Written by the reviewer from the ASR + docket; [verbatim-ASR] = quoted machine transcript; [paraphrase] = reviewer's wording, not a quote.
0:00 I'm going to call the meeting of the, what's the date today, June 22nd, 2026 housing planning
0:08 and development meeting to order.
0:10 There are three items on the agenda.
0:13 The third item we're actually not going to see today that didn't work out unfortunately,
0:18 but we'll work to get them documented as soon as possible is germane to this conversation.
0:23 Our first item up for discussion is the approval of the minutes from April 27th, 2026 meeting
0:33 I'll make a motion to approve.
0:36 It's been made and seconded.
0:43 So what we're here today mainly to hear is from Director Boss regarding the zoning
0:49 This is the probably second or third time.
0:53 I think we've heard as we move through this very intense project, which has required a
0:59 lot of work from the planning department, which we're very appreciative for, but this
1:02 is timely and a long needed update to our zoning code.
1:09 So I appreciate that and with, if there are no other opening comments, I'll turn
1:13 it over to Assistant Director Boss.
1:15 Thanks, Mr. Chair, members of council, I appreciate the time to provide this update
1:21 following the fifth meeting of the Zoning Policy Advisory Committee that happened earlier
1:29 So hopefully, I'm not going to, I don't plan to talk very long.
1:35 I'm going to cover kind of the highlights of these.
1:38 These are the last four chapters of the refreshed code itself.
1:45 General provisions, obviously, I'm not going to cover all these, but general provisions
1:49 The big one is the review, decision-making, and enforcement procedures, and then kind
1:52 of a wrap-up of all the definitions.
1:55 And so where we are right now, they're at task six, you know, we're almost there.
2:07 But frankly, I believe we're kind of getting to the hardest part, which is
2:12 when we actually go back through all the chapters again and get them formatted and ready for
2:20 final law review, final ZPAC review in August, and then submit them to, and when we do
2:28 plan to do a joint, we're trying to arrange a joint planning commission and
2:33 council hearing so that you guys can see them at the same time, allow for more discussion,
2:43 more time without it being kind of, without it being this sequential process that may
2:49 result in some recycling or miscommunications.
2:55 Just quickly, will we have the full draft before that meeting so we have time to kind
3:00 Yes, our intent is to have kind of those final drafts in August.
3:05 And so we'll provide them in advance of all that.
3:08 And thinking about the budget, you'll have the final drafts in August.
3:15 When do you anticipate submitting them to the docket, and then when would you,
3:22 when would be the administration's preference on passage?
3:24 Our intent is to get them to the docket in early September.
3:28 So I know council has its plan recessed.
3:31 That's when we were planning to do the law review and the ZPAC review and then have
3:36 kind of those two steps completed by the time council comes back in September to have
3:41 it on the docket and ready to go with those, the final versions and hopefully the accompanying
3:48 legislation and everything that kind of wraps it all together and then can start
3:53 its process, the final review process.
3:58 So a passage this year is what you're thinking?
4:00 That's the goal by the end of the year.
4:02 Do you have a law clerk to help with that, or are you guys?
4:08 That's why I've been going to all the meetings.
4:10 I also have Andy Fleck who staffs our Board of Zoning Appeals.
4:15 He is getting this in real time as well so that we're reviewing this as ongoing.
4:26 If we were to, let's say by December 31, enact the new set of zoning standards, codes,
4:35 et cetera, what's the effective date?
4:38 And then conceptually, I know some of my colleagues probably know this better by
4:44 their profession than I do, but so if we implement new standards, you've got
4:50 a bunch of, but the whole city that's been permitted under the existing zoning code.
4:59 When do the new standards take effect?
5:00 I guess it would be the standard time that any ordinance takes effect.
5:05 Then how do you actually, practical terms, implement that?
5:09 I think that's part of the, that's kind of a concurrent effort in that September
5:14 to December timeframe is the education and kind of the initial rollout of some
5:18 of those things in anticipation of passage and adoption, but I'm sure that there's
5:26 probably been several ways that cities have rolled out code, you know, concurrent or
5:31 following adoption, and we can certainly look at those things and kind of have
5:35 a, maybe have a recommendation or direction to go.
5:39 Yeah, if it's a phased implementation upon adoption or however, but we can bring
5:49 Yeah, and also I'll note, just to, I'm sure Director Boss will get there, but most
5:54 of this actually brings more of our lots into compliance, so it's actually, we're
6:01 freeing up property rights in a lot of ways for folks because we're looking at
6:06 what's existing and we're having the code more closely match that to have a
6:10 lot fewer nonconforming lots, so it's actually, but that's a part of the
6:14 education, so we'll get that.
6:16 I think, to your point, Councilman, through the Chair, I think, yeah, it's kind of
6:20 the what's changed, I mean, this is intended to be a refresh, it's not a
6:25 we're not throwing out everything, but yeah, so I think that's probably
6:32 gonna be the orientation in terms of, you know, what's changed, and like
6:35 you said, a lot more of the lots will be conforming, so yeah, at the end of
6:42 the day, those tweaks and really what I'm gonna cover tonight is actually one of
6:46 the biggest pieces of it is what we are intending to be a more streamlined
6:52 process for development, from everything from a front porch to a
6:56 planned development, and so it's really, it's our own internal
7:00 processes that are changing the most for folks. Outside of some of the
7:06 zoning map tweaks with, if we get to like the different zoning
7:10 classifications that allow maybe a little bit more density or something
7:13 like that, nothing else is, it's not gonna change anything overnight, but it
7:16 may allow different types of development in those specific areas, so
7:21 but that is a key part of that education and as part of, you know,
7:24 this is one of the major changes that have occurred or being considered
7:29 towards adoption, so.
7:30 Okay, Mr. Chair, just one last point, so if somebody is newly non-conforming,
7:36 they're protected as grandfather until a change is made or until
7:40 non-conforming uses.
7:41 Yeah, I don't know, I wouldn't anticipate that the code is going to
7:46 create a whole bunch of new non-conformities, but yes, but those
7:49 people would be covered by the non-conformities chapter that we'll
7:53 cover tonight, which is, it's a pretty standard
7:56 treatment of non-conformities that protects property owners and
7:59 structures that exist as of the adoption of the code,
8:02 so it's no different than with the multiple non-conformities that we
8:08 And once a final draft proposal is introduced,
8:14 we're gonna get more public input, I hope.
8:17 So that's the plan, we do have a, we have to set a date and we'll plan
8:21 for, like, a final kind of an open house,
8:25 just like we did at the beginning of the process, we'll do another public
8:28 open house, then a lot of it, we're gonna have
8:32 to be just creative in terms of how we communicate
8:34 and send out, whether it's, I don't know, via newsletters or what,
8:39 in terms of that, like, kind of maybe pick different themes or something of
8:43 things that have changed as much.
8:44 Conduct a CLE, you know, for real, conduct a legal training, right,
8:48 or something, you know, but so repeat, repeat, repeat, but
8:52 what I really want to ask is, once you've got it set, is it 100% done
8:58 or is it 95 or 99% done, and if somebody comes
9:01 from the public with a useful insight, we'll still have the
9:05 opportunity to consider what they're saying and improve the proposal, right?
9:08 I think you always have that opportunity with any code that, I mean,
9:12 it's gonna, it's not gonna be perfect, I'll tell you that right now,
9:15 and so, but it does, it does do, our intent is that this provides a
9:21 fairly significant cleanup of the 1996 code and the myriad of
9:27 of alterations and changes that have occurred since that point.
9:32 It does, primarily from an organizational standpoint and a
9:35 process standpoint, are probably the two of the biggest advances
9:38 that you're gonna see with this code.
9:40 Okay, all right, thanks.
9:45 So the first chapter is just your general provisions.
9:48 It's not gonna, it's really no major changes from what we have now.
9:52 It basically points you towards the purpose applicability,
9:56 where the zoning map lives, the building line map,
9:59 kind of those main things.
10:01 So there's, this is a, this is kind of a no change.
10:03 It's your, like, prologue introduction chapter.
10:09 The nonconformities piece is, again, it's not, it is not a great lot
10:15 of changes that we're implementing from what we have right now.
10:18 It protects existing nonconformities, but in balance with provisions
10:24 that will, over time, hopefully bring nonconformities into conformity.
10:28 I mean, lawful nonconformities can exist into perpetuity,
10:34 but there are regulations that you wanna have to protect the city
10:38 and to, if people are gonna modify those so that nonconformities aren't,
10:42 they don't get, they don't proliferate, they don't expand,
10:47 and that if people make significant changes to them,
10:50 that they are required over time to bring them closer to conformity.
10:56 So I think that's some of the things I just talked through there.
11:02 I think from one of the biggest things that Halsey Levine is approaching,
11:05 looking at our current code and how to put it,
11:07 is just the usability and the readability of it.
11:10 A nonconformities chapter has several sections
11:13 that treat like every different type.
11:16 They try to just make it more user-friendly and easier to read.
11:27 But it does, there are still elements like our current code.
11:31 You know, if your nonconformity is damaged more than 50%,
11:35 you are required to rebuild in conformance with the code.
11:40 That is a big thing that we have to reinforce with folks.
11:43 That's just, that's how zoning code works.
11:46 That's how you bring things into conformity.
11:52 So this is the big one, and I'll try to step through
11:55 just the basics of it.
12:00 So we really don't have a chapter like this right now that outlines.
12:05 We have pieces and parts.
12:06 We have like a mixed use overlay chapter.
12:08 We have a plan development chapter.
12:10 We have a section of another chapter on variances.
12:14 But there really isn't anything that if someone says they want to,
12:18 I'm interested in doing X, where do I go in the zoning code?
12:22 It is primarily you're going to start with this chapter.
12:27 And so if you looked at the actual draft of the chapter itself,
12:31 I mean, one of the first things in here is this table,
12:40 is your procedures overview, your general procedures table.
12:43 I mean, this tells you if you just walk down kind of the left column,
12:48 what you're looking to do from a sign permit to, you know,
12:53 porch approvals or an adjustment, a variance, a plan development.
12:57 It gives you the reference section,
12:59 and it tells you who kind of who the deciding authority is
13:03 as you walk your way across there so that you generally know
13:06 who's required to say yes or no.
13:10 One of the other big pieces with this is our current code,
13:13 for whatever reason, was designed to make the building commissioner
13:17 the holder of the predominant authority in the zoning code,
13:20 which is kind of unusual when you have a director of planning
13:25 and development that is also charged with administering the zoning code.
13:31 So we've cleaned that up.
13:33 We've retained the authority for the building commissioner
13:36 where we believed it was appropriate,
13:39 and really where the building commissioner exerts authority now
13:44 and has kind of been narrowed down,
13:46 and I'll cover some of those things.
13:48 But really you're vesting the predominance of that authority
13:52 for the zoning code with the director of planning and development,
13:55 which is a big shift from our current code.
13:57 Even though that's how we do it in practice,
13:59 that's not how the zoning code is currently written right now
14:03 because it just doesn't work that way.
14:06 This is an example of how House O'Levin has in the past structured.
14:11 So each section, so if you went to,
14:14 looking at a plan development subsection within this chapter,
14:17 or even like a front porch renovation or approval,
14:21 it should have its own page with kind of just the basic details
14:26 of how you approach that process to include flow charts.
14:32 This is how they found success in the past
14:35 with these more visual kind of flow charts and authorities
14:37 as you move through in steps.
14:39 And so this is just an example of how they're looking
14:42 to format kind of our final chapter.
14:46 What they did here for the ZPAC was just to try to provide
14:50 kind of a more simple kind of flow chart,
14:53 is they, who approves it,
14:57 and then how that process is supposed to play out.
14:59 And they get more complicated as you go along.
15:02 But these are your kind of your administrative approvals.
15:06 So if you remember recalling some of the past updates
15:11 that I provided have been more of the development standards
15:15 and the district standards and those things
15:17 that we worked hard to try to quantify objective standards.
15:24 And a lot of it is especially the design standards
15:27 and things that we've worked over the last couple years
15:29 to create objective standards and put them in place for ABR.
15:34 Those will be pulled into this code,
15:36 whether it's material standards and opacity
15:39 and glazing percentages and all these types of things
15:44 that we'll work through and you will see them again.
15:47 Those were also very hard chapters to develop.
15:50 But as you go through this, if some, generally,
15:55 if someone is able to meet those objective standards,
15:59 the approval is vested with the Director of Planning
16:03 They shouldn't need to go to a border commission
16:06 if they're meeting the standards that are in the law.
16:09 That alone should help kind of declutter our boards
16:17 and commissions so that ABR is not seeing,
16:21 you know, 400 applications a year
16:24 and Planning Commission is not looking
16:26 at parking plan reviews for every single thing.
16:32 This is something that we've very consciously kind
16:36 So these, the administrative kind of things
16:38 are listed here, whether they're small adjustments.
16:41 I think that talks about like your variances
16:46 and things that are already,
16:48 the building commissioner already decides on variances.
16:51 I believe they're less than 10%.
16:54 Those are administrative adjustments.
16:56 Porch approvals, porches that meet
16:58 the objective standards, the certificate
17:00 of appropriateness for historic changes
17:05 or alterations to a historic structure
17:08 and sign permits, things that meet
17:10 the objective standards.
17:12 Those will go through, prove and deny.
17:15 What this is also, I think it's mentioned
17:17 in one of these other things,
17:19 one of this also allows you to have an appeal
17:22 that goes instead of the common please,
17:25 the appeal goes to the board
17:27 for an administrative decision.
17:30 So it kind of allows a little internal appeal
17:33 that we don't have currently today.
17:36 So this is a residential porch approval pathway.
17:40 So we'll have the objective standards
17:42 If somebody, those plans meet the objective standards,
17:46 the plans right now do come
17:47 into the building department.
17:48 So the building commissioner will look at them,
17:51 will forward them to the planning director,
17:55 say, hey, these look like they meet the standards.
17:57 Could your ABR secretary look at these
18:02 If they do, then the planning director
18:06 If they don't meet those standards,
18:09 that same process plays out.
18:10 But just like it happens today,
18:12 the secretary of ABR will then send an email
18:15 to the person and say,
18:16 hey, you gotta go through ABR
18:17 because your porch renovation doesn't follow
18:20 the objective standards.
18:22 If they wanna bring it into standard,
18:24 they can do that and change their plans
18:26 and then avoid the board.
18:28 Otherwise, it goes to ABR
18:30 and ABR does what it does, reviews it
18:34 and provides a decision.
18:36 So it just clarifies,
18:37 it clears up the docket
18:38 and really focuses ABR's efforts
18:41 and talents on those things
18:44 that don't meet our objective standards
18:46 and where you need that additional assistance
18:49 in order to ensure the harmonious development
18:52 that is in our code.
18:55 Councilman Bullock.
18:57 Mr. Bost, this sounds good to me.
18:59 In fact, very sound to me
19:01 in terms of the process and decluttering
19:05 Now that said, I label myself
19:07 as a learning lay person,
19:13 not an expert like some of my colleagues.
19:15 Seems to me that defining the objective standard
19:18 is gonna be important to get that correct.
19:22 especially on commercial signs
19:23 and commercial awnings,
19:25 some gray zone areas
19:28 where the objective standards designed poorly,
19:33 then we're gonna have the inventory
19:35 on every awning in town, for example,
19:39 which to me is not what we're going for.
19:43 For porches, for residential porches,
19:45 it might be a materials choice, for example.
19:48 So I confess I don't know those standards
19:52 as they're currently drafted
19:53 or the proposed change off the top of my head,
19:55 but could you speak to that?
19:57 If the standard is defined well,
20:01 then the planning director,
20:03 I'm gesturing to Director Barrington here,
20:07 can efficiently move the process forward
20:09 and then also efficiently refer
20:11 to ABR those gray areas.
20:14 But if not, then you might have
20:17 a more ambiguous or controversial outcome.
20:22 So the intent is to capture
20:25 those objective standards in this refresh
20:27 so that it's in the code, it's in the law.
20:30 What we've had really for the last 15 years
20:33 is a collection of, I will call them pamphlets,
20:36 like pamphlets and design standards
20:39 that may or may not have generally been captured
20:44 by the code under which is captured.
20:48 Those types of standards are captured very,
20:51 I don't know, generally by our local building code,
20:58 chapter 13, 1325, which is the chapter
21:02 that talks about architectural border review.
21:05 It doesn't even live in our zoning code.
21:07 It makes reference to general architecture.
21:11 The board will use general architecture standards
21:15 and any other standards as adopted by the board.
21:21 It is extremely bland and there's nothing in it
21:24 that says what is the current standard.
21:28 So your point is that today we have
21:30 close to zero objective standards in the law.
21:34 They're just not adopted by council
21:36 or captured objectively in code.
21:41 We've had, the city's had a front porch pamphlet,
21:44 standard pamphlet, since 2011.
21:47 It's been updated every now and then.
21:49 But it's something that we provide.
21:52 It's not something that somebody can go
21:53 to our development section in the zoning code
21:57 and say like, oh, this is what they mean by a front porch.
22:00 They have to reach out to somebody
22:02 in the building department or something and say,
22:04 hey, do you guys have standards
22:05 for your front porches?
22:06 And depending on who they talk to,
22:08 it's yes, no, like, so.
22:11 Right, I think there was a predecessor
22:13 to Director Byneton who preferred maximum discretion
22:19 I am very keen to be, you know, I think I'm persuaded.
22:23 But again, I'd be curious as my colleagues,
22:26 you know, and again, whatever gets codified,
22:30 there's some art to wording that correctly.
22:32 Yeah, I have comments on this too,
22:34 but Councilman Capaldi.
22:38 I just wanted to real quick.
22:41 There's so much detail in all of this
22:43 and we really appreciate Assistant Director Boss
22:46 leading us through.
22:46 But, you know, part of this is having things in,
22:51 I appreciate the flexibility
22:53 and I think trying to find the right level
22:57 of flexibility with the right level of objectivity
23:01 that is codified so that a lot of folks
23:04 don't know that they need to do this.
23:06 So if you're just refinishing your porch
23:09 and that you could actually go
23:11 into the codified ordinances and see like,
23:13 this is what these standards are
23:15 and these sorts of things,
23:16 that it is helpful to have that
23:19 and also to have some of these things
23:20 streamlined with those defined standards.
23:23 And of course, anything we codify,
23:26 we can always change
23:28 through our legislative process as well.
23:30 Yeah, I think my concern,
23:32 I'll go to Council Baker in a second,
23:34 like having said, you know,
23:37 architecture board review,
23:39 I saw any number of signs
23:41 that met like so many objectives,
23:43 you know, it was this right size,
23:45 the right color, right everything else
23:46 that were horrible.
23:47 So it's like, where's that line drawn between?
23:50 Yes, I met the objectives
23:52 and something that's a really,
23:53 truly awful design and when like,
23:55 because like part of what I think
23:57 ABR does that is really helpful
23:59 is kind of nudge people along
24:00 because especially people who don't,
24:02 aren't like immersed in the design world
24:04 and it's helpful to them
24:06 to go through the process
24:07 just for their own good
24:08 because they don't know.
24:10 So that would be my concern
24:11 where that line is absolutely drawn
24:14 Sorry, Council Baker, your comments.
24:19 I think about certainty
24:20 and just construction, right?
24:22 Like we want people to maintain
24:24 our beautiful century homes here in Lakewood,
24:26 but if soft costs, design costs
24:28 and design revisions take up,
24:31 you know, 30, 40% of your budget,
24:32 that's less money you're putting into your home.
24:35 So I think whatever objective standards
24:37 we can provide would be good
24:39 and whatever people can kind of
24:40 figure out on their own.
24:41 So part of this is like
24:43 the code is going to say one thing
24:45 and I really want to work
24:46 with the planning department
24:47 to make sure that there's like
24:50 FAQs or like things
24:52 like we can point them to something
24:54 other than the code, right?
24:56 Because I think that
24:57 what it's going to do is
24:59 it's going to give people
25:02 people can look up the code,
25:03 people can look up things on their own.
25:04 We have a new website
25:05 because the point would be is like
25:07 time is money and construction
25:08 and revisions is money as well on design.
25:11 So if you can do anything
25:12 to point them in the right direction early,
25:15 And then those refinements
25:16 you're talking about are important,
25:17 but I think they can still happen
25:17 at the planning director level.
25:20 The question I have, another process thing,
25:23 because this is the second time
25:24 I've lived through this presentation,
25:28 Are you intending to refer these
25:30 to Planning Commission and ABR as well
25:31 when the whole batch comes out?
25:35 So we've sent the, we can.
25:39 So Planning Commission will see everything
25:42 in conjunction with council.
25:44 ABR has, they had the opportunity
25:48 to review the development
25:49 standards chapters back in May.
25:52 So those, a lot of those comments
25:55 have been provided to Houseale Levine
25:57 and I have no issue
25:58 with sending them to them��
26:00 again when we see the final chapters.
26:03 It helps to get more eyes
26:06 and the people that are going to have to
26:09 you know, in most cases
26:11 have to refer to them
26:13 or you know, when someone,
26:15 because someone's going to come to them
26:16 and be outside those standards
26:18 or whatever to try to help
26:19 kind of get them closer,
26:21 as close as possible to those standards.
26:25 So, but yeah, we can send them.
26:28 Thank you, because I think that,
26:30 you know, we're doing joint meetings a lot.
26:32 I actually think it's an effective way
26:34 Might work for Planning Commission
26:35 when we really dig in to the,
26:38 because I've seen these in chunks.
26:40 But it's like a, you know,
26:41 one of those paintings
26:42 where you see a blotch
26:43 and then you got to like stand back
26:44 and look at all of it.
26:46 So while we're doing the budget,
26:47 we're also going to be digging
26:49 into the zoning code.
26:49 It's going to be a fun,
26:50 maybe I'll see my kids,
26:52 you know, after the first of the year.
26:54 But I do think that
26:57 just referring the design standards
26:59 to ABR, having them do it on their own
27:02 and then maybe a joint Planning Commission meeting
27:04 would be most efficient use of our time,
27:06 but defer to the administration.
27:07 But I think that's probably how we could get it done.
27:10 I will say, I mean,
27:11 most of the standards,
27:14 Halsey, Levine and our,
27:16 you know, we had access
27:17 and provided them access
27:18 through all of those,
27:20 the downtown commercial design guidelines
27:22 that were done 15 years ago,
27:23 the front porch standards,
27:25 the, and then the residential standards
27:29 and the updated objective standards
27:31 that were done about two years ago,
27:34 that ABR now references.
27:36 So those are all kind of,
27:37 informed a lot of the work
27:39 that went into these things.
27:40 So my hope is when you go through,
27:43 most of those objective standards
27:45 or you should identify with a lot of them.
27:47 And so the ones that are kind of off
27:55 It'd be easier to highlight things
27:57 that doesn't sound right.
27:59 Or that like, like we,
28:00 when we went through those design standards,
28:02 when you're talking about
28:04 just a totally new concept
28:05 that we don't really work through right now
28:08 is like fence opacity.
28:10 But you actually have to think about it
28:13 is it something that we really want
28:14 to regulate or not?
28:16 we may just decide to strike
28:18 or like the amount of glazing
28:19 on a building or something like that.
28:23 But they've really pulled from,
28:25 I mean, they pulled from our own standards
28:27 and then they went,
28:28 they went regional and national examples
28:30 as well of kind of the,
28:32 you know, the wide menu
28:34 of things that you can regulate
28:35 with objective design standards
28:37 and to try to get it down
28:38 to what we really wanted,
28:40 you know, liquid to be.
28:41 Because you do want to be
28:42 as permissive as possible,
28:44 but within the bounds
28:45 of what you believe,
28:47 you know, reasonably to be liquid
28:50 or whatever liquid looks like people.
28:53 So I'm just gonna run through
28:57 a couple of more of these.
29:01 And I will say towards the signs
29:02 and some of the other questions,
29:03 I think the, you know,
29:05 vesting that authority
29:06 in the Director of Planning and Development
29:08 always gives them the option of saying,
29:12 I don't know about this.
29:13 I'm gonna send this to sign review.
29:15 Like, I don't feel comfortable.
29:16 Like, that option is always present
29:18 for that, which could be good,
29:23 depending on who sits in that seat.
29:29 most of these follow that same
29:30 kind of logic and path.
29:33 So if the sign meets
29:34 the objective sign standards,
29:36 which they have been cleaned up
29:39 from what we have currently,
29:40 and again, in our local building code,
29:43 1329 is the sign code,
29:45 pulling that into the zoning code
29:46 in the same section,
29:48 the chapter of its own.
29:50 So if you meet the standards,
29:55 sort of the sign review board,
29:56 the Board of Building Standards, AVR.
30:01 where the building commissioner
30:02 is gonna retain the authority
30:04 Temporary signs is going to stay
30:06 in the building department,
30:07 because that's how it works best now,
30:11 for a temporary sign permit.
30:14 It still has to adhere
30:15 the same sign standards,
30:18 that are in the sign standards
30:20 that we will now have in place.
30:22 But the building commissioner
30:24 is just in a better position
30:25 to kind of administer those permits,
30:30 with their property maintenance inspectors
30:32 to make sure that they're not,
30:33 they're not up past the 90 days,
30:36 or, and then they get a renewal
30:37 and all those things that,
30:42 we left that as an example
30:46 So BZA with variances,
30:52 kind of see how this,
30:53 how this stuff plays out.
30:54 this is very much how it plays out now.
30:56 It's just gonna be,
30:58 better and more clearly illustrated
31:00 in the code for folks.
31:05 BZA is use your dimensional standards,
31:10 and then if there are already,
31:12 you could technically get a referral
31:14 on a dimensional standard
31:15 from a subdivision review
31:17 by planning commission.
31:22 it plays out as an applications file,
31:24 the public notice goes out,
31:26 we prepare a staff report,
31:28 and then the public hearing for BZA
31:30 and then they decide.
31:36 administrative adjustments
31:37 for those small appeals,
31:40 or the small adjustments,
31:42 somebody could technically appeal that,
31:44 and so that also would go to BZA.
31:49 That's kind of the right column there.
31:53 So then there are certain cases
31:55 that go to planning commission,
31:57 and then there are cases
31:58 that also go to planning commission
31:59 and then city council,
32:01 and so how those things play out.
32:04 So those things that,
32:06 that need just planning commission decision,
32:09 usually it's a use interpretation,
32:11 which under our current code,
32:12 that's the similar use determination.
32:14 Any lot adjustments like lot splits
32:16 and consolidations,
32:17 and then conditional use permits.
32:20 Those things that would need
32:22 to go through planning commission
32:23 and then go to city council
32:25 for ultimate decision,
32:27 is your subdivisions,
32:30 your plan developments,
32:32 any kind of a test amendment
32:33 with the zoning code,
32:34 because you're changing the law,
32:36 and any zoning map adjustments,
32:38 because you're again changing
32:39 the underlying zoning on a parcel.
32:41 So those things all go through council
32:44 after they are reviewed by planning commission.
32:46 So the PC decisions are on the left column,
32:49 and then the planning commission
32:52 recommendation to city council decisions
32:54 on the right column.
32:59 I believe one of the things that will,
33:01 and you'll see this when it comes up
33:06 whether or not we even have
33:08 a minor or major subdivisions.
33:10 There's some of those things
33:10 as we dug into the older code,
33:13 that the nuance between major,
33:16 minor and major is so small
33:18 that sometimes just for clarity sake
33:20 and ease of understanding,
33:21 it might be worth just kind of
33:23 combining those together.
33:25 So that's an example of one of those.
33:27 PD was another one.
33:28 I don't know if that is the next one.
33:30 So we kind of went round and around
33:34 on do we need to define,
33:36 would it be more efficient for people,
33:38 or could we design a more efficient process
33:40 if we designed a minor plan development
33:43 versus a major plan development?
33:46 Because right now, under our current code,
33:48 you're probably aware,
33:49 there are preliminary review stages
33:53 where the project goes through everybody,
33:55 and then a final review
33:56 where it's got to go back
33:57 through everybody all again,
33:59 which is unbelievably inefficient
34:05 And so we first attacked this with,
34:08 could we make a more streamlined process
34:13 And how does that really differentiate
34:15 from a lot of other projects
34:16 when you're talking about
34:17 our current code standards 10,000 square feet,
34:21 which is not enormous,
34:24 probably for a reason
34:25 based on Lakewood's parceled out.
34:29 So what we ended up kind of settling on
34:32 was it's probably better and more efficient
34:34 just to streamline a single PD process
34:37 that still has updated standards,
34:40 but it generally follows the same
34:42 like qualification standards
34:43 for something to become a plan development.
34:45 You just have a more streamlined process.
34:48 Now, with that streamlined process,
34:51 there's no preliminary and no final,
34:55 I think the review at each stage
34:58 will be just as detailed as it is now.
35:01 It'll just be more predictable
35:03 for developers in terms of their timing,
35:06 and as they move through the process,
35:09 there's a lot less uncertainty,
35:13 well, we just passed ABR now,
35:14 but what's ABR gonna say in six months
35:17 or whatever whenever we get back to them?
35:18 It is one straight process
35:22 which should be easier.
35:27 again, this is another example.
35:29 You're gonna meet the objective code,
35:31 the objective standards that stays in-house.
35:35 It could be subject to administrative adjustment,
35:38 and when I say administrative adjustment in this,
35:40 what we're talking about is
35:43 the parking plans where someone
35:44 may not meet the minimum standards,
35:47 but they do meet the stated exceptions
35:51 that are on our code.
35:53 You know, our current parking code
35:54 lists exceptions for residential,
35:57 exceptions for commercial.
35:59 So in order technically to get that approved,
36:01 they have to go through the whole process
36:03 with planning commission.
36:04 Which I think in 100% of cases
36:08 planning commission has approved it.
36:10 Most of the time they understand the exception.
36:14 It's well thought out,
36:15 it's well developed,
36:17 and so that's just something that we thought
36:19 could be handled administratively
36:22 if someone is clearly gonna meet
36:23 one of the stated exceptions that's in the law
36:27 that they don't necessarily have to go
36:28 to planning commission.
36:30 Now, if you're not gonna meet those standards,
36:32 you're not gonna meet those exceptions.
36:33 It's just like anything else.
36:34 You have to go to see the commission
36:38 to get your parking plan approved.
36:44 this is an example,
36:45 and we're not gonna follow this.
36:47 We're still developing the process
36:51 and I don't even know if,
36:52 I can't remember where we landed,
36:53 if we were gonna even call it
36:54 a municipal district or something else.
36:59 It might be city services
37:00 or public services or something.
37:03 Because we did talk about
37:04 expanding this to include the libraries
37:06 and some of those other public entities
37:09 that are out there.
37:12 It's important to designate those
37:13 and have a specific zoning district
37:15 for your public services properties
37:19 so that the underlying zoning
37:26 or something that then becomes an issue
37:29 that requires council approval
37:30 for you to do anything.
37:32 And so what we're trying to have,
37:36 and how this came into the process
37:37 discussion for approvals
37:39 is how a property becomes
37:41 part of the municipal district
37:43 or whatever we're gonna call it.
37:44 Like if a school purchases a property
37:48 or the city purchases a property,
37:51 what's that process?
37:54 Because it does involve rezoning,
37:56 it is a process inherently
37:58 gonna have to go to city council
38:02 And so then the other side
38:04 of the coin is that now
38:06 what's the process for divesting
38:08 a municipally zoned districts?
38:10 Whether it's a school
38:13 that is looking to sell
38:15 particular properties
38:16 or the city that is looking
38:22 for a municipal function.
38:26 that you go through to divest that
38:28 and how is the new underlying
38:30 zoning determined or recommended
38:33 and then approved by council?
38:35 And so this was a slide for ZPAC
38:37 to kind of generate some discussion
38:40 on that process to hopefully
38:42 help kind of refine it
38:44 because we don't have
38:45 a municipal district right now,
38:47 it's an important thing
38:48 based on some lessons we've learned
38:51 in the last couple of years
38:52 and so it's an important thing to have
38:54 and so with a new district
38:55 you gotta have clear procedures
38:57 on how something becomes that
38:58 and how something is divested.
39:03 Definitions is the last update.
39:06 So this was kind of
39:08 our existing definitions,
39:11 new definitions within ORC
39:13 and some of the kind of
39:15 I'll just call them topics of interest.
39:17 I believe we're gonna have
39:18 we're gonna have a definition
39:21 which is something new.
39:24 But there's also other national
39:26 and regional definitions
39:28 that are common kind of terms
39:29 of practice within zoning
39:31 that have been pulled in
39:32 that they're either
39:33 they were just absent.
39:35 Some of those are like
39:38 to the objective standards
39:40 of having a single reference
39:41 where someone can figure out
39:42 how you determine building height
39:46 you know how those things
39:48 are determined for those standards.
39:52 The other thing is that
39:53 the organization of the definitions
39:56 will be in alphabetical order.
39:58 It's a novel concept
39:59 but our current zoning definitions are not.
40:03 And sometimes it's just
40:04 when you don't consciously do that
40:09 and people miss things
40:11 when they're just kind of added.
40:13 The way that they've organized this
40:17 leaves space and procedures
40:18 for how you insert new definitions
40:20 and removal definitions
40:22 so that you don't end up
40:23 with that kind of piecemeal
40:24 definition section like we have now
40:27 because that's how you kind of
40:28 get yourself in trouble.
40:31 the bike code amendment thing
40:32 if you've looked at it
40:33 I just keep adding digits
40:34 to the end of things
40:36 because that's how you keep them
40:37 in order and the word that you want
40:39 but it's not necessarily the best.
40:42 So that's this should be
40:45 pretty straightforward
40:46 but they're big on illustrations
40:51 and so they do intend on
40:53 it's not just going to be written
40:55 definitions for a lot of these things.
40:56 There should be some pretty
40:58 hopefully some pretty clear
41:02 especially zoning terms of practice
41:05 for building height
41:06 and all those types of things
41:07 is the one example that's up here.
41:11 Councilman Bullard.
41:12 For illustrations those are
41:16 can you tell us more
41:17 are those binding illustrations
41:19 or they're just examples
41:21 to literally illustrate
41:23 a legal concept that's defined?
41:25 Yeah so I'm trying to think there's
41:29 Mr. Chair I would just throw out
41:32 the example in the legislation
41:36 for front yard plantings
41:38 it would be similar to that
41:39 just an illustration
41:40 to show what we're talking about
41:44 the side yard the front yard
41:46 driveway and you know
41:48 the different angles
41:49 that that would create.
41:51 Yards for corner lots
41:54 when you're talking about
41:55 side yard dimensions
41:58 and all those things.
42:02 even in some of the standards
42:03 talk about new development
42:05 and visibility triangles
42:09 and so that you don't have
42:10 a building that's built
42:11 up to its setback on a corner
42:14 so a car at a stop bar
42:18 and so while we love
42:18 our dense development
42:20 there are those types
42:21 of a balance of considerations
42:25 at least it's at least acknowledged
42:30 And if I could just add
42:32 more so than anything
42:33 for the illustrations
42:34 is just so that like
42:35 the plain reader of the code
42:41 what they're reading
42:42 right because a lot of times
42:43 it's a property owner
42:44 they don't put up fences
42:48 but they should be able
42:50 and reasonably read
42:52 what the expectation is.
42:59 I think that's the last section.
43:01 I talked a little bit about
43:04 but so for our final
43:10 so that the full draft code
43:14 which they're now turning on
43:16 the updated chapters
43:18 so that we will have that
43:21 to the law department
43:23 hopefully within the next
43:24 by in July by mid-July
43:26 so that there's a lot of
43:29 department will have
43:33 We are going to meet
43:34 with the ZPAC again.
43:36 I think now we're shooting
43:37 for the 11th of August
43:38 which was the alternate date
43:39 that I had sent out last week
43:42 just based on people
43:45 and then we will probably
43:46 shoot for a pre-adoption
43:48 open house at some point
43:50 in early early September
43:53 It's going to be a topic here
43:55 at probably our next meeting
43:56 with House Elwesdine
43:57 is getting that on the calendar
44:01 and then we will look at
44:03 developing a schedule
44:06 probably in consultation
44:08 with at the ZPAC meeting
44:11 and with Council Clerk
44:14 and the Planning Commission
44:14 to try to align those dates
44:16 so that we can get some dates
44:19 just so everybody's aware
44:21 and then we can break down
44:23 the chapters and everything
44:25 into those reviews.
44:27 So hopefully we can
44:30 have a good back plan
44:31 and have enough time
44:33 to get through everything
44:34 in that kind of September
44:35 to December time frame.
44:39 Thanks Assistant Director Boss.
44:43 I'll open up my colleagues
44:44 and I know we have some
44:44 members of the public here
44:48 quite a bit of this.
44:51 The objective standards
44:52 I think are important
44:53 to streamline these processes.
44:56 some of my concerns
44:56 about where that stops
44:57 and where kind of that line
44:59 between what goes to ABR
45:00 because again I think
45:01 that process can be helpful
45:03 to make projects even better
45:06 that didn't even know
45:09 if they can meet the objectives
45:11 but that advice sometimes
45:13 in a better project
45:15 so I'll leave that there
45:16 and I'm really encouraged
45:19 to see kind of like these flows
45:21 these and I'm hoping
45:24 we take the opportunity
45:25 to break some of those out
45:27 into some bite-sized PDFs
45:28 and things for folks
45:30 because like I mean
45:31 what percent of our people
45:34 for permits and things
45:35 don't usually do this
45:36 and so to have this broken down
45:37 to the most visual basic thing
45:39 just so they can get
45:40 an immediate understanding
45:41 what that process looks like
45:42 I think is really important.
45:45 People who do this a lot
45:48 what the process is
45:49 so that's another way
45:51 that they're funny.
45:55 some of those visuals
45:56 are going to be really great
45:57 and I hope we can highlight those
45:59 and encourage more development here
46:02 and just try to peel away
46:04 some of those layers
46:05 more complicated than it is
46:07 and honestly more complicated
46:08 because it has been
46:10 we've been in the past so
46:13 for all that hard work
46:14 to my colleagues on the committee
46:17 if you have any questions
46:18 or comments in this time.
46:20 Councilman Bullock.
46:23 So too there was a dialogue
46:26 between you and Mr. Baker
46:28 and the administration
46:30 kind of implicitly on
46:32 the objective standard
46:37 drafting those successfully
46:40 and that is the trade-off would be
46:42 if you reduce the amount
46:46 the boards and commissions
46:47 to see to have eyes on
46:50 you might be foregoing
46:53 the scenario that Mr. Evans
46:55 was talking about where
46:56 just for the aesthetics
46:59 and something close to aesthetics
47:02 of a word for right now
47:04 they could be improved
47:06 ABR for example would be
47:12 so could you address
47:13 I think Mr. Baker was saying
47:15 planning director would have
47:16 discretion potentially
47:19 to refer something anyway
47:20 unless you can define
47:22 in the objective standards
47:23 it shall be beautiful
47:24 and seemly and comely
47:25 in appearance which
47:28 is difficult to describe
47:31 you're going to have that issue.
47:34 The only I guess in response
47:36 councilman that I would say
47:38 is that so I was secretary
47:45 I can't remember how many
47:47 but there were at times
47:50 peak building season
47:51 especially like the spring
47:52 where sometimes a docket
47:56 or more front porches on them
47:58 we had that the front porch
48:00 guidelines and the pamphlets
48:02 that the building department
48:03 they provide it to people
48:06 so there came a point
48:08 with the dockets were
48:13 like coming to the law department
48:14 with a building commissioner
48:15 and trying to figure out
48:16 if we had the authority
48:19 just to administratively
48:20 approve some of these
48:21 because of the docket
48:23 and because some of them
48:24 were pretty straightforward
48:28 our current code does again
48:30 it provides a lot of authority
48:31 to the building commissioner
48:32 and the building commissioner
48:34 the building commissioner's board
48:35 to approve those things
48:37 and so what I wasn't trying
48:40 to do an end run around
48:43 but we did get an agreement
48:48 certain things like
48:51 that even the board ABR
48:53 was like if they meet
48:56 we don't need to see them
48:58 and so it just became
49:00 it's a personification of
49:05 that was already happening
49:06 to say you're proposing X
49:09 and I can clearly see it
49:12 that you've submitted
49:12 the building department
49:13 which is not always the case
49:16 it meets the objective standards
49:21 it's got these elements
49:25 you know I used to know
49:26 like the guard rails
49:29 it's got all these elements
49:32 you could have that conversation
49:34 that submitted the plans
49:40 it will meet the standards
49:41 and you won't have to go to ABR
49:43 99 percent of the time
49:44 someone will just submit you
49:46 and they will do it
49:48 and so you get those things
49:49 and so in effect we were
49:52 that's how this process
49:54 is that it's just that
49:56 that for those front porch standards
50:00 in the development standards
50:01 not in some pamphlet
50:03 that I had in my desk
50:04 or that the building department
50:05 you know ran out of copies
50:07 and so hey do you have
50:08 an electronic copy of that
50:09 like could you send it to them
50:11 and so part of that
50:12 for me was building the
50:14 like the website I built for ABR
50:15 with all the references on it
50:17 just to try to put those all
50:19 you could direct someone
50:23 part of the intent of this
50:24 is to put them in that chapter
50:26 for objective standards
50:27 is someone can look at the section
50:30 I got to meet these six things
50:34 so you're creating clarity
50:35 you're removing ambiguity
50:42 removal from the docket
50:44 of a significant number
50:49 that all makes very good sense
50:51 and it's supportive
50:52 of what my colleagues have been saying
50:54 and the understandability
50:55 so maybe we're kind of
50:57 into the edge cases here
50:59 but if there are edge cases
51:02 with what Councilman Baker said
51:03 that the administration
51:04 could have enough discretion
51:10 the board and commission
51:12 or commission when needed
51:14 that's always the case
51:15 it has been the case
51:18 it's just trying to reserve
51:20 the ABR is always the board
51:21 that has the most applications
51:24 and what they're supposed to review
51:26 so you're trying to
51:27 you're trying to guard their time
51:29 so that they're not there
51:36 that all meet the guidelines
51:37 and then everybody's exhausted by 9 30
51:41 residential construction comes in
51:43 and everyone's just like
51:45 I don't want to have an argument with you
51:48 on your foundation exterior material
51:54 you're saving their time
51:55 for those things that
51:56 I just say are more important
51:59 don't meet the objective standards
52:03 a lot of interesting things
52:05 and so you want to reserve their time
52:07 to have that discussion
52:09 that respectful discussion
52:10 through things to bring people into
52:14 building code changes all the time
52:15 we're going to start seeing
52:17 and all kinds of interesting things
52:18 when ohio building code catches up
52:20 with a lot of kind of national
52:23 on other building things
52:24 instead of have like
52:26 that are not covered by our code
52:27 those are perfect examples
52:30 and that's how you bring
52:36 harmonious development
52:38 until our code can catch up
52:41 I'm glad here ohio is catching up
52:42 with the national standard
52:43 and for the record I think
52:46 gary on the porches
52:46 I think we can dial that in
52:48 through code enough
52:49 that we don't have to be seeing
52:50 I guess I'm more of a stickler
52:56 that will take a big
52:57 heavy lift off a lot of folks plates
53:00 from my colleagues before I turn it over
53:15 make sure it's green
53:16 you guys I think know the drill
53:31 I think we can track you down
53:34 yeah for the record
53:38 he's doing the talking
53:39 I'm just moral support
53:43 we come here tonight
53:45 with the housing changes
53:48 possibly supporting
53:51 with existing commercial properties
53:56 but just came to personal life
53:58 for us in the last two weeks
54:06 but if you look down
54:09 and there's a lot of
54:10 commercial storefronts
54:11 who've been empty for years
54:13 I went by three of them
54:14 on the way here today
54:15 and they've been five eight years
54:17 I've seen them going there
54:21 and if you look at the zoning map
54:29 including the houses
54:31 and every everything is commercial
54:33 and detroit's about the same way
54:36 and some of the things
54:37 I think this is just an updating
54:38 and I don't know how often it happens
54:43 area between ridgewood
54:44 and newman on detroit
54:46 proposed developments there
54:48 those condos have been there for
54:50 or you know something like that
54:52 so I don't know how often
54:56 we have a personal interest
54:58 in getting the zoning changes
55:00 we live in a commercial building
55:02 the madison mosaic house
55:04 live use overlay in 2000
55:12 that allows us to be there
55:14 and it's called the madison mosaic house
55:17 if you aren't aware
55:20 that building was changed
55:21 from storefront properties
55:23 to what it looks like now
55:25 the facade in the late 60s
55:28 and the glass windows
55:31 are basically no insulation
55:35 and the no insulation
55:37 on the wood that was put in
55:40 and the 60-year-old wood
55:41 is showing very much
55:45 we proposed to abr a few weeks ago
55:48 to replace all the windows
55:51 and we're turned down
55:53 that's sort of what I wanted to
55:54 talk about possibly reevaluating
55:56 the process because
55:57 according to the current guidelines
55:59 if I do anything of pulling out a window
56:01 do any of the facade
56:04 to creating a storefront
56:06 so just the large glass storefronts
56:08 which for a private
56:10 that those large glass windows
56:14 we have two office spaces
56:18 a workout room and a bedroom
56:20 in the front of the building there
56:22 we'd have those open to the public
56:23 and obviously our privacy
56:26 you know using the properties
56:30 and we've been putting
56:33 a huge amount of investment
56:36 yeah and like I said
56:37 the one was a bedroom
56:38 that we showed the public
56:43 and this is going to be
56:45 we couldn't make that work
56:46 to try to live into it
56:49 yeah so part of the reason
56:50 reasoning given to us
56:52 was that someone in the future
56:53 might want to turn it
56:57 who have been to our home
56:58 you know it's not really like
57:01 that someone's going to turn
57:02 that into storefronts
57:03 yeah the cost of the windows
57:05 would be the minor cost
57:06 compared to backing out
57:08 everything we put into the
57:12 we put in the building
57:13 I mean but using that logic
57:17 and I'm not wishing it on anything
57:19 Birdtown Brewery on Quail
57:21 right now is its own residential
57:24 if that had to close
57:26 or something like that
57:26 does that mean the only thing
57:27 they could put back in
57:29 that has to go back
57:29 to a house and a church
57:31 or you know it's it's just
57:33 same thing for Amazonia
57:34 yeah yeah like that
57:40 we chose we chose our property
57:42 because a single story living
57:44 we're getting older
57:46 we think that opportunity
57:48 who would want to use it
57:49 for for the property
57:51 we hope to stay there
57:52 for another 20 years
57:59 we think the city should
58:03 converting storefronts
58:04 into residential housing
58:07 not only so that people
58:08 who want to can age in liquid
58:12 also people with disabilities
58:14 you know we've got single store
58:17 we've got single story living
58:23 you know and I don't think
58:24 we're the only ones
58:27 thank you for the time
58:29 thank you all right
58:32 and your for your investment
58:34 I mean you certainly have
58:37 very cool living situation
58:40 I was privileged enough
58:42 so I won't get into the weeds
58:50 I think the personal feedback
58:54 won't get into addressing
58:55 your specific nature
58:57 of your concerns right now
58:58 but I will say that
59:01 of the applying department
59:02 it is a big balance
59:03 trying when you're doing
59:04 the zoning code review
59:05 like between what you're
59:08 and what you can't do
59:09 but I feel strongly
59:11 that the the zoning code update
59:12 is has more of a feel
59:14 of how can I do this
59:15 rather than you can't do that
59:17 so I think we're moving
59:18 to that to more of a document
59:20 that's living in a way
59:23 that makes things easier to do
59:25 rather than just telling you
59:26 what you what you're
59:28 but certainly appreciate
59:32 and Councilman Baker
59:34 yeah no and thank you
59:36 everything you said
59:39 for your investment like
59:40 but I will say it's where
59:41 the combination of use
59:43 and exterior appearance
59:46 so it's like ABR and use
59:48 meet and it's a really tough area
59:52 you know from a high level
59:54 I think the zoning code update
59:58 for a lot more flexible use
59:59 and that's one of the points
1:00:02 so allowing commercial spaces
1:00:05 or allowed for residential uses
1:00:08 residential uses or whatever
1:00:11 it's kind of moving us towards
1:00:15 that the physical structure
1:00:16 kind of still looks the same
1:00:17 but the use inside might change
1:00:25 to use property rights up here
1:00:28 property owners more flexibility
1:00:29 of how to use their property
1:00:34 what would disturb the neighbor
1:00:38 it is where use meets appearance
1:00:40 which is a tough confluence
1:00:44 and there are always going to be
1:00:46 but I think that generally speaking
1:00:48 the process we're going through
1:00:51 some of the goals you're talking about
1:01:07 does the city have a policy
1:01:40 and that this specific use case
1:01:59 has brought up a good point
1:02:00 like if as a matter of policy
1:02:39 hey this building is important
1:02:50 but just have a bigger process
1:03:05 So your point is the exterior
1:03:07 is different than the interior
1:03:27 like the affordable housing
1:03:40 and the entire planning department team
1:03:49 So I appreciate all your work
1:03:53 business before this committee