►
From YouTube: City Council Work Session – October 27, 2020
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
Good
afternoon,
everyone
welcome
to
the
work
session
of
the
asheville
city
council.
This
is
the
second
work
session
regarding
the
possible
revisions
to
a
hotel
zoning
ordinance
and
we're
going
to
jump
right
into
things.
We
have
our
planning
director
todd,
okala,
chaney
who's,
going
to
walk
us
through
a
presentation
regarding
the
the
different
considerations
with
the
revised
hotel
ordinance.
Take
it
away
todd.
B
B
We
also
reviewed
public
benefits
and
a
table
that
was
created
to
help
incentivize
public
benefits
in
exchange
for
a
staff
level
review
instead
of
a
city
council
conditional
zoning
process.
The
one
outstanding
main
recommendation
that
we
didn't
have
a
chance
to
cover
is
related
to
a
revised
design
review
process
for
hotel
development
next
slide.
Please
so
we're
going
to
focus
on
this
new
recommendation
or
a
recommendation,
rather
that
we
didn't
cover
at
the
last
meeting,
which
again
is
revising
our
current
design,
review
process
for
hotels
and
other
land
use
types
within
the
city
next
slide.
B
B
All
larger
projects
are
reviewed
by
the
riverfront
commission.
Those
two
bodies
have
subcommittees
that
include
designers
and
architects
that
review
projects
to
see
how
it
aligns
with
currently
adopted
design
guidelines
for
those
areas
outside
of
our
historic
districts.
The
downtown
and
riverfront
areas
are
the
only
areas
in
the
city
where
we
have
separate
design
guidelines
that
are
located
in
a
design
manual.
B
We
feel
like
this
would
help
to
strengthen
and
streamline
the
design
review
process
and
allow
those
commissions
to
focus
on
other
priorities
related
to
social
economic
issues
within
those
areas,
for
example,
combining
the
design
review
processes
into
one
single
design
review
board
would
also
apply
administrative
or
staff,
level,
review
and
council
review
and
I'll
talk
about
that
a
little
bit
later
in
the
presentation
next
slide.
Please.
C
Todd
quick
question
the
there
would
be
there
would
remain
continue
to
be
different
design
guidelines
for
downtown
on
the
riverfront
right
you're,
not
also
proposing
to
have
a
common
set
of
design
guidelines
for
both
of
those
places.
B
That's
cr,
that's
correct.
In
general,
we
have
design
guidelines
that
are
very
specific
for
the
downtown
or
central
business.
B
Subsequent
slides
one
question
that
often
comes
up
is
what
is
the
difference
between
development
standards
and
design
guidelines
and
what
would
a
design
review
board
typically
review
so
today,
our
downtown
and
riverfront
commissions
review
design
guidelines
and
projects
to
see
how
they
align
with
those
guidelines.
Those
are
typically
located
within
a
separate
design
manual.
That's
separate
from
our
unified
development,
ordinance
or
otherwise
known
as
our
zoning
code.
B
We
also
have
a
set
of
development
standards
and
operational
standards
for
all
uses
that
are
codified
in
the
city's
unified
development
ordinance
or
our
zoning
code.
Those
development
standards
are
reviewed
by
staff.
So,
when
you
receive
a
psyc
plan,
they're
very
objective
standards
and
requirements
that
have
to
be
met
as
an
example
in
the
left
column
in
the
top
row,
an
example
of
a
development
standard
would
be
that
a
building
has
a
minimum
front
setback
of
five
feet
that
is
required.
B
Moving
over
to
the
right
hand,
side
of
this
table
a
similar
design
guideline
for
the
location
or
siding
of
a
building
would
be
that
buildings
should
be
located
on
the
site
such
that
they
are
open
to
and
relate
to
the
river.
This
is
a
more
subjective
guideline
that
would
be
found
in
a
design
manual
and
the
type
of
guideline
that
would
typically
be
reviewed
by
a
design,
review
body
or
board
or
commission
rather
than
staff,
because
of
the
subjectivity
to
that.
B
We
do
feel
that
as
a
best
practice,
there
are
many
cities
throughout
the
country
and
even
in
north
carolina
that
do
have
separate
design
review
commissions
that
do
review
projects
for
these
more
subjective
type
of
design.
Guidelines
that
we
we
have
a
goal,
though,
with
this
is
to
improve
the
design
of
new
hotels
within
the
city.
B
B
The
height
or
of
structures
structures
should
not
eclipse
or
compete
with
distant
views
and
or
historic
structures,
and
that
would
be
a
way
to
again
improve
the
location
and
height
of
a
building
so
that
it
does
not
negatively
impact
adjacent
buildings
such
as
an
historic
building
in
downtown
or
compete
with
a
distant
view,
and
that
would
be
subject
to
the
review
and
approval
by
this
new
design
review
commission.
B
So
again.
These
are
very
subjective
guidelines,
but
nonetheless,
would
be
up
to
the
responsibility
of
a
new
design
review
body
to
review
that
this
slide
hopefully
answers
some
of
the
questions
from
council
member
smith
related
to
the
makeup
of
the
new
design
review
board
and
its
membership
staff
is
recommending
that
the
new
design
review
board
would
have
nine
members
who
are
residents
of
the
city
and
that
a
majority
of
the
members
shall
have
a
special
interest,
experience
or
training
in
architecture,
historic
preservation,
building,
construction,
landscape
architecture,
urban
planning
or
related
fields.
B
The
intent
of
the
membership-
and
this
recommendation
for
the
makeup
of
the
body
is
that
someone
who
has
a
special
interest
could
serve
on
the
board.
We
have
had
a
lot
of
discussion
at
the
downtown
riverfront
commissions
about
making
sure
that
we're
ensuring
that
this
new
board
is
representative
and
diverse,
it's
representative
of
the
city
and
that
we're
not
excluding
any
any
folks
from
serving
on
the
board.
B
The
other
recommendation
that
staff
has
is
that
the
downtown
riverfront
commissions
that
they
ought
to
designate
one
qualified
member
to
serve
on
the
board.
If
that's
possible.
That
way,
we
would
continue
to
maintain
a
similar
makeup
like
we
have
today
where
we
have
downtown
and
riverfront
representation
on
their
respective
design
review
body
bodies.
B
B
B
So
the
asheville
area,
riverfront
redevelopment
commission
and
the
downtown
commission
today
review
projects
their
larger
projects
in
the
central
business
district
in
the
riverfront
areas
for
design
review
compliance,
and
that
includes
all
uses,
including
hotels,
residential
office
uses,
for
example,
and
then
the
historic
resources
commission
reviews
all
larger
projects
that
are
in
our
one
of
our
four
local
historic
districts.
B
So
again,
the
difference
with
the
design
review
board
is
that
they
would
operate
mainly
for
for
new
projects
in
the
downtown
and
riverfront
areas,
but
for
any
new
hotel
they
would
review
those
hotels
citywide,
whether
they're,
located
in
the
downtown
or
riverfront
area
or
anywhere
else
in
the
city
next
slide.
Please,
and
with
that,
that's
basically
a
general
overview
of
the
new
design
review
process
and
a
good
stopping
point
in
case.
Any
council
members
have
any
questions.
E
B
The
the
new
process
actually
aims
to
get
us
in
the
step,
one
step
direction
closer
toward
having
mandatory
compliance,
but
the
way
we
would
have
that
is
through
this
would
be
an
incentive.
So
if
you
recall,
at
the
october
13th
work
session,
we
reviewed
a
development
process
chart
for
development
review
of
what
the
new
development
review
process
would
look
like.
In
order
for
a
project
to
be
approved
at
the
staff
level,
a
project
has
to
meet
one
of
three
standards
or
criteria
number
one.
B
The
project
has
to
meet
all
the
development
standards
in
our
udo
in
our
zoning
code
number
two:
they
have
to
meet
the
threshold
for
the
point.
The
points
system
for
our
public
benefits
and
number
three.
The
project
would
have
to
get
a
positive
recommendation
from
this
new
design
review
board
and,
and
the
goal
of
that
is
that
we're
trying
to
say
that
a
project
has
to
meet
the
design
guidelines.
B
D
So
todd
would
this:
this
would
not
eliminate
either
the
downtown.
F
Commission
or
the
the
river
redevelopment
commission
right.
B
That's
correct:
this
would
not
replace
those
commissions
they
would
still
operate
today.
Just
the
design
review
functions
of
those
commissions
would
fall
under
this
new
board.
C
B
Sure
so
we
had
a
couple
of
conversations
with
the
downtown
and
riverfront
commissions,
the
downtown
commission,
when
we
first
presented
the
hotel
development
recommendations
to
them.
They
did
not
take
a
specific
vote
on
this
specific
item
for
the
new
design
review
function,
but
they
did
have
a
motion
to
continue
this
process
which
which
we
have,
through
the
extension
of
the
moratorium,
we'd
like
to
go
back
to
that
commission
and
get
some
feedback
if
there's
any
new
guidance
or
recommendations
that
they
have
we'd
like
to
do
that.
B
The
riverfront
commission
also
did
review
review
this
and
they
have
not
supported
the
new
design
review
body
at
this
time
there
are.
There
were
a
lot
of
discussions
about
the
makeup
of
the
of
the
new
design
review
board
and
getting
into
some
of
the
weeds
about
what
that
makeup
would
look
like,
but
another
item
I
should
mention
at
the
downtown
commission
that
was
brought
up
from
a
member
is
that
we
there
was
a
thought
that
we
we
ought
to
improve
our
current
design
guidelines.
B
First,
that
our
downtown
design
guidelines
are
a
decade-old
riverfront
design.
Guidelines
are
old
as
well,
and
there's
been
interest
from
both
the
downtown
riverfront
commissions
to
update
those
design
guidelines
and
that
we
should
strengthen
those
guidelines.
First,
as
I
mentioned,
we
have
drafted
new
design
guidelines
that
would
pertain
just
to
hotels
and
we
think
that
creating
a
new
design
review
board
might
actually
help
to
prioritize,
possibly
updating
design
guidelines
within
the
downtown
riverfront.
B
But
again
I
I
do
understand
that
perspective
from
the
downtown
commission
members
as
well,
about
trying
to
update
our
current
guidelines.
First.
A
A
B
We're
recommending
that
at
least
one
member
from
the
downtown
riverfront
commission,
as
this
would
be
outlined
in
in
the
I
guess,
the
the
bylaws
for
that
commission
that
we
have
at
least
one
member
represent
representing
both
of
those
commissions,
but
it's
possible
also
because
we
have
several
members
that
serve
on
the
subcommittee
of
the
downtown
riverfront
commission
today
that
are
part
of
the
design
review
process.
B
B
A
B
I
should
clarify
that
it
would
follow
our
current
design
review
process
that
that
would
not
change
that
there
would
be
a
set
of
design
guidelines
and
they
would
provide
a
recommendation
to
city
council.
The
the
I
mentioned
that
just
the
quasi-judicial
aspect
of
it
is
that,
in
a
hybrid
sort
of
way
that,
if,
if
that
design
review
board,
gives
a
negative
recommendation,
then
it
it
automatically
triggers
city
council
review.
A
C
Todd
one
suggestion
I
might
have
in
terms
of
getting
particularly
the
riverfront
redevelopment
commission
on
board.
Is
you
know
if,
if
perhaps
it's
two
people
from
each
committee,
each
of
the
existing
commissions,
rather
than
just
one?
I
I
can't
remember
how
many
people
are
on
the
riverfront
redevelopment
design
subcommittee,
but
I
think
it's
what
three
or
four
or
something
like
that.
You
know,
if
I
I
just
you
know
having
having
been
on
that
commission
for
a
while.
C
I
know
that
this
is
a
big
issue
for
them
and
I
can
understand
their
reluctance
to
let
go
of
it,
but
if
they're,
if
they
have
guaranteed
good
representation
on
that
new
commission,
you
know
where
they.
They
feel
confident
that
their
members
that
are
there
are
representing
the
interests
of
the
riverfront
and
and
the
river
current
redevelopment
commission.
C
I
think
that
might
that
might
help
them
to
to
to
support
it,
because
there
are
certainly
a
lot
of
other
members
on
the
commission
itself
that
have
nothing
to
do
with
design
and
and
and
bring
no
expertise
to
that.
To
that
conversation,
so.
G
Thank
you.
I
just
need
a
little
bit
of
clarity,
I'm
just
a
bit
lost,
so
this
new
board
will
look
at
hotel
designs
or
all
all
design
review.
B
The
new
design
review
board
would
review
all
land
use
types.
G
H
B
Downtown
and
riverfront
areas
for
all
lane
use
types
just
in
those
two
areas,
but
outside
of
the
downtown
and
outside
of
the
riverfront
area.
C
B
Okay,
moving
along
the
presentation,
I
thought
it
would
be
helpful
for
us
to
have
some
further
discussion
about
all
the
these
three
major
recommendations
in
their
entirety
and
to
try
to
recap
some
of
the
comments,
questions
and
and
concerns
that
you
all
brought
up
at
the
at
the
last
work
session
on
october.
13Th
next
slide,
please
one
of
the
questions
that
came
up
at
the
october
13th
work
session
was
related
to
the
development
review
process.
B
If
you
recall,
we
reviewed
a
new
development
review
process
flow
chart
where,
if
we
would
first
identify
the
location
of
a
new
hotel,
this
is
only
related
to
hotels.
Now,
we'd
ask
the
question
of
whether
that
hotel
is
located
in
the
new
hotel
overlay
district,
and
if
the
answer
is
yes,
you
go
through
one
process
on
the
left
hand
side
of
the
of
this
chart
and
if
no,
the
answer
is
no,
it's
automatic
council
review.
B
That
also
showed
an
option
to
expand
the
zoning
district,
and
this
was
just
a
it
was
a
detail
in
there,
but
we
left
some
flexibility
at
the
time
that
if
you
had
a
piece
of
property,
that's
located
just
outside
of
the
hotel
overlay,
for
example,
there
was
an
option
that
a
hotelier
could
ask
to
expand
the
overlay
district
into
that
other
parcel.
We've
removed
that
option
to
try
to
simplify
the
development
review
process.
C
Yeah,
so
so
are
we
saying
once
we
set
these
once
we
set
these
boundaries,
then
they're?
They
they
basically
can't
be
tinkered
with,
except
through
a
a
bigger
process.
They
can't
be
tinkered
with
parcel
by
parcel
this.
We
we
would
have
to
say
to
the
staff.
Please
go
back
and
look
at
this
and
look
at
changing
some
of
the
some
of
the
boundaries.
That's
the
only
way
it
could
be
expanded.
B
So
the
under
this
recommended
change
the
the
review
process.
The
applicant
would
be
requesting
to
rezone
their
property
via
conditional
zoning,
so
this
this
would
be
a
site
plan
and
a
rezoning
application
in
one
that
would
come
to
council
or
you
would
review
the
site
plan
along
with
the
rezoning
request.
B
It's
so
it
it
technically
it
wouldn't.
What
we're
recommending
is
that
we
have
a
commercial
expansion
district,
it's
called
so.
The
the
new
zoning
category
would
be
a
commercial
expansion,
conditional
zoning
district
and
again
it's.
It
would
be
a
conditional
zoning
process
which
includes
a
rezoning
of
the
property
and
a
site
plan
and
the
difference
before
the
option
that
we
had
to
actually
expand.
B
But
it
would
only
be
a
rezoning
with
no
site
plan
and
we
thought
that
that
might
be
difficult
for
council
to
make
a
a
decision
based
on
that.
C
D
And
todd
wouldn't.
F
B
That's
true
yeah,
but
that
I
could
see
that
that
change
happening
in
in
the
table
or
or
clarification
you're
right.
If,
in
that
yellow
box,
a
question
would
also
be
right
away
is,
is
the
count?
Is
the
project
underneath
the
council
thresholds
such
as
building
height?
B
F
Just
yeah
I
mean
I
just
think
that
maybe
you
know
putting
that
council
threshold
up
at
the
top
would
be
more
clear.
B
You
a
question:
that's
come
up
on.
Some
of
our
conversations
at
the
riverfront
commission
and
with
the
community
is
whether
we
ought
to
also
have
a
new
council
review
threshold
that
would
place
an
upper
limit
on
the
number
of
hotel
rooms
for
any
particular
project
so
that
the
table
on
the
right
shows
you
a
couple
of
examples
of
what
this
could
look
like.
B
The
the
yellow
highlighted
row
indicates
how
many
hotel
projects
council
would
have
reviewed
if
we
had
a
cap
on
the
limit
on
number
of
hotel
rooms
for
for
any
given
hotel
project.
So,
for
example,
if
we
had
a
hotel
project
with
115
or
more
hotel
rooms,
council
would
have
reviewed
eight
such
projects
over
the
last
10
years.
B
Just
to
give
you
an
idea
of
what
that
might
look
like
on
the
other
end
of
the
table,
a
hotel,
that's
135
or
more
rooms.
Council
would
only
have
reviewed
three
of
such
hotels
over
the
last
10
years.
B
So
again,
just
wanted
to
give
you
some
examples
that,
if,
if
council
wished
to
place
another
new
threshold,
in
addition
to
building
height,
where
council
would
review
any
project
over
a
certain
size,
these
are
some
examples
that
that
we
want
to
show
you.
B
And
again,
a
good
stopping
point.
If
there's
any
comments
or
questions.
F
Well,
I,
for
one
would
be
supportive
of
adding
another
threshold
based
on
the
number
of
rooms,
in
addition
to
the
height,
because
I
could
imagine,
maybe
a
you
know,
a
big
complex.
That
is
only
two
stories
or
three
stories
high,
but
takes
a
big
huge
footprint.
So
I
would
be
interested
in
adopting
an
additional
threshold,
maybe
even
100
rooms,
more
than
100
rooms.
C
Yeah,
I
I
agree
with
that.
The
I
think
one
of
the
impactful
things
about
our
several
of
our
current
hotels
is
that
they
take
it
like
they
take
up
an
entire.
You
know
an
entire
length
of
a
city
block
or
an
entire.
You
know
even
a
short
side
of
a
city
block,
so
they're
they're,
you
know
they're,
they
they're
larger
than
a
lot
of
our
other
buildings,
but
give
us
remind
us.
C
I
always
feel
bad
about
asking
you
this
on
this
for
the
moment,
but
like
how
many
rooms
does
the
ac
have
and
the
aloft.
Those
are
just
two
easy
ones
for
me
to
envision.
B
Rooms,
the
heiress
hotel
has
128
rooms
as
another
example.
B
B
The
aloft
is
115
rooms.
So,
if
it's
you
know,
you're
you're
about,
you
would
possibly
would
review
that
project.
Biltmore
station
hotel
on
thompson,
street
117
rooms,
so
those
are
just
some.
C
D
D
I
I
would
agree
with
that.
Vice
mayor,
I
think
julia
mentioned
the
same
thing
as
far
as
the
cap
at
100
rooms.
C
C
B
B
I
can
go
back
one
slide.
Thank
you.
So
the
question
yeah.
If
the
cap
were
placed
at
100
rooms
or
more
in
the
last
10
years,
that
would
have
meant
that
council
would
have
reviewed,
16
hotels,
so
approximately
one
and
a
half
hotels
per
year
and
then
about
half
of
all
of
our
hotels
in
the
history
of
asheville
about
half
of
those
are
over
100
rooms.
B
So
I
I
think
the
the
way
to
look
at
this
is
you
would
possibly
review
anywhere
from
two
hotels
per
year
to
possibly
all
half
of
all
hotels
that
are
are
proposed
within
the
city.
D
C
Yeah,
I
mean
again
just
understanding
the
practical
implications
of
that.
What
that
means
is
that
it
takes.
You
know
it
takes
those
projects
out
of
the
out
of
the
staff
review
path,
so
the
public
benefits
the
design
review
like,
but
none
of
that
I
mean
it
just
it
just
throws
it
all
into
the
conditional
zoning.
It
just
keeps
us
where
we
are
now
right.
F
Or
they
would
or
they
would,
they
would
know
that
we'd
be
asking
for
the
public
benefit.
I
mean
they
would
know
that
we'd
still
probably
be
looking
at
the
criteria
that
staff
was
looking
at
when
we're
looking
at
conditional
zoning,
I
mean
I,
I
would
have
a
hard
time
envisioning
that
city
council
would
just
be
like.
Oh,
you
know,
no
public
benefits
if
it's
135
rooms.
C
C
What
does
that
mean
in
terms
of
you
know
new
in
terms
of
new
hotels,
and
you
know
some
people
would
say
that
one
of
the
advantages
of
some
of
these
larger
hotels,
including
the
three
that
you
mentioned
earlier-
the
cambria,
the
ac,
the
loft
or
the
four
the
heiress
is,
you
know
all
of
those
also
have
what
many
people
would
consider
really
nice
public
spaces,
public
restaurants.
You
know
things
like
that.
C
If
you
go
to
these
smaller
hotels,
do
you
sort
of
lose
that
kind
of
public
aspect
to
it,
because
there's
just
not
enough
either
space
or
revenue
to
include
that
kind
of
you
know
more
community
amenity
and
again
I
realize
some
people
don't
think
there
are
community
amenities,
but
but
a
lot
of
people
do
so.
I
just
like,
I
just
don't
know
practically
what
that
means.
From
a
hotelier's
perspective,
I
don't
know
the
full
implications
of
that.
C
B
And-
and
I
think
you
know
if
a
project
comes
if
it's
it's
over
100
rooms
and
that's
the
the
cap
that
that
you,
you
desire
that
the
public
benefits
would
still
be
used
as
a
guide.
B
You
know
we
have
that
in
the
udo
and
and
we're
saying
this
is
what
we
like
a
hotel
to
meet,
and
I
think
it'll
be
up
to
the
the
applicant
to
have
that
conversation
with
you
all
as
council
members
as
to
why
or
why
not
can't
they
meet
those
public
benefits
and
and
again
it's
those
public
benefits
are
meant
to
help
mitigate
the
project
so
that
that
might
be
a
good
baseline
for
for
your
review
of
any
hotel
project
that
comes
before
you
and
to
clarify
as
well.
B
If
a
project
comes
to
city
council
for
a
conditional
zoning
review,
the
the
design
review
process
would
still
be
there.
So
the
the
design
review
board
would
would
still
review
that
project
and
provide
a
recommendation
for
design
under
the
current
process.
B
If
that
didn't.
If
that
did
not
change,
that's
the
same
process
as
today
as
well
that
the
downtown
commission
and
riverfront
commissions
still
provide
a
recommendation
to
city
council.
When
there's
a
conditional
zoning.
A
Okay,
so
we
added
the
size
threshold
as
a
trigger
anything
else
that
you
all
think
staff
should
consider
as
a
trigger
to
bring
it
to
council
for
review.
G
We
mentioned
a
maximum
presence
of
hotels
on
a
block,
but
I
don't
remember
discussion
around
it.
I
don't
know
how
many
hotels
would
we
consider
a
cluster
and
what
radius
we
were
looking
at.
So
I
just
wanted
to
hear
some
more
information
or
conversation
about
what.
How
many
would
be
too
many
on
a
block.
B
Yeah
I
have
that
on
a
upcoming
slide,
but
it
might
even
be
the
next
one.
So
we
could
certainly
seems
like
a
good
time
to
discuss
that
now.
If
we
want
to
move
on-
and
yes
thank
you
so
the
the
spacing
limitations,
the
second
bullet
to
councilwoman
smith's
point.
B
This
is
something
that
that
we
briefly
discussed
at
the
last
work
session
that
whether
there's
any
interest
in
having
like
a
separation
requirement
for
hotels
for
example,
or
whether
we
would
have
a
maximum
of
hotels
in
any
given
block
it
starts
to
get
a
little
confusing
of
how
we
we
would
calculate
that.
B
But,
for
example,
in
the
downtown
you
could
say
that
a
certain
percentage
of
a
hotel
building
facade
could
not
exceed
a
certain
percentage
of
the
block
say
like
no
more
than
50
percent
of
the
block
could
be
used
for
a
hotel
use.
B
This
is
something
that
the
city
of
charleston
did
in
in
their,
I
believe
in
their
newer
hotel
standards.
B
However,
looking
at
the
makeup
of
the
the
rest
of
the
city
outside
the
downtown,
besides
the
downtown
and
some
portions
of
biltmore
village,
we
really
don't
have
a
good
urban
block
system,
a
block
grid
where
that
that
type
of
requirement
might
be
harder
to
do
in
other
areas
of
the
city.
As
an
extreme
example,
I
would,
I
would
use
the
the
river
arts
district,
where
you
have
some
really
large
parcels
that
are
really
adjacent
to
a
corridor
they're.
B
They
have
a
very
wide
lot
width
and
lot
frontage
and
and
looking
and
trying
to
apply
a
certain
percentage
of
hotel
in
that
district
would
might
be
very
difficult
to
achieve
that.
The
separation
requirement
is,
you
know,
another
possible
consideration
for
spacing
limitations.
B
E
Todd
I
believe
in
in
the
last
work
session.
It
came
up
that
maybe
someone
would
look
at
how
many
actual
building
buildable
lots
would
be
available
to
hotels,
say
in
the
river
arts
district
or
in
there
in
the
in
the
western
portion
of
downtown.
Has
that
been
looked
into
any
further,
and
I
mean,
and
maybe
it's
like
for
the
river
arts
district.
We
would
want
to
look
at
the
number
of
hotels
period
that
that
you
want
to
allow
there.
E
You
know
if
we
end
up
with
15
hotels
in
the
river
arts
district.
That
area
is
ruined
and
for
for
my
purposes
so
I
mean.
Maybe
we
should
look
at
an
overall
limit
period
in
certain
in
these
areas.
B
We
did
perform
some
additional
analysis
and
I'll
be
sending
you
all,
probably
a
response
following
up
this
week,
that
looks
at
some
sample
blocks
in
the
city
just
to
show
what
they
look
like
and
the
types
of
land
uses
that
are
there,
but
we,
we
could
certainly
also
provide
some
information
about
buildable
lots.
B
We
would
look
at
you,
know:
vacant
lots
or
surface
parking,
lots
underutilized
lots
that
that
could
be
redeveloped,
but
but
again
the
the
overlay
district
boundaries
do
show
you
kind
of
the
maximum
extent
of
where
hotels
could
be
permitted.
B
B
We
did
also
discuss
early
on
in
this
whether
it
was
possible
to
have
an
overall
cap
on
the
number
of
hotels.
Certainly
it's
it's
a
tool
that
that
could
be
available
in
in
other
states.
B
B
Yeah
by
capping
a
block
we
we
can
relate
it
to
kind
of
the
built
environment
and
and
other
kind
of
land
use
and
zoning
factors
that
we
feel
like
there's
kind
of
a
rational
nexus
for
us
to
be
able
to
regulate
at
the
block
level.
B
B
We
certainly
can,
if,
if
we're
ready
to
do
that,
if
ashley
can
bring
back
up
the
presentation.
B
B
B
Okay,
so
this
is
the
map
that
shows
where
large
and
small
hotels
could
be
permitted.
If
you
recall,
the
the
blue
areas
on
the
map
are
areas
where
we
would
allow
both
large
and
small
hotels
and
again,
we
would
define
a
small
hotel
as
less
than
35
hotel
rooms,
a
large
hotel,
larger
than
35
hotel
rooms.
B
And
then
the
orange
shows,
where
only
small
hotels
are,
would
be
permitted
and
then
the
rest
of
the
city,
hotels,
would
not
be
permitted
by
wright.
F
Well,
I'm
just
gonna
jump
in
because
I
went
and
and
looked
at
this
map
and
and
I'm
I'm
gonna
just
weigh
in
on
what
I
was
thinking.
I
would
like
to
eliminate
the
asheville
mall
property
and
basically
stop
south
of
the
current
hotels.
F
Of
where
I
mean
I'm
basically
saying
you
know
when
you
see
the
dark
area
that
in
the
dark
blue,
which
indicates
a
current
hotel.
What
I
would
say
is
stop
the
hotel
district
south
of
the
current
hotels
on
tunnel
road
except
down
south
of
sales
village.
I
mean
I
was
okay
with
that,
but
I
would
like
to
preserve
that
asheville
mall
for
other
development.
F
I
mean
I,
I
was
really
excited
about
the
possibility
of
that
being
used
for
housing,
and
so
I
prefer
not
to
have
it
available
for
hotel
and
the
same
thing
on
the
river
ridge,
shopping
center
and
then
east
of
south
charlotte
street,
between
woodfin
and
college,
there's
a
chunk
of
blue
and
and
then
and
then
the
other.
F
It
looks
to
me
unless
I'm
unless
I
misunderstood
the
map
that
basically
we're
putting
a
blue
blue,
the
hotel,
large
hotel
overlay
district
on
top
of
the
civic
center,
and
I
mean
I
would
be
opposed
to
that,
and
then
I
would
like
to
suggest
that
all
the
river
arts
district
should
be
orange
and
not
blue.
G
F
So
my
thinking
about
the
asheville
mall-
and
it's
probably
because
I
got
enthused
about
the
about
the
proposal
for
residential
on
the
old
sears
area
and
the
fact
that
it
backs
right
up
against
the
kenilworth
neighborhood
that
and
you
know,
given
that
there
are
no
hotels
there
right
now
on
the
asheville
mall
property.
F
I
just
felt
like
it
was
a
good
opportunity
to
kind
of
reclaim
that
area
and
river
ridge
to
me
that
bumps
up
against
some
also
some
residential
areas
I
mean
you've
got
you've
got
some
apartments
that
are
pretty
close
by
there.
You've
got
the
whole
oakley,
neighborhood,
etc,
and
so
again
I
would
like
to
if
there's
going
to
be
redevelopment
of
that,
I
would
like
to
have
it
as
an
opportunity
for
residential
and
or
some
more
local
retail,
so
that
that
was
my
thinking
on
those
two
areas.
F
G
D
F
When
I
looked
what
I
was
thinking,
tanika
is
so
you
see
on
the
you
you
see
where
the
last
hotel
is
on
tunnel
road,
just
north
of
the
mall,
I
would
say
kind
of
cut
it
off
right
there
and
then
there
are
a
few
little.
I
think
david's,
bridal,
etc
is
right
there
if
you,
if
you
zoom,
look
I'm
like
pointing
at
my
screen.
Like
you
know,
I
mean,
but
it's
mostly
the
asheville
mall
property.
I
guess
is
the
big
one
that
that
I
was
more
focused
on.
F
I
mean
I,
I
guess
we
can
split
hairs
on
where
it
stops
and
starts,
but
my
biggest
thing
is:
is
the
actual
mall.
You
know
that
whole
property.
B
And
if
it
just
helps
to,
I
could
give
a
quick
rationale
why
we
included
the
mall
area.
To
begin
with,
this
is
one
of
our
identified
town,
centers
and
the
comp
plan.
It's
a
large,
you
know
parcel.
We
felt
like
the
size
of
the
parcel
lent
itself
if
council
wanted
it
to
to
be
able
to
accommodate
both
residential
and
hotel
and
entertainment
kind
of.
B
When
we
looked
at
the
re-envisioning
of
indoor
malls
throughout
the
country,
we
left
some
flexibility
with
this
map
to
be
able
to
do
a
hotel
and
and
residential,
possibly
do
the
size
of
the
lot,
but
we
could
certainly
you
know,
remove
that
area.
If
council
chooses.
F
I
would
certainly
be
you
know,
be
willing
to
look
at
that
and
enthus
and
possibly
enthusiastic
about
it,
but
basically
what
this
suggests
is
that
you
know
somebody
could
put
a
hotel
there
without
all
the
all
the
great
things
that
go
with
urban
villages.
F
C
Don't
well
that's
a
good
question
because
todd
I
wouldn't
I
wouldn't
take
it
to
mean
that
I
might
you
know
maybe
down
closer
to
the
swannanoa
river,
on
on
sites
that
are
not
part
of
the
the
urban,
the
urban
village
or
whatever
we're
calling
it,
but
on
the
mall
site,
which
we
have
designated
as
as
a
place
where
we
want
mixed
use,
they
couldn't
just
come
in
and
say
I'm
going
to
do
a
hotel.
They
have.
They
have
to
come
in
with
the
bigger
mixed
use
package
right.
B
Technically
they
could
come
in
with
just
a
single
use,
such
as
a
hotel.
I
mean
they're.
The
comp
plan
does
provide
some
guidance
that
there's
a
preference
for
mixed
use
in
the
property,
but
you
know
that
it
doesn't
necessarily
preclude
a
single
use
from
coming
in,
depending
upon
the
site
in
the
lot
configuration.
If
you
recall,
like
you
know,
the
sears
property
is
owned
by
one
entity
and
the
mall
is
owned
by
another
entity.
B
I
think
we
still
feel
like
the
the
property
is
large
enough,
where,
if
a
proposal
came
in
for
something
there's
an
opportunity
to
do
more
than
just
a
single
use,
and
we
would
certainly
look
at
the
comp
plan
living
actual
comp
plan
as
a
guide
for
for
a
preference
of
having
you
know,
mixed
use
there,
that
that
would
be
something
that
we
would
evaluate.
B
The
it's
the
urban
place,
zoning
district-
this
is
part
of
an
initiative
called
urban
centers,
where,
where
we
have
a
draft
rezoning
proposal
out
there
for
some
areas
along
patton
avenue
surrounding
the
former
kmart
site,
the
the
steinmart
in
ingles
area
on
merriman
walmart
property
on
bleachery
boulevard
and
innsbruck
mall
on
tunnel
road.
The
current
urban
center's
proposal
does
not
include
the
asheville
mall.
It
does
include
the
the
innsbruck
mall.
A
Gwen
because
the
proposal
we
heard
that
we
never
got
a
chance
and
we
never
ended
up
voting
on
because
it
got
withdrawn,
yeah
todd.
Do
you
remember
that
project
it
had
a
mixed
use,
apartments,
a
movie
theater
et
cetera,
et
cetera,
and
I
thought
we
were
requiring
it
to
meet
urban
village
or
urban
center.
A
J
This
is
vadilla
with
todd's
staff,
so
just
a
clarification,
so
the
future
land
use
map
designates
this
area
in
the
south
as
town
center
right.
So
if,
if
we
want
to
create
a
zoning
district
to
implement
that
vision,
which
is
what
we're
trying
to
do
now
with
the
urban
centers,
we
need
to
do
that
and
at
some
future
point
we
will
do
that
and
effectively
what
or
what
what
this
area
would
likely
become,
is
sort
of
a
an
urban
center
like
zoning.
J
So
the
the
the
the
urban
center
standards
that
you've
already
seen
or
heard
of,
would
would
be
similar
in
this
district,
but
probably
with
a
a
a
stronger
emphasis
on
residential,
so
that
zoning
is
coming
in
the
future.
But
at
this
point
all
we
have
is
this
vision
of
it:
transforming
into
a
higher
density,
mixed
district.
C
But
but
the
fact
that
it
is
in
that
the
comp
plan
treats
it
that
way
gives
us
gives
you
staff,
I
guess
leverage
with
like.
If
someone
were
to
come
into
the
mall
area,
assuming
it
gets,
it
all
closes
and
gets
redeveloped,
or
let's
just
say
that
the
sears
property
I
mean
I'm
with
gwen,
I
wouldn't
want
them
to
just
come
in
with
a
hotel.
We
we
want
that
to
be.
We
want
that
to
all
be
mixed
use.
C
I
would
be
fine
if
a
hotel
is
a
part
of
that,
because
I
think
that
could
help
fund
the
rest
of
it,
but
so
remind
me
just
the
leverage
that
we
have
to
make
that
happen.
Just
the
future.
The
comp
plan
and
the
future
land
use
map
is
that
it.
B
That's
correct,
yeah.
The
comprehensive
plan
would
provide
guidance
and
provide
us
with
leverage
for
how
we
review
a
larger
redevelopment
project.
We
would
look
at
the
goals
of
the
plan
and
any
the
purpose
and
intent
of
this
area
which,
as
councilwoman
mayfield
you
mentioned,
does
envision
a
mixed-use
area
so
that
that
provides
us
leverage
to
do
that.
B
My
point
was
just
that
the
current
zoning
for
this
area
doesn't
necessarily
require
mixed
use,
but
the
comp
plan
would
be
a
good
guiding
document
for
whatever
happens
there,
so
so.
C
I
was
just
going
to
say
now
that
now
that
that
proposal
that
we
had
for
the
sears
site
has
been
withdrawn,
I
mean:
can
we
include
the
seer
site
and
the
mall
site
as
one
of
our
urban
center
properties,
that
that
would
be
rezoned
as
that
when
we
finally
move
forward
on
that
rezoning.
B
Absolutely
we
could
certainly
consider
the
site
we
are
still
in
the
process
of
of
meeting
with
community
members
on
the
urban
centers
rezoning
proposal,
and
it
would
kind
of
maybe
open
up
our
our
engagement
to
to
speak
with
folks
in
this
area,
because
we
haven't
had
an
opportunity
to
to
do
that
yet.
But
we
could
certainly
add
this
area
to
the
urban
center's
proposal
and-
and
there
might
be
a
specific,
different
type
of
zoning.
That
applies
strictly
for
this
area.
C
F
F
I
mean
you
know,
it
seems
to
me
that
you're
almost
you
know
you're
you're
setting
it
up
for
confusion,
you
know
it,
but
we
have
making
it
blue
says
it
should
be
or
it
can
be
hotels,
but
then
you
know
on
top
of
it
you're
putting
the
urban
center.
So
it's
like
well
so,
which
is
the
defining
overlay.
B
Potentially,
that's
that's
a
a
possible
vision.
You
know,
for
this
area
is
to
to
look
something
like
that
in
the
future,
and
vice
mayor
to
your
point,
you
know
the
overlay
map
just
says
this
is
where
a
hotel
could
be
permitted.
B
B
One
of
those
requirements
could
be,
it
has
to
be
mixed
use.
That's
that's
something
that
we're
we're
recommending
for
the
other
urban
center
locations.
B
We're
saying
that
for
like
every
five
thousand
square
feet
of
commercial
on
those
other
areas
such
as
the
former
kmart
site,
that
for
every
5000
square
feet
of
commercial
that
you
have
to
have
some
housing
units
as
well.
We
haven't
developed
that
for
this
area,
but
we
could
look
at
that.
B
I
I
don't
believe
I
have
that
available.
That
was
one
of
the
the
slides
in
the
the
previous
presentation.
H
B
Absolutely
yeah,
so
if
we,
if
we
re-zone
this
area
as
one
of
our
urban
center
locations,
we
could
require
that
mixed
use
has
to
happen,
and
then
the
overlay
for
the
hotels
just
says
you're
also
allowed
to
have
hotels
here
and
here's
additional
standards
for
those
hotels,
but
that
underlying
zoning
you
know
it
is
in
place
unless
the
hotel
overlay
says
something
in
it.
That
would
override
that
underlying
zoning.
C
C
B
C
Right
yeah,
so
I
again,
I
would
I've
said
what
I
would
do,
which
is
add
at
least
the
mall
site,
the
sears
site,
and
maybe
even
other
parcels
in
that
corridor
to
our
our
urban
center.
I
would
do
the
same
thing
with
river
ridge.
Again,
I
just
think
any
of
these
huge
commercial,
enormous,
surface
parking.
Lots
in
front
of
them
are
all
ripe
for
redevelopment
into
that
into
that
urban
center
concept.
C
At
some
point-
and
I
I
would
be
perfectly
fine
for
them
to
stay
on
this
map
and
in
terms
of
you
know,
being
able
to
have
larger
hotels
there,
because
again,
I
think
hotels
would
help
fund.
Probably
some
of
the
housing
would
help
subsidize
some
of
the
housing
and
particularly
affordable
housing
that
we
might
want
in
some
of
those
locations.
A
These
sort
of
commercial
urban
nodes
into
this
urban
place
of
zoning,
and
I'm
I'm
I'm
anxious
to
see
that
process,
speed
up
it
got
delayed
and
it
feels
like
it's
been
happening
forever
and
if
I
know,
if
we
add
more
property
to
that
picture,
that
will
that
will
probably
add
more
delay,
and
I
don't
know
if
it's
even
possible
to
do
it
if
it's
not
in
the
comp
plan,
but
but
hopefully
hopefully
it
is
because
to
me
that
that
overlay
zoning
is
more
protective
of
the
future
growth
of
those
areas
than
sort
of
picking
hand-picking
uses.
A
F
F
My
feeling
would
be
you
know
I
don't
I'd,
rather
not
put
the
hotel
overlay
district
and
then
hope
that
we
can
get
urban
center
later,
but
to
put
the
hotel
overlay
district
kind
of
I
mean
you
know
they
can
always
come
back
to
us
with
a
big
project
that
includes
mixed
use,
etc
and
a
hotel
they
can
always
go
through
the
conditional
zoning
process.
Well,.
A
You
could
also
say
when
we
adopt
the
urban
place,
zoning
which
is
going
to
require
a
rezoning
process.
Just
like
this,
we
could.
We
could
make
it
back
in
if
we
felt
like
right,
it
would
work
right.
F
But
I
just
I
mean
you
know
for
me:
I'd
rather
I'd,
rather
less
hotel,
overlay,
district
and
more
urban
center
than
the
other
way
around,
and
I
just
feel
like
it's
taken
a
really
long
time
for
us.
I
mean
you
know.
I
think
we've
been
working
on
this
what
two
years
and
we
haven't
gotten
any
we
we
haven't
actually
been
able
to
rezone
yet
so
this
process
to
me
feels
like
it's
going
faster,
which
is
good.
F
I
mean,
I
think
the
hotel
moratorium
is
pushing
that,
but
you
know
give
it
given
that
and
given
the
timing,
my
feeling
would
be,
you
know,
reduce,
reduce
the
hotel
overlay
and
then,
if
later
on,
we
get
it
to
be
an
urban
center.
Then
we
can
always
add
the
hotel
overlay.
On
top
of
that
later,.
C
A
Todd
other
than
council
sitting
here
and
redrawing
your
overlay
map.
What
other
vetting
process
are
you
going
to
be
using
going
forward
for
the
overlay
map
I
mean:
are
you
you
still
gathering
input
from
the
community
and
property
owners
about
about
the
map.
B
Our
next
steps
after
the
council
work
session
this
afternoon,
is
to
present
an
update
to
the
planning
and
zoning
commission
after
meeting
in
early
november
and
then
to
meet
again
with
the
downtown
riverfront
commissions
and
then
come
back
to
planning
and
zoning
commission.
So
that's
that's!
Basically,
our
our
process
after
today.
C
So
so
I
would
be
interested
in
going
through
the
other
areas
that
gwen
mentioned,
and
as
long
as
we
brought
in
the
urban
center
zoning,
my
understanding
and
I
could
be
wrong.
My
understanding
is
that
that
is
on
hold
largely
because
of
neighborhood
concerns
related
to
the
kmart
site.
C
So
I'm
wondering
if
it
would
be
possible
to
move
forward
with
the
zoning
for
the
other
locations
that
perhaps
are
not
so
controversial
and
continue
to
address
the
neighborhood
concerns
around
the
kmart
site
and
then,
when
those
are
addressed
and
resolved,
move
forward
on
that
site,
because
we
have
been
working
on
this
for
a
long
time.
B
Yeah,
we
could
certainly
take
a
look
at
that
option
and
to
continue
to
move
that
the
project
forward.
Okay,.
A
A
B
Good,
no
great
great
question
the
the
orange
area
looks
very
jagged
and
that
that
basically
follows
the
lines
of
our
national
historic
district
for
the
downtown,
and
that's
it
made
it
easier
for
us
to
tie
that
small
hotel
area
tie
it
to
the
underlying
local
historic
district
when
drawing
the
boundaries,
but
that
that
that
doesn't
mean
we
can't
make.
You
know
changes
to
that
as
well.
B
We
we
can
it
just,
but
that
that's
the
rationale
of
why
we
chose
you
know
that
this
the
boundaries
for
the
small
hotel
and
large
hotels
in
this
area
is
based
on
that
national
historic
district
boundary.
C
B
We
could
zoom
in
a
little
bit
more
ashley
to
and
then
let's
just
wait
for
it
to
reload,
so
that
is
in
the
it
is
in
this,
the
small
hotel
district
area
that
that
orange
area-
yes.
B
Whereas
the
civic
center,
just
on
the
right
side
of
haywood
street
is,
is
just
falls
within
that
large
hotel
category.
C
B
The
eastern
end
of
the
large
hotel
district
kind
of
the
northern
part
of
the
screen-
that's
that
is
lexington.
B
So
for
the
majority
of
lexington
is
falls
in
that
orange
color,
the
small
hotel
area,
but
not
not
the
large
hotel
area,
but.
B
H
C
Certainly
understand
your
the
rationale
for
it,
but
I
think
I
would
agree
with
gwen
that
you
know
like.
I
don't
think
we
I
don't
know
who
owns
that
parking
lot
down
there
on
lexington,
but
I
don't
think
we
would
want
somebody
to
build
a
you
know
a
large,
a
really
large
hotel
there
that
I
mean
in
some
ways
it's
right
next
to
the
interstate
sure
it
makes
sense.
But
at
the
same
time
you
know
lexington
is
one
of
our
gateways
into
the
city
and
we
probably
wouldn't
want
a
big
hotel
right.
There.
B
C
B
Let's
see
so
we're
on
south
lexington
and
biltmore
avenue.
This
is
where
we
have
the
the
hotel,
that's
built
or
under
construction
today
on
biltmore
on
biltmore
that
backs
up
onto
lexington.
That
was
part
of
the
the
approval
that
had
the
three
homes
like
historic
homes
that
were
repurposed.
B
B
The
blue
here
was,
I
think,
just
to
capture
that
that
hotel
built
having
access
to
biltmore
avenue,
we
thought
had
some
some
good
kind
of
access
to
that
area
of
biltmore
avenue
but
yeah
it.
You
can
see
on
the
map,
though
that's
it's
kind
of
a
limited
area
in
that
southern
southern
portion
of
downtown.
But
but
you
do
see,
I
guess
in
the
northern
part
of
the
screen-
it's
it's
small,
then
large
and
then
small
again.
B
But
if
there's
a
desire
to
make
this
area
a
small
hotel
area
also,
we
could
certainly
look
into
that.
A
Here's
what
I
would
say
just
because
I'm
getting
nervous
we're
going
to
run
ourselves
right
into
a
work
session
number
three.
This
will
come
back
to
us
eventually
and
it's
gonna.
You
know.
As
todd
mentioned,
it's
got
to
do
some
more.
A
It's
going
to
go
through
some
more
vetting
processes.
So
why
don't
we
see
see
how
it
comes
out
on
the
other
end
and
make
further
changes.
But
council?
Is
there
any
objection
to
making
the
changes
so
far
mentioned
by
gwen
or
julie
or
anyone
else
is
that
is?
Does
anyone
object
to
the
those
suggestions
being
counsel
counsel's
direction
to
staff
at
this
point
to
modify
this
map
as
it
makes
its
way
back
through
these
other
committees?
I
A
Todd
did
you
get
all
those
changes?
If
you
didn't
gwen
will
say,
I'm
happy.
A
F
B
Yeah
and
I've
written
down
how
the
video,
but
also
yeah,
we
could
touch
base
or
if
you
want
to
forward
me
in
an
email
with
those
locations
and
descriptions,
I'm
happy
to
take
a
look
at
that.
G
C
And
todd
we've
gotten
some
questions
about
again:
ashley
if
you
can
keep
moving
south
on
the
map.
I
guess
this
drawing
the
line
there
at
cox
ashcox
avenue
as
opposed
to
ashland
avenue,
and
can
you
offer
some
some
some
explanation
about
about
that?
Why.
C
Yes,
or
or
right,
you
know,
maybe
even
draw
the
line.
I
mean
my
assumption
about
not
drawing
it
all
the
way
over
to
ashland
is
because
that's
you
know,
that's
that's
obviously
much
nearer
to
old,
established
residential
neighborhoods,
but,
like
I
don't
know,
if
you
could,
even
you
know,
sort
of
cut
those
property
lines
down.
You
know
mid
block
between,
I
mean
between
ashland
and
cox,
or
I
don't
know.
I
just
I'm
curious
about
your
thinking.
There.
B
We
we
staff,
took
a
look
at
this
area
again
after
some
conversations
with
some
community
members
and
we
we
feel
that
we
can
extend
the
small
hotel
boundary
to
go
on
to
the
west
side
of
cox
and
capture
some
of
the
smaller
parcels
there,
but
but
still
keep
it
away
from
ashland
avenue.
B
Our
intent
was
to
try
to
stay
away
from
ashland
avenue
and
any
residential,
that's
on
the
west
side
of
ashland,
but
the
map
looks
a
little
funny
that
it
divides
cox,
avenue
right
down
the
line
and
only
has
small
hotels
on
the
right
side.
E
I
would
like
to
chime
in
just
for
a
second.
I
already
feel
very
defeated
in
this
whole
process,
but
it
seems
to
me
that
maybe
we
should
look
at
reducing
the
amount
of
blue
on
this
map.
That
and
for
many
of
us,
don't
want
to
see
a
lot
of
large
hotels
being
built
and
and
there's
a
lot
of
blue
on
this
map.
There's
room
for
a
whole
lot
of
large
hotels
to
be
built.
E
You
know
I'm!
I
struggle
going
downtown
right
now
during
a
pandemic,
where
the
amount
of
people
are
down
there
and
an
amount
of
tourists
going
around.
E
Broadcast,
just
to
you
know,
reduce
this
amount
of
blue
and
take
this
one
step
at
a
time
you
know,
and
and
and
try
to
reduce
the
amount
of
large
hotels
being
built,
especially
in
downtown
or
the
river
arts
district.
K
And
I
have
a
follow-up
question
to
one
that
brian
asked
a
while
ago
related
to
the
river
arts
district,
and
we
were
in
the
middle
of
the
discussion
about
how
hotels
can
be
limited
to
one
per
block
and
then
brian
asked.
Can
we
restrict?
You
know,
remove
the
whole
district
and
the
response
was
no,
probably
not
because
that
would
be
arbitrary
capricious.
Something
like
that.
Would.
H
K
A
Block
so
so
todd
correct
now,
if
I'm
wrong,
but
probably
the
way
that
would
work
is
like
other
zoning
that
involves
distances
where
you
say:
okay,
you
take
an
existing
hotel
and
you
do
with
no
additional
hotels
within
500
feet
or
it
triggers
a
conditional
zoning
review
by
council
or
something
like
that.
A
B
That
that
would
that
would
be
my
recommendation
if
council
desires
that
type
of
restriction
or
requirement
that
we
have
a
separation,
a
distance,
a
minimum
separation
between
hotels.
K
B
Yeah
and
I
I
can
maybe
you
could
do
200
feet
or
500
feet-
I
mean
we
could
base
it
on
something
that
I
think
that
the
the
issue
that
could
arise-
and
this
is
why
we
didn't
recommend
this
at
first-
is
that
once
one
hotel
comes
in
and
that
separation
requirement
is
there
say
it's
500
feet
that
might
pro
preclude
a
good,
a
location
that
might
be
a
good
location
for
a
hotel,
whereas
you
know
the.
B
B
B
You
all,
but,
but
I
think,
but
I
think
that
you
know
the
intent
of
the
overlay
district
was
to
set
those
those
boundaries
to
where
we
thought
might
might
be
an
appropriate
location.
B
C
J
B
I
I
think
that
that
would
just
become
an
another
council
threshold
that
someone
could
still
apply
for
a
conditional
zoning
to
request.
I
think
they're
they're,
building
to
be
larger
than
what's
allowed.
A
Council,
I
kind
of
feel
like
we're,
walking
our
way
right
back
into
the
system
we're
using
now.
I
just
want
to
point
that
out,
and
this
is
a
lot
of
work
I
mean
you
know
if
you'll
recall
right
now,
there's
only
two
spots
in
the
city
where,
where
and
I'm
forgetting
the
name
of
the
zoning,
but
it's
the
where
the
growth
park
in
is-
and
I
believe
the.
A
Crown
plaza
property,
otherwise
it's
a
conditional
zoning
and
it
comes
to
council
for
review.
So
it's
a
I
mean,
I
mean
it's
a
fairly
simple
system.
Actually
I
mean,
if
you
think
about
it,
because
they
just
most,
they
all
just
come
to
council
for
review
and
and
we
can
take
them
on
a
case-by-case
basis.
This
you
know
here
we're
trying
to
set
up
this
incredible
web
of
trying
to
guess
what
will
be
a
hotel
of
concern
versus
a
you
know
so
and
for
some
people
that
will
be
every
hotel
for
some
people.
A
That
will
be
most
hotels
so
anyway.
I
just
remember.
F
I
I
hear
what
you're
saying
esther
and
but
at
the
same
time
I
do
feel
like
this
effort
has
been,
I
mean,
even
even
if
we
do
have
you
know
a
third
of
the
hotels
that
are
going
to
have
to
come
to
council.
I
think
the
whole
process
of
setting
up
these
these
benefits
and
design
review
etc
are
gonna.
F
I
think
it's
really
gonna
help
the
hotel
developer
community
to
understand
what
our
goals
and
values
are,
and
so
I
think
it
helps
us
a
lot
more
give
them
guidance
on
the
kind
of
things
we're
going
to
take
into
consideration
when
we
either
approve
or
don't
approve
hotels.
So
I
mean
I
I
I
mean.
I
hope
that
staff
doesn't
feel
like.
F
This
has
just
been
a
an
exercise
in
futility,
because
I,
I
think
a
lot
of
the
work
around
you
know
the
design
and
thinking
about
these
maps
and
the
the
benefits
you
know
really
do
go
a
long
way
in
giving
giving
the
development
community
some
sort
of
guidance,
but
whereas
before
it
was
just
like
well,
whatever
you
know
any
council
member
on
any
given
day
feels.
I
mean
at
least
this
lays
out
some
some
of
our
thinking
and
some
of
our
values.
E
B
I
think,
in
that
case
the
public
benefits
could
be
outlined
in
the
ex
like
in
a
conditional
zoning
district,
but
it
just
it
would
still
mean
that
you
know
every
hotel
comes
to
city
council.
B
All
of
them
would
continue
to
come
to
city
council.
We
would
try
to
outline
the
public
benefits
in
that
conditional
zoning
district.
B
L
Sure
I
think
that
I
can
answer
the
question.
Councilman
haynes
asked,
at
least
in
part
by
saying
that
it
would
appear
to
me
that
this
proposed
framework
would
expand
significantly
on
what
we're
calling
public
benefits
in
terms
of
those
items
that
could
be
included
in
an
eventual
proposal
which
may
be
beyond
the
scope
of
what
is
legally
permissible
under
the
traditional
conditional
zoning
process.
L
So
I
do
think
that
you
are
seeing
numerous
items,
as
well
as
the
scale
of
those
items
which
can
be
included
under
this
type
of
a
process
which
probably
go
beyond
what
is
legally
justifiable,
just
in
general
speaking
in
a
traditional
conditional
zoning
request
for
the
b1
conditions.
A
B
B
Any
modifications
that
that
could
be
made
to
to
the
the
following
that
are
that
are
shown
on
this
slide.
So
we
continue
to
take
a
look
at
these.
These
were
some
of
the
the
issues
that
were
raised
by
council
on
october
13th
next
slide.
Please.
D
B
We
can
or
keep
moving
along.
I
think
I
just
really
had
one
more
slide.
B
Wraps
up
the
the
timeline
and
and
next
steps.
But
if
there
are
any
questions.
B
I'm
sorry
there
was
one
more
concern
and,
and
that
just
had
to
deal
with
the
makeup
of
the
design
review
board.
I
know
this
was
something
that
was
you
know
just
introduced
to
you
all
for
the
first
time
this
afternoon,
but
a
question
that
had
come
up
at
the
riverfront
commission
meeting
was
whether
to
have
all
members
or
majority
of
the
members
have
a
design
experience
or
or
just
an
interest
in
design.
B
A
You
know
on
that
point.
I
think
that
this
this
issue
for
me
of
who's
on
this
design
review
board.
This
is
more
flexible
for
me,
depending
on
whether
or
not
the
council
is
involved
in
the
review
as
well,
but
but
this,
what
you've
explained
is
that
this
review
board
is
going
to
be
doing
more
more
of
a
technical
review.
I
mean
they're
looking
to
see
if
it
physically
meets
the
requirements
right.
A
So
it
is
kind
of
I
mean
I
I
don't
like
having
all
design
professionals
on
review
boards
like
this,
because
I
do
think
that
sometimes
they
miss
the
layperson's
perspective
on
these
buildings
and
I
think,
that's
important
to
include
as
well.
A
So
I
I
would
hope
it
would
be
kind
of
a
mix,
but
I
do
understand
why
design
professionals
need
to
be
included
and
they
understand
the
logistics
of
construction
and
what
are
the
different
possibilities
and
they're
often
able
to
make
suggestions
like
why?
Don't
you
use
these
different
kind
of
windows?
I
am
aware
of
because
I
use
them
in
a
construction
project
myself
and
I
think
they're
a
better
product
or
whatever
the
case
may
be.
So
I
get
I
get
I,
but
I
like
a
blend
personally.
C
And
todd
you
know,
I,
I
appreciate
the
sort
of
classes
of
people
that
you
pulled
out.
Sorry,
I've
got
a
mosquito,
but
I
think
you
know
my
experience
is
that
a
lot
of
design
professionals
bring
that
it's
certainly
the
ada
perspective,
because
they're
used
to
designing
for
ada
I
I
would
agree
with
you
that
probably
not
everybody
brings
a
perspective
around
either
transit
or
biped,
or
things
like
that,
although
certainly
a
lot
of
people
do,
I
think
there
there
could
be
ways
that
you
know
you
could
build
those
interests
into
the
design.
C
Professionals
that
are
that
are
that
are
there,
but
I
I
guess
I
don't
feel
strongly.
It
should
absolutely
be
a
majority
of
design
professionals
because
otherwise
it's
like
you
know.
Well,
I
don't
like
brick
buildings.
Well,
I
don't,
like
you
know
it's.
Those
of
us
who
are
not
design
professionals
are,
I
think
we
just
have
less
to
say.
B
This
might
be
a
question
for
for
legal
in
terms
of
the
makeup,
I
think
you
know
in
in
we
can
kind
of
encourage
certain
types
of
folks.
We
want
on
the
board
in
terms
of
a
quota,
I'm
not
sure
if
that
would
would
be
more
of
a
a
goal,
a
council
goal,
but
I'm
not
sure
if
that's
something
that
we
could
actually
enforce.
L
Todd,
I
can
probably
assist
with
that,
so
the
ability
for
council
to
establish
this
new
board
came
out
of
the
brand
new
state
legislation,
redoing
and
recodifying
state
or
city
and
county
development
regulations,
which
is
commonly
referred
to
as
160d,
and
you
guys
have
updated
some
of
our
rules
to
coordinate
with
the
160d
changes.
L
160D-300
is
the
brand
new
statute
statewide
that
allows
for
this
commission
to
be
formed
and
what
it
requires
only
is
that
all
the
members
shall
be
residents
of
your
jurisdictional
area,
so
it
must
be
within
the
city
for
all
members
and
the
appointments
have
to
be
made
in
such
a
manner
as
that,
just
a
majority
of
the
members
regardless
in
our
case,
if
you
adopted
the
nine-member
format,
five
members
have
to
have
special
training
or
experience
in
a
design
field
such
as
architecture,
landscape
design,
horticulture
city
planning
or
a
related
field.
L
Beyond
that
there
are
no
specific
requirements
so
for
those
remaining
members
city
council
can
put
in
place
whatever
requirements
or
lack
thereof,
that
they
chose.
E
G
E
E
E
Well-
and
I
would
just
say
you
know,
I'm
fine
with
the
majority
being
there,
but
I
agree
with
esther.
I
I
think
it's
important
to
have
laymen
on
these
boards
commissions
as
well,
so
that
their
point
of
view
is
insane.
C
E
A
Yeah,
I
I
was
thinking
more
there's
been
a
couple
of
projects
that
have
gotten
a
lot
of
community
pushback
in
terms
of
their
appearance.
That
just
seemed
to
be
missed
in
the
design
review,
and
you
know,
I
think,
lay
folks
might
have
just
sort
of
stated
the
obvious
that
the
proposals
were
pretty
ugly.
B
Okay,
we
have
no
other
questions.
I
think
there
is
just
one
last
slide
on
on
next
steps.
If
ashley
can
bring
up
the.
B
Presentation,
thank
you.
So
the
tentative
project
schedule
I
mentioned
before
that
we
would
staff
would
present
an
update
to
the
playing
zoning
commission
on
november
4th.
We
would
also
would
present
some
updates
to
the
downtown
riverfront
commissions
pnz.
B
The
idea
is
that
in
december
we
would
continue
our
conversation
for
a
public
hearing
on
this
item,
with
a
recommended
vote
by
playing
and
zoning
commission
in
january,
and
then
council
review
and
a
public
hearing
in
late
january
with
a
council
vote
in
early
february.
B
If
you
recall,
the
moratorium
ends
on
february
23rd,
so
this
schedule
would
allow
us
to
stay
on
target
with
the
ending
of
the
moratorium
in
february.
A
So
you
know
listening
to
all
this
and-
and
I
think
gwen
you
did-
you
articulated
it
very
well
in
terms
of
the
this
ordinance
coming
together
to
be
to
be
better
reflective
of
the
community
and
council
concerns
around
hotel
growth
and
development.
I
I
it
does
seem
that
it
could
be
nimble
enough
and
todd.
A
You
tell
me
if
I'm
wrong
that,
if,
if
there
is
ultimately
at
the
end
of
the
line,
a
decision
made
that
all
hotel
applications
will
still
come
to
council,
it
sounds
to
me,
though,
like
we
could
still
use
the
overlay
map
in
terms
of
the
size
of
hotel,
the
locations
of
hotels,
the
design
review,
the
review
structure,
the
boards,
all
of
that
could
still
exist
and
be
adopted,
even
if,
ultimately,
it
was
determined
that
all
hotel
applications
had
to
go
to
council
as
a
conditional
zoning.
B
Yes,
with
the
exception
of
some
of
the
public
benefits-
and
this
is
what
you
know,
what
brad
right.
A
Because
the
public
benefits
helped
a
hotel
avoid
council,
but
council
could
still,
as
we
have
before,
negotiate
public
benefits
as
a
part
of
the
conditional
zoning
process.
That's.
B
F
A
F
F
Well
again,
you
guys
are
the
attorneys
not
me,
but
I
think
it
just
gives
us
a
bigger.
You
know
a
much
more
solid
couple
legs
to
stand
on.
A
Sure
yeah,
so
I
think
that's
a
good
point.
I
just
you
know
right
you're
right,
I
mean
at
this
point.
The
things
that
we
have
negotiated
with
hotel
developers
are
are
not
true
contractual
conditions.
They
are
promises
made.
K
Right
so
then,
I
would
suggest
that
for
those
benefits
that
we
do
not
require
that
the
points
that
they're
given
far
exceed
others
an
example
for
me
would
be.
I
don't
even
remember
that
number
of
points
you
need,
but
if
you
give
one
million
dollars
to
the
reparations
fund
right,
you're
right
there,
what
you
need.
F
F
C
Right,
it
becomes
guidance
for
us,
I
mean
they
could
still
provide.
They
could
still.
You
know,
check
the
boxes
and
say
look
on
your
chart,
I'm
coming
here
with
220
points
and
giving
you
lots
of
the
things
that
you
want
and,
and
we
could
say,
okay,
that's
great
or
we
could,
for
whatever
reason
say
yeah.
I
don't
know.
I
mean.
A
But
but
but
the
distinction
is
that,
under
the
proposed
system,
these
would
be
enforceable
because
you,
you
have
to
accumulate
the
points,
do
the
things
to
avoid
the
council
review
and
if
and
if
we
just
continue
with
the
council
review
process
as
a
conditional
zoning.
The
things
that
are
included
in
the
public
benefits
list
are
not
contractually
enforceable.
They
would
have
to
just
be
promises
made
by
a
developer
right.
F
And
so
I
guess
that's
the
thing
for
me
is,
like
you
know,
I
I
want
them.
I
mean
it's
frustrating
to
me
when
you
know
the
developers
sit
there
and
go.
Oh
yeah
yeah,
don't
worry
that'll
happen,
but
you
know
six
years
from
now.
We
have
no
idea
and
really
we
have
no.
We
have
no
leverage.
I
think
this
really
helps
us.
Have
that
leverage.
F
You
know,
because
we've
we've
incentivized
them
not
to
come
in
front
of
council,
but
again
I
mean
you
know
maybe
rather
than
I
I
just
think
that
maybe
it's
a
conversation
that
we
all
need
to
understand
with
brad.
I
just
I
I
I'm
I'm
just
concerned.
If
you
know,
if
all
of
a
sudden
we
just
go
back
and
say
well,
everything
has
to
come
through
cz.
F
I
just
feel
like
well,
you
know,
then,
then,
these
other
the
benefits
aren't
enforceable
and
we
go
back
to
where
we
were.
And
frankly
frankly,
you
know
there
were
a
lot
of
council
members
who
approved
hotels
that
there's
no
way
we
got
these
kind
of
public
benefits.
A
No,
I
think
that's
really
important
distinction
to
make,
and
so
before
we
close
out-
and
you
know
this
is
it
this-
is
it
right
now
for
council
in
terms
of
our
direction
to
staff
they're
gonna
tweak
this
based
on
what
we
said
here
today
and
then
go
back
as
todd
mentioned
through
this
process,
so
it
will
come
back
to
city
council
on
the
suggestion
antoinette
had
about
the
density
restriction.
A
Todd.
Are
you
gonna
counsel?
Are
you
in
agreement
with
adding
that,
and
I
don't
think
we
settled
on
a
number
like
a
like
500
feet
or,
and
we
didn't
settle
on
a
number,
but
how?
How
do
we
want
to
handle
that?
Do
we
want
to
have
have
staff,
take
a
look
at
that
and
try
to
incorporate
some
kind
of
density
restriction.
A
C
E
C
I
mean
I'm
with
you
brian,
but
you
know,
but
they
can.
They
can
build
hotels,
I
mean
just
because
they
don't
build.
A
hotel
doesn't
mean
we're
going
to
get
housing.
They
can
build
housing
there
right
now
and
nobody
is
because
apparently.
C
Yes,
they
are
waiting
to
build
hotels.
I
suppose
that's
your
point.
If
we
do
limit
you
know,
I
mean
this
gets
back
to
my
theory
of
the
market,
which
apparently
I
don't
understand,
but
right.
If,
if
we
say
over
in
that
area,
you
can
only
have
five
hotels.
If
that's
the
way
it
works
out,
then
maybe
the
rest
of
it
will
develop
as
housing
or
something
else,
maybe
so.
F
So
I
I'm
I'm
interested
in
exploring
it.
I
I'm
interested
in
staff,
exploring
the
you
know,
density
or
diff
or
distance
between
hotels
or,
but
I'm
not
married
to
it
one
way
or
the
other.
F
The
only
the
only
question-
and
you
kind
of
skipped
over
this-
and
I
just
wanted
to
ask
this
question
and
we
don't
even
have
to
discuss
it,
but
at
the
last
meeting
we
talked
about
the
eliminating
or
re-looking
at
the
green
building
benefits,
because
someone
made
the
point
that
really
these
hotels
are
already
being
built
being
built
to
to
preserve,
or
you
know,
to
have
good
energy
consumption,
and
so
I
just
I
would
like
staff
to
just
talk
about
that
sometime
and
you
know
not
give
people
credit
for
things
that
they
would
automatically
be
doing.
F
So,
just
that
that,
as
I
was
looking
back
over
the
the
the
last
presentation,
that
was
just
a
question
for
me,
but
you
don't
todd,
you
don't
have
to
talk
about
it
right
now.
Just
you
know
later
on.
C
J
C
Higher
than
what
they
would
normally
be
required
to
build
is
a
good
incentive,
because
we,
I
don't
count
on
the
standard
building
code,
continuing
to
require
high.
I
mean
they
don't
they're
we're
already
six
years
behind
the
international
building
code,
so
in
north
carolina,
our
building
code
is
not
where
it
should
be.
G
Todd
I
was
wanting
to
look
at
the
bus
pass
situation
to
me.
If
you
don't
offer
a
living
wage,
you
shouldn't
get
points
for
giving
a
bus
pass.
G
You
know
they
should
go
hand
in
hand,
and
I
don't
know
how
you
all
want
to
rate
that
individually
but
yeah
to
me.
You
don't
get
the
bus,
you
don't
get
points
for
a
bus
pass.
If
you
don't
get
a
living
wage.
E
E
C
E
Think
incentivizing
I
want
to
overstate
julia,
I'm
I'm
all
in
support
of
bus
passes.
I
just
felt
like
we
have
given
folks
too
much
credit
for
just
giving
people
a
bus
pass.
G
A
So
I
wonder
if,
on
the
on
the
chart,
with
the
points,
if
you
could
say,
living
wage
is,
however
many
points
and
that
you
can
add
to
that
by
doing
a
bus
pass,
but
you
can't
jump
to
bus
pass.
You
have
to
you
got
to
do
it's
a
it's
an
add-on.
If
you're
already
doing
a
living
wage.
A
And
I
wonder
if
there's
other
items
too,
that
should
be
tiered,
like
that,
where
you
know
we
want
to
see
this
this
and
this
first
and
then,
if,
as
if
you
want
to
move
up,
you
can
do
these
other
things,
but
you
can't
do
those
first.
We
want
to
see
these
base
things
first,
I
don't
know
just
the
thought.
F
Yeah,
I
think
that
was
the
conversation
that
we
had
the
last
time
that
we
don't
want
to
see
people
cobbling
together.
You
know
10
points
here,
10
points
here,
20
points
here,
and
it
really
is
not
making
a
big,
a
big
splash
from
the
standpoint
of
community
benefits.
So,
however,
that
can
be
incorporate.
That
concept
can
be
incorporated.
I
think,
is
what
both
shanika
and
esther
are
saying.
C
And
todd,
I
don't
think
we
included
public
art
as
one
of
those
public
benefits
and
certainly
in
comparison
to
I
mean
I
think,
from
my
view
and
probably
from
the
view
of
most
people
on
council.
You
know
public
art
doesn't
rise
to
the
level
of
living,
wages
and
bus
passes
and
and
green
building,
and
all
of
that,
all
of
that.
But
at
the
same
time
you
know
it.
Ain't
like
the
city's
paying
for
public
art.
B
Just
to
clarify
we,
we
do
have
it's
30
points
right
now
for
a
300
per
room
contribution
for
the
art
fund.
B
And
then
just
you
all
know,
the
the
bus
pass
right
now
is
only
worth
10
points
and
again
for
like
a
larger
hotel
in
downtown
would
be
required
to
have
180
points.
B
So
you
know
the
way
we
we
tried
to
structure
the
table
today
is
that
you
have
to
choose
one
of
these
really
impactful
public
benefits
like
affordable
housing,
one
of
the
higher
end,
affordable
housing
options
or
like
a
lead
goal
or
platinum,
built
type
building,
along
with
a
number
of
these
smaller
benefits
like
like
the
bus
pass
for
example,
or
like
public
art
or
another
neighborhood
type
improvement,
hey
todd.
I
This
is
keith
I'd
like
to
throw
out
a
suggestion
to
add
into
the
public
benefits
portion,
which
is
if
these
developments
are
going
to
be
paying
a
living
wage
to
also
partner
with
the
inclusive
hiring
partners
program
with
the
chamber
of
commerce.
E
A
A
Okay,
if
not
all
right,
then
we
will
will
adjourn
from
this
work
session
and
we'll
be
back
on
at
five
for
the
city
council
meeting.
Okay.