So all of those Contributing or non contributing have been evaluated within the red only within the red. Yeah Yeah Or if it's deemed a locally significant by the historic preservation committee through testimony at a design review committee or development review board here That's a good I thought maybe some of these properties even outside of the red had at least been surveyed I don't think so now. Okay. Well, that's good information to have Okay, I want to go back to it. I'm sure move us along Okay, so if who's in favor of keeping the I'm going to say the vcfa island as it is In what we start with Within the historic district. I mean within design review So raise your hand if you would if you were in favor of including that Keeping it exactly as it Yeah, it's a starting point. Raise your hand if you're in favor of including it by cutting out the savings portion of it Okay, okay. We have a two-two split Well, maybe I guess I'd rather go on a property line. I feel like that's the property or I guess never mind We want to go on zone Yeah, this would be the one zoning Well, we have two split there. So I don't know we're gonna do because we don't have to solve we're not the majority of that one So I I just asked the simple measures like why again, I'm sorry. I maybe I missed it I was looking at the stuff. Why do we want to cut that out? Why do you guys want to cut that out? My thought was if we need to expand elsewhere And we can cut out some parts that we don't need that would be good. Why wouldn't you trade off then? Maybe do a table and move on. Yeah, maybe if we talk about where we might want to expand it And then we could value we could weigh those two With each other to decide so the next the next piece is the part of main street around the middle school That goes beyond the designated downtown. So something we could remove Who's in favor of keeping that as it is wait that part is in both right there that part is in both Yes There's a piece that falls outside of that short short which we can also take a look at But just in general who's in favor of keeping that As an extension part in the yellow. Is this the little business on main street? Yes the main street around the middle school Like Barb mentioned earlier how it's an artery or uh, you know It's when you're coming and you're coming down the hill there that's in a way You're only talking about this piece These properties right here Right because it's already now in the historic district and it's in design review up until that point Right. So if we take this part out, okay. Well, who's in favor of taking that part out? Let's start small. Are you just cleaving the yellow part? Yeah, the couple of the couple of parcels that are Yes consistent with neighborhood boundary. It's not this neighborhood boundary. It's also not consistent with the national registry. Yes, okay So okay, so we have so we're definitely not going to do that. Who's in favor though of the rest of staying in Raise your hand if you want the rest of this to stay in Okay, so we have three on that one You have a persuasive That's right Offer opinion Okay, so we have that And then I don't think that it's a management way or another about the state house. But What does count is cliff street And then it's a cliff street is not in the designated downtown It is not in the design control any longer But it is in the historic district. So that was the one that was removed by the city council Because of citizen complaints about being in design review Just a majority of the citizens that were impacted by this came out and spoke out against being included in design review And they had they had some bad experiences within their network, which is hopefully what we have ameliorated now For the future and that is in the historic. Yes district, but it's not in the story, but it's not currently in design control It's not currently it doesn't get done So who would be in favor of including that back in From our for our starting point Barf's favor You see that portion of the city from the justice candidate of our It's visible it is visible right they claim it's not visible but it is visible and just because they're 1920s Buildings does not make them non historic Which was their other argument is that they didn't understand why they were part of the historic district because they didn't think they were Okay, so we had to the eraser hand about including that Anybody gonna join them? I'm gonna I'm gonna abstain. I'm gonna say my vote. I'll go with a majority of three in any case. Okay Um Okay, so it looks like we're not going to include that Oh, so you're not gonna form the three you're gonna go if we have three if you have three. I'll join you as your fourth Okay, that you need for a You know We don't have three for that, um I think that's it right we we did agree earlier north Part Yes, or at least maybe just the yellow part those are probably Maybe those aren't I don't know if I'm gonna keep those in there. Why not keep that street as well I guess it was only if we were going to remove it Jump north. Yeah. I mean, I guess I'm in favor taking out that whole Including national life Well, I guess I'm okay. Well, so Now that I have a better sense of what the proposed regulations are relative to the historic district and how that impacts existing buildings versus new construction um I am in favor of keeping it As is I was thinking about the whole western gateway So, okay It is not part of the historic so it's only Part of review. Yep. So I'm still in favor of keeping I mean only if we could take an equivalent area land area, but um, it would impact a lot of people I mean, I think the thing to be great to think about is is outside the historic district Ever it's outside the historic district as defined by the national registry or whatever metric we want to use for that like Really design review speaks to new new construction only so I You know a corridor like north field street feel like design reviews are appropriate What you're saying about speaks to So you're saying if it's not identified and maybe The things sorry that we've already gone overnight and understand. Yeah, I thought they could If your house is at least 50 years old They can they can it has to be a contributing structure in order To reread the no because it's not part of the district. The district is this map here All of the ones that are not darkened in Are identified in listed buildings. So there's a list So only the listed buildings are what defined The like for instance, I mean curvy was talking about his wife The plan for a fence permit and you don't have a contributing structure in the historic district, correct Right. So the so the historic part of the works did not apply to us. I suppose but the design review part did Yeah, so it's not just I mean you said it only applies to new development. That's why it confused me Under under under the new under the under the proposed changes to the design review regs If he's in the historic district, yes, you are the historic district. Yes We're not but our house isn't contributing. Oh, it's a non contributing structure, but it's still part of the historic Because we have some fancy little things on the outside of our house that they didn't like as historic Oh too much decoration about not historic It was added not consistent with the So help me up curvy. I don't understand the contributing versus non contributing analysis like it was um I believe it was this the city's historic preservation Committee at one point now you think it's I mean contributing versus not I don't know what into I don't know what entity decides who's contributing to me I'm not really heard that right now. I think that's part when the national register District is established. They List all of the buildings and the buildings in their listings say contributor or non contributor But who decides those listings do you recall? I think someone locally. I'm pretty sure it's not national They get the input from the state this national historic Um preservation whatever it is Department, but it's the national registered listing that actually places them So if you went on to the national register listing from appeal, you'd find your house, right? You can you can go online and find a list of the houses within this and it tells you contributing or not But but it's a detailed write-up. Yeah based on someone with some expertise. But what is the impact of Contributing versus if you're not contributing you're not regulated as much Does that mean you're not historic? No, you're still historic Okay, so but if you want but if I wanted to turn my house into a commercial property And try to get some grants based on historic preservation I would need to get my house contributing before I could qualify for those Okay Okay, so it is purely a subset within historic register Interesting but a majority of it doesn't the majority are contributing within the city Just don't throw that out right but it doesn't speak to any sort of local zoning or local regulation It will contributing or not determines whether or not ours for preservation Ordnance will will apply to your house if you're within the design review But you will still have a design review regardless. You'll have design review regardless But whether or not the historic preservation parts of it apply to you, okay, they'll be more lenient if you're a non-contributist Just look at the historic aspects of it because yeah Because if they're saying you're non-contributing then you don't have historic fabric to replace with like majority We have a sense put in I don't know if they would have decided a fence isn't historic They didn't have fences in the past No, generally just we used to be a barn Oh, interesting. Yeah, maybe have stints then too Um, all right, so we decided to not reestablish cliff street No, so far what I have is basically we're looking at using the concern The best way to put this is to think put this current design review boundary minus the part of the nine four neighborhood that's included and Potentially and that's that's it right now exit out. I mean our we agree on that So and then and then we were just now discussing whether or not the seven and four Do we we added this in? Yeah That's the plus the plus would be any part of the current design review. That's not Overlapping with disink designated downtown Okay, so current design review plus designated downtown And that's the nine four neighborhood main street east. That's all we got so far History was to leave It as is to leave it out. It's me. It was too too. I believe. Oh, we also had this Little nub here to remove the that one property that's part of nine 96 What is that number? Um, yes, it is a three um to take that piece out because it's part of Of a three is everyone in favor of that? Yes It's that multifamily brick building That may have been the historic building What street it's on it's on st. Paul Um and baird the corner of st. Paul and baird street Um, it is it is a multifamily brick building It's one of the very few and I it has some historic history to it like it was a Hospital, I don't know what it was actually I think I know what you're talking about, but if we're trying to Yeah, that's the one Okay, but that's still I assume this is a job It's like the playground in the middle school back here. Yeah, okay. So this is just taking property in the street I'll argue that to keep this in I think it's because it would be mixed use right It is currently mixed use. So it's mixed use. So again, you could have like a gas station or something like that Go in here potentially. I don't know We already have the hotel motel The motel that's It kind of like you kind of like just there That's shut down right now, right? No, the lodge is construction at the moment The lodge is open though, isn't it? I think it's open. Yeah, they they did the demolition of the This thing the failed building. Yeah, so you could have other things like that go up around there And so I think that is over using there's a parking lot there that could be developed for some other reasons So yeah, I think that should stay in What is what is this? This is a hill and there's a little neighborhood up there Oh, it's a little house. Oh, is that where the houses are? I thought it was like freedom drive while it's done It's multi-family. I think so Yeah, I think you're right. I think it would make sense. Luckly don't those other things to to make make this contour with the neighborhoods Yeah, so draw this all the way up to Derby Yeah, and cut out this green. Yeah, okay What is this a piece? I know. Yeah, then there's the screen and then this I think that those Don't those properties That's what we've been told. I haven't found an example that you're right contrary. So maybe what we're saying is Why is that? Because you couldn't you couldn't access it off of northfield street because all of these other residential properties are there so Maybe you know, we'd see the lines of the person Right. Yeah, you know, that's what I'm thinking too So we could say adjust it to conform with seven dash four with the just um, maybe we're at seven dash four Yes Including the yellow Bit or minus just something there like it cuts weirdly right here. It doesn't come Across it doesn't come up school Right, right. That's like a strange It's a straight maybe it meant to go that way. It's just yeah Following a hill or something. Yeah, but again, it's not following the property line so Without further reference Minus the small piece of what what is that? minus of uh nine dash six And then oh, this is the neighborhood of the hill, right? Yes, that's very high. Yeah, it overlooks bromance street, for sure. All right. And so then we said that it would conform With seven dash four Including adding up to derpy. I don't know why it was to you know done that way. Yeah, I mean the macro know He can always Especially for that green property, right? So Okay, so we've cleaned up to some extent this part and So a couple of things We we had table savings Vcfa earlier and we also should also decide whether or not we want to vote tonight or whether we want to just take this and Have Mike vetted before we vote to see if he could explain any of the Well, is is this as much as we want to do? So We just John and Stephanie are at the like the college personal I feel like if we put the whole discussion off to the next meeting then we're Kind of be talking about this the whole next meeting. Well, we might need to just to be able to have our Just this will this won't be our remember though that like we're just gonna put this out there and then get public comment And then we could change it down the road I mean, yeah, so that's why I'm a little bit eager to get the ball rolling. I mean that Can we agree? now that we sort of have a good sense of What we're dealing with we can kind of mull this over for the next two weeks have a pretty Focused quick conversation about this. Hopefully not Have a good one. I think that flags about to go over You know, I think we can do in 20 minutes or less ideally I think we could probably Okay, I'll just weigh in on what we want to do. Okay Do you want to wait to vote for the next meeting or do you want to vote now and then just give up? What exactly we're voting in this as well We could vote on the entire thing and then sort of at the beginning that's going to still let Mike know What the other members know when we did You could revote if Mike's like, no, you can't take that parcel out. It's special I don't know Yeah, I think in the next meeting we could just say we're only going to talk about this for 20 minutes Here's the you know, I know I know Kirby will be What's that straight there It's just it You know this existed before the zoning. So that's true. That's true So could they could be True And I mean, I think we need to think about whether or not we want to more of the area The neighborhoods downtown that are within historic Okay, we'll let's talk about that right now. I mean, what do you give a proposal? Well, I just think for one thing, uh, see pro street currently really bizarre That it's one side And not the other Of this first section But actually maybe the other side of buildings that we would want to be more concerned about including the church Um, I don't know. I guess but then if we extend it if we Take our rationale and extend it to all of of Nine or eight dash three Then we're splitting loomis splitting loomis and I can see that being a problem But as far as the public's feel on that If you decide to do both sides of loomis, then you're talking about going Well, you're talking about confirming, you know, basically Allowing the review to match the historic the reason the first three or four properties on st One side is because that's We oh, that's why it's there. Okay. Just it leaves out everything else interesting. Yeah, and if we And then we said include the fourth property because it's the same we got rid of this little green guy That would limit that street to Designate a downtown and just on miles just extending cedar street, right? So it's not the first one It's the second one. So the only that one a little triangle There's also part of our urban Center too, that's this is the plus Sorry there This patch is it's urban center yet. It's not going to be in a designer view. Well, it's a it's a mound Oh Yeah, it's pretty Yeah, I remember that yeah Yeah, in fact, that was a little harder. This is the one way it's so narrow Yeah, and part of the problem with that water mean though, I don't really that's that wasn't it Okay So we should start wrapping it up. Do we have any other things to include right now? So we could just consider whether or not we think there's a rationale for including anything else We can but so if we wouldn't keep it quick next time then on the agenda We'll have an item to something like Review of the proposal so far plus the discussion of the bcfa parcel and like limited to that. That's what i'm thinking right now unless Okay, I won't be here soon Okay, you won't have to worry about me bringing up more more districts more areas More neighborhoods Okay Well, I just want to make sure you if you want to make your case for any of these well What about this side of the very street? Yeah, I mean I again, I sort of think but it it only Half our history because very street it's a pretty major street Especially if there's no development out here Truth we're developing out this way. That's the street to get there discussion about the very street I think yeah, once you get farther to have us on very too Oh, right past the new section Anyway, I don't know that that makes it I think overall to have system You're saying all of this what Oh, just to grant a street We're just saving to sibling Uh, is anyone else in favor of adding The north side of berry street from sibling down toward downtown Of the riverfront district. Is that part of the designated downtown? It's not part of downtown The doesn't downtown splits the street there So the one side of berries in one side of berries out. So it's a cross from the designated town to You see from the water these houses get up to the water. So you see all those but this is the one way street Right So that becomes more of the early Either of you Not interested All right, we'll leave it that then Marcella do you want me to bring it up next time? What that's gonna be 60 minutes tonight was supposed to be an hour. So I know Yeah, no Because of our change to do that Minutes earlier Okay, so with that So we have a motion to adjourn Move by Aaron do the second Second by Barb And we are adjourned