►
From YouTube: Planning & Zoning Commission
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
C
If
you're
already
seeing
this,
then
you're
familiar
with
all
the
ways
to
see
it.
As
far
as
public
comment
goes,
written
public
comments
were
received
up
until
five
o'clock
yesterday
and
live
comments
will
be
received
during
this
meeting
by
calling
855-925-2801.
C
A
All
right,
chair,
houser.
D
D
E
E
F
A
E
H
C
Very
good
I
had
that
question
myself,
but
I
wasn't
sure
how
we
were
handling
it.
I
Dan,
would
you
want
to
say
a
couple
words,
or
should
I
just
go
ahead
and
get
started.
J
Sure
I'm
happy
to
to
start
with
adam
hello,
everybody
members
of
the
commission
over
the
last
year
or
year
and
a
half
the
there
have
been
three
bigger
corridor
studies
happening
in
the
area.
Last
month,
you
reviewed
the
findings
of
the
tunnel
road
study
in
the
hendersonville
road
study.
J
Those
were
presented
by
the
staff
from
prince
broad
river
mpo,
land
sky,
regional
council
staff,
and
so
they
were
managing
those
two
studies
and
then
the
study
that's
coming
before
you
tonight
is
biltmore
avenue
and
mcdowell
street,
and
that
has
been
managed
by
city
staff
and
we
hired
the
firm
of
vhb
engineering
to
do
the
study.
J
In
in
the
regional
prioritization
process,
both
of
those
corridors
have
scored
really
well
for
the
potential
of
bicycle
and
pedestrian
improvements,
but
because
of
the
the
limited
space
and
concerns
of
the
north
carolina
d.o.t
about
traffic
capacity
and
and
how
those
two
corridors
work.
In
parallel,
they
were
selected
for
a
study
where,
where
both
corridors
would
be
looked
at
simultaneously
to
see
the
best
way
to
make
multimodal
improvements,
so
I'll
turn
it
over
to
luba
zoeva
from
vhb.
To
give
you
the
findings
of
the
study.
A
And
and
lula
before
you
get
started,
let
me
just
introduce
dan.
He
is
a
member
of
the
city's
transportation
staff,
one
of
our
transportation
planners
and
who's
been
obviously
working
on
these
corridor
studies.
I
think
dan's
been
introduced
to
the
commission
before,
but
just
in
case
we
have
members
of
the
public
watching.
I
just
want
to
make
sure
we
we
recognize
and
introduce
him
so.
I
Great
thank
you
so
much
for
this
introduction.
I'm
lou
basue
with
vhb
happy
to
be
with
you
here
tonight
to
present
on
the
biltmore
avenue,
corridor,
study,
findings,
biltmore
and
mcdowell
corridor
study.
So
I'll
try
to
go
through
the
recommendations
relatively
quickly
and,
of
course,
additional
detail
is
available
in
the
report
online.
I
I
Technical
challenges
all
right,
I
think
they're
advancing
so
to
talk
a
little
bit
about
the
timeline.
The
impetus
for
the
study
originated
in
2016
when
ashwin
motion
transportation,
master
plan
was
adopted,
and
at
that
point
there
was
a
proposal
for
road
diet
along
biltmore
avenue
and
ctot
congestion
management
unit
took
a
look
at
some
ideas
for
a
quasi-couplet
along
biltmore
and
magdalene,
but
they
really
thought
that
they
needed
to
be
a
more
detailed
follow-up
study.
I
So
the
city
applied
for
a
grant
from
the
npo
and
got
some
funding,
and
so
the
study
was
started
last
fall
actually
last
summer
and
we
had
some
data
collection
and
stakeholder
interviews
through
the
fall.
We
held
a
couple
public
meetings
during
the
duration
of
the
study
in
virtual
format.
I
Due
to
covet,
we
had
a
couple
public
surveys
and
the
draft
recommendations
came
out
in
the
spring
and
then
we
presented
them
to
a
couple
other
committees
prior
to
this
one
to
the
bike,
but
task
force
back
in
may
and
the
multimodal
transportation
committee
in
june
and
then
after
the
meeting
today.
We
expect
that
we'll
go
to
the
council
for
a
presentation
in
the
next
month,
or
so
so
we're
generally
in
wrapping
up
stages.
I
As
you
all
are
aware,
there's
a
number
of
concerns
along
biltmore
and
mcdowell
corridors,
the
two
corridors
that
connect
between
downtown
asheville
and
biltmore
village.
I
They
serve
a
number
of
key
destinations
and
activity,
centers,
the
region's
hospital
asheville
high
school
ib
tech,
of
course,
there's
a
lot
of
tourism
traffic
to
downtown
and
biltmore
village
as
well,
and
there
are
some
issues
with
existing
pedestrian
bicycle
conditions
on
the
corridors,
there's
a
lack
of
a
continuous,
safe
bicycling
facility
and
for
pedestrians
a
lot
of
times
the
conditions
are
substandard
with
narrow,
sidewalks
lack
of
green
buffer
strip.
I
I
Our
recommendations
for
the
study
have
been
focused
on
three
different
themes
or
pillars,
so
be
calling
them
connected
neighborhoods,
which
is
primarily
focusing
on
pedestrian
connectivity
along
and
across
those
corridors
bike
the
build
more
to
improve
bicycling
conditions
along
biltmore
and
mcdowell
and
then
also
keep
build
more
moving.
So
that's
to
make
sure
that
traffic
congestion
is
kept
in
balance
and
the
vehicles,
especially
emergency
responders,
can
still
get
through
those
corridors
and
then
the
transit
user
experience
will
be
supported
by
all
three
of
those
themes
or
pillars.
I
So
that's
where
the
idea
of
rebalancing
or
partial
road
diet
on
one
or
both
corridors
has
been
put
forward,
and
as
already
mentioned,
there
are
some
existing
congestion
concerns
along
the
corridor,
especially
down
at
the
southern
and,
if
you're,
looking
at
the
baltimore
village,
there's.
Definitely
some
significant
congestion
concerns
and
also
at
biltmore
avenue
and
meadow
road
intersection
and,
of
course,
as
already
mentioned,
key
regional
destinations.
So
sometimes
there
might
be
situations
where
multiple
events
are
happening
all
at
once.
I
So,
as
part
of
that
biltmore
avenue
recommendations,
we
are
recommending
targeted,
intersection
improvements
so
generally
as
part
of
the
recommendations
prepared
they're,
not
as
many
widenings
proposed,
but
they
are
some
of
those
specific
intersection
improvements
and
smaller
targeted.
Widening
improvements
proposed
full
widening
along
both
of
those
quarters
was
not
recommended
due
to
a
number
of
constraints,
of
course,
historic
structures
at
both
northern
and
southern
and
and
throughout
the
corridor.
I
Cultural
resources,
the
river
crossing,
the
railroad
crossing.
So,
due
to
a
number
of
those
constraints,
we
did
not
think
that
would
be
very
feasible
to
recommend
a
full
widening
for
both
of
those
corridors.
I
So
when
looking
at
how
to
reallocate
some
of
the
roadway
lane
width
along
the
two
corridors,
there
were
three
alternatives
considered.
One
of
them
is
our
biltmore
avenue
balance
scenario
alternative
a
the
second
one
is
focusing
on
mcdowell
street
for
balancing
lane
width
and
then
the
second.
The
third
alternative
would
combine
both
so
there'd,
be
some
travel
lanes
reallocated
away
from
drivers
and
in
support
of
active
transportation
modes
along
both
biltmore
avenue
and
mcdowell
street.
I
I
We
are
primarily
focusing
on
reallocating
lane,
width
or
number
of
lanes
north
of
caledonia
road,
as
already
mentioned.
One
of
the
key
congestion
points
along
this
corridor
is
at
biltmore
avenue
and
meadow
road
bryson
street.
So
due
to
that
and
the
the
turn
lane
in
advance
of
that
intersection,
we
kind
of
focusing
lane
reallocation
north
of
caledonia.
I
So
in
this
situation,
what
the
red
arrows
show
is.
We
would
recommend
keeping
two
lanes
northbound
north
of
caledonia
to
hospital
drive
and
then
one
lane
northbound
north
of
hospital
drive
to
south
side
and
then
north
of
south
side.
One
lane
in
each
direction
would
be
appropriate
for
the
expected
traffic
volumes
now
and
in
the
future
and
then
in
the
southbound
direction.
I
At
the
same
time,
if
you
look
at
ashland
side,
even
in
the
scenario,
we're
still
recommending
some
reallocation
of
travel
lanes
on
the
ashland
side,
north
of
south
side,
so
the
south
side,
corridor
kind
of
becomes
this
cut-off
line,
above
which
it's
easier
to
reallocate
some
of
the
travel
lanes.
There's
just
less
pressure,
less
congestion
expected.
So
in
this
case
you
would
recommend
keeping
two
northbound
lanes
on
ashland
and
one
southbound
lane.
I
Looking
at
mcdowell
street
rebalance
scenario,
we
would
recommend
keeping
a
very
similar
recommendation
to
what
was
already
shown
for
biltmore
for
both
ashland
and
biltmore
north
of
southside
avenue,
so
again
that
northern
portion
of
the
corridor
from
south
side
to
hilliard.
That's
where
it's
easiest
to
reallocate
travel
lanes
based
on
congestion
and
travel
patterns
we
are
seeing
but
south
of
south
side.
I
We
would
recommend
keeping
one
southbound
lane
on
ashland
from
southside
to
hospital
drive
and
then
two
southbound
lanes
from
hospital
drive
all
the
way
to
lodge
street,
and
then
one
northbound
lane
from
lodge
street
to
hospital
drive
and
two
northbound
lanes
from
hospital
drive
to
south
side.
I
With
this
lane
reallocation,
we
would
recommend
using
some
of
this
freed
up
space
to
widen
a
sidewalk
on
one
side
of
the
road
to
a
side,
path
or
shared
use
path
facility
and
then,
on
the
other
side,
the
sidewalks
could
be
improved.
Some
of
the
gap
closure
could
occur
where
there's
a
missing
sidewalk,
and
this
would
also
be
combined
with
some
crossing
improvements.
Intersection
improvements,
some
additional
improvements.
I
The
combined
scenario
we
expect
would
be
the
most
challenging
to
implement
they
would
just
be.
It
would
require
more
more
consideration,
so
phased
approach
might
be
easier
for
the
city
to
consider,
implement
one
quarter
and
then
the
other,
instead
of
both
of
them
simultaneously
just
to
to
kind
of
test
and
check
for
any
unforeseen
impacts.
But
the
combined
scenario
we
tested
would
keep
three
lanes
on
biltmore
avenue
and
three
lanes
on
mcdowell
with
canada,
the
mirror
number
of
northbound
versus
southbound
lanes
on
the
two
corridors.
I
So
on
biltmore
again,
I
would
be
keeping
two
northbound
lanes
from
caledonia
to
hospital.
One
northbound
lane
from
hospital
drive
all
the
way
to
hilliard
on
biltmore
one
southbound
lane
from
hilliard
to
south
side,
to
southbound
lanes
from
south
side
to
hospital
in
one
southbound
lane
from
hospital
to
caledonia
road
on
mcdowell
street
north
of
southside.
Again,
it
would
be
reduced
to
three
lanes
with
two
northbound
lanes
south
of
south
side.
I
It
would
be
reduced
to
three
lanes
with
one
southbound
lane
down
to
hospital
drive
and
then
picking
up
two
southbound
lanes
from
hospital
drive
to
lodge.
I
I
This
combined
scenario
would
require
the
largest
number
of
intersection
upgrades
to
make
it
feasible
and
still
keep
the
level
of
service
at
a
reasonable
level.
As
far
as
traffic
congestion,
in
considering
some
of
the
trade-offs,
it
does
seem
like
biltmore
avenue,
lingy
suggests
that
there's
a
greater
number
and
a
variety
of
some
of
those
key
activities
and
destinations
a
little
bit
more
propensity
for
commercial
destinations
along
biltmore
avenue.
I
There
definitely
be
a
need
for
coordination
with
other
planned
transportation
improvements
and
projects
in
the
city,
and
then,
if
you
implement
the
lane
reallocation
along
either
of
the
corridors,
then
there's
a
great
opportunity
for
the
traffic
to
divert
to
the
other.
Parallel
court
or,
however,
is
that
if
the
combined
scenario
were
to
be
implemented,
then
there
is
less
of
an
opportunity
to
divert
to
the
parallel
corridor,
and
some
of
the
traffic
would
probably
choose
to
travel
further
out
of
the
way
and
take
240
to
avoid
both
of
those
corridors
altogether.
I
When
we
looked
at
the
travel
experience
for
a
typical
driver
looking
out
to
2045
they're,
predicting
an
increase
in
congestion
from
what
is
today
and
actually
implementing
either
biltmore
or
mcdowell
street
scenario
would
improve
the
travel
time
versus
kind
of
the
background,
growth
and
congestion
by
2045.,
biltmore
avenue
scenario,
in
particular,
alternative
a
seems
to
improve
the
driver
experience
the
best.
So
if
you
look
at
the
delay
per
vehicle,
it's
reduced
versus
kind
of
just
background
condition.
I
I
I
wanted
to
next
speak
to
a
few
of
the
key
intersection
improvements
that
have
been
developed
as
part
of
those
recommendations.
One
of
them
is
biltmore
avenue
at
caledonia
road.
Currently,
it's
stopped
controlled
from
caledonia
side
and
we
would
recommend
a
signal
upgrade
here.
In
addition
to
pedestrian
crossing
improvements,
the
signal
would
also
improve
driver
experience
for
people
who
are
trying
to
pull
out
of
caledonia
road.
Currently,
it's
very
difficult
for
them
to
do,
and
this
project
could
be
a
standalone
project
implemented
even
separately.
Apart
from
any
of
the
lane,
reallocation
improvements.
I
Hendersonville
road
at
vanderbilt,
road
and
also
crescent-
that's
one
of
the
biggest
congestion
hot
spots
and
pinch
points
along
the
corridor.
We
have
looked
at
several
different
configurations,
but
currently
we
think
that
the
easiest
thing
to
do
would
be
to
make
a
small
improvement
to
the
pedestrian
crossing.
I
Currently,
the
crossing
length
is
pretty
long
if
you
were
to
reduce
it
by
modifying
with
a
with
the
porkchop
island
to
shorten
the
time
required.
That
would
improve
the
signal
phase
timing
and
make
the
experience
slightly
better
for
both
pedestrians
and
for
drivers.
I
We
would
also
recommend
a
widening.
This
is
one
of
the
few
spots
that
we're
actually
recommending
a
widening
outside
of
just
adding
a
turn
lane
so
from
about
lula
street
to
this
intersection.
That
also
is
crescent.
We
recommend
adding
an
additional
northbound
through
lane.
Currently,
if
somebody
is
trying
to
just
continue
north
in
some
cases,
they
have
to
switch
over
a
couple
lanes,
because
two
of
the
lanes
continue
to
the
left
onto
mcdowell
side,
and
so
adding
this
additional
northbound
through
lane
would
help
with
the
driver,
experience
and
expectancy.
I
We
would
also
recommend
access
management
north
of
this
intersection
along
hendersonville
road
corridor.
There's
some
a
number
of
driveway
entrances
and
exits
that
make
the
traffic
pattern
less
safe
and
more
chaotic,
as
an
additional
follow
item
that
the
city
could
consider
would
be
taking
a
look
at
this
intersection
and
considering
whether
vanderbilt
road
could
be
realigned
to
intersect
further
to
the
south
and
possibly
even
make
it
a
write-in
right
out
movement
that
would
reduce
the
pressure
on
this
intersection.
I
The
five
point
intersection
that's
expected
to
carry
over
55
000
vehicles
by
2045,
but
because
there's
a
number
of
additional
stakeholders
involved
here,
you're
looking
at
gonna
additional
major
stakeholders,
we
would
recommend
this
for
a
follow-up
study.
This
is
a
a
pretty
pretty
interesting
intersection,
so
this
additional
realignment
of
vanderbilt
road
could
be
considered,
but
we
did
not
do
a
more
detailed
analysis
for
this.
I
Biltmore
avenue
at
meadow
road
and
bryson
street
has
already
mentioned.
That's
one
of
those
other
big
bottlenecks
and
congestion
hot
spots
along
the
corridor
so
currently
recommending
a
smaller
improvement
with
a
addition
of
eastbound
right
turn
lane
that
would
be
included
as
part
of
biltmore
avenue.
Reallocation
scenario
a,
however,
that
does
not
bring
the
level
of
service
for
drivers
up
to
g,
which
is
preferred
by
ncdot
standards.
I
So
an
additional
project
that
could
be
considered
would
be
to
take
a
look
at
a
partial,
quadrant
intersection,
which
would
basically
require
adding
additional
lanes
of
travel
behind.
What's
currently
that
gas
station
that's
shown
in
the
blue
line
here.
So,
if
you
add
the
additional
lanes
of
travel
for
people
who
are
trying
to
continue
eastbound
on
swananova
road
or
take
a
right
turn
and
go
south
on
baltimore
avenue,
this
additional,
this
partial
quadrant
would
make
this
movement
possible,
while
bypassing
the
main
intersection.
I
So
we
think
that
this
potential
improvement
would
be
an
opportunity
to
bring
up
the
level
of
service
to
a
d
by
2045,
but
there's
a
number
of
concerns
here
with
right
away,
impacts
and
floodplain
issues.
So
we
would
recommend
this
idea
of
a
quadrant
intersection
for
additional
follow-up
study
as
well.
I
I
We
would
also
recommend
upgrades
for
crossings
at
choctaw
and
pifer
so
where
there
are
existing
signalized
crossings
that
might
be
missing
pedestrian
signal
heads.
Some
of
those
recommendations
are
more
throughout
the
corridor,
so
upgrading
existing
signalized
crossings
that
might
be
missing.
Those
pedestrian
signal,
heads
to
add
pedestrian
signal,
heads
and
high
visibility,
crosswalk
markings
where
they
might
be
missing.
I
Also
at
the
asheville
high
school
there's
a
recommendation
to
add
an
additional
improved
crossing
at
grindstock
drive
where
currently,
there
is
a
crossing
guard
posted
during
school
hours.
However,
there
is
not
an
additional
signal
or
beacon
there
right
now
at
boston
way
in
baltimore
village,
at
hendersonville,
road
in
boston
way,
that's
another
spot
where
we
would
recommend
a
pedestrian,
hybrid
beacon
or
pedestrian
crossing
upgrades.
I
I
Ada
upgrades
are
also
an
important
part
of
this
quarter,
some
of
the
needs
that
are
here
and
in
realizing
that
we
provided
a
general
cost
estimate
for
what
it
would
take
to
go
through
and
upgrade
sidewalks
to
make
them
ada
compliant
throughout
the
corridor.
That
would
be
a
fairly
sizable
project,
approximately
15
million
based
on
our
high
level
cost
estimate.
So,
even
if
the
city
were
not
to
pursue
the
lane
reallocation,
the
ada
upgrades
would
be
needed
and
we
would
recommend
that.
I
I
For
bicycle
facility
improvements,
those
recommendations
are
partially
dependent
on
which
scenario
is
selected
by
the
city,
whether
to
reallocate
lanes
on
biltmore
mcdowell
or
both
for
biltmore
avenue.
The
recommended
bicycle
facility
in
combination
will
play
in
rebalancing,
is
to
provide
a
two-way
separated.
Bicycle
lane.
I
On
the
south
side,
as
already
mentioned,
we
are
proposing
biltmore
avenue
lane
reallocation
to
start
at
caledonia.
So
from
caledonia
down
to
lodge
street
in
baltimore
village,
we
would
recommend
a
combination
of
a
new
multi-use
path.
I
would
have
to
travel
through.
Basically,
what
is
currently
a
private
parking
lot
for
baltimore
fitness
and
then
a
neighborhood
cycling
route
through
a
short
section
of
parallel
street
and
then
a
side
path
along
biltmore
and
along
the
biltmore
avenue
bridge,
with
a
short
segment
of
a
side
path
on
the
north
side
of
lodge
street
as
well.
I
There's
also
a
proposal
to
add
or
formalize
internal
bicycle
collection
connections
through
saint
johnston's
through
bicycle
boulevards,
on
neighborhood
streets,
some
additional
parking
restrictions
on
doctor's
drive
and
you
signaled
caledonia
road
would
also
help
with
some
of
the
east-west
connectivity
for
bicyclists,
there's
just
a
little
illustration
of
what
could
be
done
with
continuing
a
side
path
at
biltmore
avenue
in
caledonia.
I
I
So
an
advisory
shoulder
combination
of
some
signage
and
markings
could
be
utilized
to
utilize,
huntsman
place
and
reroute
from
biltmore
avenue,
but
it
would
require
some
private
right-of-way
impact
for
hendersonville
road
bridge
over
the
sonora
river.
We
have
considered
something
about
a
cantilevered
additional
side
path,
but
due
to
the
floodplain
concerns
and
flat
plate
modeling
impacts,
we
think
that
the
easiest
thing
to
do
would
be
to
utilize
existing
width
of
the
bridge
and
to
shift
the
lane
with
slightly
to
make
them
slightly
more
narrow,
while
still
keeping
the
lanes
12
foot
wide.
I
I
I
Mentions
about
the
transit
user
experience
so
with
improved
pedestrian
crossings,
we
think
that
that
would
help
transit
users
trying
to
get
to
the
bus
stop
safely
and
then,
where
we
are
proposing
a
separated
bicycle
lane.
Those
the
bus
stops
could
be
configured
to
load
from
the
separated
bike.
Lane
gonna
combine
bus,
stop
and
bike
lane
space.
I
So
the
next
steps
for
the
study
would
be
to
take
the
recommendations
to
the
city
council
for
review,
and
then
the
city
would
be
expected
to
probably
work
through
the
mpo
and
ncdot
processes
to
fund
a
portion
of
the
recommendations.
I
don't
expect
that
all
of
this
would
would
happen
all
at
once,
but
if
the
city
were
to
select
one
of
the
alternatives
to
move
forward
with,
then
the
recommendations
could
be
kind
of
separated
out
into
a
combination
of
multiple
projects
or
one
project.
At
a
time.
J
C
I
did
have
a
couple
of
questions
or
comments:
did
you
use?
Were
there
any
any
pedestrian
or
bicycle
counts
that
were
used
or
taken
during
this
study?.
I
I
I
don't
think
that
we
had
very
much
in
the
way
of
bicycling
accounts
data
for
this
project.
Unfortunately,
for
prior
accounts,
I
think
a
lot
of
them
did
designate
pedestrian
accounts,
but
in
yeah
in
the
prior
accounts
that
we
had
available,
there
was
not
much
on
bicyclists.
Maybe
they
were
just
not
collected
separately.
C
You
know,
in
my
experience,
I
haven't
seen
a
lot
of
accounts
collected
in
this
part
of
asheville,
which
concerns
me
a
little
bit.
That
leads
me
to
my
next
comment:
what
which
relates
to
your
your
remarks
on
vanderbilt
road,
which
is
a
very
heavily
used
corridor
for
cyclists,
getting
down
to
the
blue
ridge
parkway
on
either
mcdowell
or
biltmore
avenue,
and
so
the
reconfiguration
of
that
intersection
would
raise
some
concern
in
my
mind
as
to
how
that
would
be
accommodated.
C
I'm
sure
there's
a
good
way
that
y'all
can
come
up
to
come
up
with
to
do
that,
but
I
just
want
to
mention
it.
The
other
comment
that
I
would
make
is
that
then
the
you
mentioned
that
the
mcdowell
corridor
mcdowell
street
corridor
would
would
have
some
benefits
to
ask
for
high
school,
and
I
think
it
would
probably
also
have
some
benefits
to
av
tech.
C
I
think
that
somebody
trying
to
get
for
instance,
from
north
asheville
to
a
b
tech
by
bike,
would
greatly
benefit
from
improvements
on
mcdouble
or
benefit
more
from
improvements
on
mcdowell
than
they
would
on
biltmore
avenue.
I
ride
both
of
them
frequently,
so
I'm
fairly
familiar
with
both
of
these
corridors,
and
I
think
that
the
suggestions
and
and
findings
that
you've
presented
are
very
exciting
to
see
so
any
comments
from
any
other
commissioners.
D
I'd
like
to
make
a
few
comments,
thank
you,
luba
and
dan
for
for
doing
this
presentation.
I
have
saw
this
back
in
june
when
they
presented
to
multimodal
commission
and
you
know,
thought
it
was
great.
Then
you
know
there's
there's
a
lot
of
great
ideas
in
here.
I
think
you
know,
like
the
combined
scenario,
would
be
wonderful.
Obviously
it's
a
it's
a
pretty
huge
lift,
but
being
able
to
have
that
kind
of
reallocation
and
essentially
use
hospital
drive,
is
kind
of
a.
D
Street,
essentially,
you
know
whether
it's
northbound
or
southbound.
I
I
think
I
remember
luba.
You
may
remember
this.
There
was
someone
else
from
from
your
firm
when
they
did
the
multi.
When
you
presented
a
multimodal,
I
want
to
say
it
was
less
than
one
minute
to
go
from,
like
biltmore
village,
all
the
way
around
on
240
to
downtown
versus
going
straight
up,
biltmore
avenue.
So
when
I
heard
that
and
again
I
may
not
be
correct
on
the
time,
but
when
I
heard
that
it
was
basically
like
who
cares
if
we
constrict
biltmore
and
mcdowell.
D
So
what
like
that
little
bit
of
time
is
just
not
you
know
to
me
it.
The
benefits
of
everything
that
could
happen
for
bike
pedestrian
far
outweigh
that.
That
little
bit
of
you
know
time
difference
for
for
cars
to
go
around.
So
you
know,
I
think
it's
great.
I
think
it's
great
as
a
you
know,
kind
of
initial
concept-
and
I
certainly
would
be
in
favor
of
you
know,
making
a
motion
to
move
this
forward.
If
there's
no
other
comment.
I
L
Yes,
I
had
one
comment
about
the
traffic
intersection
on
caledonia
and
a
bit
more.
Was
it
any?
I
mean
accident
reports
or
I
mean
for
a
traffic
light.
I'm
sure
that
you
would.
It
is
a
great
idea,
I'm
just
wondering
was
any
accident
reports
or
police
reports
recorded
at
that
at
that
corridor.
I
We
have
looked
at
the
crash
data
and
I
don't
think
the
caledonia
road
was
one
of
kind
of
the
peak
areas
of
concern
for
crashes.
But
I
can
check
on
that
and
provide
a
response
back
to
you
through
dan
and
shannon
probably.
D
Approve
of
the
corridor
study
and
and
recommend
its
approval
by
city
council.
C
C
In
a
second
in
favor
of
the
proposed
plan
or
planning.
K
C
C
C
Moving
on
to
our
first
legislative
public
hearing,
we
have
a
request
to
conditionally
rezone
the
property
located
at
120
charlotte
street,
formerly
130
charlotte
street,
from
community
business,
one
to
commercial
expansion,
conditional
zone
properties
identified
as
pin
number
nine
six,
four,
nine
five,
three
seven,
three,
four:
eight
in
the
buncombe
county
tax
record,
the
property
owner
is
22
charlotte
holding
llc
and
the
contact
is
payne
kessinger
passinger.
If
I
mispronounce
that
I
apologize
planning
coordinate
our
planner
coordinating
review
is
shannon.
A
Thank
you,
mr
chair.
Members
of
the
commission,
as
tony
has
indicated,
this
first
item
under
your
public
hearings
is
a
conditional
zoning
request
for
the
property
located
at
130,
charlotte
street
and
so
just
to
head
off
any
potential
confusion.
We
title
the
project
120
charlotte
street.
The
current
address
is
130,
but
we
are
recommending
that
the
address
be
re-addressed
for
this
project,
so
we're
referring
to
the
project
as
the
project
title
is
120
charlotte
street,
but
the
current
address
is
130
charlotte
street.
So.
A
You
all
can
see
that
slide.
A
There
we
go
all
right
so
today
that
property
is
located,
as
I
mentioned
at
130
charlotte
street
130
charlotte
street
is
the
located
at
the
northeast
corner
of
the
charlotte
street
east
chestnut
street
intersection,
and
you
can
see
the
property
there
highlighted
in
red.
A
Oh
I'm
sorry
did
I
say
northeast
yes,
northwest
corner.
Thank
you.
The
subject.
Property
is
approximately
2.3
2.4
acres
somewhere
in
that
neighborhood
and
is
currently
zoned
community
business
one.
You
can
see
that
much
of
the
corridor
along
charlotte
street
a
parcel
or
two
deep
is
community
business.
One
we've
got
a
little
bit
of
office
on
east
chestnut
and
then,
as
you
move
away
from
the
corridor,
you
start
to
enter
the
residential
neighborhoods,
most
of
which
is
multi-family
zoned
or
multi-family
zoning.
A
A
The
property
has
a
number
of
other
designations,
though
that
I
think
we
should
also
touch
on.
So
you
can
see
the
the
map
on
the
left.
The
subject
property
is
located
here.
If
you
can
see
my
cursor,
and
that
is
the
or
the
the
hatching
that
you
see
across
the
property
identifies
the
charlotte
street
overlay.
A
I'm
going
to
talk
about
that
a
little
bit
more
later,
so
you
can
see
it's
in
this
charlotte
street
overlay
and
then
the
map
on
the
right
is
the
charlotte
street
innovation
district,
which
mirrors
much
of
the
the
overlay,
but
also
includes
some
additional
properties
to
the
south
towards
the
downtown.
A
However,
I
think
it's
valuable
to
to
notice
that
the
property
is
in
this
district
because
I
think
you
know
the
purpose
of
having
an
improvement
district
is
to
kind
of
funnel
additional
resources
where
you
expect
urban
urban
urbanization
or
urban
growth.
So
this
is
definitely
an
area
identified
for
growth.
A
Now
this
map
is
pulled
out
a
little
bit
farther,
so
the
scale
is
different.
The
subject
property
is
here:
if
you
see
my
screen
kind
of
right
in
the
middle
and
the
the
outline
that
you
see
here
is
the
chestnut
hills,
national,
historic
district.
So
this
is
one
of
asheville's,
many
national
historic
districts
and
just
to
clarify
it's
not
a
local
historic
district.
Like
you
commonly
heard
people
talk
about
montford
or
albemarle
park
or
st
dunstan's,
those
are
our
local
districts.
A
Projects
in
the
local
districts
have
to
go
through
another
layer
of
review
and
are
reviewed
for
compliance
with
specific
historic
district
guidelines
that
are
established
for
that
district.
National
districts.
Don't
go
that
far.
It
is
a
historic
district,
it's
every
bit
as
historic
as
the
local
districts,
but
new
projects
do
not
have
to
go
through
a
review
by
the
historic
resources
commission
and
we
don't
have
a
separate
set
of
guidelines
for
those,
but
it's
worth
noting
again
that
the
property
is
located
within
a
historic
district.
A
A
A
A
Here's
an
aerial
image
of
the
subject
property.
You
can
see
that
it
is
currently
developed
with
a
building
sort
of
right
in
the
center
and
is
surrounded
by
surface
parking
if
you're
familiar
with
charlotte
street
or
north
asheville.
Most
of
us
will
recognize
this
as
the
current
fuddruckers
or
the
former
fuddruckers
restaurant
property.
A
The
restaurant
building
is
still
in
place,
however.
The
business
is
closed,
so
the
building
is
currently
vacant
and
the
new
project
would
require
demolition
of
the
structure.
However,
this
structure
is
not
a
contributing
historic
structure,
so
it
would
not.
The
demolition
of
such
would
not
have
an
impact
on
the
historic
district's,
designation
or
status.
A
So,
moving
on
to
the
site
plan
the
proposed
site
plan
for
the
project,
you
can
see
that
it
is.
It
occupies
much
of
that
2.3
acres.
The
building
is
a
three
to
five
story
building,
depending
on
which
part
of
the
building
you're
looking
at,
and
it
is
approximately
a
hundred
and
sixty
seven
thousand
square
feet
within
that
square
footage.
A
We
have
a
hundred
and
eighty
six
dwelling
units,
twenty
percent
of
which
will
be
set
aside
as
affordable
based
on
the
city's
standards
for
affordability,
and
we
will
have
approximately
seven
thousand
square
feet
of
non-of
street
level.
Non-Residential
space,
4,
500
square
feet
of
that
is
designated
as
retail
or
other
kind
of
service
uses.
That
would
help
support
the
community,
and
then
you
have
about
another
2500
square
feet
or
so
of
office
or
leasing
space
for
the
apartments
or
possibly
some
community
or
amenity
space
for
the
residents.
A
Along
this
portion
of
the
site
so
that
more
western
portion
of
east
chestnut
surrounding
the
property
on
the
charlotte
street
and
east
chestnut
sides,
we
have
10,
I
put
10
to
12
foot
wide
sidewalks,
it's
it's
10
foot
wide,
sidewalks
really
throughout
there
may
be
spots
such
as
here
at
the
very
corner
where
you
might
have
some
additional
hardscape.
A
You
know
that
kind
of
creates
a
wider
gathering
space
for
folks,
and
then
we
have
a
five
to
eight
and
a
half
or
nine
foot
wide
planting
strip
located
on
charlotte
street
and
east
chestnut.
So
the
the
planting
strip
on
charlotte
street
is
called
out
at
five
feet
on
east
chestnut.
This
portion
of
the
planting
strip
is
nine
feet,
so
we
think
this
is
better
for
tree
health.
A
We
prefer
the
planting
strip
because
it
provides
a
better
growth
opportunity
for
the
trees,
but
where
we
have
on
street
parking
directly
adjacent
the
having
the
sidewalk
come
up
to
the
edge
is
preferable,
so
that
is,
traffic
people
get
out
of
their
cars
and
they
walk
across.
You
know
if
you
had
a
tree
island
people
would
just
be
tromping
across
the
roots
of
the
trees.
So
this
this
is
the
preferred
form
in
that
scenario,
in
addition
to
the
sidewalk,
the
applicant
has
agreed
to
adding
a
transit
shelter.
A
A
A
So
you
have
the
building
facade
on
your
left,
there's
a
approximately
five
foot
or
so
foundation,
planting
area,
so
probably
low,
growing
plant
material,
a
ten
foot
wide
sidewalk,
and
then
we
have
that
five
foot
planting
strip
that
is
adjacent
to
the
charlotte
street
road
corridor.
I
just
realized
this
this
street
section
slightly
inaccurate
in
that.
Actually
we
have
the
bike
lane
here
and
then
we
have
our
three
travel
lanes,
so
you
can
see
that
that's
that's
a
pretty
healthy
pedestrian
oriented
cross
section
street
section
b.
A
So
this
is
the
chestnut
street
side,
so
this
would
be
looking
east
and
again
building
facade
on
the
left.
Here's
where
you
have
that
different
condition
where
you
have
the
10
foot
wide
sidewalk
and
either
we
will
have
a
street
tree
in
that
10
foot,
wide
sidewalk
and
a
great
or
you're
going
to
have
a
little
bump
out,
like
you
saw
on
that,
rendering
where
the
tree
is
in
the
island
and
then
you
have
on-street
parking
behind
it.
This
is
a
narrower
road.
A
Moving
on
to
the
building
elevations,
this
first
elevation
is
the
east
elevation
or
the
charlotte
street
side.
You
can
see
here
this.
This
is
probably
the
more
prominent
side.
It's
probably
what
we
would
refer
to
as
the
front,
although
for
buildings
that
sit
on
a
corner,
we
often
think
of
them
as
having
two
fronts,
but
this
is
the
the
probably
the
more
active
side.
A
So
you
can
see
that,
depending
on
where
you're
standing,
the
building
is
anywhere
from
three
stories
to
five
stories
so
down
here
at
the
at
the
corner,
you've
got
a
tall
first
ground
level,
retail
for
story
and
then
to
typical
stories
above
that
taller
ground
level
converts
into
two
stories
as
you
move
away
from
the
commercial
space.
So
it
allows
you
to
kind
of
convert
that
taller
ground
level
into
two
standard
levels
back
to
your
some
more
ground
level.
A
Even
though
one
is
four
stories
and
one
is
five
stores-
and
it's
because
you
have
on
one
section-
that
taller
retail
or
ground
level,
and
then
you
have,
in
the
other
section
the
the
two
stories
you
saw
a
very
similar
condition
like
this,
with
the
159
riverside
drive
project
some
time
ago,
a
couple
months
ago,
very
similar
where
a
portion
of
the
building
is
a
tall
one
or
taller
first
story
or
second
story
and
then,
as
you,
move
to
a
different
section
of
the
building,
that
becomes
two
stories
so
similar
overall
height
is
still
pretty
pretty
comfortable.
A
I
believe
I
think
it's
just
under
52
feet
in
height,
it's
really
probably
as
the
city
measures
height,
even
less,
maybe
more
like
49
feet,
because
we
we
measure
to
the
ceiling
of
the
highest
occupiable
level.
This
measurement
that
59
foot
height
measurement
or
whatever
it
was
53,
goes
to
the
this,
the
top
of
the
parapet.
So
that's
the
tallest
in
terms
of
visual
impact.
That's
the
tallest
elevation.
A
Turning
the
corner
on
east
chestnut
again,
starting
at
the
corner,
you've
got
that
three-story
piece
and
then
that
transitions
to
four
stories
or
five
stories,
depending
on
where
you
are
actually,
I
think
it's
four
stories
yeah.
A
I
want
to
also
point
out
the
entrance
to
the
parking
garage
is
here
on
east
chestnut.
The
applicant
had
originally
proposed
this
and
it
was
reviewed
in
trc
where
that
garage
was
actually
on
charlotte
street.
That
elicited
some
concerns
one
because
we
really
are
trying
to
maintain.
A
You
know
the
best
possible
pedestrian
and
bike
experience
on
charlotte
street,
so
we
didn't
necessarily
want
to
have
that
that
cut
or
that
potential
conflict
with
that
parking
garage,
but
also
because
the
city's
road
diet
on
charlotte
street
created
that
middle
turn
lane
and
the
traffic
impact
study
for
this
project.
A
I
recommended
that
you
that
we
convert
a
portion
of
that
turn
lane
to
be
a
left
turn
only
into
the
garage,
and
there
was
some
concern,
particularly
as
the
area
continues
to
build
out,
and
we
add
more
traffic
to
our
streets
that
we
could
start
to
run
into
conflict
with
that
left.
Turn
movement
and
left
turn
movements
for
people
who
are
southbound.
A
A
They
were
open
to
that
and
they
did
relocate
the
garage,
and
I
think
that
this
not
only
has
the
effect
of
resolving
that
trap
potential
traffic
concern
that
we
had,
but
it
actually
helps
break
up
the
mass
of
the
building
a
little
bit
and
that
horizontal
facade,
that
is
the
longest
facade
this
this
north
and
south
elevations.
Those
are
the
really
long
edges
so
that
that
break
kind
of
helps,
kind
of
interrupt
that
facade.
A
The
applicant
also
added
some
different
materials.
We
have
different
colors,
color
bricks,
there's
some
stepping
back
and
forth
on
that
vertical
plane.
So
you
can
see
the
different
pieces
of
the
building
step
in
and
then
maybe
even
step
in
a
little
further
with
balconies
for
some
of
those
units,
and
then
it
pops
back
out.
A
The
uppermost
level
is
actually
stepped
back
further
and
while
this
project
is
not
in
the
cbd,
this
is
actually
a
standard
that
would
typically
apply
to
urban
projects
in
the
cbd,
where
you
establish
a
street
wall
height,
and
then
you
step
back
that
usually
third
or
fourth
story
somewhere
in
there
and
that
that
just
helps
kind
of
mitigate
the
mass
of
the
building
makes
it
a
more
comfortable
experience
for
the
pedestrian
at
the
street,
especially
when
you
have
these
really
long,
horizontal
facades.
So
so
that
was
also
a
welcome
change
with
this
project.
A
Then
moving
around
the
building,
here's
the
west
elevation.
So
this
is
what
we
would
probably
call
the
back
of
the
building
against
those
offices
and
possibly
some
other
residences
where
the
project
abuts
residential
zoning,
they
are
required
to
provide
a
30-foot
vegetated
buffer.
So,
as
you
can
see,
the
height
of
the
building
has
dropped.
A
It
went
from
the
four
or
five
stories
down
to
these
three
stories
and
then
in
between
this
edge
of
the
building
and
adjacent
properties,
you
would
have
at
least
a
30-foot
vegetated
buffer
and
then
that
other
long
facade
is
the
south
elevation,
and
this
is
the
side,
that's
adjacent
to
taco
temple.
If
you're
familiar
with
that
business
and
some
of
those
other
businesses
on
broad
street
and
again,
you
see
how
the
elevation
changes
in
the
building
kind
of
drops
in
scale.
A
So
all
of
our
conditional
zoning
projects,
of
course,
come
with
a
list
of
project
conditions.
In
those
conditions
we
typically
identify
where
a
project
doesn't
comply
with
some
of
the
technical
standards
for
this
project.
We
have
two
sets
of
technical
standards.
We
have
the
udo,
the
typical
udo
standards,
but
then
we
also
have
the
charlotte
street
overlay
standards
as
far
as
it
relates
to
the
udo
there's,
only
one
technical
standard
being
modified
and
that's
the
overall
density.
A
A
That
plan
is
somewhat
inconsistent
with
our
current
comprehensive
plan.
In
an
ideal
world
in
a
perfect
world,
we
would
have
re-examined
that
zoning
and
we
would
have
redone
the
small
area
plan
for
charlotte
street.
We
just
simply
didn't
have
the
resources
at
the
time.
So
while
we
still
evaluate
a
project's
ability
to
comply
with
those
standards,
we
we
acknowledge
that
some
of
those
standards-
at
least
some
of
them,
are
probably
somewhat
outdated
and
inconsistent
with
our
current
planning
goals.
A
So
there
are
a
number
of
overlay
standards
that
this
project
will
not
comply
with,
including
the
they're
identified
in
your
staff
report,
but
it
includes
things
like
the
maximum
footprint
size.
I
think
it's
limited
to
two
or
three
stories.
A
We
also
like
to
highlight
what
we
think
is
very
positive
about
the
project
and
what
makes
it
kind
of
unique
and
special.
So
in
this
particular
case,
this
is
a
project.
It's
a
mix
use
project
which,
while
we
all
like
mixed
use,
we
still
don't
see
a
lot
of
mixed-use
projects
being
proposed,
except
for
perhaps
in
our
downtown.
A
A
A
The
project
also
proposed
18
000
square
feet
of
community
open
space.
That
is
a
good
bit
more
than
what
would
be
required,
and
I
forgot
to
mention
it
when
I
was
going
over
the
site
plan.
But
we
have
these
two
internal
courtyards
associated
with
the
project
that
would
provide
some
nice
amenity
space
or
outdoor
space
for
the
residents.
A
And
then,
lastly,
we
do
have
structured
parking
which
allows
for
the
efficient
and
optimal
use
of
the
property
231
parking
spaces
located
within
that
parking
structure
to
support
the
project
more
than
meets
its
requirements.
So
that
is
positive
as
well,
and
I
should
add
that,
technically,
this
project
isn't
required
to
provide
any
off
off
street
parking
because
it's
within
a
mile
of
our
downtown.
A
So
we
we
provide
an
exception
for
residential
projects
within
a
mile
the
downtown.
However,
there
is
still
a
practical
need
for
parking
and
I
think
most
developers
will
try
to
meet
at
least
some
of
that
parking
requirement.
If
not
all
this
actually
meets
the
full
parking
requirement.
In
addition
to
meeting
the
requirement
for
the
commercial
spaces.
A
A
If
you
didn't
see
it,
I
sent
an
email
earlier,
because
we
just
kind
of
got
it
hot
off
the
presses.
I
did
put
a
copy
in
the
public
folder
as
well.
So
if
there
were
members
of
the
public
who
wanted
to
see
it,
it
would
be
available
for
them.
So
I
think
this
is
a
really
nice
rendering
that
gives
you
a
better
sense
of
the
the
character
of
what
we're
expecting
with
this
project,
much
better
than
those
sort
of
flat
elevations,
and
with
that
I
will
conclude
my
introduction.
A
C
I
have
a
couple
of
quick
questions
on
on
the
parking,
although
it's
not
required,
does
the
231
spaces
right
does
that
meet
the
minimum
the
maximum
or
something
in
between.
A
It's
something
in
between
it's
towards
the
minimum,
though,
so
it's
not
there
isn't
a
lot
of
excess
parking.
C
C
C
I
guess
on
the
plan
I'm
looking
at,
there
are
only
six,
so
if
you
eliminated
those
six
spaces
that
would
not
cause
them
to
fall
below
a
minimum.
C
D
I
have
one
if
no
one
else
does
shannon
you
said
something
about.
If
it
went
for
a
little
yeah,
a
luigi
grant,
they
would
be
required
to
have
some
of
them.
Those
affordable
units
would
take
vouchers
in
the
b1
conditions.
It's
already
stating
that
half
of
them
take
vouchers
anyway.
So.
A
Right,
it
is
it's
being
proposed
right
now,
because
that
is
our
expectation
if
something
changes
along
the
way
and
and
the
land
use
incentive
grant
comes
off
that
that
is
a
requirement
of
the
land
use
incentive
grant.
So
we
like
to
kind
of
spell
it
out
in
the
conditions:
it's
not
necessarily
a
requirement
of
a
conditional
zoning,
so
it
would
be
up
to
the
applicant
at
that
point
to
decide
if
they
wanted
to
offer
those
or
not.
A
That
that
this
will
at
least
go
before
council
requesting
the
land
use
incentive,
grant,
we
went
ahead
and
included
them.
D
Okay,
two
other
quick
questions
and,
and
I'm
just
going
to
pose
them
here
and
certainly
the
applicant.
You
know
they're
kind
of
questions
for
the
applicant
as
well,
but
one
of
them
came
up
in
the
trc,
dumpster
location
and
the
access
for
that,
and
then
I
know
you
mentioned
that
they're
going
to
upgrade
the
transit
stop.
A
Yeah-
and
I
can
actually
answer
that
so
as
far
as
the
dumpster
pickups-
that
we
subsequently
after
trc,
we
just
talked
it
over
with
the
applicant,
and
so
we
got
more
information.
A
The
proposal
is
to
have,
I
believe,
compactors
inside
the
structure
that
will
be
picked
up
about
once
a
week
so
depending
on
the
pickup
schedule-
and
I
guess
how
much
trash
is
generated
so
they
come
out
and
then
they
will
leave
the
the
unit
in
that
loading
area
for
the
the
service
provider
to
come
and
collect
from
there.
So
we
shared
that
plan
with
the
city's
sanitation
services
manager
and
they
supported
that.
They
thought
that
was
a
good
approach
for
this
project.
A
The
transit
shelter
was
just
something
that
we,
I
think,
was
just
an
oversight.
We
noticed
that
as
well
and
brought
it
up
with
the
applicant,
and
they
agreed
that
you
know
we
would
have
a
transit
shelter
for
this
site
and
were
able
to
add
it
to
the
rendering
which
came
after
trc
so
and
please
pain,
correct
me
if
I
stated
any
of
that
incorrectly
or
if
you
have
any
additional
information
to
add.
D
A
And
we
do
I
mean
we,
we
really
the
loading
it's
another,
one
of
those
kind
of
necessary
evils
like
a
parking
garage.
You
know
like
we
don't
love
the
conflict
that
a
parking
entrance
creates,
but
you
know
you
have
to
provide
access
somewhere,
it's
kind
of
like
that
with
loading
and
dumpster
collection
or
trash
collection.
I
mean
it's,
it's
not
the
best,
but
we
do
our
best
to
try
to
contemplate
that
early
in
the
process,
so
it
can
be
accommodated
appropriately.
So,
in
addition
to
trash
collection,
loading
serves
a
lot
of
other
purposes.
A
We
have
a
lot
of
residential
units
here.
People
are
going
to
be
moving
in
and
out.
We
need
a
place
for
them
to
park,
while
they're
doing
that
we
have
other
kinds
of
deliveries
coming
to
the
site,
so
that
loading
that
that
you
know
loading
space,
that's
out
of
the
travel
lane
so
that
we
don't
have
double
parked
vehicles
is,
is
really
valuable.
D
Well
and
part
of
the
reason
I
bring
up
the
dumpster
and
I'm
curious
about
how
that
was
gonna
work
is
you
know
we
ran
into
that
problem
at
that
one
project,
those
apartments
downtown
over
there
on
it's,
not
hillary,
clingman
and
patton.
You
know
where.
A
A
So
there
is
no
loading
or
anything
like
there
is
no
other
place
to
put
it,
except
on
the
sidewalk
they've,
I'm
happy
to
say
that
that
developer
has
done
a
better
job
of
monitoring
that
and
that
doesn't
seem
to
stay
out
as
long
as
it
used
to
back
when
we
were
having
issues.
But
this
is
an
even
better
situation
where
it
can
be
not
on
a
sidewalk
and
in
a
designated
loading
area.
B
C
Have
one
other
question
real,
quick?
The
you
mentioned
that
there's
and
and
the
site
plan
shows
the
possibility
of
the
street
trees
along
chestnut
being
in
pavement
and
tree
grates.
I
assume
that
the
requirements
that
are
normally
made
for
that
type
of
installation
of
300
minimum
of
300
cubic
feet
of
soil
would
apply
here.
A
Yeah,
so
the
technical
review
plan
set
showed
trees
and
grates.
This
rendering
shows
trees
in
an
island,
I'm
not
sure
if
the
applicant
has
made
a
change,
but
if
we
go
with
the
trees
and
grades
it
has
to
meet
the
the
volume
and
then
the
city
has
a
particular
great
size
and
standard
grade
that
has
to
be
used
in
that
condition
as
well.
G
And
I
I
can
make
a
comment
or
not
we're
currently
working
on
those
tree
planting
standards
specifically
based
on
on
soil
volume,
and,
if
I
may
ask,
are
there
any
other
opportunities
to
introduce
more
trees
on
chestnut,
because
I
only
see
three
on
both
the
site
plan
and
the
perspective
drawing
and
especially,
I
would
urge
the
developer
to
to
keep
the
the
trees
in
a
lawn
in
in
the
lawn
or
a
bump
out,
as
opposed
to
putting
them
in
grates
it
and
perhaps
there's
an
opportunity
inducing
some
more
trees
along
that
side.
A
And
it
I
I
perhaps
I
you
know,
I
find
that
these
kind
of
colored
renderings
are
usually
easier
for
people
to
recognize
and
and
read
and
kind
of
understand.
The
technical
site
plan,
as
I
mentioned,
showed
trees
and
grates.
It
actually
had
eight
trees
here
so
more
than
the
three
that
are
shown
here,
as
well
as
some
trees
in
this
in
this
planting
strip.
So
I
don't
know
that
I
think
the
rendering
is
really
more
illustrative
than
specific,
but
maybe
maybe
mr
kessinger
can
provide
a
little
additional
clarity
on
that.
C
One
other
quick
question
relating
to
trees.
Again,
the
it
looks
like
the
trees
that
are
being
planted
along
both
of
those
roads
in
imply
that
the
existing
overhead
utilities
will
be
put
below
grade.
A
N
Hey,
yes,
my
name
is
payne
passenger.
I
am
the
developer
and
shannon
you
did
you
actually
did.
You
did
a
great
job
going
through
everything
that
about
our
project
and
covered
a
lot
of
things
that
I
was
gonna
discuss
and
jump
into
your
the
first
quarter.
One
of
the
first
questions.
Y'all
talked
about
lance
a
use
incentive
grant.
We
are
working
with
paul
at
the
city
right
now
on
getting
that
worked
out,
and
I
think
we
go
in
three
weeks
to
the
the
meeting.
N
May
four,
it's
the
end
of
september,
to
submit
that
and
or
go
for
approval
the
parking
on
the
street.
We
kind
of
recognize
that
our
private
or
property
used.
It's
currently
used
for
a
lot
of
parking
for
businesses
in
the
area,
so
we
were
trying
to
recognize
that
and
try
to.
I
mean
I
think,
through
the
whole
process.
N
We
were
upfront
trying
to
keep
the
parking
spots
on
the
street
just
so
we
can
provide
parking
for
the
businesses
that
when,
if
this
project
goes
forward,
we'll
lose
parking
and
so-
and
that
brings
into
some
of
the
the
polls
that
you
just
discussed.
N
N
That
would
correspond
with
having
to
look
at
the
intersection
as
well
and
having
the
traffic
lights
are
redone
to
a
certain
way,
because,
right
now
the
traffic
lights
are
on
those
said
poles
and,
I
believe,
there's
a
there's,
a
transformer
pole
in
one
of
these.
That
would
be
on
the
sidewalk
that
we
need
to
figure
out
how
to
move
the
transformer
to
a
better
location
of
the
pole,
to
a
better
location
if
it
will
put
it
underground.
N
N
I
know
the
trash
is
shown
inside
the
building
and
yes,
we'd
have
the
loading
zone
right
there
on
chestnut
street
and
how
we
have
it
right
now
it
would
be
a
compactor
inside
the
building.
It
would
be
the
trash
would
be
compacted
internally,
we
would
put
it
in
rollway
bins
and
the
trash
service
would
only
roll
them
out
to
empty
the
trash
and
then
roll
them
back
into
the
trash
area.
So
there
would
not
be
trash
on
the
street
at
any
point
in
time
other
than
when
it
is
rolled
out
at
the
time.
N
The
truck
is
there
to
or
dispose
of
it.
Yes,
the
technical
and
then
on
the
street
trees
with
bump
outs.
We're
willing
to
look
at
anything.
So
if
another
technical
site
plan
did
show
where
how
the
landscaping
would
be.
This
is
more
of
or,
as
was
discussed,
more
of
an
illustration
of
just
making
it
giving
it
a
color,
colored
look,
and
so
the
technical
site
plan
would
be
a
better
plan
to
go
off
of
that
was
submitted.
N
That
would
show
or
the
plantings
that
we
were
doing,
and
I
think,
and
then
the
tree
grates
that
were
brought
up
based
on
experience
with
other
projects
we've
done
in
the
city
and
with
the
tree
grates.
I
believe
all
of
them
have
to
be
installed
with
a
city
stamp,
and
so
they
know
or
the
ones
we're
installing
currently,
so
I
believe
that
would
be
with
the
stamp
on
it.
N
We
would
be
meeting
the
specs
that
are
required
and
I
believe,
if
y'all,
I
think
that
covered
most
of
the
questions
y'all
are
having
the
one
thing.
I
know
that
what
shannon
has
been
talking
with
us
about
was
the
tia
with
the
try
with
the
traffic
study.
We
had
one
originally
done
for
the
entrance
that
was
on
charlotte
street,
that
they
revised
the
model
last
week
or
model
network
last
week,
and
so
that
should
be.
N
A
So
I've
just
posted
the
or
put
up
the
the
site
plan,
so
you
can
see
the
the
tree
grates
here.
I
think
I
counted
eight
one,
two
three
eight
yeah
and
then
there
would
also
be
trees
in
this
island.
This
nine
foot
wide
island
right
here,
so
I
think,
we've
more
than
met
the
street
tree
requirement.
F
I
have
a
question
and
thank
you,
miss
tuck
and
mr
kassinger
for
the
presentation
mr
kassinger
did
describe
how
there
was
gonna,
be
a
compactor
on
site
and
the
tractors
be
rolled
out
as
needed
per
their
schedule.
My
question
is
a
little
more
general.
Is
there
screening
requirements
for
a
dumpster
or
for
hvac
units
or
other
transformers
or
other
utility
type
things
that
I
need
to
be
aware
of.
A
So
we
would
require
normally
screening
of
dumpsters,
but
there
really
isn't
your
traditional
dumpster
in
this
particular
case.
The
compactor
is
located
inside
the
building
and
then
they
roll
out
bins
and
then,
when
the
bins
are
empty,
they
just
roll
back
in.
So
we
wouldn't
have.
I
mean
their
their
screening
is
their
building
they're
they're,
putting
those
receptacles
inside
the
building
mechanical
equipment-
I
mean
it's,
it
depends
on
the
equipment,
so
rooftop
mechanical
equipment
needs
to
be
screened.
Typically
by
a
parapet.
A
Ground
level
equipment
doesn't
necessarily
have
to
be
screened,
but
we
do
have
these
kind
of
open
areas
behind
the
building.
That
will
also
have
some
some
buffering
and
some
other
additional
vegetation.
So
I
there
there
could
be.
I
can't
promise
that
you
won't
see
a
box
there
there's
often
often
times
too
utility
providers,
just
they
they
dictate
where
they
go
and
property
owners,
don't
have
a
lot
of
say
so,
but
for
the
most
part,
yes,
the
equipment
will
be
screened.
F
Okay,
thank
you
and
I
guess
my
second
question
again
is
just
more
from
my
reference.
The
proposed
common
area
in
the
middle.
That's
just
for
the
residents.
That's
not
like.
I
know
we're
calling
it
a
community
space
because
that's
for
the
residents,
but
that's
not
necessarily
a
public
space.
That's.
A
That
I
would
you
know
I
was
going
to
say
that's
correct,
but
I
I
guess
I
shouldn't
assume
that
either
that
was
certainly
what
we
that's,
certainly
how
we
interpreted
that
was,
that
was
space
for
the
residents
private
community
space
I'll.
Let
mr
mr
kessinger
correct
me.
If
I'm
wrong,
we
do
typically
in
a
project
like
this.
We
recognize
those
nice
wide
sidewalks
as
additional
community
space
or
places
where
people
can
stop
and
cross
paths
and
have
a
conversation.
C
I
would
elaborate
on
the
comments
on
on
this:
the
utility
structures,
the
I
mean.
Typically,
what
you'll
see
around
the
building
like
this
is
a
transformer
and
probably
a
backflow
preventer
for
water
or
fire
supply,
and
it
looks
like
the
in
the
case
of
the
water
supply.
It's
going
to
be
on
the
southwest
corner
of
the
site.
C
There's
probably
yeah
right.
There,
there's,
probably
a
couple
of
large
boxes
that
will
contain
those
backflow
preventers
that
have
to
be
above
ground
and
then
on.
The
sort
of
mid
middle
part
of
the
northern
side
of
the
site
is
where
they're
showing
the
transformers,
so
they
won't
be
out
on
the
street,
but
they
they're
not
something
that
typically
requires
screening.
C
So
there's
it's
not
clear
to
me,
except
by
the
fact
that
we're
showing
or
that
the
the
applicant
is
showing
trees,
apparently
large,
maturing
trees
along
both
rights
of
way
that
the
overhead
electrical
is
being
put
underground.
Otherwise
those
would
would
necessarily
be
small,
maturing
trees
correct
at
a
different
space.
D
D
Is
there
it
appears
that
there's
more
than
enough
roof
area
to
have
other
rooftop
mechanical?
That
would
not
be
on
top
of
that
highest
story,
but
I
just
wanted
to
clarify
that
either
from
the
developer
or
shannon.
If
you
happen
to
know
that,
because
I
think
correct
me,
if
I'm
wrong
with
the
maximum
height
in
the
see
and
this
expansion
be
80
feet,
is
that
correct,
correct.
A
That's
typically
something
that
we
check
on
and
same
with
the
small
merchant
tree
versus
a
large
maturing
tree.
These
are
the
kind
of
details
we
usually
follow
through
on
at
final
trc.
Should
this
project
be
approved
at
council,
the
requirement,
typically
in
the
staff
report,
is
you
meet
this
requirement
or
other
equal
requirements
so.
D
H
N
C
C
I'm
gonna
see
nobody
else,
making
any
questions
or
comments.
At
this
point,
I'm
going
to
step
back
to
my
my
question
about
the
on-street
parking,
if
that,
if
that
parallel
parking
is
allowed
and
is
constructed,
does
that
end
up
being
something
that
the
city
ends
up
meter,
owning
and
metering
and
maintaining.
A
The
city,
it
would
be
public
parking,
so
we
do
allow
if
you
create
on-street
parking
where
it
didn't
previously
exist.
The
udo
does
allow
you
to
to
account
a
portion
of
that
parking
towards
your
off-street
parking
requirement,
but
it's
still
public
parking
and
the
thinking
behind
that
is,
if
you
create
it,
and
it's
directly
adjacent
to
your
building.
A
It
could
be
true
in
this
case
as
well,
that
even
at
those
public
parking
visitors
to
that
site
will
likely
use
that
parking
and
not
use
one
of
the
dedicated
spaces
or
they
may
use
it
and
not
use
it.
So
we
allow
them
to
count
it
at
a
a
portion
of
it.
I
think
I
can't
remember
if
it's
a
third
or
twenty
percent,
it
doesn't
matter
in
this
case
because
they
more
than
meet
their
off-street
parking
requirement
and
they're,
not
even
required
parking
so,
but
it
will
be
public
parking.
A
So
it's
not
anything
that
the
developer
controls
it's
something
that
the
city
would
manage.
It's
not
metered
in
this
location
of
the
city,
but
it
would
be
striped
and
maintained
as
public
parking
could.
A
There
is,
I
can
go
back
and
share
my
screen
if
you
like.
A
So
there
are
both
some
setback
requirements
and
buffering
requirements,
so
the
buffer
is
really
only
required
in
this
kind
of
north
northwest
corner,
where
it's
adjacent
to
residential
zoning.
C
A
Oh,
I
gotcha.
I
am
not
clear
on
that.
I
think
that
would
be
something
our
transportation
staff
would
would
customarily
look
at
and
they
did
review
this
project
at
trc
and-
and
this
has
not
changed
since
here,
so
this
isn't
a
new
edition,
so
they
didn't.
E
K
I
can
help
you
with
that.
We
have
been
testing
it
me
and
two
additional
staff
members
just
to
make
sure
everything
was
okay,
since
probably
for
about
30
minutes
now
back
and
forth,
okay,
just
to
double
check
and
we
actually
even
called
in
I.t
to
make
sure
cause.
We
expected
a
little
bit
more
as
well.
So
if
anybody
hears
anything,
let
me
know,
but
we
did
double
check
from
my
home
phone
and
my
cell
phone
and
three
other
lines.
E
A
Discussion,
do
you
notice
if
there
are
people
listening,
but
not
in
the
caller
queue
yeah.
K
We
do
have
one
person
who's
been
listening
since
507.
They
never
switched
over
to
the
queue
I
kind
of
have
been
watching
for
that.
A
So
for
the
commission's
reference
and
understanding,
so
the
public
input
platform
that
allows
us
to
manage
these.
These
live
call-ins
will
show.
So,
as
you
know,
there's
multiple
ways
to
participate
in
this
meeting
or
to
watch
the
meeting
or
listen
to
the
meeting,
and
one
of
them
is
just
to
phone
in
and
listen
so
the
public
input
platform
lets
us
see
who's
called
in
and
is
listening.
So
we
just
see
their
phone
number.
So
we
know
that
you
know
at
any
point
in
time.
A
There's
three
people
listening
or
five
people
listening
and
when
somebody
wants
to
enter
the
speaker
queue
there
are
prompts.
When
you
call
in
to
tell
you
how
to
do
that,
and
then
it
moves
that
person
into
a
different
status,
and
so
you
it's
it's
pretty
obvious.
When
you
look
at
it,
you
can
see,
there's
like
a
little
hand
raised,
and
it
says
that
they're
in
waiting
to
speak
and
then
you
you
know
you
you
tap
to
let
them
speak.
So.
D
D
As
I
recall,
zero
letters
or
any
public
comment
on
this
when
the
project
across
the
street
generated
a
enormous
amount
of
public
comment
when
and
I'm
just
gonna
run
some
numbers
by.
So
this
project
has
186
units
on
a
little
over
two
acres,
which
I
think
works
out,
hits
the
maximum
of
almost
80
units
per
acre.
D
Is
it
55
52
feet
four
to
five
stories
project
across
the
street,
with
181
units
on
six
acres
and
maybe
five
feet
taller
yeah
kind
of
shocking?
I
I
I
would
say
that
you
know
basic
generally.
I
think
the
project
is
great.
I
would
say
I'm
somewhat
disappointed
that
it's
a
it's
a
donut
that
doesn't
have
any
penetrations,
I
mean
there's,
there's
a
there's
parking
deck
parking
garage
door,
that's
kind
of
it!
It's
it's
a
wall
on
four
sides:
it's
architecturally!
That
is
it's
just
it's
not
very
exciting!
D
That
kind
of
bothers
me-
I
mean
it's.
It
does
have
some
definition
to
the
facade,
but
there's
just
nothing.
Nothing
that
grabs
me
about
it.
I
think
that's
kind
of
the
the
one,
at
least
from
my
perspective
fault,
I
would
see
with
it.
I
I
certainly
applaud
the
developer
for
adding
the
housing,
adding
the
20,
affordable,
housing.
50
of
that
being
vouchers,
I
mean
that
is
that's
great
and,
and
you
know
doing.
D
Off
the
bat,
that's
that's
wonderful!
I
would
love
to
see
something
just
a
little
bit
nicer
as
far
as
the
architectural
and
I
know
that's
changed
over
the
course
of
I
think
I've
looked
back
through
my
records.
Initially
this
was
going
to
come
through
and
three
years
ago.
I
think
it
was
2018.,
and
so
it
definitely
has
changed
you
know
throughout
throughout
the
time.
I
think
it's
gotten
better
for
sure,
but
it's
still
just
I
feel
like
it
needs
something
else.
D
G
I'd
like
to
make
a
comment,
if
I
could,
I
want
I'm
really
glad
the
that
you
came
with
to
us
as
a
baseline,
with
20,
affordable
housing.
That
was
my
biggest
regret
about
the
other
site.
So
thank
you
and
really
really
really
like
your
the
the
plan
that
you,
your
that
you
have
submitted
for
for
the
buffer
in
the
back.
It
includes
plants,
we
normally
don't
see
in
a
project.
This
size
flame
is
aliens
anyway.
I'm
just
this
is
the
landscape
architect
in
me,
coming
out
beautiful.
G
I
would
really
love
to
see
some
more
street
trees
on
chestnut,
but
otherwise
I'm
like
this
is
a
good
plan.
I
plan
to
vote
for.
O
I'd
like
to
make
some
comments
so
well,
first
off
the
question
is:
how
tall
is
the
king
james
building
across
the
street,
with
the
chop
shop
a
tree?
Anyone
know
that.
O
O
I
think
I
think,
because
there
is
development
on
that
side
of
charlotte,
it's
easier
for
people
to
feel
more
comfortable
with
development.
On
this
side,
I
think
that's
probably
one
of
the
reasons
there's
not
as
much
opposition
and
it
sounds
like
the
applicant-
has
actually
taken
some
of
what
the
planning
staff
has
recommended
and
and
added
it
to
the
project,
whereas
you
know
the
the
project
across
the
street,
you
know
they
said
here's
what
we
got
yes
or
no.
O
So
at
least
this
applicant
is
at
least
willing
to
work
with
us.
O
I
think
also
I
do
appreciate
the
bump
outs
in
the
elevation.
I
think
it
does
make
it
read,
especially
in
the
rendering
as
a
project.
That's
not
one
huge
monolith,
and
so
I
don't
really
have
any
issue
with
plan.
It's
it's
definitely
something
you
would
see
in
an
older
city
like
I
used
to
live
in
old
town,
alexandria.
It
looks
very
similar
to
stuff
like
that,
and
I
think
niles
bolton
even
has
an
office
there.
So
maybe
maybe
that's
why,
but
I
feel
like
it's
more
in
character
with
this
neighborhood
thanks.
G
E
C
Think
that
this
is
a
really
great
project
for
this
location.
I,
like
the
density,
I
like
the
proposal.
I
think
there
could
be
some
additional
detail,
especially
on
the
corner
at
charlotte
street
and
chestnut,
to
enhance
that
a
little
bit.
Of
course,
the
the
the
transit
stop
doesn't
show
there
right
now.
I
would
strongly
encourage
you
to
consider
the
use
of
a
product
called
silva
cells
below
your
trees
for
their
benefit
and
maybe
work
with
the
tree
commission
on
what
they're
studying
right
now
as.
C
I
have
a
lot
of
concern
about
the
parallel
parking
on
chestnut
street
because
it
will
create
incidents
both
for
cyclists
as
well
as
motorists
along
that
road.
I
would
love
to
see
an
18-inch
painted
buffer
between
the
parking
space.
You've
got
nine
feet
there.
Typically,
a
car
takes
up
about
seven
feet,
seven
or
eight
feet.
Maybe
I
would
really
love
to
see
a
painted
buffer
there
so
that
motorists
or
people
that
are
parking
there
understand
that
they
need
to
pull
in
and
snuggle
up
to
that
curb.
C
But
overall,
I
I
really
appreciate
this.
I
think
this
is
the
type
of
density
that
we
need
to
see
close
end
to
town,
and
so
I
think
this
is
a.
This
is
a
great
proposal,
mr
rodriguez.
C
F
G
Hey
tony,
yes,
I
just
wanted
to
mention
to
you
real,
quick,
the
the
the
use
of
silver
cells
and
interconnected
tree,
great
pits
and
so
forth.
Those
are
being
addressed
technically
and
I
think
we'll
be
able
to
get
those
to
council,
probably
within
a
month
or
two
we're
trying.
G
C
G
And
we
can-
and
they
can
also
be
used
to
interlink
root
systems
even
with
trees
and
grates.
So
it's
it's
a
really
great
product.
O
C
P
Good
afternoon,
villa
savica,
with
planning
and
urban
design.
This
is
the
third
meeting.
We
first
brought
this
to
you
in
july,
and
here
we
are
again
knowing
that
we've
presented
this
to
you
already
I'll.
Try
to
this
is
actually
a
condensed
presentation
trying
to
keep
some
of
the
key
elements
for
people
who
haven't
seen
it
yet
there
were,
I
think
at
least
one
commissioner
who
wasn't
there,
and
we
have
a
couple
of
changes
that
we'd
like
to
highlight
so
I'll
get
right
into
it.
P
For
the
background,
I
like
to
remind
everybody
that
this
is
coming
from
the
comprehensive
plan,
and
I
want
to
read
this
paragraph
because
it
really
summarizes,
distinct
and
clearly
what
we're
trying
to
do
as
a
means
to
accommodate
a
growing
population
and
provide
for
much
needed
housing
while
minimizing
traffic
congestion
and
maximizing
the
benefit
of
public
investment
in
infrastructure.
The
city
should
adopt
zoning
code
to
promote
transit,
support
of
higher
density,
mixed-use
development
in
nodal
clusters
along
transit
corridors,
utilizing
the
smart
growth
model.
P
There's
some
precedent
in
nashville
for
this
type
of
zoning,
we
have
form-based
codes
in
both
the
river
arts
district
and
on
haywood
road
in
west
asheville
that
require
similar
types
of
development
that
we
have
based
this
zoning
proposal
from
and
these
these
zoning
districts
were
developed
with
consultants
and
very
long
public
processes
as
well,
so
we're
not
having
to
recreate
the
wheel.
P
Now,
the
next
few
slides
will
will
highlight
the
the
meat
of
what
we're
proposing
with
the
urban
place
forum
district.
So
this
is
a
very
brief
description.
We're
intending
to
accommodate
higher
density,
mixed
use,
centers
that
are
human
scaled.
P
A
key
concept
that
we're
trying
to
integrate
into
these
into
these
areas
is
connectivity,
especially
when
we
have
large
parcels
that
are
not
connected
to
to
streets
or
or
only
connected
to
streets
with
one
part
of
the
property,
and
so
this
this
conceptual
sketch
that
you're,
seeing
on
the
on
the
slide
here
on
the
left,
shows
what
you
might
see
in
the
transition
from
larger
parcels
that
over
time
break
up
in
order
to
be
able
to
build
buildings
that
are
required
to
be
on
the
streets.
P
P
That
requires
a
certain
percentage
of
that
facade
to
be
there,
and
we
have
flexibility
so
that
we
don't
require
open
spaces
or
driveways
to
be
part
of
that,
build
to
zone
we've
added
flexible
setbacks
so
that
effectively
a
building
can
be
within
zero
and
to
40
feet
of
the
street.
P
Most
of
these
districts
have
a
minimum
setback
today,
that
is
about
35
feet
and
where
this
code
is
sort
of
flipping,
that
and
saying
that
the
buildings
must
be
within
that
first
zero
to
40
feet
and
the
idea
comes
from
trying
to
keep
buildings
closer
to
the
streets
so
that,
as
they
urbanize
their
they're
more
closely
connected
to
where
people
will
be
walking
and
and
will
have
better
access.
P
We're
proposing
that
the
the
heights
of
these
structures
are
four
to
six
stories,
which
is
basically
in
line
with
what's
allowed.
Today.
Today
we
allow
a
slight
on
some.
Some
of
the
districts
allow
for
a
little
bit
more
another
additional
story,
we're
saying
four
stories
without
affordable
housing.
But
if
you
have
the
affordable
housing,
you
can
add
a
two
additional
stories.
P
This
is
a
change
that
I'd
like
to
highlight,
since
the
last
time
was
actually
the
first
time
we
presented
to
the
planning
of
zoning
commission.
We
we
have
a
code
here
that
states
that
we
we
limit
commercial
square
footage
to
20
000
square
feet
unless
you
provide
housing
and
with
with
more
back
and
forth
with
property
owners
and
their
representatives,
we
decided
to
make
this
standard
only
applicable
to
parcels
that
are
larger
than
10
acres,
and
the
idea
is
that
housing
can
be
much
more
difficult
on
smaller
parcels.
P
There
are
plenty
of
sites
and
places,
we've
all
seen
it
that
accommodate
housing
on
small,
smaller
parcels,
but
it
is
more
difficult
to
do,
and
so
we
are
proposing
a
change
here
that
this
standard
would
only
be
applicable
to
parcels
over
10
acres
and
what
that
means
for
this
first
phase
of
the
urban
centers
initiative.
Is
that
really
only
three
parcels
would
be
affected?
P
This
image
is
hard
to
to
see,
but
the
the
green
parcels
here
which,
on
the
the
northernmost
parcel,
is
the
innsbruck
mall.
The
middle
parcel
is
the
sears
former,
formerly
known
as
searsite,
and
the
walmart
off
of
bleachery
boulevard.
All
the
other
sites
wouldn't
would
be
able
to
have
whatever
commercial
square
footage
that
they
would
like
for
their
properties
without.
E
P
Housing
another
standard
that
we've
adjusted
a
little
bit
is
the
street
standard.
Previously
the
requirement
set
the
standard
from
anywhere
between
40
and
56
feet
for
the
right-of-way,
and
we've
made
an
adjustment
that
allows
for
a
little
bit
smaller
up
to
30
feet
for
some
side
streets
to
acknowledge
that
in
in
in
some
sites
where
you're,
we
don't
have
a
lot
of
development,
maybe
only
buildings
on
one
side
of
the
street.
P
P
I
have
a
couple
images
here
of
what
that
sort
of
looks
like
this
is
a
a
property
where
you
could
imagine.
Existing
buildings
are
left
in
place,
and
this
is
actually
merriman
avenue
from
merriman.
You
could
have
a
what
would
basically
be
about
a
30-foot
right-of-way
to
10-foot
moving
lanes
with
a
10-foot
sidewalk
and
street
trees.
P
That
would
lead
you
in
to
what
would
effectively
be
a
street
in
front
of
the
building
that
would
have
sidewalks
in
front
of
in
front
of
the
use
and
we're
just
showing
here
conceptually
what
the
trees
could
look
like
and
that
over
time
that
that
site
could
transition
with
more
buildings
or
not
really
dependent
on
the
use
and
the
the
cost
of
land
and
the
development
intensity.
P
P
The
the
bones
of
the
block
structure
are
what's
important
here
and
and
and
that's
really
the
key
key
to
this
project,
and
and
that's
what
I'm
trying
to
show
here
so
now
I'll
just
walk
through
where
the
sites
are.
We
have
as
part
of
this
first
phase,
four
different
nodes
that
are
circled
here
on
the
right
total
about
122
acres
and
I'll
just
walk
through
each
of
them.
P
The
next
site
is
tunnel
road
with
about
40
acres.
This
cutout,
for
anybody
who
wants
to
know
is
a
property
that
was
conditionally
rezoned,
and
so
we
can't
touch
that.
That's
not
part
of
this
proposal
and
this
district
would
change
from
regional
business
here
on
the
left
to
what
is
proposed.
The
urban
place
form
code
on
bleachery
boulevard.
We
have
46
acres
that
has
a
similar
cut
out
from
a
conditional
use
permit,
and
this
property
is
moving
proposed
to
move
from
river
district
to
urban
place.
P
Zoning
district
and
this
node
includes
one
future
land
use
map
adjustment
that
we're
proposing
that
the
current
future
land
use
map
shows
that
two
of
these
properties
are
urban
corridor
and
we're
proposing
that
they
move
to
urban
center
to
meet
their
adjacent
properties
to
have
the
same
same
future,
land
use
and
then
finally,
this
was
a
property
that
was
added,
and
we
discussed
this
at
the
last
august
at
the
august
planning
zoning
commission
meeting
at
former
sears
site,
that
is
approximately
17
acres
and
is
proposed
to
move
from
regional
business
to
urban
place,
form
district
and
that
summer,
that's
a
conclusion
concludes
my
presentation.
D
P
Good
question:
you
know
we
sort
of
tried
to
make
it
a
simple
number
and
reviewed
the
properties
to
to
knowing
that
larger
properties
would
be
easier
and
that
there
was
kind
of
a
split
off
that
really
at
about
10
acres.
You
had
a
very
distinct
set
of
properties
for
both
phase
one
and
two,
and
you
know
we're
flexible
with
possible
changes
to
that,
but
that
you
know,
as
a
starting
point,
seemed
like
a
a
reasonable
approach
or
a
a
conservative
approach.
P
I
guess
really
is
maybe
a
better
way
of
putting
it.
D
P
We
would
at
least
double
them,
so
I
can.
I
can
shift
here
to
this
interactive
map
that
you're
seeing
now
and
if
we
just
hone
in
here
on
the
tunnel
road
property.
P
P
You
know
so
we
would
add
one
there.
I
think
this
one
might
be
about
four
or
five
eight.
No,
that's
only
three
acres.
So
at
this
node
we
would
add
one
one
parcel.
Sorry,
I
don't
have
these
numbers
pulled
up.
I
think.
P
I
think
I
think,
on
merriman
avenue,
the
the
only
parcel
over
five
acres
is
on
the
north
side.
That's
about
six
acres,
so
we'd
probably
add
three
or
four
parcels.
P
E
P
What
joe
is
suggesting
is
that
we
could
change
the
trigger
that
would
require
housing
so
that,
if
you
built,
if
you
wanted
more
than
20
000
square
feet
of
commercial
on
a
smaller
site,
that's
only
five
acres
or
more
that
you
would
have
to
provide
a
housing
unit
in
order
to
get
another
thousand
square
feet
of
commercial.
P
So
currently
we're
saying
sites
over
10
acres
could
build
a
40
000
square
foot
commercial
property
without
housing,
but
sites
over
10
acres.
If
they
wanted
a
40,
000
square
foot,
commercial
property
would
have
to
integrate
at
least
10
market
rate
housing
units
and
whether
joe
is
suggesting
whether
or
not
that
trigger
should
be
less
than
10
acres.
Q
Can
you
repeat
what
you
said
about
four
stories
and
affordable
housing?
Did
you
say
if
it's
less
than
four
stories
it
doesn't
have
to
have
affordable
housing.
I
Q
P
P
Well,
not
necessarily
in
some
cases
you
would
get
you
would
get
many.
You
would
also
get
a
lot
of
market
rate
housing
units,
so
it
would
depend
on
the
size
of
the
building
and
lots
of
things,
but
it's
a
typical
incentive
that
we
see
sometimes
as
adding
height
or
density
for
affordable
housing.
I
P
Let
me
get
out
of
this
presentation
to
see
my
notes
here.
Currently,
the
code
allows
60
to
80
feet
five
to
seven
stories,
depending
on
your
your
zoning
district
right.
We
have
river
district
highway
business
regional
business,
so
we
actually
allow
in,
I
think
regional
business
up
to
80
feet,
but
other
districts
allow
a
little
bit
less.
C
Not,
but
what
you're
doing
here
is
you're
incentivizing,
higher
density
by
the
by
the
developers,
provision
of
affordability.
C
P
P
I
see
that
craig
has
raised
his
hand.
Let
me
finish
here
that
we've
met
were
discussed
at
least
a
couple
times,
and
and
really
the
changes
that
were
suggesting
in
limiting
housing
for
sites
over
10
acres
and
fine-tuning
the
street
standards
to
to
make
them
smaller
have
come
from
those
conversations
so
we're
trying
to
trying
to
meet
their
concerns.
P
We
did
yeah,
yes,
we
had
a
meeting
with
them
and
we
we
worked
through
some
sketches
and
talked
about
some
of
our
goals
and
attention
and
their
concerns,
and
you
know
we're
trying
to
trying
to
be
fair
and
reasonable
and
responsive.
P
We
are
trying
hard
to
to
meet
the
city's
goals
creatively
and
from
analysis.
P
It
seems
that
block
structure
is
key
in
the
long
term
to
get
those
transitions
and
we,
we
may
not
have
housing
in
many
of
these
sites
for
a
long
time,
but
if
we
don't
begin
to
create
some
block
structure
which,
which
is
also
coming
out
of
our
corridor
studies,
the
the
tunnel
road
corridor
study
is
suggesting
that
these
large
parcels
along
the
west
side
are
broken
into
smaller
sites
that
have
connectivity.
P
So
there's
a
lot
of
research
and
analysis.
That's
pointing
to
this
as
the
goal
you
know,
so
I
think
you
can
question
how
how
we're
coming
about
it,
but
it
seems
like
a
reasonable
way
to
incentivize
buildings
and
property
owners
to
choose
to
integrate
that
block
structure
which,
by
the
way,
happens
in
a
way
that
is
indirect,
for
example,
a
sites
like
this.
P
You
have
to
have
drive
aisles
in
and
out
and
around
your
site
anyway.
So
it's
not
that
we
are.
We
are
requiring
something
that
is
completely
not
part
of
existing
sites.
We
are
raising
the
standard
to
some
extent
to
make
sure
that
that
we
have
safe
sites
that
we
allow
for
better
pedestrian
access
and
tree
canopy.
These
are
things
that
the
public
is
is
asking
for,
and
this
seems
like
a
reasonable
way
to
to
bring
in
standards
that
bring
them
about
with
higher
standards,
but
they're,
not.
P
You
know,
for
example,
in
front
of
this
building
that
you're
seeing
here
the
existing.
If
you
want
to
call
it
the
right
of
way,
the
space
that
that
is
required
is
about
30
feet,
so
we
are
asking
for
more
through
the
zoning,
but
it's
a
trade-off
for
meeting
the
goals
that
we're
trying
to
achieve.
C
C
You
know,
I
don't
think
it
happened
as
a
result
of
of
of
an
application
of
zoning
in
a
in
in
a
somewhat
punitive
way,
and
I
guess
my
thinking
would
be
that
a
preferable
approach
would
be
to
incentivize
what
what
we
would
like
to
see
there
and
I'm
not
sure
that
that's
what's
being
proposed
here.
R
Commissioner,
I
could
I
could
probably
respond-
maybe
to
this
somewhat
toddler,
cheney
playing
an
urban
design
director.
You
know,
I
think
that
the
challenge
we're
experiencing
with
these
sites
is
there.
There
probably
is
not
a
carrot,
that's
large
enough
to
actually
get
these
sites
to
redevelop
in
a
way.
That's
consistent
with
the
goals
of
the
comp
comprehensive
plan.
We've
tried
a
lot
of
different
incentives
over
the
years
for
density,
including
you
know:
greater
building
heights,
reduced
parking
requirements
and
many
other
incentives,
and,
quite
frankly,
they
just
they
they
don't
work.
R
They
haven't
really
worked
well
for
us.
Probably,
the
the
best
case
of
an
incentive
based
approach
recently
was
the
adoption
of
the
new
hotel
development
regulations,
where
the
carrot
was
having
a
staff
level
review.
R
R
We
just
held
some
focus
groups
in
the
last
couple
of
days
to
get
some
feedback
on
that,
but
but
we
think
that
that's
one
of
our
best
possible
incentive-based
approaches
that
we
can
offer,
and
that
would
be
that
if
a
development
meets
the
requirements,
the
form
based
code,
it's
a
larger
development
that
would
normally
would
trigger
city
council
review
that
you,
you
would
have
the
option
of
possibly
being
approved
at
a
staff
level
if
you're
able
to
provide
these
additional
community
benefits.
That
would
help
to
mitigate
the
impacts
of
a
larger
development
project.
R
R
We
we
felt
like
we
had
to
use
more
of
a
big
stick
of
pro
which
and
that
there
really
is
not
an
incentive
out
there-
that
we
can
think
of
that
would
cause
these
sites
to
redevelop
in
a
way.
That's
consistent
with
the
comp
plan.
D
Can
you
go
back
to
the
slide
with
the
proposal
on
that
housing
again,
vadilla.
D
I
know
that
the
last
time
well
two
times
ago,
because
last
time
we
really
didn't
have
any
of
the
affected
property
owners
there
at
the
at
the
meeting.
I
know
the
whole
idea
of
the
housing
was
was
a
sticky
sticky
point,
and
obviously
this
is
you
know
changing
it
to
parcels
larger
than
10
acres
is
one
way
to
help
alleviate
that.
D
P
That's
a
good
point.
No,
you
know
my
recollection
is
that
there
was
significant
pushback
on
smaller
sites,
smaller
sites,
meaning
three
four,
five
acres
and
housing,
and
I
think
we've
been
trying
since
the
beginning
to
accommodate
the
concerns
that
that
we've
been
hearing
and
we've
accommodated.
P
You
know
such
that
I,
if,
if
we,
if
we
go
much
further,
we
really
lose
the
intent
of
what
an
urban
center
is.
So
I
I
think
I
could
make
the
case
that
if
we
don't
have
block
structure
that
could
in
time
be
converted
to
and
filled
in,
so
you
have
streets
and
and
and
that
form
then
really
you
don't
you
don't
have
this
urban
form
that
we're
going
for.
I.
E
P
But
it
seemed
that
that
there
was
such
a
concern
about
housing
on
small,
smaller
parcels
that
we
took
this
approach.
If
you
know,
if,
if
some
of
the
representatives.
P
The
issue
wasn't
that
we're
fine
with
housing
if
we
can
start
with
50
000
square
feet,
it
was
just
that
we
have
to
provide
some
housing
and
we
don't
want
to.
O
P
Well,
we
don't
have
limits.
To
I
mean
this
code
has
limits
to
the
size
of
buildings,
but
we
have
some
adjustments
that
allow
for
large
buildings.
So
you
know
you
can
build
very
large
buildings
on
very
large
parcels.
I'm.
P
You
could
build
much
more
on
a
four
acre
parcel.
I
mean,
I
think,
the
the
four
acre
parcel
that
that
we
were
looking
at
or
just
a
few
slides
down
the
this
is,
I
think,
about
four
acres.
You
know
and
it's
what
is
it
craig?
It's
about
fifty
thousand
square
feet,
or
so.
O
D
Just
real
quick
because
I
don't
think
we
clarified
it
from
the
beginning.
We
are
going
to
take
comment,
we're
going
to
do
it
as
public
comment
from
from
the
affected
property
owner.
So
don't
I
I
saw
that
there
was
a
hand
raised
by
mr
justice.
We're
not
ignoring
you,
we're
just
we're
trying
to
do
our
deliberation
so
just
to
let
you
all
guys
know
yeah.
I
definitely
have
a
big
problem
with
with
the
10
acre
change.
D
You
know,
and
these
go
hand
in
hand.
I
mean
what
tony's
talking
about
with
with
the
street
structure,
and
I
and
I
understand
the
developers
and
the
property
owners
issues
with
it
as
well,
but
the
the
merriman
avenue
site
is
a
perfect
example.
The
innsbruck
moss
site
is
a
perfect
example.
I
mean
inspire
mall.
There
is
a
road
you
come
out
of,
chun's
cove.
You
go
across
that
intersection.
That
is
a
road
that
leads
over
to
mineral
springs.
It's
there.
D
Now
it
exists,
it's
called
a
drive
aisle,
but
it's
there
and
so
essentially
creating
that
making
it
full
potential
makes
sense.
It
makes
logical
sense
it
for
drivers
for
pedestrians
for
everyone.
So
I
don't,
I
think,
that's
a
great
thing,
but
it
also
needs
to
be
worked
in
with
this
whole
idea
of
trying
to
create
parcels
that
make
sense,
and
so
we
get
the
housing
and
everything
you
know.
D
If
it's
10
acres
again
charlotte
street
was
166
000
square
feet
on
a
little
over
two
acres,
I
mean
we're
gonna
end
up
with
big
chunk
buildings
that
have
zero
housing
and
we're
gonna
basically
have
the
same
thing
we
do
now.
You
could
build
innsbruck
mall
again
and
and
we're
not
gonna
change.
Anything
we're
not
gonna
have
any
substantial
change
in
what
we're
trying
to
do
with
the
comp
plan
or
towards
those
goals
of
the
comp
plan,
or
even
towards
the
goals
of
the
tunnel
road
corridor
study
for
that
matter.
R
And
commissioner
archibald,
I
can
maybe
respond
a
little
bit
to
that
too.
I
I
definitely
understand
I
understand
you
know
everything
that
you
said
in
those
comments.
I
think
the
again
the
challenge
we're
trying
to
that
we
face
here
is
how
do
we
transition
these
sites
over
time
and
we're
trying
to
do
that
by
through
this
new?
You
know
block
structure
system,
and
at
least
we
don't
want
to
lose
the
opportunity
to
try
to
get
some
housing
on
some
of
these
larger
parcels.
R
One
of
our
goals
here
is
not
to
have
a
code,
that's
so
restrictive
that
none
of
these
sites
will
ever
be
developed
at
all
for
the
next
20
years,
because
there's
so
many
if
there's
too
many
unrealistic
requirements
or
expectations
built
into
the
code,
so
we
we
fit.
We
feel
like
we've.
We've
hit
a
pretty
good
sweet
spot
in
terms
of
meeting
our
goals
of
getting
housing
in
some
of
these
areas.
R
On
these
larger
sites,
getting
the
block
structure
that
we
want,
but
also
including
some
flexibility,
so
that
these
sites
can
naturally
transition
over
time,
and
maybe
we
get
some
developments
in
the
next
10
years.
That
start
to
look
like
what
we
want
them
to
look
like
that
meet
the
goals
of
the
living
actual
plan
and
then
another
10
or
20
years.
After
that,
we
start
to
see
these
sites.
You
know,
evolve
even
even
further
and
that's
kind
of
the
the
approach
that
we
took
to
this
process.
D
Yeah
I
mean
I,
I
completely
understand
it's
definitely,
you
know
it's
a
it's
a
hard
problem
to
try
to
find
solutions
for
I
I
you
know
if,
if
from
the
developer's
standpoint
and
property
owner
standpoint,
the
previous
proposal
was
too
far
towards
you
know
a
big
stick.
I
feel
like
this
is
going
too
far.
The
other
way
like
it's
just
allowing
so
much
leeway
to
to
continue
the
development
that
is
already
on
these
sites.
D
Frankly,
I
just
the
fact
that
the
only
parcel
I
can
think
of
on
the
merriman
in
that
would
be
included
right
now
in
this
phase
in
the
merriman
area
is
the
existing
angles
and,
and
let's
face
it,
that
property
isn't
going
to
get
redeveloped
for
15
or
20
years.
D
There
are
no
other
sites
that
would
have
a
requirement
of
housing,
that's
not
to
say
that
they
couldn't
have
housing,
that
housing
couldn't
be
a
part
of
it,
but
there's
no
requirement
so
there's
really.
No,
they
could
just
continue
to
build
the
same
thing
and
we
wouldn't
see
any,
and
you
know
time
and
again
we
hear
the
community
complain
about
where
housing
gets
located
and
there's
too
much
housing
here
we
know
we
need
more,
we
need
to
diversify.
We
can't
have
it
all
in
south
asheville.
We
can't
have
it
all
out
in
the
county.
D
We
got
to
start
putting
it
in
the
city
on
transit
routes
where
it
matters.
You
know,
I
don't
know
the
best
way
to
go
around
about
this,
but
it
seems
like
you
know
we.
Maybe
we
started
on
too
far
one
way
and
now
we're
going
too
far
the
other
way
and
there's
got
to
be
something
in
the
middle,
because
we've
got
to
get
to
a
point
where,
where
we're
developing
the
city
better-
and
I
don't-
I
just
don't
see
it
with
that
chain-
that
one
change
in
particular
really
really
bothers
me.
F
I've
got
two
thoughts
I
want
to
put
in
here
the
first
ones,
I
guess,
for
my
understanding,
is
for
public
record
these
changes
in
the
developmental
code.
That
applies
if
the
property
owner
is
adding
developing
doing
stuff
to
the
site
going
forward.
These
are
not
going
to
be
punitive.
F
P
Correct,
in
fact,
they
would
have
to
even
reach
a
certain
trigger
that
would
require
them
to
meet
the
new
code.
So,
for
example,
the
screen
that
you're
looking
at
is
that
building
could
be
renovated,
not
meet
the
trigger.
That's
75,
the
value
of
the
building,
and
it
could,
you
know,
put
a
new
tenant
in
there
and
proceed
without
having
to
meet
the
code.
F
P
R
There
are
some
existing.
There
is
an
existing
provision
in
the
udo
that
states
that,
if
a
nearby
development
under
the
same
ownership
is
is
constructed
within
a
certain
time
frame
that
we
all
consider
that
to
be
part
of
the
same
development
mechanism.
That's
already
you
know
in
place
that
could
potentially
you
know
address
that
that
concern.
F
P
I
don't
think
ire,
dress
or
others
did
when
you
mentioned
concern
that
this
is
too
much
of
a
stick.
I
think
in
regards
to
the
street
street
requirements
so,
for
example,
the
image
that
we're
looking
at
here.
You
know
many
of
these
requirements,
the
trees,
the
land
parking
lot
landscaping
would
be
required
under
today's
code.
What
we're
adding
is
industry
and
the
front
building
so.
P
P
C
That
was
definitely
a
concern
I
raised
at
the
last
meeting
that
we
reviewed
this.
I
don't
know
that
I
mentioned
it
earlier,
but
that
being
said
I
mean,
I
think,
there's
there's
certain
aspects
of
that
that
are
required
under
the
current
code.
C
The
the
example
that
comes
to
mind
not
sure
if
it
goes
all
the
way
to
the
public
right
away
or
not,
but
the
example
that
comes
to
mind
is
the
target
development.
C
Where
they
have
a
sidewalk
that
a
cloud
into
the
parking
area
that
may
just
be
for
for
funneling
people
who
have
parked
there-
and
I
can't
recall,
but
the
the
creation
of
a
now
public
right-of-way.
As
I
understand
it,
is
essentially
taking
that
piece
of
property
that
was
was
formally
available
for
development
and
making
it
a
public
right-of-way
correct.
P
Well,
it
doesn't
have
to
be
public,
it
can
be
privately
owned.
I
think
a
way
of
looking
at
it
is
like
the
drive
aisle
in
front
of
any
any
business
or
box
like
the
one
we're
looking
at
today
here
it
is
effectively
a
right-of-way
that
isn't
being
built
on
because
it
provides
for
the
required
access
to
and
through
a
property.
P
So
every
property
has
these,
especially
these
suburban
properties
that
have
a
lot
of
land
and
parking.
Whether
we
want
to
call
those
right-of-ways
or
drive
aisles.
What
we're
proposing
is
that
those
at
least
a
couple
of
those
need
to
be
formalized
so
that
it
it's
rather
than
a
pedestrian
walking
through
a
parking
lot.
P
There
is
a
sidewalk
that
can
direct
people
from
from
the
the
public
street
into
the
property
and
in
front
of
the
business,
and
that
doesn't
seem
like
an
outrageous
edition
for
a
new
code
that
is,
that
is
trying
to
move
in
the
direction
of
urban
and
pedestrian
oriented.
C
P
Well,
any
property
will
have
a
a
private
road
or
a
public
road
going
into
its
site
like
this
site
that
you're
looking
at
it
has
that
drive
aisle
going
into
the
site.
You
know
we,
of
course
it
could
be
developed
on,
but
if
it's
developed
upon,
then
they
need
a
different
access
into
the
property,
so
the
access
is
there,
regardless
of
whether
or
not
we
pass
this
code.
In
fact,
this
property
has,
you
can
see
on
the.
E
P
There's
a
there's
actually
an
access
point
here
and
then
at
the
the
signal.
There's
an
access
point
here.
So
those
are
there,
regardless
of
what
this
code
brings
about.
P
P
If
we
look
at
something
like
biltmore
park,
I
believe
the
road
within
the
project
now
that's
a
completely
different
project
and
I'm
not
I'm
not
trying
to
to
make
it
appear
that
these
sites
will
be
like
that.
That
was
one
property
owner
very
different
scenario.
But
I,
I
think
those
those
streets
are
private
streets
within
that
development
and
they
they
look
and
feel,
look
and
feel
like
public
streets.
C
I
guess
the
areas
that
come
to
mind
to
me
that
we're
sort
of
trying
to
emulate
here
are
areas
like
west
asheville
or
the
river
arts
district
or
the
south
slope,
basically
places
that
have
become
vibrant
and
redeveloped
and
are
somewhat
districts
of
their
own.
C
C
I
just
wonder
if
there's
a
more
incentivized
way
to
do
this,
a
participatory
way
to
do
this,
such
that
you
mentioned
earlier,
you
you
mentioned
research
and
and
so
forth,
and
you
also
mentioned
mentioned
what
what
the
public
wants.
C
I
I
wonder
if,
if
what
the
public
wants,
has
any
impact
or
effect
at
all,
unless
we're
willing,
as
a
community,
to
to
participate
in
the
process.
C
E
P
C
P
Right,
so
you
would
to
me
some
of
the
intent
without
going
as
far
as
as
we're
suggesting
that
you
actually
have
a
sidewalk
in
front
of
the
building.
So
today
you
can
build
a
structure
without
a
sidewalk.
It
needs
to
have
a
public
way
or
a
you
know,
a
way
for
pedestrians
to
get
to
the
public
way,
but
that
doesn't
have
to
be
a
sidewalk
and
and
that's
an
important
distinction
when
we,
when
we've
done
this
analysis.
P
Looking
at
urban
patterns
of
development,
the
sidewalk
is
is
a
key
element
and
it
doesn't
seem
like
a
lot
to
ask
seeing
these
larger
sites
to
integrate
sidewalk
and
street
trees,
which,
which
is
almost
as
far
as
we've
paired
this
back
to
be.
C
C
Why
don't
we
go
ahead
and
open
to
the
it's
not
really
applicant,
but
the
the
folks
that
are
representing
or
the
property
owners
are
the
folks
that
are
representing
the
property
owners
at
7
36.
S
Thank
you,
mr
chairman,
members
of
the
planning
commission.
This
is,
I
appreciate
you
having
this
slide
up
the
video.
If
you'll
keep
this
up,
I
represent
avon
partners,
they're
the
owners
of
this
less
than
four
acre
site
here
that
you
see
on
the
screen.
S
This
property
has
been
zoned
highway
business
now
for
several
decades
and-
and
you
have
to
think
about
what
was
the
intent
of
highway
business,
because
I
think
for
those
several
decades,
no
one
thought
that
the
zoning
was
inappropriate
or
improper,
or
that
the
development
was
out
of
line
with
the
goals
of
that
zoning
district
and
for
highway
business,
as
you
know,
is
described
as
an
area
that
is
addressing
the
needs
of
commercial
development
along
major
thoroughfares
right.
There
is
a
signal
that
commercial
development
is
the
focal
point
of
highway
business.
S
The
other
part
of
the
intent
of
highway
business
was,
it
is
described
as
an
automobile-oriented
development.
S
S
S
S
Now
one
of
the
changes
that
staff
made
that
notice
was
given
to
us
of
the
change
on
august
20th
was
the
idea
of
reducing
the
width
of
a
street,
and
we
greatly
appreciate
the
way
that
was
heading
part
of
our
problem.
Is
we
got
notice
of
that
on
august
20th
and
we
haven't
had
the
sufficient
time
to
sit
down
with
engineers
and
folks
on
our
side
to
do
a
charette.
S
That's
not
much
of
a
sorret,
because
I
still
don't
know
how
these
standards
that
are
being
proposed
for
you
today
will
will
actually
work
in
reality,
because
what
I
understand
of
even
with
the
reduction
of
a
street,
we're
still
talking
about
a
30-foot
right-of-way,
that's
dedicated
for
a
street.
S
S
S
Now
vidalia.
I
think
we'll
admit
that
when
we
were
talking
at
these
conference
calls,
we
brought
up
other
projects
and
we
looked
at
them
to
see
what
these
drive
aisles
reflected
in
terms
of
how
big
they
were,
how
wide
they
were,
how
much
land
did
they
take
up,
and
when
we
were
looking
at
it,
we
were
measuring
out
about
something
in
the
20s
for
these
drivers.
S
Not
sidewalks
not
street
trees,
so
that
is
the
biggest
concern
that
I
have
for
my
avon
partners.
Client
is
right
now,
as
you
look
at
this
screen.
What
is
being
mandated
is
a
big
stick,
that
we
develop
a
street
that
goes
into
the
property,
and
you
have
to
ask
what,
for
what
purpose
is
it
to
increase
mobility
of
cars?
S
S
I
know
that
mr
archibald
had
mentioned
the
size
of
charlotte
street
and
you
have
to
remember
that
site
plan
that
building
occupied
most
of
the
property.
S
S
C
So
I
would
like
to
to
respond
to
a
couple
of
those
comments
and
and
mr
suffolk,
if
you
would
also
that
that's
fine.
One
of
the
comments
that
was
made
was
that
that
that
this
was
originally
developed
as
an
orient.
Oh
excuse
me,
audible,
oriented
community
or
development,
and
I
don't
disagree
with
that.
It
was.
C
But
that
was
a
different
time
and
that-
and
I
think
that
that
we
have
seen
the
error
of
our
ways-
and
we
see
that
that
he
want
the
types
of
development
that
the
that
that
we
have
down
south
at
bill
moore
park,
and
they
want
the
kinds
of
development
that
we
see
happening
all
around
the
country
where,
where
pedestrian
and
bicycle
access
is
being
requested.
C
Just
like
the
the
presentation
that
was
made
earlier
this
evening
about
the
mcdowell
and
biltmore
corridors,
the
the
thought
of
taking
out
a
drive
lane
in
order
to
provide
bicycle
lanes
at
one
time
would
have
just
completely
been
unheard
of,
and
and
now
we're
talking
about
it
and
we're.
C
Looking
at
other
communities
where
it's
been
done
very
successfully
and
those
communities
are
succeeding
as
a
result,
we're
taking
out
railways
in
order
to
provide
greenways
and,
and
so
because
it
would
be
conceived
as
an
automobile
oriented
development
means
that
it
needs
to
stay
that
way.
So
I'm
going
to
disagree
with
you,
after
that.
C
I
think
that
there's
there's
more
than
just
a
sidewalk
burden
created
by
a
right-of-way.
A
right-of-way
typically
includes
public
utilities,
as
well
as
lighting
systems
and
a
lot
of
other
things
that
make
them
become
very
expensive
to
relocate
so
when
and
they're
very
expensive
to
maintain,
which
we
know
across
our
city
as
well
as
across
this
country,
that
that
our
communities
don't
have
enough
money
to
maintain
what
we
have
already.
C
So
the
street
is
a
concern.
In
my
opinion,
the
other
thing
that
goes
along
with
that
is
is
the
real.
The
utility
burden
because,
like
I
said,
utilities
are
typically
loaded.
Excuse
me
located
in
public
rights
of
way
and
when
they're,
not
you
end
up
with.
What's
on
this
site
and
many
other
sites
around,
probably
the
other
sites
that
we're
looking
at
this
evening,
where
you
have
utility
corridors
that
run
across
these
properties
and
it
makes
it
very
expensive
to
redevelop
if
you
have
to
relocate
those
utilities.
C
So
that's
where
I'm
and
in
some
cases
there
is
public
private
cooperation.
I
know
that
msd,
for
example-
and
I
mentioned
this
last
time-
they
have
a
process
where
they
they
contribute
to
the
cost
of
relocating
a
main,
depending
on
the
age
of
that
main,
that's
the
kind
of
incentive
that
I
think,
makes
sense
when
a
piece
of
property
gets
redeveloped,
and
I
think
these
are
like
yeah
these
sites
or
in
or
in
many
cases
anyway,
desperate
need
of
redevelopment.
C
This
one
happens
to
have
one
component:
that's
very
successful
on
the
northeast
corner,
as
of
very
recently
only
within
the
last
year.
If
that
the
rye
knot
has
become
very
successful
there,
so
you
can
see
the
potential
of
what
can
happen
here.
Innsbruck
mall
is
a
nightmare.
It
was
a
nightmare
for
years
until
ingles
bought
the
old
walmart
and
redeveloped.
E
C
And-
and
thankfully
it's
been
very
successful
since
then,
but
you
know
when
was
that
that
was
only
what
10
years
ago,
if
that
12
years
ago,
now
we're
talking
about
applying
a
and
again
I
I
hate
to
fall.
You
keep
falling
back
to
the
carrot,
stick
example,
but
we're
applying
an
overlay
or
a
district
application
that
that
I
would
hate
to
see
it
this.
I
would
hate
to
see
the
outcome
be
the
same
thing
that
you're
trying
to
avoid,
which
is
for
it
to
stall
redevelopment.
C
C
C
So
I
I
don't
know
that
parking
has
any
bearing
on
the
discussion.
Anyway,
we
can
let's,
let's
move
on
to
the
next.
Unless
anybody
else
comment.
If.
P
I
could
respond
quickly
before
I
know
mr
stevens
wants
to
go
just
to
some
of
the
comments.
One
mr
justice
said
the
street
trees
are
not
part
of
the
right
of
way.
That's
incorrect,
the
dimensions
that
I
provided
include
street
trees,
so
that
was
just
the
wrong
statement.
He
said
that
this
site
is
not
large
enough
for
structured
parking.
That's
incorrect,
we
know
it's,
it
can
fit
it's
not
to
say
that
it's
viable,
financially
or
can
work,
but
it
is
large
enough.
It
can
work.
P
We
just
saw
this
from
a
different
project.
The
idea
of
the
this
you
know,
mr
houser,
this
question
about
whether
the
streets
are
are
too
much.
This
example
that
you
see
on
the
screen
here
with
the
the
basically
the
formalized
street
into
the
project.
This
would
be
a
about
about
a
32
moving
lanes
and
a
10-foot
sidewalk
and
the
site
currently
is
exactly
that.
This
is
an
ariel
of
the
site
and
the
dimension
of
effectively
what
is
a
sidewalk.
P
It's
the
back
of
the
parking
to
the
edge
here
is
31
feet.
So,
in
all
cases,
we're
we're
not
necessarily
going
to
have
more
right
away
than
than
what
is
being
provided
today,
although
it'll
be
a
higher
quality.
M
Yeah,
mr
chairman,
members
of
the
commission,
it's
an
honor
to
be
with
you
again
this
evening,
and
I
appreciate
your
patience
through
this
important
discussion.
I'll,
be
brief.
If,
if
I
may
vandela
allow
me
to
share
my
screen,
yeah.
M
Okay,
I
I
want
the
the
realities
of
some
of
these
sites.
You
should
be
seeing
on
your
screen
the
fresh
market,
merriman
avenue.
Now
I
don't.
I
represent
ingles
markets.
I
don't
represent
this
particular
property
owner,
but
you
can
see
on
this
google
earth
image.
The
width
of
the
current
drive
aisle
is
just
23.17
feet.
M
So,
under
the
original
plan
that
the
city
put
forward,
they
were
going
to
require
that
these
buildings
be
moved
up
to
merriman
avenue.
As
we
discussed
at
the
last
meeting.
We
know
that
would
not
work
because
of
a
storm
drain
that
runs
underneath
that
parking
lot
and
has
opened
up
with
sinkholes
on
multiple
occasions
the
msd
line,
the
water
line
and
so
forth.
So
they
said,
okay,
well
we're
going
to
require
that
you
build
a
street.
M
M
M
Three
feet
where
ingles
would
rebuild
that
store
on
maryland,
so
instead
to
comply
with
this
stick
of
an
ordinance,
they
would
be
required
to
build
a
brand
new
super
wide,
almost
twice
as
wide
road.
Why
you
don't
need
a
road?
It
works.
Fine,
so
is
ingles
going
to
do
that,
probably
not!
They
will
pass
together
that
building
for
the
first
night
I'll
make
sure,
and
that
is
a
different
one.
I
also
represent
the
the
bpg
family
holdings
group,
that
is,
the
patent
family
that
owns
harry's
on
the
hill
you're.
M
Or
another
shops
are
located
now,
if
avenue.
When
we
experienced
the
heavy
rains
just
two
weeks
ago,
you
would
have
seen
a
third
of
this
parking
lot
was
flooded,
which
would
render
moving
those
buildings
to
the
street
functionally
impossible.
Okay,
so
what's
the
alternative,
we
would
take
a
24
foot
wide
dry
vial
that
functions
just
fine.
We
would
double
it
essentially
to
create
a
new
street.
Why
you
don't
need
a
new
street
in
there
again.
M
You
are
dooming
that
same
patch
together
for
the
foreseeable
future.
That
is
not
what
we
need.
What
do
we
need?
Here's
an
example
of
ingles
latest
project
on
smoky
park.
Road.
What
do
you
see?
You
see
a
brand
new
ingalls.
You
see
an
entire
space.
If
you
were
to
go
out
there,
you
would
see
that's
just
a
grass
open
space
for
up
to
80
000
square
feet
of
new
retail
shops.
You
would
see
retail
on
the
street.
Just
like
the
city
would
like
to
see.
M
You
would
see
street
you
would
see
trees
and
landscaping,
and
if
we
were
to
do
it
now,
you
would
they
would
have
to
comply
with
the
tree
canopy
and
there
would
probably
be
even
more
trees.
You
would
see
a
site
that
works.
M
You
would
see
a
site
that
in
many
ways
meets
the
goals
of
redevelopment
that
I
think
the
city
has
for
us,
because
it
made
economic
sense
to
do,
and
that
was
part
of
a
conditional
zoning
process.
There
was
considerable
negotiation
with
city
staff
and
also
with
city
council,
and
I
would
submit
that
is
a
much
much
much.
M
What
we
want
is
to
have
a
collaborative
process
with
property
owners
like
ingles,
so
that
we
can
come
up
with
sites
that
make
sense
for
everyone.
Now
you
don't
see
any
residential,
that's
true!
Ingles
is
not
in
the
business
of
providing
residential.
It
does
not
mean
that
they
might
sell
off
a
parcel
like
they
did
here
to
state
employees,
credit
union
at
some
point
in
the
future.
It
doesn't
mean
that
some
you
know
mr
kassinger
may
come
along
and
say
you
know
to
ingalls
I'd
like
to
buy
a
a
part
of
that
site.
M
I
I
I
could
build
much
more
efficiently
there,
some
multifamily
and
you
know
who
knows
if,
if
that
made
sense
for
ingles,
and
if
it
made
sense
for
mr
kassinger
or
some
other
developer,
then
it
may
happen.
M
I'm
not
suggesting
that
it
would
I'm
just
saying
that's
how
it
works
when
you
allow
property
owners
some
leeway
to
to
do
things
and
you
incentivize
that,
instead
of
beating
them
over
the
head
with
it,
this
is
a
plan
we
submitted
earlier
today
for
the
innsbruck
mall
property
that
ingalls
acquired
just
recently
you'll
see
that
they
intend
to
replace
the
angles.
Current
ingles
store
with
a
new
angle
store.
This
angle
store
will
be
sold
to
another
party
who
will
redevelop
it.
M
They
intend
to
move
the
gas
station
on
that
site
over
to
this
new
location,
create
retail
essentially
on
the
front
side
blocking
the
parking
which
I
think
is
good
you'll
notice.
Sidewalks
throughout
you
won't.
You
will
not
see
50
foot
wide,
46
foot
wide
streets,
but
you'll
see
streets
that
work
and
we
know
they
work
because
in
all
of
the
new
ingalls
shopping
centers
around
town,
they
work.
You
see
the
potential
for
a
three-story
building
of
up
to
105
000
square
feet
on
the
back,
and
you
see
retail
on
this
side.
M
That
is
the
original
ingles.
We
all
remember
that
was
there,
it's
now
a
there's,
a
tenant
in
there
and
eventually
we
hope
that
it
will
continue
to
be
redeveloped.
So
you,
you
see
an
image
that
we
are
prepared
to
have
a
thoughtful
discussion
with
city
council
about
how
to
make
this
better.
If
the
the
sidewalks
aren't
wide
enough,
we'll
make
them
wider.
M
If
the.
If,
if
the
drive
aisle
needs
to
be
a
few
more
feet
wide,
no
problem,
we
can
work
with
you.
It's
it's
a
nice
big
sight.
That
is
the
process
that
we
would
propose.
This
is
what
ingles
proposes
for
the
kmart
site.
If
you
go
to
the
kmart
site
today,
you
will
see
a
boarded-up
building
series
of
buildings
that
folks
are
routinely
trying
to
break
into.
You
would
see
garbage
all
around,
even
though
ingalls
routinely
and
regularly
cleans
it
up.
M
You
would
see
a
blight
on
our
city
that
has
the
potential
to
be
so
much
better,
and
this
is
what
ingles
would
propose
with
retail
along
the
front
on
patton
avenue,
hiding
the
parking.
You
would
see
these
nice
islands,
you
see
nice
sidewalks
throughout,
and
you
see
retail
on
either
side.
You
don't
see
residential,
we
don't
think
this
site
calls
for
residential.
M
Maybe
the
sidewalks
need
to
be
wider,
maybe
some
other
things
need
to
happen,
but
I
would
submit
to
you
that
process
has
been
essentially
halted
for
almost
three
years
as
a
result
of
the
city's
effort
to
impose
a
rezoning.
This
urban
place
free
zoning
that
that
my
client
doesn't
want,
and
I
would
submit
to
you-
there's
not
a
single
property
owner
affected
by
any
of
these
rezonings
that
has
asked
for
this
rezoning.
They
don't
want
it.
M
M
If
the
goal
is
to
encourage
redevelopment
in
new
buildings
and
and
and
more
trees
and
more
sidewalks
and
more
walkability
and
transit
stops,
which,
by
the
way,
both
of
those
proposed
sites
will
include
the
urban
place
urban
center
rezoning
won't
do
it.
You
are
dooming
these
properties
to
their
current
existence
for
the
foreseeable
future,
and
nobody
wants
that.
Thank
you.
M
P
Respond
tony.
G
P
Thank
you.
I
just
have
two
points
to
make
to
respond.
First
of
all,
we
saw
some
examples
like
the
fresh
market
here
that
you're
seeing
on
the
screen-
and
I
just
want
to
highlight
that
that
some
of
these
examples
are
currently
non-compliant.
They
don't
meet
the
current
code.
P
They
were
built
before
the
code
of
97
and
that's
simply
to
say
that
they
under
today's
requirements,
would
have
to
change
and
possibly
wouldn't
be
able
to
to
to
meet
their
current
look
the
way
they
are
designed
today,
for
example,
this
this
building
is
up
against
the
back
of
the
property
there's
no
buffer
between
them
and
the
residential
district,
which
we
normally
require
now
for
commercial
properties.
E
P
If
they
just
met
today's
code,
they
would
have
a
significant
reduction
in
parking
and
they
are
within
a
flood
zone
and-
and
that
is
a
challenge,
but
it's
a
challenge
that
any
zoning
district
that
would
would
be
in
place
regardless
of
any
zoning
district.
P
So
some
of
these
challenges
are,
unfortunately,
part
of
coming
into
compliance
with
current
standards
and
current
expectations
of
the
the
city
and
and
others
have
to
deal
with
the
sites
and
site
constraints
and,
and
they
the
second
point
is:
you
know
we
saw
a
couple
of
images
showing
the
innsbruck
mall
and
the
kmart
site
proposals
and
what
we're
seeing
is
practically
90
000
square
foot,
large
box,
suburban
development
style
with
no
housing,
that
is,
you,
know,
30
larger
than
the
existing
largest
or
typical
standard
of
angles,
which
is
about
70
000
square
feet.
P
So
I
think
one
question
or
consideration
that
we
need
to
think
about
is
is
which
direction
are
we
going
right?
The
comp
plan
highlights
this
desire
for
mixed-use
development
urbanization,
and
what
they
are
proposing
is
a
different
path
that
is
more
suburban
development,
single-use
single-story
structures.
Thank
you.
C
Thank
you
additional
comments
from
developers
or
landowners
representatives
of
landowners.
C
B
B
When
I
was
at
dinner
with
my
my
kids
and
I
got
a
phone
call
that
staff
was
presenting
to
pnz
that
night
without
even
telling
the
property
owners
ever
going,
and
so
that's
how
I
got
introduced
to
this
project.
I've
represented
english
markets
for
27
years
now,
and
I've
been
intimately
involved,
wyatt
and
craig,
and
I
have
for
the
last
34
months
of
this
project.
B
Vidalia
mentions
the
other
forum
based
codes,
you've
done
recently
on
haywood
road
and
river
arcs
he's
right.
Those
are
great
forum
based
coasts,
but
they
don't
mandate
residential.
This
is
the
only
one
that
mandates
residential.
I
don't
know
those
codes
too
well,
but
I
probably
incentivize
residential,
not
mandate
residential.
B
You
know
we,
we
we
don't.
As
white
said,
I've
talked
to
almost
every
property
owner,
that's
involved
in
phase
one
and
two
and
there's
not
one
person
who's
in
favor
of
this.
So
this
is
a
complete
rezoning.
You
know
what
what
I
we.
I
was
part
of
a
focus
group
yesterday
that
the
city
had
on
this
benefits
program
for
the
urban
centers,
and
there
was
a
bunch
of
residential
developers
on
there
and
it
was
interesting
hearing
their
take
on
it.
Their
take
was
why
are
y'all
making
the
commercial
developers
include
residential.
B
So
why
don't
you
make
it
easier
for
us
to
develop
residential?
Why
don't
you
incentivize
us?
Why
don't
you
give
us,
you
know
lower
fees
or
make
it
easier
to
go
to
process
do
residential
because
they
want
to
be
residential.
We
we
are
not
we're
retail
developers
and
that's
just
what
we
do.
You
know
you
could
take
this
and
you
could.
B
You
could
drop
the
rezoning
but
pass
the
code
pass
the
code
and
have
it
as
a
zoning
category
in
the
books
and
if
someone
wanted
to
sell
one
of
these
sites
or
someone
had
a
greenfield
development
or
another
redevelopment
and
wanted
to
use
the
code,
if
it's
that
incentivized
and
that
good
of
a
code,
they
would
use
the
code
to
read
their
properties.
It
was
mentioned
that
the
tunnel
road
corridor
study
suggested
connectivity.
B
I
was
part
of
that
process
and
went
through
the
process,
and
I
pointed
out
to
the
engineers
who
were
hired
from
out
of
town
and
don't
know
our
market
as
well
as
we
natives
do
here.
They
didn't
take
topography
into
consideration
between
properties
so
of
all
the
roads
they
showed
connecting
properties
and
secondary
corridor
was
topography
of
ash
and
they
admitted
that
after
I
brought
it
up.
B
The
benefits
they're
talking
about
entering
in
phase
two
allows
us
not
to
go
to
city
council,
but
really
all
that
saves
is,
is
you
know,
attorney's
fees
and
and
civil
engineer
fees,
which
are
maybe
five
ten
thousand
dollars.
I
spend
to
go
to
city
council
where
to
get
the
point
system
they're
going
to
propose
to
you
guys
in
the
next
meeting
next
month
is
probably
cost
me
between
quarter
million
dollars
three
to
seven
hundred
thousand
dollars
to
do
it.
It's.
O
B
B
Sidewalk
connectivity,
like
everybody,
had
mr
halser
mentioned
biltmore
park,
and
I
don't
know
if
you've
been
out
there
recently,
but
they
they
have
a
lot
of
retail
vacancy.
That
project
has,
as
you
asked
jack
he's
got
two
two
locations
out
there,
probably
7
500
feet
that
still
have
gravel
floors
never
been
occupied.
B
It
just
has
not
been
the
draw
from
a
retail,
it's
a
great
place
to
live
great
place
to
work
great
place
to
eat,
but
the
retail
has
not
worked
out
there
from
from
a
retail
broker
standpoint.
I
don't
think
that's
worked.
Parking
is
essential
for
the
grocery
business
people
have
carts
of
grocery
that
they
haul
out.
You
know
not
not
everybody
can
ride
the
bus
or
their
bike
and
haul
their
groceries
home.
B
So
for
us,
in
the
grocery
parking
is
essential.
I
mean
it
just
has
to
be
the
last
point.
Wyatt
mentioned
that
we
might
sell
the
the
town
road
angles.
No,
we
would
never
sell
it.
We
would
lease
it
out
and
I've
got
some
tenants
already
interested.
We
would
not
lease
that
would
not
sell
that
building
then.
Finally,
yes,
the
fresh
market
center
was
built
in
1963
and
the
town
of
country
center
that
owner
who's
this
they
both
have
owned
them
since
they
were
built,
and
why
should
they
be
forced
to
to
differently?
B
They've
got
an
asset
there
that
they
should
be
able
to
not
feel
like
they
have
a
burden
of
a
zoning
that
inhibits
somebody
from
doing
something
just
what
they've
got
on
the
site
before
this
is.
This
is
not
an
incentive.
This
is
a
hammer,
and
I
wish
you
would
turn
it
down
and
I
wish
city
council
would
drop
it,
but
thanks
for
your
time
tonight,.
C
C
You're
right
so
we'll
open
for
public
comment.
K
C
D
So
I
asked
this
the
previous,
not
the
very
last
time,
but
the
previous
one.
What
happens
if
we,
if
the
city
goes
back
and
says,
presses
pause,
pulls
I
my
understanding
would
be
they
would
have
to
technically
pull
the
rezoning,
thus
allowing
lifting
what
right
now
is
a
moratorium
for
building
on
these
properties,
because
with
the
rezoning
they
can't
move
forward,
at
least
that's
my
understanding,
I'm
sure
janice
and
vedilla
can
correct
me
on
that.
What
what
is
what
are
the
possible
things
or
possible
ramifications
that
I
may
be
missing
if
that
happened.
P
So
if,
if
this
doesn't
move
forward
and
we
pull
pull
this
back,
then
there
is
no
longer
a
any
site,
can
go
ahead
and
apply
for
redevelopment.
So
that
would
be
the
the
effect.
H
D
Now,
that's
not
to
say
that
you
know
I'm
thinking
about
where
what
used
to
be
the
gas
station,
which
is
now
out
of
the
old
stein
mart
on
there
and
that's
obviously
a
smaller
parcel
that
could
be
rebuilt
under
current
zoning
and
not
have
to
do
conditional
zoning,
I'm
sure.
So
there
would
be
some
that
would
not
would
not
have
another
review
other
than
staff
level
review.
Q
Yes,
thank
you.
Can
you
hear
me?
Okay,
yes,
okay.
I
just
wanted
to
go
back
and
talk
about
what
tony
had
brought
up
in
regards
to
parking,
and
I
definitely
support
less
parking,
and
I
agree
with
what
he
said
where
you
know,
if
you
do
build,
less
parking
people
will
figure
out
a
different
way
to
get
there.
There's
a
brand
new
ingalls
by
my
house
on
airport
road
and
I
walk
to
it.
Q
D
Not
I'll
try
to
make
this
my
last
one
I
would
agree,
miss
bubenik.
I
mean
I
applaud,
for
you
know
having
some
proposals
for
those
two
sites,
mr
stevens
and
mr
spake.
I
mean
it's
great,
but
but
those
are
just
that's
15
year
old,
suburban
development
and
that's
the
stuff
we've
got
to
get
away
from
and
that's
what
this
this
zoning
is
trying
to
do.
It
has
flaws.
I
really
do
not
like
this.
You
know
10
acres
to
have
housing
change
at
all,
but
but
we've
got
to
change.
D
Q
Can
I
just
add
one
more
comment
as
well:
please
the
comment
about
it's,
not
okay,
to
kick
out
the
owner
of
the
grocery
store
where
they've
been
since
the
60s,
but
somehow
it's
okay
for
us
to
kick
out
someone
from
their
home
from
an
easement
when
we
decide
to
build
off
of
I-26,
that's
okay,
so
I
just
want
to
you
know
put
that
out
there,
because
why
is
it
okay
for
us
to
do
that?
But
not
somehow
take
this
away?
And
I'm
not
saying
it's
okay
for
us
to
take
that
away.
Q
C
I
happen
to
live
close
enough
to
the
ingalls
in
north
asheville
that
I
can
walk
or
ride
my
bike,
but
not
everybody
does
and
not
everybody's
able
to
so
until
we
change
that
pattern,
which
is
what
this
this
proposal
attempts
to
do.
C
C
I
wasn't
here
at
the
last
meeting,
so
I'm
you
know
not
sure
why
it
got
extended,
but
is,
is
one
more
month
enough
to
make
a
difference
to
make
a
decision.
Is
there
a
charrette
that
can
happen
that
will
make
these
property
owners
comfortable?
C
P
Thank
you.
I'd
just
like
to
make
a
quick
comment.
I've
mentioned
already
that
we've
made
many
many
changes
as
a
result
of
our
conversations
with
some
of
these
representatives
and.
P
Changing
and
reducing
or
eliminating
some
of
the
block
structure
in
the
streets
we
could
argue
would
would
really
undermine
the
whole
initiative.
P
P
So
I
I
think,
we're
concerned
that
if
we
wait
that
we
are
not
that
that
maybe
we
will
never
reach
an
agreement
from
the
other
side
until
ultimately
what
we
we
dissolve.
The
intent
of
the
comprehensive
plan,
which
is
what
we're
trying
to
achieve.
R
German
healthcare-
I
I
think
honestly
we're
probably
at
a
point
we've
held.
We
have
held
a
design
charette,
at
least
one
two
years
ago,
with
with
engineers
and
architects
and
designers
for
for
some
of
these
applicants
and
the
representatives
we've
been
working,
collaborating
for
three
years,
which
is
a
as
we
all
know.
It
is
a
very
long
time.
R
That's
included
many
many
hours
of
conversations
and
meetings
and,
as
I
mentioned,
the
design
character,
I
think
we're
really
at
the
point
where
we
are
asking
for
for
a
vote
from
the
commission,
we're
ready
to
move
on
to
council
with
or
without
a
vote.
At
this
point
from
the
commission
and
at
some
point
three
years
we
have
a
legal
obligation
to
continue
to
move
this
forward.
I
don't
think
at
this
time
one
more
month
will
will
make
any
difference.
T
And
I
would
just
like
to
add
that
I
don't
think
that
we're
setting
up
an
us
versus
them
scenario-
I
I
do
think
we've
worked
with
the
the
property
owners
as
much
as
we
could.
I
think
what
vadilla
is
just
saying
that
it's
we've
come
to
a
point
where
there
doesn't
seem
to
be
any
other
path
forward
without,
as
he
said,
compromising
the
intent
of
the
code.
D
I
move
to
approve
the
rezoning
request
for
phase
one
properties
that
includes
approximately
122
acres
of
property
from
river
regional
business.
Highway
business,
commercial,
industrial
and
office
business
to
urban
place,
form
district
with
the
change
that
the
housing
requirement
kicks
in
on
parcels
of
over
five
acres.
D
P
If
you
can
use
if
this
was
an
oversight,
the
suggested
motion
from
the
text
amendment
includes
the
consistency
statement
and
that's
really
the
same
as.
H
D
Okay,
can
I
just
add
to
the
motion
I
just
made
then
so
picking
that
up
then
find
that
the
proposed
rezoning.
D
Would
be
is
in
the
public
interest
is
consistent
with
the
city's
comprehensive
plan
and
meets
the
development
needs
of
the
community
and
that
the
rezoning
will
encourage
responsible
growth,
increased
mixed-use
development
along
transit
corridors,
improve
urban
design,
make
streets
more
walkable,
comfortable
and
connected
increase
housing
supply
and
encourage
the
development
of
affordable
housing
and
facilitate
development
that
maximizes
public
benefit.
D
H
D
F
O
D
Okay,
let's
see
if
I
can
butcher
this
one
too,
I
moved
to
approve
the
proposed
wording,
amendments
to
chapter
7
of
the
asheville
code
of
ordinances,
with
the
with
the
amendment
that
was
previously
stated
in
the
rezoning
request
that
the
housing
would
be
required
on
parcels
larger
than
five
acres
and
find
that
the
proposed
amendments
are
reasonable
are
in
the
public.
Q
H
L
D
D
H
G
Thank
you
guys.
I've
learned
a
lot
from
you
and
it's
been
a
wonderful
you've
got
staff
you're
incredible.
You
never
cease
to
amaze
me
and
I
will
continue
serving
on
other
things,
so
you
you're
not
done
with
me
yet
so.
R
We
have
the
city,
we
greatly
appreciate
the
amount
of
time
and
hours.
We
know
that
it's
a
tremendous
effort
to
do
this
in
on
your
own
time,
not
paid.
Volunteering
is
a
big
thing
in
the
city.
We
really
appreciate
it,
and
this
just
means
you
can
apply
to
all
the
other
boards
and
commissions
that
are
available.
A
So
I
I
have
to
say
as
well
how
much
I've
appreciated
working
with
you
both
and
I
look
forward
to
working
with
guillermo,
still
and
yeah.
I
hope
that
we
see
you
around
in
lots
of
other
capacities.