The Boarded wanted me to make it clear that greater housing density would be a benefit as long as it is appropriate in the location and had greater design standards and results in more affordable housing. Page 5 numbers 6 (requirement to apply) and 11 (discussion at BOA level, they felt 11 and 2 covered the same thing), 15 (requirement for LEED Silver to apply) were marked out.

16 Page 7 Item Q was added to make it clear that LEED checkless and documentation would have to be submitted at the time of application.

Page 8 under F and G, Kevin O’Keefe suggested that we want to ensure the site plan and architecture plans are submitted at the time of rezoning so you can see what is proposed overall for development as opposed to doing the rezoning separately and someone coming back later with different site plan and architectural plans

Page 11, number 12 that was to clarify that we will be using the point system for public benefits.

Page 14, D under number 2 major amendments, some discussion at the BOA the was a request to ensure that significant changes to the outside appearance to the building including lighting materials and colors would be considered a major amendment and would have to go back through the Public Hearing process as opposed to being administrative approve.

Going back to the point system, I provided a sample point system. This is a community in Minnesota, they call them amenities instead of public benefits but what they require is that you have to at a minimum at least 10 points. And then for substitutions you need to also provide at least 5 per substitutions. So what I read is if you’re asking for a reduction in the front yard setback you have to provide one amenity if you’re asking for a reduction in the side yard you have to provide an additional amenity. Each setback would be attached to an amenity.

PUBLIC COMMENTS:

CYNTHIA METCALF – THE PLAZA

I’ve been here before because I am a member of the committee which has followed Centene from day one. The interest in the development has done nothing but increase. The consequence of the development don’t bear a resemblance to what we were originally proposed and described by the developer to us. When I read this I read it with that in mind and how can we improve this to make sure the public expectation are met and the developer matches them. Green Space – The importance of true green space, the psyche and health of people is now well accepted research has proven that it makes a difference if people live near green space. To be very specific on page 2 under definitions open space isn’t doing enough. I’m concerned about consistency in definition of open space and what people mean when they say that. Under D all of the examples are green – landscaped areas, parks, play grounds, lawns/yards – in reality, it says plaza or courtyard and those, in the development we’ve followed, we’ve seen things called green and they turn out to be hardscaped. What exactly qualifies and doesn’t qualify – it needs to be specified. Word matter and peoples words and expectations can be different and I think we need to be specific in what is green space. I’m asking for clarity.

CAROLYN GAIDIS – I appreciate your comments. What is open space, what is green space is a conversation I have with my students all the time. Open space is NOT a parking lot which is an argument I get a lot from students, so clarification would be nice.

TERRY CURLY – 139 NORTH CENTRAL

I urge you to proceed carefully and slowly. This is a flurry with all these meetings and changing things and changing agendas. This is a big deal. Page 3, under D, retail restaurant and other non-residential uses shall be located on the ground floor and public entrances of these uses shall front along a major street. My question is when the Entertainment District overlay was approved it was decided that there would be no entrances on Maryland and I am asking to be sure that this is what you told us and this will apply under this new part of this text amendment.

Page 3, under D, retail restaurant and other non-residential uses shall be located on the ground floor and public entrances of these uses shall front along a major street. My question is when the Entertainment District overlay was approved it was decided that there would be no entrances on Maryland and I am asking to be sure that this is what you told us and this will apply under this new part of this text amendment.

17

SI – Yes, this doesn’t really have anything to do with that. They are two different things. The standards adopted for the Entertainment overlay would be reviewed when a CUP for approval they would have to meet all the requirements in that process. So this doesn’t effect that at all.

PETER BARKOFSKE – GRAYBAR ELECTRIC

I think the community conference provision is important. The boundary of the neighbors should be extended I don’t think 300 ft. is realistic in a PUD setting. I would ask the boundary be expanded

SI – We’ve had 300 all along. Our notice requirements are 200. I’m open to a suggestion.

PB – I think 1000 feet would be significant enough. The other comment I would make is that a public benefit – any other public benefit that is determined by the BOA to meet the purpose and objects set forth in 405.1360 which seems to me pretty much do away with the other itemized benefits and gives the board absolute digression to do whatever it wants and I see no reason for that category to be there.

SI – Its not a concise list it’s a list of examples. Ultimately there are public benefits we don’t think about that could be site specific and that someone could suggest and that you and the BOA would have the opportunity to contemplate and make a decision on if it falls under the intent of public benefit. The it would be also the BOA responsibility to determine how many points it will be worth. That goes to the flexibility to the PUD Ord. We need to retain that flexibility and provide the opportunity that they think might be a public benefit and to be allowed to show that to the BOA and explain why they think it meets our definition of a public benefit. It’s not really changing much from what they can do now. Its up to the applicant to come up with public benefits and convince the boards that it meets the intents of the ordinance.

MR. CURLY

My concern it about the new document, the new PUD you’re looking at is a much more dynamic document than the PUDs in the past. If we apply to the block just west of here the PUD in place has strict requirements. As a citizen I’m concerned who makes the determination of what is right or wrong in this new document.

SI – The process says the same. Anyone can apply for a PUD and meet the criteria and that hasn’t changed other than the addition of the LEED Silver that we added. They still will have to request deviations from our standards and in exchange provide public benefits and the Board will still have to consider their requests for deviations from the standards and line them up with the public benefits and make a determination as to whether or not the project is compatible with surrounding development, meets the intent of the ord, is consistent with master plan and all other ords. In the city. So none of that is really changing. There is a multitude of documents, the mater plan, zoning regs, compatibility analysis, all of the PUD regulations that would have to apply, the public benefit. None of that is changing. There isn’t anything different. Under our current regs of the PUD process you’re allowed to modify regulations. This doesn’t change that it’s the same in this as it is in the current. This will more clearly identity those standards that are being modified because they will need to be called out in the PUD document as opposed to plaster3ed onto a site plan that is difficult to read and understand. There will be a table that has what is being requested in lieu of the required standards, these are public benefits, these are what we are requesting deviation from, etc. Relaxation of development standards for overall benefit to the general public is the point of a PUD. It is the responsibility of the developer to do notifications so as long as we set the standard they are required to follow it.

RON REIM – MOTION TO CONTINUE TO THE NEXT MEETING

CAROLYN GAIDIS – SECOND