►
From YouTube: City of Charlotte Transportation, Planning and Environment Committee : September 22, 2021
Description
Charlotte City Council Transportation, Planning and Environment Committee Meeting. Wednesday, September 22, 2021.
To learn more about this committee, please visit:
https://charlottenc.gov/CityCouncil/Committees/Pages/Transportation_and_Planning.aspx.
To view the agenda for this meeting, please visit:
https://charlottenc.gov/CityCouncil/Committees/Transportation%20and%20Planning%20Doc/09_22_2021_%20TAPE%20Committee%20Special%20Meeting%20Agenda.pdf
A
B
And
we
are
having
our
second
september
meeting
for
transportation,
planning
and
environment
committee
and,
as
you
know,
this
is
a
kind
of
a
carryover
of
the
last
committee
meeting,
because
we
had
a
couple
items
on
the
agenda
last
time
that
we
really
didn't
feel
like.
We
had
the
opportunity
to
to
ask
enough
questions
about
and
get
our
answers
addressed.
So
we've
got
a
full
meeting
today:
10
30
to
1
30,
and
I'm
going
to
get
started
right
away
with
introductions.
K
A
B
Great
with
that,
we're
going
to
jump
right
into
the
continuation
of
the
update
for
from
the
unified
development
ordinance,
and
I
I
believe
that
council
members
had
the
opportunity
to
submit
their
questions
on
the
udo.
And
so
I'm
going
to
turn
this
over
to
allison.
Craig
and
it
says
laura
is
floor
online
or
are
you
going
to
just
take
it
over.
F
I'll
start
laura's
online
and
I
think
she's
having
trouble
on
muting.
If
so,
okay,
someone
can
work
on
that.
So
we
appreciate
the
opportunity
to
come
back
before
council
committee
to
talk
about
the
udo
it's.
The
draft
is
expected
to
come
out
the
week
of
october
4th,
and
so
we
appreciate
the
opportunity
to
take
a
deeper
dive
into
some
of
the
new
concepts
in
council
packets.
F
Some
of
the
other
important
concepts
for
planning
for
future
street
needs
looking
at
how
we
apply
new,
curb
construction,
making
sure
we
have
adequate
street
infrastructure,
protecting
right-of-way
wits
for
a
future
multimodal
street
investment
and
some
of
the
new
ideas
too.
That
started
with
tod
as
looking
at
transportation
impact
studies
being
applied
consistently
throughout
development,
and
not
just
in
buy
right
and
rezoning
situations
as
well
as
incentivizing,
tdm
transportation
demand
management
in
more
situations
and
more
development.
We've
got
ed
mckinney
and
liz
babson
online
to
be
able
to
answer
questions
on
those.
F
I
know,
there's
been
a
lot
of
questions
about
stormwater.
I
think
that
was
one
of
the
questions
that
was
submitted
to
staff
to
address
today,
and
I
know
it
came
up
in
the
resenting
meeting
and
so
really
looking
at
being
able
to
better
protect
from
flooding,
particularly
in
our
infill
and
smaller
developments,
and
we've
got
mike
and
daryl
here
in
the
room
to
be
able
to
answer
questions
on
those
wanting
to
really
better
protect
our
natural
resources
going
forward.
F
So
looking
at
protecting
native
trees
of
30
inches
or
higher,
as
well
as
starting
to
address
canopy
loss.
That's
occurring
in
our
infill
and
single
family
development.
We
also
want
to
recognize
that
there
are
not
every
site
is
unique
and
wanting
to
allow
for
greater
flexibility
and
options
in
meeting
the
tree.
M
Later
great,
so
we
do
have
some
overlay
districts
that
deal
with
different
council
objectives,
and
the
first
is
the
neighborhood
character.
Overlay
district
is
one
of
the
items
that
we
will
have
in
the
forthcoming
udo,
designed
to
preserve
the
existing
character
of
a
neighborhood
and
would
be
applied
neighborhood
by
neighborhood
available
for
our
lower
density
zoning
districts,
and
it
would
apply
to
all
residential
construction
changes,
expansion
alterations
and
want
to
talk
a
little
bit
more
about
how
this
would
work
next
slide.
M
Ask
for
the
plan
council
to
ask
to
apply
the
neighborhood
conservation
overlay
and
the
goals
are
to
create
a
consistency
and
scale
in
a
neighborhood
or
maintain
a
consistency
in
scale
proportion
and
rhythm
and
similarity
in
the
way
that
on-site
elements
like
vehicle
parking,
landscaping,
trees
and
accessory
structures
are
addressed
with
regulation.
So
it
would
create
unique
regulations
for
the
elements
that
the
neighborhood
wanted
to
pursue.
M
In
addition
to
that,
there
are
some
standards,
a
minimum
of
one
block
face.
These
would
be
neighborhoods
of
that
have
been
established
at
least
25
years,
a
minimum
of
20
75
percent
of
the
lots
in
the
overlay
area
developed
and
would
not
be
in
addition
to
the
historic
district
overlay.
It
would
be
another
option
that
neighborhoods
could
use.
M
And
so
again,
it
would
look
at
creating
a
plan
initially
that
had
new
zoning
standards
for
neighborhoods.
That
would
be,
we
would
work
with
the
neighborhood
on
what
they
wanted,
creating
that
character
plan
that
could
deal
with
lot
area
lot
widths,
your
setbacks,
your
maximum
height
building
coverage,
amount
of
surface
parking,
trees,
tree
planting,
and
it
would
be
based
on
the
existing
character
of
the
neighborhood's
neighborhood,
so
not
intended
to
change
the
character,
but
to
maintain
the
character
that
we
have
now.
M
I
think
the
other
thing
important
for
people
to
know
for
council
members
and
others
to
know
is
that
the
uses
in
the
underlying
zoning
districts
could
not
be
changed
with
the
neighborhood
character,
so
it
would
not
deal
with
uses.
It
would
just
deal
with
what
is
the
feel
of
the
character?
Where
are
the
buildings
placed?
What
are
the
heights
and
so
forth,
to
be
able
to
maintain
that
character
and
it
would
be
tailored
to
each
neighborhood.
M
Eligibility
would
be
determined,
there'd,
be
a
public
info
meeting
to
discuss
with
the
neighborhood
and
then,
if
you
know
the
neighborhood
wanted
to
pursue
it
and
as
there
are
resources
depending
on
the
demand
for
this,
there
would
be
the
development
of
that
neighborhood
character
plan
with
staff
working
very
closely
with
the
neighborhood
and
assessing
the
current
characteristics
and
which
ones
which
of
the
current
characteristics
should
be
cut
or
put
into
zoning.
That
is
special
for
that
neighborhood
after
the
plan
is
done.
That
does
not
mean
the
overlay
would
be
applied.
M
So,
ultimately,
it
becomes
council
decision
and
then
we
also
have
a
residential
infill
overlay,
which
is
a
little
bit
more
prescriptive,
but
it
is
so
it's
not
as
neighborhood
specific
but
does
have
some
additional
standards
that
a
neighbor
pursue
for
their
neighborhood
and
it's
this
one
is
a
all.
The
standards
are
none
of
them.
It's
really
to
facilitate
infill
development
in
our
neighborhood
one
place
type
and
to
maintain
character
again
in
in
those
areas,
so
complement
the
existing
pattern
and
scale
and
controls
height
and
dwelling
size.
M
We'd
want
to
have
at
least
50
contiguous
lots
and
could
be
initiated
by
either
a
majority
vote
of
council.
If
you
all
thought
this
is
a
neighborhood
that
really
needs
a
residential,
infill,
overlay
or
60
of
property
owners
within
the
designated
area,
and
this
would
also
be
applied
to
those
our
neighborhood
one
sounding
districts
and
just
to
give
you
context.
M
M
M
We
have
put
a
caveat
in
here
that
allows
existing
homes
or
an
an
allowance
for
existing
homes
to
be
expanded,
so
that
we're
not
prohibiting
that.
But
we
want
to
make
sure
that
again,
everything
remains
in
character
with
what's
there
and
we
also
have
an
allowance
so
that
we
make
sure
there
is
enough
size
so
that
a
duplex
or
triplex
could
be
built.
A
M
M
What
we
have
done
is
made
some
changes
eliminated
geographic
limitations
on
where
this
could
go
and
and
hope
we
have
something
that
will
better
align
with
the
market
demand
than
what
we
have
on
the
books.
Now,
but
again,
you
get
a
slight
slightly
larger
number
of
lots
in
order
with
that,
you
actually
then
provide
50
of
your
additional
units
at
eighty
percent
of
the
area,
median
income
or
less
so
look.
B
C
C
M
C
C
M
Thank
you.
I,
I
think
that's
a
really
good
point
and
I
think,
as
we've
been
thinking
about
this,
what
we've
seen
in
other
communities
is.
It
is
a
larger
neighborhood
and
I
think
we
would
want
to
reach
out
if
part
of
the
neighborhood
comes
in
to
the
larger
neighborhood,
to
see
if
they're
interested.
At
the
same
time,
I
think
we
certainly
agree
with
you.
We
could
have
you
know,
part
a
of
a
neighborhood
in
part
b
that
has
slightly
different
standards.
C
And
I
believe
that
there's
going
to
be
so
much
interest
in
this
in
every
part
of
the
city
that
it's
going
to
have
to
be
someone's
job,
I
think
to
literally
just
do
at
least
for
a
period
of
a
couple
of
years.
I
think
everyone
who
believes
that
their
block
or
their
couple
of
blocks
might
be
eligible
is
going
to
want
to
do
this,
I'm
okay
with
that.
I
just
think
it
is
going
to
be
something
we
get
a
lot
of
adoption
around.
M
G
G
C
Yeah
I
mean,
and
I
would
be
curious
how
many
applications
they
vetted
and
determined
were
not
eligible,
but
yeah
I'll
be
I'll,
be
shocked
if
there
aren't
lots
of
applications
that
doesn't
mean
in
every
case
it'll
be
applicable,
but
I
mean
I've
already
got
people
and
we
haven't
even
implemented
this.
I
already
have
multiple
neighborhoods
asking
about
well,
tell
me
more
about
these
character
overlays,
because
we're
going
to
want
to
do
that,
so
everybody
at
least
initially
thinks
they're
going
to
want
to
do
it.
E
Yes,
ma'am.
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
I
I
agree
with
council
member
eggleston
that
I
I
I
think
we're
going
to
see
a
high
volume
of
applications.
Now,
whether
or
not
they're
eligible,
I
don't
know
either,
but
I
suspect
the
same
my
question.
So
I
think
we
were
just
mentioning
or
just
talking
about,
maybe
the
the
smallest
denominator
here,
which
is
block
by
block
I'm
wondering
how
large
or
or
what's
the
scope
of
what
we
defined
to
be
a
neighborhood.
E
Oh
curse
comes
to
mind
in
my
district,
where
we
could
look
at.
I
guess
what
we
kind
of
conventionally
believed
the
neighborhood
to
be,
which
is
much
smaller
than
what
some
plat
maps
would
suggest,
which
would
have
it
extending
almost
into,
but
almost
in
the
cotswold
frankly.
So
so,
how
do
we
define
the
the
scope
or
the
parameters
of
what
a
neighborhood
is?
E
But,
but
I
think
you
know,
I
suspect,
that
we're
probably
going
to
receive
some
applications
that
whose
intent
is
to
to
limit
unit
number
per
lot,
and
I'm
wondering
if,
if
that
is
something
that
is
also
applicable
here
in
this
this,
this
idea
of
what
constitute
neighborhood.
You
constitutes
neighborhood
character,.
M
E
First
question
was
about:
how
do
we
define
the
scope
of
what
is
a
neighborhood?
I
mean
once
again,
there
are
areas
where
we
could
have
swaths
of
of
of
you
know,
trees
that
are
still
considered
within
a
neighborhood,
frankly,
creating
character
there,
so
on
a
larger
scale,
outside
of
just
this
block
by
block
approach,
how
large
could
a
neighborhood
be?
How
do
we
define
the
parameters
or
the
boundaries
of
the
neighborhood.
M
So
another
great
question:
we
haven't
put
a
limitation
on
neighborhood
size,
but
I
think
what
will
probably
limit
it
and
if
we
really
end
up
like
it's
very
large,
and
we
need
to
do
this
in
a
you-
know
a
couple
of
pieces-
we
can
do
that,
but
alan
goodwin
who's
on
I'm
sorry.
I
noticed
my
camera's
not
working
apologize
for
that.
M
On
the
other
hand,
I
think
if
we
do
end
up
with
really
large
areas
with
that
many
people
we're
going
to
have
to
see,
is
there
common
character
in
all
these
areas
and
go
through
the
criteria
and
see
if
all
that
qualifies
and
if
it
really
seems
to
be
like
this
is
too
large
of
an
area
to
do
in
one
plan
we
need
to
split
it
up.
We
may
recommend
doing
that.
E
And
so
what
I
gather
laura
is
that
we're
talking
about
existing
communities
here
right,
we're
not
talking
about
the
any
areas
that
that
are
undeveloped,
right
being
somewhat
or
potentially
being
included
in
the
in
in
what
maybe
existing
community
would
consider
to
be
its
neighborhood
right.
So
I
mean
it's
just
those
existing
kind
of
pre-existing
neighborhoods
that
are
built
the
buildings
within
it
and
that's
kind
of
setting
the
parameters.
M
Yes,
and
it
would
also,
if
they're,
they
can
infill
lots
in
an
established
neighborhood,
it
would
apply
to
that
as
well
as
redeveloped
in
there.
But
if
there's
a
large
vacant
piece
of
land
or
the
neighborhoods
are
very
recent,
this
wouldn't
apply.
You
wouldn't
be
able
to
apply
for
this.
We're
really
looking
at
neighborhoods
that
have
been
established
for
at
least
25
years.
D
D
I
think,
among
other
things,
these
provisions
could
provide
a
useful
tool
for
the
anti-displacement
group
to
actually
achieve
its
mission
of
protecting
vulnerable
neighborhoods
because
they
could
promote
the
designation
of
those
neighborhoods
and
thereby
excuse
me
reduce
the
risk
of
inappropriate
development
there.
That
could
work
to
the
disadvantage
of
people
who
live
there,
but
there
are
also
neighborhoods
in
my
district,
which
does
consist
of
more
than
just
valentine
so
park.
Ridge,
for
example,
and
raintree
are
mature
neighborhoods,
where
I
think
we
might
want
to
look
at
this.
D
D
D
The
other
thing
is:
if
you
have
a
neighborhood
like
braintree
here,
that
that's
actually
older
than
that
and
the
style
of
the
homes,
there
is
kind
of
I'd,
call
it
middle
class,
maybe
a
little
less
so
would
we
would
we
require
that
they
further
development
be
compatible
with
that,
to
the
extent
that
people
couldn't
tear
down
houses,
for
example,
and
build
large
mcmansions
on
those
lots
or
or
how?
How
prescriptive
would
the
nco
be
in
a
case
like
that.
M
Thank
you
great
question.
Each
neighborhood
will
decide
what
are
the
characteristics
that
they
would
want
in
their
neighborhood
character
plan.
So
it
could
be
the
neighborhood
says.
What
we
really
want
to
do
is
keep
larger
setbacks,
but
we're
not
concerned
if
large
homes
get
built
or
we're
really
concerned
about
the
size
of
the
homes,
but
we're
okay
with
the
base
district
setback,
but
there's
a
menu
that
each
neighborhood
will
have
available
to
choose
from
on
which
things
they
think
are
important
for
maintaining
their
character.
D
I
I
just
want
to
understand
that
I'm
not
expressing
an
opinion
about
it.
Do
you
have
a
sense
of-
and
this
is
a
little
bit
further
to
the
prior
questions
of
what
percentage
of
our
land
area
might
ultimately
be
included
in
ncos
I
mean
what
is
your
sense
of
just
the
magnitude
of
this
particular
provision.
M
There
has
been
demand
for
this,
but
it
hasn't
been
every
neighborhood,
because
a
lot
of
neighborhoods
have
their
community
associations,
their
deed
restrictions
that
manage
these
kind
of
things.
So
they
may
not
be
as
interested,
and
you
have
to
have
enough
members
of
the
community
landowners
saying
that
they
want
this.
M
So
I
think
over
time
we
might
see
maybe
20
or
30,
but
I
could
be
wrong
and
council
member
ecclestone
is
thinking
a
much
higher
number,
but
from
what
we've
seen
in
raleigh
and
greensboro
and
so
forth,
it
hasn't
been
every
neighborhood
and
it's
typically
been
in
town
neighborhoods.
But
we
may
see
something
very
different
here
and
and
again
I
think
we're
gonna
have
to
deal
with
kind
of
we
may
if
we
have
that
much
demand
have
to
deal
with.
How
do
we
prioritize
going
through
this
process
with
the
neighborhoods.
D
Right,
I
just
wanted
to
get
a
sense
again
in
in
defining
these
things.
You
know
what
you
would
consider
a
a
an
acceptable
volume
of
applications
and
when
you
would
think
that
maybe
we
need
to
prioritize
but
I'll
accept
your
answer.
That's
fine
and
madam
chair,
if
I
may
just
quickly
on
the
infill
side,
certainly
in
my
district-
and
I
think
this
is
true
everywhere-
the
circumstances
of
infills
vary
a
lot.
D
It
depends
on
what's
next
door
and
so
on,
usually
typically
in
my
district,
it's
an
r3
type
of
zone
property
that
really
isn't
suitable
for
single
family
and
you
might
get
small
commercial
development
there
retail
something
like
that.
But
it
varies
a
lot
case
to
case.
So
can
we
craft
a
an
infill
kind
of
characteristic?
You
propose
some
some
dimensions
for
this
thing
that
can
we
really
craft
something
where
one
size
fits
all
and
by
the
way,
I'm
grateful
that
we're
dealing
with
this,
because
the
infills
have
been
kind
of
random.
D
M
M
D
D
So
I
just
I'll
just
make
the
comment
laura.
I
don't
really
need
an
answer,
but
I'm
saying
we
need
to
be
prepared
for
the
variety
of
situations
which
you
know
all
too
well
that
can
arise
when
you're
talking
about
infill,
because
those
little
patches
of
land
can
be
difficult
frankly
and
and
not
conform
to
what
we're
trying
to
accomplish
around
them.
Last
brief
comment:
the
density
bonus.
D
As
you
know,
the
density
bonus
hasn't
worked.
So
I
hope
that
as
we
develop
this
further,
we
will
engage
in
discussions
and
negotiations
with
developers
who
have
expressed
an
interest
in
being
involved
in
creating
affordable
housing,
but
they
haven't
seen
anything
from
us
yet
that
works
for
them
commercially.
L
I
think
it's
more
of
a
comment
as
something
that
mr
driggs
brought
up:
the
the
additional
eligibility
of
ncos
neighborhood
character,
overlay
districts
of
being
established
for
25
years.
I
I
just
would
remind
staff-
and
I
remind
neighborhood
leaders
right.
This
is
a
plan
that
is
supposed
to
be
implemented
over
a
generation
right,
so
we
might
be
looking
about
how
this
is
going
to
affect
this,
the
rush
of
neighborhoods
right
now,
but
we
will
have
neighborhoods
that
will
be
coming
online.
L
You
know
over
these
next
20
or
so
years,
I
think
of,
for
instance,
the
area
known
as
as
south
end
right.
It
didn't
exist
25
years
in
in
in
the
in
the
regards
that
it
is
now
look
at
new,
emerging
neighborhoods
that
encroach
on
old
neighborhoods
like
lozo.
If
you
go
a
little
a
little
further
south.
This
is
an
opportunity
right.
I
know.
Neighborhoods
and
definitions
of
rape,
neighborhoods
and
characteristics
of
neighborhoods
are
something
that
is
obviously
very
important
to
our
constituents.
L
This
is
something
that
we
heard
a
lot
about
coming
from
all
sides
during
the
process,
but
I
think
the
message
to
community
leaders
and
neighborhood
members
and
as
new
people
continue
to
grow
and
our
neighborhoods
continue
to
change
is
that
neighbors
have
the
opportunity
to
define
what
their
neighborhood
character
actually
is.
So
by
definition
by
this
definition,
for
instance,
south
end's
character,
neighborhood
character
cannot
be
defined
yet
right,
although
we
might
say
we
might
anecdotally,
think
that
it
has
a
certain
character.
L
L
We
were
doing
the
intentional
work
to
define
some
of
these
things,
so
we
could
manage
future
growth
and
and
create
neighborhoods
that
are
sustainable
and
perpetuated
throughout
time
under
the
under
the
guidance
of
of
these
implementations
that
we're
doing
so.
I
don't
know
how
we
do
that,
as
mr
eggleston
said.
L
Maybe
there's
going
to
be
have
to
be
somebody
that
manages
that
immediate
process,
but
who
is
going
to
be
thinking
about
that
long
term
and
working
with
neighborhoods
that
over
the
years
do
you
know,
have
the
ability,
where
other
neighborhoods
don't
to
define
what
their
their
neighborhood
character
is
going
to
become.
You
know
if
that
makes
sense.
B
B
It's
going
to
have
this
great
character,
but
I
think
it's
going
to
be
harder
than
people
think
to
get
75
or
60
percent
of
a
neighborhood
to
agree
on
what
that
character
is
and
what
people
have
to
comply
with,
because
everybody
has
different
ideas
of
what
they
want
their
house
to
look
like
and
and
they
don't
want
to
limit
the
ability
to
sell
it.
So
just
an
observation,
but
with
that
we're
going
to
move
along
to
laura,
you
were
in
the
middle
of
the
mixed
income
residential
development.
B
M
So
as
we,
we
have
re-looked
at
vehicle
parking
standards
entirely
within
the
udo
and
want
to
present
a
new
approach
and
expect
will
be
lots
of
perspectives.
We're
looking
forward
to
hearing
from
you
guys.
So,
as
we
know,
charlotte
developed
really
is
an
auto
oriented
city.
We
don't
need
to
go
into
that
too
much
we're
I'm
trying
to
get
more
of
a
multi-moodle
approach,
and
we
know
that
this
is
a
transition.
M
So
we
would
have
minimum
off
street
parking
and
no
maximum
parking
limits,
and
these
would
be
for
if
we
could
go
back
just
real
quickly.
Well,
no,
I'm
sorry
keep
going
go
back
to
slide
you
on
yeah.
This
would
be
for
our
our
manufacturing
and
logistics.
Our
industrial
areas
are
some
of
our
less
densely
developed
campuses,
our
mobile
home
parks,
our
neighborhood
one
place
type
districts
and
are
lower
intensity,
multi-family
and
so
typical
standards.
M
We
don't
have
to
belabor
this,
but
for
family
two
spaces
per
unit
for
other
residential
one
space
per
unit
and
then
for
non-residential,
usually
500
square
feet
per
unit.
But
then
we
do
have
some
some
uses
that
have
very
unique
standards,
but
we
have
some
baseline,
so
that
is
probably
our
most
traditional
tier
and
the
next
here
is
tier
2,
where
we
would
include
both
a
minimum
and
a
maximum
for
our
off-street
parking.
M
So
you
would
have
to
provide
at
least
this
many
spaces,
but
no
more
than
than
this
many
spaces
maximum
doesn't
apply
to
parking
structures,
and
this
would
be
for
our
evolving
urban
districts.
So
our
innovative
mixed
use
district,
our
intensely
developed
campuses,
our
neighborhood
centers,
are
our
community
activity
center.
The
less
intensely
developed
are
commercial
centers
and
the
most
intense
of
our
neighborhood
to
or
our
higher
density
residential
again
we
have
a
minimum
here,
one
space
per
unit,
a
maximum
of
one
space
per
bedroom
and
some
typical
minimums
and
maximums
for
non-residential.
M
M
If
you
can
show
that
you
are
handling
parking,
otherwise,
maybe
you
have
a
specific
strategy
for
your
site
that
says
we're
not
going
to
allow
people
to
to
own
cars.
Like
we've
seen
on
a
resenting
recently
or
in
an
area
with
the
city
parking
permit
program,
we
then
would
have
maximums
of
one
space
per
bedroom
or
residential
and
then
fairly
low,
well
relatively
low
compared
to
the
others
maximum
for
non-residential.
M
So
again,
just
to
sum
up
a
three-tiered
approach
based
on
the
context.
We
expect
in
each
of
these
areas
and
how
quickly
they're
transitioning
to
be
being
less
auto
oriented
and
just
want
to
leave
you
guys
with.
This
is
our
kind
of
first
thought
on
this.
We're
interested
in
hearing
your
feedback
and
also
what
we
might
adopt
initially
could
be,
could
evolve
over
time
and
could
be
adjusted
as
our
community
continues
to
change,
and
I
believe
that's
my
last
slide.
M
F
M
M
A
medical
campus.
The
ofc
is
office
flex
campus,
so
those
would
be
more
business
parks,
mhp
manufactured
housing
in
one
are
those
neighborhood
one
districts,
all
of
our
neighborhood
one
districts
for
that
place,
type
and
n2.
A
and
b
are
our
less
intensely
developed,
townhome
and
multi-family
districts,
so
for
tier
two,
innovative
mixed
use
are
intensely
developed.
M
Campus
districts
ic2
our
neighborhood
centers,
our
community
activity
center
cac
one.
The
less
intense
version
of
that
cgnc
are
our
our
commercial
districts,
which
are
really
are
frankly,
more
auto
oriented,
think
auto
dealerships,
big
boxes
and
so
forth
that
people
would
still,
at
least
in
the
near
term,
be
driving
to,
and
then
n2c
is
our
most
intensely
developed,
multi-family
district
and
then
tier
three,
where
we
would
only
have
parking
maximums
in
almost
all
cases
is
the
more
intensely
developed
community
activity
center,
our
regional
activity,
centers
think
south
park.
M
M
Thank
you,
I'm
just
trying
to
see
if
someone
else
wanted
take
this,
because
we
really
think
our
community
is
transitioning
and
that
there
are.
We
have
heard
this.
We
have
heard
both
sides
of
this
perspective.
We've
had
some
people
that
are
saying
we
need
more
parking
and
others
are
saying
we
need
less.
We've
tried
to
find
a
middle
ground,
but
again
we're
very
interested
in
seeing
kind
of
where
council
lands
on
this.
L
L
Projects
and
and
products
need
parking.
Then
the
market
will
supply
that.
That's
what
people
you
know,
that's
what
people
will
build
to
to
sell
their
product.
Why?
I
don't
understand
why
we
have
to
mandate
the
the
creation
of
certain
types
of
parking
on
people's
land?
If
that's
not
what
they
want
to
do,
and
that's
that's
not
what
their
their
market
will
respond
on
to
not
having
that,
I
I
I
so
those
are
two
questions.
M
Sure
so
secondary
effects.
Let
me
hit
that
one,
I
think.
That's
probably
easiest
is
you
may
have
a
neighborhood
that
it's
very
dependent
upon
on
street
parking
just
at
the
time
that
they
were
built,
they
didn't
have
driveways
and
off
street
parking,
and
so
some
of
those
folks
are
used
to
parking
in
front
of
their
house.
M
M
You
could
have
people
starting
to
park
in
their
next
door.
Neighbors
parking
lots
because
not
enough
was
parking
was
provided
on
their
site.
Why
we
took
this
approach?
Is
we
followed
the
comprehensive
plan,
guidance
that
talked
about
reducing
parking,
and
that's
really?
What
we've
tried
to
do
is
is
to
reduce
the
parking
again.
I
think,
ultimately,
if
we
get
different
guidance
from
council
and
and
there
there's
a
change
in
that
we
have
the
flexibility,
we're
just
at
the
beginning
process
of
the
udo
to
make
these
adjustments.
M
L
Thank
you,
that's
my
last
comment
and
request.
I
think
it's
important
for
us
to
to
remember
and
and
for
us
to
state
to
our
citizens
that
individual
citizens
do
not
own
the
public
investment,
I.e,
the
streets,
curbs
and
sidewalks
that
are
public,
even
though
the
status
quo
might
make
some
people
in
some
neighborhoods
feel
that
way.
That
is
not
in
fact
the
truth.
I
would
like
to
see
a
udl
option
that
that
that
does
not
have
any
parking
minimums
in
it.
B
I
just
want
to
comment
on
the
secondary
impact,
because
I
I
think
you
know
there
are
there
are-
I
can
think
of
the
central
coffee
on
central
avenue.
They've
got
a
few
parking
spots
and
it
used
to
be
before
some
of
those
apartments
were
built
that
their
customer
base,
a
lot
of
folks,
myself
included,
would
park
on
the
street.
B
Now,
if
you
had
one
of
those
apartment
buildings
that
were
built
and
didn't,
it
took
advantage
of
the
fact
that
there's
no
parking
minimum
and
nobody
had
a
parking
spot
in
those
apartments,
they're
all
going
to
be
on
the
street
and
that
particular
restaurant
vendor,
whatever
retail
spot,
really
only
has
two
or
three
parking
spots.
Now
there
are.
B
If,
in
fact,
it's
very
well
known
that
there's
nowhere
to
park.
So
I
think
it's
a
dynamic
conversation
that
we
have
to
have
and
we
have
to
be
willing
to
to
adjust
to
it.
So
I
almost
wonder
if
there's
a
way
to
say,
there's
a
there's,
a
a
measure
in
a
particular
area,
and
we
talked
about
this
on
cleveland
and
we
we
approved
that
rezoning
tod
conditional
because
it
had
gotten
to
a
saturation
point
where
too
many
of
the
restaurants
and
businesses.
B
There
did
not
have
any
parking
and
to
add
another
building
like
that,
with
no
parking
at
all
hit
a
point
of
saturation,
so
I
don't.
I
don't
know
if
there's
a
way
to
measure
that
to
say
okay,
you
can
have
no
parking
unless
we
hit
a
certain
amount
of
density,
where
there's
too
much
no
parking
development
in
the
area,
just
a
thought.
L
Again,
I
think
you're
illuminating
appointment,
pro
tem
of
us
trying
to
create
policy
to
guide
the
market
when,
when
you're
dealing
with
businesses
and
business
models
in
in
a
growing
city
folks
do
have
to
adjust
and
some
folks
are
going
to
adjust
and
some
aren't.
So
if
them
again,
if
the
market
is
going
to
provide
for
for
for
lens,
intense
parking
structures
and
people
are
going
to
want
to
buy
and
live
and
work
and
play
there,
then
so
be
it.
L
L
I'm
not
saying
that
we
should
necessarily
prohibit
parking.
I
don't
think
anybody
is
saying,
prohibit
parking
so
again
if
the
market
wants
to
respond
in
that
way,
they
can
and
and
should
do
that.
I
just
don't
know
why
we
would
mandate
for
folks
who,
who
think
they
have
a
a
a
market,
why?
We
would
want
to
limit
that
here
in
the
city
of
charlotte,
as
we
continue
to
grow.
B
Yeah,
no,
I
hear
you
I
just
I'm
thinking
in
particular
neighborhood
in
washington
dc
that
lost
their
restaurants
because
they
had
a
couple
great
little
neighborhood,
restaurants,
that
had
no
parking
and
when
the
parking
situation
got
so
bad,
the
neighborhood
was
able
to
put
permanent
parking
on
on
all
of
those
streets.
And
so,
if
you
didn't
live
in
the
neighborhood
and
could
park
there,
because
you
had
a
permit,
you
couldn't
go
to
that
restaurant
and
so
from
a
quality
of
life
standpoint.
I
do
think
it
matters.
B
I
don't
want
to
rely
on
the
market
because
the
market's
going
to
do
what
works
for
them
from
a
profit
standpoint
and
it's
cheaper
to
build
something
with
no
parking.
So
to
your
point,
everybody
has
the
right
to
those
streets,
but
if
you
build
things
that
are
going
to
cut
other
people
out
from
using
the
streets
as
well,
you
don't
have
a
balance
and-
and
that's
my
concern
is:
if
we
really
want
quality
of
life
and
we
want
different
uses
in
our
neighborhoods,
then
we
have
to
have
some
flexibility
about
this
a
little
bit.
B
L
Would
last
thing-
and
I
know
mr
eggleston
is
in
line-
I
would
just
say
you
mentioned
something
right
here-
that
the
market
is
going
to
respond
to
by
building
things
that
are
cheaper
or
cost
less
per
unit,
and
that
is
the
inherent
problem
that
we're
trying
to
solve
here
in
charlotte.
Is
that
the
cost
of
building
of
moving
dirt
and
building
housing
business?
L
We
have
regulations
here
that
prevent
different
price
points
from
coming
to
market,
and
I
I
think
we
should
take
the,
and
I
thought
the
goal
was
to
find
opportunity
to
provide
a
much
wider
diversity
of
price
point,
and
so,
if
the
market
is
going
to
provide
something
at
a
lower
price
point
because
they
don't
have
to
provide
those
parking
structures
or
those
parking
spaces,
I
think
that's
literally
kind
of
what
we're
aiming
to
do
to
bring
options
to
the
table.
Thank
you.
D
D
Selwyn,
the
restaurant
on
the
corner
there
people
park
in
the
lot
across
the
street
people
park
wherever
they
can
find
a
place
to
put
their
car.
So
my
general
comment
here
is
that
as
we
regulate
parking,
we
should
attempt
to
sort
of
squeeze
the
availability
of
parking
in
such
a
way
as
to
make
alternatives
to
cars
more
attractive,
and
we
should
try
to
drive
the
process
that
way.
D
People
parking
on
private
property
or
in
places
that
currently
are
occupied
by
residents
who
feel
that
they
have
a
right
to
park
near
their
house.
And
the
other
thing
is
that
if
we,
if
we're
too
aggressive
about
limiting
parking,
you
can
bet
that
the
cost
to
park
in
places
like
uptown
is
going
to
skyrocket
and
and
that
for
people
who
need
to
park
because
they
don't
have
a
means
of
transportation
is
punitive.
In
a
lot
of
cases.
D
So
I
think
we
ought
to
have
a
metric
that
it
is
is
refers
to
the
existing
situation,
and
perhaps
we
ought
to
think
about
defining
the
metric
in
such
a
way
that
it
can
evolve
over
time
in
response
to
observed
trends
in
car
ownership
and
parking
requirements,
so
that
we
don't
try
to
put
in
place
right
now.
A
long-term
plan
that
locks
in
a
number
that
could
be
too
aggressive
now
and
not
aggressive
enough
in
10
years
time,
and
and
can
we
plan
for
that?
D
Somehow
even
now,
obviously
you
know
we
always
have
the
opportunity
to
make
changes
later.
But
if
the
current
document
thinks,
in
terms
of
our
constantly
trying
to
kind
of
squeeze
the
availability
of
parking
to
induce
people
to
get
out
of
their
cars,
then
how
will
we
kind
of
maintain
that
pressure
going
forwards?
D
D
C
C
Most
of
those
secondary
impacts
happen
closer
into
the
city,
and
so
there
are
things
that
I
hear
about
more
often,
maybe
than
others,
but
I
do
think
that
that
an
example
like
the
one
that
we
had
sometime
earlier
this
year,
where
there
was
a
pledge
essentially
to
target
that
they
were
going
to
be
asking
people
to
pledge
that
they
would
not
own
a
car.
I
think
things
like
that.
I'd
like
to
see
more
of
them.
I
hope
that
that
works.
The
way
that
we
believe
and
hope
that
it
will.
C
Are
we
doing
anything
to
encourage
structured
parking,
as
opposed
to
you
know,
a
large
sea
of
surface
parking,
because
we've
talked
a
lot
about
storm
water?
Lately,
you
know
I'm
thinking
about
places
like
stonecrest
south
park,
mall
south
park.
Mall
actually
has
a
mix
of
surface
parking
and
structured
parking,
but
structured
parking
obviously
can
be
activated
on
the
ground
level.
It
can
create
the
same
number
of
parking
spaces
with
less
of
a
footprint
and
are
they?
Is
there
a
way
that
we
can
encourage
people
to
go
that
route?
C
You
go
to
stonecrest,
there's
no
structure
parking
that
I'm
aware
of
and
how
many
acres
of
surface
parking
lot
that
is
impervious
surface.
So
I
feel
like
there's
an
opportunity
there
too,
to
kill
a
couple
birds
with
one
stone.
It
creates
more
opportunity
for
us
to
create
pervious
service
if
that's
the
opposite
of
impervious,
and
I
know
that
the
costs
are
greater,
but
I
feel
like
there's,
there's
probably
a
way
that
we
could
make
that
make
sense
for
folks,
and
I
I
think
it
just
leads
to
better
development.
M
That's
a
great
question:
we've
looked
at,
I
need
to
go
back
and
see
and
we
can
make
sure
that
it's
in
there,
if
it's
not,
but
this
may
fly
in
the
face
of
some
of
the
other
comments,
but
maybe
not
demand-wise
that
maybe
you
could
increase
your
maximum
parking
where
you
have
a
maximum.
If
you
do
it
in
structure
parking,
so
that
might
be
a
possibility
of
maybe
incenting.
M
B
D
Is
response
to
that
comment?
Madam
chair?
Oh
sure?
Go
ahead.
I
just
wanted
to
say
further
to
mr
winston's
comments.
The
decision
about
structured
parking
is
basically
economic.
You
look
at
the
cost
of
the
land
and,
and
you
you
kind
of
run
your
numbers
and
in
some
environments,
as
was
the
case
in
south
charlotte
years
ago.
The
cost
of
a
structure
is
not
justified
in
relation
to
the
cost
of
the
land.
C
You're
nodding,
like
you,
know
what
I'm
saying,
but
having
the
flat
floor
pipes
having
a
certain
floor
heights,
it
is
something
that
could
be
used
for
parking
now
and
it
could
be
used
for
something
else
later.
Do
we
have
anything
as
we're
looking
at
the
udo
that
encourages
that
sort
of
potential
for
adaptive
reuse
down
the
road,
as
we
hope
that
our
parking
needs
decrease
over
time.
M
B
Thank
you.
So
my
question
is
really
that
has
to
do
with
parking
minimums
maximums
in
the
former
umud,
which
you're
saying
is
now
you
see
yes,
you're
saying:
there's
no
parking
minimums
and
maximum
parking
limits
apply,
so
I'm
gonna
be.
I
will
need
to
know
before
I
can
really
get
on
board
with
all
of
this
parking
discussion.
B
What's
going
to
change
and
will
we
have
a
formula
that
demonstrates
that,
while
we
admit,
if
you're
getting
about
build,
12
high
rises
in
uptown
you're
going
to
have
to
have
some
additional
parking,
but
overall,
what's
our
total
parking
inventory
in
uptown
and
how
are
we
managing
it
so
that,
unfortunately,
it
does
become
more
expensive
to
park?
Uptown
the
congestion
is
worse,
and
so
we
are
moving
people
in
the
direction
of
wanting
when
we
make
our
investment
in
public
transportation,
that
we
get
more
people
off
the
roads
and
to
use
public
transportation.
B
B
M
A
M
On
how
much
parking
you
can
build
in
in
our
district,
this
would
put
a
limit
on
it
and
we
also
have
a
minimum
right
now
that
even
in
as
as
our
current
ordinance
is
written,
that's
in
place
now
you
have
to
provide
parking
with
or
with
your
new
building,
we
really
thought
of
all
places.
This
is
the
place
where
there's
an
opportunity
for
to
not
require
any
parking,
and
we
have.
This
is
the
place
where
we
have
the
greatest
amount
of
transportation
options.
M
B
B
You
know
more
restrictive,
really
and
if
people
want
additional
that
goes
beyond
what
the
maximum
is,
they
have
to
you
know,
there's
a
a
community
benefit
I'll,
say
it
that
you,
if
you
want
more
parking,
then
you
pay
into
a
fund
that
builds
structured
parking
for
the
light
rail
somewhere
else
or
provides
parking
passes
for
students
or
something
that
ties
into
our
goals,
not
only
for
our
transformational
mobility
network,
but
also
for
our
c
app
and
make
sure
that
those
two
really
are
connected.
So
it's
just
something
to
think
about.
G
E
Yes,
I
I
think
it
might
be
more
of
a
a
comment
so
so
seeing
and
considering
this
through
your
approach
for
for
the
first
time
I
I
actually
like
it-
I
I
think
it
it
has
flexibility,
which
is
what
we
want
particularly
moving
forward.
Certainly
we
want
to
get
away
from
our
car
centricity,
so
being
a
car
centric
city,
and
I
think
that
this
is
a
step
in
the
right
direction
and
maybe
we
continue
to
evolve
as
we
review
this
in
the
future.
E
I
wanted
to
mention
so
we're
talking
a
lot
about
tier
three,
but
I
did
want
to
to
mention
my
concern
pertaining
to
eliminating
minimums
in
tier
one
and
possibly
even
tier
two.
You
know
we
have
a
very
large
expansive
over
350
square
mile
city,
one
of
the
the
largest
in
the
country
for
its
expansiveness,
and
there
are
many
areas
that
lack
infrastructure
and
transportation
options
all
together.
C
E
That
has
created
for
the
folks
and
residents
living
in
those
areas.
It's
created
a
public
safety
risk.
If
you
don't
have
a
you
know,
you
don't
have
public
transportation.
You'll
have
a
sidewalk
on
very
dangerous
roads
that
are
becoming
more
crowded.
I
I
I
just
want
us
to
be
kind
of
cognizant
of
that.
That
is
a
concern
of
mine,
because
I
think
that
those
are
areas
where
we
certainly
want
to
to
provide
that
infrastructure
and
transportation
over
time,
but
seeing
as
how
it
doesn't
exist
today.
E
B
F
H
Couldn't
go
ahead
and
paraphrase
it
yeah
yeah
sure.
So,
first
of
all,
it's
good
to
be
with
you.
Thanks
for
the
opportunity
to
speak
with
you
guys,
it's
been
a
little
while,
since
we've
talked
about
storm
water-
and
I
think
members
of
this
committee
have
in
years
past
spent
a
lot
of
time.
Thinking
about
sort
of
what
the
capabilities
of
the
program
are,
the
challenges
that
we
have
with
infrastructure
so
really
just
wanted
to
come
today
to
kind
of
take
advantage
of
an
opportunity
to
have
a
conversation.
H
So
what
I
would
say
is
just
to
kind
of
step
back
at
a
very,
very
high
level
and
think
about
why
the
udo
matters.
What
I
would
say
is,
as
we
think
about
the
challenges
that
we
have
faced
with,
addressing
repair
needs
around
the
city.
There's
really
three
things
you
can
do
to
to
have
any
influence
over.
What's
going
to
happen
over
the
long
run.
H
So
the
third
thing
you
can
really
do
in
a
program
that's
going
to
affect
our
long-term
ability
to
manage
the
system
is
around
development
regulation.
So
those
first
two
things
I
just
described
are
how
we
take
care
of,
what's
already
been
built,
udo
really
contemplates
what's
happening
with
new
development,
and
so
what
I'll
tell
you
at
a
high
level
is
for
decades.
Charlotte
has
benefited
from
pretty
good
regulation
around
storm
drainage,
but
the
pattern
of
growth
that
we
have
seen
has
been
different
than
what
it
is
now.
H
So,
as
large
format,
subdivisions
have
come
in
larger
commercial
developments
by
and
large
we
have
kept
up
with.
The
city
has
kept
up
with
regulations
to
try
to
mitigate
those
impacts
in
recent
years.
What
we
are
seeing
is
smaller
scale
developments
that
are
perhaps
not
triggering
certain
ordinances
or
fallen
between
the
cracks
and
certain
processes,
and
the
udo
really
gives
us
a
good
opportunity
to
work
on
those
gaps.
H
So
that's
the
that's
the
high
level.
How
does
the
udo
matter?
Daryl
hammock
is
with
me
and
he's
prepared
to
kind
of
do
a
similar
high
level
but
kind
of
go
a
little
deeper
into
what
we
do
in
terms
of
regulations
and
gaps
if
you'd
like
for
him
to
come
up
and
talk
about
that
a
little
bit
but
but
but
from
my
view
of
the
world.
B
H
H
In
2018,
we
lost
the
ability
to
apply,
what's
known
as
the
post-construction
stormwater
ordinance
to
sites
that
are
redeveloping,
except
in
cases
where
they're,
adding
impervious
the
reason
that
matters
is
because
sometimes
we
have
situations
where
we
know
there's
a
problem
today.
Something
could
have
been
built
a
long
time
ago
and
have
impacts
and
really
the
best
way
to
address.
H
It
is
as
a
site
redevelops,
and
you
can
adequately
accommodate
that
that
ability
has
been
taken
from
us
and
we
would
hope
that
that
will
one
day
be
overturned
and
the
second
thing
to
your
question
about
what
is
sort
of
looming
in
the
general
assembly
right
now.
There's
a
budget
provision
that
would
contemplate
the
local
government
would
not
be
able
to
have
stormwater
requirements
that
are
beyond
those
established
by
federal
and
state
and-
and
that
is
potentially
very
consequential
because
generally
the
way
governments
deal
with
drainage
is
at
a
local
level.
H
H
My
understanding
is
that
there
I
mean
there
is
certainly
widespread
concern
across
the
state.
I'm
not
an
expert
in
reading
the
tea
leaves
on
how
likely
any
one
thing
is
in
the
legislature.
We
are
working
through
dana
fenton
and
are
confident
that
there's
a
strong
opposition
mounted
across
the
state
to
that.
H
B
Okay,
so,
and
please
feel
free
to
come
up.
I
just
as
you
know,
my
concern
is
the
infill
development
and
what
it
does
to
our
existing
properties
in
particular,
and
it's
for
years
we're
seeing
the
the
change
in
whether
in
in
development
patterns,
is
causing
concern
for
existing
homeowners.
So
that's
still
going
to
be
my
concern.
I
Well,
thank
you
glad
to
be
here,
I'm
daryl
hammock
assistant
manager
of
stormwater
services,
and
I
just
want
to
talk
a
little
bit
about
our
current
regulatory
process
as
it
relates
to
plan
reviews.
Currently,
we
conduct
drainage
plan
reviews
for
development
sites
that
meet
certain
triggers,
and
one
of
those
triggers
is
whether
or
not
the
development
creates
more
than
twenty
thousand
square
feet
of
impervious.
I
That's
about
a
half
acre
that
planned
review,
evaluates
on-site
flood
potential
and
requires
storm
water
control
measures,
these
detention
basins,
these
collection
devices
that
detain
and
slowly
release
runoff
to
prevent
downstream
flooding.
So
that's
our
current
process,
but
we
do
have
some
gaps
in
our
process.
Right
now,
as
as
was
mentioned,
the
drainage
plan
review
threshold
for
sites
now
is
sites
that
are
greater
than
20
000
square
feet
of
impervious.
I
We
do
not
see
the
smaller
infield
types
of
developments.
Those
are
not
part
of
our
process,
so
the
nature
of
the
day
of
development
is,
as
you
know,
trending
toward
much
smaller
infill
types
of
sites.
So
what
we
want
to
try
to
seek
is
a
process
to
review
those
smaller
infill
sites.
Just
as
we
do
for
the
larger
sites-
and
we
don't
have
that
now
so
that's
the
first
gap-
is
that
we
need
to
lower
the
threshold.
I
The
development
industry
interests
in
charlotte
the
environmental
interests,
the
city
and
mecklenburg
county
all
met
together
for
three
years
to
come
up
with
a
consensus
agreement
on
a
comprehensive
stormwater
management
approach
that
balanced
all
of
the
local
interests,
but
in
the
in
december
of
2018,
state
law
changed
and
it
detrimentally
affected
our
comprehensive
approach
and
upset
that
balance
and
what
that
did.
Is
it
prohibited
cities
from
regulating
redevelopment
sites,
okay
redevelopment
sites,
but
may
not
be
regulated
as
it
relates
to
these
stormwater
control
basins,
these
detention
basins?
I
I
I
Main
changes
we're
proposing
is
to
reduce
that
threshold
for
a
plan
review
from
20
000
square
feet
down
to
about
five
thousand
square
feet
of
new
impervious
surface
new
built
upon
area.
What
that's
going
to
do
is
slow
the
creation
of
downstream
flooding
problems
that
we
often
see
with
these
smaller
tight
crammed
insights.
I
The
second
change
we're
proposing
is
aimed
at
preventing
the
flooding
problems
on
infill
development
and
and
so
we're
not
going
to
get
tangled
up
with
what
the
state
law
prohibits
us
from
doing.
But
we
are
going
to
focus
on
safely
and
responsibly,
conveying
stormwater
across
these
sites
and
away
from
these
sites
in
a
very
thoughtful
and
deliberate
way.
So,
basically,
to
summarize
there's
two
proposals
here
aimed
at
preventing
some
costly
public
and
costly
private
drainage
problems
that
are
very
expensive
and
can
be
very
costly
to
remediate
after
the
fact.
B
Thank
you,
joe.
That's
really
interesting
information.
I
think
we
should
all
bear
these
rules
and
minds
when
we
look
at
our
rezonings
because
it
I
don't
know
man,
there's
a
strong
lobby
out
there,
that's
getting
their
way
with
storm
water
and
it's
it's
hurting
everybody.
Mr
winston,
you
have
a
question.
L
Yeah
again,
it's
another
one
of
those,
I'm
not
sure.
If
it's
a
question,
comment
or
observation
kind
of
time.
In
the
last
discussion
that
we
had
around
parking
and
this
idea
around
stormwater,
it
seems
like
there's
an
opportunity
and
that
there's
a
some
type
of
correlation.
A
potential
correlation
like
mr
mr
engelson
brought
up
right.
The
idea
that
surface
level
park
area
parking
creates
much
more
impervious
runoff
than
potentially
structured
parking
thinking
about
growing
up
in
new
york
city.
L
The
idea
that
yeah
we
do
have
people
that
park
on
all
of
the
street.
You
deal
with
part
of
those
you
know
finding
you
know
driving
around
for
10-15
minutes
to
find
parking.
Well,
one
of
the
the
things
that
you
have
then
why
it
is
difficult
is
because
you
have
alternate
side
of
the
street
parking
right
and,
and
that's
not
just
for
revenue
growth
of
the
city.
There
are
practical
applications
right
when
we
think
about
stormwater
alternate
side
of
the
street
is
where
you
clean
those
sides
of
the
street.
L
Is
there
an
opportunity
to
maybe
look
at
certain
areas
as
we're
making
small
area
plants,
for
instance,
if
we
know
that
they're
going
to
be
growth
in
certain
parts
of
town
that
have
certain
types
of
specific
stormwater
issues,
I'm
thinking
of
a
lot
of
south
charlotte
and
and
things
and
things
like
that?
Are
there
certain
strategies
that,
or
or
stormwater
requirements
or
issues
relating
to
stormwater,
that
we
can
tie
into
guidance
in
our
policy
making
around
parking
right?
L
Because,
if
again,
even
if
you
do
have
more
on
street
parking,
we
have
to
think
about
how
do
we
manage
that
from
a
storm
water?
How
do
we
get
into
those
storm
drains
and
and
and
clean
those
if
cars
are
parked
there
seven
days
a
week,
50
days
in
a
row?
Is
there
a
way
that
we
can
kind
of
connect
these
two,
so
that
they're
working
together
towards
goal
and
not
not
kind
of
and
make
it
make
sense?
L
H
F
H
Yeah
great
thoughts,
I'll
just
share
a
few
of
my
reactions
based
on
here
and
hearing
those
thoughts.
I
would
start
by
saying
there
are
going
to
be
challenges
throughout
the
city.
I
don't
know
that
we
would
isolate
certain
ones
and
say:
here's
where
we
really
gotta
think
about
how
to
make
sure
surface
water
is,
is
cleaner
and
being
handled
in
terms
of
just
conveying
water.
We
face
that
challenge
everywhere
and
as
drainage
infrastructure
deteriorates
over
time,
we'll
always
need
to
be
cleaning
the
water
maintaining
those
facilities.
H
What
that
takes
me
to
is
there
really
is
an
opportunity
with
the
udl.
I
don't.
Form-Based
code
may
be
the
wrong
term
here,
but
the
more
that
we
think
about
how
compact
development
works
as
one
cohesive
thing.
The
further
we
get
to
advance
our
our
goals,
so
we're
glad
to
be
at
the
table
with
planning
and
others
trying
to
treat
it
as
one
set
of
development
regulations,
not
a
patchwork
of
different
ones,
and
then
I
guess
the
last
point
I
want
to
make
is.
H
That
said
what
we
care
more
about
is
at
the
end
of
the
day,
when
that
development
is
done,
do
we
have
the
adequate
design,
the
the
allowance
for
the
space
and
the
devices
that
are
necessary
to
slowly
release
that
water,
so
that
can
be
to
drain
into
the
ground?
It
can
be
to
be
held
in
detention
basins
and
then,
ultimately,
you
know
finding
its
way
to
creeks.
If
we
get
the
design
right,
it
can
work
with
structured
parking.
B
D
D
So
so
no
one
was
kind
of
kicked
out
that
had
a
serious
problem
and
it
was
also,
I
think,
clear
from
the
review
process
that
a
number
of
even
the
higher
priority
cases
were
didn't
really
call
for
action.
We
had
some
in
the
in
the
bees
that
were
very
stale
also,
so
I
think
we
had
a
process
for
paring
down,
but
also,
as
mr
davis
has
pointed
out,
we
have
made
significant
process
a
progress
in
dealing
with
the
remaining
applications.
D
D
I
also
wanted
to
say
that
the
in
my
mind,
the
stormwater
system
that
we
have
right
now
is
actually
good.
So
I
agree
with
the
suggestion
that
what
we
need,
maybe
our
changes
in
parameters
and
rather
than
a
complete
rethink
of
how
we
do
this.
That
requirement
is,
is
tough
and
I
think
we
take
it
very
seriously.
The
inspections
are
good.
There
are
situations
where,
in
fact,
the
runoff
onto
neighboring
properties
is
improved
by
development
and
by
new
developments
conformance
with
the
the
stormwater
regulations.
D
D
One
circumstance
we
need
to
be
sensitive
to
is:
you
could
have
something
like
an
old
dirty
parking
lot
and
if
you
impose
tough
requirements,
any
redevelopment
of
that
lock,
including
the
cost
of
removing,
what's
there
and
implementing
the
new
requirements,
could
be
kind
of
prohibitive
and
then
what
happens
is
instead
of
getting
a
better
situation
than
the
parking
lot.
You
continue
to
have
the
parking
lot.
So
I
think,
as
we
consider
these
things,
we
need
to
have
some
room
for
the
circumstances
where
a
thing
is
improved
over
what
it
was.
D
I
That
fee
essentially
went
away
that
there
were
no
more
fees
that
needed
to
be
paid
for
a
redeveloping
site
and
there
were
no.
There
was
no
mitigation,
so
the
city
had
been
taking
that
money
and
investing
it
throughout
the
system
to
improve
conditions,
and
so
it
was
very
much
helping
the
city's
surface,
water
quality
problems
and
the
city's
flooding
problems,
but
that
tool
went
away,
which
is
why
I
mentioned
earlier
that
the
balance
is
is
very
terribly
off
right
now,
and
I
think
you
have
a
second
question
there
and
a.
D
I
D
D
D
I
believe
you're
on
the
board
of
the
league
of
municipalities,
and
it
seems
that
they
ought
to
be
right
in
the
middle
of
these
discussions,
because
I'm
assuming
that
the
state
law
does
not
provide
kind
of
various
detailed
provisions
by
community
I.e.
The
stormwater
situation
varies
a
lot
from
place
to
place
around
the
state
and
unless
they
have
a
structure
that
reflects
that
the
idea
of
treating
one
size
fits
all
is
very
punitive
for
cities.
D
C
I
agree
I
agree
wholeheartedly
on
your
second
point,
we'll
we'll
debate
your
first
on
offline,
but
league
is,
as
you
know,
having
served
on
it
for
several
years
yourself,
always
in
favor
of
more
local
control,
and
so
I
know
it's
it's
something
they're
constantly
advocating
for
on
all
fronts.
I
agree
with
you
that
for
us
to
to
be
operating
under
the
same
guidelines
as
areas
that
aren't
seeing
the
level
of
development
we
are
in
some
cases,
hardly
any
development
is,
is
a
square
peg
for
a
round
hole.
D
C
As
it
relates
to
stormwater
and
things
like
that,
obviously
the
streams
and
rivers
and
things
whose
health
are
impacted
by
these
run
through
every
community
in
our
state,
so
certainly
water,
water,
runs
downhill
and
that's
urban
and
rural,
and
I
would
think
that
the
problems
we're
having
here
are
impacting
places
that
are
not
seeing
the
same
levels
of
development.
We
are
so
it
should
be
a
shared
interest.
B
Well,
what
I've
heard
from
from
other
council
members
and
commissioners
around
the
state
that
we
have
to
bear
in
mind
is
some
of
these
towns
are
really
small
and
when
you
have
a
storm
water
repair
issue,
and
you
don't
have
the
right
to
have
local
ordinances
or
whatnot,
it
hits
your
budget
in
a
much
bigger
way
too.
So
I
think
the
size
has
a
lot
to
do
with
it
as
well.
E
Yes,
I
do.
I
have
two
so
as
we
move
away
from
our
conversation
regarding
the
udo.
My
first
question
is
stormwater
related
and
admittedly
I
don't
think
I'm
as
well
versed
on
these
new
stormwater
regulations
as
everyone
else.
So
I
might
be
a
little
off
off
base
here
with
this
question,
but
I
was
just
wondering
if
there
were
regulations
pertaining
to
grade.
E
So
if
we
have
new
development
occurring
at
a
higher
grade,
then
say
surrounding
existing
developments
that
could
potentially
create
a
stormwater
issue,
a
more
impervious
surface,
and
I
just
didn't
know
if
we
had.
Maybe
this
is
something
we've
discussed
before
and
and
so
maybe
I
missed
it,
but
I
didn't
know
if,
if
that
was
so,
these
you
know
grade
levels,
but
I
suppose
you
know
higher
a
land
that
sits
higher
than
surrounding
areas.
E
If
that
has
been
taken
into
consideration,
and
then
my
second
point
before
I
forget
this,
so
I
guess
my
second
question.
You
know
once
again
as
we're
moving
away
from
our
udo
conversation.
The
udo
itself
should
streamline
the
rezoning
process
and
I
would
assume
that
there
would
be
cost
associated
with
that.
So
maybe
some
losses
on
our
ends.
E
But
I
did
want
to
ask
about
that
too,
and
maybe
put
it
on
everyone's
radar,
particularly
our
planning
department
radar,
something
maybe
to
pursue
offline,
but
just
wanted
to
get
that
out
there
if
we
could
get
some
more
information
on
what
those
impacts.
Seeing
as
how
we
have,
though
you
know
we're
going
to
enter
into
this
more
streamlined
process,
what
those
cost
impacts
would
be,
but
but
anyhow
back
to
that
first
point
or
first
question.
This
idea
of
grade
is
that
taken
into
consideration
here.
H
So
let
me
take
a
swing
at
that
and
see
if
this
answers
your
question
there
wouldn't
be
anything
about
our
regulation.
That
would
say,
because
you're
at
a
certain
elevation
there's
different
requirements,
but
perhaps
what
gets
close
to
that
is,
if
you're
in
a
very
low
lying
area,
you're
likely
developing
around
larger
stream
systems
that
do
have
various
kinds
of
buffers
and
things
that
ensure
that
those
stream
systems
are
protected.
It's
so
it's
not
related
to
grade,
but
maybe
it
is
indirectly.
H
B
Can
I
just
ask
a
question
just
because,
mr
newton,
would
it
be
okay
on
that,
because
that's
a
big
question
and
it
would
be
one
that
all
council
members
would
want
info
on
and
we
are
running
about
15
minutes
behind.
Would
that
be
okay?
If
mike?
If
you
all
came
back
with
that
information
for
everybody
and
sharing
it
with
everyone.
G
B
Yeah,
because
it
is
an
important
question,
I'm
sure
everybody
will
want
information
on.
Thank
you
both
for
being
here
today.
You
guys
have
a
tough
job.
It's
it's
a
really
critical
issue.
As
mr
drake
said,
you've
done
a
great
job
of
getting
into
that
backlog
and
cleaning
it
up.
There's
so
much
more,
and
I
hope
that
you
will.
Let
council
know
that
when
it's
a
matter
of
resources
or
whatever
it
is
because
it's
a
critical
issue.
So
thank
you.
B
G
Thank
you,
mayor
pretend.
I
know
it's
taking
some
time,
so
I'm
just
going
to
yield
to
michael,
but
I
do
know
that
this
went
to
the
planning
committee
of
the
planning
commission
yesterday
and
they
had
a
very
good
conversation.
I
think
it
went
well
it's
going
to
go
back
to
them
in
another
month
about
michael
will
kind
of
give
you
details
of
where
we
are
like
we
did
with
the
udo.
G
N
N
We
are
proud
to
work
with
the
city
and
the
planning
department
and
with
mecklenburg
county
and
for
us
to
jointly
fund
this.
This
has
been
the
model
that
we've
used
for
decades,
all
the
way
back
to
the
1966
odell
plan.
It's
a
160
page
document
that
you've
all
viewed.
It
reflects
the
community's
ideas.
N
What
they've
told
us
is
important
to
them
and
the
kind
of
place
that
they
aspire
for
the
middle
of
their
region
to
become
and
be
of
service
to
them,
and
even
though
vision
plans
are
high
policy
or
high
level
policy,
there
are
some
distinct
strategies,
projects
and
programs
that
are
within
this
that
help
us
achieve
these
community
goals
and
as
the
economic
engine
for
the
region,
center
city
is
uniquely
poised
to
be
a
real
asset
to
our
community.
I
feel
like
there's
a
handful
of
things
that
give
our
community
superpower
our
airport.
N
N
It's
for
that
reason
that
the
approach
to
this
plan
is
different
than
past,
and
this
vision
plan
we'll
be
discussing
further
today
looks
to
take
on
our
challenges
head
on.
We
think
this
plan
will
be
remembered
for
its
commitment
to
equity
in
decision
making
and
investment,
its
commitment
to
building
out
and
improving
our
mobility
network
and
all
that
that
means
for
our
community
and
supporting
the
maturation
of
our
center
city
neighborhoods
beyond
uptown,
beyond
the
cbd
to
be
complete
places.
N
N
We
kept
11
hard
copies
one
at
each
of
the
district
libraries
throughout
the
community,
and
the
team
has
also
met
with
various
community
and
stakeholder
groups
to
go
out
and
listen
intentionally.
It's
advocates
like
the
northwest
corridor
council
of
elders,
the
charlotte
mecklenburg
climate
leaders,
the
planning,
commissioners
and
and
various
groups
like
that
excellent.
Please,
since
releasing
the
plan,
the
project
team
has
also
sent
invitations
to
neighborhood
leaders
just
continuing
to
reach
out
you
just
can't
do
enough
listening,
particularly
during
this
period.
N
N
J
A
J
Ideas
that
we
hadn't
thought
of
during
this
during
this
process,
so
what
I
would
like
to
do
is
is
really
walk
through
a
summary
of
just
as
a
conversation
starter
of
things
in
the
in
the
plan
that
people
liked
some
of
the
things
we
we
missed
and
new
ideas
that
we
didn't.
Think
of
so
you
know
in
terms
of
what
people
really
resonated
with
in
the
plan.
J
J
You
know
system
of
parks
and
open
spaces
and
how
we
can
leverage
that,
through
the
cross,
charlotte
trail
and
other
trail
connections
as
well,
and
that
you
know
urban
density
in
the
center
city
is
a
good
thing
and
it
helps
drive.
You
know,
hopefully
drive
the
cost
of
living
down
and
certainly
an
increase
in
the
types
of
housing
that's
available
as
well.
J
J
You
know
the
the
concept
of
safety
while
helping
you
know
our
our
homeless
residents
and
reducing
the
need
to
kind
of
panhandle
as
well.
So
how
that
translates
to
some
of
the
focus
areas?
Is
you
know
without
having
a
kind
of
healthy
kind
of
shopping
and
service
and
retail
experience
that
vibrancy?
That
we
all
really
hope
for
in
center
city
is
is
an
uphill
battle.
J
You
know
we
need
some
specificity
on.
How
do
we
improve
on?
What's
next
after
the
epicenter,
you
know
it's
an
important
block
in
uptown,
certainly
adjacent
to
will
be
really
transformative,
project
and
redevelopment
of
the
ctc,
and
then
how
do
we
address
as
we
continue
to
build
out
the
gold
line
in
phase
three?
J
How
do
we
address
the
pedestrian
environment,
particularly
as
we
talk
about
getting
north
of
brookshire
and
highway
16
and
and
make
sure
that
that
connectivity
from
the
last
stop
on
the
north
on
the
west
side
at
that
pedestrian
environment
along
that
corridor?
Is
really
it's
really
safe
and
easy
for
people
to
travel
next
slide?
J
And
then
you
know
a
few
new
ideas
that
that
have
come
up
we've
had
we
had
a
few
folks
who
called
for
either
free
or
drastically
reduced
pricing
for
public
transportation,
particularly
within
route
4.
and
one
example.
A
comment
was,
you
know:
creating
a
fair
free
transit
zone
within
group
four,
but
certainly
we'll
need
to
coordinate
and
talk
to
our
colleagues
at
cats
to
see
how
that
ties
into
some
of
their
mobility
recommendations
with
the
bus
network.
J
Another
idea
that
you
may
have
seen
and
read
about
probably
most
famously
in
vancouver,
is
requiring
multi-family
development
to
include
child
care
facilities
and
that
not
only
our
sustainability
goals
aren't
limited
to
the
performance
of
buildings
and
landscapes
after
they
are
built,
but
but
actually,
while
they
are
constructed,
so
is
there
and
can
there
be
requirements
for
new
center
city
construction
to
promote
clean
and
sustainable
construction
methods
as
well
in
terms
of
focus
areas?
You
know.
J
Of
having
second
board
high
school
be
a
priority
was
resonated
very
well
folks,
but
should
that,
should
there
actually
be
a
partnership
with
with
community
college,
to
kind
of
expand
on
trades
training?
In
addition
to
the
kind
of
cortner
corporate
partnerships
and
programs
that
we
spoke
about
in
the
plan?
J
And
then
you
know
something:
that's
probably
your
low
hanging
fruit
forest
is
really
kind
of
expanding
the
idea
of
street
vendor
programs
and
pop-up
shops
beyond
really
just
beyond
trying
street
and
a
great
discussion
last
night
at
planning
committee
about
how
that
might
lower
the
barrier
to
entry
to
many
new
businesses
that
don't
have
the
ability
to
kind
of
and
visibility
that
that
center
city
has
in
terms
of
retail
and
commercial
environment.
So
next
next
slide.
J
N
Yeah
just
I,
I
would
reiterate
that
we're
humbled
to
be
a
part
of
this
process
with
all
of
you
and
with
the
city,
staff
and
county
staff,
and
we're
often
reminded
that
what
an
incredible
city
we
would
be
passing
on
to
the
next
generation.
If
we
were
able
to
accomplish
this
vision
and
act
on
its
values
as
laid
out
as
planned
and
we're
thrilled
to
be
with
you
and
look
forward
to
your
questions
and
working
with
you.
B
C
C
One
of
the
and
there
are
there
are
impediments
to
queen's
park
that
are
out
of
our
control
as
it
relates
to
the
railroads
but
bless
you
one
potential
impediment,
that's
not
out
of
our
control
is
the
continued
discussion
of
expansion
of
the
maintenance
facility
for
cats,
and
so
I
think,
if
this
is
something
we
believe
in
we've
got
to,
we've
got
to
get
ahead
of
that
we
can't
be
if
the
railroads
are
the
reason
the
queen's
park
doesn't
come
together.
The
way
that
it's
envisioned,
it
is
what
it
is.
C
C
Was
on
here,
that
was
interesting,
seems
kind
of
granular,
but
it's
I
don't
think
it
is
the
needs
work.
I
was
surprised
to
see,
but
pleasantly
surprised,
that
we've
identified
this
as
a
problem
need
to
address
pedestrian
environmental
base,
ford
road
or
betty's
ford
bridge
over
highway
16,
and
it's
obviously
right
there
at
our
best
water
plant,
where
the
excelsior
club
was
and
and
the
terminus
the
western
terminus
of
the
gold
line.
Streetcar
phase
two-
and
there
is
a
great
need
there.
C
The
north
end
to
kind
of
the
double
oaks
bright,
walk
general
vicinity
and,
as
the
construction
was
done
to
add
the
managed
lanes
to
77
that
was
removed
and
never
replaced,
and
I
don't
know
I
presume,
there's
no
intention
to
replace
it.
But
we
have,
with
we've,
talked
about
that
nauseam.
How
we've
used
highways
in
a
different
era
to
split
communities
in
half
77
certainly
did
that
we're
not
going
to
undo
that
by
removing
77.
But
we
can,
I
think,
bandage
those
wounds
with
with
effective
connection
points.
C
I
think
we've
done
a
good
job,
making
the
trade
street
babies
forward
corridor
under
77
we're
turning
that
into
a
plaza
making
that
much
more
inviting
and
walkable
the
streetcar,
I
think,
is
going
to
do
that.
I
think
this
identification
of
a
need
to
improve
the
bridge
of
babies
40
over
16
can
do
that.
C
E
E
I
noticed
within
the
the
presentation
that
that
there
was
a
a
a
comment
pertaining
to
too
much
parking
in
the
uptown
area,
and-
and
I
was
just
wondering,
building
upon
the
conversation
we
just
had
regarding
the
udo,
what
parking
maximums
are
there
included
within
this
plan?
You
know
we're
talking
about
so,
as
I
understand
it,
a
plan
that
will
extend
out
20
years-
and
we
may
be-
I
suspect,
we'll
be
instituting.
E
I
mean
within
that
three-tier
approach
that
we
we're
discussing
under
the
udo
we
might
be
instituting
maximums
regardless,
would
it
make
sense?
I
think
it
would
actually
make
sense
to
to
have
some
consistency
here
between
the
udo
and
our
conversations
and
the
possibility
of
parking
maximums
within
this
plan,
and
I
just
wanted
to
ask
about
that.
What
are
they
are?
Are
they
even
present
altogether
within
the
plan
and
then
the
second
question
I
have
pertaining
to
to
mode's
share
of
transportation
within
our
strategic
mobility
plan.
E
N
I
think
it's
a
great
question.
The
the
plan
is
is
very
committed
to.
I
think,
you're
correct
that
the
center
city
is
one
of
our
greatest
opportunities
to
act
in
a
sustainable
way.
It
creates
a
place
where
there
can
be
a
a
no
park
per
day
or
a
park
once
kind
of
day,
where
you're
able
to
then
walk
to
everything
you
need,
or
bike
or
transit
in,
and
that's
the
power
of
our
urban
places
throughout
all
civilization.
N
Regarding
modeshare
and
I'd
like
to
talk
more
with
grant
and
with
cdot
about
that,
and
for
us
to
evaluate
that,
because
this
is
a
vision
plan,
it's
not
going
to
describe
how
to
do
it,
because
that's
the
policy
work.
That's
done
at
a
more
granular
level,
either
through
your
policy
or
through
specific
additional
planning.
N
That's
at
the
middle
of
our
transit
system
and
it
could
have
real
negative
consequences,
and
I
think
we
need
to
be
careful,
because
I
guarantee
that
there
is
no
developer
that
comes
to
our
city
that
builds
excess
parking.
They
are
building
it.
You
know
in
connection
to
either
what
is
demanded
by
their
customer
base
or
is
required
to
get
the
financing
that
they
need.
E
And
maybe
we
can
talk
more
about
it
offline.
I
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that,
as
we
move
forward
with
our
own
policy
as
a
city,
that
there
is
consistency
between
our
policy
and
and
this
plan,
and-
and
I
do
like
what
you
were
saying-
michael,
which
is
there-
there-
should
be
some
coordination
between
your
organization
and
our
city
staff
to
to
make
sure
that
that
consistency
exists.
So
I
look
forward
to
continuing
the
conversation.
N
G
B
I
think
we
need
a
comprehensive
study
of
mobility
and
parking
uptown
growth
in
other
modes
multi-modal
modes,
but
we
just
are
sort
of
dancing
around
this
issue
and
kind
of
talking
in
silos
about
the
park
about
parking,
uptown
and
what's
really
needed
into
the
future
vis-a-vis
our
projected
growth
and
vis-a-vis
our
goals
for
public
transportation.
I.
K
N
We
would
welcome
this
and
I
think
what
it
would
allow
us
to
do
is
understand.
Some
of
the
nuances
of
you
know.
The
kind
of
uses
for
land
the
different
land
uses
and
also
looking
within
different
parts
of
the
center
city
and
how
like
each
walk
shed
is,
is
currently
served
because
you
know,
I
think,
a
lot
of
the
a
lot
of
thinking
should
go
into
what
is
immediately
adjacent
to
transit
uses.
B
Yeah,
I
I
I
personally
think
it
would
be
helpful.
I
think
some
of
my
colleagues
would
agree
with
me
when
we
had
like
7th
and
north
tryon.
Some
of
us
were
really
blindsided
with
that
request
for
for
to
contribute
to
an
underground
parking
garage,
and
we
don't
have
anything
to
compare
it
to
what
the
need
is.
So
I'm
not
saying
you
know
we
should
go
in
and
say
no,
but
we
need
information.
We
need
to
know
what
the
plan
is.
B
I
mean,
even
if
you
talk
about
existing
parking,
it
kind
of
feels
like
a
lot
of
the
parking
inventory,
is
on
the
wrong
side
of
uptown
right
now,
it's
all
off
towards
10th
11th
street.
You
know
7th
street
on
there's
a
lot
of
parking
decks,
but
the
activities
all
happening
at
third
and
fourth
street
for,
for
example,
on
a
saturday
night,
so
I
just
feel
like
we
need
some
guidelines.
B
L
I
got
a
a
lot
of
my
questions
in
about
this
the
last
time.
So
that's
why
I
don't
have
so
many
now,
but
wondering
what
what
the
plan
says
for
the
area
in
first
ward,
particularly
a
kind
of
up
and
down
brevard
caldwell,
the
the
you
know,
start
from
unc,
charlotte
kind
of
on
down
to
to
spectrum
arena
and
that
parking
deck
that
is
complete
but
is
not
being
utilized
at
all.
L
J
Mobility
that
will
happen
at
that
and
and
how
that
will
influence
that
that
kind
of
corridor
between
you
know
a
lower
density,
fourth
ward
and
a
lower
density
first
ward
as
well.
So
you
see
that
cut
in,
I
would
say
in
conjunction
with
kind
of
re-envisioning
what
the
government
district
kind
of
looks
like
that's,
really
the
influences
on
on
that
particular
area.
J
N
It's
it's
an
unmatched
opportunity
for
our
community
to
act
on
its
values
in
the
cbd,
because
it
will
create
so
much
value
and
we
have
almost
four
blocks
that
are
owned
by
mecklenburg
county
and
if
we
do
it
right,
it
becomes
also
a
real
bridge
for
vibrancy
to
spring
across
277
into
the
north
end
and
there's
a
lot
of
specificity
about
our
community's
aspirations
for
this
area.
In
the
north
tryon
plan,
which
was
adopted
by
city
council,
four.
L
I
guess
one
one
one
thing
I
I
was
thinking
about
this
this
weekend
in
context
to
a
story
that
came
out
about
uptown
traffic
and
managing
people
during
special
events,
particularly
panthers
games
and
college
football
games,
and
so
on
and
so
forth,
and
I
started
to
I
kind
of
wanted
to
think
a
little
higher
level
about
the
culture
right.
The
culture,
a
big
part
of
this
is
why
it
takes
so
much
person
power
to
manage.
L
This
is
that
we
do
have
these
cars
that
are
coming
in
from
many
different
directions
that
are
converging
on
uptown
right
and
a
big
part
of
that
is
because
of
the
tailgating
culture,
this
that
and
the
other-
and
I
think
that's
probably
one
of
also
the
reasons
why
certain
surface
area
parking
lots
remain
right.
These
are
business
models
that
have
existed
for
for
a
long
time.
There's
a
cultural
kind
of
dynamic
of
this.
L
L
Have
we
thought
about
about
that
as
we
would
as
we're
we're
changing?
How
does
the
center
city
area
kind
of
interact
in
a
mo
from
a
mobility
standpoint
from
a
congestion
standpoint,
not
just
in
the
immediate
surrounding
areas,
but
some
of
those
places
that
center
cities
might
be
particularly
hot
wired
to
over
the
next
20
to
30
years
as
those
as
as
it
becomes
really
a
central
node
to
that
multi
that
kind
of
multimodal
transportation
option.
It
might
be
some
type
of
way
we
think
about
it.
D
D
My
concern
was
mainly
that
having
spent
four
years
at
least
as
mr
mckinney
can
attest,
participating
in
the
evolution
of
the
idea
of
place
types
and
the
formulation
of
this
plan,
which
was
a
bumpy
and
pretty
arduous
road
when
considering
this
plan,
if
I'm
being
told
as
if
it
was
a
new
idea
about
our
goals
for
air
quality
and
stuff,
like
that,
I
have
to
think.
Well,
you
know
we've
done
that.
D
So
my
view
of
this
plan
is
that
it
is
a
let's
call
it
a
sort
of
satellite
to
the
2040
plan
that
specifically
addresses
the
circumstances
within
your
the
target
area,
and
I
think
it's
valuable.
It's
important
that
we
do
that.
We
need
to
recognize
what
general
provisions
in
the
2040
plan
may
not
be
applicable
to
the
special
circumstances
in
in
your
service
area
there
in
the
area
that
you
worked
on
and
therefore
I
will
look
at
this
plan
in
terms
of
maybe
what
it
implies
for
the
2040
plan.
D
What
do
we
need
to
do
in
the
2040
plan
as
we
go
to
to
work
it
out
in
greater
detail
in
order
to
be
responsive
to
some
of
the
issues
in
your
plan
or
which
things
in
your
plan
align
anyway,
and
and
can
we
adopt
you
know
without
further?
And
I
guess
that's
a
question
to
you.
Michael,
do
you
see
things
in
the
2040
plan
that
are
not
compatible
with
the
goals
that
you've
established
for
the
district
that
you're
talking
about.
N
N
D
D
There
could
be
issues
in
my
mind
and
fourth
ward,
about
the
2.1
provisions
and
we
talked
earlier
about
how
we
would
have
historic,
neighborhoods
protected,
and
I
think
that
would
be
a
an
ideal
area
to
kind
of
create
an
overlay
of
some
kind
and
its
neighborhood
character
overlay.
So
it's
not
necessarily
that
it
qualifies
for
the
historic
which
it
may
as
well,
but
there
are
in
fact,
in
the
uptown
area
in
the
area
that
you
talked
about.
D
There
are
some
cases
where
our
info
infill
and
the
neighborhood
character
overlays
could
be
applicable
so
or
where
they
there
might
be
special
circumstances
that
would
apply
to
those
in
your
area
as
opposed
to
the
reindeer
of
charlotte.
So
I'll
be
looking
reviewing
the
plan
again,
you
know
to
resolve,
in
my
own
mind
where
they,
where
it
doesn't
necessarily
line
up,
and
I
I
appreciate
the
progress
that
we've
made
at
this
point.
Thank
you.
B
Thank
you
if
there
are
no
other
questions
from
the
committee
michael.
Thank
you
very
much
for
coming
back
and
being
willing
to
answer
everybody's
questions.
We
know
this
is
a
visionary
plan,
there's
some
great
things
in
here
and,
as
I
mentioned
to
you
before,
I'm
excited
about
including
second
ward.
In
any
conversations
as
to
what
can
be,
I
hope,
queen
city
park,
the
queen
city
park
can
really
figure
out
a
solution
that
an
epicenter
because
they're
you
know,
there's
some
great
ideas
for
the
park.
B
G
Yes,
thank
you
very
much.
I
just
want
to
say
thanks
to
all
of
you
for
taking
time
to
sit
down
for
almost
three
hours,
but
this
these
two
projects
are
very
important
and
we
really
appreciate
you
doing
this.
I'll.
Just
remind
you
of
a
couple
of
dates.
The
week
of
october,
4
is
when
we
release
the
draft
of
the
unified
development
ordinance.
G
So
something
to
look
forward
to
and
then
the
following
week
is
when
we
will
have
the
draft
policy
map
out
also
for
review
the
next
week
when
we
meet
to
at
the
top
again
we're
going
to
share
with
you
preliminary
findings
from
the
fiscal
impact
analysis,
that's
related
to
the
comprehensive
plan.
That's
when
you
see
some
preliminary
findings
related
to
the
likeliness
of
duplexes
dry
plexus,
and
we
will
set
up
meetings
to
do
deeper
dive
with
you
after
that.
G
But
we
want
to
make
sure
that
we
share
that
with
you,
because
we
just
got
those
findings
this
week.
I
want
to
quickly
share
those
with
you
and
get
your
input
before
we
move
further
and
then
that
same
meeting
you're
going
to
have
about
economic
analysis
of
the
silver
line
of
11th
versus
7th
street
stations
and
then
subsequently,
once
the
first
draft
of
the
unified
development
ordinance
is
out,
we
will
conduct
another
economic
analysis
of
the
regulations
associated
with
the
udu.
G
So
the
question
that
consumer
newton
asked
about
costs,
some
of
those
will
be
in
that,
but
when
we
come
to
cancer
and
october
11,
we'll
give
you
some
ideas.
What
we're
looking
at!
In
terms
of
that
economic
analysis,
what
I
will
enter
so
just
wanted
to
throw
those
in
there
and
that's
a
lot,
but
I'm
looking
forward
to
reflecting
some
of
what
we
had
from
you
today
on
the
udl
in
that
first
draft
that
you
will
see
when
it
comes
out
early
october.
Thank
you
once
again.