►
From YouTube: July 19, 2022 UDC Steering Committee Meeting
Description
Agenda HTML: https://englewoodgov.civicweb.net/filepro/documents/141737?handle=7C93B593545F4BAC8C62E644B43957A7
Agenda PDF: https://englewoodgov.civicweb.net/filepro/documents/141736?handle=EE8ECBF8D8034444B004329928E25DFF
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. Review of Unified Development Code
3. Adjourn
2. Public Forum
To provide comments during Public Forum, please click the link below and raise your hand to be recognized. Join Zoom Meeting https://englewoodco.zoom.us/j/85606430920?pwd=a2cvRkZNKys3ZkpXaFpNVmlMK3pmQ...
Agenda HTML: https://englewoodgov.civicweb.net/filepro/documents/141737?handle=7C93B593545F4BAC8C62E644B43957A7
Agenda PDF: https://englewoodgov.civicweb.net/filepro/documents/141736?handle=EE8ECBF8D8034444B004329928E25DFF
A
A
A
Okay,
so
good
evening
we
have
added
public
forum
as
other
boards
and
commissions
have,
even
though
this
is
a
working
group,
because
the
project
is
moving
along
and
it
is
generating
interest
from
the
public.
So,
mr
jacobson,
I
know
you
wanted
to
speak
to
the
commission.
So
if
you
want
to
come
off
mute
and
you
will
have
three
minutes
and
typically
this
is
not
a
time
for
dialogue
with
the
committee,
it
is
just
time
for
you
to
address
any
concerns
or
any
topic
that
you
would
like
to
talk
about.
D
Okay,
thanks
thanks
so
much
ms
fenton,
I
own
the
non-conforming
house,
it's
a
side
by
side
at
656
and
660
east
yale,
it's
1048
square
feet.
I
know
I've
spoken
before
at
the
previous
two
times
that
the
committee
has
met.
I'm
just
trying
to
be
able
to
expand
my
footprint,
keeping
the
building
architecturally.
D
I
really
didn't
have
anything
prepared.
I
I
thought
I
was
going
to
be
at
the
physical
meeting.
However,
I
I
know
before
you
wanted
to
keep.
You
know.
People
stressed
that
you
know
you
wanted
diversity.
You
wanted
to
minimize
non-conformities
to
keep
it
architecturally
cohesive
with
the
surrounding
areas.
D
D
D
A
D
A
C
Okay,
I
think
tonight
what
we're
gonna
do
is
chris,
is
going
to.
I
think
he
may
have
some
follow-up
questions
or
items
from
our
last
meeting
as
well
as
kind
of
prevent,
prevent
present
our
schedule
for
the
next
few
months.
As
we
begin
our
technical
advisory
committee
meetings,
that's
our
city
staff
that
will
be
meeting
to
talk
about
the
really
technical
issues
with
our
code
and
then
how
we
present
that
to
you
all
so
I'll.
Just
let
chris
take
it
away.
B
Thanks
brian
I'm
going
to
share
my
screen
and
again
this
is
a
a
second
of
our
status
updates
with
the
committee
to
let
you
know
where
the
the
draft
is,
and
this
one
will
give
a
little
more
guide
posts
on
on
where
we're
going.
So
you
guys
have
some
expectations
on
when
you'll
start
seeing
review
drafts
and-
and
things
like
that
on
some
of
the
topics
we've
been
discussing
so
get
to.
E
B
We've
talked
about
and
again,
as
we
talked
about
last
time,
really
getting
into
the
the
drafting
over
the
summer
months
and
in
hopes
of
early
fall,
having
a
what
we
think
our
recommended
drafts
for
all
of
these
different
segments
of
the
code,
so
we're
still
on
track
with
that
as
we
discussed
last
month.
These
are
our
our
key
topics,
and
just
this
is
by
way
of
review
hitting
some
of
the
big
topics
that
come
all
the
way
back
from
the
2020
code,
audit
and
making
sure
we're
addressing
those.
B
But
it's
not
the
complete
set
of
topics
we'll
be
addressing
as
well,
we'll
we'll
be
doing
everything
from
the
minor
and
technical,
such
as
addressing
the
issue
we
just
heard
discussed
by
mr
jacobson.
You
know
that's
on
the
table
to
figure
out
if
those
sections
are
working
well.
Now
or
if
their
changes
need
to
be
made
and
how
we
address
different
circumstances,
so
everything
from
the
little
and
technical
to
the
big
picture,
ideas
that
you
see
on
the
screen
that
we've
been
working
with
for
a
long
time
here.
B
This
is
by
way
of
recap.
From
last
meeting
the
june
22nd
meeting,
we
had
such
a
good
discussion
and
substantive
discussion
about
the
framework
of
the
code.
It
got
us
back
into
issues
and
diving
deeper
on
some
of
them.
I
just
wanted
to
to
capture
them
and
and
give
you
all
a
chance
to
either
wrap
some
of
these
up
or,
if
it,
if
you've,
had
other
thoughts
on
these
topics.
B
B
If,
when
people
see
those
ideas
reflected
back
in
a
code,
they
need
time
to
decipher,
or
the
bigger
thing
is
that
second
bullet
point
the
reminder
to
let's
record
some
of
these
next
steps,
whether
it's
non-code
related
issues
that
are
outside
the
code,
but
need
to
be
worked
on
that
this
code
brought
up.
I
think
where
some
of
those
were
discussed
last
meeting,
but
also
things
that
we
might
need
to
revisit
in
the
draft,
so
they're
we're
kind
of
thinking
of
those
in
three
three
items:
either
things
we
we
don't
feel
like.
B
We
have
the
right
answer
yet
or
the
community
is
not
prepared
for
something
to
push
in
that
direction.
We
might
reserve
a
placeholder
for
it
things
where
we
feel
like
we're,
pushing
taking
positive
steps
towards
the
outcome
you
want,
but
we
might
need
to
revisit
and
monitor
them
so
capturing
some
of
those
ideas,
regardless
of
how
far
we
get
when
we
get
to
a
recommendation
of
a
complete
code,
update
making
sure
we
do
that
with
the
schedule-
and
I
guess
jump
in
if
you
have
any
questions
on
any
of
this.
B
Otherwise,
I'll
keep
moving
down
through
the
topics
we
discussed
last
time
and
if
ryan,
you
or
nancy
could
help
us
see.
If
you
see
any
hands
raised
streets,
we
had
a
reminder
to
reinforce
bicycle
transportation.
We
often
when
we
talk
about
multimodal
or
walkability
it's
kind
of
the
big,
in
our
terms,
the
big
umbrella
term
for
all
kinds
of
transportation.
B
But
it's
a
good
reminder
that
we
are
putting
an
emphasis
on
on
bicycle
transportation,
both
in
street
design,
access
and
parking,
so
being
sure
to
note
that
in
all
of
our
correspondence
and
then
what
we're
doing
with
the
street
sections,
you
know
we
had
a
lot
of
discussion
that
as
a
built
out
community,
we
don't
often
regulate
the
streets
that
were
street
types
that
we're
talking
about
into
existence.
So
why
do
it
in
our
minds?
B
B
These
four
bullet
points
are
the
things
that
we
usually
use
for
creating
different
standards
based
on
context,
the
first
and
easy
one
is:
you
know
by
zoning
districts.
The
districts
are
set
up
to
create
different
standards.
So
there's
our
first
one
that
you
know
when
we're
looking
for
different
standards
and
different
parts
of
the
community.
B
The
last
two
are
the
more
the
ones
that
we
build
into
the
code.
There
will
be
some
known
expected
circumstances
that
we
know
we're
going
to
run
into
where
we'll
give
flexibility
and
that
flexibility
can
either
be
in
a
range
of
options
or
ranges
of
the
standards
themselves
like,
instead
of
having
a
default
number,
having
a
range
that,
based
on
certain
circumstances,
you
need
default
within
that
range.
So
there's
a
method
of
giving
context-based
standards
and
then
the
last
is
simply
by
the
flexibility
we
built
into
the
code
that
we,
you
know.
B
You
already
have
the
alternative
compliance
section
of
your
current
code,
and
we
want
to
expand
on
that
and
that
will
allow
us
to
create
some
of
the
case-by-case
distinctions
that
don't
rise
to
a
zoning
variance,
but
that
we
can
build
in
criteria
in
the
code
for
different
contexts.
So
those
those
factors
that
we
may
not
be
able
to
predetermine
them
like
the
first.
B
The
next
major
topic
that
we
we
discussed,
kind
of
in
in
several
different
places
in
the
meeting,
so
I
really
consolidated
down
to
two
bullet
points,
but
there
was
a
lot
more
in-depth
discussion
than
than
two
bullet
and
deserves
two
bullet
points,
but
our
continued
evaluation
of
the
the
slot
home
for
lack
of
a
better
term,
at
least
right
now
and
other
missing
middle
housing
types.
The
big
emphasis
here
is
that
the
ultimate
strategy
is
is
yet
to
be
determined.
B
We
know
that
to
enable
it
it
needs
to
meet
the
city's
overall
planning
policies
and
and
possibly
deal
with
competing
policies
to
make
sure
you
know
density,
walkability
versus
neighborhood
character.
We
know
that
from
the
bad
examples
you've
seen
and
in
other
communities
that
we
want
it
to
be
a
contributor
to
neighborhood
character,
so
heavy
emphasis
on
the
frontages,
and
we
know
that
when
they
go
in,
we
need
to
have
be
sensitive
to
adjacencies
and
and
protect
neighboring
interests.
B
So
streetscapes,
frontages,
building
massing
aesthetic
design,
some
of
those
more
facade,
composition,
things
things
like
that.
We
would
hope
to
learn
from
looking
at
good
examples
of
slot
homes
and
then,
lastly,
the
livability
and
amenities,
so
usable,
open
space
and
then
the
last
topic
we
covered
was
more
of
a
catch-all,
sustainability
and
other
topics.
B
Some
some
reminders
on
landscape
issues
don't
be
looking
exclusively
at
xeric
or
when
we
do
make
sure
we
know,
xeric
doesn't
mean
no
plantings,
but
xeric
and
water
wise
is
important,
but
there's
other
things
as
well,
such
as
the
example
that
was
brought
up
as
polymer
pollinator
gardens
native
plants.
There's
there's
a
whole
host
of
sustainability
that
goes
into
landscape,
that
we'll
be
looking
to
strengthen,
and
then
there
was
a
related
to
all
of
those.
B
We
got
into
some
commentary
on
solar
access
and,
and
that's
a
that's,
actually
a
really
good
example
of
context-based
requirements.
You
know,
as
we
look
to
balance
those
competing
issues,
can
we
look
to
have
elevated
standards
or
at
least
elevate
a
review.
I
think
one
of
the
things
that
was
brought
up
in
subsequent
conversations
was
maybe
just
certain
districts
get
those
kind
of
extra
views
and
I
think
that's
an
idea
worthy
of
exploring
maybe
a
certain
streets.
B
The
the
north-facing
streets
was
brought
up
as
a
sensitive
issue,
or
maybe
it's
just
certain
building
types,
the
ones
that
we
know
are
going
to
be
pushing
the
limits
on
volume
and
height,
and
maybe
they
have
a
certain
type
of
review.
So
those
again
are
all
kind
of
part
of
our
our
discussion
at
this
point
that
we're
going
to
be
advancing
to
the
technical
committee
on.
So
that's
a
quick
summary
of
what
I
gleaned
from
the
our
discussion
last
meeting.
B
All
right
I'll
keep
moving
on
to
give
you
kind
of
a
the
more
of
the
status
of
where
we're
headed
so
again
we're
getting
we're
going
to
be
engaging
the
technical
committee,
which
is
mainly
staff
and
people,
that
different
departments
to
deal
with
the
nuts
and
bolts
of
the
code
and
development
review,
and
then
our
first
meeting
is
going
to
discuss
on.
I
should
explain
this
on
the
on.
B
But
I'll
proceed
through
these.
We
have
four
sets
of
meetings
set
up
and
from
july
through
early
september,
with
the
technical
committee,
where
we're
going
to
take
the
both
the
public
input,
urals
direction
and
some
of
the
issues
that
have
been
discussed
and
and
get
to
the
nuts
and
bolts
of
it
with
staff
and
people
who
need
to
review
and
implement
under
this.
So
the
first
one
is
coming
up
is
going
to
be
on
procedures.
B
B
So
a
lot
of
the
sections
are
there,
including
the
one
that
was
brought
up
by
mr
jacobs
in
the
non-conforming
section,
so
we're
we're
looking
at
all
of
those
things
right
now
with
staff
and
and
we're
we'll
probably
come
back
to
you
all
with
some
ideas
on
on
those
sections
just
to
verify.
If
we're
headed
in
the
right
direction,
the
second
one
we've
main
part
of
its
streets,
but
we're
kind
of
lumping
in
some
other
public
realm
design
elements.
B
The
third
one,
the
housing
and
neighborhood
design,
mainly
dealing
with
chapter
four,
where
we're
going
to
have
the
zoning
districts
and
uses,
but
then
the
idea
of
this
new
idea
of
chapter
five
of
let's
have
all
of
the
residential
development
standards.
So
the
non-use
things
the
building
scale
mass
lot
sizes,
what
types
of
design
standards
we
want
to
emphasize
and
strengthen
in
your
code.
B
All
of
those
things
that
make
the
neighborhoods
diverse
but
make
them
come
together.
Better
that'll
be
our
third
meeting.
This
one
is
also
we're
kind
of
closely
watching.
We
keep
reminding
that
there's
this
other
idea
out
there
of
housing,
affordability
and
attainability
that
root
analytics
is
working
on
through
an
a
grant
and
a
subcontract,
and
so
there
may
be.
B
It
may
go
a
little
bit
longer
or
even
beyond
this
technical
committee
meeting,
but
at
least
from
this
standpoint
we're
going
to
cover
all
the
things
that
this
committee
and
the
public's
discussed
thus
far
regarding
housing
and
then
the
last
one
again
sort
of
that
catch.
All
we're
we're
a
lot
of
it's
going
to
be
heavy
emphasis
on
sustainability.
B
But
this
is
how
we're
trying
to
line
up
both
your
all
meeting,
your
all's
meetings
and
our
schedule
with
drafting
some
of
those
and
getting
input
from
the
the
technical
committee
and
essentially
the
the
key
thing
here-
is
these
shades
of
colors.
So
these
represent
the
draft
of
those
chapters
and
sections.
So,
for
example,
if
we
just
took
the
technical
provisions
chapter,
one
general
provisions,
which
includes
lots
of
the
nuts
and
bolts
topics
in
chapter
two,
the
application
procedures.
How
does
someone
get
into
the
development
review
process
and
how
do
we
review
those
applications?
B
So
we've
already
created
a
what
we're
calling
a
working
draft
on
that
and
then
what
that's
going
to
do
is
set
us
up
to
talk
to
the
technical
committee
on
on
the
20
july
29th
up
here
and
then
from
there
from
that
input.
We
feel
we've
got
all
the
input
we
need
to
create
an
initial
draft.
That
would
then
come
back
to
you
all
at
a
steering
committee's
meeting,
probably
sometime
in
in
august,
or
perhaps
the
drafts
wait
till
until
we
start
coming
in
september.
B
B
We
give
a
an
initial
draft
that
we
get
to
you
all
for
review
and
feedback,
and
then
that
lets
us
prepare
the
final
draft
and
so
we're
staging
these
to
where
we
can
get
to
that
end
goal
of
having
what
we
think
is
the
the
recommended
draft
by
by
fall
and
and
then
we're
aligning
those
with
the
different
meetings
so
again,
not
to
dive
into
like
a
complicated
chart
and
graph
of
how
we're
doing
all
this.
What
it
means
to
you
all
is
is
the
right
of
this
screen.
B
Looking
at
our
meeting
schedule,
we're
still
trying
to
to
keep
the
the
once
monthly,
even
perhaps
in
august,
combining
we're
scheduled
for
a
city
council
quarterly
update.
We
still
won't
have
all
of
our
technical
committee
meetings
complete
by
then.
So
one
of
the
thoughts
is
well
as
we've
done
in
the
past.
Why
not
make
that
a
joint
meeting,
since
there
won't
be
too
much
subsidy
for
you
all
to
review
at
that
point.
B
But
that's
one
idea:
that's
out
there,
unless
you
have
things
that
you
feel
need
to
be
topics
of
discussion
and
then
what
we
would
do
is
by
that
first
september
meeting,
which
would
again
be
that
your
your
second
meeting
for
those
of
you
on
the
planning
commission.
We
would
have
initial
drafts.
So
in
other
words,
our
working
drafts
have
been
vetted
and
we've
met
with
the
technical
committee
on
all
the
topics
and
we
feel
we've
got
a
direction
to
create.
B
What
we
think
is
an
initial
draft
for
your
review
of
these
first
chapters
here
on
both
technical
provisions
and
the
mobility
access
and
public
realm
design,
which
is
chapters
one
two
three
and
seven,
and
then,
as
that
schedule
continues
to
stage
by
the
october.
Fourth,
one
we'll
have
all
of
our
technical
committee
feedback
and
drafts
prepared
of
four
five
six
and
eight,
so
the
the
zoning
district's
residential
design,
non-residential
design
and
the
landscape
standards.
That
kind
of
complete
that
whole
suite
of
developing
a
site,
and
that
would
be
the
the
the
fourth.
B
So
we
would
go
back
to
a
two
meeting
schedule
for
october,
hitting
your
first
meeting
on
the
fourth
and
then
reserving
that
second
meeting
for
all
of
the
other
things
things
are
kind
of
floating
out
there
independent
aren't
that
exciting
don't
hit
on
any
any
of
these
media
topics.
We
in
fact
things
we
don't
plan
on
making
big
substantive
changes
too,
because
we
haven't
heard
issues
with
them,
but
that
we
want
to
capture
and
fit
them
in
to
what's
essentially
the
complete
draft.
B
So
we
would
have
a
complete
initial
draft
by
october
and
then
the
november
meetings
would
be
where
we
think
we're
getting
ready
to
have.
What
we
think
is
our
recommendation,
and
so
that
I
put
that
as
to
be
determined
and
or
perhaps
that's
another
one
that
we
coordinate
with
a
quarterly
update,
because
we
would
be
due
for
a
quarterly
update
to
the
council
at
that
point
in
time,
and
then
the
last
thing
I
had
or
is
I'm
sure
you
know
looking
at
that
schedule
and
what
you'd
be
reviewing?
E
B
Yeah
we
haven't
engaged
them
specifically,
although
we
know
we're
aware
of
the
issues
and
we
really
what
we've
observed
in
your
code
is
it's
addressed
in
two
different
places
in
a
superficial
way
and
then
outside
the
development
code.
There's
the
establishment
of
this
condition.
Commission.
So
that's
what
chapter
12
is
is
really
for
to
say:
let's
get
it
all
in
one
place
and
figure
out
how
this
commission's
going
to
to
work
and
operate.
We
know
that
we
probably
won't
get
far
enough
on
on
the
issues
under
this
scope
of
what's
their
authority.
B
What
specific
things
do
we
want
them
reviewing?
How
do
you
do
it?
But
what
we
know
at
the
bare
minimum
is
we
want
to
capture
everything
you
have
right
now,
in
one
section:
that's
better
organized,
so
then
people
can
better
determine
some
of
those
policy
questions
on
where,
where
they
operate,
how
they
operate
and
what
goes
on
so
I
I'll
leave
it
at
that
and
then
brian
or
brooke,
if
you
want
to
talk
about,
if
there's
an
appropriate
time
to
to
get
them
involved
or
if
or
if
that's
one
of
those
things
like.
C
Yeah
and-
and
I
can
comment
a
little
bit-
they,
the
historic
preservation
commission
has
been
working
on.
You
know
kind
of
redlining
where
they
fit
into
the
code
for
for
a
while,
now
and
then
they're
still
working
on,
you
know
kind
of
finalizing
that
and
finding
our
place
to
fit
it
in
this
document
or
whether
it
comes
directly
after
this
you
know
that's
kind
of
where
we're
trying
to
sort
out
where
it's
going
to
go,
but
today
we
are
looking
into
it
as
staff
and
our
commission
is
too
mommy.
B
I
would
I
wanted
to
endeavor
to
give
you
longer
than
that,
because
that's
I
I
kind
of
laugh
when
I
hear
weak
lead
time
to
review
it,
some
of
it
the
certainly
the
executive
summary
and
the
framework
you
you
would
be
able
to
get
through
it
and
really
understand
it.
I
think
in
in
a
week,
if
you
know
it,
it
would
be
something
the
length
of
these
are
things
that
you
could
maybe
spend.
B
I
would
estimate
a
an
hour
plus
or
minus
to
be
able
to
go
through
these
whole
section
maps
on
each
section
and
kind
of
have
a
good
flavor
for
what
what's
going
on
that
now.
If
you
want
to
go
dive
in
and
look
at
the
the
chapters
or,
if
you're
one
of
the
people
that
want
to
review
the
whole
chapter
and
whole
we're
going
to
want
to
give
you
more
than
a
week
lead
time.
So
we'll
all
have
to
go
back
to
that
schedule
and
really
look
at
these
on
these
meeting
dates.
B
What
how
much
do
we
expect
you
all
to
have
covered
I'm
thinking
of
like
if
I
just
look
at
this,
the
20th
one?
I'm
thinking
we
could
probably
give
you
at
least
three
weeks
on
that,
because
I
know
the
technical
provisions
are
already
in
a
working
draft.
As
soon
as
we
meet
with
the
technical
committee
in
in
july,
I
would
plan
to
have
those
things
done
in
a
couple
weeks.
B
So
by
mid-august,
the
chapter
three
and
seven
are
would
be
cl
following
closely
behind,
but
so
that
there's
one
where
I
can
look
at
that
and
go
yeah.
We
should
probably
be
able
to
get
that
to
you
by
september
1.,
but
I'll
have
to
go
through
and
think
of
that
on
each
of
these
as
well.
But
that's
a
very
good
question
and
point.
B
My
opinion
and
what
I'm
most
used
to
is
it
is
a
building
code
issue
and
oftentimes
building
codes
will
have
a
special
provision
for
historic
buildings
or
certain
aged
buildings,
adaptive
reuse
provisions
in
the
building
code,
so
I'm
most
used
to
that
being
in
the
building
code.
Although
I
would
I
we
often
do
see
some
of
those
things
worked
into
a
zoning
related
process
for
historic
preservation.
B
D
B
C
And
then
we
we've
kind
of
faced
these
meetings
out
kind
of
once
a
month,
because
I
think
the
next
couple
of
months
are
going
to
be
kind
of
a
a
lot
of
information
coming
your
way.
So
that's
why
you
know
he's
going
with
the
executive
summaries
in
different
ways
to
be
able
to
review
staff.
You
know
we
like
to
get
into
the
real
nuts
and
bolts
and
read
every
word,
but
you
know
we're
we're
here
to
here
to
help.
However,
it
helps
you
to
be
able
to
review
those
topics.