that's really all I I guess they posted here on the front wall out [Music] right is that could be zo it's a good point just as easy [Music] [Music] yeah yeah it's like it goes through part of that's true isn't that like an old Warehouse or something I think more more people are going to have to do stuff like that take yeah I've got my parents living with us now my dad my dad has Alzheimer so all that yeah so yeah those things are great though you know even if they're in and it can just be less stressful that everybody have their own house constantly yeah then they can still kind of have their independence but close by yeah oh good shouldn't be bad okay let me know when oh Dalia's not here yet so let me wait it says slow charging yeah it wasn't wasn't working for me Mr Teresa how are the wings of Joy coming along you know it's moving along but it's it's dependent on staff's time uh yeah but it's approved now we have that's good been a time consuming project yes yeah right now I I'm consumed by other oh yeah I cannot even blame on them right ton okay guys ready ready we need to go through the same steps just okay so uh we're opening up the um work session for the local planning agency um at 7:12 p.m. and and uh do a roll call please yes person tonight we have Bruce kavana Brian Smith Lisa Ramsey and David de out is darl Lopez Katherine hun and David Pollock okay and I guess we now open it up for public comment seeing no one we'll move on to the order of business which is covering article 8 and turn it over to City staff thank you Mr chair so tonight we're going to complete our discussion for article 8 and we left off on page seven I don't know if you all can see it on your computers okay perfect so we're going to go through this quickly I have about 10 slides I thought I had five but I have 10 but it's not so bad so you'll will be okay okay so um articulation and Design um under the previous articulation and design we had um roof modulation finra materials colors height and then under the previous building sighting we had orientation lot size lot width um and setbacks so one of the comments on articulation is um the ldcc there was consensus on a one to remove the proportion that language that's highlighted which says proportion great buildings have an articulation composition based on a collection of simple proportions now for us the language has to be measurable and not fluffy so this language was um filled with fluff it says um primarily all great buildings are composed of forms elements that are designed and inherently resonate with people and give them a sense of comfort and acceptance proposed buildings we put shall um it's we were trying to make it so that it said something must be designed to incorporate the following ratios all of the elements such as Windows G windows and entrances that provide prop proportion have proven to be harmonious throughout the ages we agree with the ldcc to remove this language because it says nothing for us so I need your consensus on that I'm good with that there is a note here that says some of this language maybe not that has been moved to article four under target areas so is there this is somewhere this same language I guess is elsewhere is that what this is telling us where do you see that it's one of the notes it was listen to was it on that same section yeah yeah articulation design so it's the it's the language that I was saying the um for um articulation and design we had like roof modulation finra materials and colors so we um need to have some kind of um building form because building form was the actual title and in in the previous art um article 8 under building form it was articulation and design roof modulation finra materials colors and height so some of that moveed to a different area in article 4 and then building sighting like orientation lot size lot width and setbacks that moved to Article 4 as well okay okay but that language under um a articulation and Design One proportion we want to delete that because it makes no sense so we just need consensus on that got consensus yeah y good on that okay page seven the same section articulation and design to um it talks about Harmony so this is another one of those things that have no measurable standards it says in balance with harmonious buildings the hierarchy of elements is clear each building shall have a clear distinction between the top middle and base and then then it says base and Middle top all facade shall have a recognizable base consisting of a not limited to thicker walls and richly textured materials and then two a recognizable top consisting of but not limited to corice treatments roof overhangs with brackets Andor differently colored materials colored stripes are not acceptable as the only treatment um the title and the purpose statement um the statement base discuss base middle and top but it does not provide a standard for the middle so it discusses the um base middle I mean base and top so um we had a question for kimle horn is that intentional to not discuss the middle because it discusses only the top and the base mhm do we have other areas that I think we talked about this the last meeting other areas that discuss General style not Harmony is a weird word but you know generals didn't we discuss this once before that it was somewhere else in some of these other documents we looked at yeah it was in some other documents that we've talked about thought we was yeah so the ldcc their consensus was to move the remove the language which the talks about base middle and top I agree I'm fine with that y okay okay so now there are these buildings just going to look like square box communist you know facilities like I mean is there some other place where it talks about how they should have some sort of architectural style structure we want measurable standards is what we're telling them we want something that because the way they H have created article a you either have to be an architect or we have to have um some type of consultant who um knows the different styles and our only resident architect is Dr Korea here um if she's not here then no one else is trained to understand what these different types of architectural styles are so it's all fluff we need something today we can train people on how to review architecture um today in our code um the way that it's being changed they're removing the measurable standards and putting in what um it should look like it should look like and it should feel like and so we don't want that we want measurable standards so point being we can measure VRI but we measure Harmony yeah right different for everybody yeah so no no I totally get it so to your point though I mean is there somewhere we talked about Aesthetics standard someplace is that going to be in here someplace no we we are still we still we have them and this is just to you know so we already have them in place um these are just in recommendations to upgrade our standards but the issue that we have is that our standards are minimum standards right it's really communicate to applicants that um design matters architecture matters and these are minimum standards for you to me and you know a good architecture is not coming from our minimum standards right it's coming from good Architects behind projects in the competition right that if you bring good project then the other one wants to you know that's the standard they want to bring a little bit better whatever and that's how we have been you know attracting better architect to the city now this is all good for a a class in architecture right so we're going to talk about Harmony that's not our role right our role is that these are the minimum standards that we are going to verify so have has to be verifiable because what is harmonious for me if I don't have a standard may not be for you so it's going to be subjective we have to have something that is tangible that we can explain to applicants so that's why it's not that we do not agree with the philosophy behind it um but we do not agree with the being very subjective now this this one in architectural style the city made when we created the standards in 2017 the city made um we did the survey with the residents and there was a choice not to have one style in the city so the residents did not want cuz we did not we are not a a historic city that has one style that is predominant so there was no um desire to impose a style for the applicants and that's why we do not want to have specific style and you know Architects are you know are are welcome to bring contemporary more traditional you know you know mil classic whatever they they want to to revise and and to propose okay so if we go to to number three that Dr K pointed out it says architectural style each building must have consistent architectural elements that create a recognizable architectural style including but not limited to classical Revival colonial revival Craftsman Florida vernacular Mediterranean Revival M CIT modern minimal traditional Florida ranch or other style identified in an industry accepted architectural guide book all architect Cal elements details features and finishes on the exterior of the building must be both consistent and compatible with the architectural style employ so our question was do we want to regulate style are reviewers going to be responsible for researching a style and identifying compliance with the style components would we need to train staff to accomplish this level of of Regulation and then um we also have the comment that this section needs to be more prescriptive and will this require a resident architect or consultant review so the ldcc had consensus to remove this language so I'm not sure how the LPA feels so go so removing the language just leaves it open for more interpretation for you know I buy a property I can do it how I want from an architectural standpoint well the overall theme is to provide something that is more prescriptive for us so you can leave that language there and and then have them add um more prescriptive language if you'd like okay because this this text is it's not really for us this is for someone who wants to build something to look at right I mean because it says right in the front it says not limited to all these dozen of things you just read off but it's like it's still really meaning that you're free to do what you want because it's not limited to these 10 things or whatever it was um but my question is it's not really the staff that's determining these sort of things wouldn't they somebody that wants to build a building in town they're saying okay what does the city oo want and they're looking at our information I'm okay with taking out I'm just asking um it's really for them to determine okay the city says we should have XY it's for both of us right because these are the guidelines for them yeah and these are the guidelines for staff to review so for instance here we not we are not stating that it has to be those Styles but what you what they are saying here is that staff has to see that once you have to declare a style and then you have to see all the elements that in the building are consistent with their style so that you know implies that staff will have to be knowledgeable on architecture so today what we have is like we have articulation elements so you have to articulate facade you have to modulate the roof you have to provide fenestration a certain percentage what we are trying to avoid in the in our code today is big boxes with no interest right right but we are not dictating that oh it has to be mid-century and mid-century is a style that has certain elements right it's very clean it's very linear so don't come with a if you come with something that does not you know comply with that style according to this language we should not approve today we do not have those restrictions but going by what you just said the idea was to avoid big boxes so if we take this out does that say no we still have we still have we still have articulation elements you cannot have facade that has no if it's a primary facade it has to articulate and you have to choose from these are the elements how in on how you can articulate you can Offset you can provide balconies canopies you know you have to provide elements in the facade to articulate the facade then we have elements for the roof the roof cannot be um a straight line you know indefinitely it we have a limitation of 40 ft and then it has to either change the you know the height so the code already provides for all that these are just additional language and we we want to keep those right the fenestration you you cannot have a wall without windows or doors or openings and then we have a percentage of those um all the all the buildings that we have approved they are not big boxes or boxes right without um um so these are changes that you want what that your these are changes that you're okay well these are changes that the consultant provided and some of them you know the ldcc rejected and even staff said well it's an issue for instance the proportions we w't the one that you already reject that one meant that every window every door or every you know element that was a finestra an opening we would have to check if the proportion met they met the proportion if they didn't it's a deviation that is increases a lot the work for staff and so what what we want is is more verical you know elements but um in the ldcc it was um discussed the developers signed they they brought it up that those um proportions did not meet the the uh industry okay so that would be another issue so we did not want to go that far to create an issue for us and for them right to approve a project to make it so complicated to approve a project but we want to communicate with them yeah bring good architecture and we we're going to check some you know some elements in your project okay so what is the consensus of the board on um architectural style is it to keep it and have it have more you know have them identify what each one of these um architectural styles the components of them or is it to delete it sounds like more of the concern is the second sentence um is there is there any benefit to keep in the first sentence or not [Music] really cuz the second sentence is where it calls for the architectural elements so the first sentence says each building must have a consistent architectural elements that creates a recognizable architectural style including but not limited to classical Revival colonial revival Craftsman Florida vernacular um and so on so I if unless they provide what those um elements would be um because otherwise would we'd have to go search to see what those elements are um and then we have to um it just needs to be a little bit more prescriptive there okay yeah I'm fine taking it out yeah I'm deleting it sure but when you say it needs to be more prescriptive what are we putting in place that is more prescriptive we have other stuff somewhere else that has that prescription right the prescriptiveness that it doesn't prescribe those types of architectural Styles but it prescribes something it just it does describe something and we're going to go to what it does describe but it just does not provide those elements of those type of architectural Styles so what is the consensus of the board sure delion yeah we can take it down okay take it [Music] out okay part page eight articulation and design so this is where it talks about the articulation elements it says um this is four yeah so it says articul this is the new language articulation articul architectural oh my gosh architectural elements and variations shall we put shall in there shall not restrict uh shall not be restricted to a single facade and shall be wrapped along the entire length of all Street facing facades all sides of a building shall display a balanced level of quality and Architectural interest consistent with sound and generally accepted architectural practices and principles and so then you'll see that there there's a minimum um number of articulation elements so on the primary they have to have three elements the secondary facade two elements a rear facade one and then the rear facade that's visible to a right away um they have to have two elements and then if in B you'll see the types of elements y if you go to B and that's existing language that we have in our code okay so um the ldcc the comments that we have on this is um Article 4 of the proposed code has an articulation provision for the targeted areas and it's in article 4 and the question is shouldn't it be located to article 8 where you have all of the articulation elements um because we're trying to consolidate everything that's related to articulation to one section of the code instead of going to multiple places um so our comment was please move articulation elements from Article 4 to this subsection and the Land Development code committee um had cons consensus on this change of moving everything to one section so what is the desire of the board I would agree I [Music] agree perfect okay so page eight um for understory trees it's Roman numeral 8 it says if a rear facade is visible from but does not front a RightWay requiring two articulation elements enhanced perimeter landscape is permissible as one of the two required articulation elements the perimeter landscape area shall be a minimum of 5 ft wide and shall include ground cover shrubs vegetation that provide Dent screening with a mature height of 6 ft at a minimum and one it used to say under story tree so we removed under story tree which is the same as a small or medium tree and we just put small medium tree every 30 ft um every 30 ft so that was the only change on on that we just clarify what an understory tree is is there consensus for that yeah yeah yeah yeah okay okay page eight the um the next language where it says Corner articulation elements including um any of the above except for item eight or vertical wall signage and Associated Plaza or common area public art so we added this they removed that language we added it from the previous article 8 we just included it back so is there a consensus for that yes yes okay okay page nine okay page nine a finra so kimy horn they removed finra language that was previously in article 8 that was broken down by typology so um staff replaced the language um back so you'll see um all of two was replaced um by typology so we put Town Town Homes we added Multiplex because Multiplex is now a u new typology we added that we put multif family back in there mixed use office and Commercial um as well as parking so we added that back in there for finra is there a consensus for that yes yeah that okay page nine um four actually three and four 3 four five there um so you'll see what section is that under that one is under ministration so you'll see number three was deleted it says a garage door can be creditable as a finestra element if providing a minimum of 20% of its area as Windows they deleted that so the question question was um does this mean that all garage do will be considered fitration regardless of with if it has Windows or not number five on here and I'll go finish going over the comments but number five says Windows shall it used to say shall we changed it to encourage to be vertical in shape um height at least 20% greater than width buildings using large amount of glass shall divide the glass into smaller panels achieving proportions emphasizing verticality so um the comments were [Music] um we added to the comment that says does this mean that all garage doors would be considered finestra regardless if it has Windows or not and then we added onto the question um front loaded Town Homes car washes auto repair shops have higher deviations due to this proposed standard so staff is saying keep the existing language which is number three um and then the LBCC also wants to keep this language and I think it was the s that it could be round Teresa I think we didn't want to dictate what how the shape of the window was was that the case on this one we do not want to have the proportion it was already veral shape right now it's encouraged toal in shape but not going to check the why why I'm just curious why are we encouraged to be vertical in shape as opposed to horizontal not not being an architex that is a good question because it's more um um classical to have Windows vertical but you know mod than architecture uses a lot of horizontal um so I like it I like the horizontal one so we are not saying that um um again in architecture everything depends on the style everything depends on the balance everything depends on you know how how you you use it right but um um the more classical architecture the windows are vertical if you see all the you know they are more vertical than horizontal okay so so you guys want to put back number three is what you're saying though right yes okay okay yep and the garage door is at to count as aistra then we would like to have some transparencies for you know makes sense yeah I'm okay with that yeah sounds good okay so in page 10 this is the same thing um 8.4 materials and colors um kimley horn move removed some of the language that we thought provided measurable standard so we want to replace um this language back and um that's 8.4 materials uh so we want to replace three and five the language that you see there so we want to replace that as well as seven so number one is staying number one talks about so number one is the intent it's not going to have anything measurable it's it talks about harmonious in there a fluffy language yeah so that's the intent that's fine so that's staying over we're okay with that okay so it's it's it's not not bad to have the intent what we cannot because the intent is say these are the standards that are supposed to meet the intent because if you're deviating we will go back to the intent to say is it meeting the intent the problem is that the standard can cannot be subjective right the standard has to be objective because also if you say it shall be Harmonious by Theresa standard then it doesn't you know the develop the developer will not know what that means and cannot deviate because if it's not quantifiable you cannot deviate from so we're deleting three so we're going to keep three we're saying let's keep three so it says the number of facade materials the minimum number of building materials used on a primary facade secondary facade shall be two excluding fitration trims and decorative elements so that's measurable so we want to keep that language and then number five wrapping materials around building Corners brick and stone materials shall wrap around corners to give an appearance of structural function and minimize the veneer appearance appearance and that's measurable okay we want to keep that language okay and then um seven if you click on seven um minimum and maximum facades comment is are we really saying you will allow 100% stuck so let's go back up to the other one so we want to keep the two measurable standards there and we'll go down to seven okay so those who we want to keep we need consensus on that for number three three and five is fine y okay and you're okay getting rid of six that's what you're saying um yeah so we're going to talk about that next okay so the number seven talks about um the minimum and maximum percentages of um specific facade materials and [Music] um can you click on the comment for that one yeah and that one says um can you read that one right so are we really saying we will allow a 100% stuck facade if we remov minimum or maximum percent so this one is talking about your materials um okay right now we have a limitation on the types of materials that we can use on the building so we're questioning kimy horn that how does this affect um whether or not someone can use 100% materials on a building um Teresa will tell you um beauty is um how do you say it with the architect in these buildings that you can it's you can have a great design um I'm going to let you talk about that cuz I don't know look like if it's one material cuz that's not what we allow today so when we were um asked to create standards architectural standards one of the directions of council is that they did not want to have 100% um stuckle in a building they wanted to have and at the time there was one um council member or mayor that he wanted brick he he's he's from New York so he wanted brick and brick and then when I met with him might saw that it was brick and stone so he wanted an upgraded material to have a minimum percentage in the in the in the facade so we created um this percentage that at at least 20% of the facade if it was primary had to be um had to be brick or stone and then in the secondary would was 10% uh with time there were other materials that people would bring and say well this is also an upgraded material and and I and what Deborah was saying that we because I I used to tell there are great arit architectural you know buildings um um that have it's 100% stule a lot of more than architecture osar Maya in Brazil which is famous for all the it's all stule but he has beautiful forms so it's not a box you know in in in in uh it's not cheap right it's not it's it's it has a a a great project behind it but this is what was possible back then so what we have been doing is and we would like to flex you know the um the standard to say you we accept other materials as this upgraded form and the code always have the way out and say if you're bringing if you know if we have gim Museum coming to the city ofo you know from New York and it's all stle yeah the city can say this is innovative design it will accept it so there is a way out if you bring but then you have to make the case that it's a good architecture right behind it so so I I don't remember what was the suggestion here I think the suggestion was to keep it in Flex so yeah if you look at B so you if you look at a it says the minimum minimum under a the minimum percentage of stone and our brick on a prim primary facade is 20% and the minimum percentage of stone in or brick on in a secondary facade it's 10% so we have it so that it's measurable today if you look at B it says a maximum percentage for stucco a primary facade is 40% maximum percentage for wood panel including um painted and or stained um lap horizontal siding vertical board battenwood sighting is 40% and then the maximum percentage of Stucco and a secondary facade is 50% so you can see we limit the stule and then we limit um other things as well so the if you highlight B what's the comment on B keep this language so we want to keep that um B and we want to keep C but we're thinking about perhaps changing the percentage of um stucko perhaps I'm not quite sure how the boore feels about it click on c as well I don't mind change in the percentage I mean I mean I'll go back to the word you know harmonious just one person's opinion definition of it is different than anothers i' I'd rather make it more flexible more flexible and and you want to keep B and C to have the maximum but eliminate a so there's really not a minimum is what we're saying is that what I I'm understanding we're saying to keep it but we will consider um maybe increasing the amount of one um type of material that makes sense so you're say just to give it more flexibility just to give it more flexibility yeah I'm I'm I'm good with that y yeah okay so we will say LPA is okay with um giving more flexibility to the percentages and then eight as well click on eight so we want to keep that language yeah y I agree okay and then on page 11 um see maximum number of colors um it says maximum number of colors a maximum of three colors may be used on the exterior walls of any building plus two additional colors for trim cornice work then um they add it colors used on the exterior of any building shall be minimal colors may not Clash but should complement each other we're recommending deleting this language because we don't know what Clash is we don't there's it's to objective um I mean subjective um in the ldcc there's consensus to remove this language and staff is also recommending deletion of that language so that's C what about a r says colors that are gar Gody loud excessive and ostentatious are we leaving that in yeah those are that language if you go up number one yeah it's also subjective right yeah yeah that's existing language so we can ask them to [Music] um maybe provide some additional guidelines on what that could be yeah what does that mean yeah mhm so we can do that I think there's a consensus for that okay if you go down to back where we were under C is there a consensus to remove that language where it says colors used on the exterior of the building yeah okay and then the next one is oh Teresa did you have something no I was just going to say that the first one the one that exists is more objective right because it's the color itself it's it's too you know bright if it's too the other one is is I think was clashing what was the term clash Clash course is black and white is it clashing colors that are excessive what does that mean so if it's if it's too um bright right to yeah we never we have we never had to we never had to use that nobody had ever came with a with a you know pinky pink uh you know um building I think right florescent or ultraviolet more that makes sense but that doesn't make any sense okay and then in D under natural colors they don't count some natural colors we want a list of what that is we don't know what natural colors anything could be natural colors so it says natural M I'm sorry natural materials unpainted materials such as brick and stone do not count as colors so we want to know what natural materials are so we've asked them to provide um a list of natural materials ldcc also um provide a consensus on that as well makes sense okay so there's a consensus on that yes okay and then the next one um page 11 where it starts off this at number five number of roof modulation elements we want um to keep five and six um so the question that we had as staff is do we really want roof lines with no character if we require no roof modulation this one is removing the roof modulation it will be difficult in requiring buildings to provide architectual element um and then we also have a comment it says I've read the revisions to this section a little differently the consultant retained the design intent for the roof modulation section but removed the enforcement metrics are we no longer interested in regulating roof modulations um do we rather inform and hope for the best so the ldcc provided consensus to keep the language and add language to allow for um they wanted to allow for flat roof without pitch roof and give the flat roof options on how to articulate as well so um we wanted to keep the language the Jus is that we want to keep the language and improve upon this language by adding um an option for a flat Ro is I'm good with that y y okay I have two more slides one more after this one so the next one is going to be um 8.6 parking garage standards this one um talks about all future parking garages this is parking garage shall comply in their design to the maximum extent with the guidelines and you'll see Aesthetics you'll see um um garage Corners that are visible to the public realm she'll be treated with architectural features including screening and then um you'll see three the guidelines shall apply to parking garages multiple levels parking decks so ldcc well staff um comment was what about parking garage is not attached to a principal structure um the consultant states that a provision of the code requiring architectural features and screening for parking garages but remove the enforcement metrics in the current version of article 8 to enable regulation of the section do we want parking garage standards to be informative guidelines or measurable standards so we ask that they put language from existing article 8 into this section for parking garage standards the ldcc consensus that massing articulation Etc should apply to parking garages so we want to include those um standards as well I agree y I'm okay with that so we want something measurable so we want to put that language in there okay so LPA agrees okay so on page 12 B access requirements parking garages shall meet the following requirements and then it says parking garage shall be accessed from side streets or alleys unless no such access is available then the number of location of access points these are all new um the location the number and location of access points shall be determined during the site plan review generally parking garages shall be served by more than one access point unless determined to be unfeasible by the city engineer three pedestrian entrance to parking garage shall be accessible directly from the street Frontage then four um we deleted requirements including slope and grade are determined by the engineer in standards manual because it's um see all other design requirements of article 8 shall apply in addition to those listed in the section so the comments was what happens when there's no Street Frontage should it be better to say that pedestrian access has to be provided from the garage and then are there requirements applicable to a parking garage massing articulation and then um our engineering department says engineering standards manual does not have guidelines requirements for parking garages so that's why number four was deleted so these are all questions from staff to the app to the consultant so you don't have answers yet for that one cuz like one about the access to the garage I can see having Street Frontage if it's on a street but if it's not yeah you got to have access somewhere just not in a back corner in Alleyway or you know what you know so these are all questions for the consultant not necessarily that we need consensus from the board but we will ask the consultant this okay and this is it for article 8 yay all right very good so we are going to we're proposing to have um a work session joint work session between LPA and ldcc um we're going to try to schedule it we're hoping for next month and one it's going to be um a joint meeting on not just the ldcc I mean Land Development code but also on Regulatory takings and development extractions exactions sorry so we want to have that conversation with both boards so we're going to try to schedule that for next month August okay August Yes sounds good all right yep entertain a motion to adjourn motion to adjourn second all right so then should we leave these on or do you want us to close these or we just close them than thank you you [Music]