►
From YouTube: 3.2.2021 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
B
C
D
No,
I
had
a
major
operation.
Oh
my
most
most
of
my
stomach
and
half
my
back
was
purple.
B
A
B
D
Yeah
I
had
my
thyroid
pulled
five,
seven
or
eight
years
ago.
B
They're
thinking
of
doing
that
to
me-
because
this
is
my-
I
was
fine
for
two
years
in
2016-
I
was
in
afib
24
7
the
whole
year
for
the
same
probably
reasons
because
my
thyroid
was
acting
up
and
producing
too
much
thyroid
hormone
and
it
took
a
full
year
for
that
to
settle
down
for
me
to
get
the
ablation
done
and
then
the
cardioversion
and
I've
been
fine.
For
you
know
two
three
years
and
then
all
of
a
sudden
it's
having
a
little
party
and
they're
thinking
about
pulling
my
thyroid
out
too.
D
B
B
Uc
health,
I
was
signed
up
all
over
towns,
probably
10
different
places.
Last
monday
I
got
not
not
yesterday,
but
you
know.
Last
monday
I
got
a
thing
from
kaiser.
That
said:
oh
we,
you
see,
you
want
a
shot,
so
call
this
number
and
we'll
tell
you
what
place
you
are
online.
I
was
56
000
in
line.
Oh
my
god,
the
two
days
later
on
wednesday,
I
get
a
thing
from
uc
health
that
says,
guess
what
we
can
schedule
um's
like
yay,
so
I
went
on
friday
and
it
was
great.
A
A
D
60
and
up
starts
friday.
D
B
B
A
A
B
A
G
B
B
I
B
I
I
No,
I
was
just
gonna
say
I
wonder
if
I
can
do
a
screenshot
and
I
couldn't
raise
my
hand
last
week.
What
is
wrong
with
me
these
days.
B
I
A
I
don't
believe
that
I
believe
everyone
is
here,
but
kate
townley,
so
you're
free
to
start.
If
you'd
like.
B
I'd
like
to
call
the
meeting
of
the
march,
if
you
can
believe
it
second
planning
and
zoning
commission
nancy,
can
you
call
the
rule
please.
H
A
A
Mr
haggerty,
here
ms
donaldson
here
I
do
not
see
she
has
miss
family.
Oh
there.
She
is
here
wonderful
and
chair
austin.
Here
all
members
are
present.
B
Fantastic,
so
we
obviously
have
a
quorum.
The
first
order
of
business
is
to
approve
the
draft
minute
approve
the
minutes
of
the
february
17
2021
planning
and
zoning
committee.
A
C
A
Thank
you,
miss
fuller.
Yes,
ms.
B
A
A
B
F
B
G
I
remember
all
those
bits:
yeah,
that's
a
good
word.
I
get
to
do
a
bit
of
a
monologue
here,
and
the
purpose
I
think,
is
to
try
and
and
take
us
back
to
the
context
that
we
started
with
in
october
of
last
year
when
we
started
this
series
of
meetings,
and
hopefully,
if
I
can
lay
this
out
for
you,
it
should
make
some
of
your
subsequent
deliberations
this
evening,
a
bit
easier
and
kind
of
put
them
in
an
overall
context.
G
You
may
remember:
when
we
started
in
october
of
2020,
we
had
a
session,
it
was
actually
on
october
20th
and
that
had
followed
a
study
session
that
we
had
with
city
council
just
the
week
before,
and
that
was
a
really
pivotal
session,
in
which
we
talked
to
them
about
the
framework
agreement
that
we
were
advising
with
l
r
partners,
which
is
the
special
servicing
firm.
That
represents
the
bondholders
that
foreclose
on
the
weingarten
property
and
how
the
framework
agreement
would
interact
with
our
master
development
agreement
being
pursued
by
the
firm
of
skb.
G
It
is
a
an
amendment
to
the
preliminary
development
agreement
which
would
extend
that
agreement
due
to
the
impacts
of
covet
until
late
this
year
or
early
next
year
and
with
lnr
again
it's
the
framework
agreement
that
we
are
finalizing
and
both
of
these
agreements
should
be
up
before
city
council
in
late
march
or
early
april.
G
And
in
both
cases
you
know
what
we're
really
trying
to
do.
The
the
the
key
goal
of
our
agreements
with
both
entities
as
supported
by
the
redevelopment,
is
to
make
the
vertical
redevelopment
opportunities
as
attractive
as
they
can
be
to
the
development
community
in
terms
of
what
they're
looking
at
in
terms
of
other
tod
transit,
orion
development
opportunities
locally,
as
well
as
what
many
of
them
are
looking
at
nationally.
G
So
we
need
we
collectively
the
city
and
the
city
council,
and
hopefully,
planning
and
zoning
all
need
to
collaborate
in
this
effort
of
really.
What
do
you
know?
How
do
we
make
this?
How
do
we
facilitate
redevelopment
by
the
various
vertical
developers
who
are
going
to
be
delivering
projects?
Probably
over
the
next
10?
G
So
we
need
to
make
sure
that
we're
not
burdening
the
properties
with
zoning
related
requirements
or
processes
that
are
unlike
what
we're
they're
seeing
at
pure
cities,
because
if
we
do
that
and
I'll
give
you
a
couple,
examples
and
john
can
give
examples
as
they
pertain
to
cost.
If
we
do
that,
we'll
be
handicapping
our
efforts
and
we
won't
achieve
anything
near
the
redevelopment
potential
that
we
want
collectively
or
that
we
need
for
our
city,
so
one
example
of
that
is
and-
and
we've
talked
about
it,
a
lot
in
recent
meetings.
G
I
would
say
john
has
done
an
outstanding
job,
presenting
you
guys
with
the
individual
menus
of
what
a
redevelopment
rezoning
looks
like
and
really
fostering
a
lot
of
discussion.
Taking
that
discussion
back
and
putting
it
into
a
format
that,
hopefully,
we
can
all
process,
discuss
and
move
forward
with.
But
one
of
the
things
we've
talked
a
lot
about
is
the
parking
requirements
in
the
city
center
area
and
john.
I
can
give
you
more
details,
but
what
I
want
to
do
is
remind
us
collectively
that
we
have
a
huge
pool
of
surplus
parking.
G
We
have
over
900
parking
spaces
that
the
city
is
currently
obligated
to
provide
to
rtd
as
shared
parking
and
rtd
only
gets
to
use
those
spaces
not
on
an
exclusive
basis,
and
they
really
only
have
rights
to
those
spaces
during
the
business
day
and
during
business
hours.
So
that
means
that
all
those
spaces
are
available
for
other
uses
during
evenings
and
weekends
and
as
a
practical
matter,
a
significant
number
of
them
are
available
for
shared
use
during
daytime
business
hours.
So
the
availability
of
those
spaces
is
one
of
the
things
that
really
goes
into.
G
What
can
we
do
in
terms
of
parking
requirements
under
the
new
zoning
to
make
redevelopment
as
economically
feasible
as
it
can
be,
because,
with
those
that
number
of
spaces
available
really
our
parking
requirements
in
the
city
center
rezoning
ought
to
be
absolutely
minimal,
because,
particularly
for
hotel
and
for
residential
projects,
they
will
be
able
to
access
those
spaces
at
all
the
times
that
their
customers
and
peak
employment
loads
need
those
spaces.
So
we
we
just
absolutely
should
not
burden
our
rezoning
with
parking
requirements
that
are
at
all
tied
to
the
city's
normal
requirements.
G
They
should
really
be
much
much
lower,
taking
into
account
the
burden
of
the
parking
that
the
city
stepped
into
20
years
ago,
and
even
though
we're
anticipating
some
renegotiation
of
that
parking
amount
and
where
those
parking
fields
can
be
moved
around
to
it's
still
going
to
be
a
very,
very
large
parking
pool.
We
probably
estimate
it'll
be
in
excess
of
600
spaces,
even
at
the
end
of
the
day.
G
So
that's
one
of
that's
a
really
good
relevant
example
of
how
we
set
the
table
for
redevelopment,
and
I've
also
mentioned
that
various
times
along
the
way.
G
You
know
you've
had
a
lot
of
discussion,
really
good
discussion
about
the
goals
for
city
center
redevelopment
and
and
the
visions
and
how
it
functions
and
the
people
place
aspects
of
it
and
I've
mentioned,
and
I
think
this
is
particularly
relevant-
that
there
will
be
layers
of
contractual
agreement
agreements
with
both
skb
lnr
and
each
of
the
parties
that
they
intend
to
sell
properties
to
that
protect
those
types
of
goals,
those
visions
and
so
again,
the
master
development
agreement
with
skb
the
framework
agreement
with
eleanor
and
then
under
both
agreements.
G
There
will
be
a
series
of
development,
covenants
or
obligations
with
each
of
the
buyers
of
those
properties
and
in
each
case
it's
anticipated
that
the
city
staff,
you
know
with
input
from
planning
and
zoning
and
city
council
can
specify
a
lot
of
detail
about
the
goals
for
redevelopment.
G
So
again.
I
would
just
ask
that
you
keep
this
macro
context
in
mind,
because
I
think
it's
it's
really
relevant
to
our
overall
goal
and
if
we
get
too
carried
away
with
the
detail
and
kind
of
the
restrictive
nature
that
we
would
tend
to
typically
take
for
a
re-zoning
in
a
non-tod
environment,
then
then
we
will
not
have
been
successful
in
what
we're
trying
to
do
here
and
with
that,
I
will
turn
it
back
to
john
and
happy
to
answer
any
questions
later
or
support
his
more
detailed
presentation.
Thank
you.
A
E
I
have
two
one
is,
I
know
we
keep
refer.
You
keep
referring
to
this
rtd
parking,
but
availability
is
one
thing,
but
location
is
another,
and
if
we're
talking
about
the
parking
lot
on
the
north
side
of
the
light
rail
station
that
you
know
just
because
there's
parking
spaces
doesn't
mean
anybody's
going
to
use
them,
they
want
to
be
closer,
and
this
goes
back
to
our
conversation
about
they're
just
going
to
park
on
the
street
they're
just
going
to
park
in
other
parking
places.
E
So,
yes,
I
agree,
we
don't
want
more
parking
than
is
necessary,
but
if
it's
not
located
in
the
right
spot,
I
don't
see
how
it
matters.
So
that's
so
explain
to
me
how
their
location
is
going
to
be
improved
and
then
my
other
question
is
is
I'd
like
some
examples
of
where
else
in
the
metro
area,
any
developer
has
access
to
a
property
as
valuable
as
what
we
have,
and
I
I
don't
know
that
we
shouldn't
at
least
have
some
power
in
saying
what
is
valuable
to
englewood.
E
Instead
of
always,
I
don't
know
begging
to
be
liked
demand
that
we
only
have
the
highest
and
best-
and
I
know
you've
spent
months
and
I'm
not
discounting
all
the
work
that
you
did.
But
we've
been
talking
about
this
too
since
october,
and
I
just
feel
frustrated
that
we
have
talked
about
one,
I'm
sick
and
tired
of
talking
about
parking.
But
we
have
talked
about
this
and
we
came
to
agreements
and
then
suddenly
it
all
gets
thrown
up
in
the
air
and
we're
right
back
to
where
we
were
in
october.
E
So
there's
my
frustration.
So
my
two
questions
one
explain
to
me
how
the
location
is
going
to
be
improved,
because
I
don't
care
how
many
park
spots
there
are,
if
they're,
not
in
the
right
place,
they're
meaningless
and
two
explain
to
me
why
we
have
to
forgo
all
of
our
desires
for
zoning
specifics,
because
of
something
that
we
still
don't
know
what
people
are
gonna
want.
So
I'm
just
a
little
frustrated.
I
feel
like
we're
back
to
square
one.
G
Well,
I
would,
I
would
probably
beg
your
indulgence
and
suggest
that
you
shouldn't
be
frustrated,
but
let
me
try
to
answer
your
questions
as
far
as
the
parking
location,
very
good
location,
I
mean
and
very
good
question.
305
of
the
910
parking
spaces
that
are
obligated
to
be
provided
to
rtd
are
on
the
civic
center
site.
Today,
those
are
shared
with
city,
employee
parking
and
other
customers
of
city
center,
so
one-third,
basically
of
the
total
parking,
is
already
in
place
at
civic
center.
G
G
Well,
the
hotel
goes
on
would
potentially
go
on
the
civic
center
site.
The
parking
garage
could
both
go
on
civic
center.
It
could
go
also
on
the
adjacent
property
that
that
skb
is
negotiating
to
acquire
from
lnr,
so
between
those
two
blocks,
which
are
known
as
block
b
civic
center
and
the
adjacent
property
where
office
depot
is
located,
there's
plenty
of
room
for
additional
structured
parking,
and
it's
generally
anticipated
that
it
will
be
more
than
the
structured
parking.
G
That's
there
today,
which
is
is
basically
quite
aged
and
falling
apart
and
needs
to
be
replaced
under
almost
any
circumstance.
So
if
we,
the
developer
or
whatever
the
combination
is,
are
going
to
be
building
a
parking
garage,
it's
very
likely
going
to
be
more
than
two
levels
which
it
is
today.
G
So,
at
the
end
of
the
day,
there
will
be
a
minimum
of
300
parking
spaces
available
at
that
location
and
very
likely
much
more
than
that.
The
other
factor
we're
dealing
with
is
we
have
what's
known
as
a
master
ecr
agreement
with
walmart
walmart
was
very
concerned
about
their
parking
20
years
ago,
and
the
reality
is
they
have
surplus
parking
today
and
the
way
that
agreement
will
be
structured
is
some
of
that
surplus
parking
will
very
likely
be
available
to
support
the
overall
redevelopment
of
city
center.
G
Then
I
just
also
wanted
to
mention
the
you
know.
We
talked
about
what
other
tod
development
is
happening
around
the
area.
The
reason
we
don't,
we
don't
see
as
much
redevelopment
happening,
because
we
have
a
difficult
situation
and,
frankly,
some
of
our
zoning
and
entitlement
regulations
are
not
as
favorable
to
tod
location
as
what's
now
occurred
throughout
the
metro
area.
You
know
most
of
the
development
in
the
metro
area
is
in
fact
occurring
at
tod
locations
and
we're
actually
fighting
a
little
bit
to
catch
up.
B
That's:
okay!
That's
fine!
You
have
identified
305
parking
spaces
on
the
civic
center
site
where
the
other
600
are
they
over
there.
On
the
north
side,.
G
B
G
I
Thank
you,
and
I
I
appreciate
where
you're
coming
from
judy
location
is,
as
you
know,
it's
the
most
important
part
of
of
all
this,
but
I
I
do
also
go
back
to
what
we
were
looking
at,
that
the
redevelopment
might
happen,
but
it
might
not
be
what
we
want
it
to
be
if
we
aren't
as
aggressive
as
we
can
be
with
within
reason,
I
mean
I'm
not
one
of
giving
up
anything
here,
but
you
know
when
we
talk
about
the
sports
authority
park
area
to
the
south,
that
became
a
storage
area.
I
It
got
redeveloped.
It
wasn't
maybe
in
the
exact
way
that
we
wanted
it
to
to
be
redeveloped,
and
I
think,
just
as
some
of
the
supplemental
information
that's
been
provided
some
of
the
studies
that
we've
been
reading
and
the
way
things
are
transitioning.
That
reduction
in
parking
is
a
very
real
consideration
and
I
think
it's
just
something
that
we
want
to
make
sure
that
we're
embracing
as
much
as
possible
on
on
that
side
of
it.
So
I
I
agree
with
what
you're
saying
of
you
know.
G
And
I
think
john
will
give
you
the
specifics
that
will
give
you
some
assurance
we're
not
talking
about
eliminating
parking,
we're
just
talking
about
being
conscious
of
you
know
ex
explicit
about
the
fact
that
we
have
this
big
pool.
It
already
burdens
to
a
great
great
degree
what
the
city
can
do
redevelopment
wise
and
we
shouldn't
we
shouldn't
double
down
on
our
burden.
F
F
See
all
right
so
today
we
have
conducted
five
study
sessions
on
the
city
center
rezoning
project
and
we
have
gathered
consensus
pretty
we
think
under
the
mu1
b1
zoning
parameters
that
were
flagged
in
the
tribal
report.
F
We
think
we've
got
a
good
handle
on
minimum
and
maximum
residential
density,
and
we
think
we've
also
covered
building
height
wells
as
well.
But
we
do.
We
have
had
some
disagreements,
I
think,
in
terms
of
the
multi-unit
residential
parking
commercial
parking
and
so
that's
kind
of
what
we're
going
to
focus
on
a
little
bit
more
tonight.
F
So
when
we
we
did
get
some
of.
We
did
hear
some
of
those
different
voices
and
disagreements
about
being
too
aggressive
with
our
recommended
multi-unit
residential
parking
standards-
and
I
wrestled
with
this
for
a
number
of
weeks
and
thought
about.
How
could
I
bring
everyone
together
to
get
them
to
to
a
place
that
we
could?
F
That
would
be
workable
for
this
redevelopment
and
that
people
could
get
behind
and
in
the
end,
after
a
lot
of
wrestling
with
this,
we
kind
of
figured
out
dan
and
I
that
we
just
can't
advise
going
away
from
what
we
proposed.
Last
time
it
just
won't
work
for
this
small
site.
We
need
to
densify
the
site.
We
need
to
be
competitive
with
our
other
station
areas
in
the
metro,
otherwise
we're
just
going
to
get
passed
over
and,
like
dan
said,
we
kind
of
already
have
sort
of
like
a
built-in.
F
You
know
parking
shared
parking
situation
with
rtd
and
there's
a
lot
of
things
going
on
with
rtd
right
now,
where
they're
very
amenable
to
looking
at
that
in
different
ways,
and
so
tonight
we're
still
sticking
with
the
staff's
recommendation
of
for
the
half
mile
radius
of
one
parking
space
per
unit
from
market
rate
apartments
at
0.75,
space
per
unit
for
income
restricted
and
then
the
quarter
mile
going
down
to
a
0.75
space
per
unit
market
rate
and
a
0.5
space
per
unit
income
restricted.
F
Now
that
doesn't
mean
that
that's
what
they're
going
to
park
it
to
that's
just
kind
of
the
benchmarks
that
we're
going
to
we'd
like
to
use
and
we'll
see
how
they
come
in
and
we'll
we'll
use
those
as
negotiation
points
with
the
developers.
F
Now
in
terms
of
the
commercial
parking
we
did
kind
of
come
up
with
some.
A
different
way
of
looking
at
this.
We
think
this
is
a
less
certain
thing
that
about
it's
easier
to
predict
or
the
housing
parking.
What
we
need
for
that,
but
this
is
a
little
bit
harder
to
predict
and
there
was
some
discomfort
with
doing
that,
with
pegging
in
and
and
and
choosing
parking
ratios
for
those
things
in
terms
of
hotels,
restaurants
and
office.
F
So
we
decided
to
maybe
potentially
recast
that
in
a
different
way,
and
instead
of
actually
developing
or
identifying
exact
parking
ratios,
we
thought
we
would
go
to
more
of
a
guideline.
A
negotiating
guideline
system
where
we'd
have
parking
reduction
goals
that
would
be
negotiated
and
so
the
goal
for
the
half
mile
radius.
We
are
proposing
a
zero
to
25
reduction
from
our
typical,
suburban
parking
standards
and
in
the
quarter
mile
radius.
Our
goal
would
be
a
25
to
50
percent
reduction.
F
F
The
decision
would
be
we're
thinking
if
you're
ready,
we'd
like
to
conclude
the
study
session
series
on
city
center
zoning
and
what
that
would
mean
was
that
we
would
proceed
with
holding
a
community
meeting
and
then
we
would
also
start
working
on
developing
a
formal
recommended
ordinances
for
the
mu,
mu,
b1
text,
amendments
and
the
resulting
of
city
center
from
pud
to
mu
b1,
and
we
would
then
begin
initiating
the
ordinance
approval
process,
including
the
planning
and
zoning
commission,
public
hearings
and
findings.
Of
fact,.
F
The
criteria
in
that
tsa
overlay
that
we
are
developing
through
this
series
will
be
used
by
staff
to
do
the
site
plan,
review
text
amendments
and
base
rezoning
will
be
processed
as
separate
cases
scheduled
in
a
concurrent
fashion,
back-to-back
on
the
same
night,
the
mu
b-1
text
amendments
would
establish
critical
vested
rights
for
the
skb
and
l
r
developments,
including
land
uses
densities,
parking
and
building
heights.
F
Now,
I'd
like
to
just
give
you
a
quick
summary
of
what
we've
kind
of
run
through
the
last
few
meetings.
This
is
kind
of
this
is
what
from
the
tribal
report.
These
are
the
topics
that
we
we
tackled.
Land
use
hotel.
We
are,
we
decided
to
add
hotel
use
to
the
mu
b1
zone
district
as
a
use
by
right
in
term
for
parking
structure
principal
use.
We
decide
no
change.
F
The
mbb
one
is
necessary
at
this
time
and
we'd
regulate
through
the
city
center
special
district
plan
overlay
land
use
commercial
ground
floor
requirement.
We
ended
up
deciding
on
limiting
the
commercial
ground
floor
to
the
3
300
3,
400
and
3500
blocks
of
broadway
only
for
bicycle
parking.
We
are
recommending
no
change
to
the
current
requirement
of
one
space
per
two
residential
units
and
same
with
commercial,
no
change
the
current
requirement
of
one
bicycle
parking
space
for
10
vehicle
spaces,
multi-unit
residential
density.
F
Multi-Unit
residential
parking,
we're
looking
at
standards
of
one
space
per
unit
and
income
restricted
for
projects,
0.75
spaces
per
unit
in
the
half
mile,
and
then
going
down
the
quarter
mile
that
would
drop
by
0.25
for
each
of
those
commercial
buck
parking.
We
are
now
recommending
establishing
guidelines
to
views
as
benchmarks,
rather
than
targeted
parking
ratios
and
building
hype.
We
we
believe
that
we
should
establish
a
building
height
standard
of
125
feet
within
the
light
rails
station
influence
area
with
the
ability
to
negotiate
upwards
in
the
quarter
mile.
F
The
england
light
rail
corridor
plan.
Of
course
it
calls
out
the
following:
recommended:
housing
development
targets
for
the
england
station
neighborhood
area.
It
calls
for
a
target
of
2950
units
in
addition
to
the
art,
walk
apartments,
a
minimum
density
of
75
units
per
acre,
maximum
density
of
125
units
per
acre,
and
it
called
out
a
parking
ratio
of
1.0
spaces
per
unit.
F
Then
we
of
course,
have
we've
recently
discovered
this
report
from
rtd
that
they
did
last
year
during
the
pandemic
and
completed
here
in
december
of
2020.
The
residential
parking
and
stationary
study
staff
believes
the
rtd
station
area.
Resident
parking
study
offers
a
very
strong
evidence
that
residential
parking
is
significantly
underutilized
at,
like
near
light
rail
stations,
the
utilization
accounts
were
conducted
at
104
properties
within
10-minute,
walk
of
the
stations
in
april
2020
during
the
stay-at-home
order.
F
Tuesday,
through
thursday
10-3
market
rate
they've
discovered
that
forty
percent
of
the
provided
parking
is
not
utilized
in
the
market
rate
developments,
they
studied
one
point:
an
average
of
1.23
spaces
were
provided,
but
they
found
only
a
utilization
rate
of
0.74
spaces
and
with
income
restricted.
C
Oh
thanks.
Sorry,
I
wasn't
sure
when
to
ask
it.
I
was
just
trying
to
see
if
you
can
help
me
understand,
since
this
is
like
one
large
master
planned
area
and
do
you
anticipate
individual?
G
G
So,
at
the
end
of
the
day,
probably
the
best
answer,
kate
is
that
it'll
be
some
kind
of
hybrid,
but
that
the
hybrid
nature
of
it
will
be
helpful
in
terms
of
making
the
sure
that
the
parking
allocation
is
as
efficient
as
it
can
be
and
that
it's
you
know
there
are
multiple
opportunities
to
think
about
how
parking
is
working
or
not.
Working
as
the
project
evolves.
C
Okay,
that's
helpful
because
I'm
it's!
I
just
go
to
some
places
where
they
may
have
the
same
amount
of
parking
in
one
place
as
in
another
place
and
just
the
the
either
the
the
way
that
the
different
developments
went
in
or
the
the
time
and
the
fact
that
you
can't
get
from
one
parking
lot
to
the
other
in
that
kind
of
flow.
It
really
makes
a
difference
on
how
many
spaces
you
could
have
overall
anyway.
F
Actually
you
know
so
triba
flagged
that,
but
then
they
kind
of
walked
it
back
after
I
had
talked
to
some
people
on
the
current
planning
side
here
in
england
that
that
they
weren't
having
any
pushback
from
anybody
on
that
and
so
right
now
it's
like
two
or
I
think
one
space
for
two
units
and
I
could
easily
see
us
just
saying
it's
one's
one
bicycle
space
per
unit
and
the
reason
we
could
do
that
is
because
bicycles
really
don't
take
up
a
lot
of
space,
and
so
I
think,
that's
probably
doable
so
we'll
think
about
that.
B
John,
I
have
a
question
about
the
rtd
study
I
did
read
through
it
and
I
believe
that
they
did
not
count
the
parking
of
the
street
parking.
They
were
only
counting
the
the
cars
on
the
development
sites.
Is
that
correct.
B
F
Well,
I'd
like
to
correct
that
so
actually
oxford
station.
They
do
provide
one
space
per
unit
there.
F
There
are
a
certain
number
of
peoples
about,
maybe
10
or
so
people
who
do
like
to
park
on
the
street,
I'm
not
sure
if
it's
because
they
they
find
it
closer
to
the
door
or
they
or
if
there's
and
I'm
sure,
or
maybe
they
don't
want
to
pay.
I
don't
know
which
it
is.
But
there
are.
There
are
some
people
who
choose
to
park
there
on
the
street,
but
but
but
that
development
is
part
at
one
space
per
unit.
B
Okay,
yeah,
I
just
I
mean
I.
I
really
appreciate
you
guys
taking
what
we've
talked
about
and
trying
to
come
up
with
some
some
solutions
to
all
of
these
discussions.
B
I
just
want
to
make
sure
we're
clear
that
it
may
be
part
part
of
the
reason
why
those
transit-oriented
developments
are
under
parked
is
because
a
the
developer
is
charging
for
parking.
Of
course.
The
other
thing,
of
course,
is
rtd
making
people
pay
for
parking.
So
I
just
want
to
be
clear
on
that.
There's
numbers
the
numbers
might
not
be
totally
accurate,
but
anyway.
G
Yeah,
I
can't
help
but
contribute
this
fact
that
we
had
we,
the
city,
hired
a
walker
barking
to
do
an
independent
study
last
year,
and
it
was
during
peak
season
and
they
their
numbers
were
even
lower.
I
mean
here
at
city
center,
they
actually
went
out
and
looked
at
all
of
the
spaces
throughout
the
entire
center,
the
walmart
spaces,
the
city
spaces,
the
rtd
spaces
and
found
out
utilization
rates
in
some
cases
on
some
peak
days,
we're
actually
running
below
below
60
percent.
G
So
that
would
indicate
that
the
overall
trending
is
is
is
generally
in
that
direction
a
downward
utilization
of
parking
spaces,
and
we
see
that
clearly
on
the
private
sector
side,
where
office
developers
are
begging,
cities
to
let
them
reduce
parking
just
because
it's
going
completely
unused.
B
No,
I
I
agree,
I
actually
came
out
and
counted
the
parking
spaces.
I
think
yesterday,
but
there's
a
very
important
part
that
is
contributing
to
that,
and
that
is
that
our
heat
rtd
has
gotten
rid
of
the
sea
line
from
englewood
station
to
union
station.
So
anybody
who
wants
to
go
downtown
has
to
take
a
really
crazy
trip
and
I
actually
took
well.
I
didn't
take
the
trip,
but
I
did
go
and
investigate
it
and
them
getting
rid
of
that
sea
lion
directly
down
to
union
station.
B
F
Okay,
all
right,
so
this
slide
here
I
have
aerial
photos
of
the
art,
walk
apartments
over
the
course
of
four
different
time
periods,
2006
2010,
2014
2018,
and
what
I'm
trying
to
point
out
here
is
that
when
you're
looking
at
the
parking
areas-
and
I
would
point
you
out
to
the
middle
of
the
area
of
the
big
square
and
then
the
area
to
the
north
behind
it
and
then
also
to
the
parking
garage
on
the
west
side,
when
you
look
at
that,
you
see
a
lot
of
empty
spaces
in
the
middle
of
the
big
square.
F
F
We
think
this
development
has
too
much
parking,
doesn't
need
it,
and
we
believe
that
we
have
an
opportunity
to
tap
into
some
of
this
unused
parking,
and
so
we
would
like
to
start
talking
to
the
art,
walk
apartment
people
to
see
if
we
can
lease
some
of
that
some
of
those
areas
and
convert
that
to
some
different
things
that
maybe
portions
of
the
rtd
parking
would
be
taken
care
of
in
that
way,
or
it
could
be
shared
parking
with
some
of
the
new
residential
developments
that
we
are
envisioning.
F
And
going
on
with
that,
there's
a
lot
of
those
other
opportunities
as
well.
So
we
believe
that
you
know:
we've
got
to
the
north
that
whole
610
spaces
up
there,
which
is
just
dying
to
be
reconfigured
in
some
way.
F
In
the
past
we
have
allowed
additional
park
rtd
parking
to
have
occur
at
the
cushing
park
site
and
it
hasn't
been
a
problem
with
the
park
people
wanting
to
use
the
park.
F
It
hasn't
really
filled
up,
but
it
has
served
as
some
extra
overflow
capacity
then
to
the
south
of
the
retail
on
the
united
parkway,
that's
kind
of
where
we
envision
a
parking
structure
to
happen
and
then
going
further
east
there
to
the
walmart
over
there
that
the
area
to
the
south
of
england
parkway
is
never
typically
utilized,
except
for
maybe
during
the
christmas
season,
and
we
think
we
could
probably
negotiate
with
walmart
to
use
that
that
some
of
that
for
overflow
parking
for
rt
as
well
in
a
seasonal
way
and
then
even
farther
east.
F
There's
that
kind
of
extra
parking
there
to
the
north
of
the
england
parkway.
That
is
also
grossly
underutilized
and
we
could
probably
negotiate
with
those
folks
for
additional
overflow
rtd
parking
on
a
seasonal
basis.
F
Some
of
the
strategies
we
expect
to
be
employed
at
city
center
to
help
with
the
parking
situation
is
we
we
really
want
to
we're
really
planning
on
expanding
the
shuttle
bus
service
using
the
deda
we
would
add
nights
and
weekend
service
and
as
well
as
probably
seriously
upgrading
the
experience
for
the
riders
buying
state-of-the-art
shuttle
buses.
That
would
be
much
more
inviting
and
comfortable
to
ride
in.
We
think,
though,
that
would
be
much
more
attractive
to
people,
and
we
can
do
that
with
the
dda
once
that
gets
going.
F
We'd
also
like
to
at
some
point,
solicit
a
bike
share
company
to
come
to
ingwood
that
they
like
they
have
in
denver
to
serve
the
central
england,
central
business
districts,
and
we
have
actually
heard
from
some
bicycle
sharing
companies
about
that.
So
we
think,
that's
not
out
of
the
realm
of
possibility,
we'd
like
to
potentially
convert
some
of
the
free
parking
to
reserve
paid
parking,
there's,
probably
a
market
there
for
some
rtu
users
who
would
be
willing
to
pay
to
guarantee
a
spot
at
the
station.
F
We'd
also
might
look
into
creating
an
echo
pass
neighborhood
where
eco
passes
are
provided
for
all
the
residents
in
the
area
for
free
or
for
some
reduced
amount
of
money
that
that
comes
out
of
the
budgets
of
the
apartment
builders
and
develop
developments
themselves
and
then
again
the
shared
utilization
of
some
of
the
rtd
park
and
ride
spaces
with
other
uses
that
have
compatible
parking
patterns
and
utilization
of
the
unused
or
underused
existing
private
parking
spaces
through
parking
agreements.
F
Okay,
so
this
is
our
two-tier
stationary
map,
and
I
must
point
out
to
you
that
dan
part
of
my
frustration
with
dan
was
this
a
little
bit
dan
asked
me.
F
However,
I
felt
strongly
that
that
made
a
kind
of
an
odd
boundary
that
didn't
really
respect
the
quarter
mile
really-
and
so
I
I
said,
let's
put
in
the
walmart
and
let's
just
make
move
it
to
aladdi
and
we
would
create
that
would
be
our
quarter
mile
area
and
then
and
then
subsequently.
We
also,
I
also
decided
we
should
probably
move
the
half
mile,
then
out
of
another
block
farther,
and
so
we've
moved
that
out
to
include
the
the
live
apartments.
D
I
have
a
question:
okay,
yeah,
all
right.
I
got
a
couple
questions.
Actually
that
picture
right.
There
shows
the
where
the
parking
structure
would
be
at
the
office
depot.
D
It
looks
like
it's
actually
pretty
well
occupied,
so
I
don't
know
where
those
cars
those
are
going
to
the
shopping
center
or
what.
But,
when
you
put
a
parking
structure
in
there,
you're
going
to
be
using
that
for
rtd,
and
the
apartments
I
believe
is
that
correct.
D
Likely
so
the
the
distance
will
be
about
three
or
four
times
what
it
is
currently
to
get
to
that
parking
structure
from
the
light
rail
station
it'll
be
a
lot
a
lot
further
walk,
I
mean
it'll
be
doable,
but
they'll
be
like
a
eight
minute,
walk,
probably.
G
John,
can
you
point
out
where
we
think
the
additional
structured
parking
might
be
on
block
c.
D
That's
that's
10
to
15
million
dollars
for
a
parking
structure.
That's
going
to
be
a
free-for-all.
Basically,.
F
It
it
not
necessarily
not
necessarily
will
it
be
a
free-for-all,
because
there
there
may
be
areas
that
are
reserved
for
different
things.
A
certain
floor
might
be
reserved
for
the
commercial
retail
businesses
on
england
parkway,
whereas
the
upper
floors,
some
of
those,
might
be
reserved
or
shared
with
the
rtd
as
well,
but
it
it's
not
necessarily
all
going
to
be
shared.
There
may
be
some
reserved
for
certain
uses
at
certain
times.
G
This
parking,
the
different
users,
would
very
likely
be
arriving
and
leaving
at
different
times
of
the
day
and
one
of
the
big
things
we
all
have
to
keep
in
mind.
Contrary
to
the
date
on
which
this
picture
was
taken,
you
can
see
the
civic
center
parking
is
fairly
full
that
empty.
That
top
lot
now
is
essentially
empty.
G
Most
transit
agencies
know
that
long-term
parking
at
light
rail
stations
may
never
ever
ever
ever,
come
back
to
be
anything
close
to
what
it
is,
and
so
it's
very
likely
that
you
know
we're
looking
at
reductions
of
the
long-term
use
of
that
space
that
could
easily
be
25
to
50
of
the
prior
capacity
prior
to
covet.
D
So
you,
you
began
the
the
monologue
by
saying
that
we
have
a
over
abundance
of
parking,
but
yet
you're
you're,
talking
about
taking
the
cushing
park
parking
lot
for
a
for
a
city
park,
parking
lot
and
then
the
making
a
deal
with
the
art
walk
apartments
on
using
some
of
their
parking
and
then
also
working
a
deal
with
walmart
to
get
some
of
their
parking.
D
So
we
do.
We
have
a
lot
of
parking,
or
I
mean
a
lot
of
that.
Fun
will
be
demolished
when
the
all
the
development
starts
and
a
thing
that
kate
brought
up
that
as
things
are
rebuilt,
is
it
gonna
be
a
piecemeal
or
is
just
a
massive
configuration
of
confusion,
or
is
it
gonna
be
a
system
that
is
walkable
and
bicycle
and
that
that
is
a
issue
that
could
be
a
real
issue
there?
For
me
anyway,
you
start
building
all
this
stuff
piecemeal.
G
Well,
and
of
course,
that's
what
your
city
staff
is
here
for
to
do
that,
and
our
agreements
with
our
two
players
contemplate
that
kind
of
overall
redevelopment
coordination.
We
we're
very,
very
fortunate
in
that
you
know
we
have
the
opportunity,
through
the
city's
continued
ownership
interest,
actually
contemplate.
What
we're
talking
about
here
and
the
fact
that
this
this
ground
lease
on
the
former
weingarten
property,
is
coming
back
potentially
to
the
city
and
can
be
terminated
and
transferred
to
the
private
sector
and
then
the
if
continued,
to
hold
as
much
property
as
it
did.
G
I
mean
those
are
two
very
beneficial
circumstances
that
are
just
essentially
for
the
grace
of
god
that
we
can
now
take
advantage
of
and
are
attempting
to
do
so.
But
to
answer
your
first
question,
we
have
a
massive
oversupply
of
barking,
not
only
the
rtd
shared
parking,
but
all
of
the
other
sites.
That
john
pointed
out-
and
I
think
one
of
the
things
we're
trying
to
ensure
is
that
that
oversupply
of
parking
is
utilized
first
by
the
developers
and
is
not
not
a
cost
to
the
city
that
the
city
actually
benefits
by
the
oversupply.
B
I
would
agree
that
currently,
we
do
have
a
massive
oversupply
of
parking
and
I
think
all
if
not
most
of
the
commission
wants
to
give
the
city
the
flexibility
to
you
know
redevelop
this,
but
I,
since
we've
already
talked
about
making
a
agreement
with
walmart
and
things
like
that,
I
don't
see
any
real
reason
to
extend
the
half
and
quarter
mile
boundaries
out
at
this
point
in
time.
That's
just
my
opinion.
I
go
along
with
judy.
Is
the
parking
needs
to
be
where
it
needs
to
be
always
in
real
estate?
G
We
had
the
good
fortune
of
having
l
r
extend
both
of
those
leases
out
ten
years,
and
so,
if
we
can
put
a
redevelopment
oriented
rezoning
on
that
property,
we
can
attract
a
redevelopment
type
buyer
rather
than
a
passive
status
quo.
Buyer
and
that
will
be
a
big
big
big
value
generator
for
the
city,
so
that
would
be
the
rationale
for
making
those
adjustments.
A
J
J
Sorry,
I'm
having
so
many
difficulties
getting
my
cursor
to
move.
I
have
a
few
thoughts.
One
is
carl
with
regard
to
your
comment
about
the
thirty
five
thousand
dollars
of
space.
I
that
definitely
is
expensive
and
I
think,
but
it's
very
accurate.
It's
a
very
standard
fee
to
imagine
for
structured
parking.
J
You
know
I
think
john's
slides
showed
for
375
units,
the
that
would
yield
a
six
million
dollar
savings
to
the
developer,
which
we
could
hopefully
at
least
partially
invest
in
the
actual
development
itself
and
then
and
then
to
a
little
bit
of
a
different
point
in
englewood
forward.
I
just
did
a
quick
search.
There
are
164
instances
of
the
word,
walk
108
instances
of
the
word
move,
125
instances
of
the
word
bike
and
13
instances
of
the
word
parking
in
section,
5.1
and
going
forward,
recommends
developing
a
strategic
planning
framework
for
reimagining
among.
I
J
Things
parking
requirements
and
I
think
that
the
city
staff
has
done
a
terrific
job
of
showing
us
all
of
the
ways
that
we
need
to
reduce
the
parking.
How
we
can
do
it
strategically,
how
we
can
partner
and
share
with
other
you
know
other
spaces
across
the
city
and
how
we
have
way
too
much
as
it
is,
and
if
we
want
to
really
invest
in
englewood
forward
and
really
follow
through
on
the
mission
that
that
is
suggesting.
J
We
really
need
to
reduce
the
parking
requirement.
It's
going
to
we're
going
to
be
commuting
against
communities
that
are
already
right
now.
I
know
of
several
in
say
aurora
and
other
adjacent
communities
who
are
trying
to
do
even
denser,
more
sustainable,
interesting
developments,
and
if
we
want
to
keep
up
and
keep
englewood
as
a
player
in
the
metro
region,
we
need
to
step
up,
and
you
know
sort
of
do
some
of
what
these
things
that
the
city
staff
is
is
suggesting.
J
A
H
I
appreciated
the
the
reduction
goals
for
the
commercial
and
how
that
allows.
For
you
know,
more
negotiation,
as
opposed
to
a
rigid
framework,
has
something
like
that
been
considered
for
the
multi-unit
residential.
F
So
we
believe
that
we
really
need
to
hammer
that
down
a
little
bit
more
with
the
residential.
We
think
that
it's
much
more
easy
to
predict
that
what
we
will
need
based
on
what
the
needs
of
the
residents,
the
studies
that
are
out
there,
and
we
also
feel
that
we
need
to
be
able
to
give
a
specific
numbers
to
developers
to
get
them,
especially
for
that
l
r
property
to
when
they
want
to
market
it.
F
They
need
to
be
able
to
say
that
to
them
to
to
in
the
marketing
that
this
is
that
that's
what
the
parking
rate
is
set
to,
because
it's
going
to
be
very
critical
in
in
when
the
the
prospective
developers
try
to
develop
a
pro
forma
that
and
to
see
if
it
pencils
out,
and
so
we
believe
that
we
really
need
to
have
set
residential
numbers
up
front,
but
we
are
going
to
we
do.
We
might
have
a
little
bit.
F
We
would
probably
we
have
added
some
language
about
the
potential
for
doing
some
further
negotiating
and
to
be
flexible,
so
they're
kind
of
they're
kind
of
almost
more
like
guidelines
at
this
point
now
too,
and
so
I
think,
we've
we
feel
pretty
comfortable
with
what
we've
got
residentially.
F
The
commercial
thing,
though
I
think,
makes
more
sense
to
go
via
these
percentages,
because
it's
less,
we
we're
less
confident
about
the
what
those
numbers
should
look
like
or
or
may
look
like,
and
so
that's
kind
of
where
we're
at.
H
And
I
would
like
to
say
that,
for
you
know
we're
looking
at
the
quarter
mile
and
a
half
mile,
which
I
think
we
should
maybe
rename
as
they
don't
seem
to
be
fitting
quite
as
well,
but
my
my
preference
would
be
to
apply
the
the
yellow
rules
to
both
the
yellow
and
the
pink
area.
I
think,
that's
all
you
know
great
candidate,
for
you
know
high
density,
you
know
high
height,
you
mentioned
that
the
half
mile
area
would
not
allow
negotiation
for
higher
than
125
feet.
A
C
I
wanted
to
first
of
all,
second
everything
diane
said
so
nicely
and
then
also
no.
I
love
that
idea
of
of
kind
of
shifting
all
of
this
to
yellow.
I
think
that
that
would
be,
I
think,
it's
appropriate
for
this
area
and,
more
so
than
any
other
part
of
eaglewood.
So
it
makes
sense
to
me-
and
I
would
say
even
for
the
question
in
front
of
us
in
terms
of
like
whether
we
should
move
the
yellow
out.
At
least
I
mean
it's
still
in
my
google
map
estimate
here.
C
It's
an
eight
minute,
walk
from
that
corner
of
a
lotte
in
inglewood,
parkway,
all
the
way
to
the
the
train
station
to
where
you
get
onto
the
train.
So
it's
definitely
within
within
that
whole
10
minute,
walk
area,
which
is,
I
think,
is
why
we
use
these
radii
anyway,
but
I
would
also
be
open
to
considering
that
whole
area
as
yellow
like
noel
mentioned.
C
To
build
on
kate
and
noel,
I
like
that
idea
too,
but
looking
at
it,
I
think
maybe
the
more
natural
yellow
space
would
end
at
cherokee,
because
that's
where
that
major
light
at
hampden
is,
I
don't
know,
that's
just
kind
of
a
suggestion.
If
we
wanted
to
compromise
and
bring
that
red
back,
because
once
you
get
past
panic,
it
is
a
little
bit
further
out,
but
that
cherokee
area
is
really
walkable
too
light
rail
area
and.
B
B
B
C
I
I
was
just
going
to
mention.
I
understand
that
whole
breaking
point
at
cherokee,
but
I
think
just
in
terms
of
looking
at
the
whole
development
area.
I
think
it
would
be
a
little
bit
funky
to
have
that
one
section
of
it
different.
C
I
think
it'd
be
better
to
either
have
a
whole
chunk
different
or
or
have
it
all
the
same,
and
hopefully
within
this
master
plan
or
development,
there
will
be
more
of
the
a
trail
or
that
a
better
connection
going
from
that
little
dry
creek,
where
it
ends
to
the
station
as
well,
and
I
think
one
of
the
things
is
that
in
looking
at
this,
I
don't
think
there
is
an
expectation
for
everyone
to
walk
from
a
coma
to
the
light
rail
station.
C
But
I
think
it's
more
so
a
matter
of
parking
with
it
and
most
likely
I
mean
just
like
you
said:
you're
not
going
to
park
on
one
end
and
walk
to
the
other
end.
So,
ideally,
then
it's
it's
the.
I
would
say
the
people
that
are
choosing
to
go
there
and
not
parking
there'll
be
spaces
for
people
who
choose
to
go
there
and
park.
C
C
F
Well,
thank
you
for
that.
Those
comments
we
will.
We
will
take
those
under
advisement
and
we,
we
probably
will
come
back
for
a
short
thing
on
that,
with
what
we've
come
up
with
or
or
a
new
proposal
based
on
that,
or
maybe
we
just
stay
the
same
or
maybe
we
just
give
you
a
different
alternative
and
you
guys
can
vote,
but
I
will
then
move
so
we
have
proposed.
F
F
F
However,
we
did
have
differences
with
the
parking
staff
concludes
that
tv
had
deviating
from
the
proposed
multi-unit
residential
parking
standards
is
not
advisable,
but
we
did
recast
the
proposed
commercial
parking
standards
as
an
aspirational
parking
guidelines
to
be
negotiated.
F
Setting
a
tod
residential
park
standard
will
create
a
high
level
certainty
for
for
prospective
developers,
enabling
an
accurate
pricing
assessment
and
offer
c
staff
skb
and
l
and
r
partners
have
a
generally
agreed
to
a
350,
plus
or
minus
multi-unit
residential
project
on
the
south
path
of
the
office
depot
block
and
at
a
proposed
density
of
125
units
per
acre,
the
site
three
acre
site
would
yield
375
units
to
achieve
that
number,
we
believe
a
parking
ratio
of
one
space
period
will
facilitate
that
possibility
of
cheap
being
that
kind
of
a
density
and
that
we
believe
a
higher
parking
ratio
than
that
would
make
it
extremely
unlikely
for
that
density
to
be
achieved.
F
And,
as
you
have
gone
through,
your
slides,
well
you've
kind
of
seen
our
cost
breakdown
of
what
that
might
look
like.
If
you
had
375
units
at
three
parked
at
one
space
per
unit
times,
35
000
is
13
million
dollars
and
if
you
had
to
provide
1.5
spaces
and
they're
structured,
that
would
be
563
spaces
times.
F
35
000
would
be
19
million
dollars,
and
so
that's
a
significant
extra
expense,
6.6
million
that
have
to
be
it
would
have
to
be
provided
to
structured
parking
at
the
expense
of
the
quality
of
the
development,
and
we
have
to
compete
with
other
areas,
especially
denver,
denver
and
aurora
have
a
lot
of
different
of
these
tod
sites
and
they're
they've
got
a
lot
lower
requirements
than
than
1.5
space
per
unit,
and
we
believe
that
developers
will
be
more
interested
in
them.
If
we
have
these
this,
we
stick
with
a
1.5
spaces
per
unit.
A
All
right,
I'm
sorry,
john,
I
couldn't
get
off
me
colin-
has
a
question.
Okay,.
I
Just
a
real
quick
question,
a
reminder
on
the
commercial
side,
or
that's
like
a
one
space
per
10
000
square
feet,
or
something
like
that.
Did
you
mention
that
again
today,
then
what
that
reduction
or
goal
would
be
or
how
that
impacts
us,
because
are
we
looking
at
just
all
residential?
Do
we
not?
Are
we
not
going
to
have
any
commercial
requirements
on
this
part
of
the
development.
F
All
right,
so
here's
two
examples
of
different
developments
that
we
have
in
ingwood.
Belle,
cherry
hills
is
parked
at
1.5
spaces
per
unit,
and
it
has
a
residential
density
of
about
72
units
per
acre,
which
is
at
our
low
point,
our
minimum
residential
density
that
we're
proposing
and
then
the
live
apartments.
F
They
provide
first
poor
parking
at
one
space
per
unit,
and
that
comes
that
computes
to
a
residential
density
of
127
units
per
acre.
And
so
what
that
shows
is
is
the
difference
in
the
fact
that
if
you
have
a
1.5
space
versus
a
1.0
space
per
unit,
you
can
see
the
difference
there
in
the
density
that
you
can
achieve.
F
All
right,
so
our
our
recommended
multi-unit
residential
parking
stands
where
we're
not
we're
not
deviating
from
what
we
had
before.
F
We
were
continuing
to
put
multi-unit
residential
market
rate
apartments
at
one
space
per
unit
in
a
half
mile
subject
to
change,
maybe
based
on
those
boundaries
and
the
quarter
mile
we
had
put
in
at
.75
unit
spaces
per
unit
and
with
income,
restricted
properties,
workforce
housing.
F
We
thought
we
would
drop
those
down
by
a
quarter
for
the
half
mile
and
a
quarter
for
the
quarter
mile
and
then
for
the
recommended
commercial
parking
guidelines.
We
are
changing
that
up
where
our
proposal
is
a
little
bit
different.
F
This
time
before
we
for
hotel
office
retail
restaurant,
we
were
actually
plugging
in
parking
ratios
that
were
significant
reductions
from
the
existing
standards,
but
because
we
felt
that
it's
a
lot
less
for
certain
as
to
what
that
should
be
a
lot
less
predictable
and
because
there
was
some
a
little
bit
of
not
everybody
was
totally
on
board.
With
some
of
these
ratios,
we
thought
that
maybe
it
would
be
better
to
go
to
more
of
a
guideline
system
where
we
would
look
at
percentages
to
negotiate
reductions
from.
F
We
would
still
use
our
existing
standards
as
the
base
for
the
most
part,
except
for
maybe
the
restaurant.
We
use
a
little
bit
different
standard,
it's
more
contemporary
and
then
we
would
negotiate
in
within
the
half
mile
a
zero
to
25
percent
reduction
and
in
with
it
and
within
the
quarter
mile,
we
would
be
looking
at
a
twenty
five
to
fifty
percent
reduction.
B
B
Well,
my
house
is
1200
square
feet
and,
if
you
just
take
off
one
bedroom,
that
would
take
me
about
down
to
a
thousand
square
feet
and
if
you
are
going
to
basically
end
up
with
you
can
end
up
with
two
and
a
half
spots
for
my
house.
I
think
that
that's
pretty
thin
for
a
successful
restaurant
to
operate.
I
would
prefer
to
see
the
reduction
from
the
full
10,
but
that's
just
my
opinion.
A
I
I
I
believe,
the
even
at
five
spaces
per
1000
square
feet.
We
were
one
of
the
higher
in
the
the
metro
area.
Right,
I
don't
know.
If
you've
got
those
numbers
off
10,
we
were
like
astronomically
high
five.
We
were
still
pretty
high
as
it
is,
but
I
I
don't
remember
if
you
got
that
off
the
top
of
your
head.
F
Yes,
if
I
was
to
do
a
comparison
between
a
lot
of
different
suburbs
here
in
the
metro,
we
would
be
on
the
very
high
side
with
that
figure.
It
really
is
I've,
it's
probably
our
worst
parking
ratio
that
we
have
in
our
code.
That
doesn't
make
sense
and
is
in
it
it's
something
that
most
places
have
gone
to
something
more
closer
to
the
five
per
thousand
for
a
restaurant.
B
F
Any
other
comments
on
the
this
commercial
parking
guideline
proposal.
I
Just
real
quick
when
you
say
these
are
kind
of
goals,
these
would
be
if
you
negotiate
with
the
development,
or
these
are
things
that
we
would
potentially
put
into
the
the
zoning.
I
guess
what
do
you
when
you
say
the
goals
for
reduction
at
what
point?
Do
those
become
what
are
applied.
F
So
we
would
put
in
the
language
that
these
that
this
is
our
tsa
goals
and
that
they
would
be
substitute
negotiations.
They
would
not
be
absolutes,
so
you're
not
necessarily
guaranteed
to
get
a
25
reduction
within
the
half
mile
or
50
percent
reduction
the
quarter
mile.
But
those
are
the
ranges
that
you
have
that
have
been
set
out
by
pnz
and
city
council
with
that
would
be
used
by
the
city
staff
to
negotiate
with
developers.
F
A
J
Thank
you.
I
was
curious
if
there
is-
and
I
apologize,
if
I
forget-
and
you
had
shown
it
in
a
previous
presentation-
is
there
maybe
a
restaurant
that
you
could
recommend?
We
look
at
the
parking
lot
that
might
have
you
know
if
we
reduce
by
25
from
the
five
that's
3.75
spaces
per
thousand
and
then
50
would
be
2.5.
Do
we
have
like
somewhere
we
could
go
and
say.
Oh,
this
is
what
that
looks
like.
How
does
that
feel?
Can
we
walk
and
see?
J
Does
it
seem
too
clogged
I
mean
all
of
it
is
a
little
bit
hard
to
gauge
unless
we're
looking
at
a
true
tod
site,
that's
been
built
out
because
there's
going
to
be
all
kinds
of
amenities
and
things
that
will
allow
the
people
who
are
able-bodied
to
walk
or
bike
and
do
all
those
things
and
then
others
who
would
need
to
park
their
car,
like
you
know
the
people
who
have
triplets
and
and
who,
who
can't
walk
well,
but
I
am
curious
if
there
is
some
place,
you'd
recommend
we'd,
be
able
to
walk
and
see
or
drive
and
see
that.
F
J
J
F
C
F
No,
they
they'd
only
apply
to
the
the
tsa,
the
areas
that
we've
outlined
in
the
quarterback
half
ma.
It
would
not
apply
outside
of
the
tsa
overlay
area.
F
It
would
apply
to
the
that
entire
yellow
and
pink
area,
the
the
half
mile
and
the
quarter
mile
called
out
areas.
Would
that
would
be
the
entire
tsa
area.
C
D
The
the
restaurant
I'm
thinking
about,
I
think
I
saw
ihop
down
there
on
englewood
parkway,
I'm
kind
of
estimating
it's
probably
three
thousand,
maybe
maybe
four
thousand
square
feet.
So
it
does.
Does
the
there's
a
five
and
one
thousand
is
that
including
employees
also.
F
There
is
no
typically,
there
is
no
employee
requirement.
The
co.
Sometimes
there
are,
I
think,
with
hotels
are
we
do?
We
may
have
that
as
a
pop
as
a
potential.
F
I'd
have
to
look
in
that
again
to
see,
but
but
for
the
restaurants,
no,
it
does
not
take
into
account
spaces
for
employees
versus
spaces
for
visitors.
It's
just
one
standard
to
apply
to
both.
A
E
Here's
my
opinion,
I
don't
have
a
heartburn
with
commercial
stuff.
The
bottom
line
is
other
than
you
know
the
hotel's
going
to
be
what
it
is,
but
office
and
retail
in
restaurants.
If
a
developer
is
going
to
try
and
lease
a
restaurant
space
and
there's
no
parking,
restaurants
aren't
stupid.
If
people
can't
get
to
their
restaurant,
conveniently
then
they're
gonna
lose
clients.
E
E
But
you
know
I've
lived
in
this
area
for
a
lot
of
years
and
downtown
littleton
has
always
struggled,
and
you
can
see
people
going
in
and
out
of
there
constantly
and
one
of
the
problems
is:
there's
no
parking
and
there
never
has
been,
and
it's
always
been
a
challenge.
E
And
so,
ultimately,
from
a
commercial
standpoint,
if
a
developer
wants
to
build
a
building
and
not
have
any
parking
at
some
point,
they're
not
going
to
have
renters
for
it.
So
I
guess
I
don't
have
heartburn
with
what
happens
here
with
commercial
on
the
residential
side.
The
only
reason
that
I
have
issues
with
it
is
because
it
starts
to
overflow
into
the
commercial
areas,
and
then
you
talk
about
you
know
who's
going
to
be
responsible
for
managing
that
and
then
the
bur.
E
I
just
don't
want
the
burden
to
fall
on
the
city
that
we
end
up
having
to
manage
what
we're
talking
about
shared
parking
with
rtd
that
now
we
have
to
go
out
there
and
monitor.
I
mean
I
see
this-
that
security
guy
driving
around
in
the
parking
garage
now
still
trying
to
monitor
if
somebody's
parking
there
for
rtd.
I
don't
know,
is
that
our
dime.
E
So
that's
why
my
my
issues
is
with
the
residential.
Is
that
that's
less
controllable
in
the
sense
that
people
who
are
living
there
need
a
place
to
park?
I
don't
have
a
problem
with
it
going
out
to
a
ladder
as
as
dan
was
saying
about
finding
it
on
lot
and
block,
but
to
be
honest,
I'd
be
more
for
making
the
whole
thing
yellow
or
I
mean
whole
thing
pink
before
I
agree
to
make
a
whole
thing
yellow,
but
you
know
I'm
looking
at
long
term
down
the
line.
E
If
of
some
other
development-
and
you
know
we
have
puds
coming
across
all
the
time
where
we
have
people
asking
for
variances.
But
you
know
I'm
not
gonna,
I'm
tired
of
talking
about
parking,
but
anyways,
that's
my
opinion
on
the
commercial.
Is
I
don't.
I
don't
care
what
you
guys
do
here,
because
they'll
they'll
pay
the
price
with
not
being
able
to
get
companies
there.
I
mean
restaurants,
who
don't
have
places
for
parking,
don't
survive
so
that'll
be
on
the
developers
decision
point.
I
guess
I
don't
really.
E
I've
never
cared
about
commercial
parking,
all
that
much
but
the
residential
parking.
E
J
Yeah
I
I
just
was
curious
with
regards
to
the
restaurant
and
shared
parking
I
mean.
Is
there
I
don't
really
know
how
this
would
work
in
code
language,
but
would
it
be
possible,
for
you
know,
restaurant
tours
to
use
valet
that
you
know
parks
at
some
of
these
excess
parking
facilities
to
make
it
easier?
I
mean
I've
definitely
been
to
valet
been
to
restaurants
that
have
valet
sort
of
as
part
of
their
service
and
and
really
the
only
additional
charge,
probably
is
the
tip
anyway.
G
G
I
mean
they're
from
the
days
when
you
had
a
standalone
parking
lot
on
an
out
parcel
of
a
corner
of
a
retail
center.
G
You
know
I
mean
the
reality
is
in
a
tod
mixed-use
environment
by
the
time
that
you're
dealing
with
peak
restaurant
hours,
there's
so
much
available
parking
from
other
uses,
that's
immediately
available,
adjacent
and
and
if
those
spots
are
all
being
used,
that's
a
problem
that
we,
the
city,
would
love
love
to
have,
because
that
means
we're
being
successful
and
attracting
people
and,
as
you
said,
diane,
the
valet
parking
becomes
a
very
practical
solution
in
those
situations.
B
I
would
just
echo
judy's
comments,
although
I'm
a
little
more
commercial
oriented,
because
that's
my
background,
that
residential
parking
is
key
because
you've
got
to
go
to
the
grocery
store
and
you
need
to
be
able
to
park
somewhat
close
to
where
you
live,
so
you
can
haul
all
your
groceries
up.
So
I
just
want
to
support
your
comments.
Judy.
F
All
right
here
we,
this
is
my
final
slide.
This
is
our
showing
the
residential
density
that
for
the
maximum
and
the
minimum
within
the
half
mile
and
the
quarter
mile,
and
there
may
be
a
negotiation
higher
through
the
tsa
overlay
and
then
height.
F
D
F
F
When
you
go
beyond
the
six
stories,
then
you're,
looking
at
a
typically
a
concrete
and
steel
type
of
construction,
which
is
much
more.
D
D
Were
the
developers
build
an
apartment,
building
bigger
than
six
stories.
F
Is
not
we
have
not,
they
have
not
shown
us
that,
so
we
don't
believe.
That's
that
would
be
probable,
but
it
is.
There
are
some
developments
at
some
stations
that
that
do
exceed
that
that
are
taller.
So
it
is
it's
there.
Is
it
isn't
within
the
realm
of
possibility?
H
Earlier
when
we
talked
about
expanding
the
the
quarter
mile,
all
the
way
up
to
the
half
mile
line,
I
know
a
lot
of
that
was
focused
on
parking.
If
you
know
I
would,
I
would
definitely
be
eager
to
see
if
the
parking
changes
weren't
uniform,
that
things
like
the
height
you
know
were
uniform
across
the
whole
area.
H
I
guess
my
my
common
theme
is:
let's
go
taller
and
denser-
and
I
wouldn't
want
the
you
know-
a
disagreement
around
the
parking
changes
to
stop
at
least
those
you
know,
density
and
height
pieces
from
moving
forward.
A
I
I
think
part
of
the
follow-up-
just
maybe
carl,
to
clarify-
I
think
if
you're
gonna
go
to
that
six
stories
or
taller
they're
gonna
need
to
do
a
few
extra
stories
to
make
those
viable.
So
an
eight
story
maybe
isn't
viable.
I
So
if
we
were
only
at
80
or
90,
feet
might
not
be
as
functional
as
if
you
go
up
a
couple
extra
stories
to
add
in
a
few
more
feet
so
allowing
that
if
they
wanted
to
go
to
that
different
methodology
because
you're
right
it's
going
to
be
more
expensive,
it's
going
to
be
more
challenging
so
by
having
80
or
90
foot
requirement,
you're
kind
of
limiting
to
60
and
if
you're,
allowing
them
to
go
a
little
bit
higher.
I
think
that
would
be
the
thought
process
there.
A
A
F
F
They
are
about
120
feet
tall,
so
we
use
we,
and
so
I
think
we
automatically
kind
of
came
to
that
as
a
group
that
hey,
let's
start
there
and
then
then
and
then,
but
then
it
also
became
clear-
is
that
commissioners
didn't
really
want
to
preclude
anything
with
an
artificial
height
and
we
kind
of
decided
okay.
F
D
Have
one
more
one
more
question.
A
D
The
this
this
is
kind
of
a
general
question
on
density
is:
is
there
a
density
that
is
a
goal
density?
There
is
limits
on
what
you
can
do
for
infrastructure,
the
the
water
lines,
how
much?
How
many
thousands
of
people
can
we
add
to
our
water
system
and
how
many?
How
much
can
we
add
to
the
sewer
system?
D
That's
a
good
question
if
you
have
2
000,
more
people
and
basically
at
of
a
bronco
game,
if
they
ever
get
back
to
playing
that
everybody
flushes
the
toilet
at
halftime,
and
that
you,
your
water
pressure,
goes
from
65
to
20.,
so
is.
Is
that
going
to
be
an
issue.
F
The
city
of
englewood
back
in
the
1970s
did
some
studies
to
end.
F
In
the
study
that
I
found
it
said
it
says
that
the
city's
existing
infrastructure
can
support
a
population
total
population
of
60
000
people,
so
it
was
designed
for
significantly
larger
capacity
than
for
the
population
that
we
have
today,
probably
to
preclude
those
kind
of
issues
or
problems
for
the
city's
growth
in
the
future.
F
Yes
and
we
have
the
water
supply,
the
city
has
rights
to
more
water
than
we
a
lot
more
water
actually
than
we
currently
need
for
our
current
population
and
they
purchased
water
rights
to
serve
a
population
of
approximately
probably
twice
as
much
as
what
they
had
at
that
time,
which
was
probably
about
around
thirty
thousand,
so
they
probably
they
purchased
enough
water
to
serve
60
000
people.
D
Now
I
know
that
in
especially
in
a
drought
summer
the
englewood
sells
water
to
aurora
highlands,
ranch
and
various
other
places.
D
The
the
selling
of
a
water
we
we
do
make
a
lot
of
money
on.
B
Them
I
appreciate
your
questions,
but
I
think
we're
getting
a
little
a
field
of
the
city
center
redevelopment
at
this
point.
So
I'd
like
to
kind
of
keep
us
on
yeah.
D
The
infrastructure
is
basically
what
I
was
interested
in.
Can
we
kind
of
density
be
handled
by
that
something?
Thank
you.
F
All
right
since
it's
getting
late,
I'm
going
to
that's
the
end
of
the
powerpoint,
and
so
at
this
point
of
the
evening,
going
back
to
the
early
slide.
F
What
we
were
asking
to
the
group
is:
are
we
ready
to
conclude
our
series
of
stay
sessions
on
the
city
center
rezoning
and
then
are
we
ready
to
conclude
those
that
series
of
stay
sessions
and
are
we
then
ready
to
take
the
next
step,
which
is
to
schedule
a
community
meeting
and
to
begin
a
directing
staff
to
start
developing
the
actual
ordinance
language
language
which,
by
the
way,
we
would
still
have
a
study
session
for
that
to
go
over
those
proposed
red
lines,
and
we
would
also
have
had
the
community
meeting
and
we
would
take
the
any
feedback
that
we
got
there
and
decide
if
we
want
to
make
any
tweaks
and
then
then
we'd
be
ready
to
go
on
later
beyond
that
and
start
the
and
hold
the
public
hearing
and
make
a
recommendation
to
council?
B
Well,
I
think
that
that,
in
some
ways
that
question
can
be
turned
upon
you,
john
and
dan,
do
you
feel
that
you
got
adequate
feedback
tonight
to
essentially
finalize
the
recommendations.
F
Let
me
see
if
I
can
stop
sharing
the
screen
here.
Yeah,
I'm
not
figuring
that
out.
We
may
there
may
be
a
few
things.
I
don't
you
know,
I
don't
know.
We'd
have
to
probably
think
of
process
a
little
bit
more.
I
think
there
was
some
different
voices
about
the
boundary,
but
then
at
the
same
time
it
kind
of
came
back
to
well.
Let's
just
keep
the
boundary
so
I'm
starting
to
lean
more
towards
just
keeping
the
boundary
as
we
showed
it
tonight.
F
F
Yes,
so
I'm
thinking
we
still
could
go
with
a
decision.
If
that's
what
the
group
decides,
if
they're
ready
to
go
to
community
meeting.
H
Well,
folks,
our
office
is
going
to
have
to
draft
a
an
ordinance
change
that
zoning
and
we
need
to
have
some
time
to
be
able
to
do
that
and
to
sit
down
with
dan
and
john
to
figure
out
exactly
what
that
is
going
to
entail.
H
So
I
would
hate
to
push
this
to
a
may
or
april
date
when
we
in
our
office
are
actually
one
person
down.
So
I'd
like
some
time
to
speak
with
john
and
dan
about
the
timing
on
this.
F
F
Basically,
are
we
ready
to
move
on
from
these
st
study
sessions
on
city
center
and
start
start
working
towards
those
agreed
upon
dates.
B
F
B
F
Yes,
I
believe
that
it
would
better
at
this
point
we
would
at
the
community
meeting
we
wouldn't
want
to
be
confusing
the
public
with
multiple
options
we
would
want
to
have
say
this
is
what
we
are.
This
commission
has
come
up
with
and
that
this
is
this
is
the
result,
and
this
is
what
will
be
proposed
to
city
council.
F
I
don't
think
we'd
want
to
confuse
at
this
point,
so
so,
yes,
that
that's
kind
of
where
you're
at
tonight
are
you.
Are
we
ready
to
go
forward,
or
is
this
not
quite
there
yet.
H
Boy,
that's
a
good
question.
We
we
have
got
a
lot
of
things
coming
down
from
different
departments.
At
this
point,
I've
got
four
city:
ditch
issues
going
on,
I've
got
contracts,
I'm
still
reviewing
and
rewriting
honestly,
I
I
don't
know
I'd
have
to
talk
with
john
and
dan
and
get
an
idea
of
where
we're
going
with
this,
and
because
it's
a
zoning
change
this.
This
board
is
going
to
be
able
to
weigh
in
on
that
and
make
decisions
and
recommendations
to
counsel.
H
So
I
I
can't
give
you
a
a
hard
fast
timeline,
I'm
probably
looking
at
june
july.
H
We
are,
we
are
we
are
slammed,
I
mean
we
are
one
person
down
and
we're
scrambling
to
try
and
get
everything.
You
know
we're
getting
a
lot
of
things.
Projects
coming
through
our
office
that
we
have
to
to
address.
H
No,
I
I
I'm
fine.
I've
got
plenty
of
coffee.
H
I
could
do
two
warm
bodies
in
our
office
to
help
us,
but
at
this
point
that's
not
gonna
happen
for
a
little
bit.
B
G
G
We
might
have
a
couple
for
you
dugan,
you
know
you
may
be
able
to
utilize
the
outside
council,
gaplin,
kirsh
and
rockwell
to
do
the
the
basic
drafting
on
the
ordinance
and
associated
documents.
You
know,
because
that's
kind
of
consistent
with
their
scope,
just
a
thought.
H
Yeah,
it's
not
a
bad
thought
and
you
know
I'd
want
to
talk
about
that
with
alex,
but
I
think
we
you
and
I
and
john
and
alex
probably
need
to
get
together
at
some
point
in
the
near
future
and
discuss
the
timing
on
this.
F
B
I
H
Well,
yeah,
I'm
not
saying
that
the
board
shouldn't
make
you
know,
I
think
what
john
is
asking
is:
is
the
board
ready
to
move
are?
Are
we
done
with
the
study
sessions?
Are
we
done
with
the
informational
side
of
it,
and
if
that's
the
case,
then,
yes,
you
can
say
to
john
to
dan
and
to
myself,
please,
you
know,
bring
us
forth
a
draft
ordinance,
so
we
can
review
it
and
look
at
it
changing
the
zoning.
H
That's
I
think
where,
where
john
and
dan
are
going
with
this,
it's
not
about
we're
going
to
make
a
decision
as
to
whether
or
not
we
should
rezone
it's
just.
Are
we
done
with
the
informational
side
of
this
at
this
point
now
I'm
I'm
hearing
what
john
is
asking
the
board
to
do
and
if
I'm
wrong
john,
please
correct
me.
I
And
I
just
wanted
to
make
sure
I
understood
your
concern
dugan
on
that
along
those
lines,
I'd
like
to
say
that
I
I
feel
like
because
there
was
a
little
push
for
both
ways
or
they're,
going
all
yellow
or
all
pink.
I
I
feel
like
we've
got
a
nice
consensus
here
or
a
nice
compromise
with
you
know
the
extent
as
we
have
it
shown
as
as
john's
proposed
it
today.
I
think
we
should
move
forward
so
that
we
can
then
get
the
city's
input
and
get
the
public's
input
and
get
everyone
else's
thoughts
on
that.
I
If,
at
that
point,
we
need
to
make
some
adjustments,
then,
as
we've
said,
we
would
get
it
back
at
that
point,
but
because,
especially
because
we've
got
a
little
bit
of
push
both
ways,
I
feel
like
we're
in
a
nice
middle
spot,
I'd
like
to
see
this
moving
forward,
but
I've
obviously
listened
to
others.
Discussions.
H
That
that
would
be
my
understanding.
Is
that
we're
not
going
to
present
the
ordinance
we're
just
going
to
be
talking
about
and
again
john.
Please
correct
me
if
I'm
wrong,
but
I
think
we're
just
talking
about
the
the
rezoning
or
the
change
in
zoning
for
the
development
areas.
F
Yes,
I
don't
think
the
public
would
appreciate
going
over
text
amendments.
I
know
they
would
rather
it's
more
natural
for
them
to
talk
about
it
in
more
of
the
conceptual
level
that
we've
been
talking
about
it
for
the
last
five
six
meetings.
B
And
again
we're
just
talking
about
the
cintiq
city
center,
we're
not
talking
about
going
up
to
the
medical
districts,
correct.
F
No,
the
medical
district,
no,
it
would
just
be
what
we've
shown
city
center
would
be
rezoned
to
mub1,
and
then
the
tsa
would
cover
a
little
bit
larger
area
than
that
stretching
at
this
point,
the
with
the
yellow
and
pink
that
I
had
showed
you,
which
would
not
include
the
broadway
corridor
or
any
place
east
of
there.
D
F
D
F
I
was
not
anticipating
doing
that.
I
was
just
anticipating
to
have
a
single
meeting.
F
I
believe
that
I'm
not
certain
for
certain
that
there
would
be
different
interests
or
different
things
that
people
will
be
interested
based
on
their
city
council
district.
So
I,
my
first
inclination
is
to
have
one
main
meeting
where
everyone
can
hear
everyone.
D
B
Well,
I
think,
dan.
I
appreciate
that
and
I
think
you're
right.
We
do
need
to
keep
this
train
moving,
but
I
think
it
also.
Might
the
feedback
might
alter
that,
but
we'll
see
we
don't
know.
F
That's
true
and
and
you're
right
feedback
if,
depending
on
what
that
is,
could
alter
we'd
have.
We
might
have
to
make
an
adjustments.
G
And
well,
I
think
you
can
anticipate
some
of
the
feedback
you're
going
to
hear
because
it's
the
feedback
that
you
always
hear-
and
you
know
the
question
for
the
city,
its
decision
makers,
its
policy
makers
is,
do
we
want
to
move
forward?
Do
we
want
to
change?
Do
we
want
to
keep
up,
or
are
we
going
to
listen
to
people
who,
of
course,
are
going
to
show
up
and
complain
about
change?
I
mean
that's.
You
can
pretty
well
write
that
script
tonight.
B
You're
right
in
some
respects,
stan
there's
obviously
as
a
portion
of
the
of
citizens
who
don't
like
any
change.
C
C
It
is
that
we
started
with
the
base
three
zoning
and
then
are
like
rezoning
to
mub1
and
then
making
changes
and
reductions,
and
all
of
that,
if
I
wasn't
on
planning
and
zoning
and
a
community
member
coming
to
that
and
saying
oh
well
here,
you
have
this
many
parking
spaces
now
they're
reducing
it,
but
it's
I
mean.
Essentially,
this
is
a
whole
new
area,
it's
a
whole
new
zone
district,
and
this
is
my
opinion.
I
think,
and
I
think
it
would
make
more
sense
to
present
it
like
that
at
a
meeting.
C
Instead
of
these
are
the
reductions
we're
going
for
and
things
like
that,
because
we're
not
we're
zoning
for
a
very
unique
downtown
or
city
center
area
which
deserves
its
own.
You
know
uses
and
parking
ratios,
and
things
like
that.
So
I
would
just
keep
that
in
mind
for
those
community
meetings,
because
I
think
trying
to
follow
the
line
of
it
makes
sense
to
us.
But
I
think
it
may
be
very
difficult
for
people
to
kind
of
follow
how
this
goes.
B
Okay,
that's
advice,
that's
advice
well
taken,
and
I
my
assumption
is
that
both
john
dan
and
the
rest
of
city
staff
want
to
make
this
as
as
easy
to
understand
as
possible,
because
I
think
that
they
want
to
keep
moving
forward.
Am
I
mistaken
in
that.
E
E
I
agree
it's
time
to
move
on,
I
feel,
like
we've
beat
this
dead
horse.
I
will
say
you
know:
we've
been
appointed
to
planning
and
zoning
by
the
city
council
for
the
reason
that
we're
supposed
to
be
the
ones
that
dig
into
the
details
and
understand
this
and
kate's
exactly
right,
in
my
opinion,
that
we
need
to
make
this
straightforward
one
community
meeting
this
isn't
about.
You
know
I
have
visions
of
this
turning
into
short-term
rental
regulations,
and
that's
really
not
the
point
of
this.
E
I
mean
we're
here
to
do
a
job
that
we've
been
appointed
to
do
and
it's
our
job
to
do
it.
And,
yes,
we
want
to
hear
what
the
community
has
to
say,
but
in
some
respects
you
know
they,
we
are
going
to
just
hear
the
people
that
will
never
agree
with
any
new
development.
E
Ever
ever
it
doesn't
matter
what
it
is,
or
I
mean
if
they
just
wanted
to
get
rid
of
the
fountain
we'd
probably
have
to
have
30
community
meetings.
So
you
know
at
some
we
just
have
to
present
this-
that
we've
done
our
job
as
a
planning
and
zoning
commission.
We're
asking
for
the
community
to
help
us
see
the
spots
where
we
might
have
missed,
but
that
this
is
what's
best
for
englewood
and
how
we
present
that
to
the
community
is
going
to
be
essential,
but
you're
right.
E
We
can
predict
exactly
who's
going
to
be
there
and
exactly
what
they're
going
to
say
in
many
cases,
but
really
who
we
want
to
hear
from,
or
the
people
who
might
have
some
insight
that
maybe
we've
missed
because
we've
been
in
the
weeds
too
long.
That's
my
opinion,
but.
B
A
H
B
So
I
will
follow
dugan's
comments
and
is
there
anybody
who
has
a
burning
desire
to
not
proceed?
We're
not
going
to
vote
we're
just
going
to
get
comments.
I
think
diane's
hands
up.
B
A
F
No
yeah,
those
were
just
informational
reading
materials
for
you
all
to
to
look
through.
B
Okay,
then,
I'm
going
to
move
forward
to
attorney's
choice.
H
I
have
nothing
else
to
add,
but
I
take
it
we
I
didn't
hear
this
before
we
went
to
wade
and
I
just
want
to
make
sure
we
have
consensus
from
the
board
to
have
john
and
dan
and
our
office
and
other
staff
move
forward
with
getting
these
ordinances.
And
things
done.
Is
that
correct?
That's
what
I.
B
F
B
E
E
So
it's
going
to
be
on
zoom.
You
can
find
it
on
facebook
or
I
can
forward
it
to
you,
but
that's
always
my
pitch
other
than
that.
B
B
B
And
I
am
good
as
well:
carl
has
his
hand
up
and
waving
at
me.
B
Are
you
waving
goodbye,
so
carl
would
like
the
meeting
to
be
adjourned
without
any
further
discussion.
I
declare
the
meeting
adjourned.
Thank
you
all.
So
much
for
attending.