►
From YouTube: September 21, 2021 UDC Steering Committee Meeting
Description
Agenda HTML: https://englewoodgov.civicweb.net/filepro/documents/121827?handle=97AA55EC364D4B5D9A4CFBDF6253E256
Agenda PDF: https://englewoodgov.civicweb.net/filepro/documents/121826?handle=38D3DBAF76B64FF5B844C36D4FB88C94
1.
Three or more Planning and Zoning Commissioners may participate in the meeting. No legislative decisions or final actions of any board, commission or council will occur at this meeting.
2. Innovative Housing Strategies Grant Update
3. Adjourn
3. Parking Strategies
Agenda HTML: https://englewoodgov.civicweb.net/filepro/documents/121827?handle=97AA55EC364D4B5D9A4CFBDF6253E256
Agenda PDF: https://englewoodgov.civicweb.net/filepro/documents/121826?handle=38D3DBAF76B64FF5B844C36D4FB88C94
A
A
B
A
B
A
B
C
C
So
there's
a
little
bit
of
you
know,
strategy
of
our
own
that
we
can
use
in
terms
of
some
of
the
items
we
think
were
closer
at
achieving
and
then
maybe
some
of
those
others
that
we
need
to
do
more
work
on
that.
We
won't
be
tied
up
with
the
grant
with
so
the
five
that
we're
recommending
moving
forward
with
is
one
authorizing
accessory
dwelling
units
as
used
by
right
on
parcels
and
single
family
zoning
districts.
C
So
those
are
the
five
that
we're
recommending
again.
The
others,
as
I
said,
can
also
be
recommended.
It's
a
it's
a
city
council
decision.
At
the
end
of
the
day,
we
are
having
the
discussion
with
them
on
the
27th,
so
any
of
you
are
welcome
to
attend
either
virtually
or
in
person.
City
council
meetings
are
a
hybrid
scenario
for
for
in-person
or
virtual,
and
just
see
what
city
council
has
to
say
about
this
topic.
C
I
think,
regardless
it's
going
to
help
this
committee
in
their
discussions
on
housing,
regardless
of
whether
this
grant
is
awarded
to
the
city
or
not
so
we'll
get
some
early
guidance.
I
think
from
council
on
the
topic,
so
we
hope
you
can
either
tune
in
and
watch
or
come
in
person
and
watch
it's
your
choice
other
than
that.
That's
where
we
are
we're
in
the
process
of
writing
the
grant
now
officially
and
hope
to
have
the
grant
submitted
within
the
first
week
or
two
in
october.
C
A
C
A
C
The
one
the
ones
we
choose
as
part
of
the
grant,
we
will
have
to
make
progress
and
incorporate
in
some
fashion
into
our
code.
Yes,
so
that's
why
we
need
to
be
strategic
as
to
things
some
of
these
that
were
further
along
with
such
as
the
adus
versus
some.
That
might
take
a
little
more
work,
so
we
want
to
make
sure.
A
A
C
A
I
don't
know
if
anybody
else
has
any
feelings
on
that
I
I
would
have
a
hard
time
saying
that
we're
definitely
going
to
go
forward
with
that
I
mean
I
would
love
to
see
it.
I
just
don't
know
that
that's
the
case,
I
don't
know
if
anybody
else
has
any
thoughts
on
that
or
if
this
is
not
the
time
or
place
for
that,
then
you
can
tell
me
that
too.
C
At
the
end
of
the
day,
council
can
choose
not
to
do
any
of
these
or
all
14
if,
if
they
so
choose,
but
yeah
they'll
have
to
and
we'll
stress
this
they're
going
to
have
to
understand
that
the
grant
will
require
some
sort
of
implementation
at
the
end
of
the
day.
So,
if
they're
feeling
that
this
might
be
a
heavier
issue
that
the
community
might
not
be
willing
to
yet
accept,
and
then
I
think
that's
what
we'll
have
to
decide
with
council.
B
C
C
I
think
the
city
needs
this
planning
grant
to
figure
out
some
of
the
other
issues.
You
know
issues
and
questions
through
this
housing
needs
assessment
if
they
are
to
go
forward
and
ask
for
future
funding
for
any
kind
of
construction
project
and
so
forth.
So
this
is
the
only
one
that's
open
right
now.
So
that's
where
we're
at.
B
C
C
D
Thanks
wade
good
evening,
everyone,
I
know
we're
on
a
time
crunch
for
your
regular
meeting
at
the
top
of
the
hour.
So,
as
wade
mentioned,
we
have
a
brief
presentation
that
just
sort
of
frames
the
parking
issue.
I
am
aware
that
you
all
have
discussed
this
a
lot
through
the
the
code
assessment
and
through
some
of
that
engagement,
there's
a
lot
of
good
information
that
you've
you've
already
uncovered.
D
D
Our
frame
of
thinking
of
what
are
we
trying
to
to
maximize
as
a
city
related
to
that
is
that
the
third
angle
there's
been
lots
of
studies
and
documentation
on
how
much
parking
costs
not
only
the
the
physical
cost
of
building
it,
the
the
cost
to
developers,
but
then
also
the
opportunity
costs
to
to
the
community
as
well.
What
are
you
losing
by
prioritizing
parking?
D
So
that's
influencing
a
lot
of
the
thinking.
Fourth
is
if
we're
building
compact
walkable
places,
and-
and
this
is
how
it's
pitched
in
a
lot
of
your
planning
documents-
is
parking
versus
walkability.
It's
often
juxtaposed
is
something
that
undermines
walkability,
or
perhaps
our
investment
in
transit
as
well,
which
is
something
very
relevant
to
you
all
and
and
then
the
biking
community
as
well.
So
what?
How
does?
How
does
parking
fit
into
an
overall
mobility
strategy
that
around
compact
places
again
different
than
how
we
thought
of
parking
in
the
past?
D
The
fifth
one
there's
environmental
impacts,
documented
heat
island
impacts
are
are
very
relevant
and
then
also
storm.
Water
runoff
can
can
produce
those
negative
impacts
as
well
so
is.
Are
there
design
strategies
to
mitigate
some
of
those,
in
addition
to
reducing
the
overall
size
and
footprint,
and
then
the
last
is
one
we
just
sort
of
jumped
in
lumped
into
technology.
D
It
really
shifts
the
amount
of
area
that's
needed
for
parking
and
just
general
shifts
in
car
sharing
on
demand.
You
know
uber
lyft
those
types
of
things
that
are
sort
of
a
version
of
the
driverless
car,
even
though
they
have
drivers,
but
all
of
those
things
related
to
technology
are
shifting
how
how
parking
is
looked
at.
So
that's
sort
of
a
really
quick
overview
of
the
the
state
of
the
profession
and
things
that
people
are
looking
at
and
how
our
development
codes
need
to
change.
D
With
regard
to
parking,
an
assessment
of
where
you
all
are
at
your
development
code
again,
the
the
code
assessment
has
a
lot
of
details
on
this,
but
essentially
we're
not
going
to
uncover
anything
that
you
haven't
already
talked
about
in
your
code
in
some
way
or
another
you'll.
There
will
be
things
that
we
want
to
push
further.
D
There
will
be
things
that
we
might
want
to
look
at
a
different
way
to
accommodate
the
strategy,
but
you
seem
to
have
covered
all
of
the
things
your
minimum
parking
requirements
are
comparable
to
most
communities,
but
again,
most
communities
are
coming
from
a
suburban
or
car
oriented
philosophy,
and,
if
you're
shifting
out
of
that,
we
probably
need
to
look
at
what
to
do
with
those
those
minimums
and
there's.
Certainly
some
analysis
of
peer
communities
in
that
regard.
D
That
maybe
have
already
addressed
that
that
we
can
lean
on
flexibility
is
a
great
strategy,
the
more
flexible
you
you
can
be
with
the
standards,
the
better
off
you.
You
will
be,
at
least
in
our
mind,
and
the
easiest
way
to
get
that
in
your
code
is
through
puds.
That's
not
the
only
way
but
we're
it's
certainly
there's
room
for
more
flexibility
on
the
parking
standards.
D
You
have
exemptions
exempt
areas,
so
the
broadway
corridor
being
one
the
mub
one.
Zoning
there
doesn't
require
any
parking,
so
part
of
your
community
is
already
deregulated
in
terms
of
parking.
There's
a
lot
of
communities
exploring
that
in
a
more
expansive
basis,
more
strategic
basis,
but
some
cities
and
some
rather
large
cities
have
have
done
it.
Citywide
just
reduced
minimum
parking
altogether,
allowing
for
more
remote
off-site
parking.
D
D
Tdm,
that's
transportation,
demand
management,
it's
kind
of
a
planning
jargon
term
for
looking
at
how
people.
If
development
can
look
at
strategies
that
minimize
car
usage,
then
could
they
get
a
benefit
on
the
parking?
So
you
you
allow
that
and
you
allow
sharing
it's
just,
not
necessarily
the
clearest
path,
although
it
does
only
require
city
manager,
approval,
but
building
expectations.
If
we
want
to
expand
on
that
strategy
might
be
something
to
think
about.
D
You
do
require
bicycle
parking,
but
to
us
it
wasn't
clear
that
that
would
seem
to
be
just.
In
addition,
there
wasn't
a
benefit
to
the
overall
car
parking
footprint.
If
you
did
that
unless
we're
missing
something
there
and
then
the
last
one
is
not
really
a
development
code
issue,
but
it
is
it's
again.
D
It's
showing
that
the
city's
thought
about
this
and
the
city
uses
a
lot
of
these
different
strategies,
but
for
those
deregulated
areas,
mainly
there's
there's
some
spill-off
impacts
that
can
influence
impact,
neighborhoods
negatively
and
so
ensuring
that
they
don't
receive
all
the
overflow
parking.
The
neighborhood
permit
process
that
you
currently
have
in
place
and
so
is,
are
there
things
we
need
to
do
to
to
either
expand
that
make
that
work
better
or
perhaps
contract
it?
D
If
it's
not
working
well
so
again,
your
code
and
your
policies
are
addressing
all
of
those
things,
just
some
quick
facts
on
parking
and
why
it
matters,
I'm
sure
you've
maybe
seen
some
of
these
numbers
before
these
are
really
rough
general
numbers,
but
they
they
seem
to
play
out
in
most
communities.
But
you
know
I
mentioned
the
cost
earlier
about
eight
thousand
dollars
for
for
just
the
construction.
Some
some
are
less.
Some
are
more,
it's
all
tied
to
land
costs.
D
D
The
number
we
always
see
about
how
much
cars
dictate
our
space
with
regard
to
people.
Space
is
generally
that
a
car
has
eight
parking
spaces.
Every
car
typically
has
eight
parking
spaces
available
to
it
in
a
city
that
space
is
anywhere
from
300
to
350
square
feet.
When
you
encounter
the
parking
area
and
the
circulation
needed.
D
That
then
leads
to
in
our
commercial
areas
and
mixed
use.
Areas
somewhere
of
50
to
70
percent
of
land
in
a
typical
city
is
used
for
parking,
and
that's
that
one
to
me
is
kind
of
kind
of
a
shocking
number
when
you
think
of
it.
But
if
you've
done
the
google
maps
tour
of
places
that
it's
about
right,
that's
a
good
range,
I
think
of
where
we're
at
and
the
last
one
is
specific
to
you
all.
D
It
came
from
a
parking
study
that
the
rtd
recently
did
and
what
they
found
was
in
and
around
their
station
areas
most
uses
were
over
parked
anywhere
from
42
percent
to
50
of
what
they
assessed
as
the
peak
demand.
So
that
meant
even
at
their
highest
use
point.
The
parking
provided
was
was
somewhere
of
you
know
over
a
third
to
a
half
of
of
the
magnitude
of
more
than
what
the
parking
needed.
So
that
study
is
available
on
the
code
next
website.
D
If
you
want
to
dive
into
it
further
and
look
at
the
findings
but
well
those
are
some
of
the
things
we'll
be
looking
at
goals
and
objectives.
This
is
sort
of
how
we
think
about
parking.
When
we
go
to
to
adjust
regulations,
we
put
the
the
goals
in
in
three
different
categories
and
all
of
them
kind
of
work
together,
but
these
are
areas
where
we
can
influence
change
and
impacts
to
get
us
to
the
the
right
amount
of
parking.
D
No
one
wants
a
parking
problem,
but
we
also
don't
want
to
be
losing
other
good
things
that
come
despite
having
parking
so
first
category
design
all
of
the
things
that
are
easy
to
regulate
things
that
we
put
a
number
to
things
that
we
can
measure
things
that
we
can
put
criteria
that
are
easy
to
evaluate
how
much?
Where
are
you
putting
it?
How
large
we
can?
D
We
can
exert
influence
on
larger
or
smaller
lots
and
then
how
it's
designed
to
to
be
be
either
be
attractive,
or
at
least
not
have
impacts
on
surrounding
properties
with
landscape
and
screening.
So
all
of
those
design
categories
that
you
currently
have
we'll
be
revisiting.
Those
the
second
category
are
things
that
we're
really
trying
to
achieve
things
that
aren't
necessarily
easy
to
put
an
exact
number
to.
But
these
are
the
things
that
we
would
want
to
try
to
exert
flexibility
on
whatever
number
we
arrive
at
that.
D
If
you're
achieving
these
things,
then
maybe
the
number
could
go
down,
but
less
visibility,
less
storm
water
and
heat
island
impact,
lower
costs
and
low,
and
in
increasing
our
opportunity
cost
for
things.
Besides
parking
that
we
can
have
and
then
minimizing
the
impacts
on
neighborhoods
and
then
the
last
part
that
impacts
parking
is
the
first
one
applicability.
When
does
a
parking
standard
trigger?
D
D
The
second
part
of
administration
is
that
flexibility,
if
we're
building
in
more
flexibility
to
code
who
who
decides
when
and
how?
How
easy
is
it
to
get
to
the?
What
people
would
agree
is
the
right
number
and
then
the
last
part
coordinating
with
other
transportation
investments.
I
know
a
lot
of
times.
Development
applications
come
with
traffic
impact
studies
or
things
that
require
transportation
improvements
or
they
might
be
following
along
capital
investments,
and
certainly
one
of
the
largest
capital
investments
in
your
area
are
our
transit
investments.
D
So
I'm
just
going
to
tick
through
some
of
our
options
here
and
give
you
examples
of
things
things
that
the
code
assessment
already
talked
about,
some
things
that
maybe
are
a
little
bit
new
and
then
I'll
turn
it
over
for
a
discussion
from
you
all
because,
again,
I
know
you've
all
thought
about
this.
Probably
a
great
deal
for
some
of
you.
So
first
option
is:
do
we
reduce
the
minimum
requirements?
Do
we
bring
them
down
generally
throughout
the
city?
D
Where
it
may,
land
at
second
thing
is
implement
maximums.
A
lot
of
communities
are
doing
this
there's
several
ways
to
think
of
it.
First,
some
cities
just
convert
their
minimums
to
maximums,
in
other
words,
you're,
not
providing
any
more
parking
than
what
our
minimum
used
to
be.
There's
some
logic.
To
that.
D
D
Have
a
larger
community
benefit
if
you're
going
over
that
maximum
number
third
thing
is
expand,
specified
exemptions,
so
I
mentioned
the
broadway
corridor
and
the
mu
b1
zoning
district.
Are
there
other
locations
that
need
to
be
exempt
from
parking
altogether
so
that,
in
a
sense
being
more
strategic
about
deregulating?
Unlike
some
of
the
cities
that
just
said
we're
deregulating
it
citywide,
so
transit
served
locations
would
be
the
the
first
place
to
look
at
for
either
an
eliminating
or
a
reduced
minimum
parking.
D
D
One
of
the
strategies
for
that
is
to
reduce
the
parking
requirement,
if
not
eliminate
it
and
again,
there's
data
that
shows
those
uses
really
do
demand
far
less
due
to
transportation
habits
due
to
economic
situations
due
to
car
ownership,
and
then,
when
you
couple
that
with
locating
those
areas
and
transit
served
locations,
the
parking
goes
even
lower
and
the
rtd
study
points
that
out
as
well.
So,
there's
a
parallel
to
that
housing
issue
with
some
of
these
specified
exemptions,
streamlining
the
shared
parking,
as
I
mentioned,
you
do
have
that
in
your
code.
D
I
don't
know
how
much
it
is
used
or
how
successful
it's
used
a
lot
of
times.
Those
issues
can
become
a
little
bit
difficult
to
manage,
but
it's
certainly
something
worth
exploring
more
and
figuring
out.
If
we
can't
get
a
better
target
a
lot
of
times.
What
we'll
do
in
development
codes
is,
instead
of
just
relying
on
some
number
that's
out
there.
There
are
some
models
to
use
that
that
take
a
range
of
uses
with
different
peak
times
and
kind
of
put
them
together
in
categories.
D
The
urban
land
institute
has
a
pretty
good
shared
parking
model
that
we
could
put
in
the
code,
and
that's
your
starting
point.
So
someone
wouldn't
necessarily
have
to
go
out
and
do
a
an
in-depth
study
if
they
were
using
that
or
if
they
were
using
that
and
did
a
study
anyway,
they
could
use
that
to
to
adjust
from
there,
but
it
does.
D
I
mentioned
transportation,
demand
management,
so
things
that
are
really
related
to
the
user
themselves,
managing
how
people
get
there
so
something
as
simple
as
valet
parking
or
shuttle
parking,
finding
an
off-site
location
and
then
having
no
on-site
parking,
stacked
or
tandem
spaces.
We
see
this
a
lot
in
multi-family
or
particularly
larger
scale
multi-family,
and
if
you're
in
a
transit,
served
area
or
a
walkable
area,
this
works
really
well
or,
if
you're
targeted
towards
an
aging
population.
This
works
really
well,
they
may
have
a
car.
D
They
may
not
need
it
all
the
time,
and
so
this,
when
you
think
of
that
300
to
350
square
feet
per
parking
space
when
you
start
allowing
stacked
or
tandem
spaces,
to
count
where
someone
could,
you
know,
call
down
to
a
an
off
a
desk
and
get
a
car
moved
and
get
their
car
out.
It
may
take
five
or
ten
minutes
to
do
that,
but
that
can
actually
double
the
amount
of
parking
you
can
get
in
a
single
area.
D
That's
one
that
usually
requires
the
city
to
to
mandate
it
because
the
way
it
works
is
it
forces
you
to
sell
your
parking
different
from
your
residential
unit
so
that
there's
a
price
put
on
it,
and
then
the
developers
can
figure
out
how
much
or
how
little
they
want
to
build.
Based
on
that
price
point,
so
someone
could
rent
a
unit
absent.
The
parking
requirement
is
really
the
goal
there.
It
can
bring
housing
costs
down
by
letting
people
pick
and
choose
how
much
of
the
amenity
they
want.
Do
I
want
a
unit.
D
D
I
know
the
rfp
talks
about
building
this
into
the
code
through
alternative
compliance
in
a
number
of
ways,
not
just
parking,
but
things
that
are
more
flexible
decision
making
points,
and
then
is
there
a
certain
threshold?
That's
above
that
that
would
be
in
the
planning
commission's
court
if
it
was,
it
was
too
large
of
a
an
alternative
and
you
need
to
grant
an
exception,
but
again
something
that's
short
of
a
variance
that
that's
getting
to
the
tiers
of
flexibility
that
we
want
to
try
and
build
into
your
code
and
so
on.
D
All
of
these
we're
what
we're
listening
for
is:
where
is
the
community
at
on
each
of
these
strategies?
There's
everything
that
rains
ranges
from
really
significant
changes
to
things
that
we
can
do
to
just
improve
what
you're
already
doing
and
things
in
between
there.
So
those
are
all
that's
what
we're
going
to
be
listening
for
throughout
the
process
and
just
one
last
thought
on
our
how
we
think
about
parking.
D
This
isn't
necessarily
the
city's
policy
or
the
city's
goals,
but
it's
what
we
will
be
bringing
to
the
table
is
the
first
is
that
that
shifting
role
of
the
city,
we
do
not
want
to
set
ourselves
up
to
ensure
that
we're
going
to
have.
We
want
the
code
to
make
sure
everyone
has
parking.
That's
really
not
the
goal
of
the
code,
because
there
will
be
so
many
other
things
that
we're
trying
to
prioritize
that
in
some
cases
in
some
contexts,
maybe
parking
isn't
our
number
one
goal
or
objective.
D
D
The
other
part
is
educate
stakeholders
that
you
know
there's
there.
Most
communities
always
have
a
parking
problem
and
sometimes
some
places,
that's
a
good
problem
to
have.
You
want
a
parking
problem
in
other
places.
It's
not,
but
the
idea
that
you
have
too
much
parking
is
also
equally
a
problem
because
you're
usually
sacrificing
something
good
or
better
that
your
community
wants.
So
we
need
to
be
put
that
in
perspective
and
make
sure
everyone's
talking
about
the
picture.
D
D
These
numbers
are
fuzzy
at
best,
there's
a
lot
of
factors
that
go
into
it,
but
what
the
code
can
do
is
become
a
really
good
decision
making
tool
for
how
we
try
to
get
to
the
right
parking
number
that
optimal
number,
but
it
it
won't
spit
out
a
magic
number
that
says
we
need
this
much
parking
in
this
situation.
There's
there's
simply
no
way
to
really
codify
that,
but
we
do
want
to
start
thinking
through
the
the
the
issues
in
the
big
picture
and
starting
to
put
flexibility
and
criteria
in
where
it's
warranted
and
needed.
D
E
There's
two
things
that
sort
of
are
my
biggest
issue
when
it
comes
to
parking
and
everybody's
gonna
have
their
thing
and
you
put
in
the
design
objectives
about
the
location
and
the
the
50.
I
think
it
was
50
to
70
percent
of
a
city
is
taken
up
with
parking
and
I
think
one
of
the
biggest
issues,
at
least
from
my
view,
is
that
it's
because
the
parking
isn't
in
the
right
place,
and
so
all
the
parking
in
the
world
in
the
wrong
place
is
might
as
well
not
exist.
E
So
I
agree
it
wastes
land,
but
it
needs
to
be
in
the
right
place
when
they
were
talking
about
city
center.
We
kept
bringing
up
all
the
rtd
parking,
which
is,
and
so
I
will
disagree
with
one
comment
with
that.
You
said
we
needed
to
change
our
thinking.
I'm
not
sure
you'll
be
able
to
convince
me
is
it
needs
to
be
convenient.
I
don't
think
it
has
to
necessarily
be
free,
but
it
has
to
be
convenient.
E
The
second
thing
that
has
really
been
weighing
on
me
lately
is:
we
talk
about
reducing
parking
as
if
that's
going
to
magically
make
our
community
walkable,
and
I
really
wish
that
we
would
focus
on
making
our
community
walkable
before
we
started,
taking
away
all
the
parking-
and
I
know-
but
I
feel
like
we're
getting
the
cart
before
the
horse.
You
can't
walk
down
broadway
the
sidewalks
aren't
wide
enough
they're,
not
in
good
repair.
They've
done
a
lot
of
good
things
in
the
neighborhoods,
with
curb
cuts
and
stuff.
E
But
I've
made
this
issue
before
if
you're
walking
with
two
people
or
a
mom
and
a
stroller,
you
have
to
walk
in
the
street
because
our
sidewalks
aren't
wide
enough.
So
before
we
start
so
your
you
can
ask
people
they're,
not
gonna,
walk
from
the
south
side
of
hampton
to
downtown
broadway,
because
there's
no
safe
way
to
do
it
so
they're
gonna
drive.
E
I
mean
I,
so
I
just
think
that
we
really
I'm
gonna
harp
on
this
walkability
thing,
because
we
talk
about
it
and
we're
gonna
talk
about
the
walking
wheel
in
our
next
part
of
our
meeting,
but
until
it's
actually
walkable
you're
gonna
be
hard-pressed
to
convince
me
that
we're
gonna
start
taking
away
parking
because
that
doesn't
magically
fix
the
walkability
problem.
So
that's
my
opinion.
I'm
pretty
strong
on
that
as
well.
F
A
D
Yeah,
well,
I
think,
we're
probably
not
even
there
to
know
which
one
I
think
they're
all
on
the
table,
but
I
certainly
think
a
refined
strategy
is,
is
that's
what
we
recommend
for
most
cities?
Is
it's
not
a
one-size-fits-all
anywhere
and
to
the
the
points
that
were
just
made
before
it
yeah?
You
know,
I
think,
even
to
the
convenient
point
point
very
well
taken
by
the
way,
but
what's
convenient
and
what's
not
is
often
a
perception
of
that
walkability
I'll.
Give
you
like
an
anecdote.
I
have
is
my
the
neighborhood
I
live
in.
D
We
have
a
small
mid-sized
grocery
store
that
has
a
smaller
parking
lot,
lots
of
on-street
parking
and,
and
some
of
my
friends
who
come
to
my
neighbor
are
like.
Oh,
I
wouldn't
go
to
that
grocery
store,
there's
no
parking
when
you
count
all
the
on-street
parking,
that's
within
a
block
and
some
of
that's
much
closer
than
even
the
furthest
parking
spot
in
a
suburban
parking
space.
Those
spaces
are
all
actually
closer
and
in
fact
you
get
some
spaces
that
are
within
10
feet
of
the
door,
which
you
would
never
get
in
a
suburban
spot.
D
So
there's
like
the
having
it
be
in
the
right
location
is
so
crucial
and
often
oftentimes.
You
hear
that
it's
it's
not
so
much
that
you
have
to
get
that
spot,
but
that
the
fact
that
that
spot's
available
draws
people
there.
You
may
not
get
it,
but
then
there
needs
to
be
okay,
where's,
my
second
spot
where's,
my
third
spot,
and
then
you
know
to
the
point
only
perhaps
the
most
remote
and
on
a
bad
day
you
get
that
spot.
D
Those
are
the
ones
that
don't
have
to
be
super
convenient,
but
your
point
of
that
they
all
need
to
be
convenient
is
true,
and
so
around
way.
Getting
back
to
the
original
question
is
those
are
all
highly
context
driven.
So
the
right
solution
on
broadway
probably
isn't
going
to
be
the
right
solution
over
off
of
85
or
somewhere
like
that.
E
E
The
other
example
is,
if
you
can
think
about,
on
the
north
east
side
of
I-25
and
hampton
there's
a
small
development
there.
That
has
vastly
not
enough
parking
and,
as
a
consequence,
several
tenants
just
have
left
and
and
now
there's
actually
just
some
vacancies
and
they're
like
there
used
to
be
a
smash
burger
there
and
now
that's
closed.
B
B
B
B
B
B
I
just
don't
see
any
big
changes
that
are
really
needed
and
I
I
don't
want
to
change
our
parking.
We've
got
a
thousand
over
a
thousand
spaces
out
there
that
can
be
used
for
something
and
the
city
city
wants
to
put
apartments
in
there.
Well,
I
don't
really
agree
with
that
either.
So,
and
but
the
parking
is
there's
there's
spots
in
ingo
that
are
hard
to
park,
you
go
downtown
and
you
can't
park
on
the
main
street.
The
3400
block
pretty
much
any
time
of
the
day.
B
B
G
I
think
just
trying
to
make
more
projects
feasible,
especially
more
affordable
having
having
parking
requirements,
can
really
help
with
that,
and
then
I
also
think
some
of
what
I
saw
about
maybe
some
of
the
smaller
retail
or
or
commercial
spaces.
It
could
really
encourage
a
lot
more
adaptive
and
creative
use
along
broadway
there's
a
lot
of
opportunities
that
just
aren't
feasible
now,
because
you
can't
park
the
site
and
there's
no
room
to
expand.
A
Yeah-
and
you
know
I'm
going
to
disagree
slightly
with
michelle
and
and
and
judy,
and
I
totally
respect
you
guys
opinions.
I
just
feel
a
little
differently
about
it.
You
know
we
can't
take
anecdotal
information
from
I-25
and
hamden.
That's
not
next
to
a
light
rail.
That's
not
next
to
some
of
those
places
that
might
have
been
impacted
by
many
other
things.
Just
like.
I
don't
necessarily
love
the
the
parking
study
that
was
done
in
the
middle
of
covid
either.
I
wish
there
was
a
different
study
that
was
done.
A
That
was
maybe
a
little
more
applicable
and
a
little
better
to
be
done,
but
I
do
think
that
we
do
have
the
opportunity
to
help
enforce
change
and
actually
help
implement
some
of
these
changes
and
and
get
people
to
think
outside
of
just
having
a
car
and
carl.
You
actually
said
you're
like
whether
there's
a
driver
in
it
or
not.
That
is
actually
happening.
A
That
is
a
little
further
away
and
bring
them
into
some
of
these
more
densely
populated
areas
where
people
want
to
be,
and
so
I
think
we
need
to
set
some
of
these
minimums
that
don't
make
it
too
overly
restrictive
for
development
to
happen,
and
we
need
to
be
able
to
embrace
some
of
these
changes
that
are
going
to
make
our
city
a
dynamic
place
to
be.
We
can't
be
a
car
based
place.
That's
so
spread
out
that
you
don't
have
a
vibrant
area.
A
The
reason
why
downtown
broadway
is
awesome
in
the
3400
block
is
because
it
is
a
little
hard
to
find
parking,
because
people
want
to
be
down
there
and
there's
a
density
down
there
and
there's
an
excitement
down
there.
When
you
have
a
block
party
like
you
had
last
weekend,
and
so
we
got
to
be
able
to
look
forward
to
these
things,
and
you
know
it's
not
going
to
happen
overnight
and
and
maybe
we're
going
to
make
a
misstep
or
two,
but
I
think
we
have
to
try
to
push
forward
into
making
what
inglewood.
H
Christie
thanks.
I
had
some
thoughts
to
build
on
what
colin
was
saying,
I'm
in
favor
of
taking
the
opportunity
we
have
here
to
take
a
fresh
look
and
design
the
community
that
we
want
to
have
both
now
and
in
the
future
in
general,
I'm
in
favor
of
reducing
the
asphalt
hellscape,
and
we
have
a
lot
of
that
throughout
our
town.
Yes,
some
places
might
have
few
too
few
spaces,
but
a
lot
have
too
many
and
no
one
wants
to
walk
through
parking
lot-
land,
it's
just
so
unpleasant.
H
So
in
general,
I
think
we
probably
have
too
much
parking
I'd,
be
in
favor
of
taking
a
look
at
reducing
the
parking
minimums
or
implementing
some
maximums
or
some
combination
thereof
and
yeah.
I
thought
the
3400
block
was
a
good
example,
because
if
we
had
huge
parking
lots
for
those
businesses
on
the
3400
block
instead
of
behind
it,
it
wouldn't
be
the
charming
main
street
that
that
we
all
love
it
would
have
a
totally
different
feel
more
of
just
a
regular,
suburban,
big
box
kind
of
feel.
H
So
if
we
take
a
look
at
parking,
minimums
and
maximums,
I
think
that's
a
good
approach,
and-
and
we
could
do
some
tweaking
too
it
looked
like
some
of
the
old
standards
were
based
on
square
footage
of
the
building.
Maybe
and
some
were
based
on
occupancy.
Maybe
more
of
those
should
be
based
on
occupancy
instead
of
square
footage,
because
we
really
want
to
design
the
parking
amount
for
the
people
that
are
gonna.
Be
there
not
just
how
big
the
actual
building
is
I'd
like
if
we
could
add
more
trees.
H
H
So
I
would
like
to
add
a
lot
more
trees
if,
if
possible
or
or
work
that
into
a
number
of
parking
spaces
and
and
then
I've
seen
some
designs
both
in
our
existing
city
and
in
other
planning
and
zoning,
where
the
parking
lot
is
either
alongside
the
building
or
kind
of
integrated
into
it.
So
it's
not
just
all
you
see
from
the
streetscape,
so
there
could
be
some
places
like
that,
not
for
the
whole
city,
but
for
certain
neighborhoods,
where
that
might
be
more
appropriate.
H
I
saw
an
example
in
that
in
lakewood's
planning
and
then
the
last
comment.
Having
said
that,
I
don't
want
to
count
on
just
overflow
to
the
street,
because
it
starts
people
start
to
think
that
almost
it's
their
right
to
park
there,
whereas
I
kind
of
think
street
should
be
to
move
people
not
just
to
park
your
stuff
there.
H
So
the
more
on
street
parking
we
have
the
harder
it
gets
to
ride
your
bicycle
down
there,
because
you
are
squeezed
between
cars
that
are
going
40
miles
an
hour
and
parked
cars
that
then
open
their
doors
at
any
time.
It's
it's
a
death
trap
and
it
is
so
scary
and
you're
not
allowed
to
bike
on
the
sidewalk.
So
what
the
heck
are
you
supposed
to
do?
So
I
don't
want
to
just
force
more
people
on
to
parking
aren't
using
on
street
parking
either.
F
Just
to
echo
on
what
colin
and
christine
are
adding.
I
just
wrote
down
a
few
notes
to
add
on
to
that
kind
of
sentiment.
If
we
can
leave,
if
we
can
reduce
the
minimum
for
parking,
we
can
leave
the
decision
up
to
the
developer,
because,
when
they're
building
their
projects
they're
not
going
to
want
to
put
a
bunch
of
money
into
parking,
if
they
don't
think
that's
what
their
like
end
user
is
going
to
want.
F
That
would
hurt
their
business,
so
they're
always
going
to
do
their
own
parking
studies
to
make
sure
that
they
have
adequate
parking
to
attract
the
people
they
want
to
live
there
or
work
there
or
rent
the
space
for
retail
or
whatever
it
is.
So
if
we
can
lower
the
minimum,
we
won't
have
a
minimum
that's
of
too
high
and
then
we'll
still,
you
know
the
developers
it'll
be
up
to
them
to
decide
to
have
enough
parking
for
what
they
need
and
then
also
I
wrote
down
that
sorry.
F
And
I
do
I
can
walk
over
there,
but
like
walking
from
I
live
near
a
discount
tire
walking
from
there
to
the
library
can
just
feel
so
weird
walking
through,
like
all
these,
like
big
parking,
lots,
big
box
stores
just
to
go
from
my
neighborhood
to
like
my
library.
It
feels
like
I'm
going
through,
like
christine
mentioned,
the
suburbs
like,
and
it's
kind
of
like
a
ghost
town
like
they're,
not
very
busy,
so
I
just
feel
like
whatever
we
have
now
is
too
much
parking.
F
It's
just
not
really
adding
to
the
tapestry
of
our
culture
in
inglewood
and
then
also
I
like
what
christine
said
about
not
wanting
us
to
be
too
suburban
and
we
don't
want
to
lose
our
character.
So
if
we
just
imagined,
like
you,
said
broadway
with
a
bunch
of
cars-
well,
I
guess
not
broadway,
but
you
know
what
I
mean
that
would
take
away
from
the
tapestry
of
what
our
community
is
going
for
and
how
I
don't
know
the
character
of
our
buildings
is
really
what
I
want
us
to
be.
F
Focusing
on
and
a
thing
I
really
do
want
to
keep
in
mind.
I
think
something.
That's
really
important
for
parking
is
accessibility
for
people
that
can't
walk
or
people
with
wheelchairs,
so
making
sure
that
we
do
have
those
designated
spaces
for
them,
because
those
are
the
people-
and
I
think
someone
has
mentioned
too-
like
children,
our
parents
with
strollers,
like
I
don't
know
how
we
meet
that
specific
need
and
not
discriminate
against
other
people.