City Council Special Called Meeting Transcript – 05/31/2017 Title: ATXN 24/7 Recording Channel: 6 - ATXN Recorded On: 5/31/2017 6:00:00 AM Original Air Date: 5/31/2017 Transcript Generated by SnapStream ================================== [1:10:43 PM] >> Mayor Adler: All right. It is 1:10. Today is may 31, 2017. We're this the boards often commission room. We have two hours here to talk about codenext. The mayor pro tem laid out a -- kind of a schedule for us week. I really preach you taking the laboring for that for us. We've tried to react to it this morning with something else that's been handed out. I would suggest that this morning we actually try to get substantively involved in this and that we start with the substantive things listed here on the 31st, which are the same on both of these. And rather than spend the next 20 minutes talking about scheduling that we try to move that to the bulletin board. I know that Leslie's office has also sent in some things to take a look at. I think each of us may have separate concerns on kinds of priorities or what needs to come up first and early based on what we're seeing early from the community. But while we have the consultants here, maybe it makes sense for us to get into the substantive things as quickly as we can and if we have time at the end to deal with scheduling or if not move that to the message board. >> Kitchen: I'll respect what you are saying. I think that makes sense. One quick note. I brought forward the concern about infrastructure needs and planning and I might not be available on June 20th. So I would ask that the infrastructure needs and planning just be moved to another day. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. I think that probably can be easily accommodated, we can get it on the bulletin boardment thank you, by the way. Mayor pro tem. >> Tovo: Thanks. I just want to if I could offer a few brief comments about context here. [1:12:47 PM] Please note and this is on the back of mine, unfortunately the explanation of the asterisk ended up on the second page, but we have certain codenext meetings already scheduled. Some of these that are on my proposed schedule were not schedule. They either carve automaker some time out of the work session or add one toward the end on a Monday. So that's just something I think we'll need to think about. I did, though, try to be attentive to the space of time so on a work session day where we would only likely have an hour at the most if we all agree to carve out that time, I tried to put in topics that I thought could work within an hour. For example, in moving the topic that you just mentioned, councilmember kitchen, we'll need to be mindful of that and swap out something done recently -- it's not a matter of switching the 21st and the 20th, in my opinion. Maybe we can accomplish this, but I just think -- I just want to make it clear that I tried to look at what was on the -- what was on the message board so this does incorporate the suggestions from councilmember kitchen and councilmember pool, and as I indicated in my message board post, I was not able to incorporate all of the mayor's questions, but in looking at it I think all of them are contained in the topics that I had listed. So I think there was overlap with the mayor, even though I hadn't seen it before I dropped it in the schedule. That's not to say these are the only topics. I just tried to use -- and councilmember alter, I tried to use councilmember alter's kitchen and pool and triage them really. So these are, again, not all of the codenext topics, but I was trying to hit the ones I'm hearing most from the community. So that's -- you know, that gets to how it was structured [1:14:48 PM] and a couple of points of discrepancy relate to that so hopefully we'll have a chance to talk about it toward the end. Again I think they are pretty closely aligned. >> Mayor Adler: And there were a couple issues that I wasn't sure if they were contained within yours or not. They may have already been. And if they were different, I put them on the day that looked like it was most related to it, but I didn't feel comfortable taking anything off in order to make space for it because I didn't want the [inaudible] Suggestion to leave the page. So I erased nothing when I went from yours to mine so something wouldn't be lost, but certainly we can look at it and juggle times and days. I'm available for each of the Ater to risked days and I think that it is a good use of our work session recognizing it's going to be hard as we go into council meetings this week if we could actually take an hour and dedicate, I think that's a really good idea and I would support that as well because I think that's really topical and I think people are looking for these sessions to daylight issues and watch them. So I think it's real good use of the time. The laws one is the one I would point out in particular because that's not a work session. That's the week after our last council meeting. Our council meeting is the prior Thursday so people may have been going to the wind on the last week of June. I'll be here that Monday, that's a Monday. Leslie first, then back to miss kitchen. >> Pool: Thanks. I just wanted to touch on something you may have mentioned in your message board posting, mayor, and that is we're not using these -- and you may plan to expand on this topic, but our intention in having these meetings and discussions is to daylight the issues but not to achieve any agreements or decisions or anything. Is that right? That's what you are looking for? >> Mayor Adler: We're not going to be able to decide and [1:16:49 PM] these really aren't policy because there's clearly not enough time to do that, nor do I think this is the right time in the process to be doing that. Let's let the citizens groups work and the boards work. There will be plenty of time and plenty of policy issues that come back to us. As I see as we have discussed it collectively is to daylight issues. And if people are in the community and we see suddenly everybody is asking this kind of question, then let's ask it here while we have the consultants so that everybody can see what that answer is. So it's to kind of to daylight issues or concerns, to discuss conceptual approaches and to highlight areas that we can do work on. I think we're all kind of rolling up our sleeves recognizing this thing is not perfect and right at this point, that it still deserves a lot of work. I really appreciate most of the community being engaged that way and if it -- if it doesn't do something it's supposed to do, say hey, it's not doing this well. This is how it should be tweaked in order to get that done and let's get all that back to the consultants. >> Pool: There was one item listed on here I'm not sure we have the backup or the information from staff yet to take up and that's the time lines. >> Mayor Adler: We'll talk about that for a second. We'll probably pick that up again next week, but let's discuss it at a high level and bring something next week. Ann. >> Kitchen: I'm putting my note on the message board and just wanted to know that I think the infrastructure needs and planning deal with the flooding issues, but I don't think we can do it in an hour. I'm making a suggestion on the message board about how we switch them out. >> Mayor Adler: Okay, good. Okay. Greg. >> Casar: Just to be clear, on the message board the top scheduling issues and any suggestions for topics, those [1:18:51 PM] sorts of questions, both of those. Thanks. >> Mayor Adler: Schedule and topics both. If my office is watching this, which I hope somebody is, let's go ahead and post on to the message board the schedule that was handed out on the dais so that's also on the message board. Okay? All right. Let's -- let's bring up the consultants and staff and let's talk about the analysis. As you start, there are two things I would want you to hit and let's see if other people want to kind of outline quickly. One is just generally speaking how the envision tomorrow is that tool and how is that tool being used here. And then I will tell you that I was at a community meeting where some handed to me a copy of a work sheet that looked like an even vision tomorrow work sheet, and it indicated in a column that under scenario 1, I'm not sure what scenario 1, there was $10 billion in improvements that were going to be torn down. And I'm concerned about that number. I want to understand that number better. So the broad questions, but if you could also specifically address that. It seemed curious to me because seemed part of that was rmdr and I'm real confused by that and I think other people in the community are concerned about that too. Any other general questions we want them to hit in our discussion about the envision -- yes. >> Pool: I've got a number [1:20:52 PM] of in the weeds questions so I'll wait until after Alex makes his presentation, but I want to start on something a bit higher level that we can talk about maybe right after his presentation and that is how this information was released to the public. Because I understand it was released to the public before it came to any of the citizen boards so I would like to talk about that. >> Mayor pro tem. >> Tovo: I apologize if you've already mentioned this, but I think the other piece of data from the envision tomorrow analysis, scenario 1 that I am hearing discussed a lot in the community, the rate of -- is the total number of displacement of individuals displaced. Envision tomorrow scenario. And so I certainly want to make sure we touch on that today. That's staggering. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. >> Kitchen: Mr. Mayor, one quick comment. I think it would be important as we have these discussions about codenext that we understand the context that we're having the discussions in from a policy perspective. Because I know that we will be asking a lot of detail questions which we obviously need to ask and as a community we need to understand the responses to, but I would like for us also to understand what we're trying to accomplish from a policy perspective about particular topics. So I'm thinking as that's appropriate our consultants to that -- that discussion as a council we can speak to that. I think it helps us from a decision- making standpoint. We're not making decisions today, I accept that, we established that, but I think it helps us understand the why. What are we trying to accomplish here when we're talking about any particular aspect of a codenext change. My concern is if we don't stay [1:22:52 PM] grounded in what we're trying to accomplish, that we will lose sight of our goals. And from my perspective as we get into the weeds, you know, over the next ten months, year, whatever the process is, we will have to make decisions like we always do about tradeoffs. So in order to understand what decisions make as a community without tradeoffs we have to understand the why and we have to understand what we're trying to accomplish. I just wanted to kind of lay that out there, and I will try to do my part from my perspective and others have different perspectives, but to continually come back to the what is it that we're trying to accomplish. >> Mayor Adler: Sounds good. Are we ready? Guys, I turn it over to you. Introduce yourself. >> Alex Joyce, [inaudible] Team. I want to touch on what envision is and how it was used, but I first want to pleadly address the confusion around the spread sheet that was released to the public and look forward to the conversation on how that can be done differently the next time. It's a mountain of information and it's like drinking from a fire hose. So I'm -- to folks trying to learn their way through the information and I welcome the opportunity to help contextualize the data. We have provided an updated spread sheet and I hope it was live at some point to clarify so it provides much more descriptive headers for what people are seeing in those columns because it isn't accurate to say that envision is causing 140 some thousand displacement or that the code is. That is a measure of how many people are in areas that were colored with anything in the zoning map. It's just a summation of people and value of -- that was underlying the zoning map. [1:24:54 PM] I hope we can get clarity on that. And I hope it's clearer now, but I also look forward to more indepth conversations about the particulars. So those numbers were -- about displacement and the headers have been updated so that it's easier to understand. We can talk about that as well. It is essentially a -- it's a calculator. It's a complex calculator that helps communities understand the implications of growth patterns. When we talk about zoning, we're talking about growth patterns. So if the official way we have used envision tomorrow is in scenario planning. So we don't have one vision of the future, but we felt out multiple visions of the future and when -- test out, and when you lay out a use over here, land use over here, what does that mean. It helps contextualize what that means and quantify what different types of growth pattern mean. Toker the process each of the police types are actually zoned types. Those zoned types are form based, use based and one -- so each zone allows a certain range of buildings, a certain range of uses. That that are built using one of the tools in envision, they are then combined to create the zone types. Because Zones allow multiple types of buildings, multiple types of uses. The Zones then when they are applied by the humans, right, by the consultants, by the staff, when they are applied and when they are used means quantitatively. It's important to understand envision doesn't have a goes on my map, goes on my city button. It doesn't automatically produce a zoning map. It is used as a tool to understand what the implications of a zoning map [1:26:54 PM] that are created by humans. And to quantify things like housing capacity. To get an estimate of what are the likely housing capacity that we're creating with a given zone map. So it doesn't create the zone map for you, it just tells you things about the zone map that you give it. That's an important distinction. I think that may be confusing for some folks so I wanted to clarify that. So it's not a predictive model in that way. >> Mayor Adler: Mayor pro tem. >> Tovo: I'm not sure I'm understanding what you are saying. I think most people look at the analysis and think it's an analysis of the draft code. I don't think -- I'm not -- is that indeed what it is? >> That is -- it's an analysis of the housing capacity estimates created by the draft map which you see. >> Tovo: I just wanted to clarify because I haven't heard any members of the community who thought envision tomorrow -- that the envision tomorrow analysis was doing what you've described, creating -- that you could push -- I just want to be clear because I see some of the community members here who have been -- who are aware of it and I want to be sure -- it seems to me the people I've been hearing from who have been looking at the analysis understand it correctly, that it is an analysis of the draft code as presented. >> Okay. >> Mayor Adler: I think people are applying that, but I saw the line that seemed to purport to say there were 140,000 people that were being displaced. And what you're saying is despite that column medder, that means there were 140,000 people living in the area -- >> That had been mapped. Not a measure of redevelopment. So it was incorrectly defined in the header and we've fixed that so it's clear what it is, but also provided some notes and context for each of the [1:28:55 PM] columns around it so people understand clearly what they are looking at. >> Mayor Adler: Have we posted the revised map with the headers fixed? Have we posted that? >> Has it been posted? >> I made the request this morning. I'm not sure it's actually up on line yet, but we would take down the prior spread sheet and replace it and I've asked for both memo that you have in your possession and the spread sheet to be posted. >> Pool: So I want to ask some specific questions. So Mr. Joyce, I have a printout of some of the pages and it talks about a redevelopment rate, which you define as the percentage of the underlying land that is assumed to redevelop. Hence people's expectations that people would be displaced. And then you have the under built rate also known as abandonment rate, the percentage of underlying housing units that are assumed to disappear over the forecast horizon, and I think it is entirely understandable how people could have been completely undone by this document. So two questions specifically. What was the calculation that came up with a 35% redevelopment rate of a t5nss as an example, and how did it get released to the public in such form? >> Sure. So the question about abandonment rate, that is not applicable to this process. >> Pool: This is on the document that was posted. Why don't we talk about that first. Let's talk about how this was released and what happened. >> Mayor Adler: But I do want to get back to the other question. >> Pool: Absolutely, but I think we need to explain to everybody why they shouldn't be taking this literally. >> So there were many requests to see the underlying data that were made. [1:30:57 PM] And that was -- a decision was made to be very transparent. About all of the documentation. I think without context it's hard for people to understand this, and I completely agree with you that there is context necessary. >> Pool: So -- >> Mayor Adler: How did it go out with the wrong headings? Why weren't the headings fixed before they went out? >> So the headings aren't necessarily wrong in the sense that for many communities where we work there are complex urban issues, one of which is things like abandonment. We work in Cleveland and they have issues of abandonment. This is a tool built for use across the country. There are certain things relevant to the process we're using today, there are certain things that we're not taking advantage of, not using part of this process T context of what's relevant and isn't is really important and I agree with you -- >> Pool: I just want to get to an answer. And I would posit that the consultants don't post information. So let me turn to our staff and ask Mr. Guernsey. >> So we were asked to provide the data that was used by the consultant in the envision tomorrow tool. And so we asked -- >> Pool: And who requested? >> Many different people from the public. So in an effort to get that out, we contacted Alex and frank, he provided information and we put that out on the web so everyone would see the data that was used. That's correct, there was not an explanation, but we have been talking with Alex about getting some explanation of what that data means, which has kind of resulted in the memo that we received and you have in your possession and I gave that to the boards Z.A.P. [1:33:00 PM] Planning commission. The -- hopefully that will be posted today with the revised labels and headings. >> Pool: So it was released to the public, to members of the public before it was then released -- I think the mayor pro tem had asked for the data as well and I know I had been looking for it too. >> I think we released it to everybody simultaneously in that sense. We had a request, we put it online so everyone can see it. >> Pool: Okay. And that's fine and we can talk about processes and releases and stuff separately. So then if you could explain where you come up with, for example, the t5n show a setback of 35% redevelopment rate. >> Sure. Just to fully clear the air on the issue of abandonment, so the issue is that that -- the abandonment rate is not relevant for Austin. There's not.ment happening, there's growth happening. So what we talk about is under build. There are several ways capacity is estimated using a tool like envision. It is the amount of area a zone or Zones are painted on, to is acreage, the where, then there's the what, so what is allowed within each zone, the types of buildings, the intensity of the buildings. Those are represented in the draft zone map that you have. That's the where and that's the how much. And then the what, the quantitative of what you can build in each zone is represented in the draft code text. And envision is an attempt to bring those two things together to understand what does it mean quantitatively. Does that make sense? There's not a whole lot of mystery, and I'll get there, about the redevelopment rate and envision. It's the buildings you can build in the Zones, applied on a map. The other part of it is trying to understand zone by zone what are the likely either development or redevelopment [1:35:01 PM] rates for a given zone. So in Austin you have a lot of areas that are vacant today, and within a certain time it's not estimated every square inch of vacant land in Austin is going to be developed. So we need to make assumptions about what percentage realistically of those vacant areas do you anticipate developing. That's the under build. In areas where there's already something built and you are applying a zone and trying to understand, well, how much redevelopment can we expect in a given area for a given zone, that's the redevelopment rate. And if you look at the underlying buildings that are in each one of these Zones, not each zone is created equal. There are Zones that have much higher value buildings in them because they are taller, denser buildings, then there are Zones where there are smaller buildings and on a per acre basis they have a lower value. A single-family home doesn't have the same value as a highrise. That's intuitive. The redevelopment rates are scaled in such a way to account for the relatively value in -- anticipated in each zone. >> Pool: So you could translate 35% to an increase when the cost of someone moving out of the lower value housing unit into the higher value housing unit, size, you know, -- so then you could put a dollar figure on the new build is more expensive than the existing housing. >> That's not what it's saying. What it's saying is that relative to the other Zones, it has about this much redevelopment potential. So at the top end of the Zones there are downtown Zones that have a relatively high redevelopment rate, there are Zones like the single-family type Zones that have no or almost no redevelopment rate. Within that spectrum the higher intensity Zones are logically expected to have more ability to redevelop the [1:37:05 PM] lands on which they were mapped versus the lower intensity Zones have very little. >> Pool: How did you determine those percentages? >> Looking at the value of the buildings within those Zones -- >> Pool: You are not talking dollar value, you are talking size value. >> No, we're talking dollar value. Trying to understand what do we -- in the areas where these are mapped, do we anticipate there being a lot of redevelopment or a relatively little amount of redevelopment. Based on what's there today and the relative value of the new. >> Pool: So we have an interest in corridors. Did you apply this specifically on the corridors or -- it looks like you applied it across the city. >> Well, each zone has a redevelopment rate. It may be zero, it may be something larger than zero. Many of the Zones are only applied on corridors. >> Pool: Right. >> So those Zones that are only applied on corridors have a redevelopment rate of whatever -- whatever corresponds to that zone. I hope that answers your question. >> Pool: I don't know. I'll give up the mic and let somebody else go after it. I think we might need an individual presentation on this at some point. >> Mayor Adler: Ann. >> Kitchen: So getting back to my trying to understand the bigger picture, if I'm understanding correctly, and I think this is what councilmember pool might be -- I think where you may have gotten to just a minute ago, but basically this is a tool to help us start to use codenext zoning. So in other words, we can zone all day and put stuff on a map, but that doesn't relate to reality in terms of what the market will do. So if we're thinking in terms of where -- as councilmember pool was asking, if we're taking our next step and we're thinking in terms of where we [1:39:06 PM] might want to plan for investing, say, along corridors or investing transportation infrastructure or housing infrastructure or other kinds of infrastructure, this is just a tool to help us understand where in the city that might make sense because where in the city we might expect to have the market forces also redeveloping. So relative to other parts of the city. I guess what I'm trying to get why in the world are we doing this envision tomorrow tool in the first place. That's what I think we're trying to get to what it's useful for. >> Let me answer the last question. I think one of the ways we thought it would be useful is try and understand whether the city of Austin is going to be able to meet in a reasonable way the housing goals for the city. Right? So understand quantitatively the way it -- the Zones are mapped and the nature of what you can do in each one of these Zones, what does that add up to and does it get us close to or not close to our housing aspirations for the city. The question where something might happen from a market perspective, those are sort of the lenses through which the team of humans, consultants and staff, looked at the city of Austin when we were understanding what might [inaudible]. That's not envision. It's understanding where do we have imagine Austin policy, where do we have a lot of desirable -- desirability today, where do we have a good connective street grid, corridors that are already zoned and seeing development activity. What are the sandwich of different mappable criteria that we can use during the mapping itself. But that's not an even vision thing, but it do -- it is related but isn't coming out of envision. [1:41:06 PM] >> Kitchen: So the envision is focused on the development, redevelopment or under development, which is directly related to housing. >> Right. It's trying -- >> Kitchen: As opposed to the streets. >> Right, yeah, it's trying to understand and quantify housing being generated by the map and the code combined. >> Kitchen: Okay. So it's a tool primarily to help us consider how close we can get to our housing goals. >> That is the way it's been used in this process, yes. >> Kitchen: Okay. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Mayor pro tem. >> Tovo: So I think -- I mean one of -- one of the things I'm really trying to extract data about from this analysis, as are lots of community members, has to do with redevelopment and the extent to which is housing projections rely on assumptions that areas are going to be redeveloped. And I've asked some pretty targeted questions through the question and answer process, which I hope we can revisit at some point today so that we know when that's going to be online and available to the public to view, but I have submitted a question. We also when you laid out the mapping, we talked about can we get numbers based on district. But there is a standing council resolution that we passed I think in December or in January that asked for an analysis of the code with regard to redevelopment and loss of -- potential loss of nonsubsidized house you go, so there may be some data in this chart, in this analysis that helps shed light on that. So I'm -- I guess I'm still not understanding what you're saying about redevelopment because I'm looking at the columns say, for example, population in polygons assumed to redevelopment this the time horizon. Look ago the the t3 categories, that looks like a thousand plus 3 the 4 plus 4394, plus 2468 plus five. Can we not add those numbers [1:43:07 PM] together and assume those are the expected redevelopment numbers within t3 or is that a mislabeling of the column? >> If you are looking at the most up to date spread sheet, which I'm not sure you are -- >> Tovo: I'm looking at the one that's posted so I think we've agreed it isn't. >> As I understand -- it has been posted. >> Tovo: Has it replaced what's up there? I would suggest we not replace what's up there because people will want to compare and understand what the difference is. Is it just a label that was supposed to be on column D that ended up on column B or are you fundamentally changing the calculations that were used in producing this data? >> So it's a semantic issue. So the way that it works there is a set of columns that says these are all of the people that are in areas that you have mapped. Just people today. Not -- they are not changing, that's just -- so you understand that under the areas you have mapped, because in a typical process we're not painting the whole city, we're painting a scenario which may be a parcel here, parcel here, parcel here. But in this process we have a zoning map which covers the whole city. So it's quantifying all the people that live on parcels that are underlying anything that's been painted a color. And in this case for Austin for this example, everyone lives under a color because the zoning is a citywide process. So it's quantifying all the people that are touched by a zone. And then there's another set of columns where we do try to estimate based on the redevelopment rate how many households or jobs may be redeveloped in a time horizon given the redevelopment rate that we're assuming. >> Tovo: And so what column -- okay, so the column I just read then is just looking at total population, [1:45:08 PM] total housing units within those various categories. >> Right. >> Tovo: So which is the column, again I'm not sure which chart I'm looking at, I think I have a download of the other, but whatever is online, what's the column that would tell me expected redevelopment rate. >> Let me gate on -- get on the same page. So on the on what was posted online would be if you look at column ab, housing units and polygons assumed to develop -- column ab. You see in the entire city you see, you know, 22 some odd thousand. Okay. Are you tracking with me? >> Tovo: Yeah, housing -- uh-huh. Yeah, for some reason I don't have labels but I see that column. >> Column ab and that relates to, scroll to the right, column bd, new housing units. Which in this estimate is 162,000. And so with redevelopment occurring, you're getting a roughly six to one, you know, assumed replacement rate on average, right? Like for every unit that may be -- and this is just an estimate -- that may be redeveloped, you are getting six new units citywide. >> Tovo: So is the estimate of those units that would be redeveloped 22ish thousand? So your scenario 1 assumes that 22,000 units will be redeveloped? >> Could be. It's not -- >> Tovo: I know there's no certainty, but if we're looking for the number of estimated units that could be demolished and redeveloped. >> Cluck ab. >> Tovo: That number is [1:47:09 PM] somewhere between 22 and 23,000. >> That's correct. And then the new units are in this version of the map, which is the map posted online, is 162,000 new. That's gross new. >> Tovo: And so if I'm looking at the new data which I think I may be since it corresponds with the numbers you are talking about, this data is identical to what was up there before, but -- but labeled -- but the column for total units is labeled differently? Or have there been changes in the data? I just haven't had a chance to compare both. >> Yeah, that's a good question. So the way that the under build rate was used has been changed in those sets of columns because this is an accurate reflection of the assumptions and envisions, what you are looking at is an accurate reflection of the assumptions. >> Tovo: So you have changed the calculations, you have changed some of the assumptions? >> Because this was reflecting farther to the left and it was not accurately reflecting the column header. That's what I was explaining. There's a -- this is not a column farther to the left. So this is an accurate reflection of our estimate of redevelopment. In these columns with the new headers. >> Tovo: I think I'm going to have to sit down with the old data set and new data set and link them up as will the community members who are doing the analysis and communicating with us. It's not -- it's still annuity clear whether we're just talking about a header change or whether some of the basic assumptions that under girded your analysis have changed. >> The formula in the column has changed because it wasn't reflecting what the header said and I changed the formula so it was reflecting our [1:49:11 PM] estimates of redevelopment. It was just reflecting everyone living in areas mapped. I hope it's much clearer now and I apologize it wasn't before. >> Mayor Adler: Greg. >> Casar: That's helpful to understand because not that interested in a formula that calculates the population of an area. I think we could probably ask a demographer author that so it's helpful information to know 22 to 23,000 number. I think something else that was in that resolution and I look forward to likely talking about that on the 14th on this schedule is another part of the resolution asks for what the anticipated number of redevelopments and demolitions would be under the status quo if we were to not pass codenext, because it's important to me to be able to compare what the scenario is in the future. If I do something and what the their scenario is so I know what the difference that might be. In the resolution we were really trying to call out and understand that, you know, redevelopment both as demolition and as major remodel as much as is possible so that we can know, okay, if a -- if a little mf1 building gets torn down and replaced by a significant number of units what does that mean as opposed to getting building permits for a total redo or even just a major paint job that may still result in the significant up filtering of prices in that unit or in that building, because that will be helpful because I want to make sure as we go through this process we'll be hearing your projection as much as possible, your projections for if we pass codenext to what would happen if we don't so we can make those policy judgments. >> Mayor Adler: What is the hdr stand for? In the development type. [1:51:15 PM] High density residential. Okay. >> Thank you. With this 22 to 23,000 redevelopment, is there a way to map that so we know how concentrated that is in certain areas? >> Yes. There's a way to get the data especially. Each of the redevelopment rates is at the zone level. And so if you look at housing units assumed to be in polygons, column ab, and then you look at the map -- >> Alter: I'm not finding the ab. >> If you look at that column and look at by zone the number of units based on the redevelopment rate, which is [inaudible], then you can look at the map and kind of get a picture, but we can also map that for you so you know which Zones are where. >> Alter: I think that part of the reaction people are having to this data is a fear that it's happening disproportionately in certain areas. So to the extent we can understand how this is happening in certain areas and how -- that I think would address some of those concerns that people have. And so I would be interested in that both for the units that are being redeveloped and those that are the new units and also so then we can understand, you know, the degree to which codenext is mapping into our growth concept map with imagine Austin, you know, when we back out of these Zones to what we are expecting might be possible if the market were to cooperate. You know, I think that would be very useful information and I hope that either the consultants or the staff can provide that moving forward. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Yes. >> What is the time horizon with this analysis? >> This is for the housing [1:53:16 PM] capacity is ten years. >> So this is what we anticipate may be redeveloped over a ten-year period. >> That's correct. >> Flannigan: Okay. >> Mayor Adler: Define redeveloped. >> For the purposes of envision, it's pretty intuitive. It's in the partial data sat if it has a structure on it today, it's assumed to be developed. And if it what been mapped and we're assuming it has a redevelopment rate above zero, then anything mapped on those parcels that have a structure today, that's redevelopment if they change, right, and it's a probability. Redevelopment rate is not -- it's an assumption and it's just an assumed probability of redevelopment within developed parcels that have been mapped that particular color. So if you take, you know, a hdr, whatever the zone is and say of all the areas we've painted that zone, hypothetically half is currently developed and half is vacant. The half that's currently developed, whatever the redevelopment rate is is a probability that the underlying developed area could see redevelopment. It's not meant to be deterministic that this parcel, this parcel, but all of the area that have been mapped there's a probability that some X percent of them may experience redevelopment within the time horizon. To get down this to this one versus this, it's all the areas in a zone. If that makes sense. >> Mayor Adler: We have other topics too and we're going to have an hour. Let's get some time to be able to do that. We've aired a lot of the stuff here. >> Casar: The question you just asked, so the number, the 23,000, 22,000 number is not a number of units, it's a number of parcels or a number of -- >> No, no, it's units. [1:55:17 PM] >> Casar: So when you talk about a redevelop, for example in my neighborhood a nursery redeveloped into a multi-family, where is that counted? That's a redeveloped -- >> We've been focused on developments, but on cluck ak there is employment in polygons assumed to redevelop within the time horizon. We have a virtual present coded into the parcel. What jobs and housing are there today and this is our parcel data set at this point is a year old, but it's a virtual, it's a snapshot in time. As you map additional future uses, which is Zones are anticipating future uses, you want to understand, well, I'm mapping this here, I'm mapping this here, what's already there and what might be the interaction between the two, the new zone and what's there today. So for the nursery there would be employment, I would speculate on that area. There may not be housing. So you may may not see redevelopment of housing but you could see employment uses and houses if it's a mixed zone applied on that parcel. >> Casar: And that's just, of course, all based on your best guess of a particular commercial zone per a number of square feet creates a certain amount of jobs. It's not that you are figuring out the changing jobs at the active nursery as opposed to to right up the street at the Honda dealership. >> It's what loud, which is pretty general. >> Casar: So we should be looking at a column for redevelopment of commercial space and housing or mixed use or jobs and then a separate one which is redevelopment of a certain number of units, some portion of which might be units where there are folks living and some portion of which is housing which there isn't anybody there so you could have that sort of breakdown and figure out how much redevelopment is of units with folks and compare that [1:57:17 PM] hopefully to the status quo versus with codenext and start making some value judgments and thinking about the mapping with that information in mind. >> Right. >> Casar: Okay. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Allison and then Leslie. >> Alter: I just wanted to clarify for viewers because the spread sheet doesn't have the ak stuff, is this all under scenario 1? >> Yes. And there is only one scenario, one zoning map. Scenario 1 for envision, this is a template we use around the country. Oftentimes we have multiple scenarios. 1s. >> Alter: And the fact there are no children in these polygons -- >> We don't have that number. >> Councilmember, if you are looking on an iPad, you won't see the column ab or bc, but if you actually open in excel or Google sheets, on a laptop generally speaking you will see the columns. >> Alter: But the way somebody gets to it is from the different headers and they have to know to go to scenario 1 to find out where we're talking about. If you are on an iPad you won't have the a, the column letters, but you will have the other portions. Since we keep referring to it, I wanted to clarify that for the viewers. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Ms. Houston, because I skipped her. >> Houston: Thank you all for being here again. People are confused. In the community. And I'm not sure that we're clarifying a lot for them. It would have been helpful for you to do an example and just walk through that but I know we don't have enough time, but what I do want, rather than us talking about the city at large that we begin to break this down by districts so we can see of the 162 new units in [1:59:19 PM] scenario one how -- where will those be located and of the 22,000 in column ab, where are those located so that we get some sense of what the impacts gonna be by district rather than when we talk about 162,000 new units citywide. That doesn't talk about the impact that that's gonna have on some communities because it's dispersed when we talk about it citywide. But you know and I know where those units are gonna be located so let's be honest with people and show those. >> Okay. We've provided to staff a table that estimates the units by zone and council districts. So. . . That becomes available soon. >> Kitchen: Okay. I think that you've answered a lot of my questions. Just to sum up and I think councilmember alter and councilmember Houston were asking this. So let me just ask a few basic questions. So is this complete? This -- in other words, have you finished the analysis? So what we have posted is a complete analysis for vision tomorrow? >> It's a complete summation of housing, the housing capacity for the map that's online. >> Kitchen: Okay. So that answers that question. So we've been talking about -- we've kind of been talking about results but I want to connect the dots for people who are not as familiar with what we're looking at. Exactly what document and what tab should they look at to see the results? And what are the results that are in here? That would be helpful. We're talking about 23 number, talking about this, that, and the other but I think it may be difficult for people to connect the dots. It's certainly difficult for me because I'm not fully familiar with the spreadsheet. >> Yeah, I can sympathize, believe me. >> Kitchen: Maybe you can just point us -- just tell us where they get the spreadsheet. What -- you know, which tab they look at and what the [2:01:19 PM] header is that would tell them what we have as results, understanding that we just had requested these be broken down by district and that you guys have provided that and the staff will be providing that to us at some point. >> Okay. So in scenario one -- >> Kitchen: That means the tab, scenario -- >> There's tabs across the bottom of the screen when you open it in excel. I'm not sure what it looks like on an iPad. Scenario one, which is several tabs to the right, if you click on that tab, again, in excel, column bd, called new housing units, so it is, again, several columns to the right of where it would come up if you download it fresh from the internet. >> Pool: It's under housing mix. >> Yes, housing units, new housing units. So column bd. On the left-hand side of your screen, which is always there, it's locked, are what we call development types. >> Pool: It's not locked. >> Development types are in this instance Zones. So you see all the Zones listed. And then in column bd, housing -- new housing units are listed, and that is the estimate of new housing units by zone, citywide though, right? So this is the entire city. >> Kitchen: Mm- hmm. >> That I think is -- then to the left of that column are the housing units by type. So multi-family, town home, single family. So I think that's the most useful place for folks to direct their attention and understand the impacts of the code and the map. >> Kitchen: Okay. And I see under that column 162,011. >> So that's gross new housing units. It's -- so all of the new [2:03:19 PM] Zones are anticipated to generate new construction, so that's the gross number. That's all new housing units anticipated. In order to get the net number, which would be less redevelopment, you would have to understand what the total in column ab is, which is an estimate of redevelopment. Again, based on those probabilities -- >> Kitchen: What is column ab named? >> Housing units in polygons assumed to redevelopment in the time horizon. >> Kitchen: Okay. >> Kind of looking at those three columns, the place type, the -- >> Kitchen: I see it, okay. >> That would be helpful. >> Kitchen: And that total number is 22,393. >> That's correct. >> Kitchen: Okay, all right. Thank you. >> Pool: So the estimates that you have -- the estimate -- >> [Off mic] >> Pool: Can you talk, Alex, about how you got the redevelopment rate assumption? It's -- >> Sure. So the -- for each zone? >> Pool: Yeah. I'm assuming it wasn't a gut or intuition, it was observed data, and how old was that data? >> Sure. So trying to understand what's on the background today in the areas that are being mapped and -- its relative value compared to a zone assumed value, which, again, in the zone it's all new construction. >> Pool: Right. But the baseline is the existing value. Did you get that from Travis central appraisal district numbers. >> Tcad data has parcel values. >> Pool: You went to tcad. >> That's the data we're using for value, correct. >> Pool: Every time the map changes, and it already has [2:05:20 PM] a -- a number of parcels have already been updated, will this be updated? >> Yes, this is linked to any map changes. >> Pool: Okay. >> It's a direct output of the map. >> Pool: And the underlying data is from the central appraisal district? >> Tcad data is the parcel data we're using. >> Pool: That's what that is? >> Yes, Travis county assessor district. >> Pool: It's Travis central. >> Sorry. >> Pool: They make a big point it is not Travis county's agency. It's central appraisal district. >> Yes. >> Pool: Okay. >> Mayor Adler: The question Leslie was asking, the other part of her question, what about the redevelopment rate? So in the memo that's been handed out to us here that staff is posting, so that the public can get a chance to see it, it concludes with the redevelopment rates by Zones. >> Yes. >> Pool: And most of the real dense commercial ones are 50%. The t5 areas are 40%. The t4 areas are 25%. T3s are 15%. Not exactly. All the way down to the lmdr, which is at 1%. >> Mm-hmm. >> Mayor Adler: What do those numbers mean? >> Sure. Again, it's a probability. And so in the areas where those Zones have been applied, which are fairly narrow, like a lot of those Zones have been applied relative to the scale of the city, the Zones have been applied in a fairly narrow area. Those areas are also the areas experiencing the most development today, and so they're scaled relative to the zone. The higher intensity Zones are mapped in areas where you're seeing a lot of development today. So the probability of redevelopment in those areas is higher. >> Mayor Adler: Let me ask the question, then. >> Sure. >> Mayor Adler: There's redevelopments that happening right now in [2:07:20 PM] certain areas of town. If we didn't do the [indiscernible] And we were just looking at those areas, keeping existing code the same, would the redevelopment rates be different? >> Depends on the zone. It depends on the zone. Because certain Zones are more -- are easier to do redevelopment and certain Zones aren't. You see that today, right? Certain commercial Zones it's difficult. Maybe they don't allow by right residential uses, for instance, which is -- certain Zones do. It depends on the zone. You can understand redevelopment by zone. >> Mayor Adler: So is it -- >> Looking at things that like permit data. >> Mayor Adler: Are the residential Zones, are they changing substantially, different from what they would be without zoning, without this rezoning? >> I can't tell you definitely if the redevelopment rates. . . Yeah. The Zones and whether they are applied -- where they are applied also influences the redevelopment rate, right? So if you play -- let's say, for instance, you applied some of the more intense T Zones with a much broader brush across the city. The areas that you're applying them on may not have a great deal of redevelopment potential. And so that redevelopment rate would have to get dialed down. Because these -- the -- particularly the more intense T Zones are being mapped in areas that are experiencing change and desirability and development pressure, those more intensive T Zones are dialed up a little bit. And some of the residential only Zones, is that -- I'm not sure I understand your last question on that. >> Mayor Adler: I'm trying to draw kind of a relationship between -- I would imagine -- we have [2:09:21 PM] redevelopment happening in the city any how. >> Yes. >> Mayor Adler: I'm trying to figure out if the percentages in the back are reflecting the redevelopment we're already seeing or if they're representing either increased or decreased redevelopment based on the new category that's being painted on top of them. >> Mm-hmm. And it would depend by zone and I can't tell you a zone by zone breakdown of that. >> Mayor Adler: I will point out that the area that was most alarming to me when I looked at the original spreadsheet, which showed that 5 billion of the $10 billion in reduced improvement value torn down improvement value was in the lmdr line, which is showing a 1% redevelopment rate -- >> Right. If you remember what I was saying is it was because there's a lot of the city that's lmdr today and it was mapped lmdr. So it was just summing up the value that's there today. So there's a heck of a lot of value in the city that's lmdr today and that's all it was telling you. It wasn't giving you an estimate of redevelopment. With a 1% rate you'll see the new spreadsheet has a much different number. >> Mayor Adler: Mr. Casar. >> Casar: And so I think to summarize the point that I think I'm understanding but I want to summarize it, see if I'm understanding it right, is that you aren't saying that anywhere we map t6 there's going to be a 50% redevelopment rate. If I take t6 and decide to put it on a parcel where there's no development around it and nowhere to go there's not all of a sudden a 50% redevelopment rate on that parcel? So this is a combination of what you think the existing redevelopment would be without changing the zone plus if this particular zone was on it. >> Mapped in that particular area the way the map is today, right. >> Casar: That's helpful. So, again, to the same point, right, if we put together a map of where we think there will be redevelopment under codenext it would be helpful to [2:11:22 PM] understand under the current zoning what the redevelopment expectations are over ten years so we can understand how our vote on codenext actually changes things because I would be interested to see how redevelopment is steered with our vote as opposed to without it. That would be helpful. Then the other question I quickly had is, but since you calculate the redevelopment rate based on market strength but we know there's all sorts of other constraints to redevelopment say, certain areas a large number of irregular sized lots that may bump back into setback requirements orator damage trees or things that we value in the code, you obviously didn't go parcel by parcel, went around Austin measuring the radius of our trees. So how did you account for -- did you have some sort of stand-in way of accounting for those things? >> It would just be the reduction from 100%, right? So that there's the things that factor into a redevelopment rate are time is a big one but also the fact that owner -- not every owner wants to go out and sell and redevelopment. Not every parcel is perfectly rectangle and flat. Not every currently developed parcel has an economically inefficient use. So the throttle on those environment or market is the redevelopment rate. You can throttle down the assumptions around redevelopment rate and it's not just one factor that helps you throttle those down. It's a probability based on many factors, including the presence of difficult things to deal with like slope or whatever. >> Casar: How did you factor those in for Austin in particular, understanding that we're different than the variety of cities that you've used this tool? I guess what I'm trying to figure out is beyond just -- does market strength in Austin subfor those things already? Or I guess I'm trying to understand with the peculiarities that we embrace and have, how is [2:13:22 PM] that worked into these percentages? >> So we know that in the areas that we looked at that have a high level of development activity today, not all of the parcels in those areas are regular. Some of the parcels in those areas have trees. So looking at those areas that are experiencing development, we can surmise that development activity can happen at a rate, redevelopment activity can happen at a rate, inclusive of all the peculiarities of Austin of the. >> Casar: Right. You look at permitting data on how redevelopment is happening already, that gives you -- that's kind of is your stand in -- >> Rather than looking at it from the perspective of the unique attribute you look at the areas being redeveloped and assume they have all that difficulty as well. >> Casar: Understood. I guess the difficulty is those difficulties are in the form of difficulties as dictated in the land development code now, and not necessarily the forms of buildings you are trying to have us adopt. >> Exactly. >> Casar: So I guess I know we have to get on to other points. An interesting question some folks have asked me, since you were trying to allow, for example, more housing types, does permanent data for single family tear down sun in well for -- sub in well for -- given those peculiarities, but we don't have to belabor that. I guess that's just sort of a standing question. >> Mayor Adler: I would reiterate the request to not only see the areas that are experiencing redevelopment with the code but I would imagine those would be in many respects the same areas we would be seeing the high redevelopment rate in without the code, and I'd like to be able to see those to see if something is changing. >> Pool: I think I was -- >> Mayor Adler: Ms. Alter and back to Ms. Pool. >> Alter: Thank you. I wanted to try asking the mayor's question you a slightly different way. What I'm hearing people try to understand is how much more density would happen in [2:15:23 PM] their neighborhood if they switched zoning? For instance if they go from sf-3 to lmdr or from sf-3 to t3, is this analysis able to tell us something about the increase in density over what would have been there under the current zoning? Versus the new zoning. And if so, how -- do we find that data? >> Sure. So at the very low intensity Zones, redevelopment rate is set very low, and it's not necessarily set to capture some aspiration about redevelopment. It's set because there's a natural replacement rate in any city of housing that gets old, and it's a low percentage, but it's there. Just sort of a natural churn of neighborhoods. So from an entitlement -- it's more helpful I think to look at the difference between the standards than it is this analysis. It's, like, standards I have today and the standards that I could have tomorrow, are they different? And are they different in meaningful ways? But that's the answer, right. >> Alter: And I think that's what people are struggling with, and I would like to be able to point them in the direction so that they can very clearly understand that and we can put up on the screen stuff about setbacks and do all those other stuff, but, you know, they really want to know about the density changes. For better or worse. And without the affordability and the density, you know, portion of this, it's really hard to be able to communicate that so I don't know what advice you have for us to be able to better communicate that, but those are questions that we're getting over and over again and I would like to be able to provide a better answer than what we have on our screen when we do our codenext briefings for our community that shows them [2:17:23 PM] different setbacks and, you know, the things that changed. You really have to be able to model that change in density to communicate to them what this can mean. And that -- and I don't know if you have advice on how to do that or you guys have something in the works that will help us to explain that. And then also from our perspective, I think councilmember Casar brought this up we have to vote on this and we have to be able to understand what this change means so I'd, like, to hear how we provide that answer and what that acceptance. Answer is. >> Kitchen: Could I insert in answering just a quick question as part of her question, let's define density also, because I think that people use the term "Density" differently, so I think every time we talk about it it would be helpful. I apologize for intervening, councilmember alter, but I just wanted to -- I wanted to make sure we're all on the same page when we talk about what density is because I have found that people are meaning different things when they talk about it. >> Could be scale, it could be units yeah. Do you want to talk a little bit about -- >> Sure. Just to go back to the question about modeling and seeing the modeling. One of the things that we're getting from the work schedule that y'all have proposed is that you'd like us to come back and talk about mcmansion, particularly showing modeling particularly of compatiility, modeling particularly of t3, t4, lmdr, just in terms of the line items I see on June 6, June 7, June 13. So we would be prepared to talk to y'all about those on those dates and have images to talk with you about. >> Alter: I think that those images and modeling are posted on the message board as well, that ability to see it in 3D is really important for us to be able to digest what's being proposed and for the community to understand that. So I'm very much looking [2:19:23 PM] forward to seeing those models, and I appreciate you taking our suggestions to do that seriously. And I very much look forward to seeing them. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: My hope is that if we get it both ways, if we get the redevelopment by area or by district or by zone with the old code, in other words, what is anticipated then and then we have it with the code we'll at least be able to see from this modeling what the delta is because I think that's the question that the community is asking, and we're asking, what is the delta on redevelopment? Old code, existing code, versus new code. >> Alter: Mr. Parks seemed to have an answer. >> I think just to follow up with councilmember kitchen's question about the density, right, density and modeling and scale sometimes these things get all mixed together. So when we talk about density, we're really talking about units, units by some measure, units per acre typically, right? How many units are allowed in the new zone district per parcel, which then, you know, you can multiply and define what is the overall density potential? We don't apply -- we don't usually talk about density when we're talking about modeling of form, which is the three-dimensional modeling I think that you're talking about of understanding how the proposed dimensional standards for a building on a parcel, right -- what the overall sort of massing or volume of the form could be compared to your current zoning. Right? So I think in terms of the modeling that we're talking [2:21:24 PM] about on the form, it's three-dimensional diagrams depicting how do buildings -- how big can buildings be on a site today compared to how that could be done in lmdr, sf-3 and so forth. When we're talking about density or modeling density, the modeling of density really is the quantitative modeling in a way that the counts that we're talking about in terms of units. >> Mayor Adler: Of units, not mass. >> Yeah, yeah. >> Alter: Accept that in the models that I've seen that came out of folks from the cag, which I think were one of the inspirations for moving forward with these models, the two of them are linked in how you understand what happens. >> That's true, that's true. >> Alter: So I don't think it's one or the other. Without that picture of the mass and volume, coupled with the number of density, number of units measures -- as a measure of density, you won't understand what the implications are of what we're proposing. >> So -- right. And, again, when we talk about density we're using it as a relative measure of indent, right? When we're dealing with a lower scale densities, a duplex, Adu or single unit on a lot, it's not so much -- I mean, you could relate it to density, but it's really trying to understand how does this many units get accommodated on a parcel and how do the form controls deal with that? Again, one of the principal ideas of the form-based approach -- and it's part of the proposal in this [2:23:24 PM] draft -- is shaping the form of buildings as they are allowed to get developed on sites to be contextually based, to be sensitive to existing character of existing neighborhoods and, where possible -- or when desired, allow for some gentle increases in the number of units that could be allowed that also maintains the character of neighborhoods. In other words, there's oftentimes the binary kind of presumption that increasing density automatically changes neighborhood character in significant ways. And in fact what we can do actually is you can accommodate growth and add -- technically add some density and also preserve character and also provide more affordable housing. A number of multigoals. So rather than being always positive as you get this for this, this either or proposition, what the transect Zones, do and they -- this is why we use them in a lot of places, is they allow us to dial in the form characteristics to the character-wristing neighborhoods that you're trying to protect and preserve and also simultaneously allow some gentle accommodation of future growth. >> Mayor Adler: -- See a lot of that on the sixth, seventh, 13th which you talk about modeling. I would add when you talk about that there are some modeling or design or sketches that I see as I go out into the community that some folks have done to help illustrate some of the concerns or possible [2:25:24 PM] challenges with what's happened. I know let's get them -- if there are particular designs that we see coming up in our districts or our community meetings, let's get them to staff and the experts and say please respond to this drawing and let's put up those drawings and let's have them talk about the drawings that we're seeing out in the community as well as part of that. Ms. Pool. >> Pool: I'd like to go to the development type building mix tab on the form, and I see -- I don't know what the column designation is by letter because I don't have it on my iPad but it's average density by employment type so I was curious, retail office industrial public, educational, et cetera, where did those numbers come from for each of the different Zones? >> For employment. >> Pool: Average density by employment type, yeah. >> Yeah. Okay, so for each of the Zones, there are allowed building types. Each of those building types is listed from left to right in this particular tab on the top. Within each of those buildings are assumed uses. >> Pool: Where did those assumptions come from? >> The assumptions around uses are allowed in the Zones. >> Pool: Where did you come up with under office 120.198 for t5, Ms. How did you arrive at that number? How did the calculation come up? What's the underlying formula? >> Sure. So within a given building, you have residential area and you have employment area, and there are common employee per square foot figures that are used to generate an estimate of employees that might be in a given building type. >> Pool: So it doesn't necessarily tie back to t5? >> No, no, because the zone doesn't regulate employees you can have, just square footage. >> Pool: This is an intuition based on [2:27:25 PM] assumptions that have been used -- >> Right. >> Pool: As a tool and standard previously? >> Exactly, so they're based on census information that talks about how many square feet per employee is typical in a given use. >> Pool: Okay. So I think that would be really helpful throughout all of this is if you add the word "Estimate" throughout at the top of the columns, estimated average density, and then have footnotes that tie back to a link where it goes to the census, which is pretty old and decrepit and I think councilmember Houston was also talking about this. This looks like this is reality when in fact these are assumptions based on calculations and formulas and somebody put it together and used it previously, and it may or may not actually reflect what's going on in Austin on any given day, especially when you are strictly looking at calculations based on census data. To that point, any other cities that have done similar projects like this when moving to form-based code? Have you tested the accuracy in the end and done a look back, say, three years later to see how things played out? What's your analysis and assessment tool that you employ for look-back on your projects? >> So we oftentimes don't get the liberty of coming back three years later and doing that kind of assessment but oftentimes in planning exercises they do do assessments of how well our Zones or plans performing? For instance, Denver just did a look-back on how well our -- is -- is the application of zoning according to plans doing and achieving goals relative to growth in different areas? And it was a good picture, actually. They're achieving the growth goals in the locations where [2:29:26 PM] they wanted to achieve them. >> Pool: And how does that relate to the actual zoning that was done in the process, for example -- like the point that we're at in the process? >> A lot of different ways in terms of the map. After the new code, a higher percentage of new development in Denver is occurring in the priority areas, called areas of change. We have areas of change and area of stability. So the areas along corridors, along transit, areas assigned as areas of change are seeing a higher rate of development, significantly higher rate of development compared to areas of stability. After the code. >> Pool: And areas of stability would here be neighborhoods? >> Generally areas of stability in Denver are those areas that -- doesn't mean redevelopment doesn't happen in them. It just means when development happens it doesn't change significantly the character of the place. So it's often misunderstood in Denver that area of stability doesn't mean no development. It doesn't mean no change. It just means that it's primarily a single unit residential -- single and 2-unit neighborhood. If it gets redeveloped, it's single and two unit. It's not eight unit, 20 unit high rise, right? And areas of change are identified, for example, formerly in the plan was an industrial area that is an area of change because there will be a new transit station there and so it's come -- contemplated to change from single use industrial to mixed use modern density. So still, again, after the new code was adopted, there was a significant change in more growth happening in those prioritized areas because we mapped a lot of those areas with the new [2:31:26 PM] zone districts. >> Pool: That's good to hear. I think that's what we're hoping happens here in our areas of change we've identified previously are the corridors and the activity centers, but not the neighborhoods. Those are the areas of stability. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. >> Pool: And then the underbuild for the lmdr looks like it drops by about 50%, which seems like a bit of an outlier. Could you talk about that a bit? >> Yeah, sure. So in a city like any city, most cities -- I can't think of a city that isn't mostly comprised by when you look on the zoning map yellow, right, single family area. It could be 80, could be 90% of your land area is comprised by single family Zones. So, like, many cities you have a lot of undeveloped land in that zone today. And so the underbuild assumption is assuming that not all of it gets developed within our time horizon. That's why it is. It's an assumption to throttle down our assumptions about of what's vacant and zoned lmdr today, what do we think could be built in the future? Right? So that's the assumption on what it's trying to account for. >> Pool: Then the lmdr would be the areas of stability that Peter is talking about? >> Yeah. So the underbuild is related to lands that are zoned but not built as anything, right? >> Yeah, the underbuild is it's not yet developed versus the redevelopment. >> Pool: Is there a better term we could use? Because that seems to encourage the building and maybe that isn't really the message -- I mean, I don't know but it is definitely a message. >> Sure. It's a term -- industry term but we could figure out some way to make it more accessible. >> Pool: Could you add estimates throughout on the envision tomorrow to make it really clear where these numbers are coming from? [2:33:27 PM] Okay. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Thank you. All right. Let's move on to -- we'll let you close. This is closing on this subject. >> Tovo: Yes. I just wanted to mention, so in our first mapping session we did ask for those numbers by district, the housing projection numbers by district, so it's great that you -- it sounds like you have that number and will be providing it. I just wanted to let my colleagues know, I did take kind of our discussion from that day and added to it and submitted it through the q&a asking for projected housing numbers by district and by zoning classification to get at the question really councilmember Houston that you're asking, I mean, if we're looking at that 22,000 redeveloped tracks are they primarily in particular areas and how can we begin to get a handle on that. I also asked for particular information about, of those units expected to be achieved through demolition and complete redevelopment, where are they? Where do they fall in relationship to our homestead preservation districts, to our residential areas adjacent to neighborhood schools, especially those like Sanchez and others that are on the target utilization plan for aid, where do they fall within national register historic districts, local historic districts and contributing property so we can start to get a handle on not just where these expected demolitions and total developments would be district by district but also in what particular neighborhoods and how they might relate to other issues of priority like our neighborhood school system and other factors. But I would just ask my colleagues, I know this isn't available to the public but I think that y'all can see it at this point, if there are other things that as the staff provide that data that they should be overlaying it would be great for you to add to that question while they're producing that analysis. As well as on that so that we can understand that number, I would like to know what the number is before we do anything. So we have 22,000 units that are anticipated to be redeveloped. [2:35:27 PM] We don't do anything in the code. Are we looking at two is now or are we looking at 18,000? I mean, I'd like to know that number as well so that we can put into context and understand what it is that we're looking at here. >> Tovo: Mayor, if I might add, I heard you say that before. I would say I think that's relevant and useful. I do think and know there are community members who hoped that the code would also, though, offer us some tools for enhancing historic preservation, enhancing the preservation of our existing housing, especially that which is non-subsidized market rate housing. While I think it's interesting to know where we would stand with regard to the status quo and demolitions, please understand that there are also, you know, some significant community support for code tools that would help us reverse the trend of, you know, huge numbers of demolitions in particular areas of our city and so we're not just asking you to -- I mean, anyway. >> Mayor Adler: No, no. 100%. The whole concept of the strike fund we're trying to develop is about preserving the mixed income units that are projected over the next ten years to disappear through gentrification so I'm 100% behind that as well. >> Tovo: Can I ask that we -- I meant to put this on the draft schedule I handed out. It's my understanding that the zoning and platting and planning commission intended to address this issue last night and weren't able to but the consultants committed to coming back on the June 13 to talk about envision tomorrow again and I know I would benefit if we have an opportunity to kind of fit it back into our schedule again. I think it would be useful for us to do so, so I throw that out there, if we can revisit this topic either on June 13 with some reshuffling or later it would seem to me to match nicely with the resolution, the response to the resolution 2017 0126. >> Mayor Adler: Let's put that on the bulletin board so people can see that. [2:37:27 PM] Everybody else should be doing that as well. Let's move on. We want to talk about process and procedure, changes in codenext. Let's do the same thing we did a second ago, let's take the first three or four members to quickly say as a council what do we want them to address with respect tow the process and procedure changes in the codenext text? You want to go -- what I've heard, I've heard some people talk about that the process is changing. I think that come Morrison had taken a look at that and I don't know if there's a summary of those -- I don't know if that's been passed around or posted that folks could see that list. Do you know if that is available? >> Tovo: Yeah. Apologies to those of you who didn't see it on the message board last night. Councilmember Morrison did go through the code and made very astute observations. They worked in collaboration with the league of women voters and the league of women voters submitted that to us a few days ago, and so I posted the time and date on the message board where we received that. I'm not remembering it now. I think it came through on Monday and, again, it came via the league of women voters and it's called public process codenext assessments and recommendations and it embraces much of the work -- all of the work that councilmember Morrison did, former councilmember Morrison, as well as I assume some other things that were -- come from the league but they worked in collaboration on that. >> Mayor Adler: Have you guys seen this list? >> Yes, I think I saw it yesterday. We got it yesterday, the email. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Are you in a place to be able to respond to those things? >> Not at this moment. But we could come back. [2:39:28 PM] >> Kitchen: Mr. Mayor. >> Mayor Adler: Yes, Ms. Kitchen. >> Kitchen: Are we all laying out what we want to address in this area? >> Mayor Adler: Yes. >> Kitchen: I know you're waiting for a question -- or do you want the response on this first or shall I -- >> Tovo: Not especially. I mean, it doesn't matter. I mean, I think there are some general comments that reoccur that I think we did -- I thought we had some understanding about addressing. >> Kitchen: Okay. Well, then, I would also just -- in addition to the detail, which I think is important to address, I would also like to understand the thinking behind the -- sort of the policy thinking, as I said at the beginning. I want to have a discussion about process in the context of what we're trying to accomplish with codenext. From my perspective, these process issues are -- what we have to -- what we have to think about is the critical importance of public input and public participation and the rights of the public to participate in decisions. We also have to understand the goal -- one of the goals of making sure that our processes are not -- our processes are streamlined sufficiently so that we have a more workable code. And to my mind -- this is just me personally -- but I has been accused of a let's make a deal city and that's something I would like us to move away from with clearly defined requirements and, where appropriate, requirements that don't allow for discretion, whether that's administrative discretion or not. So I want to have the discussion about process in that context. And to just clarify, in the context -- I don't want to sacrifice the public notice and public input right, but I also want to make sure [2:41:29 PM] we're moving towards a code where we're moving away from this let's make a deal approach as much as possible. That would be my statement of the policy underlying our discussion about processes. That may just be mine but that's my perspective on this, and I'd like to understand others' perspective on that also. >> Mayor Adler: Mr. Flannigan. >> Flannigan: I concur, councilmember kitchen. I think the deal making from the dais we find ourselves in is just not a good way to make policy. I think we all get frustrated with that from time to time and I think if we're smart about how we enable staff approvals, we can be clearer about the recommendations and even be clearer about where variances are appropriate, the size of the variouses -- variances, how much from the base is a staff approval sufficient? If we're talking about one irregularly sized lot. On a certain thing. If it's not changing the overall outcome does it really need to be spending six months running people and the community through council chambers and I think that's a substantive conversation for us to have, but I'd like to see us get away from the deal making as much as we can and create some stability both for property owners and the neighborhoods so that they can more predictably know what is and isn't going to happen. >> Mayor Adler: Yes, Ms. Pool. >> Pool: So I have a few questions around assemble, which is the -- accessibility, which is the [indiscernible] Of the codenext website and then on transparency. And that's where we post up questions so the public can read them, and some of these will be directed I guess to the consultants and some to our staff. But in preparation of that, I'm going to pass around -- and let me give a copy of this. This is an email that went to all of the council office -- to all the [2:43:29 PM] councilmembers and from one of my constituents who lives in allandale and he's a zoning chair. >> Mayor Adler: So this relates to how to make comments on the codenext process? >> Pool: Exactly. >> Mayor Adler: So let's hold that. >> Pool: Accessibility. I wanted to explain what that is that you're getting. He has spent significant time trying to post comments as per the directions from staff when he calls up for assistance and it's just not working. It doesn't load fast enough and I think he was actually directed by a staffer to go use one of the computers at a public library, which really was kind of surprising. Yeah, that was a suggestion that was made. So if you will have gotten this by email, but I wanted to emphasize the concerns and -- >> Mayor Adler: We have two different topics here. One topic is the process. >> Pool: That is transparency. >> Mayor Adler: -- Within the code itself for how things are approved or not approved, as people submit applications for development. That's the issues that were raised by what we got from Francis Mcintyre. Second issue is the -- how people are relating to the codenext process itself in order to be able to comment. And the last thing we want to touch on today is the time line, just generally, and I want to hit that even if just for two minutes. I think you're going to come back next week with kind of what the time line is. We have a time line that takes us through April. I'd like to see what happens April over the two carriers following that, and I want to -- two years following that and I want to talk about the elements of that so people understand what it is that's happening now and what it is that's happening later within the overall process. So I want to hit those. We have 15 minutes. So we can spend about five minutes on each one of these. And then probably I've learned my lesson here and I will do a better job on [2:45:30 PM] these 2-hour periods of time, 1-hour period of time in moving these conversations faster. With respect to the first one, rather than talk about specific sections or things, can you daylight at a high level, mayor pro tem, some of the recurrent issues that you were talking about? Let's talk about -- see them at a high level, see if we can do that. >> Tovo: Yeah, although I would say I think some of these are -- really are things about which we need to give policy direction because there are some instances. I think the policy items -- the process items that have been identified by former councilmember Morrison and the league of women voters are really about how things proceed through our boards of adjustment and others, and there are some very significant shifts from a public process to an administrative one that I think we really need to dig into and provide staff with some guidance about -- you know, and there are lots of specific examples here. And then there are a couple -- you know, and then there are some small things that I think could easily be struck, such as if there are errors in the notice, the procedure can move forward. Those are fairly small things, but then it moves on up to something about -- and I apologize that not everyone has this in front of them but waivers and allowable adjustments to regulations in codenext. And I believe it offers a percentage if something is off by a percentage, it can -- it can be an administrative change. And so, you know, I think those are things that we really need to talk about and dig into a little more deeply. I would suggest if we don't have time today that we take some time, look over the league of women voters and come back prepared to really dig into it but those are the ones that caught my attention. There are some shortening of time frames. Some of that has to do with the correction between calendar day and bays day which I understand staff [2:47:31 PM] have made but there are still some, for example, the allowable time for an appeal has decreased depending on what notice is required. You know, there are some issues like that that, again, I think we need to talk about, but the waivers -- the waivers and the administrative adjustments to codenext is really key for us to talk about, I believe. Things about -- and then the minor use permits would be a very major -- a major shift. And I can see accommodating that on the discussion that you've proposed about commercial uses, so maybe we can merge it there but I do think we should spend time talking about changing from a public hearing and a public process before a board to a minor -- to what is an administrative process to approve some uses that the public likes to and often wants to comment on. So I guess my overall -- my global comment would be that we take this up again another day when we've all had a chance to look at it and can really dig into those issues pip haven't had an opportunity to ask the staff. Mr. Employed, you probably were involved in drafting this section and others. I'd like to hear some of the rationale beyond streamlining, but with particular attention to those -- those process that's changed from hearings processes to administrative ones, I'd like to really hear the staff's rationale for that. >> Mayor Adler: Jimmy? >> I'm curious. I assumed that the process we were following as a in public comment and taking in concerns and then providing a second draft before we started providing policy direction. Where there's already errors identified, already been concerns and tweaks like the changing of calendar to business that maybe not all of us know is an error that's being mixed right now. I have no problem, you know, for the work being integrated into the staff analysis as they prepare the next draft but I'm a little hesitant for us to start providing policy discretion while they're still taking in the public comment and [2:49:33 PM] providing us what is ultimately a staff recommendation. Did the staff or consultants speak to when policy direction was assumed to be involved from council? >> I think actually your last work session there was some discussion about having like a separate list, I understood, that council may be talking about policy issues and would be handling that separate from what we've been talking about, clarification procedures to the existing documents. I think if there is a direction, for instance, let's say council wanted to hold -- all the parkland in the city to be public, that could be integrated probably later in the process, where we actually are going to do the maps to create that be public throughout the city, and that would be something that we could move forward on fairly easy. I know there's been direction on different pieces, but if there are specific things, specific tracts -- >> Mayor Adler: So my response to what you said and to what the mayor pro tem answered is I would need to know more about what it is that is being decided at these processes in order to be able to give any kind of direction. So going back to the comment that Ann made a second ago, to the degree that we have narrowed what is allowable and not allowable -- right now there's a universe of thins that is available to be -- things that is available to be considered which is why we end up coming back to council. My thought, goal is, and one of the things I'm looking for to come out of this code is we move to the place where we're no longer having that uncertainty. We know what it is that can be done or not done. And we don't have developers coming in and saying, but lit me do this, because the answer is that's not what that allows or neighborhoods know what's going to happen [2:51:37 PM] and victims know what's -- developers know what's going to happen. If we are successful in narrowing the scope of what could be at issue it seems to me I am more comfortable with having less time to be able to do it and letting things being decided by staff within a much more narrow range. So to me the answer to the question of how I would come down on more time or less time or more area or giving the staff discretion or not giving the staff discretion is going to depend to a large degree on what it is at issue. I understand from a really high policy level that that's the level -- that's the policy codenext team is trying to determine. Can we narrow what is at issue enough so that there is not the same level of outstanding issues or discretion being given? So for that reason, I need to see more about how this develops and what it comes back at for me to be able to approach the timing issues because I don't know the answer to that until we see more of the development of the code. But I think it is really important for us to note and to see where it is that the times are changing. Where the appeal processes are lowering. Because if we only get that but we don't get the narrowing, I have a concern. >> So, mayor and council, when we come back, we'll be making a recommendation to the commissions, land use commission, planning commission, and, and then you'll be receiving their recommendation or the staff recommendation and you'll have all of that. When we come back with that draft, too, you'll see a lot of what the staff recommendation will be embedded in that document. And if there are changes to be made, we'd certainly see some probably from the commissions and perhaps from [2:53:39 PM] council as well about to change whether it's number of days or it should go to this board and rather than this commission. So that is still coming. >> Mayor Adler: Jimmy. >> Flannigan: Just to be clear. My question is when should we be providing more policy direction as the draft develops? Is it appropriate to start setting policy direction now? Or should we be waiting for staff to complete the public input process, to talk to boards and commission brothers we start slicing and dicing a draft that may already intended to be fixed or changed in some way? >> Mayor Adler: I'm not sure there's a black and white line. We're not making any policy decisions now, and a lot of the policy decisions we're going to want the community to be able to engage in. I want to see the public debate on a lot of the policy issues that have been presented. It is okay for me, I think in this process, to have staff be able to explain what their rationale was, what their thinking was behind something. To the degree something is concerned in thinking that we're making a policy change, allowing bars to be built in the middle of neighborhoods, why did you make that policy decision, I'm fine with that being there so they can say that wasn't the intent. If we're allowing that somewhere point that out to us because we want to fix that. To the point that I think -- I think it is proper for the mayor pro tem to daylight the fact for the community to know that in many instances in this code the time for appeal is shorter. There are more things that are -- can be decided by staff. There are -- there's less of the public review process. I think it's really important for us to note that and to note that on the TV so that people can see that. And I also think that it's okay for the staff to say why it was that they were doing that, and I said on their behalf what I understood their intent was [2:55:40 PM] in trying to get there both by way of confirming that I understood what the intent was and also to lay down a marker that as we go through them we have those discussions. That's what I'll be looking for. So there's not a black and white line on this. We're not going to resolve these things. He can't go through this by section and decide whether those declines are right or -- deadlines are right or wrong, we can't do that, that's not our place right now but daylighting the issue I think is really important in talking about what is the broader values or concepts or goals I think is for us to do. Ms. Houston, then Ms. Alter and Mississippi pool. >> Houston: Mayor, I can put this on the q&a but when we talking about the alternative equivalent compliance, I have no clue what that means. Not now because we're late. And then upland Zones, upland Zones. So there are things in the text that people -- it's not intuitive what we're talking about, and if -- I'll present that through the q&a so y'all can answer it there. >> Alter: I wanted to add to your comments, mayor, that this is a really complex subject and our constituents are struggling with it, and so part of our role here is to daylight the issues. And if we're hearing over and over again questions or confusion to make sure that the consultants and our colleagues are aware of that and to be able to move that forward. Because we don't want to get all the way to the council version and then have that be the only time that we're inserting these questions and concerns. And that doesn't mean that we're making policy, but if we have this concern now, I'm still goofing that concern nine months from now if it doesn't get addressed and I'd rather we get that out in the open and find a way to address that in the staff recommendation, that's fine. But if we can't have this back and forth and we can't all 11 of us have a conversation, it doesn't -- it's -- if we wait until [2:57:41 PM] then it's gonna be too late and I think we're naive if we think that our constituents are gonna all be commenting when they have concerns. Many of them do address them to our offices, and we have a role in helping to express that. I didn't mean that to you directly. >> Flannigan: Just looking right at me. >> Mayor Adler: We'll come back to you. >> Pool: So my staff ran some tests on the changes to the days. And I just wanted to provide this to our staff so that they could have advantage of it. And adding business does help, but in a couple of instances in particular for board and commission meetings, the seven days -- business days may need to be eight business days so I'm just going to give this sheet -- >> Mayor Adler: Go ahead and do this. >> Pool: With these test runs my staff did just for the good of the cause. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Jimmy and then Ann. >> Flannigan: I'm >> Flannigan: One of the things we're hearing from the community is public comment ends very quickly and I've been issuing folks that's just for this first draft. Councilmembers are still listening, we're still going to be taking in your concerns. We have a long process. Where I got a little hesitant was if we're already providing formal direction that's where I'm less on board and mayor, I think you addressed my concern. >> Mayor Adler: Good. Ann. >> Kitchen: I think it is important. I view this like the budget process where we continually are providing some kind of feedback to our staff. And again, they bring forward their recommendation to us so I think it's appropriate for us to provide our concerns and feedback now. And I think it's important that we do that. Second thing since we're running out of time, I really want this question answered which is similar to the one councilmember pool brought up [2:59:42 PM] and that's just process. I've got a constituent that is saying to us that what they are hearing is that comments on the draft will only be taken from the online comment tool. And this person expressed the same concern that I think councilmember pool did in saying that it was difficult sometimes to use the comment tool and so this person is asking if comments will also be accepted in letter form or in some other form also. And I think we need some clarity today. >> Mayor Adler: Greg. And it's the same question here. People submit comments other than on the online tool? >> We certainly have accepted them for larger groups and like neighborhood association, stakeholders. I guess if there is a problem that they cannot access, and I actually emailed I think Mr. Shaw this morning because he -- after he had sent into mayor and council he sent me a separate email and I was going to actually look into his concern. I realize it is slow and that there have been times when it's been slow, but I didn't think it was actually broken is kind of what he described in here. So I'm hesitant just to say everybody just send in comments without putting them in in the civic because the tool helps staff sort and it's for consultants and for staff. So I'm afraid if they came in without that benefit, then I need to have staff that will physically enter into civic comment as well that procedure. But if there's a constituent that's having a problem, just like Mr. Shaw has, let's see if we can work with them to try to solve that rather than just to say everybody just I ignore civic comment because all the sorting that's available through that tool will be lost. [3:01:42 PM] >> Kitchen: I certainly understand the concern and I don't know what the middle ground is, but we do have folks that are not -- don't have access to a computer or are not going to be able to submit it online and I'm just trying to understand what's an appropriate way to handle that without, of course, you getting inundated. >> Mayor Adler: Let's do this and see what the numbers are. So they are dealing directly with this person. See if you can get that person's comments in and let's see if that gives us a way to handle that absent setting up a big rule that just will have them overwhelmed. Yes. >> Tovo: I've been asked about this multiple times too and I thought I got a different answer from staff. If you have a citizen who has done -- you know, has written eight pages of comments or whatever about different areas, I understand that organizations can submit that on their letterhead directly to staff, but if you have an individual who has done the same kind of really careful thorough analysis, it is burden some to ask them to go through and submit this comment at 231b, 23 -- it is -- I would like to see another option where -- again, I thought I had a different answer that if you have an individual that has done a kind of formal analysis with multiple comments about different areas of code that they have a mechanism for submitting that so it's contained within that. And so I really do think that we should create some kind of opportunity for that work to be considered alongside organizations as well. I mean what's happening right now is that I'm the repository for those and I would like those to get to the staff. I would just say mayor when you said what we were going to talk about the next date, councilmember Houston had asked that we talk about corrections and how and when they are being made, and to that I would like to have a conversation at our next [3:03:43 PM] session if possible about kind of the broader -- the broader discussion beyond just corrections, how and who are going to be evaluating the comments that come in. Is there a team, is it an interdepartmental team, who is making choices about what comments get contained within the revisions and which don't. I just want to call your attention to corrections need to carry over to -- and councilmember Houston had some specific direction I think for that piece and then I had some broader. >> And we're updating now so those comments that come in that we see are obvious that need to be corrected, we're trying to put those online so people can see those. >> Tovo: But anyway, if we could figure out what email address people could use to get like the seven pages of very specific comments, that would really be helpful. >> It's up online now and we'll continue to update that. >> Mayor Adler: Two different things. The first one is we're online, why don't you send us out a link so we can post it. >> Kitchen: Could you tell us right now. >> Mayor Adler: That lets us know where it is people can go to see the corrections you are making so they can see what you guys have recognized need to be done. Send out that link so we can provide that to people, post that. The second question is is that when we have people that send in comments, you're going to deal specifically with these folks, but think about how we can also handle people that are spending a lot of time thinking about this, giving us really good work, may not be associated with a large organization, maybe there's a different way to assess those. >> We'll look at that. >> Mayor Adler: So take a look at that. >> Pool: Mayor, there's one more number 3 and staff created a portal for us on council to list questions and answers, but we can only get access to it from a city of [3:05:44 PM] Austin computer. We can't do it from home, for example, and nobody else can see the questions and answers. So it doesn't have a public face on it. >> So I understand the public information office is working to make that public face available. I'm not sure at the moment if it's visible, but I'm told that it will happen very soon. As far as accessing it only from a city terminal, the only other solution I'm aware of that we could -- staff could offer is go to my PC or something similar where you can access your computer at work from any remote location anywhere. >> Mayor Adler: I don't think that's -- all we have is a limited number of portals, we either can't do this or maybe we move it to budget questions where it can be posted, just migrated to budget questions and put codenext or budget questions. We can't -- we can't have an off line message board. >> Tovo: I got an email they intend to put it up. >> Mayor Adler: Ann, if you figure out how to do that, let's move this off to Ann and figure out what needs to happen. On the broader calendar, there have been some questions in the community that relate to if we adopt this in April when does it actually take effect. I assume it's not may 1st. My understanding is it's like six to eight months after that. So whatever it is, I'd like to look at that. I'd also like to know how you guys are handling in that period of time -- there are going to be typos, things we see during that period of time, what's our feedback loop on that. I also know there's been some question the community is refocused on some areas because they are the ones most walkable right now. We also have under imagine Austin goals to look at [3:07:47 PM] activity centers anodes that are just not here. My understanding is that the anticipation is that it's going to be handled with small area planning. I'd like to know what that looks like in time. So if you could come back next week at a really high level but with a way we can understand for the community what's going to happen -- we have a schedule through April. What happens after April for the next three years in the life of this kind of planning in our community. If you could bring that back for us, that would be helpful. I think with that we've handled the things that we have. I would urge everybody to get on the message board to the mayor pro tem on those scheduling issues on dates. Make sure all those dates are okay. Post the suggestions and other things and mayor pro tem, if you can be massaging those and coming back that would be helpful. >> Tovo: I think what I would propose is that I take into account people suggested and try to post that and then we can respond to one draft. Would that be -- >> Mayor Adler: We'll wait for you to post the next draft. Is that what you are saying. >> Tovo: Post now, but what I'm going to try to do is merge yours with mine and switch the ones we wanted to switch and accommodate that and then we can go from there. >> Mayor Adler: Sounds good. >> Pool: And everybody should look to add June 26th , that Monday, which is the one new date that's outside the range we were already talking about. >> Which is going to be hard, maybe even for me. >> Mayor Adler: Even if we're not here, the ability to have another public airing where the consultants will be here, if I hear a question I'm not here but I want to make sure it gets daylight, I want to say make shove on TV you -- make sure you bring up that topic. With that it's 3:10. We are recessed.