►
From YouTube: Downtown 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).
B
Wonderful
good
morning,
everyone
I'm
brian
moffitt,
and
I
would
like
to
welcome
you
to
the
meeting
of
the
november
12
2021
for
the
downtown
commission.
The
actual
downtown
commission
was
created
by
the
city
council
for
the
sustainability
and
continued
development
of
downtown
a
vital
urban
center
of
western
north
carolina's
economic,
cultural
and
visitor
activity.
B
The
downtown
commission
provides
city
council
with
recommendations
on
downtown
policies
and
initiatives.
In
addition,
downtown
commissioners
filled
four
out
of
the
nine
seats
of
the
city's
design
review
committee,
which
reviews
development
projects
within
the
central
business
district,
the
river
arts,
district
and
hotel
projects
outside
of
those
areas.
The
downtown
commission
also
has
the
opportunity
to
provide
input
on
projects
outside
of
the
scope
of
design
review.
B
All
committee
members
and
staff
are
participating
virtually.
We
appreciate
your
patience
as
we
work
through
our
committee
meetings
a
bit
differently
here
a
year
and
a
half
on
we
are
streaming
live
on
our
virtual
engagement
hub,
which
is
accessible
through
the
virtual
engagement
hub
link
on
the
front
page
of
the
city
website,
and
also
linked
on
the
committee
page.
B
B
Please
make
sure
to
mute
your
microphone
if
you're,
not
speaking
when
you
have
a
question
or
would
like
to
speak
unmute,
please
remember
to
mute
your
phone
or
audio
device
after
you
are
done
speaking
and
committee
members,
as
I
call
your
name,
please
say
a
quick
hello,
dane
barriger
hi
there,
I'm
present
franzi
is
not
with
us
this
morning,
andrew.
B
Megan
good
morning
good
morning,
miss
ruth.
F
B
Very
good
and
sage,
our
city
council,
representative,.
B
Very
good,
thank
you
so
to
help
our
audience
along,
I'm
going
to
state
each
section
of
the
agenda
aloud
and
we
will
do
a
vocal
roll
call
for
each
vote
and
committee
members.
You
know
to
raise
your
hand
to
speak
I'll,
do
my
best
to
see
everybody
and
go
from
there
at
this
time.
We
will
do
an
approval
of
minutes.
We,
the
draft
action
minutes,
are
available
as
a
link.
B
If
you
need
to
see
those
if
there
are
any
additions
or
revisions,
please
let
us
know
again
we're
not
doing
a
full
set
of
minutes.
The
the
video
recording
is
available
if
anyone
wants
to
go
back
and
watch
it.
This
is
just
a
draft
of
the
action
items
of
those
minutes
any
revisions,
or
is
there
a
motion
in
a
second
to
accept.
B
Good
I'll,
second,
that
very
good.
We
have
a
motion
and
a
second
so
I'll,
go
through
the
roll
call
dane
accept
andrew
hi,
except
kimberly.
D
B
Thank
you
steven
lee
aye,
robin
aye
geo
aye,
ms
megan
aye
ruth.
B
She's
saying
yes,
I
think
that
we
can
accept
that.
That's
a
very
visual,
yes
and
sage,
if
you're
still
there.
B
And
me
I
yes
very
good,
thank
you,
so
I
do
not
believe
we
have
any
public
comment
at
this
time.
Correct,
no
written
comments
or
voicemails.
Is
that
correct.
B
And,
and
by
the
way
for
the
public
out
there,
we
would
like
to
welcome
miss
dana
back.
We
were
not
able
to
keep
her
away
or
we
drug
her
back.
Something
like
that.
So
welcome
welcome
back
very
much
so
we
we've
got
a
couple
of
new
business
items
and
then
a
couple
of
old
business
items
the
we'll
get
to
the
new
business
items
that
we
have
on
the
agenda:
a
project,
review
development
impact
discussion
for
2123
haywood
and
then
a
discussion
of
open
space
policy
changes,
but
first
for
123
haywood.
B
My
understanding
is
that
we
will
not
be
able
to
review
that
this
morning,
because
the
applicant
has
not
met
one
of
the
administrative
requirements
of
the
unified
development
ordinance
sasha.
Do
you
want
to
explain
that
for
us
a
little
bit
better?
So
the
commission
downtown
commission
understands
thank
you.
A
Sure
thing
so
I
had
received
drawings
and
put
them
in
the
folder
and
had
not
spent
time
analyzing
them.
Frankly,
and
I
was
waiting
on
a
rendering
I
got
it.
I
reminded
the
applicant
that
we
needed
the
rendering
for
the
review.
I
got
it
wednesday,
I
believe,
and
quickly
saw
that
the
project
is
not
meeting
code.
What
what
they
have
a
50
they're
trying
to
turn.
A
This
previously
approved
condominium
project
into
a
small
hotel,
and
this
is
the
first
two
parcels
at
the
eastbound
240
entrance
right
there
on
haywood
street
kind
of
between
the
basilica
and
the
indigo
hotels,
and
they
to
meet
that
requirement.
A
So
essentially,
they
were
asking
for
a
partially
first
floor,
one
story
building
at
the
street,
which
we
don't
allow
you
you
can
do
a
courtyard
or
you
can
do
a
two-story
or
higher
building,
but
you
can't
do
a
one-story
building,
that's
just
not
allowed
so
I've
been
in
conversation
with
them
and
I
don't
it
doesn't
seem
like
they
are
figuring
it
out
quickly,
and
I
thought
I
gave
them
a
little
bit
of
time.
If
you
could
figure
out
this
really
fast.
A
B
Very
good
any
questions
on
that
item.
So
I
think,
since
it's
on
our
agenda,
I
would
like
to
move
to
continue
that
project
review
development
impact
discussion
to
a
meeting
at
which
point
the
applicant
will
be
will
be
ready
or
some
is
that
a
reasonable
option
and.
A
B
B
C
And
if
so,
if
we're
not
ready
to
to,
if
we're
not
ready
to
choose
a
date
without
the
applicant
present
and
knowing
their
timeline,
we
may
just
get
stuck
doing
this
again
and
again,
but
that
that
that's
just
that's
just
my
understanding
of
postponement
rules.
Thank
you
so.
B
Well,
I
guess
we've
considered
it
at
this
point
in
time,
the
applicant's
not
ready
so
we'll
move
we'll
just
keep
moving.
Does
that
make
sense
to
everybody?
Thank
you
andrew.
I
appreciate
that.
So
at
this
time
we
will
move
to
discussion
of
open
space
policy
changes.
Video
is
going
to
walk
through
and
explain
this.
My
understanding
from
being
on
that
task
force,
I
guess,
is
what
that
was
called.
B
I
Thank
you
good
morning,
I'm
vidila
savica
with
planning
and
urban
design
I'll
try
to
get
through
this
relatively
quickly.
So
this
is
the
update
to
the
open
space
regulations
in
the
udo
a
little
bit
of
background
I'll.
Just
let
you
read
this.
The
open
space
has
to
do
with
both
the
human
human
related
open
space
benefits,
as
well
as
the
environmental
benefits
for
trees
and
animals.
I
I
So,
most
recently,
we've
been
convening
with
a
group
of
what
we've
called
the
open
space
task
force
for
about
nine
months
made
up
of
these
different
eight
boards
and
commissions
during
16
meetings,
and
it
was
decided
that
we
go
this
approach,
because
there
was
some
concern
that
we
were
not
incorporating
everybody's
comments
and
thoughts
and
and
their
really
disparate
views.
When
you
look
at
some
of
these,
some
of
the
open
space
needs.
I
So
this
was
our
approach
to
meet
meet
those
various
interests
together
and,
and
we
created
a
consensus-based
process
so
that
we
really
had
to
struggle
through
issues
that
we
came
up
with.
We
couldn't
just
steamroll,
you
know
the
minority
and-
and
that
was
actually
really
good.
We
got
some
great
great
results
here.
I
I'm
highlighting
some
of
the
the
key
results
that
came
out
of
the
open
space
task
force
and
quickly
I'll
just
read
through
some
of
them
open
spaces
now
required
for
industrial
zoning
districts,
property
line
buffers
and
natural
areas
now
require
pedestrian
enhancements.
I
Open
space
is
limited
to
only
fifty
percent
hardscape
we're
requiring
some
strengthened
rad
standards
in
the
in
one
particular
subdistrict
of
the
rad
district,
and
most
important,
for
you
all
to
know
is
that
this,
the
the
open
space
task
force
considered
whether
or
not
to
require
open
space,
which
is
currently
not
a
required
regulation
in
the
downtown,
and
the
idea
was
that
you
know
some
people
wanted
to
require
open
space.
I
I
So
a
key
a
couple
of
things
I
want
to
point
out
specifically
to
the
downtown
that
we
discovered
as
part
of
the
subcommittee
that
we're
actually
still
working
on
are
highlighted
in
next
few
images.
This
is
an
image
of
downtown
and
the
red
lines
are
sidewalks
that
are
eight
feet
wide
or
less,
and
what
we
found
is
that
the
majority
of
sidewalks,
62
percent
in
the
cbd
are
eight
feet
wide
or
less,
which,
which
is
striking
and
that
71
percent
are
below
the
minimum
zoning
standard
of
10
feet.
I
So
this
isn't
necessarily
something
that
we
can
fix
with
landscaping
standards,
but
it's
it's
vital
information
to
help
us
understand,
tree
planting
and
other
things.
This
is
an
image
showing
the
the
same
layer
with
the
trees
the
street
trees
put
over
it,
and
if,
if
I
take
out
the
the
red
lines,
these
are
the
sidewalks
with
eight
feet
that
are
eight
feet
wide
or
wider.
You
can
see
that
most
of
the
trees
are
on
on
those
wider
sidewalks,
which
is
not
surprising.
I
So
that's
the
summary,
for
I
guess
just
the
background
for
why
open
space
is
not
being
recommended
as
a
new
standard
for
the
cbd,
so
you
can.
Probably
most
of
you
can
probably
rest
assured
that
that's
the
decision
you
were
looking
for
now
I'll
talk
through
just
the
key
changes
for
for
any
interest
you
may
have
related
to
you
know
nearby
properties.
I
As
far
as
residential
development
just
wanted
to
paint
the
picture
a
little
bit
of
where
asheville
stands
on
the
very
bottom,
you
have
a
list
of
different
cities.
The
two
on
the
right
are
first
asheville
today,
so
the
the
currently
proposed
code
and
then
on
the
far
right
is
the
proposed
code
and
each
city
has
a
low
and
a
high
threshold
for
open
space,
and
the
first
thing
I
want
to
call
out
is:
is
that
today
we're
we're
significantly
higher
and
that's
really.
I
What
we're
trying
to
do
is
rein
in
the
requirements
for
open
space
to
allow
for
across
the
board
lower
amounts
in
certain
cases.
Excuse
me
and
the
the
second
case.
The
second
point
I
want
to
make
is
that
our
current
high
requirement
for
open
space
acts
as
a
minimum
barrier
for
small-scale,
infill
and
I'll
show
you
an
image
here
to
highlight
that
this
is
an
existing
building
in
actually
outside
of
just
north
out
north
of
downtown
behind
harris,
teeter
and
trader
joe's.
I
I
lived
in
this
building
for
a
little
bit
with
my
wife
and
one
year
old
at
the
time
it's
20
unit,
building
on
a
pretty
small
piece
of
property,
and
it
was
built
before
open
space
regulations.
I
But
if
we
applied
our
current
open
space
regulations,
the
image
on
the
left
shows
you
how
much
open
space
would
be
required
more
than
75,
which
makes
it
you
know
completely
infeasible,
and
so
the
the
amount
that
we're
proposing
in
in
in
most
in
in
all
cases
has
to
do
with
the
parcel
size.
So
it
it
makes
more
sense
and
and
that's
why
it
seems
like
a
significant
decrease
because
it
is,
but
it
was
a
signific
significantly
flawed
code
for
commercial
properties.
I
We
are,
I
guess
the
first
thing
to
see
is
that
many
other
cities
don't
require
open
space
standards
for
commercial
development.
We
do
today
and
we
do
in
the
future
or
as
proposed
you'll
notice
that
there's
a
big
proposed
line
here
for
50
open
space,
which
is
a
little
bit
misleading,
but
it's
our
approach
to
how
to
improve
stormwater.
I
So
what
we're
saying-
and
this
is
a
little
bit
in
in
the
in
the
weeds
so
for
those
of
you
who
who
want
to
can
your
eyes-
can
glaze
over
at
this
point
we're
saying
that
for
large
properties
that
are
one
acre
or
more,
you
have
to
provide
50
open
space,
and
if
you
don't
want
to
do
that,
you
can
simply
provide
stormwater
management
and
that
will
drop
you
to
the
lower
thresholds
of
whatever
category
you
happen
to
be
in.
I
So,
if
you're,
a
multi-family,
you
are
thinking
of
building
a
50
unit
building,
you
would
go
from
the
50
units
to
more
of
a
15
to
20
percent
range.
If
you
were
a
commercial
project
which
is
here
is
written
as
non-residential
you'd
go
from
50
to
5
or
10
percent.
So
it's
a
very
strong
incentive
to
encourage
properties
that
normally
wouldn't
provide
stormwater
to
provide
it.
I
And
it's
it's
instances
like
this,
because
current
regulations,
hamstring
the
city,
because
state
statute
is
very
restrictive
and
if,
if
we
didn't
make
a
creative
ordinance
like
this
sites
like
this
would
never
treat
their
fair
share
of
storm
water,
I
saw
a
hand.
Come
up,
do
you
want.
I
B
J
One
slide:
can
you
go
back
that
one
slide
sure
it
is
something
from
the
presentation
I
got
in
pd,
so
if,
if
multi-family
currently
allows
or
has
no
open
space
requirements,
if
you
do
8
or
less
units-
and
this
one
now
says
8
to
19.-
I'm
wondering
if
it
should
say
9
to
19..
J
I
I
J
I
Yeah,
okay,
so
I
I
think
I
only
have
a
few
more
slides
here.
We
have
another
incentive
in
in
the
open
space
proposal,
which
is
for
good
design,
and
what
we're
saying
is
that
your
open
space
may
be
reduced
by
five
percent
further.
If
you
meet
these
four
conditions
that
the
open
space
has
to
be
mostly
contiguous,
it
has
to
be
a
a
right,
relatively
regular
shape
and
we
have
specific
code
for
that.
I
I
So,
finally,
this
is
the
the
summary
showing
where
we
stand
with
the
current
regulations
compared
to
the
proposed
and
you'll
see
in
some
cases
you
know
it's
a
decrease
in
others.
It's
kind
of
a
limit,
a
limiting
or
a
refining
of
of
regulations.
I
And
then,
finally,
our
next
steps-
we're
we've
been
reviewing
this
with
boards
and
commissions
and
we're
we're
slated
to
go
to
the
planning
and
zoning
commission
on
december
1st
and
then
to
city
council
on
january
11th
and
then
subsequently
in
the
next,
probably
in
early
spring.
We
would
move
forward
on
the
related
landscape
changes
that
are
recommended
as
part
of
the
open
space
task
force,
but
have
have
become
a
separate
creature
on
their
own
moving
on
their
own
I'll.
Take
questions
now
great.
Thank
you.
D
D
I
think,
based
on
us
being
in
the
mountains
and
even
downtown
has
a
lot
of
incline.
I
just
would
like
you
to
come,
maybe
treat
my
understanding
here.
Thank
you
sure.
I
Thanks
so
just
to
clarify
the
the
standard:
isn't
that
the
property
needs
to
be
five
percent
slope
or
less,
but
that
the
open
space
that
you
are
creating
in
order
to
to
have
a
reduced
amount
of
space
and
it's
just
a
small
reduction,
but
that
that
that
open
space
must
be
designed
better
so
that
it
is
more
accessible
to
people.
I
So
it's
just
the
open
space
of
which
75
of
it
must
be
a
finished
5
or
less
so
in
in
most
cases
in
development,
right
they're,
going
to
there's
going
to
be
a
lot
of
grading
and
manipulation
of
land.
So
to
meet
this
benefit,
they
would
have
to
meet
that
slope
and
some
in
some
properties
it
may
be
very
difficult
or
impossible.
That's
why
it's
not
a
requirement,
but
an
incentive.
I
B
Before
I
get
to
ruth,
the
five
percent
is
generally
considered
the
an
accessible
slope.
So
that's
basically
the
limit
for
an
accessible
sidewalk,
at
which
point,
if
you
go
over,
that
you
need
handrails
ruth.
F
Yeah,
I
was
just
wondering,
but
I
saw
something
on
one
of
the
slides
that
basically
said
there
was
no
requirement
for
open
space
on
low-income
housing.
Is
that
correct.
I
I
F
It
does,
but
I
I'm
curious.
I
know
we
need
affordable
housing,
but
we
also
really
need
to
control
storm
water
because
we're
in
the
mountains-
and
I
just
I
think
it's
you
know-
if
there's
a
developer
that
wants
to
build-
and
you
know
most
of
the
affordable
housing
that's
being
built
now-
is
going
into
large
developments.
I'm
wondering
how
that's
going
to
be
worked
out
is
part
of
it
going
to
be
responsible
for
storm
water
and
then
part
of
it,
like
25,
doesn't
have
to
meet
storm
water.
B
Let
me
address
a
couple
things:
real,
quick
and
kimberly.
I
do
see
your
hand
one
again
this
as
regards
our
purview
in
this
commission.
None
of
this
actually
applies
because
the
open
space,
the
city,
the
the
the
downtown
central
district,
is
exempt
from
open
space
requirements.
B
Just
because
we
build
lot
line
the
lot
line
two
we're
not
we're
not
exempting
affordable
housing
from
stormwater
standards.
They
that's
a
state
regulation.
They
still
have
to
meet
stormwater
standards.
There
are
additional
higher
level
of
stormwater
standards
for
quantity,
control
and
quality
control
and
we're
seeing
if
you
meet
these
additional
higher
level
standards.
If
you
exceed
the
the
the
statutory
requirements
and
you
meet
these
higher
standards,
then
in
certain
cases-
and
you
meet
these
other
things,
then
you
can
reduce
your
open
space
requirements.
B
So
affordable
housing
is
not
exempted
from
stormwater
regulations
there.
They
are,
they
don't
have
to
meet
the
higher
standard
in
order
to.
I
I
And
and
right-
and
this
is
also
really
highlighting-
infield
development-
green
fields
you
know
will
have
to
in
any
project-
have
to
meet
stormwater
correct.
So
this
is
the
creative
creative
incentive
we're
making
in
order
to
incentivize.
Where
did
it
go?.
B
B
Okay,
if,
if
it's,
if
you
are
exceeding
you
know,
if
you're
adding
more
than
I
think
the
statute
is
like
five
percent,
more
pervy,
you
know
impervious
and
vis,
then
you
have
to
bring
it
up
to
current
guidelines.
That's
the
standard
that
the
the
state
standard
that
we're
talking
about
regarding
stormwater
kimberly.
I
apologize.
I've
been
ignoring
you
for
too
long.
Please
go
ahead.
D
D
D
G
G
The
standard
is
seven
something
percent
to
get
ram.
So,
while
you're
on
that,
when
you,
when
you
access
the
public
sidewalk
or
the
public
right-of-way,
you,
then
the
the
property
owner
has
to
make
it
accessible,
so
it
it
has
to
conform
to
the
americans
for
disabilities
act.
So
it's
it's!
That's
that's!
D
Yeah,
you
did
okay,
this
particular
project
had
a
very
awkward
way
for
the
public
to
access
that
open
space.
If
you
were
a
person
of
different
ability-
and
so
just
specific
to
this
point,
and
that
using
that
project
as
an
example
that
doesn't
really
actually
create
more
access
and
it
so
I'm
trying
to
figure
out.
B
Let
me
jump
in
I
I
I
think
I
can
can
explain
what
she's
getting
at
so
and
andrew.
I
see
your
hand.
I
apologize.
Let
me
juggle
juggle
these
discussions
here.
So
the
open
space
requirement
has
no
expectation
or
statutory
burden
that
these
open
spaces
must
be
accessible
to
the
public.
B
These
are
not
necessarily
public
spaces
we
would
like
for
them
to
be.
We
would
encourage
them
to
be
that,
but
they're
that
you
know
they
can
make
a
open
space.
That's
an
interior
courtyard
or
something
like
that,
and
I
think
kimberly
you're
talking
about
the
the
project
on
ashland
and
they
had
they
had
this
elevated
area
that
they
were
counting
for
open
space,
but
you
had
to
go
through
the
building
to
get
to
it
and
it
was
kind
of
basically
for
the
residents
only
and
behind
closed
doors.
B
So
I
think
what
kimberly
is
saying
is
that
there
is
a
loophole.
Well,
yeah,
it's
it's!
Basically,
you
know
we're
encouraging
to
build
open
space
and
then
it's
kind
of
a
gated
thing
in
some
cases
and
for
certain
project
types
that
might
be
appropriate
and
for
others
it
might
not.
But
I
I
think
that's
what
you're
getting
at
is,
that
is
that
correct.
D
Yeah
that
that
it
seems
like
this
is
still
a
loophole
in
in
the
spirit
of
it
of
like,
and
I
get
the
private
space
thing,
but
we've
reviewed
projects
where
the
private
space
open
space
was
still
problematic
for
people
with
physical
differences.
So
this
is,
I
don't
know
if
that
layer
got
added
into
this.
I
appreciate
the
presentation
and
and
the
level
of
thought
and
collaboration.
D
B
We
did,
we
did
talk
about
it,
vadilla
remember
I
mean
we
did
talk
about
and
I
don't
think
we
had
the
the
the
legal
you
know.
North
carolina
general
statute
gave
us
the
ability
to
demand
that
they
provide
public
access
to
these
kind
of
open
space.
But
I
couldn't
be
wrong
on
that
and
then
I've
got
to
get
to
andrew.
I
Yeah,
I
think
that's
accurate
and
I
think
like,
like
you
said,
you
know,
this
open
space
could
be
a
rooftop
deck,
that's
only
accessible
or
only
open
to
the
owners
or
inhabitants
of
a
certain
building
in.
In
some
cases,
it
may
be
a
subdivision
of
property
that
the
open
space
is
only
allowed
to
be
used
by
the
the
residents
of
that
subdivision.
I
So
in
some
ways
it's
limited
and
restricted,
or
it
can
be,
at
least
if
we
were
to
specifically
say
regardless
of
whether
or
not
it's
open
to
the
public
that
it
needs
to
meet
ada,
we
would
be
making
it
we'd,
be
raising
the
costs.
I
think
necessarily
because
some
some
sites
would
have
to
put
in
much
more
infrastructure
in
order
to
meet
that
higher
higher
threshold.
D
Well,
very
quickly,
I
want
to
say
postcode,
I
promise
there's
going
to
be
more
ada
needs.
You
know,
so
the
fact
that
we're
not
considering
where
design
needs
to
go
to
accommodate
the
new
reality.
I
think
we're
handicapping,
no
pun
intended
ourselves
to
what
used
to
be.
Thank
you
for
listening.
C
I
So,
okay,
yes,
setbacks
would
mean
that
that
every
setback
is
contiguous.
We
have
a
standard
that
says
that
no
more
than
50
of
open
space
may
be
within
setbacks,
because
we
wouldn't
just
want
somebody
to
say
my
setbacks
are
my
open
space.
I
mean
in
some
cases
it
may
work.
If,
if
the
property
is
big
enough,
but
in
others
it
would
be
a
complete
failure.
I
So
we
want
to
allow
for
that
so
that
if
you
make
an
open
space
close
to
your
your
setback
and
it's
larger
than
your
setback,
you
can
do
that
and
it
and
it
makes
sense,
but
as
far
as
the
specific
language
for
contiguity,
let
me
just
read
it
so.
Well,
it's
somewhat
simple.
It
just
says
at
least
70
of
the
required
open
space
is
contiguous
for
the
benefit.
So
it's
relatively
flexible.
C
B
Sorry,
brian,
did
you
no
no
yeah,
I
was
gonna
say
we.
We
think
we
solved
that
too.
By
saying
it
had
to
be
regular,
rectangular
in
shape,
and
so
that
keeps
if
it's
contiguous
and
rectangular
in
order
to
get
the
five
percent
benefit,
then
that
keeps
it
from
being
this
just
a
perimeter
piece
around
the
parcel.
C
C
I
The
open
space
has
to
be
maintained
in
perpetuity
and
that's
clear
in
the
ordinance,
and
so
you
have
to
submit
a
plan
that
is
recorded
and
recorded.
Documents
can
be
approved,
site
plans,
subdivision
plots,
easements
deeds,
but
as
part
of
the
review
and
approval,
it's
going
to
be
on
a
plan,
that's
recorded,
so
that
you
can't
do
that.
C
Okay,
so
then,
like
a
a
deed
search
or
a
real
estate
agent,
who's
going
to
look
at
that
transaction,
be
like
nope
can't
do
it.
Okay,
that's
what
I
was.
That's
that's
what
I
was
just
concerned
about,
like
you
know
what
cool
do
we
get
the
benefit
of
this
ordinance
for
a
year
and
somebody
just
you
know
like
flips
it
so
that
that's
that's
that's
good
and
the
other
question
I
have
is
that
you
know
it
seems
that,
like
to
you
know,
we've
got
such
odd
topography
here.
C
I
feel
like
occasionally
we're
going
to
get
some
weird
results
out
of
the
requirement
and
just
sort
of
exploring
what
those
weird
results
could
be.
Could
I
could
imagine
somebody
having
to
like
sort
of
piece
together
the
right
amount
of
open
space
around
a
parcel
and
sort
of
chip
away
at
neighboring
properties
if
they
could
possibly
put
that
series
of
transactions
together
to
sort
of
build
these
the
open
space
requirements
to
comply
with
this
and
make
the
economics
of
of
site
improvement
work
together,
but
I
don't
know
what
I
don't
know.
C
Maybe
that's
not
necessarily
a
bad
thing.
Maybe
that's.
Maybe
that's.
Maybe
that's
a
good
result,
I'm
just
kind
of
trying
to
perceive
some
unusual,
some
unusual
outcomes
that
we
might
occasionally
get
with
this,
so
that
how
what's
what's
been
the
conversations
and
exploration
of
that.
I
I
guess
I
would
say
that
a
lot
of
projects
accumulate
different
parcels
to
make
their
development
plan
work,
and
so
that's
going
to
happen
regardless
of
open
space
and
and
and
this
standard
is
a
relatively
minor
standard.
As
far
as
the
requirements,
you
know,
they're
going
to
be
trying
to
accumulate
property
in
order
to
meet
their
needs
for
access
for
parking
and
driveways.
Those
are
going
to
play
bigger,
I
think,
bigger
needs
that
will
drive
their
need
for
land
and
accumulation
and
and
this
tweaking
that
you're
suggesting
then
this
will.
J
C
The
I
guess,
the
only
I
know
this
is
kind
of
well
it's
on
its
way.
Now.
The
only
other
thing
I'd
like
to
see
is
an
incentive
for
maintaining
public
accessibility.
I
know
you
probably
can't
require
it,
but
I
I
love
to
see
an
incentive,
so
you
don't
just
get
a
series
of
walled
gardens.
I
B
The
the
the
five
percent
reduction
piece
specifically
encouraged,
seating
and
kind
of
you
know
we
were
envisioning
kind
of
a
hardscape
thing,
so
in
a
commercial
environment.
So
in
a
residential
environment
I
think
you
are
going
to
get
some
for
lack
of
that's
a
good
term.
You
know
a
walled
garden
that
might
not
be
the
worst
thing,
but
but
for
but
for
commercial,
it's
really
encouraging,
basically
public
access
spaces
with
seating
and
that
could
be
used
for
dining
and
and
other
that
that
was
the
intent.
B
I
also
wanted
to
point
out
that,
while
this
does
not
specifically
really
affect
the
the
downtown,
the
central
business
district,
the
tree
requirements
that
the
task
force
agreed
to
implement
will
affect
downtown,
so
the
the
the
whole
purpose,
at
least
as
I
understood
it,
was
that
we
wanted
higher
quality,
open
space
and
higher
quality
canopy,
and
so
to
that
end,
there's
going
to
be
some
additional
requirements
regarding
soil
volume
and
detailing
of
making
sure
that
the
the
types
of
trees
that
we
put
in,
including
in
downtown
that
we
have
sufficient
soil
volume
and
that
they
have
sufficient
protection
like
silver
cells
and
and
other
kind
of
suspended
pavement
systems.
B
I
Great
point,
and
and
we'll
be
coming
back
to
you
or
we
can
come
back
to
you
before
those,
because
they
will
have
significant
impacts
in
some
cases
for
new
projects,
for
example
in
downtown
as
part
of
that
new
project.
They
may
have
to
demolish
a
good
part
or
all
of
the
sidewalk
to
make
the
infrastructure
sufficient
so
that
the
trees
that
are
there
for
the
next
50
years
grow
to
maturity
and
and
are
healthy.
B
And
andrew
to
your
point
of
of
people,
you
know
min
maxin
and
gaming.
The
system
we
had
quite
a
few
designers
on
the
task
force
and
we
tried
it
several
times
and
tried
to
point
out:
hey
guys,
I'm
just
going
to
do
this
by
the
way.
So
I
I
think
I
mean
it's
there's
nothing.
Perfect
gamers
always
break
the
system,
but
you
know,
I
think,
we've
I
think,
we've
looked
at
it
and
I
think
we're
going
to
continue
to
evaluate
how
it
works.
Kimberly.
D
Yeah,
I
just
wanted
to
say
thanks
for
all
of
this
collaborative
work.
I
my
one
concern
and
question:
is
you
know?
Is
there
a
way
to
be
more
ada
inclusive?
Like
I
said,
I
know
that
lots
of
times
design-
and
you
know
architectural
trends-
aren't
always
considering
population
changes
around
ada
needs,
but
there
will
be
a
swell
of
more
ada
requirements
or
needs
from
people
humans.
Because
of
this,
as
we
move
through
the
covid
conditions
and
then
postcovid,
there
will
be
a
lot
of
people
that
are
not
in
the
same
condition.
D
They
were
pre
coven.
So
I'm
wondering
if
and
when
just
in
our
design
process
in
our
review
our
udo
process,
we
could
really
be
more
ada,
inclusive
and
really
stretch
the
limits
here,
because
we're
going
to
be
making
rules
that
then
leave
people
out
and
we're
going
to
be
behind
again
in
three
to
five
years,
and
I
think
I'd
like
to
see
us
be
very
welcoming
to
people
of
all
physicalities
and
be
a
game
changer
in
that
area,
especially
in
a
mountain
town.
So
thank
you.
B
Thank
you.
Let
me
jump
in
there,
real,
quick
just
from
a
architect
that
works
on
these
things.
B
So
the
way
I
advise
my
clients
is
that
the
the
ada
is
a
civil
rights
law
and
we
are
to
provide
reasonable
accommodation
and
so
anytime
I
provide
a
space
on
a
site
or
in
a
building,
I'm
supposed
to
provide
reasonable
accommodation
for
anyone
to
use
that
space
or
or
site,
and
so
we
have
a
obligation
as
designers
to
make
sure
that
we
are
providing
reasonable
accommodation,
equivalent
access
to
each
kind
of
site
from
experience
on
a
site,
and
so
I
think
that's
on
the
design
community,
and
there
is
a
review
component
to
that.
B
D
I
want
to
respectfully
disagree.
I
think,
that's
why
we're
here
on
the
commission
is
to
really
I
recognize
and
appreciate
your
design
community
specific
experience,
but
I
have
lived
experience
and
I
actually
represent
a
large
group
of
people
who
have
lived
experience
with
physical
differences.
So
what
is
on
paper
and
what
ends
up
in
a
building
and
in
a
community
as
regulations
and
following
the
design
guidelines,
isn't
actually
how
it
gets
used
and
functioned
and
says
you
are
welcome
here.
So
I
really
want
to
bridge
that
gap.
D
I
think
working
collaboratively
with
people
that
don't
have
the
initials
behind
their
names
actually
creates
a
more
welcoming
community
and
I
really
really
respect
what
you
do.
I
just
want
also
that
same
consideration
that
lived
experience
and
accessibility
in
a
city
is
very
different
than
what
gets
designed
and
especially
in
our
town,
being
a
mountain
community.
Thank
you
so
much.
Thank
you.
B
K
Yeah,
I
have
two
comments
about
that.
First
of
all,
regarding
the
ada
requirements,
those
are
federal
requirements
and
I
think
it's
highly
unlikely
that
we
would
be
able
to
enforce
anything
that
goes
beyond
what
the
federal
law
requires,
which
are
actually
pretty
stringent.
Already.
K
As
far
as
the
public
access
is
concerned,
I've
lived
in
an
area
like
that.
I'm
thinking
of
the
carolina
apartments
over
on
north
french
broad-
and
we
did
have
a
very
nice
courtyard
if
you
guys
have
ever
driven
by
there,
it's
a
very
nice
space,
it's
very
convenient
for
the
tenants.
K
I'm
not
sure
it's
actually
affordable
housing,
but
it
is
public
interest
projects,
so
it
was
a.
It
was
a
very
good
place
to
live
for.
A
lot
of
you
know,
mixture
of
people,
but
it
was
an
enclosed
courtyard,
even
though
it
was
visible
from
the
street,
and
we
would
not
have
wanted
that
to
be
open
to
the
public
because
we
already
had
a
problem
over
there
with
homeless
people
like
coming
into
our
basement
and
doing
undesirable
things,
and
it
would
have
been
highly
undesirable
to
have
that
be
publicly
accessible.
B
So
let
me
redirect
real
quick
and
then
we
will
move
on
and
talk
about
the
action,
this
actual
ordinance
and
and
go
there.
I
see
your
hand
kimberly,
we
absolutely
can
exceed
the
federal
requirements.
A
universal
design
is
a
higher
standard
than
than
meeting
the
mere
code,
and
I
think
that's
where
kimberly
is
going.
Is
that
there's
a
difference
between
making
something
where
you
can
get
to
it
and
making
it
welcoming?
D
Yeah,
thank
you.
Brian
well
stated
yeah.
Basically,
I
just
want
to
say
I
want
to
keep
in
mind
that
you
know.
Laws
historically
have
been
designed
to
keep
people
out.
So
if
we
keep
it's
important
in
the
work
we
do
is
to
reference
the
boundaries
that
we've
been
given
to
function
in
the
seats
that
we
volunteer
in
at
the
same
time,
if
we
only
always,
you
know,
uphold
the
federal
state
laws
and
we
don't
exceed
them
in
the
way
that
we
treat
people
and
we
welcome
people.
D
B
Are
there
any
other
comments
or
questions
regarding
the
ordinance,
the
revised
open
space
ordinance
as
as
discussed.
B
Okay,
I
would
like
to
submit
a
a
resolution
or
a
letter
that
the
downtown
commission
has
reviewed
this
and
is
in
support
of
it.
That
would
go
to
council.
Is
there
any
first
of
all?
Is
there
any
comment
on
that?
Do
you
think
that's
a
reasonable
thing
to
do,
and
can
we
do
that
andrew
go
ahead.
C
I
I
would
say,
as
long
as
I
do
have
some
questions
about
the
stuff
outside
of
this
cbd,
and
so
I
want
to
make
sure
that
I'm
that
the
letter
that
I'd
be
in
support
of
is
speaking
only
about
our
what's
directly
under
our
purview.
Here.
B
Yeah
that,
thank
you,
andrew
that's,
a
great
clarification.
I
would
say
that
as
a
as
a
member
that
as
the
downtown
commission,
we
we
understand
that
the
central
business
district
is
exempted
from
this
open
space
requirement
and
and
are
therefore,
you
know
in
in
support
of
of
what
we
understand
the
the
open
space
ordinance
will
affect
the
downtown
that
was
kind
of
the
language
I
was
going
to
go
with.
Does
that
make
sense
to
everybody
you
know,
so
we
we
stay
in
our
lane.
B
I
think
is
what
andrew's
saying
you
know
and
and
within
our
lane,
based
on
our
understanding,
and
I
would
also
make
a
caveat
that,
based
on
our
understanding
that
this
is
tied
to.
C
B
Vadilla
does
that
make
sense
what
we're
saying
and
is
that
kind
of
what
what.
B
Okay,
any
any
other
kind
of
questions
or
discussion
on
this
before
I'm
I'm
going
to
make
the
motion,
if
that's
okay
with
everybody,
since
I
think
I
know
what
I
and
I
think
I
know
what
you
are
okay
with
me
saying.
So
I
will
I
will.
B
I
will
move
that
the
downtown
commission
submit
a
letter
to
the
city
council
in
support
of
the
proposed
open
space
amendment
specifically
regarding
the
fact
that
the
open
space
amendment
exempts
the
central
business
district
and
is
tied
to
improvements
on
the
landscaping
requirements
for
street
trees
and
tree
canopy.
B
There's
a
motion:
is
there
a
second
a
second
time
yeah?
Thank
you.
So
if
no
one,
if
there's
no
other
discussion
I'll
just
go
through
and
do
a
roll
call
dane,
I
franz
is
not
here
andrew
hi.
Thank
you.
Kimberly.
D
E
F
J
B
Very
good:
the
motion
passes
I'll
type
up,
a
quick
note
or
I'll
have
to
watch
this
again.
So
I
can
remember
what
I
said
and
we'll
we'll
forward
that
on.
B
Thank
you
so
much
y'all.
If
you
could
just
go
back
and
watch
a
couple
of
these
sessions,
you
would
understand
how
much
work
vanilla
has
been
doing
over
the
past
year
plus
on
this
thing
it
has
truly
been
a
a
tour
de
force,
so
congratulations
and
continue
on
all
right,
good
job.
B
So
our
next
item
of
business
udo.
This
is
old,
business,
udo
changes
regarding
design,
review
committee,
composition
and
then
the
udo
changes
regarding
extended
state,
hote
and
hotel
definitions.
Now
I
think,
shannon
sent
this
out
to
everybody
a
couple
weeks
ago.
Hopefully,
you've
all
had
time
to
review
it
and
I'm
not
sure
who's.
Talking
to
this
one,
I.
A
H
So,
for
the
first
item,
the
change
in
the
composition,
as
you
all
are
aware,
oops
sorry,
I
made
it
clicked
the
wrong
button.
I
apologize
give
me
one
second
here.
H
Well,
we
haven't
had
another
person
volunteer,
we
have
three
of
the
four
seats
filled
currently
and
there's
been
some
question
as
to
whether
or
not
this
is
really
the
best
structure,
both
from
just
a
burden
standpoint
or
a
time
commitment,
standpoint
of
commission
members
and
then
also
just
in
terms
of
helping
to
maintain
diversity
across
the
board.
So
with
most
large
proposals
that
our
department
does,
we
typically
do
like
a
six
month
or
a
nine
month
or
a
one
year
update
as
to
how
this
new
initiative
is
working
out.
H
Our
staff
did
a
six-month
update
at
council
in
september,
and
we
made
a
number
of
recommendations
and
one
of
those
recommendations
was
just
to
tweak
the
membership
section
of
the
new
design
review
committee
to
require
three
members
from
each
of
the
two
commissions,
downtown
commission
and
riverfront
commission,
and
that
those
two
seats
then
would
be
appointed
by
council
at
large
and
sasha
pointed
out
to
me.
That
would
probably
be
good
for
us
to
clarify
that
in
this
code,
which
you
don't
see
it
represented
here,
but
I
will
I
will
do
that
moving
forward.
H
The
ninth
seat
would
continue
to
be
appointed
by
the
committee
members
themselves
and
for
the
the
whoever
right
now
the
downtown
commission
has
four
seats.
Those
seats
will
continue
to
be
filled,
we're
not
proposing
to
revoke
one
of
them
or
anything
like
that.
That
will
whoever
would
be
the
first
to
cycle
off
at
that
time.
We
would
just
start
to
implement
this.
This
new
structure,
assuming
it's
approved
by
council,
so
that's
kind
of
it
in
a
nutshell.
A
I
just
wanted
a
quick
comment,
shannon,
and
I
think
this
is
right.
So
under
this
new
structure,
let's
say
that
somebody
else
from
the
downtown
commission
want
to
be
on
the
design
review
committee.
You
could
apply
for
an
at-large.
A
H
B
B
Forward
to
getting
kicked
off
the
island,
I
think
robin
has
her
hand
up.
E
Yeah,
I
just
wanted
to
say
that
I
think
this
is
a
great
change.
I
think
that
it
was
too
heavily
weighted
towards
the
committees
in
the
first
place,
and
I
think
this
is
gonna
really
help.
H
Yeah
from
a
mechanic
standpoint,
it's
a
very
straightforward
amendment.
So
if
there
aren't
any
other
questions
about
this,
I
can
move
on
to
the
conversation
about
the
extended
stay,
hotel
changes.
H
Dana,
do
you
happen
to
have
those
changes?
I
didn't,
I
didn't
think
to
pull
them
up
no
or.
H
Yeah,
do
you
mind
I'm
gonna,
stop
sharing.
If
you
don't
mind
pulling
that
up,
then
commissioners
can
maybe
see
that
it
might
be
helpful
to
just
see
it
in
front
of
you.
H
So
this
was
another
of
our
recommendations
at
that
with
that
six-month
report,
which
was
to
look
more
carefully
at
the
definitions
of
extended
stay
and
large
and
small
hotels
to
better
reflect
what
to
allow
ex
what
we
consider
sort
of
true
extended
stay
hotels,
which
is
probably
what
most
of
us
think
of
as
like
a
residence
inn
or
a
homestay
suites,
or
something
of
that
nature,
so
not
to
say
that
you
couldn't
do
that,
but
to
try
to
close
the
door
on
the
sort
of
condotel
or
these
conversion
of
existing
buildings,
historic
buildings
that
could
be
condominiums
or
apartments
into
these
extended
stay
sort
of
a
collection
of
short-term
rentals.
H
So
after
discussing
this
with
our
legal
staff,
I
think
where
we
landed
was
that
it
was
best
to
really
focus
on
what
is
operationally
different
between
the
two
land
uses
or
these
two
different
kind
of
lodging
establishments,
and
so
that
resulted
in
these
proposed
changes
to
definitions
so
sasha.
I
think,
if
you
don't
mind
scrolling
down
to
large,
not
that
far
to
the
large
hotel
definition
where's,
that
there
it
is
in
the
middle.
H
So
what
we're
saying
basically,
is
that
a
a
large
hotel
or
a
hotel,
really
one
of
the
defining
features
of
that
hotel
is
that
you
have
this
sort
of
staffed
lobby.
You
know
you've
got
this
on
site,
24,
7
presence
when
you
walk
in
you
check
in
they
give
you
your
key
card.
You
go
up
and
there
are
a
number
of
other
sort
of
built-in
facilities.
Oftentimes
that
you
commonly
found.
H
You
know,
find
a
you
know
an
exercise
room,
a
meeting
room,
a
little
business
area,
maybe
seating
dining
areas,
things
like
that,
so
these
are
sort
of
the
defining
features
and
operationally
having
that
manned
desk.
24
7,
we
think,
is
one
of
the.
What
makes
a
hotel
a
traditional
hotel,
distinct
from
some
of
these
extended
stay
versions.
Some
of
these
condotel
extended
state
versions
that
we've
seen
here
lately
they
might
have
a
lobby,
but
they
don't
necessarily
man
it
24
7.
H
we've
had
one
that
didn't
have
a
lobby
at
all,
and
not
all
of
them
will
also
have
housekeeping
a
lot
of
their
services
are
sort
of
contracted
out.
They
might
contract
with
housekeeping,
or
you
know,
individual
owners
may
do
their
own
housekeeping.
So
it's
it's
a
way
to
kind
of
again
further
distinguish
a
traditional
hotel
from
you
know
this
new
sort
of
condotel
version
that
we
keep
seeing
just
a
quick
note,
you'll
see
also
that
I've
struck
out.
Restaurants
bars
coffee
shops.
H
That
definitely
does
not
mean
that
a
hotel
couldn't
also
have
a
restaurant,
a
bar
or
a
coffee
shop.
It's
just
that
we
already
defined
those
separately
as
separate
land
uses,
so
it
kind
of
muddied
the
definition
a
little
bit
by
including
it
so
they
can
certainly
have
them
as
co-uses
we're
just
going
to
say
if
it's
a
hotel
that
has
a
restaurant
bar,
we're
going
to
say
the
land
uses
for
that
application
are
a
hotel,
a
restaurant
and
a
bar.
H
So
it's
going
to
include
three
land
uses
can
be
basically
a
mixed
use
project,
instead
of
just
a
single
use,
hotel
that's
different
than
like
a
hotel
that
only
offers
like
their
continental
breakfast
to
their
guests.
We
don't
consider
that
a
restaurant,
that's
where
that
dining
area
is
is
covers,
covers
that.
H
So
that
is
the
large
hotel
and
we
feel
that
this
definition
can
include
extended,
stay
hotels.
I
did
speak
with
some
operators
of
extended
state
hotels.
They
felt
that
all
of
the
things
we
described
made
sense
and
that
that
they
wouldn't
have
any
problem
meeting.
This
definition
there
looks
like
kimberly,
has
a
question:
do
we
want
to
take
these?
I'm
I'm
done
with
kind
of
talking
about
large
hotels.
So
maybe
before
I
move
on
to
the
other
definitions,.
D
Thank
you.
So
when
you
say
on-site
is
that
including
virtual,
because
that
is
a
big
thing,
that's
emerging,
so
you
know
we
could
be
doing
this
again
in
a
year
because
there's
an
emergence
of
what's
considered
on-site
being
virtually
on-site
through
a
digital
platform
or
such.
H
H
So,
in
my
conversations
with
hoteliers
of
extended
stay
hotels,
they
said
that,
in
order
to
cover
the
costs
associated
with
your
housekeeping
and
your
lobby
staff
and
your
facility
staff,
you
really
have
a
critical
mass
like
you
have
to
have
at
least
they
said
more
like
anywhere
from
60
to
90
rooms,
depending
on
which
operator
I
spoke
with,
so
that
definitely
took
out
the
small
hotels
that
it
just
wasn't
practical.
H
I
guess
to
think
that
you
would
have
a
24
7
presents
if
you
didn't
have
enough
rooms
to
kind
of
help
cover
the
costs
associated
with
that.
It
also
has
the
effect
of
removing
or
shrinking
the
areas
where
these
hotels
could
go.
But
again,
these
traditional
extended
stay
hotel
operators
didn't
have
any
problem
with
that
because
they
said
they
are
inherently
large
hotels.
They
they
could
never
do
this
with
with
fewer
than
35
rooms.
H
In
fact,
quite
a
few
more
rooms
would
be
needed,
so
they
felt
that
that
that
was
fine
and
again
we're
trying
to
limit
where
or
control
for
these
small
projects
that
could
be
apartments
or
condos
or
the
conversion
of
some
of
the
existing
buildings.
Not
too
many
of
the
existing
building.
Conversions
could
support
more
than
35
rooms
anyway,
so
this
would
help
keep
those
existing
structures
from
being
converted
into
those
condotels
and
yes,
there's
another
question
from
kimberly.
D
Thanks
so
again,
I'm
saying
it
again
because
I
think
it's
just
been
missed
because
of
maybe
the
convert
where
the
conversations
are,
but
there's
a
big
shift
taking
place
in
this
virtual
hospitality,
which
does
mean
that
it
is
possible
for
the
large
hotels
or
any
other
type
of
lodging
facility
to
actually
provide
services
virtually
and
which
also
has
a
whole
situation
with
jobs
and
everything
else.
So
I
do
want
to
just
amplify
that
knowledge
in
the
space.
D
H
H
We
feel
that
for
these
small
sort
of
boutique
hotels,
that
you
know
a
lobby,
that's
only
open
from
10
to
you
know
8
p.m
or
10
p.m.
At
night,
or
something
like
that
that
that's
that's,
perhaps
sufficient
for
these
sort
of
small
boutique
operations.
H
F
Yeah,
I
was
just
curious:
I've
been
doing
lots
of
traveling
recently
and
and
my
husband
and
I
stayed
in
some
small
what
I
would
call
boutique
hotels
and
they
have
less
than
35
rooms,
and
so
I'm
just
wondering
why
you're
leaving
it
at
36
or
less
guest
rooms,
because
I
could
see
someone
go
into
montford
and
buy
three
or
four
large
houses
they
own
all
three
or
all
four,
but
each
of
them
maybe
only
has
10
bedrooms
and
so
they're
coming
underneath
this
requirement.
H
So
the
36
room
came
through
much
discussion
with
the
the
study
and
the
development
of
the
ordinance
that
was
adopted
in
february.
That's
that
was
for
better
for
worse
that
was
sort
of
the
distinguishing
line
between
large
and
small
that
everybody
could
agree
to
to
to
control
what
you're
describing
buying
these
sort
of
large
house
properties
or
some
of
these
other
sort
of
underutilized
properties
and
converting
them
into
small
hotels.
H
That's
going
to
be
controlled
by
the
overlay,
so
just
to
remind
everybody,
you
cannot
have
a
hotel
in
asheville
unless
you're
located
in
one
of
the
overlays
and
so
sasha's
brought
up
the
map.
The
large
hotel
overlay
is
represented
in
blue
and
the
small
hotel
overlay
is
represented
in
orange.
So
if
you're
in
blue,
you
can
do
a
larger
small
hotel
of
any
size.
If
you're
an
orange,
you
can
only
do
a
small
hotel
and
under
these
proposed
changes
you
would
no
longer
be
able
to
do
extended.
H
Stay
hotels
in
this
orange
because
you
are,
by
definition
now
a
large
hotel
so
or
can
only
be
a
large
hotel.
So
you
would
have
to
be
located
in
blue.
So
that's
what
I
mean
is
when
I
said
you
know
we're
further.
Restricting
where
these
you
know,
sort
of
condotel
kind
of
options
could
go
both
by
the
definition,
but
also
by
shrinking
the
overlays,
where
they
could
potentially
be
located
so
and
and
these
overlays
do
not
extend
into
any
residential
areas.
H
B
I
I
I
could
be
wrong,
but
I
think
what
so
I
appreciate
one.
This
has
been
a
ton
of
work
and
again
we
I
I
know
we're
one
of
the
groups
that
ask
for
this
clarification,
because
we've
been
reviewing
projects
that
seem
to
be
trying
to
say.
You
know
we
look
like
a
condo
and
we
want
to
be
reviewed
like
a
condo,
but
we're
going
to
rent
these
things
out
and
we're
like
well.
That
was
not
the
intent,
and
so
I
I
think
that's
what
everybody's
asking
about
so.
B
Could
you
speak
to
what
ruth
is
talking
about?
So
if
I,
if
you
have
a
a
a
a
a
property
that
is
30
units
and
does
not
have
on-site
management,
it's
got
they're
there
20
20
hours
a
day,
but
not
24
or
whatever
it
is.
You
know,
but
it's
not
36
or
more.
It's
30
units,
I'm
thinking
of
the
one
across
from
the
orange
field.
It
seems
like
that
one
was
really
close
to
that
and
they
don't
have
on-site
management,
it's
virtual
or
whatever
kimberly.
What?
What
is
that.
H
B
H
Yeah,
the
small
hotel
definition
says
that
you
have
on-site
supervisory
personnel,
it
doesn't
say
24
7.
and
if
we
add
you
know
say
if
we
take
kimberly's
lead
and
we
add
physical
to
the
definition
of
large
hotel,
where
you
have
physically
on-site
people,
24
7
versus
the
small
boutique
hotel.
H
B
H
H
L
H
But
if
you
think
it's
not
necessary
for
anybody
to
be
there
at
all,
then
we
can
do
that.
That
just
starts
to
feel
more,
like
a
short-term
vacation
rental
to
me,
like,
if
you're
entirely
logging
in
online
and
going
in
and
checking
yourself
in
and
there's
nobody
there
to
help
answer
questions
or
give
you
advice
where
to
go
eat
or
whatever.
B
Okay,
all
right,
let
me
let
I
can't
remember
who
went
first
robin
you
go
ahead
and
then
kimberly.
B
B
Okay,
thank
you,
yeah
all
right,
kimberly.
D
Yeah,
I
was
gonna
say
thank
you
robin
I'm
sorry,
I'm
going
in
the
opposite
direction,
because
I
think
it
should
be
struck
because
I
their
the
contactless
movement
is
not
going
away.
It's
only
increasing
right.
So
the
more
we
say
on-site,
the
more
that's
antiquated
and
actually
leaves
room
for
more
wiggle
room
to
do
to
basically
get
around
the
rules.
So
I'm
all
for
rule
breaking
I'm
all
about
it,
but
my
I
think
I'm
trying
to
figure
out
what
the
spirit
of
this
is.
H
It
it
definitely
is
an
evolving
industry.
Talking
about
hotels
today
is
very
different
than
talking
about
hotels
20
years
ago,
and
the
online
features
like
a
typical
days
inn
you
can
go
and
check
in
and
book
your
room.
You
know
you
used
to
have
to
call
and
book
a
room,
and
now
you
can
just
log
in
and
book
a
room
and
so
a
lot
of
those
online
features.
We
don't
we're
not
trying
to
control
that
right.
H
We're
saying
you
can
definitely
book
your
room
and
maybe
even
check
in,
but
that
we
just
felt
that
it
was
important
from
an
operational
standpoint
that
hotels
where
you
have
a
congregation
of
people
who
are
not
familiar
with
the
town
who
are
not
familiar
with
their
surroundings,
that
there
is
somebody
responsible
on
site,
whether
that's
there's
a
problem
with
the
lock
on
the
door.
It's
not
working
properly
like
from
whether
it's
a
safety
stamp
issue
or
a
just
a
hospitality
feature.
You
know
that
is
typical
of
a
hotel.
H
We
just
thought
that
that
was
important
again,
not
necessarily
24
7,
because
it
is
a
smaller
operation.
But
so
it's
a
good
conversation.
We
can
certainly
reflect
the
different
thoughts
in
the
staff
report,
moving
forward
to
the
planning
zoning
commission-
and
just
you
know-
maybe
let
them
wrestle
with
it
a
little
bit
and
make
a
recommendation
to
city
council
and.
D
I
just
want
to
rebut
what
you're
saying
in
a
way
that
brings
in
what
ruth
said
is
you
know
there
are
lots
of
llc
like
there
are,
you
know,
say
three
people
who
have
seven
out
different
llc's
buying
up
in
opportunity
zones
adjacent
to
downtown,
I'm
just
going
to
break
it
down
and
keep
it
super
real
right.
So
in
that
situation
it
appears
that
it
is
one
entity
functioning
as
a
small
hotel,
but
in
truth
it
is,
you
know,
38
units
spread
across
an
opportunity
zone.
D
That's
adjacent
to
downtown
to
actually
create
the
benefit
of
what
a
hotel
would
get.
So
I'm
not
here
to
like
you,
know,
get
into
the
weed
so
to
speak,
but
I
do
want
to
amplify
since
we're
having
the
conversation
that
there
are
strategic
work
arounds
that
are
happening
that
that
I
don't
know
these
definitions
I
feel
like
are
helpful,
but
they
don't
get
to
the
heart
of
the
intent
and
what
I'm
trying
to
accomplish.
I
know
you
are
as
well.
I
know
we're
all
doing
that.
H
H
Having
the
those
condo
tell
models
where
you
have
multiple
owners,
and
I
know
this
isn't
exactly
what
ms
hunter
is
getting
at,
but
but
I
that
it
sparked
that,
in
my
mind,
that
I
probably
should
have
clarified
for
you
all
earlier
is
that
we
can't
control
ownership.
So
we
can't
use
that
as
sort
of
one
of
the
distinguishing
or
defining
features.
E
Yeah,
I
think
that
the
the
on-site
for
me
I
mean,
I
think
the
virtual
check-in
is
a
thing
and
I
think
it's
gonna
gonna
be
a
thing
and
I
I
think
the
thing
about
leaving
the
on-site
in
the
small
hotels
and
not
making
it
24-7
is
important
because
to
me
that
means
that
there
is
someone
who
works
there,
who
manages
the
place
and
makes
it
less
likely
that
it's
just
going
to
be
this
multiple
owner,
condo
situation.
So
that's
why
I
like
the
onsite
and
I
think
the
24
7
is
the
key.
E
I
don't
think
somebody
needs
to
be
there
all
the
time
at
a
reception
desk.
But
that
means
there
is
someone
available
hired
by
someone
to
supervise
things,
but
the
virtual
check-in,
and
all
that
is
definitely
gonna
happen.
So.
G
M
G
In
other
words,
are
we
creating
a
loophole
so
that
people
can
squeeze
in
these
little
places?
Just
because
there's
not
someone
at
the
lobby-
and
I
I
I
kind
of,
if
that's
the
intention
that
commissioner
hunter
is
going
to,
I
agree,
creating
that
that
loophole.
I.
G
H
So
right
now
our
definition
says
you
have
to
have
on-site
supervisory
personnel.
We
just
don't
say
it's
24
7.,
but
we
say
you
have
to
have
on-site
supervisory
personnel,
which
is
why
I
think
these
condo
tells
are
sticking
lobbies
in
their
buildings
and
they
put
somebody
there,
but
they
might
only
be
there
a
couple
hours
a
day.
I
think
the
real
key
to
controlling
these
short-term
vacation
rental
hotels
is
to
one
say
you
can
only
be
a
large
hotel
right,
because
a
lot
of
these
are
small
projects.
They
are
not
over
35
rooms.
H
The
other
is
that
you
can
only
be
located
in
the
blue
overlay,
that's
that
is
like
cutting
in
half
where
they
could
potentially
be
located
and
then
requiring
that
you
have
that
on-site
24-7
for
for
an
extended
stay
version.
So
I
think
if
you
want
to
do
individual
units
and
do
these
condo
tells
that
people
are
bringing
forward
to
you,
we're
restricting
and
limiting
what
they
can
do
under
those
models.
Most
of
those
projects
aren't
going
to
fit
this
current
definition.
H
This
proposed
definition
most
of
those
projects
could
not
move
forward
as
extended
state
hotels.
They
would
either
have
to
change
their
format,
to
be
small
hotels,
so
they're,
not
they
don't
have
kitchens,
they
don't
have
cooking
facilities,
they're,
just
your
typical
hotel
room
or
they
do
an
apartment
development
and
just
make
it
a
residential
unit,
which
is
really
what
we
would
prefer.
B
A
So,
thank
you.
So
I
think
the
key
difference
here
and
several
staff
are
telling
me
like
somebody's
got
to
say
this-
that
I
think
partly
what
I'm
hearing
or
we're
hearing
is
that
there's
a
concern
about
short-term
rentals
outside
of
town,
either
near
downtown
or
in
downtown
they're,
not
allowed
y'all
nowhere,
so
either
you're
a
hotel
or
you're
not
allowed.
So
we're
not
you
know
there
are
people
by
there
are
llc's,
probably
buying
houses
and
running
them
as
collection
of
rooms,
but
they're
illegal.
A
So
I
think,
I'm
not
sure
if
that
was
part
of
the
worry,
but
that
that
really
is
the
thing
like
you
cannot
do
it
unless,
unless
you
were-
and
I
know
shannon
hates
this
term,
but
we
all
understand
it
grandfathered,
it's
not
a
great
term,
but
if
you
were
somehow,
you
are
allowed
at
some
point
way
way
back
and
you've
continued
that
use
you.
You
know
some
people
are
continuing
it,
but
otherwise
we're
not
allowing
those.
It
doesn't
mean
it's
not
happening,
but
they're
illegal.
H
Right,
so
really,
what
we're
doing
is
we're
further
limiting
these
legal.
These
applications
that
you've
seen
these
are
legal
right
today,
and
we
want
to
control
for
that,
because
we
think
that
there's
this
real
estate
that
could
be
housing,
whether
it's
new
construction
or
even
more
concerning,
is
the
conversion
of
existing
units.
H
You
know
into
these
extended
stay
hotels
when
there's
only
six
units,
you
know
that's
a
collection
of
short-term
vacation
rentals,
that's
not
a
hotel!
So
if
you
want
to
be
a
hotel,
be
a
hotel
and
do
all
the
things
that
hotels
do
or
figure
out
something
else.
That's
legal.
K
Well,
first
of
all,
I
agree
with
robin
that
we
want
to
include
the
on-site
staff
for
a
small
hotel
that
actually
makes
it
more
restrictive
in
order
to
be
considered
a
hotel.
As
sasha
said,
you
know,
if
they
don't
have
on-site
staff
and
it's
a
bunch
of
individual
owners
like
the
I'm
thinking
about
the
one,
the
project
across
from
the
orange
peel.
K
You
know
if
they
didn't
have
on-site
staff,
those
would
be
considered
vacation
or
short-term
rentals,
which
would
not
be
allowed,
and
so
in
order
to
be
considered
a
hotel,
we
want
them
to
have
to
require
on-site
staff,
because
that
makes
it
more
restrictive.
If
we
didn't
have
that,
then
it
would
be
less
restrictive,
so
we
we
do
want
to
include
that.
K
But
my
other
question
is
you
know
one
thing:
you
know
we
have
a
lot
of
condos
in
north
carolina
and
in
nashville,
but
another
form
of
ownership,
which
is
common
in
other
cities,
which
we
haven't
really
seen
here
is
co-ops,
which
are
individually
owned.
Do
we
have
anything
regarding
co-ops?
H
We
don't
so
that
is
another
form
of
ownership,
so
that
that
is,
I
think
you
say
co-op.
I
think
other
people
might
know
it
is
like
a
time
share
and
they're.
These
are
different
ways.
You
know,
I
think
again,
we
have
to
focus
on
how
does
it
operate?
Does
it
operate
like
a
hotel
whether
there
are
30
owners
or
does
it
operate
like
a
collection
of
short-term
vacation?
Rentals
sometimes
shares
like
you
see
them
sometimes
in
resorts.
They
definitely
run
more
like
a
hotel.
Others
feel
more
like
condominium
apartment
projects,
so.
K
It
was
just
a
question
because
it
is
something
it's
kind
of
another
exception
to
the
whole
hotel
versus
short-term
rental
thing,
so
we
could
start
seeing
those
pop
up
and
they
don't
have
to
be
time
shares
they
can
be,
but
they
don't
have
to
be.
A
H
Have
to
be
a
hotel,
that's
the
only
form
of
lodging
that
we
allow
in
the
downtown,
so
they
would
have
to
have.
You
know,
regardless
of
what
the
ownership
structure
is.
They'd
have
to
have
that
lobby.
They
would
have
to
have
the
24
7
they'd
have
to
have
in-house
keeping
services
so
have
those
kind
of
features
and
be
large.
B
J
Sure,
just
a
thought
and
question
as
I've
been
talking
more
and
more
about
this,
so
you
know
historically,
and
often
we
refer
to
these
older
hotels
that
converted
to
housing
or
in
the
case
of
the
days
in
you,
know
permanent
supportive
housing
as
good
things.
The
you
know,
vanderbilt
et
cetera,
downtown,
so
there's
that
concept
now
it
almost
sounds
to
me
like
something
I
didn't
catch
early
on
in
the
initial
review
of
this,
that
we're
actually
making
it
more
challenging
to
do
the
extended
stay
hotel
than
to
do
an
actual
hotel
is
what
I'm
sensing.
J
So
I
think
the
intent,
as
I
understood,
was,
let's
get
the
extended
hotel.
This
loophole
to
be
under
the
same
umbrella
as
hotels,
but
I
don't
know
that
it
was
to
make
it
even
harder
than
a
hotel,
and
I
say
that
because
if
our
goal
is
to
eventually
convert
hotels
to
housing
or
if
not
that's
the
goal,
but
that's
a
pleasant
externality
down
the
road,
then
wouldn't
we
want
the
ones
with
kitchens.
So
like
the.
H
H
We're
further
limited,
I
don't
I
mean
we
are
we're:
we're
not
adding
development
requirements
right,
we're
we're
narrowing
the
definition
of
what
is
a
hotel.
So
if
we
are
sort
of
effectively
maybe
making
it
more
difficult
because
we're
saying
you
can
only
be
an
extended
stay
if
you're,
large
and
you're
in
located
in
one
of
these
areas,.
J
H
J
B
J
H
It's
you're
not
incorrect.
I
think-
and
just
one
thing
to
keep
in
mind-
is
that
we're
trying
to
ask
people
so
in
the
version
that
you
describe
where
a
hotel
becomes
housing
down
the
road?
That's
only
going
to
happen
if
that's
under
single
ownership.
H
So
when
you
have
a
building
that
has
30
condominiums,
that's
not
going
to,
probably
you
know,
become
a
vanderbilt
in
the
future
they're
going
to
remain
individually
owned,
and
when
they
have
these
you
know
some
of
them
might
become
housing
but
they're
going
to
be
individually
owned.
So
it's
going
to
be
harder
to.
I
think
see
that
that
change
over
time.
C
I'd
just
like
to
note
that
I,
I
guess
sage,
I
guess
I
just
I'm
a
little
unsure
that,
whether
a
30
year
old
or
50
year
old
kitchen
is
present
in
a
hotel
or
not,
would
change
the
refit
and
redevelopment
standards
it
seems
like
it
would
all
have
to
go
anyway.
So
I'm
not
sure
that
that's
going
to
make
the
difference
and
sort
of
those
long-term
outcomes
with
these
types
of
of
developments.
I'm
thinking
of
you
know
like
the
apartments
above
like
above
malaprops
and
places
like
that.
C
I
I
think
it's
pretty
clear.
They
didn't
have
kitchens,
but
that
didn't
even
stop
the
that
didn't
stop
those
efforts.
So
that's
the
kitchen
aspect
is,
I
think
I
I
think
that
your
fears
are
not,
as
is
as
big,
but
I
mean
tell
me
I'm
wrong.
H
We
did
on
on
that
along
those
lines.
One
thing
we
did
discuss
and
chose
not
to
add
to
the
definition
was
a
size
restriction
so
that
you
could
have
you
know
800
square
foot
suites.
You
know
hotel
suites
that
didn't
have
the
kitchens
that
could
be
converted
in
the
future.
If
that's
what
somebody
wanted
that
flexibility,
one
of
the
hoteliers
we
spoke
with
said
you
know,
the
typical
extended
stay
is
really
only
you
know
four
or
five
hundred
square
feet.
H
J
That's
an
interesting
point
too,
and
you
know
the
other
thing
I
consider,
because
I'm
just
trying
to
weigh
all
the
sides
here
is
that
there's
so
much
pressure
on
the
market
for
these
short
term
rentals
that
are
kind
of
complete
housing
stays.
You
know
we're
watching
the
hotel
industry
not
rebound
as
rapidly
while
the
short-term
rental
market
has
gone
up
significantly
year-over-year.
J
So
I
also
wonder
about
the
sector:
have
these
type
of
coal
units
and
disallowing
them
further?
What
does
that
mean
for
the
pressure
on
neighborhoods
and
stuff
so
just
kind
of
thinking
about
it
holistically?
I
know
I'm
I'm
appreciating
all
of
y'all's
input.
We
have
a
little
bit
of
time
before
this
comes
to
council,
so
great
to
start.
B
I
think
ruth
you
had
your
hand
up.
You
still.
F
You
know
you
mentioned
full
kitchens,
but,
as
I
mentioned
before,
I
took
this
trip
out
west
and
many
of
the
hilton
hotels
that
we
stayed
at
actually
had
an
additional
sink.
That
was
in
the
bedroom
area,
which
was
near
the
keurig
coffee
maker,
which
also
had
a
small
refrigerator
and
a
microwave.
F
So
to
me,
that's
a
kitchen,
and
you
know
how
you
really
define
kitchen:
does
it
really
have
to
have
a
stove
or
as
a
microwave
and
a
convection
oven,
really
considered
a
kitchen?
And
then
you
have
all
these
hotel
rooms
which
are
extended
stay
basically,
because
they've
met
the
requirements
of
having
a
kitchen.
H
So
not
not
to
dismiss
this
point,
but
when
we
start
to
talk
about
kitchens,
it
gets
super
complicated
super
fast,
because
then
we
we
fold
in
considerations
related
to
homestays
and
short-term
vacation
rentals.
So
I
can
tell
you
that
under
today's
rules
for
our
definition
of
a
kitchen
that,
if
you
had
a
sink,
we
would
call
it
a
kitchen
that
is
likely
going
to
change
in
the
future
so
that
it
won't
be
quite
that
limiting.
H
I
I
think
that
we
there
will
be
a
time
that
we
will
cross
this
bridge,
but
I
think,
as
part
of
this
ordinance,
what
we're
trying
to
do
is
really
just
control
for
this
new
construction
or
these
conversions
and
not
not.
H
K
Yeah,
I
agree
with
andrew
that
I
don't
think
the
kitchen
is
really
meaningful.
As
far
as
you
know,
the
definition
of
a
hotel
room
is
concerned,
I'm
thinking
of
like
it's
more
of
an
economic
decision
on
the
for
the
owners
of
the
hotel,
I'm
thinking
of
like
the
windsor
hotel.
You
know
which
is
would
be.
We
would
call
a
small
hotel
under
you
know
the
current
definition
and
they
did
include
full
kitchens
in
those
with
the
idea
that
they
could
long-term
be
con
convert
into
residence,
and
so
that
was
a
decision
that
they
made.
K
You
know
for
with
a
long-term
investment
point
of
view,
so
I
don't
think
that's
going
to
have
any
effect
on
what
happens
with
these
hotels.
You
know
the
four
I'm
just
pointing
out
the
four
affordable
housing
buildings
that
we
have
in
downtown
all
were
originally
hotels
and
they
were
successfully
converted
into
you
know,
affordable
housing.
So
I
mean,
I
don't
think
that's
really
a
relevant
matter
for
this
particular
discussion.
B
Very
good
this
has
been
really
good
input.
Thank
you
folks,
for
at
least
helping
me
understand
what's
going
on,
because
I
think
I
understand
it
better
and
I
agree
with
the
on-site
thing
now.
Are
there
any
further
input
that
you'd
like
to
let
shannon
know
as
she
shepherds
this
through
and
shannon?
Do
you
need
something
from
us
specifically?
No.
H
It
was
just
back
yeah,
just
feedback.
If
I
could
indulg
could
I
be
indulged
just
for
a
couple
more
minutes
with
one
more
quick
question,
so
something
that
has
come
up
and
we
chose
just
like
limiting
the
size
of
the
room
we
chose
not
to
do.
There
was
a
question
about
whether
or
not,
as
you
all
know,
hotels
are
the
only
land
use
in
our
downtown
that
are
required
to
have
parking
off
street
parking
and
there's
been
a
question
as
to
whether
or
not
that
parking
needs
to
be
on
site.
H
So
we
do
notice
that
with
conversions
of
existing
buildings
into
extended
stays
that
they're
not
putting
parking
on
site
because
they
weren't
designed
that
way,
originally
so
they're
having
to
find
parking
somewhere
else
or
convert
some
part
of
a
little
alley.
It
would
be.
It
would
be
further
limiting
if
we
did-
and
I
didn't
know
if
that
was
important
or
not,
we
chose
not
to
include
it
at
least
in
this
round,
but
I'm
just
curious
what
you
all
think.
C
I
I
think
that
parking
should
absolutely
be
on
site
and
I
would
say:
there's
there
should
be
no
exceptions
built
in
to
code.
C
If
they
want
an
exception,
they
can
go
to
council
and
ask
for
one
just
because
if
we're
talking
about
stressing
other
public
amenities,
if
tourism
stressing
other
public
amenities
like
on
street
parking
like
existing
public
parking
garages
like
just
creating
circling
traffic
looking
for
parking
or
creating
weird
valet
situations
like
flatiron
and
the
and
then
the
others
parking
spot,
I
think
we
want
to
avoid
all
that
stuff
and
if
they
can't,
if
they
can't
figure
out
how
to
put
it
on
on
site,
then
they
don't
get
to
have
it.
G
My
concern
was,
I
don't
think
we
want
to
incentivize
keeping
open.
You
know
parking
lots,
you
know
just
random
so
just
to
to
eliminate
surface
parking
lots.
That's
my
my
only
concern
I
I
I
would
not
want
to
incentivize
that
so
keeping
it
keeping
parking
associated
with
immediately
associated
with
building
is
what
I
would
encourage.
C
Yeah,
I'm
just
going
to
jump
back
and
follow
up
with
guillot.
I
don't
think
that
the
I
don't
think
that
the
land
value
economics
are
going
to
lead
to
any
surface
parking
in
downtown
at
all.
So
that's
so
I
don't
think
that
we're
going
to
if
we
require
parking,
I
don't
think
it's
going
to
turn
into
surface
parking.
It
requires
it's
going
to
turn
into
underground
parking
or
within
the
structure.
There's
I
don't
think
there's
any
way
that,
with
the
land
values
downtown
you're
going
to
have
to
see
any
further
surface
parking,
construction.
B
G
B
B
You
know
we
do
it
a
lot,
but
what
you're
saying
you
know
downtown's
a
different
kind
of
animal
for
for
for
that,
and
we
just
have
to
be
cognizant
that
this
is
that
this
hotel
district
is
not
just
out
affecting
downtown
you're
saying
you
wouldn't
allow
them
to
do
on
off-site
parking
in
the
village,
for
example,
unless
it
was
part
of
a
cz.
B
B
C
Either
way,
but
I
but
there's
always
that
cz
potential
in
there,
I
would
hate
to
try
to
have
all
those
potential
interesting,
unique
negotiations
that
could
happen
down
the
road
circumvented,
because
we
put
something
in
the
udo
that
that
didn't
get
us.
There
didn't
give
us
those
opportunities.
B
Okay,
so
so
you're
saying
it'd
be
okay,
but
it
would
need
to
be
part
of
a
cz
process,
which
I
think
is
what
shannon
was
asking
and
and
I'm
in
agreement
with
that.
You
know
if
you
want
to
do
that,
that's
a
cz,
okay,
there
was
another
hand
and
I
lost
it.
Didn't
I
somebody
else?
Okay,
that
was
good
any.
B
All
right,
I'm
going
to
try
to
get
us
out
of
here
y'all.
We
had
several
more
things
to
talk
about,
updates
and
reports.
Let's
go
through
our
committee
reports,
but
then
I
want
to
get
to
the
commission
openings
and
the
our
our
priorities
and
planning
that
we've
got
coming
up
so
stephen
lee.
Can
you
give
a
quick
design
review
committee
report.
M
I
was
not
at
that
last
meeting,
so
I
can't
give
a
report.
It's
two
projects
that
were
already
reviewed
by
the
downtown
commission
and
they
were
continuing
for
another
level
of
review,
so
sasha
you
may
have
more.
You
would
like
to
add
to
that
or
brian
or
kimberly
robin
if
y'all
are
in
attendance.
A
Well,
I
think
48
well,
48
south
market
got
continued
for
fenestration
issues
and
then
50
collier
did
get
passed
and
they,
I
think
your
discussion
here
at
the
downtown
commission
in
october
was
super
helpful.
A
So
and
this
coming
meeting
because
of
123
getting
continued,
we
really
just
have
this:
isn't
the
update
but
a
hotel,
that's
outside
of
downtown
that
already
has
been
approved
by
cz.
They
just
want
to
change
the
facade
and
the
materials
and
then
there's
an
informal
review
that
some
of
you
might
be
interested
in.
It's
72
broadway's,
the
old,
create
broadway
site,
but
it's
smaller
site
level.
2
project
has
to
meet
the
small
hotel
standards
so
we'll
see
how
that
goes.
B
Very
good
asheville,
downtown
association.
L
So
that
is
a
a
big
impact
to
downtown
with
road
closures
and
traffic,
so
heads
up
there,
it
will
be
a
shorter
parade,
we're
trying
to
keep
things
distanced
and
separated
a
little
bit
we're
also
having
a
quick
after
party
with
free
photos
with
santa
and
games
and
activities
at
rabbit
rabbits
from
two
to
four
next
saturday
and
then
working
on
planning.
What
I
hope
will
be
a
full
slate
of
events
in
2022..
L
I
think
I've
mentioned
before
at
these
meetings.
Our
survey
that
we
did
that
ended
back.
You
know
end
of
august
and
the
the
primary
issues
that
came
up
in
that
survey
were
public
restrooms
safety
and
cleanliness.
Those
are
the
three
things
that
I
continue
to
hear
about
from
downtown
businesses
a
couple
of
months
later
you
know
we
are
supporting.
There
are,
I
think
everybody
knows
the
city
is
accepting
proposals
for
arpa
funding.
That
deadline
is
monday,
we're
looking
at
putting
in
proposals,
but
also
looking
at
what
proposals
we
can
support.
L
Certainly,
an
internal
request
for
public
restrooms,
the
shared
space
initiative
and
some
other
private
requests
that
we're
hearing
are
are
going
to
be
brought
forth
through
that
process.
So
I
would
encourage
you
all
to
keep
an
eye
on
those
two
to
see
what
you
might
want
to
support
that
benefit
downtown.
This
is
a
huge
opportunity
for
us
to.
You
know,
see
an
influx
of
good
projects
for
downtown,
so
I
hope
that
you
all
will
follow
that
process
along
as
well
and
that's
it
unless
anyone
asks
questions.
B
Do
we
need
to
go
through
the
downtown
update
hit
the
highlights
real,
quick.
J
Yeah
I'll,
probably
let
you
guys
read
through
that.
Let
me
see
megan
mentioned
arpa,
application
deadline
is
monday
and
we
have
an
internal
application
process
as
well
and
again
megan
kind
of
mentioned,
but
we're
proposing
some
public
restroom
facilities
downtown
also
some
resources
to
transition.
J
Some
of
the
outdoor
expansion
initiatives
longer
term
also
an
application
to
support
some
planning
and
investments
in
the
block,
and
I
don't
know
exactly
the
process
of
how
you
know
the
internal
requests
when
I
think
probably
all
the
requests
will
be
available
at
some
point
and
of
course
this
is
going
to
go
to
city
council,
so
we'll
keep
you
guys,
posted
and,
and
I'm
sure
city
council
will
welcome
any
of
your
input.
So
that's
arpa
and
yeah.
J
I
think
if
you
guys
have
any
questions
and
then
I
do
want
to
talk
about,
we
have
it
in
the
next
portion
of
the
agenda.
Some
dates
coming
up
with
vacancies
and
some
some
work
that
we
have
that
we're
planning
to
do
with
you
all.
Do
you
want
me
to
move
on
to
that
or.
F
I
know
you've
been
gone
from
the
city
for
a
month
or
so,
but
I
am
on
the
asheville
business
owner's
email
list
and
they
have
placed
some
more
concern
about
pritchard
park
and
I
was
just
wondering
if
there
was
any
more
update
other
than
the
response,
which
was
we
can't
afford
to
have
police
there
and
they've
basically
refused
to
close
the
park,
and
a
lot
of
people
have
asked
for
the
park
to
be
closed.
So
I
didn't
know
if
you
had
an
update.
J
I
do
have
an
update
and
I
know
megan
received
an
update.
Peggy
wrote
the
interim
director
of
parks
outlined
several
things
that
are
being
done.
I'm
happy
to
just
forward
that
to
you
all,
if
that's
okay
and
I'm
I'm
meeting
with
peggy
today
as
well,
so
I
can.
I
can
give
you
guys
the
updates
that
I
have.
B
Dana,
why
don't
you
move
into
the
future
agenda
items.
J
Okay,
so
hopefully
you
guys
saw
a
calendar,
invite
that
I
just
sent
yesterday
it's
it
says
it's
a
multimodal
commission
meeting,
but
it's
really
a
joint
meeting,
so
it's
december
16th.
I
think
it
starts
at
2
p.m,
and
we've
been
discussing
this.
This
is
a
time
to
get
together
and
review
the
public
space
management
framework
that
we've
been
working
on
for
the
past
couple
years
and
and
get
your
feedback
on
moving
forward
with
that.
So
that
should
be
a
good
session.
J
J
We
do
have
two
vacancies
coming
up
on
the
down
on
the
commission,
commissioner
barger
and
commissioner
sharon
are
rolling
off
of
their
second
term,
so
they're
not
eligible
for
reappointment.
Commissioner
raines
is
eligible
for
reappointment,
but
we
will
have
those
two
openings
and
the
vacancies
were
just
posted
wednesday
and
that
deadline
is
december.
20Th,
so
help
get
the
word
out.
J
If
you
can
and
then
appointments
are
going
to
be
made
january
11th,
and
so
we
also
had
a
little
huddle
this
week
with
chair
and
vice
chair
and
with
kimmy,
to
talk
about
moving
forward
with
our
committee
work
and
moving
forward
to
set
some
goals
to
focus
on
for
the
next
year
or
so.
Of
course
we
have
the
annual
report
coming
up
as
well.
That'll
be
submitted
at
the
end
of
january.
J
So
so
what
I'll
ask
you
to
look
for
is
a
survey
that
we're
going
to
send
you
next
week.
That's
going
to
ask
some
questions
like
what
are
your
top
two
core
competencies
or
skills
that
you
bring
to
the
downtown
commission?
J
Also,
you
know
what
work
are
you
most
proud
of
accomplishing
during
your
time
on
the
commission,
and
this
is
two
prongs,
so
one
we're
going
to
try
to
see
what
we're
missing
when
it
comes
to
reappointments.
J
So
with
that
and
yeah
I
see
some
faces.
We
can
talk
more
about
it,
but
so
we
have
the
special
session
in
december
and
then
we
look
at
after
the
new
appointments
are
made
january
11th
having
a
special
session
after
that
to
to
prioritize
some
goals
for
the
year
ahead,
and
that
would
include
the
new
commissioners,
but
I
think
we
we
may
learn.
We
can
learn
a
lot
during
the
survey
process,
which
will
give
you
guys
pretty
much
the
whole
month
to
fill
out
those
surveys
in
advance
to
the
next
meeting
kimmy.
B
Discussed
mean
it
does
to
me,
I
mean
one
of
the
one
of
the
many
ways
I
I
feel
like
I've
failed.
You
folks
this
year
is
that
we
we
made
our
priorities
and
recommendations
last
year
and
so
there's
what
we
said
was
important
and
then
what
we've
actually
spent
the
most
time
on,
and
it
doesn't
look
to
me
like
those
two
things
quite
match
up.
B
So
maybe
I
did
a
poor
job
in
guiding
us
in
in
picking
our
priorities
and
or
implementing
them
one
of
the
way-
or
maybe
I
failed
in
both
I'm
not
sure,
but
I'd
like
to
do
better
this
year
in
in
making
sure
that
what
we
say
we're
going
to
do
is
what
we're
actually
spending
time
on
and
so
we're
trying
to
come
up
with
ways
to
engage
that
and
then
the
the
subcommittee's
task
force.
B
You
know
making
sure
that
we
get
you
folks
involved
in
the
things
you
actually
want
to
be
involved
in
and
then
and
then
putting
things
together
there
and
and
not
wasting
your
time.
So
I
I
think,
I'm
encapsulating
what
I
remember.
I
had
to
bug
off
of
that
meeting
a
little
a
little
early.
I
wanted
to
apologize
to
ruth
and
kimmy
for
that.
I
had
a
prior
appointment.
I
couldn't
get
out
of
anyway
any
questions
on
kind
of
what
we're
starting
to
talk
about
and
do
so.
B
C
Hey
guys
come
see
the
parade
my
band
is
playing
on
the
zoom
bus,
so
excited
excited
about
being
being
back
for
that
that's
gonna
be
fun,
and
then
the
symphony
is
tomorrow
night
too,
so
like
or
saturd
that
same
saturday
night,
the
first
symphony
back
in
thomas
wolfe,
so
a
little
it's
it's
so
nice
to
see
a
little
bit
of
our
downtown
sort
of
familiarity
and
events
coming
back.
So
nice
awesome.
B
Yes,
very
good:
well
is
there
a
motion
to
adjourn.