 Ready to go. Okay, so first item is public comment. No one wants to comment from the public. So then we move approval of the minutes of August 23rd. So I have a motion to approve the minutes of August 23rd. Any discussion about the minutes? Hearing none, all in favor please say aye. Aye. Anyone opposed? Sorry. Sorry. Okay. Changes are amendments to the agenda. Any changes? I don't think so. So city updates. Yes. Thank you. A couple of things to update you on for tonight. The first thing is council at their last meeting approved a schedule for the housing fall housing series and the inclusionary housing and replacement housing ordinances. That schedule is at your place. If you want me to just just for informational purposes at this point, basically we're looking at November December timeframe for the planning commission to start diving into that information. That should hopefully be after the master plan is drafted and ready to go for public hearing. So that's when we're plugging in. There's also a few other dates on here for your information along with the, we're putting together a kind of an open house housing series. And the date that we have for that is right. Is that here? It will be there. Yeah, that'll be here. So that'll be kind of an open house for, for, we'll have some, some guest speakers to talk about the differences and the nuances of the housing regulations and things like that. And so to kind of more give some educational outreach on, on the housing piece. So as I mentioned, council did approve the schedule. So that's what we're working with right now moving forward. The other item to, to, to talk about under city updates is we are the city is, is applying for a municipal planning grant again this year. So as part of that, we will need a signature from the chair of the planning commission. So I wanted to at least have that discussion and Heather's here to provide a little overview of what the application is and for you all to have any discussion about it to then authorize Mike to sign off on the application. So we've applied for municipal planning grants for the last couple of years. We've received them for the last two years. So the first one we use to do our economic development strategic plan. And the second one is why Regina is here right now facilitating this process. So we've been successful with them. I don't know if we can be successful three years in a row. That's a lot to ask, but I'm going to apply for it anyway. So this year, what I intend to apply for is a grant to hire a consultant to do a wayfinding plan for downtown and for the gateway districts leading to downtown. It's something that we've talked about for years, but we've had to put it off as we go through the planning process. It's something that was identified as a priority in the parking study. And one of council's priorities for staff this year is to implement the parking study. So it aligns with what we're trying to do. I'd like to request a grant in the amount of $22,000. And this year, ACCD has reduced the match that we have to provide. So we only have to provide a 10% match, but their points gained by having more than that 10% match. So I'm proposing a 15% match of $3,300, which would come from community development, corporations, EDC, budget reserves. So I would love to have your permission to apply for that. Are there any questions or comments? So that's just for the development of the plan, but not the implementation. Right. Then I would follow it in February, I believe there's a downtown transportation grant that I can apply for for implementation. So I would follow it with that to implement it. Is it just parking wayfinding? No, it's complete wayfinding. I'd like to be looking at coming up with signs for identification signs, directional signs, informational signs, and regulatory signs being all part of this wayfinding plan. Any other questions? You can welcome to any of these signs. All of it. All of it. Yeah, a full wayfinding package. Are there service stipulations? You get this grant, do you have to use it with a certain period of time? This will be within an 18 month period, but the last two grants that we've had, I've administrated a much quicker timeline a month. So I think this will be relatively quick. And typically with the musical planning grants, the 18 months is just to get to a draft plan. You don't have to have everything finalized and implemented. You just need to have a product that they can see. Any other questions? I'm looking for a motion to authorize me to sign the grant on behalf of the Planning Commission. Second. Second. Any further discussion? Thank you. Here we go. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed? Okay. That's all I have for city updates. Okay. Heather or Seth anything? So continued discussion on housing chapter. I'm just going to turn this over to Regina at this point. It's basically just a continuation of the last meeting where we talked about where we had the personal introduction to housing. So, Regina, take away. All right. So try to address what we talked about last time. There are some changes in the introduction. I think part of this was trying to get a little bit more out of the whole ownership picture on the table. So that's in there. Then a little bit, originally some of this came from the housing needs assessment and the economic development plan. Like Heather suggested is kind of getting, has a more accurate picture of some of the changes and things going on. So that's how this has been edited in the introduction chapter. Then the insights and key issues have been reworked quite a bit. Again, to try to address some of the questions from before also try to be a little bit more the message. I feel like with all of these chapters to have not been coming across as positive. So getting more at the positive component of this and how the affordability really is a key point of pride in the city. And nobody's really looking to get away from that. Trying to think here about anything else in particular to point out. Again, I think there were some more home ownership data added to the insights section that wasn't there before. A little bit more description around the gentrification scorecard and this is the updated gentrification scorecard. And there's a bit of a lot more description around what's kind of going on with that. And then year built data also trying to get at the sort of the, it's not the best indicator of quality of housing stock, but it's one that we've got. So that's in there as well. Question about that one. Yeah. Is there certain ideals that a city wants to have in the distribution of housing? Year built? Yeah. No. And is that an issue to have 43% older than, and I'm just, I guess I'm curious. Yeah, not really. I mean, the data doesn't take into account rehabs or renovations in any way. So it's not, it's not awesome. Also, I would say generally, you've got really great bones. Like there's just such great historic, you know, resources and everything in your, in fact that you're an older city and all of that is good and positive. So in and of itself, there's not necessarily like a, from an age of housing stock, I wouldn't say there's anything out there about the percentage in where you want to be in different ages. I don't know if you feel differently about that, but. No, I think with your passing data that might be useful for you that we've gotten from our firehouse software. John Audi just delivered to me the first sector of the city, what the most frequent code violations were, how many 19% of the housing units inspected did not meet minimum housing quality. So some of that, I can share some of that information with you. I just got that from him today. Okay. Great. And that's going to be all rental, right? No, he does not just do, he doesn't just do rental. Great. It will be primarily rental. Okay. But it's a thousand two hundred and ten units in the city that were looked at this last year. Also, I know you talk about the need for single, more single-family housing and all that. Do we know percentages of like, more single-family houses? I guess I'm just trying to get a feel of what is the architecture here? What is it? I mean, is it branch style or is it middle houses? Or is it, you know, the multi-family, is it three or five store? You know what I mean? I guess it's just a sort of a, I guess they can go to the housing. Does that talk about that? Yeah. Oh yeah. We've broken that. We've really taken a deep dive into the data. So, yeah. I guess a visual to, I'm very visual. Yeah. I mean, it's not in terms of the actual architectural style or anything like that, but it does break it down. And keep in mind that we have primarily focused our efforts to date on rental housing, not because we're not going to look at single-family homes, but because the development pressures that are coming onto the city right now are among, along the gateways and are with development of rental housing. Right. So we focused our efforts because we had a very compressed timeline to be able to get some targets out there. And after we've completed the process of doing incentives and policies, then we're going to turn our attention to single-family home ownership opportunities. Right. So there will be more to come. There are graphic representations of all of the data. I guess we mentioned in a few places in here that we want to keep the character of our neighborhoods. Yeah. But if you don't really understand what that character is, how do you, do you know what I mean? Yeah. Yeah. I always get into the details. And trust me, you can dive pretty deep into the details if you look at the housing data. Right. I guess I just wonder how much we put in here. I think you stay really high level here because what you're looking to do with that is give us a lot of leeway and flexibility to do things like apply for grants. And so if there's something high level that supports what we're looking to go for or will help us to move forward with the project, that's great. If it gets down into the details, it may limit our capacity. Right. Okay. So on that. Go ahead. But then also because in here, there's a lot of data again saying we are this. We have this, but there's nothing that says we want to get here. And I don't know if that should be in here or if that, do you know what I mean? Yeah. The housing commission is working on very specific targets and we have very, we do have percentages broken out of, you know, in terms of rentals, what we want in terms of rentals that are available for moderate income families and that are for low income families and what specifically that entails and we'll get there with single family comes as well. So I think this document will refer out to the housing document as an appendix. Right. Is that correct Regina? It is. The goals and objectives, there's a lot of things in here that we state like improved energy efficiency of new and existing homes, but there's really not the most discussion of where are we with that. Do you know what I mean in a few of these? So like where are we in stormwater? I guess that's just sort of one a little more information, but is that, I guess to all you guys, is that too much to put into this? I think my career would be that if this plan is going to last, you know, for five to 10 years, what, like if we're looking at this plan then in five to 10 years, will it be very valuable to say, okay, in 2018 we were at this knowing that now that data is not current. And so I don't know, I could see the value of focusing more on like our broad desire to improve energy efficiency without worrying too much about what energy efficiency was in 2018 because I don't know if that'll matter a ton to us in 2023. Right. I guess just some people just don't know what those things mean. And so I guess I'm just trying to get a benchmark of sort of where we are, but maybe you're right, maybe it doesn't. I'm just thinking, like we don't need it. I'm just wondering if how, like I think we need to balance how specific we want to be with recognizing that the, those numbers won't be current for a lot of the time this plan isn't used. Yeah. I mean, back to your point, we have all this data in here that's like, it's just that it doesn't mean that unless it's, we're starting to know where we want to go, I guess. So I was just going to offer that I think one thing that's interesting sitting and listening to this is you, those types of discussions also expose areas where we lack plans and frankly policy or direction. And that that, that's something that as we work through this, I think we're all benchmarking is to say, we actually, we don't have any kind of plan or any kind of real initiative together that type of data or information or have, we haven't really investigated policies besides the one, you know, bonus story item on efficiency that we added in zoning. So I think that that's part of this too is it exposes the fact that we need to come back and put some more detail into some things like that. And I would just say then maybe that frees you up from having to try to dig into that and getting to detail now. We create this parking lot over here. Oh crap, these are the things that in the planning we've referenced but we realize there's really nothing to point to this is a conceptual thing on Eric. That makes sense. Yeah, no, I think that makes perfect sense. It's, you know, some of the information we might have in some of the other studies but as the mayor points out, we may be lacking and we don't have that information yet to benchmark but as we try to figure out, you know, as you mentioned how we determine energy efficiency, maybe that's something we need to do as a planning study is to determine where we are currently and set some targets there so that we're doing that outside of the framework of the master plan so that it can be more nimble and be updated easier and quicker and more efficiently. But yeah, to have those data points would be helpful. I guess I just see with these goals, I feel like there needs to be some like at the end, I just sort of felt like they're thrown on and there's nothing. I feel like there should be a little blurb about every single one of these goals down here, don't you think? The goal and objective? Or do you think just, I mean, because I think a lot of this information is pointed out in these goals and objectives. It sort of hits on issues that fall within here but there's a few of them in here that there is nothing in in the bulk of it so I just think there just needs to be a little more and I don't think it needs to get specific. Is anyone feeling anything like that? Just like encourage low impact development and I don't feel like that was really talked about in anywhere except for just in the objective. Right. So I'll just chime in. I think, you know, if there's, if you are having trouble getting through the document and feeling like it's not helping you to understand where the city is going then we should try to address that and figure out if there's some things that we need to get in here to help clarify that. Just two points of information, just on specific things that you asked for. So the energy efficiency stuff, there will be some of that data as best as that data is available in the energy data guide. That does exist somewhere. It's kind of deep. It's in there. You can pull it forward if we want to. It's not great data, like a lot of data. It's not great data. But it comes from efficiency Vermont. They have some sense of what folks have sort of done some auditing. They have some sense of folks who have moved forward on some of the financial benefits, that kind of stuff. It's not complete, but it's something. The pieces that talk about low impact development and all that kind of stuff, those are goals that are coming from the Public Works Commission that makes sense under housing. But I still think the majority of that is going to be talked about in the infrastructure section. And so we're struggling a little bit because we're still seeing these in pieces, pieces, pieces. So the idea is for us to try to tell the story, how they all interrelate with each other. And it's hard to see that when you're seeing all the separate pieces. So I think we're moving towards seeing the whole thing next. So hopefully some of that will be figured out. But it also may mean that we have to do more somehow, visually or something in the text to try to get that across. Third point, which I haven't done yet here in this chapter, is we did have this concept in the other chapters that we would have some kind of visual that helps kind of carry the message forward on what these goals mean. We haven't done that yet here, but some of these are a little more challenging to do that, but I think we can probably still get there to some extent. And again, that's really just an example of what an implementation step might look like under that and a way to help tell the story, but not get into the nitty-gritty details of every single action that's going to happen under each of these steps to get us someplace if that helps. No, I think that definitely does. And I think what's here is, I mean, it's very interesting. I think it's great. I just think we could expand that. I'm just going to throw out, we have to be, I think we have to be careful that we don't put anything in this plan that contradicts our zoning. Well, we don't tie our hands either, but zoning, if I'm not mistaken, has to conform to the municipal plan. So we don't want to do anything that we just rewrote zoning. So we don't want to put something in this plan that contradicts what is in our zoning now. I know I'm saying this is the case here, but if there were a zoning change that you wanted to see happen, you certainly could highlight that in your plan as an action or a goal that you might want to move toward something and it being worded in that way, that you're going to investigate it, think about it, whatever, that in and of itself would not create an inconsistency that you need to be worried about because it's a forward-moving action stuff. But I don't know that, or at least I haven't heard so far, that there's any zoning change, policy kind of stuff that we are feeling like we need to move towards. I just wanted to throw it out because I don't want to get in that position where we've contradicted something or as you said, even tying the hands of future planning commission or somebody. I think the point that Regina made about seeing this as just one piece is part of the challenge here where I think some of the information that you might be looking for is in other sections. So when we look at the whole plan, not to say that I think what I might suggest is that once we look at the whole plan in its entirety, then we can see where we might have some of those gaps. So if there is information that still needs to be identified for energy efficiency, for example, then we can get it if it's not covered somewhere else. Right, and I'm assuming we'll just say see municipal section for more detail. Yeah, I do see what's all being said here and I'm also thinking, you know, the data on the different types of housing and family composition and socioeconomic status like senior housing, low income, subsidized and all that. This data is relatively easy to find, I think. So like the data we have here, I don't know if you think it is important to have this data in there as well. Like the data that's in here maybe shouldn't be in here? Is that what you're suggesting? No, no, no. And more data? Yeah, more data on, you know, the data on senior housing, low income housing, subsidized housing, and what's left for an open market. So that, those information? Yeah, I think we have a lot of that in the housing studies. So I think it's, we're hoping to refer to that instead of trying to incorporate that information in here. Okay, but it should be alluded to in here so they need to go there. Correct. And I think that's true with a lot of those. Okay. Yeah. I was just going to ask a quick question about, so the rental homes that are affordable by income bracket, I think we may have talked about this last time, but that's defined by the fact that this is the number of homes that are affordable. If you take like 30% of someone's income between or under that range, is that how that's calculated? So sorry, just like into which one? 54 and 55, the chart showing the number of rental homes affordable by income bracket, is that calculated by looking at how many homes rent falls within 30% of that income bracket? Well, so that particular chart is talking about and Heather correctly, if I'm wrong, and if you need to know which chart. Yeah, I don't need a chart. Yeah. Oh, come on. Oh, thank you. Yeah. So essentially, this chart is talking about the number of homes that rent, where their rents are affordable to the people within those income brackets. Right. And affordability is? Assuming 30% of their income is going towards rent. Okay. Or less. Yeah. Okay. And is that, I would maybe. So 30% is the same as an insurance? I don't see it. And so I would say if that could be included just to clarify that, that would be helpful. Having some sort of glossary explaining the difference between small affordable and large affordable, I think it's absolutely crucial as part of this. I think it's a commonly misunderstood concept in the community as a whole, as well as the nation as a whole. So I think that might be helpful. I've encountered that repeatedly working with the housing. On page 53, at the top point, I know this comes from the Economic Development Plan, but I'm really, so we're talking about the pent of demand for single-family homes that says while there is little available land to construct new homes, there are opportunities to return multi-family homes back to single-family homes or renovate duplexes. I don't really, I understand this is not the goal section, it's more of a descriptive section, but I do read the subtext of this as saying like we should be thinking about creating more single-family housing stock by converting duplexes or multi-families and single-families, whereas I see that contradicting with our stated goal to maintain or increase density in our city. And furthermore, even though I think I totally think we need to address how we can increase good quality single-family housing stock in the city, in addition to other types of housing stock, I don't think converting multi-families back to single-families is either, not only is it contrary to our goal to create a maintaining or increasing density, but it also is not the most economic way to create high-quality single-family housing stock, which might be something more like creating opportunities for people to renovate aging single-family homes, something like that, or creating friendly policies for people that want to construct single-family units or something like that. I just don't think that that is the primary way for us to create better housing stock for single-family houses to convert duplexes into single-family houses. What happens if those duplexes were run down? I think we should focus on renovating or improving the duplexes. I'm not going to say that we should prohibit changing a duplex into a single-family, but to state that that's the primary strategy for us to be creating high-quality single-family housing stock that it doesn't really, I think one, I think it contradicts other things that holistically we're trying to do, and it's also not practical. Even on a pricing level, to buy a duplex is going to be more expensive than buying a single-family. It's not an economically efficient way to create a... You might not be attracting certain families that want single-family, which I would think you'd want to diversify what type of people are in the city, are different family types, and so I guess there might be certain places where the zoning is like, this should be more single-family or such, and that there might be a duplex or multi-family that's sort of out in nowhere that doesn't really fall in line with the topic. Sure. So I think there's anomalies that... I mean, as I said, I don't think we need to prohibit people from taking a duplex and making it a single-family. I'm not opposed to people doing that, but I don't necessarily think we should say, like, this is our strategy for creating good single-family housing stock. It's to take multi-families and convert them to single-family. What I read this as, is they conducted interviews and that there's not enough single-family homes to meet demand, and because there's not a lot of land that would include converting multi-family back to single-family, but that doesn't mean to me that's less density. That's just targeting areas where density is. Like, if we build up Main Street as being like three, four-story buildings that offer one, two, three-bedroom apartments, we're becoming Spencer City, even if we're taking some of our bigger homes and de-converting them from broken up through three new homes. Heather has something to say. I think this is a response directly to the Economic Development Strategic Plan community survey. And in the community survey, one of the things that was asked was, housing preferences. And one of the things that came up repeatedly in that is a lot of people in the community wanted to see duplex units converted back to single-family homes. So I don't think, I agree with you 100% on what you're saying, that it should not be a primary strategy and I don't think that it is a primary strategy. I think that's where this language came from. Doesn't mean that it belongs necessarily in this chapter. It's just that was the basis for times that language. There's been a lot of conversations over the years about converting a duplex back to single-family. And we do have areas in our zoning that are identified as low-density, residential, not necessarily single-family. But I'm wondering if in this the wording could be, instead of single-family and converting, blah, blah, blah, opportunities for home ownership. Yeah, because you can take a duplex and make it two conduits. Right, right. So if we talked about enhancing the availability of home ownership opportunities or something like that, maybe that will cover it, as well as recognizing that we have areas that are low-density and areas that are high-density. What's your thought? But is this valid? I guess is what I'm back at. We seem to have a lot of multi-family or duplex type units. Is there a valid need for more single-family homes? I assume the Housing Commission has looked at that. Again, that's why I said instead of saying that, what, home ownership? Yeah, but I see those as distinctly different things. We also know that we have a very low vacancy rate in this, so the housing's being used. So there's just a lot of demand to live in Manuski, both for single-family and multi-family. Right. And at the end of the day, is there more multi-family to meet that need than there are single-family to meet that need? I mean, I'm not quite sure how to even quantify that question, but I can't live here right now. I think that there are a lot. I mean, we have low vacancy. We have people who want to buy single-family homes here. I think as a realtor, like my perspective on it is that a lot, we do have a lot of single-family homes in this city, but many of them are not in the condition that people are looking for, and there is limited inventory that is attractive to buyers. So if I were, just my gut on it and Heather has all the stats is that encouraging people to have resources to renovate and upgrade the single-family housing stock or to even in some cases tear down really aging buildings and rebuild single-family homes, that would be the solution to the single-family housing stock issue. More than, I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with the multi-family which high demand for apartments or condos, like I'm saying, in Manuski. That's a, and a lot of the people that want to live here, that's the kind of housing stock they're looking for too. It's just, we have a lot of people that want to live in Manuski. Families and professionals, students, all sorts of people. So we want to have as many different types of options for people as we possibly can and vacancy is low in all of them. Yeah. You know, and as a largely built-out community we don't have a ton of places to put new stuff. So I think all of those options are options that we're considering and a few, you know, very specific things that we're working on at the city, but aren't there yet. Is one category worse off than others? I mean, we have more renters than we have homeowners. That's just what our housing stock is. So it falls about 60-40 renters to homeowners. I think, you know, again, I don't think that we have a certain preference. I think we've been a strongly rental community for a very long period of time and both of those vacancy rates are low. I think it's slightly lower in home and available home ownership opportunities. I guess I'm thinking like single family to multifamily to duplexes. Yeah, we have a really high percentage of duplexes in this community compared with all the surrounding communities and Chittenden County as a whole. It's, it was really high and I can't remember the exact percentage, but it was a magnitude higher than the surrounding communities. But part of that is what makes us an affordable community because a lot of people buy a duplex as a means of subsidizing their mortgage. So that is a piece of affordability to have. So is that part of your diversity though is having those a variety of types? Absolutely. And it's not just single family home ownership. It's duplex home ownership. It's a condo home ownership. You know, and there are a bunch of different ways that might work. And how does that whole cottage fall into this now that zoning has changed? The accessory dwelling unit? Yeah. Well, there's an accessory dwelling unit, but then there's, isn't there a cottage attached cottage? Yeah, attached cottage. As a condition of use. But if, if I remember right, that was a, that was a part of the accessory, you know, well, so the, the way the zoning is written now is that depending on what district you're in, your maximum density is either going to be two or three units and that can be met with either a duplex, single family, a duplex, an accessory dwelling or a detached cottage. Right. Some combination of those to get to the maximum allowable units. And then when we had the conversation, if I remember correctly, the detached cottage was to take, provide opportunity for folks to take advantage of, like, carriage houses in the back or garages that were big on it. But is that still considered a single family home if you have a detached cottage in the back? Yeah. The, the, if there's a single family home in front, yes. Okay. The detached cottage would be a detached cottage. I guess I just see us moving because it's going to become more density. We're trying to get more dense so we're getting away from these single family homes that sounds like people are trying to understand. I, I think to remember if, and again correct me if I'm wrong, but is it state law allows an accessory Yes. unit? And so You can't disallow it. You can't disallow it. So we, we had the conversation about single family but there's nothing you can do and accessory unit I forget if it's described as 30% of the primary, whatever, I think it's 30%. That's 30. What's the last Yeah. But the problem is, how do you, how do you police that when it's done? You know, I put in a little accessory apartment and the next, I sell my house the next person says, oh, this is great. There's two units here in the rental. They're not supposed to how do you police it? And Seth's hand shot up as soon as I started talking about this. No, I just, I just pulled up the house and he answered the question that was that. So, it's Newsy has the smallest percentage of one unit attached and attached housing structures and the greatest percentage of two unit housing structures. The percentage of three or more unit structures is similar in Burlington but higher in the south of the Colchester. Three plus units comprises 46% of our housing stock. Two units comprise 20%. One unit is 25%. I think that our open fairly open policies regarding accessory units is a big asset to our community. It allows people to have a vehicle to make their living situation more affordable. It gives people that otherwise might be priced out. Other opportunities for generating income. It's a great way for us to add density in our city without having to expect and allow the average person to be a part of that rather than just have big developers to derive all of the value. It creates immediate variety in our housing stock. I think there's a lot of benefits and I personally would even as a goal it doesn't necessarily need to be stated in here but say something along the lines that encourage opportunities for developers to build accessory dwelling units or improve accessory dwelling units if they would like to do so because I think that's going to have a lot of positive benefits for our city overall. I totally agree that I think accessory units are great. I think I just hear us wanting to develop, develop, develop and I work on doing master plans a lot for universities and with making sure that Winooski is ready to deal with all these implications of increasing the population. So I'm going to interrupt this for a minute because it's 7.15 and we have another item to do to see demographics and background. Is that something that's going to take us 40 minutes or can we spend more time on this chapter? Thoughts? I don't know what anybody's going to say about it but we're seeing it and there's a lot of holes in it so why don't we do five sitting here for a while? Why don't we do five more minutes on housing and then move to control it? Is that right with it? Yeah because I don't think we'd come to a great spot with this particular bullet because I just want to make sure when we're talking about everybody and we said our growing that leave because there's not homes available for them so I just want to make sure that whatever we end up in the master plan we're truly talking about everybody and being inclusive in that and looking at data largely to support what diversity means like truly creating diverse diversity of housing on both sides of the spectrum. What is an accessory here? What does an accessory or is it no it's different than a duplex because an accessory unit can be I believe it can be either attached or detached but in order to rent it out you have to be owner occupying the property so a duplex if you own a duplex you could live in another state and you could rent both units with an accessory dwelling unit you need to live in one unit and then you can rent the square footage the size is also restricted it's a secondary unit to the primary so our regulations define an accessory dwelling as a dwelling that's included in the primary structure and is secondary to that primary use basically so that it's a you're renting the basement it has its own entrance it has its its own cooking facilities bathroom facilities things like that but it's a smaller space I think it's maxed at 30% of the of the the square footage of the primary structure but it has to be within the primary structure the primary structure has to be owner occupied as well yes and we use a different character detached structure correct we it's a detached cottage it's a standalone structure on the property we don't have to be owner occupied for that for the detached cottage I don't believe it does no is mother in law apartment considered as necessary if it's in the structure yes okay I want to think though when we talked about the cottage we were talking about it has an accessory unit so it was meant to be an owner occupied I may be wrong but that's how I recall it I don't know if there's any owner owner occupancy requirements with the cottage they are conditional use in our regulations and they do play into the mix of maximum density so in I believe in the R.A. district you're allowed two units whether that be single family in the detached cottage a duplex or a single family an accessory dwelling in the R.B. in the R.C. you can have three so that can be a duplex in the accessory duplex single family accessory and detached cottage so it's I think that's where it plays in to kind of limiting how it's put together but that's what I'm recalling in my head right now thank you I just had two other comments before I move on one was on page 55 the last one I'm wondering why we're grouping when you see and Burlington together and we've sort of been talking about them separately or just talking about when you see so it's talking about the day against you and then it goes to when you see and Burlington so is that just when you see Burlington both have three and a half percent and then it and then it grows and dropped both by the same I'm just wondering why we're grouping them yeah sorry and I don't I didn't finish pleading this it's just how Maya Brooks and Ellen reports it basically a suburban and an urban and the urban vacancy rate is when you see and Burlington combined okay it's just how the data comes because that's okay yeah and then on page we can be the ACS vacancy rate it's not as accurate as theirs so and I don't know if you have a preference what was it what was that do we know what it was was it close to three and a half or was it what this X is AC yeah and then a 57 they include information the homeless population I assume that's in contrast to either our neighboring cities or towns or in overtime how it's changed in Manuski yeah so great question I haven't been able to investigate this this is a comment that came from the community services commission they just want to make sure in the housing chapter that we don't forget about these folks and the issue I don't quite know yet how to talk about this is it typical investor plans this information no but I don't know that means we shouldn't talk about it we certainly talk about it in the ECOS plan part of that is because some of it really isn't it's a regional issue lots of these things are regional issues and certainly more of the shelters and everything are in Burlington but it doesn't mean that Manuski doesn't have a homeless population and we like have an accurate accounting of what that is the point of time counts no longer than a five municipality is by name for the state processes point of time counts done every year to account for the homeless individuals in the state the reason we dropped the decision was because of the transitional nature and of the that's the reality right and definitely blew it back up to a concentration when looking at regional levels that's the way it's being approached down by the council on homelessness and other housing entities in the state so what do you see the value in having it in the master plan I think it's awareness that there are services that may need to be provided we also do have locations in the community that have historically been places you know like in point right either in the train tracks down here in the bridge down here you know we know that there are encampments there consistently from a awareness perspective so how if we don't have when you see level data do we just talk about the regional like how do we talk about it if we don't have information do we talk about it in a way that we're we're providing services that we have like that's what I guess I maybe it's in the context of the larger community that there's a homeless issue it's you know we have it here and how are we going to how are we going to deal with you know I'm not sure but with shelters you know and as I say that I don't want to get that specific you know what I mean I think more broadly about housing needs and so there's a housing need for single-family homes there's also a housing need for houses and so I think it can be folded in without I think necessarily having to say this is in here because Wyniewski is looking for a shelter-oriented plan I think if we're going to talk about the housing needs of the community there's a place to talk about folks who don't have housing yeah I think if we have a general statement that overrides everything there's a safe housing because how you deal with homes is a policy level issue where the council deal with us I think as opposed to this plenty of it but if you you know if you have a general statement about providing housing for everybody that includes you know yeah I have a two things I was going to ask about one is and I'm sure we say this throughout the plan but I think it's something we should be excited about is that Wyniewski is one of the few municipalities in Vermont whose population is growing and so we like we talk in the beginning of the plan about the influx of who's coming in and I think it would be cool to put the context of that is like the fact that there is influx isn't itself a notable thing about this city especially compared to cities of relative like yeah the state and other places of relative sizes it is so unique about this place and really it's the proof of the vibrancy that we describe you know when you said that I chuckled because if you look at the annual census data the estimates Wyniewski is actually going down and it's we've always had a discussion about how accurate is that data and I agree when you add 300 housing units and the population declines you're going to kind of scratch that I've noticed you have a census through the American community survey actually I just sat through really interesting presentation yesterday on how to establish the margin of error and all the great algebraic equations you need to incorporate to determine if that data is good or usable and because there's a lot of questions about it there's actually an article in the that discusses some of the challenges with that ACS data yeah I mean I feel like you can't possibly think that's true Wyniewski the population would be going down I mean yeah so there's a couple of things happening so A, the ACS it's a survey it's a sample size it's a small sample size it's not a count at all really so just something to keep in mind second because the census are shrinking it is really doing some interesting things to population counts so more units don't necessarily mean that your population is going up that's an interesting point yeah but it's tough there are few things out there that really help you understand your exact population the 10-year census is sort of the closest in a while and we will have it it'll happen in 2020 but the data will lag after that so it's a tricky thing to nail down such a small city like this I should just go do it at dawn yeah it takes you like this weekend weekend yeah it's like when you get any place to do it you can do it at like Yule's door even that fluctuates from 2 to 10 yeah depending on family goes in family goes out the pricing piece we have better data than that because we did send out a survey to every landlord so every rent so we have 70% reporting on that so that's the best data that we have on anything but not on population just on pricing it noted that the higher rent it's not just the higher rent landlords it's just I know who didn't report and so I knew that I didn't have her ever run I knew I didn't have Millhouse last year but I also know what the rents are there so you were able to incorporate these numbers right yeah I'll just play that there's a couple places where quotes or comments from the gentrification report were taken out and I know we have this information on page 56 about how we're not gentrifying but I'm wondering if there's like it just seems like some of the comments from the gentrification report which talk about things like how we can keep from gentrifying so I'm trying to I'm wondering why like what the sort of thought process was taking those out or if there's another way to refer to them just because I do think that would be valuable for us to include as a sort of predetermined set of goals or ways to accomplish a goal so part of what was removed from the last version that you saw were some goals that kind of came out in an earlier housing commission discussion process associated with that first gentrification report and even earlier something housing needs assessment and that kind of stuff the goals that are now in this version that are like one through seven or something like that those are the latest iteration of the text that was in here before that was removed so it's just the city has evolved and so now we've got in the right goals that were removed before if that helps okay there are also some slightly different results but if you look at that first gentrification report versus the most recent one and I tried to sort of explain at least in the text that's still there what those changes were applied okay so it's now seven third people feel like we're in a good place on that one for now good point because we're going to put some more in sure okay so let's move on to introduction to city demographics speaking of which that was a good intro for us absolutely yeah so first look at the introduction section and also demographics so there's also some this is kind of and I don't want to correct me if I'm wrong this is kind of becoming a little bit of a catch all for some of the other parts and pieces of the statutory requirements that we haven't really been able to find a place for it yet so you'll notice at the end of this section is a is a land use discussion and a land use map so that's a statutory requirement but we don't really have a place for that in the other in the rest of the framework so it's here for now not to say it's going to stay here but just to kind of give you context for what this section includes and is about and with that we're going to continue to yeah okay so this starts out with the purpose of the plan just trying to explain what this plan does public engagement that's definitely a required element to sort of talk about the public engagement that went into the plan so that's why that section is there some of that I'm envisioning what the future is going to happen in the future and it might not turn out that way so I will remind myself to edit it then basically we're getting into the vision statement so this is the agreed upon vision that the city is moving forward with we have this outstanding question here about the economic vitality phrasing but let me just give you an overview and we can go back to these pieces in that section there also is the brand the brand story then the history section is a timeline again this will be much more visually pleasing than it is now I'm just trying to throw things in here that make sense the kind of thing is missing or anything feels wrong we can adjust that very easily I think you missed AD 0 I know there's like massive gaps then some demographics essentially this is a lot pulled from the economic development plan and then some of the income and economic diversity information from that's going on and housing work but it is a little bit more just sort of telling the picture of your demographics and your people I brought that up to the top but it's a little disjointed at the moment then like Eric said we have the land use section there's a map in here as well that goes along with that that's attempting to just pull your zoning into higher more broad land use categories and this is where we're attempting to make the point about Cassavante Memorial Park and Gilbert being zoned up something different than what they are used for in reality the next section I have to fill in you've got to do a little bit of discussion about how when you see relates to your surrounding municipalities and the region as a whole so we'll get that in here then the implementation program so this I think we have like a whole meeting dedicated to this have to ultimately sort of figure out are we landing with this plan at those goals that are at the end of each of the other chapters so far are we going a little deeper are we making connections in some other way to other pieces so we'll kind of circle back on that when we get there I don't think that's it right, yep so if maybe we just tackle this economic vitality question and get that solved so this is Paige I think if I'm working with the same pages that you guys are working on page 4, page 4 yes, page 4 yeah I think just to kind of recap or refresh some of you on the discussion there was this started back in our first our first meeting we were looking at drafts when we had the vision statement on the front of the economic vitality and there was a lot of discussion about the language that was used and so we came up with several other options it seemed like the majority of the folks that were involved in some of the later discussions were comfortable with option 2 that's identified there where we replaced the small town field language with 4-hour city there was the third option that kind of went in a completely different direction not completely different changed the intent I think to some extent which was from a staff level there was some pushback on that because it changed it so much that it was there was some concern that it was it was shifting what the community had collectively come together and agreed upon as part of that vision statement so so that's kind of where we ended up the discussion at the last time we looked at this so I think generally there was some comfort with option 2 I don't know if that still stands option 2 is it? can I feel like it's too general I just feel like any other city do you know what I mean I don't know I prefer I prefer option 2 because I'm I guess I much because small town field ends up kind of going undefined and that term just kind of sitting out there without a sort of discussion of it in another context I don't think works for our like for something as overarching as like a general statement of economic vitality and because that is ultimately I think just the phrase our city is a more sort of welcoming and forward looking one I agree about option 3 both because I think that is too much of a modification and also because economic enhancement is just kind of a meaningless term whereas maintaining expanding our economic development gives folks a sense of maintaining means doing more of what we've done we have a sense of what we've done expanding it again is there's a roadmap contained there that I think makes sense that I don't see in one or two or one or three what do you think if you replace for our city well obviously just because I think the size of us is unique and I feel like if you just say a long-term vibrancy for our city that could be any I mean I know there's not that many cities in Vermont but I guess I just want a little more descriptive character of who we are I don't know I would be okay with our community there's just something about small town feel that's like kind of parochial in a way that's totally great it sounds like a small urban community I'm afraid it's small as too I don't know like it's in the words small though because I don't feel like I want to like obviously we're never going to be a giant city but at the same time I don't know if small is like a value it's just what it is what we are but we're also we want to allow room for density changes and demographic changes I think what matters most is not our size but it's we want to be a vibrant and I like the word engaged community I don't know like I feel like I don't know how to fit that into the sentence exactly but and it doesn't necessarily need to fit but I feel like that's what small town feel is supposed to be communicating with public engagement so I don't know if that's more specific but it's not really like size doesn't really matter it's really about the sense of connectivity or engagement that I think was what was trying to be the intention of that statement I don't know I don't know me or Eric you well not because I think you like the small town feel but I guess what I was just wondering what you're trying to get at I mean if someone's just reading this document and they don't only know I have no problem with making a community I think that's more of what's the right word it's a softer word to me or more it's a friendlier kind of word I think and as before you were talking about size doesn't matter I was going to throw out an eyeball thing say our 1.2 square mile community you know because we were talking about giving some context to it this is so unique what it is I mean how geographically it's not that's what I was getting at yeah like how does a city right well that's why I was trying to get a little more descriptive to what we are I think the challenge here is that because we're taking the language that is currently contained within the vision statement for the for the city that was that was discussed and went through a large community process because we're putting that in directly I think the concern is that we don't want to change it too much so that we're taking it out of that original context so I think it's I know there is concern with the language that with that small town feel in particular that one phraseology but it's I think we need to be we need to be careful how much we we try to change it so that we're not kind of negating that original discussion and that original community involvement to come up with this vision statement not to say that we can't have a future time change it but I again I like community and I suppose we could say you know again probably not though anyway our city will maintain and expand blah blah blah for our community and you get city in there as well too redundant or not but say that again just say our our city will maintain and expand our economic development to ensure long term vibrancy for our community I think it brings up an interesting question which is like like are we are we one community or are we sizable enough to be multiple communities even though we're legally one city but like I would like us to feel like one community you know what I mean even if there are multiple subgroups in that one community and I think to me that's where the small town feel comes in it's one community entity yeah subgroups within it but you know one community maybe that's too I would agree with that I I don't know I'm kind of on the fence about that idea you know I like it aspirational as like a utopian vision I could see that but at the same time I I'm afraid of even saying the word just community like the community is somewhat exclusionary but perhaps to certain people who may not feel like it's inclusive of unique community like that if you are not in the community or you don't identify in the community the community then you don't belong here I don't know but so the third community is that one I mean I I feel like we as when you see as our tribe if I run into anybody anybody else from when you see anywhere else you're cool let's hang out with all feeling like a kinship with anybody who chooses to live in when you see or what that I didn't have with Burling Tonians that I mean I can I mean I feel the same way I think a lot of people would feel the same way but I don't know if everybody feels the same way and I think coming from the particular perspective of being someone you know like was raised in an environment of civic engagement where English is it's easy to feel that way being born in this country whatever but I don't know if like when you say that I don't I mean I mean there's a lot of there's a lot of diversity of perspective so I'm just I don't know like I'm I'm open to it I guess but I'm just cautious of saying like like sometimes I hear in our community it's like assimilation like you know that's what I'm so this helps at all that there is an intro sentence to all of your vision statements and it describes community slightly already so it starts as when news people be an affordable of the first community okay then so if you referred to community again in this statement at least at reference is back to like a broader definition of what we mean by community and I was thinking to point about I know like what you were thinking you mentioned was connectivity but we you know we have a whole bullet talking about connectivity and so I think that idea is present in there already you're right they've helped me connect to people it's just down two points yeah so I'm so I think that that like message is already part and parcel of what we're putting forward with the vision statement and if economic vitality is about you know purely economic vitality I I think that like that that like that point is being made it's just kind of this part I guess a question of like do we want to say city town or community and do we have like so Mike you want to say community I'm just thinking that community is a more welcoming term city is to me is more of a cold statement you know what I mean community to me is a warm that's right um do you and so palace what would you pick um you can disagree with me yeah can I hear another option don't say town well what I was going to say is I feel like instead of trying to figure out what else to say here instead of small town feel because this whole section for the strategic vision statement for the city that was adopted by council would it make more sense to to include an introductory paragraph that says this is what the adopted vision is for the city that is guiding this plan and just leave it at that as almost a direct quote of the vision statement that exists currently I think the only thing in set correct me for wrong with or concern with small town feeling through it to us yeah the council should first us thank you what I'm looking for right now is the marketing I again would suggest referencing back to that for some of these decisions just because we did have somebody come in collect all that information and help us with a lot of that wording because it describes it it sort of jives well when you have that and that brand statement of story right below these in the text so it's all it just to say we're a small city we're a city we're a it also says we're a community where everybody can participate in city government and you gather gatherings in lively downtown I think I can look at the one meeting where we were we were digesting 325 responses to a survey what do you love about living here right and it was I can tell you Seth Gillum wrote it I can tell by the way it was written but you know and he wrote it very eloquently and you read it you were like yeah that's it you know and what he was describing was yes I live in a city with this fiber downtown but when I walk into my neighborhood a big you know bustling thing I mean my neighborhood right and so that if that helps at all I mean that's where that was I think that's nice too is to put that idea of urban because we are I guess we're not really I mean I guess I mean we are a densest city so that's why I think when I got the idea of this because community is general and so I wanted to give a little more umph and that's why I said small because it's like a walkable and I was I just I liked where you were going we're trying to get some votes I will offer one other thing that can maybe be helpful you end this sentence after vibrancy yeah I thought about that too because all these other concepts that we're trying to define are already described that is true I'm gonna go for that because what I was gonna say is the point of this bullet is economic development right so as long as that point is communicated the rest is no dressing sorry I caught you up no no I was just trying to read it to myself thinking a lot and vibrancy not I think on its own communicate sort of the point like stuff was just bringing up from the there is downtown vibrancy and there's also neighborhood vibrancy and part of vibrancy is like neighbors knowing each other and being outside and like talking to one another and I think that just leaving it off that vibrancy communicates both of those ideas and one like word I think there is a presupposition here and you know I think for our city or for our community is already understood in there so you know I think I feel good you know um ending it at long term vibrancy that that would be fine I think and we're not changing anything which is brilliant right yeah brilliant alright good job just sitting just sitting okay what's good with that too late Regina has spoken okay great um so any other thoughts comments about this chapter anything um so you know what this chapter also can do that's not doing right now is can help try to explain how all those other four chapters really are not just four separate chapters these are silos they're really all intertwined interconnected um and we can really get that point across up here in some way um so definitely think about that um I have I have three discrete thoughts um one is two which are very small one is um instead of AD can we use CE on page 5 page 5 instead of what so instead of AD or anodomony if we could use CE for common era never heard of that that's just me though the trend in since I've been in school was to not say BC and AD but to say BCE and CE I'm much older I'm only BC and AD we um I'm glad if we just don't use any of it we could cause we don't have BCE to contrast it with so um on page 8 we talk about the like youthfulness of our population but I don't see a mention of the fact that we're the most racially diverse municipality in northern New England which would be a I think like cool demographic point to mention on page yes page 8 we have you know we have in common age but not racial diversity um I definitely think that's something because it's not just I'm sorry I can on page 10 this top paragraph I'm having some difficulty with one because the phrase rendering a city a hip place is like sort of painful like we can't if we call the city hip then it isn't hip and then the contrast between yet while the city welcomes new residents it also wants to ensure there's still a place for new Americans and long-time residents feels like it's setting those three groups up in opposition to each other and I think one thing we're trying to emphasize with this plan is that what Wyniewski is doing is like creating elements of community life that are appealing to everyone so because that implies that new Americans and long-time residents don't own an urban environment with a strong I look for what it's worth in that third line that says yet while the city welcomes new residents I might throw in while the city has always wanted new residents because when we go back in our history it's always been a community of strivers no incorporates immigrants strivers is from our it's been great someone has never the right I I guess I don't know what the public opinion is on this topic but I feel like in the history one of the points should mention that don't actually that is Wyniewski's best fact yes that's true and I feel like I mean I guess if we're branding ourselves as strivers or whatever I mean yeah it didn't happen outside the box it is one of the largest paragraphs on our Wikipedia page yeah do you know this is a little bit it's on this topic but when I was mayor I got an email from someone from Beijing China who said in their fourth grade social studies it talked about a city with an umbrella that's Wyniewski Vermont wow and he asked me he said I Google it people learn and I can't see it I actually think it may be even worth putting in a graphic of the proposed I think it's fun yeah I think there is one on like a picture on Wikipedia yeah it was the overall purpose of the ad it wasn't in the winter it was just to keep people dry and easy to get around climate control it's a climate control it's not a bad idea well what I'm wondering too in your bring back the dome so do you think also in the purpose of the plan the first paragraph we talk about Wyniewski and responding thoughtfully and appropriately to changing economic and social conditions should environment be part of that? yes what page is that? that's the very first it's at page two changing economic, environmental and social conditions especially with the lake I think of the storm water and all that and that connects that connects to things like energy efficiency right it gets back to the dome that's why I was asking the question I'm supportive of anything that means more dome but yeah I don't think there's environment yeah because then maybe it could also be well I'm also wondering if it should be challenges rather than conditions but I mean I'm supportive of that in environmental question for you on page five 1909 Lewis Hyde photos in the chase mill which is in Wellington was he taking photos in the woollen mill that was in Manuski good question I mean I would just put woollen mill on who care who know Mike that is us literally fake news everyone on TV turn it off no but I think they're all connected so I'm sure that if he was taking over these people were working over here too they were working over here too yeah that's what I'm saying the chase mill in the woollen you're all connected so yeah I was also thinking I only I found this out recently that the reason when you ski is a city and the reason like a bunch of places in our cities is because of like their original chartering it has nothing to do with like population or anything so like Regens is a city but like Millbury is a town and so that could be like a fun fact section like other people will find that it's like the bloopers at the end of the hour how many cities are there in Vermont? eight eight wait but there are only six marathons no there's eight we would always in a merge six six six mayors six volunteer one volunteer and there are two full time two full time oh we're just barely two so St. Alvin's popular when you ski Regens St. Johnsbury no St. Johnsbury is not a city the definition in the United States so it is 2,500 people are more accountable for that some states have very different specifications do you need to be within a circle 2,500 people are more and you can qualify yourself as a city that's a fun fact it's a fun fact it's a fun fact and in the general bloopers in the United States I'm just thinking it's 2,500 it's 3,500 we became a city I just heard an MPR piece about a city in North Dakota three people and that could be well and so states can supersede that definition even though you heard that too yeah because didn't you guys all watch Iowa country how they made their own city with 150 people no no yeah guys people should watch that people should watch that doctor I'm going to interrupt again I'm going to interrupt again it's 8 o'clock it's 8 o'clock it's 8 o'clock so we can continue for a few minutes or we can wrap up while while 8 o'clock it's a series we talked at length I think last time about this term of high level poverty and not really recognizing the fact that we have students and lots of senior housing and we have two I don't see both these any trapped piece in the track 25 that track is basically the church it's the seniors like housing residents and it's the beverage warehouse with their little multifamily next to it right so like leaving them on this 31% yeah it goes to LaFast it goes to LaFast okay so it's a little bit of the homes too but we talked about like this is like let's just describe us as being a very poor community when in reality we have seniors we have students we have lots of people that don't make a lot of money that wouldn't be typically associated under like poverty people in poverty are you going to put median incomes in here or average annual wage anything like that because we stack up pretty good with chicken counts I mean it looks like so there's median income on page 8 but are you talking about more specific than that no I just because the images that were poor community but when you look at this the data averaging the wage or how much median income is I can look at it here but it's not you know it's like in the middle of Chittin County where it's right there so you know it's not like Chittin County median income is what $52,000 that for our median income is 25 right you know like I think that people associate when you see being poor but we may be better at all than Burlington we may not be poor we may just have a diversity of folks in different phases of their life it does not reflect in their sentence and I think we were also I mean we remember last time we were surprised that the section that includes the condos is categorized it right like what is this 25% of right which led us to thinking that they were like working at the hospital as like the future doctors you know when they like are originally sleeping together what they need but they're working their way up to right and I mean I can say like anecdotally my building I live in Riverhouse and my building is mostly medical residents graduate students undergraduate students and then like a few full like attending physicians or like full-time attorneys but that is absolutely the minority it is mostly medical residents and graduate students right so this is when they just get their education like in poverty but they're not going to be super wealthy at where they're at in their careers right they're building up a career so that's why I just think that representation of this is not right and it might be dangerous like to say we're much more concentrated in specific neighborhoods for us to be like this neighborhood is like we need to do something like it's like not necessarily reflective we need to take out all those pre-medical residents medical residents need to leave sorry our math is not so good down there I mean would you ever include anything about like education levels I mean is that I've seen that sure yeah because that would sort of get at sort of except undergrad don't have an undergraduate degree and the grad students don't yet have graduate degrees in college yeah I don't know I mean I think well we could we could accomplish that if we had a paragraph being like you know when you ski is home to like graduate students medical residents like our proximity to the hospital means that we have this like large population that works like for UVM or maybe I don't have the data but it would be great to say like we have X number of graduate students living in our city limits or Y number of you know undergrads and like and this many professionals like if we had that kind of demographics that would actually help probably combat some stereotypes when you ski too because like into your point down there we've got spent a place with 300 students yeah right yep the poverty levels because these kids that are undergrads that don't have a lot of money they're paying significant amounts down on the waterfront despite that so page 11 I would just say you probably would do it anyway but maybe you have more distinct colors the lanes Jeff yep the lanes Matt yep and those I guess those green waves because you have the parks but I just think more in the park and a lot of these places I would like to I don't know see more green they're reflective of the like the open space yeah so this is this really is a culmination of zoning it isn't a culmination of use actually land use on the ground but we really can do whatever with this map and we can pull some of that out but I think one thing I'm trying to get across with this map is that there's and we should have a bowl or something that kind of goes along with this to point out that some of your parks are zoned for not parks at all right I was going to say and I was going to say it's not Gilbrough Gilbrough and Memorial thank you that's like a complete brain break about what that park is called so that's kind of what that's attempting to show a little bit there and we'll have some text around it but we can do whatever with this map this is like yeah this is just very first crack of what this should look like so we can do anything to it so I think calling out the actual parks and stuff on here is probably a great idea and the zoning park to zone commercial or industrial for Gilbrough shouldn't that be hatched then where it's pink because that's city park zoned as industrial the top part of it should be yeah so the school is zoned park open space the zoning district is public that's where it's tied well the school might have changed yeah the school's in the probably because it's from the yeah the school is a specialist but it is yeah it's I think it would be I think we do have a public district I think it's technically in the gateway it's a civic plot it's a little different but anyway yeah so and but the back property I don't know what this is I think it's also the school yeah like well yeah that's that's technically public so the zoning district just to be clear is not parks only it's essentially a more broad category of public where you can do other types of public like things it doesn't necessarily just have to be a park or a recreation use necessarily right on page 10 we have for natural and cultural assets but the so we in this case the fund is a revered natural recreational cultural assets but then pretty much what's listed is natural and maybe recreational so I was thinking it'd be cool if you could list a couple of cultural assets or just to show that that is a meaningful statement and that could be the library for example or the church or I don't know like the sources or older architecture the performance identify them and have a dot associated to that yeah and then yeah there's there's like a performance space on this road next to the circle the proposed strand this park or no there's no it's indoor during weekend windows they have like comedy in there and they record podcasts it's next to where it can eat in the now cider places okay you talking in spinner place at the yeah there's like on the ground level there's a performance space there's the crafts right now from that's a shame there used to be yeah I think they open it up for I think they rent it oh okay it's not like continuously alright never yeah but there is a museum right yeah yeah yeah and I mean the church is used as a performance venue besides weekend windows right I know that they're going to have a concert in October so it's when it's used for food shelf yeah it's for food shelf monkey house does oh monkey house of course yeah and then bird folk brings in a lot of local artists to display their stuff which I think is really cool so it's 8.10 we won't keep talking we want closer to the house can I just ask so are some we have you know our standard zoning plan I thought that's what was going in here now it's a whole another you can do it if you want there's lots of thoughts and opinions about it you technically have to have a future land use map in your plan oh okay I am 100% buying the zoning map for that others are not there's just different debates about it the benefit of not using your exact zoning map is particularly helpful if you have some areas that you may want to zone something different going further which is definitely the position you guys are in with those three parcels so it's a little more helpful to not use the exact zoning map that you have now you could use it more in terms of the and identify as exactly what it is but as Mike pointed out earlier you do want to make sure that you consistent between the two and technically the zoning always comes from the plan you know we're constantly on a cycle so that it doesn't one doesn't always cleanly come before the other but in this circumstance I think we want to have a future land use map that doesn't say in this plan exactly what those districts are going to get or that they should definitely be resumed or whatever but that a conversation needs to happen at some point about what to do with those parcels so the map should allow for that so I think it's a good idea to have this current land use and then have one that has the public spaces the public stuff yeah okay discussion of public outreach activities you have one minute okay well then I guess brief um so I wanted to put this on the agenda tonight so that we could talk about some of the public engagement activities that we that we should be doing as part of this plan we've identified the having some information at the Halloween event on October 27th possibly having a session at the Mayor's show at some point in the process and then also we talked early on about using the Regine and I talked about September 23rd Farmers Market as a possibility to present some information or have some information available the challenge that I'm seeing with some of these outreach activities is because we're keeping the plan at kind of a high level if we're asking specific questions I don't know how we would integrate that information into the plan so I think the question that I have is what would be good information to provide or try to solicit from from these public engagement events and it may be that we're just we just have copies of the plan on display we're just handing out postcards say if you want more information here you go it could be that we're asking people about one of the thoughts that I had actually earlier today was we have maps and ask people what neighborhood they live in to get to that question of neighborhoods of areas of the community that we've had some discussions about but just I think it's I don't want to I don't want to go into those events and ask these very specific questions and then not do anything with that information relative to the plan since we are keeping it at a higher level so it's more a question of what we want to try to put out there and because we will not meet before that September 23rd farmers market event you know have a table set up to say hey we're doing the plan here's a postcard for more information or and that's about it so I don't know what your thoughts are on any of that going forward but it's something to think about for sure and that's probably more than my minute I'm fine with that I also like the idea that you said about finding out from people what they think their neighborhood is you know whether it's on a map or just a you know and what they call it because people might have a whole lot of different ideas of what they consider their neighborhood that would be interesting that would be really interesting okay good I guess sorry just with having said all that I just want to put those dates at least the September 23rd and October 27th on your calendars so we are able to participate that would be great to have people there honestly I'm not here on the 23rd let's help the 29th it's the 27th on October the Halloween when you ski Halloween so the farmer's market is 10 and 2 I think that's right I'll find out the specific something that set out in condition Eric can email say yeah I can do it and it has to be there from 10 to 11 10 to 12 you know 10 to 2 whatever so we have an idea you know to share that any other business just that our next meeting is September 27th we don't have anything scheduled as far as specific planned content to look at what I was thinking we might do with that meeting is look at the full plan or whatever version of the draft we have so we can see context of how all these sections are no pressure she's already out my schedule is that I'm not producing for that meeting just so you know so I am my role at this stage is to go back and just crank and take the fact that I have three weeks to do it to really try to bring home a. address all of the second round discussions that we've had with you guys get that stuff in there and really get the whole thing to a better place so I need to not have a week deadline from today actually be able to do that so that way you get for your next meeting is actually something helpful and useful from a more complete perspective good I'm looking for a motion to adjourn second all in favor aye thanks everyone thank you thank you